Mr. Freeman,

I'm always happy to take up the cause when you issue a challenge like "do the math".

The only factor that limits the number of flights operating at the Island airport is the number of slots (take offs and landings) allocated to the facility based on the noise exposure of the types of aircraft in use.

Porter operates a newer variant of the Dash 8 which I've already shown is about 3 decibels quieter on average compared to older generation Dash 8s. The new aircraft (soon) flying on behalf of Air Canada and Continental will also be Dash 8-400s - same as Porter. I don't discount the anecdotal evidence that many have provided indicating just how invasive the airport noise is but the computer modeling used to map the aircraft generated noise shows us that MOST (not all) loudest noise is registered where no one lives - on the water. With the move towards a proven quieter aircraft, the number of slots was allowed to increase to approximately 200 from about 125.

Therefore, Porter, Continental and Air Canada could decide to bring 100 aircraft to the Island airport if they so desire. Other than run out of parking space, they will only be able to use each aircraft to operate 1 landing and 1 takeoff (100 aircraft X 1 takeoff each + 1 landing each = 200 slots) The inefficiency of such an idea makes it highly unlikely but the fact is the ceiling remains at 200 flights NO MATTER how many planes decide to visit. We can argue about numbers all day but the ONLY reason I choose to take issue with your comment is that you have only one goal- to bring additional stress and fear to those living in the areas affected by the airport. Throwing numbers around the way you do sounds very convincing but it can only be construed as fear mongering. Your calculations only tell half the story and give the impression that aircraft traffic will grow without any constraints into infinity (more planes = more traffic, repeat etc..). Ignoring the actual slot limitations imposed on the airport so it remains within one of the most stringent noise exposure areas in the world is unfair and misleading.

On a related note, a recent post by Leida Englar states that the Tri-Partite agreement says something about "no expansion" On that note, if the airport has been approved for 200 slots then that is the quantified limit on the "expansion" of airport traffic. I think the context of the term "expansion" in the agreement relates to a physical growth of the airport - longer runways etc... As far as I know, the airport still occupies the same number of acres as it did 10 years ago.

I too hope that the next Mayor will insist on adherence to the tripartite agreement. If mayor Miller couldn't do it, I wonder how a mayor that might be more open to supporting the airport might do it. Additionally, I hope they add a section to the agreement eliminating maintenance runs of the overnight variety. I think only Rob Ford is pushing for that one - we'll see.

Take Care!
Joe