Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New SYD Airport In Botany Bay  
User currently offlinejetfuel From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2252 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2364 times:

AN ambitious plan to build a fourth and fifth runway at Sydney Airport on reclaimed land in Botany Bay has won the backing of state Treasurer Mike Baird.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...ydney/story-fndo28a5-1226514736234


Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
87 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlyingsottsman From Australia, joined Oct 2010, 565 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2376 times:

Build the airport like what they did in Hong Kong and Kansi, build it on reclaim land in the middle of Botany Bay ? Sounds like a plan.  

User currently offlineskyhawkmatthew From Australia, joined Oct 2005, 185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2368 times:

There's no way this will ever happen.


Qantas - The Spirit of Australia.
User currently offlineaussie18 From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1757 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2370 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Cant see this going ahead,Best chance of a 2nd Sydney airport is at Wilton but even that is in the "Too hard basket".

User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1584 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2370 times:

Not going to happen.. for one thing the greenies will go on about changing tides and habitats for wading birds, also it concentrates noise over the inner west so will still be subject to curfew and movement caps.


BV
User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 898 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2368 times:

Sydney will never get it's second airport.

User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5316 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2370 times:

This would never get through... and their is no point.


Sydney doesn't need more runways.... it's runways are already artificially capped.

This proposal just routes more flights over the suburbs which is why we have caps now.

If they wanted to expand SYD I would say get rid of the artificial cap and build a new terminal on reclaimed land.


User currently offlineFlyingsottsman From Australia, joined Oct 2010, 565 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2368 times:

[quote=BoeingVista,reply=4]Not going to happen.. for one thing the greenies will go on about changing tides and habitats for wading birds

LOL you are spot on my friend, not to mention it might scare the fish away. Unfortunealy as good as it sounds and yes Sydney has to do some thing the Greenies will always get in the way of progress and Julia will be to scared of the Greens to give this project the go ahead.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5005 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Quoting jetfuel (Thread starter):

Finally someone has the balls to build a new Sydney Airport... Wait sorry didn't mean to get excited so quickly...

Ain't going to happen in a million years... I remember the 2nd airport was being discussed a good 26 years ago!!!

Never forget the sign erected across the road from Australia's Wonderland!

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 898 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 7):
the Greenies will always get in the way of progress and Julia will be to scared of the Greens to give this project the go ahead.

Why only blame the Greens? This is as much to do with other self interests.

a) Local residents, at all three proposed airport sites.
b) Investors in the existing airport.
c) Investors in land around the proposed airports.
d) Infrastructure needed for the proposed airports
e) The proposed new runways do nothing for caps on movements per hour and curfew.
f) Clashes between three levels of government, local, state and federal.
h) The interests of regional airlines that want to fly to the main airport, and not be consigned to a secondary airport.

Changes in government at all levels have done nothing to move expanding air capacity any closer to a reality. Instead, what you get is the necessity of making it look like something is happening. It was only recently the Liberal State Government proposed Canberra as the second airport, now they have just come up with something that is just as much a fairy tale. In the meantime, they have approved expansion of housing near the Canberra airport. You couldn't write a French farce that was more absurd.


User currently offlinejetfuel From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2365 times:

I had to check it wasn't dated April 1


Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
User currently offlineQuokkas From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2366 times:

Quite apart from any thoughts Greens or local residents may have, the salient point in the linked article may be,

Quote:
Mr Baird said he believed the Sydney Airport company, federal and state governments could all contribute to the cost of funding the plan.

I can see them all doing the sums to see who can out-bid to stump up the most. Sure. The company is primarily concerned with the shareholders and may be averse to the risk of using its own money. The State will cry poor and suggest that, as interstate and international travel is a federal matter, the Commonwealth should provide the most. Meanwhile, the federal treasurer can be heard muttering about a surplus and suggest that as Sydney is the main beneficiary...


User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1584 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2369 times:

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 9):

Why only blame the Greens? This is as much to do with other self interests.

I don't really, that was me being ironic  

Look the simplest and best solution is a no brainier, build the 2nd airport at the site bought by the federal government in 1994 for the purpose of building Sydney's 2nd airport, Badgerys Creek.

This will never happen either.



BV
User currently offlineIrishpower From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2365 times:

I'm confused. I don't see the 3rd and 4th new runway in the picture, unless they are planning to keep the old airport open as well. In that case then it looks like planes would be landing/taking off right behind each other or towards each other.

Doesn't make sense.


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5939 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2366 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 4):
Not going to happen.. for one thing the greenies will go on about changing tides and habitats for wading birds
Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 7):
the Greenies will always get in the way of progress and Julia will be to scared of the Greens to give this project the go ahead.

I want to precis this comment by saying that I am in no way a supporter of the Greens.

Nonetheless, tidal flows, fish patterns, and wading birds were - in fact - the first things I thought of when I saw the image in the OP's post. This plan would potentially cut Botany Bay in half, and would therefore be an ecological disaster.

Quoting Quokkas (Reply 11):
The State will cry poor and suggest that, as interstate and international travel is a federal matter, the Commonwealth should provide the most

And there's the real reason that nothing will ever happen. Our wonderful split system of government means that every level can palm off responsibility to someone else, and use the "we're too poor, but they're loaded" argument to justify doing nothing. It works for roads, so I'm sure it's good for airports as well.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5005 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2365 times:

Quoting Irishpower (Reply 13):

So am I...!

The best solution to the problem being faced would be to buy out the properties in Kurnell and build a NEW airport similar to HKG in the ocean... Once the NEW airport becomes operational redevelop the current Kingsford Smith airport... BUT.... We all know that's in the too difficult not going to bloody happen basket!!!

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25690 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2365 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):
Nonetheless, tidal flows, fish patterns, and wading birds were - in fact - the first things I thought of when I saw the image in the OP's post. This plan would potentially cut Botany Bay in half, and would therefore be an ecological disaster.

  

And if the western suburbs keep growing as fast as they are, it's going to be gridlock for anyone from the west getting to SYD.

Back in the old days, Botany Bay was a great idea for the flying boats, as an alternative to Rose Bay, but those days are gone.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2732 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2368 times:

Build an HSR between Sydney-Canberra-Melbourne and eventually Brisbane and you won't need a second airport. But Australia seems, like the US, unable to make big infrastructure decisions any more...


When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlinefuffla From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2365 times:

That proposed development will never happen. That is a wildlife conservation area, the suburb is home to 2600 people and is the site of Captain Cook's first landing.

There are two main issues with the current Sydney Airport site. Runway capacity is limited under a cap system to reduce aircraft noise, and the layout of the airport itself is restricting gate availability during peak periods (or all day if you are flying Virgin Australia).

The first issue will only be resolved when local residents and politicians pull their heads out of their arses and lift the cap and reduce the curfew times (say to 0100-0500L). Travellers will be the first to complain when their flight is delayed due to the cap or congestion but will then on the other hand complain about aircraft noise. Education and responsible government will be the only cure.

The second issue comes down to ageing airport infrastructure and layout which can only be fixed by Sydney Airport Corporation and pressure from the government. One only has to arrive on an international flight at 0800-0900 in the morning and spend 30 minutes waiting for a gate to realise how bad the situation is becoming with no fix (neither short or long term) on the horizon. The airport needs to make better use of the limited land it has available, but that costs money and SACL (Macquarie Group) won't part with that anytime soon.

A new airport isn't required, the current site requires responsible government and capital investment. So unfortunately, the situation will not improve for some time because we do not have a responsible government on either side of parliament and no-one will part with their money.


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 3020 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2366 times:

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 17):
Build an HSR between Sydney-Canberra-Melbourne and eventually Brisbane and you won't need a second airport. But Australia seems, like the US, unable to make big infrastructure decisions any more...

        .

I find it impossible to believe that a federal government so intent on delivering major infrastructure (like the NBN) has such a shortsighted approach to this issue. Why spend all this money on a new airport, when it can be redirected to pay for most of a system that will revolutionise the way Australia travels/does business domestically.

All this talk though, nothing is going to happen until the change is forced (ie fuel getting really expensive).


User currently offlineSYDSpotter From Australia, joined Oct 2012, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2366 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 15):
The best solution to the problem being faced would be to buy out the properties in Kurnell and build a NEW airport similar to HKG in the ocean... Once the NEW airport becomes operational redevelop the current Kingsford Smith airport... BUT.... We all know that's in the too difficult not going to bloody happen basket!!!

Hmm, was just thinking how much $$$ you would be able to raise by selling off the existing airport site to developers? A billion or more? Kingsford Smith sits on some pretty prime real estate so I would imagine it would be very valuable.

Building an airport on reclaimed land in the ocean though is prohibitively expensive.Maybe the best option is to build a brand new purpose built airport at Wilton and link it to the CBD via a dedicated HSR. The journey time would be what 30-40 mins to the CBD?? which would acceptable to most people. Once you build that HSR to Wilton, you've got the first link of the HSR to Canberra/Melbourne, although if we were to build that, we wouldn't need a second airport would we !!!   



319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
User currently offlinebjwonline From UK - England, joined Mar 2007, 112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):
I want to precis this comment by saying that I am in no way a supporter of the Greens.

Nonetheless, tidal flows, fish patterns, and wading birds were - in fact - the first things I thought of when I saw the image in the OP's post. This plan would potentially cut Botany Bay in half, and would therefore be an ecological disaster.

  

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 17):
Build an HSR between Sydney-Canberra-Melbourne and eventually Brisbane and you won't need a second airport. But Australia seems, like the US, unable to make big infrastructure decisions any more...

        

Quoting anstar (Reply 6):
Sydney doesn't need more runways.... it's runways are already artificially capped.

This proposal just routes more flights over the suburbs which is why we have caps now.

If they wanted to expand SYD I would say get rid of the artificial cap and build a new terminal on reclaimed land.

For the foreseeable future, this is the ONLY option for SYD. The runways are nowhere near at capacity physically, just politically. The cap must be increased. The noise level of an airport is not what it was back when these caps were agreed upon, with the modern jets of today (ie A380, B77W, B788 etc) the cap could harmlessly be increased and the curfew even "trimmed" a bit too. I'm not just making this "someone else's problem" I live next to SYD and can say the noise is not a problem anymore like it was with older jets.

As for terminal space, there is so much ample room on solid ground at SYD even the need for reclamation from the bay for a terminal is not necessary. There have been many studies done on how to better use the plentiful land at SYD, the governments just need to agree and let the operators of SYD make it better.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25690 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2366 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting qf002 (Reply 19):
Why spend all this money on a new airport, when it can be redirected to pay for most of a system that will revolutionise the way Australia travels/does business domestically.

Maybe I'm missing your point, but I don't see how HSR between Sydney and Melbourne has more than a very small impact on air traffic congestion at SYD or MEL.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineSYDSpotter From Australia, joined Oct 2012, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2371 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 22):
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I don't see how HSR between Sydney and Melbourne has more than a very small impact on air traffic congestion at SYD or MEL.

I think there are like 70 daily flight pairs between Melbourne and Sydney daily (70 arrivals and 70 departures). I believe there are about 400 odd daily departures and 400 arrivals (international and domestic) everyday into and out of SYD. So MEL to SYD does contribute to alot of the airport traffic, if a HSR were to be in place, you would maybe take away say 50% of the existing air market, so you save about 30 odd arrival and departure slots (a little under 10%). You're right a small impact, but would make a difference in the peak times when you have flights every 1/2 hour from QF, DJ, JQ and TT between SYD and MEL departing/arriving.



319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 3020 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2370 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 22):
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I don't see how HSR between Sydney and Melbourne has more than a very small impact on air traffic congestion at SYD or MEL.

Something like 30-40% of SYD movements (I'll see if I can track down the place I read that) are to/from MEL, CBR and BNE. Offer alternative ways of reaching those cities at a cheaper cost, in as little time centre to centre and you'll free up a lot of capacity at the existing airport.


25 Post contains links BoeingVista : Nope, I used to live between 16 and 34 about 5km out and operation between 6.00 and 23.00 is quite enough thank you. Until I moved I really didn't ap
26 strangr : Well if we want to talk about reclaimed land. How about we chuck it here. -34.044837,150.810943
27 Flyingsottsman : What is the actual problem with SYD ? is it the curfew ? is it a lack of gates? is the airport to small for the amount of flights that come in ? is 3
28 EK413 : You hit the nail in the head...!!! With the exception of the 3 runways... Sydney needs the curfew altered with extended hours of operations... The in
29 RickNRoll : There is so much empty land around Canberra, why put a housing estate there?
30 a36001 : Get real! This will never happen! Our politicians simply do not have the guts to do it! They will scuttle the entire economy of Sydney (drama added) b
31 Cerecl : The way I see it, the federal government hasn't really obtained a mandate for an HSR. With the current political and economical environment I think i
32 qf002 : Yup, and the problem is that the mandate often doesn't exist until after the issue has taken effect. With a project that would take so long to develo
33 Post contains images OzGlobal : It's called "leadership"....
34 Cerecl : Labor hasn't enough political capital to exhibit any leadership on this issue at the moment. If they win government next year they may start to lay t
35 RickNRoll : Politics is in a very negative phase at the moment. Everyone wants to keep their head down, and save money. In theory, a functional NBN could reduce
36 strangr : Sydney does not need a bigger airport. The simple solution is to build a 3rd Runway in Melbourne, we have no issues with a curfew and well we are cryi
37 EK413 : No offence but SYD is the gateway to Australia and I bet my money MEL will get a 3rd runway built way before any decision is made on the 2nd SYD airp
38 mariner : I"m surprised by that number. I'm not disputing it, but it seems high. I'm no greenie, but I prefer to live with some considerations for the environm
39 RyanairGuru : I'm not overly surprised myself. If you think that QF runs flight up to every 15 minutes from SYD to MEL at peak times, plus 2 with DL, plus JQ and T
40 BoeingVista : Getting planning permission for a 1000km high speed rail line would be a nightmare as would the actual build. And when you have finished you will be
41 Cerecl : I should have been clearer. What I proposed obviously depends on Labor actually having an internal consensus that an HSR should be built. They may no
42 qf002 : I'm not being precise here, but: SYD has just over 310,000 movements a year. That's 850 movements a day on average and includes departures and arriva
43 OzGlobal : Of course it's competitive. What's more, comfort and productivity of the time are much higher. You can work or dine, when you want, from the time you
44 TheCommodore : I may be completely wrong, but I think I read somewhere (long time ago) that SYD/MEL was one, if not the, busiest routes in the world.
45 OzGlobal : Depending on the season and the way you measure (seats vs flights), it is top 4 or top 5 in the world...
46 tp1040 : As an outsider, just looking at the map, you could put a nice 6 runway airport in Heathcote.
47 cosyr : Rather than building the whole airport out there, why don't they just extend the existing peninsulas and move the runways farther out. Then they can b
48 PITrules : I like the article's headline, but that's about it. The layout depicted is nonsensical. Lift the movement cap, then build a 3rd parallel runway in the
49 EK413 : Botany Bay is a historical bay it ain't going to happen plus I wouldnt want to see that either... EK413
50 PITrules : Yet the bay has continued to see large scale reclamation, even very recently.
51 TheCommodore : OZ, thanks for the clarification. New that it was up there somewhere. There has been some very large scale development in Botany bay over the years,
52 Post contains links RyanairGuru : According to Wikipedia (if you have a better source I'd much rather rely on it!) it is #4 by capacity and #2 by movements. Top 5 by seats: 1) HND-CTS
53 EK413 : Do we forget the noise surrounding the expansion of Port Botany... & we expect another 2 runways to be built...? It ain't going to happen... EK41
54 VIDP : Not sure of PEK-SHA but yes capacity on SYD-MEL is definately more than DEL-BOM. I know the noise abadement laws are pretty strict but i think the fi
55 PITrules : Well I suggested only one additional runway; it would be in immediate proximity to the existing airport boundary and I believe the number of people a
56 qf002 : It's not feasible to do that at the existing airport. As much as we moan about it, the fact is that SYD is an urban airport, and while that has massi
57 RyanairGuru : VA isn't really an LCC anymore, but even when they were they used airbridges whenever possible, as does JQ. The only time that VA don't park at an ai
58 TheCommodore : Housing and business around the airport, were not so long (1985-96) ago, given sound insulation as part of a package by the Gov People know there is
59 EK413 : Would be great if you can share it with us... I couldn't care less what they build... I ain't complaining I'm just being realistic... The aircraft ca
60 Post contains images qf002 : But people move there knowing there's an 80 movement/hr cap and a curfew. They are happy to deal with that, because it's a pretty minimal invasion. N
61 RickNRoll : That doesn't sound right to me. The 744 and A380 are significantly different terms of noise level.
62 qf002 : The 744 is certainly the louder of the two, but both are still extremely loud. It might be a little quieter, but the A380 is still a big, heavy, loud
63 EK413 : Sorry I noticed my typing error... I meant to say the infrastructure in place can handle more traffic it's curfew and cap on movements which is restr
64 Post contains images PITrules : Here ya go.. When I first posted this another poster was adamant that it would not increase capacity, which I find not to be the case at all. After a
65 OzGlobal : Not really, since PEK-SHA now has an HSR service, the flights will have dropped considerably which actually helps to prove the point...
66 BoeingVista : Because capacity remains capped by law at 80 movements per hour. A third runway in the same orientation would increase the noise burden on the same a
67 PITrules : The issue was the physical capacity, not the artificial cap. It seems to me that landing to the south or taking off to the north on this new runway a
68 RickNRoll : This artificial cap is cast in iron. The government that changes it will lose so many seats, the next election and several after it will be guarantee
69 BoeingVista : Central Sydney isn't the point the noise burden is felt by the inner west and depending on wind direction the eastern suburbs. You have a point but r
70 RyanairGuru : Beyond the fact that I am a massive proponent of CBR as SYD#2, I am cynical enough to believe that this is why O'Farrel was quite keen on the idea. H
71 BoeingVista : Yup, he is trying to create the illusion of action, it would be more convincing though if his housing minister didn't go and approve a housing develo
72 RyanairGuru : I know, and as someone said above it is particularly stupid as it's not as though there is a shortage of land in the CBR region. I thought that these
73 BoeingVista : No, the Packer casino saga at Barangaroo shows that its not just the ALP that makes corrupt and illogical planning decisions.
74 Post contains images Flyingsottsman : LOL That is gold well said. Just about every thread in this subject leads to the one common denomator and that is "Leadership" from Federal, State, a
75 Post contains links and images EK413 : Well here is Japan's solution... View Large View MediumPhoto © Steven Shi A portion of the runway is reclaimed and the other portion is built on a p
76 RickNRoll : It has little to do with greens. As I said earlier, the pecking order starts with the residents of the area, 90% of whom are not greens. Then there a
77 mariner : That would be beyond my understanding. The one thing we are not short of in Australia is land so why we would spend untold billions creating an artif
78 Mortyman : The way I see it and understand the article is that they plan on keeping the old airport open and connect it with a new road and rail acess to the ad
79 EK413 : Why is it every time a link or proposal is posted on a thread the messenger is criticized...? Anyways, moving on a number of comments have been towar
80 SYDSpotter : There were delays this afternoon (18th) around 4pm at SYD. Pilots on my flight mentioned flight ops were limited to one runway due to strong winds and
81 mariner : I'm not shooting the messenger and I'm sorry if you thought that - I was shooting the message. A concept as in the photo you posted would be extraord
82 EK413 : No harm done... Must admit though HND is a pretty amazing piece of engineering... As for the badgerys creek proposal I believe that ship has sailed e
83 mariner : That's probably true, but when I first started hearing about it - decades ago - it seemed a good location. I would have thought the RAAF base at Rich
84 EK413 : I remember heading out to Australia's Wonderland there was absolutely nothing out there back in the 90s... Nothing... It's was a perfect site for a 2
85 TheCommodore : mariner, Its all about location. One of the great benefits about Kingsford Smith, it is proximity to Sydney city, which many folks appreciate. From w
86 mariner : I understand that, it has all been the problem. And I think Sydney has to make up its mind whether it wants that proximity or whether it wants an air
87 Post contains links EK413 : I stumbled across the Richmond option... Interesting but the area is populated... http://futureurbanism.blogspot.com.a...2010/09/second-sydney-airport
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
New Mega-Airport In Florida... posted Fri Feb 6 2004 04:31:09 by AAgent
New Int. Airport In China To Be Opened In 2003! posted Fri Apr 20 2001 10:06:41 by Wolfy
New Intl. Airport In Mojave Desert posted Tue Mar 6 2001 07:30:02 by Early Air
Proposal: New Chicago Airport In Lake Michigan... posted Sun Feb 25 2001 08:39:01 by 747-600X
Proposed New Domestic Airport In Sydney? posted Mon Dec 20 1999 09:06:40 by PerthWA
Quito Gets A New Airport In 2012 posted Mon Nov 28 2011 13:38:07 by wingedtaurus
New Airport In London? posted Thu Nov 3 2011 14:26:08 by ZKSUJ
Next New Airport In Japan posted Mon Feb 16 2009 14:53:36 by Carpethead
Beautiful New Airport In Bangalore (BLR) posted Sat Apr 12 2008 20:35:59 by Comorin
New Airport In Natal, Brazil? posted Sat Mar 29 2008 14:29:27 by Varig767