QF175
Topic Author
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:42 am

G'day and welcome to the Australian Aviation Thread # 69. In the previous thread, the following points were discussed/raised:

* Qantas International operations - 787s and A330s
* Perth and Adelaide - International Qantas flights
* Tiger announces it will re-commence services to Alice Springs and Maroochydoore later in 2013
* Garuda Indonesia announces nonstop Perth - Jakarta flights from June
* Sydney Airport - Long term plans
* ACCC's concern over Virgin's plan to acquire 60% stake in Tiger Airways Australia
* Virgin Australia E190 Business Class installation
* Brisbane and Melbourne Airports - New services and capacity increases
* Malaysia Airlines to reportedly increase services to Perth
* Sydney Airport - diversions
* Jetstar announces daily Ayers Rock/Uluru services from June, replacing QF and its 737-800s
* Qantas confirms cancellation of its Canberra - Darwin service
* Virgin Australia - Fleet repainting
* Philippine Airlines reportedly close to announcing Brisbane/Darwin/Perth flights
* Singapore Airlines temporarily decreases BNE/MEL/SYD flights
* Air Pacific reveals A330 schedules, with Brisbane being first Australian port to receive the a/c
* Brisbane International Terminal - Minor redevelopment
* Air Canada signals Brisbane as a possible contender for services to Vancouver
* Increased Jetstar Perth - Singapore services from April
* Qantas/Emirates codeshare update
* Qantas 737-800 VH-VXG and new 'Bring it On' decal
* Virgin Australia confirms A330s for 2 of 3 BNE-PER weekday flights from May
* Virgin Australia announces Brisbane - Moranbah & Bundaberg from APR/MAY respectively
* Virgin Australia profit announcement for 1/2 year period ending 31DEC12
* Emirates confirms a second, daily A380 service for Sydney
* The first Sichuan Airlines Chengdu - Melbourne service touches down

Australian Aviation Thread # 68
 
QF175
Topic Author
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:53 am

Ben175, you will no doubt be pleased that Philippine Airlines has finally confirmed Brisbane, Darwin and Perth services from June 2013.

BRISBANE
All services operate via Darwin with A320s

MNL/BNE 2205/0920+1 PR221 Mon/Wed/Sat
BNE/MNL 1010/1800 PR222 Tue/Thu/Sun

DARWIN
All services operate with A320s

MNL/DRW 2205/0400+1 PR221 Mon/Wed/Sat
MNL/DRW 2225/0420+1 PR219 Tue/Thu/Fri/Sat
DRW/MNL 1500/1800 PR220 Mon/Wed/Fri/Sun
DRW/MNL 1500/1800 PR222 Tue/Thu/Sun

PERTH
All services operate via Darwin with A320s

MNL/PER 2225/0750+1 Tue/Thu/Fri/Sun
PER/MNL 0850/1800 Mon/Wed/Fri/Sat

SOURCE - Philippine Airlines International Timetable

Fares are not yet bookable through Philippineairlines.com, however are available for booking via the likes of Zuji et al.
 
TruemanQLD
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:09 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:02 pm

Question... who does AeroCare look after at Brisbane airport?
 
ben175
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:37 pm

Quoting QF175 (Reply 1):
Ben175, you will no doubt be pleased that Philippine Airlines has finally confirmed Brisbane, Darwin and Perth services from June 2013.

Absolutely fantastic! So great to see yet another addition to PER, bringing an exotic new destination on the line. Hopefully the flights perform well and they can go direct eventually.
 
CXfirst
Posts: 2875
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:13 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:50 pm

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 2):

Question... who does AeroCare look after at Brisbane airport?

I believe Tiger Airways Australia, not sure who else (if any).

-CXfirst
 
Quokkas
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:51 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:56 pm

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 2):
who does AeroCare look after at Brisbane airport?
Quoting CXfirst (Reply 4):
I believe Tiger Airways Australia, not sure who else (if any).

Do they also look after Air Nuigini?
“Not to laugh, not to cry, not to hate, but understand.” Spinoza
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18111
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:39 pm

Having just read an article by Ben Sandilands - why do I do this to myself? - I'd like to pick up on the comments about the second Sydney airport from the previous thread.

The debate has been going on for as long as I have Australian memory - to the point where I've lost track of what the debate is all about.

I understand some of the debate is "political" - but why is it political? Most politicians are agreed it is a good idea (Sandilands says) but some are scared of a backlash. What backlash?

I understand that Sydney has enormous affection for its institutions, but surely Mascot won't close - or will it? And isn't this about financial benefit to massive Sydney? It can't be about money - can it?

I hesitate to invite opinions here because I suspect there may be some conflict, but it boils down to one thing in my mind - does Sydney need (or will it need in the foreseeable future) a second airport?

If it does, then - just do it. if it doesn't - why won't the issue go away?

mariner

[Edited 2013-03-01 14:40:57]
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:11 am

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 4):
Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 2):

Question... who does AeroCare look after at Brisbane airport?

I believe Tiger Airways Australia, not sure who else (if any).

-CXfirst

JQ...?

Quoting mariner (Reply 6):
If it does, then - just do it. if it doesn't - why won't the issue go away?

The way I read the 2nd Sydney Airport discussion would be the fact politicians either win or lose votes...
I really don't see why the residents of western Sydney have a say where it should be built, just build it! Lets not forget people of the west keep on complaining they have no jobs but yet they don't favour a major piece of infrastructure which brings jobs to their door step...

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:42 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 6):
I understand some of the debate is "political" - but why is it political? Most politicians are agreed it is a good idea (Sandilands says) but some are scared of a backlash. What backlash?

Umm, increased noise for people that aren't currently experiencing significant aircraft noise.

There's also a lot of $ involved.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 2:07 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 7):

A second airport is a massive political issue in Sydney. The western suburbs of Sydney represent a population base of over 2m people. They are geographically distant from Mascot so the current airport t is not well sighted for them. These suburbs also represent a number of swinging electorates so whilst some will be attracted to the economic benefits attached to a new airport, there are a number who will not want the noise etc associated with a large curfew free airport.

There is also the politics of Mascot to consider. Sydney Airports Corp is wealthy and very well connected to both sides of politics they do not want to see their monopoly power eliminated so will constantly lobby against a second airport. There is also the issues like the curfew, and the fact the the current Minister for Aviation's electorate surrounds Mascot

Further complicating matters are the different cycles of state and federal parliaments . whilst both may agree it is a good idea, either one or other is adverse to risking making such a hot decision within sight of a election

Finally, there are other cities particularly Melbourne and Brisbane, who delight in the prevarication of Sydney. They will work against a large slice of federal funding going to Sydney to support the infrastructure required for a new airport as they know the longer a new airport is delayed, the more economic benefits flow to their cities.
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,310,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,AT
 
QF175
Topic Author
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 2:38 am

VIRGIN AUSTRALIA

- 777-300ER VH-VOZ returned to Sydney today sporting the new Virgin livery. This aircraft is to be named Palm Beach and joins VH-VPD and VH-VPH which also feature the new livery
- Fares for Virgin Australia's new services to Bundaberg and Moranbah from Brisbane went on sale earlier today, with fares starting at $61 and $102 respectively (for a Saver Lite fare)
- Airline representatives met with the Cloncurry Mayor recently to discuss future mining projects in the region and the possibility of flights to/from Brisbane - Source

SHARP AIRLINES

- South-East Australian regional carrier Sharp Airlines has launched a new customer facing website - Click here to view the new website

TOOWOOMBA AIRPORT

- Flights from Toowoomba to Roma are looking more likely in the next few years with the QLD Government confirming that the route would not fall under the 'regulated air route' scheme - Source
- The construction of the new Wagners Airport at Toowoomba is well under way, with grading works for the 2.8km runway the current focus. Wellcamp Downs Stud is located directly on the site of the new runway and Elders has been tasked to auction the Stud's equipment and facilities, ranging from tractors to stables. The Airport is on track to open in July 2014 and will be capable of handling small to large jet aircraft - Source. The new Airport paves the way for jet services to Sydney and other ports, and will allow larger freighter aircraft to land at the Airport delivering mining and other equipment

KOREAN AIRLINES - MELBOURNE

- The Airline operated its last scheduled flight from Melbourne to Seoul (Incheon) today, with A330-200 HL7552 operating the final service. Korean Airlines commenced thrice-weekly flights to Melbourne on 22 October 2007

PERTH - T2 NOW OPEN

- The new $120 Domestic Terminal (T2) opened today and is home to Alliance Airlines and Skywest. It is the first terminal to be built at Perth Airport for 26 years. Tiger Airways will join Alliance and Skywest when it commences services from the terminal in May. Visit the Airport's dedicated website to view more information about T2.

REGIONAL EXPRESS - DUBBO

- The Airline has announced that it may leave Dubbo Airport after the Council and the REX failed to reach an agreement with Dubbo City Council regarding the introduction of security screening charges

Quote:
As we highlighted and explained in our Media Release, Dubbo City Council (DCC) has decided to charge every Rex passenger about $9 per departure for security screening charges that are not required by law. This levy will go towards subsidising QantasLink flights, which are required by law to be screened and which necessitated this new screening regime at Dubbo airport. Rex passengers will be subsidising QantasLink around $300,000 every year.

Continues...

Visit REX's dedicated 'Stop Screening Charges at Dubbo' page for further information - Click here
 
TruemanQLD
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:09 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 6:32 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 7):
JQ...?

Would they wear JQ uniforms for such position? Or would they wear AeroCare uniforms?
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 6:55 am

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 11):

Quoting EK413 (Reply 7):
JQ...?

Would they wear JQ uniforms for such position? Or would they wear AeroCare uniforms?


From below the wing they wear Aero Care uniforms but above the wing don't quote me but I believe it's JQ staff...

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 9):

You have valid points and so does

Quoting thegeek (Reply 8):

... Unfortunately SYD is going to fall behind MEL & BNE if the government doesn't step in and make a decision concerning a 2nd Airport OR plan B which is review the current conditions at SYD...

EK413

[Edited 2013-03-01 23:35:41]
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
User avatar
zkokq
Posts: 512
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 8:44 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 7:20 am

How much growth do we think BNE will see once the second runway is operational?
 
The Coachman
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:57 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 7:38 am

My post on #68 was right near the end so I'll move it across.

Does anyone know the VA SYD-PER rotations get aircraft allocations? I've been keeping track of the various regos that run VA555 (since I'll be on that flight in a couple of weeks) in the vain hope that I can find out which aircraft will operate the flight on my date (prefer -XFC,-D, -E for product reasons obviously).
M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 8:11 am

Quoting ZKOKQ (Reply 13):
How much growth do we think BNE will see once the second runway is operational?

My personal opinion? None in the short term. Longer term it's a bit hard to tell. That would be like forecasting the price of oil 15 years into the future. Seems a significant risk.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 12):
... Unfortunately SYD is going to fall behind MEL & BNE if the government doesn't step in and make a decision concerning a 2nd Airport OR plan B which is review the current conditions at SYD...

I wonder if Richmond can be made a public/military facility, like Williamtown. An airport at Badgery's Creek with less capability than SYD would only be used by narrow aisle aircraft IMO anyway.
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 8:38 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 15):
I wonder if Richmond can be made a public/military facility, like Williamtown. An airport at Badgery's Creek with less capability than SYD would only be used by narrow aisle aircraft IMO anyway.

I believe Richmond (RCM) in the past has been discussed & considered as an option but once again you face the same problem Badgerys Creek bring with it... If the 2nd airport was to provide any relief then Bankstown (BWU) is a far better option considering the close proximity to the city...

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
bill142
Posts: 7853
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 1:50 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 9:12 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 15):
I wonder if Richmond can be made a public/military facility, like Williamtown. An airport at Badgery's Creek with less capability than SYD would only be used by narrow aisle aircraft IMO anyway.

Problem with this split use idea is that it will most likely become a while elephant like YMX. If anyone stumps up the cash for a new airport in SYD it has to be a replacement for the current airport and not a second airport as it has long been referred to. But the short sighted nature of our political parties outweighs the long term benefits posed buy building a new airport.
 
skyhawkmatthew
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:42 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:39 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 16):
If the 2nd airport was to provide any relief then Bankstown (BWU) is a far better option considering the close proximity to the city...

Bankstown is really not an option. The runways are far too short and there's not nearly enough space or infrastructure for a full-on passenger operation. The circuit area is congested enough as it is with training aircraft and helicopter operations all over the place - not to mention there are already noise abatement restrictions in place with regard to the circuit training operations, let alone airline flights!

All that said, it was a pretty impressive sight seeing a Global Express hooking around base onto 29C the other day - don't know how feasible it'd be to have that size aircraft flowing in and out all day long though!
Qantas - The Spirit of Australia.
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4328
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:25 am

Quoting skyhawkmatthew (Reply 18):

I'm well aware Bankstown isn't suitable, there was a masterplan released with the main runway extended to handle A320/B737 aircraft type... If we are talking about a 2nd airport to provide relief then Bankstown would provide that relief allowing low cost carriers to relocate from Sydney Kingsford Smith...

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
ben175
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:44 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sat Mar 02, 2013 3:51 pm

Quoting The Coachman (Reply 14):
Does anyone know the VA SYD-PER rotations get aircraft allocations? I've been keeping track of the various regos that run VA555 (since I'll be on that flight in a couple of weeks) in the vain hope that I can find out which aircraft will operate the flight on my date (prefer -XFC,-D, -E for product reasons obviously).

I think it's quite random, if anything. I have flown DJ569 SYD-PER twice on a Sunday night, one was with VH-XFD and the second VH-XFB.
 
User avatar
allrite
Posts: 2350
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:01 pm

Former CEO of Qantas James Strong has passed away. He was serving as a director on the board of the airline.
I like artificial banana essence!
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:43 pm

Quoting EK413 (Reply 7):
I really don't see why the residents of western Sydney have a say where it should be built

Unfortunately Western Sydney is the geographic region that, almost singlehandedly, determines the outcome of elections, both Federal and NSW.

It is an incredibly "marginal" region, and - as the media noted recently with Julia's holiday there - whoever wins out west this year will almost certainly be PM.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 7):
people of the west keep on complaining they have no jobs but yet they don't favour a major piece of infrastructure which brings jobs

Good point. But don't let rational economic arguments get in the way of emotion 
Quoting Bill142 (Reply 17):
Problem with this split use idea is that it will most likely become a while elephant like YMX



I agree. Either that, or they will make Badgery Creek the one for international flights and have Mascot as the convient, city centre airport for domestic flights. See: HND/NRT, LIN/MXP, SHA/PVG, SDU/GIG - and note how useless those cities are for connecting hubs because operations are split over two airport.

MEL and BNE will be rubbing their hands with glee if they tried this!

In short: SYD would have to close. We should be aiming for HKG or BKK, not NRT or MXP. And certainly not YMX!

Quoting QF175 (Reply 10):
It is the first terminal to be built at Perth Airport for 26 years

Wow, if PER can't build a terminal in 26 years (how big was Perth then compared to today?!?) then we have no hope for a second airport in SYD within our grandchildren's lifetime...

Quoting QF175 (Reply 10):
The new Airport paves the way for jet services to Sydney and other ports, and will allow larger freighter aircraft to land at the Airport delivering mining and other equipment

I am really excited to see what the economic benefits of this airport will be for Toowoomba. The city has been living in the shadows for two long, it has a lot of potential and I think that this is the first step to realising it.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
qfvhoqa
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Sun Mar 03, 2013 11:02 pm

Quoting Bill142 (Reply 17):
Problem with this split use idea is that it will most likely become a while elephant like YMX. If anyone stumps up the cash for a new airport in SYD it has to be a replacement for the current airport and not a second airport as it has long been referred to. But the short sighted nature of our political parties outweighs the long term benefits posed buy building a new airport.

If the 2nd airport has good transport links then I don't see it suffering the same fate as YMX. A heavy rail connection (whether to Badgery's Creek or Richmond) will improve its prospects as a 2nd airport. If a 2nd airport gets built I see Sydney ending up with a MXP/LIN situation with SYD offering short haul traffic and the 2nd airport doing long haul. Not the best situation but better than YUL/YMX.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:03 am

Quoting QFVHOQA (Reply 23):
Problem with this split use idea is that it will most likely become a while elephant

Infrastructure needs to be considered as a long term investment which is probably why it's best done by government rather than private enterprise. Sydney is a city of nearly 6M people and it is continuing to grow, albeit a bit slower than Melbourne and Brisbane. The footprint of greater Sydney can really only grow west. It is blocked by the sea to the east and national parks to the north and south. A city of 6M+ can easily handle 2 airports. If you consider greater Brisbane and the Gold Coast as one urban grouping, which it is now, then it already has 2 airports. Likewise MEL has 2 (with a third being planned for the south east) and Avalon's growth is restricted by MEL being curfew-free. Badgery's Creek won't have this limitation.

Look overseas and you will see most major cities have 2+ airports, NYC has 4 (when Teteboro is included), Washington has 2 with another 2 within an hour or so, Paris, Tokyo, Houston and Dallas have 2 whilst London has 5.

Badgery's Creek would probably start slowly but quickly gain critical mass via freight and back of clock operations. Realistically, even if it was given the go-ahead today, it is still probably 10 years from operation. How chaotic will SYD be by then!!!
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,310,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,AT
 
CXfirst
Posts: 2875
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:13 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:29 am

Quoting The Coachman (Reply 14):

My post on #68 was right near the end so I'll move it across.

Does anyone know the VA SYD-PER rotations get aircraft allocations? I've been keeping track of the various regos that run VA555 (since I'll be on that flight in a couple of weeks) in the vain hope that I can find out which aircraft will operate the flight on my date (prefer -XFC,-D, -E for product reasons obviously).


The entire fleet is rotated throughout the routes. The rotation happens at night. VA691, VA572 and VA697 all come at night. Two go back as VA696 and VA573, while one overnights at PER. I've seen all combinations of turnarounds. Any of the three can stay overnight.

Apart from that 2 planes fly between PER and SYD, while 3 do the MEL route. But even knowing which airplane flies overnight does not mean you'll know which does VA555, as I've seen the plane flying overnight land and immediately turn around to do the early ex-SYD departure, and I've also seen it land and stay a while, while the plane that overnighted in SYD do the early departure.

Things will change when the 6th airbus comes and BNE starts up.

-CXfirst
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:50 am

Quoting Bill142 (Reply 17):
Problem with this split use idea is that it will most likely become a while elephant like YMX.

Well clearly public use of Richmond would not at all be like YMX, which is kept open by heavy freighters using it. It would be more like Avalon, but much closer to a large population base.

As for being a white elephant, only the terminals and access facilities need to be new, runways and towers are already there and the RAAF can be paid out for their use. Major issue I see is that the distance between the runway and the road alongside is pretty short and putting the facilities on the north side of the field is an ugly option too. To put the terminals etc on the south side of the field may require the road to be relocated and the railway line buried.

Quoting Bill142 (Reply 17):
If anyone stumps up the cash for a new airport in SYD it has to be a replacement
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 22):
In short: SYD would have to close.

To both of you, say what? There is no way SYD would close, nor should it have to. The proposed airport at Badgerys Creek never had long enough runways AFAIK nor should a perfectly capable facility at SYD close for a new option.

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 24):
valon's growth is restricted by MEL being curfew-free. Badgery's Creek won't have this limitation.

Who said Badgery's Creek Airport would be curfew free? I can't see that being a reality at all.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:08 am

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 9):
There is also the politics of Mascot to consider. Sydney Airports Corp is wealthy and very well connected to both sides of politics they do not want to see their monopoly power eliminated so will constantly lobby against a second airport. There is also the issues like the curfew, and the fact the the current Minister for Aviation's electorate surrounds Mascot

Not really. The owners of SYD have the first right of refusal to build and operate the second airport. So no Government money necessarily has to flow into that. Also, with the potential major roads going to Badgerys Creek, they're mostly already privately owned tollways so you could easily, again, ask the private sector to expand on the existing infrastructure which they currently own to build the roadways. So the private sector could foot a substantial amount of the bill for a new Sydney Airport.

I think the key point is that the second airport cannot be an overflow or competing airport, it has to be a replacement airport. A city the size of Sydney doesn't need two International Airports where one large, proper facility can be used.

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 9):
They will work against a large slice of federal funding going to Sydney to support the infrastructure required for a new airport as they know the longer a new airport is delayed, the more economic benefits flow to their cities.

Again not really. Both MEL and BNE have embarked on major infrastructure spending based on Sydney's toll road concept and public/private partnerships. When it comes to Sydney, having the number of marginal seats is more what will work against a new airport however smart approach designs, noise mitigation and the economic development that will occur will far outweigh any of these. A smart politician would point out the number of businesses, jobs and people that will move from the areas surrounding SYD to the West should a new Airport be build to replace the airport in Mascot.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 26):
To both of you, say what? There is no way SYD would close, nor should it have to.

In order to get a return on investment, Sydney Airport should close. It's too close to housing and would be an awesome site for urban consolidation and an expansion of container shipping in Botany Bay.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 26):
The proposed airport at Badgerys Creek never had long enough runways AFAIK nor should a perfectly capable facility at SYD close for a new option.

The proposed airport at Badgerys Creek should be built with Runways long enough for all purposes. Train lines should be extended to it for both passenger and freight to allow for seamless connections on both. The good thing is that Badgerys has enough room to properly execute all of its missions, SYD does not.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 26):
Who said Badgery's Creek Airport would be curfew free? I can't see that being a reality at all.

On this I agree. Badgerys will probably keep a curfew however having an increased number of runways and more room for flight operations will allow for more aircraft movements. The most important thing for Badgerys is that it can't be slot controlled. It needs to be a facility without an artificial cap on its movements for the hours that it is open.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:45 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 27):
The owners of SYD have the first right of refusal to build and operate the second airport. So no Government money necessarily has to flow into that

Whilst they have the first right of refusal, they have no incentive to exercise these rights and a huge incentive to participate solely with aim of slowing down the whole process. They currently get monopoly pricing on a fully utilised facility. They have zero incentive to build a 2nd airport to compete with themselves. The first right of refusal is yet another roadblock to sensible decision making on this whole topic.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 27):
Both MEL and BNE have embarked on major infrastructure spending based on Sydney's toll road concept and public/private partnerships

I think the first major public-private partnership may have actually been Melbourne's Citylink project created under Jeff Kennett. Unfortunately Brisbane seems to have copied Sydney in creating toll roads that miss their targets massively and go broke. Citylink didn't go broke basically because the government forced users onto it by making alternative routes harder to use through removal of clearways etc.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 27):
It's too close to housing and would be an awesome site for urban consolidation and an expansion of container shipping in Botany Bay.

You're right but no one could afford to pay Sydney Airports out so it won't happen. The state government is already broke and has a huge infrastructure backlog and any Federal Government that proposed to direct such a huge amount into NSW would be destroyed in the other states.
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,310,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,AT
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:08 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 27):
The proposed airport at Badgerys Creek should be built with Runways long enough for all purposes. Train lines should be extended to it for both passenger and freight to allow for seamless connections on both. The good thing is that Badgerys has enough room to properly execute all of its missions, SYD does not.

3 or more runways, one of which is at least 3.25km long! Is the land available at Badgery's Creek big enough for that?

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 28):
You're right but no one could afford to pay Sydney Airports out so it won't happen.

Probably correct. How long is their management right for, or is it indefinite?
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:25 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 29):
How long is their management right for, or is it indefinite?

99 year lease so they lose their management rights in 2101!!!
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,310,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,AT
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:36 am

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 28):
Whilst they have the first right of refusal, they have no incentive to exercise these rights and a huge incentive to participate solely with aim of slowing down the whole process. They currently get monopoly pricing on a fully utilised facility. They have zero incentive to build a 2nd airport to compete with themselves. The first right of refusal is yet another roadblock to sensible decision making on this whole topic.

Actually they don't. The first right of refusal is for a set period which I think is only a couple of years. After that the Government is free to build a new airport or have someone else build it.

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 28):
You're right but no one could afford to pay Sydney Airports out so it won't happen. The state government is already broke and has a huge infrastructure backlog and any Federal Government that proposed to direct such a huge amount into NSW would be destroyed in the other states.

No-one needs to buy SYD out. The land SYD sits on is Commonwealth Govt land so the Govt could negotiate a settlement on Sydney Airport that in return for closing the airport, the Government will convert the lease into a freehold title with the Government holding a percentage of a joint property company to develop and sell the land. It could be done where it's in SYD' interest to develop the land to recover its lease investment and to make a profit.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 29):
3 or more runways, one of which is at least 3.25km long! Is the land available at Badgery's
Creek big enough for that?

There is plenty of land available around it. The real question is which way they will point and how many people the noise will effect.

Quoting tullamarine (Reply 30):
99 year lease so they lose their management rights in 2101!!!

Again, that's not an unsolveable challenge. With the right incentive in relation to development, SYD owners could be enticed to do what is best for Sydney. It's only a question of how much money they will get to keep once the development is all done.
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:11 am

SYD isn't enough of a basket case to justify throwing billions of dollars at closing it as far as I can see. It's actually a very convenient location for many people so a huge number would be inconvenienced by its closing, as well as businesspeople mostly needing to travel further to do business.

Sorry, the case for closing SYD isn't satisfactory as far as I am concerned.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:37 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 32):
SYD isn't enough of a basket case to justify throwing billions of dollars at closing it as far as I can see.

But that's the thing, you won't throw billions of dollars at it. In the end, if handled properly, it should actually make money.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 32):
It's actually a very convenient location for many people so a huge number would be inconvenienced by its closing, as well as businesspeople mostly needing to travel further to do business.

The business people argument is entirely false. There are plenty of examples of large airports built in the same vicinity as Badgerys Creek is to the Sydney CBD where business hasn't been affected. Sure people from the Eastern suburbs and CBD will have to travel more, but moving the airport will actually encourage a substantial number of businesses to relocate out West which will drive employment and economic outcomes in Western Sydney.

Quoting thegeek (Reply 32):
Sorry, the case for closing SYD isn't satisfactory as far as I am concerned.

I disagree. The case couldn't be better for closing and moving Sydney Airport to a site where it can grow in future to meet Sydneys aviation requirements. Such a move would create thousands of jobs, would result in a regeneration of the Western Sydney economy, reduce delays across the Eastern seaboard and would result in a large regneration project in what is a prime site near the Sydney CBD. It can only be good for Sydney, the problem is the politicians have sat on their hands for too long and are now too frightened to actually do anything.

This is also an interesting read as well;

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/avi..._nine_future_use_badgery_creek.pdf
 
shnoob940
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:53 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:30 am

Sorry if this has already been discussed, but is D7 going 2x daily on the KUL-SYD return rotation? (D7220/221?)

cheers
gibbo
A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A359 A388 733 734 735 737 738 739 743 744 762 763 772 77E 773 77W 788 789 E170 E190 Q400 AT7 DH
 
tullamarine
Posts: 1612
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:47 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 31):
Actually they don't. The first right of refusal is for a set period which I think is only a couple of years. After that the Government is free to build a new airport or have someone else build it.

You're right, hence SACL will do everything to prevent anyone making a firm decision. Why do you think they keep talking about there being plenty of capacity for growth at Mascot? It suits their long-term interests and makes it so the politicians don't have to make a decision even though Blind Freddie can see the airport is already maxxed out.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 31):
With the right incentive in relation to development, SYD owners could be enticed to do what is best for Sydney

I think they are more interested in their own shareholders. It's unlikely the interests of Sydney and SACL shareholders coincide.
717,721/2,732/3/4/5/7/8/9,742/3/4,752/3,762/3,772,W,310,320/1,332/3,388,DC9,DC10,F28,F100,142,143,E90,CR2,D82/3/4,SF3,AT
 
qf002
Posts: 3066
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:48 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 32):
Quoting sydscott (Reply 33):
The business people argument is entirely false. There are plenty of examples of large airports built in the same vicinity as Badgerys Creek is to the Sydney CBD where business hasn't been affected

The difference being that the population generally isn't as dependant on air travel in most of those examples. There are plenty of other examples where multiple airports in a city cater for different needs, which is the model I think we should be aiming towards.

Build a brand new airport that is capable of handling all long haul international, most cargo and part of the domestic traffic, and use this airport as the principal vessel for growth moving forward.

Then chop up the existing airport to create a new single runway 'Sydney City' style airport, extending the existing third runway inland a little bit and building a brand new terminal area to the north (ie accessed straight off the end of Southern Cross Drive). Some space can be used to grow the shipping/container operation, and the rest ofnthe area (particularly to the south and west) can be turned into public, residential and industrial areas. The amount of demand for new developments in that area is very high, so the land would probably generate a decent return.

The city airport would be restricted to domestic and limited Tasman routes, and would probably be NB-only/heavily slot restricted. Local residents would see a massive benefit, and a business/government oriented airport is easy to operate within the existing curfew/movement cap.
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:54 pm

Quoting qf002 (Reply 36):
Build a brand new airport that is capable of handling all long haul international, most cargo and part of the domestic traffic, and use this airport as the principal vessel for growth moving forward
Quoting qf002 (Reply 36):
Then chop up the existing airport to create a new single runway 'Sydney City' style airport

And I'll say it again. We end up with Haneda or Linate. Those cities are useless hubs. People flying CBR-SYD-HKG or ADL-SYD-LAX will go through BNE or MEL because of the better domestic-international connecting opportunities, so the big loser here is SYD and the NSW economy.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
Mikey86
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 11:51 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:46 am

Was the Air Canada announcement just speculation via a press release along with AC touting services to MEL? Does anyone have a reliable source that this would definitely come to fruition?
mikey86 - Greenslopes, Queensland
 
qf002
Posts: 3066
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:01 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 37):
And I'll say it again. We end up with Haneda or Linate. Those cities are useless hubs. People flying CBR-SYD-HKG or ADL-SYD-LAX will go through BNE or MEL because of the better domestic-international connecting opportunities, so the big loser here is SYD and the NSW economy.

But if we did it right, we could end up with an LCY, LGA, DCA etc.

The trick would be to find the balance between domestic services at the new airport and the existing one. There are so many flights connecting our major centres that it would be very easy to split operations.

I'm just not confident that the transport links will be there to make the commute work from the city and anywhere outside the west. It's going to equally harmful to the economy if the new airport isn't able to cater to the needs of those who rely on it for their business.
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:55 am

Quoting qf002 (Reply 39):
But if we did it right, we could end up with an LCY, LGA, DCA etc.

The trick would be to find the balance between domestic services at the new airport and the existing one.

Right, I think I understand what you're saying. If we take DCA and LGA, then we can actually add the likes of HND as well as being "good" regional city airports.

The problem comes from the inherently inefficient nature of this sort of operation. LGA is another good example of this, DL are desperately trying to "win New York" but the split JFK-LGA operation makes this harder to achieve. EWR, despite being less convenient to most of Manhattan, is the only airport that can truly serve this purpose because it is all under one roof.

DCA works, like LCY, because it very conveniently serves an incredibly high yielding market. There is the DC Metro or DLR+Underground straight to the airplane door, and having flown into both they really are a delight. You can be in the city centre 15 minutes after stepping off the plane.

SYD does, to a degree, offer this sort of convenience. After all, Domestic to Central is only 12 mins IIRC. However, in order to make SYD the "premium" city centre airport and stop airlines flying there rather than SYD#2 you would have to severely slot constrain it. See DCA-IAD. Arguably Washington is a model we can follow. That means having a large, hub-capable airport far out in the sprawling suburbs (NoVA or Western Sydney) that has a large population catchment, but not so convenient to the city centre. Build it big, make it a hub, and have flights from that airport to the entire globe. Then have a highly restricted airport for the inbound city-centric traffic. By restricting the other airport, not all O&D can be handled at DCA/SYD meaning that there is sufficient domestic flying at SYD#2 to support the international network.

You need to slot constrain it to make airlines fly there rather than IAD/SYD#2. When you allow a free for all, but keep long haul excluded, you get the dysfunction at Milan, where one of the reasons AZ don't have an MXP hub is because there isn't enough traffic to support Euro routes out of MXP.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 39):
I'm just not confident that the transport links will be there to make the commute work from the city and anywhere outside the west.

I appreciate that much, we are after all talking about Australia, and NSW in particular. If we were doing it "properly" we would build a super-fast rail link to the city that connects the airport in under 30 minutes (see HKG), and maybe extend it to reach Newcastle and Canberra in an hour, but that sort of common sense thinking will never fly here   
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:00 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 40):
but that sort of common sense thinking will never fly here

Of course it will, it's just a telephone call to Macquarie Bank away from reality......................
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18111
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:21 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 40):
You need to slot constrain it to make airlines fly there rather than IAD/SYD#2.

The perimeter rule (2000 km) at DCA helps, although there are some (Congress mandated) beyond perimeter exemptions. Generally, if you want to fly long-haul (even transcons) it's IAD, as at LGA (perimeter) it's JFK or EWR.

Curiously, the perimeter rule at LGA is relaxed on Saturdays and few have been able to make regular "beyond perimeter" flights work, not even to the Caribbean (say), even in winter (busiest season) and on Saturday (busiest day). There is a market, there are some charter flights (LGA-PUJ e.g.), but no scheduled service.

Still, your plan for SYD and SYD2 works for me.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:33 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 42):
The perimeter rule (2000 km) at DCA helps

I agree, but I didn't bring it up as I think that SYD1-PER makes sense. After all, having open access from DCA and LGA to, say, SFO, LAX, SEA, DEN would be a major leg-up to the corporate travel market.

Having limited slots available should be sufficient to "force" some traffic to SYD2, while allowing the market to determine where to fly. Rather than "use up" their slot portfolio on routes such LGA-ROA or DCA-FAY, as DL@LGA and US@DCA have done, I personally believe that the airlines should be able to fly wherever they feel that they can best maximise their limited resources.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18111
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:42 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 43):
I agree, but I didn't bring it up as I think that SYD1-PER makes sense.

Agreed again, but it is why I used the well-run DCA - which has beyond perimeter exemptions allowing a few transcons - as the primary example.

The management of the slots at (perimeter restricted) LGA has been a cock-up.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:55 am

I think that Sydney Airport could easily be a superb international and domestic airport, with a western Sydney secondary airport for the LCC market (Tiger, Jetstar, Scoot, Air Asia etc).

The problem at Sydney - like most Australian airports - isn't so much capacity as the stupid separation of international and domestic, which leads me to avoid it like the plague for my international travel.

In contrast, Melbourne co-locates the two nicely.

There seem to be a lot of Qantas hangars at SYD between international and domestic which get in the way of having two adjoining terminals. I've got four Business Class long-haul trips scheduled over the next few months, and three route from Queensland via Auckland and the other via Abu Dhabi. That could have been Sydney's business (especially as OOL suits me far better than BNE) but I will not do the terminal change there, under any circumstances.
 
qf002
Posts: 3066
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:31 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 40):

Agree with everything you say.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 40):
I appreciate that much, we are after all talking about Australia, and NSW in particular. If we were doing it "properly" we would build a super-fast rail link to the city that connects the airport in under 30 minutes (see HKG), and maybe extend it to reach Newcastle and Canberra in an hour, but that sort of common sense thinking will never fly here

It's also about putting transport options in place for people outside the city. It's pretty straightforward for most people to get into the city, but the infrastructure to travel west is far less established.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 43):
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 43):
Having limited slots available should be sufficient to "force" some traffic to SYD2, while allowing the market to determine where to fly.

As long as SYD2 is the main international gateway, both QF and VA will be forced to maintain a decent number of flights to support connecting traffic. It would also be easy to charge higher handling fees at SYD1, which would push JQ/TT out to SYD2, and promote the new airport by offering identical fights at a slightly lower price (I think $5-10 would be sufficient to convince people choosing between the two).

Quoting koruman (Reply 45):
There seem to be a lot of Qantas hangars at SYD between international and domestic which get in the way of having two adjoining terminals

I think you'll find that it's the main runway that poses the biggest issue. The jet base is tucked away in the corner very nicely, to the extent that most people don't even seeit unless they are flying from on of the gates along the rear of terminal 3.

I do share the sentiment that the existing site could be a real world class airport, but creating such an airport would be a massive (and extremely expensive) task. There is very little that they could do to make major changes to the configuration of the airport now that General Holmes Dr and the M5 are where they are and the residential area surrounding the site comes right up to the airport.

And the additional political and social issues would continue to be present.

Quoting koruman (Reply 45):
I've got four Business Class long-haul trips scheduled over the next few months, and three route from Queensland via Auckland and the other via Abu Dhabi. That could have been Sydney's business (especially as OOL suits me far better than BNE) but I will not do the terminal change there, under any circumstances.

I doubt it, since that would mean (probably) flying QF, which you also hate with a passion. You've proclaimed before that you'll only fly across the Pacific with NZ (so you'd be flying straight into AKL anyway, avoiding SYD), and not many Queenslanders would be looking to fly via SYD when heading west.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 2773
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:20 pm

Syd2 better hope its not the next Mirabel if it is not co-ordinated well. Getting the ops mix right will be vital, especially given the amount of stakeholders who have a stake in this.

The amount of investment needed will be considerable and some are right that other states will have a field day attacking large scale federal govt funds to this airport and other related infrastructure (ie. roads, rail).
 
travelhound
Posts: 1113
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:42 pm

Quoting sydscott (Reply 31):
There is plenty of land available around it. The real question is which way they will point and how many people the noise will effect.

There are quite a few sensitive Ecosystems that make expanding Sydney Airport difficult. If you have a look at the environmental issues of extending the runways into Botany Bay many years ago that will give you an idea of he issues.

Quoting sydscott (Reply 33):
But that's the thing, you won't throw billions of dollars at it. In the end, if handled properly, it should actually make money.

I read feasibility studies about the re-development of Sydney Airport quite a few years ago where it was concluded redeveloping Sydney would cost some where in the region of three times more then developing a green field site.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 36):
There are plenty of other examples where multiple airports in a city cater for different needs

The business case for any airport is dependent upon multiple factors. For example expanding Sydney Airport or developing a second Sydney airport could be undermined by the further development of Darwin Airport for International operations. With the introduction of new long range and efficient aircraft the business case for developing Darwin Airport becomes stronger.
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Australian Aviation Thread # 69

Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:33 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 33):
But that's the thing, you won't throw billions of dollars at it. In the end, if handled properly, it should actually make money.

Do you have any reason to believe that would be the case?