More fuss over Rwy 07/25 Closure

[NickN]

From todays Daily Telegraph....

By Brad Watts

April 04, 2008 12:00am


SYDNEY Airport's east-west runway will close despite a public consultation and thunderous opposition over the major development, the Federal Government has warned.

Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese told The Daily Telegraph he expected the proposed safety upgrade to proceed despite deafening community concern over the runway closure, resulting in more than 70 per cent more flights over the inner west and North Shore.

The public is asked to comment on the draft plan, which will cause disruptions until mid-2010 - a year longer than planned - due to the $85 million safety work at the Cooks River end of the east-west runway.

Mr Albanese baulked at suggestions to keep the runway open and the safety extension work to be completed between 11pm and 6am.

Mr Albanese slammed the idea, saying, "It's a recipe for a permanent end to the noise-sharing arrangement."

"Every engineering expert who has looked at it says that's not possible," he said. "I (also) want disruption minimised."

Last February, Mr Albanese gave an iron-clad guarantee the curfew would remain, but angry residents say the latest runway closure will eat away noise-free periods and give homes on the northside 17 hours of noise a day.

No Aircraft Noise president Allan Rees called Mr Albanese's attitude to residents appalling.

Sydney airport did not respond to specific questions, however a spokeswoman said management will carefully consider all submissions received and submit them to Mr Albanese.

[Andrew P]

I can’t work out why they could not use the 11pm to 6.00am option.

When Hong Kong Kai Tak airport had to be have its landing zones replaced. they closed the airport for 6 months every night.

Last take off was 10.30pm and at 11.00pm, the airport was handed over t the contractors, who had to off by 5.00am so it could cleared for 6.00am opening.

It worked well

Banjo

[Nigel C]

Banjo,
The curfew period works quite well at the moment for most maintenance and construction jobs around the airport, but there may well be elements of the construction that require more than just 7 hours to complete.

You have to remember it's a delicate job having to work around and over the rather old and no doubt brittle SWSOOS tunnel. The potential environmental consequences of any stuff ups could be huge.
I'd prefer them to take their time and do it properly than rush to beat a curfew end time.

There's also the long term aircraft noise concerns that have been raised for suburbs along the 16/34 flight paths. If the work was to only proceed during curfew, then the job would take far longer and effectively rule 07/25 out of service for a greater period. I'm sure Mr Albanese's electorate would thank him if he went with that option...

Regards,
Nigel

[NickN]

Sorry not quite sure what the SWOOS tunnel is?

[Nigel C]

Southern and Western Suburbs Ocean Outfall Sewer.

[Steve S... 2]

I think passenger safety is more important than noise on the North Shore and Inner West (which were under the flight path long before the residents bought their properties).

What concerns me is the danger of aircraft landing on runway 16/34 in gale force westerlies and there will be some very serious problems in the coming months. You will probably find the airport will have to close as the winds are shocking at that time of year, and it will happen the wind can last for days even a week at a time.

Glad I am not booked on any flights during June to September.

[Nigel C]

That's OK Steve. They're not planning the closure until October 08.

All going well I reckon they're hoping to have the runway available in some capacity (with recall time) if the need arises by July next year. Obviously that'll depend very heavily on the works progress up until then.

At the end of the day, if the pilot is faced with crosswinds that he/she either isn't trained for, or the aircraft isn't rated for, then they have the legal (and moral) obligation to go elsewhere. It is fair to say that diversions at some point will be expected.

Cheers
Nigel

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Hey Nigel

If the western end of the runway is where the work will be conducted, do you know if RWY07 would be available for departures from a slightly displaced point adjacent to GOLF2 or thereabouts?

Cheers

Andrew

[D Chan]

I think passenger safety is more important than noise on the North Shore and Inner West (which were under the flight path long before the residents bought their properties).

100% agree with this. And also these residents are bound to fly out of Sydney at some stage of their lives. If any of those residents are involved with an overrun incident I am sure they would change their mind.

[NickN]

It always confuses me why residents under the flight path purchase their homes in the knowledge aircraft noice will be an issue and then cry foul afterwards. Sort of like purchasing a car knowing it has high kilometres then complaining when it breaks down.

[Adam P.]

potential environmental consequences

Couldn't have the office stinking any more than it does already, could we Nigel???:D

Nick the opening of the third runway some 14 years ago pushed more noise over more areas of the eastern bit of the inner west that wasn't affected beforehand... some people may well have bought their properties before then!

[Brendon I.]

Nick,

Agree with you 100%. I bet they all thought it was great when they purchased their homes at bargain prices years ago. Now they whine about the noise. Don`t know exactly how long airport has been there but I`m sure it has been there long before all of the current residents.

[Hugh Jarse]

Steve S2,

Airports no longer "close" due to strong winds, thunderstorms or other extreme phenomena. That type of operational control ceased over 10 years ago. The onus is now on the flight crews as to whether they elect to use the airport or not in such conditions.

I live under the flight path of 16R, and have done so for most of my life. Our local rag (anti-aircraft) was quoted as saying that they had 6 aircraft fly over in less than 2 minutes. Now excuse me for being picky, but my understanding is that the total movements at SY is capped at 80 per hour.

That makes it 180 landings per hour just on 16R. Without departures. Typically it's 1 for 1.

This is the sort of lies we are up against.

[Darren Butterworth]

Nick - Agree. We moved from Qld 2yrs ago and sadly, a factor in us settling in Annandale was vision of the flight path.

My son is 13, has Cerebral Palsy and we love nothing more than sitting in our tiny back yard, watching the Sydney airport website on the wireless network, listening to the tower on the scanner, taking pics and putting them on our webpage. It beats negotiating a shopping centre on a Saturday morning with a wheel chair and having old people stare.

We're not all crack pots in the inner west, bring on the extra traffic on 16R.

Only thing is, it's gettin rather cool now for our Qld blood to rush out to watch the A380 each morning.

(tried to upload an image, but seem to have had an issue, wahever size I made it, was what I'd exceeded my quota by??)

[Ash W]

I think passenger safety is more important than noise on the North Shore and Inner West (which were under the flight path long before the residents bought their properties).

What concerns me is the danger of aircraft landing on runway 16/34 in gale force westerlies and there will be some very serious problems in the coming months. You will probably find the airport will have to close as the winds are shocking at that time of year, and it will happen the wind can last for days even a week at a time.

Glad I am not booked on any flights during June to September.

There are plenty of single runway airports in the world, or places like LHR where there are two (or more) parallel runways. Why is it so dangerous in Sydney that it will effect passenger safety?

[Nigel C]

Hey Nigel

If the western end of the runway is where the work will be conducted, do you know if RWY07 would be available for departures from a slightly displaced point adjacent to GOLF2 or thereabouts?

Cheers

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

I don't believe there will be displaced departures. There would probably be a jetblast issue for the works behind it.:eek:

Cheers
Nigel

[Nigel C]

....they had 6 aircraft fly over in less than 2 minutes.


Separation standards? What separation standards!:rolleyes:

[Ryan Hothersall]

Although, I don't live in Sydney, I get the impression all the stink about the noise is not to do with safety (except in stormy conditions), but more like people worried it will devalue house prices.

[Adam P.]

devalue house prices.

House prices in Sydney going DOWN????


I'd like to see that!!!! :eek:

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Hi Andrew,

I don't believe there will be displaced departures. There would probably be a jetblast issue for the works behind it.:eek:

Cheers
Nigel

Thanks Nigel - suspected as much.

Perhaps the Dashs, Saabs and Air Ambos could do it, especially as they're somewhat limited in their cross wind allowances compared to the larger jets.

Anyway, I appreciate it's somewhat above your pay scale. :cool:

Cheers

[Adam P.]

somewhat limited in their cross wind allowances

Saabs have a 35kt xwind limit.... there have been occasions when Rex could get into places like Ballina when DJ couldn't due the crosswind. Admittedly the factor there is a narrower runway that reduces the limit on the 737, but don't think that the 'smaller' aircraft necessarily can't accept some fairly severe winds!

[NickN]

Only thing is, it's gettin rather cool now for our Qld blood to rush out to watch the A380 each morning.


Awwwww c'mon mate! You Cane Toads always whinge about our fantastic Sydney weather:p. Maccas is right next door to the mound now, a hot coffee in one hand and some hot hash browns in the other you wont even know its coming up to winter.

It's great to see someone appreciate their location that close to the airport rather than complain!