Emirates charged with breaching overnight curfew

[Alex T]

From: http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/emirates-charged-with-breaching-overnight-curfew-at-sydney-airport-20131105-2wyqj.html :(

Emirates charged with breaching overnight curfew at Sydney Airport

Emirates has become the first airline to be charged with breaching the overnight curfew on flights at Sydney Airport since Jetstar was prosecuted six years ago. After an investigation, the Department of Infrastructure and Transport has decided to push for charges to be laid against the Dubai-based airline for three alleged breaches of the curfew between late 2011 and January this year. The airline faces a maximum fine of $550,000 for each breach of the curfew, which is designed to prevent commercial airlines from flying between 11pm and 6am at Kingsford Smith. The department alleges that the most recent breach occurred on January 8 when Emirates flight EK413 took off from the airport bound for Dubai about 11.40pm – 40 minutes after the curfew takes effect.

The latest an Emirates flight – EK413 – is alleged to have taken off is about 11.46pm on December 16, 2011. The other charge relates to an alleged breach by flight EK419 about 11.14pm on November 8, 2011.

Emirates is yet to enter a plea in the case, which is before the Downing Centre Local Court in Sydney.

[Philip Argy]

The Local Court can't impose a fine of that magnitude - if it's in that court it's just being prosecuted as a summary offence, with a maximum penalty of $6,600.

[NathanJ]

I'm sure they can afford it haha.

[Stephen Brown]

Watching the Dubai Airport show on Foxtel last night and seeing them invest $3 billion in a new terminal and getting an impression on how they run things, it will be pocket change to EK.

It was embarrassing to watch them struggling to get EK414 away on time last night because they were trying to beat the curfew in Sydney.

[Kent Broadhead]

It was embarrassing to watch them struggling to get EK414 away on time last night because they were trying to beat the curfew in Sydney.
Embarrassing because they hadn't been able to plan better to meet the rules of the airport?

[Greg McDonald]

It was embarrassing to watch them struggling to get EK414 away on time last night because they were trying to beat the curfew in Sydney.

Or embarrassing that the airport has stupidly antiquated rules and gutless politicians who won't change them?

[Kent Broadhead]

Surely Sydney is the only significant airport with a curfew?

Oh, sorry, no it isn't. How does Heathrow manage its curfew?

Look, I can see a place for greater flexibility with the curfew around major service disruptions such as severe weather (and removing the 80ph cap), but SYD is not located for 24/7-365 service without a major impact on a big chunk of Sydney's population.

[Hugh Jarse]

I suspect the cost of any fine imposed will be less than that of the operational cost associated with unexpected accommodation, downline delays for that aircraft etc. :)

If it were not, Emirates Ops would have canned the flight/s and rescheduled :)

[Gavin Otto]

How does Heathrow manage its curfew?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quota_Count_system

Seems a bit better than Sydney's 'all in' antiquated approach

[Kent Broadhead]

True. Perhaps some greater variations whilst maintaining the 34L takeoff ban.

[Scott L.]

Scheduled services should be between the curfew hours but dispensation should always be provided for operational reasons. A fair use / breach policy should apply so its not abused.
Its embarrassing that in Sydney, as remote as we are, these rules persist.
If you live in the city - expect noise.
If you want peace and quiet, move away from the city.

[Ash W]

. A fair use / breach policy should apply so its not abused.

The issue of course is how do you police possible abuse?

[Garry Emanuel]

Yay Scott !

In the early days of the expansion of the airport, I am sure many of the residents were caught in a very tight spot - unexpectedly, noise was increasing and their formerly quiet locale had been overrun (or should I say flown) by previously unthinkable planes (size and number).

Some years on, it is time to accept that the precincts close to an existing transport hub will come with considerable noise.

For all those that have purchased in the proximity of the airport in the last 25 years, get real.

Time for the curfew to be seriously reviewed and pruned - if we want to be a global city, we need to be globally aligned and readily accessible.

It would be interesting to see how schedules would change if YSSY became less constrained !

[Stephen Brown]

Or Build Badgerys Creek.

[Ash W]

Badgerys creek now has houses around it too, so same issue really.

[Bradley Porter]

Why build Badgerys Ck. and subject a whole new area to noise, just remove the curfew at Sydney, and develop the current Airport to its full potential.

There is a lot more development to be done at YSSY before it becomes redundant.

[Mick F]

Perhaps, but why just continue to build on something that is 95% full now, when you could build a brand new facility that will do for a longer period of time.

Time to make a move on Badgery's Creek. Just need a government who's got the ***** to do it. Think about the country's infrastructure, rather than just the next election.

Mick

[Garry Emanuel]

Yay Mick.

All for the infrastructure - need to get a "long term set" happening with the near-sghted pollies !

[Bradley Porter]

Perhaps, but why just continue to build on something that is 95% full now, when you could build a brand new facility that will do for a longer period of time.
Mick

Where do you get the 95% full statistic from ?

http://www.sydneyairport.com.au/corporate/~/media/files/corporate/about%20us/fact%20sheets/fact_sheet_sydney_airport_capacity_the_facts.pdf

According to the fact sheet above Sydney Airport can cope with passenger demand until 2045 without any changes to Runways, Curfew or Movement Caps.

Now imagine how much more useful life YSSY could have if some more development work and the removal of the curfew were to take place.

For example:
1. Fill in the area between the two North/South runways out in the bay and place the freight terminal and Aircraft Maintenance Hangars out there with road access from Foreshore Drive.
2. Extend 16L/34R to cater for larger aircraft movements.
3. Remove the QANTAS hangars and extend the current domestic terminal into that area.
4. Move ahead with the proposal to run both Domestic and International Operations from both sides of the airport i.e Oneworld carriers on one side and Star Alliance etc on the other.
5. Build a world class train link underground for easy passenger transfers between terminals, and include a cargo link to transfer baggage and cargo easily between terminals instead of using carts above ground.

As you can see, the current airport has so much more potential and most of all it is in the best location where people want to fly to, politics is holding YSSY back as well. From a cost point of view, the development of YSSY is much more beneficial to the countries economy than building a white elephant airport out in the western suburbs when some of the money that would be invested would be much better spent on building better roads to the current airport and CBD.

[Ash W]

it is in the best location where people want to fly to

Agree with the bulk of what you wrote except for this. What I gather you meant is it is the best location wherethe bulk of inbound passengers want to fly to.

It is not very convenient however for the bulk of passengers that want to use it outbound. It is convenient for those who live in the city, eastern suburbs and inner west and south. The bulk of the people in Sydney live much further out where getting to the airport is a PIA. Try getting to the airport from Parramatta for example, which is the population centre of Sydney.

[Bernie P]

Seems 'appropriate' that I post this pic here... Spotted yesterday surveying Sheps Mound, so it may seem as though the 'development' is on the cards for that area... Seemed to be about 10m intervals around the area, and there was a second surveyor (inside the perimeter fence) towards the back corner of the bus area next to Sheps!

Now, back to EK and breaching curfew...

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7334/10739103344_0fbe01d325_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/berniep/10739103344/)
Sheps Mound being surveyed-2545 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/berniep/10739103344/) by A u s s i e P o m m (http://www.flickr.com/people/berniep/), on Flickr

[Montague S]

Watching the Dubai Airport show on Foxtel last night and seeing them invest $3 billion in a new terminal and getting an impression on how they run things, it will be pocket change to EK.

It was embarrassing to watch them struggling to get EK414 away on time last night because they were trying to beat the curfew in Sydney.

it's embarrassing to know they spent that much money on the new terminal at DXB and it's still a mess! not to mention a human zoo.

[Ash W]

Indeed, getting off topic I know but I laughed when I saw the episode which had the poor signage, especially to the lounge, because had the same issue myself the first time I used the new terminal. But guess thats getting OT a little.

[Greg W.]

The Local Court can't impose a fine of that magnitude - if it's in that court it's just being prosecuted as a summary offence, with a maximum penalty of $6,600.

Assuming that the offence provision being prosecuted is s.7 of the Sydney Airport Curfew Act 1995, the maximum penalty is a fine of 1000 units. It is multiplied x5 for a corporation. A penalty until prior to the end of Dec 2012 was $110, when it changed to $170. Being an offence punishable by fine only, it is a summary offence and therefore must be heard by the Local Court. There is no monetary jurisdictional limit for the Local Court exercising federal jurisdiction. By my logic, the max penalty for the 2 earlier offences will be $550,000 and $850,000 for the January 2013. :eek:

[Philip Argy]

In my opinion the Local Court cannot impose a fine of more than 300 penalty units [$51,000] on a corporation or 60 [$10,200] on an individual when exercising Federal jurisdiction. If the prosecution wants a higher penalty, it needs to prosecute the offence in a higher court.