After 2300 hours post-curfew operations in SYD on Sunday 5 June 2016

[Melburnian1]

Sunday 5 June and the preceding six hours saw 150mm of rain dumped on Sydney Airport.

There were numerous delays and a few cancelled flights. Delays reached four hours in some cases but two was more typical.

Several RPT aircraft at least technically breached the 2300 hours curfew. I have written this up in the CX, JQ, QF, TT and VA threads called 'delays/ cancellations.' there may also have been a ZL aircraft bound for DBO that did the same.

That these flights would have obtained a dispensation from the Federal 9caretaker) Ministerial delegate is more or less a given. Just how each argued the case for granting is not clear to me, as late running alone is not sufficient.

The latest departure that I saw was a TT flight with a 2319 hours takeoff for PER.

These departing flights all took off to the south, but arrivals coming in between 2255 and 2302, as others had earlier, landed from the east over suburbia.

Is this issue likely to be ignored during the Federal election campaign or will the 'no aircraft noise' advocates of previous years again have something to say if they become aware of these late takeoffs and I think one late arrival on Sunday?

 

[moa999]

Also an even later CZ arrival
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/CSN301/history/20160605/0020Z/ZGGG/YSSY

 

[dajop]

Only comment .... ZL wouldn't have breached as from memory ZL's SAABs don't have a curfew ....

 

[jb747]

You aren't breaching anything if it's done with approval.

 

[docjames]

Common sense at last from the government regarding curfew waiver!

 

[Danger]

That these flights would have obtained a dispensation from the Federal 9caretaker) Ministerial delegate is more or less a given. Just how each argued the case for granting is not clear to me, as late running alone is not sufficient.

What do you mean by "caretaker"?

 

[dajop]

Is this issue likely to be ignored during the Federal election campaign or will the 'no aircraft noise' advocates of previous years again have something to say if they become aware of these late takeoffs and I think one late arrival on Sunday?

It's also all relative .... when there are storms about ... a little bit of aircraft noise is trivial amongst the noise from wind, heavy rain etc ......

 

[Simo]

I am glad they allowed this to happen last night..

It shows some commonsense from the Govt.

I would like to see the thread renamed as no one breached curfew as it was approved.

 

[Melburnian1]

What do you mean by "caretaker"?

Danger, we are in a Federal election period as the writs were issued for dissolution of both the House of Representatives and the Senate with a Federal election - called in this case a 'double dissolution' - to occur on Saturday 2 July (with voting also possible by post, absentee and from two Mondays before the polling date, at an early voting centre).

During what this time is an unusually long about 50 day period, Ministers remain so but by convention are restricted in what decisions they can make. The nomenclature therefore calls them 'caretakers.'

 

[Melburnian1]

You aren't breaching anything if it's done with approval.

Correct, but in the past there have been multiple cases of EK, and at least one case of JQ, breaching the curfew:

Emirates charged with breaching overnight curfew at Sydney Airport

 

[jb747]

Correct, but in the past there have been multiple cases of EK, and at least one case of JQ, breaching the curfew:

Emirates charged with breaching overnight curfew at Sydney Airport

Perhaps, but it isn't relevant to this day, is it?

 

[Melburnian1]

I would like to see the thread renamed as no one breached curfew as it was approved.

I tried to rename the thread, which only worked for the initial heading. I do not know how to use the 'advanced' feature to rename a thread: this may be something that only the moderators can do. Thank you Simo.

I am not sure during the caretaker period whether the Federal Minister's delegate, who is a public servant if I recall, would have to refer any contentious decisions to the Minister or his staff, as the Ministers are in 'caretaker mode' as noted above.

Granted that this was a most unusual day - 150mm of rain at the airport in 30 hours - but some local residents who have objected in the past may still regard takeoffs of large aircraft at 2315 or close to 2330 as breaching the letter, and the spirit, of agreements and stipulations about aircraft noise.

I am not necessarily agreeing with them, but that may be their view. It has been noisily expressed in the past - 'No Aircraft Noise' party and so on - although they have to bear in mind that last night if I recall all the post 2300 hours takeoffs of RPT aircraft were to the south, which is way preferable to them occurring to any of the other three directions.

And as another AFF member said, the storm intensity was arguably more important than any intermittent additional noise emissions from passenger aircraft trying to get passengers to their destination for the night, or overnight in the case of CX.

 

[Melburnian1]

Perhaps, but it isn't relevant to this day, is it?

I can't say with certainty that all these operations were officially approved. Highly likely, the more so because there were multiple takeoffs that occurred well after 2300 hours but that's why a report is presented on a quarterly basis to the Federal Parliament about whether in each case 'dispensation' was granted.

 

[junbugging]

I find the political aspect of this thread kinda weird.

 

[Simo]

I find the political aspect of this thread kinda weird.

I don't understand your comment in regards to Politics as the curfew rules are controlled by the Govt and as we are in election period the current Govt is in Caretaker mode.

Many times in the media the term caretaker is used at the moment.

 

[Melburnian1]

I find the political aspect of this thread kinda weird.

There is nothing above about 'politics', which is adversarial.

The 'caretaker period' is by convention, and essentially an administrative arrangement. Government still needs to function, as any public servant who receives a fortnightly pay packet would understand, or anyone who receives a Centrelink benefit. However in a democracy we have a period after which parliamentarians are no longer 'the Member for...' or 'Senator the Hon...' and need to seek re-election, or retire.

It is troubling that many individuals in our society do not understand longstanding concepts like this. 'How can such individuals make an informed choice at an election?' will be the extent of any 'political' comment.

 

[Himeno]

but some local residents who have objected in the past may still regard takeoffs of large aircraft at 2315 or close to 2330 as breaching the letter, and the spirit, of agreements and stipulations about aircraft noise.

I am not necessarily agreeing with them, but that may be their view. It has been noisily expressed in the past - 'No Aircraft Noise' party and so on - although they have to bear in mind that last night if I recall all the post 2300 hours takeoffs of RPT aircraft were to the south, which is way preferable to them occurring to any of the other three directions.

My view is that if people have an issue with aircraft noise, then they shouldn't have moved close to an airport. Especially when said airport and many of the flight paths predates those homes.

 

[Melburnian1]

This is the more interesting of the two SYD curfew quarterly reports tabled in Parliament in 2016, as it includes approvals and also a couple of instances (where inclement weather was key) where dispensations to breaching the curfew were not granted:

https://infrastructure.gov.au/aviat...ationReports/2016/files/Webreport_01_2016.pdf

The more recent report only had approvals, but can also be read online through the same website.

 

[clifford]

It is troubling that many individuals in our society do not understand longstanding concepts like this. 'How can such individuals make an informed choice at an election?' will be the extent of any 'political' comment.

A very good question!

 

[medhead]

I find the political aspect of this thread kinda weird.

Probably weird because there is no political aspect to this thread.