Sydney curfew lost opportunities

[docjames]

Add me to the late night departure for Europe. QF29 no longer heading to lhr and thus being retimed is a real loss for me.

Our last qf29 had an aborted takeoff and took 2hrs to fix, we subsequently left after midnight. If we'd been in Syd we would have been stuck overnight and lost a whole day of our trip to Europe.

Late departure allows for a full day of work, and an afternoon arrival into Europe, both of which appeal to me.

Sorry JohnK but Sydney's curfew is a joke - the new aircraft are so much quieter than the 60s/70s jets it's not even close, and should be allowed to come and go overnight. LHR is an equal joke on this issue. As is their lack of a third runway (at least Syd has that!).


Sent from AFF Mobile Edition

 

[anat0l]

My advice to those airlines wanting to fly to SYD: Don't. Simple.

MEL and BNE make excellent alternatives, and they easily connect those in SYD if they want to. And any money which SYD "lost" will be gladly welcomed by those two airports.

I guess SYD has enough... "importance"... because airlines will continue to fly there, and fly a lot there, and still put up with this nonsense. Then again, carriers fly to many places in the EU, and put up with curfews (at a few airports), passenger movement charges (Germany, UK, Switzerland) and EU 261/2004 protections.

I wonder how they quantified the $600 million of "loss". I'm sure that's not exactly the money which they have actively lost as much as it is just opportunistic, apart from direct revenue, e.g. SYD charging carriers to use the airport. $600 million.... I'm sure the NSW government would be able to recover that much money by stamping down on corruption, fixing its healthcare system and improving its own domestic infrastructure before its international ones. Notwithstanding the capex required to upgrade SYD (or make a new one), which may include land reclamation and compensation... I know that the payback period might be short, but that reasoning doesn't fly very well with governments, particularly those standing for another election.


Although we repeat a lot of arguments about this topic, as I've said before, I don't see a lot of flights departing at, say, 3 am in the morning. The only exceptions may be IRROPs, which may not be so bad in SYD except that when they do happen, of course SYD / SACL / the government plays absolutely no part in the compensation or recovery process at all, even if SYD / SACL actually play a part in the delay. The main increase in flights I would imagine would be between 2300 - 0230, and from 0350 - 0600. And I would think that between 0030 - 0445, the density of flights would be very, very sparse.

I do have to say that there has been an increase in these kinds of articles of late. Either it's a really slow news day or something else (not us, obviously!) is kicking this argument along in a big way.

 

[samh004]

MEL and BNE make excellent alternatives, and they easily connect those in SYD if they want to. And any money which SYD "lost" will be gladly welcomed by those two airports.

Exactly this, just wish Qantas would realise this too.

Operate some late night flights from BNE and MEL to Dubai next year and see how long it takes for NSW to wake up. There are quite a few airlines departing BNE late these days... and while a lack of public transport is the issue right now, as more airlines sign up, I have a feeling options will open up, otherwise they'll be missing out on money too.

 

[anat0l]

Exactly this, just wish Qantas would realise this too.

Well the difference is that - rightly or wrongly - Qantas just isn't seeking more traffic, whether from SYD or not. But of course given that SYD is a major hub, they will always try and squeeze them out through SYD. BNE probably comes out third because it's not a premium hub (no F Lounge, and a barely big enough J Lounge).

Most of the traffic, I'd imagine, that wants to get into SYD is either new airlines, or second flights from airlines who already have one flight to SYD.

Operate some late night flights from BNE and MEL to Dubai next year and see how long it takes for NSW to wake up. There are quite a few airlines departing BNE late these days... and while a lack of public transport is the issue right now, as more airlines sign up, I have a feeling options will open up, otherwise they'll be missing out on money too.

BNE and MEL have been doing it for a very long time now; I don't think NSW will "wake up" any time soon.

I think this article is just more posturing; it's not terribly obvious of the economic factors.

Also, even though we (mostly) think that the infrastructural and economic benefits really demand that SYD be expanded or at least the curfew is abolished, people do live in flight paths, they need to sleep, they're JohnKs .... and since they mainly vote the governments in (because we live in a nation where the government should be "elected by the people for the people"), their arguments for no expansion / keeping the curfew are very real (in the most part; some of them are irrational, just like some on the other side of the argument, too). It's not much different in resistance arguments to being displaced by mining operations, or a new shopping mall with giant car park being built near residential areas, a park being removed to make way for more houses, or houses being resumed to make way for a new major roadway / passage, or a new train line (underground or overground).

But rather than complain about the system, airlines who want more traffic to Australia should be thinking a lot more laterally and considering other gateways. Not difficult, and actually I'd imagine that getting traffic rights and other approvals (including gate space, arranging ground services and costs) into non-SYD ports would be far easier than getting into SYD.

 

[Dee Thom]

As anat0l notes, the major airlines that have sufficient equipment to use other gateways ie., QF, EK, SIA etc.,are starting to fly out of ADL/PER and even MCY now, which means less intra state trafic, and an easing of flights to/from say the SYD hub.

Also, the A380 received an award for being the quietest RPT aircraft in service. Why, pray tell, hasn't this allowed this capable large capacity people mover with the best noise footprint, to be utilised during SYD's curfew ???

Say no more.

Cheers,
Dee

 

[Joshua]

Having played with noise modelling and undertaken analysis of propositions in ADL I have a fair understanding of the science and structure that underlies the policies. I do feel there needs to be an improvement made some of the methods used to calculate the ANEF's, this includes better appreciation for the general movement to newer aircraft with loser noise footprints and holding more people (in theory less frequent aircraft movements). There are quite a few technical issues in that but it underpins much of the decision making. The rest is entirely social and political which is open for opinion.

As for the SYD situation, more intelligent use of the runways could be an option, but I am no aviation expert to know if that's workable.

 

[JohnK]

Couldnt agree more. The airport was there long before those whining residents.

And that adds real weight to the debate.

in any case the noise is something you get used to very quickly.

You get used to the noise quickly? Just remember not everyone is the same and those that bought ~10kms from airport in 1974 were not under any flight path until some dope decided to share the load everywhere in the 90's.

Don't tell me about there being no choice. There is a choice. Move all flight paths to where the people use them the most. And that would be the Eastern Suburbs and North Shore. There problem solved....

 

[Sprucegoose]

And that adds real weight to the debate.


You get used to the noise quickly? Just remember not everyone is the same and those that bought ~10kms from airport in 1974 were not under any flight path until some dope decided to share the load everywhere in the 90's.

Don't tell me about there being no choice. There is a choice. Move all flight paths to where the people use them the most. And that would be the Eastern Suburbs and North Shore. There problem solved....

They are liberal seats so that's certainly out of the question.

Tell the hillbillys to buy earplugs.

 

[samh004]

BNE and MEL have been doing it for a very long time now; I don't think NSW will "wake up" any time soon.

I meant more so that Qantas should participate

 

[mannej]

I am sorry but if you buy a house around 10 k's from an airport (especially your major ones) and not expect noise, you have rocks in your head.


Sent from AFF Mobile Edition

 

[mannej]

I meant more so that Qantas should participate

I wish PER would get a curfew to encourage QF away from the 00:40, 04:45 and 04:55 arrival times!


Sent from AFF Mobile Edition

 

[JohnK]

I am sorry but if you buy a house around 10 k's from an airport (especially your major ones) and not expect noise, you have rocks in your head.

So my parents have rocks in their head.

I just love all the helpful comments (actually more like insults but let's not go there) on the debate today and we should just get rid of the curfew so a couple of AFFers don't get inconvenienced on their way to Europe. Much more important than inconveniencing the people who live there.

 

[docjames]

I certainly wasn't insulting you John, I just don't agree with you re:curfew.

There will always be a divide on this issue between those directly affected and those who aren't.

I lived under the flight path in Brisvegas (actually about 800m lateral at about the 5km mark on a straight in approach / departure), and it really wasn't that bad.

Departures typically the aircraft seemed higher, but notably louder. And notably different depending on aircraft type. Arrivals were lower but quieter.

I made one noise complaint in the time I lived there - a MAS 742 freighter at 1am - off track, too low and waaaaay louder than usual. At comparable times overnight, the Cathay A330 departure I rarely heard, the EK 777 also rarely heard. The QF 744 during the day was amongst the loudest at any time (barring rare aircraft eg. Antonovs etc). The 738s seemed fractionally louder than A320s. All of this is subjective and no doubt there's hard data somewhere "ranking" aircraft.

I just think that with the newer aircraft it's time for SYD to loosen up the curfew.

IMO it could be arrivals any time, departures to 0200 and after 0430, provided the a/c met noise regs outside current curfew hours (noise dB to be determined but essentially A380 and better). Means it won't suddenly change overnight (no pun), but with time will increase flexibility for airlines prepared to invest in newer, quieter aircraft.


Sent from AFF Mobile Edition

 

[mannej]

So my parents have rocks in their head.

I just love all the helpful comments (actually more like insults but let's not go there) on the debate today and we should just get rid of the curfew so a couple of AFFers don't get inconvenienced on their way to Europe. Much more important than inconveniencing the people who live there.

Sorry John, but I think that we can all agree that 10km's is a very close distance to an airport. No arguments there.

With that in mind, should it not be reasonable to expect some sort of noise from an airport? Stop with the negative tit-for-tat statements, as it is realistic to expect noise. Jumbos have been going to SYD since 1970. I did over simplify my thoughts, but it is far from an insult.

We cop the heavies coming in from the Middle East and Africa, as well as the flights heading north and don't find it an issue. You get the odd loud aircraft (it always seems to be SA280 that comes in around mid day). To be honest with you, I find that we get more noise out of cars and public transport around the place than what you do from aircraft noise. I feel sorry for those who live close to PER, considering that there is no form of noise compensation for them.

Perth airport residents denied noise insulation - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Each to their own

 

[mannej]

As for Aircraft Noise

BNE
WebTrak: Brisbane International Airport

SYD
WebTrak: Sydney International Airport

PER
WebTrak: Perth International Airport

 

[Sprucegoose]

A lot more noise on ths forum at times than the most strategically placed airport in the country!!

 

[JohnK]

Why do some people continue to degenerate threads with rubbish?

I certainly wasn't insulting you John, I just don't agree with you re:curfew.

I know you didn't.

I do not mind a good argument for having/not having a curfew.

Personally I think a curfew is a great idea.

I do agree though that there could be a little more flexibility when there are situations beyond their control like weather. I guess mechanical issues could also be included but I would be concerned airlines would abuse this for other reasons.

And yes I do understand that you may want to leave at 2:00am to get somewhere overseas but I cannot understand why you want to land at 1:00am-2:00am when the first domestic flight is not for many hours more. I did this is Perth a few times and it is not a fun transit.

Also I think the people on the ground who are affected are a little more important that people seem to think. You can't just say it is tough luck you bought there as you knew in 40 years time the airport was going to have 10 times more traffic and the flight paths would change.

 

[mannej]

So because someone doesn't agree with your point of view John it is rubbish?

Like I have said, 10 k's is a very close distance to an airport, so I would say its a fair assumption to make that noise may be an issue.


Sent from AFF Mobile Edition

 

[Must...Fly!]

And yes I do understand that you may want to leave at 2:00am to get somewhere overseas but I cannot understand why you want to land at 1:00am-2:00am when the first domestic flight is not for many hours more. I did this is Perth a few times and it is not a fun transit.

Nothing wrong with landing at 2am after a long haul. Straight to bed, up fresh in the mid-morning!

 

[Isochronous]

Just build Badgery's Creek and run it 24/7!