Sydney's Second Airport

[Erik H. Bakke]

Any new airport for Sydney does not necessarily have to be located close to the city.
The international trend is for new airports in major cities to be located further and further away from the cities and connected to their cities through high-speed rail.

In Europe, several airports are already on the high-speed rail network and rail is being used more and more for the domestic leg of international travel. There are even airlines that codeshare with the train companies. (AF/KLM codeshare with TGV/Thalys, for example)

The major drivers for building away from the cities are the cheaper land and reduced noise impact. The lower land price is offset by having to build fast and convenient transport links to the site, but building a major airport is never going to be cheap anyway. What is required is a government that is willing to spend money without expecting a short term ROI, and a population that is willing to support the decision.
The main drawback to putting an airport away from the city is travel time. This can be mitigated by high-speed rail and by making sure there is an adequate transport link for those who need to use a car.
As long as travel time to/from the airport is kept within certain limits, the increased distance from the city will not be a significant disadvantage.
With the airport being where it is now, when I need to travel in the morning I routinely spend 90 minutes or more to get there from my home at West Ryde. Going by car or by train doesn't alter the picture much in this case.
Now, if the airport was away from the city, I would be going against or across the traffic flow to get there, no need to brave the traffic on Victoria Road or the M5...

[Andrew C]

I agree that the trend is now for Airport moving out. I can't see the state paying the significant costs for a fast rail.

Also most people will still want to go to YSSY so the new aiport will have issues trying to make a go of it.

[Mick F]

Who ever said that YSSY would stay open if a new airport was built?

[Peter T Syd]

Newcastle is a good option as it could open up a fast train link from Newcastle to Sydney capturing Gosford Commuters...its up in swinging voter territory and also can help the job issue up there since the closure of the steel works...also have you noticed the F3 is being expanded and there is a M2 link that is in the cards...So Buses could be on the F3 , The airport will create a demand that could have a very large knockon effect up the Central and Mid Coast......what do you think?

[Adam P.]

One accident on the F3 and it all falls to pieces. Some other type of link would be required.

[David Sims]

Somehow I don't think an airport in Newcastle will be the right solution to Sydney airport problems. My feeling is to expand Bankstown.

[Russell D]

What about an expansion of Camden airport. Its not to far from the M5, which connects to the M7. Plus there's plenty of room to facilitate an expansion. Only thing is the rail line is not as close as it ought to be, but that could change in future. However, I would have to admit that the incidence of fog down that way would present some sort of formidable barrier.

Would the Federal Government ever consider developing a portion of the Military Reserve just east of Cambelltown? (adjoins Holsworthy Barracks to the North, and is not too far away from Sydney, YSBK, and YSSY.

[Justin L]

Originally Posted by Michael Flood

Who ever said that YSSY would stay open if a new airport was built?

I think as the statement refers to a second airport in Sydney, then at least in the short- to medium-term following the opening of any new airport, you could assume YSSY would remain open.

If a new airport out of the metro area was to be built, then you'd think this could become the predominant international terminal, still with several connecting trunk domestic routes for connections etc., with YSSY remaining the main domestic airport, to allow easy same day returns for business traffic, with also perhaps short-haul smaller aircraft international routes such as trans-Tasman and Pacific island services staying at Mascot.

If they weren't to build a completely new airport, but utilise an existing airfield, perhaps we could see Richmond become Sydney's second airport. Assuming any defence force issues can be resolved, then expanding Richmond would allow airports in geographically separate areas in Sydney's north-west and central-south, with perhaps Richmond being used predominantly for domestic LCC and perhaps some/all regional routes, and Mascot remaining the main airport. Clarendon station on the Richmond branch of the Western Line is close by, so dedicated shuttle buses to the terminal, or construction of a spur line from Windsor Station would allow for convenient rail travel. You could maybe even extend the planned North West Metro from Rouse Hill to Schoefields station to connect to heavy rail to Clarendon/Richmond Airport which would open up even more possibilities for residents on that line. Road capacity may be an issue though, but a motorway spur north west from the M7 just before it curves south could help.

Anyway, just my two cents.

[Nick W.]

bring back the flying boats, easy way to fix it!

my generation doesn't even think a boat can fly



N

[Kurt A]

I like your thinking Justin.

Rudd government must focus on infrastructure

Aussie airlines Qantas and Virgin Blue have publicly encouraged the new Australian government to include infrastructure problems in air travel whilst they undertake a broad assessment of the aviation industry.

Both Brett Godfrey and John Borghetti, chief executive of Virgin Blue and executive general manager of Qantas respectively, noted the difficulties that Australian aviation faced due to the inability of infrastructure to meet growing demands.

"Aviation infrastructure is lagging behind national requirements, simply because aviation demand has grown much faster than anyone predicted" Mr Borghetti said.

Special emphasis was accorded to Perth and Sydney as particularly worrisome. Passenger numbers in Sydney have multiplied by 50 percent in the past decade, and Mr Borghetti recognised that passenger needs could not continue to be met by the current capacity of the airport.

"Given the long lead times to identify, plan and develop sites, Qantas believes that consideration must turn as soon as possible to meeting the needs of the growing numbers of passengers in the Sydney basin," he said.

The Government intends to finalise a white paper regarding aviation by mid-2009, with infrastructure one of the topics considered.

The paper will have regard to international and domestic services, with consideration of skill needs, air traffic management, safety and regulatory reform, climate change, consumer protections and security, as listed by The Australian.

Transport Minister Anthony Albanese noted that "There unfortunately hasn't been a national aviation policy for at least a decade.”

“Indeed, I found it extraordinary that no Australian government has produced an aviation white paper. The Rudd Government will change that."
Mr Albanese listed a range of issues that the government ought to consider, giving special attention to the shortage of pilots.

He pointed to the recent reduction in Qantaslink and Rex services, claiming "Aviation activity is predicted to double by 2020, but our airlines are cancelling services because they can't get pilots."

-eTravel