Sydney Airport Message Board Sydney Airport Message Board  

Go Back   Sydney Airport Message Board > Aviation Industry News and Discussion > Australia and New Zealand Industry


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 7th January 2009, 04:39 PM
Tim C's Avatar
Tim C Tim C is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: YSRD
Posts: 133
Default Perth Airport continues to surge

Airport use continues to surge
Chalpat Sonti
January 7, 2009 - 8:37AM

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/ai...0106-7b3x.html

There might be an economic crisis and tourism might be in the doldrums, but Perth Airport is busier than ever.

Latest federal government figures on usage for the often-criticised airport show 837,424 passengers used the airport in October, the highest for any month this year. The month was the busiest October on record nationally.

They took the number of passengers using the airport in the first 10 months of 2008 to more than 7.6 million, putting it well on target to break its own estimate of 9 million for 2008.

About one-quarter of October users were international passengers, with regional numbers holding up well at 40,776 despite a downturn in the mining industry.

Total aircraft movements for the month, at 6457, were also a high for the year.

Meanwhile Perth's - and one of Australia's - busiest international routes, to and from Singapore, also grew slightly in October.


With 82,397 people flying the route, it held its position as the nation's third-busiest internationally, albeit with just 197 more passengers than October 2007.

But growth for the year to October was more impressive, at 4.5 per cent. More than 957,000 passengers flew the route, behind only Sydney-Auckland (1.2m) and Sydney-Singapore (1.06m).


However, traffic to and from Bali almost doubled, to 33,357, and there was an almost 60 per cent increase in the Hong Kong route, with 16,697 passengers.

On the other hand, traffic to and from Dubai dropped about one-quarter on the previous year, with 24,548 passengers.

Perth Airport has been the subject of stinging criticism, from both state and federal politicians and the general public.

However, it has started a $1 billion upgrade which will eventually bring the domestic and international terminals together.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 7th January 2009, 05:49 PM
NickN NickN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,394
Default

Well done to you guys over there in the west. Looks like good times ahead.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 7th January 2009, 05:54 PM
Montague S's Avatar
Montague S Montague S is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 957
Default

good times, crap airport!
__________________
photos updated 29 Sept

Next Flights:
MEL-HKG-HND-HKG-JFK-HKG-NRT-HKG-MEL/CX
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 7th January 2009, 05:59 PM
NickN NickN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,394
Default

Can't have your cake and eat it too. Although it sounds like when the upgrade is done you will.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 7th January 2009, 06:26 PM
Montague S's Avatar
Montague S Montague S is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 957
Default

well the upgrade has been scaled down...
__________________
photos updated 29 Sept

Next Flights:
MEL-HKG-HND-HKG-JFK-HKG-NRT-HKG-MEL/CX
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 7th January 2009, 06:56 PM
Bob C Bob C is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 687
Default

I've never been a fan of the merged terminals concept and very much doubt that it will solve the problems and will surely create more, particularly in regards to vehicle access and parking.

Sandgropers only have to ask themselves how can they see Horrie Miller Drive coping with all the vehicle traffic that now feeds into the existing domestic terminal ? Already the intersection of Horrie Miller Drive and Tonkin Highway is very congested at peak times so are any plans in place to overcome this ? And with commercial development along HMD continuing unabated, there are bound to be accidents which will cause delays, missed flights etc etc.

The problem would be further exacerbated if all the FIFO workers had to use Terminal W A which one assumed was the original intention but that does not now appear to be so (in the short term).

And as for public transport access, forget it ! We'll probably only get a token bus service from ???? A rail link had been included in the original proposal but that would have only served a very small segment of the market and wasn't of any use to those living in the sprawling Northern, Southern and Western suburbs of Perth. I believe that the rail link has now be dropped (by the new Liberal Government ?)

The "Perth Airport Vision" issued in May 2008 was changed soon after and the separate Terminal WA concept seems anything but as I believe that even Skywest (W A's own airline) is resisting the forced relocation.

Skywest is apparently waiting for a larger airline to commit - who are they talking about - Qantaslink ? And even WAC appears to be talking down Terminal WA now and has mentioned it being used for INTERSTATE flights and by LCCs.

I still believe that separate terminals are better as on an average night, 30-38aircraft from QANTAS, QANTASLINK, Virgin Blue, Skywest, Alliance and Ozjet overnight in Perth. I've excluded those operated by FIFO specialists NJS, Skippers, Network, Maroomba etc which would double that number.

My preference would have been a revamped International Terminal with extra gates and a totally new Domestic Terminal on the existing site. It could have been shaped like an inverted "T" with 40 or more gates (to allow for growth) in three separate wings -the centre one for the QF group, one for Skywest and the third for other carriers.

A multi level carpark (a la Brisbane and Melbourne) could have been constructed adjacent to the Terminal.

Oh well !
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 7th January 2009, 11:41 PM
Ellis Taylor Ellis Taylor is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 47
Default

The traffic problems really could be changed with the proposed overpass on Tonkin HWY, which the state government is warming to. Bear in mind that there is also going to be a road through from the existing domestic precinct to Horrie Miller part of the way down the road, which gives some alternative access to the international precinct.

Since its design, the TWA has been envisioned as something for both the FIFO operators as well as a quasi-LCC terminal. When I interviewed Brad Geatches last year for the article in AA, he talked about using TWA for Jetstar and Tiger's domestic flights, and it may also play a role in taking some other flights before everything is consolidated.

The problem with the domestic precinct is that there simply isn't enough airside access to accomodate all those aircraft or to expand the facilities to handle the medium term growth. To make the area work would require some massive capital investment and a helluva lot of inconvenience for passengers, which is probably why they chose to look at the consolidation earlier. Sure, it's probably going to be put back a bit due to the economic slowdown, but at the end of the day it makes much more sense to go over the international side.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 8th January 2009, 11:12 AM
Rhys Xanthis Rhys Xanthis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 992
Default

Praise to the airport for sorting out the long term problems.

They've built 2 long term car parks, and finally gotten the idea right of offering a quickcheck machine, 3 monitors for flight times, and drinks and food machines in an air conditioned room while you wait for the new (yes, we havent had one before a few months ago) transfer bus for long term -> terminal.

They have also put in an inter terminal transfer bus to go to the international terminal, which i only assume is free. You used to have to pay $8 for the privelidge of getting taken...
__________________
Next Flights: 08/7 PER-DRW QF | 15/7 DRW-PER QF // 14/8 PER-MEL JQ | 15/8 MEL-PER JQ
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 8th January 2009, 02:38 PM
Brenden S Brenden S is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,063
Default

Oh and not to mention that Terminal WA will have no Aerobridges at all.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 8th January 2009, 02:51 PM
Bruce Bramwell Bruce Bramwell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 155
Default

Quote:
Terminal WA
Why? If its going to be used mainly be regionals who use turboprops then why use aerobridge.... its quicker to turn the page round by not using the aerobridge
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 05:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Sydney Airport Message Board 1997-2022
Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Conditions of Use and Privacy Statement