More fuss over Rwy 07/25 Closure

[NickN]

From todays Daily Telegraph....

By Brad Watts

April 04, 2008 12:00am

SYDNEY Airport's east-west runway will close despite a public consultation and thunderous opposition over the major development, the Federal Government has warned.

Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese told The Daily Telegraph he expected the proposed safety upgrade to proceed despite deafening community concern over the runway closure, resulting in more than 70 per cent more flights over the inner west and North Shore.

The public is asked to comment on the draft plan, which will cause disruptions until mid-2010 - a year longer than planned - due to the $85 million safety work at the Cooks River end of the east-west runway.

Mr Albanese baulked at suggestions to keep the runway open and the safety extension work to be completed between 11pm and 6am.

Mr Albanese slammed the idea, saying, "It's a recipe for a permanent end to the noise-sharing arrangement."

"Every engineering expert who has looked at it says that's not possible," he said. "I (also) want disruption minimised."

Last February, Mr Albanese gave an iron-clad guarantee the curfew would remain, but angry residents say the latest runway closure will eat away noise-free periods and give homes on the northside 17 hours of noise a day.

No Aircraft Noise president Allan Rees called Mr Albanese's attitude to residents appalling.

Sydney airport did not respond to specific questions, however a spokeswoman said management will carefully consider all submissions received and submit them to Mr Albanese.

[Andrew P]

I can’t work out why they could not use the 11pm to 6.00am option.

When Hong Kong Kai Tak airport had to be have its landing zones replaced. they closed the airport for 6 months every night.

Last take off was 10.30pm and at 11.00pm, the airport was handed over t the contractors, who had to off by 5.00am so it could cleared for 6.00am opening.

It worked well

Banjo

[Nigel C]

Banjo,
The curfew period works quite well at the moment for most maintenance and construction jobs around the airport, but there may well be elements of the construction that require more than just 7 hours to complete.

You have to remember it's a delicate job having to work around and over the rather old and no doubt brittle SWSOOS tunnel. The potential environmental consequences of any stuff ups could be huge.
I'd prefer them to take their time and do it properly than rush to beat a curfew end time.

There's also the long term aircraft noise concerns that have been raised for suburbs along the 16/34 flight paths. If the work was to only proceed during curfew, then the job would take far longer and effectively rule 07/25 out of service for a greater period. I'm sure Mr Albanese's electorate would thank him if he went with that option...

Regards,
Nigel

[NickN]

Sorry not quite sure what the SWOOS tunnel is?

[Nigel C]

Southern and Western Suburbs Ocean Outfall Sewer.

[Steve S... 2]

I think passenger safety is more important than noise on the North Shore and Inner West (which were under the flight path long before the residents bought their properties).

What concerns me is the danger of aircraft landing on runway 16/34 in gale force westerlies and there will be some very serious problems in the coming months. You will probably find the airport will have to close as the winds are shocking at that time of year, and it will happen the wind can last for days even a week at a time.

Glad I am not booked on any flights during June to September.

[Nigel C]

That's OK Steve. They're not planning the closure until October 08.

All going well I reckon they're hoping to have the runway available in some capacity (with recall time) if the need arises by July next year. Obviously that'll depend very heavily on the works progress up until then.

At the end of the day, if the pilot is faced with crosswinds that he/she either isn't trained for, or the aircraft isn't rated for, then they have the legal (and moral) obligation to go elsewhere. It is fair to say that diversions at some point will be expected.

Cheers
Nigel

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Hey Nigel

If the western end of the runway is where the work will be conducted, do you know if RWY07 would be available for departures from a slightly displaced point adjacent to GOLF2 or thereabouts?

Cheers

Andrew

[D Chan]

Originally Posted by Steve S... 2

I think passenger safety is more important than noise on the North Shore and Inner West (which were under the flight path long before the residents bought their properties).

100% agree with this. And also these residents are bound to fly out of Sydney at some stage of their lives. If any of those residents are involved with an overrun incident I am sure they would change their mind.

[NickN]

It always confuses me why residents under the flight path purchase their homes in the knowledge aircraft noice will be an issue and then cry foul afterwards. Sort of like purchasing a car knowing it has high kilometres then complaining when it breaks down.