[Peetwo]

Follow up to Labor Badgerys thought bubble policy -

via the Oz.. :

No-fly zone would cripple Badgerys Creek airport: Tony Shepherd

Also on the Project Eureka & airports front, this from Binger in the Oz today..  

Soaring rents pushing general aviation business to the brink 

And finally an update from Oz Aviation :

Pilots’ union expresses concerns on proposed Badgerys Creek restrictions

...Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) treasurer Adam Susz said the Labor proposal would place a heavy restriction on the airport’s operations, noting departing aircraft would have to be well out of the approach path before arriving aircraft could land, resulting in a fairly low movement rate.

“It would not be possible to have simultaneous operations in an opposite direction on a single runway unless those operations were separated by 15 to 20 minutes,” Susz told Australian Aviation in an interview on Friday.

“That is possible with technology and the navigation systems we have and air traffic control and radar providing separation, but it is not ideal.

“From a pilot perspective we don’t want to see a curfew. We’d like to see 24-hour operations that are unrestricted by noise and other political agendas.”

The federal government’s draft airport plan and environmental impact statement for the proposed Western Sydney Airport showed a 3,700m runway on a south-west, north-east orientation.

Arrival flights will be directed to north west of the airport and be between 5,000-7,000 feet when over Penrith and 2,000ft near Bankstown when landing on Runway 23.

Meanwhile, departing aircraft on Runway 05 would be at about 5,000ft by the time they were over Bankstown and at 10,000ft by the time they were at RAAF Base Richmond if headed north, or at 10,000ft between Camden and Picton if heading south.

The master plan said it was planned for the airport to operate on a curfew free basis.
Susz, who is a Boeing 747 first officer with Qantas, said the restrictions meant aircraft would be unable to land on Runway 05 if winds were too strong.

“When there is a south westerly blowing at 10-15-20 knots it is not possible really to conduct a landing with that sort of tail wind,” Susz said.

“Our perspective would be to maintain as much operational flexibility as possible. We’d like to be able to land in the safest direction with optimal winds.

Susz said noise abatement procedures such as curved approaches, lower thrust settings on engines and advancements in aircraft technology all reduced the noise impact on the surrounding community.

“I think the impact of noise can be minimised by procedures currently available and also the technology is continuously improving with aircraft engine. They are always getting quieter,” Susz said.

“I don’t think the issue is as bad as people are making out.”

While Sydney’s Kingsford Smith Airport did occasionally have “simultaneous” operations, where all aircraft take off and land over Botany Bay, the key difference was Badgerys Creek would begin operations in the mid-2020s with just a 3,700km single runway, compared with two parallel runways at Mascot.

“The margin of safety is greatly improved because the aircraft are using different runways,” Susz said of the simultaneous operations at Mascot...

Along with the 'do nothing' approach by Albanese on the disturbing findings of the Senate PelAir cover-up inquiry - Chris Reason - Yahoo7 on August 28, 2013, 5:46 pm 

Election squabbling buries air safety recommendations, c/o ProAviation:

Senator Fawcett points out that the report was tabled on May 23, allowing the Minister a three month window to respond and that given its damning findings Minister Albanese should have made this his top priority, particularly given his promise that ‘nothing is as important as aviation safety.’

   

MQ said;

"But the former deputy of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority said caretaker mode should not get in the way of aviation safety.
"The disturbing thing is, safety is no longer the priority," Mick Quinn said".

Mick nailed it in one. Well said.'Safety' shouldn't be put on hold for any reason at any time, full stop. Particularly for a reason as soft as 'impending election and possible change of Government'.

Another year, more elections, more assclownery, more political waffle, more stupidity from dipshits like Albo, Bowen, Penny Strap-on, Darren of the immaculate, Short-one etc etc etc.....

"Safe pork barrelling for all"

Sunday update: Albo - "...nothing is as important as aviation safety; well almost??"

 From Piers, via the Daily Telegraph  :

Bill Shorten’s Badgerys Creek airport is unsafe for takeoff

April 24, 2016 12:00am
PIERS AKERMAN The Sunday Telegraph

SLIM Dusty reckoned that there was nothing “so lonesome, morbid or drear than … a pub with no beer” but then he hadn’t heard of Bill Shorten’s plan for an airport that would effectively ban airplanes from flying.


Just imagine all the empty runways, the passenger terminals, the freight areas, the transport networks and Labor’s ban on flights. How bad could that be?

With their populist assertion that Labor would support “no-fly” zones for the $2.5 billion-plus airport proposed for Badgerys Creek, both Shorten and Labor’s infrastructure spokesman Anthony Albanese effectively undermine the ­entire project. Labor wants to apply the same restrictions on flight to the new project as those which currently hobble the operations of Sydney’s Kingsford Smith Airport.

Shadow Minister for Transport & Infrastructure Anthony Albanese, shakes hands with Opposition Leader Bill Shorten after addressing the media at Emu Plains in western Sydney last Thursday

They want a night time no-fly zone between 11:00pm and 6:00am in order to eliminate aircraft noise for residents. Under the plan, the airport would allow qualified 24-hour access with night flights restricted to the southwest over unpopulated areas.

This is such a dumb proposal, so stupid in its conception, that it could only have come from the smartest people in the Labor Party. That’s right, exactly the same people who embraced the notion of a NBN after being briefed on a plan drawn up on the back of a drink coaster, and who thrilled to the prospect of an unfunded NDIS, and wet their pants at the prospect of the unfunded Gonski proposal though they had experienced the disastrous pink batts fiasco and the humiliating mining tax retreat which were also delivered by their in-house genii.

Shorten and Albanese clearly don’t want to acknowledge that the curfew at Sydney’s current airport is already an aviation industry disaster and is only maintained for fear of upsetting a small group of NIMBYs — all being people who have moved to the neighbourhood since the first flight operated from there in 1919.

It’s not as if the residents didn’t know that they buying in an airport neighbourhood when they were offered cheaper properties. Encouraged by weak politicians, they have used their decision to buy into the area to leverage sound proofing and the current curfew, and aircraft get quieter by the generation.

That’s one of the reasons why the decision by Labor to opt for no-fly zones is so dumb and here is another. Labor’s not so-dynamic duo were asked at Thursday’s press conference a very straight forward question about aircraft operations. Here it is: “Is it not true flights and aircraft have to fly into the wind if it’s greater than 10 knots?” To which Albanese responded: “No it’s not. These days technology has got a lot better.”

A map of the fast rail connecting Parramatta to the proposed Western Sydney airport at Badgerys Creek

Unfortunately, technology hasn’t yet been able to change the physics of flight and as much as Albanese might like to claim expertise as a former aviation minister, the basics are just as they were when ­Orville Wright took off for the first powered flight in 1903. The Wright brothers took off and landed into the wind. Just as modern aircraft are almost always required to do by air traffic controllers today if wind speeds are more than about five knots or just less than 10km/h even though some aircraft such as the Boeing 777 is certified to land with a maximum tailwind of 10 knots.

It might help the former aviation minister to review some of the factual material available about the physics of flight rather than try to wing it. All aircraft manufacturers publish a tail wind component limit for both takeoff and landing in their aircraft flight manuals (remember those Albo?) and in most cases it is in the order of 10 knots but with some planes may be as high as 15 knots.

And an experienced aviation authority like the former minister would undoubtedly be aware that the closer the tailwind is to the upper limit, the more dangerous is the landing. But Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) nominates a safe landing tailwind upper limit of five knots in dry conditions and zero in wet. That’s not a lot of breeze as any sailor, surfer, footballer, or golfer will tell you and how often does it rain at night at Badgerys — enough to shut down a runway or the whole airport as it would under Labor’s plan.

The Shorten-Albanese solution would require aircraft using Badgerys Creek to operate from only one runway directed to the southwest from 11pm to 6am — the same hours as the curfew operates at Kingsford Smith.


Opposition leader Bill Shorten

Maybe it has not penetrated Albo’s old leather flying helmet, but he should be made aware that there are a number of other options airlines could adopt to cut unnecessary aircraft noise because, and you can be sure of this, there will always be some noise when aircraft engines are used to provide the power for safe movement, particular during takeoffs, landings and turns.

One of the strategies employed by pilots globally is the concept known as Continuous Descent Approach which improves safety and pilot situational awareness and reduces pilot workload, improves fuel efficiency by minimising the low-altitude level flight time and reduces noise levels by minimising the level flight time at high thrust settings.

The union representing Qantas pilots has also condemned Labor’s plan to impose flight limits on their new airport.

Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) treasurer Adam Susz said the Labor proposal would place a heavy restriction on the airport’s operations, noting departing aircraft would have to be well out of the approach path before arriving aircraft could land, resulting in a fairly low movement rate.

It would not be possible to have simultaneous operations in an opposite direction on a single runway unless those operations were separated by 15 to 20 minutes, he said.

“From a pilot perspective we don’t want to see a curfew. We’d like to see 24-hour operations that are unrestricted by noise and other political agendas,” Susz told Australian Aviation Friday.

Coyly, Albanese refused to name the experts consulted before this woeful plan was released, or perhaps he wished to save them embarrassment. He could have saved time by asking any major airline pilot.

By severely limiting aircraft movements at the new airport, Labor effectively destroys the principal rationale for the whole project. What a no-brainer. Incoming aircraft will still have to consider the possibility of diverting to Melbourne or Brisbane. Well, done Biggles Shorten and Algy Albanese. -

 Nice shot Akermann...

If ever there was a pollie & former miniscule who cannot hide his contempt for anything to do with aviation it is Albo...

Let us for a minute, reflect on parts of Albo's reply speech to the former miniscule's delivery of the Government's response to the Forsyth review: Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (09:20)

..If I could sound that cautious note, as I expressed to David Forsyth: the customers are not the people who own the planes; the customers of CASA and aviation safety are the people on the planes and the people who would be impacted if there were an incident. Planes fly over my house at far too regular intervals. My electorate is the second smallest geographically; Wentworth is the smallest. These areas have highly dense populations. If there were an incident in these most densely populated areas of Australia, it would have an impact not just on people on the planes but on people in the vicinity of an airport. If I could express that concern—that we must never sacrifice rigour for harmony...

 
Okay so it is not acceptable to have anything but the highest safety risk mitigation over densely populated electorates like Grayndler & Wentworth. However when it comes to flying over sections over 'less' densely populated areas like those in the Sydney Western suburbs & the Blue Mountains, it is perfectly acceptable - .

...I agree with the minister that the actions of the regulator must be firm, and they must also be fair. But the minister has a responsibility to hold the line against industry pressure. We must maintain the necessary tension between the regulator and the regulated to keep all parties on their toes. If they are on their toes then they are focused on what matters: the safety of the travelling public. If they were allowed to operate too closely and without appropriate distance, the public would be the loser. So, while doing all we can to promote professional dealings among all participants in the industry, our overriding responsibility is to make accident prevention and proper safety standards our primary concern. All other concerns must be further down the ladder...

  
Bollocks Albo - your priority is trying to get back into an electorate that has serious aviation prejudice...
"..Planes fly over my house at far too regular intervals..." 
The following quote is perhaps the biggest insult to the intelligence, of not only the industry and the travelling public but also the victims (who still carry the scars & permanent injuries) of the Norfolk Island ditching of VH-NGA & Senate PelAir cover-up inquiry: 

I note the minister's comment that he is considering asking the ATSB to reopen the investigation into the Pel-Air incident of 2009. This follows the findings this week of the delayed report of the inquiry that I commissioned as the minister, which was conducted by the Canadian Transportation Safety Board. I note that the TSB found that the ATSB investigation methods were best practice, but I certainly welcome, as I previously said, the principle that, if there is any doubt at all, there is a need to take that precautionary principle into consideration.

Unless of course if it is only three months before an election - FFS! Couple that spin and bulldust with this vomitus paragraph from earlier in the former miniscule for No-aviation's weasel words:

...I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to John McCormick. John McCormick did an outstanding job. He was someone who was recruited after an international search for the best person. He brought decades of experience, not just in the Australian aviation industry but also particularly in Hong Kong, for Cathay Pacific, and in the international sector. I think he provided a rigour that was needed at the time...

  

You begin to realise how much Albo's extreme prejudice against aviation, has set back the GA industry for probably decades, if indeed it is recoverable. It also again puts to the sword all possible association that Albo's actions/inactions as miniscule, had anything remotely to do with aviation safety -    
MTF...P2