Yes Canberra is another naive politically expedient suggestion.
However it cannot hurt to keep building pressure with your elected representatives to modify the Sydney Airport Demand Management Act, or the movement cap!
There is after all a greater appreciation today of the economic impact, and a glimmer of political will.
The fact that the opponents to the third runway were able to couple noise & movements when this legislation was negotiated was unfortunate.
The curfew is going to stay and it is a fight we cannot win.... except maybe pushing for some concessions in the 11:00pm to 12:00am shoulder to recover aircraft following say a day of extreme weather.
However I feel increasing the hourly movement cap from 80 to 100 is potentially a winnable battle. Although we would probably need to retain the 80 movement restriction during the curfew shoulder periods to help sell the changes.
In building the argument with our politicians we need to decouple movements from noise... by that I mean there are a number of smaller quieter aircraft that should never have been included in the cap in the first place (one example back in 1995 was the Aero Pelican Twin Otters that were suggested should not have been included in the cap due to their low noise signature and operational flexibility such as using intersection departures on 07 and steep approach capability... today one example is probably the RFDS that could be considered for exclusion, or indeed any aircraft that are exempt under the curfew should also be exempt under the cap)
A good place to start for those that care is with your local politicians to tell them Canberra is a dumb idea; and although we want a second airport for Sydney, for now the artificial restrictions imposed by the hourly movement cap must be relaxed from 80 to 100. This will create enormous economic value to not only NSW but also Australia with little or no perceptible impact on noise.
Last edited by hiwaytohell; 30th Dec 2012 at 21:00.