Richmond new Sydney airport?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Owen Stanley's "Real World"
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DutchRoll
Keg was spot on. Sydney prob30 = Richmond pea soup. The runway and approach config is very limited by both terrain, and the townships. You could, in a moment of madness, build a longer runway towards the south, which will be great fun for all in the roaring westerlies which dominate many parts of the year (the last one blew my chimney flu cap off!).
Given that airport infrastructure costs a lot they could probably build a North-South runway and put the road under the runway. UWS has plenty of paddack space in-line with the N/S grass runway. You could build a 12,000 foot runway there with no real terrain off each end. Sure you'd get adverse winds on days - but the majority of time it would be suitable.
Politically if the government (which I hate - no surprises there) was worried about the uproar they could move a few C-17's there and ramp up heavy jet moves in order to "prepare" the local community.
Cheers,
PAF
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gidday mate! Yeah no surprises there PAF. 
South is the only feasible way another runway could go, except don't forget about the railway line too. However given the rate of expansion of the northwestern suburbs, well, I'd be surprised it ever happens! It would require planning and land aquisition to start now. The idea being touted by some of a 10/28 runway extension is poppycock, IMHO.
The fog will be the major weather issue. I cannot even begin to count the number of times I've looked out the front window from my perch here in the mountains and seen the base shrouded in fog, then driven into SYD where it has been fine. And who could forget the good ol' days when we used to do local, and sit around for hours playing uckers waiting it to lift?
South is the only feasible way another runway could go, except don't forget about the railway line too. However given the rate of expansion of the northwestern suburbs, well, I'd be surprised it ever happens! It would require planning and land aquisition to start now. The idea being touted by some of a 10/28 runway extension is poppycock, IMHO.
The fog will be the major weather issue. I cannot even begin to count the number of times I've looked out the front window from my perch here in the mountains and seen the base shrouded in fog, then driven into SYD where it has been fine. And who could forget the good ol' days when we used to do local, and sit around for hours playing uckers waiting it to lift?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canberra probably isnt viable any more, now that Terry Snow has put buildings alongside 90% of the runways and the taxiway is blocked as soon as one jet pushes back. Not to meation the resisdents of Jerrabomberra already complain of the nose, imagine what they would say about even more aircraft movements......
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fog bound ,house bound.
I'd say minimal, and it usually clears away quickly.
Also looks pretty good to me with plenty of room for expansion, and even minimal houses to remove to double its existing length, or add additional runways.
All they need to do is get the NorthWest railway built and extended 14 Klms to Richmond.
Pretty cheap option all up I'd say, even it you left the existing strip alone and built 2 new east/west runways at the northern end of the property
RIC gets minimal fog???
Take a look at BuMet stats for the last year and see how often fog was forecast.
Remember, it doesn't matter a fig whether the fog ACTUALLY occurs, only whether or not it is FORECAST.
Take a look at BuMet stats for the last year and see how often fog was forecast.
Remember, it doesn't matter a fig whether the fog ACTUALLY occurs, only whether or not it is FORECAST.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No airport is going to be built anywhere in Sydney's western suburbs that won't generate a huge nimby reaction, particularly in regards to noise. The locals will love the better roads and railways that go in to support the new airport - and developers will throw up closely packed MacMansions by the squadillion as close to the boundaries of the new airport as they can while it is being built (or in Richmond's case, extended),
... and then the people who'll buy said MacMansions will scream blue bloody murder about the aircraft noise, and because they vote, they'll be heard.
And the new airport will have a curfew and silly bloody 'noise sharing' rules before it's even fully operational.
Fact.
As I said above, Botany Bay would make a lot more sense and end up cheaper in the long run.
....if it wasn't for that rare as bat**** Botany Bay three-toed sulphur crested peri-newt.
... and then the people who'll buy said MacMansions will scream blue bloody murder about the aircraft noise, and because they vote, they'll be heard.
And the new airport will have a curfew and silly bloody 'noise sharing' rules before it's even fully operational.
Fact.
As I said above, Botany Bay would make a lot more sense and end up cheaper in the long run.
....if it wasn't for that rare as bat**** Botany Bay three-toed sulphur crested peri-newt.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Owen Stanley's "Real World"
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cougar
PAF - are you skylarking as Pass-A-Frozo or have you really changed names to Pass-A-Frozzo??
I am intrigued... too much time on your hands at the CC?
I am intrigued... too much time on your hands at the CC?
I no longer work at the CC or in fact for the same employer
I now have an extra Z in my name after I wrote (what I thought was) an awesome application that did some housekeeping by deleting some 4000+ previous posts. PPRuNe HQ took umbrage to a user account with 4000+ deleted posts
The fog issue aside I think it's possible they (the Fed Gov't) could ask the RAAF to move (to Amberley) and open the airfield up as a second airport.
After electoral boundary changes RAAF Richmond was moved into Greenway which was won by the Liberals with a margin of ~4.5%. It's quite possible the Federal Government won't care that much about a "nimby" reaction any more than the NSW State Government care about complaints regarding Sydney's transport network in the NW or North Shore.
If the land purchase wasn't so expensive the Federal Government would build a new airport in the middle of Mosman with a one-way strip so as to keep the flight path over Manly and the northern beaches.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4000? Oh come on! You cannot be serious! And I thought my post count was excessive despite the number of years I've been on pprune. 
Well, I think that concept (do it over your enemy's electorate) cuts both ways no matter who is in Government.
I'll still be amazed if it ever gets up.
If the land purchase wasn't so expensive the Federal Government would build a new airport in the middle of Mosman with a one-way strip so as to keep the flight path over Manly and the northern beaches.
I'll still be amazed if it ever gets up.
God forbid you'd build an airport with CAT IIIB/C ILS capability to deal with fog.
However, whilst you will more than likely be able to land off a Cat III, you still need to carry the alternate fuel. That's a lot of extra gas every year to carry Melbourne or Brisbane as an alternate. (assuming Sydney KSA is not available).
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one don't see the point of having two airports in Sydney with curfews. You might as well just stick with YSSY if that's the case.
Richmond would add a lot of additional capacity and potential capacity, for minimal cost - including building the rail links.
No brainer really.
Best part of it is we stop getting sucked dry by Macquaire, for everything from parking to passenger charges!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dunedin, NZ
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How long did it take them to put up the Sydney Domestic Express Terminal when Virgin Blue and Impulse got going? A few months. All they need is a very basic terminal at Richmond with stands for 10 planes of A320 or 737-800 size. The current runway would allow flights to just about anywhere in Australia, and if you want International flights, the same planes could make it over to Kiwiland. No movements before 0600 or after 2130 ( I think some UK airports allow airlines access during curfew periods on some rare events, so the plane does not get turned away if it misses curfew by a few minutes).
A320s and 738s will make less noise than many of the Military planes that already operate at Richmond.
A320s and 738s will make less noise than many of the Military planes that already operate at Richmond.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the last 10yrs china has built/upgraded 40 international airports. In the last 40yrs Australia has talked about building 1 new airport,
Build one outside syd basin with a high speed train ie shanghai 400km+ And get private equity to pay for it.
Build one outside syd basin with a high speed train ie shanghai 400km+ And get private equity to pay for it.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting discussion!
p.j.m
Your expansion drawing above looks great except for a couple of issues:-
1. The land to the north of the existing hangers and east-west runway is approx 50ft below the runway surface level [river valley]. Your north-south parallels, and the northern most east-west [in blue north of the existing paved runway] is not buildable!
2. Likewise, your proposed extension to the east of the existing east-west is also a deep land depression [and creek] between the runway and the Windsor township [which is elevated compared to the existing runway]
A single north-south [or parallel set] is technically doable as far south as Blacktown Road, possibly futher south to where you have drawn. The road and rail might link with terminal/s built in the south-east quadrant south of the existing road and rail lines with tunnels under said north-south runways and taxiways.
The land aquisition costs would be astronomical as Richmond/Windsor and surrounds has in recent years become quite popular for townies and small acreage types!
Are the political and financial ducks in a row for such a large and likely locally unpopular project? Who knows! From what I know of the local discussion, it is the usual mix of those that don't like the noise, but like the RAAFie's and Yank's in town spending money. A civilain op would atract the same division I guess.
The only sale to the locals would be a reduced o/fly [Richmond at the western end, and Windsor at the eastern end] footprint from a north south runway!
If the State were to consider a loop line linking the Richmond line south to Penrith, then the locals get another public transport link they would use [Penrith shopping], and the state could loop services in opposite directions through Richmond and Penrith back into the suburbs. There's your airport Pax feed and quick air link for western sydney residents!
CATIII, an ILS to the north-south [built with necessary lighting], you could overcome some of the negatives of the terrain [very high terrain] not that many miles to the west, the terrain south and to a lesser extent to the north is relatively flat.
p.j.m
Your expansion drawing above looks great except for a couple of issues:-
1. The land to the north of the existing hangers and east-west runway is approx 50ft below the runway surface level [river valley]. Your north-south parallels, and the northern most east-west [in blue north of the existing paved runway] is not buildable!
2. Likewise, your proposed extension to the east of the existing east-west is also a deep land depression [and creek] between the runway and the Windsor township [which is elevated compared to the existing runway]
A single north-south [or parallel set] is technically doable as far south as Blacktown Road, possibly futher south to where you have drawn. The road and rail might link with terminal/s built in the south-east quadrant south of the existing road and rail lines with tunnels under said north-south runways and taxiways.
The land aquisition costs would be astronomical as Richmond/Windsor and surrounds has in recent years become quite popular for townies and small acreage types!
Are the political and financial ducks in a row for such a large and likely locally unpopular project? Who knows! From what I know of the local discussion, it is the usual mix of those that don't like the noise, but like the RAAFie's and Yank's in town spending money. A civilain op would atract the same division I guess.
The only sale to the locals would be a reduced o/fly [Richmond at the western end, and Windsor at the eastern end] footprint from a north south runway!
If the State were to consider a loop line linking the Richmond line south to Penrith, then the locals get another public transport link they would use [Penrith shopping], and the state could loop services in opposite directions through Richmond and Penrith back into the suburbs. There's your airport Pax feed and quick air link for western sydney residents!
CATIII, an ILS to the north-south [built with necessary lighting], you could overcome some of the negatives of the terrain [very high terrain] not that many miles to the west, the terrain south and to a lesser extent to the north is relatively flat.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i.e., by no means an 'easy option'.
Even if they did have to create 50 foot landfills for the airstrips, it would be much easier and cheaper doing it on dry land, rather than trying to fill in more of Botany Bay.