Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Gold Coast needs an ILS

Old 8th Feb 2012, 22:31
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: BNE, Australia
Posts: 273
I wonder if that coincides with Scoot entering the playing field?
chuboy is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 00:30
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,872
For the life of me in this day & age where modern techno stuff is rampant we can't have a Sat/GPS App that takes us down to the same Min as an ILS.
It is, Wally. Give me a timeline and cost for your fleet to be RNP-AR equipped and approved and you'll probably find the $10m isn't looking too bad spread amoungst the 5 million-odd inbound pax movements per year.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 00:39
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,383
IF (and it's a big if) airports were run properly in this country you could fund any infrastructure by a small one year passenger tax to improve services.

The ILS could be easily funded by a ticket tax and then removed after one year.
A small price to pay to enable people to actually get where they need to go.
The reality is the people who run airports in this country are not interested in aviation.

Anyone have any idea how this ILS will work? I assume it will be on 14 but from discussions on here the minima isn't going real low.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 01:06
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bradd
Age: 57
Posts: 150
The ILS won't cost $10 million

Only up for $2m to replace ours shortly. The $10m will largely be for the D.A that has to go in and for the ILS Cat (insert number here) lighting they put in.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 07:27
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 396
You guys really do need to be careful what you wish for.

Yes a Gold Coast ILS is coming.......but you will never guess what runway they want to put it on

You guys are happy to fly an ILS down to minima, and then have to circle to land or accept a large tailwind in marginal conditions aren't you? The people making the proposal seem to think this is fine.

We all know the marginal weather comes when a NORTHERLY is blowing!!!

I have an overwhelming sense of value for money
alphacentauri is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 07:34
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 1,934
Lovely, relative short runway with a tailwind on a wet night or the circling approach on a wet night!
Stationair8 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 07:49
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: in the stars... looking at the gutter.
Posts: 409
An ILS on 32 wouldn't be much fun, with the displaced threshold not a lot of LDA for landing with a tailwind.
Goat Whisperer is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 08:06
  #68 (permalink)  
b55
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 94
JFC! Even Sheridan, Wyoming, USA has an ILS, FGS! Never heard of it you say???! BECAUSE "NO ONE" GOES THERE!!! And many more places like it too with an ILS. This country needs to get its head out of its ass when it comes to serious flying conditions. "It'll do" just isn't good enough for that 10% of serious bad weather flying. Lockhart River wasn't BIG ENOUGH it seems for the vast majority of the public. One day this country will get what it has been waiting for. God, I hope not.* Gold Coast two ILS's, at least one for CFS, MC, Gla, RK, Mk, 2 for TL and CS( too many go arounds there the last few days onto Rwy 33.) and a few more CATII(III) as well.
*Day off and a few reds already.

Last edited by b55; 20th Mar 2012 at 12:22.
b55 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 14:10
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mydadsbag
Posts: 1,113
Cheer up chaps.....at least we can drink the water here!

Bbbzbzbzbzbzbbzzzzzzzz
Mr.Buzzy is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 16:09
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,383
In the US airports are generally owned by a city or municipal council and is provided as a community facility, not as a way of spinning money. It benefits the WHOLE town to have a good airport. In Australia some genius thought it would be a good idea to sell off all the airports and to run them as a private business as a result we get carparks factories and fast food outlets built overnight but things like ILS aerobridges and terminals are not built because they are to expensive.

If they are really going to build 32 ILS in OOL that would have to show how much the people who are running the airport know about aviation
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 22:38
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 82
Posts: 1,349
And add some bloody arms whilst your at it. With the GC storms and unpredicable WX, having PAX standing around like saturated cattle is not a good look. I was flying into OOL in the sixties, the PAX go wet then, and still they get wet. Last week they had to bring mops onto the aircraft to at least dry it up the front, near the galley, time to grow up OOL if you want to go fully international or indeed grow. A ILS AND some arms please.
teresa green is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2012, 23:56
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bradd
Age: 57
Posts: 150
Neville

Code:
In the US airports are generally owned by a city or municipal council and is provided as a community facility, not as a way of spinning money. It benefits the WHOLE town to have a good airport.
Also much easier to run the airport as a community facility when the good old FAA antes up the $3million for the runway overlays when they are due and pays for the new aprons, and the fire service, and security............... We don't have a lot to learn from them because we used to do it too, we just lost our way.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2012, 03:49
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Any updates?

As one of the locals living on the extended centreline of Runway 32, I am very interested in this topic. Has there been any more news about whether the proposed ILS is going ahead, and if so, which end it will be?

I am definitely not an expert, but I can't understand why RNP isn't more widely used for situations like this - with farmland and ocean on either side of us, it seems (to me) that an ILS is not the best solution. Happy to hear the arguments for and against though.
Blocker is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2012, 07:26
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: You live where
Posts: 395
Consider this.

MILLIONS of dollars are being poured into a three-phase upgrade of the Gold Coast Airport to make it one of the most technologically advanced in the country when it comes to landing safely.

First cab off the rank is new high-intensity runway lighting that allows pilots to see the runway from great distances, even during bad weather.

The upgrade has already proved successful, with planes able to land in heavy rain after the installation in February when they would in the past have diverted to Brisbane.

The 130 lights along 30km of cable are 12,000 candela -- up from the old lighting's dim 600 candela.

Progress has also stepped up between airlines and airport bosses who are locked in discussions with Air Services Australia about the installation of a vital instrument landing system worth between $5 million and $6 million.
missy is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2012, 08:41
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Yes, I read that in the paper a couple of weeks ago. The same article goes on to say:

"Airlines, including Jetstar, are also using Gold Coast Airport to trial satellite-based navigation technology known as Required Navigation Performance. It gives pilots a clear, narrow flight path, allows planes to travel on a direct route, saving fuel, and can safely guide planes around cloud-shrouded mountains, through valleys and on to the ground safely during low visibility and bad weather. Airport boss Paul Donovan said the airport was already RNP-capable, meaning it would habe the option to operate both ground-based and satellite-based tchnology."

So I am still none the wiser - which end are they talking about, and why do they need an ILS if they could use RNP instead?
Blocker is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2012, 09:48
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,383
So I am still none the wiser - which end are they talking about, and why do they need an ILS if they could use RNP instead?
ILS has broader reach of aircraft. Everything from a C150 through to a B747 can fly an ILS and will become operational the day they sign it out.

RNP however is only really limited to new generation jets and require much more pilot training and recurrency, (read money spent by the airlines) and may not be that popular with airline accountants.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2012, 09:48
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 396
Many more aircraft can use an ILS, than can use RNP-AR. That's why they are pursuing the ILS option.

I believe it is to be installed to service approaches on RWY 14
alphacentauri is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2012, 19:08
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Hot zone
Posts: 197
You can bet that it will never happen. Modern RPT jets can be RNP APP approved easily, although at a cost to the individual airline. GC airport investing in an ILS will cost them. Easy to see which way this will go. The problem is the Gold Coast region is in dire need of the inbound tourist dollars to bail them out of the recession that exists there. Any airline in Asia looking at a new destination such as OOL will have a look at the facilties and ask, "How much will it cost us for a diversion (or incident) as our crews can only use the VOR approach". With Ozs high cost of even breathing the air, they will move to the next project. Witness Air Asia's recent performance.
Maisk Rotum is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2012, 01:38
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,872
Modern RPT jets can be RNP APP approved easily, although at a cost to the individual airline. GC airport investing in an ILS will cost them.
So you've done a cost-benefit analysis on say a half a dozen airlines individually getting RNP-AR approvals (and maintaining their currency) verses plopping in a ILS, not to mention the smaller operators that don't have a hope of ever attaining RNP-AR capability?

After the recent shenanigans, it's pretty obvious the evidence is now overwhelming for some sort of precision approach, and GC certainly wouldn't be putting in an ILS gratis. They'd up the landing fees. But why's that different with any other piece of infrastructure? Service providers the economy-over upgrade equipment/services and then charge for it.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2012, 01:44
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 1,543
Any ILS lovers work out how long the LDA will be for the GS displaced threshold to cater for the hill to the North?
RNP can do a curved approach at greater than 3degrees.
Tankengine is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.