Emirates busts Sydney curfew 3 times
Nunc est bibendum
Spare me the accusations of parochialism. The curfew is the curfew. You either work within the bounds of it or you cop a fine. The fine obviously isn't enough because people are quite happy to wear it. I don't give two hoots who busts it- QF, DJ, J*, etc.
I've been in the same situation on a number of times. I've had to stand in front of a delayed bunch of passengers and tell them that they're now going to be delayed another 7+ hours. I've stood there and written out the cab charge dockets to get them home and back again. It's part of doing business.
Sure, the curfew is a horses ass. Sure, the minister should provide dispensations if the weather has been diabolical and a/c can take off south and/or land north, etc. What I find most interesting is that we keep diverting back into the actions of the minister (something we professional crew have little control over) or talking about how third world Sydney is in having a curfew and avoid actually looking at the issue that we DO have control over- whether or not you'd take off knowingly breaking the law. Why is that we're so reluctant to examine this issue?
I've been in the same situation on a number of times. I've had to stand in front of a delayed bunch of passengers and tell them that they're now going to be delayed another 7+ hours. I've stood there and written out the cab charge dockets to get them home and back again. It's part of doing business.
Sure, the curfew is a horses ass. Sure, the minister should provide dispensations if the weather has been diabolical and a/c can take off south and/or land north, etc. What I find most interesting is that we keep diverting back into the actions of the minister (something we professional crew have little control over) or talking about how third world Sydney is in having a curfew and avoid actually looking at the issue that we DO have control over- whether or not you'd take off knowingly breaking the law. Why is that we're so reluctant to examine this issue?
short flights long nights
I am surprised that you can take off....isnt the airport considered "closed"?
What law is it though Keg? The same one that prevented you from driving faster than the speed limit to catch your flight on time? If you take off after curfew are you endangering others like the fast diver?
75% of EK pax transit Dubai. So the 15+hr delay at SYD (min crew rest is 12hrs and there are no spare crews there) would have costed a mint. The aircraft being delayed and not used on the next sectors, and missed connections for Pax would have taken days to sort out (problem of having such high load factors and aircraft utilisation). The company would have weighed up all the costs and considered the fine the best option if it asked the crew to depart.
Fines of this magnitude do a good job of enforcing the curfew.
German airports are probably a very good example of how curfews can be administered practically. They consider every exemption request on its merits and consider the company history (they don't want you doing it all the time). The will give concession for weather and some tech issues as they also serve the traveling public. And they have good beer too!
The Don
75% of EK pax transit Dubai. So the 15+hr delay at SYD (min crew rest is 12hrs and there are no spare crews there) would have costed a mint. The aircraft being delayed and not used on the next sectors, and missed connections for Pax would have taken days to sort out (problem of having such high load factors and aircraft utilisation). The company would have weighed up all the costs and considered the fine the best option if it asked the crew to depart.
Fines of this magnitude do a good job of enforcing the curfew.
German airports are probably a very good example of how curfews can be administered practically. They consider every exemption request on its merits and consider the company history (they don't want you doing it all the time). The will give concession for weather and some tech issues as they also serve the traveling public. And they have good beer too!
The Don
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must confess that I'm amazed that people don't get this ...
N
- Sydney Kingsford Smith is open 24 hrs a day.
- Certain aircraft (most) have restrictions due noise between 2300-0600.
- ATC are not there to judge which aircraft comply with the noise requirements, rather it is the OPERATOR to judge (it is pretty clear cut).
- You know if your aircraft is subject to the restrictions, so if you don't get a taxy clearance by the appropriate time, you are in breach ... simple.
N
Keg, speaking of curfew and the culture of organizations (or Groups) that are happy to bust it:
Jetstar flies into storm over curfew
I seem to recall that in the subsequent prosecution it emerged that the breach occurred with the blessing of J* flight ops management.
Jetstar flies into storm over curfew
I seem to recall that in the subsequent prosecution it emerged that the breach occurred with the blessing of J* flight ops management.
Nunc est bibendum
Yep. It's crap. J* should be sanctioned for the breach. It says a lot about their ops too that they're prepared to flaunt the law. Given what we've seen in the Senate Inquiry of late though I don't think that anyone should be surprised that J* management are without a moral compass- of the QF CEO either for that matter.
Don, laws exist for a multitude of reasons and most commonly exist for the 'greater good'. There are laws that say I can't pump music out at ridiculous levels after midnight on a Saturday night. Is that dangerous if I do? No. Is it illegal? Yes. If you think I may disrupt someone's sleep and thus be a danger then I offer you an aircraft departing after curfew as an equivalent issue.
Don, laws exist for a multitude of reasons and most commonly exist for the 'greater good'. There are laws that say I can't pump music out at ridiculous levels after midnight on a Saturday night. Is that dangerous if I do? No. Is it illegal? Yes. If you think I may disrupt someone's sleep and thus be a danger then I offer you an aircraft departing after curfew as an equivalent issue.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The airport is open 24hrs except for aircraft that have wings"
N
Thread Starter
Which by sheer coincidence are operated by the wealthier individuals in society. Anyone actually compared the noise footprint of a 737 to a G IV? I wouldnt have thought there would be much in it.
As one who previously lived at Dolls Pt and still spends the odd overnight at Brighton, it is quite obvious that a number of the aircraft operating during the curfew make as much, if not more, noise than the jet aircraft that land just after 5:00am on 34L or depart just after 11:00pm on 16R.
Thankfully the old Fockers and Argosy's and those RR Darts that converted kerosene to noise, have long since departed!
Thankfully the old Fockers and Argosy's and those RR Darts that converted kerosene to noise, have long since departed!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Springfield
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australia is obsessed with rules, as supported by these posts, the law is the law is the law. No application of its intent just it's letter... Two years ago I was on a layover in BNE, a policeman pulled me over along with several other commuters. We were not drivers, we were on bicycles on the bike path. My crime.... I didn't have a bell on the bike.... A frigg'n bell! fined AUD 50! But I don't live in Oz I explained. The answer, sorry that is the law. Same deal with the curfew, its the law.... Well what about the spirit of that law, is its intent to stop every single big jet from taking off or can there be excusable exceptions when a storm delays refueling and a 380 load of pax will be stuck for 15 hours (crew duty..) with no hotels to put them in. It's called humanity and compassion and a vote for common bloody sense. Ah but this is Australia and we have legislated against common sense, there's a rule for that.....
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry that is the law.
HOW most of its silly idiotic laws are formulated, and the
political machinations that get them gazetted in the first
place.
Nunc est bibendum
Well what about the spirit of that law, is its intent to stop every single big jet from taking off or can there be excusable exceptions when a storm delays refueling and a 380 load of pax will be stuck for 15 hours (crew duty..) with no hotels to put them in.
Do I think it's crap that the minister doesn't give more dispensations for weather related delays? Sure do but them's the rules. Do I think that we're over governed? Sure do but I have a choice in the matter. I can comply or I can seek a dispensation. Do I support a changing of the wording relating to Sydney departures so that weather related events don't require dispensation of the minister for (say) up to midnight local? Sure do and I've written that to the local member- I also live in a 'noise sensitive suburb' too.
Believe me, I'm the first person to look at the intent of a particular rule and try and work that rather than the letter- particularly if the letter of the law is an ass- but at the end of the day, I have to comply with the letter of the law even when it's stupid.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bradd
Age: 61
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember a documentary a coupla years back,
Which heavily featured Emirates. Seems most flights contain one or more members of the seven monarchies that make up the UAE. They don't care about delays or curfews because 90% of the time, a guy in the back, who is basically the king, and a controlling shareholder, says 'we're going' or 'we're waiting' and the guy at the front, if he knows what's good for him, does as he's told. Not saying it's accurate or that it applies in this case, but it shows why sometimes our little laws are given the finger.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sydney NSW
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK413 5 January
Ex A380-800 driver,
I am not a pilot, but I thought this thread might be interested in the stated reasons for a recent post 2300 departure by EK from Sydney. We were passengers on EK413 (A380-800) on 5 January 2012 scheduled 2145 departure. The night was mild and there was some rain. We were held at various points before and during taxi by air traffic control. Then according to my memory of cabin PA from Captain, we had to wait for the brakes to cool down because the brake temperatures were too high from excessive taxiing at low speeds with a fully loaded aircraft. I assume the brakes were too hot to allow safe takeoff (presumably because they would be less effective in case of emergency stop.) I certainly would not want to be taking off if the brakes wouldn't have functioned effectively if required.
After waiting about another 20-30 minutes, we eventually took off at around 2315. As passengers, we were certainly saved a lot of grief by not having to 'deplane'. But I was surprised that taxiing an A380 in this situation could overheat the brakes. Does this happen often with A380s? Can it be avoided? How would this go as a justification for possibly breaching curfew?
I am not a pilot, but I thought this thread might be interested in the stated reasons for a recent post 2300 departure by EK from Sydney. We were passengers on EK413 (A380-800) on 5 January 2012 scheduled 2145 departure. The night was mild and there was some rain. We were held at various points before and during taxi by air traffic control. Then according to my memory of cabin PA from Captain, we had to wait for the brakes to cool down because the brake temperatures were too high from excessive taxiing at low speeds with a fully loaded aircraft. I assume the brakes were too hot to allow safe takeoff (presumably because they would be less effective in case of emergency stop.) I certainly would not want to be taking off if the brakes wouldn't have functioned effectively if required.
After waiting about another 20-30 minutes, we eventually took off at around 2315. As passengers, we were certainly saved a lot of grief by not having to 'deplane'. But I was surprised that taxiing an A380 in this situation could overheat the brakes. Does this happen often with A380s? Can it be avoided? How would this go as a justification for possibly breaching curfew?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Dubai
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So basically, to sum it up, is there anyone that does not agree that;
1) The YSSY curfew policy could benefit with a review, paying particular attention to extensions following periods of poor weather
2) There is no clear evidence under which circumstances Emirates operated during the curfew, and that it should be left to the courts to decide whether the breaches were intentional, and exactly which (if any) penalties should apply
1) The YSSY curfew policy could benefit with a review, paying particular attention to extensions following periods of poor weather
2) There is no clear evidence under which circumstances Emirates operated during the curfew, and that it should be left to the courts to decide whether the breaches were intentional, and exactly which (if any) penalties should apply
If the Jan incident happened as posted by the pax, then as I understand it- no breach as they obviously got clearance and taxiied before the cutoff.
Back to dispensations- I recall one occasion a couple years back where due severe weather disruption we sat around for ages, going, not going, going, not going (thankfully we were on a/c and pax in terminal with access to facilities)
Eventually it was decided (by local authorities I guess) we could break the curfew and depart, due to no rooms available anywhere for pax or crew. Loaded everyone on, doors closed, ready to push back... oh wait permission revoked.
Long story short the "rescheduled" flight for the next morning ended up being further delayed because with the thousand or so pax dumped into Sydney, there was no transport (company transport stretched so private transport booked).
It failed to turn up for nearly 2 hours, by the time we got to the hotel we'd well and truly busted min rest (which in this case could be reduced to I believe 10hr for the CC) and ended up sharing rooms. I think the pax slept in the airport. So for the sake of a 737 not making too much noise we were delayed in total over 15hrs, the aircraft and crew were out of position in Sydney instead of Melbourne and the subsequent day's flying had 2 legs cancelled and the rest severely delayed. 2 of the crew were on legal days off so had to passenger home on the same flight rather than operate and we copped further delay waiting for replacements (as they were all in Melbourne due to not being allowed to land into Sydney the night before)
So yes I agree, flexibility needs to be there and more consideration given to the knock on effects of keeping a flight on the ground. (In this case it was firstly ATC delay in MEL then severe, hours long tx delays in Sydney)
Back to dispensations- I recall one occasion a couple years back where due severe weather disruption we sat around for ages, going, not going, going, not going (thankfully we were on a/c and pax in terminal with access to facilities)
Eventually it was decided (by local authorities I guess) we could break the curfew and depart, due to no rooms available anywhere for pax or crew. Loaded everyone on, doors closed, ready to push back... oh wait permission revoked.
Long story short the "rescheduled" flight for the next morning ended up being further delayed because with the thousand or so pax dumped into Sydney, there was no transport (company transport stretched so private transport booked).
It failed to turn up for nearly 2 hours, by the time we got to the hotel we'd well and truly busted min rest (which in this case could be reduced to I believe 10hr for the CC) and ended up sharing rooms. I think the pax slept in the airport. So for the sake of a 737 not making too much noise we were delayed in total over 15hrs, the aircraft and crew were out of position in Sydney instead of Melbourne and the subsequent day's flying had 2 legs cancelled and the rest severely delayed. 2 of the crew were on legal days off so had to passenger home on the same flight rather than operate and we copped further delay waiting for replacements (as they were all in Melbourne due to not being allowed to land into Sydney the night before)
So yes I agree, flexibility needs to be there and more consideration given to the knock on effects of keeping a flight on the ground. (In this case it was firstly ATC delay in MEL then severe, hours long tx delays in Sydney)