I don't think anyone could overstate the noise abatement / demands for a curfew any development of Richmond would create, which would make it almost useless, or at least not a step forward any new airport for Sydney should be.

p.j.m., have you ever operated out of Richmond? As you think it's a good option, I doubt it. As well as the noise abatement problem, the fog problem there can be atrocious, and a Cat III ILS (a definite requirement for Richmond should it become Sydney's second airport), involves huge expense, both for the airport operator and the airlines that will use it.

So many NIMBY's around here.

Seems the RAAF have no problems using Richmond as an airbase. I'm sure any commercial operators would have a similar experience.

And yes, by all means, lets equip the airport with the latest CAT III ILS, and 21st century baggage handling too!

Great opportunity here, lets not let the naysayers kill it!

CAT III ils ... how about a low-cost GBAS/GLS. Will solve the fog problem (pending CAT III certification) for small bikkies, and give fancy approaches to assist NAP to boot!

Fellas,

It doesn't matter what approaches you've got, cat III, cat IV, cat anything. When fog is forecast you must carry an alternate and that gets hard from LAX.

That is the major operational objection to RIC. Look how often fog was forecast, I said forecast, in the last year.