Paraparaumu Extentions???
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paraparaumu Extentions???
Long term $750m plan to develop Paraparaumu airport
1.00pm Wednesday May 31, 2006
The new owners of Paraparaumu Airport, on the Kapiti Coast north of Wellington, have long term plans for hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent developing the facility providing thousands of jobs.
Paraparaumu Airport Holdings' major shareholder Noel Robinson told The Dominion Post that he and two other investors, accountant Steve Bootten and property investment manager Tom Hoare, had bought the airport for "well under $40 million".
The new owners wanted to enhance the 131ha site's potential as a source of business growth and employment, and as a community amenity, Mr Robinson said.
"We want to create about 8000 new jobs, so half the local population will not have to travel out of the district to work, as it does now."
Fifteen consultants were working on the project, and it was planned that $750 million would be spent in a 30-year redevelopment.
Plans included walkways, open spaces, canals (up to 2km long and 20m wide), water features and sculptures, two terminals and a network of wide tree-lined boulevards in a new commercial area.
The main runway would be extended to allow planes carrying up to 70 people to land, with the aim of making the airport a major subregional facility, although not in competition with Wellington Airport.
In 1995 the National government sold the airport complex to Murray Cole and some associates for $1.65 million. Soon afterward the new owners sold part of the area to a developer for $800,000.
In 2004 Te Whanau a te Ngarara and airport users opposed Paraparaumu Airport Ltd's application for a plan change to include a mix of airport-residential, commercial, general business and varied aviation use.
The iwi staged an occupation at the airport in protest that the land had not been offered back to it, as members believed it should have been under the Public Works Act, through which it was taken during World War 2.
- NZPA
With all the houses at each end there is not a lot of room to extend the runway? But would be nice to see the RW and taxiways resealed they are getting just a bit lumpy!
1.00pm Wednesday May 31, 2006
The new owners of Paraparaumu Airport, on the Kapiti Coast north of Wellington, have long term plans for hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent developing the facility providing thousands of jobs.
Paraparaumu Airport Holdings' major shareholder Noel Robinson told The Dominion Post that he and two other investors, accountant Steve Bootten and property investment manager Tom Hoare, had bought the airport for "well under $40 million".
The new owners wanted to enhance the 131ha site's potential as a source of business growth and employment, and as a community amenity, Mr Robinson said.
"We want to create about 8000 new jobs, so half the local population will not have to travel out of the district to work, as it does now."
Fifteen consultants were working on the project, and it was planned that $750 million would be spent in a 30-year redevelopment.
Plans included walkways, open spaces, canals (up to 2km long and 20m wide), water features and sculptures, two terminals and a network of wide tree-lined boulevards in a new commercial area.
The main runway would be extended to allow planes carrying up to 70 people to land, with the aim of making the airport a major subregional facility, although not in competition with Wellington Airport.
In 1995 the National government sold the airport complex to Murray Cole and some associates for $1.65 million. Soon afterward the new owners sold part of the area to a developer for $800,000.
In 2004 Te Whanau a te Ngarara and airport users opposed Paraparaumu Airport Ltd's application for a plan change to include a mix of airport-residential, commercial, general business and varied aviation use.
The iwi staged an occupation at the airport in protest that the land had not been offered back to it, as members believed it should have been under the Public Works Act, through which it was taken during World War 2.
- NZPA
With all the houses at each end there is not a lot of room to extend the runway? But would be nice to see the RW and taxiways resealed they are getting just a bit lumpy!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NZWN New Zealand
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand they wish to extend and concentrate on one runway 34/16 ?
The other runway would be sold as commercial developments is my guess and financing seems to be based upon the carve up of this land. Interesting since the local maori have prior claim if the land is withdrawn from airport use.
What sort of aircraft would cope with the current 1350m runway ?
Thereis hardly any fencing around the airport, so security would be a significant worry. Anybody care to hazard a guess how many people in the immediate catchment would want to fly to Auckland each morning ?
The other runway would be sold as commercial developments is my guess and financing seems to be based upon the carve up of this land. Interesting since the local maori have prior claim if the land is withdrawn from airport use.
What sort of aircraft would cope with the current 1350m runway ?
Thereis hardly any fencing around the airport, so security would be a significant worry. Anybody care to hazard a guess how many people in the immediate catchment would want to fly to Auckland each morning ?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a public meeting about it last week. Strong defence of the cross runway on the basis of emergencies and crosswind issues during westerly winds, but overall the case for retaining it is pretty weak.
Anything up to a BAe146 could use the main runway at the moment (assuming the runway is strong enough).
Auckland flights have been tried a few times and it never lasted long. Origin is rumoured to be opening a couple of routes, last I heard it was NS-PP-AA.
Air2there are also looking at a commuter service to Wellington, landing on the Westpac Stadium walkway. It is technically feasible, but who knows how serious Air2There are about anything...
Anything up to a BAe146 could use the main runway at the moment (assuming the runway is strong enough).
Auckland flights have been tried a few times and it never lasted long. Origin is rumoured to be opening a couple of routes, last I heard it was NS-PP-AA.
Air2there are also looking at a commuter service to Wellington, landing on the Westpac Stadium walkway. It is technically feasible, but who knows how serious Air2There are about anything...
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Speightsville
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't Air Nelson try PPAA back around the early 90's? - Good on QO if they give it a try
, you couldn't blame them if it doesn't work I guess
. Kapiti Coast has grown hugely since Air Nelson stopped, but if Eagle AND QO can operate in/out of WAG, surely Kapiti Coast could sustain at least a daily flight? - On the side Air2There I note on their website are launching "Day Excursions" 
to the mountain for around $250rtn. (flying time quoted at less than an hour each way) Interesting watching.
, you couldn't blame them if it doesn't work I guess . Kapiti Coast has grown hugely since Air Nelson stopped, but if Eagle AND QO can operate in/out of WAG, surely Kapiti Coast could sustain at least a daily flight? - On the side Air2There I note on their website are launching "Day Excursions" to the mountain for around $250rtn. (flying time quoted at less than an hour each way) Interesting watching.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure about Air Nelson, but Associated Aviation tried it with an OP J31 in the early '90s. They had previously operated a daily service with a 421. The J31 lasted a few months, from memory.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NZWN New Zealand
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just ran the runway performance of a 737-200-9 and IFR fuel for PP-AA and it turns out the 732 could carry 92 pax plus bags with HLZ diversion and 45 minutes loiter fuel.
Thanks for the imput. What would the flight time be for an Origin J42 ?
Origin is really struggling with creditors at WLG from what some mates at AGS told me recently.
Anybody know the proposed runway extension length ?
Surely if motivated to do so then the Air NZ Q300 could also manage the current 1347m runway ?
Thanks for the imput. What would the flight time be for an Origin J42 ?
Origin is really struggling with creditors at WLG from what some mates at AGS told me recently.
Anybody know the proposed runway extension length ?
Surely if motivated to do so then the Air NZ Q300 could also manage the current 1347m runway ?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Hmmmm a 732 out of Para para.....I wonder who would want to operate out of there?
Air2 where? werent they going to fill the skies with Caravans?
Personally, I think the only realistic operators in and out of Para will be freight orientated....as long as the costs stay low
Air2 where?
werent they going to fill the skies with Caravans?Personally, I think the only realistic operators in and out of Para will be freight orientated....as long as the costs stay low
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Speightsville
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its worked in some places in Australia (Avalon/Newcastle...) but of course there is a population base to support it. If someone is brave enough, they will give it another go. I would think that a J41 is about all the pax you would get, not forgetting that people in the northern suburbs of WLG would perhaps consider driving north to PP where the carparking and perhaps airfares a both cheaper (still will be hard to compete with a 737). - I would have thought that the new announcement of TRG-CHC during the week and TRG-NSN on saturdays would be harder to fill...... 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There isn't a snowballs chance in hell of a 737 operating out of PP... too many issues (noise, obstacle clearance surfaces, lack of infrastructure, not nearly enough pax to warrant it). I could just about see a 146 if you could find the pax - it is far more neighbour-friendly than the 737. It could lift more than 90 pax too... more like 125 for a -300 series to Auckland.
Far more likely to be a small turboprop of some sort. Good luck to whoever tries it... it SHOULD work, but for some reason, it never does.
Air2there aren't serious players, as any casual study of their operation will reveal.
Freight operators are unlikely to ever prosper at PP due to noise considerations (not to mention lack of infrastructure).
Far more likely to be a small turboprop of some sort. Good luck to whoever tries it... it SHOULD work, but for some reason, it never does.
Air2there aren't serious players, as any casual study of their operation will reveal.
Freight operators are unlikely to ever prosper at PP due to noise considerations (not to mention lack of infrastructure).
Guest
Posts: n/a
" Paraparaumu aerodrome is no longer needed"
That was the decision of the Swedavia Report roundabout 1988 , and following the report the airfield was sold for some 1.6 million dollars. These owners have not apparantly been able to make a profit, even with high landing fees, own airline???, and even a cafe!!!!.
The local story is that the new owners paid something in excess of 30 million dollars. This is only a rumour, but if it is only half correct some persons have done very well out of the Swedavia report. As the new owners are not a philanthropic society how are they going to get a return on their outlay?? certainly not operating that lump of land as an airport. Their core business is as land developers, now why would they buy an airport that is no longer needed??.
Prospector
That was the decision of the Swedavia Report roundabout 1988 , and following the report the airfield was sold for some 1.6 million dollars. These owners have not apparantly been able to make a profit, even with high landing fees, own airline???, and even a cafe!!!!.
The local story is that the new owners paid something in excess of 30 million dollars. This is only a rumour, but if it is only half correct some persons have done very well out of the Swedavia report. As the new owners are not a philanthropic society how are they going to get a return on their outlay?? certainly not operating that lump of land as an airport. Their core business is as land developers, now why would they buy an airport that is no longer needed??.
Prospector
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You forgot to mention that the "previous owner" sold off lumps of the airport, enough of it that it came close to returning his original investment. The land was promptly developed for housing (surprise, surprise), and, despite signing covenants to the effect that they would never complain about the noise, the residents of said housing now spend a consderable amount of their time, you guessed it, complaining about the noise. In the time-honoured way of the squeaky wheel, their voices carry a disproportionate amount of influence.
Good analysis of the new owners intentions, though. One way or another, the runways are destined to be dug up under the new owners - maybe not immediately, but you can bet your bottom dollar it will happen eventually.
As usual, the pilot community, other voices of common sense, and the original Maori owners, will all lose out. Such is the way under an (allegedly) corrupt local government.
Once it is gone... you will never get it back...
Good analysis of the new owners intentions, though. One way or another, the runways are destined to be dug up under the new owners - maybe not immediately, but you can bet your bottom dollar it will happen eventually.
As usual, the pilot community, other voices of common sense, and the original Maori owners, will all lose out. Such is the way under an (allegedly) corrupt local government.
Once it is gone... you will never get it back...
Last edited by MOR; 25th Jun 2006 at 05:16.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NZWN New Zealand
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey MOR ... Which end of the airport did they sell off last time ?
The purchase price is reported in the press as NZ$40m which is quite a capital gain! Any jet service would only benefit from outbound to Auckland in the morning and inbound from Auckland by evening...
As for obstacle clearance I was looking at 737-200-9A BFL from the Boeing website. The later models couldn't manage it. Incidentally I was looking at standard day +15C. On a standard day it would get 113 out of there with bags.
The purchase price is reported in the press as NZ$40m which is quite a capital gain! Any jet service would only benefit from outbound to Auckland in the morning and inbound from Auckland by evening...
As for obstacle clearance I was looking at 737-200-9A BFL from the Boeing website. The later models couldn't manage it. Incidentally I was looking at standard day +15C. On a standard day it would get 113 out of there with bags.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The east end (Milne Drive and environs).
As for your performance figures, it would be interesting to see them (ie a link to the site). I doubt that they would apply in any case, as the US calculates performance differently to the CAA. Also, those figures are probably predicated on the use of reverse - maybe not, but probably are. I doubt that you would ever get permission to use a 737 with reversers at PP, too much noise.
As for your performance figures, it would be interesting to see them (ie a link to the site). I doubt that they would apply in any case, as the US calculates performance differently to the CAA. Also, those figures are probably predicated on the use of reverse - maybe not, but probably are. I doubt that you would ever get permission to use a 737 with reversers at PP, too much noise.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NZWN New Zealand
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/air...ps/727sec3.pdf
Hopefully I inserted the link to Boeings website PDF properly...
If not this is how it should read:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/ ai...s/ 727sec3.pdf
....commercial/airports/acaps/727sec3.pdf (is the full text)
No that is merely the balanced field length with brakes. I understand that the NZCAA certification for the 737 family is based on acceptance of the FAA type certificate.
It is the trend in Europe to use smaller airports as alternate to big city airports but then they have huge populations.
Hopefully I inserted the link to Boeings website PDF properly...
If not this is how it should read:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/ ai...s/ 727sec3.pdf
....commercial/airports/acaps/727sec3.pdf (is the full text)
No that is merely the balanced field length with brakes. I understand that the NZCAA certification for the 737 family is based on acceptance of the FAA type certificate.
It is the trend in Europe to use smaller airports as alternate to big city airports but then they have huge populations.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
errr... those links are to 727 perf, not 737. Even if you look up the 737 charts, it all depends on whether you use FAR or JAR figures, what empty weight you use, etc.
The NZCAA may use the US type certification as a basis for approval, but that is because they have no choice! As you may have noticed from the 737 perf charts, the type certification is not approved in the same way as performance data is - hence the FAR and JAR figures. For a start, you would never use only a balanced field length when assessing runway performance.
It's all academic anyway, no chance of a -200 series 737 ever being used at PP.
It is true that smaller airports are popular with LCCs in Europe, but "smaller airport" normally means a runway of at least 1800m.
The NZCAA may use the US type certification as a basis for approval, but that is because they have no choice! As you may have noticed from the 737 perf charts, the type certification is not approved in the same way as performance data is - hence the FAR and JAR figures. For a start, you would never use only a balanced field length when assessing runway performance.
It's all academic anyway, no chance of a -200 series 737 ever being used at PP.
It is true that smaller airports are popular with LCCs in Europe, but "smaller airport" normally means a runway of at least 1800m.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NZWN New Zealand
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR it was very late at nite when at your request i went to the Boeing website to get the link for you. Why can't you go and read the damn thing yourself or are you totally helpless.
I did my calculations from the correct PDF. I just gave you the wrong link. Do you suffer from little people's disease or something?
I did my calculations from the correct PDF. I just gave you the wrong link. Do you suffer from little people's disease or something?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in a fantasy world that is aviation.
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Extended Runway aye?
Lets all hope if it does go ahead, their runway maintenance on the new seal is boosted, or should I say, lets hope a maintenance program is created. The current seal sure makes things interesting.
However this does not concern me a great deal, as landing at "ANY OTHER" airport is a sure pleasure, therefore another bonus to look forward to on XCs.
Not to mention i believe the pilots get great training on Aquaplaning, debris dodging, trespasser(s) dodging, spot the centreline, spot the threshold, guess where rwy11 starts and have midair’s with golf balls on short finals for 29.
Lets all hope if it does go ahead, their runway maintenance on the new seal is boosted, or should I say, lets hope a maintenance program is created. The current seal sure makes things interesting.
However this does not concern me a great deal, as landing at "ANY OTHER" airport is a sure pleasure, therefore another bonus to look forward to on XCs.
Not to mention i believe the pilots get great training on Aquaplaning, debris dodging, trespasser(s) dodging, spot the centreline, spot the threshold, guess where rwy11 starts and have midair’s with golf balls on short finals for 29.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiwiguy
No, I suffer from can't-be-bothered-with-people-who-don't-undertand-the-principles disease...
From the anger in your post, I'll just assume your understanding of transport-category performance is minimal and that you have misinterpreted the graphs. Which one did you use?
Anyway... all academic. Now go and kick your cat, you'll feel better...
No, I suffer from can't-be-bothered-with-people-who-don't-undertand-the-principles disease...
From the anger in your post, I'll just assume your understanding of transport-category performance is minimal and that you have misinterpreted the graphs. Which one did you use?
Anyway... all academic. Now go and kick your cat, you'll feel better...
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Zealand
Age: 47
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devolved . you forgot to mention some cat eyes on the runway which actually reflect for nights ops as well.
well , as for a 737 trying to land at NZPP , **** poor old grandma in raumati south that believes the hughes 300 sounds like a WW2 air raid would really complain then Ha HA
well , as for a 737 trying to land at NZPP , **** poor old grandma in raumati south that believes the hughes 300 sounds like a WW2 air raid would really complain then Ha HA
Last edited by CougarNZ; 26th Jun 2006 at 09:18.