Western Sydney International & Bankstown
I remember the photo on the front page of the local newspaper when PM Gough Whitlam visited the Baulkham Hills Shire Council chambers, at the time when those chambers were located in the main street through Castle Hill. He was met with a protest. The photo featured one of my little brothers waving a pamphlet in Gough’s face: No Airport For Galston. I assume my little brother had been pressed ganged into service by our parents.
Gough was PM 50 years ago.
The debate about the location of Sydney’s second international airport had raged for many years before that minor skirmish. The Badgerys Creek area had been set aside in the 60s, but lots of other locations - including Galston - were run up the flagpole.
As with aviation safety regulation, airport location is mostly about politics.
Gough was PM 50 years ago.
The debate about the location of Sydney’s second international airport had raged for many years before that minor skirmish. The Badgerys Creek area had been set aside in the 60s, but lots of other locations - including Galston - were run up the flagpole.
As with aviation safety regulation, airport location is mostly about politics.
The following users liked this post:
I do not know all the steps that went into WSI but it is clear that an EIS was carried out in 1996/1997 that recommended the WSI runway be more N/S alighned to enable a coherent mix of traffic with SYD and BK. Expert aviation opinion had been sought by the Department for that EIS. Sought, yes, but ignored.
Tony Abbott eventually ordered another EIS which by design or omission, I do not know, did not seek the kind of expert ATC advice that helped inform the first EIS. The outcome and the recently revealed flight paths shall we say, offer a more politically acceptable outcome but at a higher risk of poor aviation operational and safety outcomes.
So in this political planning methodology, the airport is almost physically complete. Now is the time to tell the populace what it means to them in terms of flight paths... now that it is too late to change the runways and thus the resulting flight paths.
Oh, yes Minister, we will indeed consult widely with the community, but with the physical infrastructure almost complete that is just for show, box ticking, expensive time wasting to say we did it.
Now that we have decided the flight paths, yes Dick, now we (who, tell me their name and expertise) can do an airspace study and invent some new, never before heard of (certainly not USA best practice) method of managing this mess of Departmental creation. Somebody has already remarked on the resultant camel of a horse designed by committee.
What an unholy mess. Why can people not learn? The USA tried to get Dulles to replace Washington National, the Canadians tried to get Miirabel to replace Dorval for Montreal. Neither worked as desired.
So as EX-FSO Griffo wisely put it: I think you're confusing 'our authorities' with 'other authorities' who actually know what they are doing..........
(And he learned to fly at YSBK about the same time you and I did!)
The following users liked this post:
So in this political planning methodology, the airport is almost physically complete. Now is the time to tell the populace what it means to them in terms of flight paths... now that it is too late to change the runways and thus the resulting flight paths.
Oh, yes Minister, we will indeed consult widely with the community, but with the physical infrastructure almost complete that is just for show, box ticking, expensive time wasting to say we did it.
Now that we have decided the flight paths, yes Dick, now we (who, tell me their name and expertise) can do an airspace study and invent some new, never before heard of (certainly not USA best practice) method of managing this mess of Departmental creation. Somebody has already remarked on the resultant camel of a horse designed by committee.
What an unholy mess. Why can people not learn? The USA tried to get Dulles to replace Washington National, the Canadians tried to get Miirabel to replace Dorval for Montreal. Neither worked as desired.
Oh, yes Minister, we will indeed consult widely with the community, but with the physical infrastructure almost complete that is just for show, box ticking, expensive time wasting to say we did it.
Now that we have decided the flight paths, yes Dick, now we (who, tell me their name and expertise) can do an airspace study and invent some new, never before heard of (certainly not USA best practice) method of managing this mess of Departmental creation. Somebody has already remarked on the resultant camel of a horse designed by committee.
What an unholy mess. Why can people not learn? The USA tried to get Dulles to replace Washington National, the Canadians tried to get Miirabel to replace Dorval for Montreal. Neither worked as desired.
It seems it works so well that it's SOP for governments all over.
BNE way different to WSI
I really don't understand why folks are surprised by this, since exactly the same process (with some local variation) was followed with Brisbane's additional runway not all that long ago: Step 1: Build it. Step 2: Release the flight paths to the locals to complain about, Step 3: Pin the blame on one or more of the hundreds of government-selected 'consultants' on the buck-pass list and finally move on squeaky-clean.
It seems it works so well that it's SOP for governments all over.
It seems it works so well that it's SOP for governments all over.
GO back to the 1970's Parliamentrary Public Works Committee documents and you can follow the design through to the Airport Master Plan.
Roads were laid out, the tower sited, its pillars oriented, all to allow for that runway.
In those days the Department of Many Names (DCA then I think) included what is now CASA and AsA as well as the "Airports Branch" which then designed airports but later became simply a management function in the Department where it is today.
One thing that did change following community consultation is that the new parallel was "slid" north along its centerline to reduce noise in the suburbs to the south of the airport.
Thank BACL for that change; it had zip to do with the government.
The processes for BNE were vastly different (and much better informed) than those for WSI.
The following 2 users liked this post by Advance:
Sorry Piper Cameron but BNE was always intended to have a parallel runway.
GO back to the 1970's Parliamentrary Public Works Committee documents and you can follow the design through to the Airport Master Plan.
Roads were laid out, the tower sited, its pillars oriented, all to allow for that runway.
In those days the Department of Many Names (DCA then I think) included what is now CASA and AsA as well as the "Airports Branch" which then designed airports but later became simply a management function in the Department where it is today.
One thing that did change following community consultation is that the new parallel was "slid" north along its centerline to reduce noise in the suburbs to the south of the airport.
Thank BACL for that change; it had zip to do with the government.
The processes for BNE were vastly different (and much better informed) than those for WSI.
GO back to the 1970's Parliamentrary Public Works Committee documents and you can follow the design through to the Airport Master Plan.
Roads were laid out, the tower sited, its pillars oriented, all to allow for that runway.
In those days the Department of Many Names (DCA then I think) included what is now CASA and AsA as well as the "Airports Branch" which then designed airports but later became simply a management function in the Department where it is today.
One thing that did change following community consultation is that the new parallel was "slid" north along its centerline to reduce noise in the suburbs to the south of the airport.
Thank BACL for that change; it had zip to do with the government.
The processes for BNE were vastly different (and much better informed) than those for WSI.
The following users liked this post:
Western Sydney environmental impact statement released:
https://minister.infrastructure.gov....eased-feedback
"Today the Albanese Government is releasing the draft Environmental Impact Statement for Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport for public feedback.This feedback will help guide the final stages towards opening Australia’s new international gateway.
"The EIS includes assessments of the noise, social and environmental impacts of the WSI preliminary flight paths and the Australian Government’s proposed actions to address any areas of concern."
Sydney Morning Herald article:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/...23-p5eedz.html
https://minister.infrastructure.gov....eased-feedback
"Today the Albanese Government is releasing the draft Environmental Impact Statement for Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport for public feedback.This feedback will help guide the final stages towards opening Australia’s new international gateway.
"The EIS includes assessments of the noise, social and environmental impacts of the WSI preliminary flight paths and the Australian Government’s proposed actions to address any areas of concern."
Sydney Morning Herald article:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/...23-p5eedz.html
From the EIS
To mitigate the impact the strategy will be
1. Assuming their estimates are valid, my reading is they are saying the costs passed on to ab initio training will be of the order of $90 per flight hour (and increase hours to achieve qualifications by 20%.) Students will walk away - why pay more for slower and longer training? Why pay more to spend 20% more time in flight transit, not actually doing the lesson? Why pay more, to rack up 20% more hours to get a licence - needing more log book hours to get your basic qualifications is not a selling point.
2. I assume the mitigating strategy they propose to address these issues (continued consultation) will be the same as the consultation they say they have done with operators leading up to this... ie... nil (other than to inform them of the pre-decided outcome).
I am not commenting on the need for the new airport or the value it can bring to the overall economy - I can see why they want this to proceed but I believe it will not only bring benefits, but also nasty financial impacts to many existing operators, including the closure of businesses. I doubt YSBK can survive as a GA training aerodrome and YSCN is not in a position to take up any slack due to its inherent physical constraints. I cannot see how these impacts can be mitigated.
All my personal opinion.
19.5.5 Economic impacts to Bankstown and Camden airports
Due to the introduction of flight paths for WSI, there will be a change in the
overall airspace configuration within the Sydney Basin available for Camden and
Bankstown Airports. According to Aeria Management Group (the airport operator),
both airports will contribute around $1.6 billion and around 10,000 jobs by
2024/2025. Transport for NSW (2022) and .id Consulting Pty Ltd (2022) indicate
there are around 3,500 jobs at Bankstown Airport, and around 350 people work in
retail and food services on the fringe sites.
Both airports provide essential flying training capacity in the context of the
global shortfall in pilots. Pilot shortages can constrain the economy with
wide ranging impacts. Flying training at Bankstown and Camden airports provides
capacity for more than 600 student pilots per annum. The trainee pilots use 3
flying training areas within the vicinity of WSI. With the introduction of the
proposed airspace design, these flying training areas are anticipated to be
restricted to the residual portions of the flying training areas as well as 2
possible areas to the north and south of the Sydney Basin. This means that the
pilots would need to be travel further to reach the new flying training areas
which would translate to increased “transit” flight durations, extended
training schedules and increased costs including increased flying training
times and increased fuel maintenance costs.
The majority of training flights for the CASA Recreational Pilot Licence (RPL)
are based on a one hour start-up to shutdown sortie length. According to
operators at Bankstown Airport this is likely to increase to 1.2 hours due to
longer transit times to and from what is anticipated to be the new training
area resulting in a marginal cost of $91.80 per lesson. Training flights for
the issue of a CASA Private Pilot Licence (PPL) would increase flight time by
around 10 per cent at a marginal cost of $50.60 per lesson. Joy flight sorties
would face an increase in flying time of approximately 20 per cent at a
marginal cost of $222.
This assessment has assumed that half of all aircraft movements (being around
150,000 per annum) are affected by extending flight times at an average cost of
$100, resulting in around $15 million in additional costs each year. This would
increase over time with rising demand at around one per cent per annum
Due to the introduction of flight paths for WSI, there will be a change in the
overall airspace configuration within the Sydney Basin available for Camden and
Bankstown Airports. According to Aeria Management Group (the airport operator),
both airports will contribute around $1.6 billion and around 10,000 jobs by
2024/2025. Transport for NSW (2022) and .id Consulting Pty Ltd (2022) indicate
there are around 3,500 jobs at Bankstown Airport, and around 350 people work in
retail and food services on the fringe sites.
Both airports provide essential flying training capacity in the context of the
global shortfall in pilots. Pilot shortages can constrain the economy with
wide ranging impacts. Flying training at Bankstown and Camden airports provides
capacity for more than 600 student pilots per annum. The trainee pilots use 3
flying training areas within the vicinity of WSI. With the introduction of the
proposed airspace design, these flying training areas are anticipated to be
restricted to the residual portions of the flying training areas as well as 2
possible areas to the north and south of the Sydney Basin. This means that the
pilots would need to be travel further to reach the new flying training areas
which would translate to increased “transit” flight durations, extended
training schedules and increased costs including increased flying training
times and increased fuel maintenance costs.
The majority of training flights for the CASA Recreational Pilot Licence (RPL)
are based on a one hour start-up to shutdown sortie length. According to
operators at Bankstown Airport this is likely to increase to 1.2 hours due to
longer transit times to and from what is anticipated to be the new training
area resulting in a marginal cost of $91.80 per lesson. Training flights for
the issue of a CASA Private Pilot Licence (PPL) would increase flight time by
around 10 per cent at a marginal cost of $50.60 per lesson. Joy flight sorties
would face an increase in flying time of approximately 20 per cent at a
marginal cost of $222.
This assessment has assumed that half of all aircraft movements (being around
150,000 per annum) are affected by extending flight times at an average cost of
$100, resulting in around $15 million in additional costs each year. This would
increase over time with rising demand at around one per cent per annum
DITRDCA will continue to consult with aerodrome
operators and airspace users at Bankstown and
Camden Airports regarding airspace requirements in
order to minimise risks and associated economic costs.
operators and airspace users at Bankstown and
Camden Airports regarding airspace requirements in
order to minimise risks and associated economic costs.
2. I assume the mitigating strategy they propose to address these issues (continued consultation) will be the same as the consultation they say they have done with operators leading up to this... ie... nil (other than to inform them of the pre-decided outcome).
I am not commenting on the need for the new airport or the value it can bring to the overall economy - I can see why they want this to proceed but I believe it will not only bring benefits, but also nasty financial impacts to many existing operators, including the closure of businesses. I doubt YSBK can survive as a GA training aerodrome and YSCN is not in a position to take up any slack due to its inherent physical constraints. I cannot see how these impacts can be mitigated.
All my personal opinion.
From the EIS
To mitigate the impact the strategy will be
1. Assuming their estimates are valid, my reading is they are saying the costs passed on to ab initio training will be of the order of $90 per flight hour (and increase hours to achieve qualifications by 20%.) Students will walk away - why pay more for slower and longer training? Why pay more to spend 20% more time in flight transit, not actually doing the lesson? Why pay more, to rack up 20% more hours to get a licence - needing more log book hours to get your basic qualifications is not a selling point.
2. I assume the mitigating strategy they propose to address these issues (continued consultation) will be the same as the consultation they say they have done with operators leading up to this... ie... nil (other than to inform them of the pre-decided outcome).
I am not commenting on the need for the new airport or the value it can bring to the overall economy - I can see why they want this to proceed but I believe it will not only bring benefits, but also nasty financial impacts to many existing operators, including the closure of businesses. I doubt YSBK can survive as a GA training aerodrome and YSCN is not in a position to take up any slack due to its inherent physical constraints. I cannot see how these impacts can be mitigated.
All my personal opinion.
To mitigate the impact the strategy will be
1. Assuming their estimates are valid, my reading is they are saying the costs passed on to ab initio training will be of the order of $90 per flight hour (and increase hours to achieve qualifications by 20%.) Students will walk away - why pay more for slower and longer training? Why pay more to spend 20% more time in flight transit, not actually doing the lesson? Why pay more, to rack up 20% more hours to get a licence - needing more log book hours to get your basic qualifications is not a selling point.
2. I assume the mitigating strategy they propose to address these issues (continued consultation) will be the same as the consultation they say they have done with operators leading up to this... ie... nil (other than to inform them of the pre-decided outcome).
I am not commenting on the need for the new airport or the value it can bring to the overall economy - I can see why they want this to proceed but I believe it will not only bring benefits, but also nasty financial impacts to many existing operators, including the closure of businesses. I doubt YSBK can survive as a GA training aerodrome and YSCN is not in a position to take up any slack due to its inherent physical constraints. I cannot see how these impacts can be mitigated.
All my personal opinion.
Given this, wouldn't it be more like 15min each way so actually another 0.5 per lesson? Sounds way more expensive to me.
I can't speak for the transit times to the S training areas as I'm not familiar with what they currently are or will become.
Also doesn't account for the time you spend waiting for takeoff clearance at BK!
I am not commenting on the need for the new airport or the value it can bring to the overall economy - I can see why they want this to proceed but I believe it will not only bring benefits, but also nasty financial impacts to many existing operators, including the closure of businesses. I doubt YSBK can survive as a GA training aerodrome and YSCN is not in a position to take up any slack due to its inherent physical constraints. I cannot see how these impacts can be mitigated.
All my personal opinion.
All my personal opinion.
My personal opinion also.
I can't see any other outcome other than training moving to YSHL and YWVA. Surely driving to those airports is cheaper than the additional transit costs going to and from the training area.
I feel sorry for all the adventure flight/scenic operators at BK that will struggle to remain compeitive.
I feel sorry for all the adventure flight/scenic operators at BK that will struggle to remain compeitive.
There's no need to feel sorry.. Because they don't need training areas, adventure flights/scenics of Sydney and the harbour will still be viable from YSBK (as will helos and commercial charter) for a long time to come, so the airport itself isn't likely to go anywhere anytime soon - it'll just shrink a bit (which will suit the new owners), and force students elsewhere as you point out.
There's no need to feel sorry.. Because they don't need training areas, adventure flights/scenics of Sydney and the harbour will still be viable from YSBK (as will helos and commercial charter) for a long time to come, so the airport itself isn't likely to go anywhere anytime soon - it'll just shrink a bit (which will suit the new owners), and force students elsewhere as you point out.
The EIS looks at how the preliminary flight paths will affect First Nations and historic heritage
towards opening Australia’s new international gateway.
Some interesting news in Aust Flying today, appearing to show YSBK isn't going anywhere anytime soon:
Bankstown Airport Precinct Receives $130 Million Investment
https://admin.australianflying.com.a...ion-investment
Mayor El-Hayek said that as the third busiest airport in Australia, Bankstown Airport and the surrounding precinct supported more than 160 businesses and 6500 jobs and contributed over $1 billion to the NSW economy each year.“The potential to double the number of jobs and investment in our city is not a ‘pie in the sky’ vision – it’s a reality,” Mayor El-Hayek said. “It is no surprise that council’s commitment to providing opportunities to connect, share knowledge and ideas and form partnerships or collaborations, has led us to become one of the most innovative cities in Australia.”
AMG, which is owned by Aware Super, manages and operates Aeria precinct and Camden Airport, in South West Sydney.
Mr Jarosch said the company’s two new Major Development Plans, to be released in early 2024, would set the standard for 21st century airport precincts.
“Our planned $50 million central aviation precinct at Bankstown Airport will include up to nine new hangars with priority VIP aircraft access, to meet the needs of aviators today and beyond. This includes private charters, maintenance, flight training and advanced air mobility technologies, which will be powered by electric and hydrogen aircraft and next-generation drones,” he said.
AMG, which is owned by Aware Super, manages and operates Aeria precinct and Camden Airport, in South West Sydney.
Mr Jarosch said the company’s two new Major Development Plans, to be released in early 2024, would set the standard for 21st century airport precincts.
“Our planned $50 million central aviation precinct at Bankstown Airport will include up to nine new hangars with priority VIP aircraft access, to meet the needs of aviators today and beyond. This includes private charters, maintenance, flight training and advanced air mobility technologies, which will be powered by electric and hydrogen aircraft and next-generation drones,” he said.
Mr Jarosch said the company’s two new Major Development Plans, to be released in early 2024, would set the standard for 21st century airport precincts.
“Our planned $50 million central aviation precinct at Bankstown Airport will include up to nine new hangars with priority VIP aircraft access, to meet the needs of aviators today and beyond. This includes private charters, maintenance, flight training and advanced air mobility technologies, which will be powered by electric and hydrogen aircraft and next-generation drones,” he said.
“Our planned $50 million central aviation precinct at Bankstown Airport will include up to nine new hangars with priority VIP aircraft access, to meet the needs of aviators today and beyond. This includes private charters, maintenance, flight training and advanced air mobility technologies, which will be powered by electric and hydrogen aircraft and next-generation drones,” he said.
These appear every 5 years.
I understand (assuming the previous 2010, 2015 and 2020 plans have been successfully implemented) that Camden Aerodrome now has an Aviation Museum, an aviation business park, access arrangements for cyclists, more hangars, more aircraft parking and new taxiway signs.
I know for a fact they have added new taxiways signs. Not that the Echo sign is much use as it faces the wrong way and can't be seen taxiing out until you are past it.
Oh - and there is now a new tall perimeter security fence! Well.. not quite the whole perimeter, maybe about halfway around? you can still simply walk onto the airside by stepping over the donkey paddock fences that are around knee high and falling down and just walk on down. Although the tower does spot people doing this and sends the car to admonish the interlopers.
As for new hangars... well they have done some work on 3 of the 80 year old Bellman hangars to make them look newer. And knocked some other hangars down.
Can't say I have seen any actual new hangars. (Maybe some new glider hangars down near the river?) Currently hangar space at a premium. Most hangars packed like sardines.
Oh and not quite sure what facilities were needed to be added to make cyclists more welcome... you can still park your bicycle just about anywhere. You could probably even lift it over the donkey paddock fence if you wanted to and cycle along the runway.
The donkey, sadly, is getting pretty old but is still friendly. It wouldn't mind I don't think.
I recall Gerard O'Dea one of the old tower controllers used to ride his pushbike to work and leave it resting against the Tower. Perhaps if they open a push bike parking area it could be named the "O'Dea Bike Lot" in his honour? That's be a nice touch and recognising some of the history of the place.
Still looking for the museum and business park though...
Oh and a pair of plovers laid their egg next to the Alpha holding point well inside the flight strip a while back. I didn't hold much hope but happy to say the egg has hatched and now there are currently 2 plovers and a cute little chick wandering about the holding point! The groundsman regularly tries to shoo them away but they are always back soon after.
Personally,I think the Plovers raising a chick on the edge of an active runway is something to impressed by and a positive development.
They seem to be pretty sensible about the taxiing and landing aircraft, (unlike, unfortunately, the galahs, some of which clearly didn't look out on final approach and are now ex-galahs).
NOTAM INFORMATION
-----------------
CAMDEN (YSCN)
C61/23
INCREASED BIRD HAZARD (GALAH) IN VCY OF AD
FROM 10 232231 TO 11 230000
Can't wait to see what will be happening in the next 5 year plan!
Last edited by jonkster; 10th Nov 2023 at 05:19.
The following 2 users liked this post by jonkster:
Hopefully the new plan will include a VertiPort and - to stretch the memories of those committed to progress - a Multifunctionpolis. Those two - and diesel piston engines - will usher a new dawn for general aviation in Australia.
The following 6 users liked this post by Clinton McKenzie:
Bankstown Airport Wins Australia's Metro Airport of the Year Award
https://admin.australianflying.com.a...the-year-award
I know I've said it before, but I really don't think YSBK is going away anytime soon.
https://admin.australianflying.com.a...the-year-award
Bankstown Airport has been named Metro Airport of the Year at the 2023 National Airport Industry Awards.
The coveted title celebrates the excellence of Bankstown Airport – operated by Aeria Management Group (AMG) – in supporting the general aviation industry and sustainable growth, including essential emergency services and emerging net zero electric and hydrogen-powered aircraft.
The coveted title celebrates the excellence of Bankstown Airport – operated by Aeria Management Group (AMG) – in supporting the general aviation industry and sustainable growth, including essential emergency services and emerging net zero electric and hydrogen-powered aircraft.
No doubt YSBK will remain. For a while.
But if you think it’s anything other than a shadow of what it used to be for GA (including runways, hangarage and maintenance/parts support) at reasonable prices, I’ve shares in the Harbour Bridge to sell you. The ‘emergency services’ operators pay (NSW taxpayers’) money through the nose to Aeria to have any base at YSBK. Heritage hangars bulldozed. Runways bulldozed. You should know the MO, from your experience at YMMB.
And ‘net zero electric and hydrogen-powered aircraft’? Let’s hope the Multifunctionpolis is well-advanced in its research.
But if you think it’s anything other than a shadow of what it used to be for GA (including runways, hangarage and maintenance/parts support) at reasonable prices, I’ve shares in the Harbour Bridge to sell you. The ‘emergency services’ operators pay (NSW taxpayers’) money through the nose to Aeria to have any base at YSBK. Heritage hangars bulldozed. Runways bulldozed. You should know the MO, from your experience at YMMB.
And ‘net zero electric and hydrogen-powered aircraft’? Let’s hope the Multifunctionpolis is well-advanced in its research.