Toowoomba and regional jets – an imbroglio

There are a number of issues with operating RPT services Toowoomba. The airport is also by houses which generate the usual complaints, while fog and low cloud at times sees some aircraft forced to divert through nearby Oakey, which has an ILS. Runway length would also present an issue. For comparison, Qantas quotes 1400m required for a Q400 to depart Gladstone (sea level) for Brisbane. To operate a Toowoomba-Sydney service with a heavier aircraft would need near twice the distance off a much higher Density Altitude runway near 5,000ft in summer, further increasing takeoff and landing distances.

For that reason, expanding Oakey arises as a possible solution. The local member, as Defence Minister, awarded Oakey the Army Aviation home base site and a joint user facility with a civil terminal on the Toowoomba side. After transfer of the civil part from federal ownership under the local ownership programme, civil access to the terminal has reportedly become difficult and RPT recommencement is reportedly opposed as the base has taken on a greater role for wider ADF helicopter training.

Oakey does raise the often ignored chestnut of runway bearing capability arises. Oakey’s runway is listed as Low Strength PCN 9/ F27, which is approximately 50 per cent below Q400 level. It would be advisable to upgrade to take max weight Q400s or heavier E Jets, although that would require a costly foundations upgrade and reseal. A similar jet capable greenfield site would cost $20 million or more when taking into account transfer costs for current tenants, while an alternative site near Wyreema is 1650ft AMSL. The reality is terrain, elevation and weather wise, Oakey’s low, flat terrain beats nearby alternatives, which is why RAAF built it there.

Compared to other joint use aerodromes such as Williamtown and Townsville, Oakey would face few conflicts between military and commercial movements. The initial entry of two daily off peak civil jets or turboprops is unlikely to develop to generate more movements than Army’s until recently Oakey based “Redback” King Airs’ peak. Just four round trips daily by Q400s or E170s would typically lift 140-150,000 passengers per annum – approximately the current population size.

If civil access were possible, perhaps the council and carriers could fund an upgrade of Oakey’s runway 14/32 to E-190 capability, around PCN 25. Alternatively, a new parallel runway east of the current one could be constructed for unlimited military access and do away with the proposed upgrade at Toowoomba or the new site proposal. That would leave the questions of over terminal access and traffic mix, like Toowoomba’s hump and road lighting trap to those directly involved, but it may never arise.

A new option has also recently entered the fray near Gatton, halfway between Toowoomba and Ipswitch. A consortium involving former Macair owner Randal McFarlane has applied to build an airport there, which is curiously described as a non RPT airport able to take up to 30 seaters with a 1200m runway. Elevation is around 450 ft, but it shares Amberley’s fog issues. It has been attacked by some locals but applauded by Ipswichites, whose mayor has pushed for a regional airport after being denied permission to build a civil terminal at Amberley. Ipswich, which now is set to get two satellite cities, has a near 600,000 population and shares Toowoomba’s nightmare drive to Brisbane. If Toowoomba or Oakey are too hard, Gatton might end up as a Q400/E190 capable airport which Toowoomba and Downs passengers, civil and military, would also have to drive past to reach Brisbane.

But the funders of such an RPT level facility would require an airline to sign up to operate there. Currently, the airlines lift passengers from the same catchment through Brisbane for no additional cost, but the one who signs up for whichever solution win will likely get the lot, including the lucrative Government and Defence contracts from the whole Ipswich/Toowoomba catchment.