Can You Hear The Whistle Blowing?

So, on current settings, it is clear Sydney needs a second airport – certainly that is the finding of a report for the government inquiry into the airport location by Booz and Company, which says Sydney is operating at near capacity, and a new airport is needed within a decade.

Not surprisingly, Sydney Airport Corporation disagrees, noting the movement cap is “arbitrary”.

And certainly the technology is there, especially with GBAS and RNP, to easily allow a substantial expansion in Sydney’s movement rate to more like 100 plus movements an hour. That there is a near instant 20 per cent increase in Sydney’s capacity.

Easing curfew restrictions would offer some incremental benefit as well, but few passenger like departing or arriving at an airport in the middle of the night, and this magazine fully supports the guaranteed access to Sydney Airport for regional airlines, so booting them out in favour of larger aircraft is not a solution either. But clearly, there is more capacity available at Sydney.

But expansion of the cap won’t happen, certainly under Minister Albanese’s watch – the Minister’s own seat is under Sydney Airport flighpaths, and he has been a long time proponent of strict enforcement of Sydney’s curfew and movement cap.

So accepting the cap and curfew as non-negotiable, not only selecting a site, but actually building a second Sydney airport, looms as time critical.

But good luck to the study in nominating a site by the end of this year. There are seemingly no sites close enough to Sydney to viably be considered a second airport location, where noise, environmental or cost considerations don’t rule them out.

Take a look down the list: Badgerys Creek? The Hawke Labor government nominated Badgerys Creek, west of Sydney, as the planned site for a second airport for Australia’s largest city a quarter of a century ago in February 1986! Land acquisition for the new airport began later that year, and even today the federal government owns the land on which the planned airport would have sat. It would be an ideal site – located close to the geographic centre of Sydney and needing only relatively straightforward extensions of existing road and rail links. But the Labor Party has long ruled out Badgerys due to the issue of aircraft noise for surrounding communities.

Holsworthy? With its deep gullies and ravines and the issue of expended Army ordnance, it is an environmental minefield, and a costly proposition.

Richmond? Seems to be discounted on the premise that it is too logical an option, or community concerns about airport noise, one of the two! Newcastle/Williamtown? Getting too far from Sydney to be viable for most of the city, not to mention the issue of it being the RAAF’s most important, and one of its busiest, bases.

Goulburn? Goulburn Airport is 200km from the centre of Sydney by road. The only way it could be a realistic option is with a true high speed rail connection that could whisk passengers to the Sydney CBD in under an hour. But that will only be viable for long haul international passengers. No business traveller flying to Sydney from Melbourne or Brisbane wants to have an hour plus long flight followed by an hour long train journey to get to the city centre.

Still, a fast train does present interesting scenarios, and may do without the need for a conventional second airport for Sydney.

Fast train proponents long point to rail’s ability to take passengers off the airlines. Imagine the impact of a mature Melbourne- Canberra-Goulburn Airport-Sydney-Newcastle/ Williamtown-Gold Coast- Brisbane-Sunshine Coast high speed rail network on domestic airline travel.

It would kill off Canberra- Sydney flights (Qantas alone operates nearly 20 return Canberra- Sydney flights a week day, many during peak times), and put a big dent in Melbourne- Sydney and Brisbane-Sydney flights. And it would allow a greenfields site at Goulburn to handle some long haul flights, and/or an expanded Newcastle/ Williamtown to take domestic flights, which combined would serve to take a lot of the load off Sydney Airport.

The issue of a fast train though is who will fund its construction (at a cost of over $80 – yes, eight-zero – billion)? Maybe Sydney Airport owner Macquarie Airports could help? Maybe Qantas and Virgin Blue could be given a stake in return for dropping some Sydney flights, and they could codeshare on train services? But clearly, federal and state governments would have to stump up for its development.

So is there light at the end of the [Sydney second airport] tunnel, or is that a [high speed] train approaching?