Qantas Plans OneWorld Superterminal at Sydney

[Sprucegoose]

Yes, it’s going to be a beauty IMO.
We are very excited about it and some of the concept plans for our footprint out there look amazing

Yep, from my perspective, they have got a lot right, including the infrastructure required on day one. The governments did a tour of the most effective aerotropolis environments back in 2018.

 

[justinbrett]

So that's the only thing that's wrong with Melbourne's Tullamarine airport. The lounges are amazing, the security is quick and the connection process is painless?

You’re easily impressed aren’t you? I guess you love LAX for some weird reason, and when I think about it, MEL is the most LAX-y of Australian airports (drab concrete structures that you can walk between).

Amazing lounges? The domestic J lounge is good, the Flounge is nice but still a poor cousin to SYD, The rest of the lounges are pretty terrible.

 

[drron]

You’re easily impressed aren’t you? I guess you love LAX for some weird reason, and when I think about it, MEL is the most LAX-y of Australian airports (drab concrete structures that you can walk between).

Amazing lounges? The domestic J lounge is good, the Flounge is nice but still a poor cousin to SYD, The rest of the lounges are pretty terrible.

And when you are allowed lounge access on JQ MEL makes it very hard. And no mention of the taxi touts.

 

[dajop]

And when you are allowed lounge access on JQ MEL makes it very hard. And no mention of the taxi touts.

Yeh, but that’s only an issue because you’re comparing it to Sydney, where they make lounge access so easy when flying JQ

 

[Mwenenzi]

. Having lived in a number of continents, I'm surprised at how poorly connected Australia is in terms of flights. I mean 2 non-stop routes to Europe? Really?

Non stop routes are a technical engineering issue of aircraft range - weight - capacity - engine fuel consumption. Need to carry of fuel to be able stay in the air for a long time. And burning fuel to carry that fuel. Used to be 2-3-4 stops on the way AU UK for fuel top ups.

Are many airlines offereing flights AU to EU. Via Asia, ME, North America and even non stop PER-London/Rome,

 

[dajop]

Non stop routes are a technical engineering issue of aircraft range - weight - capacity - engine fuel consumption. Need to carry of fuel to be able stay in the air for a long time. And burning fuel to carry that fuel.

And therefore also an issue of economics.

 

[Mwenenzi]

And therefore also an issue of economics.

And long non stop flights are not the minimum cost considering fuel burn/range. life time aircraft maintenance, crewing. Some aircraft maintenance/costs are cycles (take offs-landings) and others hours or condition.

 

[Lynda2475]

including the infrastructure required on day one

For freight perhaps, but for commuters who actually live in Sydney proper (as opposed to the extreme outer most suburbs of greater Sydney) I think not. I've seen nothing about fast 24hr public transport to the new airport?

Given how built-up Sydney is, the only fast option would be a new underground subway tunnel for the whole way to get into Sydney proper for a business meeting/tourist hotel or home for anyone living north shore, east or inner west.

If I need to take the 6am SYD-MEL, when I leave home at 4:45am I can be in the lounge by 5:05am Barista coffee in hand having checked luggage. To make a 6am flight from the new airport would mean leaving home at like 3am if not earlier and $200+ on an uber/taxi as Sydney trains dont run 24*7, over night busses run about once an hour to the city.

 

[jase05]

For freight perhaps, but for commuters who actually live in Sydney proper (as opposed to the extreme outer most suburbs of greater Sydney) I think not. I've seen nothing about fast 24hr public transport to the new airport?

Given how built-up Sydney is, the only fast option would be a new underground subway tunnel for the whole way to get into Sydney proper for a business meeting/tourist hotel or home for anyone living north shore, east or inner west.

If I need to take the 6am SYD-MEL, when I leave home at 4:45am I can be in the lounge by 5:05am Barista coffee in hand having checked luggage. To make a 6am flight from the new airport would mean leaving home at like 3am if not earlier and $200+ on an uber/taxi as Sydney trains dont run 24*7, over night busses run about once an hour to the city.

The new line is already under construction and will run from St Mary’s station. Obviously they will need to improve the rest of the rail system and make it 24hrs

 

[Lynda2475]

So in peak hour where trains are plentiful it takes 65-74 mins to go from Circular Quay to St Mary's Stations, plus however extra long to get to the Airport likley another 30 mins at least.

Not too many tourists would feel safe catching a train from St Mary's at 2 or 3am (not that the trains even run at that time of night). Once the commute to an airport is over an hour it becomes impractical.

Hooking into a railway station that isnt any sort of main transit hub (really needs direct express services from Central and City Circle) only really provides for those that live in or want to stay in the outer western burbs.

I personally would have preferred they expand SYD, they could easily have a floating runway in botany bay ala Hong Kong and scrap the pointless curfew.

I'm just hoping the premium routes stay at SYD and that if I cant get the international route I wat out of SYD that I can route from SYD via MEL or BNE to get there, as will be much quicker and cheaper to tack on a domestic leg than try and get to the new airport.

If all freight moves out there, should be more capacity for passenger flights at SYD.

 

[jase05]

So in peak hour where trains are plentiful it takes 65-74 mins to go from Circular Quay to St Mary's Stations, plus however extra long to get to the Airport likley another 30 mins at least.

Not too many tourists would feel safe catching a train from St Mary's at 2 or 3am (not that the trains even run at that time of night). Once the commute to an airport is over an hour it becomes impractical.

Hooking into a railway station that isnt any sort of main transit hub (really needs direct express services from Central and City Circle) only really provides for those that live in or want to stay in the outer western burbs.

I personally would have preferred they expand SYD, they could easily have a floating runway in botany bay ala Hong Kong and scrap the pointless curfew.

I'm just hoping the premium routes stay at SYD and that if I cant get the international route I wat out of SYD that I can route from SYD via MEL or BNE to get there, as will be much quicker and cheaper to tack on a domestic leg than try and get to the new airport.

If all freight moves out there, should be more capacity for passenger flights at SYD.

Dedicated freighters will move out there but every single flight that comes in has freight of some description so that will still need to be shuttled out West

 

[justinbrett]

For freight perhaps, but for commuters who actually live in Sydney proper (as opposed to the extreme outer most suburbs of greater Sydney) I think not. I've seen nothing about fast 24hr public transport to the new airport?

Given how built-up Sydney is, the only fast option would be a new underground subway tunnel for the whole way to get into Sydney proper for a business meeting/tourist hotel or home for anyone living north shore, east or inner west.

If I need to take the 6am SYD-MEL, when I leave home at 4:45am I can be in the lounge by 5:05am Barista coffee in hand having checked luggage. To make a 6am flight from the new airport would mean leaving home at like 3am if not earlier and $200+ on an uber/taxi as Sydney trains dont run 24*7, over night busses run about once an hour to the city.

It will end up similar to LGA vs JFK or HND vs NRT. Or possibly even OOL vs BNE (was going to say AVV vs MEL but I think the new WS airport won't just be a LCC market)

There's certainly enough people living in the area that will keep domestic flights going strong - probably to a CBR sized airport.

International will only thrive with a mixture of carrot (financial savings to airlines) and stick (increased curfew restrictions at SYD and fewer slots).

But I don't see it ever replacing SYD as the primary domestic airport. It then gets a bit messy if all the connecting flights are flying into SYD but then pax have to road transit to WS - so I can see QF and VA pushing to keep international at SYD. But then all their partners will want to stay as well (which is why I think the HND/NRT example is pretty close).

 

[jase05]

It will end up similar to LGA vs JFK or HND vs NRT. Or possibly even OOL vs BNE (was going to say AVV vs MEL but I think the new WS airport won't just be a LCC market)

There's certainly enough people living in the area that will keep domestic flights going strong - probably to a CBR sized airport.

International will only thrive with a mixture of carrot (financial savings to airlines) and stick (increased curfew restrictions at SYD and fewer slots).

But I don't see it ever replacing SYD as the primary domestic airport. It then gets a bit messy if all the connecting flights are flying into SYD but then pax have to road transit to WS - so I can see QF and VA pushing to keep international at SYD. But then all their partners will want to stay as well (which is why I think the HND/NRT example is pretty close).

I attended a work seminar/planning concept meeting last year and it was mooted that already over a dozen International airlines have shown interest (no doubt a decent sweetener thrown in)
It won’t be a LCC airport and I agree with you 100% that SYD will still retain the bulk of flights but it will end up similar to HND/NRT and a transit between airports will be required

 

[Lynda2475]

was going to say AVV vs MEL but I think the new WS airport won't just be a LCC market

Remember AVV didnt start out to be LCC only, its just how it ended up after people found out how inconvenient it was to Melbourne.

I think new airport will end up the same in the long term once people realise how far it is from anywhere useful.

I'm betting it will become the main base for Jetstar and Bonza; routes that are popular with Western Sydney i.e Bali and airlines that fly direct to destinations which have large populations in the Outer Western Suburbs i.e. maybe Air India, Vietnam or Bamboo Airlines and China Eastern.

Personally, I cant see too many flights with a F cabin or the new ULH QF routes using it and those like QF who will remain at SYD know they can charge a premium to avoid having to go out to the western burbs.

You can get from JFK/LGA to Manhattan in under an hour; new airport to martin place won't ever be possible in under an hour,

 

[Guvner]

You’re easily impressed aren’t you? I guess you love LAX for some weird reason, and when I think about it, MEL is the most LAX-y of Australian airports (drab concrete structures that you can walk between).

Amazing lounges? The domestic J lounge is good, the Flounge is nice but still a poor cousin to SYD, The rest of the lounges are pretty terrible.

So your argument against an airport terminal upgrade at MEL is that the existing airport terminal at MEL needs an upgrade? Yep, makes sense.

 

[jase05]

Remember AVV didnt start out to be LCC only, its just how it ended up after people found out how inconvenient it was to Melbourne.

I think new airport will end up the same in the long term once people realise how far it is from anywhere useful.

I'm betting it will become the main base for Jetstar and Bonza; routes that are popular with Western Sydney i.e Bali and airlines that fly direct to destinations which have large populations in the Outer Western Suburbs i.e. maybe Air India, Vietnam or Bamboo Airlines and China Eastern.

Personally, I cant see too many flights with a F cabin or the new ULH QF routes using it and those like QF who will remain at SYD know they can charge a premium to avoid having to go out to the western bubrs.

You can get from JFK/LGA to Manhattan in under an hour; new airport to martin place won't ever be possible in under an hour,

I would almost guarantee that won’t be the case.
Will it take over from SYD in the near future then no but at the roadshow we were presented with plans and data that would see the new airport become the Primary airport in NSW at around 2060 and potentially sooner. Not in my lifetime but still soon enough
As I said at the show last year they had interest from about a dozen International airlines and have already signed MOU’s with Virgin and Qantas (even outlining space for lounges) At that stage they said several international airlines were close to signing MOU’s also but I haven’t seen a update since. With no curfews and more peak slots available aswell as offering the quickest MCT I can see it being appealing for some airlines

 

[Lynda2475]

the Primary airport in NSW at around 2060

Well i hope it takes longer than that, Id like to still be flying from SYD at aged 85.

 

[justinbrett]

Remember AVV didnt start out to be LCC only, its just how it ended up after people found out how inconvenient it was to Melbourne.

I think new airport will end up the same in the long term once people realise how far it is from anywhere useful.

I'm betting it will become the main base for Jetstar and Bonza; routes that are popular with Western Sydney i.e Bali and airlines that fly direct to destinations which have large populations in the Outer Western Suburbs i.e. maybe Air India, Vietnam or Bamboo Airlines and China Eastern.

Personally, I cant see too many flights with a F cabin or the new ULH QF routes using it and those like QF who will remain at SYD know they can charge a premium to avoid having to go out to the western bubrs.

You can get from JFK/LGA to Manhattan in under an hour; new airport to martin place won't ever be possible in under an hour,

Which is why I used OOL as an example instead of AVV - I think there is a market for QF/VA flights at WS - the population base well exceeds the parts of Melbourne/Geelong that are closer to AVV than MEL (noting MEL is already a Western Melbourne airport).

I'm agreeing with you, WS is too far for the majority of Sydney travellers - I'm just saying the market is big enough to support two domestic airports - but just for the major routes (like CBR). In the end I don't think WS will come at the expense of SYD. Even JQ shunned AVV and is now mostly back at MEL.

So your argument against an airport terminal upgrade at MEL is that the existing airport terminal at MEL needs an upgrade? Yep, makes sense.

I never commented on whether MEL needs an upgrade. It does.

 

[Mwenenzi]

This is old news.
This was first discussed in 2011 but was canned.
As recently as last year such was not planned.

Master Plan 2039 - Downloads

# Master Plan 2039 - [Sydney Airport Master Plan 2039](//downloads.ctfassets.net/v228i5y5k0x4/6BdjDg1hDpubx2F8817NrI/597809341db00e0953a2df403a53136c/Sydney_Airport_Master_Plan_2039_F.pdf) - [Sydney Airport Environmental Strategy 2019-2024](//assets.

www.sydneyairport.com.au

Agree nothing new. Just a blogger looking for clicks (= money)
As Qantas do not own the Sydney airport will be what the owners consider will maximise profits ( staff bonus) in short and medium term. Not long term. Govt border force requirements cost also a factor. But to me does make sense if the main airlines and its partners were in one terminal.

AU airports are tending to being an expensive shopping/food centre with very expensice car parking that happen to have aircraft.

Many posts now getting off topic. That new way west Sydney airport & Avalon etc

 

[dajop]

Which is why I used OOL as an example instead of AVV - I think there is a market for QF/VA flights at WS - the population base well exceeds the parts of Melbourne/Geelong that are closer to AVV than MEL (noting MEL is already a Western Melbourne airport).

I'm agreeing with you, WS is too far for the majority of Sydney travellers - I'm just saying the market is big enough to support two domestic airports - but just for the major routes (like CBR). In the end I don't think WS will come at the expense of SYD. Even JQ shunned AVV and is now mostly back at MEL.



I never commented on whether MEL needs an upgrade. It does.

Yes, even in the western suburbs of Melbourne, a lot of people are closer to MEL than they are to AVV. Unlike SYD, where a big chunk of western Sydney population will be closer to the new airport. For most of Melbourne (except NE suburbs) only about 20 mins difference between travelling to MEL and travelling to AVV by road, but perception counts and IMHO the biggest problem is the unreliability of the travel time to AVV, the Westgate/Princes Fwy is an absolute shocker in terms of both reliability and stress.