Sydney Airport Curfew Change Call - EK faces $1M fine

[drron]

Actually, residents are generally more important to local politicians than "air TRAVELLERS".

This is because local residents have the ability to put local politicians out of their role.

Well have you seen the promo for Yes Minister for tonight.Jim Hacker is deciding whether he should come down on the side of the Teachers and nurses or the Back benchers.
His wife says that the Teachers and nurses are more important.Jim answers-no,the teachers and nurses can only vote me out at the next election,the back benchers can vote me out at 10 o'clock tonight.
And that is certainly the history of those electorates around SYD.
The ? full story here-
Second Sydney Airport-A Chronology (September 2003)

And if you happen to read that report note who leads the opposition to increasing SYDs capacity-the members for Kingsford Smith and Barton.

 

[MarkD]

It's not just airports, around westend in Brisbane they are having a ****fight about trucks around apartments, now for those unaware, westend is THE industrial area of inner Brisbane, and dare I suggest some cash changed hands to allow yuppie apartments to be built right in the guts of it. The residents are now whinging like old moles about trucks delivering and removing goods from factories and warehouses that have been there for a hundred years. Some people are just arrogant wankers

 

[Jane-Doe]

It's not just airports, around westend in Brisbane they are having a ****fight about trucks around apartments, now for those unaware, westend is THE industrial area of inner Brisbane, and dare I suggest some cash changed hands to allow yuppie apartments to be built right in the guts of it. The residents are now whinging like old moles about trucks delivering and removing goods from factories and warehouses that have been there for a hundred years. Some people are just arrogant wankers

This is happening everywhere. Sydney Airport is one site of many industrial/residential colocations.

I have subscribed to this thread and watching with fascination.

 

[medhead]

It's not just airports, around westend in Brisbane they are having a ****fight about trucks around apartments, now for those unaware, westend is THE industrial area of inner Brisbane, and dare I suggest some cash changed hands to allow yuppie apartments to be built right in the guts of it. The residents are now whinging like old moles about trucks delivering and removing goods from factories and warehouses that have been there for a hundred years. Some people are just arrogant wankers

Same with live music in the valley.


Sent from the Throne (80% chance) using Aust Freq Fly app

 

[djfuzz]

Having grown up right next to Essendon airport and under the MEL flight path, I've had some trouble understanding how that amount of noise is such a big deal, and who would keel over if they made it just a wee bit flexible. I did some work in Petersham recently and must admit to noticing the noise, but equally I may have been distracted by the spectacle of seeing some great aircraft approaches.

 

[anat0l]

It's not just airports, around westend in Brisbane they are having a ****fight about trucks around apartments, now for those unaware, westend is THE industrial area of inner Brisbane, and dare I suggest some cash changed hands to allow yuppie apartments to be built right in the guts of it. The residents are now whinging like old moles about trucks delivering and removing goods from factories and warehouses that have been there for a hundred years. Some people are just arrogant wankers

Same with live music in the valley.

Both problems are due to misguided gentrification. After all, living in the inner city these days is the chic thing, isn't it?

In some reality, if the only residents were yuppies or demographic of age 20-38 years, there probably wouldn't be a problem. (If it's this demographic that are complaining then God save us...)

Kinda the same with the airport curfew and aircraft noise.

 

[missafternoondelight]

Haha. Great thread. Good to see some rigorous political discussion going on.

I work in Government, and frequently have 'customers' elevating their complaint to me about certain infrastructure near their homes, that was there before they were. My answer is that the definition of Government corruption is the failure to consider the greater public interest first and foremost. It is my duty to constantly seek out the best outcomes for the wider community, and then balance this against cost.
I can't prioritise the rights of one householder, business or other entity if the community benefit outweighs the drawbacks. It is certainly a case of needs of majority versus needs of minority, and cost benefit.

Having said that, everyone who works in Government knows that while we aim to work consistently by this ethos, we are frequently rolled by political direction, which can contradict all our other decision making.


In summary, yes, the curfew should be abolished, most people even outside this forum (where we have a bias towards aviation progress) would agree it is in Sydney, and Australia's best interests to do so.
But don't underestimate / overestimate politics.. or the power of a few squeaky wheels.

 

[harvyk]

Both problems are due to misguided gentrification. After all, living in the inner city these days is the chic thing, isn't it?

And there in lies the problem, we are building residential houses \ units \ apartments in area's that are totally unsuited for residential use, and whilst there are certainly pluses to living in said area's there are also draw backs. Of course the way to deal with the draw backs is to shout and complain.

But don't underestimate / overestimate politics.. or the power of a few squeaky wheels.

A very few squeaky wheels, I remember reading that the bulk of airport noise complaints basically came from about 20 people. There was a few in there who averaged one angry letter per day.

 

[drron]

A very few squeaky wheels, I remember reading that the bulk of airport noise complaints basically came from about 20 people. There was a few in there who averaged one angry letter per day.

Well there is one person who believes BNE needs a curfew-
Anna Bligh and Campbell Newman Rule Out Need For Brisbane Airport Night Curfew

Mr Rudd, who rose to prominence in his Griffith electorate when he campaigned on aircraft noise, believes it necessary to test the need for a curfew at Brisbane Airport.

The Prime Minister explored the idea as an opposition backbencher, reportedly spending $30,000 of his own money in a court battle against the second runway in 2007.

 

[Moody]

In summary, yes, the curfew should be abolished, most people even outside this forum (where we have a bias towards aviation progress) would agree it is in Sydney, and Australia's best interests to do so.
But don't underestimate / overestimate politics.. or the power of a few squeaky wheels.

You may advance an argument that there will be financial gains for some if the curfew is abolished, but to call residents who will have to bear the brunt of that decision "squeaky wheels" is insulting.

When aircraft at KS take off to the north and hang a left over the inner west (regardless of their final destination) I am unable to watch TV for about 30 seconds and the windows sometimes shake a bit (depending on aircraft type and throttle setting). No doubt there are sad plane-spotters out there who love that sort of thing, but I am not a weirdo and do not aspire to be one. This could be considered the price you pay for a 3rd runway and political inteference in aircraft movements. Whatever your personal opinion I think most of the residents (like me) are resigned to this situation.

But now we have a call for the curfew to be abolished - that is a legitimate position to take and you are welcome to champion the cause. But denigrating residents who would oppose such a change is completely unwarranted. Also comparing them to residents who move into a known situation and then complain about it is misleading at best, dishonest at worst. I don't appreciate people who are try to deceive the stupid with such tactics.

So what is my opinion? I think there should be more leeway for operators who have been delayed through no fault of their own, as long as the impact can be minimised. I also think the fine should be a multiple of the maximum ANEFs (DBs?) recorded times the number of minutes outside curfew. This money should be funnelled into compensation for residents impacted (more noise insulation, some nice noise-cancelling headphones, etc.)


There - a logical and reasonable position without insulting anyone. And it wasn't hard to do!

 

[oz_mark]

But now we have a call for the curfew to be abolished - that is a legitimate position to take and you are welcome to champion the cause. But denigrating residents who would oppose such a change is completely unwarranted. Also comparing them to residents who move into a known situation and then complain about it is misleading at best, dishonest at worst. I don't appreciate people who are try to deceive the stupid with such tactics.

So what is my opinion? I think there should be more leeway for operators who have been delayed through no fault of their own, as long as the impact can be minimised. I also think the fine should be a multiple of the maximum ANEFs (DBs?) recorded times the number of minutes outside curfew. This money should be funnelled into compensation for residents impacted (more noise insulation, some nice noise-cancelling headphones, etc.)

I think this was the general thrust of what the original article was about. Not that the curfew be abolished, but that there be more leeway in cases such as this where thunderstorms had prevented the refueling of aircraft etc. I've never tried but I imagine finding accomodation in Sydney for 500+ passengers may have been a difficult task at that time of night.

As I understand it, the flight took off an refuelled somewhere en-route.

 

[Alanslegal]

For most part it is just the minorioty who despite knowing what they are getting themselves into will whinge, just like those that purchased units next to Luna Park in Sydney then compalined about the nosie, causing the roller coaster to be moved off site etc orthose who have bought near a rail line/station and then complain of the noise from trains and/or station announcements.

Those who bought near Luna Park were sucked in by the real estate agents promise of being close to 'entertainment', those who bought next to railway lines were promised it was convenient to 'transport', those who bought on busy roads were promised good road access to major cities of Australia :shock:

 

[anat0l]

...to call residents who will have to bear the brunt of that decision "squeaky wheels" is insulting.

...

No doubt there are sad plane-spotters out there who love that sort of thing, but I am not a weirdo and do not aspire to be one.

...

There - a logical and reasonable position without insulting anyone. And it wasn't hard to do!

Hypocrisy, much?


In reality there is denigration of parties on both sides. Residents who are opposed to the abolition of the curfew and/or opposed to the loosening of conditions around the curfew and/or support tighter conditions around the curfew and/or are opposed to the expansion of operations at SYD within the current curfew timing (not necessarily movement conditions) are just as denigrating and critical of the proponents and their supporters as the other way around. You might argue that there is a spot concentration of one side of such arguments on this forum. So I would not go on the "holier than thou" argument.

To loosen the curfew conditions to allow for weather delays etc. is tantamount really to removing the curfew. No reasonable supporter of the curfew would allow the loosening (even temporarily) of the curfew just to allow some airlines to fix up their cooked schedules; that would imply they are prepared to take the temporary "pain" for a greater good, where the "good" here is commercial / economical, not environmental / social / amenity (which is the purpose of the curfew). Nah, I don't see that happening. Besides, there is simply no precedent for the number of times this has happened at SYD (or for flights with delays going to SYD), so I don't expect that to change now unless there has been a dramatic demographic shift. Can you imagine the tremendous outrage that would've resulted if the Minister decided to grant dispensation to many airlines in order to account for the weather delays? Don't be mistaken - it definitely would've happened. Hey - people gotta sleep even if there's a thunderstorm out there, so now you're prepared to give up your sleep for 1-2 nights for the good of the airport?

I also don't buy the argument of all fines collected through curfew breaches to be offered as compensation to the residents. If the residents required compensation by means of glazing on windows or better hearing protection, then that should be demanded as a matter of course now, not when the curfew is broken. Also, if the residents are demanding this kind of compensation then that should be a step towards abolishing the curfew (i.e. from non-acceptance to tolerance), but that's not happening either. The fine for breaking curfew is intended to be purely punitive (i.e. a punishment for airlines breaking the law), not compensatory or contributing to some noise-reducing slush fund.

I think this was the general thrust of what the original article was about. Not that the curfew be abolished, but that there be more leeway in cases such as this where thunderstorms had prevented the refueling of aircraft etc. I've never tried but I imagine finding accomodation in Sydney for 500+ passengers may have been a difficult task at that time of night.

As mentioned, I think it's a case of have it or remove it. At best, to relax the curfew would force a slippery-slope argument from those supporting the curfew, as well as a severe debate and backlash against the regulator as to a more loose system of granting/denial of dispensation.

If the status quo "works", then the curfew should stay and weather conditions should continue not to be a reason to grant dispensation. AFAICT (from guessing) this is similar to most other jurisdictions around the world where the airports have movement restrictions / curfews.


And you're right - finding accommodation for 500+ people in Sydney late at night is no easy feat. Let alone these properties would not be near the airport (this is bad enough as it is). Luckily SYD has some capacity to deal with these. In another international airport in Australia, the problem might just be exponentially more difficult (to put it conservatively).

 

[medhead]

Well there is one person who believes BNE needs a curfew-
Anna Bligh and Campbell Newman Rule Out Need For Brisbane Airport Night Curfew

More than one. There is a whole group in the bulimba/hawthorne area, including my uncle who jumped up and down when he lived there. Funny he never said anything about aircraft over my house until they change the approach path to go over bulimba.

You may advance an argument that there will be financial gains for some if the curfew is abolished, but to call residents who will have to bear the brunt of that decision "squeaky wheels" is insulting.

And dismissing someone who doesn't live need Sydney is what, exactly? [calling people sad weirdos has been covered already]

So the Sydney curfew is redundant to someone who lives in the boondocks? How quaint.

 

[drron]

More than one. There is a whole group in the bulimba/hawthorne area, including my uncle who jumped up and down when he lived there. Funny he never said anything about aircraft over my house until they change the approach path to go over bulimba.

Presumably he moved before 2009/10-bulimba just 6 complaints by 6 people in 12 months.At Mt. Gravatt there really know how to jump up and down-619 complaints from just 2 people!
http://www.rag.org.au/asa/pdf-files/complaints 12 months 1-7-2009 to 30-6-2010.pdf

 

[JohnK]

In summary, yes, the curfew should be abolished, most people even outside this forum (where we have a bias towards aviation progress) would agree it is in Sydney, and Australia's best interests to do so.
But don't underestimate / overestimate politics.. or the power of a few squeaky wheels.

I like your post but do not quite understand this statement.

Why would it be in Sydney's best interests to remove the curfew? So more flights are scheduled which will result in an increase in tourism? Do tourists really avoid a country because of it's airport?

 

[medhead]

Presumably he moved before 2009/10-bulimba just 6 complaints by 6 people in 12 months.At Mt. Gravatt there really know how to jump up and down-619 complaints from just 2 people!
http://www.rag.org.au/asa/pdf-files/complaints 12 months 1-7-2009 to 30-6-2010.pdf

Yeah he's been down the bay for a number of years. Funny that, I used to live west of Mt Gravatt on the other side of the freeway and the aircraft would come almost directly overhead. It was awesome, especially when the f111s would go over. So I have no idea what those 2 idiots are complaining about.

 

[wandering_fred]

Maybe if we had a curfew in PER, QF would not have rescheduled a SIN-PER flight to arrive at 0440. :shock::mrgreen:

On a more serious note, get rid of half of the problem by allowing landings to be scheduled anytime under the rationale that the noise footprint is dramatically smaller for landings.. I realize that this change would not help the current EK situation. But it might highlight that fact that modern airliners are quieter than planes were when the curfew was initiated.

I suspect my $0.02 is worth just as much as everyone else's in the AFF community. That is for the SYD authorities - absolutely nothing.

Fred

 

[Hvr]

The curfew is cough. The airport was around a lot longer than those that decided to settle there in its environs.

Its an ALP hoax and should be dealt with as such.

Toughen up you lot or leave...

And yet John Howard actively supported the curfew. He may well have been a stooge but he is part of the far right not from the left (ALP side) of politics.

Nor are the current NSW Liberal government interested in making any changes so it could be said that the curfew has bipartisan support.

Having said that I share the belief that if you choose to live under a flight path then you should either know what you're getting into or reconsider your ability to make a rational decision and be put into supported living arrangements.

Of course the whole curfew issue could be solved if there was a very fast railway put through to CBR and then the planes could take off and land at anytime they wanted to and the pax could catch a clean and efficient train to the centre of SYD.

 

[Moody]

And dismissing someone who doesn't live need Sydney is what, exactly? [calling people sad weirdos has been covered already]

Yes - it has been covered ... by more dishonest quoting out of context as usual. Some people would call that lying but I couldn't possibly agree.

I said that people who like to not hear themselves think for 30 seconds and instead listen to their windows rattling as planes go overhead, were in my opinion weirdos. Do you know of any such people and what would you call them?

And if someone from outside Sydney wants to offer the opinion that the curfew is irrelevant, then in my opinion they are living in the mental if not literal boondocks, as their empathy for fellow human beings is not from my neck of the woods.

Please quote me directly and fully in future and we will get along much better.

10 ...9....8...7....