Yes, I live on the Central Coast, but I grew up in inner western Sydney right under the flightpath to what became the main, longest runway. I loved it. My mother hated it. Of course she had earlier moved from Kogarah (which was under what was then the main runway's flightpath) to Marrickville when it was affected only by the "second", less used runway. And before the jet era, anyway. But they grew that short, secondary runway into the bay, an eminently sensible option in many respects, didn't they?
Of course the noise could be horrendous - and isn't much better now, even if high-bypass engines are demonstrably quieter and cleaner. And back then planes were smaller, so there were more of them at peak times. But now they are larger but quieter, which somehow sounds good on paper but in reality is as bad as ever. But they bought out the worst affected homes and insulated others, too. So "bearable" may suffice, if you like.
Anyway, point is that it's been there - Sydney Airport - since a certain Mr Love turned some distant Sydney swamp into an airfield not long into the 20th century. The runways were grassed and switched around a bit over the years, but it wasn't a problem for the locals, really, as it was just a swampy area fit only for pony racing, golf courses and industry (at least to a developer's eyes). When international air travel began to take off it was from Rose Bay, not Mascot. Flying boats were the long-haul heavy-lifters of their day. What happened next however is that Love's Mascot airfield slowly grew and so did the surrounding suburbs. And when the flying boats boomed then declined after the second world war Sydney's major air traffic needed to shift to the land - and thus the chickens came home to roost.
Traffic of course grew and runways became fixed - and longer. Aircraft now flew in and out over those growing suburbs to the west and the golf courses to the east. Until suddenly 747s arrived with larger payloads and longer runway requirements. Hence the focus shifted to the short north-south runway which was lengthened substantially into the bay. And then a parallel runway to that was built as well. But well before all of that came to pass various plans were put forward for a "second" Sydney Airport. Indeed there were studies galore.
In the 1970's it was proposed that the Central Coast could well be the right site for a second airport (although in truth there have always been many more airfields in Sydney than just one, indeed Bankstown Aiport has regularly exceeded Sydney in air movement volumes) and a lumpy, foggy and expensive Somersby site was seriously considered, amongst others. But political will was weak and impetus was lost until finally the Badgery's Creek site was selected in western Sydney. Or so we thought. In fact it stalled. And we are left here, decades later, with just the one "main" domestic and international airport at Mascot. Which suits the commercial airport operator just fine, of course, and keeps things simple for airlines and passengers, too. (There's no confusion over which airfield is which, for example, and no expensive transfer to distant termials to change flights.)
Of course Sydney AP could stay "as is" for decades, anyway, or even grow further into the bay. But the wheels are still turning on a "second" airport - if slowly - and Badgery's - or is it Wilton? - may one day come to be. But that doesn't stop the odd proposal for a regional airport that could siphon off some Sydney air traffic, just like Newcastle airport does today but moreso. It's not a "second Sydney airport" like the beat-up kings at The Telegraph would have us believe but a serious regional airport that would - if allowed to proceed - attract many northern-dwelling Sydney-siders looking for an easier way to fly within Australia. It would be an economic boon to the Central Coast and make interstate air travel more attractive to many, getting more cars off the roads. But it will get tarred with the usual brush, of course, and is almost certainly doomed.
Council's airport fibs put region in tailspin | thetelegraph.com.au
Of course the noise could be horrendous - and isn't much better now, even if high-bypass engines are demonstrably quieter and cleaner. And back then planes were smaller, so there were more of them at peak times. But now they are larger but quieter, which somehow sounds good on paper but in reality is as bad as ever. But they bought out the worst affected homes and insulated others, too. So "bearable" may suffice, if you like.
Anyway, point is that it's been there - Sydney Airport - since a certain Mr Love turned some distant Sydney swamp into an airfield not long into the 20th century. The runways were grassed and switched around a bit over the years, but it wasn't a problem for the locals, really, as it was just a swampy area fit only for pony racing, golf courses and industry (at least to a developer's eyes). When international air travel began to take off it was from Rose Bay, not Mascot. Flying boats were the long-haul heavy-lifters of their day. What happened next however is that Love's Mascot airfield slowly grew and so did the surrounding suburbs. And when the flying boats boomed then declined after the second world war Sydney's major air traffic needed to shift to the land - and thus the chickens came home to roost.
Traffic of course grew and runways became fixed - and longer. Aircraft now flew in and out over those growing suburbs to the west and the golf courses to the east. Until suddenly 747s arrived with larger payloads and longer runway requirements. Hence the focus shifted to the short north-south runway which was lengthened substantially into the bay. And then a parallel runway to that was built as well. But well before all of that came to pass various plans were put forward for a "second" Sydney Airport. Indeed there were studies galore.
In the 1970's it was proposed that the Central Coast could well be the right site for a second airport (although in truth there have always been many more airfields in Sydney than just one, indeed Bankstown Aiport has regularly exceeded Sydney in air movement volumes) and a lumpy, foggy and expensive Somersby site was seriously considered, amongst others. But political will was weak and impetus was lost until finally the Badgery's Creek site was selected in western Sydney. Or so we thought. In fact it stalled. And we are left here, decades later, with just the one "main" domestic and international airport at Mascot. Which suits the commercial airport operator just fine, of course, and keeps things simple for airlines and passengers, too. (There's no confusion over which airfield is which, for example, and no expensive transfer to distant termials to change flights.)
Of course Sydney AP could stay "as is" for decades, anyway, or even grow further into the bay. But the wheels are still turning on a "second" airport - if slowly - and Badgery's - or is it Wilton? - may one day come to be. But that doesn't stop the odd proposal for a regional airport that could siphon off some Sydney air traffic, just like Newcastle airport does today but moreso. It's not a "second Sydney airport" like the beat-up kings at The Telegraph would have us believe but a serious regional airport that would - if allowed to proceed - attract many northern-dwelling Sydney-siders looking for an easier way to fly within Australia. It would be an economic boon to the Central Coast and make interstate air travel more attractive to many, getting more cars off the roads. But it will get tarred with the usual brush, of course, and is almost certainly doomed.
Council's airport fibs put region in tailspin | thetelegraph.com.au
Wyong mayor Doug Eaton last month accused the media of a beat-up after The Daily Telegraph reported the council's plans for a second Sydney airport. "The key words here are 'regional airport'," he wrote in his weekly local newspaper column.Here is an updated list of Sydney's airports.
"The Sydney media have built it up to be our grab for Sydney's second airport.
"But all we ever proposed was a single runway, type 3 regional airport, similar to Coffs Harbour or Port Macquarie."
Mr Eaton has repeatedly stated it was meant to be a small regional airport despite the proposal featuring a 2600m-long runway, which would make it the second longest runway in NSW behind Sydney's main runway and capable of accommodating international flights.
Yarramalong resident Laurie Eyes, who lodged the GIPA request, said Mr Eaton and the council had been caught out in a "bare-faced lie".
Back-peddling yesterday, Mr Eaton said he strongly refuted claims he or the council misled the public in that the proposal started out as a push for a second airport.
