Bankstown Airport Readied For Sale

Table of Contents

New Owners

The Federal Government has escalated plans to sell Bankstown Airport. The remnants of the Federal Airports Corporation became a set of companies, initially under Federal Government Ownership. From July 2nd, 1998, Bankstown Airport is managed by Bankstown Airport Ltd (BAL) a subsidiary company of Sydney Airports Ltd - the managing company for Kingsford Smith Airport.

Ministerial responsibility will also transfer from the Minister for Transport, Mark Vaile, to Minister for Finance and member for the Badgerys Creek area, John Fahey (see Fahey's thoughts on Bankstown Airport )

The present manager of Bankstown Airport has been appointed General Manager of Bankstown Airport Ltd. (BAL). See what airport managers say about residents concerns.

There will be a coordinator between Bankstown Airport Ltd, and the parent Sydney Airport Ltd. Sydney Airport Ltd will manage Kingsford Smith Airport (KSA), and will oversee other subsidiaries than manage Hoxton Park , Camden, and Essendon Airport.

Essendon Airport is a General Aviation Airport in Melbourne, some 900 km from Sydney. It's in the package because no one wanted to buy it when offered for sale recently. Obviously is wasn't profitable. Sydney siders will be delighted with this great opportunity to prop up Melbourne flyers, this time using KSA's profits. If not delighted, don't hold your breath while waiting for the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission intervention to prevent this cross-subsidization.

New Owners Front Bankstown Council

Following strong representation from a variety of concerned community groups, senior FAC managers fronted Bankstown Council on Tuesday 23rd June to explain the activities at the airport.

They opened their address by stating "we are always willing to consult with the community", oblivious to the full public gallery which was well aware of FAC's limitations. The FAC had begun what it called drainage works well ahead of turning up at Council to explain itself (and there was absolutely no hint of a request for Council's or the communities' approval of the works).

It was similar willingness to consult that allowed the FAC to approve a service station on its property and allow it to sell liquor, much to the consternation of councillors, local residents and small businesses.

Pixies Expand Bankstown

They equally believably claimed there had been no expansion at Bankstown Airport, when asked by Councillors for details of when the runways had been extended since 1996. This was only shortly after showing a green field picture of Bankstown Airport in 1946, where runways and other developments were insignificant grass strips (very difficult to discern on 1951 aerial photos). I guess we just all woke up one morning and said "Gosh, look at what the pixies built at the bottom of our garden ".

We don't want to be unfair to the BAL managers, so here is a direct transcription of the official tape from the council meeting (um's, ah's and grammatical errors made by speakers have been included uncorrected):

Extension Questions from Councillor Ian Stromborg

At the time of the Council Meeting, Mr B. Thompson was General Manager/Operations FAC, and Mr H. Knox was General Manager/Bankstown Airport. They occupied similar roles in the newly corporatised Sydney Airports Corporation Limited/Bankstown Airport Limited from July 2nd 1998...

I.Stromborg: Um, the first one is, have, has, there been any extensions to the length of any runway, um, at Bankstown Airport, since 1996 to the present time, and when did such extensions begin and when did they finish ?

B.Thompson: No.

I Stromborg: What further extensions are proposed to runways at the airport ?

B.Thompson: None.

I. Stromborg: None ? Okay.

Why wasn't an Environmental Impact Study undertaken for the extensions to runway 11C/29C and 18/36 ?

H. Knox: They haven't been extended.

B. Thompson: They haven't been extended. That's the...

I. Stromborg: Okay, I'm just reading the questions

Roll your eyes, folks !

B.Thompson: Yeah, I know, but they don't make any sense, there's been no extensions so we obviously wouldn't do it.

Since 1996, there have been clearly evident extensions to runway lengths and widths (300 m and 400 m), and various runway zone markers.

Any reasonably intelligent person can spot the differences on aerial photographs. Click here to download the relevant section of the official Central Mapping Authority aerial photographs from 1996 (84K) and 1997 (141K).

All of these extensions are highly material in extending the range and performance capabilities of large aircraft using the airport. Ask any certified Air Transport pilot, under oath, and he'll admit this.

This runway has never been longer, and no runway at Bankstown has been able to offer similar or better performance in terms of its critical aeroplane.

1962 Runway Length

Airport Managers and aviation lobby groups have claimed in local media that the runway was 1460 meters long in 1961. This is immaterial in deciding the truth of answers to a question relating to "since 1996". As well as being immaterial, it is factually wrong.

Click hereto get the real facts on 1962 .

Critical Aeroplane

I. Stromborg: What is the largest type of aircraft that can currently be accomodated at Bankstown Airport, example, Dash-8, Sabre 340s, Falcon 50, uh, BA, uh, British Airways, um, Corporation, 146 ?

H. Knox: Aircraft up to 50 ton. Aircraft up to 50 ton., uh, which is like a 146 but, we've had, er, Hercules in at 63 ton.

The Maximum Take-Off Weight of a 737-100 is 46 tons, a basic 737-200 is 47 tons [Janes 70/71, p291]. Later models range up to 63 tons. There's over 1,100 737-200's in the world - it's the most numerous model of the world's most numerous aircraft.

As well, Lockheed's C130H Hercules has a maximum take-off weight of 70 tons, not 63.

I. Stromborg: I guess this question is trying to ask is, is it envisaged that, what type of aircraft, er, the upper limit aircraft, envisaged for the foreseeable future, in terms of size.

B.Thompon: Uh, it's a complex question to answer. On a very infrequent basis you can get quite heavy aircraft in. It's a complex question.

Did he tell us what the upper limit aircraft is ? If not, why ?

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)'s "Rules and Practices for Aerodromes" [RPA1998,p7-2] describes the critical aeroplane thus:

"The critical aeroplane is a conceptual aeroplane whose characteristics are a composite of the most critical elements of all the aeroplanes that the facility is intended to service. For example, in the design of a runway the critical characteristic determining runway width may derive from a different actual aeroplane than the critical characteristic determining clearance to the parallel taxiway...

It is the aerodrome operators' responsibility to determine the critical aeroplane for each aerodrome facility. This should be done in close consultation with users (airlines etc.,), and the CAA"

If the airport managers have properly discharged these responsibilities, it should be a simple matter to describe the critical aeroplanes for the runways and taxiways or to pick out the one amongst them that answers's Stromborg's "largest" question.

Is the proper answer to this question, a 737-300 ?

I.Stromborg: Mmm

B.Thompson: If you... going... planning on them coming in regularly, then obviously it's a lower weight because the the pavements are effected by total stress which is a combination of weight, tyre pressures and frequency of use. But the airport would be basically be able to handle at the moment virtually unlimited operations by aircraft up to 20,000 kilos which is roughly, Dash-8.

Interjection (Knox?): Size.

So what are the HS-748's, aircraft with MTOW just over 21,000 kgs, doing at Bankstown ? When did they first come to Bankstown ? Do they fly out every day ? Who's paying for their damage to the runways ? Or are the runways really capable of a lot more ?

Incidentally, the HS748 Series 2B has a Take-Off Run specification of 1,134 m under the British Civil Airworthiness Regulations (BCAR [Janes, 82/83, p243]). Some 20 meters shorter than the Take Off Run Available at Bankstown prior to the 1996 extensions (which BAL deny). VH-IMK is one of these

So a relevant questions for airport managers would be: was it possible for the HS-748 Series 2B aircraft, or any other aircraft now operated from Bankstown, to operate at Bankstown Airport on any date prior to 1st January, 1996, and if so, what special dispensations needed to apply ?

Was the HS748 the "critical aeroplane" driving the 1996/97 extensions ? Or is it something bigger like the 737's, and/or heavily laden BAe 146's ?

This is not an argument with International Aviation (or its successors in Horizon Airlines), nor any reasonable aircraft operator prepared to take a healthy attitude to sound regulation, community consultation and protection. Evidence given by IA to the Legislative Council Inquiry into Regional Air Services suggest they are a good neighbour in this respect.

The worry is with the cowboys in the industry who want to ride roughshod over the community, those in the bureaucracy who might seek to protect them, and the future privatised airport operators with irresponsible short-term profit motives.

To view the full transcript of the Council Address, click here .

Just in case you're still inclined to believe the no expansion stories, here are some more facts. See the diagram from the January 1998 En Route Supplement Australia ERSA (see ERSA to find out what an ERSA is) - it clearly shows the runway length as 1415 m - and this matches the ERSA's specification for the Take-Off Run Available (TORA).

The 1998 ERSA diagram was previously on BAL's web-site, but was taken off. A copy of the 2002 ERSA diagram is here.

Further evidence is in the FAC's 1996 and 1997 annual reports, where Bankstown's longest runway was 1110 m then 1415 m respectively. These are not insignificant or temporary changes in operational length we are talking about here.

As at June 30th 1996, Bankstown's main runway 11/29C, had an operational length (TORA) of a mere 1110 metres (see En Route Supplement Australia).

By mid 1997, while the local community was distracted by the Holsworthy issue, 11C/29C was extended to 1415 km. The Second Sydney Airport Draft EIS gives now its length as 1580 metres - very close to what the 1982 Masterplan gives. Do they know another 140 meters is coming up ?

In 1997, the 18/36 runway operational length (TORA) was extended from 480 m to 800 meters - making it fully sealed.

Take a look at the aerial photographs taken by the NSW Central Mapping Authority in April 1996, then December 1997. Ask yourself if you can see extensions in length, width or any other salient runway size feature. If you look closely, you can even see the old runway zone markings painted over and showing clearly what has been moved (more details on aerial photos page).

Lastly, consider the 1982 Master Plan prepared by the FAC (now BAL) - which BAL recently claimed as the justification for all the present works.

The Master Plan describes the runways that existed then in the following terms (refer page 6):

"11C/29C is a sealed runway 1111 meters x 30 meters in a strip 1231 meters x 90 meters.
18L/36R is substantially a natural surface runway, 1018 meters x 30 meters in a 1138 meters x 90 meters strip
18R/36L is a grassed runway 786 meters x 18 meters in a 906 meter x 90 meter strip"

There is only one of the two 18/36 direction runways left. Some time between 1982 and 1996, the shorter 18R/36L dissappeared, and half of the remaining runway was sealed.

Was the 1982 Master Plan misleading us ? Or is BAL now misleading us ?

For all this work, there was absolutely no community consultation, and no EIS - it's obviously all the work of the bad fairies. Is Airservices Rules and Practices for Aerodrome's prescription for community consultation on Master Plan's wrong ? Have BAL's managers failed in their duty ?

FAC/BAL's statements also fly in the face of evidence on instrument landing capabilities being added at Bankstown.

Occasional Becomes Continuous

Belly View of BAe146 DeHavilland Dash8-300 Airport managers claim that Dash-8 (left, 30+ passengers), and BAe146 jet aircraft (right, 58 passengers) could be expected to use Bankstown during the Olympics, but these were already using Bankstown occasionally. Unfortunately, they were not questioned on when they consulted with the community about escalating the role of Bankstown to bring in high performance and jet aircraft. Does FAC know how to consult ? Residents certainly have never heard of it.

FAC bureaucrats do not like to make any distinction between occasional use, such as occurred to date, and routine passenger flights (say everyday or every 5 minutes).

If scheduled flights of interstate or regional aircraft start in the next few years, what will you say ? How can you answer the argument that, well, it's no more that what you've had before ? It is vital that you write and tell him how wrong this is. Demand legislation ensuring that scheduled regional services at not transferred to Bankstown..

KSA Implications

If you live near KSA and really believe in the fairies, you might think it a good thing to get rid of as much airport traffic as possible by shifting it to Bankstown.

But you might be less than pleased to find slots vacated by Dash-8's and Falcon 50's handed over to 747's and other monsters. The net result would be oodles more noise than you've ever had.

Communities across Sydney must be united in their opposition to further airport development within the Sydney Basin. It doesn't matter whether it's Badgery's Creek, Bankstown or KSA, all of Sydney will suffer until an out-of-basin airport is built.

Consultation Challenge

If Bankstown Airport managers consulted the community, they might discover that what people are prepared to tolerate by way of once-a-week or occasional flights by celebrities is different to what is acceptable for routine scheduled operations.

FAC managers were invited by councillors to verify their willingness to consult by attending a meeting with residents on Sunday 28^th June 1998. Of course, they did not readily accept, and offered excuses about how busy they are and unsure of things on account of the restructure imminent at the time. They later declined the official invitation.

They just don't get it, do they ? If they're unsure, and they're experts, where does it leave the community ? It's exactly the time they should be out there talking with people, explaining the processes and plans to them.

First Published July 1998. Last Revised p>Last Change: vdeck mod

Visitor since Sat 21-Feb-2004.