Air today, train tomorrow?

By HENRY WARRICK
SYDNEY’S controversial second Airport proposal struggles to get off the ground as high-speed city rail links get on the drawing board.

1. What is the condition of Sydney Airport?

Sydney Airport is Australia’s most significant piece of domestic and global connecting infrastructure. In 2009 the airport was used by 33 million passengers, an average of 90,000 passengers a day. Sydney Airport also receives half of all air cargo. It is also one of the most important economic assets in New South Wales, providing employment for more than 150,000 people. In the 2005 Skytrax Airport of the Year Award, Sydney Airport was in the Top Ten listed airports worldwide. Sydney Airports Corporation Limited regularly cooperates with the Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Services, the State Government, local government and private and commercial Transport sources. The primary airlines which use Sydney airport are: Qantas, Regional Express, Virgin Blue, Jetstar and a host of International Airlines that use Sydney Airport as a port for their airline schedules.

2. Why does Sydney need a second Airport?

Earlier this year, The International Air and Transport Association (IATA) which represents some 230 airlines comprising 93% of scheduled international air traffic; predicted that over the next eight years, the airline industry would need a further 200,000 pilots to fulfil growing demand for air travel. Since the construction of Kingsford Smith Airport in 1919, aviation in Australia has grown substantially. According to the Sydney Airport statistics report issued in June 2010, between 1987 and 1999, domestic flights in and out of Sydney more than doubled to nearly 27 million passengers. International passengers increased from eight million to more than 15 million in the same period. Almost half of all scheduled flights in Australia land or take off at Kingsford Smith, and the airport dealt with 45% of international passengers in 1998. In 2009 there were also 17,280 general aviation flights and 6,700 freight flights giving a total of 289,741 total aircraft movements for the year; translated to an average of 790 movements per day. According to Former Virgin Blue Chief Executive Officer Brett Godfrey, these numbers are excessive for an airport hosting only two active runways during operations. Plans for a second Sydney Airport have been on the drawing board since 1970 to relieve the pressure on Kingsford Smith and its deficient capacity to deal with the exponential growth in flight numbers.

3. Where will Sydney fit a second airport?

The most contentious aspect of a second Sydney Airport is a practical location that combines space and efficiency for passengers to access the CBD following their flight. The Australian government’s Economics, Commerce and Industrial Relations Group released a report showing that planning for a second airport for Sydney began with the Major Airport Needs of Sydney (MANS); an intergovernmental group established to select a site. The initial pitch suggested construction in Badgerys Creek, but in 1989, the Hawke Government also made the decision to permit the construction of the third, perpendicular runway at Kingsford Smith. The political fallout from this decision due to unfair noise abatement regulations in residential Sydney resulted in the Keating Government abandoning the idea. Under the Howard government in 1999, it was confirmed that Badgerys Creek would once again be the preferred site. In the Proposed Second Sydney Airport at Badgerys Creek: Environment Assessment report released in late 1999, recommendations were made that domestic air travel be shifted to Bankstown Airport, a new general aviation airport be built at Badgerys Creek, and enquiries were to be made regarding construction of new high speed rail links between the four major transport hubs of Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane. As of 2010, the Gillard Government wants the second airport to be outside the Sydney basin and is currently considering Canberra Airport as its secondary port for Sydney’s airline operations.

4. What is so good about high speed rail links
According to a study released jointly by AECOM, one of the world’s experts on replicating fast trains for governments, and lobby group Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, a high-speed rail network between the major transport hubs could rival the convenience of air travel. The study argues that at speeds of 350km/h, high-speed rail would allow a “10-minute trip” between Sydney and Campbelltown and 50 minutes to Canberra. It estimates that travel from Sydney to Melbourne would take three hours. Importantly, the study maintains that high speed rail links would avoid the $15 billion cost of developing the proposed second Sydney airport. Director of the Australian Rail Track Corporation Dale Budd says that high speed rail should not be disregarded or overlooked. “High speed rail is a vital piece of infrastructure…People just need to rethink their favourite means of travel and try something different that is proven to work” he said. Japan, Spain, France and Britain are just a few of the countries using high-speed rail.

5. Which is better? Plane vs. Train?

On the 13th of January 2009, The Guardian weekly reported that 20% of domestic air travel in Spain has transferred over to rail travel since high speed rail services to the major transport hubs and cities began in January 1993. The expectation would be that similar results could be achieved in Australia. In the East coast very high speed train scoping study: phase 1-preliminary study commissioned by the Howard Government in December 2000, the travel corridor between the major hubs of Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane would benefit greatly from a high-speed rail network. It predicted its total daily passenger forecast to be approximately 100,000 people. According to the study, the proposed high speed rail networks would move passengers from Sydney to Melbourne at speeds of 350 km/h meaning a trip time of four hours. Aircraft servicing the air corridor between these two ports are still significantly faster completing the journey in less than two hours.