Chapter Five
OTHER ISSUES PRESENTED TO THE INQUIRY THAT
REQUIRE CONSIDERATION
Restriction or exclusion of small carriers from KSA
5.1 During the course of the inquiry, the exclusion of regional aircraft from KSA was raised both as a
concern by stakeholders and by some as an approach to allowing greater international and domestic use
of KSA. The exclusion of regional carriers from peak and shoulder periods was also raised.
5.2 The issue raised by BARA and Qantas in their submissions concerning their negative perception of
small aircraft with a small number of passengers displacing jets carrying “400 hundred plus” illustrates the
complexity of demand management at KSA. On face value, enabling more passengers to be landed in
peak times is alluring, but does not take into account the complexity of the environment in which KSA
operates or the needs of rural and regional Australia. This chapter outlines the main issues that illustrate
the complexity of the KSA environment and its critical place in linking regional NSW to Sydney and the
domestic and global economies.
Exclusion would affect approximately 1.2 million regional passengers
5.3 To follow BARA and Qantas' argument to its conclusion, if best use of KSA peak and shoulder
landing slots is to exclude small aircraft in favour of large interstate and international carriers and their
customers, then this would exclude regional carriers and their customers.
5.4 Approximately 1.2 million regional passengers used Sydney Airport in 1996/97. Given regional
airline indications that this is when they have their biggest loads, it seems reasonable to conclude most of
this 1.2 million people travelled in peak or shoulder periods. It is simple then to conclude that exclusion of
regional carriers from peak periods would exclude or inconvenience a large proportion of those 1.2
million customers.
5.5 Total exclusion of the regional airlines from KSA, as has been suggested by some, would exclude 1.2
million customers travelling to and from regional areas. While this may only be 6% of passengers [1] who
used KSA, it is a significant number in terms of regional communities and NSW. NSW at the 1996
census had 6,038,696 residents [2].
Regional airlines have rights as businesses
5.6 The argument that airlines with a smaller volume of passengers should make way for those with a
large volume of passengers raises equity and free trade concerns. If one ignores for the moment the
number of customers an airline has, and looks at them as a business, the Committee can see no valid
argument to exclude regional carriers from KSA, more than any other carrier. One could equally argue
that international aircraft travelling empty or nearly empty between cities fall into the same category of
using space that could be filled by a full aircraft.
5.7 Regional carriers currently occupying peak and shoulder time slots have demonstrated a capacity to
compete, under the surcharge system, on the same playing field as the domestic and international airlines.
They have all been commercially able to pay the price of operating at peak and shoulder times. To deny
regional airline access to KSA during the most commercially desirable periods of the day or altogether
because of their size would seem an unfair restriction on business and potentially a barrier to the
continued success of regional airlines.
Impact of exclusion from peak and shoulder time slots
5.8 A number of airlines and community representatives indicated that forcing regional airlines to fly only
off peak would reduce their business trade because they would not be able to offer customers sufficient
time in Sydney to do their business in one day. This is particularly of concern where other forms of
transport such as road and rail were an option. As Councillor Wardman, Mayor of Bathurst, stated in
evidence on 24 April 1998:
The great problem we have – and I do not want to repeat it- is that we are not far from
Sydney. We are only three hours from Sydney by car. [3]
5.9 Where, due to distance, there was little choice of an alternative to air travel, it was suggested by
witnesses that business would have the additional costs of an overnight stay added to their travel,
increasing costs to regional businesses.
5.10 Impulse's comment in their submission is illustrative of concerns raised with the Committee:
Approximately 75% of traffic on peak Impulse services is travelling for business
purposes. In almost every case, a high priority is given to offering a schedule which offers
same day return. Almost invariable schedules are skewed to offer regional travellers the
longest period of time on the ground in Sydney. In other words, most regional services
operating into Sydney originate in country areas, bring their traffic to Sydney then pick up
the originating Sydney traffic and take it back to the regional centre. This offers the
benefit to the regional passenger of maximum time on the ground in Sydney and the
Sydney traffic generally requires less time on the ground in regional areas before they
return on a flight that evening.
In our opinion same day returns on schedules is critical for the survival of regional
services into regional New South Wales. [4]
This argument equally applies to the issue of excluding regional airlines from KSA.
5.11 The Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW's submission echoes other local
government representative views on this matter:
The need to access KSA is also related to the need for regional airlines to operate at
peak periods. Airlines which serve rural areas provide critical links to the wider air
network. For these links to be viable they need to be tied in with the schedules of the
intrastate and international airlines schedules.
The failure of an airline to provide attractive scheduling, limits the airline's marketing
ability. Pushing a regional airline into slots outside normal peak and shoulder times causes
an inconvenient and unattractive service. [5]
Residents in Sydney see positive impacts of regional airlines on noise pollution
5.12 Evidence given to this Committee and to a recent NSW Parliamentary Standing Committee, suggest
that residents residing in areas affected by noise from Sydney Airport see regional aircraft, which are
primarily propeller driven (“turbo prop”), as preferable to domestic and international jet aircraft. The
community view is that regional aircraft are quieter, providing respite from domestic and international jet
aircraft noise. On the question of redirecting all regional services to Bankstown, the Standing Committee
wrote:
The Standing Committee received a number of submissions from representatives of
various community groups across Sydney who were particularly worried that such a
move might increase jet operations at Sydney Airport. [6]
5.13 The view that regional aircraft are quieter than jets is supported by evidence from a number of
airlines including Impulse Airlines who state in their submission:
The essential characteristic of regional aircraft in turbo prop configuration is that they can
begin their descent into Sydney Airport much later than is the requirement for heavy jets.
Being able to maintain higher altitude and a better speed until the final approaches to the
airport means that regional aircraft have less noise impacts and can generally be
processed much more quickly than can the bigger jets.
Jet aircraft require long stabilised approaches for their flight management systems. This
results in large noise foot prints and minimal flexibility in their approach, Turboprop
aircraft are better able to maintain higher approach speeds and altitudes approaching the
airport environment. This enables far greater flexibility with Air Traffic Control as well as
reducing noise impacts and achieving much greater efficiency in the performance of the
airport. [7]
5.14 Clearly there would be a great deal of resistance from Sydney Communities to the removal of
regional aircraft from peak times or the exclusion of these services from KSA entirely. The benefits to the
Sydney community of regional aircraft helping to control aircraft noise and pollution levels should be
considered in any discussion of KSA and management of these issues.
Impact on rural and regional communities if services are pushed out of KSA.
5.15 A wide variety of people raised concerns with the Committee that excluding regional services from
KSA would disadvantage regional passengers, communities and airlines. Concerns included loss of
services completely, increases in travel time and costs and problems with making connections to
domestic and international flights. The majority of submissions and witnesses rejected the exclusion of
regional airlines from KSA. The Committee notes that the NSW State Committee on State Development
had similar feedback from an even wider group than those who chose to make submission to this inquiry:
In evidence to the Standing Committee, rural and regional communities rejected the
redirection of country air services to Bankstown, as it would increase travelling time,
increase travel costs and would be inconvenient, particularly to passengers wanting to
connect to interstate or international flights or travel to the centre of Sydney. The airline
operators opposed any redirection to Bankstown, primarily for the reason that
passengers do not want to travel to Bankstown. [8]
5.16 Mr McGrane, Mayor of Dubbo, evidence to this Committee is indicative of Council concerns
expressed during the inquiry:
Moving regional airlines to Bankstown would be an absolute disaster. As I have
indicated, 63 per cent of our traffic is business and another four per cent to six per cent is
medical. All those people and the business people want to go to the CBD area of
Sydney or interstate. The business people basically live in the eastern suburbs of
Sydney,that is a fact of life.
If they have to go to Bankstown to catch a plane, they would not be able to do the round
trip in a day. Likewise, our business people going to Sydney could not go to Bankstown.
When you go to Sydney, you basically do your business in the CBD area. The time
factor and the cost factor of getting from Bankstown would make it totally unviable. You
would look at other means of transport to get to Sydney.
There is also the tourist factor. If you go to Bankstown, you then have to somehow get to
Kingsford Smith airport to catch the international or interstate flights. [9]
5.17 A range of witnesses were also concerned about the current and future potential for pricing
decisions at KSA to inadvertently or deliberately force airlines out of KSA. The Local Government and
Shires Associations of NSW's argue in their submission, that the end result of this scenario in the present
environment, is not movement but termination of services:
At present there is a lack of alternative airport facilities for regional aircraft to operate
into. Unless there is an airport with suitable links provided then the discrimination pricing
of regional airlines may not lead to a shifting of service but to the termination of the
service altogether. [10]
Difficulties with making domestic and international connections
5.18 It was argued to the Committee that excluding regional aircraft from KSA would also cause
significant problems with connecting to domestic and international flights. Several organisations gave
estimates of the number of travellers who make connections to domestic flights, indicating the magnitude
of the problem a shift to another airport would cause. For example, Hastings Council in their submission
indicated:
From figures supplied by airlines operating from Port Macquarie (PMQ) Airport, 30% of
customers travel via Sydney to other destinations. Obviously, landing at Bankstown and
then proceeding to KSA for an international or domestic connection is inefficient in the
extreme, time consuming and costly. A return taxi fare alone between Bankstown and the
City is approximately $100, taking 1.5-2 hours. [11]
5.19 Impulse Airlines indicated that for interline traffic:
Most services have as much as 25% of their traffic originating in regional areas and
comes to Sydney Airport to interline with other carriers to travel interstate or overseas.
Some services from the Upper Hunter have as much as 70% of their traffic as interline
traffic. A substantial portion of inbound traffic, interstate and international, also is interline
traffic. [12]
5.20 It would appear that movement to an alternative airport such as Bankstown would cause significant
logistical problems and inefficiency in moving passengers to connect to domestic and international flights.
This in turn, witnesses argued, would have cost implications for passengers and potential flow on costs to
regional and rural business.
Increases in travel time and costs
5.21 Community representatives and regional airlines argued that moving to Bankstown Airport, for
example, would increase travel time and costs for passengers. Hastings Council argued:
The extra time that would be involved travelling from Bankstown rather than Mascot to
the city, suggests that for many, one day business trips to Sydney will no longer be
possible. Subsequent stopover expenses will add considerably to costs incurred. [13]
Hastings Council gave an estimate of the extra costs that might be incurred:
…the extra costs for a typical business person travelling to Sydney to attend say, a full
day conference in 1999, is likely to be in the order of $200 to $250 [14]
5.22 Coffs Harbour City Council had concerns that these additional costs would make regional centres
less attractive to business:
Regional centres, such as Coffs Harbour, rely heavily on air transport to gain quick and
easy access to the business centre of Sydney. If quick and easy access is not available at
the appropriate times, business costs go up and regional areas become less attractive and
competitive as centres of business and industry. [15]
5.23 As previously mentioned, some witnesses felt that increased costs and time resulting from flying to
another airport could lead to the loss of air services. This was of particular concern to regional centres
where road transport was a viable option.
Bankstown Airport
5.24 Even were airlines and regional/rural customers not so strongly against using Bankstown for the
reasons outlined above, Bankstown Airport may not be a suitable alternative. As Mr Bredereck from
Tamair pointed out
There is one very relevant point that I omitted in that comment, and that is that
Bankstown is already the busiest airport in New South Wales, which is a further reason
why it would not be a suitable alternative. [16]
5.25 This view was supported by the findings of the NSW State Committee on State Development:
Bankstown Airport, situated 22 km south-west of Sydney's central business district is
Australia's busiest airport. In fact, Bankstown Airport was the fifth busiest airport in the
world in terms of aircraft movements. It is acknowledged as the hub of general aviation in
Australia, and is a major training facility. [17]
5.26 Concerns were raised with this Committee and, it notes, also with the NSW Standing Committee,
over the safety of adding to the load at Bankstown. In evidence on 11 May 1998, Mr Bredereck of
Tamair gave his reasons for his view concerning safety at Bankstown if commercial regional services
were transferred from KSA:
Bankstown airport operates as what we call a GAAP general aviation procedures
airport. It is not like the full primary class A air space that we have at Sydney, in that
aircraft are not positively separated. We have three closed-space parallel runways at
Bankstown, and it has the highest number of movements of any airport in Australia and it
is one of the busiest airports in the world, as I understand. You have a high level of
training activity, with low time, inexperienced pilots, and you have a very high proportion
of low performance aircraft, such as training aircraft, plus a mixture of very high
performance freight aircraft operating into that environment. Having a high traffic density,
without positive separation, with a high mix of performance, the potential for an incident
or accident is very significant.
5.27 The NSW Standing Committee on State Development indicated that safety was of concern to
number of local Bankstown residents, particularly given large numbers of aircraft over densely populated
areas. [18]
5.28 The Committee does not believe Bankstown is a suitable alternative for regional airlines to KSA.
The Committee's view is best illustrated Tamair's comment in their submission:
Bankstown is not suitable because a whole new set of noise and community problems
will be created, access to the CBD is unacceptable in terms of cost and time, and there is
no access to connecting flights. [19]
Second Sydney Airport
5.29 Views similar to those concerning Bankstown were expressed concerning sending regional airlines
to a Second Sydney Airport. Coffs Harbour City Council summarised these views succinctly in their
submission:
Regardless of how the second Sydney airport issue is resolved, regional centres will
always need timely easy access to the centre of Sydney. Restricting access to an outer
airport or to a general aviation aerodrome (e.g. Bankstown) will only go to increase
travel costs. [20]
5.30 The Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW raised the issue that any alternative airport
would require suitable links, otherwise services may cease altogether:
At present there is a lack of alternative airport facilities for regional aircraft to operate
into. Unless there is an airport with suitable links provided then the discrimination pricing
of regional airlines may not lead to a shifting of service but to the termination of the
service altogether. [21]
5.31 Despite the possibility of improved or innovative approaches to transporting passengers into Sydney
from a new airport (eg fast train), most witnesses, on the subject of a new Sydney Airport, saw the issue
as not a matter of breaking up the air network existing at KSA by excluding regional aircraft. Instead,
they saw a new airport developing a new network with its own international, domestic and regional
services and linkages. They saw its evolution as more like the overseas experience, with the new airport
developing its own network of interdependent flights. For example, Mr Dawson of Impulse Airlines
stated in evidence when asked about exclusion from KSA:
Yes. We oppose that. I think one of the things that any airport in the Sydney basin has to
perform is that it is all interconnected-you need interstate services connecting with
intrastate services connecting with freight; there is always a dynamic involved. Whatever
airport comes up there-Badgerys, Bankstown, or both-we believe that you need to be
able to put those connecting services into all those airports. So it is not a question of
moving everything out of Sydney and dumping it in Badgerys or dumping it at
Bankstown. You will need ongoing access for regionals into Sydney, ongoing access for
regionals into Bankstown, and ongoing access for regionals and interstate and possibly
international at all those three airports. The history of running regional services out of
Bankstown has been a disaster. Nothing has worked. Tamair, which I think will be
coming later in the day, have had some experience of running services there. [22]
5.32 Based on the evidence before it the Committee does not believe that sending existing regional
services to a new Sydney Airport is the solution to congestion at KSA. Exclusion of regional services
from KSA overlooks the inherent interdependency of the whole of the air transport network and the
needs of its 1.2 million regional passengers and their communities and businesses.
KSA is the centre of a major network that includes regional NSW
5.33 One of the key points concerning KSA that was made clear to the Committee from its inquiry is that
KSA cannot be looked at in isolation from the community and economy which it serves. As Kendell
Airlines argue in their submission, on the subject of restricting regional access to KSA:
Such a view fails to recognise that KSA is part of a global air transport system – a
system which provides air travellers with the ability to travel internationally, interstate,
domestically and regionally domestically and appropriately connect between these
services. Any major airport being part of this system must provide access to all players at
an appropriate rate. [23]
5.34 Similarly, Hazelton Airlines, statement in their submission reflects this essential issue of where KSA
fits in the economy of NSW:
Safe reliable and efficient air services are vital to the development of regional Australia. In
1994 the consulting firm, McKinsey & Company was commissioned by the then Federal
Government to undertake a comprehensive study of growth potential of Australia's
regional areas. The subsequent report to the Government entitled “Lead Local Compete
Global” of July 1994 identified the critical role of air services both for regional
communities to achieve their growth potential and the importance of access to domestic
and international airports as a consideration in selecting a regional centre for a business
relocation. [24]
Hazelton went on to state:
The people of regional NSW have a fundamental right to continue to be able to afford
access at KSA. It is their capital city airport and access to it is essential to the continued
growth of regional NSW. [25]
5.35 In summary, it is this Committee's view that KSA is a vital centre not only for international and
domestic services, but also rural and regional access to Sydney and to these other services. It links rural
and regional NSW to the domestic and global markets on which they depend. To exclude rural and
regional Australia from KSA to supply landing slots for future international and domestic flights is short
sighted and potentially damaging to the economy of NSW and hence Australia.
5.36 Until the concerns expressed to this Committee are able to be addressed in an appropriate way,
sensitive to the needs of rural and regional Australia, it does not believe that removing regional airlines
from KSA or from peak time slots at KSA is an appropriate remedy to its long term growth problems. In
addition to this it counsels those involved with managing slots and setting prices at KSA against using
these as a mechanism by which to push regional airlines out of KSA. The evidence before this inquiry
strongly suggests that this would potentially have a strong negative impact on regional airlines and the
communities they serve.
Recommendation
This Committee recommends that the Minister and Senate take note of the key nature of KSA
in the economy of NSW and Australia. It is a major transport hub in a complex and
interdependent air network that includes regional and rural Australia. It considers that any
discussion of the future of KSA and Airports in the Sydney region should take this committee's
findings into account to protect the interests of regional and rural Australia.
Footnotes
[1] Submission, Federal Airports Corporation, p.3.
[2] 1996 Census of population and housing, Australian Bureau of Statistics.
[3] Evidence, Bathurst City Council, p. 6.
[4] Submission, Impulse Airlines Pty Ltd, p. 5.
[5] Submission, The Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW, p. 6.
[6] Interim report on Provision and operation of rural and regional services in New South Wales,
Parliament of New South Wales, Legislative Council, Standing Committee on State Development, Vol 1,
p. 74.
[7] Submission, Impulse Airlines Pty Ltd, p. 9.
[8] Interim report on Provision and operation of rural and regional services in New South Wales,
Parliament of New South Wales, Legislative Council, Standing Committee on State Development, Vol 1,
p. 61.
[9] Evidence, Dubbo City Council, p. 33.
[10] Submission, The Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW, p. 6.
[11] Submission, Hastings Council, p. 1.
[12] Submission, Impulse Airlines Pty Ltd, p. 4.
[13] Submission, Hastings Council, p. 1.
[14] Submission, Hastings Council, p. 2.
[15] Submission, Coffs Harbour City Council, p. 1.
[16] Evidence, Tamair, p.135.
[17] Interim report on Provision and operation of rural and regional services in New South Wales,
Parliament of New South Wales, Legislative Council, Standing Committee on State Development, Vol 1,
p. 62.
[18] Interim report on Provision and operation of rural and regional services in New South Wales,
Parliament of New South Wales, Legislative Council, Standing Committee on State Development, Vol 1,
p. 73.
[19] Submission, Tamair, p. 3.
[20] Submission, Coffs Harbour City Council, p. 1.
[21] Submission, The Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW, p. 6.
[22] Evidence, Impulse Airlines, p. 122
[23] Submission, Kendell Airlines (Aust) Pty Ltd, p. 2.
[24] Submission, Hazelton Airlines, p. 4.
[25] Submission, Hazelton Airlines, p. 5.