Adelaide Airport Visions

[Wayno]

The Adelaide Airport Master plan says the current runways (not terminal) will reach capacity in 2025. Thats not too far away, given that it takes years of planning and development to solve such a problem.

wow! i did not realise this was the case! and i presume this was based on the master plan from a few years ago? I wonder if 2020 is now a more realistic deadline?

I don't actually believe the terminal/runway at AA will ever close. The "Precinct Concepts" in the master plan are too grand and dependent upon airport activities (new hotel, storage facilities, etc).

Maybe AA should be used purely for interstate/international flights with all regional flights moved elsewhere (e.g. Parafield)? How much time would this buy?

[Aidan]

Adelaide doesn't need a replacement airport. We have plenty of terminal capacity, and when we need more, we can reopen the old domestic terminal. And if we ever need an order of magnitude more terminal capacity, we can extend the terminal along to where the old domestic terminal is, then loop it back towards Ikea! Nor is runway capacity an issue - in the unlikely event of it ever becoming a problem, we could open another airport Up North or near Murray Bridge, and Jetstar would be sure to transfer some of their flights there. But it will be a long time, if ever, before the runway reaches capacity.

The Adelaide Airport Master plan says the current runways (not terminal) will reach capacity in 2025. Thats not too far away, given that it takes years of planning and development to solve such a problem.

Actually it says the opposite: "the anticipated air traffic can more than adequately be accommodated within the year 2025 horizon."

Sure there are periods of the day when its quiet, but its about getting as many planes in and out during peak hours (e.g early morning and evening).

In the unlikely event that the runway reaches capacity at these times, landing fees could be adjusted to encourage airlines to adjust their schedules to land here at less busy times.

The current land doesn't lend too well for a decent 2nd parallel runway. Also, one significant thing has changed over the past 10 years in Adelaide. Inner metro land value, highlighted by Rann's urban density plan. There are few cities in the world that have an airport 5km from the CBD for this very reason. Sure its convenient for travellers, but its not the best use of such valuable land.

.
But Adelaide Airport is actually the source of a lot of the area's land value. Being near the airport is important for many businesses, particularly in high tech industries. These businesses require a very large catchment area (to get the best workers) and proximity to an airport (preferably a major one). Adelaide's geography is not conducive to the formation of edge cities, so it would be very difficult to create conditions as advantageous as what we currently have.

The last terminal served us for 20 years, 5-7 years too long in my opinion, as it was long over due to be replaced. I read that it was expected the current terminal (even with extensions) will last a similar period, perhaps even shorter (15 years). Given the runway capacity reaching capacity in 2025 and the terminal life expiring there abouts (2020-2025), im sure these two factors alligning is no coincedence and there will be a good case for relocating the airport in around 2020-2025. An accouncement and planning for such a move would have to happen around 2013-2018.

You seem to be under the strange misapprehension that replacing an airport is the only option you have when it reaches capacity. But supplementing it is likely to be far more practical. And why would the terminal life expire so soon? I know enough about structural engineering to know that this structure was built to last! It may reach capacity in 2020-2025, but that's not a problem because it can be extended or supplemented.

And are you sure the last terminal served us for 20 years? I first came to Adelaide twenty years ago, and it didn't look new then!

[ad5]

But Adelaide Airport is actually the source of a lot of the area's land value. Being near the airport is important for many businesses, particularly in high tech industries. These businesses require a very large catchment area (to get the best workers) and proximity to an airport (preferably a major one). Adelaide's geography is not conducive to the formation of edge cities, so it would be very difficult to create conditions as advantageous as what we currently have.

.

All new developments have little to do with the airport. e.g Harbour Town, Ikea, Woolworths etc. i doubt their stock arrives on a plane. Shipping/rail/trucking is how they get their stock in.

And are you sure the last terminal served us for 20 years? I first came to Adelaide twenty years ago, and it didn't look new then!

Sorry, the old international lasted just under 23 years. According to the Adelaide Airport Web site it opened in late 1982. The new terminal opened in 2005.

"Regular International services began in November 1982 with the construction of a separate International terminal building to accommodate an influx of overseas visitors."

[AtD]

All new developments have little to do with the airport. e.g Harbour Town, Ikea, Woolworths etc. i doubt their stock arrives on a plane. Shipping/rail/trucking is how they get their stock in.

There is far more on the Airport's land than just Harbour Town. Export Park, for example.

[Ho Really]

All new developments have little to do with the airport. e.g Harbour Town, Ikea, Woolworths etc. i doubt their stock arrives on a plane. Shipping/rail/trucking is how they get their stock in.

There is far more on the Airport's land than just Harbour Town. Export Park, for example.

Export Park is the oldest of the developments listed and has some affinity to air transport (eg: FedEx). Another development is AQIS (Australian Quarantine Inspection Services) next door to Export Park on Sir Donald Bradman Drive. The latest and current development is Burbridge Business Park (on Sir Donald Bradman Drive).

Cheers

[Aidan]

But Adelaide Airport is actually the source of a lot of the area's land value. Being near the airport is important for many businesses, particularly in high tech industries. These businesses require a very large catchment area (to get the best workers) and proximity to an airport (preferably a major one). Adelaide's geography is not conducive to the formation of edge cities, so it would be very difficult to create conditions as advantageous as what we currently have.

.

All new developments have little to do with the airport. e.g Harbour Town, Ikea, Woolworths etc. i doubt their stock arrives on a plane. Shipping/rail/trucking is how they get their stock in.

Not all new developments near the airport have been on airport land! Many businesses have chosen to locate themselves between the City and the airport, and we can expect this trend to continue as the airport gets busier. Of course the shops (on the other side of the airport) don't rely so much on air transport, but you can expect the Burbridge Business Park tenants to.

[duke]

Looking at the map of Adelaide Airport, it looks like they could possibly squeeze another runway between Harbor Town and the existing runway.
They would need to flip the taxi roads over to the other side and put the new runway over Tapleys Hill Road over the Golf Course.
Based on the length it should not stretch out into the sea much more than the existing boat area. So sand movement should not be too much of an issue if they have already put sea walls up.
I would prefer expanding the current airport capacity rather than moving it outside the city, especially with all the new development planned to happen. New parking, hotels.

[Ho Really]

Looking at the map of Adelaide Airport, it looks like they could possibly squeeze another runway between Harbor Town and the existing runway.
They would need to flip the taxi roads over to the other side and put the new runway over Tapleys Hill Road over the Golf Course.
Based on the length it should not stretch out into the sea much more than the existing boat area. So sand movement should not be too much of an issue if they have already put sea walls up.
I would prefer expanding the current airport capacity rather than moving it outside the city, especially with all the new development planned to happen. New parking, hotels.

I don't think they can squeeze a runway the same length as the one already in operation. From recollection the original airport plan envisioned this, but allowing the construction of Harbour Town and a few other buildings has made things tight. It may still be possible to build a short runway, but either way Tapleys Hill Road and the golf course would need to be diverted, removed or remodelled. A second major runway wouldn't be warranted for a long while yet and hopefully if there ever became a need, aircraft would have advanced to shorter take-offs and landings (maybe even vertical).

Cheers

[Aidan]

Looking at the map of Adelaide Airport, it looks like they could possibly squeeze another runway between Harbor Town and the existing runway.
They would need to flip the taxi roads over to the other side and put the new runway over Tapleys Hill Road over the Golf Course.
Based on the length it should not stretch out into the sea much more than the existing boat area. So sand movement should not be too much of an issue if they have already put sea walls up.
I would prefer expanding the current airport capacity rather than moving it outside the city, especially with all the new development planned to happen. New parking, hotels.

Moving the taxiways to the other side of the runway from the terminal is not a good idea from a safety perspective, as it would create too many conflicting movements. And the capacity of a pair of close parallel runways is much less than two wide space runways.

I don't think they can squeeze a runway the same length as the one already in operation. From recollection the original airport plan envisioned this, but allowing the construction of Harbour Town and a few other buildings has made things tight. It may still be possible to build a short runway, but either way Tapleys Hill Road and the golf course would need to be diverted, removed or remodelled. A second major runway wouldn't be warranted for a long while yet and hopefully if there ever became a need, aircraft would have advanced to shorter take-offs and landings (maybe even vertical).

If the existing runway ever reaches capacity and adding more capacity was regarded as the best solution, a short runway is the obvious answer, as diverting the small aircraft there it would free up space on the main runway for large aircraft. But there is no reason to tamper with Tapleys Hill Road and the golf course, and significant environmental reasons why that would be a bad idea.

Allowing construction of Harbour Town Woolworths and some of the Burbridge Business Park buildings has indeed made things tight, but why should that be a problem? If necessary things can be loosened up again by allowing their destruction! Even so, this whole idea of expansion is rather puzzling. Who do you think would use all these extra flights? And where would they go?

[Ho Really]

If the existing runway ever reaches capacity and adding more capacity was regarded as the best solution, a short runway is the obvious answer, as diverting the small aircraft there it would free up space on the main runway for large aircraft. But there is no reason to tamper with Tapleys Hill Road and the golf course, and significant environmental reasons why that would be a bad idea.

A short runway still needs room at both ends and to the sides for safety and taxiways. The original plan had room on the western side of Tapleys Hill Road and I assumed they still needed that.

Allowing construction of Harbour Town Woolworths and some of the Burbridge Business Park buildings has indeed made things tight, but why should that be a problem? If necessary things can be loosened up again by allowing their destruction! Even so, this whole idea of expansion is rather puzzling. Who do you think would use all these extra flights? And where would they go?

I like your idea of demolition. I agree that Adelaide doesn't require a second runway yet. There should be enough slots available for a while. Also Adelaide needs to seriously look at dropping the curfew. That would also alleviate things. As for where would flights go? Good question. If Adelaide ever attains the 1.5 - 2 million inhabitants, we could expand to more direct Asian destinations (see: Korea, Japan, Thailand, India, Philippines, etc.), something similar to Brisbane and Perth. Of course if there was no demand there would be no need.

Cheers

[Aidan]

If the existing runway ever reaches capacity and adding more capacity was regarded as the best solution, a short runway is the obvious answer, as diverting the small aircraft there it would free up space on the main runway for large aircraft. But there is no reason to tamper with Tapleys Hill Road and the golf course, and significant environmental reasons why that would be a bad idea.

A short runway still needs room at both ends and to the sides for safety and taxiways.

Safety, yes. Taxiways, no - have a look at London City Airport. If aircraft need to taxi, they do so on the runway itself.

The original plan had room on the western side of Tapleys Hill Road and I assumed they still needed that.

Still needed that to do what? It would still be needed to provide the maximum possible capacity, but who needs that??

Runways can be used far more intensively than when the original plans were drawn up. Last year the single runway of London Gatwick airport handled over 30 million international passengers!

Allowing construction of Harbour Town Woolworths and some of the Burbridge Business Park buildings has indeed made things tight, but why should that be a problem? If necessary things can be loosened up again by allowing their destruction! Even so, this whole idea of expansion is rather puzzling. Who do you think would use all these extra flights? And where would they go?

I like your idea of demolition. I agree that Adelaide doesn't require a second runway yet. There should be enough slots available for a while. Also Adelaide needs to seriously look at dropping the curfew. That would also alleviate things. As for where would flights go? Good question. If Adelaide ever attains the 1.5 - 2 million inhabitants, we could expand to more direct Asian destinations (see: Korea, Japan, Thailand, India, Philippines, etc.), something similar to Brisbane and Perth. Of course if there was no demand there would be no need.

Interesting you should mention Brisbane... because despite their greater range of destinations, the start date for construction of their new parallel runway has been put back to 2018. Perth also has only one main runway, and AFAIK there are no plans to construct any more. And unlike Brisbane and Perth, Adelaide isn't on the way to anywhere besides NZ.

[AG]

Interesting you should mention Brisbane... because despite their greater range of destinations, the start date for construction of their new parallel runway has been put back to 2018. Perth also has only one main runway, and AFAIK there are no plans to construct any more. And unlike Brisbane and Perth, Adelaide isn't on the way to anywhere besides NZ.

...or Antarctica.

[iTouch]

Interesting you should mention Brisbane... because despite their greater range of destinations, the start date for construction of their new parallel runway has been put back to 2018. Perth also has only one main runway, and AFAIK there are no plans to construct any more. And unlike Brisbane and Perth, Adelaide isn't on the way to anywhere besides NZ.

...or Antarctica.

nope Hobart's got priority over us for that

... Kangaroo Island perhaps?