13 replies

F-Flyer

Member since 11 Aug 2015

Total posts 23

Badgerys Creek Airport. What airlines apart form QF,VA and JQ will fly to Badgerys Creek? (Presuming that those 3 do as they are Aus' big 3) Where will those 3 airlines most likely fly to? It is probably a bit early to tell but would love to hear anyone's thoughts.

RealKid

Member since 20 May 2014

Total posts 92

I think Badgerys creek will be Sydney's Avalon airport.  We'll have to see whether there will actually be a market for a full service carrier like QF or VA to actually fly there.  I think once passenger flights start to the airport (as I believe it is meant to be cargo-only initially, although someone correct me if i'm wrong), it will mostly be JQ and Tigerair flights.   I know Qantas has said that they would fly Qantas and Jetstar flights the airport, but I think it is more likely they mean QantasLink, vs the full-service carriert. 

Most corporate clients will be either based in the CBD or (increasingly) Parramatta.  Parramatta is actually 10km closer to Sydney airport than the proposed Badgerys Creek site, and already has a train line (which is contentious for Badgerys Creek).  In addition, Westconnex if it ever gets completed will help ferry cars from Parramatta to the Airport faster, so it is unlikely corporate clients will switch from SYD.  And if that's the case, it may be that QF decides not to fly there, regardless of what they say at the moment. 

TheRealBabushka

Member since 21 Apr 2012

Total posts 2,059

Sydney's Avalon? Wouldn't that nullify the whole point for developing a new airport for Sydney?

The new airport should be owned by the current owners of the Mascot aiport so that there is a commercial incentive to move to Badgery Creek, where slots, 24 h operations and capacity is guaranteed.

If the incumbents are not given owership, they will prove to be a thorn on the side of the new operations, which will limit the potential and effectiveness of the new airport.

Alternatively the Federal Govt could nationalise the current airport, then transfer all operations to Badgery Creek. This is unlikely to happen, no matter how close we pivot towards Asia (e.g. NRT, HKG, ICN, KUL, BKK).

Therefore to ensure the success of the new airport and to ensure the public and business community enjoy the full potential of Badgery Creek, the airport needs to be presented to the current owners of Mascot on a silver platter, with strong caveats that they terminate operations at Mascot.

In the future Mascot can be developed as a specialist airport for premium domestic/trans-tasman traffic, much like LCY. But in the short term, Australia does not have the volume to develop efficiencies and synergies, with two competing international airports serving the same market (SYD/NSW).

henrus

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 23 Oct 2013

Total posts 768

Your just being a pain now

You know he meant Melborune Avalon

TheRealBabushka

Member since 21 Apr 2012

Total posts 2,059

Of course I know he was referring to the useless airport in the fringes of Geelong.

Melbourne is a case in point that you cannot sustain two airports serving a single metropolitan region in Australia.

TheRealBabushka

Member since 21 Apr 2012

Total posts 2,059

henrus,

I would suggest that you haven't understood the central thesis of my argument.

kimshep

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 11 Oct 2014

Total posts 336

Essentially, you are asking 'how long is a piece of string' and 'how many ways can it be twisted'. LOL

IMHO, initially on 'start-up', the new airport will cater to:

- airfreight (courtesy of 24hr operation) and domestic LCC's. Think Jetstar, Tiger

- Later on (perhaps 12-15 months after opening) Qantas will also probably add a small base of flights from Sydney West. And wherever QF goes, Virgin won't be far behind.

- Perhaps one or two international LCC's will be lured at start-up (AirAsiaX or Lion derivatives), depending on the differential of landing costs (compared with Kingsford Smith), if there are any.

However, how the airport develops / evolves will depend on a number of issues over which the new airport will NOT have direct control. These include:

1) the appetite and capex of Qantas / Virgin to replicate existing facilities at SYD at 'Sydney West'. This will be cost intense for those carriers.

2) How and WHEN rail access is introduced. State, Federal, private equity or a mix of funding in addition to passenger 'demand'.

3) Pricing and promotional efforts by Kingsford Smith owners ie: Sydney Airport Corporation. Think landings costs and retail opportunities.

4) Willingness of hotel operators to build new inventory around the second airport.

Each of these above items are critical in how Sydney West grows and the timing of each will determine the growth pattern.

Personally, I feel that - eventually - SYD Kingsford Smith) will evolve its role into the primary international gateway (tourists and business travellers want to be close to the CBD), with only limited hourly domestic connections to other major Australian cities. This frees up slots and allows a more comfortable operation of Mascot, while maintaining its international credentials.

That would then allow the greater domestic operation to move to Sydney West and closer to the geographic 'centre' of Sydney. Naturally, if there are pricing advantages, the LCC domestic brigade will move asap to take cost advantages. Some international LCC would also probably make it their choice also.

The intruiging point will be what happens to the INTRA state carriers, such as REX and QantasLink. Country-based passengers regularly show demand for SYD services, in order to be close to CBD hospitals, shopping and business - and won't want to travel for an hour or so from the airport to get there.

Himeno

Member since 12 Dec 2012

Total posts 289

It could also become like other airport city pairs like LGA/JFK, NRT/HND or LHR/LGW. I, however, don't believe this airport will happen until it's open with aircraft using a runway. We've been at this stage before and the airport has been debated for over 30 years.

Hugo

Member since 12 Jun 2013

Total posts 216

What do New York, Tokyo and London have in common? They're bloody huge. Unlike Sydney.

Any good examples of Sydney-sized metro areas which happily support a couple of airports, without one being a remote hole used only by discount carriers? Berlin, but that's a weird temporary case. Miami/Fort Lauderdale maybe? But that's really two major cities which have joined up. 

Himeno

Member since 12 Dec 2012

Total posts 289

KIX/ITM, ICN/GMP, SFO/OAK, DFW/DAL, IAD/DCA...

kimshep

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 11 Oct 2014

Total posts 336

New York City has a catchment population of approx 8 million people and it is able to support JFK / LGA and EWR as major airports, let alone an interesting number of subsidiary 'community' airports such as Teterborough and Stewart.

Also, think about Dubai with a vastly smaller catchment population than Sydney - think DXB and the new Jebil Ali airport DWC which will open, full-scale, shortly for passenger ops.

Washington DC is also another with similar catchment sizes to Sydney - and supports IAD / DCA and BWI.

Paris has a population of 2.3 million and can support CDG and ORY.

Singapore has a similar population size to Sydney - approx. 5.5 million people and SIN successfully operates close to Kuala Lumpur's KUL (350 klms away).

RaptorNation158

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 21 Aug 2014

Total posts 186

Sorry if I haven't read some parts properly but...

For Dubai, there are two airports because first of all Arabs are rich and wanna put their oil money somewhere else, so they chose a new $33 billion airport and Dubai is 11th most busiest airport in the world and is filling up quickly thanks to Emirates and their ever growing fleet of A380s need to go somewhere so a new airport makes sense.

Paris in total has a metro of 12 million people, so they can support two airports.

New York metro in total is around 23 million, so they can support three airports.

Now for Washington I fully agree with you but you also have to see that US in general is much bigger market than AUS and promises much more money, and being a capital city of a superpower also maybe helps.

For Singapore and Kuala Lumpur, they are both different airports and have their own airlines, and being in different countries with different appeal, Singapore is looked to as a business destination while Malaysia has the leisure side of appeal.

Now for Sydney, it might be the biggest city in Australia, I honestly only see it become like Avalon but that's just my opinion.

kimshep

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 11 Oct 2014

Total posts 336

@Rishi - thanks for your reply.

Dubai - Irrespective of your interpretation, Dubai still only has an itinerant population of 2.1m people. No-one is doubting the (Emirates) need for places to land / store / depart, but the fact still answers the question of cities with two major airports.

NYC (New York City, as opposed to New York state). According to the US Census Bureau, the TOTAL population of NYC (not New York state) 2013 .. is 8.4m people, consisting of the following 5 burroughs : Manhattan (1.62m), Brooklyn (2.59m), Bronx (1.42m), Queens (2.3m) and Staten Island (473k). This represents the entire NYC metro area.

Your figure of 23m appears to be derived from Wikipeadia where it loosely defines the metropolitan area as "counties comprising Long Island and the Mid- and Lower Hudson Valley in the state of New York; the five largest cities in New Jersey (Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, Elizabeth, and Edison) and their vicinities; six of the seven largest cities in Connecticut (Bridgeport, New Haven, Stamford, Waterbury, Norwalk, and Danbury) and their vicinities; and five counties in northeastern Pennsylvania."

Forgive me if I am wrong, but areas within Pennsylvania and Connecticut  have their own dedicated airports (PHL,BDR,HVN,ORQ,DXR etc). I can possibly accept Jersey City as crossover point. but the rest of New Jersey is an entirely different state, as are Connecticut and Pennsylvania. All these have their own city/state population demographics, in all honesty.

Whilst I don't entirely agree with your premise that SIN=business and KUL=leisure, I will admit to throwing in that pair to stimulate some thought, simply to show how close adjacent airports can work independently or co-operatively.

With your last point (re. SYD vs Sydney West) there is no valid reason that it should become 'like Avalon'. Take the examples to the north of Sydney - Brisbane and Coolangatta. Would you suggest that OOL is the Avalon of the north? I certainly wouldn't. Both BNE and OOL are two separate airports, serving entirely different demographics, but both appear to work very, very well,

DOPEFRESHNATION

Member since 09 Mar 2015

Total posts 17

This airport i believe is going to be for low cost carriers and most cargo aircraft. It is going to be the size of the God Coast Airport when it starts operating in 2025 and is going to grow to an Adelaide sized airport in 2030. We would then start to see those big airlines operate from badgerys creek with Qantas to be jumpstarting large operations at the airport

It is quite early to foresee what happens so we'll see.

Hi Guest, join in the discussion on Badgerys Creek Airport.

Attach Files