Daily Review 25/11/2015

7 comments on “Daily Review 25/11/2015 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. greywarshark 1

   25 November 2015 at 6:55 pm

   A proposal to extend the Wellington airport runway is necessary because the bigger planes now being used internationally won’t be able to land there. The sum of $300 Million has been given, which sounds quite cheap for the size of the job. How long the planes will go on flying laden with money carrying tourists we don’t know. The airport says by 2060 the extension would mean another 200,000 users a year.

   If they don’t get the extra length added on, it could mean that many of the planes would have to land in Auckland instead, bypassing Wellington, a loss of passengers and an inconvenience for them. Also many tourists might fly from Auckland direct to Christchurch I think, and fly on by the capital altogether. Not good for the maintenance of business there, and further imbalancing the country’s business and enterprise revenues towards Auckland.

   But the pilots legal adviser has quoted that Wellington is 29 times likelier than Auckland to have an over run. Which would lead to tremendous loss of life. To add the full length of extra safety area that is recommended would mean an extra 240m making the job very expensive indeed. All those who have flown into Wellington when it is blowing one of its gales can empathise with the pilots concern. The CAA does not sit in my memory with any laurel wreath around its logo – they need an eye kept on them.

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/289795/pilots-take-runway-battle-to-high-court
   “Landing a plane in Wellington was hard enough already, given the challenges posed by the weather and the terrain, and the chance of an overshoot was 29 times greater than in Auckland.
   “Wellington Airport is widely considered by pilots to be a very challenging airport for a number of reasons including strong gusty and unpredictable wind conditions, surrounding high terrain, its relatively short single runway, and the particular hazards at either end of the runway, the drop into Cobham Drive to the north, and the steep drop into Lyall Bay to the south.”

   Mr Rennie said the runway extension would not be long enough, and the pilots were asking the High Court for an order for a special safety area to be put on the end. This should be 240m long, and the pilots wanted the court to rule that this was required by law.
   An alternative could be an equivalent solution such as crushable concrete.
   Part 139 of the Civil Aviation Rules said a safety strip must extend to a distance of at least 90m and, if practicable, to a distance of at least 240m from the end of the runway strip.
   Mr Rennie said the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) was letting the airport go ahead with the runway extension, without extending the safety area.
   • Paul 1.1

     25 November 2015 at 6:58 pm

     By 2060 Wellington airport will be affected by rising sea levels.
     Has that been taken into consideration?
     • greywarshark 1.1.1

       25 November 2015 at 7:04 pm

       Paul
       Good question. I doubt it. So many businesses are still in the thinking along the past trend line. But climate change is going to introduce chaos theory into the equation. I wonder how many computer simulations have been run off around each of the forthcoming projects which will surely be affected by the big CC?
       • weka 1.1.1.1

         25 November 2015 at 10:24 pm

         “By 2060 Wellington airport will be affected by rising sea levels.
         Has that been taken into consideration?”

         Lolz that one.

         The other is that part of the argument against flying (because, CC) is that it’s not just about emissions from flights. It also includes the fact that when you fly you require more infrastructure over time. If people keep flying they will keep building airports (and extending runways so bigger planes can land) and then they will need more people to fly to make all that financially viable for investors, so let’s introdce deals that encourage people to fly (plus population increases mean more planes are needed). And so on.

         It’s gobsmacking that the people in charge can prepare and plan without taking CC into account.

         and btw, the Green Party want all legislation to be written with a CC impact report. If we already had that in place, things would be being dealt with differently now.

         https://www.greens.org.nz/news/press-releases/green-party-launches-climate-change-test-bill
   • Rosemary McDonald 1.2

     25 November 2015 at 8:07 pm

     “The CAA does not sit in my memory with any laurel wreath around its logo – they need an eye kept on them.”

     This would be the understatement of the year.

     I was reading that article earlier and got the impression the pilots concerns were being sidelined.

     Wellington Airport…my last landing on a domestic flight was the ‘last before the airport closed due to high winds’. On the final approach…I literally resigned myself to imminent death.

     Perhaps…CAA’s offices could be relocated to the end of the proposed new runway extension?

     On piles, of course, to allow for rising sea levels.

     Maybe, if we were making long term plans, further development of the airport at Paraparaumu could be explored.
     • greywarshark 1.2.1

       25 November 2015 at 10:03 pm

       Now that’s an idea Rosemary. The work on an extended runway would of course mess up the sea more than somewhat. What are the roads like to Paraparaumu?
       The map says 42 mins 50.3 km, it goes up through Porirua, and it is across from Masterton.

       But there is a rail line to Paraparaumu. Its part of the main trunk line. Present travelling time 1hour 11m but only at 11pm and three from 5.30 am to 7 ish. Couldn’t a fast shuttle be put on there? Well maybe, but isn’t Wellington Airport owned by Lloyd somebody and Infratil and ? and the most practical forward-thinking plan is not their business, it’s to make money out of their slice of heaven.
2. Paul 2

   25 November 2015 at 7:18 pm

   Fascinating interview
   Worth 45 minutes of your time.
   Interesting insights from an old school conservative into World War 1, Churchill, Thatcher, state ownership of railways, …

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS