Talk:Sydney Airport

Misc

Question: Is the airport's name Kingsford Smith Airport? Is "international" not part of the name. U.S. airports tend to use the term "international" in their names. TL500 23:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The official name on pilots' documents (e.g. approach and departure charts) is "Sydney (Kingsford Smith) International".

Curious: What's Sydney Airport's third terminal? There's the international, domestic...Virgin used to have a seperate one but now Ansett's gone they're in the Domestic?

Is there a terminal I don't know about or is this just old info?

thx Dysprosia 07:48 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)

T1: International

T2: Domestic (Virgin Blue, Regional Express, Aeropelican, Horizon, Air Link and QF Flights QF1600 and above)

T3: Qantas

http://www.sydneyairport.com.au -- Tim Starling 08:12 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Ohhhh right! I remember now. Sorry :)

Dysprosia 08:15 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Don't really like this for a bunch of reasons. The 'T1', 'T2', and 'T3' designations are new, brought about by new owners. The terminals are 'International', 'Qantas' and 'Ansett' (regardless of who actually occupies the terminal nowadays). The 'T' things are figments of some marketeers imagination - presumably someone who wants Sydney to be like Heathrow, Kimpo or Seoul when it grows up???

Second, 'Most locals refer to it as Mascot' is a gross overstatement. 'Many' might be a slighty more tolerable exagerration. GeoffB 04/Oct/2004

I see that this mention has gone. Pity, since when I first came to Sydney and heard so many people talking about 'flying out of Mascot', etc, I assumed that they were talking about another, local airport, not the very same one that I'd just arrived at! Only later did I realise the truth. Therefore it is pretty common, and obviously many folk expect you to know what they're talking about, so the article should mention this, even if only to supply that little nugget of information to travellers who, like me, may otherwise be in the dark as to what these people are on about! Graham 01:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

'Even once the "parallel runway" (as it is universally known to Sydneysiders)...'

I (as a Sydneysider) and everyone I know call it the "third runway". Zak, 03 November 2006

Table

I've inserted a table that the WikiProject Airports is trying to make standard, and one that I'm trying to add to all Australian airports. I've tried to complete all the facts, and I have but for who operates the airport and who owns it. I'm not sure. If somebody does know, could they please change the information as appropriate. Also, there was no image in article for me to include in the table. Most other airport articles have photo's. Perhaps somebody could source and upload one for use.--Cyberjunkie 07:15, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Owner/operator

I notice the infobox currently lists the owner as the Australian Government, with SACL as the operator. Is anyone able to confirm that this is actually the case, and if so how the arrangement works?

Regards, --Daveb 06:12, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

The Australian Government doesn't own Sydney Airport now. This page on the airport's website provides all the ownership information, but I'm not sure how it should be entered into the infobox.

-QFlyer 10:06, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that, I'll list the ultimate parent company as owner. When I created it, I could only find information on which companies had a stake. As an aside, part of the reason I listed the Australian Government as owner is because, AFAIK, it is the ultimate owner as Sydney Airport was only leased (albeit for 100 years, I think).--Cyberjunkie | Talk 11:21, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Due to privatization, this is about the only airport that charges ($5) for transfers between domestic and international terminals. Also provides no facilities for car pickups at arrivals while charging $7 per half an hour for parking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.119.148 (talk) 05:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

From the Sydney Morning Herald more information on extortionist parking prices: "According to the government statement, short term car parking fees at Australian airports range from $4 in Adelaide to $13 in Sydney. JFK International Airport in New York charges $6.55, while Heathrow in London is $8.50.

In 2006/07 revenue from parking ranged from $9.8 million at Adelaide Airport to $69.6 million at Sydney Airport." http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/airport-car-parking-fees-under-scrutiny/2008/04/06/1207420166228.html?s_cid=rss_news —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.103.201.212 (talk) 05:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Airlines

The list of airlines that serve Sydney Airport includes airlines such as American, Air France and KLM, which only serve Sydney through codeshare services and not with their own aircraft. I'm not sure if these airlines belong in the list. If they will stay there, maybe it should be noted that they only serve Sydney via codeshare.

-QFlyer 11:12, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree. They should not be listed. Could you remove those that operate through code share?--Cyberjunkie | Talk 11:23, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Ok, all the codeshare airlines are removed. I have another question though: Should intermediate destinations be listed next to each airline? For instance, Air Canada flies Sydney-Honolulu-Vancouver. Should Honolulu be noted as an Air Canada destination out of Sydney?

-QFlyer 10:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think the destinations should be listed at all. They were only recently added. If they are kept, a better way of presenting them needs to be found. Perhaps a table? It could have columns for "Airline" - "Airline code" (or some such) - "Destinations" (including intermediates) - and whatever else seems appropriate.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 10:55, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Air Niugini

Does Air Niguini even operate scheduled flights to Sydney anymore? I haven't seen a scheduled arrival into Sydney for at least 3 months! --Pavlova 16:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Air Niugini flies POM-BNE-SYD (PX 5) every Sunday and Friday, and departs the next morning (PX 6). Qantas codeshares on those flights as QF 352 and 351 respectively. Elektrik Blue 82 20:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I just did a search at the Sydney airport daily schedule and, yes there was a Qantas to Port Moresby, however no Air Niguini sign was linked with it. This led me to the Qantas site and I did a pretend booking. Air Niuguini flies to Cairns and Brisbane but not to Sydney anymore. It codeshares with Qantas down to Sydney with all flights from Brisbane and Cairns being Qantas's --Pavlova 11:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Check the Air Niugini website. There is an announcement that the Boeing 767 is under scheduled maintenance and therefore the flight is being flown by a Qantas aircraft. This doesn't mean however that the route was terminated by PX. Elektrik Blue 82 13:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Right you are--Pavlova 14:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC), just did another pretend booking for December and it was Air Niguini

They no longer fly to Sydney! They have no scheduled flights, it no longer shows up as a PX flight from Sydney to Port Moresby, rather Qantas to Brisbane, then PX to Port Moresby. Even with the completion of the B767 maintenence they do not show up as a scheduled flight at Sydney Airport either.

I checked the website of the airport, and only QF 351/352 is listed there. But the destination is Port Moresby. On the other hand, I checked Air Nuigini's schedule, found here, and it still says that all flights to Sydney and Brisbane are operated by Air Niugini. Elektrik Blue 82 17:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh well it seems to be ambiguous to say the leastPavlova 10:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I occasionally see Air Niugini aircraft at the international terminal. Zak, 03 November 2006

Image

I have uploaded an image, Image:Sydney_Airport_(2004)_By_Air.jpg, but am unsure how to place it in the info box. Someone with a bit more Wiki knowledge should do it. Mathieumcguire 00:18, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Done. Graham 01:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

3rd runway controversy

For a recent(ish) event that was intimately linked with Sydney Airport, and occupied the attention of many thousands of people for years, and was a sigificant issue at successive federal elections, it's odd that this hasn't, until now, rated a mention in the History.

I've thrown in a mere stub to remind others much better informed than I to flesh this out.

Suggest putting it in a separate section under history maybe? --Arnzy (talk ·  contribs) 09:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Old tower? New tower?

There's a nice image of the "old" control tower and the TCU. Is the tower still used for anything? What about the TCU, is it still in this building or has it moved? Where is the old tower located within the airport -- does it appear on the aerial photo? Maury 22:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the TCU is still located in the old tower complex (in fact, it is the fourth control tower - the current one is number five). I don't believe the tower itself is used for anything these days. Unfortunately it is located just to the right of the frame of the overview photo. It can be seen fairly well in this picture - it is on the right hand side, directly beyond the international terminal. As an aside, the structure of the third tower can be seen in this photo too - it is the square brick structure just beyond the Virgin Blue aircraft on the apron at Terminal 2. It has now been demolished as part of the works to prepare the taxyways at Sydney for the Airbus A380. The second control tower can be seen in this picture - it is the building with the Qantas sign on top of it. Nick Moss 07:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm a bit curious though, is the first tower still around? I see why the got rid of the second "tower" (uhh, second floor, shurely!), and the third. I also see things that look like towers to the left of the main tower and beyond it. What are these?

LHR

Should LHR even be listed as a destination? Other airlines fly from Sydney to London and some may even use the same plane. The US airlines probably use the same flight number that continues beyond Los Angeles. I think London should be removed until there are non-stop flights. Archtrain 23:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Direct flights are to be including according to WikiProject Airports. Pcpirate16 02:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Notability

What encyclopaedic purpose does a long list of airlines and their terminals serve? Wikipedia is a list of indiscriminate information, rather it should carry only notable info. I have made this change twice with explaining edit summaries, however it was automatically reverted by two editors who did not address the reasoning. That's poor wiki form.

Before you reinstate it - please seek explain why this info is notable and also provide a reference to a reliable published source as per WP:ATT. Please don't say "because other articles do it". That is not a justification. --Merbabu 08:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airports Pcpirate16 02:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone explain why such lists are notable? The page is an encyclopedia, not a roadside sign outside the arrivals building. Merbabu 03:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I suggest taking up the question at the WP:AIRPORTS talk page, most Airport contributors can be found there. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 05:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the trivial list again as no-one has a response. --Merbabu 07:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

This discussion over destination lists has been raised time and time again on the Wikiproject Airports talk pages (I'm sure there are more in the archives). Personally, while I do think it may be notable, I personally dont agree with how it's currently layed out. There however has been ways to incorporate this, see Ben_Gurion_International_Airport, a featured article, as an example.

Furthermore If you want to remove the destinations lists from Kingsford Smith International Airport, this wuld mean removing lists from every Airport article worldwide that comes under the Airports Wikiproject category. I would suggest seeking consensus for removal of destinations from every Airport article on the Airports Wikiproject talkpage before proceeding. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 08:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Again, no-one can explain why it is notable. The only reason provided - ie, 'get consensus for removal from all articles' - is merely a blocking strategy in my opinion. I ask, yet again, why is this information notable and worthy of an encyclopedia? The page is not a directory, nor is it a list of indiscriminate information. Merbabu 08:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Once again, read the WP:AIRPORT discussion pages and archives, it's been raised up many times there by a number of editors over time. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 08:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you two please sort it out and work together to build some consensus. You have opposing views, and citing different pieces of policy (which incidently take precidence over project formatting guidelines which another of you keeps quoting) are not helping anyone here. Thewinchester ^(talk) 09:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

edit conflict: I have looked through there - please assume a little more faith. I will now look again, but all I see is dicussions of formatting, not inclusion in the first place. If notability is so obvious though, why are people so refusing to discuss it? Surely if it is obvious, it's easy to explain. You haven't touched it once - merely blocked the issue with the ole "if you do it here, you need to do it to all". Merbabu 09:06, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I vote to follow the convention present in virtually all articles on major airport -- i.e. to include a list of all airlines operating scheduled services as well as their scheduled destionations. I have yet to find an major airport article that does not do what I have described. I don't see the benefit of removing this information from the article as I'm sure many people would find it useful. James Pole (talk) 10:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

passenger numbers

In 2003 it was 25 million and listed 28 the busi airport list(link in article), 2006 at 30 million should also be on the list and possibly for the the intervening years as well it needs a source. Gnangarra 00:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

No, Sydney Airport is no longer in the list of top 30 busiest airports, the barrier for entry in 2007 is 33,383,812. See World's busiest airports by passenger traffic —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvjs (talk • contribs) 22:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Destinations by Region Table

The Destinations by Region Table is used extensively at airports around the world. To just name a few Macau International Airport, Mactan-Cebu International Airport, José Martí International Airport, Ninoy Aquino International Airport, Narita International Airport, Hong Kong International Airport, Incheon International Airport, Suvarnabhumi Airport and Melbourne Airport. So, having addressed Russavia's concern, I will re-add the table. Mvjs (talk) 22:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

SYD's website mentions [1] nothing of Kingsford Smith, the corporation is not called Kingsford Smith. It's simply known as "Sydney Airport". Is the airport still known as Kingsford Smith International Airport? Mvjs (talk) 08:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll say those who were use to the old Airport name will still call it by Kingsford Smith bit like Tullamarine in Melbourne. Bidgee (talk) 12:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Support move OK, I've changed the name of the airport in the lead paragraph to show Sydney Airport as the main name. I can't unfortunately move the page as the Sydney Airport redirect is preventing me from doing it. So, I've requested the page be moved on the Requested Moves page. FYI, this is the reasoning, "The name of the airport is Sydney Airport. An alternative name, in which it may have previously been called is Kingsford Smith International Airport. The Kingsford Smith name appears to be much like the alternative name of Melbourne Airport, Tullamarine Airport. MEL's article is called Melbourne Airport. The website proclaims the name as Sydney Airport and the parent company is called Sydney Airport Corporation Limited. The media refers it to Sydney Airport."

Support move Whilst still referred to as Kingsford Smith, the airport has for some time simply been known as Sydney Airport. --Россавиа ^Диалог 19:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. The common name, in Sydney at least, is Kingsford Smith. Used in common speech as well as the news (television, not sure about print). I have never ever heard of it referred to as Sydney airport. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 06:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Melbourne Airport is called by some as Tullamarine Airport but by no means means that it is the name of the airport. Here is a quick sample of some articles about Sydney Airport in the media, notice all of them refer to the airport as simply "Sydney Airport". Kingsford Smith is found rarely, most news results will refer to Kingsford Smith Drive. [2] [3] [4] [5] I rarely, if ever, hear people say "Oh, I'm flying into Kingsford-Smith on Saturday." It's "I'm flying into Sydney Airport." Mvjs (talk) 06:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Support move. The airport is known as Sydney Airport and media use Sydney Airport(Google News Search). Bidgee (talk) 06:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Abstain. FYI, The name registered at CASA is
1-PMBD, Sydney (Kingsford Smith) INTL, Sydney Airport Corporation 13/01/06
But I recognise it is best known as "Sydney Airport" now. It is convenient and is not likely to cause confusion / ambiguity. --Soredewa (talk) 13:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Support. The airport's website just calls itself "Sydney Airport". What evidence do we have that people commonly call Sydney Airport "Kingsford Smith"? Sadly, not that many people know who Australia's pioneer aviator was. Kransky (talk) 13:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Support It's one of those situations where the airport was renamed for corporate reasons - the Sydney Airport Corporation runs it and has sort of branded it as a destination. (Ironic in a way given many Canadian airports have moved the opposite direction in recent years). Orderinchaos 23:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Why was Sydney Airport moved to Kingsford Smith International Airport without a comment on the talk page? Bidgee (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

• Oops, didn't see this, and wasn't intentional. I would have supported the move anyways. NHRHS2010 |  Talk to me  19:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • in fact, it's better known as "Kingsford Smith" rather than the plain old "Sydney Airport". There is another one in Canada as well. NHRHS2010 |  Talk to me  19:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

We already had a debate about this. Please get a new consensus! I'm now going to raise this issue in the AN/I. Bidgee (talk) 19:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

• OK, please move the article back to Sydney Airport if I don't ever show up. NHRHS2010 |  Talk to me  19:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

The removal of the gallery

I've removed the gallery as it had way to many photos for the page plus more photos are located on Commons. Bidgee (talk) 12:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I completely agree with the removal of the gallery. An incomplete adds a whole lot of unnecessary weight to the page when you can just go to Commons. Mvjs (talk) 08:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Qantas Denpasar - Sydney

Qantas does fly to Denpasar when i was at Ngurah Rai Airport i seen a Qantas plane and it said on hte Destanation board Sydney they operate 737s from Denpasar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.111.239 (talk) 04:45, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Space shuttle

An anon user has just removed this image - if you look the the left the NASA Space Shuttle is on the back of a B747. I seem to recall that the main north-south runway is a emergency landing site for the shuttle, but I don't think that it has actually landed there. Does someone have a source for my recollections, and if the image is a fake, can we get it deleted? Wongm (talk) 08:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the Shuttle has ever landed in Australia but the Shuttle can't land at Sydney. Only two emergency landing sites in Australia which are Amberley and Darwin. I've asked User talk:VirtualSteve‎ to look at the images history on Wiki before it was uploaded on Commons to make sure it hasn't been changed[6]. Bidgee (talk) 08:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The image is definitely a fake. The supposed 747 and space shuttle are completely out of proportion with the aircraft in the foreground. For the record, the two space shuttle emergency landing sites in Australia are Darwin International Airport and RAAF Base Amberley. Mvjs (talk) 08:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Infact it's RAAF Base Darwin since Darwin International doesn't own and control the runway. Bidgee (talk) 09:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

As per Bidgee's request I have checked the original image. The commons image (prior to my adjustment) is clearly a fake. I have uploaded the old image over the fake image now (I think successfully) but as I do not have administration rights on Commons you may want to pursue the "fake" uploader through Admins there - to ensure that s/he has not uploaded more manipulations. If I can assist further please do not hesitate to come to my talk page (as I am not watching this page). Best wishes.--VS ^talk 11:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)