Flight Training School (post 2)
sue October 27th, 2008
It was interesting to read the recent media coverage re the potential Flight Training School (Flight Training Queensland) proposal to locate to the Fraser Coast. This school is a very professionally run school currently based in Adelaide. The Maryborough City Council had made commitments about this school prior to amalgamation but final decisions etc will be made by the ‘new’ Fraser Coast Regional Council.
Questions that come to my mind relate to ‘real’ economic return for the region, ‘real’ cost to Council and the impact of noise on both Maryborough and Hervey Bay residents. Although the school buildings etc are proposed to be built on the Maryborough airport grounds the aircraft will use both airports to facilitate their training. The amount of flying undertaken is an issue as, in my personal opinion, the impact of 6 planes a day flying over my house is quite different to that from a possible plane flying over my house every 6 minutes.
Here is a recent media release responding to questions forwarded by the Fraser Coast Chronicle to the FCRC CEO Mr Andrew Brien.
MEDIA RELEASE
23 October 2008
Response to FCC re Flight Training Queensland
1: Is the flight training school plan being held up – if so why?
The FTQ Project is still in the process of negotiation between the two parties, these being the Fraser Coast Regional Council and Flight Training Australia. The process for negotiating an agreement of this type is complex and there is a need to ensure that all parties are happy with the final agreement. The Council and FTQ continue to discuss the project.
2: When do we expect to see movement on the flight training school if it is not being held up?
A number of workshops, a site visit to Adelaide and updates provided by State Government Departments have already been undertaken. Council has been progressively briefed on the FTQ project. Many of the briefings have been undertaken on a confidential basis due to the commercial nature of discussions.
3: Have officials any documented evidence that the flight training school should not go ahead?
The Council has been provided with extensive information in relation to the project which outlines all of the benefits and issues associated with the project. This information has been assessed and matters identified are being worked through.
4: Are there any Council officials stalling the project?
No.
5: Does the flight path of the proposed school fly over the CEO’s house?
While the question is irrelevant, the Flight Training School at this stage has not provided any flight paths. A review of the flight paths of the existing Flight Training Australia operations in Adelaide shows that the majority of houses in Maryborough would be under the flight path. This is shown on the diagram contained in a report prepared by Airservices Australia. The map is provided below and provides an overview of the flight paths over the Parafield site over a 3 week period.
ENDS
My copying and pasting skills are lacking so here is the link to the report which includes maps of flight paths etc at the Adelaide Parafield Airport.
http://www.airservices.gov.au/projectsservices/reports/nfpms/2006/PF1484.pdf
- Council related issues
- Comments(29)
I refer to your statement
“The map is provided below and provides an overview of the flight paths over the Parafield site over a 3 week period.”
Sorry, it does not!
The air services report should, if one takes the time to read it carefully, indicate some of the problems you will encounter when a flight training school finds willing partners in deception, within Air Services Australia; the agency who should be putting the needs of the public first.
Page 9 of the linked Air Services’ report reveals that none of the Flight Training school flights had been recorded on the charts, or in fact anywhere!
Why? Because their aircraft’s transponders are turned off. When transponders are turned off, Air Traffic Control don’t know they are in the air, and do not correlate their flights against the noise monitor device.
This is rather clever; because the flight training school allows the students to climb to an altitude of around 100 meters and then make a sharp turn, whilst on full throttle, directly over hundreds of homes. The new, supposedly quiet, GRUB aircraft lift the noise level in my living room, with the window open, from 24db to an average of 87 decibels. (Very noisy).
With a flight passing over my roof every ninety seconds, between 7pm and 11 pm, a “wall of sound” is created. This noise, because it isn’t measured as aircraft noise, becomes part of the measured Background noise, which allows some noisy general aviation aircraft to avoid noise augmentation. The nuisance level is based on the difference between the aircraft’s noise and the average background noise.
As far as flying over houses at a third of the minimum safe altitude, whilst climbing through a sharp turn, hundreds of times a night. Well no one knows and as far as Canberra is concerned, the twenty year old flight charts show the Parafield flight paths to be over empty paddocks, instead of where hundreds of new homes are.
I worked next to Parafield airport for 25 years before buying a home at Mawson Lakes. The noise of planes during the day didn’t bother me. (I used to fly a light aircraft myself). Unfortunately, I was usually on my way home, to the other side of town, by the time Flight Training Adelaide started their activities.
I was aghast when I found out that I would have to submit to the dreadful noise, and the fear of one of the students crashing into my home. I contacted the Environment Protection Agency. They can protect me from any form of illegal noise, except noise from aircraft in the air; unless I am a whale! It seems that whales can’t be flown over at altitudes of less than 1500 feet.
The job of protecting the public from aircraft noise has been handed to Air Services Australia. Their policy is “people shouldn’t live near airports” but they do have a noise complaints hot-line, which allows them to direct complaints, into a black hole, away from prying eyes.
If you make a stand, and call Flight Training Adelaide, a scripted process of marginalisation and ridicule is put into action.
You will be told “Some people need to get a life” So typical is wording of the response, that it seems to have been work-shopped by a PR firm.
So in frustration, you write to your local news paper to voice your concern. For the following week, a small army of cohorts will sideline complainants with such statements as “Well if they want to restrict flying they should live somewhere else” or the “flight angels” are more important than a disgruntled resident (I agree)
The counter arguments will always try to make it look as if the complaint is against the airport or the people and pilots who use the airport. The only problem people have ever had with Parafield Airport is the Flight Training Adelaide School.
Fred Firth
Resident of Mawson Lakes,
South Australia 5095.
Sue,
Putting aside all the other arguments for and against the flight training school.
Can some one please answer the following; why do people living close to
Parafield, Essendon, Bankstown, Moorabbin, Sydney etc airports want them moved?
Sadman
Ok.. I know I’ve said this before but I’ll say it again. I’ve had a gutful of the usual suspects with their narrow minded thinking and nimbism - if we all said “we don’t want it here” we’d end up with an Air Garuda scenario with cowboy pilots flying for our airlines and then how many dramas would we have?
Lets ask the company behind this proposal to hire in a fleet of these little birds and fly around Maryborough and the Bay for a few days.. follow up with some solid public consulatation asking a broad spectrum of residents and not just the usual whingers and then see where we stand.
Failing this, I hear Bundaberg Regional Council is licking their lips at the prospect of pinching this one from us.. to be honest, I suspect their airport being further from most residential areas could be more appropriate in any case.
** The writer above, as with A Robb and others have continually failed to appreciate the flight training school proposal clearly outlines their intentions to use a newer SIGNIFICANTLY QUIETER fleet of aircraft.
I live directly under the regular flight path and when these craft were here last time I did not notice them until one caught my eye flying directly over head at no more than a couple hundred feet.. the cane trucks flying past my house make much more noise. **
Ben,
You are right, you have said it all before. In the past you have also failed to answer my question (above),
there must be a reason Ben, why people living near airports want them moved.
The other question Ben, is can FCRC ratepayers support two airports, both of which are currently losing
money? Until these two questions are addressed all right thinking people should oppose the flight traing
school. If Maryborough’s airport can’t support it’self financially, lets sell it.
Sadman
Ben, I really did enjoy reading your last comments to Sue B regarding the Mbo flight school. Your summation is spot on in my humble opinion. Most folk I talk with agree entirely with you on this and other large, forever-stalled projects. It’s funny though, how some other large, controversial projects simply seem to breeze through the approval process virtually unchallenged and actually eventuate?
I lived near airports and under flight paths in Brisbane and Bilinga for most of my life. Even in these locations, with many more flights and much larger aircraft, noise was not really a major problem. As you suggest, the more important local business and financial aspects shouls have been well and truly addressed by now, so the time to decide one way or another has definitely arrived! The time to act is yesterday!
One interesting corollary to the current situation has always concerned me is this. Many investor/developers can take great advantage of the very long development application approval process to create personal wealth. While they wait, property prices invariably increase and eventually they usually benefit even further because of the increased value resulting from the approval itself. Maybe granted property development/building approvals should have a ‘use by date’ to encourage action by genuine investors and to discourage devloper inaction and personal profit taking by non-genuine applicants? So many non-genuine applications are of no benefit to the community and only cause further backlogs in the approval process.
The Fraser Coast seems to have more than its fair share of rampant knockers and negative thinkers, so it’s always good to hear from Ben and other objective thinkers who care enough to express the opinions of the silent majority!
Wayne S,
What are you really saying? Why did you move here from Brisbane and Bilinga, was it to escape the noise
and bustle? What benefit will the flight school have for ratepayers? Do you want your rates to continue to
prop up loss making ventures? Why will no one address the issues that matter, the well being of the people?
Wayne as you and Ben are “objective” thinkers, how about some “objective” answers to real questions.
Sadman
For those that doubt many people worry about the proposed Flight training School,
try reading on http://www.booral.org and bringbackstrewth.com.au. There are a number
of views on the proposal.
Sadman
Oh dear Sadman,
Did it ever cross your mind that YOU could be one of the ‘rampant knockers and negative thinkers’ I was alluding to?
\wayne s
Wayne Oh Wayne,
Did you ever think you are one of those too scared or ignorant to answer a
simple question? What is it with you people, you make blanket statements
but can’t back them up with logic.
Sadman
Could we please refrain from the personal attacks? Healthy debate encourages diversity of opinion and mature people respect people with opinions that differ from their own! I’m tempted to say… ‘now children”…. Cheers, Sue
Come on Sue,
Let them fight, I hate peace. But I agree with Sadman,
it would be nice to get answers from Sean, WayneS and Ben.
A few facts might give their comments some weight, then
again they might not?
Jonangel
Sadman, you have made your position clear numerous times, but all I’m asking for is for council and the community to examine this opportunity thoroughly and to either get on with it or throw it out.
At this time I have no evidence to suggest the flight school and other add-on opportunities that have been previously investigated for Maryborough’s airport are not viable or unacceptable to the broader community.
To answer your questions:
1) There are many reasons why residents near airports have problems - many are caused by people moving in without properly assessing the location - its a bit like moving in next door to a quarry then complaining about the dust.
2) I completely agree, the new council does need to evalutate the viability of having two airports. It is my understanding the reason the old Maryborough City Council looked at bringing in additional industries to their airport was they were looking to improve their viability of this community asset.
The Maryborough showgrounds is a good example of how this works - By maximising use of the facility, council is now recovering more of the cost of running it.
If it is possible to enhance our two airports by bringing in new industry that does not adversly affect the surrounding community then council should be bending over backwards to do so. If not.. then yes, one airport needs to go.
Ben,
Let’s look at the positives of your last post. Yes, council should be
“bending over backwards” to improve industry in our region.
Yes, you are right again, council does need “to evaluate the viability
of having two airports”. It needs to be an open and transparent evaluation.
As to the anti-people aspects of the airport and Flight Training School,
the people liveing near Maryborough’s airport are there now. There was no
mention of such a school when they bought. So your response is not
valid. There is a big difference between 6 or 8 flights a day and 6 or 8 flights
an hour.
As to overall benefits to our region; Ben do you really believe the school will
put $20 million dollars into the region? Do you also believe Maryborough’s
airport will be cost negative to ratepayers?
Sadman
Still sounds like good, practical positive reaoning to me Ben!
I agree that procrastination by decision makers should cease after such a long delay. Surely by now we can make the final decisions based on known data and practical common sense and get on with it one way or another?
WayneS,
“Surely by now we can make the final decision based on known data”.
What data Wayne? What do you know about the benefits of otherwise?
What do you know about the impact on our region?
What’s it going to cost us?
Come on wayne, tell us why it’s a good idea? Or maybe you can’t!!
Sadman
Sadman, there is no need to resort to personal attacks.
Whether it is 10 or 50 additional flights per day, the question remains as to whether most of us willl even notice them.. these craft are quiet!
Its not really for us to debate - the only way to find out one way or the other is to do a fly in day - get as many of these beaut aircraft into town and do non-stop touch and goes for a whole day.. would be very interesting to see what the reaction from the community is. Again, we can only speculate.
As for economic return, Maryborough City Council spent many thousands of dollars and countless hours evaluating the flight training school and other add-ons for the airport as well as evaluating the impact on nearby residents.
As a Maryborough resident, I have every confidence the project will be viable - and it is private enterprise footing the bill so if the thing shuts its doors in a few year’s time the community will not be the losers.
Ben I can assure you that the planes are not quiet! If you are standing adjacent to the flight path that they use for landing you may not hear them very loudly at all as they are approaching under no power but if they fly overhead or if you are near the flight path for take offs you will hear them. There is no such thing as a ‘quiet’ plane in my opinion. There are noisy planes and less nosiy planes but we are yet to invent a ‘quiet’ plane!
I moved a motion yesterday in Council to have information sessions about the FTQ proposal in both Hervey Bay and Maryborough that was unanimously supported. I hope that FTQ demonstrate the noise with actual planes as you suggest Ben. Sue
Ben,
I don’t believe I have personaly attack any one, unlike some I also do my best to answer questions.
I don’t make statements then run for cover. As to your “it’s private enterprise footing the bill’,
that is untrue. Fraser Coast Regional Ratepayers subsidise both airports! Again I challenge you to tell
us, will the flight training school benefit the bulk of ratepayers and if so, how?
Sadman
Sadman, I was refering to the FTQ project being privately funded - if it goes belly up it is their loss not ours - however, in the mean time, if this school succeeds in bringing even a 100 students per year, that is 100 people that need food, accomodation, entertainment etc.
The example has been used elsewhere but I’ll borrow it here, the airports themselves do not register a ‘profit’ as such. However, they are vital in ensuring our tourism industry remains vibrant as well as providing essential links for emergency services, industry and others.
Why don’t we ask council and the tourism industry, how much business would be lost to the region forever if we were to close our links to the huge southern markets of Brisbane and Sydney? The amount would no doubt be in the hundreds of millions.
As for the aircraft noise, Sue and others, I do not disagree aircraft are noisy - but as Sue points out the bulk of the noise is on take off and landing - so the majority of the community has reduced exposure to it anyway. Yes, those immediately beside the airports will notice the additional flights but in the bigger picture I am sure most of us would not be too fussed. To clarify the situation, I do live directly under the flight path - so yes I do hear the aircraft as they climb.. no, its not bothersome at all.
Sadman, I’ll ask the question, if we close down the airports, how many jobs would be lost?
Also, how will the FTS impact negatively on tourism? If anything, the school will be producing pilots that could be lured to our fantastic region to enhance the region’s tourism capacity - I am sure local flight charter companies would love access to additional pilots.
We are probably best to agree to disagree and leave it to council to clear it up one way or the other.
Yes Ben you raise an excellent point in referring to how much funding is private and how much Council would be contributing. I can’t disclose this as firstly it hasn’t been finalised and secondly it is commercial in confidence. But I can assure everyone that the students live on campus. (See my new post 3). The staff however would most likely live within the community and contribute to the local economy directly.
I do not personally support any move that would inhibit air services to our region and find it very sad that history has left us with two airports which are both badly located in terms of providing a regional service. Every time I flew to Brissy and did so via Maryborough I couldn’t help but think what a total waste of time and money to have a plane take off and land twice within 10 minutes. Not a sustainable way to fly at all! From where I live in Dundowran both airports are of a similar distance to me in terms of time to travel to them.
If only Maryborough and Hervey Bay had got together years ago and built a combined airport we would now be better served. Our challenge now is to think of the best way forward so we don’t repeat the mistakes of the past!
Ben,
Why do you always distort the facts?
Ratpayers not only subsidise both our airports, but we pay sweetners to the airlines in different ways.
As to cutting off links to the souther states, we currently only fly to one direct. Also the lack of a flight traing school will have no impact on our commercial flight
service.
Regarding tourism, I can’t speak for all tourists, but those I know and speaking for myself. I would not want to holiday with the constant buzz of planes overhead.
I notice once again you neglect to tell us how the FTSQ
will improve the lot of the bulk of FCRC’s residents and ratepayers. I believe even the FTSQ is being offered sweetners to move here, tell me I’m wrong Ben?
Isn’t this fun.. Sadman, I have a big idea that I am hoping to turn into a business - now this business may or may not create a handful of jobs but it will create a flow on effect that will in a small way benefit the community. Now will you ask that council blocks me because my proposed operation does not benefit the entire community? I certainly hope not.
Council may in fact be providing ’sweeteners’ to attract new aviation business (which should, in turn add value to their asset and reduce the burden on the community). Councils can play a pivotal role in attracting new business to their areas and if this involves assisting new business start ups or relocations etc this is great.
Your have not given a valid reason as to how flight training will affect tourism - until FTQ outlines proposed flight paths and training loops we can not even suggest aircraft will be constantly buzzing tourist areas. In fact, why not write to council and ask that they consider stipulating that FTQ specifically avoids flying over the more populated areas of Hervey Bay?
Sadman, I do not deny our council funds the airports nor do I deny that councils present and past will do their best to ensure we have a continuation of air services - If they have to dangle carrots to do so then so be it.
The failure of Rex to continue services to Maryborough was not a failure by Maryborough’s council nor was it a wasted exercise - it merely proved the desperate need for flight training - Australia does not have enough pilots yet has a continuing demand that needs to be filled.
Sue raises a good point - our previous councils failed to see the opportunity to push for a combined regional airport - there is still several great sites for this to happen which have good buffer zones (several kilometres) to the nearest houses - many of us have raised this one over the years yet I am sure it would be put in the too hard basket very rapidly by most.
I sincerely hope council does hold more public consultations regarding this and other proposals for our airports and may the best solution be found.
Ben,
You have done it again, distorted the argument. If you intend to start a business, I wish you well. That is not what we are talking about, your business is your money, we are talking about ratepayers money.
We are talking about getting the best value out of OUR rates for the greatest number or residents/ratepayers.
It’s not very smart Ben to have two businesses, both losing money, 5-10 minutes flight time apart, servicing the same people. Would you open or expand a fish & chip shop, next to a fish & chip shop?
Ahh sadman.. I didn’t have the confidence in my own ability - I DO have the skills to be a politician afterall..
I think we’re all getting confused.. too much speculation going on here for our own good. On that note, I’ll leave the debate.
Ben,
Believe me, I am not the slightest bit “confused” on this issue.
Yes, based on you posts, you “DO” have the “skills” to be a
politician, they also neglect to produce hard facts and ignore what
they don’t want to see.
Sadman
Fred Firth is spot on. I used to live in a well established part of Salisbury and just had to move out without compensation because of the sudden increase in relentless flight training noise. I’d be happier living in a remote wurlie than under that mind scrambling drone all day/evening. This happened at a time Fred’s area was surveyed for sale. It’s not funny how the commerce cohorts move the pollution to obtain the highest land prices. Now that people have committed to Mawson the flight training operations return. I did consider moving to beautiful Maryborough, from what I read what’s going on, it’s not a lot different to the inconsiderate administrating mob in SA. I’m glad I didn’t decide to move all that way rebuild a peaceful life there! I’ve added Ramon’s post for your perusal. As a Councilor, you should consult your Constituents. All this growth hype only benefits a few.
—-
On November 6, 2008 at 1:39 am Ramon Said:
If FTQ trains over residential areas your towns will regret it. I think your Council is also being encouraged by influential others in the name of ‘growth’. Ask yourselves why they do not wish to fly over uninhabited areas? Learn what ANEF contours mean, and how many people will be adversely affected. These rubbery noise plots will appear in your airport Master plans.
At Parafield, we had no say, and had no idea what we were in for when this mass flight training rot started. The Department of Transport simply developed the airport for maximum capacity with impunity, as if thousands of homes around it did not exist. Flight training will fly everywhere in uncontrolled airspace, their noise pollution remains unmeasured, maintaining the true adverse impacts to be unrecognized.
Beware, at the moment there is little binding legislation protecting Community from unnecessary aviation.
http://messenger-news.whereilive.com.au/news/story/time-parafield-airport-buzzed-off-salisbury-mayor/
-
Interesting links and Archives below. Amongst the Newspaper archives, the Aldinga story also demonstrates the media bullying, even from a small recreational airfield:
http://sites.google.com/site/parafieldairport/
This catch phrase “Unneccesary Aviation” really makes me laugh.
Regardless where it is done, Aviation training is critical to maintaining a safe airline industry and ensuring the industry remains viable by ensuring a steady flow of quality pilots.
I hope those who complain about aircraft noise never need to be flown via air on the Royal Flying Doctors or Medi-vac helicoptors - the pilots in these aircraft all learnt to fly at training centres not unlike the one proposed for Maryborough.
I look forward to attending one of the four information sessions the council is attending and commend Sue for raising this issue in council. This is true community representation - Thanks Sue!
Medivacs & Flying doctors are not causing the distress.
Those ‘experts’ quoting that “Unneccesary (sic) Aviation” is a catch phrase do not make me laugh. They seem to deliberately leave out the adjunct “over established residential areas”, or are not be able to comprehend sentences containing more than a handful of words.
Flights training for Local needs are necessary, and were tolerated around Parafield until industrial flight training commenced - for foreign needs. These foreign cadets do not live here, do not have family here, and are not committed to remain here - so they can train anywhere, not over established urban areas.
i was one of the first to buy land in mawson lakes,
the airport was known and the amount of flying was ok.
you only have to go to the air services website to see the intolarable increase of traffic that has been generated by the flying schools. scince 1999 to now
and yes its 10.37pm and they have been circling over my house from 6.30 when i got home.
iv’e heard all the put downs from people anout this and that.
it can be hell sometimes.