Jump to content

Talk:Sydney Airport

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Misc

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
As a lifelong Sydney resident, I've never referred to it as anything but Mascot and I wasn't born until the 1970s. I've rarely heard anyone call it anything other than "Mascot" or simply "the airport". Mascot continues to be the surrounding suburb so it remains a valid descriptor for the area. Kingsford Smith is just too many syllables. - 203.59.32.63 (talk) 03:08, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'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
I (as a Sydneysider) and everyone I know... don't think about how many runways there are and never refer to it at all. There certainly isn't a universal name for it. 203.59.32.63 (talk) 03:09, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Table

[edit]

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)

Oldest airport 1911

[edit]

Sydney is the oldest extant right in the world? Is that for major internationals or all airports/fields? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.43.217.70 (talk) 03:30, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

At least in Australia, the oldest international airfield would have to be the Fannie Bay airstrip at Fannie Bay, Darwin, Northern Territory where on 10 December 1919, the Vickers Vimy of Sir Ross and Keith Smith landed and claimed the prize for the first international flight from England to Australia. What is now Ross Smith Avenue served as the Royal Australian Air Force airfield until a new military field was built further inland at the end of World War Two. After the war, the civilian activities at the Fannie Bay field were moved to the new RAAF base and the Fannie Bay airfield was closed and converted to a public road.

Sydney Airport’s aviation history began when the first aircraft took off from the airport site during April 1911. from sydney airport official website, apprently u cant quote verbatim an official reference?

Owner/operator

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

yes there is another story in the herald today about Sydney airport and parking prices - i'll add to the article. --Amaher (talk) 23:26, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Airlines

[edit]

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)[reply]

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

Air Niugini

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Right you are--Pavlova 14:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC), just did another pretend booking for December and it was Air Niguini[reply]
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)[reply]
Oh well it seems to be ambiguous to say the leastPavlova 10:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I occasionally see Air Niugini aircraft at the international terminal. Zak, 03 November 2006

Image

[edit]

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)[reply]

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

3rd runway controversy

[edit]

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)[reply]

Old tower? New tower?

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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

[edit]

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)[reply]

Direct flights are to be including according to WikiProject Airports. Pcpirate16 02:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since an anon has removed some instances of LHR without giving a reason, I have removed the rest for consistency. Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports does not to seem to comment on this, but it makes sense to list only direct destinations. See also Kangaroo Route.--Shantavira|feed me 10:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Direct destinations also include "one-stop" flights which uses the same plane and same flight number through, which Qantas uses. Other Airlines require you to change planes at their hubs. So I've reinstated LHR for Qantas and BA only as well (which uses the same plane/flight number)Sb617 (Talk) 11:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Virgin Atlantic also uses the same plane and flight number throughout the journey, so I have reinstated that as well.--Shantavira|feed me 13:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Just a wiki reader here, but I personally found the list of airlines and destinations to be quite useful. However, regardless of my personal thoughts, as it stands, the "new" layout made it difficult for me to ascertain what airlines were operating at the airport. Yes they are eventually listed when discussing the terminals, but having to go through those was a tad frustrating. I think that at the very least a list of what airlines operate from the airport should be provided, or that the old layout of airlines + destinations + terminals should be made collasable, so that the information is still available to those who find it necessary or useful. - Anonymous May 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.141.196 (talk) 16:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

passenger numbers

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Destinations by Region Table

[edit]

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)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Qantas Denpasar - Sydney

[edit]

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)[reply]

Space shuttle

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Infact it's RAAF Base Darwin since Darwin International doesn't own and control the runway. Bidgee (talk) 09:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
Thanks for that VS. I've looked and it's only the one but will be watching them. Bidgee (talk) 12:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can i see the fake photo plz? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.6.74.181 (talk) 08:03, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Transaero Airlines at SYD

[edit]

Several months ago I saw that they were going to commence flights to SYD from Moscow- Domodedovo via Hong Kong, but Transaero is no longer listed in the airlines at SYD list. Does anyone know what happened?

Cheers,

--Loy Wong (talk) 04:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delta Air Lines

[edit]

Where are ya'll getting that Delta is starting flights to Sydney from Los Angeles and Atlanta? I can't seem to find a press release from DL, the flight is definitely not loaded into Delta's schedules, and i couldn't find a statement saying that DL even announced it. Please point me to a source. Thanks! Cashier freak (talk) 05:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delta's flights will originate/terminate in Atlanta w/a fuel stop in Los Angeles, that's why we are listing Atlanta as a destination. Will send the link of the article shortly so don't say i'm making it up!!!

I've checked recent timetables. SYD-LAX is an exception to the DL rule and will fly SYD-LAX only. Even if the flight number (only) originates in Atlanta, it would be a different plane, hence it is not listed. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 07:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's listed in the Atlanta airport article as well as on the Delta webpage...so quit deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atler5264 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not when I last checked, so quit adding it. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 01:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And the flight uses different numbers at LAX per updated DL timetables. 74.183.173.237 (talk) 06:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just looked at the Syndey Airport Flight Departures and it has DL 016 - Los Angeles and Atlanta. Would this be enough to make the listing both Los Angeles and Atlanta on Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by M i k e y 86 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, LAX should only be listed as a destination from SYD. Per Delta timetables, DL16/17 no longer originates in ATL, it is now just routed SYD-LAX and vice versa (although the same 777LR is used on the LAX-ATL leg however it is under a different flight number) so therefore Atlanta cannot listed as a destination for Delta from Sydney. Charmedaddict (talk) 06:45, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked thru DL's timetables and its ahowing DL16/17 originating from Atlanta. So I have added it to the list. 74.183.173.237 (talk) 20:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

International vs Domestic

[edit]

I believe multi-destination flights leaving SYD with an intermediate stop in Australia depart from the domestic Terminal. The SYD-ADL-SIN flight would leave from the international terminal of Adelaide airport, where all passengers would clear customs. Kransky (talk) 10:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

QF Flights below 399 depart from the International terminal, regardless if its to a international or domestic destination. It's even stated that on the Qantas website.
Also to add, domestic passengers on the QF399 or below usually have a "D" on their boarding pass, and they only have to show ID at customs (and not their passport). Passengers clear customs at the terminating destination. For example QF20 Manila-Brisbane-Sydney, they clear in Sydney but are only in Transit at Brisbane. --Sb617 (talk · contribs) 10:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, you're right. I just checked on the Sydney Airport website and the flight to Brisbane leaves from the International Terminal. [7] Kransky (talk) 10:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Jetstar International Destinations

[edit]

Need to add in Tokyo [Narita] as it is not currently listed. However they do not fly there directly, but rather via Gold Coast [OOL]. Though Osaka [Kansai] is currently listed, but flights to there are via OOL also. --220.233.190.106 (talk) 00:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NRT Requires a plane change in OOL, whereas the SYD-OOL-KIX flight (JQ19/20) is the same flight number and plane despite stopping at OOL for a fuel stop. Thus technically the NRT flight is not "direct" and not listed. --Sb617 (talk · contribs) 10:40, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

This map could be one of many maps developed to show which cities a given airport serves through direct passenger air links. You may like it or not, but you probably can think of ways how it can be improved. At the moment it is in its experimental stage, which you and I consider the scope of such a project. Is it worth doing? Where should it go? Is this the best style? What maintenance problems could emerge? Should it be purple? If you don't like it, by all means offer your view below, but let's leave it up for a month so that as many people can comment. Kransky (talk) 11:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A bit too squashed, but some things escape my mind on how to improve the map atm (drinking does that to you). Will think of something over the next couple of days. --Sb617 (talk · contribs) 12:56, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot Los Angeles on the Map Bwhistle (talk) 07:36, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and SFO, I know. Thanks. Kransky (talk) 08:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The map is also missing Papeete and Mauritius, also you have Paris on the map - there are no direct passenger links to Paris from Australia. However, the Mauritius flight does not resume until July.

Richmond Airbase as second stop-gap airport?

[edit]

I recently came across this news article: New airport set for take-off which says the RAAF base at Richmond might be a stop-gap second airport while they find the site for a permanenent one...can anyone put that into the 2nd airport section?Ahmadmuj (talk) 12:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! The second Sydney airport saga continues! The chances of Richmond as a civilian airport are POOR. Its' been looked at and rejected(1977). Foggy, too near the mountains etc. 45 Years this has been talked about!(Article say 63 so really started 1946!!) They actually "turned the first sod" on Badgery's Creek, now thay are starting to sell the land off! While the government/s prevaricated and played political games Sydney has grown and too many peolple would now be under the flight path!
"In December 2003 John Anderson, the then transport minister, said "following exhaustive examination it is clear the existing airport at Mascot will be able to handle air traffic demands for a long time to come". Better hope so! Maybe modern planes are able to land/take off steep enought to make Richmond viable now.
I am looking at expanding the full Second airport article, as it tells about 1/10 of the story. See the talk page for details--220.101.28.25 (talk) 00:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Canadian and American airports generally contain a link to an aviation weather source in their external link section. Why should airports in this country be different?DSatYVR (talk) 22:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Airport name

[edit]

At Sydney, the name of Sydney Airport is periodically changed to "Kingsford Smith" or some variant. Looking for a citation to add to the article to prevent these periodic changes I discovered that, according to the Geographical Names Board, the geographical name was changed to "Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport" on 8 July 2005.[8] --AussieLegend (talk) 07:21, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is Air Asia X flying to sydney on april 1 or not?

[edit]

121.209.164.167 (talk) 09:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)A few days ago i noticed that Air Asia X was on the airlines list with flights to Kuala Lumpar beginning on April 1st. The website which was linked about this said they will be flying there,but now i see its deleted from the airlines list on the current revision [as of Jan 14th 2012]. Is this True or was it accidentally deleted?[reply]

Eliz2009 (talk) 12:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC) It is confirmed that AirAsiax is flying to Sydney; it is in several articles and Tony Fernandes confirmed on his Tweet page. The start date April is 1 has not been confirmed by the airline. I think that the start date should not be mentioned in the article until it is confirmed by the airline.[reply]

EVA Air

[edit]

I read on http://airlineroute.net/2012/04/04/br-syd-jul12/ that EVA Air will be during the month of July 2012, operate 5 round-trip service on Taipei Taoyuan – Sydney route, on board Airbus A330-200 aircraft. Not sure what to write it as on the airlines and destinations section so i just wrote Seasonal. Pls edit it if you know and also tell me so that i will udnerstand how to add something like that next time. Thanks. -Donwarynosug-

Where to list Sydney Airport app?

[edit]

Like many airports, Sydney now has an iOS app which I believe would be relevant to this page – it'd certainly be of interest to travellers flying in & out of SYD. The app's link on the page would take visitors to http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/sydneyairport/id475492230?mt=8.

1. Should airport apps be listed on the relevant page?

2. If so, where? I can't see any current heading under which this would be a neat fit. Should a new category be created, or is it enough to list & link the app in the Summary box – perhaps following 'website'?

Djsflynn (talk) 02:34, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed material

[edit]

I removed several entries from the "Prospective users and routes" section that were outdated. I also removed the following tables:

I couldn't figure why a single months numbers were in any way encyclopaedic. There is no way to tell if the numbers are representative of a normal month or what. Also it shows a decrease or increase but doesn't explain from what. Was it from the same month in a prior year or just for the previous month? CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 23:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the monthly figure should be there. All Wiki page airports in Australia have that figure. The decrease and increase is obviously comparing the number of the same month from the previous year. Eg: January 2012 compare with January 2011. Look at the link for the original report. However, the calculation of the percentage need to be calculated manually as the report only provides the numbers. I hope the the table can be reverted to the original position. Thank You. Rahimiraduan (talk) 15:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to your comments. There are 157 airports linked from {{Airports in Australia}} and of these there are 15, Perth Airport, Melbourne Airport, Mildura Airport, Hobart International Airport, Launceston Airport, Adelaide Airport, Rockhampton Airport, Townsville Airport, Gold Coast Airport, Cairns Airport, Brisbane Airport, Alice Springs Airport, Darwin International Airport, Newcastle Airport (Williamtown), Canberra International Airport, that have the monthly figures. So obviously not all Australian airports include them. By the way one of those has not been updated since 2009 and if I recall correctly 6 have not been updated since 2010. If the % change was obvious then I would not have mentioned it. The reader should not have to look at the source to find that out it should have been provided in the article. But you haven't told me what is encyclopaedic about a single months figures. I've gone through the other airports and removed the monthly figures, as well as making the font full size and fix the incorrect flag usage. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 22:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference autogenerated2 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/international_airline_activity-monthly_publications.aspx

International Destinations

[edit]

Turkish Airlines will soon fly in 2014 to from Istanbul-Sydney & Sydney-Istanbul. Should this be included in the International Passenger Destinations section? I am also going to change QantasLink and that it has completely moved operations to T3. Perisher Blue (talk) 08:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems a bit far off at this stage. Could fail to happen for all sorts of reasons. Wait till nearer the time, and have a reliable source for it, and it could be a valid addition. HiLo48 (talk) 10:40, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure - Declaring an Interest

[edit]

I'm Colin and I work in Sydney Airport's Corporate Affairs team. I'm here to contribute information that will improve the quality of Sydney Airport-related pages.

I am aware of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and I will abide by them.

My edits will be restricted mostly to talk pages, and I will not engage in editing text directly on any Sydney Airport-related page. Instead, I will volunteer information on the talk pages, and ask for Wikipedians' help.

If you want to contact me, please leave a message on my talk page.

Colin at Sydney Airport (talk) 02:45, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Map's wrong

[edit]

Norfolk Island is not international. Norfolk is part of the Commonwealth of Australia.203.161.10.6 (talk) 05:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver

[edit]

In January Qantas are flying a few "experimental (my words)" ski charters to Vancouver. This appears to me have been taken up by the "promote Qantas at any cost" brigade as a piece of currently rare Qantas good news and been causing a rather pathetic series of changes and reverts. I think I would prefer that this was not even mentioned as such one off charters are not normally mentioned in airport articles and because such entries are easy for the "faithful" to add but the same "faithful" are never around to remove them when they become embarrassingly out of date. I have reverted the entry to a (fairly stable) version from a few weeks ago that mentions the published start and stop dates and think this is the best compromise for those that do want this listed and those who have worries about relevance an maintenance issues.

It should be removed after the last flight and only re-entered if the flights prove to be regular and or truly seasonalAndrewgprout (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AA resumes or begins?

[edit]

Thanks for this discussion. It was actually one stop DFW Hawaii Sydney service briefly in the 90s according to the dallas morning news. This in NO way if that is the case that this is a resumption of serviceRicHicks (talk) 04:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Since it's gone back and forth several times here and at Los Angeles International Airport, should we say the American Airlines LAX-SYD flight is "resumes" or "begins"? We now have a source that says that AA briefly had direct, 1-stop LAX-SYD service in the early 1990s (thanks, CHCBOY). But that's a materially different service more than two decades ago that has absolutely no bearing on today's AA service; AA was no more or less likely to begin LAX-SYD service now because they had that flight in the past than they would be without it. By contrast, QF's SYD-SFO service is very clearly a resumption. It's the same route with the same plane less than five years later; their traffic data from when they operated SYD-SFO is very relevant. So I think that saying "resumes" for the AA service is not helpful for readers and doesn't make sense. For all practical purposes, AA's LAX-SYD flight is a completely new service. —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 13:56, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

American Airlines previously performed one-stop service to Sydney/Kingsford-Smith. All Airlines And Destinations lists' should only consist of non-stop service. This means that this is new service. This also means that London-Heathrow should not be a destination listed as all planes going to Heathrow must make a fuel stop to be able to continue to London. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Planeexpert777 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus on WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT is that all direct services are listed in these tables, with the exception of "timetable direct" services through domestic hubs. Eg if AA has the same flight number on BOS-ORD-SFO or LHR-ORD-STL, don't list BOS-SFO or LHR-STL. (It would be much, much better if this was said explicitly in the articles for readers, instead of just on a Wikipedia page for editors, but that's a losing battle with the number of editors who insist on maintaining destination lists as a travel guide, contrary to Wikipedia policy. And that's a discussion for elsewhere.) Either way, I obviously agree that the 1-stop direct service two decades ago doesn't make this a "resumption". —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 14:49, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Although technically correct (at least twice - as there were even earlier island hopping "American" 707 flights from Sydney) I too am unhappy with 'resumes' in this case but had resisted doing anything because the whole problem resolves itself eventually and really is not worth the electrons on screen. I agree with Ashill that such detail is not really encyclopaedic and insisting on such pedanticness, in the end, could lead to a concensus to remove (or perhaps move to wikivoyage) all of the destination boxes on airport artices. Andrewgprout (talk) 19:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Let me add another vote for "begins", and let me argue that "resumes" is not encyclopedic enough to be notable, or may I say it crossed the border to be on the travel guide side. As Wikipedia becomes longer in history, "resumes" will become more and more ridiculous in maintainability. HkCaGu (talk) 00:29, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So what about on the American Airlines destinations page? Should it be "resumes" or "begins" on that page. It was listed as a terminated destination but it was unsourced (so I think that SYD was a AA destination itself in the past doesn't matter what route is has flown). 97.85.113.113 (talk) 05:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We have a source that AA used to fly to SYD, so including it in a table of former AA destinations is clearly appropriate. (I'll add the ref.) Once it's in that table, mentioning that AA service to SYD is resuming is obviously appropriate. But listing SYD as a historical AA destination is different than claiming that LAX-SYD is a resumption of a previous service; for all practical purposes, it's not. —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 12:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested edits to improve accuracy

[edit]
[edit]

New Sydney Airport logo[1]

Statistics - 2014 figures

[edit]

Passengers: 38,496,000[2]

Aircraft movements: 327,190[3]

Economic & social impacts: $30.8 billion in value-added and 306,700 FTE jobs[4]

88 destinations (44 domestic and regional and 44 international) are served to Sydney directly by 39 airlines (as of 31 December 2014).[5]

Curfew

[edit]

Suggested clean-up of paragraph chunk below for clarity (e.g. fines are , and to update source to web page rather than PDF.

In 1995 the Australian Parliament passed the Sydney Airport Curfew Act 1995, which applied a curfew at Sydney Airport between 11pm and 6am. While most aircraft operations are prohibited during this period, there is provision for the operation of emergency aircraft, some small jets, propeller-driven aircraft and freight movements. A limited number of scheduled landings by international passenger jets are permitted between 5am to 6am. The curfew is legally enforceable and failing to comply is an offence that may result in the Federal Court of Australia imposing significant fines.[6]

In exceptional circumstances the Minister for Infrastructure may grant dispensations for aircraft to take off or land during curfew when they would not otherwise be allowed to do so. These must be issued in accordance with guidelines which define what ‘exceptional circumstances’ are. Approved dispensations are tabled in both houses of the Federal Parliament. The Act provides for fines up to $850,000 for a body corporate.

Slot management at Sydney Airport is governed by the Sydney Airport Demand Management Act 1997. Special provisions in the legislative regime that differentiate it from worldwide industry standards relate to the 80 per hour movement cap; guaranteed slots for NSW regional services; greater access for new entrants; size of aircraft test and the compliance regime to encourage timely performance. Day–today administration of the Slot Scheme is undertaken by Airport Co-ordination Australia (ACA).

Expansion

[edit]

Parts of this section include outdated information regarding ownership.

In 2002, the Australian Government sold Sydney Airports Corporation Limited (later renamed Sydney Airport Corporation Limited, SACL), the management authority for the airport, to Southern Cross Airports Corporation Holdings Ltd. Today, Sydney Airport is listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) with the ticker ‘SYD’ and has around 100,000 investors.[7]


T2 expansion:

In December 2013, the T2 Pier A extension was completed. It added five new gates capable of handling wide-bodied aircraft and 4,500m2 of additional space to Australia’s busiest airport terminal. It also facilitated the widening of the passenger concourse to improve passenger circulation. The extension was critical to facilitating domestic wide-bodied aircraft operations which are increasingly prevalent on the Sydney-Melbourne and Sydney-Perth routes.

Future

[edit]

Should note approval of the master plan.

On 17 February 2014, the Australian Government approved Sydney Airport’s Master Plan 2033.[8], which outlines the airport’s plans to cater for forecast demand of 74 million passengers in 2033. The plan includes Sydney Airport’s first ever integrated ground transport plan[9].

Shuttle bus for terminal transfer

[edit]

Suggest we add information about shuttle bus terminal transfer for clarity.

T-Bus is a shuttle bus transfer service between the International (T1) and Domestic (T2) terminals which costs AUD$5.50 (one way, per person). The journey takes up to 10 minutes and operates frequently in the morning peak period from 6am, then half hourly until 9pm. The bus stops are located on Arrivals levels, at T1 Bus Bay 21 and at T2 on the first roadway in the centre of the terminal.

Colin at Sydney Airport (talk) 04:31, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yellow tickY Partly done In the "Expansion" section, what part of that quote is outdated? Stickee (talk) 06:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Sydney Airport website". Retrieved 2015-07-21.
  2. ^ "Sydney Airport 2014 Annual Report". Retrieved 2015-07-21.
  3. ^ "Sydney Airport 2014 Annual Report". Retrieved 2015-07-21.
  4. ^ "Economic Impact". Retrieved 2015-07-21.
  5. ^ "Sydney Airport 2014 Annual Report". Retrieved 2015-07-21.
  6. ^ "Curfew at Sydney Airport". Retrieved 2014-03-11.
  7. ^ "Ownership - Sydney Airport". Retrieved 2015-07-21.
  8. ^ "Sydney Airport Master Plan Approved". 2014-02-18.
  9. ^ "Master Plan". sydneyairport.com.au. Retrieved 2014-03-11.

Qantas SYD-LAX-JFK

[edit]

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports#Qantas_SYD-LAX-JFK - TheChampionMan1234 02:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Sydney Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aerodrome Chart

[edit]

I've added in the aerodrome chart from Air Services Australia, hopefully this was a meaningful contribution but if it isn't please feel free to revert the article. Anzmibu (talk) 05:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Sydney Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sydney Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop your vandalism

[edit]

"Laterthanyouthink", you are the vandal, not me. The incident did happen. The content is sourced. It belongs here. You just leave it alone.113.197.13.138 (talk) 07:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@113.197.13.138: - It is not just one editor who has reverted your edits, several have done so. You have been warned repeatedly for edit-warring yet continue to do so. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked this IP. Graham87 12:40, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed image removal

[edit]

With this edit Magnolia677 removed an image of an aircraft on approach that, rather than being just an "airplane in the sky" was a photo of a cargo aircraft, on approach with the CBD in the background and was in the cargo section. As this seemed an appropriate image I restored it but was reverted with the summary "Reverted 2 edits by AussieLegend (talk): Per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE; this article is about an airport, not a city, the sky, or an airplane. The image is irrelevant and decorative. Please discuss.", which I dispute. MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE states "Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative" and the image meets this requirement. While Magnolia677 is correct that this article is about an airport, not a city, the sky, or an airplane you can't divorce the city from the airport. Sydney is part of the airport's name and the airport is located in Sydney so the city is entirely relevant. The image is in the "Cargo" section and it is a cargo aircraft so that is relevant. The image shows Port Botany with the CBD behind it so it gives an idea of the airport's location in respect to the CBD so that too is entirely relevant. That being the case, Magnolia677's claim that the photo is irrelevant and decorative is clearly incorrect. I will be reverting the removal of the image to the status quo per WP:STATUSQUO until there is consensus to remove it. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:33, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The photo in question
Cruise ships arriving at PortMiami
We differ on our interpretation of "relevant". The article is about an airport, and this image is an airplane in the sky. Maybe if it was touching down and you could see the runway or parts of the airport (or that smoke when the wheels hit the runway), then sure. But really, it's an airplane with Sydney in the backdrop. This article isn't about Sydney; it's about an airport in Sydney. "Relevant" should suggest that some infrastructure associated with the airport--a train to the airport; an airport highway; people walking on a sidewalk into the airport--be visible in the photo. It's like adding the photo on the right to PortMiami. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:54, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One more point, a few years ago I edited a number of airport articles and cleaned out hundreds of pictures of airplanes in the sky. People love to take pictures of airplanes and those photos often end up on Wikipedia. I guess my question is, at what altitude should a plane be flying, or how much of a city should be visible, before an airplane in the sky becomes relevant to an article about an airport? Magnolia677 (talk) 18:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but your image comparison is a stretch at best. The cruise ships show only water and nothing else, unlike the aircraft image. As the caption says, it's on short final so it's very close to the airport and in that, it provides context for the airport's location WRT the city. The image shows a plane about to land at the airport so it is relevant for the reasons that I stated. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:47, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The removal as per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE for an image for the Sydney Airport seems fully appropriate as nothing clearly identifying the airport is visible. --Masem (t) 18:32, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly you can't see buildings but it does give context for the airport's location in Sydney. The caption needs to be expanded and warrants discussion in the text that won't fit in the caption. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:47, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but in fact, it gives no context for the airport's location in Sydney. From this photo, I can tell neither where the airport is in relation to the city, nor what the airport looks like. I've had a quick look at the article and its other images, and they all supplement the text of the article, and have a clear relationship to the subject. This one is inferior to the others for this usage. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 20:00, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Really? It's entirely obvious to me, even though I'm not a Sydney local. --!!!!— Preceding unsigned comment added by AussieLegend (talk • contribs) 13:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Airport Map / YSSY layout.svg image

[edit]

Hi, The image labelled as Airport Map, with filename YSSY Layout.svg, is incorrect and needs fixing. It shows runways 16L and 16R as 19L and 19R. I'm very new to editing wikipedia, so I'm not sure if there's a more formal way to flag the image, so I'm posting here.

Thanks. Ellsta51 (talk) 10:00, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Airport Runway map graphic is wrong.

[edit]
Moved from Wikipedia talk:Administrators

Hi, I recently viewed Sydney Airport Map of runways, 16R/34L is incorrectly labeled 19R/34L.

Could someone please change the Graphic.

Thank you

Moz 58.107.87.191 (talk) 05:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sydney_Airport&oldid=1258809275"