Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Tralee (Canberra’s own Lucas Heights) starts selling.

farq 17 February 2014 67

image from The Canberra Times

Affordable Tralee a boon for buyers Canberra Times puff piece: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/affordable-tralee-a-boon-for-buyers-20140216-32u7u.html

It’s interesting that the article does not mention the airport noise issue at all. If history is any guide, the residents will start complaining by the time their first rate bill arrives.

When the flight path gets moved over Canberra, everyone should remember the Villains Village Building Company’s contribution to our fair city.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
67 Responses to Tralee (Canberra’s own Lucas Heights) starts selling.
Filter
Order
Diggety Diggety 5:42 pm 24 Feb 14

Deref said :

switch said :

Diggety said :

I don’t understand the Lucas Heights comparison.

I think it is alluding to the fact that the nuclear research reactor at Lucas Heights, built back in the fifties, well and truly predated anyone buying land there now. Sydney was a lot further away in those days.

Yes, and to the fact that the people who bought land near the reactor immediately started complaining about it.

The worst kind of NIMBY…

neanderthalsis neanderthalsis 4:13 pm 24 Feb 14

To quote from the great Strayne film, the Castle: “He say plane fly overhead, drop value. I don’t care. In Beirut, plane fly over, drop bomb. I like these planes.”

watto23 watto23 10:39 am 24 Feb 14

I’ve seen enough episodes of Air Crash Investigation to know living under a flight path is a bad idea 🙂
I’m looking forward to the upcoming episode on QF32.

RadioVK RadioVK 1:25 pm 23 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

JC said :

Sorry not this time.

A curfew isn’t a total ban on something, it is a time when there are restrictions on certain movements. That description fits Sydney perfectly and indeed it is enacted by law, a law called the Sydney Curfew Act 1995.

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2006C00603/Download

To show the difference between a curfew and a noise abatement procedure, one just needs to look at Canberra Airport. Noise abatement is a policy and matching set of procedures that requires aircraft to fly certain predefined routes, not be below certain heights at given points and where possible arrive between certain times on certain runways.

Noise abatement is not a law where one can get fined, unlike the Sydney airport curfew, it is simple a policy and procedure that they intend to follow when they can.

So no apology from me this time, but in the past when proven wrong I have apologised or have self placed myself in the naughty corner and kept quiet, rather than making a tool of myself.

So a curfew is what the Commonwealth Government says it is? Fair enough. Perhaps it should be Curfew and the rest of us can continue to use curfew. (I can’t resist mentioning 1984 and NewSpeak.)

I had a quick check to see if any airports’ noise abatement is legislated, e.g. by State/Territory law or local government. Couldn’t find an answer (Melbourne seems to be “no”, and then I got bored). If it is legislated, or part of the conditions attached to a DA and therefore legally enforceable, then it has similar status to the Feds’ Curfew legislation, just enforced by a different body.

IP

Noise Abatement/Curfews, along with all other flight procedures, are legislated and enforced by CASA at the Federal level.

RadioVK RadioVK 1:18 pm 23 Feb 14

JC said :

Noise abatement is not a law where one can get fined, unlike the Sydney airport curfew, it is simple a policy and procedure that they intend to follow when they can.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/noise/sydney.html

Penalty for violating flight corridors is $25k.

Noise Abatement Procedures are mandatory, and legally enforceable.

JC JC 11:51 am 23 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

So a curfew is what the Commonwealth Government says it is? Fair enough. Perhaps it should be Curfew and the rest of us can continue to use curfew. (I can’t resist mentioning 1984 and NewSpeak.)
IP

No it isn’t because the Commonwealth Government says so, it is because the word curfew means to RESTRICT movement, not ban, which is what you appear to believe it means going by your comments here. Did you miss that part in my post?

IrishPete IrishPete 9:49 am 23 Feb 14

JC said :

Sorry not this time.

A curfew isn’t a total ban on something, it is a time when there are restrictions on certain movements. That description fits Sydney perfectly and indeed it is enacted by law, a law called the Sydney Curfew Act 1995.

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2006C00603/Download

To show the difference between a curfew and a noise abatement procedure, one just needs to look at Canberra Airport. Noise abatement is a policy and matching set of procedures that requires aircraft to fly certain predefined routes, not be below certain heights at given points and where possible arrive between certain times on certain runways.

Noise abatement is not a law where one can get fined, unlike the Sydney airport curfew, it is simple a policy and procedure that they intend to follow when they can.

So no apology from me this time, but in the past when proven wrong I have apologised or have self placed myself in the naughty corner and kept quiet, rather than making a tool of myself.

So a curfew is what the Commonwealth Government says it is? Fair enough. Perhaps it should be Curfew and the rest of us can continue to use curfew. (I can’t resist mentioning 1984 and NewSpeak.)

I had a quick check to see if any airports’ noise abatement is legislated, e.g. by State/Territory law or local government. Couldn’t find an answer (Melbourne seems to be “no”, and then I got bored). If it is legislated, or part of the conditions attached to a DA and therefore legally enforceable, then it has similar status to the Feds’ Curfew legislation, just enforced by a different body.

IP

JC JC 7:49 am 23 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

So now can the people saying Sydney Airport has a curfew also front up and admit that it is not a curfew, because it has so many loopholes that make it not really a curfew after all. I shall prepare for the stampede of people admitting that they also were wrong. (Tumbleweed blows down street.) JC? Anybody?

IP

Sorry not this time.

A curfew isn’t a total ban on something, it is a time when there are restrictions on certain movements. That description fits Sydney perfectly and indeed it is enacted by law, a law called the Sydney Curfew Act 1995.

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2006C00603/Download

To show the difference between a curfew and a noise abatement procedure, one just needs to look at Canberra Airport. Noise abatement is a policy and matching set of procedures that requires aircraft to fly certain predefined routes, not be below certain heights at given points and where possible arrive between certain times on certain runways.

Noise abatement is not a law where one can get fined, unlike the Sydney airport curfew, it is simple a policy and procedure that they intend to follow when they can.

So no apology from me this time, but in the past when proven wrong I have apologised or have self placed myself in the naughty corner and kept quiet, rather than making a tool of myself.

IrishPete IrishPete 8:46 pm 22 Feb 14

“Completely agree. Irish Pete has a long track record of partially admitting he’s wrong, then if he gets one post supporting him, changing his mind to him being right all along.”

Gotta love generalisations. It could only be a long track record if I am frequently factually wrong, which I’m not. Like all humans (but perhaps not the superhumans who populate and self-appointedly police the Riot ACT) I am capable of being wrong.

When I am wrong, I admit it. When someone is grossly over-reacting, or being childishly pedantic, I don’t cave in, because it only encourages them. .

But just for the record – I was wrong, because it appears no Australian airport has a genuine curfew. Some have some restrictions that they call a curfew, but are full of loopholes that make the term “curfew” inaccurate. Others have noise abatement arrangements which they could call a curfew, but don’t. While other(s), specifically Canberra Airport, market themselves as not having a curfew, even though they have some noise abatement arrangements that it would be inconvenient to their marketing to mention..

So now can the people saying Sydney Airport has a curfew also front up and admit that it is not a curfew, because it has so many loopholes that make it not really a curfew after all. I shall prepare for the stampede of people admitting that they also were wrong. (Tumbleweed blows down street.) JC? Anybody?

IP

Queen_of_the_Bun Queen_of_the_Bun 7:50 pm 22 Feb 14

JC said :

IrishPete said :

Instead of berating you for your attempts at trolling, I am just going to pity you for your limited grasp of English.

IP

Must admit my written English ain’t no good (victim of 1980’s English ACT public school style), but I am surprised that is the best you can do.

But two points, for one I am not trolling, I am just discussing your pathetic excuse for a post, this is after all a discussion board where one does that. Secondly even with my poor written English I know the difference between a curfew and noise abatement. You don’t, but still believe it is me who is lacking in English skills.

Just admit for once that you were wrong, as quite clearly proven. On the one hand you call for a curfew like everywhere else, when pointed out you say no you meant noise abatement, fair enough I guess, except of course Canberra airport already has a noise abatement policy and procedures, so no idea what your after, don’t think you do either.

Completely agree. Irish Pete has a long track record of partially admitting he’s wrong, then if he gets one post supporting him, changing his mind to him being right all along.

JC JC 3:13 pm 22 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

Instead of berating you for your attempts at trolling, I am just going to pity you for your limited grasp of English.

IP

Must admit my written English ain’t no good (victim of 1980’s English ACT public school style), but I am surprised that is the best you can do.

But two points, for one I am not trolling, I am just discussing your pathetic excuse for a post, this is after all a discussion board where one does that. Secondly even with my poor written English I know the difference between a curfew and noise abatement. You don’t, but still believe it is me who is lacking in English skills.

Just admit for once that you were wrong, as quite clearly proven. On the one hand you call for a curfew like everywhere else, when pointed out you say no you meant noise abatement, fair enough I guess, except of course Canberra airport already has a noise abatement policy and procedures, so no idea what your after, don’t think you do either.

farq farq 2:30 pm 22 Feb 14

tommy said :

all as measured (by eye) while between trallee and environa on that map.

According to the site there are 3 more scheduled planes still to land. First plane off in the morning is 6am.

Imagine how busy this could be in 10-15 years?

4000 feet is still over 1.2 kilometres above the ground. That’s a long way away – longer still if you triangulate it to either Jerra or Tralee.

Your comment that air traffic will increase dramatically does not seem to be reflected by actual usage. The number of air movements are decreasing every year, and the number of passengers travelling to/from SYD, MEL, BNE, ADL is also declining . The Canberra Airport forecasts of movements and actual movements appear to be about 3x inflated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canberra_International_Airport#Statistics

I think the recent decrease in travel may have something to do with the public service cut backs on travel.

You think that in 10-20 years we won’t have more air traffic?

When I’m sitting in my garden in west belconnon I can still hear the jets and they are already at about 10,000ft. Imagine how bad it’s going to get in the future.

Or should we just give up and let bad planning and developer/government greed doom us to repeat the mistakes of older cities.

RadioVK RadioVK 1:31 pm 22 Feb 14

JC said :

Curfew and noise abatement are two totally different things.

No, they’re not. Noise Abatement Procedures include when and which runways are available. Curfews (eg. no runways available) are just another noise abatement procedure.

RadioVK RadioVK 1:13 pm 22 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

Mark of Sydney said :

So having pointed out that only three airports have curfews (of the 11 busiest airports in Australia according to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics) in response to a reasonable interpretation of what you said, JC is being pedantic but you don’t know what you meant.

As someone who is sympathetic to many of the views you post (on climate change for example), can I suggest you stop making throw-away comments about things you clearly don’t know much about, and stop giving ammunition to those who love to jump on glib claims from the left. Please!

(And why not just admit you were wrong:)

Oh puhlease. A curfew is not a curfew anyway – http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/environmental/curfews/SydneyAirport/SydneyCurfewBrief.aspx

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

I knew that, I just wrote a sentence not a dissertation.

IP

IP, you are in fact correct on this.

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/pending/dap/SSYNA01-129.pdf

Using Sydney as an example here, you’ll notice that Kingsford Smith Airport is restricted to a single runway between 2300-0600. This obviously severely restricts the amount of traffic it can handle, but it isn’t a complete shutdown.

Curfews, or lack thereof, are all part of, not separate to, the Noise Abatement Procedures.

IrishPete IrishPete 11:03 am 22 Feb 14

JC said :

IrishPete said :

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

3rd dumbest post. First off you say Canberra should have a curfew like every other airport. When pointed out that few have curfews you start talking noise abatement, and now make the statement no Australian airport has a genuine curfew. Make up your mind for christ sakes or maybe shut up for once.

Instead of berating you for your attempts at trolling, I am just going to pity you for your limited grasp of English.

IP

JC JC 10:43 pm 21 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

3rd dumbest post. First off you say Canberra should have a curfew like every other airport. When pointed out that few have curfews you start talking noise abatement, and now make the statement no Australian airport has a genuine curfew. Make up your mind for christ sakes or maybe shut up for once.

IrishPete IrishPete 9:30 pm 21 Feb 14

Mark of Sydney said :

So having pointed out that only three airports have curfews (of the 11 busiest airports in Australia according to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics) in response to a reasonable interpretation of what you said, JC is being pedantic but you don’t know what you meant.

As someone who is sympathetic to many of the views you post (on climate change for example), can I suggest you stop making throw-away comments about things you clearly don’t know much about, and stop giving ammunition to those who love to jump on glib claims from the left. Please!

(And why not just admit you were wrong:)

Oh puhlease. A curfew is not a curfew anyway – http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/environmental/curfews/SydneyAirport/SydneyCurfewBrief.aspx

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

I knew that, I just wrote a sentence not a dissertation.

IP

howeph howeph 4:44 pm 21 Feb 14

JC said :

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

Many airports have curfews. In Europe they are called “Night flying restrictions”.

Here are some German cities with them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nachtflugbeschraenkungen.jpg

The red periods are labeled “flugverbot” which translates to “flight ban”.

“Dumbest statement in a long while”… Hyperbole much, or just dumb?

Mark of Sydney Mark of Sydney 3:38 pm 21 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

JC said :

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

Sure, there are no curfews at many airports but there are restrictive noise abatement procedures that have the same effect. So you are right about curfews, but possibly being a bit pedantic, and definitely exaggerating about the “dumbest comment”.

You’ve also missed the alternate meaning of my post – add “should have one” to the end and it should be obvious. I can’t recall which meaning I intended.

IP

So having pointed out that only three airports have curfews (of the 11 busiest airports in Australia according to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics) in response to a reasonable interpretation of what you said, JC is being pedantic but you don’t know what you meant.

As someone who is sympathetic to many of the views you post (on climate change for example), can I suggest you stop making throw-away comments about things you clearly don’t know much about, and stop giving ammunition to those who love to jump on glib claims from the left. Please!

(And why not just admit you were wrong:)

JC JC 3:34 pm 21 Feb 14

IrishPete said :

JC said :

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

Sure, there are no curfews at many airports but there are restrictive noise abatement procedures that have the same effect. So you are right about curfews, but possibly being a bit pedantic, and definitely exaggerating about the “dumbest comment”.

You’ve also missed the alternate meaning of my post – add “should have one” to the end and it should be obvious. I can’t recall which meaning I intended.

IP

Nice attempt at a back peddle, but big fail and now the second dumbest post I have seen.

Curfew and noise abatement are two totally different things. As for missing should have one, no I didn’t miss that, I was having a go at your stupid comment that every other airport has it, not that Canberra should. Though personally Canberra shouldn’t, what I believe is that we should not be building under the approach paths.

Now yes many more do have noise abatement procedures. So even if in saying curfew you meant noise abatement, then your quite clearly you have no idea (as usual) what your talking about.

Proof, simple really Canberra has a noise abatement plan, which no surprise covers night time operations.

So please explain again what you were trying to say?

An overview of those and their effect can be found here:

http://www.canberraairport.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Noise.pdf

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site