In 1996 the Financial Review told the story of how this came to be.

If Need Be, Adtranz Trains Grow Wings
By Tony Thomas
21 October 1996

It was a big air-freight parcel, but flying two locomotives to Switzerland ensured that Adtranz kept a deadline and its reputation for innovation.

When the Adtranz factory at Dandenong, near Melbourne, built the first two of 33 locomotive bodies for Indian Railways, it had a freight problem. The prototypes had to go to the prime contractor, Adtranz Switzerland, for electrical installation and testing, but the timing was tight.

The solution was for the general manager (manufacturing) at Dandenong, Don Osborne, to contact the freight company operating the Russian Antonov super-freighter that circles the globe in search of business. The Antonov, detoured from China, took on the 96-tonne load at Avalon Airport and was in Zurich in a few days, saving about seven weeks of sea-freight time. The bill was not exactly low, but it was only one-third more than sea freight.

This is the innovative style of Adtranz, which was formed in January by merging the transport arms of Asea Brown Boveri (Sweden) and Daimler-Benz (Germany). Twenty-eight of the 33 locomotives have been delivered, and Indian rail workers will soon get the technology transfer to make their own.

Dandenong wins Adtranz locomotive and train subcontracts through internal bidding because its design and labor costs are well below the European operation’s levels. Direct labor costs are about half the European rates, and productivity, although hard to compare, is satisfactory.

Most of the output is for export. Osborne says: “It is lumpy, with a long time between lumps for local work, but for the past three to four years the factory has had a fair degree of work stability.” Dandenong, bought from Comeng in 1990, is one of three Adtranz global factories building train carriages in stainless steel; its rivals are Adtranz Sweden and Adtranz Portugal. The criteria for winning work are price, delivery and workload. Osborne foresees Dandenong getting orders for carriages worldwide, in sets of hundreds valued up to $200 million.

The Dandenong factory has 190 shop-floor workers, including 16 apprentices. Because stainless-steel welding is not a common skill, tradesmen have to re-qualify to Adtranz standards. Computer-aided design is linked to laser cutters to cut the parts. “New processes usually need a bundle of new technologies and skills,” Osborne says. In the past few years demarcation has been reduced to produce the required flexibility.

Globally, the locomotive business has split into the European group of Siemens, Adtranz and GEC Alsthom, which have the edge in lightweight electric trains, and General Electric and General Motors in the US, the kings of the heavyweight diesel-electric category. Now there are cross-Atlantic alliances covering both diesel and electric models, including a technical agreement between Adtranz and GE for lightweight diesel-electric units.

Any client inquiry leads to Adtranz mobilising globally to work out the best way of winning the bid. The internal bidding process could cause one Adtranz unit to hoard expertise. “Initially, we found it hard to share our knowledge,” Osborne says. Adtranz dealt with the issue by setting up, and helping to fund, global centres of excellence in sub-systems such as propulsion, carriage bodies and bogies. “At Dandenong we focus on car-bodies for global markets and complete vehicles for the local market.”

After the first two locomotive bodies were air freighted to Switzerland onboard a Antonov An-124, the following units were able to leave Australia by the slower route by sea. After their final fitout in Switzerland, the finished locomotives were then moved by road to the Rhine, transported by barge for transit to Rotterdam, and then by cargo ship to Calcutta.

The WAP-5 electric passenger locomotives that went by air are still in service in India today.

Photo by Abhishek Jog, via Wikimedia Commons

Along with the WAG-9 electric freight locomotives that also had their body shells built at Dandenong.

Photo by Belur Ashok from Secunderabad, India, via Wikimedia Commons

Meanwhile in Philadelphia

Believe it or not, this is another train built in the 1990s by Adtranz at Dandenong – the M-4 subway cars used on the Market–Frankford Line in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Photo by AEMoreira042281, via Wikimedia Commons

Again, the Financial Review has the back story behind the Australian connection.

Dandenong is supplying 222 carriage shells and bogie sets to the SEPTA for a subway and elevated rail system. The contract is valued at almost $100 million. The units are being shipped on top of sea containers for fitting out at Elmira, near New York, by Adtranz US. Eight prototypes are in final assembly there, and Dandenong has moved on to production versions for the next two years.

The standards are rigorous, including a 100-tonne compression test for buckling or distortion. Clients are also demanding extremely lightweight structures, compared with older designs. The penalties in the contract for excess weight are severe; equivalent to the lifetime extra energy cost per kilogram.

A SEPTA inspector from Pennsylvania is stationed at Dandenong to check product quality, which has improved practically with each new shell as output rises to 14 a month, using three shifts.

The roof and side-wall welding in the trains is being automated with a purpose-built machine made by Harris Engineering, Sydney. This will cut the welding time from almost five days to six hours. “It is not world-beating technology but it is a good solution,” Osborne says.

SEPTA has specified a 40-year guarantee of serviceability, which requires the factory workers to take a new perspective on quality and customer expectations. Bogie design must pass tests over an enormous six million cycles. In earlier years there was a cost-plus outlook and allowances for contingencies. The workers have met the challenge with new skills and more flexible work methods.

In practice, a train becomes obsolete because of patterns of use, not because of hardware. Operators chase improvements in comfort to woo people back to public transport. Osborne says: “For example, trains are replaced in favor of air-conditioned models long before the old ones wear out.”

Commissioning is a complex affair, including the measurement of various movements as the trains speed along the Pennsylvania tracks, to ensure clearances throughout the lines. Among the difficulties is that the US still uses imperial measurement, rather than metric, so components ordered from US makers need careful re-specification.

Footnote: some prophetic words

The 1996 Financial Review article also had some prophetic words given the decline in rollingstock manufacturing across Australia.

He is disappointed there is no industry-wide approach to rail vehicle supply in Australia. “Instead of the railways and suppliers sitting down and working on the best solutions for themselves and Australia, we fight over the same patch each time. The public tendering system is a major barrier to forming an efficient industry with export potential.” (The other large groups are Clyde Industries, taken over by Evans Deakin last July, and the Howard Smith subsidiary Goninan, which has been named preferred tenderer for a National Rail order for up to 120 locomotives.)

Osborne says: “In Europe, Adtranz is working jointly with its big rival Siemens on the 330-kilometre-per-hour ICE [intercity express] trains because the project can’t afford fragmented manufacture. Likewise, the Swedes and the Germans co-operate on tilt-train design. Adtranz, Siemens and Thyssen are working jointly on the Transrapid magnetic levitation train between Hamburg and Berlin, which has been operating for three years on test tracks and has a top speed of 500kmh. The industry in Australia ought to get together on a project like the next-generation Olympia class double-decker trains for the Sydney lines, create a brilliant train, then break into export markets with it.”

The world trend is for rail standardisation across borders. Australia has been one of the worst offenders on non-conformity, because each state’s rail engineers have tended to specify exclusive features. Osborne sees the first use by TNT of its own trains on government track from Sydney to Perth as the start of a new era in making rail freight more competitive.

Further reading

Indian railfan Sundar Mukherjee has covered the history of the WAP-5 and WAG-9 locomotives in his article “Indian Railways GP 140. Introduction of 3 Phase Locomotives in India. (The beginning of a new era)“.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post The train that flew from Melbourne to India appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Ding ding

Metcard had been switched off.

The ‘safety’ zone tram stop on Epsom Road in Ascot Vale was copping a beating.

Route 19, 57 and 19 passengers didn’t have any platform stops along Elizabeth Street.

And the Colonial Tramcar Restaurant was still running lunch and dinner tours of Melbourne.

And trains

Evening peak would see massive crowds of pedestrians waiting to cross Spencer Street at Collins Street.

While on Friday nights, the queues would be at the V/Line booking office, waiting to buy a paper ticket.

South Yarra station was also becoming surrounded by new apartment blocks, but the single station entrance was struggling to cope – a problem not addressed until 2020.

But Footscray was getting an expanded station as part of the Regional Rail Link project.

The near-new footbridge demolished to make room for two additional platforms.

And Metro had unveiled a new infrastructure inspection train, in an attempt to address a spate of overhead wire failures crippling the rail network.

Things that are gone

Melbourne Bike Share was still operating.

One of the operational costs being the need to resupply bikes to empty stands.

Remember the “My Family” sticker fad? By 2013 they were on the way out.

Heritage listed public toilet on Queen Street? It was decommissioned in June 2013 and capped with concrete.

Horse drawn carriages leaving a trail of horse crap across the Melbourne CBD? They’re finally banned.

And Phillip Island

I headed out to Phillip Island, to look for the remains of the Summerland Estate. The only trace – a few dirt tracks.

I also made a detour to Pyramid Rock.

Which looked like the name suggested.

And on the way back I found a radio tower out in a paddock.

Turns out it was a non-directional beacon (NDB) used as an aviation navigational aid.

It was decommissioned in 2016 thanks to the popularity of GPS based navigation technology in general aviation.

Footnote

Here you can find the rest of my ‘photos from ten years ago‘ series.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Photos from ten years ago: February 2013 appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Some background

Adelaide Airport is located approximately 6 kilometres from the Adelaide CBD.

With the suburbs of Brooklyn Park and West Richmond under the approach path to the main runway.

Approach lighting directs aircraft towards runway 23.

Airservices Australia – YPAD Aerodrome Chart

But the airport land ends just a short distance away from the runway threshold.

So the approaching lighting continues beyond the airport fence.

On the hunt for approaching lighting

The first set of approach lights are found at the corner of Morley and Trennery Street, on a piece of land fenced off from the public but outside the airport perimeter fence.

Turn 180 degrees, and you’ll find a another gantry holding approach lights, this time just sitting beside the nature strip.

Heading along Trennery Street, you’ll find a set of lights wedged between two houses.

A few doors down is an short fence on an empty block of land, and a set of runway lights at the rear.

Around the block on Ralph Street, there is a set of lights in a backyard.

And another on the block next door, which no longer has a house on it.

Next door the runway light is in the front yard.

Down the street is another gantry just chilling on the nature strip.

And few houses along I found the last set of runway lights – on a double block of land with a short fence preventing public access.

All lit up at night, they look like this.

Photo by Airport Electrical

So who owns the land?

The Adelaide Airport master plan details current and future aircraft approach lighting situation.

Aircraft approach lighting is operated and maintained by Adelaide Airport Limited (AAL). The approach lighting is located at the ends of the Adelaide Airport runways, extending into residential areas at West Richmond for Runway 23 where such lighting is generally held under easement or by ownership of specific allotments.

The long-term continuity of this lighting in the vicinity of the current sites is aligned with aviation services at Adelaide Airport. It is possible that such lighting will be replaced with more efficient systems within the next 20 years.

AAL has purchased freehold land outside of the airport site to ensure the long-term protection of the runway approach lighting corridor. Additional land will be secured as it becomes available. The freehold land is not subject to the airport lease arrangements or Airports Act regulatory framework.

The parcels of freehold land are indicated on the master plan map.

And include:

• the three parcels I’ve already identified on Trennery Street and Ralph Street,
• one parcel on Lyons Street which is empty,
• and a parcel on Britton Street which adjoins the airport.

The most recent acquisition appears to be 17 Ralph Street – older Google Street View imagery shows the runway lights in a backyard, not an empty block. The property was sold in June 2017 for $325,000.

Another hut

In between houses on Press Road in Brooklyn Park I found another aviation related building – an Airservices Australia equipment hut.

Located around 1000 metres from the end of Adelaide Airport runway 23, I suspect it houses the instrument landing system (ILS) ‘Middle Marker’ beacon transmitter.

More lights on Marion Road

Over on Reddit someone mentioned that the high voltage power lines along Marion Road also have aircraft warning lights atop them.

A total of 10 power poles have them – stretching from Brooklyn Avenue in the north to Knight Street in the south – seen here with a Qantas 737 flying overhead.

And another lucky Google Street View catch

Back in September 2019 the Google Street View car was driving down Lyons Street in Brooklyn park where it captured something interesting in the sky.

A plane on final approach

A Jetstar A320 to be precise.

Coming in over the the houses.

And in to Adelaide Airport.

A technical footnote

The Airservices Australia Aerodrome Chart lists the following approach lighting at Adelaide Airport.

Runway 05: HIRL MIRL
Runway 23: HIRL MIRL HIAL – CAT 1 HSL
Runway 12: MIRL
Runway 30: MIRL

Notes:
– HIAL non-standard 4 bar system
– HIAL CAT 1 aligned with ILS GP

Translated into something resembling English.

HIRL: High Intensity Runway Lights
MIRL: Medium Intensity Runway Lights
HIAL: High Intensity Approach Lighting System
HSL: Hold Short Lights

And ILS GP:

Instrument Landing System Glide Path

Sources

• Adelaide Airport charts, Airservices Australia
• Adelaide Airport master plan

Further reading

• Adelaide Airport: a brief overview of its history by the West Torrens Historical Society
• Planespotting in Adelaide at Weekend Notes
• Adelaide Airport at spottersguide.net

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Backyard approaching lighting at Adelaide Airport appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Trains

Work on Regional Rail Link was kicking off at Middle Footscray.

Excavators having rolled in.

To demolish the compulsorily acquired houses along Buckley Street.

Work on the extension of suburban trains to South Morang was almost complete, with track laid up to the future terminus.

As was duplication of the single track section between Keon Park and Epping.

The Metcard ticketing system was still hanging on, but new LCD next train displays were being rolled out.

Southern Cross Station was in the middle of a revamp – adding more shops.

While South Yarra station still had it’s little kiosk sticking out into the concourse opposite the ticket gates.

Things that go bump

On 26 November 2011 a V/Line train bound for Albury derailed at West Footscray.

The train split between two tracks.

The incident investigation report finding:

Shortly after its exit from the Bunbury Street tunnel the locomotive encountered a track defect at a location beneath the Nicholson Street road overbridge in Footscray that caused the derailment of one wheelset.

The train continued for about 1200 metres with the locomotive in this partially-derailed state until it encountered a turnout, resulting in the complete derailment of the locomotive and the first passenger car, and the derailment of the leading bogie of the second passenger car.

There were no injuries to passengers or V/Line personnel; however the track sustained significant damage.

Trams

Back in May 2011 work started on platform stops along Swanston Street – months later, the stop outside Melbourne Central was still incomplete.

Yarra Trams marking November with fuzzy Movember moustaches on the front of their trams.

They’ve missed a few Movembers in the years that have followed, and switched to a simpler stick on decal.

And some other bits

A $300 million expansion of Highpoint Shopping Centre was underway, with tower cranes at work on the 30,000 sqm extension, taking the centre to a total of 156,000 sqm.

Mobil petrol stations on the way out, having been taken over by 7-Eleven.

Down at the west end of the Melbourne CBD things were much emptier.

Emporium Melbourne was just a big hole between Little Bourke and Lonsdale Streets.

A day of planespotting

I made a trip out to Melbourne Airport to photograph the procession of planes.

Finding Virgin Blue’s only ‘blue’ plane.

Air New Zealand 747 – since retired.

United Airlines 747 – also retired.

V Australia 777 – subsumed into Virgin Australia.

Skytraders A319 – famous for another reason.

Tiger Airways A320 – merged into Virgin Australia and since retired as a brand.

Singapore Airlines A380 – on hiatus thanks to Covid.

And a Strategic Airlines A330 – liquidated in 2012.

And a trip to Adelaide

I ended November 2011 with a trip to Adelaide.

Where I rode some trams.

Their ‘Jumbo’ railcars.

And the diesel version of Melbourne’s Comeng railcars.

Footnote

Here you can find the rest of my ‘photos from ten years ago‘ series.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Photos from ten years ago: November 2011 appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Google Earth

14 January 2014
Air India flight AI301
Boeing 787-8 VT-ANM

Photo by byeangel from Tsingtao, China, via Wikimedia Commons

From the Carry-on blog.

Operating AI301 from Sydney to Melbourne VT-ANM approached and crossed Melbourne from the east following usual tracking paths for aircraft inbound from the north-east to YMML’s active Runway 34.

The flight crew initiated a right turn to lining up for Essendon’s Runway 35 mistaking it for YMML’s Runway 34.

Sources in Airservices Australia confirm the flight crew discontinued the approach at roughly 1,050 ft after being notified by Melbourne Approach, made a left turn, climbed to 1,500 ft and re-established a second approach this time to Runway 34.

The missed approach is easy to see on the flight track.

FlightAware flight tracking log

31 March 1994
Australian Airlines
Boeing 737-300 VH-TJA

Photo by Aero Icarus from Zürich, Switzerland, via Wikimedia Commons

Note: not the same 737 as this incident

From the ATSB investigation.

At about 18 NM from Melbourne, the crew were requested by air traffic control to report when the Melbourne runway was in sight. The crew reported they had that runway in sight and were cleared to track to join final inside 8 NM from Melbourne.

The crew requested and were given further track shortening until they were instructed to make a visual approach for runway 34 and to call Melbourne Tower. The Approach Controller then diverted his attention to other duties for a short period.

On rechecking the progress of the aircraft it appeared, to him, to be on final for runway 35 at Essendon. The aircraft was at an altitude of approximately 1500 feet. The Approach Controller advised Melbourne Tower who instructed the aircraft to turn left for Melbourne. The aircraft subsequently landed without further incident.

The flight crew subsequently advised that when they were given the visual approach they believed they had the Melbourne Airport in sight and its position was confirmed by checking the map displayed on the aircraft flight management computer. However, they had not used any other aircraft navigational systems to confirm their position in relation to Melbourne.

24 February 1991
Lufthansa
Boeing 747-400 D-ABTC

Photo by Aero Icarus from Zürich, Switzerland, via Wikimedia Commons

From the ATSB investigation.

The aircraft, which was approaching Melbourne Airport from the west, was radar vectored onto base leg and descended to 3000 feet.

At 1704 hours Melbourne Approach Control advised the crew that their position was nine miles south-west of the field. They were asked to advise when they had the runway in sight and also to say when the runway 34 lead in strobe lights were sighted.

Shortly after, the crew responded that they had the runway and strobe lights in sight. Approach Control gave the crew their position as six miles south-west of the field, told them to make a visual approach and not to descend below one thousand five hundred feet until established on final.

At 1706 hours the controller told the crew they were approaching the runway extended centre line. The Approach Controller noted that the aircraft was passing through the extended centre line and had not turned to line up with runway 34. He promptly issued instructions to the aircraft to climb to 2000 feet. At about the same stage the crew realised that the runway they had been looking at was too short for their operations and also decided to go around. Further radar vectors were given and the aircraft subsequently landed normally on runway 34 at Melbourne without any other problems.

Runway 35 at Essendon Airport was the runway sighted by the pilots. It does not have lead in strobe lights. The crew indicated they must have seen reflections near Essendon which they mistook for strobe lights.

On the approach the crew had seen a runway from a long way out, which they thought was the north/south runway for Melbourne Airport, but was in fact runway 35 at Essendon Airport. In the lighting conditions at the time they did not see Melbourne Airport, until on the go around.

On the approach the minimum height descended to was just over 1000 feet above the elevation of Essendon Airport.

8 August 1987
Singapore Airlines flight SQ31A
Boeing 747-200, 9V-SQM

Photo by Ted Quackenbush, via Wikimedia Commons

From the ATSB investigation.

On arrival in the Melbourne area the aircraft was vectored by Air Traffic Control (ATC) to a left base position for an approach to runway 34.

At a point 5 nautical miles (9.2 kilometres) south of the airport, and 1 mile (1.7 kilometres) to the left of the extended centreline of the runway, the aircraft was instructed to turn left to take up a north-easterly heading. The crew reported at this time that “we have the field visual.”

The aircraft was then instructed to make a visual approach, and to turn further left for a direct approach to the runway. The crew acknowledged this instruction, but the aircraft was observed to pass through the extended centreline. ATC advised the aircraft that it was now to the right of the centreline, and instructed it to turn left onto a north-westerly heading to intercept this line. The aircraft landed without further incident.

The Captain of the aircraft later advised that he was familiar with the Melbourne/Essendon area. Appropriate navigation aids had been selected to monitor the approach.

The Captain reported that he had initially mistaken Essendon for Melbourne, because the latter had been obscured by rain and low clouds. However, the crew became suspicious when the navigation aids did not confirm the visual indications. They were in the process of correcting the situation when ATC instructed the aircraft to turn to the left as it had passed the extended centreline. The crew had then sighted the Melbourne runway complex and had proceeded visually.

13 May 1987
Air New Zealand
Boeing 767-200ER, ZK-NBC

Photo by Ken Fielding, via Wikimedia Commons

From the ATSB investigation.

The aircraft was radar-vectored for an approach to Melbourne (Tullamarine) Runway 34. The flight crew reported they were “visual” when at 2000 feet and about 17 kilometres (9 nautical miles [nm]) south east of Melbourne.

The Approach Controller advised the flight of its radar position in relation to Melbourne and requested confirmation that the crew had Runway 34 in sight. When this was acknowledged, instructions were given for the flight to take up a heading of 320 degrees; to intercept the extended centre line of Runway 34 from this heading; and to make a visual approach.

Shortly afterwards the Tower Controller at Essendon Airport (5 nm south east of Melbourne) called the Melbourne Approach Controller and reported that a heavy aircraft was on approach for (Runway 35) Essendon.

The Approach Controller called the aircraft, requested its present altitude and, on being advised it was “through fifteen hundred” (feet), instructed the flight to climb to 2000 feet and turn left onto a heading of 320 degrees. He also advised that the aircraft was 7 nm south east of Melbourne and still two miles to the right of the runway centre line.

Shortly afterwards, the flight crew reported they were at 2000 feet and had “Runway 34 Melbourne in sight”. The aircraft was then cleared for a straight in approach and for transfer to the tower frequency. The aircraft landed without further incident.

The flight crew have confirmed that they initially turned towards Essendon but detected their error at about the time the Approach Controller instructed them to turn (back) to 320 degrees and to climb.

30 December 1985
Qantas flight QF36
Boeing 767-200, VH-EAJ

Photo by Ken Fielding, via Wikimedia Commons

From the ATSB investigation.

Air Traffic Control of the aircraft was being exercised by Melbourne Approach, which was directing the aircraft for a landing on Runway 27 at Tullamarine. The controller obtained approval from the Essendon controllers to vector QF36 through Essendon airspace.

The aircraft was progressively descended and when clearing the aircraft to descend to 2000 feet the controller advised the crew that the aircraft was 4 miles to the left of the runway extended centre line. The crew advised that they had visual contact with the ground and were then cleared to continue a visual approach.

Shortly afterwards, the crew sighted a runway and commenced a turn to the left, during which visibility reduced as the aircraft entered a rain shower.

On passing through the shower, the crew immediately realised that they had turned towards Essendon, and a right turn was carried out to continue tracking towards Tullamarine.

When the premature turn was commenced, it was observed on radar by the Approach controller and visually by both the Melbourne and Essendon Tower controllers. The Approach controller queried the aircraft intentions at about the same time as the crew commenced the turn back towards Tullamarine.

A normal landing was carried out about 3 minutes later.

19 June 1985
Garuda flight GA898
Boeing 747-200, PK-GSB

Photo by Peter Bakema, via Wikimedia Commons

From the ATSB investigation.

Garuda Flight 898, was being radar vectored by Melbourne Air Traffic Control (ATC) for a landing on runway 34 at Tullamarine Airport. Shortly after the pilot acknowledged an instruction to call Melbourne Tower the aircraft was seen to turn and descend as though making an approach to runway 35 at Essendon Airport.

The Melbourne Tower controller instructed the aircraft to climb to 3000 feet above mean sea level (AMSL), and a few seconds later the aircraft was seen to be established in this climb. After further radar vectors were given, an uneventful landing was carried out at Melbourne.

It was subsequently determined that the aircraft had descended to a minimum height of approximately 350 feet above the level of Essendon Airport, and was about 1.5 kilometres from the runway threshold before the climb was commenced.

So why is it confusing?

Until the 1960s Essendon Airport was Melbourne’s main international gateway.

Photo by Peter Hough, via Wikimedia Commons

But today it is mainly used by business jets and light aircraft.

But mid-sized jets such as the Fokker F70 can also safely operate into the airport.

From the 1,921 metre long east-west and 1,504 metre long north-south runways.

Google Earth

Which just so happen to be a similar orientation to the 2,286 metre long east-west and 3,657 metre long north-south runways at Melbourne Tullamarine.

Google Earth

This similarity has been noted by ATSB investigators.

There have been a number of instances where Essendon has been mistaken for Melbourne. The two airports are in close proximity and have similar runway configurations. In this instance the flight crew members were not very familiar with the Melbourne area or with the approach to Runway 34.

Who recommended the following back in 1987.

It is recommended that consideration be given to the following

– 1 Operators briefing the relevant flight crews on the real possibility of misidentifying the two airports.
– 2 Operators instructing flight crew to make full use of available radio aids on visual approaches to Melbourne.
– 3 The Department of Aviation providing visual and/or radio aids to assist ready identification of Runway 34, such as sequenced strobe lights leading to the threshold and/or an instrument approach facility to the south of the airport.

The largest aircraft ever to land at Essendon Airport were a handful of Boeing 707s back in the 1960s – I’d hate to see what would happen to a Boeing 747 that tried to do the same.

Spot the difference

One spotting feature is the different strobe lights pattern at each airport – Essendon Airport’s beacon flashes white every four seconds – Melbourne Airport’s beacon flashes alternate white/green.

While the aerodrome charts also feature a warning – “WARNING: Secondary airport (Essendon) 5NM south-east”.

Airservices Australia – Aerodrome Charts

And Melbourne Airport runway 34 now has a distinctive identifier – three sets of sequenced white strobe lights commencing 485 metres from the end of the runway, and aligned with runway 34 centreline.

Airservices Australia – Aerodrome Charts

Footnote: freeway confusion

A hazard for pilots landing at Essendon Airport at night is the freeways that surround the airport.

An issue raised by the ATSB in a 2017 investigation.

The airport has two runways aligned 17/35 and 08/26, and it is bounded on two sides by freeways with substantial amber lighting and well-lit residential areas. At night, the lights around the airport present a complex picture. The published aerodrome chart had a caution note describing that amber freeway lighting may confuse flight crews when attempting to identify runway 08/26 lighting.

Computer confusion too

On 10 March 2015 an AirAsia flight from Sydney to Malaysia ended up having to divert to Melbourne when the pilot entered the wrong initial coordinates into the inertial navigation system.

Photo by byeangel from Tsingtao, China, via Wikimedia Commons

And some unsourced stories

I found this story online referring a supposed incident around 1996.

About 5 years ago I was flying in the circuit in a little PA-28 at Moorabbin. It appeared to me that there was a B747 on long final. My flight instructor flicked the freq to Melbourne International, and sure enough, Alitalia 747 was lined up on the Moorabbin runway (which is less than 1.6 km long!) and complaining that he had visual but his navaids were all wrong. Melbourne Airport cleared him for a visual landing but then cancelled the clearance when they saw where he was on radar!

And this one from the 1970s.

They were also aware of anecdotal accounts of a DC-10 lining up to land on the Essendon runway sometime in the 70s, and being warned off at the last minute.

• An even longer list of mistaken approaches to Essendon Airport
• Boeing 737 at Essendon Airport? –
  Sydney Airport Message Board
• 100th Anniversary of Essendon Airport – Aviation Spotters Online
• Flightpaths and building heights around Melbourne Airports
• Wrong Runway, Wrong Airport, Wrong Country – OpsGroup
• Runway confusion – Flight Safety Australia

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Pilots confusing Essendon Airport for Melbourne Airport appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Down in Docklands

We start down in the windswept streets of Docklands.

Where I had a look over the last remaining part of Melbourne Yard – the heritage listed No. 2 Goods Shed completed in 1889.

And looked across to 67 Spencer Street – the former Victorian Railways head office.

Then walked home past the ‘Wailing Wall‘.

None of these views are possible today – the Melbourne Quarter development covers the block bounded by Wurundjeri Way and Collins Street, the retained wall partially demolished to provided vehicle access.

Taking off

October 2010 saw me pay a visit to Essendon Airport.

Where the terminal looked much the same as when it served as Melbourne’s international gateway.

But the scene is different today – a $4 million renovation completed in 2019 has converted the main arrival hall into office space.

An even more dramatic transformation was at RAAF Williams in Laverton.

Once empty paddocks between the Princes Freeway.

A decade later the airfield is gone, turned into the suburb of Williams Landing.

Big road spending

Work on the $371 million West Gate Bridge Strengthening project was well underway, with scaffolding covering the bridge while work was completed to add a fifth traffic lane in each direction.

Another road project was the $48.5 million Kororoit Creek Road duplication, which removed a level crossing on the Werribee line.

And Laverton station received yet another car park extension, taking it all the way to the Princes Freeway overpass.

At the rate the car park is being extended, it will soon join up with Aircraft station!

New trains

Delivery of more X’Trapolis trains was starting to ramp up during 2010, the imported body shells waiting outside the Alstom plant in Ballarat awaiting final fitout.

And a new stabling yard had just opened at Newport to park all of these extra trains.

A decade later the new HCMT fleet is being built at Newport, the Alstom Ballarat plant mothballed due to with no work, the workers redeployed to the V/Line maintenance workshops down the road.

Forgotten heritage

I made my way up to the Seymour Railway Heritage Centre.

Where I found a tine capsule from the 1980s.

Buffet carriage ‘Tanjil’.

The carriage remains in storage today, awaiting a future restoration to service.

Meanwhile in Melbourne’s northern suburbs, the Preston Workshops was a dumping ground for retired W class trams.

But the scene today is different – in 2014 the old trams were moved out and given away to new homes, making way for the ‘New Preston Depot‘ that opened in 2016 for the fleet of brand new E class trams.

Meanwhile Flinders Street Station was a dank and crumbing place.

The only upside being a dance party happening in the Campbell Arcade subway.

A decade later the tiles have finally been fixed, part of the $100 million Flinders Street Station upgrade project, but for the Campbell Arcade the future is not as rosy – half the shops are due to be bulldozed by the Metro Tunnel project to provided a connection to the new Town Hall station.

And things that never change

Promotional crap blocking access to Melbourne Central Station.

It just keeps on happening.

Footnote

Here you can find the rest of my ‘photos from ten years ago‘ series.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Photos from ten years ago: October 2010 appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

The history of Melbourne’s SkyBus

SkyBus commenced operations in 1978, running a shuttle service between Tullamarine Airport and Franklin Street on the northern edge of the Melbourne CBD. In 1982 it took over the airport bus services run by the now-defunct airlines Ansett and TAA, with the service taking the current form in 2000 when the city terminus was moved to Spencer Street Station, with services operating express to the airport. 2002 then saw the state government contributing $3 million in funding to upgrade the service in place of the construction of an airport rail link.

Articulated buses were introduced to the service in 2002.

With the first Bustech “CDi” double deck buses entering service in 2015.

Travel times were once advertised as 20 minutes from airport to the city, but increasing congestion saw the claim gain a “times may vary due to traffic conditions” disclaimer, then dropped altogether in 2016.

The monopoly nature of the SkyBus service saw private equity firms take in interest in the company, with two foreign firms taking a majority stake in the company in 2014, in a deal valuing SkyBus’s parent company at $50 million to $100 million.

And diversification

It appears that the new management realised that their gravy train of monopoly profits on the Melbourne Airport – City route wouldn’t last forever, as they soon started acquiring other airport bus operators across Melbourne, Australia, and even New Zealand.

October 2015

SkyBus purchased the Airbus Express service in Auckland, New Zealand.

January 2016

SkyBus purchased the Frankston and Peninsula Airport Shuttle (FAPAS) business, rebranding it as SkyBus (sidenote: who the hell thought that FAPAS was a good name to call their business?)

August 2016

SkyBus launched a new direct bus service from Melbourne Airport to St Kilda, speeding up the journey for longer distance travellers from Frankston. (announced in April 2016)

February 2017

SkyBus took over operation of the Avalon Airport – Southern Cross Station route from Sita Group. (announced in December 2016)

July 2017

SkyBus took over operation of the Avalon Airport – Geelong route from Murrell Group.

November 2017

Skybus launched a new direct airport express for Southbank and Docklands.

December 2017

SkyBus purchased the Gold Coast Tourist Shuttle (GCTS) service in Queensland, rebranding it as SkyBus.

July 2018

Skybus launched two new airport bus services: Melbourne Airport to Tarneit and Werribee; and Melbourne Airport to the Mornington Peninsula via Rosebud, Mordialloc and Mentone.

July 2018

SkyBus purchased the Hobart Airporter service in Tasmania, rebranding it as SkyBus.

Seeing the writing on the wall

In 2016 SkyBus director, Michael Sewards, gave a hopefully response to airport rail proposals:

The reality is, just because you build an airport rail, it doesn’t mean people want to use it.

Yes, let’s plan for the next 15 or 30 years, but let’s also be somewhat sensible in this conversation by recognising we’ve had a service for over 38 years, which over 50 million passengers have used. We think we can co-exist with rail and provide a very competitive offering.

If we ever have an airport rail, it has to deliver all those value points for customer experience. Melbourne Airport warrants and deserves many modes supplying the highest level of customer experience, and we think SkyBus will be one of those.

But by 2018 they were more worried, questioning the government for choosing to subsidise a competing rail link.

“SkyBus welcomes any compelling mass transit rail option that can compete with our services, but surely there are important questions about at what cost the Victorian taxpayer will be asked to contribute both the build of this and the ongoing operations, let alone the fare price a $10-15 billion investment requires for a return to its investors,” added Mr Sewards.

Getting an opinion piece published in the Herald Sun on 28 August 2018.

Many people have welcomed the news that the long-debated Melbourne Airport Rail Link has finally secured funding from the Victorian and Federal governments.

As the existing provider of Melbourne Airport’s mass-transit service, SkyBus has also welcomed this development.

However, while a rail link to Melbourne Airport is an important development for the many thousands of people who currently travel to and from Melbourne Airport every day, it is only one part of the total transport solution needed to respond to the needs of travellers now and into the future.

And launching a ‘There’s room for everyone‘ campaign, and taking out a full page ‘We welcome an airport rail link too’ advertisement in the Herald Sun.

But experience at overseas airports shows that SkyBus will survive – many passengers will still choose an airport bus over an airport train, with one example being Hong Kong.

The Hong Kong experience

Hong Kong Airport is served by an airport rail link that overseas visitors love to rave about.

But it is the network of direct bus services that have captured the market.

In general, public transport modes dominate HKIA ground access market. Franchised buses have a large proportion (47 percent) with the Airport Express rail line (AEL) having 23 percent. The primary reason attracting air passengers to use the franchised buses is the lower travel cost. ‘Shortest time required’ is the main reason for those who used AEL.

Research there showed that directness of service was the reason for mode choice:

In order to understand the motivation for mode choice – and to explore the attribute of directness of service — MTR managers undertook some market research. Of those riders on the direct bus routes, an expected 55 percent said that the lower fare was a reason for choosing the bus; importantly, 51 percent stated that directness of service (i.e., no need to transfer) was a reason for their choice of mode. Directness of service was considered a factor by only 18 percent of rail riders, presumably those with destinations convenient to the terminals.

And that even throwing money at a gold plated rail service will do little to attract additional passengers.

It is apparent that even with a good design and well-integrated railway service, the Airport Express does not have inherent advantages over more direct single mode bus travel. In other words, the speed advantage of rail versus single mode road competitors when travelling over distances of only up to 34 km [21 mi] do not result in significant enough time savings to compensate for the necessary transfer.

Which also provides lessons for the State Government on how to deliver a Melbourne Airport rail link.

So what will Melbourne Airport rail do to SkyBus?

2018 saw the the signing of a new 10 year contract between SkyBus and the State Government, so it doesn’t look like SkyBus is intending to go anywhere.

I suspect that the Hong Kong experience will also play out in Melbourne – patronage on SkyBus’ primary Melbourne Airport to CBD route will plummet, with passengers switching to rail based on cost if it is a extension of existing suburban services, or quality if it is built as an express airport link.

As for the other SkyBus routes recently launched to other parts of Melbourne, patronage will stay much the same, with the one seat journey being preferred over a change trains in the city. However the real competition will be driving directly from home to the airport, over a freeway network that the State Government continues to expand.

Footnote

There is more than one way to get to Melbourne Airport, as Daniel Bowen describes in his post The cheap way to Melbourne Airport.

There are also a other privately operated bus services that run from Melbourne Airport towards Dandenong and Ringwood, as well further afield to Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo, Gippsland and Shepparton.

More photos

Until the early-2000s SkyBus used full sized coaches for the trip out to the airport – ‘The Tulla Flyer’ has posted a selection of photos from this period on the Australian Transport Discussion Board.

Photos of the former SkyBus terminal at Spencer Street Station can be found at the ‘Showbus Australia’ website.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Melbourne Airport rail and the diversification of SkyBus appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.