independent review narrabri airport infrastructure upgrade facilities... · independent review...
TRANSCRIPT
INDEPENDENT REVIEW
NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE
Prepared for Narrabri Shire Council
MAY 2013MAY 2013MAY 2013MAY 2013
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
i i
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Document Title: Narrabri Airport Infrastructure Upgrade – Independent Review
Reference: YNBR01-01
Release Date: 27 May 2013
Prepared by: Keith Tonkin
Reviewed by: H. Stafford
Released by: K. Tonkin
Revision History: Release
Revision History
Version Description Transmitted Reviewed by Date
0.10.10.10.1 First Draft 24 May 2013 H. Carroll
1.01.01.01.0 Final for release 27 May 2013
COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER NOTICE
This document and the information contained herein should be treated as commercial-in-confidence. No part
of this work may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means (graphic, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, taping or information retrieval system) or otherwise disclosed to any other
party whatsoever, without the prior written consent of Aviation Projects Pty Ltd.
This report has been prepared for the benefit solely of the Client, and is not to be relied upon by any other
person or entity without the prior written consent of Aviation Projects Pty Ltd.
© Aviation Projects Pty Ltd, 2013. All rights reser ved
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
ii ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS Document Control ____________________________________________________________________________ i
Copyright and Disclaimer Notice ________________________________________________________________ i
Table of Contents ____________________________________________________________________________ ii
List of Figures ______________________________________________________________________________ iii
List of Tables _______________________________________________________________________________ iii
1. INTRODUCTION _________________________________________________________________________ 1
1.1. Situation _____________________________________________________________________________ 1
1.2. Purpose of task _______________________________________________________________________ 1
1.3. Scope of work ________________________________________________________________________ 1
1.4. Exclusions ___________________________________________________________________________ 2
1.5. Methodology _________________________________________________________________________ 2
1.6. Stakeholders _________________________________________________________________________ 2
1.7. References ___________________________________________________________________________ 2
1.8. Glossary _____________________________________________________________________________ 4
2. AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 2011 ____________________________________________________________ 5
2.1. Stage 1 development __________________________________________________________________ 5
3. APRON EXTENSION DESIGN – GHD ________________________________________________________14
4. APRON EXTENSION DESIGN – SECTION 355 COMMITTEE _____________________________________20
5. TAXIWAY/RUNWAY DESIGN - HYDER ______________________________________________________22
6. OTHER RELATED DEVELOPMENTS ________________________________________________________26
6.1. Avgas fuel facility ____________________________________________________________________26
6.2. Jet A1 fuel facility ____________________________________________________________________26
6.3. Rural Fire Service operations centre and firebombing operations ____________________________27
6.4. General aviation and charter parking locations ___________________________________________27
7. RECOMMENDATIONS ___________________________________________________________________28
ANNEXURE 1 – CONCEPT LAYOUT SKETCHES ____________________________________________________ 1
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
iii iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Proposed Stage 1 Development _________________________________________________________ 6
Figure 2 GHD Concept apron layout_____________________________________________________________15
Figure 3 Apron extension pavement plan ________________________________________________________16
Figure 4 Apron line marking ___________________________________________________________________17
Figure 5 Section 355 Committee apron extension general arrangement _______________________________20
Figure 6 General layout ______________________________________________________________________26
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Master Plan issues ____________________________________________________________________ 7
Table 2 Apron extension issues ________________________________________________________________18
Table 3 Section 355 Committee apron extension design issues ______________________________________21
Table 4 Hyder runway/taxiway design issues _____________________________________________________23
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
1 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Situation
Narrabri Shire Council (NSC) developed and adopted the Narrabri Airport Master Plan in 2011 and has
commenced implementing the first stage of infrastructure upgrades at the airport. NSC is on the cusp of growth
generated by the resource industry and ancillary services and the airport is an important element of transport
infrastructure in the associated coordination of people movement.
The airport supports regular passenger transport (RPT) air services operated by Aeropelican to Sydney (and in
the past - Brisbane and Newcastle), charter and other commercial and private aircraft operations.
Work undertaken in the process of implementing the Master Plan includes detailed design and specification of
an extension to the aircraft parking apron and associated civil infrastructure, and concept geometric and
pavement design for the runway extension and strengthening overlay.
The main runway 18/36 is published as code 3 instrument non-precision, with a straight-in approach provided
to runway 36.
Aeropelican operates a regulated air service between Narrabri and Sydney using Jetstream 32 (19-seat) and
Jetstream 41 (29 seat) aircraft.
1.2. Purpose of task
The purpose of this task is to review existing plans and designs to ensure NSC is proceeding in a manner which
meets the anticipated requirements for Narrabri Airport, will meet compliance requirements for the types of
aircraft mix likely to be operating at the airport, and is a sound investment.
1.3. Scope of work
The scope of work for this engagement involved:
• Visit Narrabri and meet with relevant stakeholders to gain an overall understanding of current and
anticipated needs for the airport upgrade;
• Review the Narrabri Airport Master Plan 2011;
• Review current preliminary and detailed designs for proposed upgrades to the apron and runway
18/36 (the apron extension tender has been advertised and tenders closed on 16 April; tenders have
been placed on hold pending this review);
• Review proposed changes to the above apron design provided by members of Council’s Section 355
Committee;
• Review other related developments / options e.g. current location of Avgas and JetA1 fuel, Rural Fire
Station, General Aviation and Charter parking locations etc; and
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
2 2
• Provide Council with a written report that provides an opinion regarding the suitability of current plans
and designs, identifies issues or risks to Council and makes recommendations regarding proposed
solutions.
1.4. Exclusions
The following exclusions apply to the work undertaken in the performance of this engagement:
• No consideration has been given to geotechnical or pavement design aspects of the proposed works;
and
• No consideration has been given to the effect of obstacles on proposed concepts unless specifically
noted (obstacle survey results were not provided for review).
1.5. Methodology
In undertaking this task, the following activities were conducted:
• an initial site visit and meeting with relevant stakeholders was conducted on 10 and 11 May 2013;
• a desktop review of existing material and documentation was conducted;
• analysis of aircraft performance data was requested from Aeropelican and Qantaslink;
• preliminary concept designs were sketched; and
• this report was prepared.
1.6. Stakeholders
During the course of this engagement, discussions were held with the following stakeholders:
• The Mayor, Councillor Flower and the General Manager and other officers of Narrabri Shire Council;
• aircraft operators including local general aviation operators, charter (Corporate Air) and regular public
transport operators (Aeropelican and Qantaslink); and
• Civil Aviation Safety Authority (allocated Aerodrome Inspector).
Other stakeholders considered in the course of the engagement included:
• Office of Transport Security;
• the local community; and
• the general public.
1.7. References
References used or consulted in the preparation of this report include:
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
3 3
• Airservices Australia, Aeronautical Information Package; including En Route Supplement Australia
(ERSA, DAP) effective 7 March 2013;
• Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 737 Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning, October 2005;
• Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Civil Aviation Safety Regulation 1998 Manual of Standards Part 139 –
Aerodromes version 1.10: dated April 2012;
• GHD – apron extension design drawings as supplied by Narrabri Shire Council;
• Hyder – Narrabri Airport Upgrade – Design Options for Taxiway F, letter A001-AA005529-AAL-01
dated 2 April 2013;
• Hyder – Narrabri Airport Airfield Upgrade – Design Basis Report A0001-AA005529-AAR-01 dated 1 March 2013
• Hyder – runway design drawings as supplied by Narrabri Shire Council;
• International Civil Aviation Organization, Doc 8168 Procedures for Air Navigation Services – Aircraft
Operations, Fifth Edition, July 2009;
• International Civil Aviation Organization, International Standards and Recommended Practices
(SARPS) Annex 14 Aerodromes, Volume 1 Aerodrome Design and Operations;
• Narrabri Shire Council – apron extension design; and
• Rehbein Airport Consulting, Narrabri Airport Master Plan 2011.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
4 4
1.8. Glossary
AHD Australian Height Datum
ASDA accelerate-stop distance available
CASA Civil Aviation Safety Authority
CASR Civil Aviation Safety Regulation 1998
ERSA En Route Supplement Australia
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
LDA landing distance available
MOS Manual of Standards
MTOW maximum take-off weight
NSC Narrabri Shire Council
OLS obstacle limitation surfaces
RESA runway end safety area
RPT regular public transport
TODA take-off distance available
TORA take-off run available
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
5 5
2. AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 2011
Narrabri Shire Council commissioned Rehbein Airport Consulting to prepare a Master Plan for Narrabri Airport.
The document reviewed referenced as Narrabri Shire Airport Master Plan Ref: B09046AR001Rev1.doc dated
21 June 2011.
Aeronautical development was proposed in three stages:
• Stage 1 – Short term (2011-2021);
• Stage 2 – Medium term (2021-2041); and
• Stage 3 – Long term (after 2041).
2.1. Stage 1 development
Proposed Development Anticipated Trigger
Extend Runway 18/36 by 350m to the southExtend Runway 18/36 by 350m to the southExtend Runway 18/36 by 350m to the southExtend Runway 18/36 by 350m to the south Immediate
Interim measures to increase existing capacity of terminal buildingInterim measures to increase existing capacity of terminal buildingInterim measures to increase existing capacity of terminal buildingInterim measures to increase existing capacity of terminal building Immediate
New passenger terminal building (area approx. 750mNew passenger terminal building (area approx. 750mNew passenger terminal building (area approx. 750mNew passenger terminal building (area approx. 750m2 2 2 2 )))) Immediate
Pavement strengthening for Runway 18/36, existing Pavement strengthening for Runway 18/36, existing Pavement strengthening for Runway 18/36, existing Pavement strengthening for Runway 18/36, existing taxiway and taxiway and taxiway and taxiway and
terminal apron to Q400 capabilityterminal apron to Q400 capabilityterminal apron to Q400 capabilityterminal apron to Q400 capability
Dash 8-100 (or similar) operation
Terminal apron expansion of 4,700mTerminal apron expansion of 4,700mTerminal apron expansion of 4,700mTerminal apron expansion of 4,700m2222 Dash 8-100 (or similar) operation
Grass taxiway network including parallel taxiways for both runways with Grass taxiway network including parallel taxiways for both runways with Grass taxiway network including parallel taxiways for both runways with Grass taxiway network including parallel taxiways for both runways with
sections of allsections of allsections of allsections of all weather surfaceweather surfaceweather surfaceweather surface
Immediate
The works proposed in Stage 1 are shown in Figure 1.
The works under consideration in this engagement are elements of those contemplated by Stage 1 of the
Master Plan.
Significant issues in the Master Plan are documented in Table 1.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
6 6
Figure 1 Proposed Stage 1 Development
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
7 7
Table 1 Master Plan issues
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
3.1.1 R3.1.1 R3.1.1 R3.1.1 Runway stripunway stripunway stripunway strip Runway strip for runway 18/36 is noted in the Master Plan as 150 m, but is marked
and reported in ERSA as 90 m graded and 90 m overall. It should be 90 m graded and
150 m overall (unless not practicable and used by aircraft up to and including code
3C). MOS 139 6.2.18.2 refers.
Runway 09/27 is noted in the Master Plan as code 3C non-instrument, but is
published in ERSA as code 2 with a 90 m runway strip width.
Runway 18/36 runway strip width should be 90 m
graded and 150 m overall. If maintained at 90 m graded
and overall, a safety case should be prepared and
submitted to CASA for an exemption from the
requirement.
3.2.4 L3.2.4 L3.2.4 L3.2.4 Lightingightingightingighting Runway edge lighting is 90 m spacing but should be 60 m spacing, plus it has non-
standard spacing between edge lights near the touchdown markers. No requirement to
upgrade to current standards until the airport is upgraded. MOS 139 9.1.1.1 refers.
If the apron is extended or the runway upgraded to
accommodate more or larger aircraft, the aerodrome
lighting system should be upgraded. If the runway works
are planned to occur subsequent to the apron extension
and it would be reasonable to upgrade the runway
lighting system during that activity, then a safety case
should be prepared and submitted to CASA.
3.5.1 BoM AWS3.5.1 BoM AWS3.5.1 BoM AWS3.5.1 BoM AWS The automatic weather station may be affected by future development within 300 m
subject to BoM evaluation.
Any proposed development within 300 m of the AWS
(such as the proposed RFS facility) should be referred to
BoM for evaluation.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
8 8
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
3.6.1 Electricity3.6.1 Electricity3.6.1 Electricity3.6.1 Electricity Electricity supply requirements were not evaluated Electricity supply requirements should be evaluated and
incorporated in the overall upgrade plan.
3.6.4 Comm3.6.4 Comm3.6.4 Comm3.6.4 Communicationsunicationsunicationsunications Communications infrastructure was not evaluated. Communications infrastructure requirements should be
evaluated and incorporated in the overall upgrade plan.
4.1.2 Aircraft movements4.1.2 Aircraft movements4.1.2 Aircraft movements4.1.2 Aircraft movements The aircraft movement reference baseline is based on general aviation movements for
the period April to December 2010; this is not a good basis for accurate forecasting.
RPT aircraft movements were estimated.
The RPT service to Brisbane has since ceased.
The aircraft movements baseline should be updated.
4.2.1 Passenger traffic4.2.1 Passenger traffic4.2.1 Passenger traffic4.2.1 Passenger traffic The passenger forecast provides low, medium and high growth scenarios. The high
growth scenario does not reflect the likely impact of a significant increase in FIFO
operations in the short term, which can generate compound annual growth rates of
greater than 50%.
The passenger demand forecast should be updated.
4.2.2 Aircraft movements4.2.2 Aircraft movements4.2.2 Aircraft movements4.2.2 Aircraft movements Aircraft movements are closely related to passenger movements. The aircraft movements forecast should be updated.
5.1.2 Table 3 5.1.2 Table 3 5.1.2 Table 3 5.1.2 Table 3 Key RPT Key RPT Key RPT Key RPT
Planning parametersPlanning parametersPlanning parametersPlanning parameters
Dash 8-400 aircraft were not expected to be introduced until after 2021/22. The first
Dash 8-400 operation actually occurred Friday 17 May 2013.
For information only.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
9 9
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
5.2.1 Runway length5.2.1 Runway length5.2.1 Runway length5.2.1 Runway length Discussion re Aeropelican requirements for runway length, introduction of larger
aircraft and payload restrictions in high temperatures is not supported with evidence.
Requirement for runway extension of 350 m is not supported with evidence or valid
analysis. Recommendation re detailed assessment by Aeropelican has presumably not
been done.
Current runway 18 TORA = 1524, TODA = 1584.
350 m extension would provide TORA = 1874, TODA = 1934
Current runway 36 TORA = 1524, TODA = 1622.
350 m extension would provide TORA = 1874, TODA = 1972
Runway length requirements noted in Table 5 generally exceed minimum length
requirements and are not supported with evidence.
It is not reasonable to extend a runway for a Dash 8-400 that isn’t planned to operate
for another 10 years (according to the forecast) then decide to extend the runway by
74 m more than the required runway length = 1800 m (based on TORA) or 134 m
(based on TODA).
B737-800 aircraft operate off runway lengths between 1800-1900 m (e.g. Ballina,
Sunshine Coast) on sectors significantly longer than 250 nm.
Qantaslink advised that a Dash 8-400 could operate with a full passenger during
winter conditions off the current length. It also advised that provision of a 60 m
stopway at the departure end of runway 36 or a 60 m extension at threshold 36 would
enable take-off with a full passenger load off at temperatures up to 30 degrees.
Validate requirement for runway extension through
analysis of Jetstream 32/41 and Dash 8-400
performance under expected environmental conditions.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
10 10
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
5.2.1 Runway length 5.2.1 Runway length 5.2.1 Runway length 5.2.1 Runway length ––––
B737B737B737B737----800800800800
Agree with option to preserve land on southern extension footprint. But disagree with
need for 250 m extension to support unrestricted B737-800 ops to Brisbane and
Sydney.
B737-800 aircraft operate off runway lengths between 1800-1900 m (e.g. Ballina,
Sunshine Coast) on sectors significantly longer than 250 nm.
Extension to the north would not be viable without substantial earthworks (cut and fill)
to meet the maximum longitudinal gradient requirements. Currently 1.5% for first
300 m of runway 18, but max 0.8% for first and last quarters of runway for code 4
aircraft. MOS 139 6.2.6 refers.
Validate future runway length requirements through
further analysis, and preserve appropriate extension
footprint.
5.2.1 Runway width5.2.1 Runway width5.2.1 Runway width5.2.1 Runway width Widening runway to 45 m for B737 (and other code 4 aircraft) ops would be
conditional upon meeting other geometric design requirements.
Consider validity of B737 (code 4) as future design
aircraft—Decision required as to ultimate design code
number (code 3 or 4).
5.2.1 Runway strip width5.2.1 Runway strip width5.2.1 Runway strip width5.2.1 Runway strip width Refer to discussion at 3.1.1.
Re 300 m runway strip width for B737, it is not an appropriate to nominate the
granting of an exemption from a design standard (150 m in lieu of 300 m wide runway
strip width) as the basis for future compliance requirements.
A 300 m wide runway strip extends beyond the airport site and encompasses a private
dwelling on the eastern side at the southern end of the site.
If B737 (code 4 aircraft) is endorsed as the future
design aircraft, a 300 m wide runway strip width and
associated obstacle limitation surfaces should be
protected from encroachment by development in the
intervening years—Decision required as to ultimate
design code number (code 3 or 4).
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
11 11
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
5.2.1 Runway 5.2.1 Runway 5.2.1 Runway 5.2.1 Runway lightinglightinglightinglighting Runway lighting does not conform to current standards and should be replaced in
conjunction with appropriate works. Refer to 3.2.4.
Agree with provision of PAPI at each end.
Incorporate PAPI in lighting upgrade.
5.3.2 Immediate terminal 5.3.2 Immediate terminal 5.3.2 Immediate terminal 5.3.2 Immediate terminal
requiremerequiremerequiremerequirementsntsntsnts
Agree that the current RPT terminal is inadequate and should have interim
redevelopment.
If RPT and FIFO operations conflict and render the RPT passenger terminal beyond
capacity, consider extending and making the Aero Club building available for
charter/FIFO passengers.
Provide interim increase in capacity through current
passenger terminal for RPT passengers. Consider
redevelopment of Aero Club for charter/FIFO passengers
as applicable to RPT schedule.
5.3.3 Future terminal 5.3.3 Future terminal 5.3.3 Future terminal 5.3.3 Future terminal
requirementsrequirementsrequirementsrequirements
Agree with proposal to plan for construction of new passenger terminal.
Agree with estimated floor area of 1200 – 1400 m2 for short to medium term.
Agree with proposition that security screening may be required in the future, and
should be scoped in design of new passenger terminal.
Don’t necessarily agree with proposed location of new passenger terminal due to
limited space available for building depth and apron depth from runway and potential
OLS infringements.
Plan for construction of new passenger terminal.
Consider alternate location due to building envelope and
apron depth requirements.
Refer to Annexure 1Annexure 1Annexure 1Annexure 1 for a concept layout of the apron
extension and associated infrastructure and facilities.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
12 12
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
5.4.2 Apron expansion5.4.2 Apron expansion5.4.2 Apron expansion5.4.2 Apron expansion Agree with requirement for larger apron, but not with proposed location and line
marking plan. The design aircraft should be Dash 8-400. Refer to separate discussion.
The parking apron extension as shown in layout drawings will not permit B737 aircraft
to park clear of the OLS (transitional surface) associated with a 300 m wide runway
strip due to tail height.
Redesign apron extension in consideration of other
airport users and larger design aircraft (Dash 8-400).
Consider requirement to provide for future B737 parking
re tail height and OLS.
5.5.2 Addi5.5.2 Addi5.5.2 Addi5.5.2 Additional Taxiwaystional Taxiwaystional Taxiwaystional Taxiways The additional taxiways nominated will not necessarily optimise operational capability
within a limited budget.
Reconsider taxiway system in conjunction with apron
extension and plan and new terminal location.
5.6.2 RFS Centre5.6.2 RFS Centre5.6.2 RFS Centre5.6.2 RFS Centre A site for the RFS centre is nominated between the Aero Club and existing hangar.
There is likely a better location for this facility, subject to apron extension design.
Consider alternate location for RFS facility.
5.6.3 Fuel facilities5.6.3 Fuel facilities5.6.3 Fuel facilities5.6.3 Fuel facilities The proposed new location for the Jet A1 fuel storage facility may not be optimal with
respect to alternate development scheme.
The avgas refuelling facility is in the wrong place and Council advised that it is to be
removed.
Consider alternate location for Jet A1 fuel storage facility
and need for underground piping system (consider
tanker instead).
Consider alternate location for avgas fuel storage and
dispenser system.
Refer to Annexure 1Annexure 1Annexure 1Annexure 1 for a concept layout of the apron
extension and associated infrastructure and facilities.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
13 13
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
5.5.5.5.7 Staged development 7 Staged development 7 Staged development 7 Staged development
planplanplanplan
The staging plan does not align design aircraft, passenger movement forecasts,
planning periods etc.
Reconsider periods nominated as short, medium and
long term and proposed development during each stage.
8.3 Proposed 8.3 Proposed 8.3 Proposed 8.3 Proposed
developmendevelopmendevelopmendevelopment t t t precinctsprecinctsprecinctsprecincts
The validity of proposed uses within the precincts is not able to be verified. However,
the location of particular precincts and associated aeronautical and landside
infrastructure may result in preferred alternate layout.
Reconsider precinct locations and compositions
following apron extension and new passenger terminal
concept design.
8.4 Access and Car 8.4 Access and Car 8.4 Access and Car 8.4 Access and Car
parking, road networkparking, road networkparking, road networkparking, road network
Terminal access, car parking arrangements and the internal road network may need to
be redesigned according to a preferred alternative layout.
Reconsider terminal access and car parking
arrangements following apron extension and new
passenger terminal concept design.
General General General General ---- Staging and Staging and Staging and Staging and
timelinestimelinestimelinestimelines
The ten year period from 2011/12-2021/22 (Stage 1) is nominated as the short term.
It would be preferable to think of the short term as the next five years, since this is the
period for which demand can be determined with relative certainty. The medium term
would be the next five years, and the long term would be beyond the ten year mark.
There is inconsistency in the application of time frames and the naming of stages.
Short term – next five years
Medium term – five – ten years
Long term – beyond 10 years
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
14 14
3. APRON EXTENSION DESIGN – GHD
Detailed design and specifications for expansion of the main RPT aircraft parking apron have been prepared by
GHD and issued for tender. Tenders for construction closed in April 2013 and are waiting consideration
pending the outcomes of this review. The intention is to accommodate two Dash 8-400 and one Dash 8-300
aircraft.
The aircraft that are currently operating at Narrabri airport are the Metro III, Jetstream 32 and Chieftains, with
Jetstream 41 expected to operate in the near future. The apron is to be line marked for the current operating
aircraft.
The site contains various existing services including power and communications cables; these services will
require relocation, protection and modification as appropriate.
The Work under the Civil Contract includes the construction of new flexible pavements, drainage structures,
excavation for and backfilling of pit and duct work associated with the airfield lighting works including apron
floodlighting pole footings.
The principal components of the Scope of Works include:
• Earthworks for pavement construction, open drains, drainage structures, pole footings, electrical
services trenches and all other incidental construction work not specifically mentioned;
• Modification to the existing drainage system, including construction of reinforced concreted box
culvert (RCBC) and headwall inlet/outlet structures;
• Construction of new flexible pavements for apron and taxiway fillets;
• Supply and installation of rock beaching, topsoil and grassing to open unlined drains (OUD);
• Supply and installation of pits, ducts, draw ropes and pole footings ready for the Airfield Ground
Lighting (AGL) and apron floodlighting installation contractor;
• Supply and application of jet fuel resistant surface treatment;
• Supply and installation of pavement markings;
• Landscape and grassing; and
• The Scope of Works also includes all electrical work associated with the supply and installation of
taxiway edge lighting, apron floodlighting and illuminated wind direction indicator.
A concept layout of the proposed apron extension showing two Dash 8-400 and one Dash 8-300 aircraft is
provided at Figure 2.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
15 15
Figure 2 GHD Concept apron layout
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
16 16
Detailed design of the apron pavements is shown in Figure 3. It can be seen that fuel resistant membranes are
planned to be included in the works.
Note also the requirement to re-direct surface drainage at the southern end of the extension area.
Also note that the taxiway is to be widened.
Figure 3 Apron extension pavement plan
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
17 17
Detailed design of the apron line marking is shown in Figure 4.
Note the two PA-31 parking positions at Bays 4 and 5.
The line marking plan does not optimise the space available.
Figure 4 Apron line marking
Issues associated with the apron extension design are provided in Table 2.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
18 18
Table 2 Apron extension issues
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
CCCConcept apron loncept apron loncept apron loncept apron layoutayoutayoutayout The Dash 8-400 on bay 1 potentially restricts access to the remainder of the general aviation precinct
(subject to aircraft wingspan) due to limited space between the tail of the aircraft and the apron edge.
Check design aircraft characteristics with
respect to taxilane width behind
Dash 8-400 Bay 1.
Consider alternate layout for apron
extension to the north of the current
apron.
Apron extension Apron extension Apron extension Apron extension
pavement planpavement planpavement planpavement plan
Fuel resistant membranes are planned to be constructed prior to the ultimate overlay works, which
would make them redundant. The membranes are located under piston engined aircraft <5700 kg
MTOW which would not normally be allocated a line marked parking position and do not have access
to avgas in those positions in any case.
The taxiway is shown as being widened to 18 m. There is no requirement to widen the taxiway to
18 m as long it is intended to serve aircraft with a wheelbase of less than 18 m. MOS 139 6.2.1.1A
refers.
B737-800 wheelbase is 15.6 m, A320-200 wheelbase is 12.64 m, Dash 8-400 wheelbase is
13.99 m.
Reconsider the need for fuel resistant
membranes in the apron extension
project.
Reconsider the need to widen the main
taxiway to 18 m.
Pavement marking planPavement marking planPavement marking planPavement marking plan Line marked parking positions are provided for PA-31 aircraft. These aircraft are <5700 kg MTOW
and would not normally be allocated a marked parking position.
Reconsider need to provide line marking
for individual PA-31 aircraft.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
19 19
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
Flood lighting detail, Flood lighting detail, Flood lighting detail, Flood lighting detail,
lighting and circuiting lighting and circuiting lighting and circuiting lighting and circuiting
detaildetaildetaildetail
The max height of flood light pole is shown as 19.8 m in drawing 23-14538-E020. With an RL at the
base of the southern light pole of approx 221.8 m plus 19.8 m pole results in height of 241.6 m AHD
at top of pole.
Using 150 m runway strip (75 m either side of centreline) and approximately 204 m from centreline
to light pole leaves 129 m between pole and edge of runway strip. Transitional surface inclines at 1:7,
so max height possible at light pole position is 14.84 m above centreline RL (219 m) equals
233.84 m AHD.
So the apron flood light poles would penetrate the transitional surface by approximately 7.76 m. The
poles can be a maximum of approximately 12 m high at this offset distance from the runway with a
150 m runway strip width.
Also, CASA guidance is that flood lighting should be 20 lux for large aircraft such as Dash 8-400.
The apron flood lighting needs to be
redesigned so that the light poles do not
infringe the OLS (transitional surface) and
provide 20 lux illumination on Dash 8-400
parking positions.
Hyder Design Basis Hyder Design Basis Hyder Design Basis Hyder Design Basis
Report 2.2 Taxiway desiReport 2.2 Taxiway desiReport 2.2 Taxiway desiReport 2.2 Taxiway designgngngn
Note re taxiway longitudinal gradient in excess of maximum limit (>1.5%) not resolved in concept
design stage.
Main taxiway longitudinal slope limit
should be resolved in design.
Hyder Design Basis Hyder Design Basis Hyder Design Basis Hyder Design Basis
Report 2.3 RPT Apron Report 2.3 RPT Apron Report 2.3 RPT Apron Report 2.3 RPT Apron
DesignDesignDesignDesign
Note re slope on apron parking areas >2% to be resolved in detailed design stage. Main RPT apron slope should be designed
to meet required standards.
General General General General –––– pavement pavement pavement pavement
conditionconditionconditioncondition
The taxiway and apron pavement is in relatively poor condition and will require at least a shape
correction treatment in the near future, regardless of the requirement for strengthening.
Consider minimum pavement
rehabilitation works.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
20 20
4. APRON EXTENSION DESIGN – SECTION 355 COMMITTEE
The Narrabri Airport Section 355 Committee prepared an alternate design of the apron extension subsequent
to tendering for construction. This alternate design extends the apron to the north of the existing apron and
provides another stub taxiway (assumed to be 18 m wide) to the main runway 18/36, as well as an alternate
location for a proposed passenger terminal with separate sections for FIFO/Charter and RPT passengers.
A copy of the general arrangement plan is provided in Figure 5.
Figure 5 Section 355 Committee apron extension general arrangement
Issues associated with the Section 355 Committee apron extension design are provided in Table 3.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
21 21
Table 3 Section 355 Committee apron extension design issues
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
Proposed terminalProposed terminalProposed terminalProposed terminal There are unlikely to be significant benefits from segregating FIFO/Charter and RPT passengers as
indicated.
The terminal frontage should probably be set back further back from the apron edge to allow room for
greater apron depth with respect to tail height constraints imposed by the OLS (transitional surface).
Relocate the terminal further away from
the apron frontage and disregard
separation of FIFO/Charter and RPT
passengers.
General arrangementGeneral arrangementGeneral arrangementGeneral arrangement The general arrangement is better than the master plan and GHD design, but will not permit smaller
aircraft to pass behind larger aircraft parked at the front of the apron due to wing tip clearance
limitations.
The apron extent is probably too large and could be reduced in width and increased in depth.
There may be issues associated with design gradient requirements.
The avgas refuelling facility would need to be removed.
The new apron could be constructed to Dash 8-400 bearing strength requirements, leaving the current
apron as lower strength pavement for lighter aircraft servicing the existing RPT terminal.
The design has the additional benefit of not requiring relocation of the primary illuminated wind
direction indicator and signal circle.
Care will need to be taken in locating the new stub taxiway clear of the PAPI at the left hand side of
touchdown on runway 18.
Use this design as the basis for further
optimisation of parking apron and
runway capacity, as well as interim
upgrades of the existing passenger and
Aero Club facilities.
Check conformance with geometric
design requirement re gradients.
Consider the location of PAPI re new
stub taxiway.
Refer to Annexure 1Annexure 1Annexure 1Annexure 1 for a concept layout
of the apron extension.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
22 22
5. TAXIWAY/RUNWAY DESIGN - HYDER
Hyder was engaged to prepare preliminary designs for the runway extension and pavement strengthening for
all pavements including the runway, taxiway and aprons. This work is planned to occur subsequent to the apron
extension project.
Specifically, the scope of work is described in the Design Basis Report as:
• A 350m extension to the south end of Runway 18/36, including the provision of a new runway end
safety area (RESA)
• Strengthening of the existing runway 18/36, taxiway C, and RPT apron pavements;
• Replacement of the existing runway 18/36 lighting system and installation of Precision Approach
Path Indicators (PAPI).
Issues associated with the runway extension and strengthening design are provided in Table 4.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
23 23
Table 4 Hyder runway/taxiway design issues
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
Design Basis ReportDesign Basis ReportDesign Basis ReportDesign Basis Report The Master Plan high growth rate scenario has been adopted for the pavement design.
The adopted pavement design (traffic scenario 2) derives an average of 7.1 Dash 8-400 and 18.8 J41
movements per week. Subject to customer expectations about demand for Dash 8-400 and possibly
other larger aircraft such as Dash 8-100/200/300 or Saab 340 etc, the adopted traffic scenario might
not adequately reflect future impacts to pavement life.
Revalidate pavement design after
revision of the passenger and aircraft
movement forecasts.
Alignment plan Sheet 3Alignment plan Sheet 3Alignment plan Sheet 3Alignment plan Sheet 3 The case for widening the taxiway is yet to be made. Reconsider need to widen taxiway.
Alignment Plan Sheet 1,7Alignment Plan Sheet 1,7Alignment Plan Sheet 1,7Alignment Plan Sheet 1,7 A 60 m clearway and 90 m RESA is shown at the new extended threshold 36, but not at threshold 18.
The clearway at threshold 18 is currently 98 m, and the RESA is 60 m. Ideally the RESAs would be the
same length following the upgrade.
Alignment Plan Sheet 1 (and other design drawings) is cut off at the threshold of runway 18. Due to the
importance of longitudinal and transverse gradients in the design task, the full clearway and RESA
should be shown in the drawings.
90 m RESAs are only required when used by code 3 or 4 air transport jet aeroplanes. MOS 139 6.2.26
refers.
Plan to provide at least 60 m RESAs at
both runway ends.
Show the full clearway and RESA at
threshold 18 in applicable drawings.
Alignment Plan Sheet 8Alignment Plan Sheet 8Alignment Plan Sheet 8Alignment Plan Sheet 8 The apron extension footprint may not be optimal for airport operations and should be reconsidered. Reconsider location of apron extension
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
24 24
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
Runway Long Section 1Runway Long Section 1Runway Long Section 1Runway Long Section 1 The long section drawing shows the runway threshold at chainage 148.902.
Longitudinal slope for first part of runway is 1.499% (max 1.5% for code 3).
Long section at existing ground level extends beyond threshold into clearway (cut off at ch 130) at
1.5%. Max clearway longitudinal slope is 1.25%. New surface grades down from threshold to existing
surface in clearway at 2.5% (max 1.25%). MOS 139 6.2.33 refers.
Existing aerodrome facilities do not need to be immediately modified in accordance with the new
standards until the facility is replaced or upgraded to accommodate a more demanding aircraft. MOS
139 2.1.2 refers.
Existing non-conformance with respect
to clearway slope must be rectified if
the upgrade project accommodates a
more demanding aircraft.
Alternatively a safety case could be
made for an exemption based on
current design and aerodrome category.
Runway Long Section 1,2Runway Long Section 1,2Runway Long Section 1,2Runway Long Section 1,2 Longitudinal slope requirement for code 4C jet aircraft is max 1% overall, max 1.25% along any part of
the runway and max 0.8% along first and last quarters of the runway. Uniform slope required for at
least 300 m at each end (600 m for large jet aircraft).
The current runway longitudinal gradient would not accommodate code 4 aircraft. Significant cut and fill
works would be required in order to meet the design standards at significant cost.
Consider future need to accommodate
code 4 aircraft with respect to cost of
conforming to geometric design
standards.
Runway Long Section 6Runway Long Section 6Runway Long Section 6Runway Long Section 6 Max clearway longitudinal slope is 1.25%. New surface grades down from threshold to existing surface
in clearway at 2.5%. MOS 139 6.2.33 refers.
Design clearway longitudinal slope in
accordance with design standards.
Taxiway Long SectionTaxiway Long SectionTaxiway Long SectionTaxiway Long Section Max taxiway longitudinal slope for code C aircraft is 1.5%. Max shown on drawing is 1.73%. MOS 139
6.3.4 refers.
Design taxiway longitudinal slope in
accordance with design standards.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
25 25
Item/Reference Discussion/Issue Proposed Resolution
Runway Cross Section 35Runway Cross Section 35Runway Cross Section 35Runway Cross Section 35 Transverse gradient of runway strip is shown as 2.5% up on uphill side of runway. The transverse slope
of the graded runway strip adjacent to the runway shoulder, for the first 3 m outwards, must be
negative and may be as great as 5%. MOS 139 6.2.22 refers.
Redesign runway strip transverse slope
in accordance with design standards.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
26
6. OTHER RELATED DEVELOPMENTS
Other developments associated with the upgrade were reviewed and are discussed in the following section.
Figure 6 General layout
6.1. Avgas fuel facility
The avgas facility is located in such a position that an aircraft parked in front of it prevents use of the taxiway
and therefore access to the rest of the general aviation precinct.
Council representatives agree that the avgas facility should be moved to another location.
The facility should be located so that it permits easy access by avgas users and clear of operational parts of the
taxiway and apron system. Consider provision of trailer-mounted or fixed above-ground storage and dispenser
system.
6.2. Jet A1 fuel facility
The Jet A1 facility consists of a fuel storage tank, underground pipes and a hose reel and dispenser at the front
of the current RPT apron.
Council representatives advised that the potential environmental impacts were unacceptable and the cost of
maintaining and monitoring the relatively long underground pipes is prohibitively expensive, and expressed a
Jet A1
Avgas RFS
Precinct GA
Precinct
TerminalPrecinct
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
27
desire to more the storage tanks closer to the apron or provide an alternative means of fuel delivery (such as a
mobile tanker).
A mobile tanker would provide greatest flexibility with respect to providing fuel to various locations on the
airport site.
The fuel storage facility may not need to be moved in the short term, subject to the location of the new terminal
and internal roads/car parks.
6.3. Rural Fire Service operations centre and firebombing operations
Two large water storage tanks have been installed to the north of the hangar precinct, and Council
representatives advised that RFS intends to construct an operations facility nearby. The facility would be
approximately 30 m x 18 m.
An indicative location for this facility is shown in the concept sketch at Annexure Annexure Annexure Annexure 1111.
6.4. General aviation and charter parking locations
Council representatives expressed a desire to provide additional hangar sites for up to B350 sized aircraft.
An indicative location for these additional hangar sites is shown in the concept sketch at Annexure Annexure Annexure Annexure 1111.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
28
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommended resolutions for the issues that have been identified as a result of this review are documented in
the applicable sections of this report.
Before the design work is revised, the following significant issues should be resolved:
1. Passenger and aircraft movement demand forecasts should be revised/revalidated;
2. The issue of whether or not to consider and protect the future requirements of code 4 aircraft such as
A320/B737should be incorporated in current spatial planning;
3. Infrastructure proposed to be provided in the short term should be matched to design aircraft
requirements and design standards;
4. The apron extension and terminal location should be considered in conjunction with associated
infrastructure such as the internal road network, car parking, services, utilities and fuel storage; and
5. A fully scoped design brief should be prepared.
YNBR01-01 NARRABRI AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEW V1.0 RELEASE 130527
1-1
ANNEXURE 1 – CONCEPT LAYOUT SKETCHES
1. Concept Apron Extension Layout
2. Concept General Aviation Precinct Layout
ooLf)
oo00
...-io(V)
~
3~~
+-JV
l
.Ct
\>111
Q)
l-Q)
Q)
••..•+-J
,i
~~
3~.
~~
...cwi
;;'4(~
'1+
-'1.--
~lieco
j~
.,
Q)
~f;
~~
0.;~
~~
iit
--0'04J~~
1'l
J0
~-..~
..0
•tit
v'Z