Talk:Adelaide Airport

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

Jakarta as a destination[edit]

I think it would make sense that Garuda would fly direct to Jakarta and I make the edit to the destination section because on Soekarno-Hatta International Airport page, it lists that Garuda does fly to Adelaide.

According to Garuda's official website, they do not fly between any Australian city and Jakarta, so I'll remove it.

Just how busy?[edit]

I read somewhere that Adelaide airport is Australia's 4th busiest domestic airport and australia's 6th busiest international airport. Has anyone else read this?

Adelaide is the 6th busiest International Airport in Australia, ranking behind the Gold Coast or Cairns depending on when you look. Technically we have more movements than Perth domestically, but Perth is busier domestically in terms of passengers --Linkqer (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate[edit]

Just who is Adelaide Airport Corp? What else do they own (parrafield?). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.26.122.12 (talk) 02:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

When privatised by Howard govt the operation of the aerodrome was leased to AAL for 99 years. Approx for $300 million. They are owned by european superannuation companies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.61.229.90 (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide Airport Limited purchased the operating leases for Adelaide and Parafield Airports in May 1998, to operate both airports for the next 50 years with an option for a further 49 years. (Source: About Adelaide Airport > Adelaide Airport Limited. The current shareholders are no longer European superannuation funds - as listed at Adelaide Airport Limited – Shareholders, the current largest shareholder is the Adelaide University superannuation fund Unisuper, plus Local Super, Colonial First State and various other superannuation and fund managers. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 04:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gold Airways?[edit]

Gold Airways has recently been added to the domestic carriers list. Unlike OzJet, i have doubts whether this airline will ever get off the ground. A quick Google search reveals no news reports about Gold Airways, and the only other mentions of it seem to be people who question the character and integrity of the proponent and his ability to launch an airline. There have been no reports of Gold Airways that I am aware of in any industry magazines/publications. I don't think that there is any evidence to warrant an encyclopaedic entry. I have less concerns with OzJet because their progress towards obtaining an AOC has been widely reported in the press and publicised by the company, I think I would rather wait until there was either a start-up date, or the company had commenced services to teh city rather than say "subject to AOC" (AOC not having been defined in the article). I'm going to delete both of them for now but am happy to discuss should people have concerns with this. Adz 06:10, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it Cyberjunkie. - What are your thoughts on leaving OzJet up there before they have anounced a launch date? Adz 06:13, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I didn't realise anyone had commented on this. My main reason for reverting was because an anon had made unorthodox changes to links. Secondly, I've not heard of Gold Airways before. As for OzJet, it could perhaps be removed also, given the list is meant to indicate airlines that have currently operate here. I'll leave it to you. --Cyberjunkie | Talk 06:29, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think we were both editing at the same time, hence you beat me to it. I hadn't heard of Gold Airways either before it appeared here, so I went Googling. From what I have read on discussion boards, I suspect that it is a pipedream. I'd be happy with OzJet, but it doesn't appear on any other airport pages, I don't think they have published a start-up date yet, and I don't think that Adelaide will be one of their first destinations. I'll get rid of it for now, and when a start up date and routes have been discussed, i'm sure plenty of people will want to update it. Adz 07:04, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Everyone's looking at it! - I just added "(expected early 2006)" based on this report --Scott Davis Talk 07:08, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delay for Domestic Carriers[edit]

I think reference to the 2 month delay for domestic airlines to move into the new terminal should remain in this article even after they finally solve the problem. I would describe the delay as embarrassing and frustrating - why is this not a NPOV? Auswide 11:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As an encyclopædia, we must only document, not emote. "Frustrating" and "embarrassing" are emotive words. The only way they could be included is if they were mentioned as something a credible third-party source had said, such as: "AAL chief Joe Blogs remarked that the incident was such and such (link to source)". But I doubt even that would be necessary.--cj | talk 05:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well just for this discussion page, the AAL chief has admitted the delay has gone beyond being embarrassing. Here is the link [1] Auswide 12:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree- a reference to it should still stay in the article if/when the situation is resolved. --Rachel Cakes 04:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rex problems[edit]

Sorry, my bad I did not fully read the article properly. Apologies to those who followed my comment here. Sorry, once again. Nicktwiggy 06:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I hope that eventually the Rex concerns will become a minor footnote to the development of the new terminal, but agree that at the moment they are significant enough to be mentioned in the article. I moved things around to try and make the whole article flow better. It could still be improved, but is at the limit of my writing ability. --Scott Davis Talk 10:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that AAL was planning to use shuttle buses for Rex passengers, but AAL later said this was unviable. Should this be updated? I caught a Rex flight from Whyalla to Adelaide last week. Once I exited the plane, everyone boarded a small shuttle bus to take us back to the main terminal to pick up luggage. 203.23.152.2 12:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine Airlines[edit]

Where on earth did this come from? I haven't found any articles or press releases relating to the service.

I reverted an addition a few weeks ago and it's back again. I also reverted the addition of direct flights by Garuda to Jakarta. I'm mystified. Softgrow 08:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea. I searched the PR website and they say nothing. So I reverted it back. Elektrik Blue 82 11:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International Destinations[edit]

To me it seems odd to list domestic destinations under the International heading simply if there's a stop over there. I know there's been a case or three in the past where these have been added and removed. It is also redundant to state there are Qantas flights to Melbourne under the International heading when it's already listed under Domestic. --AtD 04:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree completely. I've removed Sydney and Melbourne from the international destinations as well. --splashmo 01:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QF1-399 flies between domestic ports departing from international terminals, QF400 and above departs from domestic terminals. There is currently no consensus against listing "domestic" destinations flown by their home carriers between international terminals (ie QF175 Sydney to Brisbane to Los Angeles), but listing it as (Singapore via Melbourne) for example isn't allowed, so therefore technically those 'domestic' destinations counts as a destination from the international terminal per WP:AIRPORTS. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 08:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feet/metres fix needed[edit]

The airport info box is obviously labelling the lengths of the runways runways incorrectly (e.g. 05/23 appears as 3,100 ft and 10,171 m). Looking at the relevant code, it seems correct ( |runway_length_f=10,171 |runway_length_m=3,100 ). I'm not sure where the error lies: in the fact box template? Can someone more knowledgable than I fix this? -Ian Page 22:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be OK for me. Perhaps it's been fixed. --AtD 03:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Someone edited the template to try and force the meteres to show before the feet and all it didn't work. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charter airlines[edit]

The other day a person added the Air South Charter information, which I subsequently tidied up. Now I'm looking at various airlines' websites like Regional Express and Alliance, and see that they regularly run charters out of Adelaide too. Should the charter airlines' section be removed altogether? --splashmo 07:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it anyway. --splashmo 01:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed all four airline entries with exactly same charter destinations none had citations despite the request for them to have a ref for over 8 months now. Charter entries need to have proof they operate timetable/routemap etc. From WP Airports: Do not include ad-hoc, irregular, or private charter services. Because they are under this category I have removed them.CHCBOY (talk) 18:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added Internal Links[edit]

I have added Internal Links to this article. Kathleen.wright5 13:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QantasLink[edit]

Haven't QantasLink suspended their services to Port Lincoln and Kingscote? Why is QantasLink listed under regional carriers? Anyone opposing the removal of this? --Besancon 14:16, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go ahead and remove it --splashmo 21:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

International Destinations within Australia[edit]

Should we mention in the article that the Cathay Pacific flight runs through Melbourne to Hong Kong but nonstop Hong Kong to Adelaide, but you can't fly just Adelaide to Melbourne on Cathay Pacific. Maybe also an explanation for the Qantas International Flight to Sydney.--Goldwing 5000 (talk) 04:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Aircraft Used[edit]

I've removed the Aircraft Used section which was added but an Anon IP as it's pointless since it's nothing to do with the airport only the airlines and what aircraft they use which does nothing to improve the article.. Bidgee (talk) 09:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the image of Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER 9M-MRO should be removed - it is actually the aircraft lost whilst flying service MH370 earlier this year. Can someone confirm my opinion on this, and perhaps action this removal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate42 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

Do we need two images in infobox? Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 04:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Several airports have both a logo and a picture in the box. However, I don't recall seeing such a large logo before. I reduced the size a bit. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 09:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 06:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aviation weather links[edit]

Canadian and American airports generally contain a link to an aviation weather source in their external link section. Why should airports in this country be different?DSatYVR (talk) 22:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Busiest International Routes out of Adelaide Airport[edit]

In the box "Ngurah Rai International Airport" has a note numbered 2 but there is no actual note 2 given. something lame from CBW 06:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pacific Blue Adelaide to Nadi Flights[edit]

Pacific Blue flights from Adelaide to Nadi have been cancelled as of May 6 2010 see http://www.tripadvisor.com.au/ShowTopic-g294331-i883-k3490130-Virgin_Pacific_Blue_Flight_Changes_from_Adelaide_Australia-Fiji.html so I have made the change in the Airlines and Destinations --Linkqer (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the airport?[edit]

I know that "historically the airport has always been regarded as being located at West Beach", but is this still the case? After all, it is marked as a separate suburb in the Adelaide UBD street directory. It also has a separate post code (5950). Also, being a major airport, wouldn't the area be under federal control rather than state or council authority? And considering the sheer size of the place, is it reasonable to refer to it as being merely a part of a suburb, as if it is just a community park or a shopping centre?

My questions then, are as follows: Is Adelaide Airport still officially part of the suburb of West Beach? Was Adelaide Airport (as opposed to the land it is on) ever officially part of the suburb of West Beach? On what basis (i.e. by which referenced authority) is Adelaide Airport considered to be part of the suburb of West Beach and not, for example, Netley or Brooklyn Park?

Please don't think I'm trying to be pedantic. I just don't think it's wise to base a claim on nothing other than that it was historically regarded as such. (The same could be said about the reality of Santa Claus).--~ ~ : Lincoln Cooper : ~ ~ (talk) 10:55, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LincolnCooper, this is a complex question which doesn't fit neatly into categories, just as the suburb of West Beach itself is split between the Cities of West Torrens and Charles Sturt.
Adelaide Airport is operated by Adelaide Airport Ltd (AAL) under a 49+50 year lease from the Commonwealth Department of Transport (there is still federal oversight, but not control, over AAL's operations). As Commonwealth land, although it lies entirely within the boundaries of the City of West Torrens, it is not considered as part of the City of West Torrens, and there has been a long history of disputes between AAL and the City of West Torrens over planning issues, payment of rates, etc. It also lies outside State jurisdiction, e.g. it is policed by federal police, not SAPOL.
Although Adelaide Airport has its own postcode, part of the airport (including a parcel of land still designated in the Airport's Masterplan for a possible third runway, extends west of Tapleys Hill Road and south of West Beach Road. As this third runway is unlikely to be built in the near future at least, under its current 5-year masterplan AAL is considering "temporary" development on part of the site along the western side of Tapleys Hill Road (formerly occupied by the silt ponds from the dredging of the Patawalonga in the mid-1990s, and opposite HarbourTown), just as it has allowed development of the nursing home on its land adjacent to the University Playing Fields (west of Tapleys Hill Road and south of Burbridge Road, the approach path to the second, NW-SE, runway). Both of these areas ("precincts" in the Airport's Masterplan) lie within the boundaries of the suburb of West Beach.
The situation is further complicated by the fact that parts of the Adelaide Shores complex (which is operated by the West Beach Trust, which lies within the suburb of West Beach, but is a separate jurisdiction again from the City of West Torrens under its own Act of Parliament), is also Airport land: "Furthermore Adelaide Shores has care, control and management responsibility of the sand dunes and beach to low tide and leases 22 hectares from Adelaide Airport Ltd which accommodates the Executive 60 golf course. In their entirety they are marketed as Adelaide Shores." Adelaide Shores Strategic Plan 2007-2012 Summary
On the AAL website, http://www.adelaideairport.com.au/corporate-and-community/adelaide-airport-limited, under "History": "The site of today's Parafield Airport was acquired and progressively developed. By 1941 it was clear once again that the State's aviation needs had yet again outgrown Parafield. The West Torrens site, also known as West Beach, was chosen for Adelaide Airport."
Given the long history of disputes between the council and the airport (e.g. "The location of the airport in the heartland of the city has long been a bone of contention for West Torrens' politicians and residents." Peter Donovan: Between the city and the sea, a history of West Torrens from settlement in 1836 to the present day, Wakefield Press, 1986, page 257), and the fact that the Airport lies outside jurisdiction of the City of West Torrens, I've never heard the airport's location being described as being "West Torrens", but it is still often referred to as "West Beach", as the AAL website acknowledges.
So what this boils down to is: in the series of articles that you are currently editing, are you trying to include only present-day data based on rigidly defined residential suburb boundaries, or will you be giving a historical background of the locality as well? And please bear in mind that suburb boundaries themselves can change from time to time, as has happened recently (and controversially) as part of the Port Adelaide redevelopment. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 09:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, now I understand. I used to live in West Beach and could never understand why the airport was referred to as being there, especially as the entrance and terminal seemed so far (or was that just peak hour traffic on Don Bradman Drive). Nonetheless, all I'm trying to do with the various suburb articles is develop some sort of consistency that provides a bit more structure to the article. In other words, turning 'em from stubs to starts. I'll leave it for others to add all the juicy details. Thanks again for making things clearer for me.--~ ~ : Lincoln Cooper : ~ ~ (talk) 10:55, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Main runway length is 3100m[edit]

A couple of recent edits have tried to increase the main runway length from 3100m to 3200m, without substantiation. These edits have been reverted as the figure given in Adelaide Airport Ltd's Masterplan (Vol. 1, December 2009, page 1.12) is 3100m. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 12:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Old photo[edit]

Id like to know why someone put up a old picture of the airport in the infobox? The terminal obviously is still not finished according to this photo. You can see the passenger bridges have still not been added. This photo would be appropriate in some other section.

I've promoted a different picture from the stack further down the article. --Scott Davis Talk 23:35, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

China Southern[edit]

I understand the reason why this taken out of the Airlines and destinations for the service advertised as beginning in December. However a simple search of China Southerns schedules on http://www.csair.com/au/en/ will show the following:

  • 22:00 Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport CZ663 Airbus A330 09:30+1d Adelaide International Airport 9h detail L(Economy) $1617.45

So why is this such as an issue? --Linkqer (talk) 08:25, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Adelaide Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:09, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Adelaide Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Annual Passengers[edit]

Please explain why 2020-21 ,2025-26 and 2030–31 added to this table?

Annual passenger statistics
Year Passenger movements
2020-21 9,856,000
2025-26 11,552,000
2030–31 13,537,000

Khoshhat (talk) 06:29, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:51, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andrewpgrout[edit]

Hi Andrew. You asked who cares. Well. Lots do. If you don't, well piss off180.150.114.118 (talk) 01:37, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@180.150.114.118: Sorry - the "who cares" comment was about the misplaced A380 comment I deleted. A piece of detail which probably does not belong in the article at all - like why is that special - and certainly not where it was situated. Please try to assume good faith in your comment telling someone to "piss off" is simply not on and could easily lead very quickly to you being blocked. The additions you have made are of very low quality - All airport have taxis outside - it really does not need saying, and you left the opening sentence of a section without a date (after you removed it with no explaination) leaving readers quite unaware of the chronology of the detail being discussed. Andrewgprout (talk) 02:56, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh oh oh, threats. Go ahead and block. Blocks get lifted anyway and also, there's ways around them.180.150.114.118 (talk) 12:35, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Banner[edit]

@The Banner, I removed one source because Adelaide wasn't the focus in the article and at that time, the airline has not yet announced that its next destination. I also removed Perth because Australia currently has a policy that doesn't allow (most?) foreign airlines (Vietnam included) to operate domestic flights.[1] The reason why the flight from Adelaide starts on the 22nd is because when you check the times and frequencies in the existing source, the flight from Vietnam arrives in Adelaide on the night of the 21st at 9:10pm. The aircraft will rest in Adelaide overnight and the flight from Adelaide starts the next morning of the 22nd at 07:25am.

Again, please take note from the existing source of the times of departure and arrival, the days of the week, and how the source implied (but not state) that flights from Adelaide start on the 22nd. RPC7778 (talk) 12:22, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So you admit that the start date of the 22nd is not sourced but is own research? The Banner talk 12:28, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Someone who is not stupid can already figure out that it starts on the 22nd just by looking at the days of the week the flight operates based from the source. RPC7778 (talk) 12:31, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-04/international-airlines-allowed-fly-domestic-routes-reduce-fares/9617598

User:Luke848[edit]

Also tagging User:SmileSmite83, User:Takendreams83, and User:Coastie43

Luke, we are not trying to edit war. However, per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, EXACT dates are required to add start dates to an airport page: “For future destinations, add: "(begins date service begins)" after the destination. Starting dates must be provided with full date including the year and references should be provided.”

Additionally, you appear to have a Conflict of Interest, as you have stated you work for the airport (seen in this dif: [[2]]). You have been warned of this more than once (seen here: [[3]] and here: [[4]]). WP:BFAQ#RULES states “Avoid editing articles relating to your organization entirely, because of the conflict of interest.” You are clearly not following this and have reverted multiple times to the point you appear to be breaking WP:3RR. Please refrain from further reverts.

Thank you. (VenFlyer98 (talk) 14:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Yeah yeah, alright you win kiddo. I’ll refrain. Luke848 (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vickers-Vimy museum[edit]

Need someone to update this section as I believe the aircraft was due to be moved late last year. 118.211.85.229 (talk) 13:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adelaide_Airport&oldid=1211419338"