Australia Suggests New Site For Greymouth Aerodrome

Grey River Argus, 7 April 1948, Page 7

Australia Suggests New Site For Greymouth Aerodrome

Mr A. W. Colis. of Melbourne, chairman of Trans-*Australian Airlines, inspected the Greymouth Aerodrome during a recent visit with Sir Leonard Isitt, chairman of NationalAirways of New Zealand. In a letter to the Progress League, he states: "You will see that your proolem is a much greater one than tne extension or tne southern end oi Hie aerodrome, if scheduled Hying with modern aircraft is to be permitted. Your real problem is due to the location not allowing a sale angle oi approach excepting for small, obsolesuete. types of aircraft. It appears that the solution to the problem lies in finding and developing a new site affording greater area and fewer obstacles.” Along witn the letter, Mr Coles makes the following report, based on comparison with Australian aerodrome requirements: “In its present state, the only aircraft which could operate from this areodrome would be De HaviUand 84’s or light, singleengine types. Heavier types such as the De Havilland 89 or Lockheed .10 aircraft on certain occasions would operate, but the restrictions would pcso great as to make it impracticable to schedule regular services. Owing to the fall of ground from west, to east and the short run oi only .1,5/5 feet, with overhead wires anlong the railway line, take-offs and landings would not be permitted in these directions. . EFFECT OF RAINFALL “From the meteorological information, the rainfall in This area ig approximately 109 inches per year, and as t-be aerodrome is oi a grass surface, it would probably heroine unserviceable alter approximately . 4(1 points of rain, which would cause the surface of the aerodrome to oecoiiu too slippery to permit the effective use of brakes.

“The present approaches allow for only one in 25 angle of approach. To meet our standards, this would have to be improved to one in 40. The new LC.A.O. standards will require approaches to all aerodrome t.o be one in. 50. “From the attached plan, I would say there was little nope of altering the present aerodrome to the dimensions required for the operation nf DC-3 type aircraft, the minimum requirements of which are as follows;— Two runways of 4,700 feet and 4000 feet with the longest runway in the direction of the prevailing Wind. Th« approach gradings at either end oi these runways not to exceed, one in 40 for a distance of two miles &t either end of the strips. Owing to the heavy rainfall in this area, it would probably be necessary t'or these run ways to be heavily gravelled or bitu-men-sealed to overcome bogging oi skidding.-

“With the present trend in sircraft design, oven in the case oi feeder line aircraft, it would only be a very temporary measure to lay down an aerodrome belnw the minimum standards required for DC-3 type operation.” MINISTER CONCURS General agreement with the views of the Australian expert was expressed in the following letter from the Minister' of Defence, the Hon. F. Jones; — “.Tn reply to "the representations contained in your letter of February 20, you will recall that my communication of February 17 intimated that it was difficult to convey in simple terms the full implication of the technical information yo.u requested. 1 should indicate at this stage that the International Convention for Civil Aviation is applicable only in respect of International services and is not necessarily intended as a basis for domestic standards insofar as aerodromes are. concerned. However, in order to assure some degree of uniformity it is 'to Class E international standards or better, that is, briefly, with a minimum primary runway of 4.750 feet, and with a secondary run wav or runways of 4.020 feet. The standard requires also a freedom of obstruction within a gradient of one in 30 from the ends of all runwavs or. in the case of those runways on which landings by radio aids are effected. within, a gradient of one in 50. This information summarises generally the purport of the technical data previously supplied to you. impossible to develop “To deal specifically with the case of the Greymouth aerodrome, I must indicate immediately that it is not possible to develop this air field to meet international requirements. You wil’ doubtless be aware of the several physical factors which make any expansion of the existing runways economically impracticable and I assume that htere is no need for me to discuss these in detail. However. I feel that the inability to extend J.he Greymouth aerodrome is not a matter of very great concern as Grevmouth is not situated on an international route nor on an internal main trunk route. The question should, therefore, be considered from the viewpoint, of Greymouth's position in relation to other aerodromes in the region and to the potential nassenger traffic. Hokitika aerodrome is being reconstructed to Class F standards and will be capable of extension to Class E standards. It will therefore, be adequate for use by medium sized transport aircraft at present used on the Dominion’s air routes. . x 1 “You will, I think, appreciate that with Greymouth and Hokitika in such close proximity it would be difficult to justify the expense involved in providing large aerodromes at both towns nor would it be economical for the National Airways Corporation to operate large aircraft from both centres in view of the comparatively limited passenger and freight potentials. The needs of Greymouth can be adequately catered for by feeder services using small aircraft.” WEHEKA NOT FOR USE. Due to the lack of proper maintenance, and the fact that the Air Department is unwilling to do any thing the Weheka aerodrome cannot be used by Fox Moth aircraft, the gen eral manager of the National Airways, Mr F. M. Clarke, advised the League. “Until improvements aTe made, no operation from Weheka can be contemplated other than for urgent ambulance cases, the degree of urgency being assessed between the risk to the patient involved in transportation by (a) surface means and (b) by air under existing conditions. Any requests to the Corporation for air ambulance service in cases which may be classed under the above categories will receive every consideration,” Mr Clarke wrote. Mr J. B. Kent, M.P., informed the League as follows: “In connection with the Weheka aerodrome, I have to report that the relicensing of this aerodrome is under review. It. is one of several aerodromes maintained by the Public Works Department and the Minister of Defence states that it is seldom used and owjng to the nature of the surface is not entirely suitable. The Minister further states that owing to its isolation combined with the relatively little use it receives it would be uneconomical to effect major improvements at. the present time. It is considered also that the licence which will be issued shortly will probably not include Dominie type aircraft.” A recommendation of the Transport and Communications Committee that the reports should be sent to the West Coast Aero ( Club for consideration and suggestions,