Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
Chiliburn

Port Botany cruise terminal

Recommended Posts

If Hayes Dock is not an option what about that stretch of land directly to it's left in the photo. No problems with flight connections then 🙂 An underground travellator could operate from the airport terminals, allowing arrivals/departures by train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Chiliburn said:

 Send the container ships to Kembla or Newcastle .

Newcastle has been trying for years to use the old BHP site as a container terminal but is being blocked by the NSW Government. Something to do with compensation to be paid to Port Botany due to lost business. The ACCC has launched a Federal Court action claiming the Port Botany deal is "anti-competitive and illegal"See ACCC.

 

Time will tell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr walker said:

If Hayes Dock is not an option what about that stretch of land directly to it's left in the photo. No problems with flight connections then 🙂 An underground travellator could operate from the airport terminals, allowing arrivals/departures by train.

The airport charges $15 to use their train platform,what would they charge a mega ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Chiliburn said:

The airport charges $15 to use their train platform,what would they charge a mega ship.


LOL, $16?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Chiliburn said:

 

It would be quite nice sitting on your balcony plane spotting.

No, it wouldn't. The noise becomes very tedious after a few planes have taken off or landed almost over your head. I live 18-20kms from Sydney airport (as the crow flies), on one of the incoming flight paths. Even at that distance away you can't hear someone talking when outside when a plane goes over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

No, it wouldn't. The noise becomes very tedious after a few planes have taken off or landed almost over your head. I live 18-20kms from Sydney airport (as the crow flies), on one of the incoming flight paths. Even at that distance away you can't hear someone talking when outside when a plane goes over. 

It will be better once the 2nd airport is in operation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hayes dock cannot be used as the height of the cruise ship is  to dangerous for planes landing wind turbulence  according to pilots union …  the answer is Newcastle , port kembla , or Wollongong …  500 million to build it at botany , they could spend 100 million to upgrade all three other options and give the  rural fire brigade / farmers  urgent funds to combat the fires and drought … there is no need to destroy and waste that kind of money for a cruise line like royal carribean who made 2 billion profit …  royal carribean should  not be pushing the gov for it to be built there knowing how much damage it will cause to the bay and beaches ..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, in rod we trust said:

hayes dock cannot be used as the height of the cruise ship is  to dangerous for planes landing wind turbulence  according to pilots union …  the answer is Newcastle , port kembla , or Wollongong …  500 million to build it at botany , they could spend 100 million to upgrade all three other options and give the  rural fire brigade / farmers  urgent funds to combat the fires and drought … there is no need to destroy and waste that kind of money for a cruise line like royal carribean who made 2 billion profit …  royal carribean should  not be pushing the gov for it to be built there knowing how much damage it will cause to the bay and beaches ..  

Move the navy to Newcastle 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the report the chief of army said the amphibious vessels are in garden Island and the troupes are in Brisbane,Townsville and Darwin.
He said it would be more practical to have the troop carrying vessels near the troops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MicCanberra said:

I agree, no use having the navy in the heart of the harbour.

In the event of a missile attack the Navy would be a prime target and its in the heart of Sydney.😲

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, in rod we trust said:

hayes dock cannot be used as the height of the cruise ship is  to dangerous for planes landing wind turbulence  according to pilots union

Rod. If that is the case, how come it is being considered as a possible interim terminal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, By The Bay said:

Rod. If that is the case, how come it is being considered as a possible interim terminal?

I’m wondering if rod is a cruiser or a Botany resident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Hayes Dock is right alongside one of the main runways of the airport. I can't see how that could be a suitable place, even if only temporary, for a cruise terminal. And Yarra Bay isn't that much further away. Most of the time planes take off over Botany Bay and noise during and just after take-off is far worse than that from incoming planes. 

 

I can't think of any major cruise port that is situated right next to a major airport like that one would be if it goes ahead. I think it would put people off cruising from there.

 

I just don't see the logic in having the naval base in Sydney Harbour these days. Yes, it would be expensive to move it, especially if they had to move the dry dock, but they would probably recoup a lot of that cost selling some of the land to developers for apartments, restaurants and shops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kiwi Kruzer said:

In the event of a missile attack the Navy would be a prime target and its in the heart of Sydney.😲

Not exactly, the Navy would be at sea but the bigger targets in times of war are imports and trade. If an enemy can shut down trade like the oil supplies, fuels, and items to sustain a country then it can force a country to surrender. Attacking docks is counterproductive as it leaves no infrastructure to use for an invading force.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MicCanberra said:

I agree, no use having the navy in the heart of the harbour.

It is extremely beneficial. The purpose of the Navy is to protect the supply lines and trade such is oil imports. Sydney is a vital port where a lot of our materials come through. Having the Navy as a line of defence is extremely important. It must also be able to cover the airport and defend aircraft landing and taking off within its range. Sydney being a major port also allows the Navy to keep supplied and resourced and is in a better position to respond and deploy their ships in a times of natural disaster and emergencies. By having the ships located in a major port if there was an earthquake or natural disaster then it would not take long to supply them and deploy them to the disaster zone. There is a whole vast amount of reasons why the military presence is important for Sydney. It has infrastructure. Any invading country would find that infrastructure invaluable and would not want to destroy it but use it. Having the Navy there defends against that.


A few years ago a loonie politician named dudd wanted to relocate the Navy to Brisbane based on pure votes and ego. He was ill informed and knew nothing about national security. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kiwi Kruzer said:

In the event of a missile attack the Navy would be a prime target and its in the heart of Sydney.😲

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

That Hayes Dock is right alongside one of the main runways of the airport. I can't see how that could be a suitable place, even if only temporary, for a cruise terminal. And Yarra Bay isn't that much further away. Most of the time planes take off over Botany Bay and noise during and just after take-off is far worse than that from incoming planes. 

 

I can't think of any major cruise port that is situated right next to a major airport like that one would be if it goes ahead. I think it would put people off cruising from there.

 

I just don't see the logic in having the naval base in Sydney Harbour these days. Yes, it would be expensive to move it, especially if they had to move the dry dock, but they would probably recoup a lot of that cost selling some of the land to developers for apartments, restaurants and shops.

The one in Buenos Aires is pretty close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brisbane41 said:

It is extremely beneficial. The purpose of the Navy is to protect the supply lines and trade such is oil imports. Sydney is a vital port where a lot of our materials come through. Having the Navy as a line of defence is extremely important. It must also be able to cover the airport and defend aircraft landing and taking off within its range. Sydney being a major port also allows the Navy to keep supplied and resourced and is in a better position to respond and deploy their ships in a times of natural disaster and emergencies. By having the ships located in a major port if there was an earthquake or natural disaster then it would not take long to supply them and deploy them to the disaster zone. There is a whole vast amount of reasons why the military presence is important for Sydney. It has infrastructure. Any invading country would find that infrastructure invaluable and would not want to destroy it but use it. Having the Navy there defends against that.


A few years ago a loonie politician named dudd wanted to relocate the Navy to Brisbane based on pure votes and ego. He was ill informed and knew nothing about national security. 

So the Navy should go to Botany Bay with that reasoning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, MicCanberra said:

So the Navy should go to Botany Bay with that reasoning.

Exactly, but that wouldn't suit NIMBY Rod.

 

I can only wonder what the Botany Bay area would look like today if La Perouse had planted his flag instead of Cook. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, mr walker said:

Exactly, but that wouldn't suit NIMBY Rod.

 

I can only wonder what the Botany Bay area would look like today if La Perouse had planted his flag instead of Cook. 

mr walker

like the pomie bastards or not ,where ever they have been and and set up their form of government, the countries have thrived.

Spanish ,Russian,Portugal,Dutch,French  all those colonies are third world.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...