Kingscote Airport Master Plan Apr 2010 - Kangaroo Island Council

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
CONTENTS
PAGE No
Movement Area Planning 3
Critical Aircraft 3
Turbo-prop Replacement Options 3
Consideration to Regional Jets 3
The Role of Executive Jets 4
Critical Aircraft Recommendation 4
Runways 5
Runway Length Needed for the Critical Aircraft 5
Runway Width and Strength Considerations 5
Requirement for Secondary Runways 5
Runway Capacity & Demand 7
Taxiways 8
Provision of Additional Taxiways 8
Aprons 10
RPT Parking 10
General Aviation Parking 10
Refuelling Apron 10
Helicopter Parking 10
Terminal Area Planning 12
Passenger Terminal 12
Need for Expansion 12
Security Screening 13
Expansion Options 13
Roads Car Parks Bus Parking etc 13
Other Aviation Facilities 14
Aircraft Hangar 14
Aircraft Refuelling 14
Navigation Aids 14
Airport Lighting 15
Rescue & Fire Fighting 15
Emergency Facilities RFDS/Police/CFS 15
Meteorological Facilities 15
Airport Maintenance 15
Non aviation Facilities 16
Commercial Sites 16
Surrounding Area Planning 17
Protection of Airspace 17
Aircraft Noise 18
Environmental Considerations 20
Implementation 22
Appendix A Supporting Data and References 23

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLES
Table 1 Possible Future Critical Aircraft
Table 2 Wind Speed by Direction and Percentage of Time
Table 3 Terminal Area Estimates
Table 4 Building Site Acceptability Based On Aircraft Noise Levels
Table 5 List of Future Development Items and Associated Triggers
FIGURES
Figure 1 Overall Layout Showing Runway Taxiway and Apron Development
Figure 2 Long term Development of the Terminal Area and Apron
Figure 3 Identification of Potential Commercial Sites
Figure 4 Single Event Noise Contours for Saab 340/F50/Dash8
Figure 5 Stormwater Drainage and Flora Areas

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Movement Area Planning
The following study looks seeks to provide a planned approach to development at Kingscote
Airport over the next 15-20 years.
Critical Aircraft
The critical aircraft for master planning purposes can be defined as the largest aircraft likely
to use the aerodrome on a regular basis. Currently the turbo prop Saab 340 with 34
passenger seats fills this role. Although larger aircraft may occasionally visit Kingscote, they
do not have a key role in the current economics of the airport and therefore are not
considered critical in terms of provision of infrastructure.
In 15-20 years time, the Saab 340’s are unlikely to be operating due to their age; production
ceased in 1999. Similarly the Fokker F50 with 50-58 passenger seats, currently flying to
several ports in South Australia, ceased production in 1996. At the end of the 15-20 year
master planning period, the newest Saab 340s will be over 25 year old. By this time, the
number of permitted load cycles from landings, pressurisation, are likely to have been
exceeded and the aircraft retired.
Turbo-prop Replacement Options
A replacement turbo prop is unlikely to be in the range of an 18 to 34 seat capacity, as worldwide,
there are no such aircraft in production. Aerospatiale ATR 42, ATR 72 and Bombardier
Q400, are currently the only turbo prop airliners being made. These models range from 44 to
78 passenger seats.
Aircraft of this type will fit into the existing infrastructure at Kingscote without the need for
significant changes to the aircraft pavement. The increased seating capacity will potentially
lead to increased congestion in the terminal especially if passengers from more than one
flight are using the facility simultaneously.
Looking at the forecasts in the Kingscote Airport Strategic Plan, the predicted passenger
movements are estimated to range from 84,000 to 156,000 per annum by the year 2023/24
(these are totals of the arrivals and departures). The passenger numbers equate to between
3 to 6 flights daily using a 50 seat aircraft with 70% seat occupancy.
Consideration to Regional Jets
For short haul routes, turbo prop aircraft are significantly more cost effective than jets as they
use around 30% less fuel. The speed advantage of the jet is largely negated when flying
short stage lengths as the time spent boarding, taxiing, taking off and landing takes up a
large portion of the flight time. Government regulations currently require greater security
checks for regular passenger jets. Adding time for the higher level of passenger and
possibly baggage screening, the overall travel time between Adelaide and Kingscote could
increase if jets were introduced.
Regional jets operating in Australia include the Embraer EMB 170 (70-78 seats) operated by
Airnorth and Virgin and the EMB 190 (108-118 pax seats) operated by Virgin. Because of
inefficiencies with short haul routes, these aircraft would only operate into Kingscote if there
were sufficient passenger numbers flying direct to other ports such as Melbourne or Sydney.
The passenger numbers in the Strategic Plan forecasts equate to between 1.5 to 3 flights
daily of a 100 seat aircraft with a 70% seat occupancy.
3

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
South Australian based passengers are likely to prefer Adelaide as their port of origin while
International and interstate passengers may have a preference for either Melbourne or
Sydney. So even if half the passengers originated from interstate, it only generates 1.5
flights per day using optimistic forecast. The demand is unlikely to warrant an expected
capital outlay of between $10M and $20M for infrastructure needed to allow introduction of
regional jets.
So at this stage unless there is significant shift in passenger demand, it is unlikely we will see
regional jets operating regularly into Kingscote within the 15 to 20 year Master Plan study
period.
The Role of Executive Jets
These aircraft currently operate on an occasional basis into Kingscote, primarily servicing the
high end resort market. Provided operating times do not clash with scheduled flights, the
existing passenger facilities at Kingscote will generally be satisfactory.
The ability of the aircraft pavements to cope with increased loads and tyre pressures
becomes an issue when larger corporate jets such as the Gulfstream IV are proposed.
Those aircraft requiring stronger pavements, greater runway lengths etc, may need to look at
alternatives as their numbers are unlikely to generate enough revenue to the airport through
landing charges to justify additional infrastructure solely for these occasional aircraft.
Details of the weight and passenger capacity of existing and possible future aircraft for
Kingscote are listed in Table 1:
Critical Aircraft Recommendation
Based on known and predicted passenger trends, a turbo prop aircraft with a seating
capacity range of approximately 50 to 80 appears to be the most likely choice to replace the
current Saab 340 commuter fleet. The 50-80 seat aircraft typically have a wingspan of
around 30m and a fuselage length of 35m. Some growth in size may occur; both
Aerospatiale and Bombardier have plans for 90 seat stretched versions of the ATR 72 and
Q400 models respectively, but they will remain within the Code 3C criterion which permits up
to 36m wingspan. Either way, the current apron and terminal facilities can be expanded to
accommodate all potential Code 3C turbo prop aircraft.
Table 1 Possible Future Critical Aircraft
TURBO PROP Max Weight kg Passengers
Saab 340 (production ceased 1999) 13,200 34-36
Fokker F50 (production ceased 1996) 20,820 up to 58
Bombardier Dash 8 300 (production ceased 2008) 18,860 50-56
ATR 42 500 18,600 44-50
ATR 72 22,970 62-74
Bombardier Q400 (Dash 8 400) 29,260 68-78
JETS
Embraer ERJ 170 35,990 70-78
Fokker F100 (production ceased 1999) 41,730 107
BAE 146 300 (production ceased 2000) 44,230 87
Embraer ERJ 190 (comparison only – beyond Master Plan) 50,790 108-118
Airbus 320 (comparison only – beyond Master Plan) 77,000 148-180
Boeing B737 800 (comparison only – beyond Master Plan) 79,230 162-175
4

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Runways
Runway Length Needed for the Critical Aircraft
In broad terms, a runway length of approximately 1600m is needed for turbo prop regional
airliners such as the Q400. Regional jets such as the Embraer 170, need around 1800m
while B737/A320 domestic jet aircraft require in the order 2000m of runway. Refer Appendix
A.
The actual length needed will depend primarily on the aircraft model and the destination
stage length (the longer the stage length means the aircraft has to carry more fuel which
adds to the weight which increases the length requirement). Within the master planning 15
year time frame, it is unlikely stage lengths longer than Kingscote direct to Melbourne or
Sydney will be needed. The runway lengths noted above would be suitable for Kingscote-
Melbourne/Sydney.
The existing 1402m main runway 01/19 can be increased to 1524m while remaining inside
the existing runway strip and clearway area (marked by the white gable markers). Further
lengthening in the order of 220m is available within the aerodrome boundary to the south if
needed.
An extension to the north beyond the current clearway is unavailable due to the presence of
Arranmore Road and a requirement to maintain an obstacle clear gradient over vehicles.
So it is possible to have a runway length of 1740m without the need for land acquisition,
although some clearing of trees on the adjacent properties will be needed.
A future runway length of 1740m has been adopted for the 15 year Master Plan.
Runway Width and Strength Considerations
The existing 30m runway width is sufficient for turbo prop and jet aircraft including Embraer
170. Boeing B737 and Airbus A320 models are also approved to operate off 30m runways.
The existing sealed aircraft pavements were constructed to Fokker F27 standard at a
maximum weight 20,000kgs. The pavements will require significant strengthening to cater
for the heavier turbo prop aircraft through application of additional layers of crushed gravels
and bituminous resurfacing. The heavier jets require much stronger pavements and possible
consideration to asphalt surfacing, although some regional ports (Broome, Gove and Hervey
Bay) cater for B737 services with only spray sealed runways. Strengthening of drainage
culverts that run beneath the main runway will also be needed.
Requirement for Secondary Runways
The percentage of time an aircraft can use a runway without restriction due to cross winds, is
termed the runway wind useability. The allowable cross wind tolerance increases as the size
of aircraft increases.
CASA does not specify a wind useability level; it is left to pilots to operate their aircraft within
the specified allowable cross wind. ICAO Annex 14 1 recommends the number and
orientation of runways should provide a usability of not less than 95% for the aeroplanes that
the airport is intended to serve.
1 Annex 14 –the International Standards and Recommended Practices” Aerodromes” Annex
14 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation Volume I Aerodrome Design and
Operations
5

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
For planning purposes the limiting cross-wind component recommended for use in Annex 14
is:
− 37 kph (20 kt) for aircraft whose reference field length 2 is 1500m or over,
− 24 kph (13 kt) for aircraft whose reference field length is 1200m or up to 1500m; and,
− 19 kph (10 kt) for aircraft whose reference field length is less than 1200m.
(ICAO Annex 14 2004)
2 Reference Field Length is the minimum field length required for take-off at maximum
certificated take-off mass, sea level, standard atmospheric conditions, still air and zero
runway slope.
The previous Master Plan found the main 01/19 runway had a useability of 94.2% based on
a 24 kph allowable cross wind. Couper Technics 1997
All the critical aircraft mentioned in this study have a cross wind capability in excess of 24
kph, so the existing runway by itself can be considered suitable in terms of wind useability.
Additional runways have been constructed at
Kingscote, primarily to cater for light aircraft when
winds on the main runway are unsuitable.
The addition of the 06/24 and 15/33 runways
increases the useability of the aerodrome to 99.74%
for aircraft with a cross wind capability of 24 kph.
Couper Technics 1997.
Updated wind data was obtained from Bureau of
Meteorology as shown in Table 2 overleaf.
The data relates wind speed and direction to the
percentage of time and for the occurrence.
The wind data in Table 2 has been collated for the 9am and 3pm periods to represent typical
operating periods, as opposed to a 24 hour average, where the results can be skewed as
little activity occurs at night, particularly by small aircraft. Winds are also less intense at
night.
Keys aspects that can be drawn from the wind data include:
−
−
−
the majority of wind favours the north south runway;
the strongest winds occur in the afternoon and are from a westerly direction; and,
the data reinforces the findings of the 1997 Master Plan.
The data confirms the current layout is appropriate in providing adequate cross wind
useability for current and future aircraft likely to use Kingscote Airport.
6

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Table 2 Wind Speed by Direction and Percentage of Time
9AM N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW Total
Calm 7.40
1–5 km/h 0.29 0.13 0.22 0.16 0.24 0.09 0.18 0.20 0.35 0.31 0.60 1.01 0.84 0.51 0.11 0.20 5.46
6–10 km/h 0.90 0.79 0.77 0.57 0.86 0.46 0.60 0.64 0.95 1.25 1.78 2.86 3.87 1.54 0.59 0.59 19.00
11–15 km/h 1.61 1.26 0.88 0.55 1.14 0.99 1.04 0.92 1.61 1.63 0.93 1.76 2.69 0.75 0.64 0.84 19.26
16–20 km/h 1.28 0.84 0.66 0.37 0.82 0.70 0.79 0.86 1.45 0.90 0.77 0.79 1.83 0.57 0.49 0.82 13.95
21–25 km/h 1.59 0.93 0.59 0.38 1.04 1.21 1.83 1.48 1.61 1.21 1.06 1.45 1.74 0.53 0.79 1.15 18.62
26–30 km/h 0.97 0.40 0.07 0.16 0.55 0.86 1.41 1.06 1.36 0.57 0.49 0.71 0.81 0.42 0.51 0.66 11.03
31–35 km/h 0.20 0.05 0.09 0.16 0.46 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.16 0.24 0.27 0.20 0.18 0.42 3.12
36–40 km/h 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.15 0.11 0.16 0.20 0.18 0.15 0.16 0.20 0.22 0.09 1.81
>40 km/h 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.35
TOTAL 6.96 4.38 3.19 2.27 4.76 4.53 6.49 5.55 7.73 6.38 6.01 8.98 12.24 4.75 3.56 4.82 100.00
3PM N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW Total
Calm 0.11
1–5 km/h 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.20
6–10 km/h 0.58 0.57 0.29 0.24 0.31 0.15 0.22 0.15 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.24 0.07 0.20 0.22 3.95
11–15 km/h 2.17 1.75 1.72 1.52 1.95 0.55 0.91 0.71 1.11 0.68 0.53 0.24 0.62 0.46 0.60 1.19 16.71
16–20 km/h 1.79 1.44 1.35 1.61 2.19 0.68 1.53 1.11 1.10 0.79 0.58 0.37 0.84 0.69 0.75 0.93 17.75
21–25 km/h 1.94 1.50 0.91 0.73 1.48 0.58 2.94 3.21 2.45 2.08 1.41 0.99 1.30 1.75 1.55 1.26 26.08
26–30 km/h 1.17 0.31 0.18 0.13 0.37 0.29 2.63 3.34 1.81 2.45 1.42 0.75 1.44 1.68 1.30 1.02 20.29
31–35 km/h 0.35 0.05 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.86 1.28 0.58 0.89 0.69 0.47 0.82 0.84 0.55 0.27 7.78
36–40 km/h 0.20 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.37 0.55 0.37 0.69 0.68 0.46 0.71 0.64 0.37 0.16 5.28
>40 km/h 0.04 0.04 0.16 0.09 0.18 0.16 0.33 0.29 0.44 0.11 1.84
TOTAL 8.26 5.68 4.55 4.24 6.39 2.26 9.52 10.52 7.67 7.95 5.68 3.82 6.28 6.58 5.42 5.08
Bureau of Meteorology October 2009 via climate.sa@bom.gov.au
100.00
Runway Capacity & Demand
Regional 50 seat airliners, predicted to operate into Kingscote during the Master Plan time
frame, are likely to confine landings and take offs to the main runway 01/19, as the other
runways are unsealed and are of insufficient length.
The capacity of a single runway free of taxying and air traffic restrictions, is approximately
200,000 movements per annum. US Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular AC
150/5060-5. Previously the RPT traffic peaked at around 6,000 yearly movements using
Saab 340 (34 seats) and Cessna 404 (9 seats) aircraft. The 2024/25 Optimistic Forecast of
156,158 annual passengers will require less than 5000 movements by a 50 seat aircraft at
70% occupancy. Therefore a single main runway will easily cope with the optimistic forecast
in RPT traffic.
General aviation aircraft accounted for nearly 4000 annual movements in 2008/09. AVDATA
Airport Usage Analysis. No data is available of predicted general aviation traffic. The BTRE
web site provides a breakdown of the general aviation hours flown nationally from 1994-
2007. The data shows an annual growth rate of just 0.52% in that period. Bureau of
Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics via http://www.bitre.gov.au/info 2008.
Assuming Kingscote performs far better than the national average, with a growth of 5% per
annum for master planning purposes, around 8000 annual general aviation movements can
be generated by 2024/25.
The optimistic combined total of Regular Public Transport and general aviation movements
at 13,000 per annum remains well below the airport capacity. The numbers show it is
unlikely there will be aircraft delays due to lack of airfield capacity within and well beyond the
master plan time frame.
7

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Taxiways
Provision of Additional Taxiways
International planning guidelines show parallel taxiway facilities are needed when aircraft
operations reach 30,000 – 60,000 movements per annum. ICAO Airport Planning Manual
Part 1 While the Kingscote numbers are well below the 30,000 threshold, some conflict may
occur if movements increase and aircraft predominantly use the main runway for takeoff,
landings and backtracking.
Departing aircraft enter runway 01/19 at the northern end via a short sealed taxiway. For
takeoffs to the north the aircraft must backtrack the full length of the runway to reach the
southern end. Delays can occur due to the time the back-tracking aircraft occupies the
runway. A similar situation occurs when incoming aircraft land from the north and run
through to the southern end of runway 01/19. These aircraft then perform a 180 degree turn
and backtrack to the northern end to the taxiway exit point.
An alternative is to transit via the 15/33 runway which gives similar taxying distances and
brings aircraft into the western side of the apron. This is an ideal arrangement as it promotes
flow across the apron rather that having single entry / exit which can add to congestion. The
downside is that many aircraft will avoid using the unsealed 15/33 runway and the western
taxiway (Taxiway B) due to potential stone chip damage. Sealing of runway 15/33 and
Taxiway B would overcome the problem and provide the airport with an effective parallel
taxiway, overcoming the need for aircraft to back track on the main runway.
Other delays can occur to aircraft on approach with ground based aircraft backtrack to the
northern end of runway 01/19. Extending the runway further to the north will increase the
time of backtracking. Provision of a short section of parallel taxiway from the sealed taxiway
to the northern end of the runway would enhance the airport layout and has therefore been
included in this Master Plan.
General aviation aircraft will use all runways and taxiways available provided the pilot
accepts operations off unsealed surfaces. Sealing of runway 15/33 is expected to promote
increased use of the facility. Access to the general aviation parking areas on the western end
of the apron can be from either Taxiway Bravo which connects from the northern end of
runway 15/33 or via the RPT apron and Taxiway A which connects to the northern end of
Runway 01/19. The busy area for these aircraft is likely the section of taxiway adjoining the
edge of the general aviation apron. By making the area wide enough to incorporate possible
passing lanes, congestion of general aviation traffic can be avoided.
Sealing of Taxiway Bravo would compliment the sealing of runway 15/33 to provide a
bituminised taxying option for aircraft operating between the apron and the southern end of
runway 01/19.
A possible long term taxiway layout is shown at Figure 1.
8

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Figure 1 Overall Layout Showing Runway Taxiway and Apron Development
9

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Aprons
RPT Parking
The existing apron has space provision for:
− 1 x BAe 146 (eastern apron extension);
− 3 x Saab and 1 x Dash8/Saab 1 x RFDS PC 12 (main apron); and,
− 3 x Cessna 402 or equivalent (western apron extension).
The overall length of the apron is approx 300m with a depth of 57m from the edge of the
passenger walkway to the centreline of the apron edge taxiway. Increasing the depth by up
10m would allow unrestricted parking and taxiway access for aircraft with wingspans of 30m.
An additional 6m extension would allow unrestricted taxiway access and parking for Code
3C 3 aircraft including the Q400 and EMB 170 etc.
Figure 2 overleaf illustrates how the existing apron can be extended to the east, west and
south to a size well in excess of the predicted parking demand.
General Aviation Parking
A sealed area for general aviation parking is provided at the western end of the existing RPT
apron. A grassed area provides additional space further west of the seal. It is suggested the
entire area from the western end of the apron be set aside for future general aviation use as
shown on Figure 2. Areas east of the apron could be utilised to accommodate future
demands for long term RPT and corporate jet parking.
Refuelling Apron
Currently aircraft refuelling is not available to aircraft operators at Kingscote Airport. A gravel
pavement to the south of the general aviation apron has been used on occasion for storage
of drum and above ground tank fuel for private and emergency use; for example during bush
fires used to replenish fire bomber aircraft. The current location fits in well with long-term
expansion of the adjacent apron facilities and has therefore been retained in this Master
Plan. Note the refuelling of RPT aircraft, if ever required, would take place on the RPT apron
as discussed under Aircraft Refuelling.
Helicopter Parking
There is no regular helicopter flying out of Kingscote. Growth in either the tourism or mining
sectors may see some increase in activity. Helicopter parking is provided south of the apron
(a) near the illuminated wind indicator and (b) east of the fuel storage area. Within the time
frame of the master plan there is no indication for additional space beyond the area already
provided. Refer Figure 2 overleaf
3
The Airport Reference Code is described by International Civil Aviation Organisation
(ICAO) as a system that relates the characteristics of Airports to specifications that are
suitable for the aeroplanes that are intended to operate from these Airports. The code
number relates to the aeroplane reference field length, the code letter is based on the
aeroplane wingspan and outer main gear wheel span. Note that determination of the
aeroplane reference field length is solely for the selection of the code number and is not
intended to influence the actual runway length provided.
10

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Figure 2 Long Term Development of the Terminal Area and Apron
11

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Terminal Area Planning
Passenger Terminal
The existing terminal has a floor space of approximately 300 square metres and features two
check-in areas, a combined departure lounge / arrivals hall, toilet facilities, hire car booths,
airline office space and external baggage makeup and reclaim areas.
Need for Expansion
The Kingscote Airport Strategic Plan estimates passenger movements to range from 84,000
to 156,000 per annum by 2023/24 (these are totals of the arrivals and departures). The
passenger numbers equate to between 3 and 6 flights daily of a 50 seat aircraft with a 70%
seat occupancy.
In broad terms the aircraft would require a terminal area of approximately 530 square metres
increasing to 880 square metres for two 50 seater aircraft arriving simultaneously. Table 3
provides for a breakdown of how the broad area estimates were determined.
Table 3 Terminal Area Estimates
Design Aircraft 1 or 2 x 50 seat regional airliner Area M2 Area M2
No of passenger based on 80% load factor 40 Pax 80 Pax
Baggage Check in and ticketing
40% of pax @2.0m 2 16 32
allowance for .5 friend/ passenger @1.5m 2 12 24
+ 10% circulation 3 6
Check in Counters allow 2 or 3 @ 2.5 wide by 4m 30 45
Baggage make up
Security baggage X ray pax scan
Include operator allow area 4m x 10m 40 40
Security office space allow 12m 2 12 12
Secured Gate Lounge
100% of pax @1.5m 2 60 120
allowance for 0.3 friend /passenger @1m 2 18 36
add 20% circulation 31 31
Baggage Reclaim
baggage breakdown passengers @1.2m 2 48 96
allowance for 0.3 friend /passenger @1m 2 12 24
add 20% circulation 12 24
Arrivals Hall
pax @1.25m 2 50 100
allowance for .3 friend /passenger @1m 2 12 24
add 20% circulation 15 25
Miscellaneous
Concessions 30 50
Airline offices 30 60
Toilets 40 50
Plant allow 40m2 30 40
Entrance airlock 30 40
TOTAL AREA (internal) 531 879
12

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
The existing terminal would require expansion and rearrangement to cater for increased
passenger loads. The present layout can become congested even with Saab operations.
For example the existing check-in desks are at opposite ends of terminal, designed for a 2-
airline operation. The current schedules consist of a single airline operation, so one of the
desks remains vacant. Only the eastern check in is use; it can become overcrowded due to
(a) a lack of building depth for queuing, (b) conflict between the check-in queues and access
to the public toilets (c) conflict between the check-in queues and the baggage reclaim.
Security Screening
There are no dedicated facilities for security checking of passenger or baggage at Kingscote
Airport. Long term planning will need to include allowance for screening passengers and
carry-on baggage, as well as having provision for checked bag screening.
The requirement to introduce increased security measures rests with the Office of Transport
Security which is part of the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development
and Local Government. At the time of writing, only jet RPT services are subject to passenger
and baggage screening. That may change with the release of the Aviation White Paper that
is expected to be released early 2010. The White Paper may recommend introducing
security controls based on aircraft size rather than the method of propulsion.
Expansion Options
A previous study by Woodhead Australia produced plans for a revised terminal expanded to
680 square metres and included improvements comprising;
− new check in and departure lounge at the western end of the building;
− new airline office space and baggage make up area at the western end;
− new café souvenir shop and food preparation area in the centre of the building; and ,
− new arrivals lounge and under-cover baggage retrieval at the eastern end.
The plans did not include space for passenger or baggage screening, although with some
modifications and area increase, the design could be readily modified to include provision for
security checking if required by change in regulations.
The Woodhead Australia plans show the existing terminal can be expanded twice the current
area, with additional space available for further extensions if needed. Figure 2 shows
adequate space is available for very long term expansion that would provide sufficient
terminal sizing even for jet aircraft. A building depth of 30m and a length of well over 100m is
available for future development if required.
Similarly, sufficient space is available to meet supporting landside infrastructure including
and upgraded road and carpark network.
Roads Car Parks Bus Parking etc
Figure 2 shows the areas available for vehicle and bus parking to cater for optimistic growth
in terminal use. Parking will comprise space for rental car, private vehicles, long term
parking. Bus parking can be accommodated separately in a dedicated area on the either
side of the terminal pending demand and future terminal layouts.
Stakeholder input identified pedestrian hazards due to traffic speeds past the terminal.
Future terminal development planning will need to include a road network that provides
improved pedestrian safety while catering for increasing growth. This may include road
realignment and provision of calming devices to slow vehicle operating in front of the
terminal.
13

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Other Aviation Facilities
Aircraft Hangar
The existing hangar at Kingscote is for low-level usage is used for aircraft storage rather than
maintenance workshop facilities. For long term planning light aircraft hangars should be
linked to the western end of the apron as shown on Figure 2.
To economise on available space and minimise supporting infrastructure, small hangars say
less than 225m 2 , should be grouped into blocks, with each block capable of supporting 6-10
aircraft; as opposed to having 10 small individual buildings.
If an unexpected demand for general aviation parking occurs additional apron could be
developed south of the apron into the grassed area set aside for helicopter parking. The
helicopter area consists of a grassed area marked with cones which could easily be
relocated further east if required
Aircraft Refuelling
There are no current facilities for refuelling RPT aircraft as these traditionally fly between
Adelaide and Kingscote. The short stage length makes it cheaper to refuel on the mainland.
Should longer RPT flights be introduced, such as to Melbourne or Sydney there may be
requirement for fuel. For an apron with free-moving parking positions; as opposed to fixed
aerobridge positions, the use of mobile tankers offers the most adaptable method.
Fixed fuel hydrants are expensive to install and often end up being in an incorrect location
when a change to the aircraft model operating occurs. A tank connected to a bowser and
hose reel, while quite common, can only reach a parking position within 30m of the bowser
due to limitations on the hose reel length. This places the bowser in close proximity to the
terminal which is detrimental to safety as well as aesthetics. A remote location is of little use
to aircraft parking in front of the terminal. For this reason a remote storage facility with
mobile tankers is suggested.
The RPT fuel storage and tanker accommodation could be located in the precinct of the
existing general aviation fuel storage located 180m off the southwest corner of the apron.
The facility is suitably located clear of existing and future areas needed for aircraft parking
and has therefore been retained in this Master Plan. Being located airside it allows refuelling
tankers to access aircraft without the need for passing through security. External bridging
tanker deliveries, operating on an infrequent basis, could be escorted airside as required.
Navigation Aids
Kingscote is currently equipped with a non-directional beacon (NDB) located in the northwest
part of the airport. The NDB is owned and operated by AirServices Australia. The range of
the NDB is listed as 35NM (60NM over water). NDBs are old equipment and were previously
mentioned in terms of eventual replacement, possibly with satellite based technology.
However there have been no recent announcements from AirServices Australia on this issue,
so it is presumed the NDB will remain on the present site for the life of the equipment.
A non-precision GPS approach is available for instrument landings from the north onto
runway 19. Provision of a GPS approach to the main runway from the south is a possible
future option. It does not require any ground-based installations, and terrain clearance is
already protected to the non-precision approach standard.
14

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
The Master Plan concludes that under current regulations, the increase in size of RPT
aircraft from 34 to 50 passenger seats, or the introduction of jet aircraft does not introduce a
requirement for new navigational aids.
Airport Lighting
Kingscote is equipped with low intensity runway edge lights. Pilot slope guidance on
approach is provided to both ends of the main runway with an Abbreviated “T” Visual
Approach Slope Indicator System A-TVASIS. There is no additional slope guidance lighting
needed to allow introduction of larger 50 seat or jet aircraft. Council may need to eventually
replace the A-TVASIS with a Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) the modern
equivalent of the VASIS should parts for the former become scarce and maintenance
becomes overly expensive.
The remainder of the airport lighting comprising low-intensity, runway and taxiway lights, has
recently been upgraded to the current standards. It is unlikely there will be a demand to
upgrade the current lighting within the Master Plan time frame, other than provision for
additional flood lighting to compliment any future expansion of the apron areas used at night.
Rescue & Fire Fighting
Fire Fighting Services are required when an aerodrome which has more than 350,000
passengers in a year MOS Part 139H-Standards Applicable to the Provision of Aerodrome
Rescue and Fire Fighting Services. The optimistic growth forecast shows passenger
numbers to be around 156,000 in 2024/25. Dedicated on airport fire fighting facilities are
therefore not required within the Master Plan time-frame.
Emergency Facilities RFDS/Police/CFS
Sufficient space airside will be set aside for allocation of an open area for bush fire response
teams. Facilities include replenishment water tanks and fuel storage for fire fighting.
Possible locations can be developed on any open grassland areas that are clear of
movement areas with access to water supply and the external road network for emergency
service access.
Meteorological Facilities
A field weather station comprising anemometer, Stevenson screen, ceilometer (cloud height
detector), visibility metre and rain gauge, is located on airside south of the apron. The
location provides ready access for observers from the building area. The site remains clear
of likely future use by aircraft and is therefore suitable for long term use. Should the Bureau
of Meteorology require larger building installations a remote location possibly to the east of
runway 01/19 would be appropriate.
Airport Maintenance
Airport maintenance facilities vehicles equipment and materials are located north of the area
set aside for future terminal, roads and car parks. The facilities can remain without
interference to development although for long term planning, new permanent facilities should
be located clear of the terminal and carpark precinct. A possible site is in the north western
sector of the airport.
15

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Non aviation Facilities
Commercial Sites
Stakeholder inputs did not identify significant development options other than rental car
facilities see above and a possible tourism information centre.
It is suggested the entire sector of land north of runway 06/24 and within the northern extent
of runways 15/33 and 01/19 should give priority to future use associated with aircraft and
passenger handling and supporting infrastructure. Future commercial facilities located within
the area marked in pink on Figure 2 should be placed clear of possible areas for terminal
road and carpark development.
Long term non-aviation development could take place as shown in Figure 3 in the large
areas to the western side of runway 15/33 and clear of the 06/24 approach and takeoff area,
and clear of the NDB navaid. Additional development east of runway 01/19, again clear of
the 06/24 approach and takeoff area is possible without interference to the long term aviation
use of the airport as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 Identification of Potential Commercial Sites
16

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Surrounding Area Planning
Aircraft flight paths into Kingscote will either follow straight into the northern end of runway
01/19 for aircraft arriving from Adelaide or follow a left hand circuit to the southern end. The
unsealed and shorter cross runways will be used less frequently and generally only by
smaller aircraft less than 5700kg. Aircraft flying crosswind, downwind and base legs will
generally be operating within a 2.5 km radius from the runway end in use, or within a 5km
radius in the case of the larger RPT aircraft.
Protection of Airspace
Height control of objects and structures within the vicinity of the airport is needed to protect
airspace from obstacles that would otherwise make use of the airport unviable for aircraft
operations. A set of plane surfaces, the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) defines the
allowable height of objects and structures within the approach-take off, side transition and
circling areas. The OLS for the various aircraft types and flying condition (i.e. visual,
instrument, day and night) are defined in the CASA Manual of Standards Part 139-
Aerodromes.
The existing OLS is protected for Code 3 aircraft operating non-precision approaches into the
main runway. Code 3 aircraft includes the turbo prop regional airliners ATR 42/75, Saab
340, Q400 etc and regional jets such as the BAe 146 and Embraer 170. Note the EMB 190
which is a stretched version of the E170 is listed as by CASA Code 4 as are the Airbus A320
and Boeing B737 models.
For Code 3 aircraft the approach and take areas extends 15km out from the end of the
runway end (2500m for Code 2) rising at a gradient of 2% from the runway ends. A
horizontal circling area extends on a radius of 4000m from the main runway ends at a height
of 45m above the aerodrome. The limit of the horizontal surface connects to a conical
surface rising at a rate pf 5% for a further 75m of elevation. These plane surfaces form the
basis of the Kingscote Airport OLS.
Subject to adjustment for an increase in the length of the main runway, the existing OLS for
the main runway meets the design parameters for the critical aircraft. It is suggested a
planning OLS be prepared to include the extended runway lengths needed for the critical
aircraft as identified in this Master Plan.
A building height map is incorporated into the Kangaroo Island Development Plan May 2009,
to assist in protecting the airport against possible airspace intrusion. Minor adjustments to
the main runway length are unlikely to effect the Development Plan Maps although this
aspect needs to be confirmed.
The 15/33 and 06/24 runways are protected to Code 2 non-precision approach standard.
While the wind data shows larger Code 3 aircraft do not require additional runway usability,
upgrading runway 15/33 to Code 3 standard for daytime use is simply a matter of widening
the approach and take off inner edge from 80 to 90m. This would legitimise the use of this
runway for Saab 340 and equivalent aircraft and give some increased flexibility to the airport
layout. It would also make sense as the 15/33 runway is recommended for sealing in the
long term, to provide additional taxiway access between the apron and the southern end of
the main runway. The runway, already 30m wide, could easily be transformed into a Code 3
facility.
17

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Aircraft Noise
The Australian Noise Exposure Forecast (ANEF) system is used to determine potential
aircraft noise around Australian airports. The ANEF system uses the sum of predicted
aircraft noise events over an average day to determine the forecast noise exposure level.
For airports with low traffic volumes and no jet activity, noise footprints generated by the
ANEF model often barely go beyond the airport boundary. This can give a perception that
aircraft noise does not occur in areas where residents do in fact experience aircraft noise
albeit on an infrequent basis. An alternative approach is to compare the frequency and
extent of individual noise events to the Building Site Acceptability provided in AS 2021
Acoustics - Aircraft Noise Intrusion - Building Siting and Construction as shown in the
following Table.
Table 4 Building Site Acceptability Based On Aircraft Noise Levels
Aircraft noise level expected at building site, dB(A)
20 or less flights per day Greater than 20 flights per day
Building site Acceptable Conditionally
acceptable
Unacceptable Acceptable
Acceptable
Conditionally
Unacceptable
House, home
unit, flat, 90 85
caravan park
Hotel, motel,
Hostel,
95 90
Public Buildings
Commercial
building
< 90 90 to 100 > 100 90
Light Industrial < 95 95 to 105 > 105 100
Heavy Industrial No limit No limit No limit No limit No limit No limit
For the purpose of this Master Plan the following assumptions have been made:
− the maximum size aircraft regularly servicing Kingscote within a 15 year time frame will
be F50/Q400;
− the aircraft arrivals and departures will follow the extended runway centreline for duration
of noticeable noise levels; and,
− traffic numbers using the cross runways are so low that aircraft noise is unlikely to impact
on the community which remains well clear of the flight paths for this runway.
Australian Standard AS 2021 Acoustics - Aircraft noise intrusion - Building Siting and
Construction provides noise level tables dB(A) for aircraft representative of the design aircraft
i.e. the Saab / F50 / Dash 8 aircraft. A plot of the single event contours is shown on the
following plan at Figure 4. Note the Dash 8- Q400 is rated quieter than the aircraft listed in
AS 2021 so the noise level shown overleaf can be considered a worst case scenario.
The plan shows the extent of individual noise contours of the larger aircraft (expected to be
less than 20 flights per day) do not extend to the population centres. Similarly general
aviation aircraft operations even if exceeding 20 flights per day, remain clear of population
centres. In order to avoid future noise problems it is recommended that noise sensitive
development such as residential areas be kept clear of the 80 dB(A) contours shown on the
plan. Where a proponent wishes to construct individual dwellings within the 80 dB(A) zone
consideration to the use of noise control features in the design as per the recommendations
contained AS 2021 is suggested.
18

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Figure 4 Single Event Noise Contours for Saab 340/F50/Dash8
19

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Environmental Considerations
Off-Airport Land Use
Areas close to the airport need to be managed to ensure hazards to aircraft are not created
through poor planning or management practices. Developments such as landfills, feedlots,
sewage lagoons, and some agricultural activities can attract large numbers of birds so
appropriate planning controls and management practices are needed.
There is also a need to prevent obstacle intrusion into airspace not only through the control
of man made structures but also the control of trees especially in areas close to the runway
ends. Aircraft approach, takeoff and side transitional areas are continually for monitored tree
growth, which if left uncontrolled would increase the risks of flying and reduce aircraft
payloads. In normal circumstances regular trimming takes place without any significant loss.
In the period beyond the master plan time frame, should runway lengthening be required,
some tree removal will be necessary.
At the northern end of the main runway, the takeoff surface is already protected for the
ultimate runway end through the use of an extended clearway, so continuation of the existing
tree trimming programme will also meet long term requirements.
At the southern end, the takeoff fight path is over open farm land with isolated native trees. It
is unlikely land acquisition will be needed as any foreseeable runway extension will remain
within the existing aerodrome boundary. A runway extension would necessitate only the
removal / trimming of a limited number of trees. The effect could be readily offset by
replacement planting in areas clear of future flight paths
Protection of flora and fauna
The airport has substantial tracts of land containing native plants, some which are rare or
endangered species and are subsequently monitored by the Department of Environment and
Heritage. The areas are shown overleaf on Plan on Figure 5 and are clear of the parts of
the runway required for future aviation development.
Heritage
There are no known areas on the airport containing items of cultural or heritage significance.
Stormwater discharge
Stormwater runoff from buildings and aprons travels via open unlined channels and
underground pipes to discharge points at the aerodrome perimeter. From here the water
flows via creeks and dams and eventually to open sea east of the aerodrome.
Increased stormwater runoff from building and pavement development within the master plan
time frame is unlikely to generate sufficient change to warrant installation of new drainage
systems. The most likely outcome would be a need to widen some of the existing channels
where necessary to increase short term runoff detention.
The absence of industrial activities suggests the problem of pollutants entering the system is
minimal. On exception would be if refuelling is introduced on areas that can flow into
stormwater drains. In these cases controls such as interceptor pits, plate separators etc can
be incorporated into facility designs in order to minimise the risk of pollution.
Land acquisition
This Master Plan does not foresee a need to acquire additional airport land within the next 15
years.
20

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Figure 5 Stormwater Drainage and Flora Areas
21

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Implementation
The following lists to possible future Airport development to take place within and beyond the
15 year master planning horizon.
Table 5 List of Future Development Items and Associated Triggers
Development
Item
Terminal expansion
RPT apron and
taxiway development
Expanded access
road and carpark
facilities.
Engineering
services:
Sealed general
aviation apron
Aviation fuel storage
facility
Helicopter Parking
Hangar development
Commercial
development
Sealing taxiway
Bravo
Sealed taxiway to
northern end of
runway 01/19
Extension to runway
01/19
Sealing 15/33
runway
Freight facilities
Strengthening of
culverts beneath
aircraft pavements
Land acquisition for
runway extension
Possible Triggers / Drivers
Existing terminal does not meet either:
− space requirements of increased passenger numbers from
introduction of larger aircraft;
− passenger demand for food an beverage facilities; and,
− compliance with changed security regulation and / or
disabled access etc.
Part of infrastructure required for new passenger terminal
development.
New demands for bus parking from expanded tourism market
Supporting infrastructure required for expanded passenger
terminal development.
Supporting infrastructure needed for expansion of the passenger
terminal.
Increased use results in unacceptable level of deterioration to the
grassed surface and or a need to provide all weather general
aviation pavements.
Mobile tankers needed to service expanded RPT operations.
General aviation demand for AVTUR and AVGAS fuels via self
service card operated system.
Existing unsealed area unable to cope with increasing demand.
Sealed pavement required.
Market demand for additional undercover storage for weather
protection.
Market demand.
Feasible use of currently space that is clear of known aviation
requirement
Increased demand from general aviation development. Also
seen as complimentary development to sealing of runway 15/33
Increased congestion due to back tracking to the northern end
and / or extension to the northern end of runway 01/19.
Introduction of larger critical aircraft than predicted, or longer
stage lengths i.e. direct flights to interstate ports.
Congestion on runway due to increased traffic. Need for
additional taxiway link when aircraft movements exceed 30,000
per annum.
Expanded marketing of island products for example aquaculture
or agriculture product requires rapid deliver by air.
Introduction of heavier wheel loads above those applied by the
predicted critical aircraft.
Introduction of jet RPT services
Possible
Timeframe
5 years
plus
5 years
plus
5 years
plus
5 years
plus
5 years
plus
0-15 years
5 years
plus
5 years
plus
5 years
plus
5 years
plus
15 years
plus
15 years
plus
15 years
plus
15 years
plus
15 years
plus
15 years
plus
22

KINGSCOTE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Appendix A Supporting Data and References
A1
Indicative requirements for Q400 aircraft received via email
from Mario Cipollone, Manager Flight Technical, Qantaslink
to Peter Francis
date 5 October 2009
Email advice from Mario Cipollone, Manager Flight Technical, Qantaslink confirmed a runway
length of 1550m would be ideal for the Dash 8 Q400. A 60m clearway should be provided with a
takeoff clear gradient of 1.9% over obstacles.
Additional information
Sealed Runway Width
30m
Runway Strip Width
150m ‐ 90m graded.
Taxiway Width
18m sealed plus low strength taxiway shoulders.
Pavement Classification Number Flexible C (medium) strength sub‐grade : 18.5
Tyre Pressure Rating
973 kPa
Runway Slope