Why Sydney Airport isn't that bad

We’re sorry, this feature is currently unavailable. We’re working to restore it. Please try again later.

Advertisement

This was published 8 years ago

Why Sydney Airport isn't that bad

By Ben Groundwater
Updated
Loading

Sydney Airport has its annoyances. The parking is hugely expensive. The alternative to driving – the train – is also hugely expensive. In fact, the whole airport is run privately in a monopoly arrangement, which means that everything is hugely expensive.

But that's Sydney Airport. You know how it works. You know that in this age of celebrity-chef-run restaurants appearing in airport lounges, the food in Sydney is pretty basic. You know that compared to the mega-airports of Singapore or Dubai or Hong Kong, Sydney lacks facilities, and its terminals are comically difficult to transfer between. You know that while the Shanghainese are travelling to the airport at 428km/h on the Maglev train for a reasonable fee, we're puttering along in a normal carriage for top dollar.

It's not perfect. But a few weeks ago I was flipping through the newspaper and saw one of the letters to the editor in Traveller that posed the question, probably rhetorically, "Is there a worse airport in the world than Sydney?" And I thought: um, yeah. There is. Plenty, in fact.

We might not love Kingsford Smith, and we might rightly hold it up for its shortcomings, but it's not the worst airport in the world. In fact even for the developed, Western world, we have things pretty good here.

You don't have to go far to find something worse. Let's start with Melbourne, which doesn't even have a train, and if you're going to catch a cab you're looking at paying at least $50. (Though the Skybus is a great service.) Once you arrive, if you're travelling with one of the budget airlines you'll either end up in a glorified hanger waiting for a Tiger flight, or down in the "cow shed" waiting for Jetstar. But even Tullamarine is OK on a global scale.

Let's discount, for starters, countries that don't have things so good. I was just in Carthage airport in Tunisia, and found that there were only two places in the entire international terminal to buy food, and both of them were closed. At 1pm. But you can let that slide when there are bigger problems in the country to be solved.

I've sat and sweated in Nadi airport in Fiji for hours with nothing to do and nothing to eat, several times. But you can roll with the punches there.

It's far more annoying in countries that you would expect would have the very best facilities, but don't.

Try living in London. If you're going to fly out of the city itself, you've got Gatwick, which is a never-ending battle of long queues and crowded departures areas, or you've got the monstrosity that is Heathrow to deal with. The other options are Stanstead or Luton, which you'll spend longer getting to than you'll then spend in the air travelling to your actual destination. At least Sydney's airport is central.

Advertisement

Or what about LAX, which is fine if you're lucky enough to be flying in and out of the new Tom Bradley Terminal, but a nightmare if you're lumped with any of the other eight regular terminals. They're old, they're shabby, they're crowded, there are few shops and there's barely anything decent to eat. And the whole airport effectively isn't served by public transport.

It's a similar story across the country in New York, where LaGuardia has just one bus service connecting it to the city, meaning every visitor's first action on arrival in NYC will probably be shelling out for a cab. Inside the airport it's similar to LAX, with long queues and limited facilities. Most American airports, in fact, are just as dire.

And you think Sydney is bad? We haven't even touched on, say, Istanbul's airport that services budget carriers, Sabiha Gokcen, that is situated about 60km from the city and should really be struggling to pass itself off as an Istanbul airport. We haven't talked about the huge distances you'll need to walk and bizarre lack of anything to do in Suvarnabhumi Airport in Bangkok. We haven't mentioned the nightmare that is Sheremetyevo Airport in Moscow.

So yes, there are worse airports in the world than Sydney. Plenty of them. Kingsford Smith might not be perfect; it might not even be great. But it's better than most.

UPDATE: TripAdvisor has announced today it will now start letting its users rate airports on its site. Currently Singapore's Changi Airport is the only one listed, but more will come online over the next month, including most major Australian airports.

Are there worse aiports in the world than Sydney or are people right to complain about it? Leave a comment below.

See also: The cheapest ways to get to airports in Australia
See also: Inside the world's best airport
See also: The worst airports in the West

Email: b.groundwater@fairfaxmedia.com.au
Instagram: instagram.com/bengroundwater

Sign up for the Traveller Deals newsletter

Get exclusive travel deals delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up now.

Most viewed on Traveller

Loading