Fact #1:
The word "indicative" appears in volumes two and three of the EIS 111 times.

The appearance of this word again and again is a measure of how poor is the science behind this document. But perhaps beyond and above anything else, it relates to one single well known cause, which for us would be fact number two:

Fact #2:
The department of infrastructure did not see the need to investigate flight path options and their associated impacts.

Undoubtedly a wise political move, preventing public opinion from roaring too high.

But politics aside, I ask you: would you hire a builder that tells you, "let's build the house and then just before handing in the keys I will let you know where the doors and windows will be"?

Clearly you would dump this charlatan from the would be stairs. How can anyone propose such an approach, let alone when billions of dollars and the health and well being of Sydney residents are at stake. This goes beyond politics! Engineering, safety, health, etc. It seems that some politicians forgot that duty of care for the people stands somewhere at the top of the priority ladder (fact). The "indicative" flight path suggests that the EIS process, a key mechanism in our government process designed to protect you the citizen/resident, was done just to tick the accountability check box.

Besides, if we assume that noise sharing will take place, half of Sydney's west would be in direct contact with the planes 24/7. In this case it is fair to assume that the flight paths proposed in the 1999 EIS are the ones to rely on.

So, let me give you a feel what 111 times the word "indicative" looks like:

indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative, indicative,
indicative!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Disclaimer: note that we scanned only two documents so the number is likely to be greater than the one mentioned. Have a safe flight.