Page 1

The Airport Capacity Crisis in Its Various Forms

Amedeo R. OdoniProfessor of Aeronautics and Astronauticsand of Civil and Environmental EngineeringMassachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

IFSPA 2008, Hong Kong IFSPA 2008, Hong Kong –– May 26, 2008May 26, 2008

Page 2

OutlineOutline

Runway systems as drivers of ultimate airport capacityPrincipal factors that determine a runway system’s capacityThe different characteristics of the airport capacity problem in Asia, North America and EuropeFuture directions / trendsConclusions

Page 3

Airport Capacity Airport Capacity ““CrunchCrunch””: A Global Problem: A Global ProblemFrom a strictly local problem 30 – 40 years ago, to a global problem today and in foreseeable future2007 was the worst year in history, in terms of aircraft delays– USA: 24% of all arrivals >15 min late; $6 – 10 billion

in costs– Europe: 22.7% of all intra-European movements >15

min late; June 2007 worst month in history; 26 major airports > 20% late movements

– Asia: many major airports scheduled at highest limit of declared capacity for many hours a day

Statistics on delays to aircraft under-estimate delays to passengers: High load factors; poor connection possibilities[But, long-term impact of fuel prices??]

Page 4

Principal Measures of CapacityPrincipal Measures of CapacityAircraft movements: per hour; per year

Passengers: per hour; per year

Cargo: per day; per year

The capacity of the runway system (number of aircraft movements that it can handle and number of passengers and tons of cargo that can be moved through it) is typically the most restrictive, because the capacities of terminals and of other airport facilities can be “stretched”to accommodate demand.

LetLet’’s look around the worlds look around the world……..

Airports with the same number of runways and same runway layout may have vastly

different capacities, especially annual passenger capacities

Page 6

Hourly Capacity for Aircraft MovementsHourly Capacity for Aircraft MovementsThe hourly capacity for aircraft movements may vary greatly depending on:– ATC separation standards in use– Mix of aircraft types– Weather conditions (visibility, ceiling, winds)– Training/performance of ATC controllers

Capacity per runway in good weather ranges from 25 to 55 movements per hour in countries with reasonably modern ATC systems

Page 7

IFR Separation Requirements: Single Runway (ICAO)IFR Separation Requirements: Single Runway (ICAO)

3

3

4

6

A380

1086Airbus 380

333Light (MTOW ≤ 7 t)

433Medium (7 t < MTOW ≤ 136 t)

654Heavy (MTOW > 136 t)

LightMediumHeavy

Arrival-Arrival:(1) Airborne separations on final approach (n. mi.):

Trailing aircraft

Leading aircraft

(2) Leading aircraft must be clear of the runway before trailing aircraft touches down

Page 8

Hourly Capacity for Aircraft MovementsHourly Capacity for Aircraft MovementsThe hourly capacity for aircraft movements may vary greatly depending on:– ATC separation standards in use– Mix of aircraft types– Weather conditions (visibility, ceiling, winds)– Training/performance of ATC controllers

Capacity per runway in good weather ranges from 25 to 55 movements per hour in countries with reasonably modern ATC systems

Page 9

Annual Capacity for Aircraft MovementsAnnual Capacity for Aircraft MovementsAnnual capacity for aircraft movements is determined by– hourly capacity for aircraft movements – daily pattern of utilization of airport (hours of

intensive use of airport, curfews, noise-related restrictions on runway utilization)

– seasonal variability of demand– utilization “slack” (for adequate LOS and schedule

reliability)Typically annual capacity for movements is equal to only about 50% to 60% of what one would obtain by multiplying hourly capacity by 8760 (the no. of hours in a year) The range of annual capacities in terms of aircraft movements is even wider than that of hourly capacities due to the factors above

Page 10

Annual Passenger Capacity Varies Even MoreAnnual Passenger Capacity Varies Even MoreWide range of seat capacities of commercial aircraft:– Regional jets and non-jets: 30 – 100 seats– Narrow-body jets: 100 – 210 seats– Wide-body jets: 250 – 650 seats

Types of markets served and role of airport, imply different mixes of aircraft types:– Intercontinental/long range flights wide-body– Medium range mostly narrow-body– Domestic and short-range narrow-body and RJ– Hub airport mix of large and small aircraft– Low-cost carrier airport almost all narrow body

Load factors may also vary significantly by season

Page 11

6452333.4Charlotte NC15430547.0Hong Kong8738733.7Miami7860947.6Las Vegas7943234.0Munich10545447.8Amsterdam13226034.3Dubai10844347.8New York/JFK7845035.2Minneapolis/St. Paul8161449.9Denver13226735.2London/Gatwick10848352.1Madrid18219535.5Tokyo/Narita13440053.7Beijing9438035.8San Francisco11049354.2Frankfurt7746736.1Detroit8768559.8Dallas/Ft. Worth10136036.4Orlando10855359.9Paris/CDG8244436.4New York /Newark9168161.9Los Angeles16522336.7Singapore20133266.7Tokyo/Haneda15526641.2Bangkok14248168.1London/Heathrow7853842.2Phoenix8292876.2Chicago/O’Hare7160443.0Houston9099489.4Atlanta

(1)/(2)(2)(1)(1)/(2)(2)(1)

30 Busiest Airports in the World (2007)(1) = pax (million); (2) = movements (thousand)

Source: ACI (2008)

Page 12

Capacity of North American AirportsCapacity of North American AirportsHeavy reliance on large capacities (as measured by aircraft movements) of airports with multiple runways (3 – 6)Practically no slot controls (only 5 slot-controlled airports)Airlines are free to add flights anywhere at any time of day US FAA capacity benchmarks (2004): 35 busiest airports– 26 of 35: VMC capacity > 100/hour; range: 56 – 279– 16 of 35: IMC capacity > 100/hour; range: 48 – 193– 12 of 35: Plan new runway by 2013

Only four non-US airports have a declared capacity of more than 100/hour(!) – a few more within next 5-10 yearsUnexpected(?) consequences:– Airlines compete on frequencies (“RJ phenomenon”) – Small number of passengers per movement– Large delays, unreliability of schedules

Page 13

Average No. of Seats Per Departure: USAAverage No. of Seats Per Departure: USA

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220Av

erag

e N

umbe

r of S

eats

per

Dep

artu

re Domestic

International

Total

Page 14

Capacity of North American AirportsCapacity of North American AirportsHeavy reliance on large capacities (as measured by aircraft movements) of airports with multiple runways (3 – 6)Practically no slot controls (only 5 slot-controlled airports)Airlines are free to add flights anywhere at any time of day US FAA capacity benchmarks (2004): 35 busiest airports– 26 of 35: VMC capacity > 100/hour; range: 56 – 279– 16 of 35: IMC capacity > 100/hour; range: 48 – 193– 12 of 35: Plan new runway by 2013

Only four non-US airports have a declared capacity of more than 100/hour(!) – a few more within next 5-10 yearsUnexpected(?) consequences:– Airlines compete on frequencies (“RJ phenomenon”) – Small number of passengers per movement– Large delays, unreliability of schedules

Page 15

Annual Capacity Coverage Chart: Boston/LoganAnnual Capacity Coverage Chart: Boston/Logan

10080

80

120

40

0

604020

Movements per hour

% of time

Page 16

Capacity of Asian AirportsCapacity of Asian AirportsRelatively small number of runways per airport and thus small airport capacities, as measured by the number of aircraft movementsReliance in many Master Plans on expectation of large and increasing number of passengers per movementBut is this expectation valid?– Rapid growth in short-haul regional + domestic traffic– Rapid growth of low-cost carriers (typically narrow-

body aircraft) – Increasing use of hubbing

Estimates of ultimate annual passenger capacity proving over-optimistic at several airports (running out of runway capacity!)Slot controls already heavily exercised

Page 17

Averages for 15 Busiest Airports* (2007)Averages for 15 Busiest Airports* (2007)

153 (+84%)23435.8Asia

107 (+29%)34837.2Europe

8364253.1North America

Passengers per

movement

Thousands of annual aircraft

movements (average)

Millions of Annual

Passengers (average)

Busiest 15 Airports in…

*Source: Airports Council International (2008), preliminary figures

Page 18

Capacity of Asian AirportsCapacity of Asian AirportsRelatively small number of runways per airport and thus small airport capacities, as measured by the number of aircraft movementsReliance in many Master Plans on expectation of large and increasing number of passengers per movementBut is this expectation valid?– Rapid growth in short-haul regional + domestic traffic– Rapid growth of low-cost carriers (typically narrow-

body aircraft) – Increasing use of hubbing

Estimates of ultimate annual passenger capacity proving over-optimistic at several airports (running out of runway capacity!)Slot controls already heavily exercised

Page 19

Capacity of European AirportsCapacity of European AirportsPersistently fast-growing demand since 1993, exceeding predictionsLimited increase in runway capacities of airports, despite airline behavior increasingly imitating the“American model”Heavy reliance on administrative slot allocation– 17 major airports already receiving more slot

requests per week than total available capacityBut, grandfather rights in slot allocation give strong advantage to former and current “flag carriers” at most desirable airports Possibly world’s most problematic region in terms of long-term ability to match capacity to demand, due to ambivalent government attitudes toward infrastructure expansion

Page 20

Future Trends: Capacity Expansion Future Trends: Capacity Expansion Sustainability, cost, public acceptance dominantVery few new primary airports in North America and Western Europe; several in Asia (India, China, Middle East) New runways at major existing airports when opportunities arise (few in Europe, more in US + Asia)Global emphasis on increasing capacity through improvements in Air Traffic Management systems (NextGen, SESAR, etc.); but will result in only limited changes in runway capacity at the busiest airports North America and Western Europe [+10% – 25%(??) over 20 years]Growing role for Air Traffic Flow Management Centersto co-ordinate traffic flows in major world regions

Page 21

Page 22

Future Trends: Demand ManagementFuture Trends: Demand ManagementInnovative slot allocation schemes with emphasis on more efficient use of slots (e.g., incentives for use of large aircraft, “specialized”airports with respect to traffic)

and/orSlot allocation schemes that include economic criteria and approaches:– Congestion pricing– Slot auctions– (“Secondary) slot trading

Page 23

Future Trends: MultiFuture Trends: Multi--Airport SystemsAirport Systems

Growing reliance on multi-airport systemsaround the globe, through the utilization of existing (and some new) secondary airports near major hubs of air transport activity

Decreasing traffic share of primary airportswithin multi-airport systems

Already in full swing!

Page 24

MultiMulti--Airport Systems (2007)Airport Systems (2007)

Asia/Pacific

Legend

Europe

North America

Latin America &Caribbean

Middle East

Multi-Airport System

Source: Bonnefoy (2008)

Page 25

Future Trends: Bypassing Large HubsFuture Trends: Bypassing Large HubsIncreasing number of point-to-point connectionsbetween “second-tier” cities/airports on both long-haul and short-haul routesSupporting developments:– Rapid growth of low-cost carriers– Expansion and construction of new airports

near second-tier cities– Increased utilization of secondary airports

within multi-airport systems– Open skies agreements: EU-US, EU-Canada,

Singapore-UK, et al– Boeing 787, Airbus A350,… vs. Airbus 380

Page 26

ConclusionsConclusionsTwo airports with the same runway layout may have very different capacities [recent work].The future capacity of an airport, for any given airport layout, is subject to much uncertainty.The “airport capacity problem” has different dimensions and is addressed in very different ways in North America, Europe and AsiaThe airport capacity crunch may lead to major re-configuration of airline networks and of the air transport system, in general:– a “two-tier” system (airlines and airports)?– new approaches to airport capacity

allocation?

BackBack--up Slidesup Slides

Page 28

80 mio (max)30 – 60 mio (typical)

~500,000400 – 600 K

100 (typical) 75 – 120 (range)

3 (2 close + 1)

90 mio (max)50 – 70 mio (typical)

~ 600,000450 – 750 K

120 (typical)90 – 140 (range)

4 (Indep’nt pairs of close parallels)

65 mio (max)25 – 50 mio (typical)

~ 400,000340 – 530 K

80 (typical)65 – 100 (range)

2 independent parallels

50 mio (max)18 – 38 mio (typical)

~ 350,000280 – 420 K

70 (typical)55 – 80 (range)

2 medium-spaced parallels

45 mio (max)15 – 33 mio (typical)

~ 300,000250 – 370 K

60 (typical)48 – 70 (range)

2 close parallel runways

35 mio (max)10 – 22 mio (typical)

~ 200K150 – 280 K

40 (typical)25 – 55 (range)

Single runwayAnnual PaxMov’ts/yearMov’ts/hourConfiguration

Some Approximate Benchmark CapacitiesSome Approximate Benchmark Capacities

Page 29

Page 30

Capacity of North American AirportsCapacity of North American AirportsHeavy reliance on large capacities of runway systems, as measured by the number of aircraft operationsPractically no slot controls (only 4 slot-controlled airports)Airlines are free to add flights anywhere at any time of day US FAA capacity benchmarks (2004): 35 busiest airports– 26 of 35: VMC capacity > 100/hour; range: 56 – 279– 16 of 35: IMC capacity > 100/hour; range: 48 – 193– 12 of 35: Plan new runway by 2013

Only four non-US airports have a declared capacity of more than 100/hour(!) – a few more within next 5-10 yearsConsequences:– Airlines compete on frequencies (“RJ phenomenon”) – Small number of passengers per movement– Large delays, unreliability of schedules

Page 31

London Gatwick (LGW): 1 runwayLondon Gatwick (LGW): 1 runway

Page 32

Seoul Seoul IncheonIncheon: 2 close parallel: 2 close parallel

Page 33

Parallel Runways (IFR)Parallel Runways (IFR)

Indep’ntIndep’ntIndep’ntIndep’ntIndependent> 5000* ft

(> 1525* m)

Indep’ntIndep’ntIndep’nt1.5 nmi(diagonal)

Medium-spaced2500 – 5000* ft(762 – 1525* m)

Departure is clear of runway

Arrival touches

down

As in single runway

As in single

runway

Closely-spaced1200 – 2500 ft(366 – 762 m)

Departure/ arrival

Arrival/ departure

Departure/ departure

Arrival/ arrival

Separation between runway

centerlines

* 3400 ft (1035 m) or 4300 ft (1310 m) are alternative limits

Page 34

Milan Milan MalpensaMalpensa: 2 medium: 2 medium--spaced parallelspaced parallel

Page 35

Barcelona: 2 mediumBarcelona: 2 medium--spaced parallel (+ 1 intersecting)spaced parallel (+ 1 intersecting)

Page 36

Munich: 2 independent parallelMunich: 2 independent parallel

Page 37

Hong Kong: 2 independent parallelHong Kong: 2 independent parallel

Page 38

Orlando, Florida (in 2003): 2 close + 1 independentOrlando, Florida (in 2003): 2 close + 1 independent

Page 39Source: Airliners.net

Paris CDG: 2 independent pairsParis CDG: 2 independent pairs

Page 40

Atlanta: 4 main runways + 1 secondary (2 indep’nt pairs)

Page 41

Putting Everything TogetherPutting Everything TogetherIt is hard to predict how much capacity will be demanded at an airport It is also hard to estimate how much capacity will be actually providedTherefore, it is difficult to specify exactly what kind of airport one should develop, for an extended time-horizon of 25+ yearsThus, a flexible approach is needed..… which means that one needs to – plan for a general layout and maximum potential

number of runways, but commit now only to what is immediately needed (the “strategy”)

– adjust the number of runways to future requirements and developments (the “dynamic” aspect)

Page 42

Osaka Kansai: 1 runway (until 2007)

Page 43

OutlineOutline

Runway systems as drivers of ultimate airport capacityPrincipal factors that determine a runway system’s capacitySome standard airport configurations and the associated range of capacitiesImplied unreliability of airport capacity forecastsAspects of the airport capacity problem in Asia, North America and EuropeFuture directions / trendsConclusions

Page 44

Standard Types of Airport LayoutsStandard Types of Airport LayoutsThe layouts of new airports are increasingly standardized at sites where the topography and weather conditions are favorable (e.g., no major physical obstacles or other constraints)Some standard layouts:– ONE runway– TWO closely-spaced parallel runways– TWO medium-spaced parallel runways– TWO independent parallel runways– THREE runways (2 close parallel + 1 independent)– FOUR runways (2 independent pairs of close parallels)

By considering (i) the factors that affect capacity and (ii) international experience, it is possible to come up with some approximate benchmarks for airport capacities for these layouts

Page 45

Example: Hong KongExample: Hong KongOpened in 1998; two independent parallel runwaysAirport capacity:– was forecast as 87 million to be reached in 2040– based on forecast of 348 passengers per

movement by 2040BUT: average aircraft size has declined rapidly since 1998 from 295 seats per movement to 240 seats per movement in 2007– Reason: rapid growth of domestic traffic in China

and hubbing in Hong KongResult: Capacity is now estimated as 55 – 60 million!In 2007 the airport already served 47 millionpassengers!No place to build a third runway!

Page 46

Land Area of Some Major AirportsLand Area of Some Major Airports

Airport Acres m2 (x106)

Denver 34,000 136Dallas/Ft. W. 18,000 72Orlando 10,000 40Kansas City 8,200 33Chicago 6,500 26Atlanta 6,000 24JFK Intern’l 4,950 20Los Angeles 3,600 14Miami 3,250 13Newark 2,300 9Boston 2,250 9Wash Reagan 960 3.8LaGuardia 650 2.6

Airport m2 (x106)Buenos Aires EZE 34Paris CDG 31Amsterdam 28Delhi 20Frankfurt 19Athens 16Munich 15Singapore 13Brussels 12Milan MXP 12London LHR 12Tokyo HND 11Sydney 9Zurich 8London GTW 8Tokyo NRT 7Kansai 5

Page 47

Hong Kong: 2 independent parallelHong Kong: 2 independent parallel

Page 48

Example: London GatwickExample: London Gatwick

Most international airports with a single runway have an annual capacity of 10 – 20 million passengers.But London Gatwick Airport– serves about 35 million passengers per year– is one of the 25 busiest in the world– has higher passenger capacity than many airports

with 2, 3, 4, or 5 runwaysReasons: The airport operates with– a capacity of about 45 movements per hour on its

single runway– numerous wide-body aircraft– almost 17 hours of intensive utilization per day– limited seasonal variability of demand

Page 49

Factors Affecting Airport Area RequirementsFactors Affecting Airport Area Requirements

• Principal factors affecting airfield size are:– Airside capacity requirements: number and

configuration of runways and apron stands– Weather: no. and configuration of runways– Unused area: noise “buffer” or for future expansion– Types of aircraft and operations: runway, taxiway,

apron dimensions and separations– Location of passenger terminals and landside facilities

relative to runways• Terminal facilities and related landside space

typically take up only 5-20% of an airport’s total area

Page 50

7541130.8Munich15827142.8Bangkok

7441831.0Toronto15728044.0Hong Kong

6251631.8Philadelphia10543545.5Madrid

16818931.8Tokyo/Narita10544046.1Amsterdam

8438632.5Miami7561946.2Las Vegas

9535333.5San Francisco7959747.3Denver

13026334.2London/Gatwick12937648.5Beijing

9935034.8Orlando10848952.8Frankfurt

16421435.0Singapore10554256.8Paris/CDG

8044435.5New York /Newark8670060.1Dallas/Ft. Worth

7547635.6Minneapolis9365761.0Los Angeles

7648236.4Detroit22928565.2Tokyo/Haneda

7754141.4Phoenix14247767.5London/Heathrow

11437542.6New York/JFK7995976.2Chicago/O’Hare

7160342.6Houston8797684.8Atlanta

(1)/(2)(2)(1)(1)/(2)(2)(1)

30 Busiest Airports in the World (2006)(1)= pax (million); (2)= movements (thousand)

Page 51

●787-8

● ●A350-800 A350-900

Page 52

30 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 200030 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 2000

Airport Pax (million) Mvts (000) Pax/Mvt. Atlanta 80.2 915 88 Chicago (ORD) 72.1 909 79 Los Angeles (LAX) 66.4 783 85 London (LHR) 64.6 467 138 Dallas/ Ft. Worth 60.7 838 72 Tokyo (HND) 56.4 256 220 Frankfurt/Main 49.4 459 108 Paris (CDG) 48.2 518 93 San Francisco 41.0 429 96 Amsterdam 39.6 432 92 Denver 38.8 520 75 Las Vegas 36.9 521 71 Minneapolis/St. Paul 36.8 523 70 Seoul/Gimpo 36.7 236 156 Phoenix 36.0 638 56

Page 53

30 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 2000 [2]30 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 2000 [2]

Airport Pax (million) Mvts (000) Pax/Mvt Detroit (DTW) 35.5 555 64 Houston 35.3 484 73 New York/ Newark 34.2 450 76 Miami 33.6 517 65 Madrid 32.9 358 92 New York (JFK) 32.9 345 95 Hong Kong 32.8 194 169 London/ Gatwick 32.1 261 123 Orlando/Int’l 30.8 359 86 St. Louis 30.6 481 64 Bangkok 29.6 195 152 Toronto 28.9 427 68 Singapore 28.6 184 155 Seattle 28.4 446 64 Boston 27.4 479 57

Page 54

30 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 200030 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 2000

Airport Pax (million) Mvts (000) Pax/Mvt. Atlanta 80.2 915 88 Chicago (ORD) 72.1 909 79 Los Angeles (LAX) 66.4 783 85 London (LHR) 64.6 467 138 Dallas/ Ft. Worth 60.7 838 72 Tokyo (HND) 56.4 256 220 Frankfurt/Main 49.4 459 108 Paris (CDG) 48.2 518 93 San Francisco 41.0 429 96 Amsterdam 39.6 432 92 Denver 38.8 520 75 Las Vegas 36.9 521 71 Minneapolis/St. Paul 36.8 523 70 Seoul/Gimpo 36.7 236 156 Phoenix 36.0 638 56

Page 55

30 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 2000 [2]30 Busiest Airports in the World (Passengers): 2000 [2]

Airport Pax (million) Mvts (000) Pax/Mvt Detroit (DTW) 35.5 555 64 Houston 35.3 484 73 New York/ Newark 34.2 450 76 Miami 33.6 517 65 Madrid 32.9 358 92 New York (JFK) 32.9 345 95 Hong Kong 32.8 194 169 London/ Gatwick 32.1 261 123 Orlando/Int’l 30.8 359 86 St. Louis 30.6 481 64 Bangkok 29.6 195 152 Toronto 28.9 427 68 Singapore 28.6 184 155 Seattle 28.4 446 64 Boston 27.4 479 57

Page 56

5948628.5Philadelphia11732037.5New York/JFK

7140328.7Toronto142*267*38.0Bangkok

8035728.7Seattle9640238.5Madrid

7540130.2Miami7254739.5Phoenix

16418530.4Singapore7654541.4Las Vegas

16818531.1Tokyo/Narita7655942.4Denver

9632431.1Orlando10141942.5Amsterdam

13124131.5London/Gatwick9553550.9Paris/CDG

7343331.8New York/Newark10747751.1Frankfurt

9535333.5San Francisco7480259.4Dallas/Ft. Worth

11430534.9Beijing9365560.7Los Angeles

6852035.2Detroit219*284*62.3Tokyo/Haneda

7151736.5Houston14347067.3London/Heathrow

15523736.7Hong Kong7699275.5Chicago/O’Hare

6854136.7Minneapolis8796583.6Atlanta

(1)/(2)(2)(1)(1)/(2)(2)(1)

30 Busiest Airports in the World (2004) (1)= pax (million); (2)= movements (thousand)

* Estimated from 2003

Page 57

5544724.7Philadelphia6551033.2Minneapolis

6737124.7Toronto7247534.2Houston

10025425.3Sydney9338435.9Madrid

8829826.3Rome/Fiumicino7250136.3Las Vegas

15417226.5Tokyo/Narita6954237.4Phoenix

7635326.8Seattle7550037.5Denver

13719827.1Hong Kong9840840.0Amsterdam

9429127.3Orlando9451548.2Paris/CDG

8833429.3San Francisco10545948.4Frankfurt

7240629.4New York/Newark7076553.3Dallas/Ft. Worth

7141729.6Miami8862255.0Los Angeles

12324330.0London/Gatwick22128462.9Tokyo/Haneda

14221230.2Bangkok13746463.5London/Heathrow

11228231.7New York/JFK7592969.5Chicago/O’Hare

6749132.7Detroit8791279.1Atlanta

(1)/(2)(2)(1)(1)/(2)(2)(1)

30 Busiest Airports in the World (2003)

Page 58

IFR Separation Requirements: Single Runway (USA)IFR Separation Requirements: Single Runway (USA)

2.5 (or 3)2.5 (or 3)2.5 (or 3)S

3/4*2.5 (or 3)2.5 (or 3)L

544B757

5/6*54H

SL or B757H

Arrival-Arrival:(1) Airborne separations on final approach (n. mi.):

Trailing aircraft

Leading aircraft

(2) Leading aircraft must be clear of the runway before trailing aircraft touches down

* Applies when leading aircraft is at threshold of runway

Page 59

IFR Separation Requirements: Single Runway (USA) [2]IFR Separation Requirements: Single Runway (USA) [2]

Trailing aircraftH L + B757 S

H 90 120 120B757 90 90 120

L 60 60 60Leadingaircraft

S 45 45 45

DepartureDeparture--DepartureDeparture (approximate, in seconds)

ArrivalArrival--Departure and DepartureDeparture and Departure--ArrivalArrivalLeading aircraft must be clear of runway at the instant when trailing aircraft starts takeoff roll or touches down on the runway, respectively. In D-A case, trailing arrival must also be at least 2 n. mi. from runway when takeoff run begins

Page 60

Separation Requirements (Italy; except Rome, Milan)Separation Requirements (Italy; except Rome, Milan)

Departure/ArrivalArrival must be at least 5 n.mi. away from

runway threshold

Arrival/Arrival(in nautical miles)

Departure/Departure120 seconds between successive departures

SLM

H/

SLMH /

⎥⎥⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢⎢⎢

⎣

⎡

555555755

Page 61

Alternatives for Relieving Airport and Terminal Airspace CongestAlternatives for Relieving Airport and Terminal Airspace Congestionion

1. Increased airport capacity – second, third, … airports– new, larger airports to replace older ones– more runways, etc. at existing ones– improved ATM

2. Demand management– total operations– by time-of-day

3. Air traffic flow management (ATFM): reduces cost and impact of unavoidable delays

4. Substitute other modes of transportation5. Substitute for transportation through various modes of

communications

Page 62

Delay vs. Demand and CapacityDelay vs. Demand and Capacity

Max throughput capacity (ρ = 1.0)

Demand

Expected delay

Page 63

ConclusionConclusionAn airport with two independent parallel runways will most probably cover all of Lisbon’s requirements over the foreseeable future.However, it is advisable to provide for the possibility that a 3-runway arrangement (2 close parallels + 1 independent runway) may be necessaryThis calls for reserving approximately 2000 hectares for purely airport-related development at the Alcochete site.[NOTE: This is a very rough estimate based on international experience and may be changed following a careful study.]If further development, indirectly related to the airport such as the Airport City, is desired, then additional land should be reserved.

Page 64

StrategyStrategy

Therefore it is essential to:1.Provide for flexibility by reserving an adequate

land area for a range of alternative futures.2.Adopt a dynamic strategic approach for the

development of the airport commit to only one step at a time.

Page 65

Capacity of Asian AirportsCapacity of Asian AirportsRelatively small airport capacities, as measured by the number of aircraft movementsReliance on expectation of large and increasing number of passengers per movementAn obsolete “model”?– Rapid growth in:

• short-haul international and domestic traffic• Low-cost carriers (fly narrow-body aircraft)

– Increasing use of hubbingEstimates of ultimate annual passenger capacity proving over-optimisticExpensive mistakes!Slot controls already very heavily exercised