M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l M I T I n t e r n a t i o...

M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r A i r T r a n s p o r t a t i o nM I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r A i r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factors Influencing the Emergence of

Secondary Airports

in the United States

Philippe A. Bonnefoy

& Prof. R. John Hansman

MIT - Global Airline Industry ProgramNovember 4th 2004

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Motivation

Airports (runways) are key constraints in the National Airspace System(e.g. La Guardia in 2000, Chicago O’Hare in 2003)

Potential capacity increase is limited at major airportsCapacity Shortage* is expected over the next 20 years (even with current OEP)

* Reference: FAA, Capacity Needs in the National Airspace System, 2004

Passenger enplanements will grow in the upcoming years

Decreasing size of aircraft

Greater number of operations are expected in the NAS

Increasing pressure on major airports

Underutilized secondary airports are an alternative for accommodating part of the future growth

Understand the dynamics of the system at both the regional and the national level of the emergence phenomenon. Understand the factors influencing the emergence of secondary airports.

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

US National Airport System

Large-Hub Primary airport

Medium-Hub Primary airport

Small-Hub Primary airport

Non-Hub Primary airport

Other Commercial airport

Relievers

General Aviation

Large-Hub Primary airport

Medium-Hub Primary airport

Small-Hub Primary airport

Non-Hub Primary airport

Other Commercial airport

Relievers

General Aviation

Data source: FAA National Plan for Integrated Airport System (Airports open to the public: 3175 airports)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Airport Systems* Studied

based on the 18 airports that experienced the highest percentage of delayed operations in 2000

SFO

LAX

MSP

DFW

IAH

DTWORD

STL CVG

ATL

DCA

PHLLGA / JFK / EWR

BOS

MIA

PHX

BOS Logan International Airport

50 miles

EWB

MHT

PSM

ORH

PVD

BED

BVY

ASH

SFZ

LWM

FMH

NZW (Closed 1994)

OQU


50 miles

EWB

MHT

PSM

ORH

PVD

BED

BVY

ASH

SFZ

LWM

FMH

NZW (Closed 1994)

OQU

Original

Core Airport

* defined as all airports within 50 miles of a major airport

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Availability of Runways at the Regional Level

(runways longer than 5000 ft)

106

46

9

4

9

4 4 4 5 4 3 3 3 3

14

1415

1310

147

11 11 10 99

9 8 7

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

Dallas

Chicago

Los A

ngeles

Detroit

New YorkBos

tonHous

tonSan

Fransis

coPhil

adelp

hiaAtla

ntaWash

ington

Miami

Phoen

ixCincin

nati

Saint L

ouis

Mineap

olis

Regional Airport Systems

Num

ber o

f run

way

s (lo

nger

than

500

0 ft)

Surrouding Airports

Core Airports

Data Source: FAA Form 5010, http://www.gcr1.com/5010web, [Last Accessed: July 2004]

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT


Core airport

50 miles

EWB

MHT

PSM

ORH

PVD

BED

BVY

ASH

SFZ

LWM

Surrounding airports (with runways length greater than 5000 ft)

Secondary airport

Boston Metropolitan Area Case Study

BOS

MHT

PVD

02468

10121416

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Milli

onPa

ssen

ger E

npla

nem

ents

ASH BED BOS BVYEWB LWM MHT ORHPSM PVD SFZ

Data source: Historical data from FAA Terminal Area Forecasts

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Tota

l Ann

ual O

pera

tions

Max cap. * 0.85

Boston Logan airport (BOS)

Max capacity

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Passenger Enplanements Analysis

BWI

DCA

IAD

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Milli

ons

Enpl

anem

ents

2W6 ADW BWI CGE DCAESN FDK GAI HEF IADJYO MTN W66

FLL

MIA

PBI

02468

1012141618

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Mill

ions

Enpl

anem

ents

BCT FLL FXE LNA MIAOPF PBI PMP TMB X51

Washington Region Miami Region

MDW

ORD

05

10152025303540

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Milli

ons

Enpl

anem

ents

3CK 05C ARR C77 DBKDPA ENW GYY LOT MDWORD PWK RAC UGN RFD

New York Region

EWR ISP

JFK

LGA

02468

101214161820

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Milli

ons

Enpl

anem

ents

39N 47N BDR BLM CDW DXREWR FRG HWV ISP JFK LGAMMU N12 N51 N87 TEB

Chicago Region


MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Evolution of the Passenger Enplanements atLGA, JFK, EWR and ISP

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005

Mill

ions

Enpl

anem

ents

JFK

LGA

EWRISP

LGAJFK

Data source: From 1949 to 1976: Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (http://www.panynj.gov)

From 1976 to 2001: Historical data from FAA Terminal Area Forecasts

EWR

Original Core Airport

Emerging Secondary Airport Emerged Core Airport

Emerging Secondary Airport Emerged Core Airport

ISP Emerging Secondary Airport

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Emerged Core Airports & Secondary Airports

SFO

LAX

MSP

DAL

HOU

DTWORD

STL

CVG

ATL

DCA

PHLLGA / JFK / EWR

BOS

MIA

PHX

Original Core airport

Secondary airport

BUR

OAK/SJC

ONT

SNA

FLL

BWI ISP

MHT

MDWPVD

LGB

Emerged Core airport

DFW

IAH

IAD

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factors Influencing the Recent Emergence of Secondary Airports

Congestion at a core airport- Level of Service offered at the core airport

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Delays at major and secondary airports

Data Source: OPSNET data, http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/faaopsnetall.HTM, [Last accessed: September 2004]

Evolution of percentage of operations delayed at :

Boston LoganManchester Providence

- Level of delays in 2000 and early 2001- Impact of 9/11

Analysis of core and secondary airports at 7 regional airport systems

High delays at core airports ⇒ Low level of service

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

01/20

0004

/2000

07/20

0010

/2000

01/20

0104

/2001

07/20

0110

/2001

01/20

0204

/2002

07/20

0210

/2002

01/20

0304

/2003

07/20

0310

/2003

Perc

enta

ge o

f Ops

del

ayed

BOS

PVD

M HT

LAX

JFK

LGA

SFOORD

MIASJC FLL

BOS

EWR

DCAPVDMHT

LGBONT

BUR SNA ISPBWI

OAK

MDW0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

Regions

Ave

rage

Per

cent

age

of D

elay

ed F

light

s in

2000

Core airportSecondary airport

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT



Availability of capacity at the regional level

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Remaining Availability of Runways at the Regional Level

(runways longer than 5000 ft)

106

46

9

4

9

4 4 4 5 4 3 3 3 3

46

4 5 43

1410 9

1310

10 7 6

11 10

56

9 8 7

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Dallas

Chicag

oLo

s Ang

eles

Detroit

New York

Boston

Housto

nSan

Fran

sisco

Philad

elphia

Atlanta

Washing

ton

Miami

Phoenix

Cincinn

atiSaint

Louis

Mineap

olis

Regional Airport Systems

Num

ber o

f run

way

s (lo

nger

than

500

0 ft

) Surrouding Airports

Current Secondary Airport

Core Airports

Data Source: FAA Form 5010 (update July 2004)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT



Availability of capacity at the regional levelEntry of a Low Cost Carrier

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Secondary Airport Emergence is correlated with the entry of Low Cost Carriers

Enplanements at airports within 50 miles of Boston (BOS)

BOS

MHT

PVD

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Mill

ion

Enpl

anem

ents

ASH BED BOS BVY EWB LWMMHT ORH PSM PVD SFZ

Southwest entry

Southwest entry


MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Secondary Airport Emergence is correlated with the entry of Low Cost Carriers

Enplanments at airports within a 50 miles of La Guardia (LGA)

EWRISP

JFK

LGA

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

Mill

ion

Enpl

anem

ents

39N 47N BDR BLM CDW DXR EWR FRG HWV

ISP JFK LGA MMU N12 N51 N87 TEB

People Express entry

Southwest entry


MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Following the entry of a Low Cost Carrier,fares drop, the market is stimulated :

“The Southwest effect”

Impact of the entry of a Low Cost Carrier on the fares (at the overall airport level)

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

0.22

0.24

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Yiel

d*at

the

airp

ort l

evel

(a

djus

ted

to 2

003)

Boston Logan (BOS)

Manchester (MHT)

Providence (PVD)

Southwest entry

Southwest entry

MHT

BOS

PVD

Data source: Bureau of transportation statistics, DB1B data *non weighted (Average Fare / Average Flight Distance)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Impact of the entry of a Low Cost Carrier on the level of competition at the airport

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Ave

rage

num

ber o

f dep

artu

res

per d

ay

Cont. Express

ACA

American Eagle

Delta

Continental

Northw est

Southw est

United

US Airw ays

Manchester airport

Data source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Tran Stats, Form 41

Entry of Major & Low Cost Carriers → Increased competition

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT



Availability of capacity at the regional levelEntry of a Low Cost CarrierPopulation

- Distribution- Size of Basins


50 miles

MHT

PVD

Population density

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Distribution of population

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48

Thou

sand

s

Distance (in miles) from BOS airport

Popu

latio

n

Core airport

Secondary airports

Primary Basin

of Population

Distribution of Population around Core and Secondary Airports

(Boston Region)

Manchester (MHT)Population within 20 miles: 760 000

Providence (PVD) Population within 20 miles: 1 250 000

Boston Logan (BOS)Population within 20 miles: 2 700 000


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48

Thou

sand

s

Distance (in miles) from MHT airport

Popu

latio

n


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48

Thou

sand

s

Distance (in miles) from PVD airport

Popu

latio

n

Local Basin

of Population

Local Basin

of Population

BOS

MHT

PVD

Data source: US Census Bureau, 2000 U.S. Gazetteer, http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/places2k.html , [Last accessed: February 2004]

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Distribution of Population around Secondary Airports


0

50

100

150

200

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48

Thou

sand

s

Distance (in miles) f rom BLV airport

Failed Secondary Airports

Saint Louis Mid America (BLV)Population within 20 miles: 340 000

Worcester (ORH) Population within 20 miles: 680 000

BLV


0

100

200

300

400

500

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48

Thou

sand

s

Distance (in miles) f rom ORH airport

ORH

http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/places2k.htmlData source: US Census Bureau, 2000 U.S. Gazetteer, , [Last accessed: February 2004]

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Population around Core and Secondary Airports

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Mill

ions

Popu

latio

n w

ithin

20

mile

s of

the

airp

ort

Core airports Successful secondary airports Failed secondary airports

LGA

MIA

EWR

ORD

JFK

LAX

DCABOSSFO

MDW

FLLOAK

LGB

BUR

SJC BWIIAD

SNA

PVD

ONT

MHT (Mid America) BLV

(Worcester)

ORH

http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/places2k.htmlData source: US Census Bureau, 2000 U.S. Gazetteer, , [Last accessed: February 2004]

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT



Availability of capacity at the regional levelEntry of A Low Cost CarrierPopulation


Infrastructure (Runways)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Aircraft Performance

Data Sources: Jane’s All the World Aircraft 2004-2005

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Aircraft Performance vs. Airport Access

Data Sources: Jane’s All the World Aircraft 2004-2005 and FAA Form 5010

Access to runways

At the National Level:

Runway length Number of runwaygreater than

7000 ft 9865000 ft 30753000 ft 6431

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Airport Infrastructure: Boston Region

Very LightJet

Data Sources: Jane’s All the World Aircraft 2004-2005 (aircraft performance) and FAA Form 5010 (runway length)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Airport Infrastructure: Washington Region

Very LightJet

Data Sources: Jane’s All the World Aircraft 2004-2005 (aircraft performance) and FAA Form 5010 (runway length)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT





Infrastructure Nature of the Regional Airport System

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Role of the Nature of the Regional Airport System

SFO

LAX

MSP

DAL

HOU

DTWORD

STL

CVG

ATL

DCA

PHLLGA / JFK / EWR

BOS

MIA

PHX

Original Core airport

Secondary airport

BUR

OAK/SJC

ONT

SNA

FLL

BWI ISP

MHT

MDWPVD

LGB

Emerged Core airport

DFW

IAH

IAD

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Passenger Enplanements at the Regional Level vs. Type of Regional Airport System

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Mill

ions

Tota

l enp

lane

men

ts o

f the

regi

onal

air

port

syst

em (y

ear

2001

)

Single Airport System Multi Airport System

Atlanta

Phoenix

DetroitMinneapolis

Cincinnati

PhiladelphiaSaint Louis

Los Angeles

New-York

Dallas

Chicago

MiamiWashington

Houston

San Francisco

Boston

Data Source: Historical Data from FAA Terminal Area Forecast (2001)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT





Infrastructure Nature of the Regional Airport System

Other factors:Ground accessPolitical willingnessIncentives

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Conclusions (1)

Secondary airports that emerged over the last 20 years have shown they were viable options for increasing the capacity of the system.

Pressure on major airports in the upcoming years

Increasing utilization of secondary airports

Characteristics of future secondary airport candidates

- Located close to a congested core airport

- Proximity of a local basin of population

- Runways length greater than 5000 ft (or possibility of expansion)

- Higher chance of emerging if the core airport is not a transfer hub or if a strong local market exists

- Good ground access

- Ability to attract a low cost carrier (incentives, etc)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Conclusions (2)

Implications

Public:Alternative travel options

Low cost alternatives (market stimulation & market displacement)

Airlines:Development of parallel networks

(e.g. BOS/DCA, PVD/BWI, MHT/BWI, etc)

(e.g. 35% of identical destinations between BOS and MHT)

Increased competition

Inter airport (LCC at the secondary airport or/and at the core airport)

Intra airport (e.g. Southwest adding flights at MDW to meet Air Tran)

Decentralized networks (Expansion of parallel networks to small and medium airports)

Infrastructure (Airport & ATC System):Investments in additional capacity (Major, Existing and/or Potential Future Secondary airports)

Interactions between airports at the regional airport system level (e.g. New York airport system)

Need to include these factors in the NAS and ATC improvements

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Questions&

Comments

M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l M I T I n t e r n a t i o...

Documents

Transcript of M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l M I T I n t e r n a t i o...