Evaluating current demand at the airport and forecasting how that demand may change in the future is required to properly plan for facility needs over the next five, ten, and twenty years. For this element of the master plan update for Scholes International Airport at Galveston (GLS), forecasts of county regis‐ tered aircraft, based aircraft, fleet mix of based aircraft, annual operations, and peaking characteristics are projected.
The projections presented in the following sections may be used for a variety of purposes, such as facility needs assessments and environmental evaluations. The intent of the forecasting effort is to enable the airport to make facility improvements to meet demand in the most efficient and cost‐effective manner possible. The forecasts will be submitted to TxDOT for review and approval to ensure accuracy and rea‐ sonable projection of aviation activity.
It should be noted that aviation activity can be affected by numerous outside influences that may occur locally, regionally, or nationally. At the time of this writing in June 2020, the biggest factor influencing the aviation industry is the COVID‐19 pandemic that has resulted in a significant reduction in air travel. While general aviation and business aviation operations have been returning to pre‐COVID levels, there is still much uncertainty as to how this health crisis will affect airports in the coming months, or the lasting impacts it may have on the industry as a whole. With that in mind, it is important to note that aviation demand forecasts should be used for advisory purposes only. It is recommended that planning strategies remain flexible to accommodate unforeseen events, and that airport decision‐makers be pre‐ pared to adapt plans as necessary.
FORECASTING APPROACH
Typically, the most accurate and reliable forecasting approach is derived from multiple analytical fore‐ casting techniques. Analytical forecasting methodologies typically consist of regression analysis, trend analysis and extrapolation, market share or ratio analysis, and smoothing. Through the use of multiple forecasting techniques based upon each aviation demand indicator, an envelope of aviation demand projections can be generated.
Regression analysis can be described as a forecasting technique that correlates certain aviation demand variables (such as passenger enplanements or operations) with economic measures. When using regres‐ sion analysis, the technique should be limited to relatively simple models containing independent varia‐ bles for which reliable forecasts are available (such as population or income forecasts).
Trend analysis and extrapolation is a forecasting technique that records historical activity (such as air‐ port operations) and projects this pattern into the future. Oftentimes, this technique can be beneficial when local conditions of the study area are differentiated from the region or other airports.
Market share or ratio analysis can be described as a forecasting technique that assumes the existence of a top‐down relationship between national, regional, and local forecasts. The local forecasts are pre‐ sented as a market share of regional forecasts, and regional forecasts are presented as a market share of national forecasts. Typically, historical market shares are calculated and used as a base to project future market shares.
Smoothing is a statistical forecasting technique that can be applied to historical data, giving greater weight to the most recent trends and conditions. Generally, this technique is most effective when gen‐ erating short‐term forecasts.
NATIONAL GENERAL AVIATION TRENDS
Each year, the FAA updates and publishes a national aviation forecast. Included in this publication are forecasts for the large air carriers, regional/commuter air carriers, general aviation, and FAA workload measures. The forecasts are prepared to meet the budget and planning needs of the FAA and to provide information that can be used by state and local authorities, the aviation industry, and the general public. The current edition is FAA Aerospace Forecasts – Fiscal Years 2020‐2040, published in early 2020. The FAA primarily uses the economic performance of the United States as an indicator of future aviation industry growth. Similar economic analyses are applied to the outlook for aviation growth in interna‐ tional markets. The following discussion is summarized from the FAA Aerospace Forecasts.
Within the general aviation section, the FAA forecasts the fleet mix and hours flown for single engine piston aircraft, multi‐engine piston aircraft, turboprops, business jets, piston and turbine helicopters, light sport, experimental, and others (gliders and balloons). The FAA forecasts “active aircraft,” not total aircraft. An active aircraft is one that is flown at least one hour during the year. From 2010 through 2013, the FAA undertook an effort to have all aircraft owners re‐register their aircraft. This effort resulted in a 10.5 percent decrease in the number of active general aviation aircraft, mostly in the piston category.
The long‐term outlook for general aviation is stable. The FAA projects the active general aviation fleet to drop slightly from 212,335 aircraft in 2019 to 210,380 aircraft in 2040 – a difference of 1,955 aircraft. While steady growth in both GDP and corporate profits results in continued growth of the turbine and rotorcraft fleets, the largest segment of the fleet – fixed‐wing piston aircraft – continues to shrink over the FAA’s forecast.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-2
In 2019, the FAA estimated there were 142,335 piston‐powered aircraft in the national fleet. The total number of piston‐powered aircraft in the fleet is forecast to decline by 1.0 percent from 2019‐2040, resulting in 115,970 by 2040. This reflects a decline of ‐1.1 percent annually for single engine pistons and ‐0.5 percent for multi‐engine pistons.
Total turbine aircraft are forecast to grow at an annual growth rate of 1.9 percent through 2040. The FAA estimates there were 32,035 turbine‐powered aircraft in the national fleet in 2019, and there will be 46,675 by 2040. This includes annual growth rates of 1.2 percent for turboprops, 2.4 percent for business jets, and 1.8 percent for turbine helicopters.
While comprising a much smaller portion of the general aviation fleet, experimental aircraft, typically identified as home‐built aircraft, are projected to grow annually by 1.0 percent through 2040. The FAA estimates there were 27,725 experimental aircraft in 2019, and these are projected to grow to 33,475 by 2040. Sport aircraft are forecast to grow 3.6 percent annually through the long‐term, growing from 2,700 in 2019 to 5,430 by 2040. Exhibit 2A presents the historical and forecast U.S. active general avia‐ tion aircraft.
The FAA also forecasts total operations based upon activity at control towers across the U.S. Operations are categorized as air carrier, air taxi/commuter, general aviation, and military. General aviation opera‐ tions, both local and itinerant, declined significantly with the 2008‐2009 recession and subsequent slow recovery. Through 2040, total general aviation operations are forecast to grow 0.4 percent annually.
General Aviation Aircraft Shipments and Revenue
The 2008‐2009 economic recession had a negative impact on general aviation aircraft production, and the industry was slow to recover. Aircraft manufacturing declined for three straight years from 2008 through 2010. Since this time, aircraft manufacturing has stabilized and returned to growth. According to the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), there is optimism that aircraft manufactur‐ ing will continue to show gains in the coming years, especially in the turbine aircraft market. Figure 2A presents currently available historical data related to general aviation aircraft shipments.
Worldwide shipments of general aviation airplanes have increased each of the last three years with a total of 2,658 units delivered around the globe, compared to 2,268 units in 2016. Worldwide general aviation billings were also highest since 2014. In 2019, $23.515 billion in new general aviation aircraft were shipped as compared to $20.564 billion in 2018. North America continues to be the largest market for general aviation aircraft and leads the way in the manufacturing of piston, turboprop, and jet aircraft. The Asian‐Pacific region is the second largest market for piston‐powered and turboprop aircraft.
Business Jets: Business jet deliveries grew from 703 units in 2018 to 809 units in 2019, the most since 2009. The North American market accounted for 67.1 percent of business jet deliveries, which is a 2.0 percent increase in market share compared to 2018.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-3
FIGURE 2A | General Aviation Airplane Shipments
4,500 Aircraft Registration Rule Change Period 4,000
3,500
3,000 Shipments
2,500 Airplane 2,000 Aviation
1,500 General 1,000
500
0 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Single‐Engine Piston Multi‐Engine Piston Turboprop Jet Source: General Aviation Manufacturers Association, 2019 Databook
Turboprops: Turboprop shipments were down from 601 in 2018 to 525 in 2019. North America’s market share of turboprop aircraft, however, increased by 0.5 percent in the last year. The Latin American and Middle East African markets also increased, while the European and Asian‐Pacific markets decreased their market share.
Pistons: In 2018, piston airplane shipments grew to 1,111 units over 2017’s shipment of 954 units. North America’s market share of piston aircraft deliveries recovered from a 4.1 percent decline in 2018 with a 4.9 percent increase in 2019. The Asian‐Pacific and Latin American markets experienced declines in mar‐ ket share during the past year.
U.S. Pilot Population
There were 664,565 active pilots certificated by the FAA at the end of 2019, including student pilot cer‐ tificates. All pilot categories, except for private, rotorcraft only, and recreational only certificates, con‐ tinued to increase. Except for student pilots and airline transport pilots (ATP), the number of active gen‐ eral aviation pilots is projected to decrease about 12,120 (down 0.2 percent annually) between 2019 and 2040. The ATP category is forecast to increase by 25,150 (up 0.7 percent annually). The FAA has sus‐ pended the student pilot forecast due to insufficient data.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-4
AIRPORTPORT MASTERM PLAN AND BUSINESS PLAN
U.S. Active General Aviation Aircraft U.S. Air Taxi Operations
10 Historical 2020 Piston Forecast Turbine 8 2025 Helicopters 6 Other 2030 4 2035 Operations (in millions) Operations 2 2040 ‘19 0 50 100 150 200 250 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Aircraft (in thousands)
Active Pilots By Certificate
2019 2040 Total Active Pilots: 466,900 Total Active Pilots: 479,930 U.S. General Aviation Operations 20.5% 30 Historical Forecast 25 35.3% 43.1% 39.9% 20 39.6%
15 21.6% 10
Operations (in millions) Operations 5 Recreational / Sport Pilot /
‘19 Private / Glider / Rotocraft 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Commercial Itinerant Operations Airline Transport Local Operations *Excludes Student Pilot Certificates
Source: FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY2020-2040
Exhibit 2A Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-5 NATIONAL GENERAL AVIATION/AIR TAXI FORECASTS This page intentionally left blank
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-6
RISKS TO THE FORECASTS
While the FAA is confident that its forecasts for aviation demand and activity can be reached, this is dependent on several factors, including the strength of the global economy, security (including the threat of international terrorism), and oil prices. Higher oil prices could lead to further shifts in consumer spending away from aviation, dampening a recovery in air transport demand. Oil prices moved lower in 2019 to about $60 per barrel and lower still in early 2020 but are projected to gradually increase to $100 per barrel by 2040.
As stated previously, the rapid spread of the COVID‐19 that began in early 2020 now presents a new risk without clear historical precedent. It is not known at this point how the virus will affect aviation in the long‐term; however, impacts have already been felt in 2020 and could carry over into 2021. The long‐ term impact of COVID‐19 on the aviation industry will not be understood until the full spread or intensity of the human consequences, as well as the breadth and depth of possible economic fallout, is known.
AIRPORT SERVICE AREA
Before current and future aviation demand can be determined at an airport, it is first necessary to iden‐ tify the airport’s role. GLS is classified in the NPIAS as a general aviation reliever airport, with a primary function of relieving general aviation (GA) traffic from commercial service airports in the Houston area, while also serving GA needs in the local area. GA, which is the largest component of the national aviation system, describes a diverse range of activity that includes pilot training, recreational flying, and the use of turboprop and jet aircraft for business and corporate use. Only commercial and military operations are excluded from the GA category.
With the role defined, the next step in determining aviation demand is to identify the airport’s service area. This is a generalized geographical area where there is a potential market for airport services, par‐ ticularly based aircraft. Typically, an airport’s service area can extend up to 30 miles, and sometimes even beyond. Additional factors that help determine the size of the service area include the quality of services at the airport, the proximity of other airports in the area and quality of their services, and the ground transportation network.
As detailed in Table 2A, there are nine public‐use airports within a 30 nautical mile (nm) radius of GLS. Of them, only three are included in the NPIAS. The remaining airports have limited services and, with the exception of Wolfe Air Park and RWJ Airpark, have very few based aircraft. GLS is the only public‐use airport within Galveston County.
When evaluating the GA service area, two primary demand segments must be considered: based aircraft and itinerant operations. An airport’s ability to attract based aircraft is an important factor when defining the service area, with proximity being the top consideration for most aircraft owners. Aircraft owners typically choose to base at an airport that is close to their home or business. Exhibit 2B depicts a 10‐, 20‐ and 30‐nautical mile radius from GLS, which extends beyond Galveston County and into neighboring Brazoria, Harris, and Chambers Counties. Registered aircraft in the region and aircraft based at GLS are
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-7
AIRPORT MASTEMASTER PLAN AND BUSINESS PLAN
¤£90 ¦¨§45 ¤£90 Liberty Jefferson County County
Harris 59 ¤£ County
¤£90 ¦¨§10
Ä Ä 146 TS225 225 TS Chambers County
¤£90
30nm
Galveston County 20nm
TS6 Ä ¦¨§45 Ä 146 TS288 10nm
Brazoria County
LEGEND 01020 Scholes International At Galveston Miles Based & Registereddfdd Aircraft Address Locations NPIAS Airport
Distance Based Aircraft Registered Aircraft Based Aircraft Address 10 nm 44 56 Registered Aircraft Address 20 nm 13 176 County Boundary 30 nm 16 697 Nautical Mile Radius Total 73 929 Source: ESRI Basemap Imagery (2010), BasedAircraft.com, FAA Registered Aircraft database.
Exhibit 2B Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-8 REGISTERED AND BASED AIRCRAFT
also shown on the exhibit, with large clusters of registered aircraft located in the Houston metropolitan area and near Texas Gulf Coast Regional Airport in Brazoria County, as well as Pearland Regional, Elling‐ ton, and La Porte Municipal. In total, there are more than 900 aircraft registered within a 30‐nm radius of GLS. The airport has a validated based aircraft count of 131 aircraft, with more than half of these attributed to addresses within 30 nm of the airport.
TABLE 2A | Airports within 30 Nautical Miles of GLS Distance FAA Service Based Annual Longest Lowest Visibility Airport Services from GLS Level Aircraft Operations Runway Minimums Fuel, hangars/tiedowns, Galveston (GLS) ‐‐ Reliever 131 29,930 6,001’ ½‐mile maintenance Alvin Airpark 24 nm NW NA 16 0 1,500’ (turf) None Hangars/tiedowns (6R5) Pearland Fuel, hangars/tiedowns, 25 nm NW Reliever 166 59,860 4,313’ ⅞‐mile Regional (LVJ) maintenance La Porte Fuel, hangars/tiedowns, 26 nm NNW Reliever 44 29,200 4,165’ 1‐mile (T41) maintenance Fuel, tiedowns, Ellington (EFD) 26 nm NW Reliever 97 102,200 9,001’ ½‐mile maintenance Wolfe Air Park Hangars/tiedowns, 28 nm NW NA 75 16,060 2,910’ None (3T2) maintenance Bailes (7R9) 29 nm WSW NA 9 1,092 2,060’ (turf) None Tiedowns Flyin’ Tiger 29 nm W NA 8 1,768 2,261’ (turf) None None (81D) RWJ Airpark 30 nm N NA 45 9,125 5,035’ 1‐mile Fuel, hangars/tiedowns (54T) Skyway Manor 30 nm NW NA 5 504 2,550’ (turf) None None (T79) Sources: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, 2019‐2023 Report; Airnav.com NA: Not applicable
The second demand segment to consider is itinerant operations. These are operations that are per‐ formed by aircraft that arrive from outside the airport area and land at GLS or depart GLS for another airport. In most cases, pilots will use airports nearer their intended destinations. However, this is de‐ pendent on the airport’s ability to accommodate the aircraft operator in terms of the facility and services available. As a result, airports with better facilities and services are more likely to attract a larger portion of the region’s itinerant operations.
When compared to the other public‐use airports in the region, GLS is better‐equipped than most to ac‐ commodate aircraft operators in the area. While the three NPIAS airports in the region offer similar facilities, none of them are located on Galveston Island or even within the county. For those traveling to or doing business on the island, this makes GLS a very appealing option. Combined with the longest runways in the region (with the exception of Ellington Airport), the lowest approach minimums available, and the variety of services, GLS is an extremely competitive facility in terms of attracting based aircraft and itinerant operations. For these reasons, the entirety of Galveston County is considered the core service area for the purposes of this study.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-9
GENERAL AVIATION FORECASTS
To determine the types and sizes of facilities that should be planned to accommodate general aviation activity at GLS, certain elements of this activity must be forecast. These indicators of general aviation demand include based aircraft, aircraft fleet mix, and annual operations.
The number of based aircraft is the most basic indicator of general aviation demand. By first developing a forecast of based aircraft for the airport, other demand indicators can be projected. The process of developing forecasts of based aircraft begins with an analysis of aircraft ownership in the primary general aviation service area through a review of historical aircraft registrations. An initial forecast of county‐ wide registered aircraft is developed and will be used as one data point to arrive at a based aircraft forecast for the airport.
Registered Aircraft Forecast
Historical registered aircraft in Galveston County since 2000 are included on the top portion of Table 2B. Aircraft registrations have grown from a low of 361 in 2000 to 415 registrations reported in 2020. The historic peak was reached in 2012, when there were 462 aircraft registered in the county. Aircraft regis‐ tration generally declined in the years following, likely due in part to the FAA’s requirement that aircraft owners re‐register their aircraft to retain U.S. civil aircraft status. As a result, previously registered air‐ craft that may have been sold, scrapped/destroyed, or registered to multiple addresses were dropped from the database.
A breakdown of the Galveston County registered aircraft fleet mix was not available for 2020, but historic records show most registered aircraft in the county have fallen within the single‐engine piston category. In 2019, 313 of the 410 county‐registered aircraft were single‐engine piston. Helicopters made up the next largest segment with 35 registrations, followed by 30 multi‐engine piston aircraft. There were also 17 turboprops, nine jets, and six aircraft that fell in the “other” category, which includes gliders, balloons, and experimental aircraft.
Different forecasting strategies were used to determine registered aircraft projections. The first strategy evaluated the service area’s market share of total active GA aircraft in the U.S. This market share analysis compares aircraft ownership trends in the service area against national aircraft ownership trends. As detailed in Table 2B, the market share has fluctuated between 0.1660 percent and 0.2210 percent since 2000. In 2020, the service area held a market share of 0.1954 percent. Carrying this figure forward as a constant results in a decrease in registered aircraft in the service area over the long term, dropping from 415 registrations in 2020 to 413 in 2025 and 411 registrations in both 2030 and 2040. This is a result of the FAA projecting active aircraft in the national fleet to decline over the planning period.
An increasing market share projection was prepared that considers the potential for county registrations returning to the historic high market share of 0.2210 percent that was reached in 2012. This results in a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 0.57 percent, which equates to 465 registered aircraft by 2040 – an increase of 50 over the next 20 years.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-10
TABLE 2B | Galveston County Registered Aircraft Projections Service Area U.S. Active Air‐ Market Share of Service Area Aircraft per Year Registrations craft U.S. Aircraft Population 1,000 Population 2000 361 217,533 0.1660% 250,675 1.44 2001 389 211,446 0.1840% 254,521 1.53 2002 387 211,244 0.1832% 260,096 1.49 2003 414 209,606 0.1975% 265,269 1.56 2004 426 219,319 0.1942% 269,760 1.58 2005 417 224,257 0.1859% 274,806 1.52 2006 407 221,942 0.1834% 279,182 1.46 2007 428 231,606 0.1848% 283,770 1.51 2008 431 228,664 0.1885% 288,643 1.49 2009 425 223,876 0.1898% 287,428 1.48 2010 434 223,370 0.1943% 292,476 1.48 2011 456 220,453 0.2068% 295,576 1.54 2012 462 209,034 0.2210% 301,053 1.53 2013 429 199,927 0.2146% 306,614 1.40 2014 447 204,408 0.2187% 313,426 1.43 2015 441 210,031 0.2100% 321,003 1.37 2016 450 211,794 0.2125% 328,822 1.37 2017 417 211,757 0.1969% 334,304 1.25 2018 387 211,749 0.1828% 337,890 1.15 2019 410 212,335 0.1931% 340,796 1.20 2020 415 212,380 0.1954% 343,570 1.21 Constant Market Share of U.S. Active Aircraft (CAGR ‐0.05%) 2025 413 211,400 0.1954% 358,763 1.15 2030 411 210,440 0.1954% 377,373 1.09 2040 411 210,380 0.1954% 403,820 1.02 Increasing Market Share of U.S. Active Aircraft, Historic High (CAGR 0.57%) – Selected Forecast 2025 427 211,400 0.2018% 358,763 1.19 2030 438 210,440 0.2082% 377,373 1.16 2040 465 210,380 0.2210% 403,820 1.15 Constant Ratio Projection per 1,000 County Population (CAGR 0.81%) 2025 433 211,400 0.2048% 358,763 1.21 2030 456 210,440 0.2167% 377,373 1.21 2040 488 210,380 0.2320% 403,820 1.21 Increasing Ratio Projection per 1,000 County Population, Historic High (CAGR 2.17%) 2025 467 211,400 0.2209% 358,763 1.30 2030 526 210,440 0.2500% 377,373 1.39 2040 638 210,380 0.3033% 403,820 1.58 Increasing Ratio Projection per 1,000 County Population, 5‐Year High (CAGR 1.46%) 2025 448 211,400 0.2119% 358,763 1.25 2030 487 210,440 0.2314% 377,373 1.29 2040 555 210,380 0.2638% 403,820 1.37 Sources: FAA Aircraft Registration Database; FAA Aerospace Forecast ‐ Fiscal Years 2020‐2040; Woods & Poole 2020
Population trends have also been used to analyze and project aircraft registrations within the service area. This projection method analyzes the service area population as a ratio of the historical registered aircraft per 1,000 population. In 2020, there were 1.21 registered aircraft per 1,000 population in the service area. Carrying this ratio forward as a constant results in 488 registered aircraft by 2040, for a CAGR of 0.81 percent.
Two increasing ratio projections were also evaluated. The first considered a return to the historic high of 1.58 that was reached in 2004. Applying this figure to the forecast years results in 638 registered
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-11
aircraft by 2040, representing a CAGR of 2.17 percent. Next, a more moderate increasing ratio projection was analyzed based on the recent five‐year high of 1.37 aircraft per 1,000 population. This projection results in 555 registered aircraft by 2040 for a CAGR of 1.46 percent.
Several regression forecasts were also prepared, including single‐ and multi‐variable regressions exam‐ ining correlations between registered aircraft and the GLS service area population, employment, income, and gross regional product, and with U.S. active GA aircraft. None of the regressions produced a strong correlation (r2 value greater than 0.9); therefore, they were not considered further.
A graph comparison of each projection is shown in Figure 2B. The registered aircraft projections pre‐ pared result in a range between 411 and 638 service area registered aircraft. The two increasing ratio projections represent the high end of the planning envelope and likely overstate the growth potential since aircraft registrations typically grow at slower rates than population. The constant market share projection represents the low end of the planning envelope, with 411 service area registrations by 2040. This forecast is also considered unreasonable, as the probability of registrations decreasing over the 20‐ year forecast period is very unlikely. More reasonable is the increasing market share forecast, which projects 465 registered aircraft in the service area by 2040. This projection shows moderate growth in Galveston County’s registered aircraft, in line with historic growth. Therefore, this projection will be car‐ ried forward as the selected forecast for service area registered aircraft.
FIGURE 2B | Galveston County Registered Aircraft Projections 650
600
550
500 AIRCRAFT
450 REGISTERED
400
350
300 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
History Constant Market Share of U.S. Active Aircraft Increasing Market Share of U.S. Active Aircraft ‐ Selected Forecast Constant Ratio Projection per 1,000 Population Increasing Ratio Projection per 1,000 Population (Historic High) Increasing Ratio Projection per 1,000 Population (5‐Year High)
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-12
Based Aircraft Forecast
The FAA did not historically require airports to report their based aircraft counts, nor did they validate based aircraft at airports. This has changed in recent years, and now the FAA mandates that airports report their based aircraft levels. These counts are recorded in the National Based Aircraft Inventory program and maintained and validated by the FAA to ensure accuracy.
According to the FAA’s database, GLS has 131 based aircraft, a count which was last validated on July 14, 2020. Some historic airport records detailing validated counts were also available for years 2013, 2015, and 2019. Prior to 2013, historic based aircraft counts have been derived from the FAA Terminal Area Forecasts (TAF) for the years 2001, 2005, and 2010. While the TAF counts are not validated, they do provide historical perspective. According to the historical data, based aircraft at GLS over the last 20 years has ranged between 115 in 2013 and 2015 to 211 in 2005.
Like the registered aircraft forecasts, several based aircraft forecasts have been developed using market share and population data as comparison points. As shown in Table 2C, the first three projections eval‐ uate the airport’s market share of based aircraft as compared to the service area registrations. In 2020, the airport’s market share was 31.6 percent. Carrying this percentage through the forecast years results in 147 in 2040, for a CAGR of 0.58 percent.
Two increasing market share projections were also developed. The first considers a return to the historic high of 53.7 percent that was reached in 2001, resulting in significant growth in based aircraft over the planning period. Under this scenario, there would be 250 in 2040, equating to a CAGR of 3.28 percent. The second increasing market share forecast evaluates a mid‐range projection that shows more modest growth, with 198 based aircraft in 2040, for a CAGR of 2.09 percent.
Three projections based on population were also developed. In 2020, there were 0.38 based aircraft per 1,000 service area population. The first forecast carries this ratio forward as a constant, resulting in 154 based aircraft in 2040 and a CAGR of 0.81 percent. The next projection considers a return to the average ratio seen over the last 10 years. This is reflective of a CAGR of 1.00 percent, which equates to 160 based aircraft in 2040. The final projection based on population considers stronger growth based on a return to the 10‐year historic high, resulting in 191 based aircraft in 2040, for a CAGR of 1.90 percent.
The FAA TAF was also included for comparison. As stated previously, the TAF reports just 107 based aircraft in 2020, whereas the validated based aircraft count at the airport has been recorded at 131 for the same year. This discrepancy results in no growth in based aircraft over the short and intermediate terms; however, by 2040, the TAF projects a based aircraft count of 160. This is reflective of a 1.00 per‐ cent CAGR over the growth period.
Figure 2C compares each of the new based aircraft forecasts, along with the FAA TAF and forecasts pre‐ pared for the airport as part of a 2013 update to the Houston‐Galveston Area Council (HGAC) Regional Aviation System Plan. The HGAC projection for GLS, which is now seven years old, projected based air‐ craft at GLS to reach 165 by 2020, the current base year for this study, and 200 by 2030. Those projec‐ tions have not come to fruition but are included for historical reference.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-13
The based aircraft forecasts resulted in a planning envelope ranging between 147 at the low end to 198 at the high end. Considering that GLS has a hangar wait list of approximately 15 individuals and only one vacant hangar available, as well as apron space already allotted for new hangar development, it is rea‐ sonable to assume moderate growth in based aircraft over the planning period. Therefore, the based aircraft projection that will be carried forward is the return to the 10‐year average, with 160 based air‐ craft in 2040.
TABLE 2C | Based Aircraft Forecasts GLS Based Service Area Service Area Aircraft Per Year Market Share Aircraft Registrations Population 1,000 Population 2001 209 389 53.7% 254,521 0.82 2005 211 417 50.6% 274,806 0.77 2010 138 434 31.8% 292,476 0.47 2013 115 429 26.8% 306,614 0.38 2015 115 441 26.1% 321,003 0.36 2019 124 410 30.2% 340,796 0.36 2020* 131 415 31.6% 343,570 0.38 Constant Market Share (CAGR 0.58%) 2025 135 427 31.6% 358,763 0.38 2030 138 438 31.6% 377,373 0.37 2040 147 465 31.6% 403,820 0.36 Increasing Market Share, Historic High (CAGR 3.28%) 2025 158 427 37.1% 358,763 0.44 2030 187 438 42.6% 377,373 0.50 2040 250 465 53.7% 403,820 0.62 Increasing Market Share, Mid‐Range (CAGR 2.09%) 2025 147 427 34.3% 358,763 0.41 2030 163 438 37.1% 377,373 0.43 2040 198 465 42.6% 403,820 0.49 Constant Ratio per 1,000 Population (CAGR 0.81%) 2025 137 427 32.1% 358,763 0.38 2030 144 438 32.9% 377,373 0.38 2040 154 465 33.1% 403,820 0.38 Return to Average Ratio per 1,000 Population (CAGR 1.00%) – Selected Forecast 2025 138 427 32.3% 358,763 0.39 2030 147 438 33.6% 377,373 0.39 2040 160 465 34.4% 403,820 0.40 Increasing Ratio per 1,000 Population, 10‐Year High (CAGR 1.90%) 2025 145 427 34.0% 358,763 0.40 2030 161 438 36.8% 377,373 0.43 2040 191 465 41.1% 403,820 0.47 FAA TAF (CAGR 1.00%) 2025 119 427 27.9% 358,763 0.33 2030 130 438 29.7% 377,373 0.34 2040 160 465 34.4% 403,820 0.40 Sources: Airport records; Previous Airport Master Plan; FAA TAF; Woods & Poole CEDDS 2020 Italics=airport records; other based aircraft records are from TAF *Validated count as of 7/14/20
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-14
FIGURE 2C | GLS Based Aircraft Projections
240
220
200
180 AIRCRAFT
BASED 160
140
120
100 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
History Constant Market Share Increasing Market Share (Historic High) Increasing Market Share (Mid‐Range) Constant Ratio per 1,000 Population Return to Average Ratio per 1,000 Population ‐ Selected Forecast Increasing Ratio per 1,000 Population (10‐Year High) FAA TAF 2013 Regional System Plan
Based Aircraft Fleet Mix Forecast
The fleet mix of based aircraft is often more important to airport planning and design than the total number of aircraft. For example, the presence of one or a few large business jets can have a greater impact on design standards for the runway and taxiway system compared to a greater number of smaller, single engine piston‐powered aircraft.
The based aircraft fleet mix forecast for GLS is presented in Table 2D. Fleet mix projections have been developed based upon the FAA’s estimates of how the national fleet mix will evolve over the same time period. Local factors, such as the potential for increased helicopter operations at GLS, have also been considered.
In 2020, most based aircraft (71%) at the airport fell into the single‐engine piston category. This is pro‐ jected to remain the majority category over the planning period, with slow and steady growth in the
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-15
number of single‐engine piston aircraft based at the airport by 2040. The next largest aircraft type is rotorcraft, with 20 helicopters based at GLS in 2020. This segment, which comprised 15 percent of the fleet mix in 2020, is expected to grow to 18 percent by 2040, with the addition of nine helicopters. Based helicopter growth will largely be dependent on renewed growth of the oil platform charter industry. Recent discoveries of new oil reserves in the Gulf is anticipated to increase demand for these charter activities in the future. Jets and turboprops are also expected to increase at the airport, while multi‐ engine piston aircraft decrease, in line with national trends.
TABLE 2D | Based Aircraft Fleet Mix Forecast 2020 % 2025 % 2030 % 2040 % Single Engine 93 71% 98 71% 104 71% 110 69% Multi‐Engine 10 8% 7 5% 5 3% 1 1% Turboprop 0 0% 1 1% 3 2% 5 3% Jet 8 6% 9 7% 10 7% 14 9% Helicopters 20 15% 23 17% 25 17% 29 18% Other* 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1% Total 131 100% 138 100% 147 100% 160 100% * “Other” aircraft include gliders, balloons, and experimental aircraft Source: Airport records; Coffman Associates analysis
OPERATIONS FORECAST
Operations at GLS are classified as either general aviation, air taxi, or military. General aviation opera‐ tions include a wide range of activity from recreational use and flight training, to business and corporate uses. Air taxi operations are those conducted by aircraft operating under FAR Part 135, otherwise known as “for‐hire” or “on‐demand” activity. Historically, the most significant air taxi operations at GLS are the offshore oil rig helicopter charters. Military operations include those operations conducted by various branches of the U.S. military.
Aircraft operations are further classified as local and itinerant. A local operation is a takeoff or landing performed by an aircraft that operates within sight of an airport, or which executes simulated ap‐ proaches or touch‐and‐go operations at an airport. Generally, local operations are characterized by train‐ ing activity. Itinerant operations are those performed by aircraft with a specific origin or destination away from an airport. Typically, itinerant operations increase with business and commercial use since business aircraft are used primarily to transport passengers from one location to another.
Several methods have been employed to develop a reasonable planning envelope. The following sec‐ tions present several new operations forecasts. Operational counts from the GLS airport traffic control tower (ATCT) were utilized in this analysis.
Itinerant General Aviation Operations Forecast
Table 2E presents several forecasts for itinerant GA operations. Each forecast is based on the airport’s market of total U.S. itinerant GA operations, examining different historic trends to develop a range of projections. The FAA TAF for GLS and the TAF growth rate for the State of Texas are also included for comparison purposes.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-16
TABLE 2E | Itinerant General Aviation Operations Year GLS Itinerant Operations U.S. ATCT GA Itinerant Operations GLS Share % 2010 9,011 14,863,856 0.0606% 2011 9,782 14,527,903 0.0673% 2012 9,369 14,521,656 0.0645% 2013 12,952 14,117,370 0.0917% 2014 12,649 13,978,993 0.0905% 2015 13,740 13,887,203 0.0989% 2016 15,479 13,905,204 0.1113% 2017 16,070 13,839,151 0.1161% 2018 15,310 14,130,495 0.1083% 2019 13,879 14,244,787 0.0974% 2020* 12,013 14,412,203 0.0834% Constant Market Share of U.S. Itinerant GA Operations (CAGR 0.24%) 2025 12,200 14,593,580 0.0834% 2030 12,300 14,779,512 0.0834% 2040 12,600 15,166,018 0.0834% Average Market Share of U.S. Itinerant GA Operations (CAGR 0.66%) 2025 13,100 14,593,580 0.0900% 2030 13,300 14,779,512 0.0900% 2040 13,700 15,166,018 0.0900% Increasing Market Share of U.S. Itinerant GA Operations (CAGR 1.93%) – Selected Forecast 2025 13,400 14,593,580 0.0915% 2030 14,700 14,779,512 0.0997% 2040 17,600 15,166,018 0.1161% 10‐Year Growth Trend Projection (CAGR 2.93%) 2025 13,900 14,593,580 0.0952% 2030 16,000 14,779,512 0.1083% 2040 21,400 15,166,018 0.1411% State TAF Growth Rate (CAGR ‐0.26%) 2025 11,900 14,593,580 0.0815% 2030 11,700 14,779,512 0.0792% 2040 11,400 15,166,018 0.0752% FAA TAF (CAGR 0.90%) 2025 13,308 14,593,580 0.0912% 2030 13,658 14,779,512 0.0924% 2040 14,377 15,166,018 0.0948% Sources: Airport records; FAA Aerospace Forecast 2020‐2040; FAA TAF * 2020 airport operations from May 2019‐April 2020
In 2020, the airport held 0.0834 percent of the market share of national itinerant operations. The first forecast carries this figure forward as a constant through the planning period, resulting in 12,600 oper‐ ations by 2040 and a CAGR of 0.24 percent.
Next, the historic average of the market share was applied to the forecast period. Since 2010, the airport has averaged 0.0900 percent of the U.S. market. When this figure is factored into the plan years, the result is 13,700 operations by 2040, for a CAGR of 0.66 percent.
The historic high market share was also considered. The peak market share of itinerant operations held by GLS was 0.1161 percent in 2017. This forecast, which has been calculated to increase over the plan period and ultimately return to the peak in 2040, resulted in 17,600 itinerant operations by 2040, and a CAGR of 1.93 percent.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-17
Operational growth trends have been considered as well. Since 2010, operations at GLS have a CAGR of 2.93 percent. Applying this historic growth rate over the forecast period results in 21,400 operations by 2040.
Lastly, projections presented in the FAA TAF were evaluated. For the first TAF projection, the itinerant operational growth rate forecast for the entire State of Texas (‐0.26%) was applied to itinerant opera‐ tions at GLS. This results in a reduction of operations, with 11,400 itinerant operations in 2040. The FAA TAF for GLS has also been included as a point of comparison. For GLS, the TAF projects 13,308 itinerant operations to grow to 14,377 in 2040, for a CAGR of 0.90%.
Figure 2D presents a graph of the new itinerant GA operation projections. Combined, the forecasts pre‐ sent a planning envelope ranging from 11,400 itinerant operations (state TAF forecast) to 21,400 oper‐ ations (10‐year growth trend forecast). Neither of these are considered reasonable. The state TAF fore‐ cast predicts itinerant operations in Texas decreasing as a whole for all airports. However, as evidenced by historic itinerant operations at GLS specifically, operations have generally increased and there is no cause to believe this trend will not continue over the course of the long‐term period. At the other end of the spectrum, the 10‐year growth trend forecast likely overestimates operational growth. Itinerant operations have decreased the last two years, and with uncertainty regarding the COVID‐19 pandemic remaining, it is unlikely the airport will see this level of sustained growth. More reasonable is a moderate growth scenario over the next 20 years; therefore, the increasing market share forecast is the selected projection. This forecast predicts a moderate growth rate of 1.93 percent over the planning period, reaching 17,600 operations in 2040.
FIGURE 2D | Itinerant GA Operations Projections
20,500
18,500
16,500
14,500 OPERATIONS
12,500
10,500
8,500 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 History Constant Market Share of U.S. Itinerant GA Operations Average Market Share of U.S. Itinerant GA Operations Increasing Market Share of U.S. Itinernat GA Operations ‐ Selected Forecast 10‐Year Growth Trend State TAF Growth Rate FAA TAF
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-18
Local General Aviation Operations Forecast
Local operations, or those that stay within the traffic pattern, in sight of the tower, or are executing touch‐and‐go operations, have also been forecast. This type of operation comprises a smaller share of the total operations occurring at GLS, with 8,616 local operations recorded in 2020. Table 2F details historic local operations at the airport since 2010, which have ranged from a low of 4,229 in 2012 to a high of 9,100 in 2010. The base year of 2020, with 8,616 operations, represents a market share of 0.0634 percent when compared to total U.S. local operations.
TABLE 2F | Local General Aviation Operations Year GLS Local Operations U.S. ATCT GA Local Operations GLS Share % 2010 6,916 11,716,274 0.0590% 2011 6,134 11,437,028 0.0536% 2012 4,229 11,608,306 0.0364% 2013 7,568 11,688,355 0.0647% 2014 9,100 11,675,040 0.0779% 2015 7,507 11,691,338 0.0642% 2016 5,520 11,632,612 0.0475% 2017 5,740 11,732,324 0.0489% 2018 6,616 12,354,014 0.0536% 2019 8,836 13,109,215 0.0674% 2020* 8,616 13,600,473 0.0634% Constant Market Share of U.S. Local GA Operations (CAGR 0.33%) 2025 8,800 13,824,423 0.0634% 2030 8,900 14,055,227 0.0634% 2040 9,200 14,538,858 0.0634% Average Market Share of U.S. Local GA Operations (CAGR ‐0.13%) 2025 8,000 13,824,423 0.0579% 2030 8,100 14,055,227 0.0579% 2040 8,400 14,538,858 0.0579% Increasing Market Share of U.S. Local GA Operations (CAGR 1.37%) 2025 9,300 13,824,423 0.0670% 2030 9,900 14,055,227 0.0706% 2040 11,300 14,538,858 0.0779% 10‐Year Growth Trend Projection (CAGR 1.09%) – Selected Forecast 2025 9,100 13,824,423 0.0658% 2030 9,600 14,055,227 0.0683% 2040 10,700 14,538,858 0.0736% State TAF Growth Rate (CAGR 0.59%) 2025 8,900 13,824,423 0.0644% 2030 9,200 14,055,227 0.0655% 2040 9,700 14,538,858 0.0667% FAA TAF (CAGR 0.22%) 2025 9,023 13,824,423 0.0653% 2030 9,018 14,055,227 0.0642% 2040 9,008 14,538,858 0.0620% Sources: Airport records; FAA Aerospace Forecast 2020‐2040; FAA TAF * 2020 airport operations from May 2019‐April 2020
Like the itinerant forecasts, several market share projections were made, as well as forecasts based on the historical growth rate and the TAF growth rate for statewide local operations. The TAF projections for GLS have also been included.
In the first forecast, the constant market share of 0.634 percent was carried through the plan years. This resulted in 9,200 operations by 2040, for a CAGR of 0.33 percent. The next projection evaluated the
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-19
average market share held by GLS between 2010 and 2020, which was 0.0579 percent. Maintaining this average over the course of the planning period equated to a negative growth rate of ‐0.13 percent, prompting a decline in local operations. Under this scenario, local operations decrease to 8,400 by 2040. An increasing market share scenario was also evaluated. This projection assumes a return to the historic peak market share of 0.0779 percent that occurred in 2014. The result is 11,300 operations by 2040, for a CAGR of 1.37 percent.
A growth projection based on the previous 10‐year trend was also calculated. The CAGR for local opera‐ tions between 2010 and 2020 is 1.09 percent. Applying this growth rate to the forecast years results in 10,700 operations by 2040.
As mentioned, the TAF forecasts have also been included. The TAF identified a CAGR of 0.59 percent for local operations for the State of Texas. When this growth rate is applied to local operations at GLS through the planning period, it results in some growth over the forecast years, with 9,700 operations by 2040. For GLS specifically, the TAF projected virtually no growth in operations between 2025 and 2040. While a CAGR of 0.22 percent is shown, this is based on growth between 2020, when local operations reached 8,616, and 2040, in which the TAF is forecasting 9,008 local operations. The intermediate years between 2025 and 2040 are projected to show a very slight decline in local operations, according to the TAF.
Figure 2E presents a graph of the new local GA operation projections. The planning envelope that results from these forecasts ranges from 8,400 to 11,300 local operations. Like the itinerant forecasts, the most reasonable forecast lies between the two extremes. In this case, the 10‐year growth trend forecast is the selected projection resulting in 10,700 by 2040 – an increase of approximately 2,100 local operations over the next 20 years. This is in line with a national increase in local operations that is projected by the FAA to occur over the planning period, as well as the forecast for increased local operations in the State of Texas. GLS itself has seen an increase in local operations over the last five years, with no indication that this trend will reverse in the coming years.
FIGURE 2E | Local GA Operations Projections
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000 OPERATIONS
6,000
5,000
4,000 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 History Constant Market Share of U.S. Local GA Operations Average Market Share of U.S. Local GA Operations Increasing Market Share of U.S. Local GA Operations 10‐Year Growth Trend ‐ Selected Forecast State TAF Growth Rate FAA TAF
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-20
Air Taxi Operations Forecast
The air taxi category, which is a subset of the itinerant operations category, is comprised of operations that are conducted by aircraft operating under 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 135. Part 135 operations are “for‐hire” or “on‐demand” and include charter and commuter flights, air ambulance, or fractional ownership aircraft operations. Air taxi operations at GLS, which account for approximately 25 percent of total operations, are conducted primarily by ERA Helicopters and PHI Helicopters.
As illustrated in Table 2G, GLS has experienced a wide range of air taxi operations over the last 10 years. In 2010, the airport recorded 16,040 air taxi operations, which was the peak over the historical period. Since then, these operations have declined by more than half, with 7,155 air taxi operations occurring in 2020. Over the past several years, the demand for oil has declined, causing oil prices to bottom out. As a result, many of the offshore oil rigs have been shuttered, reducing demand for ERA and PHI, which provided helicopter transportation for oil rig employees. Air charter activity at GLS reached its low point in 2019, but so far through April 2020, charter activity has started to rebound slightly. There is potential for a return to growth if oil prices rebound. At a national level, air taxi operations are actually projected to continue to decline in the near term driven by the transition away from 50‐seat regional jet aircraft in the fleet mix of airline aircraft that are considered air taxi aircraft. Airlines have been upgauging to air‐ craft with larger seating capacities (greater than 60 seats), that are classified as an air carrier aircraft. Since GLS does not have scheduled passenger service, it is not affected by this air taxi fleet mix transition.
Like the previous operations forecasts, market share, growth trend, and TAF forecasts have been evalu‐ ated. In 2020, GLS held 0.0964 percent of the market share, and the first forecast considers this figure remaining a constant over the plan years. The result is 6,200 operations by 2040, for a CAGR of ‐0.71 percent.
Next, an average market share forecast was developed. Since 2010, the airport has averaged 0.1211 percent of U.S. air taxi operations. This figure was carried through the planning period, resulting in a slight reduction of operations in 2025 with 6,700 before maintaining slow growth through 2040 reaching 7,800 operations. This represents a CAGR of 0.43 percent.
An increasing market share was evaluated based on a return to the airport’s peak market share of 0.1705 percent. Under this scenario, a CAGR of 2.17 percent results in 11,000 air taxi operations by 2040.
The growth trend of air taxi operations at GLS over the last ten years was also calculated and resulted in a negative growth rate of ‐3.96 percent. When this rate is applied to the planning period, a significant decrease in air taxi operations results, with a reduction to 3,200 in 2040.
Last, the TAF projections were used as additional comparison points. The TAF projects air taxi operations across the state to decrease at a rate of ‐2.08 percent, resulting in another downturn in GLS air taxi operations. The result is 4,700 air taxi operations in 2040. Likewise, the TAF forecasts reduced air taxi operations occurring at GLS, albeit at a less severe rate. For GLS, the TAF projects declining growth at a CAGR of ‐0.14 percent, equating to 6,960 air taxi operations in 2040.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-21
TABLE 2G | Air Taxi Operations Year GLS Air Taxi Operations U.S. ATCT Air Taxi Operations GLS Share % 2010 16,040 9,410,381 0.1705% 2011 12,060 9,278,542 0.1300% 2012 11,759 8,994,371 0.1307% 2013 12,411 8,803,402 0.1410% 2014 11,245 8,439,711 0.1332% 2015 10,681 7,895,478 0.1353% 2016 9,026 7,580,119 0.1191% 2017 7,526 7,179,651 0.1048% 2018 6,552 7,125,556 0.0920% 2019 5,712 7,234,239 0.0790% 2020* 7,155 7,422,696 0.0964% Constant Market Share of U.S. Air Taxi Operations (CAGR ‐0.71%) 2025 5,360 5,557,084 0.0964% 2030 5,630 5,840,150 0.0964% 2040 6,230 6,462,425 0.0964% Average Market Share of U.S. Air Taxi Operations (CAGR 0.43 %) 2025 5,700 5,557,084 0.1026% 2030 6,350 5,840,150 0.1087% 2040 7,820 6,462,425 0.1211% Increasing Market Share of U.S. Air Taxi Operations (CAGR 2.17%) – Selected Forecast 2025 7,800 5,557,084 0.1404% 2030 9,280 5,840,150 0.1589% 2040 11,020 6,462,425 0.1705% 10‐Year Growth Trend Projection (CAGR ‐3.94%) 2025 5,850 5,557,084 0.1053% 2030 4,780 5,840,150 0.0818% 2040 3,190 6,462,425 0.0494% State TAF Growth Rate (CAGR ‐2.08%) 2025 6,430 5,557,084 0.1157% 2030 5,770 5,840,150 0.0988% 2040 4,660 6,462,425 0.0721% FAA TAF (CAGR ‐0.14%) 2025 5,992 5,557,084 0.1078% 2030 6,297 5,840,150 0.1078% 2040 6,960 6,462,425 0.1077% Sources: Airport records; FAA Aerospace Forecast 2020‐2040; FAA TAF * 2020 airport operations from May 2019‐April 2020
Figure 2F presents a graph of the new air taxi operation projections. The air taxi forecasts range between a low of 3,200 operations, based on the 10‐year historic growth trend at the airport, and a peak of 11,000 operations based on an increasing market share. While air taxi operations at GLS have been declining in recent years, this trend was reversed in 2020, when the airport saw an increase in helicopter charters. As mentioned previously, there is potential for offshore oil platform charters to grow as the price of oil increases and new oil fields are opened to drilling. Based on the optimistic potential for helicopter char‐ ters, the selected forecast is the increasing market share, which shows modest growth over the next five years, followed by stronger growth through 2040, with 11,000 operations projected by 2040.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-22
FIGURE 2F | Air Taxi Operations Projections
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
OPERATIONS 8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 History Constant Market Share of U.S. Air Taxi Operations Average Market Share of U.S. Air Taxi Operations Increasing Market Share of U.S. Air Taxi Operations ‐ Selected Forecast 10‐Year Growth Trend State TAF Growth Rate FAA TAF
Military Operations Forecast
Military aircraft can and do utilize civilian airports across the country, including GLS. However, it is inher‐ ently difficult to project future military operations due to their national security nature and the fact that missions can change without notice. Thus, it is typical for the FAA to use a flat‐line number for military operations. For this planning study, military operations at GLS are projected to stay constant through the plan years at 902 itinerant operations and 665 local operations, for a total of 1,567 military operations.
Peak Period Forecasts
Peaking characteristics play an important role in determining airport capacity and facility requirements. Tower operations data provides an understanding of the peak operational periods for the airport. The peaking periods used to develop capacity and facility requirements are as follows:
Peak month – the calendar month in which traffic activity is the highest Busy day – the busiest day of a typical week in the peak month Design day – the average day in the peak month, derived by dividing the peak month by the number of days in the month Design hour – the average hour within the design day Peak hour – the peak hour within the design day
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-23
Over the last four years, the peak month has TABLE 2H | Peaking Characteristics averaged 11.6 percent of annual operations. Peak Period 2020 2025 2030 2040 Annual Operations 29,351 31,867 35,167 40,867 The busy day averaged 59.2 percent more Peak Month 3,418 3,711 4,096 4,759 operations than the design day during a Busy Day 178 194 215 248 typical week in the peak month. Design hour Design Day 112 122 135 156 was calculated at 10 percent of design day Design Hour 11 12 14 16 Peak Hour 28 30 33 38 operations and the peak hour at 24.6 percent of design day operations. Table 2H summarizes the peaking operational characteristics for GLS.
Forecast Summary
Table 2J presents a summary of the selected forecasts and a comparison to the TAF. The direct compar‐ ison between the master plan forecasts and the FAA TAF is presented at the bottom of the table. The operations forecast is within 15 percent of the TAF in the 10‐year period. The master plan forecast for based aircraft differs from the TAF more significantly due to the discrepancy between baseline counts. The TAF reports only 107 based aircraft, which is well below the airport’s actual validated count of 131.
TABLE 2J | Forecast Summary and TAF Comparison 2020 2025 2030 2040 FORECAST SUMMARY OPERATIONS Itinerant Air Carrier 0 0 0 0 Air Taxi 7,155 7,800 9,300 11,000 GA 12,013 13,400 14,700 17,600 Military 902 902 902 902 Local GA 8,616 9,100 9,600 10,700 Military 665 665 665 665 Total Operations 29,351 31,867 35,167 40,867 PEAK PERIOD Peak Month 3,418 3,711 4,096 4,759 Busy Day 178 194 215 248 Design Day 112 122 135 156 Design Hour 11 12 14 16 Peak Hour 28 30 33 38 BASED AIRCRAFT Single Engine 93 98 104 110 Multi‐Engine 10 7 5 1 Turboprop 0 1 3 5 Jet 8 9 10 14 Helicopter 20 23 25 29 Other 0 0 0 1 Total Based Aircraft 131 138 147 160 TAF COMPARISON OPERATIONS Master Plan Forecast 29,351 31,867 35,167 40,867 2020 FAA TAF 29,291 29,920 30,570 31,942 % Difference 0.20% 6.30% 13.99% 24.52% BASED AIRCRAFT Master Plan Forecast 131 138 147 160 2020 FAA TAF 107 119 130 160 % Difference 20.17% 14.79% 12.27% 0.00%
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-24
CRITICAL DESIGN AIRCRAFT
The critical design aircraft is defined as an aircraft conducting at least 500 annual itinerant operations at an airport. The demands of aircraft operating at the airport must be considered when planning for future airport facilities, and caution must be exercised to ensure that short‐term development does not pre‐ clude the airport’s long‐term needs. Thus, development planning should strike a balance between the facility needs of aircraft currently operating at the airport and the needs of aircraft projected to operate at the airport in the future.
Aircraft Classification
The use of appropriate FAA design standards is generally based upon the characteristics of aircraft com‐ monly using or expected to use the airport facilities. The design criteria used in the aircraft classification process are presented in Exhibit 2C. An airport’s critical aircraft can be a single aircraft or a collection of multiple aircraft commonly using the airport that fit into a single aircraft category. The design aircraft or collection of aircraft is classified by three different categories: Aircraft Approach Category (AAC), Air‐ plane Design Group (ADG), and Taxiway Design Group (TDG). The FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300‐ 13A, Airport Design, describes the following classification systems and parameters.
Aircraft Approach Category (AAC): A grouping of aircraft based on a reference landing speed (VREF), if specified, or if VREF is not specified, 1.3 times stall speed (VSO) at the maximum certificated landing weight. VREF, VSO, and the maximum certificated landing weight are those values as established for the aircraft by the certification authority of the country of registry. The AAC generally refers to the approach speed of an aircraft in landing configuration. The higher the approach speed is, the design standards become more restrictive. The AAC, depicted by letters A‐E, represents the approach category and relates to the approach speed of the aircraft (operational characteristics). The AAC typically applies to runways and runway‐related facilities, such as runway width, runway safety area (RSA), runway object free area (ROFA), runway protection zone (RPZ), and separation standards.
Airplane Design Group (ADG): The ADG, depicted by a Roman numeral I through VI, is a classification of aircraft which relates to the aircraft wingspan or tail height (physical characteristics). If the aircraft wing‐ span or tail height fall under two different classifications, the higher category is used. The ADG is used to establish design standards for taxiway safety area, taxiway obstacle free area (TOFA), taxilane object free area, apron wingtip clearance, and various other separation standards.
Taxiway Design Group (TDG): A classification of airplanes based on outer‐to‐outer main gear width (MGW) and cockpit to main gear (CMG) distance. The TDG relates to the dimensions of the under‐carriage of the design aircraft. The taxiway design elements determined by the application of the TDG include the taxiway width, taxiway edge safety margin, taxiway shoulder width, taxiway fillet dimensions, and, in some cases, the separation distance between parallel taxiway/taxilanes. Other taxiway elements, such as the taxiway safety area (TSA), taxiway/taxilane object free area (TOFA), taxiway/taxilane separation to parallel taxi‐ way/taxilanes or fixed or movable objects, and taxiway/taxilane wingtip clearances are determined solely based on the wingspan (ADG) of the design aircraft utilizing those surfaces. It is appropriate for a taxiway to be planned and built to different taxiway design standards based on expected use.
Exhibit 2C presents the aircraft classification of common aircraft in operation today.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-25
AIRPORT MASTEMASTERE PLAN AND BUSINESS PLAN
AIRCRAFT APPROACH CATEGORY (AAC) Category Approach Speed A less than 91 knots B 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots C 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots D 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots E 166 knots or more AIRPLANE DESIGN GROUP (ADG) Group # Tail Height (ft) Wingspan (ft) I <20 <49 II 20-<30 49-<79 III 30-<45 70-<118 IV 45-<60 118-<171 V 60-<66 171-<214 VI 66-<80 214-<262 VISIBILITY MINIMUMS RVR* (ft) Flight Visibility Category (statute miles) VIS 3-mile or greater visibility minimums 5,000 Not lower than 1-mile 4,000 Lower than 1-mile but not lower than ¾-mile 2,400 Lower than ¾-mile but not lower than ½-mile 1,600 Lower than ½-mile but not lower than ¼-mile 1,200 Lower than ¼-mile *RVR: Runway Visual Range TAXIWAY DESIGN GROUP (TDG)
140
120 TDG-6
100 TDG-7
80 TDG-4 TDG-5
60 TDG-2
40 TDG-3 TDG-1B
COCKPIT TO MAIN GEAR (FEET)TO COCKPIT 20 TDG-1A 0 0 102030405060 MAIN GEAR WIDTH (FEET)
Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design Exhibit 2C Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-26 AIRCRAFT CLASSIFICATION PARAMETERS AIRPORT MASTEMASTER PLAN AND BUSINESS PLAN
A-I Aircraft TDG C/D-I Aircraft TDG
• Beech Baron 55 1A • Beech Bonanza 1A • Lear 25, 31, 45, 55, 60 1B • Cessna 150, 172 1A • Learjet 35, 36 (D-I) 1B • Eclipse 500 1A • Piper Archer, Seneca 1A
C/D-II • Challenger 600/604/ B-I 800/850 1B • Cessna Citation VII, X+ 1B • Beech Baron 58 1A • CRJ-700 2 • Beech King Air 90 1A • Embraer Legacy 450/500 1B • Cessna 421 1A • ERJ-135, 140, 145 2 • Cessna Citation CJ1 (525) 1A • Gulfstream IV, 350, 450 (D-II) 2 • Cessna Citation 1(500) 2 • Gulfstream G200/G280 1B • Embraer Phenom 100 1B • Lear 70, 75 1B less than C/D-III 150,000 lbs. A/B-II 12,500 lbs. • Boeing 737-700, BBJ 3 or less • CRJ-900, 1000 2 • ERJ-170, 175, 190, 195 3 • Beech Super King Air 200 2 • Gulfstream V 2 • Cessna 441 Conquest 1A • Gulfstream G500, 550, • Cessna Citation CJ2 (525A) 2 600, 650 (D-III) 2 • Pilatus PC-12 1A
C/D-III over B-II 150,000 lbs. over 12,500 lbs. • Beech Super King Air 350 2 • Airbus A319-100, 200 3 • Cessna Citation CJ3(525B), • Boeing 737 -800, 900, Bravo (550), V (560) 2 BBJ2 (D-III) 3 • Cessna Citation CJ4 (525C) 1B • MD-83, 88 (D-III) 4 • Cessna Citation Latitude/Longitude 1B C/D-IV • Embraer Phenom 300 1B • Falcon 10, 20, 50 1B • Airbus A300-100, 200, 600 5 • Falcon 900, 2000 2 • Boeing 757-200 4 • Hawker 800, 800XP, • Boeing 767-300, 400 5 850XP, 4000 1B • MD-11 6 • Pilatus PC-24 1B A/B-III D-V • Airbus A330-200, 300 5 • Bombardier Dash 8 3 • Airbus A340-500, 600 6 • Bombardier Global 5000, • Boeing 747-100 - 400 5 6000, 7000, 8000 2 • Boeing 777-300 6 • Falcon 6X, 7X, 8X 2 • Boeing 787-8, 9 5
Note: Aircraft pictured is identified in bold type. Exhibit 2C continued Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-27 AIRCRAFTExhibit REFERENCE 2F continued CODES AIRCRAFT REFERENCE CODES
Airport Critical Design Aircraft
Having an accurate understanding of the type of aircraft that operate at the airport now and in the future is critical to the development of appropriate facilities. The type of aircraft using the airport can have a significant impact on numerous design criteria, such as runway length and width. Thus, an evaluation of the types and categories of aircraft utilizing the airport is necessary to determine future airport stand‐ ards that must be met to accommodate certain aircraft.
The FAA’s Traffic Flow Management System Count (TFMSC) database captures an operation when a pilot files a flight plan and/or when flights are detected by the National Airspace System, usually via radar. It includes documentation of commercial traffic (air carrier and air taxi), general aviation, and military air‐ craft. Due to factors such as incomplete flight plans, limited radar coverage, and VFR operations, TFMSC data does not account for all aircraft activity at an airport by a given aircraft type. However, the TFMSC does provide an accurate reflection of IFR activity. Operators of high‐performance aircraft, such as tur‐ boprops and jets, tend to file flight plans at a high rate.
Exhibit 2D presents the TFMSC operational mix at GLS for turboprops and jets since 2010. As can be seen, the airport experiences activity by the full range of business jets, including some of the largest in the national fleet. According to this data, turbine operations at GLS within AAC B and ADG I and II have exceeded the 500 operations threshold each year since 2010. Operations within AAC C also occur regu‐ larly, but only exceeded 500 in 2015, with 418 Class C operations recorded in 2019. AAC D operations are fewer but still represented 146 operations in 2019. Combined, AAC C and D have exceeded 500 an‐ nual operations at GLS since 2011. Airfield design standards for AAC C and D aircraft are grouped to‐ gether within FAA’s Airport Design standards. Therefore, for the purposes of this study, the combined operational group of AAC C/D exceeds the 500 operations threshold to be considered the critical design AAC. Reported operations within ADG III are well below the critical design threshold; therefore, the rep‐ resentative critical design ADG is II.
The most active C/D‐II aircraft operating at GLS are the Learjet 35/36 (TDG 1B), Hawker 800 (TDG 1B), and Cessna Citation III/VII (TDG 1B). Establishing the critical design aircraft for TDG also must consider aircraft within the B‐II category, such as the Beechcraft King Air series of turboprops. While these aircraft have slower approach speeds than the business jets, they have a higher TDG rating of 2. The King Air aircraft are one of the most frequent operators at GLS; therefore, for the purposes of this study, taxiway design should meet TDG 2 standards.
It is anticipated that the fleet mix of aircraft at GLS will continue to include a growing number of business jets within the AAC C/D and ADG II categories. Larger aircraft within ADG III include narrow‐body com‐ mercial aircraft, such as the Airbus A320, Boeing 737, but also include business jets, such as the Gulf‐ stream G550/650. Operations by these aircraft are likely to continue to be well below the critical design aircraft threshold over the course of the planning period. Therefore, the future design aircraft for pri‐ mary Runway 14‐32 is planned to remain within the C/D‐II categories. Taxiway design should also remain within the TDG 2 category.
Runway 18‐36 has historically been designated to meet B‐II standards, and crosswind coverage of pri‐ mary Runway 14‐32 exceeds 95 percent in the 16‐knot condition. Thus, a crosswind runway is only jus‐ tified to the 13‐knot condition, which correlates to ARC B‐II. According to TFMSC data, the most frequent
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-28
AIRPORTPORT MASTERM PLAN AND BUSINESS PLAN ARC Aircraft Model 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 ARC Aircraft Model 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Cirrus Vision Jet 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 Embraer ERJ-135/140/145 0 6 0 0 4 10 4 4 0 2 Eclipse 400/500 0 10 6 10 14 18 16 10 12 10 C-II Embraer Legacy 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 A-I Epic Dynasty 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Fairchild A-10 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Kodiak Quest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 Gulfstream 100/150 6 8 4 4 4 18 10 2 14 4 Piper Malibu/Meridian 12 22 20 48 54 24 28 28 16 32 Gulfstream 280 0 0 0 8 0 0 4 4 12 2 Socata TBM 7/850/900 2 10 10 16 22 32 50 22 44 36 Gulfstream G-III 8 8 2 2 0 6 2 0 2 0 TOTAL 14 44 36 74 90 76 98 60 74 84 Hawker 800 (Formerly Bae-125-800) 40 58 42 32 104 74 52 36 30 28 Cessna Caravan 32 24 36 24 30 6 18 14 2 12 Learjet 70 Series 0 0 0 0 4 22 8 10 2 16 A-II De Havilland Twin Otter 0 10 6 2 0 4 0 6 4 0 TOTAL 78 156 86 110 212 230 156 120 144 132 Pilatus PC-12 42 70 144 154 168 74 102 84 70 76 Airbus A319/320/321 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 TOTAL 74 104 186 180 198 84 120 104 76 88 Boeing 737 (200 thru 700 series) 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 A-III De Havilland Dash 7 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 C-III De Havilland Dash 8 Q-400 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Mcdonnell Douglas DC-9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 Aero Commander 680 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 P-3 Orion 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Beech 99 Airliner 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 44 2 4 2 0 2 8 0 0 Beechjet 400 56 60 60 68 82 118 70 50 36 10 Boeing C-17 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 Cessna 425 Corsair 12 4 4 8 14 10 16 10 12 2 C-IV C-130 Hercules 4 2 2 2 2 4 10 28 0 10 Citation CJ1 72 46 58 46 48 40 28 40 54 92 TOTAL 4 2 2 2 2 4 12 28 2 10 Citation I/SP 32 72 32 14 30 66 36 10 30 28 C-V Airbus A350/360 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Citation M2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 TOTAL 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Citation Mustang 18 28 22 38 34 46 28 26 36 24 F/A-18 Hornet 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Falcon 10 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 6 2 D-I Learjet 35/36 122 112 136 168 106 60 86 82 180 94 Hawker 1000 4 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 T-38 Talon 0 2 0 6 6 16 4 12 12 4 B-I King Air 90/100 128 110 152 138 208 206 198 164 194 122 TOTAL 122 114 136 178 112 76 90 94 192 98 L-29 Delfin 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Gulfstream 200 4 0 4 2 4 4 0 4 4 4 L-39 Albatross 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 D-II Gulfstream 450 36 20 24 26 20 14 20 18 8 10 Mitsubishi MU-2 20 2 4 12 16 28 0 4 10 2 TOTAL 40 20 28 28 24 18 20 22 12 14 Phenom 100 12 20 8 14 12 28 48 26 12 18 D-III Gulfstream 500/600 2 6 14 4 18 2 8 24 16 34 Piaggio Avanti 20 8 14 2 22 16 12 6 2 8 TOTAL 2 6 14 4 18 2 8 24 16 34 Piper Cheyenne 36 44 94 52 40 70 88 58 34 14 E-I F-16 Falcon/Viper 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Premier 1 14 4 12 12 4 20 28 30 6 12 TOTAL 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rockwell Sabre 40/60 0 2 8 0 2 4 2 10 4 0 Swearingen SJ-30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 ARC CODE SUMMARY T-6 Texan 6 8 10 6 0 22 28 8 28 20 ARC CODE 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 TOTAL 436 418 478 412 516 676 584 450 464 364 A-I 14 44 36 74 90 76 98 60 74 84 Aero Commander 690 14 18 12 16 20 20 10 14 20 8 A-II 74 104 186 180 198 84 120 104 76 88 Beech 1900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 8 A-III 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Cessna Conquest 10 10 18 4 10 22 26 4 4 2 B-I 436 418 478 412 516 676 584 450 464 364 Challenger 300 10 10 16 26 18 12 22 20 26 32 B-II 680 768 734 756 816 846 1062 820 856 612 Citation CJ2/CJ3/CJ4 30 40 64 136 112 174 156 150 72 38 B-III 12 4 0 14 8 16 30 38 32 22 Citation II/SP/Latitude 50 68 84 64 102 86 54 66 82 54 C-I 204 174 230 272 236 288 244 270 144 276 Citation Longitude 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 C-II 78 156 86 110 212 230 156 120 144 132 Citation V/Sovereign 46 80 98 88 82 72 184 92 106 78 C-III 0 44 2 4 2 0 2 8 0 0 Citation X 6 14 10 10 8 18 10 24 30 12 C-IV 4 2 2 2 2 4 12 28 2 10 Citation XLS 30 48 58 42 72 58 90 70 60 50 C-V 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Dornier 328 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 2 4 6 D-I 122 114 136 178 112 76 90 94 192 98 B-II D-II 40 20 28 28 24 18 20 22 12 14 Falcon 20/50 14 6 14 22 12 6 6 12 8 10 D-III 2 6 14 4 18 2 8 24 16 34 Falcon 2000 10 18 12 12 10 4 6 6 28 6 E-I 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Falcon 900 4 0 0 10 8 4 8 6 4 4 TOTAL 1,672 1,854 1,938 2,034 2,236 2,316 2,426 2,040 2,012 1,736 Hawker 4000 0 4 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 King Air 200/300/350 424 432 314 286 260 280 400 300 336 230 APPROACH CATEGORY SUMMARY King Air F90 26 14 16 16 64 38 38 24 10 8 AC 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Phenom 300 0 2 6 16 12 28 38 26 42 46 A 90 148 226 254 288 160 218 166 150 174 Pilatus PC-24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 B 1128 1190 1212 1182 1340 1538 1676 1308 1352 998 Shorts 330/360 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 C 288 376 322 388 454 522 414 426 290 418 Swearingen Merlin 4 4 10 8 26 14 8 4 8 18 D 164 140 178 210 154 96 118 140 220 146 TOTAL 680 768 734 756 816 846 1062 820 856 612 E 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1,672 1,854 1,938 2,034 2,236 2,316 2,426 2,040 2,012 1,736 ATR 42/72 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bombardier Global Express 8 4 0 8 4 0 2 4 4 0 C-I CASA 235 0 0 0 0 0 6 24 24 28 20 AIRPLANE DESIGN GROUP SUMMARY De Havilland Dash 8 Series 0 0 0 6 2 6 4 6 0 2 DG 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Falcon 7X/8X 2 0 0 0 2 4 0 4 0 0 I 778 750 880 936 954 1116 1016 874 874 822 TOTAL 12 4 0 14 8 16 30 38 32 22 II 872 1048 1034 1074 1250 1178 1358 1066 1088 846 Beech Starship 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 III 16 54 20 22 28 18 40 72 48 58 C-II Challenger 600/604 8 12 16 16 16 20 16 30 20 24 IV 4 2 2 2 2 4 12 28 2 10 Citation III/VI 16 64 22 46 80 78 60 34 52 30 V 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Embraer 500/450 Legacy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 18 TOTAL 1,672 1,854 1,938 2,034 2,236 2,316 2,426 2,040 2,012 1,736
Note: ARC- Airport Reference Code Source: Traffic Flow Management System Counts Exhibit 2D Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-29 HISTORICAL TURBOPROP AND JET OPERATIONS This page intentionally left blank
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-30
ARC B‐II airplane operating at GLS is the Cessna Citation Sovereign and the Beechcraft King Air 200/300/350. It is anticipated that this runway will continue to primarily serve aircraft within this cate‐ gory for the duration of the planning period. Therefore, these aircraft will be identified as the critical design aircraft for Runway 18‐36.
RUNWAY DESIGN CODE
The runway design code (RDC) relates to specific FAA design standards that should be met in relation to a runway. The RDC takes into consideration the AAC, ADG, and the runway visual range (RVR). The RVR relates to the available instrument approach visibility minimums expressed by RVR values in feet of 1,200 (⅛‐mile), 1,600 (¼‐mile), 2,400 (½‐mile), 4,000 (¾‐mile), and 5,000 (1‐mile). The RVR values approximate standard visibility minimums for instrument approaches to the runways. In most cases, the critical design aircraft will also be the RDC for the primary runway.
The runways should be designed to accommodate the overall design aircraft, which has been identified as C/D‐II‐2. Runway 14‐32 is 6,000 feet long, 150 feet wide, and has precision instrument approach ca‐ pability with visibility minimums down to ½‐mile. As such, the existing and ultimate RDC for this runway is described as C/D‐II‐2400. Runway 18‐36 is 6,001 feet long, 150 feet wide, and has visibility minimums down to 1‐mile. With the critical design aircraft identified within the ARC B‐II category, the applicable existing and ultimate RDC for this runway is B‐II‐5000.
APPROACH AND DEPARTURE REFERENCE CODES
The approach and departure reference codes (APRC and DPRC) describe the current operational capabilities of each runway and the adjacent parallel taxiways, where no special operating procedures are necessary. Essentially, the APRC and DPRC describe the current conditions at an airport in runway classification terms when considering the parallel taxiway, unlike the RDC, which is based on planned development.
Runway 14‐32 has a partial‐parallel taxiway, Taxiway B, located approximately 460 feet from the runway centerline. Runway 14 has a precision ILS approach with ½‐mile visibility minimums. Based on these con‐ ditions, the APRC for Runway 14‐32 is D/IV/2400 and D/V/2400, and the DPRC is D/IV and D/V. Runway 18‐36 also has a partial‐parallel taxiway along the west edge of the apron that has a runway/taxiway separation distance of approximately 550 feet. Runway 18 has a non‐precision approach with 1‐mile visibility minimums. Based on these conditions, the APRC for Runway 18‐36 is D/VI/5000 and a DPRC of D/VI.
CRITICAL AIRCRAFT SUMMARY
Table 2K summarizes the airport and runway classification currently and in the future. The critical aircraft is now defined by those aircraft in ARC B‐II for Runway 18‐36 and ARC C/D‐II for Runway 14‐32 and is expected to remain in these categories in the future. Figure 2G illustrates the existing and ultimate air‐ craft dimensions.
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-31
TABLE 2K | Airport and Runway Classifications Existing/Ultimate Runway 18‐36 Existing/Ultimate Runway 14‐32 Airport Reference Code (ARC) B‐II C/D‐II Cessna Citation Sovereign Learjet 35/36 Airport Design Aircraft King Air 200/300/350 Cessna Citation III/VI Runway Design Code (RDC) B‐II‐5000 C/D‐II‐2400 D/IV/5000 Approach Reference Code (APRC) D/VI/2400 D/V/5000 D/IV Departure Reference Code (DPRC) D/VI D/V Taxiway Design Group (TDG) 2* 2* * Based on the Beechcraft King Air 200/350 Source: FAA AC 150/5300‐13A; Coffman Associates analysis
Aviation Demand Forecasts | DRAFT 2-32