DOCSLIB.ORG

A Feasibility Study of Regional Air-Cargo Airports

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Feasibility Study of Regional Air-Cargo Airports Report to Congress U.S. Department A Feasibility Study of of Transportation Federal Aviation Regional Air-Cargo Airports: Administration Including a Case Study of a Regional Air-Cargo Center for the Washington, D.C., Area Report of the Federal Aviation Administration Pursuant to Senate Report 101-121 Accompanying the Department of Transportation and Related Washington, D.C. 20591 August 1991 Agencies Appropriations Act, 1990 A Feasibility Study of Regional Air-Cargo Airports 2 A Feasibility Study of Regional Air-Cargo Airports Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 7 I — Introduction. ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Purpose............................................................................................................................................. 9 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Study Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 10 Problem Areas ................................................................................................................................ 11 II — Background and Future Requirements............................................................................................... 13 Evolution of the Air-Cargo Industry ............................................................................................. 13 Pre Deregulation ...................................................................................................................... 13 Post Deregulation .................................................................................................................... 14 Current Status ................................................................................................................................ 15 Future Requirements...................................................................................................................... 17 III — Regional Air-Cargo Centers ............................................................................................................... 19 Description of the Concept ........................................................................................................... 19 Developing a Regional Air-Cargo Center ...................................................................................... 20 Advantages............................................................................................................................... 20 Disadvantages .......................................................................................................................... 21 Integrated and Traditional Air-Cargo Carriers ........................................................................ 22 Facilities Required.................................................................................................................... 23 Cost Estimates ................................................................................................................................ 24 New Facilities ........................................................................................................................... 24 Converting and Improving an Existing Airport ..................................................................... 26 Case Studies ................................................................................................................................... 27 Fort Worth Alliance Airport (AFW) ........................................................................................... 27 Stewart International Airport (SWF) ......................................................................................... 29 Huntsville International Airport (HSV)..................................................................................... 33 IV — Analysis of Air-Cargo Operations ..................................................................................................... 35 Cargo Operations and Their Contribution to Delay..................................................................... 35 Analysis of All-Cargo Operations at New York-Area Airports....................................................... 39 General .................................................................................................................................... 39 John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) ........................................................................... 41 LaGuardia Airport (LGA) ........................................................................................................... 43 Newark International (EWR) ..................................................................................................... 45 V — Air-cargo Operations in the Washington, D.C., Area........................................................................ 47 Description of Washington Air-Cargo Operations ....................................................................... 47 Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD) ...................................................................... 47 Washington National Airport (DCA) ........................................................................................ 49 Baltimore/Washington International Airport (BWI) ................................................................ 51 Effects of Air-Cargo Operations on Congestion and Delay .......................................................... 53 General .................................................................................................................................... 53 Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD) ...................................................................... 53 Washington National Airport (DCA) ........................................................................................ 57 Baltimore/Washington International Airport (BWI) ................................................................ 57 Alternative Locations for Washington, D.C., Regional Air-Cargo Facility ................................... 59 Tipton Army Airfield (FME) Fort Meade, MD ........................................................................... 59 Martin State Airport (MTN) ....................................................................................................... 61 Winchester Regional Airport (W16)......................................................................................... 61 Martinsburg Eastern West Virginia Regional Airport (MRB) .................................................... 63 Hagerstown Washington County Regional Airport (HGR) ...................................................... 63 VI — Findings ............................................................................................................................................. 65 Appendix A — Tabulation of Hourly Operations ...................................................................................... 67 3 A Feasibility Study of Regional Air-Cargo Airports 4 A Feasibility Study of Regional Air-Cargo Airports List of Figures Figure 1 World Air Freight Forecast ................................................................................................ 17 Figure 2 Fort Worth Alliance Airport (AFW) ..................................................................................... 28 Figure 3 Stewart International Airport (SWF) ................................................................................... 30 Figure 4 Huntsville International Airport (HSV) .............................................................................. 32 Figure 5 Total Hourly Operations at John F. Kennedy International Airport ............................... 40 Figure 6 John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) ..................................................................... 41 Figure 7 Total Hourly Operations at La Guardia International Airport ......................................... 42 Figure 8 La Guardia International Airport (LGA) ............................................................................. 43 Figure 9 Total Hourly Operations at Newark International Airport .............................................. 44 Figure 10 Newark International Airport (EWR) .................................................................................. 45 Figure 11 Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD) ................................................................ 48 Figure 12 Washington National Airport (DCA) .................................................................................. 48 Figure 13 Baltimore/Washington International Airport (BWI) .......................................................... 50 Figure 14 Total Hourly Operations at Washington Dulles International Airport ........................... 52 Figure 15 Total Hourly Operations at Washington National International Airport ....................... 56 Figure 16 Total Hourly Operations at Baltimore/Washington International Airport ..................... 58 Figure 17 Tipton Army Airfield (FME) ................................................................................................ 60 Figure 18 Martin State Airport (MTN) ................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CAA Filed Comments
    BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C. COVID-19 Related Relief Concerning Operations at Chicago O’Hare International Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, Los Angeles International Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport, New York LaGuardia Airport, Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, and San Francisco International Airport for the Winter 2020/2021 Scheduling Season Docket No. FAA-2020-0862 RESPONSE OF THE CARGO AIRLINE ASSOCIATION INTRODUCTION The Cargo Airline Association is the leading organization representing the U.S. all-cargo air carrier industry.1 We are writing in response to Proposed Extension of Limited Waiver of the Minimum Slot Usage Requirement at certain enumerated airports for the Winter 2020/2021 scheduling season published in the September 15, 2020, edition of the Federal Register (85 Fed. Reg. 57288). The FAA’s proposed action would extend the limited waiver of the minimum slot usage requirements (with some restrictions) at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), New York LaGuardia Airport (LGA) and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) until March 27, 2021. The proposal would also extend the FAA’s coronavirus-related policy for 1 All-cargo airline members include: ABX Air, Atlas Air, FedEx Express, Kalitta Air and UPS Airlines. prioritizing flights canceled at designated International Air Transport Association (IATA) Level 2 airports in the United States – only through December 31, 2020.2 Our members are fully aware of the daunting operating challenges facing both airports and airlines in an environment poisoned by the COVID-19 coronavirus. We appreciate the actions taken by the United States government to address the many challenges impacting the aviation sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Service Incentive Program
    ASIP5 AIR SERVICE INCENTIVE PROGRAM MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT THE MIA AIR SERVICE INCENTIVE PROGRAM INTRODUCTION: The Miami-Dade Aviation Department (MDAD), op- destination (city) from MIA will qualify for 100% erator of Miami International Airport (MIA), is pleased abatement of landing fees on the new service, for a to offer ASIP5, the latest and most dynamic of its air 12-month Promotional Period. The service must be service incentive programs. The MIA ASIP5 comple- operated for 12 consecutive months. The incen- ments the strategies and objectives of the airport’s tive is available for any domestic U.S or Cana- air service development efforts while encouraging in- dian city pair regardless of present service levels cumbent carriers at MIA to consider expansion and to and from MIA by the applicant carrier or an- new market development. other carrier on that specific route. MIA OBJECTIVES: 2. New International Passenger Air Service: A. Any air carrier establishing scheduled, year-round • Stimulate domestic and international passenger passenger service to an international destination (city air service at MIA and / or airport) not currently served from MIA by any • Stimulate international freighter service to MIA carrier, will qualify for 100% abatement of landing • Increase non-aeronautical revenues at MIA fees on the qualifying service, for a 12-month Pro- • Reduce costs per enplaned passenger at MIA motional Period. Any secondary airports within the same destination will be deemed a new interna- ASIP5 PROGRAM COMPONENTS: tional route and will qualify for the incentive. For example, a carrier commencing London-Gatwick The MIA ASIP5 offers features that include: service will qualify for the incentive even though • An incentive for domestic passenger routes and MIA is already served from London-Heathrow.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals for the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
    USCA Case #11-1018 Document #1351383 Filed: 01/06/2012 Page 1 of 12 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued November 8, 2011 Decided January 6, 2012 No. 11-1018 REPUBLIC AIRLINE INC., PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, RESPONDENT On Petition for Review of an Order of the Department of Transportation Christopher T. Handman argued the cause for the petitioner. Robert E. Cohn, Patrick R. Rizzi and Dominic F. Perella were on brief. Timothy H. Goodman, Senior Trial Attorney, United States Department of Transportation, argued the cause for the respondent. Robert B. Nicholson and Finnuala K. Tessier, Attorneys, United States Department of Justice, Paul M. Geier, Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, and Peter J. Plocki, Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, were on brief. Joy Park, Trial Attorney, United States Department of Transportation, entered an appearance. USCA Case #11-1018 Document #1351383 Filed: 01/06/2012 Page 2 of 12 2 Before: HENDERSON, Circuit Judge, and WILLIAMS and RANDOLPH, Senior Circuit Judges. Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge HENDERSON. KAREN LECRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge: Republic Airline Inc. (Republic) challenges an order of the Department of Transportation (DOT) withdrawing two Republic “slot exemptions” at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (Reagan National) and reallocating those exemptions to Sun Country Airlines (Sun Country). In both an informal letter to Republic dated November 25, 2009 and its final order, DOT held that Republic’s parent company, Republic Airways Holdings, Inc. (Republic Holdings), engaged in an impermissible slot-exemption transfer with Midwest Airlines, Inc. (Midwest).
    [Show full text]
  • JFK International Airport the New Terminal One
    JFK International Airport The New Terminal One M/WLBE Information Session November 10, 2020 THE NEW TERMINAL ONE JFK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Our World-Class Team Airline Sponsors Financial Sponsors Operating Partner Project Management Office NAMC National named The New Terminal One the 2020 Development Team of the Year THE NEW TERMINAL ONE JFK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 2 Commitment to Diversity Diversity efforts start with The New Terminal One’s Leadership: • Dr. Gerrard P. Bushell, Executive Chair of The New Terminal One and Chair of Carlyle Airport Group Holdings, is a leader with experience in government, labor and the private sector. Dr. Bushell served as the President and CEO of the Dormitory Authority of the State of NY (DASNY) where he deployed more than $38 billion of capital and financing and managed a construction portfolio valued at over $6 billion in construction projects all while advancing the State’s M/WBE goals beyond 30% for DASNY. • JLC Infrastructure is a 30% equity partner. JLC Infrastructure is a leading investment firm with a strong track record and presence in NY and is a registered MBE with the PANYNJ. JLC’s participation since the inception of the project has helped to drive the commitment to fostering diversity. • McKissack & McKissack, the oldest woman and minority-owned design and construction firm in the US, is leading the Project Management Office. Cheryl McKissack Daniel, its President and CEO, is actively engaged with The New Terminal One as an advisor. McKissack has a formidable track record of delivering projects that meet and often exceed MWBE goals. Its portfolio of projects includes: World Trade Center, Columbia University, Metropolitan Transportation Authority (as Independent Engineering Consultant for 8 years), Philadelphia International Airport and LaGuardia Airport.
    [Show full text]
  • PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT Laguardia Airport Central Terminal Building Redevelopment
    PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT LaGuardia Airport Central Terminal Building Redevelopment Queens Borough New York City Prepared for Port Authority of New York & New Jersey Port Authority of NY & NJ 225 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10003 Prepared by Frank G. Mikolic, Principal Investigator John W. Lawrence, Principal Investigator Brian M. Albright, GIS Specialist/Field Director AECOM 516 East State St. Trenton, New Jersey 08609 June 2013 PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT LaGuardia Airport Central Terminal Building Redevelopment Queens Borough New York City Prepared for Port Authority of New York & New Jersey 225 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10003 Prepared by Frank G. Mikolic, Principal Investigator John W. Lawrence, Principal Investigator Brian M. Albright, GIS Specialist/Field Director AECOM 516 East State Street Trenton, NJ 08609 June 2013 Management Summary SHPO PROJECT REVIEW NUMBER: 12PR05127 INVOLVED STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES: FAA Port Authority of New York and New Jersey PHASE OF SURVEY: IA, Literature Search and Sensitivity Assessment LOCATION INFORMATION: Location: New York City Minor Civil Division: Queens Borough County: Queens County SURVEY AREA: Length: 1.2 mi (2 km) Width: width varies depending on location Number of Acres Surveyed: 159 ac (64 ha) USGS 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE MAP: Central Park, Flushing SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT: Prehistoric (high, medium, low): Sensitivity Area 1 (Moderate to High), 2 (High), 3 (Low) and 4 (Moderate). Historic (high, medium, low): Sensitivity Area 1 (Moderate to High), 2 (Low),
    [Show full text]
  • Public Notice Maryland Department of Transportation Notice to Architects & Engineers Transportation Professional Services Se
    PUBLIC NOTICE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NOTICE TO ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS TRANSPORTATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SELECTION BOARD REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES The Secretary of the Maryland Department of Transportation has certified to the Transportation Professional Services Selection Board the need to utilize the services of engineers and architects for the following project(s): Contract Number MAA-AE-18-001 - Comprehensive Airport Planning Services at Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall and Martin State Airports. Firms interested in being considered for work on any Project must submit an Expression oflnterest for the Project as set forth herein. The Expression of Interest shall be in an envelope marked with the specified contract number for the Project. The letter portion of the Expression oflnterest shall indicate the firm's desire to perform services and indicate the specific tasks or areas of expertise that will be subcontracted, and to whom. Interested firms must submit the required material or the interested firm will not be considered for the Project. Of all the firms expressing interest in a Project, those judged most qualified will be requested to submit Technical Proposals. Additional information will be supplied to the selected firms so they can prepare such proposals for the Project. If an interested firm is requested to submit a technical Page 1 of17 MAA-AE-18-00 I Comprehensive Airport Planning Services proposal, their proposal should substantially reflect the same composition and area of involvement as their Expression oflnterest. The firm(s) that submits the highest rated Technical Proposal will be requested to submit Price Proposals. Salary, Payroll Burden, and Overhead limitations have been eliminated.
    [Show full text]
  • September, 2008
    WWW.AIRCARGOWORLD.COM SEPTEMBER 2008 International Trends & Analysis INTERNATIONAL EDITION The World’s Top Cargo Airlines50 Cargo Security • India • Anti-Trust 2008 SUPPLY CHAIN INNOVATION AWARD FINALIST 6H>6 IDD J#H# EDGII"ID "9DDG# 96NN"9:;>C>I::# ,% A:HH I=6C6>G# As fuel prices send airfreight costs soaring, only OceanGuaranteed ® provides day-definite delivery from Asia to the U.S. that’s just as reliable, but at a fraction of the cost.With the combined resources and expertise of APL Logistics and Con-way Freight, OceanGuaranteed provides a unique single-source LCL/LTL solution with proven 99% on-time performance. In fact, your shipment is guaranteed to arrive on schedule, or we’ll pay 20% of the invoice.* Call 866-896-2005 or visit www.oceanguaranteed.com/22 for more information or to book a shipment today. *Conditions and restrictions apply. See website for full details. Service also available to Canada and Mexico. International Edition September 2008 CONTENTS Volume 11, Number 7 COLUMNS Top Cargo 12 North America Airlines With all the turmoil in Ohio, 22 The annual ranking of the growth at Toledo Express the world’s top 50 cargo air- Airport as a freight center is lines by traffic, with aircraft noteworthy orders and cargo revenue. 14 Pacific Yields on freighters may be down, but handling cargo in China remains a feast • JAL Slimmer 17 Europe Despite its bad timing of entering the market, Cargo 30 India B could be a survivor among India could become a plenty of airline failures key growth market for air 30 cargo, but overcapacity could spoil the party for freight operators.
    [Show full text]
  • (Eu) 2015/ 1014
    27.6.2015 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 162/65 COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/1014 of 25 June 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 establishing the Community list of air carriers which are subject to an operating ban within the Community (Text with EEA relevance) THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 December 2005 on the establishment of a Community list of air carriers subject to an operating ban within the Community and on informing air passengers of the identity of the operating carrier, and repealing Article 9 of Directive 2004/36/CE (1), and in particular Article 4(2) thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 (2) established the list of air carriers which are subject to an operating ban within the Union, referred to in Chapter II of Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005. (2) In accordance with Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005, some Member States and the European Aviation Safety Agency (‘EASA’) communicated to the Commission information that is relevant in the context of updating that Union list. Relevant information was also communicated by certain third countries. On the basis of that information and the verifications carried out by the Commission, the Union list should now be updated. (3) The Commission informed all air carriers concerned, either directly or through the authorities responsible for their regulatory oversight, about the essential facts and considerations which would form the basis for a decision to impose on them an operating ban within the Union or to modify the conditions of an operating ban imposed on an air carrier which is included in the Union list.
    [Show full text]
  • THE AERO AERIAL KB3KRV De SQ1RLL
    . THE AERO AERIAL KB3KRV de SQ1RLL The newsletter of the Aero Amateur Radio Club Volume 2 Issue 6 June 2005 Editor Frank Stone AC3P Officers Committees Al Alexander K3ROJ President Repeater/Trustee Phil Hock W3VRD Bob Landis WA3SWA Vice-President VE Testing Pat Stone AC3F Joe Miko WB3FMT Recording Secretary Public Service Frank Stone AC3P Pat Stone AC3F Corresponding Secretary RACES/ARES Joe Miko WB3FMT Warren Hartman W3JDF Treasurer Field Day Bob Landis WA3SWA Election Judge Ron Distler W3JEH 1 ABOUT THE AERO AMATUER RADIO CLUB Meetings: First and Third Wednesdays at 7:30 pm at Coffman’s Diner (Middle River and Orem’s Rd.) Nets: See Local Area Net Schedule Repeaters: W3PGA (147.24 MHz - / 449.575 MHz -) WEBSITE: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/w3pga/ LOCAL AREA NETS Day Time Frequency (MHz) NET NAME Daily 9 – 10 am 147.03 ORIOLE Net Daily 6 – 6:30 pm 3.920 Maryland Emergency Phone Net Daily 6:30 – 7 pm 146.670 Baltimore Traffic Net Daily 7 pm and 10 pm 3.643 Maryland/DC/Delaware Traffic Net Daily 7 pm 146.505 AERO Code Practice Net 1st Tues 7:30 pm 145.330 Baltimore ARES Net 2nd Tues 7:30 pm 146.670 Baltimore County RACES Net 2nd Wed. 8 pm 28.445 AERO ARC Net 4th Wed 8 pm 147.240 AERO ARC Net 5th Wed. 8 pm 449.575 AERO ARC Net 2 Polls Show Distler in Lead With the 2005 AERO Election Campaign underway, the Gottcha Poll Co. survey shows Ron Distler, W3JEH, leading all contenders for all club offices.
    [Show full text]
  • FREDERICK MUNICIPAL AIRPORT: EXPANSION & BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Table of Contents
    University of Maryland Robert H. Smith School of Business Management Consulting – BUMO 758K Fall 2014 F r e d e r i c k M u n i c i p a l A i r p o r t : E x p a n s i o n & B u s i n e s s D e v e l o p m e n t S t r a t e g y Airport Team 2 Ryan Curley James Moscariello Furqan Chiragh Steven Reddick Andrew Chudy Gretchen Wintringer Under the supervision of Professor Protiti Dastidar 2 PALS/UMD | FREDERICK MUNICIPAL AIRPORT: EXPANSION & BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Table of Contents Executive Summary............................................................................................................................... 3 Industry Analysis of Domestic Airports using Porter’s Five Forces................................................. 3 Overview...................................................................................................................................... 3 Industry Outlook.......................................................................................................................... 3 FDK Competitor Analysis..................................................................................................................... 5 Marketing Strategy................................................................................................................................ 7 Branding.......................................................................................................................................7 Website, Signage..........................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Tenant Directive
    TENANT DIRECTIVE MTN: 200.8 Date: March 11, 2015 TITLE: Helicopter Operations (skid-type) I. References: Code of Maryland Regulation (COMAR) 11.03.02.2 “Aircraft Regulations”. II. Directive Statement: A. Compliance with this directive, which includes all helicopters without wheeled landing gear, is mandatory for all tenants and transients which use the airport facilities. B. This Directive has been established to provide a safe environment for all helicopters without wheeled landing gear operating and or conducting business at Martin State Airport. C. This Directive supersedes MTN Tenant Directive 200.8, dated April 1, 2004. III. Procedures A. All helicopters utilizing Martin State Airport without wheeled landing gear shall land and depart via the South Helipad and park in the adjacent designated helicopter parking area. (See attached) NOTE: Airport Management prior approval maybe granted to permit skid-type helicopters to land, depart and/or park at another location on the airport. B. Helicopters without wheeled landing gear are restricted to hover operations only within the helicopter parking area and to and from the South Helipad. C. Any movement from the helicopter parking area by a skid-type helicopter to any other location on Martin State Airport will be via helicopter landing platform or temporary attachable wheels. D. Helicopters equipped with wheel landing gear shall be permitted to land and depart at a tower designated movement area location and ground taxi to a hangar area or to transient parking. ELECTRONIC COPY ORIGINAL ON
    [Show full text]
  • Air Freight Transport a Strategic Modelling Approach on a Global Scale
    Air freight transport A strategic modelling approach on a global scale GEORGIOS TZIMOURTOS Master Thesis May 2015 Air freight Transport A strategic modelling approach on a global scale By Georgios Tzimourtos Student number: 4185269 E-mail: [email protected] in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Transport, Infrastructure and Logistics at the Delft University of Technology, Thesis committee: Prof.dr.ir. L.A. Tavasszy – TLO/TPM Dr. Ron van Duin (J.H.R.) – TLO/TPM Dr. Milan Janic – CiTG Dr. B.F. (Bruno) Santos – ATO/L&R An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/. Cover photo credits: Deutsche Lufthansa AG Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Problem statement ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Research question and objectives ...................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Scope of this research ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Approach and research methods ........................................................................................................ 4 1.5 Thesis structure ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]