Ultra Crowded Airports

Page 6 of 7« First<34567>
October 28th, 2017 at 5:50:42 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
Quote: Fleastiff
Of course. These are all advocacy documents.


The 149 page document on the San Diego airport by SH&E Forecast that
SDIA Will Reach 260,000 Aircraft Operations Between 2015 (High) and 2022 (Low)
At 300,000 Annual Operations, Severe Runway Congestion Will Eliminate Further Growth (Between 2021 and 2030)

In reality the operations at San Diego airport only increased for one year after the Nov 2006 vote.
Instead of hitting 260,000 as early as 2015, they may never reach that many operations
1990 212,553
1991 206,487
1992 213,983
1993 208,506
1994 221,044
1995 245,280<--------- All time Maximum number of operations
1996 224,466
1997 224,488
1998 223,257
1999 222,356
2000 207,916
2001 206,848<--------- San Diego County Regional Airport Authority formed in 2001 to relocate airport
2002 206,605
2003 204,713
2004 215,211
2005 229,192
2006 230,798<----------- year citizens voted about relocating airport
2007 237,574
2008 228,167
2009 199,612
2010 190,137
2011 185,143<----------- minimum number of operations since 1989
2012 187,326
2013 187,981
2014 191,765
2015 193,712
2016 196,935
Sources: Air Traffic Activity System (ATADS)

The report considered the following factors and ranges
(0) they did not think load factors would increase noticeably beyond the 77 percent
(1) range of operations per year from 260,000 to 300,000 which would be considered severely congest to unable to add more flights
(2) range of potential growth of air passengers from 27 to 33 million
(3) range of seats per operation from 129.2 to 137.0 with a best guess of 130 seats (130*77%=100 passengers per operation)

The baseline was 119.7 seats per operation with 72.60% load factor is 86.9 passengers per operation in 2002.

The only variable that really is important is #3 (the average size of the plane). If you double the number of passengers then you have to come pretty close to doubling the number of passengers per operation or your single runway will be overloaded.

But as you said, the study is an "advocacy document" to provide a public statement that if a new runway is not built the airport will reach constrained flying in a decade. It justifies the $10 billion that they were proposing and forcing the military to give up 3000 acres at Miramar and moving the freeways.

It is interesting that once the vote was rejected in 2006, by the next year the average size of plane and the load factor started to zoom. They reached 100 passengers per operation by 2010 (which was predicted by the forecast for 2030).

Congestion on the runway has actually decreased so that by 2016 it is the same as it was in 2003. The multi million dollar study predicted that constraints on flights would probably begin in 2015.
October 28th, 2017 at 8:48:08 AM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 50
Posts: 5266
Airport over crowding can probably be broken down into Runway congestion, Taxiway Congestion, Ramp Congestion.
Ramp congestion is the easiest to deal with. Planes can be turned around faster and "self-loading freight" can get cattle prods used on them to make them move faster, but runways and taxiways are not particularly subject to shaving seconds. Passenger traffic can be limited by price and by time of day.

Once additional runways or additional airports are in the works, there is no room for adjustments: the bonds have to be paid. An airline, on the other hand, can experiment with new pricing schemes, new loading procedures, new in flight procedures, etc. to shave time.
October 28th, 2017 at 10:15:16 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
Quote: Fleastiff
Airport over crowding can probably be broken down into Runway congestion, Taxiway Congestion, Ramp Congestion.


There is also passengers per gate (or terminal congestion). But there are no uniform standards here as well. For instance San Diego airport publishes their gate utilization rates every month Southwest prefers to heavily use their gates because there is very few transfers at San Diego. It is mostly origin and destination traffic at San Diego. So they want an efficient bus terminal kind of operation where people deposit or pick up bags and don't hang around the airport.

San Diego Airport Gate Utilization Rate (Passengers for month September 2017)
Terminal 1 East 64,286 (8.9 departures per day)~ Southwest Airlines
Terminal 1 West 29,923 (4.6 departures per day)
Terminal 2 (FIS) 7,735 (0.7 departures per day) foreign other than Canada - Federal Inspection Station (FIS)
Terminal 2 East 26,274 (3.3 departures per day)
Terminal 2 West 32,220 (4.3 departures per day)
October 30th, 2017 at 9:16:16 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
I'm thinking perhaps what the A380 accomplished was to take away orders from Boeing's 747
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
October 30th, 2017 at 11:29:19 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
Quote: Nareed
I'm thinking perhaps what the A380 accomplished was to take away orders from Boeing's 747


I read one analyst who said that statement in all seriousness. The number one objective of the A380 was to kill the B747 sales. The bulk of the B747s were sold as exports. The USA airlines ordered heavily at the beginning, but almost completely stopped ordering once twinjets were approved to fly transatlantic in 1985. After that date they ordered a final 40 planes to fly to the Pacific (being retired this Fall).

Deliveries B747 over lifetime of program (until end of Aug 2017)
706 Asia (Singapore, Australia & NZ)
389 Europe
313 USA (106 ordered between Apr 13, 1966 - Jan 10, 1968)
62 Middle East (Israel)
29 Africa
21 Canada
13 Latin America
1533
October 30th, 2017 at 1:01:42 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
Quote: Pacomartin
I read one analyst who said that statement in all seriousness. The number one objective of the A380 was to kill the B747 sales.


The A380 was the only other VLA in the market. So naturally that was an objective. But:

Quote:
The bulk of the B747s were sold as exports. The USA airlines ordered heavily at the beginning, but almost completely stopped ordering once twinjets were approved to fly transatlantic in 1985. After that date they ordered a final 40 planes to fly to the Pacific (being retired this Fall).


And no US airline ordered the A380.

But suppose Airbus had not developed the A380, would Emirates have built up the backbone of their fleet with 747s? It seems inevitable, minus perhaps such things as onboard showers. Lufthansa, Air France, Korean, Thai and BA already operated the 747. Lufthansa and Korean, in fact, have ordered the 747-8. I'm less sure about the rest of the A380 operators, such as Malaysia, Asiana and one or two Chinese airlines (I don't even try to keep them straight).

The Twins are just amazing, more so to someone who grew up with the 747 and DC-10 as mainline wide bodies. The 777 is pretty much a single-deck 747, as far as passenger space goes.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
October 30th, 2017 at 4:01:48 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
Quote: Nareed
But suppose Airbus had not developed the A380, would Emirates have built up the backbone of their fleet with 747s?


It's impossible to say for certain, but my guess would be they never really considered the B747.

Emirates placed their three Boeing 777 orders with one massive order for 120 aircraft. I think it is possible that they would have tried to build their entire fleet with Boeing 777s. When it was clear that the A380 program was in trouble Boeing executives tried to go around the CEO and persuade the Sheik that he should buy the B747s, but it didn't work.

Emirates historical orders (143 A380s and 150 B777s)
  • 20 A380 passenger November 2001
  • 21 A380 passenger June 2003
  • 120 777-300ER 19-Jul-2004 (since expanded to 140 with 125 currently delivered)
  • 10 777-200LR 21-Nov-2005 (special ultra long range version with fewer seats)
  • 2 A380 May 2006
  • 4 A380 May 2007
  • 11 A380 November 2007
  • 32 A380 June 2010
  • 50 A380 December 2013
  • 3 A380 April 2016

150 B77X were ordered on 08-Jul-2014

Emirates had 66 Airbus widebodies in it's fleet in the past which have all been retired as of 2016.
Airbus A300-600R 6
Airbus A310-300 10
Airbus A310-300F 3
Airbus A330-200 29
Airbus A340-300 8
Airbus A340-500 10

Emirates will also have retired 21 older Boeing 777s as of end of 2017.

=======================================
Airbus has only delivered 9 A380s this year (6 to Emirates). Last year at this time they were up to 19 for a year end total of 28
221 Airbus A380-861 A6-EUI Emirates 21. Feb 2017 Active F-WWAF
228 Airbus A380-842 A6-EUP Emirates 24. Mar 2017 Active F-WWSC
233 Airbus A380-861 A6-API Etihad Airways 24. Mar 2017 Active F-WWAK
197 Airbus A380-861 A7-APH Qatar Airways 05. May 2017 Active F-WWAS
229 Airbus A380-842 A6-EUQ Emirates 12. May 2017 Active F-WWSF
237 Airbus A380-861 A6-APJ Etihad Airways 24. May 2017 Active F-WWAR
241 Airbus A380-842 A6-EUX Emirates 28. Jul 2017 Active F-WWSG
242 Airbus A380-842 A6-EUY Emirates 29. Aug 2017 Active F-WWSX
244 Airbus A380-842 A6-EUZ Emirates 29. Sep 2017 Active F-WWAT


Outside of Emirates there are only 10 A380s on the books that stand a reasonable chance of actually being delivered.
3 : All Nippon Airlines ~ will take them to pay off debt to Airbus for support in Skymark takeover
2 : QATAR AIRWAYS ~ doesn't really want them, but bound by contractual obligations
5 : SINGAPORE AIRLINES ~ doesn't really want them, but bound by contractual obligations

The "imaginary" deliveries that Airbus won't take off their books are:
8 : QANTAS AIRWAYS has made it pretty clear they don't want them. They're last delivery was almost 6 years ago.
20 : AMEDEO a leasing company that said they would buy them if they have a customer
10 : UNDISCLOSED a Hong Kong airlines being told by mainland Chinese government they can't buy them
6 : VIRGIN ATLANTIC on books since 2000
3 : AIR ACCORD in Bahamas (old Russian deal that went South when airlines went bankrupt)

I can't understand why Airbus doesn't simply shoot the dog this year.
October 30th, 2017 at 4:59:20 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
Quote: Pacomartin
It's difficult to say for certain,


No counterfactuals are ever certain ;)

There is nothing to check them with.

Quote:
but Emirates placed their three Boeing 777 orders with one massive order for 120 aircraft. I think it is possible that they would have tried to build their entire fleet with Boeing 777s. Some Boeing executives tried to go around the CEO and persuade the Sheik that he should buy the B747s, but it didn't work.


It didn't work in a world that included the A380. In a different world, it may have worked.

On the one hand, the 747-400 would have remained the largest passenger plane. On the other hand, it's not that much larger than the 777. So who knows. But I think it would have been a major possibility, if only because what emirates would have done with the upper deck.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
October 30th, 2017 at 11:44:36 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
Quote: Nareed
On the one hand, the 747-400 would have remained the largest passenger plane. On the other hand, it's not that much larger than the 777. So who knows. But I think it would have been a major possibility, if only because what emirates would have done with the upper deck.


But by 2004 when Emirates made the massive order for the B777-300ER the B747-400 was approaching the end of it's production cycle. There was only 3 delivered in 2004 and 2 in 2005. The new version of the 747 was not delivered to Lufthansa until 2012.

The fuel burn was very high compared to the B777, so it was late in the game for Emirates to invest that heavily in archaic technology.

As you know, I have felt for some time that Emirates will never take all 143 A380s they have ordered. Right now they are not planning to take any deliveries in 2019 and 2020, so I sincerely doubt that Airbus can afford to keep the production line going all that time, unless some of these phantom orders actually take place.
October 31st, 2017 at 1:58:32 AM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 50
Posts: 5266
Do phantom orders have phantom delivery dates?

No way anyone can afford to shut down a production line and then re-start it to meet contractual commitments.

Someone has to clarify these shadowy orders as either dead or alive. Parts, jigs, technicians, floor space .... its all got to be yeah or nay, not maybe.
Page 6 of 7« First<34567>