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

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Emergence and Impact of Secondary Airports in the United States

Philippe A. Bonnefoy bonnefoy@mit.edu

R. John Hansman rjhans@mit.edu

6th USA/Europe ATM 2005 R&D SeminarJune 27-30 2005

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Motivation

Capacity of the National Airport System• Airports (runways) are key constraints in the U.S. Air Transportation System• Potential capacity increase is limited at major airports

Mismatch between needs and capacity adjustments at major airports in the OEP

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Motivation

Capacity of the National Airport System• Airports (runways) are key constraints in the U.S. Air Transportation System• Potential capacity increase is limited at major airports

Mismatch between needs and capacity adjustments at major airports in the OEPDemand for Air Transportation

• Pressure from a growing demand for air transportation• Greater number of operations are expected in the NAS in the upcoming years• Factors amplifying the problem

Decreasing size of aircraft: Influence of Regional JetsPotential entry of small aircraft in the NAS in the upcoming years: VLJs, UAVs

Total Enplanements in the U.S.

1976

1979

1990

2000 2004

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Mill

ions

Enpl

anem

ents

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Motivation

Capacity of the National Airport System• Airports (runways) are key constraints in the U.S. Air Transportation System• Potential capacity increase is limited at major airports

Mismatch between needs and capacity adjustments at major airports in the OEPDemand for Air Transportation

• Pressure from a growing demand for air transportation• Greater number of operations are expected in the NAS in the upcoming years• Factors amplifying the problem

Decreasing size of aircraft: Influence of Regional JetsPotential entry of small aircraft in the NAS in the upcoming years: VLJs, UAVs

System Capacity Inadequacy• Indicators of capacity inadequacy

Delays in 2000 with LGA and resurgence of delays at ORD in 2003.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Milli

ons

Del

ays

(in m

in.)

National Delays12 per. Mov. Avg. (National Delays)

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Sept. 11

1995 1996 1997

Air 21 act

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Milli

ons

Del

ays

(in m

in.)

National Delays12 per. Mov. Avg. (National Delays)

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Sept. 11

1995 1996 1997

Air 21 act

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Motivation

Capacity of the National Airport System• Airports (runways) are key constraints in the U.S. Air Transportation System• Potential capacity increase is limited at major airports

Mismatch between needs and capacity adjustments at major airports in the OEPDemand for Air Transportation

• Pressure from a growing demand for air transportation• Greater number of operations are expected in the NAS in the upcoming years• Factors amplifying the problem

Decreasing size of aircraft: Influence of Regional JetsPotential entry of small aircraft in the NAS in the upcoming years: VLJs, UAVs

System Capacity Inadequacy• Indicators of capacity inadequacy

Delays in 2000 with LGA and resurgence of delays at ORD in 2003.• Increasing pressure on key airports

Alternatives & Solutions• The use of secondary airports has been and is expected to be one of the key

mechanisms by which demand is met in congested metropolitan areasNeed

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

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Methodology

Identification of Airports• Case study approach• Selection of case studies based on the

30 busiest airports in the United States• Regional airport system defined as all

airports within 50 miles of a major airport

• Criteria and threshold for identifying secondary airports:

1 % traffic share based on passenger enplanements within the regional airport system

Airport Classification:• Core airports (Original)• Core airports (Emerged)• Secondary airports• Secondary airports (Re-emerged from

an original core airport)

• Other airports (traffic share below 1%)

Boston BOS

Manchester MHT

Providence PVD

Bedford BED

Worcester ORH

Beverly BVY

Norwood OWD

Marshfield 3B2

Lawrence LWM

Mansfield 1B9

6B6

Taunton TANPlymouth PYM

Pawtucket SFZ

Nashua ASH

Fitchburg FIT

Provincetown PVC

New Bedford EWB

50 miles

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Core and Secondary Airports in the U.S.

SFO

LAX

MSP

DAL

HOU

DTWORD

STL

CVG

ATL

DCA

PHLLGA / JFK / EWR

BOS

MIA

PHXCore airport (Original)

Secondary airport

BUR

OAK/SJC

ONT

SNA

FLL

BWI ISP

MHT

MDWPVD

LGB

Core airport (Emerged)

DFW

IAH

IAD

PHX

LAS

SLC DEN

MEM CLT

MCOTPA

PIT

SEA

SAN

SRQPIE MLB

SFB Secondary airport (re-emerged from original core)

SFO

LAX

MSP

DAL

HOU

DTWORD

STL

CVG

ATL

DCA

PHLLGA / JFK / EWR

BOS

MIA

PHXCore airport (Original)

Secondary airport

BUR

OAK/SJC

ONT

SNA

FLL

BWI ISP

MHT

MDWPVD

LGB

Core airport (Emerged)

DFW

IAH

IAD

PHX

LAS

SLC DEN

MEM CLT

MCOTPA

PIT

SEA

SAN

SRQPIE MLB

SFB Secondary airport (re-emerged from original core)

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factors Influencing theEmergence of Secondary Airports

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factor #1: Congestion of the Core Airport

Correspondence between the congestion of the core airport and the existence of secondary airports in the regional airport system.

Reasons:• Degraded level of service at the core

airportDecreased attractiveness of the core airport to both airlines and passengers.Increase of the attractiveness of closely located and underutilized airport that do not exhibit the same congestion problems.

Airport Code Airport Name Operations

delayed Existence of secondary

airport LGA LaGuardia 15.6% Yes EWR Newark 8.1% Yes ORD Chicago 6.3% Yes SFO San Francisco 5.7% Yes BOS Boston 4.8% Yes PHL Philadelphia 4.5% JFK Kennedy 3.9% Yes ATL Atlanta 3.1% IAH Houston 2.8% Yes

DFW Dallas/Ft.Worth 2.4% Yes PHX Phoenix 2.2% LAX Los Angeles 2.2% Yes IAD Dulles 2.0% Yes STL St. Louis 1.8% DTW Detroit 1.8% CVG Cincinnati 1.5% MSP Minn./St. Paul 1.3% MIA Miami 1.1% Yes SEA Seattle 1.0% LAS Las Vegas 0.8% DCA Reagan National 0.8% Yes BWI Baltimore.-Wash. 0.7% Yes MCO Orlando 0.6% Yes CLT Charlotte 0.6% PIT Pittsburgh 0.4% SAN San Diego 0.3% DEN Denver 0.2% SLC Salt Lake City 0.2% TPA Tampa 0.2% Yes MEM Memphis 0.0%

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factor #2: Low-Cost Carrier Entries at Secondary Airports

The entry of a specific carrier –generally a low-cost carrier- was correlated with the emergence of secondary airports.

• e.g. Case of Manchester (in the Boston region)

year to year growth in passenger enplanements: 6% from 1990 to 1997after the entry of Southwest: 45% from 1998 to 2000.

BOS

PVD

MHT0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

Mill

ions

Enpl

anem

ents

Entry of Southwest

Entry of Southwest

BOS

PVD

MHT0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

Mill

ions

Enpl

anem

ents

Entry of Southwest

Entry of Southwest

Secondary airport Low-cost carrier Year of entry

Chicago Midway (MDW) MidwaySouthwest

19791985

Fort Lauderdale (FLL) Southwest 1996Providence (PVD) Southwest 1996Manchester (MHT) Southwest 1998Orlando Sanford (SFB)Melbourne (MLB)St Petersburg (PIE)Sarasota (SRQ)Oakland (OAK) Southwest 1989Burbank (BUR) Southwest 1990Ontario (ONT) Southwest 1985Orange county (SNA) Southwest 1994Long Beach (LGB) jetBlue 2002Islip (ISP) Southwest 1999Baltimore (BWI) Southwest 1993Newark (EWR) People Express 1980Dallas (DAL) Southwest 1971Houston (HOU) Southwest 1972

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factor #2: Mechanisms of Emergence of Secondary Airports

Change in the dynamics at the airport level following the entry of a low-cost carrierMarket Stimulation: Fares and Destinations

• Prior to the entry: High fares, limited destinations

• After the entry:Drop in average fare(e.g. at MHT average aggregate yield dropped by 27% between 1997 and 1999)Stimulation of traffic(e.g. at MHT: enplanements increased by 154% between 1997 and 1999)

Increased competition at the airport level

• Entries of low-cost carriers and legacy carriers

• Loss of monopolistic power of incumbent airlines

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.22

0.24

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Ave

rage

Yie

ld a

t the

airp

ort l

evel

($

per

flow

n m

iles)

adj

uste

d to

200

3

Boston Logan BOS

Manchester MHT

Providence PVD

Entry of Southwest

PVD MHT

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

0.22

0.24

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Ave

rage

Yie

ld a

t the

airp

ort l

evel

($

per

flow

n m

iles)

adj

uste

d to

200

3

Boston Logan BOS

Manchester MHT

Providence PVD

Entry of Southwest

PVD MHT

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Ave

rage

num

ber o

f dep

artu

res

per d

ay Cont. Express

ACA

American Eagle

Delta

Continental

Northw est

Southw est

United

US Airw ays

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factor #3: Distribution of Population

Influence of Local Basins of Population:

• Secondary airports generally emerged close to medium to large local basins of population

Single core (Centralized):• Original core: Large local basin• Secondary airport: Smaller basin(e.g. Boston, San Francisco, Miami, Tampa)

Multi-Core airport system:• Original core: Large local basin• Emerged core airports: Smaller basin(e.g. New York, Washington)

Single core (De-centralized):• Emerged core airport: Small local basin• Secondary airport re-emerged from a core:

Large local basin(e.g. Dallas, Chicago, Houston)

It was observed that secondary airports tend to emerge further away from the core local basin of population

FLLEWR

MHT

PVD ISP

MDWOAK

IAD

TTN

SWF

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008Year of Emergence

Dis

tanc

e (m

iles)

from

the

prim

ary

basi

n of

pop

ulat

ion

to th

e ai

rpor

t

ForecastHistorical

FLLEWR

MHT

PVD ISP

MDWOAK

IAD

TTN

SWF

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008Year of Emergence

Dis

tanc

e (m

iles)

from

the

prim

ary

basi

n of

pop

ulat

ion

to th

e ai

rpor

t

ForecastHistorical

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factor #4: Airport Infrastructure

Runways are the most constraining element in an airport system.

Generally, the core airport can accommodate: Wide Bodies, Narrow Bodies, Regional Jets, Turbo Props.

Secondary airports can accommodate: Narrow Bodies, Regional Jets, Turbo Props. (in some cases Wide Bodies)

The current set of airports, which possess one or more runway with length greater than 5,500 ft constitute the potential secondary airports of the future.

Currently, there are 74 airports with at least one runway longer than 5500 ft that are located within 50 miles of 16 key metropolitan areas.

5,000 ft

10,000 ft

7,000 ft

5,000 ft

10,000 ft

7,000 ft

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

P SM

B OS

M H T

P VD

B ED

OR H

A SH

B VY

EWB

SF Z

LWM

F IT

P YM

OWD

P VC

1B 9

T A N

Maximum Runway Length (ft)

Airp

orts

with

in 5

0 m

iles

of B

osto

n Lo

gan

(BO

S)

5,000

ft

10,00

0 ft7,0

00 ft

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

P SM

B OS

M H T

P VD

B ED

OR H

A SH

B VY

EWB

SF Z

LWM

F IT

P YM

OWD

P VC

1B 9

T A N

Maximum Runway Length (ft)

Airp

orts

with

in 5

0 m

iles

of B

osto

n Lo

gan

(BO

S)

5,000

ft

10,00

0 ft7,0

00 ft

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Factor #5: Connecting Passengers at the Core Airport

The emergence of a new secondary airport is more likely to happen at an airport where connecting passengers are not predominant (below 25%)

Exceptions: Secondary airports that re-emerged from an original core airport: Secondary airports located inland close to a major hub airport:

• MDW / ORD• HOU / IAH• DAL / DFW

These airports were able to reemerge because they had an advantage in terms of location compared to the emerged core airport.

SFO

LAX

MSP

DAL

HOU

DTWORD

STL

CVG

ATL

DCA

PHLLGA / JFK / EWR

BOS

MIA

PHXCore airport (Original)

Secondary airport

BUR

OAK/SJC

ONT

SNA

FLL

BWI ISP

MHT

MDWPVD

LGB

Core airport (Emerged)

DFW

IAH

IAD

PHX

LAS

SLC DEN

MEM CLT

MCOTPA

PIT

SEA

SAN

SRQPIE MLB

SFB Secondary airport (re-emerged from original core)

SFO

LAX

MSP

DAL

HOU

DTWORD

STL

CVG

ATL

DCA

PHLLGA / JFK / EWR

BOS

MIA

PHXCore airport (Original)

Secondary airport

BUR

OAK/SJC

ONT

SNA

FLL

BWI ISP

MHT

MDWPVD

LGB

Core airport (Emerged)

DFW

IAH

IAD

PHX

LAS

SLC DEN

MEM CLT

MCOTPA

PIT

SEA

SAN

SRQPIE MLB

SFB Secondary airport (re-emerged from original core)

* Secondary airportre-emerged from an originalcore airport

* Secondary airportre-emerged from an originalcore airport

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Models of the Dynamics of Secondary Airport Emergence

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

System Dynamics Model

Demand for AirTransportation

Enplanements TotalOperations

GA / NonCommercialOperations

GDP

+

Average a/cSize

AirportAttractiveness to

Airlines

Cost of Operatingat this Airport

Externalities

ResourceAdequacy

Congestion &Delays

AirportAttractiveness to

Passengers

+

+

AirportCapacity

AirportDevelopment

Required

Travel TimePressure to

ReduceCongestion

+

Level of Service(Dest. - Frequency)

+

+

- -

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

Local CommunityComplaints

AirportExpansionConstraint

- -

-

AirportInfrastructure

FinancialIncentives

Taxes,Charges...

PopulationDistribution

GroundAccess

Fares atAirport

-

+

-

+

-

+

+

-

Regulations--

+

AirTransportation

Industry

+

+

Demand Stimulation

Airport growth

Airport congestion

Airport capacity adjustment

Core airport

Secondary airportLocal Market /Unmet Demand

Congestion/Capacity Inadequacy

ATC Constraints

-

ATC Constraints

-

Commercialoperations

-

Enplanements. TotalOperations.

GA / NonCommercialOperations.

Average a/cSize.

AirportAttractiveness to

Airlines.

Cost of Operatingat this Airport.

Externalities.

ResourceAdequacy.

Congestion &Delays.

AirportAttractiveness to

Passengers.

+

+

AirportCapacity.

AirportDevelopment

Required.

Travel Time.Pressure to

ReduceCongestion.

+

Level of Service(Dest. -

Frequency).

+

+

- -

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

Local CommunityComplaints.

AirportExpansionConstraint.

- -

-

AirportInfrastructure.

FinancialIncentives.

Taxes,Charges....

PopulationDistribution.

GroundAccess.

Fares atAirport.

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

Regulations.-

-

+

Substitution to othermodes of transportation(or no transportation)..Demand Spill.

-

+

Demand Stimulation

Airport growth Airport congestion

Airport capacity adjustment

Commercialoperations.

-

Demand for AirTransportation

Enplanements TotalOperations

GA / NonCommercialOperations

GDP

+

Average a/cSize

AirportAttractiveness to

Airlines

Cost of Operatingat this Airport

Externalities

ResourceAdequacy

Congestion &Delays

AirportAttractiveness to

Passengers

+

+

AirportCapacity

AirportDevelopment

Required

Travel TimePressure to

ReduceCongestion

+

Level of Service(Dest. - Frequency)

+

+

- -

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

Local CommunityComplaints

AirportExpansionConstraint

- -

-

AirportInfrastructure

FinancialIncentives

Taxes,Charges...

PopulationDistribution

GroundAccess

Fares atAirport

-

+

-

+

-

+

+

-

Regulations--

+

AirTransportation

Industry

+

+

Demand Stimulation

Airport growth

Airport congestion

Airport capacity adjustment

Demand for AirTransportation

Enplanements TotalOperations

GA / NonCommercialOperations

GDP

+

Average a/cSize

AirportAttractiveness to

Airlines

Cost of Operatingat this Airport

Externalities

ResourceAdequacy

Congestion &Delays

AirportAttractiveness to

Passengers

+

+

AirportCapacity

AirportDevelopment

Required

Travel TimePressure to

ReduceCongestion

+

Level of Service(Dest. - Frequency)

+

+

- -

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

Local CommunityComplaints

AirportExpansionConstraint

- -

-

AirportInfrastructure

FinancialIncentives

Taxes,Charges...

PopulationDistribution

GroundAccess

Fares atAirport

-

+

-

+

-

+

+

-

Regulations--

+

AirTransportation

Industry

+

+

Demand Stimulation

Airport growth

Airport congestion

Airport capacity adjustment

Core airport

Secondary airportLocal Market /Unmet Demand

Congestion/Capacity Inadequacy

ATC Constraints

-

ATC Constraints

-

Commercialoperations

-

Enplanements. TotalOperations.

GA / NonCommercialOperations.

Average a/cSize.

AirportAttractiveness to

Airlines.

Cost of Operatingat this Airport.

Externalities.

ResourceAdequacy.

Congestion &Delays.

AirportAttractiveness to

Passengers.

+

+

AirportCapacity.

AirportDevelopment

Required.

Travel Time.Pressure to

ReduceCongestion.

+

Level of Service(Dest. -

Frequency).

+

+

- -

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

Local CommunityComplaints.

AirportExpansionConstraint.

- -

-

AirportInfrastructure.

FinancialIncentives.

Taxes,Charges....

PopulationDistribution.

GroundAccess.

Fares atAirport.

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

Regulations.-

-

+

Substitution to othermodes of transportation(or no transportation)..Demand Spill.

-

+

Demand Stimulation

Airport growth Airport congestion

Commercialoperations

-

Enplanements. TotalOperations.

GA / NonCommercialOperations.

Average a/cSize.

AirportAttractiveness to

Airlines.

Cost of Operatingat this Airport.

Externalities.

ResourceAdequacy.

Congestion &Delays.

AirportAttractiveness to

Passengers.

+

+

AirportCapacity.

AirportDevelopment

Required.

Travel Time.Pressure to

ReduceCongestion.

+

Level of Service(Dest. -

Frequency).

+

+

- -

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

Local CommunityComplaints.

AirportExpansionConstraint.

- -

-

AirportInfrastructure.

FinancialIncentives.

Taxes,Charges....

PopulationDistribution.

GroundAccess.

Fares atAirport.

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

Regulations.-

-

+

Substitution to othermodes of transportation(or no transportation)..Demand Spill.

-

+

Demand Stimulation

Airport growth Airport congestion

Airport capacity adjustment

Commercialoperations.

-

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Two Major Mechanisms of Emergence of Secondary Airports

Core airport congestion• Congestion at the core airport and the

degraded level of service increase the attractiveness of underutilized regional airports

Local market• Based on the distribution of demand for

air transportation at the regional level, airlines may choose to exploit market opportunities and enter service at a specific regional airport.

Combination of both modelsLocal market based emergence

Cor

e ai

rpor

t con

gest

ion

ba

sed

emer

genc

e

Combined factors PVD, MHT, MDW,

FLL, OAK, SJC, BWI, BUR, ONT, SNA, LGB

Congestion predominant

DFW, IAD, JFK, EWR, IAH

Local market predominant

PIE, SRQ, SFB, MLB, DAL, HOU

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Implications of the Emergence of Secondary Airports

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Impacts of the Emergence of Secondary Airports

Implications at the Regional Level• Advantages:

Relieve core airportsBetter access to air transportation for suburbs and neighborhood towns’ residentsStimulate a local market

• Disadvantages:Environmental: increase population exposure to noise. Dilution of operations for airlines. Limits the opportunity for economies of scale. Force G.A. activity to move to small regional airports

Impact on the Regional Airspace System• Interactions between airports appear and airport operations become dependent.

(e.g. New York airport system face operational constraints due to airport interactions)• Consolidation of TRACONs (Terminal Radar Approach Control).

e.g. In 2003, the Potomac TRACON in Washington was the result of the merger of 4 single airport TRACONs that became inefficient because of the greater interactions between Washington National, Washington Dulles, Baltimore and the Andrews Air Force base airportse.g. Boston region (February 2004) with the merger of Boston and Manchester TRACONs.

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Impacts of the Emergence of Secondary Airports

Implications on the National Infrastructure• Decreasing concentration of activity at major airports• Reliance on a larger set of airports. • Reliability:

Effects of the disruption of activity at an airport are lower than what they would have been if all activities were located at the same airport. e.g. use of Ontario airport during intense fog conditions at Los Angeles (LAX)

• Greater dilution of funds and a more difficult fund allocation process from an infrastructure investment stand point.

Implications of Multi-Airport Systems at the National Level• Secondary airport emergence implies new connections to the rest of the airport network.

e.g. Emergence of Providence led to the creation of OD pairs such as: PVD-ORD (a secondary to core airport market) PVD-MDW (a secondary to secondary airport market)

• At the national level, OD pairs (or inverse) between:Secondary to core airports: + 13 % between 1990 and 2003 Secondary to secondary airports:+49% during the same time period

• Creation and growth of parallel air transportation networks

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Conclusion

Secondary airport emergence is the expression of the adaptation and transformation of the national air transportation system to capacity constraints and market opportunities.

In the past, secondary airports have proven to be effective mechanisms for increasing the capacity of regional airport systems.

Increasing demand for air transportation in the future

Need to consider existing underutilized resources as an opportunity to exploit through the emergence of secondary airports.

Factors influencing the emergence of secondary airports:• Congestion of the core airport• Distribution of population at the regional level• Airport infrastructure (airports with runway length as low as 5500 ft)• Connecting passengers • Entry of a specific carrier -generally a low-cost carrier-• Political factors, etc.

The transition from single core airport to region wide multi-airport systems impose new constraints that need to be taken into account in the management and modernization of the National Airspace System.

MIT MIT ICAT ICAT

Questions&

Comments