Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Ground Access and DistributionProf. Richard de Neufville
Airport Planning and Management
Module 25
January 2016
Istanbul Technical University
Air Transportation Management
M.Sc. Program Airport Planning and Management / RdN
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Objective: To identify issues, provide
guidelines, present current situation
Airport Ground AccessUser Needs compared to Standard Notions
Cost Effectiveness Analysis
Policy Conclusions and Guidelines
Worldwide deployment
Airport People moversCatalyst of Major Improvements in Airport
Form and Service
Ground Access and Distribution
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
As a rough general rule…
Most airport traffic is to suburbs Travelers, employees, and others each
comprise about 1/3 of airport traffic
Employees mostly in suburbs
Suppliers mostly in suburbs
Travelers: about half to suburbs, half to
“city center” (this may be a large area)
Conclusion: Only about 1/6 of airport
access traffic to “city center.” broadly
defined (maybe a radius of 1 km)
Airport Access Needs
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Traffic to city center alone is not enough to
justify mass transit economically
Example analysis 25 million total passengers airport with 20 % transfers
=> 10,000,000 enplanement airport• About 30,000 pax/day => ~ 15,000 pax/day to city center
If mass transit mode split is 50% (which would be
excellent), this gives it 7,500 passengers per day
Since capacity of rail line is about 7,500 pax/hour
Airport traffic to city unlikely to justify mass transit
Rail justified by being part of city network,
distributing workers, others across city
Rail Access to Network
RER Access to Paris airports
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Network of High-
speed, long
distance trains in
Paris (RER) connect
to both airports:
Paris/de Gaulle
(top)
Paris/Orly (bottom)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Travelers’ priority: reliability of travel time Making the flight is most important
Direct travel, without changing modes, is an
important part of travelers’ confidence in
reliability of access
Compare “direct taxi trip” to “multi-mode rail
trip” [get to station, train, from station to airport]
Travelers do not put priority on speed of
travel to airport Travelers typically arrive early – 2 hours in
advance or more
Saving some travel time may not be important
Traveler Priorities
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Travel to/from airport is too slow Crawling in traffic is absurd compared to
speed of aircraft
Solution: High speed link between
airport and “city center”
Examples London/Heathrow – Heathrow express
[to Paddington Station, far from business or
tourist center]
Shanghai/Pudong – Maglev connection
[to Longyang Road metro station]
A Standard Concept of
Airport Access
Maglev from Shanghai/Pudong
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Source: www.chinatouristmaps.com
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Heathrow Express: “you can be in the centre
of London… in just 15 minutes” Actually, schedule is 23 min from Terminal 4
To Paddington Station, 20 to 30 minutes from “centre”
by metro or taxi
Need to buy ticket, wait for train – it’s an hour trip
New York AirTrain 2006: “Airport to
downtown in “less than 45 minutes” If you happen to want to be in Penn Station!!!
After 2007, brochure more correctly gave travel times
of 60 min to Penn Station; 1 ¼ hours to Canal St; 85
minutes to 125th
Rail Access often “over sold”
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Heathrow Express to Paddington, 2016:
£22 ~ $32 1-way adult (child under 15 free)
(on board costs $8 more) Price for family of three, including taxi to station ~ $90
Time: 20+ minutes station to station + taxi time + time
to buy ticket and wait for next train = ~ 50 minutes
Heathrow connect, normal train service
2016: £10.20 ~ $15 (~ $60 total for 3) ~ 45 minutes, plus time to get to/from station, etc.
2016 minicab direct from Hotel to airport:
$55 Less money, less hassle, about same
time
Rail often not competitive
(London)
Rail access (London/Heathrow)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdNSource: Londonheathrow,com
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
AirTrain, 2016: $5/person + $2.50 subway Note: Employees get subsidized fare -- $1/ride
Passengers walk to AirTrain station, through Jamaica
station, and from metro station to hotel, office, home…
6.5 million passengers in 2014
Airport subsidizes AirTrain through its Passenger
Facility Charge (PFC) $5/departure: ~ $90
million/year or ~ $14/rider in 2009 (latest)
True cost per rider ~ $21.50
For family of 3: ~ $65, about 1 ½ hour, much hassle
Compare taxi: $52 flat fee (+ tolls and tips)
from Airport -- about same price, faster,
easier
Rail often not cost competitive
(New York City)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Map of Airtrain (NY/Kennedy)
Source: Gosling report on jfk
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
An issue of social justice: Why should air travelers get special treatment,
compared to commuters?
Air travelers a fraction of urban congestion
Air travelers also only a fraction of rush hour
traffic to/from airport
• Balance are airport employees, etc.
• Example: ~20% at San Francisco
Examples of these objections New York -- Newark and Kennedy to downtown
Proposals killed after debate, metro solutions
implemented, as elsewhere
A Standard Objection to High
Speed Airport Access
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
What solutions provide the best value for
money? The best service for the cost?
For a Range of ConditionsSize of Airport, Distance from city center
Looked at Cost & Speed of Many ModesTaxi, Car, Bus, Bus on own right-of-way
Rail, High-Speed Rail, -- even Helicopter
Most attractive mode depends on how
much passengers willing to pay for
saving time, their value of time
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
of Airport Access
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Airport Access
Cost versus Time Tradeoffs
BUS
AUTO
“Limousine”
TAXIHelicopter
High-Speed
RailExpress Auto
High Occupancy
Vehicles (HOV)
BUSWAY
Total Cost of Trip
Total
Travel
Time
Value of Time
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Preferred Access Mode
Depends on Traffic, Value of Time
EXPRESS
AUTO / HOV
AUTOBUSWAY
(Silver line
In Boston)
TAXI
BUS
Value
of
Time
Traffic Volume
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Customers prefer Rubber-tired access Such as Boston Silver line, a bus service on own
lane, direct to airport terminals
These offer better service to most
customers because they are: Faster: direct service (no need to go to station)
that eliminates schedule delay
Cheaper: Less Capital intensive (at margin:
people already own cars)
Also (not included in analysis) these vehicles can
distribute traffic around city, not just to central
city, this is most important to employees
Results of Cost-Effectiveness
Analysis
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
A metropolitan rail net exists, so that:
….cost of airport extension is smaller
Highway access difficult (example: to
congested areas or airport islands such
as Hong Kong, Osaka/Kansai)
As a pollution control measure
Many rail systems exist, being developed
(Washington/Dulles ~$6 billion, for 2010)
When is rail access effective?
Metro to Washington/Dulles
Ground Access and Distribution / RdNSource: www.dullesmetro.com
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Rail Access To Airports
(Europe, part 1)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Rail Access To Airports
(Europe, part 2)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Rail Access To Airports
(Asia and Australia)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Rail Access To Airports
(United States)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Low-cost airlines are transforming
airline/airport industry – What might
be effect on airport access?
Let’s examine possibilities…
“Planning Airport Access in an Era of Low-
Cost Airlines,” J. of American Planning
Association, Summer 2006, 72(3), pp. 347-
356. R. de Neufville
Effect of Low-Cost Airlines?
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Low-cost airlines associated with
Secondary airports – often remote – such
as Sabiha Gokcen
Inexpensive facilities
Cost-conscious passengers
This is not a market favorable to expensive
rail projects
Some LCC Airports do have rail connection,
left over from when airports were traditional
London/Stansted; Baltimore/Washington
Possible Logical Chain
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Alternatives are coaches, vans “Super Shuttle” – Veolia owned consortium of
shared-ride operators, mostly in US, also UK,
France, Mexico ~ 8 million pax/year
http://www.supershuttle.com
“Go Airport Shuttle” > 60 airports in US, France,
Dominican Republic, Mexico, Czech Republic,
Australia http://www.goairportshuttle.com
Boston: Logan Express 4 routes to suburbs;
BRT – Bus Rapid Transit – Silver Line in Boston
Many Regulatory issues to be solved…
Rubber-tired Alternatives
Example of Airport Shuttle vans
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Source: www.facebook.com
Super Shuttle in Paris France
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
PEOPLE MOVERS
Distribution across Airport
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
People movers are “trains” that cover short
distances -- “horizontal elevators”
They constitute major element in design of
passenger buildings for large airports
They resolve tension between Desire to concentrate passengers
Need to space aircraft widely
They link landside and airside buildings or
landside and remote parking, stations... A way to reduce curb congestion and pollution
Role of People Movers
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Airport People Movers:
North AmericaRegion Country City Airport Landside Midfield
Canada Toronto Pearson yes
Mexico Mexico yes
Atlanta yes yes
Chicago O'Hare yes yes
Cincinnati yes
Dallas/Ft.Worth Dallas/Ft.Worth yes
Denver International yes
Detroit Wayne County yes
Houston Bush yes
LasVegas yes
Miami International yes yes
Minneapolis/St.P International yes yes
Kennedy yes
Newark yes
Orlando International yes
Phoenix uc 2013
Pittsburgh yes
Sacramento yes
San Francisco International yes
Seattle-Tacoma yes
Tampa yes
Washington Dulles yes
U.S.A.
America
New York
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Airport People Movers:
Europe & Asia
Narita
PM now
closed
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Two general types Self-propelled (motor on board)
Cable-driven (lighter, shorter distances)
Can be rubber-tired or steel-wheeled
Many, many manufacturers. However, a
couple are beginning to dominate: Bombardier (Ex Adtranz and Westinghouse) --
rubber-tired, self-propelled, longer distances
Poma/Otis -- cable driven, short distances
Types of People Movers
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Following 10 slides from presentation
by
Harley Moore, Chairman, Lea + Elliott
Drawn from their extensive, world-
leading practice in the design and
implementation of people-movers
Examples of People Movers
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
POMA-Otis
DTW – NW
Midfield Terminal
Cable Propelled
Air Levitated
On Mezzanine
Level inside
Airside Building
Source: NW (now
Delta) Airlines
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Siemens
Dusseldorf
Airport
Suspended
Monorail
Source: Siemens
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Tampa Airport
Original Shuttle
New CX-100
Shuttle
Rubber-tired AGT
Source: ADtranz
Bombardier (ex ADtranz)
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Bombardier (ex Adtranz)
Frankfurt
CX-100
Rubber-tired AGT
Pinched-Loop
System
Source: ADtranz
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Bombardier (ex Adtranz)
Rome-Fiumicino
CX-100
Rubber-tired AGT
Source: ADtranz
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Matra
Chicago-O’Hare
Now Siemens-
Matra
Rubber-tired AGT
Source: Matra
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Bombardier (Adtranz) Innovia
D/FW Airport
Rubber-Tired
AGT
Source:
Lea+Elliott
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Bombardier
JFK – Air Train
Steel Wheel / Rail
Linear Induction Motor
Source: Bombardier
Ground Access and Distribution / RdN
Rail Transportation now a common
feature at major airports worldwide
Role as much for employees as for
passengers – speed not critical factor
Rubber-tired solutions most attractive
On-airport “rail” allows designers to
spread out passenger facilities and
provide good service for big airports.
Common feature of big airports.
Summary