Review of the 2000 Regional Airport System Plan

1. Review of the 2000 Regional Airport System Plan September 29,2006

2. Purpose • Summarize prior RASP work on alternatives to new runways • Obtain input from RAPC • Incorporate input in Phase 1

3. Topics for Today • RAPC’s Role • Bay Area Airport System Overview • RASP Aviation Forecasts • Airport Constraints • RASP Alternatives to new runways -New Air Traffic Control Technology (Ph 1) -Demand Management (Ph 1)

4. RAPC’s Role • Recommendations may be implemented by the region through other agencies and the airports • MTC: Aviation Element of the RTP • BCDC: Policies and recommendations used in San FranciscoBay Plan • ABAG: Land use planning; demographic projections

5. Some of RAPC’s Past Activities • Periodic updates to the Regional Aviation System Planning Analysis • General Aviation Element (2003) • Air Passenger Surveys (since 1975) • Airport Land Use Compatibility • Original ALUC legislation • Original ALUC Planning Handbook • Airport Land Use Brochure (2005)

6. Some of RAPC’s Past Activities (Cont.) • Airport Overflight noise forums (as part of the RASP) • Studies of civil aviation use of Hamilton AFB (since closed) • Travis AFB Joint Use Feasibility Study (1976) • Oakland Airport Service Case (CAB)

7. The 2000 RASP Included: • Updated Demand Forecasts (2010 and 2020) • Passengers • Cargo • Flights • Airspace and Runway Capacity Analyses • Causes of Delay • Computer simulations of new runways and effects of demand management • Alternatives to New Runways • Overflight Noise Forums (4)

8. 2000 RASP (Cont.) • Air quality: Aircraft and auto emissions • Ground transportation: projected traffic volumes • Bay fill: Bay Resources Impact “Scorecard”

9. Bay Area Airport System • Three major commercial airports: • San Francisco International • Oakland International • Norman J. Mineta San Jose International • 23 Airports serving general aviation • 1 Military: Travis AFB • 1 Federal: Moffett Federal Airfield (NASA)

10. Bay Area Air Ports

11. 1998 SFO: 65.6% SJC: 18.2% OAK: 16.2% Total 56.6 MAP 2005 SFO: 56.6% OAK: 24.8% SJC: 18.6% Total 58.0 MAP Air Carrier Airports(Passenger Shares)

12. Airport Roles • SFO: • Only airport for some domestic service • Hub for United • the region’s primary International airport (passengers/air cargo) • OAK: • frequent service in dense, short haul markets • low fares • Fed Ex Hub • SJC: • frequent service in dense, short haul markets • limited air cargo service

13. General Aviation • Smaller private and business aircraft • 5,800 planes in Bay Area • Runways: 2,200 ft to 6,000+ ft long • Over 1 million annual takeoffs and landings (not counting training flights) • 4-5% of flights on primary air carrier runways at SFO/OAK/SJC are GA

14. Demand Forecasting Approach • Each airport has a primary catchment area for passengers • Share of passengers determined by: • Quantity, quality, and price of service • Services provided are a function of airline route strategies • Network carrier (e.g., United) • Point-to-Point carrier (e.g., SW)

15. 2000 RASP Forecasts(1998-2020) • Air Cargo: 3X increase • Air cargo volumes peaked in 2000 and are currently about 25% lower • Air Passengers: 2X increase • Current (2005) air passenger volumes are about 17% lower than forecasted • Air Carrier Flights: 1.6X increase • the average passengers per operation is decreasing at some airports, not increasing as forecasted

16. Components of Bay Area Air Travel 1998 2020s

17. Factors Affecting Airport Capacity • Runway Configuration • Number, lateral spacing, arrival and departure dependencies • Fleet mix (heavy and small aircraft) • Traffic Peaking (Arrivals/Departures) • Weather (wind, ceiling, visibility) • Visual or Instrument operations

18. Airport Constraints-SFO • Runway configuration • Close runway spacing (750 ft. apart): limits arrivals to one runway in poor weather • Crossing runways: requires gaps in arrival stream to get departures out • Fog/low stratus clouds in summer • Average aircraft size is decreasing • Cost of new runways

19. Airport Constraints-OAK • Single runway with multiple users • sair passenger, cargo, some General Aviation (noise abatement) • North Field limited to General Aviation • Pronounced peaks • Aircraft size static • Cost of new runways

20. Airport Constraints-SJC • Closely spaced runways • Land area for terminals/parking/ cargo is the main capacity constraint — not runways • Pronounced peaking • Curfew (11:30 pm to 6:30 am) • General aviation use not an issue in terms of runway capacity

21. Airport Capacity

22. Bay Area Airspace • A complicated airspace; over 2 million annual flights • Operations are different for good and bad weather • Under some bad weather conditions, airports can experience significant delays and some flights may be cancelled

23. Insert Figure 3

25. New Air Traffic ControlTechnology • En route Airspace: • more flights; • safer separation • more direct, fuel efficient routes • Terminal Airspace (30-50 mile from airport runways): • more efficient sequencing of arrivals • more precise flight paths, including curved paths • safer separation of aircraft through wake vortex surveillance • expand number of airports with all weather instrument approach procedures

26. What is New ATC Technology? • In space: 27 satellites transmit GPS signals • On Aircraft: • Hardware to use GPS signals for precision navigation • equipment to keep aircraft safely separated from each other (reduced controller workload) • On the Ground: • Specialized equipment to enhance GPS signals to improve reliability and accuracy • improved radars • wake turbulence detection/ monitoring equipment • computer automation tools to help controllers efficiently sequence arriving aircraft

27. New Air Traffic Control Technology • What the RASP said: • Foreseeable advances in technology would not “solve” SFO’s poor weather problem of having only a single runway for arrivals • A new procedure (SOIA) would help to increase arrival capacity at SFO in some weather conditions (procedure implemented in 2004) • the timeframe for introduction of many new technologies is difficult to gauge • new technology issues include safety, redundancy, pilot acceptance, liability, etc.

28. FAA’s Next Generation Air Traffic System • Goal: handle 3X Traffic by 2025 • More efficient flow of traffic • reduce separation between aircraft without compromising safety • more automation to reduce controller workload • better information sharing between pilots and controllers • Not a “fix” for any particular airport

29. Future ATC Benefits • All runways • optimal sequencing of heavy and small aircraft to maximize runway capacity • reduced distance between aircraft through wake vortex surveillance • Closely spaced parallel runways • expand time paired operations can take place in weather • closer spacing of any new parallel runways

30. Today’s Side-by Operation Figure 5

31. Today’s In-Trail Instrument Approaches Figure 6 - Poor Weather -

32. SOIA/PRM Operations Figure 7

33. Demand Management • Strategies to better match demand with runway capacity, generally by limiting operations in some manner • requiring larger aircraft • limiting total operations • limiting operations by time of day • limiting categories of use (e.g, GA)

34. Airline Deregulation • Before Deregulation (1977) • Airline routes and fares regulated by CAB • After Airline Deregulation • sAirlines choose which cities they want to serve, fares, and type of aircraft to fly

35. Who Controls Airport Access? • For Some Airports, Congress Does • Two forms: slots or perimeter rules • Four Airports: ORD, JFK, La Guardia, and Reagan National • Airports may propose access restrictions (Part 161) • Review and approval by FAA required

36. FAA Conditions on Access Controls • Restriction must be reasonable, non arbitrary, and non discriminatory • Does not burden interstate commerce • Maintains safe/efficient airspace • No conflict with other federal laws • Opportunity for public comment • No burden on national airspace system

37. Demand Management Methods • Landing fees • Airline leases • Other airport regulation consistent with FAA conditions • A future change in federal law, which would allow other methods

38. What the RASP Evaluated • Increases in aircraft size (seats) • Southern California (737’s to 757’s) • Commuter flights (Turboprops to Reg Jets) • Cap on flights to So. California • Increase Load Factors (to 75%) • Shift all General Aviation to reliever airports

39. What the RASP Concluded • Demand management could reduce operations by 5-7% at an individual airport • Demand management alone would not prevent future delays at SFO in poor weather

40. Other Demand Management Approaches • New Authority to Shift Flights from SFO to OAK/SJC • Must address restrictions in federal law • Shift could accelerate capacity problems at OAK/SJC • Need legal mechanism to prevent “backfilling” of shifted flights • Underwater rail connection between SFO and OAK (SB 1562) • high cost/uncertain impact on passengers