Click here to sign up for one of our email lists.
We send a monthly newsletter with links to the month’s magazine articles. We also send a weekly email with a list of the top news stories.
The Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association, one of the stronger aviation lobbying groups if for no other reasons than its numbers and grass roots orientation, is up in arms about user fee increases that go into effect January 1 at Teterboro (NJ) Airport. (One can stand on a ramp at TEB and enjoy the vista of the New York skyline — it’s that close.)
The complaint, per AOPA, is that small aircraft are being disproportionately charged in the new fee structure. Perhaps. However, with the new reality of business aviation dominating interests at various bizav airports around the country, it’s not an unexpected development.
At Teterboro, an aircraft weighing less than 12,500 pounds will see its landing fee go from $15 to $22.50 overnight. Alas.
An aircraft owner who flies his aircraft into TEB does so, generally, because of its logistics to the city. This is probably worth an extra $7.50 for the light aircraft owner. This is economics, particularly in the 21st century business aviation age. Airports such as Teterboro are going to find themselves leveraging their capacity business jets versus mainstream general aviation. Bizav will, and should, win every time. And, with the pending onset of very light jets, which could include air taxis targeting airports such as TEB, the dynamic may grow.
The rights of GA flyers should be protected. At the same time, the realities of the marketplace need to be respected, or at least recognized. The industry continues to evolve. Just as certain airports have evolved into airline-only airports for the most part, some airports will become business centers. It’s a good thing.
At TEB, the airport says the rate increases are necessary because of increased operating, capital, and safety improvement expenditures at the airport.
Thanks for reading.
The recent tragedy at Chicago’s Midway International Airport when a Southwest airliner stopped beyond the fence and landed in a nearby street intersection, killing a young boy in a vehicle, is a cause for reflection. In the general media, its an opportunity to jump on runway lengths. Someone said something like, Midway’s runways are shorter than a commercial airport of similar size. That’s all CNN & Company needed to jump on what must be the cause lack of pavement.
Perhaps an issue, but this window brings in a vast array of concerns, and arguments (ATC modernization, better zoning laws, the need for cockpit/GPS navigation are a few that come to mind). From NTSB and other reports about what actually happened (at this point), it appears a winter storm situation was further exasperated by turbulent, changing winds. Recent reports indicate that controllers were considering changing runway patterns as the Southwest airliner approached. A tailwind and faulty reverse thrusters may in time prove to be the cause of the accident. Of course, 5,000 more feet of runway could have helped avert a tragedy.
Midway International Airport sits embedded in the neighborhoods of South Chicago. Its fence, which abuts major city roads on all sides, is little barrier to overrunning aircraft. It’s a tribute to Midway staffers and the U.S. air transportation system that an airport of this magnitude can operate so smoothly, and incident free, on a daily basis, when surrounded by population. But this, in reality, is not good planning. No matter how safe U.S. air transportation is, situations like this are merely a bet against long-term odds.
From the editorial seat, this only helps emphasize the need for regional planning, particularly in a city with a history as a transportation center. It gets back to a recent entry in this space that questioned the expansion currently underway at O’Hare International. According to reports, one of the considerations in redirecting airliners at Midway to different runways during the storm was that the change would have caused a logjam in the Chicago airspace, as it would have interfered with O’Hare airspace concerns. Point is, the two are interconnected. The point gives credence to the argument that there’s a need for true regional planning in the Chicago area, and in regions across the country, because current capacity can’t handle the future. In Chicago, the answer is a third commercial airport, one not limited by runway configurations and population density; in other cities, the answer may be tapping an underutilized regional airport.
Thanks for reading.
Thoughts on a few recent items in the news
Item 1: Giovanni Bisignani, director general of the International Air Transport Association, calls on airports worldwide to discard inefficient business practices and to stop considering airlines as their cash cows. Bisignani apparently is displeased with the fact that while his constituents, the air carriers, have been immersed in the worst five financial years in history, airports have been able to remain financially stable.
Every estimate I’ve ever heard on airline costs puts overall airport charges to airlines at some 4 percent of their overall cost structure. Seems they ought to be more focused on the other 96 percent. Airports can operate more efficiently, to be sure, but the stability of airports says quite a bit about their resourcefulness in finding new sources of revenue at a time when airlines are on life support. In the U.S., two keys in helping them operate more efficiently include: promoting the creation of independent airport authorities; and, allowing them to react more freely to market forces without federal government approval.
Item 2: The U.S. and Canada enter a much more open open skies agreement.
It’s about time. It’s interesting that in a world undergoing globalization, the symbol that epitomizes the concept continues to be stymied by old trade barriers.
Item 3: The Transportation Security Administration says it will allow items such as scissors and screwdrivers through passenger screening. The move is expected to free up screeners to focus more fully on finding the really bad stuff.
The most fascinating aspect of this declaration is the reaction of the general media. They’re all over it. After all, this is the type of security story that really brings home the war on terror to the average passenger. Forget the fact that their elected officials in Congress have yet to figure out how to fund the explosives detection systems needed. That’s the debate that needs to be thrown at the public again and again on the nightly news channels.
Thanks for reading.