Report calls airport 5th worst in US for delays per 1,000 flights
By Matthew Brelis, Globe Staff, 4/27/2001
Quantifying how badly Boston's Logan International Airport performs in bad
weather, a Federal Aviation Administration study found that the number of
flights scheduled exceeds capacity eight hours each day.
The controversial study of the nation's 31 largest airports also found that
at four - Atlanta, Chicago's O'Hare, Newark, and New York's LaGuardia -
demand exceeds capacity even in perfect weather. The so-called Airport
Capacity Benchmark found that in addition to Logan, three other airports -
New York's Kennedy, Philadelphia, and San Francisco - do not have enough
capacity to meet demand in bad weather. The report said Logan had the fifth
most delays per 1,000 flights of any airport in the country.
Congress is considering a limited antitrust exemption to permit the airlines
to discuss schedules with each other in an effort to manage demand at the
nation's busiest airports.
But Continental chief executive Gordon Bethune said in an interview: ''We
can talk about it, but I don't know who will agree to it.
''We are all demand driven The airlines only get paid to do what customers
want.''
United Airlines president Rono Dutta said the answer is more runways. ''Key
airports around the country must build new runways now, or consumers will
face increasing delays and cancellations,'' he said in a statement. ''We are
not able to solve this problem with Band-Aid solutions or approaches that
result in fewer flights or higher costs to consumers.''
Massport is trying to win approval for a 5,000-foot runway that has received
intense opposition from many residents, local and state politicians, as well
as some members of the congressional delegation.
Last week, state Representative Jarrett Barrios (D-Cambridge) sponsored a
state Democratic party resolution opposing Logan's expansion plans. ''The
Cellucci/Swift runway and taxiway are Band-Aid solutions that fail to
address the root causes of flight delays, which are airline overscheduling
and antiquated air-traffic control systems. We are also long overdue in
making better use of the region's other existing airport, as well as its
rail facilities, rather than putting all our eggs in one basket at Logan.''
Opponents - who turned out in force Wednesday at a public hearing on the
runway - say not enough is being done to increase the use of regional
airports and high-speed rail. In addition, many opponents believe the runway
will only increase capacity at Logan and be of minimal value in reducing
delays while exacerbating noise and air pollution.
The FAA's report found the capacity at Logan to be 118 to 126 flights per
hour - a figure higher than previous claims by the Massachusetts Port
Authority, which owns and operates the airport.
In bad weather, the report said, Logan's capacity drops to 78 to 88 flights
per hour or less when, according to the report, visibility is poor, winds
are unfavorable, or there is heavy rain or snow.
The report said that in 2000, about 5 percent of flights at Logan were
delayed 15 minutes or longer. ''In adverse weather, capacity is lower and
scheduled traffic exceeds capacity eight hours of the day and the percentage
of significantly delayed flights jumps to 12 percent,'' the report said.
In writing about Logan, the report states that ''a new runway, planned for
completion in 2005, will not affect the Boston capacity benchmarks. Instead,
this runway will help mitigate delays normally encountered during adverse
wind conditions when the airport is reduced to a single runway operation
today.''
Massport officials contend Runway 14/32 is needed to alleviate delays when
the wind is from the northwest and Logan is restricted to using two or even
just one runway. Massport officials have said they would increase landing
fees at peak times to limit scheduled flights when they exceed airport
capacity.
The FAA report states that capacity at Logan is expected to increase by 4
percent, not because of the runway, but rather from technological
improvements.
The FAA benchmark report states demand at Logan is expected to grow by 6
percent in the next decade, ''but delays are not expected to increase
primarily due to the construction of the new runway.''
Despite the 6 percent increase in traffic over the next decade, an FAA
official said that does not mean Logan's capacity would necessarily
increase - just that the additional flights could be in hours where demand
is now soft.
Anastasia Lyman, vice president of Communities Against Runway Expansion, was
stunned that anyone would consider trying to let 126 planes operate at Logan
in a given hour.
''They have one combination of runways that can handle 120 operations and no
more,'' she said, adding that the draft report on the proposed runway states
that no more than 107 flight an hour could operate using the proposed runway
and two others in northwest winds.
This story ran on page D1 of the Boston Globe on 4/27/2001.
==========
**NOTICE: In accordance with 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.**
==========