Visibility nil in Worcester

By Adrian Walker, Globe Columnist, 1/23/2003

You always suspected it wasn't going to end well at Worcester Regional Airport. It always had that eerie, ill-fated, quirky-appliance vibe.

For example, there was the now-legendary event a few years ago when a major carrier was making its inaugural run into the airport. Dignitaries crowded the runway. Bunting and ribbons were up. But then ... the fog rolled in. As Worcester waited for its big moment, the plane landed. In Providence.

This week, the last passenger airline serving the airport, US Airways, announced it is suspending operations in a couple of weeks. The company, which is under bankruptcy protection, can no longer afford the expense of three half-empty flights a day from Worcester to Philadelphia.

''Demand just doesn't exist,'' one glum airline spokesman said earlier this week. ''We're not filling flights and we aren't making money.''

US Airways will probably find a way out of its financial mess, so the big losers in the failure at Worcester, the people who will really pick up the tab, are the taxpayers of Massachusetts, thanks to the past two Republican administrations.

The Massachusetts Port Authority took over management of the airport in 2000. At the time, operating the airport was costing the city of Worcester roughly $2 million a year. But Central Massachusetts was part of Paul Cellucci's political base. Moreover, state officials were hard-pressed to watch an airport close while pushing for a new runway to relieve congestion at Logan. So Worcester Regional Airport became a ward of Massport, which poured money into promoting the facility and attempting to lure carriers.

The airport now loses at least $1 million a year, according to Massport, which is signed to a contract with Worcester until 2005.

From the beginning, there were a few problems with Worcester. First was the site. With its hilltop elevation of 1,009 feet, the airport has a serious fog problem, not readily cured.

Then, it is next to impossible to get to the place. It is plagued by terrible access roads, and driving there even from downtown Worcester is a major project. At one point, the state proposed claiming dozens of homes under eminent domain, bulldozing them, and building a new access road. Thank goodness, many inspirations in government never get carried out.

So passengers couldn't get there, and airlines didn't want to be there. On one memorable afternoon a few years ago, some airport officials graciously gave me a tour. At one point, we were riding in a truck, discussing a proposed million-dollar navigational system to deal with the wind and fog issues.

It occurred to me that we were actually riding up and down the runways. I wondered, you know, were they worried that a plane might need the runway we were on?

They just giggled; silly me. And there were 11 flights a day then, almost four times the number the airport has now.

The political establishment, at the highest levels, has taken notice of the latest failure. Senators John F. Kerry and Edward M. Kennedy and Representative Jim McGovern have called for a meeting of interested parties to have an ''honest discussion about the airport's future.''

Let the honesty begin here: Worcester Regional Airport has no future. Obviously, it is not going to be a commercial airport. It has not thrived as a cargo airport, either - Hanscom makes too much more sense. With volume down 21 percent at Logan, there is simply no good use for one in Worcester.

There was talk a couple of years ago, just musing, really, about possibly renting it as a location for commercials, that kind of thing. If someone is filming a disaster movie and needs an airport that can be blown up without being missed, I have one to recommend. But a future as an airport? Please.

It's just too bad that millions of dollars in public money had to be sacrificed before anyone realized the future of the Worcester airport is going nowhere.

This story ran on page B1 of the Boston Globe on 1/23/2003.
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.
==========
**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.** ==========