Aviation Strategy

Written evidence from the West Windsor Residents Association (AS 28)

1. AVIATION STRATEGY

a. West Windsor Residents Association represents more than 1000 households in the Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead. Our members include many people who are currently employed, or have worked in the airline industry over the past six decades. They also have experience of living under a flight path into Heathrow, where there is often no respite from aircraft noise between 4am and 11pm. Thus, we not only understand the adverse impact that the aviation industry has on our environment but also the service it offers and its positive impact on the economy.

b. Many of our members have a good working knowledge of the functioning of airline operations, including flight operations, aircraft and crew scheduling, maintenance and ground operations, passenger service, security and catering. We also have two chartered civil engineers on our committee.

c. We do not have access to current data that is available to larger organisations, particularly airport authorities and airlines. However, we can bring to any discussion related to expansion of airport capacity, not only non-politicised common sense, but a wealth of experience.

d. Capacity, connectivity and competition are three key issues that have to be addressed when considering the strategic needs of the aviation industry and the U.K economy. Within this context, the provision of good levels of service, security and safety have to be addressed and the potential environmental impact has to be considered. All too often opinions are expressed without adequate consideration of this range of issues.

2. CAPACITY

a. The capacity limitations of airports are generally expressed in terms of the number of air transport movements (atms) per annum. However the key consideration is the capacity to handle the number of movements scheduled during peak periods. These often last for two hour periods or more and may be caused by the terminal and ground service limitations, runway capacity or the surface access to airport facilities. A key factor is often the scale of a hub operation.

b. At Heathrow, for example, there appears to be ample terminal capacity planned but both runway capacity, surface access and support services are lacking. During periods of major disruptions, all the local hotels have often been full and passengers left to fend for themselves. Traffic bottlenecks on the M25 around Heathrow also have a significant impact.

The Hub Operation

c. It is easy to understand the attraction of the hub operation to the airlines. It facilitates the concentration of resources, aircraft and crew scheduling and permits greater control of fare structures for an airline whose operation dominates at a given hub. However it contributes significantly to the creation of peak periods, and, when taken to excess, imposes considerable stress on air traffic control, security and the ability to handle off schedule operations

d. Passengers normally want to travel directly from one point to another. If not, they want as rapid a connection as possible. Taken together with the fact that there have always been certain hours that are the most popular and convenient on given routes, the demand to operate during those times can readily exceed capacity. Passengers that transit on the same aircraft are not a problem but if they need to transfer from one aircraft to another or between airlines they add to the general congestion.

e. Hubs are said to enable the operation of routes at a frequency that would not be feasible without accommodating transfer passengers. That is true but when this becomes excessive at an airport that is already operating at or near peak capacity, they inhibit optimum use of that airport to provide proper connectivity. An example that should be considered is the 9000 flights per annum from Heathrow to New York.

f. In 2009 nearly 38 per cent of the passengers using Heathrow were transfer passengers. They appear to contribute little or nothing to the U.K economy.

g. We suggest that the Committee would be helped by an update to the 2003 Mott MacDonald report on Key European Hubs. 

3. CONNECTIVITY

a. The important consideration here is the degree of connectivity between cities rather than the connectivity to given airports. London, for example, is served by three major airports Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted as well as two other very significant airports, London City and Luton, all of which are suitable for regular scheduled service. Others, such as Manston are completely underutilised in large part because of the lack of good surface access.

b. There is considerable debate about the provision of High Speed Rail and, properly planned, it will relieve some of the domestic demand for air travel, albeit only 7 to 8 pc of the passengers arriving at Heathrow are using domestic flights. Consideration should be given to the probability that the considerable pressure for these rail services to concentrate on Heathrow will only cause the airlines to seek to use Heathrow for even more international services. Thus, no relief to the congestion at Heathrow is likely to be achieved and the potential adverse impact of this on airports serving Birmingham, Manchester and Edinburgh needs to be considered, given their vital roles in developing the regional economies.

c. Consideration should be given to connecting Heathrow, Stansted and Gatwick by using existing rail networks or new ones to connect to CrossRail rather than expensive tunnels between Gatwick and Heathrow. Equally, Gatwick could possibly provide a good connection to Eurostar through Ebbsfleet.

d. In this manner, the airports serving London would become the hub for the U.K and would seem to provide the possibility of better connectivity that that provided to Paris through Orly and Charles de Gaulle or to New York through Kennedy Newark and La Guardia.

e. Stansted, apart from serving London appears to offer excellent access to the Midlands. This must surely be an important consideration in any attempt to seek balance to the development of the U.K economy.

4. COMPETITION

a. If we are to expect airlines to cooperate in reallocating the use of the available airport capacity, more must be done to allow key airports to operate in an even manner. Airlines will not willingly move away from Heathrow, unless the alternative airport offers the possibility of an equal or better operation than that afforded at Heathrow. Their cooperation is needed because, apart from other considerations, the outdated slot allocation system together with the "grandfather" rights gives them the right to remain.

b. One of the key attractions of Heathrow has been the extent to which Fifth Freedom rights have been granted to routes through Heathrow which permits foreign carriers to compete on more even terms with U.K. Based carriers. To date those rights have not been available on routes operated through Gatwick and Stansted. Equally, if other airports are to be used to relieve the pressure on Heathrow by attracting airlines to use them they must be accorded equal consideration in terms of surface access and all other facilities.

Available Alternative Airports

c. Heathrow is clearly the airport of choice for airlines serving the U.K but it is at full capacity. There is a considerable possibility that it could be used more efficiently, particularly in view of the fact that, to make the routes served viable, it needs more than 37 pc of transfer passengers to support the frequency of those routes and as previously noted those transfer passengers are of little or no benefit to the economy and exacerbate the problems of the "peak" periods. It is possible that the available capacity of Heathrow is excessively committed to leisure travel, which currently has a negative impact on the U.K. Balance of payments.

d. There has been renewed lobbying for a third runway at Heathrow. Apart from the numerous environmental problems this would cause, it would seem ridiculous to consider a developing an airport with an operation such as that at Heathrow with a very busy trunk road running through the middle as well as numerous hotels situated between two busy runways. Also a commitment to the further expansion of Heathrow would generate the need for a fourth runway, which would result in a second trunk road between two runways. This and the increased need for further hotel as well as the impact on other services, schools, housing, transport etc. should exclude such an idea from serious consideration.

e. The United Kingdom is unique in the developed world in the number of its major or significant airports are limited to a single runway. Gatwick is prevented from building a second runway until 2019 but surely it is time to start planning for one now. The same applies to Stansted. Both airports can accommodate a second runway with considerably less adverse impact on the environment than other options. Improved access can readily be provided, to permit them to offer a considerably better service to London than is currently available.

f. The runway at Luton needs to be extended together with additional taxiways in order to extend flexibility to its utilisation. Manston is another airport that should be considered for development. It has one of the longest runways in the country and much of the approach to Manston is over the sea. Its final approach is over Ramsgate but there is space to extend the runway to the west, which would allow that approach to clear Ramsgate at a higher altitude. Its other major problem is poor surface access which would need to be addressed. Lyneham, also, is deserving of consideration in view of the improved rail service serving London from the west.

g. Before leaving this subject it is necessary to address the proposals to build a new airport east of London. Fifty years ago this seemed feasible and might have prevented many of the present day problems. Now it appears too costly both in terms of building the airport itself, providing the necessary infrastructure to support it and addressing the problems and costs in making such a move. The risk of adverse impact on Heathrow and the Thames Valley economy would be a major consideration.

Utilisation of the available airports.

h. Although there is considerable conjecture on the rate that aviation needs will increase there is less information as to the form that increase might take. The rate at which ‘full service, low cost/no frills’ and ‘charter’ flights might increase relative to each other would have a significant impact on how the various airports should be used to accommodate flying in the future.

i. One might reasonably assume there will be more demand from the full service passenger for more convenient point to point routes particularly with new aircraft such as the 787 to fly further. Leisure travel from China and other developing countries will undoubtedly increase and do something to balance the leisure travel economy

j. Equally an important consideration will be the extent that routes at a given airport are operated by an airline based at that airport vs. airlines operating into or out of that airport from a base situation elsewhere.

k. At first sight it would appear logical to consider Heathrow and Gatwick to predominate in the long haul intercontinental market and Stansted to be the main hub for low cost operations.

l. The roles of Manchester, Birmingham and Edinburgh will largely depend upon how the economies in those areas develop for which we have little information.

Air Traffic Control

m. Regardless of how it is considered desirable to distribute the increase in anticipated aviation activity, it will be necessary to insure proper coordination with the various air traffic control functions in order to avoid conflict with existing procedures,

5. ENVIRONMENT

Air Pollution

a. It appears obvious that the aviation industry will not be able to meet WHO guidelines in the foreseeable future and the short fall must, therefore be taken from other industries. We have no expertise to comment further.

Disturbance Related to Aircraft Noise

b. The problem in addressing this concern is that the attempts are being made with no commitment to properly understand it. It has been clear for at least twenty years that averaging noise energy levels, which is based on research conducted more than thirty years ago, no longer properly reflects the level of disturbance. Abandoning the ANASE report, for all its shortcomings, reflected the lack of commitment to do achieve full understanding.

c. With that in mind, the only reliable noise abatement measure that can be consistently relied upon is runway alternation as currently practised for easterly landing at Heathrow. Consideration of runway alternation should be a standard at all two runway airports and capacity limited accordingly. This provides scheduled periods of relief. Also the alternation of runway use for night flying as practised at Heathrow should be adopted as standard.

d. The lack of awareness of the importance of scheduled relief is demonstrated by the failure to inject any urgency into doing the necessary work on Heathrow taxiways and hard standing which would permit runway alternation on easterly landings. It is now nearly four years since the Cranford Agreement was abolished and little or no progress appears to have been made.

e. There is no valid reason for continuing to ignore actual noise measurements for landing aircraft and noise limits should be introduced similar to those applied to take offs with appropriate penalties. The noise disturbance caused by landing aircraft has become of increasing concern.

Night Flying

f. Considering that we believe that more long haul point to point routes are both necessary and desirable and considering the varying time clocks around the world, there will no doubt be demand for some night landings. However, it the current frequency of night flights appears excessive and we believe that such flights should be allowed only after stringent reviews of the necessity of each flight. There should also be restrictions requiring the use of the quietest aircraft.

g. Finally serious consideration should be given to adopting European Time as standard in order to avoid the excessive problem of early morning arrivals currently experienced between 0600/0700

17 October 2012