Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAirport.Agenda.10-06-1992AGENDA CAPE GIRARDEAU AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1992, 4:00 P.M. PILOT'S CLUB I. Call to order. II. Approval of minutes of September 8, 1992, meeting. III. Review of the extension of the Control Tower Contract with the Federal Aviation Administration. IV. Review of Weather Station changes. V. Update on the terminal building project. VI. Review of funding information on the Missouri Block Grant Program. VII. Review of information from Intermodal Conference. VIII. Miscellaneous matters. IX. Adjourn. The Airport Board of the City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, may as a part of a study session or regular or special Airport Board meeting hold a closed session to discuss legal actions, causes of legal action or litigation, leasing, purchasing or sale of real estate, hiring, firing, promotion of personnel or employee labor relations. AIRPORT JJSAGE REPORT i DATE: /JL4 ,. s s 9-�2 _ /5y ENPLANEMENTS 1992 YTD 1992 1991 YTD 1991 TWEy(s b....�. ,j317_ —. 4U7 3j CCA /76 �L_. _6 X3.— OTHER_ Pf G _.�/a —. 6�. TOTALS 7,1 j� NUMBER OF AIR CARRIER LANDINGS RELIABILITY FACTORS METRO _ _ COMPANY ON TIME %O. 6� J-31_ STATION ON TIME SAAB COMPLETION EMB 120 OTHER AIR TRAFFIC COUNT ITINERANT 1992 1991 AIR TAXI _ /5y GENERALAVIATION 173K MILITARY LOCAL CIVIL 7� MILITARY D INSTRUMENT OPERATIONS AIR TAXI GENERALAVIATION ,3.3� MEMORANDUM TO: Douglas K. Leslie, Public Works Director FROM: Mark J. Seesing, Airport Manager DATE: September 24, 1992 SUBJECT: FAA Option on Control Tower Contract The FAA has elected to pick up the second year option on the tower contract at the airport. The enclosed copy of the contract extension will need Council approval via a resolution accepting the terms. The contract is being extended at the current rate of $13,204.68 per month or $158,456.16 annually. This rate reflects the current DOL wage rates and insurance costs. Ms. Calabro has indicated to me over the telephone that she is waiting for an update to the wage rate from DOL but has not received it yet. She has elected to proceed with the extension with the understanding that when the wage rate comes in that there will be an amendment to the contract to compensate the wage increase. I am currently looking into what the new insurance premium will be so as to add that to the addendum. MJS:gc Cen lr al Rrtglon 601 E 1216 Sl met US Department n n„�.�: civ. Mr::.,r, r sninb of Tronsportanon Federal Aviation Administration August 14, 1992 City of Cape Girardeau Attn: Mr. Mark Seesing, Airport Manager P. 0. Box 617 Cape Girardeau, Missouri 63702 Dear Mr. Seesing: Contract No. DTFA09-91-C-21024, Air Traffic Control Services, Cape Girardeau Municipal Airport, Cape Girardeau, Missouri In accordance with Part 11, Section I, FAR Clause 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Term of the Contract, this letter will serve as a preliminary notice of our intentions to exercise our option to extend the term of this contract for one year. This preliminary notice does not commit the Government to an extension. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (816) 426- 3053. Sincerely, Sty. ron M. Cal abro Contracting Officer r r" IS PACE oF�PACFS 'n• FnrFrv4MOCIFlCAnOry NU ]EFFECIrvE UntE)f AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 7�15 t rYcUUSrTO.VNJrCHnSEKVECt rA(XUPAa6b)0004 10-01-92 CODE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 32010020"Cer r. AOMrwsiEREOEv (x mCODE _ ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT BRANCH , ACESS 601 EAST 12TH STREET KANSAS CITY, MO _ 64106 _ s •4, nNUaOiMESSpF rbHIPAC:Un Iµ}, gsy,awrH 3AN...d LY Cote) � 6I. UAEti4MEHl CF 501.KrtA!IQN Iq. FAA0739S CITY OF CAPE GIRARDEAU P.O. BOX 617 ATTN: Mr. MARK SEESING .wTED(sEEREM,rj"- CAPE GIRARDEAU, MO 63702-0617 10""1OI*"�ttON OFCONtiUCfR%YIER Ia. .._ X DTFA09-91-C-21024 _ 10B. SA";'IfrH I]1 03-27-91 cs.;r - FAcnrtt cocE I i. THS FitiouNLT nrrues to gMtNUMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS 1 he sho—nu•nb«oarl IN:"ccrecal .a amendedusetro:h,n Item ta. The hour a•W data specirod for recante at offersrs"n't—Wed. T sour eirry"i rff Irnu.t k ledge receipt of thisendmvt prior In the hunt and dote specfad n the whclaton or As emended, by one a lolbw ng meth 19 Ili rOmplelaing Items 8 and 15, and mWrning –_, copies of Ne emenEmeob(bl By acknowladgir receipt of this amendment on each copy of that offer submitted: cr p; or -'sate letter c't¢hgram whzh ocludes a or'shr rce to the soikia!ion and mnso nemt members. FAILURE OF YOUR ACXNCAILEOOEMENT TO BE RECEMEDATTHE I ACF DESIGNATED FOR THF RECE I VT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOAR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OP YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendmnnl ,,,, desire no charge an otter tlr¢edY subrlrtted, such :here may Uri by ief're, or, letter, provided oath teagram or letter makes rofmmme na Ne ao:iatallon and Nis arrwndoent. and is received prior o the opening hour and data specifed. - ACCOVNT'N4 4V0 aPP>JPFIAiION NATA (X rsrvlmd) — N%,301/0/2021/120/2587/CGI 168, 466.16 13. TH'S ITEM APF[ ?FS nNi Y TO AlnnlrrlsTtrtM1 nc rnAr ics.11 mneoe X 1 10- r a. PURSUAM TO DHE E IMPORTANT: Conhw.r [XI bnor F]]le meuired to sign Nia Co¢ument and return_ 0 poples to Use lssuIn, ofis., ANENOMENtIMJ01FKAfKK! (CrP nrout, UCFwYk+rcasaNy h sWatf rdkasLNYurGetlarL(q-(rrrpv artery yyyaJ 1 Subject contract to provide Air Traffic Control Services at the Cape Girardeau Municipal Airport, Cape Girardeau, Missouri is modified as follows: The Government hereby exercises Option 2 to commence October 1, 1992 through September 30, 1993. The monthly rate remains $13,204.68 and the total amount of the contract is changed from $234,340.56 to $392,796.72, or an increase of $158,456.16. --caa. OF SgNER ,IF . aA a,!]A are SHARON M. CALABRO 0004 10-01-92 DTFA09-91-C-21024 This modification is contingent upon appropriation of funds by Congress. PR REF: 32010020 -001 2 ATC SVCS/CGI 1 YR 158,456.16 THIS AWARD IS INCREASED BY: FROM: TO: 158,456.16 158,456.16 234,340.56 392.796.72 MISSOURI STATE BLOCK GRANT FUND PROGRAM As you may know, the Missouri Highway and Transportation Department's aviation section is administering the federal airport improvement funds for all commercial service airports in Missouri which enplane less than 10,000 passengers per year, and all reliever and general aviation airports, for three years, from October 1, 1989, through September 30, 1992. This is a demonstration program authorized by the U.S. Congress and involves the states of Missouri, Illinois and North Carolina. The purpose of the program is to allow the states to demonstrate their ability to administer the federal funds more efficiently. Enclosed is an application form for your use in connection with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) State Block Grant Program. We have attempted to simplify the application process for the program as much as possible, however, we would point out certain items on the form that require particular attention. Your best estimate of how the project(s) will be funded is needed, with emphasis on how the local share will be provided. If local force account is to be part, or all, of the local share, please give us as accurate a breakdown of the individual items as possible. If your proposed project(s) involves construction of any type, provide a complete description of the work as you envision it at the time of application. If your request is for multiple projects, please rank them in your order of priority. The facility diagram should graphically portray the scope and location of the project(s) relative to the existing airport or airport site. Please show the proposed project(s) on the most current airport layout plan (ALP). An accurate count of based aircraft, by type, and annual operations is necessary. By using the Missouri Airport System Plan and other factors, we will assign relative priorities to the applications we receive. Since all needs of the airports throughout the state cannot be satisfied in any single year, we will attempt to identify those which are most urgent. Disapproval of an application does not mean we do not consider the project important. It means that available funds were exhausted before every important project could be accommodated. Sponsors whose applications are approved for funding will be sent a letter of tentative allocation of funds with instructions on what is required to finalize the actual grant for the project. Please note that only one copy of the application with attachments is required. Don't hesitate to contact me at (314) 751-2589 or David Burle at (314) 751-2521 if you have any questions. Missouri Stale Block Grant Fund Application TO: Missouri Bighway and Transportation Department Date: Aviation Section P.O. Box 270 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Airport Name Sponsor: Name Address Contact Person's Name Address county Phone The undersigned understands state block grant funds are federal funds administered by the state of Missouri which are granted on the basis of 908 of the approved cost. Proposed Project Funding as you Now Estimate it to be: Block Grant (Federal) Amount: State Amount: Local Amount: _ Total: Project Description Breakdown of Local Amount ❑ Cash. Amount on deposit in airport account prior to execution of contract will be at least Force Account. Estimated force account amount Please attach itemizedestimated force account cost to sponsor of all in- kind labor, equipment, and materials. Other. Explain Planning: El Airport Master Plan ❑ Airport Layout Plan 11 Other. Explain Proposed Construction: Revised 11/1/89 Other Proposed Improvements: Facility Diagram: Attach a drawing of reasonable accuracy and proportion to show size and dimensions of all the proposed improvements to existing facility, showing property lines, roads, buildings, easements, power and telephone lines. Showing the proposed improvements on a copy of the current approved airport layout plan (ALP) is preferred. Why is the proposed project necessary and what benefits will be realized Number of based aircraft: Jet Twin Single Engine Number of annual operations (existing facility only): (An operation is either a takeoff or a landing) FOR DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION USE Fai1ities inspaded by. _ Project considered: DEmcrgem, DRoulwe Recommend: DApproval DDisapproval Resson(s) for rccommend'mg disapproval: Project completed: Inspected by Dale: Remarks: Signature of Applicant Date: To: Douglas K. Leslie, Public Works Director FROM: Mark J. Seesing, Airport Manager DATE: September 30, 1992 SUBJECT: Steel Cure II Site Layout To the best of my knowledge, the site plan for Steel Cure II at the airport will just about absorb the facility. I have depicted on the enclosed drawing where I believe everything will be situated. Keep in mind that situations change or maybe a site will not work out, but I feel this map pretty well shows their locations. MJS:gc 09 v.. MEMORANDUM TO: Airport Advisory Board FROM: Douglas K. Leslie, Public Works Director ��- DATE: October 2, 1992 SUBJECT: Southeast Missouri Hospital LifeBeat Helicopter Service Approximately two weeks ago we were contacted by representatives of Southeast Missouri Hospital concerning the possible relocation of their LifeBeat helicopter operation to the airport. Their operation consists of pad and hangar for their helicopter, office area for dispatching, mechanics area, and quarters for the flight crew. This would consist of approximately five employees per shift. We feel that basing the helicopter operation at the airport would be very positive for the airport and for the overall safety of the service. After assessing site possibilities at the airport, Southeast Missouri Hospital representatives have decided on utilizing a portion of the existing Drury owned hangar located at the north end of the airport near the entrance road. Please see the attached Airport Plan for location. They would make the necessary capital improvements to the building, pad, vehicle parking, and utility services to accommodate the operation. They would have a sublease with Drury for the hangar space and building improvements and a lease with the City for the land used for the pad and outside operations area. one of their significant concerns for the airport location revolves around their ability to obtain their own fueling facility. They have indicated that they would need to have a 10,000 gallon jet fuel tank and pumping equipment. This would be an above ground system with required diking for containment purposes. The City staff is concerned about having additional bulk storage and pumping facilities located on the airfield. Having an additional facility such as this would increase our exposure to accidents and fuel cleanups. In addition, we are concerned about how this situation may adversely affect our existing tenant, Cape Central Airways, who presently provides the helicopter service fuel. Cape Central currently operates 24 hours per day Monday through Friday and from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. on weekends to accommodate overnight airport needs and LifeBeat. LifeBeat presently uses about 45,000 gallons of fuel per year, thus they are a significant customer of Cape Central Airways. I have met with Hospital Administrator Jim Wente concerning this matter and informed him that handling their own fuel is an `'" area of concern for the City. He plans to be at your meeting 011 Tuesday afternoon to present his concept of the operation and to seek approval of the concept before they develop final improvements plans for the Drury hangar. He has assured me that Mark Spatz of Cape Central Airways has been in contact with him concerning the fuel issue and Cape Central an opportunity to work out a cost effective arrangement with the Hospital. Mr. Wente also indicated that they have looked at other sites for their base of operations including on site fuel storage. Their view will be toward total cost of the operation. They do want to locate at the airport, and we feel it would be very advantageous to have them there but preferably without additional fuel facilities. We would like to see them explore other alternatives including more satisfactory arrangements with Cape Central Airways or a cooperative arrangement with Cape Central in putting in a new fueling depot that would serve both operations. Since this is a land/contact matter, the item should be discussed in closed session. If you have questions or need additional information, please call. DKL:gc Attachment 0 • 0 � F 1M ft6\ \ EXlS�iNG E �CiL Preparing Lambert for the 21st Century The 15 -year, $1 billion to $1.3 billion constructi program will provide for: ✓ Four ew runways to add capacity in all wealher conditions, ✓ Doubling of passenger terminal space to accommoa 40 million passengers (from 20 million today); ✓ Parking for 25,000 cars (we have 14,000 spaces today), ✓ An increase to 119 passenger gates with the flexibdity to 40 plus more gates (we have 80 gates now). The expansion plan's key points: ✓ The first and most critical new runway makes maximum us property already owned, or already scheduled to be purcha: by the airport; ✓ The expansion plan calls for the least impact possible Lambert's neighbors. For those who will be bought out, the, aprogram to ensure lair market value is paidlor their houses f federally required relocation costs; be There will be minimal disruption in surrounding communis Projecled takeoffpaftems will ultimately create less noise for n residents who now have noise problems, both in the immediately around the airport and outlying communitiesr ✓ The new runway and takeoff pattern basically parallels existing Norfolk & Western railroad tracks on the northern bo of Bridgeton. Some facts about Lambert: • Almost 440,000 aircraft operations are completed annual the airport • Currently, air travelers spendmore than $1 billion annually If local economy. • About 1,200 /lights either depart from or arrive at Lair every day • Lambert currently provides direct flights to over 100 c around the world • Currently, 9 mayor airlines. 2 commuter airlines, 6 ch airlines, and 10 cargo operators are based at Lambert. • Truly an international hub with daily nonstop flights to Em y tial... its will Do you have a question about the stioned plans for Lambert's expansion? )e(ating Call the Lambert Expansion Information Hotline to leave a message or receive infor- mation about public events and announce- . Louis ments that you'll want to know about. You can hearcontinually updated information on the Lambert Expansion plan, as well as )anion having the opportunnyto voiceyour opinion tatusas on all aspects of airport operation and airlines expansion. Every call will be answered. vithout Lambert Information Hotline suffer. 851- 0907 i `\ ;; j LAMBERT -ST. LOUIS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT An Important Economic Asset St. Louis' most important economic asset is Lambert -St. Louis International Airport, a hub airport similar in function to airports in Newyork, Chicago, Atlanta, Denver, Los Angeles — all cities in the top tier of American economic and cultural life. The St. Louis area is a growing, diversified region, with a wide variety of established indus- tries and small businesses, a skilled, educated workforce, and the third largest concentration of Fortune 500 headquarters in America. In order to remain one of our country's busiest and most efficient hub facilities, Lambert -St. Louis International Airport must expand. The future economic growth of St. Louis requires it. _ If ® EXISTING RUNWAY TO REMAIN O EXISTING RUNWAYS REMOVED 8 PROPOSED RUNWAYS EXISTING AIRPORT TERMINALS PROPOSED TERMINAL ADDITIONS ® 0 PROPOSED ROAD CHANGES ------- F-1 METROLINK O FUTURE PARKING �Po O AIRPORT PROPERTIES* 'e 'Current Noise Abatement Program Areas /s T MBERT-ST. LOUIS INTERNATIONAL __ ------< AIRPORT ------ Lambed InlemAsul Airport is the economic engine" that drives our regional economy It we are to maintain the economic momentum that's vital to our region, airport elpags,on ei crucial Now more Inch ever the region trust unite to expand Lambert so that it can remain our biggest economic generator Vincent C. Schoemehl, Jr. Mayor, City of St. Louis Airport Related Earnings.. a • The Airport accounts for $3.9 billion of our area's total economic makeup. That's almost $1,600 for every man, woman, and child in the region. There's almost halts billion dollars in income earned by employees at Lambert during the course of a year. • Not only is Lambert one of the major forces in our regional economy but it is the lifeblood of the individual communi- lies surrounding it. Residents throughout thirty -elghtcommuniliesin North SL LouisCounry five home more than $134 million annually In wages from airport related jobs. If you live in Jennings, you'll be happy to know that over200 of your neighbors will earn a cumulative $4 million from Lambert during the course of a year. There are 264 Berkeley residents employed in and around Lambert earning over $5million in anygiven year. And ifyouhappen to live in SL Ann, you should know that over 600 residents ofyourarea work in airport relatedjobs, naming more than $22 million in anygiven year • Lambert's economic impact is both far- reaching and dramatic. Bythe year2600, the expected annual economic impact of Lambert will exceed $63 billion. As a point of compari- son, an NFL Super Bowl is estimated to provide $250 million in economic impact for its host city. If Lambert expands to continue as one of our nation's leading aviation facilities, its economic impact every year would be equivalent of 26 Today, cities such as Dallas, Kansas City. Denver and Memphis are expanding or considering malar expansfonpmgrams ll we decide nor to repand our airport facilities, these. CIMes will accommodate the growth at our expense. Ned Taddeucci President, St. Louis Regional Commerce A Crorth Association (RCCA) The Most Important Issue... • Lambert -St. Louis International Airport is now the seventh busiest airport in the United States serving over 20 million passengers every year Experts predict that Lambert will serve nearly 40 million passengers annually by the year 2010. • To handle the increased number of pas- sengers and the airplanes it'll take to get them where they want to go — Lambert must expand. • Being on time is the single most impor- tant issue to travelers. Right now, there is a six minute average delay perplane at Lambert at a cost to airline carriers of over $50 million a year Ifnothing is done, passengers can expects 23 minute average delay by the year 2010, with associated costs of $250 million. Commercial carriers simply will not pay these delay costs. • Unless Lambert expands, our major hub carriers will look elsewhere for their future gate space. On lop or all the positive long-term growth for our community will be the millions of hours of work expansion will bring No one on tarn their backs on that kmd of community impact Failure to expand would be a disaster for the entire community. Richard Manila FxecutireSecretary. rreewmr St. Louis Building a Construction rnau Cowell, AFL-CIO To Service Increased Air Traffic,., • To adequately serve the needs of Lambert, both now and into the 21st century, four new runways will replace two existing runways. The result will be a totallynew airport being built on top of the existing one, in planned stages, so as not to disrupt existing air service, while still expanding capacity at every step. -But there's more to Lambert's expansion than runways — The expansion will also provide 39 Pew gates fora total of 119 passenger gates (up from 80 todav and wrh the flexibility to add 40 plus more at a later date), 25000 parking spaces (from the 14,000 cur- renely in use), and nearly double the existing terminal space to 2.1 million square feet from 1.2 million square feet today. The expansion of LambertIntemaltonal Airport to make it a world-class airport is essential to making SI Louisa world - Gass city Jahn C. Danforth uniwsblahnafos Both Now and In The Future,. a -Airport expansion will generate an estimated $1.3billion o1 construction and construction relatedentemoses over the next 15 years at Lambed. This equates to 50 million man-hours of work — or a lull year's employ- ment for 25,000 workers. • Lambert Airport currently employs over 19,000 area residents, making Lambert the secondlargestemployerfnthe region . Theseare 19, OOOjobs providing sustenance andprosper- fly for numerous families. Overall, the airport generates almost 53, 000reiatedjobs. Thatmeans that one out o1 every 24 jobs in the region is airport related • Lambert's contribution to the economic stability of the area will only grow with expansion, withanestimatedincreaseto92,000 airport related(obs during the next lwenty years. Jobs that mean livelihood and prosperity in the future for your children, or your neighbors, or even you Your Support Is E The expansion of Lambert is a major undertaking requiring support from all sectors of the community. As a group, we all share in the economic benefits that a world class airport like Lambert provides us, and we must speak with one voice to ensure that progress continues at the airport. Expansion means the St. Louis area will retain its position as one of the leaders of American business. With a hub airport, St. Louis travelers can reach over 100 U.S. cities with direct flights. Expansion also means St. Loi continue to receive the unque. economic benefits resulting from of a world class airport. Without expansion, Lambert P remain a hub Airportand all St travelers will suffer. Make no mistake about it — the ex ofLambertAirport would ensure its., a hub airport for one or more major well into the 21st century. b expansion, Lambert will not remai airport and all St. Louis travelers wi I': I THE $3.9 BILLION ECONOMIC ENGINE THAT DRIVES ST. LOUIS' GROWTH Office of the Mayor xmcry6A Tuc4er6Mnr4e5,rtes V M1¢mIC SrM1cemeM1l,Ie SL Louo,MmuunM1J10] Moyor bla)allJIDl It turned out to be an unexpected, but welcome, surprise. As part of our long-range Master Plan, the St. Louis Airport Authority's professional consulting firm conducted an in-depth study of the current economic impact of the airport on the St. Louis region. The results are startling. The airport provides a $3.9 billion shat in the arm to our regional economy. Previous studies estimated an impact of $2 billion, itself no small number. But the new study, based on 1988 data, the latest figures available, shows the economic importance of the airport to be almost double all previous estimates. And the future looks even brighter, not only in terms of the actual impact on our regional economy, but also in terms of new businesses wanting to look at the St. Louis region as a place to locate. With more than 100 direct non-stop flights daily to cities throughout the United States and the world, St. Louis is indeed the Gateway to the Future. This report states the obvious: Lambert International Airport is indeed the "economic engine" that drives our regional economy. And while not directly addressed in the study, having a major "hub" airport in the heart of our metropolitan area is a tremendous magnet for companies seeking a location with convenient air service. If we are to maintain the economic momentum that is vital to our region, and meet the projected passenger demands into the 21st century, airport expansion is crucial. Now more than ever, the region must unite to expand Lambert so that it can remain our biggest economic generator. Sincerely, Mayor LAMBERT FUELS OUR REGIONAL ECONOMY, TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE 10. Lambert -St. Louis Interna- tional Airport has been called the "economic engine" that stimulates our regional econ- omy. A new In-depth study of the airport's regional sea. I`"' I AAII1 Airport Mind Related Jobs anionic Impact Indicates that the economic value of the air- port to our region Is twice as large as previous projections, made In 191 Today, this en- gine generates more than $3.9 52,900 people are rsaao employed as a esulr of the airport G rs,uCU rs ,vm� ,un.0 rvnu u. Jn.pq �y,. billion annually for our region. And this does not lncludethe added economic benefits that a $1 billion airport expansion will bring to our region. That's great news for every- one TODAY and promises wen greater news In THE FUTUREI 1986 study bythe An ransparc ion Association, using 1985 data TODAY: LAMBERT STIMULATES EVERY PART OF OUR ECONUMY As measured by all key indicators— o Directly, 19,200 men and women airport -related jobs spend their pay- shopping, and see the sights. And ;abs, community prosperity, tourist work for the airlines, cargo companies, checks in grocery stores, shopping this spending creates employment. spending—it is clear just how important in-flight caterers, parking companies, centers, gas stations, and for other Lambert -St. Louis International L-( rt is.* concession stands and other airport- goads and services. This impact is Airport is the region's second largest J.,Ir Airport is region's second related companies. This number is up spread throughout the local economy. employer, surpassed only byMcOonnell- largest employer. nearly 50 percent from 1985 estimates aAir travelers create an additional Douglas. Today, 52,900 people are employed as of 13,000 airport lobs. 15,400 jobs with the money they spend a result of the airport. This translates m Indirectly, another 18,300 people while visiting St. Louis. They take cabs, *All estimates and Projections dsceot where into I of every 24 workers in this region' are employed because employees with stay at hotels, eat in restaurants, go ndedl are based on ms 1988 data, the listen available mWrr iso. Paychecks: Airport's impact is double previous m Indirectly, another $18 li is spent in the local From this, $381 pmjeetions. economy each year as airport workers spend their in- million annually Because of Larrberi Louis International Airport, 01 this, more than comes on day-to-day Irving. and companies serving the flows directly Into $3.9 billion a year flows into area businesses. Previous $1.1 billion a year airport spend money conducting their business. Those local paychecks. studies estimated that almost $2 billion flows through- goes directly dollar, spent at the supermarket, gas station and out our local economy because of the airport. Ifs now into paychecks of shopping center have a "multiplyingeffect, creating area workers. double that! even more impact. ■Directly, $915 million is generated each year by 01 that total, m Ar travelers spend more than $320 in ill ion annually, Of this, $216 million airport -related businesses paying salaries, buying $501 million a year generating a total of $12 hillinn in total economic may year goes goods and services from companies serving their needs, goes directly activity, as they use our hotels and restaurants and directly into workers and taxes paid to local governments. into local paychecks visit our tourist attractions paychecks. Lambert's Economic Impact On St. Louis 17 on $3.9 B/IIBon A Year Flows Into al [P Our Economy Because Of Lambert -My. ecks F $1.8 Billion Indirect Impact From airport employees and companies /n the general economy i $1.2 Billion Air Travelers Impact Rom visitors here r $915 Million Direct Impact / For se goods, andservices Where The Lambert Employees Live And Spend Their Paychecks• Wellrton 25 $237,333 Woodson Temee Q $1 607,759 Pemelnln9 m1i 457n7 $1439 iiey. Was— 5u>T-no 13,184 $339.163,911 Illinois Communli 1.732 $47,871873 TOTAL 14,916 SM],035pB4 'Primary duet/ ImpMpOS anM a }7p primary ugrvxl,mgcl pN rid rrchdW Communities near airport benefit the most. While the entire metropolitan legion benefits from this major infusion of cash into our local economy, the major benefactors are the 38 communities cIL` to the airport • 38 percent of all airport -related employees live within five miles of the airport. as These employees earn $184 million in wages every year that goes back into their local communities to be spent at laundries, restaurants, hardware stores, movietheaters, carrepairshops and so on. Airport Related Paychecks Benefit Entire Region St. Louis City $46.5 million (10 percent) Illinois $47.8 million (17 percent) Other Missouri $144 million (32 percent) Louis County $208.5 million Overall, 47 percent of airport -related Paychecks ($208.5 million) go to St. Louis County residents, 10 percent to City residents ($46.5 millionL 32 percent ($144 million) to Missouri residents living in nearby counties, and 11 percent to Illinois residents ($47.8 million). AI mast ane fourth of the employees working in airport -related jobs live in five communities—Florissant, Bridgeton, Maryland Heights, St. Ann and Hazelwood. They return $124 mil- lion each year in paychecks to their communities (27 percent of the total). THE FUTURE: MORE JOBS, A Now that the facts are in, it is obvious that the airport is vital to our local economy. For the future, that picture is even brighter. As more people fly, the airport will play an even larger rale in our region's economy, pro- viding jobs and paychecks for more and more people. The Airport's Master Plan looks forward to the year 2010. The plan's findings are clear. If the airport can expand to meet the growing demands for air service, it will provide an enormous economic boon to our region. Today, 10 million passengers board airplanes at Lambert. Throughout the next five years. that number should grow to 15 million. Bytheyear2000, it should be 17 million passengers and by 2010, an estimated 19 million passengers will board airplanes here. That means economic 'good news" for our region in terms of: Cash in our local economy. From 1990 to 1995, the total economic impact generated by Lambert should increase from $3.9 billion to $5.g billion a year. By the year 2000, it should reach $6.3 billion annually and by 2010, the total annual impact should soar to a staggering $6.8 billion, nearly a 75 percent increase over 1990 levels Jobs, a lot more of them. Today, the airport generates 52,900 jobs. By 1995, the jobs of some 77,000 area people will exist be- cause of the airport, a45 percent increase over today's employment. A Bright Future If Lambe -ft As Lambert Grows To Accom - '-"- More Passer The Region Econor Grows. ...Everyone Benefits L-cpands d PAZ,00 By the year 2000, that number should be at 84,600 and by 2010, an estimated 92,000 jobs should be available to area workers as a result of the airport, a 74 per- cent increase over today. Every community in this region will benefit. Thousands of today's children will have major employ- ment opportunities in the years ahead. More paychecks for more people. Each year airport activity di- rectly contributes $1.1 billion to the paychecks of local workers and their families. If the proposed expansion occurs, that should increase to $1.6 billion annually by 1995, to $1.8 billion a year by 2000 and $1.9 billion a year in 2010. That's a lot more paychecks for a lot more people. More business for more local businesses. Today, Lambert directly and indirectly accounts for $719 mil- lion being spent yearly in the local economy. In the next five years, that should increase to $1 billion, to $1.1 billion annually by 2000 and w2010 to $1.2 billion annually, creating thousands of new jobs. Everyone benefits. The Impact ofan expanded Lambert airport Is clear: jobs, businesses, local communitles—everyone— benefits. "Airports need the power to expand because capacity Is critical to Increasing competl- tlon In the airline Industry. New entrants need ground facilities to successfully operate a hub airport. The expansion of Lambert Inter, national Airport to make N a world-class airport Is essential to making Sl. Louis a world. class city." U.S. SenatorJohn C. Danforth "Lambert International Airport Is a vital economic drawing card for the St. Louis area— attracting business, providing jobs and bringing tremendous economic benefftsto the entire region. A healthy future for Lambert Is bound tightly W a St. Louis prepared for the challenges of the next century. To lose such a hub of eom- merce and productivity would spot economic disaster for St. Louis and eastern Missouri." U.S. Senator Christopher Bond -There Is no question that Lambert Is Important to the economy of St. Louis County. Its future as a first-rate Into. national airport must be assured. To reduce Its Import. ance would mean economic disaster to this area." County Executive H. C. Mi ford Expansion and further de. velopment of our major airport Is absolutely essential If St. Louis Is to remain one of the significant metropolitan areas In our country. Being centrally located In the United States affords our city a unique and enviable advantage over many other urban centers throughout the country—an advantage which must be maxlmlxed." Harry T. Morley President Home Builders Association of Greater St. Louis J Two facts should now be clear with respect to the proposed expansion of Lambert Field: first, expansion Is necessary, and second, the proposal accepted last week by the St. Louls Airport Commission Is the bast way to accomplish It ... And It does so without unduly Increasing the noise the existing airport Impor - on the surrounding commr...ay." St. Louis Post -Dispatch I.- "The expansion of Lambert Airport beyond Its present boundarles Is vital If the St. Louts region Is going to keep pace with the projected Increase In the number of passengers using the facility. Air service Is a key factor used by businesses In evaluating locations, especially for corporate, regional and divisional headquarters. Expansion clearly Is the best solution to meeting our needs Into the next century. Building a new airport Is out of the question, since the cost of a new airport Is approximately if the cost of ext. Do our current airport. The projection for passenger utilization Is that by the year 2010 we will double the number ,f passengers presently using the airport. Today, titles such as Dallas, Kansas City, Denver and Memphis are expanding or considering major expan. sion programs. If we decide not to expand our airport facilities, these titles will accommodate the growth at nurexpense." .fed Taddeucci President, St. Louis Regional Commerce and Growth Association (RCGA) "On top of all the positive long- term growth for our community will be the mill Ions of hours of work our building trades workers will obtain for the 10 or more years that the $1 bil. lion expansion project will be underway. No one can turn their backs on that kind of community Impact. Failure to expand would be a disaster for the entire community." Richard Mantia Executive Secretar Treasurer Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL CIO "Lambert expansion Is, at heart not Just a business Issue but also a business neces- sity... Survey after survey of St. Louis as a business loca. tion list the airport, under one rubric or another, high among the area's major business assets, If not as the major one. A prudent city, like a prudent person, doesn't throw, Its assets away." Susan Thomson Business Editor St. Louis Post -Dispatch M "Lambert International Airport Is running out of capacity. Yet the demand for air travel wl11 double in the next 20 years, If present trends con. tinue. This could mean more than 19 million passenger boardings a year. Present facll Itles at Lambert field can. not handle the load .... The wisest choice is expanding Lambert. Doing nothing would Invite another metropolitan area to replace St. Louis as a vital hub In national air traffic... The economic future of St. Louis Is at stake." KMOX Radio editorial -The metropolitan area needs more airline capacity for the future and Ifwe do not provide It, the St. Louis region will fall behind while other titles move forward. - Mayor fames j. Eagan City of Florissant LAMBERT'S EXPANSION WILL PROVIDE I IMMEDIATE ECONOMIC BENEFITS Analysis of construction impact provided by the St. Louis Regional Commerce and Growth Association. It is not part of the Landrum 8 Brown economic study. The one billion dollar expansion of Lambert -St. Louis International Airport will generate an estimated 50 million man-hours of construction and con- struction -related jobs. It is estimated the expansion project would provide the equivalent of a full year's employ- ment for 25,000 workers. With some segments of our local economy now slipping, expansion of Lambert Airport will be an important boost to the St. Louis economy. The impact of the Lambert Airport expansion, exclusive of land acquisi- tion and contingency costs, includes: ■ 22 million man-hours of construc- tion jobs, the equivalent of a full year's employment for 11,000 workers*; 028 million man-hours of jobs in supplier industries and in service industry jobs, the equivalent of a full -year's employment for 14,000 workers generated through the multi- plier effect**; ■ A total impact of 50 million man- hours, the equivalent of a full year's employment for 25,000 workers, in all sectors of the regional economy. 'Estimate based on unpublished data tram the me. of Employment $fanatics, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (19861. —Estimate based on the 'Regional Input - Output Modelling System (AIMS) for Missouri, 1987, U S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 4w. Today, and tomorrow, Lan t - St. Louis International Airport serves the region as its economic gateway to the future. In the past 70 years, air travel changed from a daredevil stunt to an everyday occurrence affecting the way we plan for business and pleasure travel. Lambert has changed as well. In 1920, the airport, then called Lambert Flying Field, was privately owned an 169 acres. In 1930 the property, con- sisting of three small runways on 546 acres, was sold to the City of St. Louis. Today, Lambert International Airport is one of the major "hub" airports in America, serving more than 20 mil- lion passengers. 1990 Airport Profile: ■7th busiest in the nation (annual air operations) ■ Over 600 flights a day an 430,000 aircraft operations an Serves 100 cities with direct flights around the world ■ ll major airlines ■ 5 commuter airlines ■ 2 charter airlines an 10 cargo operators Today Lambert 19 a vital link in the national transportation system. While St. Louis proudly serves America as the Gateway to the West, lambert proudly serves our community as the Gateway to our Economic Future. LAM$M.Ss uamS IIRMtHATIOWAL AIRPORT CRT OF SL LOUIS MRPORTAURIORRY P.O. BOX 10212 R. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63145 Vincent Schoemehl, Ir. MAYOR MRPORT COMMISSION CIWRM Donald W Bennett Albert Director COMMIssimm: Gabriel). Alberlci Kenneth A. Bauman, Paul A. Be,, John E. Daniel Clifton W. Gales The Honorable Vin,. Jones Wendell Bivers Lawrence K. Baas ElmerE Smith Jahn G. Storey The Hanarable Thomas A. Villa The Hanarable JoAnne Wayne Milton P Wilkins, Jr. This economic impact study of Lambert International Airport was prepared by Landrum 8 Brown. It is based an 1988 data, the last full year for which such economic information was available. r��1GOPrF9 Wtsrc •via :o ��. Udd�l't •od''N�snr�o ��klterNlbrW Association GovernmenUludustry Public d wareness and Aviation Education Partnership MIDWEST INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CONFERENCE -III EASTWEST GATEWAY Embassy Suites Hotel ®'Il�o�oepanm�dva•roona III_ COORDINATING COUNCIL 901 North First Street St. Louis, MO 63102 Intermodal Facilities Addressing America's Transportation Needs Transportation Partnerships Through Publi&Private Cooperative Ventures Funding Grants September 18, 1992 Conference No. 13 Mufti -Modal Concepts Interconnecting Transportation Facilities far Rail -Highway -Water and VTOL Aircraft New Innovative, Creative, and Responsive Ideas to Present and Future Transit Needs TRANSPORTATION = COMMERCE + JOBS + LOCAL TAX BASE ENHANCEMENT Sponsors Missouri Chapter-A.P.A. • St. Louis Metra Section-A.P.A. • Federal Aviation Administration • Federal Highway Administration Federal Mantbne Administration • Federal Railroad Adminlstmnon • Federal Trareit Administration • National Aeronautics and Space Admin. Allison Gas TurbinelGenerai Motors Corp. • Textron Lycoming • American Helicopter Society • Center for Intctmodal Transportation Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. • Boeing Helicopers • E.H. Industries, Inc. • Helicopter Association hall. Fast -West Gateway Coordinating Council • DOT's of Illinois, Missouri, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana & Ohio Fostaire Helicopters, St. Louis • Textron Marine Systems • Mid West Helicopter Association • U.S. Hovercraft Society International Hydrofoil Society • ARCH Helicopters, St. Louis • Lambert -St. Louis International Airport Agenda Midwest Intermodal Transportation Planning Conference Embassy Suites Hotel 901 N. First Street St. Louis, MO 63102 Friday, September 18, 1992 8:00 - 8:45 a.m. Registration and Continental Breakfast Courtesy of Lambert -St. Louis International Airport and Helicopter Association International 8:45 - 9:00 a.m. Call to Order Gary Stevens, Flight Safety Coordinator, IDOT-Division of Aeronautics Opening Remarks/Program Overview/Announcements Master of Ceremonies, Bob Donahue, President, Aviation Associates, Inc. 9:00 - 10:45 a.m. 'Federal Role in Intermodal Transportation Planning' Panel Moderator, Don Gamble, Manager, Aviation Development, IDOT- Division of Aeronautics Hugh Jones, Assistant Div. Administrator, Federal Highway Administration George Schoener, Chief, Intermodal Division, Federal Highway Administration Captain James R. Carman, Chief, Office of Port and Intermodal Development, Federal Maritime Administration Ni' Robert Owens, Director, Office of Intermodalism, Federal Transit Admin. Gilbert E. Carmichael, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration John Zuk, Chief, Civil Technology Office, National Air and Space Administration (NASA) Paul Erway, Engineer, Vertical Flight Program Office, Federal Aviation Admin. Questions and Answers 10:45 - 10:55 a.m. Break - Refreshments Courtesy of Fostaire Helicopters, St. Louis, Mo 10:55 - 12:00 p.m. 'Vertical Flight as a Component of Intermodal Transportation' Panel Moderator, Pamela I Charles, Director of Heliports & Technical Programs, HAI, 'Point to Point Travel - Assessment of Present & Future Assets' Gary Link, Manager, Civil Tiltrotor Program, Boeing Helicopters, 'Technology - Providing True Origin to Destination Travel' Ron Reber, Manager, Commercial Tiltrotor, Bell Helicopter Textron - 'Intermodaliry - Designing the Intermodal Transportation & Commerce Centers for Tomorrow' �. Dr. Cliff Bragdon, Georgia Institute of Technology, 'Vertigate - A Vertical Gateway to the 1996 Olympics and Beyond' Questions and Answers 12:00 - 1:00 p.m. Lunch - On Your Own Introductions Greg Bradley, Regional Manager, Bell Helicopter Textron Luncheon Speakers Jill Roach, Transportation Director, St. Louis Community Development Agency and John Hoal, Assistant Director of Urban Design, St. Louis Development Corporation 1:00 - 2:20 p.m. 'Regional and Community Role In Transportation Planning' Panel Moderator, Les Sterman, Executive Director, East-West Gateway Coordinating Council John K Leary, Jr., Executive Director, Bi -State Development Agency Rick Hargrove, Deputy Director of Airports, Lambert -St. Louis International Airport James Pennekamp, Executive Director, Southwestern Illinois Leadership Council Questions and Answers 2:20 - 2:30 p.m. Break - Refreshments Courtesy of ARCH Helicopters, St. Louis, Mo 2:30 - 4:00 p.m. 'Community Considerations and ,eneflits of the Intermodal Planning Process' Thomas R. Shrout, Jr., Executive Director, Citizens for Modern Transit Bryon Rakoff, Senior Airport Planner, TRA, Inc. Richard The Bullet Train' Pisani, Midwest Regional Director, National High Speed Rail/Maglev Association Questions and Answers 4:00 - 4:15 p.m. Conference Wrap-up and Summary Bob Donahue For information about future intermodal planning conferences, please contact Norm Mowbray at (202) 637-3893. MIDWEST INTERMODAL `► TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 18, 1992 EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL ST. LOUIS, MO 63102 CONFERENCE #13 ROSTER OF SPEAKERS DON GAMBLE MANAGER, AVIATION DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS ILLINOIS DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION ONE LANGHORNE BOND DRIVE SPRINGFIELD, IL 62707-8415 (217) 785-8380 FAX (217) 785-4533 BOB DONAHUE PRESIDENT, AVIATION ASSOCIATES, INC 625 SOUTH SECOND STREET SPRINGFIELD, IL 62704 (217) 5447880 FAX (217) 5448814 RHETT FLATER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY 217 N. WASHINGTON STREET ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 (703) 6846777 FAX (703) 739-9279 ROBERT G. OWENS DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF INTERMODALISM FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION 400 7TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 (202) 366-4050 FAX (202) 366-2360 HUGH JONES ASSISTANT DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION P.O. BOX 1787 JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65002 (314) 636-7104 FAX (314) 636-9282 GEORGE SCHOENER CHIEF, INTERMODAL DIVISION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION 400 7TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 (202) 366-4067 FAX (202) 366-3713 CAPTAIN JAMES R. CARMAN CHIEF, OFFICE OF PORT AND INTERMODAL DEVELOPMENT FEDERAL MARITIME ADMINISTRATION 400 7TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 (202) 366-4357 FAX (202) 366-5522 DR. JOHN ZUK CHIEF, CIVIL TECHNOLOGY OFFICE NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER M/S 237-11 MOFFETT FIELD, CA 94035 (415) 6046568 FAX (415) 604-6996 GILBERT E. CARMICHAEL ADMINISTRATOR FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION 400 7TH STREET, S.W., ROOM 8206 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 (202) 366-0710 FAX (202) 366-3244 PAMELA K. CHARLES DIRECTOR, HELIPORTS AND TECHNICAL PROGRAMS HELICOPTER ASSOC. INTERNATIONAL 1619 DUKE STREET ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 (703) 683-4646 FAX (703) 683-4745 RON REBER MANAGER, COMMERCIAL TILTROTOR BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON P.O. BOX 482 FORT WORTH, TX 76101 (817) 280-2923 FAX (817) 280-3911 PAUL ERWAY ENGINEER, VERTICAL FLIGHT PROGRAM OFFICE ARD -30 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 800 INDEPENDENCE AVE, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20591 (202) 267-8514 FAX (202) 267-5117 GARY L. LINK MANAGER, CIVIL TILTROTOR PROGRAM BOEING HELICOPTERS P.O. BOX 16858 M/S 23-15 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19142 (215) 591-4011 FAX (215) 591-8022 JOHN T. HOAL ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF URBAN DESIGN ST. LOUIS DEVELOPMENT CORP. 330 N. 15TH STREET ST. LOUIS, MO 63103 (314) 622-3400 FAX (314) 622-3413 DR. CLIFF BRAGDON LES STERMAN GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 781 MARIETTA ST. WC 328 EAST -WEST GATEWAY ATLANTA, GA 30332 COORDINATING COUNCIL (404) 894-6914 911 WASHINGTON AVENUE FAX (404) 853-0023 ST. LOUIS, MO 63101 (314) 421-4220 FAX (314)231-6120 GREG BRADLEY REGIONAL MARKETING MANAGER BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON 1516 MAPLE KNOLL CT. NAPERVILLE, IL 60563 (708) 355-6650 FAX (708) 355-6675 JOHN K. LEARY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BI -STATE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY 707 N. FIRST STREET ST. LOUIS, MO 63102 (314) 982-1400 FAX (314) 982-1560 JAMES PENNEKAMP EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS LEADERSHIP COUNCIL 200 UNIVERSITY DR #240 EDWARDSVILLE, IL 62026 (618) 692-9745 FAX (618) 692-9779 RICK HARGROVE DEPUTY DIRECTOR LAMBERT -ST. LOUIS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT P.O. BOX 10212 ST. LOUIS, MO 63145 (314) 426-8162 FAX (314) 426-1221 THOMAS R. SHROUT, JR. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITIZENS FOR MODERN TRANSIT 100 S. FOURTH STREET ST. LOUIS, MO 63102 (314) 4441167 FAX (314) 4441122 JILL ROACH TRANSPORTATION DIRECTOR ST. LOUIS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY 330 N. 15TH STREET ST. LOUIS, MO 63102 (314) 622-3400 FAX (314) 622-3413 BRYON RAKOFF SENIOR AIRPORT PLANNER TRA, INC. 38 CHAUNCY ST., STE. 1002 BOSTON, MA 02111 (617) 482-1962 FAX (617) 482-7178 RICHARD PISANI MIDWEST REGIONAL DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGH SPEED RAIL/MAGLEV ASSOCIATION 5595 WATERMAN ST. LOUIS, MO 63112 (314) 532-8224 FAX (314) 4549333 u :J ur swam A .--- w /L11 Bell Helicopter 1 i Intermodal Transportation and Commerce Center INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION AND COMMERCE CENTER An Intermodal Transportation and Commerce Center (ITCC) provides travel- ers convenient access to several forms of transportation at one central loca- tion. A strategically located ITCC will allow travelers to select the type of transportation that best suits their needs; rail, bus, automobile, light rail, ver- tical lift aircraft or any combination. ITCCs will be located on dual -use prop- erties, that is, properties already devoted to transportation. Suggested sites for such centers include interconnected facilities in existing airports, over major highways, over or adjacent to conventional rail or light rail stations and adjacent to waterfronts. The anchor for such centers will be tiltrotor ver- tiports. Tiltrotor aircraft that are able to takeoff and land vertically and cruise at 300 miles per hour, will provide a short -haul air travel system (under 300 miles). This system will allow passengers convenient connection with the other modes of transport in a trip that avoids the necessity of using con- gested airports. Allowing these short -haul travelers to depart from such con- venient intermodal centers will reduce congestion at the airport and expand the air transportation system capacity without physically expanding the airport. These multi-level intermodal centers will enhance the value of the total transportation system. ITCCs will attract commerce and industry to the sur- rounding vicinity, create jobs, boost the local tax base and develop dormant land while protecting the environment. ITCC Example Specifications Size: 4.5 acres Multi -mode Access: Yes Air Gates: 4 Food: Yes Ticketing: Yes Parking: Yes Baggage: Yes Services: Yes Shopping: Yes Hotel: Yes Offices: Yes For more information, contact: Public Affairs Office BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON INC. P.O. Box 482 Fort Worth, Texas 76101 (817) 280-6440 Reprinted from Planning, copyright 1992 by the A.kerican Planning Association. � Up, Up, and Away f A Are vertiports the wave of the future? By Erik Ferguson, AICP By the end of this decade, planners inclined to buy into Buck Rogers fan- tasies may well have a new toy at their disposal—a helicopter that turns itself into an airplane. A prototype of such a plane, a 'tiltwing rotorcraft,' has already been pro- duced by the U.S. Department of Defense, and a commercial model may follow. Mean- while, planners in several cities are think- ing about new landing strips—vertiports— orabout converting older facilities lheliports) to accommodate the new craft. During takeoff and landing, a dltwing rotorcraft operates just like a helicopter, with twin rotors churning away above the craft. During the plane's ascent, the rotors operate in vertical alignment, but after that, they swing into horizontal align- ment, just like the propellers on a tradi. tional fixed -wing aircraft. The hybrid na- ture of the rotorcraft allows it to take off and land in small areas dike helicopters), while operating at miciflight at speeds and altitudes more commonly associated with fixed -wing aircraft. The Federal Aviation Administration has not yet developed separate standards for vertiports. It appears, though, that tiltwing rotorcraft will require no more land than many existing heliports. Large, commercially operated public -use heli- ports remain a rarity in most American cities, however, primarily because of safety concerns and noise complaints. The most desirable location for a public -use heli- port is generally thought to be a down- town business district or large suburban office park. But in those areas there we often significant local zoning restrictions and other barriers. During the 1980s, several conferences on rotorcraft were held, including two that brought representatives of the Verti- cal Takeoff and Landing industry together with practicing planners to discuss ways of accommodating VTOL operations in desirable commercial locations. The first of these conferences was held in Monterey in 1981, the second in Philadelphia in What a ,artiport of the fame might look lire. S y r I.,. Planning February 1992 1990. Both were sponsored by the Heli copier Association International in coop- eration with APA's Transportation Divi- sion, ivision, the Federal Aviation Administration, and other groups. During the decade, few new public -use heliports, and none that would accommodate VTOL operations, were built. Dallas ahead - Since 1988, the FAA's airports division has spent about 83 million for 17vertiport planning studies. Five of the studies were in the northeast corridor—one each in Boston and Washington, D.C., two in the New York -New Jersey region, and one in Manhattan. Two were in Florida (Orlando and the South Florida -Bahamas areal. Three other studies were funded in Cali- fornia, one statewide and one each in San Francisco and Southern California. Other statewide studies were in Alaska, Illinois, and South Dakota; others were in Canada, Puerto Rico, Sl. Louis, and the FAA's southwest region ILouisiana, Texas, Okla- homa, and New Mexico(. A few of the studies were canceled, but most are done or nearing completion. The purpose of these studies varied considerably. Over half of them focused on market analysis. Some were designed to assess the potential of verticraft and vertiports in relieving congestion at ma- jor airports. Still others looked at improv- ing access to remote areas, establishing light cargo services, or providing emer- gency medical service. Four of the studies focused on vertiport site selection. Only one study has so far led to the actual design and construction of a vertiport. That one is in Dallas, where a new facility is expected to open in two years, at an estimated construction cost of $11.5 mil- lion. Of this amount, 90 percent will be paid by the FAA through its airport im- provementprogram, and lopercentbythe city. The facility, specifically designed for both helicopters and tiltwing rotorcraft, is under construction atop the loading dock of the city's newly expanded convention center in the heart of downtown. The Dallas facility was not originally planned as a vertiport. A 1983 heliport systems planning study, conducted for the North Central Texas Council of Govern- ments, recommended that several public heliports be built in the Dallas -Fort Worth Metroplex. Two Dallas sites were rejected because of land -use conflicts and safety problems; one was in the historic ware- house district and one was on top of the Reunion Arena parking garage. The third choice was the convention center. Local authorities worked with the FAA to design or fl {j t wow Mi The V 22 Osprey coming in far a landing. Below, in redphase one of the Dallas heliport/vertiport, to he completed hyJanuary 19W. and, in gray, phase two. The Iacono. is the Ioading dock roof of the city's new, co --mum center. flight paths calculated to disturb the fewest residents—over the rights-of-way of ad- joining interstates 30 and 35 and over the Trinity River, which runs through the city. Requirements of a vertiport such as that in Dallas differ somewhat from those of a heliport. Vertiports require more structural support because of the heavier loads they will carry. They also require larger landing pads because tiltwing ro- torcraft are larger than helicopters. And they may need longer runways 1'rollways" in rotorcraft parlance( if more fuel-effi- cieat Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL( operations are to be allowed. The Dallas vertiport includes a 360 -foot rollway, which can be expanded to 1,000 feet in the future. 'The master plan for the convention center allows for expansion of the vertiport, should demand warrant it, if and when the convention center is expanded," ac- cording to Chris Basham, AICP, vice. president of Charles Willis & Associates, Inc., of Arlington, who serves as a con- sultant to the city of Dallas on the vertiport project. Existing convention center facili- ties and those now under construction total about 500,000 square feet. 'Over the next 20 years," says Basham, "as many as five additional vertiports could be built in the region, including two full-service fa- cilities in downtown Fort Worth and at the Dallas -Fort Worth International Air- port, and three smaller facilities in various, as yet undesignated, suburban locations.' Danny Bruce, director of the Dallas De- partment of Aviation, noted at the APA national conference in Denver in 1989 that the Dallas vertiport was designed as part of efforts to revitalize the city's downtown. 'This gives us a chance to do some advance planning for a change," Bruce said, refer ring to the opportunity for planners to line up sites for future vertiport construction. In the works Denver is also gearing up. In 1986, the Denver Regional Council of Governments published a regional heliport study that called for construction of one central, full-service heliport in downtown Den- r�. ver. Gordon Appell, principal planner for the city, says that over a dozen sites for that facility have been considered over the last several years. Last year when federal planning funds to study vertiports became availablethe city applied for, and was one of the first to obtain, a grant to conduct a vertiport feasibility study, including an environmental assessment. The study, to be conducted with a con- sultant, will focus on the market for verticraft flights up and down the front range of the Rockies and alternative site analyses for a vertiport. According to Appell, the word vertiport raised concerns when it was first brought up because so little is known about the characteristics of tiltwing rotorcraft. Appell notes that Denver's zoning code, unlike that of many cities, allows heliports to be located as a use by right in certain indus- trial zones—including one area that has been proposed for conversion to residen- tial uses. Last fall, the city council voted to require a 1,000 -foot buffer between any residential zone and a heliport/vertiport site. The council has indicated that neigh- borhood concerns will be taken into ac- count in the feasibility study. In Atlanta, the 1996 Summer Olympics has been a spur to vertiport planning. A Georgia Tech planning professor, Clifford Bragdon, AICP, has proposed that the Olympics committee, the university, and other interested groups construct a "vertipark" to serve the Olympic Village that will be built to house athletes and foreign dignitaries. Bragdon's proposal is for an air -rights site over the I-75/1-85 downtown connector; it would include a full-service vertiport, a helicopter landing pad, three levels of automobile parking, and a shopping center—all adjacent to a 33 -acre park. The total cost of this project currently is estimated at about $40 million, which includes $10 million for construction of the vertiport, $8.5 million for land acqui- sition, $3 million for bridge construction, $13 million for the support span across the highway, the parking garage, and the shopping center, $3 million for landscap- ing and improvements, and $1.5 million for architectural design. Preliminary design work has already been done by Paul Muldaur, an Atlanta architect, and the FAA has recently au- thorized about $100,000 for a feasibility study to consider alternative sites for the vertipark. The study will be done at Geor. gia Tech under Bragdon's direction. In Japan, meanwhile, a national system of heliports is already under way. Forty heliports are in various stages of con- struction under the "Heliport 600" pro- gram, which calls for a total of 600 heli- port and vertiport facilities. Vertiports are viewed as economically viable in Ja- pan because the high cost of land and difficult terrain make it almost impos- sible to build enough conventional air- ports to keep up with demand. Who will pay? According to Larry Dallam, principal trans- portation planner for Howard, Needles, As part of a study oflikely markets, researchers at Georgia Tech are looking at the expected operating range of tiltwing rotorcraft. A 8 Taromen & Bergendoff in Minneapolis and former chair of APA's transportation divi- sion, tiltwing rotorcraft have one key aa - vantage over both fixed -wing aircraft helicopters. The noise "footprint" create by rotorcraft on takeoff and landing is far smaller than that of fixedwingaircraft. And the rotorcraft's noise frequencies tend to be less annoying than those of helicopters. Economically, there are both pluses and minuses. Vertiports are much cheaper to build than airports, but rotorcraft will cost more to operate than fixed -wing air- craft (although the difference depends to some extent on passenger loading, main- tenance costs, reliability, and a host of other factors(. At APA's Denver confer- ence, Chris Basham noted that vertiports typically cost $3 to 510 million, versus the $2.7 billion budgeted for the first phase of the mammoth new Denver airport, ached tiled to open in October 1993. Operating costs for helicopters have come down in recent years but are still three to five times higher per passenger mile than are equivalent commercial airline operating costs. Given their greater size, tiltwing rotorcraft may be a little cheaper to fly than helicopters, if passenger loads can be maintained at appropriate levels. Assuming that all relevant econon-:- environmental, and social costs are tam„ into account, it seems most likely that rotorcraft will be competitive in serving a medium -distance "niche' market for air travel—for passenger trips of 150 to 450 miles. This is the market the rotorcraft industry apparently is aiming at—although vertiports will have to be in place if the industry is to compete. The biggest cost is in developing the craft itself. A recent Pentagon audit con- cluded that the military version, the V-22 Osprey, which is still under development by Bell Helicopter Textron, Boeing Heli- copters, and the Allison Gas Turbine divi sion of General Motors, is at least 5446 I million over budget. Most of these devel- opment costs will be borne by the federal government. Conversion of the V-22 osprey to commmercial use will have to be fi- nanced privately; that cost may be mod- erate, however, because the V -22's pri- mary mission is troop transports for the U.S. Marine Corps, making it similar in concept to the commercial version. It appears that we'll have to wait a while to find out just how expensive all this will be. At this point, no date ' qs been set for full production to begi, n the V-22 Osprey. _ Erik Ferguson, AICP, teaches dry planning at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta; he isvice chair of APA's transportationdivision. Th, � #- % olympko L Chance to How Powered-Uft Can Serve 1u. by Charles C. Crawford Charles C. Crawford is the Chief Engineer of the Aerospace Sciences and Technology Laboratory at the Georgia Tech Research Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia. II II.: r ih: il — !I:e ;� tC cti Oil \,l. It r ll, 11 tri 11111 : U'!. n. n1, dam.. 111!e11 fd,u a ra 11'. L 1 a'c m A[L, n I.. and ✓n nm. arc the mrv.t exci md, v,I ca r..ern,J thet nu .tune:. „rn Iell unturntd In mak, thn innsnar,"I.1 c,,ut — ti,: three "e:k, the hens of nu llmm ia to leiimon —.i Th, Georeia Telt cI..nnumur,. escn do.cr to the cawo. wuh the pl.mned Olympic Villa__e on the Tech cunitin , w both c uthua.t�t is and concerned. Althor'll n o,h has been data (,ver the %earn to intprnse niniNp,rteuun m the Atlanta area. rhos vle, huve [tied to act branch or around the nn in rush hour traffic know how huuaune that enle,nouce can be The vaaly imprmed Hartsfield International Airport in one of the bmie,o and. I behese. most convenient in the nation. The seemingly uneumn, con.[ruawn of interstate m,,huays throuch and around Atlanta protide multi -lane opportunities for transportation by auto. Three major interstates. 1-'_(l. 175. and I -S5 merge uathin a by, miles of the proposed 01. topic Villas, sue. two of these amin a few hundred yards of the site. Even more important is the modern and lot cost Metropolitan A[Ianta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) Rail system, which run's from the northeast Atlanta area to the thr- port on the southwest side, and east to west across the center of the greater Atlanta area. Like the interstates mentioned above, multiple MARTA stops will also be only a few hun- dred yards from the center of Olympic activity. Howeven to date, none of these transportation systems are tied in to an intermodal system with vertical lift passenger aircraft. while Atlanta has many helicopter landing pads at major hospitals throughout the city. and numerous helipads for the safe trans- portation of money by the banking community, a veniport system has never been established for use by the general public. The advent of the Olympic games will dramatically demonstrate the shortfalls of the capacity of the Atlanta trans- portation facilities, but more importantly, focus on the oppor- (.miles for demonstrations of the role that powered -life air- craft can play in providing a cost effective way of enhancing the existing transportation network to deal with these prob- lems. My contention is that this can be done safely and with minimal or no environmental impact. But we must start now. The special needs for transportation during the Olympic games are obvious. However, the solutions will require unique capabilities to be applied in innovative ways. Olympics -related missions ranging from news media flights, patrols for security sensitive firms, transporting game admin- istrative officials, security personnel of local, state, and the armed services, VIP's, athletes, and the tremendous influx of visitors, are but a few examples. The August, 1984 issue of Rotor & Wing International contained one of J.J. Barber's typically excellent articles, "Los Angeles Looks to Helicopters to Make the Olympics Fly;" which explained the plans of a team of about 150 civil and -military helicopters to support the Los Angeles Olympics, showcasing the rotorcrafi s ability to hurdle traffic jams and get the job done. Olympic events were conducted in more than 22 sites in the greater Los Angeles area and three additional remote sites, as far away as Palo Alto, in northern California. This disbursement required the coordination of many police departments as well as the State Department, Defense Department. and Secret Service officials. In addition no the normal role that military helicopters play in areas of security, the plans emphasized their general use because of the need for profit-making commercial operators to commit 34 VERTTLITE 0 September/October 1991 thea tic t„ hi ..in V Cyan^_t�i Tech'��e1aivann•_ .,Ite rco- "a, I,,, cert ytun cap,u n) dud plecc ,mut have hcen spcarhoedcd by D. Chit l iud Brae Jo n, AICD, who is a $penal Assistant to the Office of the President and a Prolessnr of City Plannimi. A spa - nlic example is the -Envirommenal Assclsnsnt Int the Atlanta International Vertiparl.:' prepared by one of Dr. Bran- don's classes and published in June, 1991. This study proposed n multiple 1111 tualov that inc,,racs a recreational and cultural park system with intermodal transportation The plan's central theme is to make use of airspace right above the freeways in the vicinity of the pro- posed Olympic Villaee to be located on the campus of Georgia Tech. The pro- posed development includes the follow - ins activities: • A vertiport providing inter- and in- tra -city air transportation • Connection to an adjacent MARTA station providing light rail and bus transportation • Private vehicle access from 1-75/85 and city streets • Pedestrian and bicycle access • Parking facilities • Passive and active recreation fa- cilities • Permanent indoor and outdoor space for cultural exhibitions and activities (including the Piedmont Arts Fes- tival and Olympic Museum) • Educationally oriented conference and telecommunications facilities • Multi -use gallery area including a terminal and space for restaurants/ shopping venues After studying sev tial loca- tions. Dr. Bragdon's C', _ ing class selected the mid -town AqFft site based on the following -bjecdW • Utilization of three-dimensional spa- tial opportunities for land develop. ment in an efficient manner • Provision of multi -modal facilities conveniently located to serve an urban population • Enhancement of economic develop- ment and creation of spatial resources to support the Atlanta park A F,,,,, !. system and inter (intra -city trans- portation needs for the 1996 Summer Olympics • Demonstration of recreational tech- nology for the 21st century • Provision of an example of public/ public and public/privaze partner- ships to extend limited economic and human resources The vertiport would be located on I- 75/85 in the area bounded by lath Street. Williams Street, 12th Street. and Techwood Drive. The layout of this ver- tiport in relation to the above mentioned interstates is shown in Fieure 1. The vertiport would accommodate at least three V-22 tilt -rotors and helicop- ters with rotor diameters up to 75 feet. Figure 2 illustrates these landing spots. Environmental considerations are o,_ obvious importance, but it must be un- derstood that the vehicular traffic already VOL 37. No. 5 35 Peak Noise Levels (in dBA) Roadway Vehicle Sources Distance from Centerline in Feel Noise Source 50 100 250 500 Vehicular Traffic, 1991 88 84 79 75 Vehicular Tra@ic. 1996 90 I 86 li 81 77 TiLlr I extent a of `.i^nnicim annoyance and prolcned to sub.L`.m;ally tnc;case by 1996hlrsuremenis taken this vear xs'ith 1996 projecuons arc shown in Table L To ur.ize the opportunity of the 1990 A[lann Olvintl to demonstrate a fully functional VTOL tmnspor ration system urine the mast suitable aircraft and ATC system available. is a coal that must not be missed. The demonstration could be integrated with the normal military sup- port of this type of operation. The Olym- pic events set the stage for the demon- stration of disbursed operations with worldwide v,sibihty that can enhance not only [he mmge of powered -lift rehldes. but the nation as a whole. Aircraft i ,rI should include co, porate through transport size helicopters including the military's CH46s and CH -47 a, the CV -22 tiltrotor. and the commercial leh,dz venture with the TW - 6S alt -win¢, utilizing NILS, RSAV, and other ATC technologies in support of air operations on it scheduled basis. The data gathered would be extremely valu- able in further evaluating the capabilities of urban VTOL operations. The range of the primary operating area is illustrated In Figure 3. F;n me lu Il;:lidle .ndl d \TOL I;an s p... wsmm denlomu.I- lion on ;to awn is nut lea.;hle hecaux of the m;my upc rating restn;m, and the public safety ......mors that nm sl be ad- dressed. Therefore, gosenlrl spoieG, ship of this inwativc is a nun( and it ssou[d stent to be a namrai imueole to the FAA_ CrMcJl tO the plJll of such a dennmstrdlion lull be defiil of nlea- am es of effeu; renes. for steep alae approaches with large trampon sire heli - coodr,. lust as important to the succem of the demonstration is the -round based equipment to provide the traffic control and obstacle avoidance navie:mou for the movement of the VTOL a;r traffic. Further technical work is needed to define the cockpit systems to permit the Flight crew to safely operate the aircraft at steep approach angles on a routine basis. The information gathered from this demonstration would provide a tre- mendous impetus to further study the application of VTOL technology to solve these protracted problems of urban trans- portation. PRELIMINARY OPERATIONAL AREA y DOBBINS AIR FORCE BA5E Dalhonega y Focal Point for Support Air Kayak Venue Operations Steep Approach 70 all ! 2�sort / zxzz Stone slountain enms venue Ga Tech ATLANTA �p`� •: 25 sml SAVANNAH 215 sm I. _- 10 am 11 Steep Appro Hartsfield International 36 VERTIFLITE ■ September/October 1991 a — Spo��cP- � N SUMMARY THE NEED IS FOR DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION POLICY Federal policy could stimulate the creation of a national tiltrotor system which can capitalize on the benefits of tiltrotor aircraft to short haul transportation. THE PROBLEM IS WORSENING AIRPORT CONGESTION As growing travel demand clogs terminals, runways, and skies, there seems to be no remedy to the malady of congestion. THE REASON IS INEFFICIENT USE OF RUNWAY SLOTS Small, short haul airplanes get equal runway access but don't carry a proportionate share of passengers. THE SOLUTION IS A TILTROTOR (NON -RUNWAY) SYSTEM By transferring short haul traffic to tiltrolors, runway slots are available for wide-body long range jets. THE BENEFITS OF A TILTROTOR SYSTEM ARE BROAD AND SIGNIFICANT Creation of a national tiltrotor system could greatly benefit travel, trade and economy in both the U.S. and abroad. THE ECONOMIC LEVERAGE OF A TILTROTOR SYSTEM IS ENORMOUS Transferring a portion of short haul traffic to fiftrotor frees runway slots for larger higher revenue generating aircraft. THE CHALLENGE IS IN GETTING STARTED New ideas, no matter how good, always compete with well entrenched ideas. Federal help is needed to get tiltrotor into the system. THE TECHNOLOGY WILL BE ADAPTED FROM THE V-22 OSPREY PROGRAM Tftrotor technology is the only aviation technology unique to the U.S. The military V-22 know- how, when fully proven, will be the basis for all civil tiltrotor developments. THE TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND IS CONVINCING Development of the tiltrotor technology spans halt the history of aviation and has been proven in three successful flight test aircraft... the XV -3, XV -15, and V-22. TILTROTOR PUTS TECHNOLOGY IN TRANSPORTATIONH THE NEED IS FOR DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION POLICY A DOT policy statement which recognizes the need for a National Tiltrotor Transpor- tation System would be an extension of existing national commitments toward this goal. The precedent exists. The Aeronautical Policy Review Committee of the President's office of Science and Technology Pol- icy reported in its February 1987 findings an Agenda for Achievement which specifically discusses tilt- rotor aircraft in the context of an integrated national air transportation system and recommends tiltrotor development: .. Full realization of the National Goals will depend on how fast the National Airspace System can incorporate these advances and other new capabilities such as ffltrotor, V/STOL, supersonic, and the system in a timely manner.' .. Civil derivatives of some of these high-speed rotorcraft, operating in the vertical or short takeoff modes, are foreseen with the economy, productivity, and maintainability of fixed wing passenger aircraft. Advanced craft of this kind can provide improved intercity and interregion transportation, reducing congestion in U.S. airports without major invest- ments in new runways ..." .. Clearly, the nation needs to establish a collective commitment among industry, DOD, NASA, FAA, the universities, and Congress to assure American leadership in this pivotal subsonic area." ... Industry needs to explore development of timely and affordable civil derivatives of the new generations of military VTOL ... aircraft for intercity and intenegion transportation ..:' . the Committee believes that the depth of foreign aeronautical resolve and the con- ce.rted U.S. national effort required to maintain American competitiveness are still largely underestimated." Similarly, in the June 1987 NASA/DOD/FAA Civil Tiltrotor Report: "There are ... two basic forces at the national and intemational level that appear to have major implications for both civil tiftrotor and related national policy and planning: (1) strong global competition in aerospace markets (especially ask relates to balance of trade) and (2) significant congestion in the air transportation system." Congressional hearings have been held, the FAA Administrator has charted a course to enable civil tiftrotor operation, government and industry have conducted in-depth studies, and the V-22 aircraft is flying. While significant activities have been underway in the FAA, NASA, DOD and industry, national policy from DOT will also stimulate state and local leaders to begin planning the infrastructure re- quired to attract tiltrotor transportation convenience, and will stimulate industry investment to create the vehicie. Ctv1C 11111RUroRpPp► tC MiSSiON � pY A RESER CH STU Poi�aY xwoo SuPPo1n9 g°cumentm U.S. NASA C()tj roR BEPONT 1T1451 c�L�! .190A CIVIL APPLICATIONS 0p _•`���� BaeiW Cammel$tDff10Plan __ —_ r.a. ast am • _' �� TILT ROTOR Boe1n0 a---.. StubY team— ge�i to JOINT g goeta FARING t NASA SU8(•pMMITTEF. `roa•t„s ` ON For FAPJNAsaa A V[,i TfON AMD MATERIA ATION. txo a`u SRM GTNt C01L WT tEE ON �l SrA. CE. AND TECHNOLOGY C/p/ \ 4 rpt r }yyFS11. ITI&TIM UA ISTY nm gPPOaT TO 0.MG9LS5 c"11. TSWrottW kta T➢US TlTrm eTsm Pcke ,q41 � gr�oN Cv.v! :llr: oxo: rwhtcioq} dmlopmuc ku 4 Savdvtttl a sha ftti .c bronwuca and Spca 3Omi.alacsaAan (a151). tha bpactaus of bLua (DCDI avd fvdufc:T orar eh. put aural daetlaa. T61, aanaliut witlnq 1 T^hmy m1 nlativuhip la aipcttl tG cuctnua and m pw.1N tacpulaq} Imp o.macf •ey Uac ill v,gra.. nota iLa prfortuvty aM tSa acenmlc .tabillcT o1 thlf clot of •ahlcba. tM avyyfzyap Ftlaai l.Acivn kmalnutucivn (FLLv ucleiuv oil adtlrna cha woaoaic ¢abillc} vi cvm.arclal salttoWr an1p. <attlf tcuiGn raqultamwtf. kTC rpcvai apraclnq ud aqulppnc Saqulzfmantr W! atandatdf [oi f.2tlprt Ja.mlo(at Pu[ axudua hao fndined: =1 lift.ahlelu, lftludlmq s11[rveor uF n[fu eka peutial aT LLla.faclnq aoM of eha eoapwiu p2vai�a 1v hlgb - f a:au b} pnclnq Scam aapatua fmilicla: ac a)ei trwrca. IDai • maaahaiicl of epzrtiva t:na wctlptta laaaeed 4 yr tl)wan[ pail} tnap +ahlcln u} th afy ttl urticatm . I., is klgh t route L Da baste k .. T and a+ . T -rt. ••. am nhn. ftcaoc •�a[tl fII ­hiob, -. dfnai2T L la t!a E sr�'or THE PROBLEM IS WORSENING AIRPORT Air travel is not quite as convenient as what it used to be, nor as frustrating as it may become. Air travel is by far the choice for inter -city and international transportation. But it is in danger of being overwhelmed as its success has spawned system congestion ... a spreading malady ... in airports, on runways and in the skies, with no remedy in sight. The swift uncompromising service expected by air travelers, is being undermined by this growth of congestion. As tens of millions of passengers and thousands of new aircraft are added to the system in the decade ahead, there is worse news to come. In 1988. the FAA listed 16 major airports as "congested" i.e, having an annual cumulative delay of de- partures exceeding 20,000 hours. This included the "top ten busiest' airports which together handled about 1/3 of all passenger enplanements. On the right is a map of these airport locations, which rep- resent virtually all of the densely populated regions of America. By 2000, forecasts show 58 "Con- gested" airports as enplanements increase 75%. The facing page shows an FAA forecast of traffic growth. There are currently 1600 airline gates in the U.S. and about 4 aircraft per gate, (4274 U.S. jet aircraft plus turboprops plus a portion of 7868 foreign flag planes). There will be 5000 more airplanes added to the system by 2005 (ref BCA). How does congestion eect travelers? White the above numbers are relatively well known, the conse- quences are not as well known. Consider delay. According to FAA records, 1988 saw a cumulative 590,000 hours of delay at the "top fen" airports. These delays cost the traveling public a staggering 50,000,000 hours of lost time. In terms of productive work Time this represents a loss of over 25,000 man-years of labor, or the equivalent of idling an entire medium size city for a year! If considered only as lost personal time which is of great value to the individual or in term$ of interrupted schedules or plans the delays inconvenienced an estimated 190,000,000 people. On either basis, the waste is huge. By the year 2000. unless major improvements take place, the traveling public may give up well over 100,000,000 hours in lost time. In economic terms, at modest wages, that could be equated to a $1,000,000,000 in personal loss, not counting the $4.6 billion system cost attributed to delays (ref AOCI). This is NOT the promise of air travel -Data from Airport Operators Council International (AOCI) GROWING AIRPORT CONGESTION SEA HPN BOS O LGA MSP EWR ISP CLE BALL JFK SMF oRNO O ORO D PITT DC AIY SLC *DEN CMH OAK a MCI O 4 CVG SFO STTIL BODO AUR L#AS p OBNA CLTO LAX ONT PHX OABO O •ATL LGB i LIT MEM DFW BRM SNA OTUS so SAN AUSLFT MSY MCO O IAH O "A PBI • CONGESTED NOW SAT SRO MIA O CONGESTED BY 2000 (REF. FAA & NPIAS REPORTS) GROWTH IN U.S. PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS 0 $572Airline 800- 00700600 700- 600 .0 600 400 y 300 I f200 100 58.641.7 19. 1950 1960 1970 1980 1987 1990 2000 (AEF. FAA) THE REASONIS INEFFICIENT USE OF RUNWAY SLOTS Each airplane takes the same slot... and a majority of airplanes fly short distances Long haul and short haul aircraft use the same runway space. And the percentage of aircraft that travel short distances is surprising. A survey of the Official Airline Guide of arrivals at the "ten busiest airports" reveals that 41 %of all domestic flights come from less than 300 miles away. The accompa- nying chart shows that this factor varies from 15% at Denver ... which might be expected due to the dispersed population centers in the midwest ... to a high of 75% at Boston, a region where the popu- lation centers are more concentrated. It is interesting to overlay the current 16 congested airports with a 300 mile radius circle. Virtually all of the country except the Northwest is affected by short haul flights. By extending this exercise to the year 2000, circles around all 58 then congested airports would blanket the country. Can these short leg flights be accomplished without use of a runway? Even more significant is the example of the three New York airports, where international passengers outnumber commuter passengers by 8:1, while the number of commuter flights outnumber the inter- national big jets by 3:2! In other words, 3% of the passengers use a disproportionate 19% of the run- way slots. Imagine now, the impact on these factors and the congestion forecast, if there were an aircraft avail- able; swift, safe and quiet, THAT DIDN'T NEED TO USE A RUNWAY ... OR DIDN'T EVEN NEED A MAJOR AIRPORT!! The solution is a tiltrotor (non -runway) system. \.. LOTS OF AIRPLANES... DON'T GO VERY FAR! 10 BUSIEST U.S. AIRPORTS (AOCI) ARRIVAL DATA FROM AUGUST 1989 CAG 80 70 60 % ARRIVALS "" FROM LESS 40 THAN 300 — MILES nn 20 10 0 DFW DEN JFK SFO MIA LGA BOS 300 MILE RANGE FROM ALREADY CONGESTED AIRPORTS O SEA HPN BOS O LGA MSP EWR ISP CLE BALL JFK SMF ORN0 O ORD O/ pIT OCA AIY OAK SLC • DEN FMH IAD O MOI STL��—���iiiC �� BUR LAS TUL RD U O 0 O \ 01NA CLTO LAX ON T OABO \O O •ATL LOB 0K DFW \LITS MEM BHM SNA OTUS b �I SAN AUS IAH LFT MSY MCO • CONGESTED NOW SAT TPA PBI S MIA O CONGESTED BY 2000 9 THE SOLUTION IS A TILTROTOR (NON -RUNWAY) SYSTEM One type of aircraft can help avert a national aviation gridlock. That aircraft is the TILTROTOR. Simply stated, a tiltrotor is a turboprop aircraft that doesn't need a runway. It doesn't need the enormous fixed lacifibes cost of an airport. It does need a relatively small, inexpensive vertport. In these simple statements, there are enormous national benefits, both economic and demographic. Demographic Air access has become the transportation root upon which the daily life and economic growth of America is nurtured. But America is characterized by an increasingly fluid society. People, industries and centers of economic activity relocate, shift and move. In this fluid demographic situation, there is a need for flexibility in the evolution of transportation systems to keep pace with changing public demands. Current transportation problems need to be solved in ways which have the flexibility to encompass anticipated future needs. A National tiltrotor transportation supplementing the current air transport system will provide that flexibility. Initial service could begin as vertiport-to-airport feeder (150-300 mile) service m selected high density areas, shown as Stage I. In this stage, considerable short haul traffic would be diverted to tiltrotor, relieving runways for large long haul jets. As the vertiport system is extended, much of the traffic would be from vertiport-to-vertiport, providing time -saving point-to-point service and completely bypassing airports (Stage II), except for connecting passengers. As population expands and spreads, the vertiport system moves wRh it; even provides an air transportation focal point for new modes of economic activity. in this way, the tiftrotor system fosters development across the vast undeveloped areas of America, bringing air access without airports. Economic It has been estimated that one hub new airport to serve a major urban area in the northeast could cost up to $6,000,000,000... if the land could be found. With growing environmental consciousness, that is A VERY BIG IFI This new airport would relieve the traffic problem for one city ... temporarily. Then, it too would become congested. For less than half the cost of a new airport, a total tiltrotor system of 18 vemports ($11-$80 million each depending on location) plus the development and production of aIi the tiltrotor aircraft to serve them could be put in place. This would relieve congestion for many airports, and provide faster more convenient service to many travelers. The sketch depicts a typical 4.5 acre city vertiport, sized to handle up to 3000 passengers per day. 10 L m PHASE Feed the Hub PHASE 11 Portal to Portal — •--•k ©'Y� ` ice.. �. ` O CITY VERTIPORT 8WRA contour -- Approach _ 3'�ft � d Gate TaReoit D Terrain at s Parkhg Approximately 4.5 acres 3000 Passengers In and Out per day REP: BCA THE BENEFITS OF A TILTROTOR SYSTEM ARE BROAD AND SIGNIFICANT. Everyone benefits from the addition of a tiltrotor system. Some of the valuable benefits of a tiltrotor transportation system are: For the Traveler: Today, airplane trips are mostly spent on the ground as shown. For distances of 300 miles, 65% of the trip time (portal to portal) using modem jet transportation is spent on the ground .. not including any delays. Vertiport sites closer to real origins and actual destinations will give the traveler better service with less an route time. For the Airport: A progressive offloading of runways to tiltrotor aircraft reduces the pressure for airport expansion, thereby extending the airport's economic life. For the Aviation System: Megacarriers can enhance their long-range and international operations by sponsoring regional tiltrotor aircraft partners. A significant portion of short haul domestic traffic can be offloaded from runways ... especially for city-to-city travelers. For International Travel: Encouraging the use of tiltrotor networks by foreign operators will also extend the economic life of their airports, thereby enhancing U.S. access for the overseas ends of U.S. flag carrier routes. For Commerce and Trade: New centers of eccnomic/industriai development, remote from current airports are linked to the air transport system. For Balance of Trade: As tiltrotor is a uniquely American aviation product its world market will aid U.S. balance of trade. For The Environment; Tiltrotor operations will have minimal space or noise impact. It requires very little space, space which may already be dedicated to transportation use; i.e. over river piers, over city circumferential freeways, over rail terminals, or on unused airport land. All these areas are already publicly owned and environmentally adjusted to certain noise levels. Additionally, due both to its steep approach/departure operation and its inherently low noise level, the acoustic footprint of the tiltrotor would generally be confined to the immediate vicinity of the vertiport. It all adds up to a remarkable national transportation assetl 12 r•. AIRPLANE TRIPS ARE MOSTLY SPENT ON THE GROUND �r..P 0 80— - C CONo1T10NS -- Percent 70 • Twin Turbojet Airc2R _ of Trip • 1/2 Hour Ground Access To BENEFIT..-=�' Time and 12 Hour From Airport -° FOR =- Spent 60 -. THE on the TRAVELER Ground 50 (Ground Portal) 40 700 30 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Distance (Statute Miles) REF: BCA FIXED RUNWAY CAPACITY CAN BE SUPPLEMENTED A RUNWAY DEMAND U.S. TILTROTOR SYSTEM TIME 10- FOREIGN TILTROTOR SYSTEM 13 THE ECONOMIC LEVERAGEOF A TILTROTOR SYSTEM IS It's not what it costs that counts... it's what it's worth Affordability is defined as utility exceeding costs. While each of the elements in the utility/cost equation must be examined and reexamined, it appears that a b1trotor system can be affordable. UTILITY: A network of 7 vertipons in the New York area (proposed by the PANYNJ), could each handle 1,000,000 passengers per year connecting with other vertiports within 300 miles. The FAA/NASA/ DOD study shows that a 4.5 acre site with four gates could enplane 3000 passengers per day (handle 6000 passengers total), with a peak rate of 600 per hour. This site would be large enough for a 500 foot departure lane permitting short rolling takeoffs for added comfort and safety. Based on data in the study, this number of passengers could be rerouted from New York's three airports in a system using about 100 thirty-nine passenger tiftrotor aircraft. A typical vertiport could be built on city waterfront property, over existing piers, above railway terminals, by bridging highways or, for connecting passengers, on the unused spaces at airports. Such facilities could be multi -decked to provide for parking. Veniports should be planned to be co -located with intermodal connection to other means of public transport. ECONOMIC LEVERAGE: In a pro forma analysis of the three New York airports in 1988, if half of the under 300 mile departures (which averaged 34 passengers) were offloaded into the above tiltrotor system, 279 takeoff slots would be made available for larger longrange aircraft. Using the 1988 mix of domesticlintemational departures, the substitution would yield an estimated daily revenue increase of $9,500,000 or $3.6 billion annualiyll in addition, many runway slots would also become available at Boston, Washington, and other destinations. COSTS: Initial cost depends on vehicle size, development cost, market size and rate of expansion, and resulting production rate. Having more mechanical systems than a turboprop, it will be more expensive. Tiltrotor operating costs will be more than for a turboprop but less than a helicopter of the same size. While fewer larger aircraft would have some economic advantage, it would be at a compromise in satisfactory frequency of point-to-point service. USERS PRICE: In direct comparison, a tiltrotor portal-to-portal "ticket price" (including ground transportation acts) will be competitive with fixed -wing alternatives given a modest premium for the benefits of convenience and time savings. There is little merit in compering the tiftrotor on the traditional airline seat -mile -cost criteria, any more than seat -mile cost is a measure of efficient taxi usage. 14 CURRENT NEW YORK TRAFFIC (1988) THREE AIRPORTS COMBINED 56% OF DEPARTURES CARRY 82% OF PASSENGERS >300 MILES i 44% OF DEPARTURES CARRY 18% OF THE PASSENGERS <300 MILES AOCI & DAG DATA PRO FORMA NEW YORK TRAFFIC (1988) TRANSFER 50016 OF LESS THAN 300 MILE TRAFFIC TO TILTROTOR SYSTEM o� 9%PASSEN 22% OF DEPARTURES RESULTING ECONOMIC LEVERAGE SAME NUMBER OF RUNWAY DEPARTURES PROVIDE: • 23% PASSENGERS 118,200,000/YEAR] •$3,600,000,000 REVENUENEAR • $350,000,000 TILTROTOR SYSTEM REVENUENEAR 15 THE CHALLENGE IS IN GETTING STARTED It's difficult for a revolutionary idea to break into an evolutionary cycle. Oversimplifying a very complex pattern, the high technology aviation system can be depicted as evolving in a closed loop. Need defines demand; then infrastructure evolves which encourages operators to state requirements; aircraft are developed; operator demand drives production; aircraft enter service to meet the need, and by now demand has increased and the loop recycles. Today's air transportation system is a fully matured loop. The tiltrotor, which must enter a similar loop, in which the user will expect similar results, does not have the advantage of starting at square one. The problem is that industry resources will not be made available in any significant amount until government, operator, industry, and user have a common commitment to a national tiltrotor system. What makes this happen? What is needed to stimulate the introduction of tiltrotor into the main stream of the aviation loop is a "Federal Jump -Start" which includes several elements. 1. Infrastructure. The FAA has already taken the initiative with the awarding of several study grants to metropolitan aviation authorities for the study of vertiport locations. 2. Regulatory revision. The FAA has published tiltrotor certification criteria and is studying vertiport design criteria, and tiltrotor air traffic control integration. 3. Demonstration. To create market interest and investor confidence a flight demonstration of the tiltrotor is considered essential, whether this be a modified XV -15 (see following pages) or a ..civilianized" V-22. A demonstrator built with funding support from the government needs to be shown in numerous potential markets in order to accelerate the creation of a civil tiltrotor system. While looking at the "aviation loop," 0 is worth noting that intermodality, between various forms of transportation, each of which has a similar evolutionary loop, occurs when their infrastructures are designed for physical interconnection. A good example is Frankfurt airport and the German railway system. A bad example is Washington's National Airport and the "nearby" Metro. With true intemadality comes such innovations as point-to-point ticketing which includes all of the modes needed to get from origin to final destination. 16 SYSTEM INTERMODALITY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM EVOLUTION MARKET DEMAND TRANSPORTATION NEED INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE AVIATION LOOP PRODUCTION OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS OPERATOR VEHICLE DEMAND DEVELOPMENT FEDERAL "JUMP-START" liw - - - - DOT/FAA - INITIATIVE OPERATOR MODIFY? INTEREST 40 OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS DEMONSTRATOR AIRCRAFT V-71 MOD- XV -15 17 THE TECHNOLOGYWI LL BE ADAPTED FROM THE V•22 OSPREY PROGRAM Civil tiltrotors will draw on the technology base created in the development of the military V-22 Osprey, Under Department of Defense contract, the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor is now in full scale development. Six aircraft are being built and flight tested to rigid military specifications. Deliveries to operational units are scheduled for 1993. It is essential to the timely emergence of any civil tiltrotor project that it be preceded by this substantial V-22 development investment as well as the operational experience and confidence levels which will come from the military program. Under contract to FAA/NASA/DOD an industry study by Boeing Commercial Airplane, Bell Helicopter Textron Inc., and Boeing Helicopters evaluated the potential civil market, required design characteristics, and market economics for several tiltrotor aircraft. The aircraft studied included three derivative aircraft: ■ V-22 with minimum changes retaining the non -pressurized fuselage of the military version, to carry 31 passengers. ■ Two V-22 derivatives with the substflution of stretched and pressurized fuselages to carry 39 or 52 passengers. and three all new designs: ■ An eight passenger high wing configuration ■ A 19 passenger low wing design, and ■ A 75 passenger low wing design Potential market forecasts for these aircraft over the next decade varied from 310 to 1430 units depending on size with the largest demand found to be in the 36-45 seat size class. Phase II of the FAA/NASA/DOD study is now underway to further refine these findings. While firm estimates have not been made, it is generally expected that V-22 derivative developments may require investment of several hundred million dollars. New developments may require from one to two billion dollars depending on size and design considerations. 18 L 1-22 Min Change 4a ' (31 Passengers) .� ( Im • Nonpressurized Fuselage V-22 Derivative �����T` (391 asseq-ts, XV -15 Size -q I_ — J (8 Passengers) ,�1� • New High -Wing Design New Tiltrotor (19 Passengers) • M o • New Low -Wing Design New Tiltrotor (75 Passenger: REF FANNASADOD REPORT • New Low -Wing Design 19 THE TECHNOLOGYBACKGROUND IS CONVINCING Development of the tiltrotor technology base spans half the history of aviation. XV -3: A Research Aircraft Exploratory research into the potential of tiltrotor began in the 1940s but was brought to vehicle design and flight beginning with the NASAARMY/BELL XV -3 in 1953. First conversion was accomplisned m December 1958. This aircraft program, which continued until 1966 served the purpose of proving feasibility and revealing technical deficiencies which had to be overcome in future cesigns. XV -15: A Technology Development Aircraft Proof -of -concept was greatly extended in the NASAARMYiNAVV funded Bell XV -15. Developed in the early 70's, its first flight was in June 1977. Two aircraft were built, and they have been flying with great technical and operational success for 12 years, amassing 750 flight hours, with high reliability and NO SPARE PARTS! Over 160 pilots have flown the XV -15, all flying through conversion from helicopter to airplane mode with ease. V-22: The First Production Tiltrotor Development In 1962, based upon selection of the tiltrotor from among the large number of VTOL research aircraft seen, the Department of Defense started the JVX program. Following funded studies and tests to further reduce technical risk this became the V-22 Full Scale Development program with the contract award to the team of Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., and Boeing Helicopters in June 1986. Today, the first two of the six test aircraft are flying to qualify against the very rigorous military specifications. Production aircraft are expected to be delivered in 1993. The Next Step Progress toward a civil bitrotor depends first upon continued progress on the military V-22 program. Its technology, its operational experience, and demonstrated reliability are precursors to more widespread civil acceptance. The next step- a production civilian aircraft would evolve from this American knowhow to yield an effective, safe, and environmental aircraft. The Phase 2 FAA/NASA/DOD Civil TiltRotor Study and other studies will determine the outcome of the size, the market timing, and the governmental support needed to build a national tiltrotor system. iia em 1N•3 1953.1966 Xy -15 1912•P�§en1 21 Supertrains; Solutions to America's by Joseph Vranich with a Foreword by Tom Clanc, "What if someone were to invent some magic new mode of transportation that was safe, energ efficient, and environmentally benign? Somec has. It's called the train ... this is an important book." —from the foreward by Tom Clancy "This book is for all those train passengers whose journey lasted ten hours when it shoult have been two. Highly recommended." —Ray Bradbury "Great, informative, intelligent, actual and prognostic reading!" —Melvin M. Belli, Sr. Super -speed trains are coating to the United States. Travelers frustrated by highway and airport gridlock will flock to high-speed trains on our busiest travel corridors. This call-to-amion book makes the case for drastic changes in the nation's transportation policies. Transportation Gridlock the umtea States rs more than a generation behind its primary, economic competitors, the Europeans and the Japanese, in building high-speed train systems. However, by the tum of the century, several heavily traveled corridors in the United States will be connected by advanced trains. Some will bchigh-tech steel wheel trains while others will be magnetic levitation trains (maglev) that"float" while traveling at 300 miles per hour. This book examines the world's best trains, the impeccable Supertrain safety record, how some states are bucking Washington by planning their own train systems, the devastating pollution and gluttonous oil use resulting from excessive dependence on highways, and hidden aviation and highway subsidies. It offers a scathing look at misleading reports about trains prepared by those predisposed to the construction of more highways and airports. The authorpredicts that the 1990s will be the age of the "Great American Airport Revolt' just as citizens opposed freeways in pan decades. Fully documented with maps, figures, chants, and photographs, Supertrains offers a hopeful account of a more mobile and efficient future. Joseph Vranich has over two decades of experience in transportation. He has written extensively and has testified before Congress on this issue. He has worked in the inner councils of the railroad, aircraft manufacturing, and bus transit industries. The High Speed Rail Association acknowledges him as a "world expert" on super -speed trains. St. Martin's Press, January 1992 �.- v....... For fast Service — CALL TOLLWEE 24 hours a Dav: l..S 0-262-2776.