Comments on RPS Forecast Report - Capacity

The Forecast Report is focussed on making the case that growth in aircraft movement demand will reach the point where the existing airside infrastructure at the airport reaches capacity, and additional airside capacity is required.

There is little argument in this. At some point in time, regardless of which air traffic forecast is applied, aircraft movement demand will reach the practical capacity of the present airside system, despite any operational improvements that may be made. When this happens, additional airside capacity in the form of a new runway will inevitably be required.

The Forecast Report suggests that the demand / capacity analysis concludes that such additional capacity would be required as early as 2008 (high GDP growth scenario), or as late as 2013 (low GDP growth scenario). The Centreline forecast (i.e. Medium Growth condition) suggests that the additional capacity will be required in 2010, when aircraft movements reach 44 movements per hour.

What the Forecast Report fails to address is the what will be the ultimate capacity of the 2-parallel runway system, and how much additional time this will provide for Dublin Airport in terms of airside capacity. Aside from not dealing with the matter of ultimate 2-runwsy capacity, a critical failure of the Forecast Report, in discussing the demand/capacity analysis, is that it does not suggest how even greater capacity would, or could, be provided at Dublin Airport, when the 2-parallel runways both reach capacity - at around 80 movements per hour.

A simple review of the extrapolated demand forecast for aircraft movements shows that the second parallel runway would 'buy' capacity until about 2030 based on the Centreline Forecast. This means, effectively, that the second runway would add sufficient airside capacity to last only 20 years, but only 15 years if high economic growth is achieved. By 2030, when the airside capacity bought by constructing the second runway is exhausted, the airport would only be serving just over 44 million annual passengers.

The Airport Master Plan provides for longer term terminal expansion but, clearly, any terminal expansion beyond 44 mppa cannot be supported by the airside system, even if the 2nd parallel runway is built. Expansion of passenger terminal capacity, and the ability of Dublin Airport to continue to serve air transport growth beyond 2030, therefore requires a 3rd, and much later a 4th, runway.

It is very obvious that the Dublin Airport site cannot accept a 3rd and 4th runway, and further site expansion would not be feasible either. The clear indication is therefore that the 20-year horizon, beyond implementation of the 2nd parallel runway, demands that a new airport be developed - elsewhere - to serve air transport growth in the Dublin region beyond the capacity limits of the present airport site.

If the utility obtained from constructing a 2nd parallel runway is only 15 to 20 years, and an increase in airside capacity beyond the limits of the 2nd parallel runway cannot be achieved at the present site, and development of a new airport would therefore be required, this then calls into question whether the decision to address the near term capacity issue by constructing a new runway of limited useful life, is wise in the first place.

Consultants for UPROAR