Microsoft Word - 04MSP_Annual-rev2.doc

____________________________________________________

2004 ANNUAL REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

____________________________________________________

METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION

September 2005

2004 REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

Metropolitan Airports Commission

___________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

In 1989, the Minnesota Legislature adopted the Metropolitan Airport Planning Act. This

legislation required the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and the Metropolitan

Council (MC) to complete a comprehensive and coordinated program to plan for major

airport development in the Twin Cities. The planning activities were designed to

compare the option of future expansion of Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport

(MSP) with the option of building a new airport.

The analysis was completed in 1996, and the MAC and MC formally submitted their

recommendations to the Legislature on March 18, 1996. On April 2, 1996, legislation

was passed by both the House and Senate, and subsequently signed by Governor

Carlson, stopping further study of a new airport and directing the MAC to implement the

MSP 2010 Long Term Comprehensive Plan.

The 1996 legislation requires the MAC to prepare an annual report to the Legislature by

February 15th of each year that describes recent airport activity, current and anticipated

capacity and delay for the airfield and terminal, and technological developments that

could improve airport efficiency. Activity trends are compared to the 1993 MAC

forecasts. The report also compares MSP trends with Detroit Metropolitan Wayne

County Airport (DTW) trends.

The 2004 Annual Report to the Legislature is divided into five sections:

• Description of MSP and DTW facilities.

• Comparison of MSP and DTW activity.

• Comparison of 1993 MAC forecasts with actual activity.

• Current airfield capacity and average length of delay statistics.

• Technological developments affecting aviation and their effect on airport operations

and capacity.

DESCRIPTION OF AIRPORT FACILITIES

_____________________________________________________________________

This section compares the facilities of MSP and DTW. Table 1 summarizes the major

airport components and identifies when new facilities are expected to be in place.

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport

Figure 1 shows the general airport layout for MSP. The airfield consists of two parallel

runways and one crosswind runway that intersects both parallel runways. Runway 12L-

30R is 8,200 feet long; Runway 12R-30L is 10,000 feet long; and Runway 4-22 is

11,006 feet long. A deicing pad was constructed at Runway 12L in 1998 with the

capacity to accommodate six jets and two regional aircraft. During the reconstruction of

the southeastern portion of Runway 12R-30L, a new parallel taxiway was constructed

south of the runway, and a deicing pad capable of handling six jet aircraft was

constructed at Runway 30L in 1999. A deicing pad for Runway 30R was constructed in

2001 and can accommodate 3 narrowbody and 2 regional aircraft. In addition, an

Engineered Materials Arresting System (EMAS) was installed on the approach end of

Runway 30L to enhance safety. In 2003 a deicing pad was added to Runway 12R and

can accommodate 3 widebody, 3 narrowbody and 2 regional aircraft. Construction on

the new Runway 17-35 began on March 15, 1999, with an anticipated completion date

of October 2005. In 2003, the north end of the runway was paved and the remaining

southern portion will be paved in 2005. The runway will be commissioned and open for

operation on October 27

2005. Two cargo aprons (50 acres of concrete) were

constructed in 2000. FedEx opened their cargo sort facility in 2002, and UPS

completed construction of their facility in 2003. MAC constructed a multi-tenant cargo

facility in 2004. An airline maintenance apron was constructed in 2001 and Mesaba

Airlines completed construction of their facility in 2003. Sun Country Airlines and

Champion Air constructed their maintenance hangars in 2004. A new public roadway

system was opened in 2003, providing access to the west side of the airport for

relocated and future airport tenants. The Light Rail Transit station directly east of the

Humphrey terminal was completed in 2003 and another station at the Lindbergh

terminal was completed in 2004, with passenger service initiated on December 4, 2004,

providing direct access to downtown Minneapolis and the Mall of America. In addition,

a new and larger Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility started construction

in 2004, along with the new Runway 17 deicing pad. The tunnel under Runway 4-22

was also under construction in 2004, providing additional secure access to the midfield

area.

Table 1

2004 REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

Comparison of Existing Airport Facilities

Airport Component MSP DTW

Runways

Main 2 Parallel 4 Parallel

Crosswind 1

(1)

Total

(1)

Longest (ft.) 11,006

(2)

12,001

Terminal Facilities

Square Feet (millions) 2.4 3.0

Total Gates 127 133

Lindbergh 117 McNamara 97

(6)

Humphrey 10

(4)

Smith & Berry 36

(7)

Northwest Gates 68

(3)

(8)

Regional Gates (50 seats or less) 30 32

Auto Parking Spaces 18,996

(5)

20,000

(9)

Notes:

(1)

New North/South runway will open on October 27, 2005.

(2)

Runway 4-22 has environmental approval to be extended to 12,000 feet.

(3)

By 2007, NWA will occupy 11 more gates at Lindbergh.

(4)

More gates are planned for non SkyTeam airlines by 2007.

(5)

The Humphrey garage provides 4,674 public parking spaces, a second facility will add another 4,526

public and employee spaces in the future.

(6)

In 2005, 9 more gates will be added.

(7)

The new replacement North Terminal will provide 27 gates in 2008 for non SkyTeam airlines.

(8)

Northwest has 97 gates at the new mid-field terminal, including 25 regional gates.

(9)

Approximately 4,500 parking spots were removed in 2004 from general public use for other airport

obligations.

Source: HNTB analysis.

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Layout Figure 1

A N N U A L R E P O R T T O T H E L E G I S L A T U R E

MAC

SCALE IN THOUSANDS OF FEET

0 1 2 3 4 5

Humphrey

Overflow

Apron

Proposed

Rental Cars

12R

12L

30R

30L

Lindbergh

Terminal

Federal Express

Humphrey Terminal

Parking Garages

LRT Station

(Underground)

Control

Tower

USAF

Minnesota

ANG

UPS

ARFF

NWA

Building

NWA

Building

Deicing

USPS

MAC Cargo

Mesaba

NWA

Building B

(to be

removed)

Champion

Sun

Country

The Lindbergh Terminal is located between the two parallel runways, east of the

crosswind runway. The terminal is laid out with single-loaded and double-loaded

concourses that provide 117 gate positions in 2004. A concourse tram along

Concourse C began operation on May 5

2004. Two NWA maintenance bays at

Building B near Concourse G were demolished in 2004 to make room for future

concourse expansion.

Lindbergh Terminal

The Humphrey Terminal opened in 2001 as part of the MSP 2010 Airport Expansion

Plan, and provides 10 gates used by charter airlines and Sun County airlines. The

Humphrey parking garage has a total of 4,674 spaces provided to employees and the

public. This is the first phase of a 9,200-space parking facility for both employees and

the public. Construction of the second garage (4,526 spaces) would occur in the future

as demand warrants.

Humphrey Terminal

MSP 2020 Vision

On September 21, 2004, Governor Pawlenty proposed an $862 million expansion for

MSP called 2020 Vision. Proposed improvements to the Humphrey and Lindbergh

Terminals are described below.

The Phase I and II expansion plans of the Humphrey Terminal are outlined as follows:

• All non-Sky Team member airlines would be moved from the Lindbergh Terminal

to the Humphrey Terminal

• Currently, there are eight gates serving charter airlines. Gates nine and ten,

which have been partially completed, would be completed in addition to six more

gates which would be provided on the northern side of the terminal.

• Eighty-eight check-in counters (doubled from the current total of forty-four), an in-

line Explosive Detection System (EDS) and two baggage claims (to bring the

total to six) would be added to accommodate the increased traffic.

• If demand warrants, the terminal parking garage could be expanded to

accommodate an additional 1,500 vehicles. Space is also available for another

parking garage or surface lot to the north of the current parking structure that

could add about 4,500 spaces.

Humphrey Terminal, Phase I (2007)

• If demand warrants, additional space to the south of the current terminal could

accommodate the construction of an additional four to eight gates in phase II.

Humphrey Terminal, Phase II (2010)

The following figures show the Phase I, II and III expansion plans of the Lindbergh

Terminal. The construction of a 400-room hotel with a 25,000 square-foot conference

center facility has been proposed and would be built after 2007 whenever it would be

economically justified with funding to be provided by a potential developer.

The phases for Lindbergh Terminal development are as follows:

Phase I

• The shift of non-Sky Team members to the Humphrey Terminal would free-up an

additional eleven gates at the Lindbergh Terminal.

• Extra ticketing counters, more screening lanes and in-line EDS would be added

to the terminal area.

• Due to the rise in popularity of the e-Park and pre-payment options available to

passengers using the airport’s parking facilities, fewer cashier checkout lanes

would be required, making additional space for a second curbside passenger

drop-off area and ticketing facility available behind the Blue and Red parking

ramps. Land freed-up by the removal of checkout lanes will also be where the

new hotel will be sited.

Lindbergh Terminal, Phase I (2007)

Phase II

• Around 2010, a fifteen-gate extension Concourse H, capable of handling the

largest narrow-body aircraft, would be added to the end of Concourse G along

with a new NWA World Club at the intersection of Concourses G and H. The

new concourse will be built on land previously occupied by Building B, which

once served as NWA headquarters and, along with seven attached hangars, a

maintenance base.

• A new people mover (the airport’s third) would be built along the roof of

Concourse G and H with stops at both ends and one in the middle at the

beginning of Concourse H.

• Two narrow-body gates in Concourse C would be converted to accommodate up

to four regional jets. The total number of regional airline positions would then

total forty-six (thirteen at Concourse A, sixteen at Concourse B and seventeen at

Concourse C).

Lindbergh Terminal, Phase II (2010)

Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport Layout Figure 2

22L

21R

21L

27R

27L

22R

A N N U A L R E P O R T T O T H E L E G I S L A T U R E

SCALE IN THOUSANDS OF FEET

0 1 2 3 4 5

Control

Tower

Berry

Terminal

Smith

Terminal

McNamara

Terminal

MAC

Proposed

Expansion

Proposed

Expansion

NWA

Maintenance

Phase III

• As passenger numbers continue to increase, a ten-gate extension could be

added to Concourse H, bringing the total number of gates in this concourse to

twenty-five.

• The demolition of NWA Building B would be completed with the current de-icing

pad for runway 30L being relocated at the southeastern tip of Concourse H. The

only remaining structure of NWA Building B complex would be the employee

parking lot at the extreme southeastern border of the airport.

• Nine additional gates in Concourse C would be converted for use by regional

jets, creating a total of eighteen new positions and bringing the total number of

plane stands for regional jet use to fifty-five.

Lindbergh Terminal, Phase III (Post 2010)

General Aviation (GA) services are provided south of Runway 12R-30L. In 2001,

Signature Aviation opened two maintenance hangars to replace facilities that were

removed to allow for construction of the Runway 12L deicing pad. The second hangar

is operated by Gulfstream Aviation. Signature also opened a new FBO Terminal in

2002. Cargo operations and airline maintenance are located on the southwest side of

the airport. U.S. Air Force Reserve and Minnesota Air National Guard facilities are

located on the north side of the airfield.

Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport

Figure 2 shows the general airport layout for DTW. The airport has six runways: four

main parallel runways oriented on a northeast-southwest heading and two crosswind

runways oriented on an east-west heading. Runway 4R-22L is 12,001 feet long,

Runway 4L-22R is 10,000 feet long, Runway 3L-21R is 8,500 feet long, Runway 3R-21L

is 10,000 feet long, Runway 9L-27R is 8,700 feet long, and Runway 9R-27L is 8,500

feet long. Runway 4L-22R is the newest runway and was commissioned on December

11, 2001.

There are three passenger terminals located north of Runway 9L-27R, between

Runways 4R-22L and 3L-21R. Two double-loaded concourses provide 97 gates at the

McNamara Terminal. The M. Berry International Terminal provides an additional four

gates for charter airlines and the L. C. Smith Terminal provides 38 gates for other non-

SkyTeam airlines. General Aviation services are provided on the east side of the

airport.

In February 2002, Northwest Airlines and Wayne County completed the $1.2 billion

McNamara Terminal Project which features overhead trams to transport passengers

between gate connections, 97 airline gates, and an 11,500-space parking deck. In

2002 John Dingell Drive was opened providing a second main entrance to the airport

with a six lane, four mile long road connecting I-275 traffic to the new McNamara

terminal via the Eureka Road exit.

McNamara Terminal

Moving walkways link gates for added passenger convenience. An expandable remote

boarding area, for regional and other domestic aircraft connects to the main terminal by

means of an underground tunnel equipped with a moving walkway. The new terminal

opened on February 24, 2002, and currently houses Northwest, KLM, Continental,

British Airways and Lufthansa. British Airways and Lufthansa will relocate to the new

North Terminal in 2008.

This Midfield Terminal Project, approximately 2 million square feet in size, is comprised

of a passenger terminal and three concourses. Concourse A has 64 jet aircraft gates

and a passenger tunnel connecting it to Concourse B, while Concourse B has eight jet

gates and Concourse C has 25 commuter aircraft gates. The terminal project also

included an energy plant, a three-level roadway system, and 180 acres of apron,

taxiways, and support facilities. A Westin Hotel attached to the Midfield Terminal

opened in December 2002 and provides over 400 guest rooms.

Towards the end of 2002, a $175 million plan to expand the B and C concourses at the

Midfield Terminal was placed on hold, due to unfavorable economic conditions and the

slowdown in air travel. The project to expand the concourse by 25 gates – nine jet and

sixteen regional – was reinstated in 2003 and is scheduled to be completed by mid-

2006. In 2002, NWA demolished Concourses D, E, F, and G along with half of

Concourse C at the Smith Terminal.

Westin Hotel

Smith Terminal

Berry Terminal

Wayne County plans to demolish the Berry Terminal and concourses A, B and C at the

Smith Terminal and replace them with a new North Terminal consisting of 27 gates for

non SkyTeam airlines; it is expected to open as early as 2008 at a cost of $428 million.

Future North Terminal

In 2003, Northwest Airlines completed construction on a $31 million hangar, the last

piece of DTW’s six-year, $1.6 billion expansion program. The 128,100 square-foot

hangar is located north of the Berry Terminal, and is designed to simultaneously

accommodate one 757-200 and two 747-400s.

AIRPORT ACTIVITY AND SERVICE TRENDS

_____________________________________________________________________

This section presents an overview of passenger and aircraft activity at MSP and DTW,

and compares air service at the two airports. It should be noted that the Northwest

Airlines (NWA) Pilots Strike, during August and September 1998, affected activity levels

during 1998. If the strike had not occurred, the activity levels for 1998 would likely have

exceeded 500,000 aircraft operations at MSP. NWA’s schedule returned to pre-strike

levels around October 1998.

Sun Country Airlines, which is based at MSP, initiated scheduled passenger service on

June 1, 1999. By the end of 2000, Sun Country had flown 1,437,496 total passengers,

or 4.3 percent of MSP’s passenger traffic, to or from the Airport. Due to severe financial

pressures, the airline ceased operations December 7, 2001. Sun Country resumed

charter operations to several destinations in mid-2002 with new investors and reinstated

scheduled service on February 27

, 2002 to Orlando and Pensacola. Sun Country

added more destinations in March of 2002, and as of December, 2004 serve 31

destinations.

The events of September 11, 2001 had significant financial and operational impacts on

MSP. Decreased numbers of air travelers reduced both year-end revenues and

passenger facility charges by $10 to $12 million in 2001. In 2002, these revenues

increased only marginally. Due to reduced demand and the loss of parking spaces near

the terminal, as mandated by the FAA’s 300-foot rule, revenue from parking declined by

65 percent in 2001 and early 2002. However, all general and short term parking areas

(1,626 spaces) at the Lindbergh Terminal that were off limits under the 300-foot rule

were re-opened in April 2002. In May, the 480-space valet garage at the Lindbergh

Terminal was also re-opened.

Funding for construction in 2002 was reduced by $295 million, from $371 million to $76

million. Again in 2003 the construction budget was reduced, down to $86.9 million.

Projects previously scheduled for 2003 at MSP that were deferred include: the new fire

and rescue station; expansion of the Lindbergh Terminal for concessions; a second

parking deck structure at the Humphrey Terminal; miscellaneous projects related to

Runway 17-35 land acquisition, noise mitigation and landside rehabilitations.

Passenger traffic numbers started to rebound slightly in 2003 and by 2004 had

surpassed 2001 levels by 11 percent. In addition, a major terminal expansion plan was

proposed to accommodate future passenger volumes. This ambitious plan, known as

2020 Vision and endorsed by the governor of Minnesota, lays the foundation for

consolidating all non SkyTeam airlines in an expanded Humphrey Terminal and all

SkyTeam airlines at the Lindbergh Terminal.

September 11

impacts on DTW included the addition of four new passenger screening

lanes in the new mid-field McNamara Terminal, raising the total number to sixteen.

Parking at the new mid-field terminal was also affected. Level 10 of the garage was

closed and full inspection at each entry point was instituted. The $175 million plan to

demolish and expand Concourse B and C at the new Midfield Terminal was deferred.

In 2003, the concourse project was reinstated and will be constructed in 2005/2006.

FAA expects airfield capacity and delay to be a major issue for the nations air

transportation system with the return of passenger levels experienced prior to 2001.

Domestic Originations/Destinations

Figure 3 compares historical domestic passenger originations/destinations (O&D) at

MSP and DTW. O&D passengers are those who begin or end their trip at the airport

(versus passengers who are connecting at the airport en route to another destination).

O&D passenger demand is primarily driven by local socioeconomic factors. Following is

a summary of recent O&D activity at MSP and DTW. DTW’s Domestic O&D data for

2004 are estimated based on passenger activity in the first three quarters of 2004.

• Between 1990 and 2004, domestic O&D passengers at MSP rose from 9.5 million to

16.5 million, an increase of 73.2 percent. This increase represents an annual

compounded growth rate of 4.0 percent.

• At DTW, between 1990 and 2004, domestic O&D passengers rose from 12.1 million

to 16.8 million, an increase of 38.8 percent. This increase represents an annual

compounded growth rate of 2.4 percent.

• The number of domestic O&D passengers increased 9.6 percent at MSP, from 14.8

million in 2003 to 16.3 million in 2004, and 10.1 percent at DTW, from 15.3 million in

2003 to 16.8 million in 2004.

Domestic Connections

• Between 1990 and 2004, the total estimated number of domestic connecting

passengers at MSP, as a percentage of total passengers, increased from 48.0

percent to 51.8 percent. Data for 2004 include both air carrier and regional carrier

passengers.

• During the same period, the percentage of domestic connecting passengers at DTW

increased from 43.0 percent to 48.0 percent. Like MSP, the 2004 data for DTW

includes both air carrier and regional carrier passengers.

• Connecting passengers at MSP and DTW in 2004 are both estimated from the first

three quarters of 2004.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

MSP

DTW

Figure 3

Annual Passenger Originations/Destinations* Totals

1990-2004

O&D Passengers (Millions)

*2004 O&D passengers estimated from first three quarters of 2004.

Sources: U.S. DOT; HNTB analysis.

Total Annual Passengers

Total annual passengers are shown in Figure 4. Total passengers include O&D and

connecting passengers.

• Between 1990 and 2004, total annual passengers grew by more than 16.0 million

passengers at MSP and approximately 13.4 million passengers at DTW, with MSP

reaching 35.2 million total passengers and DTW reaching 35.2 million total

passengers in 2004. This represents an annual compounded growth rate of 4.5

percent for MSP and 3.5 percent for DTW.

• A decline in total annual passenger numbers occurred in 2001 at MSP and DTW,

due to the events of September 11

. MSP numbers dropped 8.3 percent from levels

reported for the year 2000, while Detroit’s overall passenger count decreased 9.2

percent compared to 2000 levels.

• In 2004, both MSP and DTW experienced increases in total annual passengers.

MSP numbers increased from 32.3 million to 35.2 million passengers, an increase of

9.0 percent. Total passengers at DTW increased from 32.7 million to 35.2 million,

an increase of 7.6 percent.

Aircraft Operations

Annual aircraft operations are presented in Figure 5.

• In the early 1990s, MSP and DTW had similar levels of operations (approximately

390,000 annually); by the mid-1990s, operations at DTW had increased more rapidly

than at MSP.

• Total annual operations in 2000 at MSP and DTW were up 36 percent and 43

percent since 1990, respectively.

• Total annual operations at MSP and DTW declined during 2001 after the events of

September 11

. At the end of 2001, total operations at MSP were 501,522 (3.9

percent decline) and at DTW 522,132 (5.9 percent decline).

• At MSP, 2004 operations increased over 2003 by 5.8 percent to 541,093. At DTW,

in 2004 total annual operations increased over 2003 operations by 6.4 percent to

522,538 operations.

• Due to the effects of September 11

, Northwest scheduled air carrier operations

decreased at both MSP and DTW in 2001. At MSP, operations experienced a 3.6

percent decrease; while at DTW they decreased by 4.5 percent. During 2002, the

lingering effects of September 11

coupled with the economic downturn also

affected Northwest scheduled air carrier operations at both MSP and DTW. At MSP,

Northwest operations increased, by 1.5 percent, and at DTW, Northwest operations

decreased by 2.7 percent.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

MSP

DTW

Figure 4

Total Annual Revenue Passengers

1990-2004

Passengers (Millions)

Sources: Metropolitan Airports Commission, Wayne County, Airports Council International; HNTB analysis.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

1990

1993

199

1997

2000

2004

100

200

300

400

500

600

MSP

DTW

Figure 5

Annual Aircraft Operations

1990-2004

Aircraft Operations (Thousands)

Sources: Metropolitan Airports Commission, Wayne County, Airports Council International; HNTB analysis.

•

In 2004, Northwest domestic air carrier operations decreased by 0.1 percent at MSP

and increased by 4.2 percent at DTW.

Nonstop Markets

Figure 6 shows the number of nonstop domestic and international (including Canada)

markets served by MSP and DTW in 2004. The domestic markets include those

receiving an annual average of at least five weekly nonstop flights. The international

markets include those receiving an annual average of at least one weekly nonstop flight.

Some of these markets are served only seasonally.

• MSP offered 131 nonstop markets – 116 domestic and 15 international (nine of

these international markets were in Canada). This is an increase of 10.1 percent

from the number of markets MSP offered in 2003.

• DTW offered 130 nonstop markets – 108 domestic and 22 international (nine of

these international markets were in Canada). This is an increase of 12.1 percent

from the number of markets DTW offered in 2003.

Figure 7 shows how these flights are served, either by air carrier service (jet aircraft),

regional service (regional jet or turboprop aircraft), or a combination of air carrier and

regional carrier service. For the purposes of this report, a “regional jet aircraft” is

defined as a jet aircraft with 85 or fewer seats (i.e., Avro Regional Jet, Canadair

Regional Jet, and Embraer Regional Jet).

• 29.8 percent of MSP markets are served exclusively by air carrier jets. Regional

carrier service accounts for 26.7 percent of MSP markets, with 17.5 percent being

served by regional jets and 9.2 percent being served by turboprop aircraft. 43.5

percent of MSP markets are served by a combination of air carrier and regional

service.

• 33.9 percent of DTW markets are served exclusively by air carrier jets. Regional

carrier service accounts for 31.5 percent of DTW markets, with 24.6 percent being

served by regional jets and 6.9 percent being served by turboprop aircraft. 34.6

percent of DTW markets are served by a combination of air carrier and regional

service.

Figure 8 and Table 2 compare MSP to other major metropolitan areas in terms of the

number of nonstop markets served by each airport per population of the Metropolitan

Statistical Area. As shown, few metropolitan areas of any size have more cities served

by nonstop flights than MSP.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

MSP

2003

MSP

2004

DTW

2003

DTW

2004

105

116

108

100

110

120

Domestic

International

Figure 6

Number of Nonstop Markets

2003 and 2004

Sources: Official Airline Guide via BACK Aviation Solutions, 2004; HNTB analysis.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

M S P

131 Nonstop Markets

D T W

130 Nonstop Markets

Figure 7

2004

Nonstop Markets by Type of Service

Air Carrier

29.8%

Air Carrier

33.9%

Turboprop

9.2%

Turboprop

6.9%

Combo

43.5%

Combo

34.6%

Sources: Official Airline Guide via BACK Aviation Solutions, 2004; HNTB analysis.

Air Carrier Service = Jet Aircraft

Regional Carrier Service -

Regional Jet = Regional Jet Aircraft

Turboprop = Turboprop Aircraft

Combo = Combination of Air Carrier

& Regional Carrier Service

Regional

Jet

17.5%

Regional

Jet

24.6%

Note: Regional jets are defined as a jet aircraft having 85 or fewer seats.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

Figure 8

Population vs. Nonstop Service

2004

Nonstop Markets

ATL

NYC

WAS

PHL

BOS

DTW

DFW

HOU

MIA

SEA

CLE

SAN

STL

PHX

TPA

MSA Population (Millions)

810

CHI

LAX

SFO

MSP

Sources: Bureau of Economic Analysis 2002, Data Published for May 2004; Official Airline Guide via BACK Aviation Solutions, 2004; HNTB analysis.

DEN

Population

(2)

Markets/Pop. (Million)

Metropolitan Area

(1)

(Millions) Ratio

New York 21.7 184 8.5

Los Angeles 17.0 120 7.1

Chicago 9.5 165 17.4

Washington-Baltimore 7.8 108 13.8

San Francisco-Oakland 7.2 83 11.5

Philadelphia 5.9 102 17.3

Boston 5.8 83 14.3

Dallas-Fort Worth 5.7 147 25.8

Detroit 5.4 130 24.0

Houston 5.1 166 32.5

Atlanta 4.5 178 39.6

Miami-Fort Lauderdale 4.0 111 28.0

Seattle-Tacoma 3.7 76 20.5

Phoenix 3.5 93 26.6

Minneapolis-St. Paul 3.1 131 42.3

Cleveland 2.9 68 23.1

San Diego 2.9 34 11.8

St. Louis 2.7 73 27.4

Denver 2.6 119 45.4

Tampa-St. Petersburg 2.5 55 22.0

Notes:

Nonstop Markets by Metropolitan Area

2004 REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

Table 2

(2)

Bureau of Economic Analysis, MSA CA1-3-Population for 2002, Data published for May 2004.

(1)

Twenty largest metropolitan areas in the US with the greatest number of non-stop markets,

excluding San Juan, PR.

Nonstop

Markets

(3) (4)

Sources: Bureau Economic Analysis, 2004 Official Airline Guide via BACK Aviation solutions

(3)

Multiple Airports serving the same metro area are counted as on nonstop market

(i.e. Chicago Midway and Chicago O'Hare are considered one nonstop market).

(4)

Nonstop markets include all domestic nonstop markets to which the originating airport

the originating airport had at least one weekly nonstop flight between Jan 2004 and Dec 2004.

had an average of at least five weekly nonstop flights and all international markets to which

COMPARISON OF 1993 MAC FORECAST WITH ACTUAL ACTIVITY

_____________________________________________________________________

As required by the Metropolitan Planning Act of 1989, the Dual Track forecasts were

revised in 1993, using 1992 as a base year. To ensure that the revised forecasts were

optimal from both predictive and planning standpoints, forecast workshops were

convened in 1992 and 1993 by the MAC and the MC. The Expert Panel Session on

Forecast Methodologies, held on October 29, 1992, focused on the most appropriate

forecasting techniques given recent aviation trends and the character of aviation

demand at MSP. The Expert Panel Session on Aviation Assumptions was held on

November 18, 1992, and addressed ongoing trends in the aviation industry with regard

to fares, aircraft equipment, and airline service practices. The Socioeconomics Expert

Panel Session was convened on November 19, 1992, to assess the most likely trends

in area population, employment, and income that ultimately drive demand for aviation

services. The final Expert Panel Session was held on May 27, 1993, to review the work

accomplished to date and to develop a consensus on the final assumptions,

methodologies, and scenarios to be used in the updated forecasts.

The forecasts were developed with the understanding that the assumptions used were

likely to vary over the forecast period, and that the variation could be material. The

likely range of possibilities resulting from these variations was tested by constructing

alternative scenarios in conjunction with the expert panels. These scenarios were

developed separately and in combination. In this manner, a range of possible variations

from the base case forecasts was developed.

The scenarios took into account factors affecting economic growth, including fuel prices,

low-cost carriers, airfares, airline hubbing ratio, regional carrier penetration into air

carrier markets, and changes in the structure of air travel demand. The highest

scenario was defined by the following assumptions:

• Higher than projected economic growth.

• A continuation of the high level of connecting activity at MSP by Northwest.

• High international travel demand resulting from an increasingly globalized economy.

The most conservative scenario was defined by the following assumptions:

• Lower than projected economic growth.

• A reduction in connecting activity by Northwest airlines to the minimum level allowed

by the hub covenant contained in the Northwest loan agreement.

• A greater transfer of routes from air carriers to regional carriers.

A comparison of the enplanement, passenger origination, and aircraft operations

forecasts with actual 1993-2004 activity follows. It should be noted that there are often

substantial year-to-year fluctuations in activity levels around a long-term average. It is

important to distinguish between these short-term fluctuations and long-term trends

when evaluating a forecast.

Figures 9-11 show O&D, total passengers, and annual aircraft operations, respectively.

• Actual passenger originations were slightly below the high forecast level in 1993 and

1994, but increased to above the high forecast level through 2000 (Figure 9). The

growth in 1996 was due, in large part, to the passenger ticket tax lapse that

stimulated passenger demand by lowering effective ticket prices. Northwest

continued to reduce real fares during 1997. This, combined with a strong economy,

caused originations to grow. Passenger originations and destinations in 1998 were

reduced because of the loss of service resulting from the Northwest strike in August

and September. O&D totals were also down in 1999 due to the strike, but

rebounded midway through the year to pre-strike levels. At the end of 2001, O&D

numbers decreased 8.4 percent from a high of 16.6 million after passengers

abstained from air travel in response to the events of September 11

. In 2002, due

to the lingering effects of September 11, 2001 and the economic downturn, O&D

passenger numbers continued their decline. By the end of the year, they were down

5.3 percent from 2001, to 14.4 million. The FAA expects domestic flights to return to

pre-September 11, 2001 levels by 2005. 2004 O&D passengers increased 11.4

percent over the year 2003 level to 16.5 million. The 2004 O&D level is 4.6 percent

below the high forecast.

• As shown in Figure 10, MSP total passenger activity closely paralleled the base case

forecast in 1993, but enplanement growth accelerated between 1994 and 1995 and

approached the high forecast in 1996. In 1999 and 2000, total passengers

exceeded the high forecast. Much of the passenger growth at MSP during the last

six years was the result of one-time factors. These include Northwest’s airline hub

consolidation that involved reducing operations at other airports to concentrate

connections at the two major hubs (MSP and DTW in 1992 and 1993), the

liberalization of Canadian markets which opened up MSP as a hub for cross-border

traffic beginning in 1995, and the lapse of the passenger ticket tax during most of

1996, which reduced effective fares to travelers and thereby increased demand.

Also, airlines have developed much more sophisticated reservation systems in

recent years, allowing them to generate more revenue by filling otherwise empty

seats with passengers flying on discount fares. The passenger growth rate in 1998

decreased from that of previous years because of the loss of service resulting from

the Northwest strike in August and September. Discount fares helped Northwest

regain lost passengers volumes in 1999. A decline in the number of total revenue

passengers occurred after September 11,

2001, with MSP experiencing an 8.3

percent decrease from 2000 levels. In 2002, MSP experienced another decline in

total revenue passengers, due to the aftereffects of September 11

coupled with the

sluggish economy. Passenger levels decreased 2.2 percent from 2001. In 2004

passenger levels increased 10.8 percent over 2003. The 2004 passenger level is

2.8 percent below the high forecast.

• Figure 11 compares total aircraft operations (as counted by the MSP Air Traffic

Control Tower) with the base case, high, and low forecasts. There was an initial

burst of aircraft operations in 1993 and 1994 as a result of significant build-up of

regional carrier flights by Northwest Airlink. Since that time, the factors that have

stimulated passenger traffic, such as the strong economy, Northwest’s hub

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

Actual

High

Low

Figure 9

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport

Forecast vs. Actual 2004 Passenger Originations/Destinations

O&D Passengers (Millions)

Sources: MSP Base and Combination 2 Forecasts; U.S. DOT; HNTB analysis.

Note: O&D Passenger estimates are based on the first three quarters of 2004.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

Actual

High

Low

Figure 10

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport

Forecast vs. Actual 2004 Total Revenue Passengers

Total Passengers (Millions)

Sources: MSP Base and Combination 2 Forecasts; Metropolitan Airports Commission; Airports Council International; HNTB analysis.

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

Actual

High

Low

Figure 11

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport

Forecast vs. Actual 2004 Total Aircraft Operations

Aircraft Operations (Thousands)

Sources: MSP Base and Combination 2 Forecasts; Metropolitan Airports Commission, FAA; HNTB analysis.

consolidation, the liberalization of Canadian markets, and the lapse of the passenger

ticket tax, have served to maintain a high number of aircraft operations. Numbers of

total aircraft operations decreased in 1998 due to the Northwest strike in August and

September. As stated previously, the Northwest schedule rebounded to pre-strike

levels in October 1998. After September 11, 2001, air carriers reduced aircraft

operations at MSP nearly 20 percent in response to low passenger demand. As a

result, MSP aircraft operations in 2001 decreased by 3.9 percent from 2000 levels.

The economic downturn and lingering effects of September 11

have also affected

the growth rate of total aircraft operations at MSP in 2002. Operations in 2002

actually increased by 1.2 percent over the total number of aircraft operations in

2001. In 2004 operations increased by 5.8 percent over 2003. The 2004 operations

level is 5.3 percent below the high forecast.

AIRPORT CAPACITY AND DELAY

_____________________________________________________________________

This section describes the airfield capacity of MSP and DTW. Aircraft delay analysis is

also summarized.

Airfield Capacity

Airfield capacity is typically described in terms of annual capacity and hourly capacity

under good weather and poor weather conditions. Table 3 compares existing and

future capacity for MSP and DTW.

Table 3

2004 REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

Comparison of Capacity and Delay

MSP

DTW

Airfield Capacity Existing 2013 Existing 2013

Airfield Capacity

Hourly

(1)

Good Weather 114-120 167 184-189 189

Poor Weather 112-114 137 136-145 145

Annual 480,000

(2)

640,000

(2)

700,000

(3)

700,000

(3)

Notes:

(1)

FAA Benchmark Report, 2004. A refined methodology in the 2004 Benchmark Report

created several differences in airport capacities compared to the 2001 report. Because of

these refinements and different input data, these updated benchmarks should not be

compared to the 2001 benchmarks.

(2)

1993 MSP Capacity Enhancement Plan (FAA).

(3)

Annual capacity level derived from the addition of the new fourth runway in December 2001,

Runway 4L-22R. Estimated based on FAA AC150/5060-5 and professional judgment.

MSP

• As shown in Table 3, existing hourly capacity at MSP is about 114-120 operations in

good weather and 112-114 operations in poor weather. With the addition of the

north-south runway, hourly capacity is expected to increase by 33 to 40 percent to

160 operations in good weather and by 10 to 12 percent to 125 operations in poor

weather. Specific conditions that define poor weather include the airport’s most

commonly used instrument configuration, where operations are conducted below

visual approach minima (i.e. instrument approaches).

• By 2013 Minneapolis-St. Paul’s hourly capacity will increase by a total of 39 to 46

percent to 167 operations in good weather and by a total of 20 to 22 percent to 137

operations in adverse weather. Improvements in technology and procedures paired

with the addition of the new runway will support higher capacity levels.

• According to the FAA’s 1993 Capacity Enhancement Plan for MSP, annual capacity

at MSP is currently about 480,000 operations assuming a 4-minute average delay

per aircraft and use of the Precision Runway Monitor (PRM). With the north-south

runway in place, annual capacity would increase to 580,000 operations assuming

the same 4-minute average delay level. At slightly higher levels of delay, capacity

could reach 640,000 operations, as indicated in the Dual Track Airport Planning

Process, Report to the Legislature.

• Over the next decade (2003-2013), demand at MSP is projected to grow by 30.1

percent according to the FAA Terminal Area Forecast. However, further increases

in delay are not expected with the opening of Runway 17-35 in late 2005.

DTW

• The addition of Runway 4L-22R in 2001 has raised the existing hourly capacity at

DTW to 184-189 operations in good weather and 136-145 operations in poor

weather.

• Annual capacity at DTW is now about 700,000 operations. The new runway

significantly increased annual capacity.

• Detroit’s capacity over the next decade (2003-2013) will keep pace with the airport’s

demand, which is expected to grow by 36 percent. Arrival and departure demand

levels remain similar such that the current capacity adequately meets the demand.

• Flight delays of more than 15 minutes constitute less than 2 percent of Detroit’s total

operations.

Airfield Delay

Delay can be measured in several ways. The FAA (OPSNET database) counts flights

that were delayed by 15 minutes or more. In CY 2004, the FAA identified 6,464 flights

at MSP which were delayed at least 15 minutes, a decrease of 11.9 percent from 2003

(7,333 delayed flights). At DTW, 6,548 delayed flights were identified, an increase of

35.2 percent from 2003, in which 4,842 flights were delayed. These delays can be

caused by numerous factors, including mechanical problems, lack of crew, and weather

below minimums, and are not limited to capacity constraints.

Figure 12 shows the on-time gate arrival performance for domestic air carrier flights at

MSP and DTW, based on the delay data extracted from the Federal Aviation

Administration’s Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) database. The data

series includes only those flights which were delayed at least 15 minutes from their

scheduled times. Within this data set, aircraft must be airborne in order for them to be

considered “delayed,” therefore, cancelled and/or diverted flights are not considered

2004 Annual Report to the Legislature

Metropolitan Airports Commission

Figure 12

On-Time Gate Arrivals

1999-2004

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

100.0

Jan

Jul

Jan

Jul

Jan

Jul

Jan

Jul

Jan

Jul

Jan

MSP

DTW

Percent of On-Time Gate Arrivals

Sources: Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) database, FAA-APO, HNTB analysis.

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

“late” in this system. Scheduled times typically include some “cushion” for delay. As

with FAA-reported statistics, delays can be caused by numerous factors and are not

limited to capacity constraints.

MSP’s average monthly on-time gate arrival percentage fluctuated greatly between

1998 and 2004. It decreased from 83 percent in December 1998 to a period low of

nearly 73 percent in January 1999. A noticeable decline in performance occurred again

in November 2000 when on-time percentages dropped from 80 percent to 70 percent.

In November 1999, the performance experienced a high of 91 percent. In 2004 monthly

on-time gate arrival percentages fluctuated from a low of 73 percent to a high of 88

percent, averaging 81 percent for the year. During the same period from 1998 to 2004,

Detroit’s monthly on-time gate arrival percentage followed much the same pattern as

MSP, with a few exceptions. In terms of the average yearly on-time percentage, DTW

increased from 79 percent in 1998 to 86 percent in 2001. In 2004, monthly on-time gate

arrival percentages for DTW fluctuated from a low of 73 percent to a high of 88 percent,

for a yearly average of 83 percent.

For previous editions of this report, delay was estimated by using the Consolidated

Operations and Delay Analysis System (CODAS) and the DOT Airline Service Quality

Performance (ASQP) database to compare optimal versus actual taxi and flight times,

and calculate the average airport delay for MSP and DTW. Airport-attributable delay

can be estimated by comparing actual air and taxi times of flights with unconstrained

times. The Federal Aviation Administration’s Aviation System Performance Metrics

(ASPM) database was used for this report. The ASPM uses ASQP database

information and compares optimal versus actual taxi and flight times. The FAA has

replaced CODAS with this new program providing delay information to industry

professionals and government agencies. Creation of the ASPM database provides a

more comprehensive analysis of airport delay and capacity. The FAA also uses the

results to create performance benchmarks for airports, based on facility enhancements

that occur each year.

Each of the current delay reporting systems used by the various agencies and groups

was designed for a specific and different purpose, based on an independent data

source or methodology and reports delay differently. As a result, the measures of delay

are difficult to compare with each other. No existing delay measurement system

provides a comprehensive measure of the performance of the air traffic control (ATC)

system. The ASPM has been designed to remedy this deficiency.

The Aviation System Performance Metrics program was created by the FAA’s Office of

Aviation Policy and Plans (APO) to provide estimates of aircraft delay by airport. APO’s

main objective was to develop a clear and well-supported methodology to calculate

aircraft delays that will be accepted by both government and industry as valid, accurate

and reliable. Because the acceptance of the ASPM delay estimates is the key to its

usefulness, APO coordinated the development of ASPM with other FAA organizations

and major air carriers and continues to do so.

The ASPM information shows that, for 2004, average delay was calculated to be

approximately 6.72 minutes per operation at MSP, and 5.97 minutes per operation at

DTW. By comparison, MSP averaged 6.81 minutes of delay and DTW averaged 5.40

minutes of delay in 2003. ASPM also provides airport rankings by average delay. As

shown in Table 4, MSP ranked tenth in the nation in 2004, in terms of highest average

delay versus DTW’s 2004 ranking of twelfth.

Table 4

2004 REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

Top Fifteen Large Hub Airports with

Highest Average Total Delay per Operation

(1)

Rank Airport

2004 Total

Operations

2004 Total

Minutes Per

Operation

2003 Total

Minutes Per

Operation

2003 Rank

Change

from 2003 to

2004

1 EWR 437,994 10.43

9.27 1 1.16

2 PHL 478,122 9.95 8.85 2 1.10

3 LGA 402,518 8.98 8.73 3 0.26

4 IAH 514,424 8.38 6.16 8 2.22

5 ATL 968,663 8.27 7.39 4 0.88

6 ORD 993,847 7.97 7.20 5 0.77

7 JFK 321,915 7.76 6.19 7 1.58

8 DFW 804,004 6.84 5.9. 9 0.91

9 IAD 502,500 6.81 5.16 19 1.65

10 MSP 541,093 6.72

6.81 6 -0.09

11 BOS 399,973 6.09

5.34 16 0.75

12 DTW 522,538 5.97

5.40 15 0.57

13 CLE 261,568 5.78

5.19 17 0.59

14 HPN 126,882 5.72 5.42 12 0.30

15 MDW 323,658 5.69 5.45 11 0.25

Notes:

(1)

Taxi-in, Taxi-out and Airborne delay included

Source: Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) – Office of Aviation Policy and Plans, FAA 2004

TECHNOLOGICAL / CAPACITY ENHANCEMENTS

_____________________________________________________________________

The FAA continuously investigates potential capacity-enhancing development/

technology in an effort to increase airport efficiency and reduce delay. When an

advancement is identified, efforts are made to implement the technology at the busiest

airports. This section describes these efforts as they apply to MSP and DTW.

MSP

• In 1993, the FAA published the Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport Capacity

Enhancement Plan. The purpose of the plan was to identify potential cost-effective

projects which would appreciably increase airport capacity. The plan was followed

by the 1996 Airport Capacity Enhancement Terminal Airspace Study, which

identified potential methods of improving airspace capacity.

• Airport Surface Detection Equipment (ASDE-3) was installed at MSP in 1996. It

allows controllers to “see” aircraft movements on the ground during poor visibility,

which increases safety and efficiency.

• Capacity improvements at Minneapolis-St. Paul will be aided by the use of Flight

Management System/Area Navigation Routes (FMS/RNAV). The equipment will

provide a more consistent flow of aircraft to the departure runway.

• A Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) was installed in 1997 and has been

commissioned. The PRM permits simultaneous landings on the parallel runways in

poor weather down to CAT I minimums. Due to airline and air traffic control

coordination issues, the PRM was removed from service in mid-2002. It was

returned to service in 2003 and helped reduced delays, as indicated in Table 4.

• MAC installed a differential Global Positioning System (GPS) unit at MSP. It has

been certified as a Special CAT I installation. The GPS approach allows flight

management approaches that reduce fuel consumption and controller workload.

Ultimately, curved approaches and precision missed approach may be provided to

reduce noise impacts and to lower landing minimums. This will result in a small

increase in airport capacity.

• In an effort to increase the operational efficiency and capacity of MSP during

inclement weather, MAC has implemented additional CAT II and CAT III capabilities

at the airport.

• Future increases in MSP capacity levels will depend on the introduction of new

aircraft avionics. An enhanced tool called Automatic Dependent Surveillance-

Broadcast/Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (ADS-B/CDTI), with a Local Area

Augmentation System (LAAS) identifies the location of other aircraft and displays

their position in the cockpit. This technology allows pilots to maintain the desired

separation more precisely; however, it requires aircraft to be properly equipped to

use this device.

• Alternative airspace improvements were studied in the Airport Capacity

Enhancement Terminal Airspace Study. The report found that the existing airspace

around MSP can be reconfigured to accommodate the proposed north-south

runway. In addition, airspace efficiency can be improved either by adding a new jet

arrival fix or a new parallel jet arrival stream.

• Within the next decade air traffic controllers will begin using the Passive Final

Approach Spacing Tool (pFAST). It assists controllers with sequencing aircraft and

creates a better flow of traffic into the terminal area.

• The new north-south runway is under construction and, when opened on October

27, 2005, will provide additional airfield capacity.

• 2020 Vision, introduced in September 2004, outlines the growth of MSP over the

next fifteen years. The plan proposes that Non-SkyTeam member airlines will be

moved to an expanded Humphrey Terminal while SkyTeam Airlines will be

consolidated in the Lindbergh Terminal. By 2020, if the demand is warranted, the

Humphrey Terminal could be expanded to 18 to 22 gates. A new concourse,

Concourse H, will be added to the southeast end of Concourse G at the Lindbergh

Terminal and, at final build-out, will have a total of 25 gates. Additionally, several

other gate areas throughout the terminal will be converted to regional jet gates.

DTW

•

The new 97-gate mid-field complex for Northwest and international flights was

completed in February 2002. It is being expanded by 25 additional gates – nine jet

gates and sixteen regional gates – with jet gates expected to be completed by

February 2005 and the entire project completed by mid-2006. The terminal is

designed with ten gates designated for jumbo aircraft. These gates will have two jet

bridges apiece in order to take advantage of the multiple doors of larger aircraft.

Currently, the Smith Terminal has 32 gates for airline use.

•

A fourth parallel runway commissioned as Runway 4L-22R opened on December 11,

2001. It was the only runway in America to open in 2001. The addition of this

runway makes simultaneous arrivals and departures possible.

• Use of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and Cockpit Display

of Traffic Information (CDTI) with Local Area Augmentation Systems (LAAS) will help

increase Detroit’s future capacity levels. These instruments allow pilots to maintain

a more precise taxiing separation as cockpit displays indicate the location of other

aircraft. Integration of the new technology will require aircraft to be properly

equipped to use these devices. Capacity improvements will be brought about with

the implementation of Flight Management Systems (FMS) and Area Navigation

(RNAV) routes. This new technology will provide a more consistent flow of aircraft to

the runway.

Comparison of Precision Instrument Approaches

In addition to how an airport’s runways are separated and configured, airfield capacity

can be greatly affected by how the runways are equipped for inclement weather. A

comparison of the number and type of precision instrument approaches at MSP and

DTW is summarized in Table 5.

A feasibility study was conducted to determine which runways at MSP would be likely

candidates for CAT II/III landings and low-visibility departures based on existing ground

equipment, dimensional criteria, aircraft equipment, and operational procedures. The

analysis determined that the most feasible runways at MSP for this capability are Runway

12R, Runway 12L, and Runway 35. The schedule for implementing these upgrades is as

follows:

Runway Approach Year

12L CAT IIIb Completed (2003)

12R CAT IIIb Completed (2003)

35 CAT IIIb 2005

Table 5

2003 REPORT TO LEGISLATURE

Comparison of Precision Instrument Approaches

MSP CAT I CAT II CAT III

Runways:

30R

12L

12R

30L 12R

12L

35 - 2005

DTW CAT I CAT II CAT III

Runways:

21L

22L

22R

27L

27R

Notes: The term decision height is defined as the height at which a decision must be made during a precision

approach to either continue the landing maneuver or execute a missed approach.

Precision approaches are categorized based on decision height and the horizontal visibility that a pilot has along the

runway. Visibility values are expressed in statute miles, or in terms of runway visual range (RVR), if RVR measuring

equipment is installed at an airport.

The different classes of precision instrument approaches are:

i. Category I (CAT I) – provides approaches to a decision height down to 200 feet and a basic visibility of ¾

statute miles or as low as 1,800 feet RVR.

ii. Category II (CAT II) – provides approaches to a decision height down to 100 feet and an RVR down to 1,200

feet.

iii. Category IIIA (CAT IIIA) – provides approaches without a decision height (down to the ground) and an RVR

down to 700 feet.

iv. Category IIIB (CAT IIIB) – provides approaches without a decision height and an RVR down to 150 feet.

v. Category IIIC (CAT IIIC) – provides approaches without a decision height and RVR. This will permit landings

in "0/0 conditions," that is, weather conditions with no ceiling and visibility as during periods of heavy fog.

Source: December 2004 U.S. Terminal Procedures, NOAA.