Commentary: Unclogging the airways

Positive infrastructure change for the good of the airline industry seems to be an uphill battle, but air traffic control company NATS argued if the United Kingdom’s air infrastructure is not upgraded soon, airline delays will skyrocket.    The push is on for modernization of the United Kingdom’s friendly skies.
   In early December, the U.K.-based air traffic control company NATS released a report in which it argued that unless the country’s air infrastructure is upgraded soon, airline delays will skyrocket over the next 15 years. According to the report, annual airline delays will rise from their current cumulative total of 1,500 hours to an annual total of more than 66,500 hours by 2031. While that number seems extremely high, keep in mind that the number of annual U.K. flights is expected to grow by 1.1 million over that same time period.
   “A thriving aviation industry that connects us to the rest of the world has never been more important, but this problem is an existential threat to both the industry’s health and the wider health of [the U.K. economy],” said NATS CEO Martin Rolfe.
   To bring home the benefits of a modern skyway and lobby the government on its behalf, NATS has banded together with the International Air Transport Association, the Airport Operators Association, BAR U.K., and Airlines U.K. to form a group called The Sky’s The Limit.
   In addition to basic on-time performance, proponents argue that an upgraded airspace would help the industry achieve greater sustainability gains, and the group has been collecting support from major European airline players. In a NATS press release, Virgin Atlantic CEO Craig Kreeger said a modern air infrastructure would allow the company to fully take advantage of new plane technology.
   “We’re calling on the government to recognize the overwhelming positive case for change in terms of the wider economic value and the benefits for noise and emissions,” he said.
   A proposed third runway at London Heathrow Airport has been seen as one way to ease the U.K.’s airline infrastructure woes. The U.K. Department of Transport in October signaled its support of the development, but since then environmental groups have expressed concerns about the project. While an official National Policy Statement about the runway’s development won’t come from the government until sometime next year, the U.K. Committee on Climate Change is already making sure officials know the addition of a third runway will significantly increase airline emissions in the U.K.
   While the addition of more planes will, of course, increase emissions, the committee argues that with improving technology and changes to aircraft management, “aviation emissions should be at the same level in 2050 as they were in 2005 without the use of international credits.” The group added that airline emissions in the U.K. have gone down in the past decade despite an 11 percent increase in traffic. It is concerned that the government is not taking into account this zero-emissions goal when considering the third runway at Heathrow and could actually be moving the emissions target, deciding that it is acceptable to aim for a 2050 emissions goal that is significantly higher than the 2005 level.
   In 2015, the U.K. Airports Commission made the recommendation to expand Heathrow, and it’s been a topic of great debate ever since. The airport in November awarded design contracts for the expansion to seven companies it said “will help deliver one of the most leading-edge airport operations in the world.” Calling the news a “significant milestone in what will be a fast paced design and engineering schedule,” Heathrow’s head of design, Barry Weekes, said the third runway project will give Heathrow much-needed added capacity and help it to maintain its position as an industry leader.
   All of this comes back to the broader quest for a better U.K. air infrastructure, a task that roughly mirrors the Federal Aviation Administration’s NextGen air traffic control project. A recently released government report found that the FAA has invested around $3 billion on NextGen and other “transformational programs” since 2007. Despite that money, the report found the programs have had a hard time – implementation deadlines will extend beyond 2020 and costs are projected to exceed $5.5 billion.
   “FAA originally identified the transformational programs as efforts that would fundamentally change the way the agency would manage air traffic,” according to the report. “However, our review has found that, at least until 2020, most of the transformational programs will not transform how air traffic is managed in the National Airspace System.”
   The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee jumped on the report, using it as a means to attack the NextGen program.
   “The Inspector General’s latest report on FAA’s costly, ineffective NextGen implementation efforts again underscores the need for comprehensive reform of how our nation’s air traffic control system is managed,” said Rep. Bill Shuster, chairman of the committee.
   Seeing that the results of the election, coupled with this latest report, might help speed along air traffic control privatization efforts, Rep. Peter DeFazio cautioned against a hasty approach. “We must not rush to pass a proposal that hasn’t been properly vetted just because the political landscape has changed,” he said in a statement.
   So it seems whether in the U.K. or the U.S., positive infrastructure change for the good of the airline industry is an uphill battle. For IATA’s Rafael Schvartzman, the modernization decision in the U.K. also boils down to politics, and these differences are getting in the way of real change.
   “Air routes in the U.K. are hampered by lack of political will to help NATS deliver change to ensure greater capacity, fewer delays, and reduced emissions and noise,” he said. “The Sky’s the Limit campaign is calling for the U.K. government to set a policy for modernization and reform – an objective fully shared by the airline community.”

   Ross, a former American Shipper editor, writes about air transport and freight issues. He can be reached by email at jonhross@gmail.com.