Airport Capacity and Demand Calculations by Simulation - The Case of Berlin-Brandenburg International

Branko Bubalo1 und Joachim R. Daduna2

1 2 3

Berlin School of Economics and Law / German Airport Performance, Badensche Str. 50 - 51, D - 10825 Berlin /
branko.bubalo@googlemail.com

Berlin School of Economics and Law / Badensche Str. 50 - 51, D - 10825 Berlin
daduna@hwr-berlin.de

Problem description

Airports play a key role in the design of national and international Air Transportation Systems (ATS). On one hand they are core elements of infrastructure representing the nodes of air transport networks, on the other hand they serve as interfaces to the ground transport modes in pre- and on-carriage traffic. With these characteristics airports act as the crucial point in the operational processes of commercial ATS, so capacity bottlenecks are a limitation of the overall productivity of the entire system. At the landside airport capacity is restricted by road and rail accessibility, airport facility capacity and ground handling performance. But of considerable importance is the airside capacity, which is determined by the layout and configuration of the runway(s), high-speed runway exits, taxiways, apron area and air traffic control (ATC). Generally the enhancement of airside capacity, especially the realization of an additional runway, requires lengthy planning and approval processes as well as a time-consuming construction work, furthermore large investments are needed, which make detailed forecasts of future demand necessary. The focus of our study is to analyze the impact of different scenarios and increasing levels of demand on the airside throughput and capacity utilization. Based on real requirements, e.g. resulting from the proposed runway layout, technical and safety restrictions, a simulation approach is applied to this study. Only with simulation it is possible to analyse such complex problem structure, where questions, like whether the planned maximum capacity is adequate for serving the future demand or what the consequences for the airport users will be if capacity is not sufficient, can be answered. This type of what if (sensitivity) analysis will be shown in the case of the Berlin-Brandenburg International (BBI) airport, which is still under construction. The planned airside configuration of BBI airport will be critically examined with regard to the development of demand.

Methodology

With the BBI airport there is an ongoing debate regarding the capacity, since BBI as one single parallel runway airport will have to serve the traffic volume of the two operating airports in Berlin having three runways in operation. Contradictory views lead to the question, which capacity can ultimately be attained (considering certain quality levels) with the given airport layout of BBI. To be in a better position to answer such question, certain scenarios are created, which are transformed from the baseline flight schedule. Based on these scenarios the required calculations are made with the Visual SIMMOD software package (see e.g. [1]) in connection with tools from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (see e.g. [4]).. The airside airport layout structure will be simulated as an independently operating far parallel runway system (with a minimal separation of 4.300 feet), where arrival and departures are served separately on the two runways. For this configuration the official planning documents reveal a capacity of 83 flights in the peak hour, which is used as a benchmark for our calculations. 2.1 Applied scenarios

Basic data of the simulation processes are the 635 operated flights on a typical peak day (Thursday, June 26th 2008) at the current Berlin airports, Berlin-Tegel (TXL) and (Berlin-)Schnefeld (SXF). Compensating the drop in demand in 2009, the traffic volume in 2010 has attained the 2008 level again, so the input data (see Tab. 2.1) remains plausible for the further computations. These flights are divided into three (aircraft-related) weight classes, Heavy (H) (> 136 tons Maximum Take off Weight (MTOW)), Medium (M) (7 to 136 tons MTOW) and Light (L) (< 7 tons MTOW) (see e.g. [5]: 90), where the shares of these classes describe the mix of aircraft types at a specific airport over certain periods of time (in our case-study one day).

Tab. 2.1: Daily flights divided into weight classes The sequencing of aircrafts in the airspace needs to be seen as an additional influence on the airside capacity and performance of an airport system. Here the weight classes represent wake turbulence categories, which define minimal distance requirements between two aircrafts in seconds (for departures) and in nautical miles (NM) (for arrivals) and also combinations for mixed runway operations (see [5]: 113) (see Tab. 2.2).

Tab. 2.2: Wake turbulence separation minima Since the minimum values of these combinations among the categories or classes are not symmetric, the sequencing results in different lengths of lines of aircrafts, e.g. during landing, which also has an influence on the throughput of an airport. This can be observed based on an example of combinations of H and L class aircrafts. For the sequence of arrivals H L H L H L the calculated length of the line is 24 NM, whereas for the sequence H H H L L L the result is reduced to 20 NM. This intuitive example shows the effect of aircraft mix,sequencing and bundling of succeeding H category flights on the runway performance (see e.g. [6]). Therefore different mixes of aircraft types are examined which will result from future demand of various airport user groups. Initially a basic scenario is created (Scenario 0), which then is modified into five additional scenarios (Scenarios I to IV and VI) (see Tab. 2.3). The mix index is a mathematical expression describing the mix of category shares at an airport giving a three-fold weight to H category aircrafts, whose (commercial) significance will increase in the future (see e.g. [2]: 391pp; [5]: 515pp)..

Tab. 2.3: Scenario data For each scenario we apply growth rates resulting in different levels of demand, starting from a decline in demand of 20%, a basic scenario with 0% growth and a stepwise increase of 20% (up to 200%). The objective is to determine a maximal throughput capacity of the planned airport (airside) layout, to estimate the time when demand outruns the existing capacity for the different scenarios. 2.2 Computational results

In the context of this contribution the attained results can only be outlined in the form of a short summary. Therefore two results are presented as examples, which may be regarded as representative for the computational tests. Based on scenario 0, the simulation runs provide the number of flights per day and occurring waiting times, which is the basis for the throughput capacity calculations. Here it shown

that the daily growth rate of traffic volume which exceeds a 60% increase from the basic level will result in considerable capacity bottlenecks and delays. Estimating the performance indicator for value of time average delay per flight at a value of 42 per minute (see e.g. [3]: 9ff), extremely increasing delay costs arise. Ultimately, bottlenecks and delays lead to cancellations, which can be costly for airlines and could affect their profitability. Depending on the aircraft size the costs may be between 3,400 and 75,000 (see e.g. [3]: 19). The direct relationship between increasing levels of demand and resulting delays and costs resulting from congestion is presented in table 2.4.

Tab. 2.4: Computational results from scenario 0 A comparison of the results of all scenarios demonstrates a significant exponential correlation between the daily demand of flights and the computed delays.(see e.g. [2]: 449; [5]: 488). For all scenarios the clearly recognizable sharp increase of the exponential function starts beyond 1,000 daily operations (see Fig. 2.1). During the simulation runs delays mainly occur at entry of arrivals in the airspace holding stack, or at the runway departure queue or directly at the gate for departures. The close correlation of the functions also proofs that the aircraft mixes used in the scenarios does not have a significant effect on congestion under current conditions and rules. 3 Analysis and evaluation

The results for scenario 0 (starting from the base year 2010) have shown that a cumulative growth of demand above 60% increase from the baseline results in mid- and long-term capacity problems (see Fig. 3.1). The time when these bottlenecks occur depends on the assumed annual growth rates. In our case study we expect the practical capacity to be reached as early as 2018, but 2026 the latest, assuming average annual growth rates between 6% (which already have been reached at the Berlin airports between 2003 and 2008) and 3% respectively.

Fig. 2.1: Comparison of delay extends and number of flights

Fig. 3.1: Influences of different (annual) growth rates With regard to the future development and the market position of the BBI airport this study outcome could result in serious problems. The possible risk for the occurrence of capacity bottlenecks six years after the opening of the airport (scheduled for mid 2012), raises questions. An essential aspect is found to be the underestimation of future demand for the Berlin-Brandenburg Region stated in the

official forecasts. The impact on traffic increase at BBI airport will be even more critical, if the airport will be used as a hub for flights to and from Scandinavia and eastern European countries and / or if airlines choose BBI as their main German base (see [7]: 343pp). 4 Conclusions and outlook

Risking capacity bottlenecks and congestion (especially in the demand peaks) one must ask which sequence of action is required. Airport expansion projects not only have a technical and operational dimension, even more important are the political and economical aspects related to maintaining a competitive (transportation) quality, locally and regionally. The occurrence of bottlenecks will be observable in the not too distant future, therefore this predictable lack of capacity must be included in national traffic planning and has be put on the political agenda with high priority within a clear mid-term horizon, otherwise opportunity costs will arise during periods, where runway capacity is unable to satisfy all demand. When looking at the lengthy procedures which are occurring in planning and realizing large transportation infrastructure projects (not only in Germany), the discussion for a demand-oriented and timely expansion of BBI beyond the current runway layout should already have been started. This is necessary to guarantee reliable and efficient processes in airside and terminal operations for the airport users and also to provide an attractive service now and in the future. References
[1] AirportTools (2003): Visual SIMMOD - Version 1.9.1. Los Altos, CA / http://www. airporttools. com/apecs/sdk/vs/index.html [2] de Neufville, R. / Odoni, A.R. (2003): Airport systems - Planning, design, and management. (McGraw-Hill) London et al. [3] EUROCONTROL (2009): Standard Inputs for Cost Benefit Analyses. Brussels [4] Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (1995): Advisory Circular AC 150/50605, Airport Capacity and Delay. Washington D.C [5] Horonjeff R. / McKelvey, F.X. / Sproule, W.J. / Young, S.B. (2010): Planning and Design of Airports. 5th ed. (McGraw-Hill) New-York et al. [6] Klempert, B. / Wikenhauser, F. (2009): Versptungsprognosen auf Basis der Kapazittsauslastung. in: Internationales Verkehrswesen 61(5), 162 - 168 [7] Ministerium fr Stadtentwicklung, Wohnen und Verkehr (MSWV) des Landes Brandenburg (2004): Planfeststellungsbeschluss Ausbau Verkehrsflughafen BerlinSchnefeld. / URL: http://www.mil.brandenburg.de/sixcms/detail.php/bb1.c.155609.de (27 jul 2010)