Commercial Aviation: Potential Safety and Capacity Issues Associated with the Introduction of the New A380 Aircraft
Published: 2007-04-20T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Airbus S.A.S. (Airbus), a European aircraft manufacturer, is introducing a new aircraft designated as the A380, which is expected to enter service in late 2007. The A380 will be the largest passenger aircraft in the world, with a wingspan of about 262 feet, a tail fin reaching 80 feet high, and a maximum takeoff weight of 1.2 million pounds. The A380 has a double deck and could seat up to 853 passengers. GAO was asked to examine the impact of the A380 on U.S. airports. In May 2006, GAO issued a report that estimated the costs of infrastructure changes at U.S. airports to accommodate the A380. This report discusses (1) the safety issues associated with introducing the A380 at U.S. airports, (2) the potential impact of A380 operations on the capacity of U.S. airports, and (3) how selected foreign airports are preparing to accommodate the A380. To address these issues, GAO reviewed studies on operational and safety issues related to the A380 and conducted site visits to the 18 U.S. airports and 11 Asian, Canadian, and European airports preparing to receive the A380. GAO provided the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Airbus a copy of the draft report for review. Both generally agreed with the report's findings. FAA and Airbus also provided technical clarifications, which were incorporated as appropriate.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The A380 will be the first of a new category of large passenger aircraft introduced into the national airspace system in the coming years. The size of the A380 poses some potential safety challenges for U.S. airports. As a result, airports expecting A380 service may need to modify their infrastructure or impose operating restrictions, such as restrictions on runway use, on the A380 and other aircraft to ensure an acceptable level of safety. In addition, increased separation between the A380 and other aircraft during landing and departure is also required because research data indicate that the air turbulence created by the A380's wake is stronger than the largest aircraft in use today. The A380 also poses challenges for fire and rescue officials due to its larger size, upper deck, fuel capacity, and the number of passengers. FAA, Airbus, airports, and other organizations have taken several steps to mitigate these safety challenges. For example, the A380 is equipped with some safety enhancements, such as materials designed to reduce flammability and an external camera taxiing system to enhance pilot vision on the ground. The impact of A380 operations on capacity is uncertain. The A380 was designed, in part, to help alleviate capacity constraints faced by many large airports in the United States and around the world by accommodating more passengers and freight on each flight than any aircraft currently in use. However, potential operating restrictions and the increased separation requirements imposed to ensure the safety of the A380 and other aircraft at airports and during flight could reduce the number of flights that airports can accommodate. The extent to which possible operating restrictions, increased separation, and gate utilization impact capacity would depend on the time of day, the number of A380 operations, and the volume of overall airport traffic. Selected foreign airports that GAO visited have taken different approaches than U.S. airports in preparing for the introduction of the A380. These differences reflect the expected level of A380 traffic at the airports--and in some cases, the anticipated economic benefits of the A380 flights. The different approaches include adopting alternative airport design standards, making significant investment in existing infrastructure, and designing airports that allow for new large aircraft. By implementing these approaches, officials from the foreign airports that GAO visited do not anticipate that the introduction of the A380 will result in delays or disruptions at their airports, despite higher levels of expected A380 traffic compared to most U.S. airports.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Airbus S.A.S. (Airbus), a European aircraft manufacturer, is introducing a  Airbus S.A.S. (Airbus), a European aircraft manufacturer, is introducing a  new large aircraft designated as the A380. When the A380 enters service— new large aircraft designated as the A380. When the A380 enters service— which is currently expected in late 2007—it will be the largest passenger  which is currently expected in late 2007—it will be the largest passenger  aircraft in the world, with a wingspan of about 262 feet, a tail fin reaching  aircraft in the world, with a wingspan of about 262 feet, a tail fin reaching  80 feet high, and a maximum takeoff weight of 1.2 million pounds. The  80 feet high, and a maximum takeoff weight of 1.2 million pounds. In comparison, the largest passenger aircraft  the cabin configuration.category as the A380, and is expected to enter service in late 2010.
The freight version of the aircraft, the A380F, has been delayed and the first delivery is to  be determined.
The A380 has a typical seating capacity for 555 passengers, but is certified for a maximum  of 853 passengers. According to Airbus, the seating capacity for the A380s currently on  order range from about 480 to 650.
The freight version of the 747-8 is expected to be delivered in the third quarter of 2009; the  passenger version of the 747-8 is scheduled for delivery beginning in 2010.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: FAA, airports, and aircraft manufacturers have worked to meet the  demands of continued growth in passenger and cargo traffic in different  ways. FAA has worked to improve the capacity and efficiency of the  national airspace system to accommodate a greater number and variety of  aircraft by, for example, improving air traffic management systems and  implementing domestic reduced vertical separation minimums. FAA is  also currently working on the transformation of the nation’s current air  traffic control system to the next generation air transportation system—a  system intended to accommodate the expected growth in air traffic.  However, the full implementation of the next generation air transportation  system is years away. To accommodate increased traffic, airports have  expanded the number of available runways and gates to service additional  aircraft and in some cases new airports have been built. However, airports  cannot always accommodate increased air traffic by expanding their  infrastructure for a variety of reasons, including the lack of physical space  to build additional runways or terminals. Aircraft manufacturers have  developed larger and more efficient aircraft to meet growing passenger  and freight demand. For example, Boeing introduced the first wide-body  aircraft in 1969, the 747-100, which significantly changed the aviation  market and was much larger than currently operated aircraft. According to  Airbus, the 747-100 had roughly two and a half times more seating capacity  than the largest aircraft operating at the time. Since then, other wide- bodied aircraft have been introduced to accommodate the increasing  emphasis and demand placed on international service.
The Airbus A380 represents another generational change in aircraft size  and seating capacity. Specifically, the A380 is much larger than other  aircraft, with a wingspan of about 262 feet, a tail fin reaching almost 80  feet high, a maximum takeoff weight in excess of 1.2 million pounds, and  seating between 555 and 853 passengers. In comparison, the largest  commercial aircraft in use today, the Boeing 747-400, has a wingspan of  211 feet, a tail fin about 64 feet high, a maximum takeoff weight of 875,000  pounds, and can seat between 416 and 660 passengers.
Although the A380 will be the first in the new category of large passenger  aircraft, it will likely not be the last. In December 2006, Boeing announced  that it received orders for its 747-8 passenger aircraft. The Boeing 747-8 is  anticipated to have a wingspan of about 225 feet, a tail fin about 64 feet  high, a maximum takeoff weight of about 970,000 pounds, and typically  seats 467 passengers in a 3-class configuration. These dimensions place  this aircraft in the same category as the A380. (Figure 2 shows the  dimensions of the Boeing 747-400, Airbus A380, and Boeing 747-8 aircraft.)  Airbus anticipates there will be a continued demand for larger aircraft that  can connect busy and congested hubs in the future. According to its  analysis, Airbus estimated that new large passenger and freight aircraft  would make up about 10 percent of the overall fleet from 2004 to 2023. In  contrast, Boeing, while conceding the demand for a small number of very  large aircraft, projects a greater demand for smaller-sized aircraft, such as  the Boeing 787, which can provide point-to-point service, especially in long  distance markets.
The air carriers that have ordered the A380 plan to operate at airports  throughout the world, including certain U.S. airports. As a result, the A380  must comply with aviation standards set by individual countries from  around the world. ICAO is the international body that seeks to harmonize  global aviation standards so that worldwide civil aviation can benefit from  a seamless air transportation network. Its members or contracting states,  including the United States, are not legally bound to act in accordance  with the ICAO standards and recommended practices. Rather,  contracting states decide whether to transform the standards and  recommended practices into national laws or regulations. In some cases,  contracting states deviate from the ICAO standards and recommended  practices, or do not implement them at all. Although ICAO has no  enforcement powers and only establishes standards and recommended  practices, air carriers that use airports that do not comply with them may  be subject to increased insurance costs. The A380 falls under ICAO’s  design standards for the largest aircraft (Code F), which require at least  60-meter-wide runways (about 200 feet) and 25-meter-wide taxiways  (about 82 feet). In addition, ICAO has also established varying in-flight,  landing, and takeoff separation standards for the different classes of  aircraft.
In the United States, FAA, an agency of the Department of Transportation  (DOT), is responsible for regulating the safety of civil aviation and also  establishes the standards and recommendations for the design and  development of civil airports. FAA’s role as a regulator is to foster aviation  safety by overseeing manufacturers and operators to enforce full  compliance with safety requirements. To this end, FAA must certify any  new aircraft design before that aircraft can be registered in the U.S. for  operations by domestic airlines. This design certification is the foundation  for many other FAA approvals, including operational approvals. When  domestic aircraft manufacturers request approval of a new aircraft design,  FAA uses the type certification process to ensure that the design complies  with applicable requirements or airworthiness standards. Type validation  is the type certification process that FAA uses for foreign or imported  products, such as the A380, to ensure that the design complies with  applicable FAA standards. The A380 was validated by FAA and issued a  type certificate in December 2006. Also, in March 2007, Airbus completed a  series of airline route proving and airport compatibility flights, which were  designed to demonstrate the A380’s ability to operate at airports around  the world. As part of these flights, the A380 visited four U.S. airports,  including New York John F. Kennedy, Chicago O’Hare, Los Angeles, and  Washington Dulles International Airports.
FAA also establishes standards and recommendations for airport planning  and design. Due to the size of the A380, it is subject to the FAA’s design  standards for the largest aircraft (Airplane Design Group VI standards). To  be in compliance with these design standards, airports are required to  have 200-foot-wide runways, 100-foot-wide taxiways, and appropriate  separation distances. Table 1 shows the wing span criteria for the  airplane design groups and examples of aircraft that fall into each  category. These design standards group aircraft by wingspan and set  ranges for which the aircraft that fall within each group could operate  without limitations. According to FAA standards, the A380 could operate  at U.S. airports built to Design Group VI standards without the imposition  of operating restrictions to the airport or aircraft. However, most U.S.  airports that anticipate receiving A380 service are not built to Design  Group VI standards. When airports do not or cannot meet the required  FAA design standards to accommodate certain aircraft, airport officials  can apply for Modifications to Standards through FAA. This would allow  certain aircraft to be operated at airports under certain conditions as long  as the airport can provide an acceptable level of safety comparable to that  of an airport meeting Design Group VI standards. The use of Modifications  to Standards is a process to provide U.S. airports flexibility when the  required design group standards cannot be met to accommodate certain  operations, as long as an acceptable level of safety can be maintained.
After reviewing the design specifications of the A380, FAA issued interim  guidance in 2003 that allows the A380 to operate at airports with runways  and taxiways that do not fully meet Design Group VI standards. In order  to avoid costly or impractical changes to upgrade runways and taxiway  systems to Design Group VI and be approved for A380 operations under  the interim guidance, FAA must approve an airport’s request for  Modifications to Standards when the standards are not met. These  modifications may include A380-specific operational restrictions or special  operating procedures to ensure that existing non-standard infrastructure is  providing an acceptable level of safety.
section_title: A380 Poses a Number of Potential Safety Challenges at Airports
paragraphs: The A380 will be the first of a new category of large passenger aircraft  introduced into the national airspace system in the coming years. The size  of the aircraft poses a number of potential safety challenges for airports.  Most U.S. airports were not designed to receive aircraft the size of the  A380 and therefore, the width of their runways and taxiways do not meet  FAA safety standards. As a result, airports expecting A380 service need to  modify their infrastructure or impose operating restrictions on the A380  and other aircraft to assure that safety is maintained. In addition, research  data suggests that the wake turbulence created by the A380 is stronger  than any aircraft in use today and would require greater separation from  other aircraft during landing and takeoff. Although the A380 is equipped  with some safety enhancements, such as new internal and exterior  materials designed to reduce flammability and an external taxiing camera  system to enhance pilot vision on the ground, the A380 poses safety  challenges for fire and rescue officials due to its larger size, upper deck,  fuel capacity, and the number of passengers. The fire and rescue officials  at the airports we visited were confident in their ability to respond to an  A380 incident, but almost all of them identified some equipment,  personnel, or training needs that would improve their ability to respond to  emergencies involving the A380. Similar concerns were raised for the  Boeing 747 aircraft when it was introduced to the market, and these  potential safety challenges would likely be present for other similarly-sized  aircraft introduced in the future. FAA, ICAO, Airbus, and airports have  taken a number of steps to mitigate potential safety challenges posed by  the A380.
subsections: section_title: A380 Offers Some Safety Enhancements But Its Size Presents Potential Safety Challenges for Airports
paragraphs: The A380 offers air carriers and airports several safety enhancements over  existing aircraft. For example, it has a cockpit with the latest advanced  displays and avionics, and is equipped with an external taxiing camera  system to assist flight crews in keeping the aircraft in the center of  taxiways when moving on the airfield. The cockpit was also designed to  be much lower to the ground than other large aircraft to provide the flight  crew better visibility. Other technical advances include the aircraft’s new  external and internal materials that are designed to reduce flammability. A  new material called Glare that is highly resistant to fatigue, is used in the  external panels for the upper fuselage and provides a longer period of time  preventing fire from penetrating into the passenger cabin—about 15  minutes compared to about a minute for standard aircraft aluminum. In  addition, thermal acoustic insulation blankets, designed to extend the time  before an external fire penetrates the fuselage, will be used inside the  A380. Combined, these materials could provide additional time for  evacuation by delaying the entry of fire into the cabin. The interior  materials used in the A380 will also have decreased flammability  properties and the aircraft will be equipped with enhanced fire and smoke  detection systems.
However, the size of the A380 also presents several potential safety  challenges. These challenges include accommodating the A380 at airports  that were not designed for aircraft as large as the A380, ensuring that the  air turbulence caused by the A380 does not impact the flight of other  aircraft, evacuating large numbers of passengers from the A380, and  ensuring that airports have the necessary fire and rescue capabilities  available. These issues would likely be present for other similarly-sized  aircraft that may be introduced in the future. FAA, ICAO, Airbus, and  airports have taken several steps to mitigate these challenges.
subsections: section_title: U.S. Airports Typically Not Designed to Handle A380-sized Aircraft
paragraphs: The size of the A380 presents a safety challenge because most U.S. airports  were not built to accommodate such large aircraft. FAA’s design standards  are intended to ensure the safety of the aircraft and passengers at the  airport. For example, FAA’s Design Group VI standards, which are  applicable for the largest aircraft, including the A380, require that airports  have 200-foot-wide runways. According to FAA officials, this standard  helps ensure that pilots can safely operate large aircraft like the A380.  Although the design standards do not govern aircraft operations, aircraft  operators must seek FAA’s approval for certain aircraft to use facilities  and infrastructure that do not meet standards and demonstrate to FAA  that an acceptable level of safety is maintained. A few airports, such as  Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, and Washington Dulles International Airports,  meet some design standards for A380-sized aircraft; however, no U.S.  airport is completely built to those standards.
To address this issue, airports have made or are making infrastructure  changes to safely accommodate the A380. In May 2006, we reported that 18  U.S. airports were making preparations to receive the A380 and estimated  that it would cost about $927 million to upgrade their infrastructure.  About 83 percent of the costs reported by airports were identified for  runway or taxiway projects. Most projects widened existing runways or  taxiways and, in some cases, relocated taxiways to increase separation.  The remaining costs were for changes at gates, terminals, or support  services. Although these changes to airport infrastructure were driven by  the introduction of the A380, they will also benefit current aircraft and  other new large aircraft that may be introduced in the future. Further,  officials at some airports told us that the economic benefits from having  A380 service at their airport will outweigh the costs associated with the  infrastructure changes needed to accommodate the aircraft.
To safely accommodate the A380, many of the U.S. airports we visited that  expect to receive this aircraft have requested Modifications to Standards  from FAA. The use of Modifications to Standards is an established  process to provide U.S. airports flexibility when the required design group  standards cannot be met to accommodate certain operations as long as an  acceptable level of safety can be maintained. For example, if the  separation between a runway and a taxiway at an airport is less than the  established standards, a Modification to Standards can be granted by FAA  for not meeting the current standards when federal funds are being used  for a planned improvement to that runway or taxiway and FAA determines  that it is operationally safe. According to FAA, the use of Modifications to  Standards at airports does not compromise safety. This process has been  used by U.S. airports that do not fully meet the design standards for  certain sized aircraft. However, FAA officials said the Modification to  Standards process being applied to the A380 is seldom used because this  process generally is not used to limit operations of a particular aircraft at  an airport.
Of the 18 U.S. airports we visited, 11 have applied for Modifications to  Standards that would allow them to operate the A380. Of the remaining  seven airports, officials indicated they were unsure if such modifications  will be needed and will decide whether to request Modifications to  Standards after FAA decides whether an A380 can safely operate on a 150- foot-wide runway or whether a 200-foot-wide runway will be required.  According to FAA officials, a decision on runway width is expected in late  summer of 2007.
Finally, the airports also anticipate implementing some type of operating  restrictions in order to safely accommodate the A380. Specifically, all 18  U.S. airports we visited anticipated imposing some type of operating  restrictions on the A380 or on other aircraft that operate around the A380.  The anticipated operating restrictions would generally affect runway and  taxiway use. For example, officials at San Francisco Airport plan to  restrict the movement of certain aircraft from using sections of parallel  taxiways when an A380 is taxiing to and from the terminal because the  taxiways are not far enough apart to meet the standards for taxiway  separation required to safely operate the A380. FAA officials noted,  however, that FAA is still conducting an operational evaluation for the  A380, and therefore has not determined what, if any, operational  restrictions for the A380 will be required. Thus, airports’ planned operating  restrictions are subject to change when FAA completes its operational  evaluation, which is expected this summer. FAA officials said that, FAA  will perform an operational evaluation similar to the evaluation used for  the A380 for the Boeing 747-8 and other large aircraft when they enter  service.
section_title: A380 Produces Greater Wake Turbulence Than Other Aircraft
paragraphs: The wake turbulence of the A380 and other large aircraft can create safety  issues if appropriate wake turbulence separations are not applied. Wake  turbulence is created behind aircraft and the strength of the turbulence is  dependent on the wingspan, the weight of the aircraft, and its speed. In  general, the bigger the aircraft, the greater the wake created. Wake  turbulence can affect following aircraft during landing, takeoff, and in- flight. Figure 3 illustrates how wake turbulence is created by an aircraft  and the direction it travels. FAA and ICAO have adopted standards for  keeping aircraft separated from each other during landing, takeoff, and in- flight to avoid the adverse effects of wake turbulence.
ICAO and FAA have studied whether the A380 needs greater separation  than current standards require and determined that the A380 produces  stronger wake turbulence than any aircraft in use today. On the basis of  this data, ICAO issued new guidance on the separation required between  the A380 and other aircraft during landing, takeoff, and in-flight in October  2006. ICAO officials acknowledged that the guidance could be more  conservative than the final standards, noting that the initial flight  separation standard for the Boeing 747-400 aircraft was also set  conservatively, but later reduced. The separations for the A380 could be  changed in the future on the basis of operational experience of the  aircraft. However, while this guidance is in effect, there will be somewhat  longer intervals for departures following an A380 than currently exist and  greater distances between aircraft following an A380 during landings.  Figure 4 illustrates the interim flight separation standards for the A380  compared to other heavy category aircraft, such as the Boeing 747-400  aircraft.
Another potential safety challenge is the large number of passengers to  evacuate from an A380 during an emergency. The A380’s maximum seating  configuration can accommodate up to 853 passengers—193 more than  carried by the maximum seating configuration of the Boeing 747-400. To  obtain type certification, aircraft manufacturers must demonstrate that the  aircraft can be evacuated within 90 seconds. In March 2006, Airbus  conducted the emergency evacuation demonstration for the A380. During  the demonstration, 853 passengers and 20 crew members were  successfully evacuated from the aircraft within 78 seconds. Airbus officials  credited the design of the A380 for the successful evacuation  demonstration.
A related concern of FAA officials, airport fire and rescue officials, and  some experts with whom we spoke is how to handle the large numbers of  people around the aircraft after evacuation is complete. In particular,  some fire and rescue officials were concerned about their ability to control  the crowd and how to treat injured people on-site prior to being moved to  nearby hospitals. To address these concerns, airport fire and rescue  officials are reexamining their equipment needs and emergency plans for  treating a greater number of passengers. FAA guidance states that an  airport’s emergency plans should, to the extent practical, provide for  medical services, including transportation and medical assistance, for the  maximum number of people that can be carried on the largest aircraft that  an airport reasonably can be expected to serve. However, in most cases,  airport fire and rescue officials said that they plan for reasonable worst- case scenarios in which about 50 percent of the passengers can be treated  for injuries on the largest aircraft operated at the airport.
section_title: Size of A380 Could also Pose Airport Fire and Rescue Challenges
paragraphs: The advent of the A380 also may introduce a number of new fire and  rescue safety issues for airports. For example:    The A380 can hold almost 82,000 gallons of fuel, compared to about 57,300  gallons carried by the Boeing 747-400. While an A380 or a 747-400 may not  be fueled to maximum capacity, the proportional increase in fuel that  could be on the A380 compared to that of a 747-400 means that fire fighters  will need additional water and extinguishing agent to contain and  extinguish a fire. Although the A380 will have Glare material, designed to  increase the amount of time it takes before a fire can enter the cabin, it  will not be installed on the underside of the aircraft where a fire caused by  leaking fuel is most likely to occur, according to a FAA official. Thus,  assuring that airports have sufficient extinguishing agent is important.
Airports may not have the necessary equipment to access the upper deck  of the A380 for fire fighting or evacuation purposes. Most fire and rescue  officials at the airports we visited indicated that they do not have the  equipment to access the upper deck of the A380 for fire fighting or  evacuation purposes. Although the height to the upper deck door of the  A380 is essentially the same as that of the 747, according to a FAA official,  the need to invest in such equipment now becomes more critical for the  A380 because more passengers are seated on the upper deck of the A380.
The A380 was designed with 16 evacuation slides and the longest slide, on  the upper deck, will extend out about 50 feet from the aircraft. This  increased number of slides could improve passenger evacuation, but  according to some fire and rescue officials we interviewed, the number  and position of the A380’s slides could also impede the fire and rescue  vehicles’ access to the aircraft and making it more difficult to suppress the  fire.
Several airport fire and rescue officials with whom we spoke were  confident they could respond to an A380 incident with their current  resources. However, most stated that they were evaluating personnel,  equipment, and training needs to ensure that the airport was adequately  prepared for the A380. Fire and rescue officials from several airports  stated that the introduction of A380-sized aircraft will only increase their  needs for additional personnel and equipment. For example, officials from  some airports told us that they are planning to add a vehicle with a  penetrating nozzle with a higher reach that can inject fire extinguishing  agent into the upper deck of the A380. Figure 5 shows a fire fighting  vehicle with a penetrating nozzle fully extended and elevated to its  maximum height of 50 feet.
To help address these safety concerns, FAA has begun evaluating the need  to update its airport fire and rescue safety guidance for new large aircraft,  such as the A380. Officials from FAA’s Technical Center said that the  guidance needs to be updated to reflect the A380’s vertical height, high  numbers of passengers, second passenger deck, and increased fuel loads.  FAA is also researching the need to increase the amount of water and  extinguishing agent needed to respond to an A380 incident. In addition,  FAA is studying the quantity of fire-suppressing agents needed to combat  fires on new large aircraft and double-deck aircraft—taking into account  the vertical dimension of the A380. However, FAA officials noted that most  of the airports expecting to receive A380 flights currently exceed the  vehicle and extinguishing agent requirements applicable to the aircraft and  therefore would likely already meet new standards. FAA researchers are  also helping to develop a penetrating nozzle on a 65-foot boom that would  provide greater extension and a higher reach to inject fire extinguishing  agent into the upper deck of the A380.
section_title: A380’s Impact on Capacity at U.S. Airports Is Uncertain
paragraphs: The impact of the A380 on the capacity of U.S. airports is uncertain and  would depend on multiple factors. Airport capacity is generally measured  by the maximum number of takeoffs and landings that can occur within a  given period of time. The A380 could increase passenger capacity at  airports because it can carry more passengers than current aircraft and  fewer flights could be used to accommodate air traffic growth. However,  potential operating restrictions and the increased flight separation  requirements could adversely impact capacity by limiting the number of  flights that airports can handle. Further, the effects of gate restrictions,  such as the number of gates available for A380 use and restricted use of  gates adjacent to the A380, and terminal congestion from the increased  number of passengers will need to be evaluated and could cause delays to  the A380 and other aircraft. The extent of disruptions and delays caused  by possible operating restrictions, increased separation requirements, and  gate restrictions would depend on the time of day, the number of A380  operations, and the volume of overall traffic. Many airport officials stated  that as long as the number of A380 operations per day remains low, the  impact of the A380 on airport capacity—even with operating restrictions,  increased separation requirements, and gate restrictions—should not be  significant; however, as the number of A380 operations increases, the  potential for an adverse impact also grows.
subsections: section_title: A380 Designed to Provide Some Capacity Benefits
paragraphs: The A380 was created, in part, to help alleviate airport capacity constraints  caused by the continued growth in passenger and cargo air traffic. Air  traffic in the U.S. increased by 35 percent from 1991 to 2001. Despite the  low passenger travel following the events of September 11, 2001, FAA  forecasts this growth to continue—estimating that air traffic will triple  over the next 20 years. The current and projected growth in air traffic will  also include new classes of aircraft, such as the A380. This greater  diversity of aircraft—in terms of size, speed, and operating requirements— will add to the demands placed on the national airspace system and  airports.
Historically, airlines have addressed increased passenger demand by  simply adding more flights and airports by expanding infrastructure.  However, these are not viable options when airport runway infrastructure  cannot be expanded and the volume of landings and departures at an  airport exceeds the limits to operate efficiently. For example, in August  2006, FAA proposed a rule to limit the number of flights at New York’s  LaGuardia Airport to reduce the level of congestion and delays. To offset  the limit on flights, the rule encourages the use of larger aircraft at the  airport to accommodate increased passenger demand. By using larger  aircraft, the airport could accommodate more passengers with fewer or  with the existing number of daily flights. Similarly, London’s Heathrow  airport plans to increase its passenger capacity without increasing the  number of daily flights by expecting as many as one of every 10 flights to  be an A380 by 2020.
According to Airbus, the A380 will help alleviate capacity constraints by  accommodating more passengers and freight on each flight than any other  aircraft in use today. Airbus officials estimate that the A380 can carry at  least 35 percent more passengers and the A380 freighter will carry 50  percent more cargo volume per flight than other aircraft currently in use.  In addition, the A380 can fly up to 8,000 nautical miles non-stop, enabling  airlines to carry more passengers for greater distances than the current  largest aircraft. Thus, the A380 could transport more people or freight  greater distances with the same number—and possibly fewer—aircraft  than are used currently. At congested airports, when A380 aircraft are  used, airlines could meet anticipated growth in air travel without having to  schedule additional flights.
In addition to alleviating capacity constraints, Airbus and airport officials  told us that the potentially greater number of passengers on each A380  compared to currently used aircraft could translate into economic benefits  for the airports and local communities that would receive them.  Specifically, airport expansion to accommodate anticipated growth in air  travel, including the larger volume of passengers that the A380 could bring  to an airport, could contribute to an area’s economic growth. According  to Airbus and some airport officials, if airports received more passengers,  airports will benefit from greater parking revenues, passenger facility  charges, retail and restaurant sales, and other services. In addition, if A380  service increases the number of passengers flowing in and out of the  airport, that increase could translate into more job opportunities at the  airport and in the community. Studies have indicated that economic  benefits can accrue to local economies as a result of activity at airports  through expansion projects, directly and indirectly, in terms of additional  jobs or increased salaries and wages. Therefore, the economic impact of  A380 service on local communities near airports could be substantial, but  it is not certain because the degree to which passenger volume would  increase is uncertain. Furthermore, any economic benefits realized by  airports and local communities as a result of airport improvements to  enhance capacity, including accommodating A380 service, may represent  transfers of economic activity from one airport or community to another.
section_title: Airports’ Planned Operating Restrictions, Increased Flight Separation Requirements, and Gate Limitations Could Offset Some Capacity Benefits
paragraphs: Airports’ planned operating restrictions and separation requirements  resulting from A380 ground and flight operations, as well as the reduction  in gate utilization and flexibility could offset some of the capacity gains  anticipated as a result of the aircraft at U.S. airports. Potential operating  restrictions and the increased separation requirements imposed to ensure  the safety of the A380 and other aircraft at airports and during flight could  result in a reduction in the number of flights that airports can  accommodate. Furthermore, gate availability, restricted use of gates  adjacent to A380 gates, and potential congestion issues could reduce gate  utilization and flexibility at some airports—which could also lead to fewer  flights at an airport. According to most of the airport officials and experts  we interviewed, the extent to which operating restrictions, increased  separation requirements, and gate utilization would impact capacity would  depend on the volume of A380 traffic, the time of day, and the volume of  overall air traffic.
section_title: Operating Restrictions on the A380 at U.S. Airports Could Adversely Impact Capacity
paragraphs: Most U.S. airports we visited that expect to receive the A380 are not  designed for aircraft of this size and, therefore may need to implement  operating restrictions to safely accommodate the A380. These restrictions  can come in many forms—from restricting the A380 to certain runways  and taxiways to stopping the movement of other aircraft when the A380 is  in close proximity. In addition some airports have designated specific  routes for the A380 to use when landing and taxiing. These specific routes  are needed because the wingspan of the A380 prevents the aircraft from  passing various objects on the airfield, such as buildings, without violating  the spacing requirements established by FAA. Therefore, airports  expecting large aircraft service like the A380 will have to evaluate taxi  routes to ensure required distances from other objects are maintained— which is a normal procedure for airports that receive larger aircraft.
The effect of these operating restrictions have not been determined, but a  potential impact is that airports may not be able to handle as many  landings and departures in a given time period. For example, at one  airport, airport officials said landings and departures could not be  performed on one runway while an A380 is taxiing to or from the runway  for about two miles on the adjacent taxiway. According to the air traffic  controllers, this would disallow use of that runway for about three  minutes. Even delays of a few minutes at an airport could increase the  operating costs of air carriers. For example, FAA officials from FAA’s  Technical Center estimated that one minute of delay would cost an air  carrier at San Francisco airport about $57, or about $3,400 per hour.  Similarly, the A380 may need to follow a designated route to and from the  runway—and not necessarily the most efficient route—potentially  delaying other aircraft that may need to wait for the A380 to complete its  maneuvers. As a result, fewer aircraft could be able to access runways to  land and depart in a given period. Most experts and air traffic controllers  said the cumulative effect of these restrictions could reduce the number of  flights at a busy airport because delays exacerbate airport congestion and  make the job of managing air traffic more difficult. In the long-term,  airports could work with airlines to schedule A380 aircraft during off-peak  times to lessen this effect. However, airlines may be reluctant to schedule  these flights during off-peak hours because it might be contrary to their  international flight time slots to which A380s will likely be largely used.  Regardless, even if schedules were adjusted to account for the operating  restrictions, the additional time associated with the restrictions could  result in the airport being unable to accommodate as many flights as it  could if not for the A380 operating at the airport.
According to many airport officials and aviation experts with whom we  spoke, the extent of disruptions and delays caused by the operating  restrictions would depend on the time of day, the number of A380  operations, and the volume of overall traffic. Many airport officials and  experts we interviewed stated that as long as the number of A380 flights  per day remains low, the impact of the operating restrictions should not be  significant; however, as the number of A380 flights increases, the potential  impact would also grow.
subsections: section_title: Separation Requirements for A380 Could Adversely Impact Airspace and Airport Capacity
paragraphs: The increased separation requirements for the A380 could adversely  impact airspace and airport capacity. Under ICAO’s current guidance,  separation distances are based on the size of the aircraft following an  A380, with lighter aircraft requiring a greater separation. To illustrate the  increased separation requirements for the A380 on approach for landing,  there must be a 6 nautical-mile separation between a heavy category  aircraft, such as a 747-400, trailing an A380. In comparison, a heavy aircraft  trailing another heavy aircraft needs to be separated by 4 nautical miles.  The cumulative effect of this extra separation could adversely impact  airspace capacity by reducing the number of flights that could be  accommodated in the airspace during a given time frame, according to  most of the experts we interviewed. In addition, the additional separation  between the A380 and other aircraft during takeoff and landing can reduce  the number of arrivals and departures at an airport, which could also  negatively impact airport capacity. Airbus officials, however, noted that  such reductions in the number of arrivals and departures will be countered  by the potential increase in the number of passengers per A380 flight—that  is, the number of airplane operations may decrease, but the number of  passengers arriving and departing from the airport may increase.
Most of the experts we interviewed generally agreed that the increased  flight separations required for the A380 could have a significant impact on  airport capacity, but noted the magnitude of the impact would depend on  timing of flights and volume of A380 traffic. Most airport officials at the  airports we visited indicated that they expected few A380 flights and  therefore, did not anticipate that the additional separation or ground  traffic issues would have a significant impact. FAA’s analysis of capacity at  a few airports expecting to receive the A380 supports these views. For  example, using ICAO’s current separation standards—which increase  separation by the size of the aircraft following an A380—FAA projected  that A380 operations at the San Francisco airport in 2015 would add no  increase in delays given the few A380s expected. However, given the larger  number of expected A380s at New York’s JFK airport, A380 operations  would increase the total annual delay about 2 percent in 2015 over the  expected total annual delay without A380 service. In addition, FAA  projected that as the number of A380 flights increase by 2025, an increase  of about 1 percent in the total annual delay can be expected at San  Francisco airport and almost 2 percent at New York’s JFK airport over the  expected hours of total annual delay without A380 service. The projected  cost to airlines in 2025 for A380-related delays at San Francisco airport  would be $11.6 million and $59.2 million at JFK airport. According to  Airbus officials, however, the analysis does not reflect potential cost  savings to airlines due to the reduction in the number of arrivals and  departures and as previously noted the potential increase in the number of  passengers per A380 flight. Without an integrated analysis that includes  passenger throughput, we are unable to determine the net effect.
section_title: A380 Could also Create Gate and Terminal Disruptions
paragraphs: The size of the A380 may also impact gate utilization in several ways. First,  the A380 will need to use gates with at least two passenger loading  bridges. The A380—similar to the 747-400—will be limited to using specific  gates because not all gates have two bridges. Similarly, many terminal  areas at U.S. airports where traffic bottlenecks and congestion are  common will not have the necessary clearances for an A380 to operate on  taxilanes between or beside other aircraft (see fig. 6). Thus, the A380 will  be limited to certain gates. Second, the size of the A380 could restrict the  size of the aircraft at the adjacent gate, or close the gate entirely. Third,  loading and unloading passengers and baggage on an A380 could take  longer because of the increased number of passengers on the aircraft. As a  result, the A380 could tie up a gate longer than other aircraft, reducing the  number of aircraft that could be served by the gate in a given period.  According to most of the experts with whom we spoke said these gate  issues can reduce flexibility in airport operations and lead to delays.  However, Airbus officials noted that the interior cabin design of the A380  and the use of two bridges should allow turnaround times of about 90  minutes—which is similar to the turnaround time of the 747-400.
The increased passenger load carried by an A380 could strain current  airport terminal facilities and operations, such as check-in, baggage claim,  and customs and immigration services. For example, most experts we  interviewed said that a surge in passengers created by an A380 going  through airport check-in procedures could not only delay the A380  passengers but also passengers of other flights. In addition, the amount of  baggage from an A380 flight to load or unload could lead to delays for  passengers and other aircraft waiting at the gate. One expert noted that  the delays caused by the new security procedures introduced in the  summer of 2006—which resulted in an increase in checked baggage for a  period of time—illustrates how surges in the amount of baggage loaded  and unloaded can lead to delays and congestion. However, airport officials  generally had no concerns with the A380’s impact on airport terminal  facilities and operations. Additionally, a few experts told us that the A380’s  incremental increase in passengers and baggage over that of a 747-400  would have little impact on terminal operations, especially at airports that  will only receive a few A380 flights per day.
As mentioned earlier, the next generation air transportation system is  being designed to accommodate as much as 3 times the current air traffic,  including the introduction of new large aircraft such as the A380. The  planning underway involves so-called “curb-to-curb” initiatives that are  designed, in part, to address the potential capacity and gate disruption  issues discussed above. Since the planning and implementation phases of  the next generation system remain in the early stages, however, it is  currently unclear the extent to which the initiatives will effectively  mitigate those potential issues.
section_title: Foreign Airports Have Taken Different Approaches to Prepare for the A380
paragraphs: Selected foreign airports we visited have taken different approaches to  prepare for the introduction of the A380. These differences reflect the age  and the expected level of A380 traffic at the airports—and, in some cases,  the anticipated economic benefits of the A380 flights. The different  approaches include adopting alternative airport design standards to  accommodate new large aircraft, making significant investment in existing  infrastructure, and designing airports that allow for new large aircraft. By  implementing these approaches, officials from the foreign airports we  visited do not anticipate that the introduction of the A380 will result in  delays or disruptions at their airports, despite higher levels of expected  A380 traffic compared to most U.S. airports because these airports will not  have to impose operating restrictions on the A380 to the extent of U.S.  airports.
subsections: section_title: Adopting Alternative Standards to Accommodate New Large Aircraft
paragraphs: The A380 Airport Compatibility Group (AACG), which includes four  European aviation authorities, agreed to adopt adaptations of the ICAO  standards for A380 operations at existing airports that do not currently  meet the requirements. For example, ICAO standards require runway  width to be no less than 60 meters (about 200 feet) and taxiway width 25  meters (about 82 feet), but the AACG decided widths of 45 meters (about  150 feet) for runways and 23 meters (about 75 feet) for taxiways would be  adequate to safely operate the aircraft. Officials of European civil aviation  authorities said the AACG decision was based on runway-to-taxiway  centerline deviation studies that have found that large aircraft do not  deviate significantly from the centerline. In addition, the AACG decision  was influenced by the anticipation that the A380 would be certified by the  European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to operate on 45-meter  runways—which occurred in December 2006. In contrast, the FAA type  certificate does not include approval to operate on 150-foot-wide runways  and evaluations of these operations have not been completed. According  to FAA, the decision about runway width is an operational concern, rather  than a certification issue. FAA is currently evaluating the use of narrower  runways (less than 200 feet). FAA expects to complete its evaluations and  issue a decision in summer 2007.
section_title: Making Significant Investment in Infrastructure Changes
paragraphs: Like most U.S. airports, the older foreign airports we visited were not  designed to accommodate aircraft as large as the A380. However, unlike  the U.S. airports, these foreign airports made significant investments in  infrastructure changes and improvements in anticipation of future growth  and the need to modernize, which included accommodating new large  aircraft such as the A380. For example:    Airport officials at London Heathrow airport indicated about $885 million  would be related to accommodating the A380. Heathrow’s investments  related to the A380 included widening and strengthening its two runway’s  shoulders and upgrading runway lighting, demolition and redevelopment  of a portion of an existing terminal to add four A380 gates and allow more  space for the aircraft, and development of a new terminal to provide five  A380 gates by 2008 and 14 by 2011.
At the Paris Charles de Gaulle airport, about $132 million is being spent to  prepare for the A380. The investment includes widening and strengthening  two runways at the airport and building a new satellite terminal complex  specifically to accommodate the A380. Initially, nine gates with upper deck  access and two remote parking positions are available, but airport officials  expect the number of A380 gates to increase to about 30 by 2018.
At the Beijing Capital airport, A380-related improvements have been  included in the $3 billion renovation projects—particularly to prepare for  the 2008 Olympic Games—that include building a new terminal to handle  the anticipated increase in future demand, a new 3,800-meter-long, 60- meter-wide runway to accommodate the A380, new facilities and cargo  areas, and additional landing areas.
At the Amsterdam Schiphol airport, a new 60-meter-wide, 3,800-meter-long  runway and associated taxiways were built that meet international  standards, and the terminal was expanded at a cost of over $440 million  and $213 million, respectively, to expand capacity and maintain its  competitive position as an international hub. The new, longer runway and  terminal expansion projects were initiated to enhance overall capacity of  the airport and to accommodate new large aircraft, such as the A380. The  terminal will have four gates ready for the A380 in 2007.
In contrast, all the 18 U.S. airports expecting to receive the A380 plan to  invest about $927 million in total on A380 infrastructure changes—which  is only slightly more than the investments being made at Heathrow. The  most a single U.S. airport is investing in infrastructure changes to  accommodate the A380 is $151 million. The level of planned investments  reflects the expected level of A380 traffic. Specifically, the foreign airports  we visited are expecting more A380 traffic, in part, because they will serve  as hub airports for international travel or serve as hubs for airlines that  have purchased the A380. For example, JFK expects about 16 A380  arrivals and departures per day in 2015—possibly the most daily A380  flights at any U.S. airport. However, Heathrow airport officials expect that  by 2020, one of every 10 aircraft arriving and departing will be an A380, or  about 130 arrivals and departures per day. Similarly, officials at the Paris  Charles de Gaulle airport estimate that at least 10 percent of all passengers  arriving at the airport will be aboard an A380 by 2020.
In addition to the level of investment, U.S. and foreign airports differ in the  type of investments. Foreign airports, in particular European airports, are  investing more in terminal and gate improvements to accommodate the  A380 than U.S. airports. For example, London Heathrow, Paris Charles de  Gaulle, and Amsterdam Schiphol airports have undertaken major terminal  and gate improvement projects to accommodate the A380. In contrast, the  majority of investments reported by U.S. airports (83 percent) were for  runway and taxiway projects to accommodate the A380. This difference  likely reflects that all Asian airports meet ICAO standards, including  runway and taxiway width, for new large aircraft, such as the A380, and  that the AACG determined that European airports could use more narrow  runway and taxiway widths for the A380, which negated the need to widen  the runways or taxiways.
section_title: Designing Airports That Allow for New Large Aircraft
paragraphs: Seven of the eight Asian and Canadian airports we visited were designed  for future expansion or were built to allow new large aircraft, such as the  A380. Five airports—Singapore Changi, Hong Kong, Tokyo Narita,  Montréal Trudeau, and Toronto Pearson—were not designed specifically  for the A380, but rather were built to accommodate the arrival of new  large aircraft in the future and either complied with or needed only  minimal modifications to comply with international standards applicable  to new large aircraft. For example, at the Singapore Changi and Toronto  Pearson airports, the runways were wide enough to accommodate the  A380, but the shoulders needed to be modified to comply with ICAO  requirements. Taken as a whole, these airports will not have to impose  operating restrictions on the A380 except for a few instances, but not to  the extent as U.S. airports.
Two Asian airports in Bangkok, Thailand and Guangzhou, China, were  built in compliance with the international standards for new large  aircraft. According to airport officials, these two airports were built  because of the economic activity they were expected to generate for their  region and their countries. Moreover, these officials stated that to remain  competitive, the airports had to be able to receive new large aircraft, and  in particular the A380 because it represents the next generation of aircraft.  Because these two Asian airports in Bangkok and Guangzhou were built to  comply with international standards for new large aircraft, they will not  need to restrict A380 operations or the movement of other aircraft as they  move around the airfields to and from terminals. Figure 7 shows a picture  of the Baiyun International Airport in Guangzhou, China.
In comparison, most of the 18 U.S. airports expecting to receive the A380  and the three European airports we visited were not built to comply with  international standards for new large aircraft, such as the A380. As a  result, officials from the U.S. airports told us that they anticipated  imposing operating restrictions on the A380 or aircraft operating in  proximity to the A380 to ensure safety. As discussed previously, European  airports have adopted alternative standards and only one of these airports  we visited plans to impose some operating restrictions.
section_title: Concluding Observations
paragraphs: Many large airports in the U.S. and around the world are facing capacity  constraints as passenger and cargo traffic continues to grow. The A380  was designed, in part, to help alleviate these capacity constraints.  However, the impact of its arrival on airport capacity in the United States  is uncertain. The exact impact will likely vary by geographic regions of the  U.S. and will depend on a range of factors, including the volume of A380  traffic, timing of these aircrafts’ operations, and the operating restrictions  imposed on the aircraft and those aircraft operating around it. Although  many U.S. airports are facing capacity constraints, the decisions by airport  officials to make the necessary infrastructure changes to accommodate  the aircraft were not solely driven by potential capacity gains. Rather,  officials at some airports told us that they want to receive the A380 to help  their airport’s competitive position. They are expecting that the economic  benefits from having A380 service at their airport will outweigh the costs  associated with the infrastructure changes needed to accommodate the  aircraft.
While the impact of operating restrictions on airport capacity is not clear,  FAA and industry experts generally agreed that the A380 will add another  element of complexity to airport operations and airspace management.  This could limit A380 operations to designated gates, taxiways, or runways  at many airports. This will reduce air traffic controllers’ flexibility in  making routing decisions for the A380 and other aircraft. Further  exacerbating this situation is the current and projected growth in air  traffic as well as the rollout of new classes of aircraft that could have their  own operating and infrastructure requirements. Optimizing the use of  airspace and airport facilities to the growth in air traffic and new classes  of aircraft, including the A380, will be challenging.
To address some of these challenges, airports expecting to receive the  A380 are making infrastructure changes to accommodate it that involve  retrofitting or expanding existing infrastructure, such as runways and  taxiways. As we have previously reported, the airports estimated that  these changes will be costly and were driven by the introduction of the  A380, but they will also benefit current aircraft and other new large  aircraft that may be introduced in the future. If recent history is a guide,  the evolution of aircraft will not stop with the A380 as evident with  Boeing’s decision to go forward with its own new large aircraft, the 747-8.  Thus, to help mitigate future difficulties, federal policymakers, airport  officials, and other stakeholders are considering the introduction of the  A380 and other new classes of aircraft as they move forward with airport  development throughout the nation as well as the development of the next  generation air transportation system.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Transportation for  review and comment. FAA officials generally agreed with the report’s  findings. FAA officials also provided technical clarifications via e-mail,  which were incorporated as appropriate.
In addition, we provided a draft of this report to Airbus North America  Holdings, Inc. (Airbus) for review and comment. Airbus provided written  comments, which are reprinted in appendix III. In its letter, Airbus states  that we correctly identified potential safety and capacity issues associated  with the introduction of the A380. However, regarding our discussion on  capacity issues, Airbus expresses concern that we overemphasized the  operational constraints imposed on or by the A380. We interviewed a  range of aviation experts and examined a variety of studies and analyses to  understand any potential impact, both positive and negative, the A380  could have on capacity. Although the report does describe the potential  operational constraints associated with the introduction of the A380, we  believe the report provides a balanced discussion regarding the potential  benefits that new large aircraft, such as the A380, could provide to help  alleviate capacity constrained U.S. airports as well as the potential  capacity reduction due to operating restrictions, increased separation, and  gate utilization issues associated with A380 operations. Airbus also  suggests that our capacity discussion should include information on  passenger throughput, noting that we use one definition of capacity—that  is, the maximum number of aircraft takeoffs and landings (aircraft  movements) that can occur during a given period. We acknowledge that  we defined capacity by aircraft movements and agree that passenger  throughput is another measure of capacity. We chose to use aircraft  movements as the definition of capacity for this report because FAA uses  the maximum number of aircraft movements to express airport capacity.  The report includes information on the potential impact of the A380 on  passenger throughput—specifically, that the A380 could accommodate  more passengers and freight on each flight than any other aircraft in use  today. However, we added additional information on the A380’s potential  impact on passenger throughput on the basis of Airbus’ comments. Airbus  also provided technical comments, which were incorporated, as  appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 10 days from the  report date. At that time, we will send copies to appropriate congressional  committees, the Secretary of Transportation, and representatives of  Airbus. We will also make copies available at no charge on the GAO Web  site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512- 2834 or by e-mail at dillinghamg@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of  Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page  of this report. Individuals making key contributions to this report were  Nikki Clowers, Assistant Director; Vashun Cole; and Frank Taliaferro.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: We were asked to review and identify the impact of the Airbus A380 on  U.S. airports. In May 2006, we issued a report that estimated the costs of  infrastructure changes that U.S. airports plan to make to accommodate the  A380. This report discusses (1) the safety issues associated with the  introduction of the A380, and how U.S. airports are addressing them, (2)  the potential impact of A380 operations on the capacity of U.S. airports,  and (3) how selected foreign airports are addressing these safety and  capacity issues.
To address these issues, we reviewed published studies on operational  issues related to the A380 and on aircraft fire and rescue equipment and  tactics, A380 emergency evacuations, pavement strength issues for the  A380’s weight, and other safety-related issues. We also reviewed FAA’s  design standards and attended FAA briefings on its type validation and  type certification processes. For our May 2006 report, we analyzed the  A380-related requests for Modifications to Standards made by the U.S.  airports we visited and summarized FAA decisions regarding the  infrastructure and operational impacts to the airports. We also  discussed—with FAA and airport officials—the effect that Modifications  to Standards would have on airports’ infrastructure. For this report, we  discussed with FAA officials the safety considerations of Modification to  Standards, but did not analyze the extent that Modifications to Standards  are used at all U.S. airports. We also examined FAA William J. Hughes  Technical Center’s (Technical Center) analysis of the impact of new large  aircraft operations at Memphis International, New York John F. Kennedy  International, and San Francisco International Airports. We analyzed the  Technical Center’s methodology in preparing these analyses and the  results of these analyses and met with FAA officials to discuss the  analyses. We determined that the Technical Center’s analyses were  sufficiently reliable for our purposes. We also examined the International  Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) guidance and standards for airport  design and aircraft separation.
We interviewed officials from FAA and representatives from ICAO, Airbus,  and aviation trade association to discuss safety and capacity issues  associated with the arrival of the A380. In addition, we conducted semi- structured interviews with 17 aviation experts to obtain their views on the  impact of the A380 on airport operations and capacity and potential safety  issues. We contracted with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to  identify individuals who are experts in the fields of safety, capacity,  infrastructure, and certification. We developed an interview guide that  asked for the expert’s views on a series of questions on safety and capacity  issues related to the introduction of the A380 and pre-tested this guide  with two experts to ensure that the questions sufficiently addressed the  issues and were not biased, misleading, or confusing. We incorporated  feedback from our pretests into the interview guide, and then used the  guide for our interviews. After conducting the interviews, we analyzed the  experts’ responses to our questions to identify major themes. The aviation  experts we interviewed were not selected randomly and their views and  opinions cannot be generalized to the larger population of experts and  aviation officials. See table 2 for the aviation experts we interviewed.
We conducted site visits to the 18 U.S. airports that are making  infrastructure improvements to accommodate the A380. (Table 3 shows  the U.S. airports that we visited.) We conducted these site visits from  September 2005 to February 2006. During these site visits, we interviewed  airport officials, including airport management, air traffic controllers, and  fire and rescue personnel, and toured the airport facilities to identify  safety and capacity challenges associated with the arrival of the A380 at  their airport and efforts they were undertaking to mitigate these  challenges. To ensure the accuracy of information summarized in the  report, we verified the information we collected with officials from the 18  airports in the fall of 2006.
We also conducted site visits to 11 Asian, Canadian, and European airports  that will be receiving the A380. (Table 4 shows the foreign airports we  visited.) We conducted these site visits from February 2006 to November  2006. We selected these high-capacity airports based on the expected level  of A380 operations or the presence of airlines that have ordered the A380  aircraft and intend on using these airports as a hub for their operations.
During these site visits, we interviewed airport officials, including airport  management, air traffic controllers, and fire and rescue personnel, and  toured the airport facilities to identify the safety and capacity challenges  associated with the arrival of the A380 and the efforts being undertaken to  mitigate these challenges. We summarized the information obtained for  this report and sought verification from the 11 airports in the winter of  2006.
We performed our work from May 2005 to March 2007 in accordance with  generally accepted government auditing standards.
section_title: Appendix II: Foreign Airport Summaries
paragraphs: To determine how foreign airports were addressing the potential safety  and capacity issues associated with the introduction of the A380, we  visited 11 foreign airports. The following are summaries of the information  airports’ provided on operations and their A380 plans.
subsections: section_title: Asian Airports
paragraphs: Bangkok Suvarnabhumi International Airport, currently the operating hub  for Thai Airways, opened in 2006 and was built as an ICAO Code F airport  that could handle 45 million passengers and three million tons of cargo per  year at a cost of about $3.9 billion. The airport is one of the largest in Asia,  with a terminal slightly larger than that of Hong Kong airport. The final  phase of construction, expected to begin in about 2015, will add a fourth  runway and another terminal to increase the capacity to 100 million  passengers per year. A maintenance facility has also been built at the  airport that can house up to three A380s in one hangar at the same time.  Officials of the Thai Department of Civil Aviation do not expect that the  A380 would cause delays at their airport. A380 flight operations will begin  with Qantas and United Arab Emirates airlines service in early 2008. Thai  Airways ordered six A380 aircraft and will begin service in 2009 or 2010  after it takes its first delivery from Airbus. Table 5 provides A380-related  issues at Suvarnabhumi airport.
Early 2008.
Initially: Anticipates 12 per day.
5th year: 12 per day (possibly more).
Singapore Airlines, Air France, and Qantas  (2008), Emirates and Lufthansa (2008 or  2009), and Thai Airways (2009 or 2010).
Passenger: Not available.
Cargo: Not available.
Airfield is ICAO Code F compliant.
None. Passenger waiting rooms could  become crowded and baggage facilities in  the new airport were built to receive new  large aircraft such as the A380.
Five A380 gates with one upper and two  lower boarding bridges.
None.
None.
None.
None.
Meets ICAO ARFF requirements for A380- sized aircraft.
Beijing Capital International Airport has been upgraded with several  renovations since it opened in 1958, and in 2005 it handled about 41  million passengers and about 782,000 tons of cargo. Airport officials said  that in anticipation of the increasing aviation demands due to the  economic development of the Beijing area as well as the 2008 Beijing  Olympic Games, Beijing Capital airport officials have begun a $3 billion  airport expansion plan to double the existing capacity. When completed,  the airport will be able to handle 60 million passengers, 1.8 million tons of  cargo, and about 500,000 flights per year. A380-related improvements have  been incorporated in the renovation projects, which include building a  new terminal to handle the anticipated increase in future demand, a new  3,800-meter-long, 60-meter-wide runway to accommodate the A380, new  facilities and cargo areas, and additional landing areas. In addition, major  terminal and gate improvement projects have been undertaken to  accommodate the A380. China Southern Airlines is the only Chinese A380  customer. However, in addition to China Southern Airlines, Air France,  and Lufthansa Airlines have expressed their intent to operate the A380 at  the Beijing airport. Table 6 provides A380-related issues at Beijing airport.
Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport, currently the operating hub for  China Southern airlines, opened in 2004. It cost roughly $2.39 billion, is  one of the three large hub airports on the Chinese mainland, and is the  busiest airport in south China. In 2005, the airport handled 23.5 million  passengers and 750,000 tons of cargo. The airport was the first in China  designed and built with the hub concept and a capacity to accommodate a  projected annual growth of 27 million passengers and 1.4 million tons of  cargo through 2010. China Southern Airlines is the only Chinese A380  customer and has already considered replacing an existing nonstop route  from Guangzhou to Los Angeles using an A380. The airport has one  runway and will have one gate ready for the A380 in 2008 and plans to add  additional A380 gates as needed in future planned concourses. Airport  officials said A380-related improvements exist in a $2.22 billion expansion  plan that includes the construction of an additional runway, terminal, and  cargo facilities. The facilities will be increased as the expansion plans are  completed with a capacity to accommodate 80 million passengers and 2.5  million tons of cargo annually. Table 7 provides A380-related issues at  Baiyun airport.
Hong Kong International Airport is the busiest airport for freight (by  weight) in the world, handling about 3.6 million tons of freight in 2006. The  airport also handled about 44.5 million passengers in 2006. The airport was  built on a landfill in the Hong Kong bay and began operations in 1998. The  airport has additional expansion plans to increase passenger capacity to  80 million per year by 2025. However, in order to achieve that capacity the  airport authority is planning to conduct engineering and environmental  feasibility studies on the construction of a third runway for the airport.  The airport authority had spent approximately $15 million in airport  enhancement works for the operation of A380 passenger flights and was  certified as an ICAO Code F airport in July 2006. The airport is an  operating hub for DHL freight, and FedEx and UPS also operate at the  airport. No airline based in Hong Kong has purchased the A380, but airport  officials expect to accommodate foreign carriers’ A380 flights. The airport  serves about 80 foreign airlines and about 70 percent of the flights to Hong  Kong are wide-body jets. Singapore Airlines will likely be the first to bring  an A380 into Hong Kong. Table 8 provides A380-related issues at Hong  Kong airport.
Singapore Changi International Airport has undergone several expansions  since the airport opened in 1981. In 2006, the airport handled over 35  million passengers and almost two million tons of cargo. Changi airport is  the operating hub for Singapore Airlines, which is the launch customer for  the Airbus A380. Singapore Airlines will begin receiving its A380 deliveries  in the fall of 2007 and plans to begin flight operations in January 2008 with  flights to London Heathrow and San Francisco airports. Lufthansa, Qantas,  Korean Air, and Virgin Atlantic airlines could begin flights to Singapore by  2010. The airport authority has spent about $43 million on improvements  such as widening runway shoulders, and runway-taxiway and taxiway- taxiway intersections, installing upper deck loading bridges, and  expanding the seating areas to handle A380 passenger loads. The airport  has two parallel runways and will have 11 gates ready for the A380 in  2007—a total of 19 gates will be available in 2008. Changi airport will also  have a maintenance facility with hangars that can fully enclose two A380  aircraft and a third A380 compatible hangar under construction. In 2008, a  new terminal (Terminal 3) will open for operations and will enable the  airport to accommodate 64 million passengers per year and add 8 more  gates for the A380. Table 9 provides A380-related issues at Changi airport.
Tokyo Narita International Airport, which opened in 1978, handles the  majority of international passenger traffic in Japan and in 2005 handled  over 31 million passengers and more than 2.3 million tons of cargo. In  terms of the number of international passengers, it is ranked eighth in the  world and second highest in the world in terms of the volume of  international cargo. To date, six airlines—Lufthansa, Air France, Qantas,  Virgin Atlantic, Singapore Airlines, and Korean Airlines—have announced  plans to operate A380s at the airport. No Japanese air carrier has any  immediate plans to purchase the A380. The airport has one runway and  will have ten gates ready for the A380. Airport officials said existing  facilities are used to accommodating very large passenger loads arriving at  the same time on a daily basis. In fact, large aircraft, such as the 747-200,  747-400, and 777-200, currently make up about 75 percent of the traffic at  Narita airport. The officials said the nominal increase in passenger loads  on A380 flights will not have a significant impact on the efficiency of the  airport’s internal operations. Table 10 provides A380-related issues at  Narita airport.
Montréal Trudeau International Airport, first opened in 1941, is the third  busiest airport in Canada in terms of passenger traffic (after Toronto  Pearson and Vancouver airports) and served about 11 million passengers  in 2005. The airport is undergoing a major $716 million expansion and  modernization plan designed to double terminal capacity to handle 25  million passengers per year and enhance the level of passenger service.  The first A380 arrival is expected during the summer of 2009 with an Air  France flight on its daily Paris to Montréal route. Montréal Trudeau, which  serves as the main operating hub for Air France, is expected to be the only  airport in Canada with a daily A380 flight. Airport officials said that no  major investments were needed because runway width and clearances  between runways and taxiways comply with ICAO Code F requirements.  The airport has three runways and one gate that will be available to  accommodate the A380 in 2007. The runways are 62 meters wide, but vary  in length and have non-paved, grass shoulders. Airport officials stated that  two of the runways do not meet the necessary length requirement for A380  departures, but could be occasionally used for landings. Table 11 provides  A380-related issues at Trudeau airport.
Toronto Pearson International Airport, first opened in 1939, is Canada’s  busiest airport and handled almost 30 million passengers, 410,000 tons of  cargo, and about 410,000 flights in 2005. Four carriers operate at Pearson  that has purchased the A380, but none have indicated intent to operate  their A380s at the airport. The airport is nearing completion of a $3.7  billion Airport Development Program to address improvements in  groundside, terminal and airside infrastructure. Airport officials said the  investments in airport infrastructure were meant to replace and expand  their capacity to receive more passengers and freight and were not  directed exclusively to accommodating the A380 because they did not  expect many A380s at the airport. However, about $37.3 million of the  improvement costs can be attributed directly to accommodating the A380  and future new large aircraft for airfield and terminal modifications. The  airport currently has two runways and will have four gates ready for the  A380 in 2007. The runways are 60 meters wide, but have non-paved, grass  shoulders that may have to be paved to protect against jet blast. Airport  officials stated they took A380 needs into account when designing the new  Terminal 1, which opened in April 2004. Table 12 provides A380-related  issues at Pearson airport.
Amsterdam Schiphol Airport is one of four major European hubs for  passenger and freight air traffic. It is the third busiest European airport for  cargo traffic with over 1.4 million tons transported and fourth in passenger  traffic with over 44 million passengers in 2005—much of which is due to  the trans-shipment of cargo and connecting passenger traffic. The airport  will not be a hub for A380 traffic but will accommodate significant A380  passenger transfers to other planes bound to other destinations. A380  flight operations could begin in February 2008 with flights from Malaysian  Airlines. Schiphol began planning for airport improvements related to new  large aircraft in 1996. The new Code F runway and associated taxiways  cost over $440 million and the expansion of the terminal cost over $213  million. The airport has one runway that is compliant with ICAO Code F  but will also use the other four 45-meter runways and associated 23-meter  taxiways in accord with a European agreement that Code E infrastructure  could be used for the A380. Airport officials said A380s will be operated on  the runways and taxiways not designed to Code F standards under waivers  approved by the Netherlands Civil Aviation Authority. The airport will also  have two gates ready for the A380 in 2007 and another two after 2008.  Schiphol officials indicated that they would not need many additional  A380 gates in the future when A380 flights increase because large aircraft  gate occupancy and turnaround time present no issues. Table 13 provides  A380-related issues at Schiphol airport.
London Heathrow International Airport is the world’s busiest airport in  terms of international flights. The airport is an important hub with the  largest number of passengers of any European airport in 2005—almost 68  million—and handled about 1.4 million tons of cargo. The airport has  reached its capacity for flights but would like to increase passenger  capacity to 90 million by 2020 and 95 million by 2030. The first A380 flight  will likely be Singapore Airlines in early 2008. Airport officials said they  made significant investments of about $885 million in airport  improvements to expand their capacity to receive more passengers. Most  of the spending was used to build new terminals and gates to  accommodate the A380, but also included widening and strengthening its  two runway’s shoulders and upgrading runway lighting, and improvements  to existing terminals to provide A380 gates. The airport will use two 50- meter-wide, parallel runways that are not Code F compliant for width and  will use a waiver approved by the United Kingdom Civil Aviation  Authority. The airport will have 12 gates ready for the A380 by 2008, but  Heathrow officials anticipate that they will need about 35 A380 gates by  2015. In addition, they eventually expect that one of every ten aircraft  arriving and departing (130 arrivals and departures) will be an A380 by  2020. Table 14 provides A380-related issues at Heathrow airport.
Paris Charles de Gaulle International Airport handled about 53.7 million  passengers and over two million tons of cargo in 2005. The initial A380  flights from France to North America will be to the New York JFK and  Montréal Trudeau airports beginning in 2009. United Arab Emirates,  Singapore, and China Southern airlines could begin flights to Paris in 2008  and 2009, and will be an A380 operating hub for KLM-Air France. Over  $132 million has been invested for infrastructure upgrades to  accommodate the A380, such as widening taxiway bridges to allow A380  access to all terminals. The investment also included widening and  strengthening two runways at the airport and building a new satellite  terminal complex specifically for A380s. The airport has four runways that  will be used for A380 operations. Two of the runways are 60 meters wide  and comply with ICAO Code F width, but their 2,700-meter-lengths will  likely be too short for departures. The two 4,200-meter-long, 45-meter- wide runways can be used for departures and landings but will have to be  operated under waivers approved by the French Civil Aviation Authority.  Nine gates will be ready for the A380 in 2008 and will be increased up to 30  by 2018. Airport officials estimated that at least 10 percent of all  passengers arriving at the airport will be aboard an A380 by 2020. Table 15  provides A380-related issues at Charles de Gaulle airport.
section_title: Appendix III: Comments by Airbus