With the entry into service of the Airbus A380 looming later this year, airports around the world are gearing up for its arrival
Los Angeles International will be one of the first airports to receive the Airbus A380, but what shape will it be in? The airport is expected to receive the superjumbo some time in 2007, but will only have two contact gates at the Tom Bradley International Terminal available, along with four remote gates. Virgin Atlantic Airways has put back its delivery dates for the A380 partly as a result of concerns about the readiness of Los Angeles, and says the situation regarding airport selection is still “fluid”.
Los Angeles at last got the go-ahead for its $11 billion expansion plan earlier this year. This is expected to add six to eight A380 contact gates on the western side of Tom Bradley in the longer term.
In Europe, meanwhile, the A380’s arrival at London Heathrow for compatibility tests at Terminal 3’s Pier 6 provided a taster for things to come. Airport operator BAA has spent £450 million ($845 million) to accommodate the A380 at Heathrow, which is expected to receive its first services in December when lead customer Singapore Airlines begins flights on the Kangaroo route between London and Sydney.
The A380 will only be able to operate on Heathrow’s southern runway due to potential taxiway issues, however, with BAA yet to name a date for modification works that will enable the aircraft to use the northern runway.
Diversion airports
Airlines have expressed concerns that this could cause problems if the southern runway becomes blocked. The scarcity of diversion airports in general is a worry for A380 operators, although London Gatwick says that it would in principle be able to handle an A380, provided it is notified in advance of the aircraft’s flightplan.
Los Angeles will be able to offer its customers a nearby alternative in the form of Ontario airport, which recently underwent a $50 million runway upgrade to handle the type.
All these modifications cost money, which has sparked debate about who will pay for these improvements.
Carriers not operating the type, such as Air New Zealand, are making it clear that they are less than happy at the prospect of paying for A380-related work. Auckland International airport is spending NZ$27 million ($16.7 million) on airside improvements that will include widening the runway by 7.5m (25ft) on each side, as well as filleting taxiways and aprons.
ANZ’s says it does not want this to result in increased charges. Early last year, the carrier reacted angrily to reports that the airport wanted to recover costs associated with the A380 from all carriers.
Little has changed in the interim. “We would be unhappy if the work that is being done for the A380 is passed onto us as a cost,” the carrier says. “We would in affect be subsidising our competitors.”
Don Huse, chief executive at Auckland International, responds: “We’ve undertaken new investment and we expect that to be taken into account. One only makes new investments if one can expect a return on it.” He adds that the fact that A380s will be putting more passengers through the airports is a separate issue. “The regulatory system here, which has been in place since 1988, consists of the dual-till approach. There is no cross-subsidy from non-aeronautical revenues.” He adds that the A380 will be important for New Zealand’s tourism, travel and freight industries.
For its part, IATA is clear that size should not matter when it comes to airport charges and wants all aircraft types to be treated the same. It notes: “We are trying to take aircraft weight out of airport charges. At some airports, aircraft weight is seen as a proxy for ability to pay. In principle, we reject that. It leads to distortions. Charges are not driven on a per passenger basis. What the A380 does is increase the number of passengers and revenue at the airport.”
It continues: “There should only be one set of charges across an airport. If Auckland, or anyone else, is building facilities to house the A380 and it is not leading to sufficient volumes to make it pay, why do it?”
Source: Airline Business
