National Academies Press: OpenBook

Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions (2010)

Chapter: Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes

« Previous: Chapter 3 - Multijurisdictional Issues inAviation Capacity Planning
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14363.
×
Page 89

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

The focus of the previous chapters was on the total impact of various strategies and management processes; this chapter reviews these concepts on an airport-by-airport basis. The content of Chapter 4 includes the following: • A summary of the role of shorter distance, intra-mega-region traffic at the subject airport. • A review of the possible implications of planned rail projects for trip substitution. • A review of the role for rail and proximate airports for multijurisdictional solutions. • A review of the importance of shorter distance flights to support economically important longer distance flights, such as international services. • Conditions in the year 2025, in which the calculated impacts of doing nothing are presented as a surrogate metric for the scale of the challenge at the subject airport. • A quick, preliminary assessment of the potential roles of rail substitution, rail complementarity, and better regional cooperation, which suggests that, while important, none of these alone represents a “silver bullet” that will eliminate the problem of aviation capacity in the mega-regions. Exhibit 4.0. Highlights and key themes included in Chapter 4. 72 4.1 Major Themes of the Report for Airport-Specific Application Chapter 4 now presents an airport-by-airport review of how major airports in the two study areas might, and might not, be influenced by each of the major themes of the study that have been presented up until this point in the analysis (see Exhibit 4.0). Each major airport will be reviewed in terms of the themes developed in the previous three chapters. In terms of their implications for specific airports, the major themes of the project can be summarized as follows: 1. The problem of lack of effective aviation capacity in the East Coast and West Coast Mega-regions is real and present and has significant economic and environmental consequence. The cost of not addressing the problem could rise in 2025 to as high as $20 billion in the aggregate and would be asso- ciated with GHG impacts of 17 million metric tons of CO2 per year. The surrogate measure of the future cost of doing nothing provides a quick metric that scales the urgency, presented in this section on an airport-by-airport basis. 2. Aviation planning could benefit from becoming more multimodal. At the moment, there is no universally accepted method to examine the possible impact of par- allel federal and local policies toward existing and planned HSR improvement. Although HSR projects in the aggre- gate could divert as many as 14 million air trips per year in the next 25 years, the early implications for individ- ual airports should be examined now. 3. Aviation planning could benefit from becoming more multijurisdictional. In some cases, chronically underused runway and supporting facilities can take the pressure off of larger, more strategically important regional airports. In some cases, innovative ground services could provide complementary roles to major airports; in other cases, adjacent airports could provide more services to national hub transfer points. Data could be provided that would help explain the extent to which shorter distance flights are key to making longer distance flights successful. In short, this chapter provides airport-specific information that would be involved in the application of a revised planning C H A P T E R 4 Airport-Specific Implications of the Major Themes

73 process that was more multimodal and multijurisdictional in nature. After this analysis of the potential role of strate- gies external to the aviation industry, the following chapter (Chapter 5) examines alternative strategies to better manage the airport and air systems facilities themselves. Issues for Airport-by-Airport Review For each of the largest airports in the two study areas, this section of the report reviews the local airport data to provide the following: 1. A summary of the role of shorter distance, intra-mega- region traffic at the subject airport. 2. A review of the possible implications of planned rail proj- ects for trip substitution. 3. A review of the role for rail and proximate airports for multijurisdictional solutions. 4. A review of the importance of shorter distance flights to support economically important longer distance flights, such as international services. 5. Conditions in the year 2025, in which the calculated impacts of doing nothing are presented as a surrogate metric for the scale of the challenge at the subject airport. 4.2 Strategic Implications for the Major Airports in the West Coast Study Area Section 4.2 reviews the implications of the major themes of this research project on the four largest airports in the West Coast study area, with particular attention to the shorter distance trips and trip segments that occur within the borders of the study area. In this project, the shorter distance air segments require the most analysis. Trips to and from areas outside the study area are simply not candidates for either rail substitution or for providing complementary services, as discussed in Chap- ter 2. However, longer distance trips may be candidates for diversion to adjacent airports closer to the origin of the trip- maker, as discussed in Chapter 3. Thus, the longer distance trips are described for each major airport in terms of the geo- graphic distribution of their destination trip ends. 4.2.1 San Francisco International Airport (SFO) SFO ranks 13th in the ACI-NA list of American airports in 2007. On the basis only of the DOT’s OD survey, it is esti- mated that about 22% of enplanements at SFO are made by those from connecting flights (see Table 4.1). The limitations of various data sources are discussed in Section 4.6. 4.2.1.1 The Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at SFO Of all those passengers enplaning at SFO (both originating and connecting), 17% are going to destinations within the West Coast study area: 15% are going to destinations in the Southern California/Las Vegas McCarran Airport (LAS) Mega- region, with only 2% going to the Northern California Mega- region. Of all those enplaning at SFO, 11% are making trips entirely within the West Coast study area. 4.2.1.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on SFO Of these trips, the 1.6 million SFO trips with actual des- tinations in the southern portion of the study area are the San Francisco, 2007 (SFO) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights From West Coast Study Area Outside West Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South-Central America Northern California 1.9 318,233 22,280 295,953 82,740 169,566 73,195 4,905 Southern California/ LAS 14.6 2,405,822 1,614,370 791,452 127,720 618,016 271,751 7,868 To the North 11.2 1,852,852 1,250,521 602,331 278,036 145,823 155,797 29,199 To the East 42.2 6,963,448 6,067,140 896,308 251,760 271,390 504,283 2,220 Transatlantic 9.1 1,503,667 1,419,502 84,165 57,671 48,320 0 0 Transpacific 16.8 2,767,323 1,846,162 921,161 287,275 767,697 10 220 South-Central America 4.2 696,748 652,236 44,512 12,773 60,618 320 0 Totals 100 16,508,093 12,872,211 3,635,882 1,097,975 2,081,430 1,005,356 44,412 Table 4.1. Origin–destination passenger volumes at SFO (1).

74 most logical candidates for diversion HSR services. Chap- ter 3 reported that air volumes between the Bay Area and the Los Angeles Basin could be expected to drop by about 40% with the inauguration of the full California HSR project. From the same calculations, the air volumes between the Bay Area and San Diego would fall by about 35%. Assuming that HSR lowered the number of air trips to the southern region as a whole by about 35%, this would be a decrease of 600,000 air passengers from SFO. This would rep- resent a decrease in total SFO boardings of between 3–4% of total SFO air passengers. No direct rail services between the Bay Area and Las Vegas are contemplated at present. 4.2.1.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports SFO will be linked to the California HSR system, possibly using the existing (currently unused) Bay Area Rapid Transit alignment between the International Terminal and Millbrae Station along the existing CalTrain right of way. This align- ment could have major implications for the use of HSR as a feeder mode for longer distance flights, particularly extend- ing the airport’s market-shed area far to the south, to San Diego, Gilroy, and beyond. Airport rail ground access to Merced, Modesto, and Stockton would also be somewhat improved. All of this supports the need to examine alternative futures for each of the airports in the region, to build on the strengths of each. That study could also examine the possibility of more flights from smaller airports directly to transfer hubs (e.g., Salt Lake, Denver, and Phoenix) that would avoid move- ments in the West Coast study area airports. The existing scope of services for the MTC RASP reflects very positively many of the innovations commenced in the FAA’s NERASP program in New England (2). An early RASP meeting included a major presentation from managers at Boston’s Logan Airport, reflecting the progress encouraged by the NERASP program. The MTC project could be closely monitored for its implication for future multijurisdictional aviation studies, including a proposed project for Southern California. 4.2.1.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights Of the 2.8 million boardings for transpacific flights, two thirds of those come from local originations, with another 900,000 transferring from feeder flights. Clearly, the success of SFO as a jump-off point for transpacific flights is the com- bination of a strong home (origination) market and the abil- ity to continue filling seats with flights from distant areas. Overwhelmingly, those feeder trips are coming from outside California, with nearly 770,000 connecting trips. Of all the SFO passengers connecting to the Pacific, only about 60,000 per year (6% of passengers transferring to the Pacific) are being supplied on the short flights from the immediate Northern California area. The airport does not play much role in shorter distance (OD) travel in the Northern California. Local air travelers with destinations in this part of the state make up about 0.1% of the total enplanements at SFO. Its role as a transferring “gateway” to the West Coast study area is modest, with only about 7% of SFO airport users con- necting to other airports in the West Coast study area. The SFO airport passenger activity summary (Appendix A) pres- ents the 10 closest airports, the most distant of them being Santa Barbara (257 miles). 4.2.1.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE (3) program predicts that demand for domestic originations at SFO will increase by about 76% over what the research team reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Forecasts, which look at domestic originations, transfer activity, and inter- national activity, have predicted an 84% growth between 2007 and 2025 for SFO. The implications of doing nothing at SFO. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the 2025 cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at SFO would be about $0.8 billion compared with a base-case benchmark condition of the delay experienced at SFO in the year 2003. 4.2.2 Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) LAX is the largest airport in our two study areas, com- manding both domestic and international markets and rank- ing as the third largest airport in the United States according to the ACI-NA 2007 rankings. From the DOT’s OD survey, about 19% of enplanements are estimated to be made by those from connecting flights (see Table 4.2). 4.2.2.1 The Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at LAX Of all those enplaning at LAX (originating and connecting), 15% are going to destinations within the West Coast study area, 6% are going to destinations in the Southern California/ LAS Mega-region, and 9% are going to the Northern Califor- nia Mega-region. Of all those enplaning at LAX, 10% are making trips entirely within the West Coast study area.

4.2.2.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on LAX In terms of potential intermodal impacts, the 10% of LAX- originating boarders with actual destinations in the study area are the most important. Table 4.2 shows that 1.9 million pas- sengers are destined to the Northern California Mega-region; if HSR could divert 35% of these travelers from air, boardings at LAX would decrease by 670,000. The total number of passengers flying from LAX to the des- tination of Las Vegas Airport is 629,000. Assuming a range of air diversions from 20% to 35%, the decrease in LAX board- ings would range between 126,000 and 220,000.32 If HSR were assumed in both corridors, the higher level of diversion would result in a decrease of 3–4% of LAX total boardings. 4.2.2.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports It has now been established that the California HSR system will not directly serve LAX, and thus the role of HSR as feeder to longer distance flights at LAX will be insignificant. How- ever, HSR’s role as a feeder to both ONT and Palmdale should be explored in the next phase of Regional Aviation Systems Planning in California. It may be possible to use HSR mean- ingfully to increase the relative role of Palmdale and ONT as part of a “family of airports” concept. SCAG has done exten- sive modeling of HSR access to both Ontario and Palmdale airports in its 2001, 2004, and 2008 Regional Transportation plans. The modeling work showed both modal shifts and pas- senger and cargo demand increases at those airports resulting from HSR access. The impacts of HSR access to other airports in the SCAG region were also modeled for these plans, including San Bernardino International, March Inland Port, and Southern California Logistics airports. This underscores the need, as discussed in Chapter 3, to continue the emphasis on multijurisdictional planning efforts in the aviation sector in Southern California. Such study efforts would also examine the possibility of more flights from smaller Southern California airports directly to transfer hubs (e.g., Salt Lake, Denver, and Phoenix) that would avoid transfer movements in the West Coast study area airports. The timing of the proposed regional program could benefit both from the innovations of the FAA’s NERASP program and from the other multijurisdictional work undertaken by the major MPOs in California. 4.2.2.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights Of a total of about 29 million boardings in the OD data- base, 23 million are from the Los Angeles area, with less than 6 million transferring from a feeder flight. Of about 4.9 mil- lion passengers boarding from transpacific flights (including Hawaii), about 1.2 million are brought to LAX on feeder flights, and about one quarter of these are from the West Coast study area, which includes all of California and the Las Vegas area. Additionally, LAX is a major beginning point for trans- atlantic travel, in spite of its western location. In fact, more people (at more than 2.0 million) board a plane at LAX for a transatlantic trip than do from IAD, PHL, or BOS. The trans- atlantic flyers are overwhelmingly from the Los Angeles area, as only 5% of those boarding for a transatlantic destination are transferring from a connecting flight. Its role as a transferring gateway to the West Coast study area is modest, with only about 6% of LAX users connecting to other airports in the West Coast study area. The 10 closest air- Table 4.2. Origin–destination passenger volumes at LAX (1). Los Angeles, 2007 (LAX) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights From West Coast Study Area Outside West Coast Study Area From Atlan- tic/Pacific From South-Central America Northern California 9.2 2,627,051 1,917,500 709,551 117,190 345,914 140,034 106,413 Southern California/LAS 6.1 1,762,497 720,760 1,041,737 225,160 523,295 253,302 39,980 To the North 9.2 2,630,745 2,248,781 381,964 123,939 88,277 77,337 92,411 To the East 42.8 12,291,794 10,499,730 1,792,064 817,950 92,297 860,166 21,651 Transatlantic 7.1 2,034,528 1,923,241 111,287 91,411 19,876 0 0 Transpacific 16.9 4,863,465 3,642,293 1,221,172 301,925 918,087 20 1,140 South-Central America 8.7 2,495,635 2,233,500 262,135 146,393 114,022 1,720 0 Totals 100 28,705,715 23,185,805 5,519,910 1,823,968 2,101,768 1,332,579 261,595 32 This range represents a higher level of diversion than that reported in Chapter 2, which was for a specific, non-electrified rail technology. 75

76 ports are described with their segment passenger volumes and their distance from LAX in the LAX airport passenger activity summary included in Appendix A. 4.2.2.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at LAX will increase by about 80% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s more comprehensive Terminal Area Forecasts have predicted a 98% growth between 2007 and 2025 for LAX. The implications of doing nothing at LAX. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at LAX would be about $1.8 billion compared with a base-case benchmark condition of the delay experienced at LAX in the year 2003. 4.2.3 Las Vegas McCarran Airport (LAS) LAS has the highest volume of domestic origination pas- sengers in the nation—about 16.9 million in the Las Vegas area. In total volume, it ranks seventh among airports in the United States in the ACI-NA 2007 survey. On the basis of the DOT’s OD sample, about 16% of the enplanements are from connecting flights (see Table 4.3). 4.2.3.1 The Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at LAS Of all those passengers enplaning at McCarran Airport, 26% are going to destinations within the West Coast study area; 16% are going to destinations in the Cal South/LAX Mega-region and 10% are going to the Cal North Mega- region. Of all those enplaning at LAS, 20% are making trips entirely within the West Coast study area, which is the second highest level of intraregional orientation in the full ACRP sample of major airports. 4.2.3.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on LAS Looking first at the 20% of LAS boarders who are originat- ing in Las Vegas and ending their trip in California, Figure 2.2 shows that 1.6 million people are currently flying from LAS to the Los Angeles Basin. If air volumes decreased by 35%, that would be a drop of 560,000 air passengers. This would represent about a 3% decrease in the number of air passengers at LAS. At present, no direct rail services are planned from Las Vegas to San Diego or to Northern California, unless the two pro- grams are merged, which is under discussion. 4.2.3.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports As interviews with managers at LAS revealed, there is no major logical feeder area for LAS flights beyond Clark County. On the basis of the growth in demand revealed in this analy- sis, the major question concerns new airport capacity to serve what is basically a Clark County market. 4.2.3.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights At LAS, few people actually start, or end, an international flight of any kind—about 2% of the total boardings. Still, the airport handles more than 3 million transfers, generally from the lower 48 states. The majority of these are from California, transferring to a flight to the more eastern parts of the coun- try. Of those eastbound, more transfer from the West Coast study area than from the rest of the country combined. Its role as a transferring gateway to the West Coast study area is modest, with only about 7% of LAS airport users Las Vegas, 2007 (LAS) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights From West Coast Study Area Outside West Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South-Central America Northern California 9.8 1,958,160 1,494,860 463,300 93,190 364,270 4,170 1,670 Southern California 15.8 3,178,330 2,192,520 985,810 164,530 813,290 5,760 2,230 To the North 9.8 1,959,300 1,685,100 274,200 71,180 200,700 1,470 850 To the East 62.6 12,572,580 11,203,850 1,368,730 1,097,420 218,180 52,960 170 Transpacific 1.9 378,100 313,450 64,650 9,930 54,650 0 70 South-Central America 0.2 30,640 25,700 4,940 3,900 960 80 0 Totals 100 20,077,110 16,915,480 3,161,630 1,440,150 1,652,050 64,440 4,990 Table 4.3. Origin–destination passenger volumes at LAS (1).

transferring to other airports in the West Coast study area. The 10 closest airports are described with their segment pas- senger volumes and their distance from LAS in the LAS air- port passenger activity summary (Appendix A). Looking at the shortest flights feeding LAS, nearly a quarter of the pas- sengers are traveling less than 260 mi, with major concentra- tion of destinations into Phoenix, LAX, SAN, Burbank, and John Wayne. 4.2.3.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at LAS will increase by about 85% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Forecasts have predicted a 104% growth between 2007 and 2025 for LAS. The implications of doing nothing at LAS. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the 2025 cost of not deal- ing with the issues addressed in this project at LAS would be about $1.8 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at LAX in the year 2003. 4.2.4 San Diego International Lindbergh Field (SAN) San Diego is a major airport in the United States, ranking 29th in the ACI-NA 2007 listings. It is characterized by an extraordinary reliance on originating traffic, with only 5% of enplaning passengers having arrived by connecting flight (see Table 4.4). 4.2.4.1 The Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at SAN Of all those enplaning at SAN, 26% are going to destina- tions within the West Coast study area; 6% are going to des- tinations in the Southern California/LAS Mega-region, and 20% are going to the Northern California Mega-region. Of all those enplaning at SAN, 24% are making trips entirely within the West Coast study area, which is the highest level of intra- regional travel of any major airport in the ACRP study. 4.2.4.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on SAN In the analysis presented in Chapter 2, the HSR program could lower the number of passengers flying between San Diego and the Northern California Mega-region by about 35%. Assuming that diversion, the total number of air pas- sengers boarding at San Diego would decrease by about 6%. 4.2.4.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports The California HSR system can directly serve SAN, where studies are now underway to make the airport more oriented to a possible intermodal center located on the rail right of way. In theory, the logical catchment area of SAN could geographically grow to increase market participation from communities near the proposed rail stations at Escondido, Murrieta, and University of California-Riverside. Alterna- tively, the opposite phenomenon might also be true: these market areas might be more attracted to ONT, assuming that its services and prices were improved. With a greater variety of destinations and flight options available at SAN compared with ONT, an HSR connection might have the initial affect of drawing more passengers to use SAN rather than shifting pas- sengers to ONT until possible airport congestion or cost causes SAN to be a less attractive alternative. With increased use, ONT might develop route patterns similar to SAN; at best, the rail system would provide a mechanism that would allow more optimized airport choice by the customer. Table 4.4. Origin–destination passenger volumes at SAN (1). San Diego, 2007 Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights From West Coast Study Area Outside West Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South-Central America Northern California 19.7 1,831,720 1,731,620 100,100 11,480 84,513 2,310 1,797 Southern California/LAS 6.0 552,448 447,460 104,988 19,430 80,543 3,293 1,722 To the North 11.2 1,038,112 1,014,541 23,571 5,316 11,669 922 5,664 To the East 54.6 5,063,861 4,891,420 172,441 144,680 12,259 14,531 971 Transatlantic 2.7 248,829 245,848 2,981 2,095 886 0 0 Transpacific 3.8 352,355 334,250 18,105 3,508 14,567 10 20 South-Central America 2.1 190,137 179,963 10,174 3,519 6,635 20 0 Totals 100 9,277,462 8,845,102 432,360 190,028 211,072 21,086 10,174 77

78 As noted, the proposed California HSR system will not serve as a feeder to LAX, so the problem of where to transfer SAN- originating passengers seeking access to more difficult destina- tions remains to be resolved, including the increased role of ONT. This underscores the need for a comprehensive Regional Aviation System Plan in Southern California to maximize the potential contribution of all major regional airports in the study area. Because of the recent decision to have the airport remain in its present, highly constricted location, the impor- tance of increased roles for airports to the north (and possibly more use of airport capacity to the south) should be a high pri- ority for the long-term intermodal strategy in San Diego. (In the event that San Diego managers find an alternative location, the role of rail would need to be re-examined.) 4.2.4.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights Historically, SAN has not been a major international air- port. It was once served by an international airline, which had to fly partially empty planes in order to deal with the limited runways at the airport; this service has since been abandoned. SAN’s role as a transferring gateway to the West Coast study area is minimal, with only about 2% of airport users transferring to other airports in the West Coast study area. SAN is not characterized by having direct service to nearby smaller airports. Indeed, the closest airport with direct service is LAX, where many SAN passengers go to transfer to the more abundant set of services to varied destinations. 4.2.4.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at SAN will increase by about 72% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Forecasts have predicted a 73% growth between 2007 and 2025 at SAN. The implications of doing nothing at SAN. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at SAN would be about $0.6 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at SAN in the year 2003. 4.3 Understanding the Role of Smaller Airports in the West Coast Study Area Most of the transfer activity and the international activity in the West Coast study area occur at the airports whose pas- senger flows are documented in some detail in the previous sections. The other airports tend to be dominated by domes- tic flows, with less reliance on transfers, and a greater percent- age of boardings from the local area (originations). To better understand the passenger activity in more of the West Coast airports, Appendix C includes the comprehensive passenger activity summary tables for the following 11 air- ports (generally ordered from north to south): • Sacramento Airport, • OAK, • SJO, • Burbank Airport, • Long Beach Airport, • ONT, • John Wayne Santa Anna Airport, and • The four airports discussed in this section. The airport passenger activity summary tables developed in this project are described in the introduction to Appen- dix C. With these summary tables, the reader can learn the following: • The absolute volumes of origination and transferring air passengers at the subject airport, from the Airline Origin and Destination Survey of the Office of Airline Informa- tion of the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (DB1B); • The destinations of all originating and transferring air pas- sengers at the subject airport, organized by 13 super zones of origin and 13 super zones of destination (also from the DB1B); • The volumes of total air passengers carried to the 10 closest airports to the subject airport, from the DOT T100 database, which includes very small commuter carriers not included in the DB1B data; and • A single example of the number of such air travelers who are traveling to that destination with the subject airport as the origin (again from the DB1B). 4.4 Strategic Implications for the Major Airports in the East Coast Study Area 4.4.1 Boston Logan Airport (BOS) BOS is ranked as the 20th airport in the United States in terms of passenger activity in the ACI-NA 2007 survey. BOS is primarily an airport for originating/ending traffic. Of the trips captured in the DOT’s OD survey, about 5% of the enplanements are by passengers who arrived at the airport by connecting airplanes (see Table 4.5). 4.4.1.1 Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at BOS Of all those passengers enplaning at BOS, 21% are going to destinations within the East Coast study area: 1% are going to destinations in New England; 12% are going to New

York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 8% are going to the Washington, D.C./Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at BOS, 19% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area, the highest level of any East Coast study area airport. 4.4.1.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on BOS According to the analysis by the DOT’s Office of the Inspec- tor General, increased investment in the rail system between Boston and NYC could divert an additional 10% of air pas- sengers in a lower speed scenario, and 20% in a higher speed scenario. In the research team’s database, departing air traffic from BOS with actual destinations in NYC, Philadelphia, and the Washington, D.C., region constitutes about 2.0 million annual passengers (2007). Applying this range of diversions would lower this volume between 0.2 million and 0.4 million passengers. This suggests that improved rail as far south as Washington, D.C., could lower the volume of total passen- gers boarding at BOS by 1–3%. 4.4.1.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports Table 4.5 shows that passengers boarding at BOS are not coming from adjacent airports, with less than 1% of its traf- fic associated with other New England airports. Thus, even assuming a hypothesized rail (not planned) between Boston and Maine, for example, would not decrease local feeder flights. An air market does exist between BOS and Cape Cod and the Islands, but the geography is not conducive to a rail connection. An HSR connection west to Worcester and Springfield would improve ground access for those Western Massachusetts passengers willing to change to some connect- ing mode at South Station to get to BOS. Rather, continued regional airport systems planning should build upon the analysis commenced in the NERASP study to widen the unique and successful system of intercity bus ser- vices directly serving BOS. The need in New England is not to alter the present pattern of regional sharing of demand, but to continue building on the success of NERASP. 4.4.1.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights BOS serves as the point of origin for 1.5 million trips across the Atlantic, most of which fly directly from the airport, but there is considerable “leakage” to other gateway airports. Look- ing at BOS as the “logical” gateway for transatlantic travel from New England, note that on an annual basis about 64,000 air passengers from New England choose JFK; 55,000 choose EWR; about 42,000 choose PHL; and 32,000 choose IAD. Of the 1.5 million passengers boarding a plane at BOS for a transatlantic trip, only about 7% got to the airport by a con- necting flight. Its role as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is minimal, with only about 2% of airport users transferring to airports in the East Coast study area. The role of nearby airports in providing feeder service to BOS is somewhat low. Of the 10 closest airports with direct service, three—Martha’s Vineyard, Provincetown, and Nantucket— can only be accessed by (or over) water, so they cannot be con- sidered as prime candidates for relief by new rail service. In short, BOS does not rely on a network of New England local services to feed its longer distance services; such traffic from Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont travels directly from those states to points of hubbing (e.g., Chicago, Detroit, Atlanta, etc.). Table 4.5. Origin–destination passenger volumes at BOS (1). Boston, 2007 (BOS) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast Study Area Outside of East Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America New England 0.8 102,529 3,270 99,259 28,160 65,490 3126 2,483 NY, NJ, PA 11.6 1,573,230 1,459,650 113,580 24,940 62,628 18,301 7,711 Mid-Atlantic 8.2 1,106,834 1,060,670 46,164 11680 17943 14,109 2,432 To the South 22.7 3,085,099 2,981,240 103,859 51,970 24,685 25,332 1,872 To the West 35.3 4,788,332 4,629,810 158,522 68,350 26,312 55891 7,969 To the North 2.5 341,529 309,261 32,268 10,161 22,097 0 10 Transatlantic 11.1 1,502,673 1,393,366 109,307 32,167 77,140 0 0 Transpacific 2.3 305,501 298,039 7,462 3,369 4,083 0 10 South-Central America 5.6 764,752 742,275 22,477 12,626 9,851 0 0 Totals 100 13,570,479 12,877,581 692,898 243,423 310,229 116,759 22,487 79

80 4.4.1.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at BOS will increase by about 75% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have predicted a 45% growth between 2007 and 2025. The implications of doing nothing at BOS. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at BOS would be $1.8 billion when compared against a base-case benchmark condition of 100% flights on schedule, or about $1.2 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experi- enced at BOS in the year 2003. 4.4.2 John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) JFK ranks sixth among airports in the United States in the ACI-NA ranking for 2007. Of the passengers in the DOT’s OD database, some 17% of boardings at JFK are by people who accessed the airport by a connecting flight (see Table 4.6). JFK carries about 7.4 million passengers across the Atlantic and the Pacific, making it the largest intercontinental airport in the study, just ahead of LAX, which has about 6.9 million such passengers. 4.4.2.1 The Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at JFK Of all those enplaning at JFK, 10% are going to destinations within the East Coast study area: 4% are going to destinations in New England; 4% are going to New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 2% are going to the Washington, D.C./ Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at JFK, only 6% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area. 4.4.2.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on JFK The 6% of JFK traffic that is internal to the mega-region can be examined for potential diversions. JFK currently sends about 316,000 OD passengers to the other major airports on Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor. Assuming an additional range of diversions between 10% and 20%, boardings at JFK would decrease by 30,000–60,000 passengers. JFK currently sends about 480,000 OD passengers to Albany, Syracuse, and Buffalo along a potential Empire Corridor HSR line. Applying the same diversion factors (with the understand- ing that Buffalo would get a diversion in the lower range), boardings at JFK might decrease by 48,000–96,000 passengers. Assuming HSR were implemented on both the NEC and on the Empire Corridor, the decrease in JFK total boardings would represent less than 1% under the higher diversion scenarios. 4.4.2.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports Looking at segment ridership (which includes both feeder and OD traffic), JFK gets a small amount (28,000) of air passen- gers connecting from Albany just 145 miles away; with a larger contribution (190,000) from Syracuse (208 miles) from JFK. Hartford (106 miles), Providence (143 miles), and Manchester (199 miles) each contribute more than 20,000 air passengers. Table 4.6. Origin–destination passenger volumes at JFK (1). JFK, 2007 (JFK) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast StudyArea Outside of East Coast StudyArea From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America New England 3.6 785,829 297,990 487,839 38,940 300,140 91,478 57,281 NY, NJ, PA 4.3 934,491 583,290 351,201 29,980 239,594 56,013 25,614 Mid-Atlantic 2.0 428,277 221,960 206,317 31,830 54,554 100,182 19,751 To the South 14.7 3,208,073 2,603,270 604,803 254,390 55,559 275,574 19,280 To the West 25.1 5,470,486 4,540,380 930,106 316,940 67,046 473,038 73,082 To the North 1.0 221,079 196,956 24,123 5,438 18,495 0 190 Transatlantic 28.5 6,212,549 5,293,191 919,358 204,210 715,148 0 0 Transpacific 5.4 1,183,751 1,106,744 77,007 43,463 33,464 0 80 South-Central America 15.5 3,388,359 3,193,241 195,118 102,646 92,452 20 0 Totals 100 21,832,894 18,037,022 3,795,872 1,027,837 1,576,452 996,305 195,278

Under present configurations, neither service on the Empire Corridor nor service on the NEC is routed to the major airport transfer facility at Jamaica Station on Long Island. As long as this configuration exists, the role of rail to substitute for or augment feeder services will be minimal. In terms of track geometry, trains that currently terminate at NY Penn Station could be through-routed (without revers- ing directions at Penn Station) from the Empire Corridor in the North and from Philadelphia in the South to provide direct service to Jamaica Station. Questions of rail system capacity under the East River would need to be resolved as part of the larger question of through-routings between the systems now underway in New York. 4.4.2.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights Looking just at the enplanement with destinations across the Atlantic, about 15% of those passengers accessed the air- port by a connecting flight. This is much lower than with a mirror situation in LAX, where about 25% of those board- ing places for the Pacific have come by connecting flight. As might be expected, those that do use JFK for a transfer to a transatlantic flight come from longer, not shorter distances. More people transfer to a transatlantic flight at JFK from the Southeast than from the entire Mega-region from Maine to Virginia. Passengers leaving JFK for Pacific destinations (including Hawaii) are overwhelmingly local in origin; only 6% came by a connecting flight. As an airport designed for longer distance trips, JFK’s role as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is modest, with only about 5% of airport users connecting to other airports in the East Coast study area. More detail is presented in the JFK airport passenger activity summary (Appendix A). 4.4.2.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at JFK will increase by about 71% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have predicted a 76% growth between 2007 and 2025. The implications of doing nothing at JFK. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at JFK would be about $1.2 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at JFK in the year 2003. 4.4.3 LaGuardia Airport (LGA) LGA airport ranks 21st in activity level among airports in the United States, as ranked in the 2007 ACI-NA report. Although LGA is designed as a shorter distance OD airport, passengers do use it for transferring. About 8% of those boarding a flight at LGA arrived there by a connecting flight (see Table 4.7). 4.4.3.1 The Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at LGA Of all those enplaning at LGA, 16% are going to destinations within the East Coast study area: 6% are going to destinations in New England; 3% are going to New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 6% are going to the Washington, D.C./ Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at LGA, 13% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area. LaGuardia, 2007 (LGA) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast Study Area Outside of East Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America New England 6.4 804,995 556,390 248,605 59,650 169,416 11,136 8,403 NY, NJ, PA 3.1 386,013 241,930 144,083 43,890 93,903 3,316 2,974 Mid-Atlantic 6.3 794,248 707,890 86,358 51,750 24,325 7,433 2,850 To the South 34.2 4,299,430 4,094,210 205,220 130,310 40,585 28,267 6,058 To the West 40.2 5,054,435 4,818,840 235,595 136,710 48,721 35,336 14,828 To the North 4.6 581,598 558,928 22,670 5,434 17,236 0 0 Atlantic/Pacific 1.8 222,999 137,511 85,488 21,885 63,603 0 0 South-Central America 3.3 417,342 382,209 35,133 14,227 20,906 0 0 Totals 100 12,561,060 11,497,908 1,063,152 463,856 191,051 85,488 35,113 Table 4.7. Origin–destination passenger volumes at LGA (1). 81

82 4.4.3.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on LGA The 13% of LGA passengers with OD trips entirely within the East Coast Mega-region represent the market segment of most interest in the study of rail diversion. Currently, LGA sends 1.0 million OD passengers to the major airports along Amtrak’s NEC system. Applying the low- and high-diversion factors would predict a diversion of 100,000–200,000 LGA- departing passengers to Amtrak’s NEC. At present, LGA sends about 79,000 air passengers with OD trips to Rochester, Syracuse, and Buffalo, along a pos- sible Empire Corridor HSR system. Applying the range of diversion factors would predict a decrease in air volumes of 8,000–16,000 LGA-boarding passengers. If HSR improve- ments were implemented in both the NEC and the Empire Corridor, the total number of boarding passengers at LGA might decrease between 1% and 2%. 4.4.3.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports Like JFK, LGA is not characterized by having a large net- work of close-in feeder airports with direct services. Using segment data that combine OD traffic with feeder traffic, the LGA airport passenger activity summary (Appendix A) describes the 10 closest airports with direct service. These include Albany (136 miles) with 10,000 annual passenger trips; Providence (143 miles) with 17,000 trips; Ithaca (178 miles) with 18,000 trips; and Syracuse (197 miles) with 51,000 trips. Again, Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard together have 18,000 trips, but their over-water trip makes them less relevant to the concepts of rail diversion. Unlike JFK, LGA currently has no connection to the regional rail system. Thus, there is no immediately obvious strategy to bring rail travelers to this airport to continue the longer dis- tance segment of their trip. LGA is, however, intricately intertwined with the present and potential role of adjacent airports. The major rise of traffic at Long Island-Macarthur Airport (ISP) in Long Island has moderated demand at both LGA and JFK. (By way of example, ISP sends 263,000 passengers to BWI, of which 116,000 are OD in nature.) Similarly, the PANYNJ is under- taking a major effort at present to expand the role of its newly acquired Stewart Airport. Because of the PANYNJ’s domi- nance in the major airports for the region, multijurisdictional planning there is now underway on a major scale. 4.4.3.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights LGA plays no direct role in long-distance international fights, with about 2% of its users working their way through other gateways to finish their intercontinental trip. Its role as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is modest, with only about 4% of airport users transferring to other air- ports in the East Coast study area. Of those boarding a plane at LGA to a destination in the East Coast study area, 24% were connecting from another flight. 4.4.3.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at LGA will increase by about 71% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have predicted a 37% growth between 2007 and 2025 at LGA The implications of doing nothing at LGA. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at LGA would be about $1.1 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at LGA in the year 2003. 4.4.4 Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) EWR ranked as the 11th most active airport in the United States in the ACI-NA survey. Unlike LGA—and to a greater extent JFK—EWR operates as a hub for connecting flight activity. Of the passengers included in the DOT’s OD sample, 21% of enplanements at EWR gained access to the airport by a connecting flight (see Table 4.8). Of the passengers on-board flights from EWR to the East Coast study area, two thirds are connecting passengers, rather than passengers with origin or destination in the Newark area. 4.4.4.1 Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at EWR Of all those enplaning at EWR, 7% are going to destina- tions within the East Coast study area: 3% are going to desti- nations in New England; 2% are going to New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 2% are going to the Washington, D.C./Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at EWR, only 2% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area. 4.4.4.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on EWR EWR’s role in providing services within the East Coast Mega-region is small, with only 2% of its users making trips with both origins and destinations in the corridor. Thus, the potential for adjacent improvements to Amtrak to lower demand at EWR is limited. Currently, about 210,000 EWR

OD passengers go to major airports in the NEC, and three quarters of those go to BOS. Applying the range of diversion factors, the decrease in air passengers could range from 21,000 to 42,000. This would decrease total passenger boardings at EWR by less than one half of 1%. 4.4.4.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports The EWR Rail Station provides a high-quality transfer capability between the airport internal circulation system (AirTrain) and the main line of Amtrak’s NEC service. In theory, such a connection could be used to provide reliable feeder services to longer distance flight segments. As dis- cussed in Section 2.5.1.3, efforts to market rails as a feeder mode to EWR have had limited success. Realistically, through-routing of some Empire Corridor services might be required to make HSR truly serve as a feeder mode. (See Section 2.5.2 for a discussion of the difficulties in making this work.) Higher speed and more reliable service along the NEC could strengthen feeder service patterns to Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore. Significant rail investment in the Keystone Corridor between Harrisburg and New York could also improve the market for feeder ser- vices to EWR. The multijurisdictional relationship between EWR and Stewart Airport is being addressed. 4.4.4.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights The carriers at EWR have developed an aggressive program to build up transatlantic services over the past decades. Cur- rently, 19% of the originating passengers at EWR have desti- nations across the Atlantic. Of those enplanements, 30% of passengers are connecting from feeder flights, making that market one of local origination by more than two-thirds. EWR’s role as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is modest, with only about 5% of airport users connecting on to other airports in the East Coast study area. Of the passengers on board flights from EWR to the East Coast study area, two thirds are connecting passengers, rather than passengers with origin or destination in the Newark area. EWR does not have significant OD volumes to many close- in airports—the closest is Bradley Field in Hartford, some 115 miles from EWR (with 47,000 segment passengers). The EWR passenger activity summary included in Appendix A shows volumes for proximate airports including Albany at 143 miles, Providence at 159 miles, Syracuse at 194 miles, and Rochester at 246 miles. 4.4.4.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at EWR will increase by about 93% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have predicted a 66% growth between 2007 and 2025. The implications of doing nothing at EWR. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at EWR would be about $1.6 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at EWR in the year 2003. This level of delay potential is by far the largest of any airport in the East Coast Mega-region. Table 4.8. Origin–destination passenger volumes at EWR (1). New England 3.0 498,987 167,220 331,767 10,670 203,477 79,146 38,474 NY, NJ, PA 2.1 352,863 95,760 257,103 8,750 171,024 58,195 19,134 Mid-Atlantic 1.6 259,276 88,330 170,946 10,260 56,401 84,589 19,696 To the South 26.4 4,371,081 3,811,240 559,841 139,730 88,189 318,698 13,224 To the West 33.2 5,499,294 4,575,950 923,344 281,190 91,538 484,358 66,258 To the North 2.2 358,408 281,069 77,339 11,042 66,177 0 120 Transatlantic 19.3 3,190,883 2,267,337 923,546 174,854 748,692 0 0 Transpacific 3.1 516,935 415,365 101,570 47,076 54,364 0 130 South-Central America 9.1 1,501,701 1,344,455 157,246 77,304 79,662 280 0 Totals 100 16,549,428 13,046,726 3,502,702 760,876 1,559,524 1,025,266 157,036 Newark, 2007 (EWR) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast Study Area Outside of East Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America 83

84 4.4.5 Philadelphia International Airport (PHL) PHL ranked as the 17th busiest airport for passenger activ- ity in the ACI-NA 2007 survey. Of those boarding planes at PHL, 36% are connecting from other flights, making it the most aggressive connecting airport in the two ACRP 3-10 study areas (see Table 4.9). 4.4.5.1 Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at PHL Of all those enplaning at PHL, 22% are going to destina- tions within the East Coast study area: 10% are going to destinations in New England; 9% are going to New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 3% are going to the Wash- ington, D.C./Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at PHL, 10% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area, reflecting its role as a gateway from more dis- tant origins. 4.4.5.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on PHL Looking first at the 10% of PHL making trips entirely within the mega-region, 480,000 trips are made from origins in Philadelphia to destinations at major East Coast airports. Virtually all of these trips are from airports along the north- ern portion of the corridor, including Boston, Providence, and Bradley. A low-range estimate of decrease in air passen- gers at PHL due to this diversion would be 48,000; a high range would be 96,000. These would represent a decrease of between three tenths of 1% and six tenths of 1% of total boarding passengers at PHL. 4.4.5.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports Some of the direct flights that feed this network come from airports relatively near Philadelphia. The PHL airport pas- senger activity summary (in Appendix A) shows that, of the 10 closest airports with direct service, Allentown (55 miles away) sends 40,000 passengers; Harrisburg (83 miles away) sends 60,000; Wilkes Barre–Scranton (104 miles away) sends 60,000; Salisbury, MD, (106 miles away) sends 39,000; and Westchester County (116 miles away) sends 25,000. Of these present feeders, significantly improved rail service might com- pete effectively for feeder passengers from Harrisburg and Westchester County. More importantly, improved rail would strengthen existing market patterns from the NEC stations in New Jersey and Wilmington. Given presently existing track geometry, rail service from the north, which today terminates at Philadelphia’s 30th Street Station, could continue on to PHL, assuming capacity issues could be resolved on the “high-speed” line. Reportedly, con- siderations are also being given for a new airport-related stop directly on the NEC main line. The possible roles of adjacent airports to operate in a com- plementary mode to the operations of PHL were explored in Chapter 3. The kind of work program briefly initiated in the analysis of Chapter 3 should be continued and expanded by the ongoing program of the Delaware Valley Regional Plan- ning Commission. 4.4.5.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights PHL relies heavily on a system of feeder connections to position itself in the markets deemed most important. Over 1 million passengers board with transatlantic destinations; Table 4.9. Origin–destination passenger volumes at PHL (1). Philadelphia, 2007 (PHL) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? New England 9.7 1,505,299 660,820 844,479 142,300 596,696 44,286 61,197 NY, NJ, PA 9.2 1,427,940 314,290 1,113,650 188,460 772,477 85,093 67,620 Mid-Atlantic 3.1 488,810 64,630 424,180 144,560 195,350 54,764 29,506 To the South 28.5 4,432,596 3,318,690 1,113,906 745,840 195,460 159,970 12,636 To the West 34.8 5,418,630 4,194,550 1,224,080 765,660 196,069 215,130 47,221 To the North 1.7 264,031 158,589 105,442 33,543 71,809 0 90 Transatlantic 6.8 1,054,772 507,231 547,541 175,936 371,605 0 0 Transpacific 0.9 140,824 129,062 11,762 8,207 3,495 0 60 South-Central America 5.3 819,621 601,271 218,350 158,323 59,907 120 0 Totals 100 15,552,523 9,949,133 5,603,390 2,362,829 2,462,868 559,363 218,330 Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast Study Area Outside of East Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America

of those, the majority (52%) have flown to PHL to make that connection. Making this network system work, two thirds of the transferring travelers come from beyond the East Coast study area. Market share is attained from as far as the West Coast (defined as California and the Northwest states), where 132,000 trips originated in 2007. The role of PHL as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is significant, with about 15% of airport users con- necting to other airports in the East Coast study area. 4.4.5.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at PHL will increase by about 68% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have predicted a 79% growth between 2007 and 2025. The implications of doing nothing at PHL. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at PHL would be $1.1 billion when compared against a base-case benchmark condition of 100% flights on schedule, or about $0.5 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experi- enced at PHL in the year 2003. 4.4.6 Baltimore Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport (BWI) BWI ranked 25th among airports in the United States in passenger activity in the 2007 ACI-NA survey. About 13% of enplanements at BWI are by connecting passengers, accord- ing to the DOT’s OD sample, placing it in the midrange of study area airports (see Table 4.10). 4.4.6.1 Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at BWI Of all those enplaning at BWI, 22% are going to destina- tions within the East Coast study area: 13% are going to des- tinations in New England; 8% are going to New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 1% are going to the Washington, D.C./Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at BWI, 16% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area, which is high for this sample of major airports. 4.4.6.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on BWI Currently, about 870,000 air travelers fly from origins at BWI to destinations at airports to the north along the Amtrak NEC, serving NYC, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachu- setts, and Virginia. If HSR on the NEC could divert these travelers, a decrease of 87,000–174,000 could be expected. Currently, another 160,000 OD travelers fly from BWI to Albany and Rochester on the Empire Corridor. Application of the diversion range suggests between 16,000 and 32,000 poten- tial diversions to rail, assuming the Empire Service was through- routed to Washington, D.C. If improvements were made to both the full NEC and the Empire Corridor (extended), the decrease in passenger boardings at BWI due to substitution of trips could be 1–2%. 4.4.6.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports BWI has a moderate-quality connection with Amtrak’s NEC, with a 10-min bus trip between the rail station and the airport. At present, rail services at BWI are providing feeder services, predominantly from Washington, D.C. Between 1% Table 4.10. Origin–destination passenger volumes at BWI (1). Baltimore/Washington, 2007 (BWI) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? New England 12.7 1,267,249 980,020 287,229 25,000 261,708 248 273 NY, NJ, PA 7.7 765,056 490,800 274,256 31,150 241,517 637 952 Mid-Atlantic 1.2 121,814 48,420 73,394 25,290 47,670 135 299 To South 28.3 2,815,842 2,503,910 311,932 245,410 63,805 2,507 210 To West 43.2 4,301,984 3,939,840 362,144 286,420 70,006 4,291 1,427 To North 0.7 69,914 68,578 1,336 295 1,041 0 0 Transatlantic 1.8 182,322 176,403 5,919 467 5,452 0 0 Transpacific 1.1 107,569 105,670 1,899 553 1,346 0 0 South-Central America 3.2 318,053 314,882 3,171 1,524 1,647 0 0 Totals 100 9,949,803 8,628,523 1,321,280 616,109 694,192 7,818 3,161 Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast Study Area Outside of East Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America 85

86 and 2% of non-connecting air passengers use the rail system to access the airport. Significant improvements in rail travel times could increase the geographic scale of the market watershed area to the north and to the south. The analysis of the operations (particularly groundside) of BWI have benefitted from a long-standing program at the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments to survey all three metro-D.C. airports in one coordinated effort. As discussed in Chapter 3, these efforts could be expanded into a more complete merging of ground and air destination data, as was pioneered in the NERASP program. 4.4.6.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights BWI does offer limited transatlantic service, for which 97% of the passengers are of local origination. For a variety of rea- sons, the airport is not particularly dependent on a system of feeder flights to make its operations successful. BWI’s role as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is average, with about 6% of airport users transferring to other airports in the East Coast study area. Its primary air car- rier, Southwest Airlines, does transfer many passengers at this airport, though not following in the path of a traditional dominant hubbing airport. Of the passengers at BWI going to the East Coast study area, most are not transferring: 71% of them are originating in the BWI area. 4.4.6.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at BWI will increase by about 80% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have also predicted an 80% growth between 2007 and 2025. The implications of doing nothing at BWI. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at BWI would be about $0.6 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at BWI in the year 2003. 4.4.7 Dulles International Airport (IAD) IAD operates as both a center of hubbing and server of local origins in the southernmost area of the East Coast study area and ranks 22nd in passenger activity in airports in the United States in the year 2007 ACI-NA survey (see Table 4.11). Of those trips documented in the DOT’s OD survey, 33% of IAD’s enplaning passengers came to the airport on a connect- ing flight. Thus, the role of transferring passengers in the activity of the airport is slightly less than at PHL and consid- erably higher than at either EWR or JFK. 4.4.7.1 The Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at IAD Of all those enplaning at IAD, 16% are going to destinations within the East Coast study area: 7% are going to destinations in New England; 7% are going to New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 2% are going to the Washington, D.C./ Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at IAD, only 6% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area. Table 4.11. Origin–destination passenger volumes at IAD (1). New England 6.6 732,916 336,310 396,606 27,090 293,408 53,051 23,057 NY, NJ, PA 7.1 792,541 202,680 589,861 43,440 425,690 86,516 34,215 Mid-Atlantic 2.3 254,026 7,570 246,456 37,690 164,513 38,397 5,856 To the South 19.0 2,114,290 1,305,570 808,720 311,920 260,405 220,027 16,368 To the West 37.1 4,122,526 2,951,190 1,171,336 562,870 234,266 302,199 72,001 To the North 1.9 215,233 136,991 78,242 17,341 60,861 0 40 Transatlantic 16.9 1,879,036 1,278,306 600,730 122,374 478,356 0 0 Transpacific 3.8 424,932 325,362 99,570 55,590 43,870 0 110 South-Central America 5.2 580,579 428,942 151,637 63,128 88,389 120 0 100 11,116,079 6,972,921 4,143,158 1,241,443 2,049,758 700,310 151,647 Dulles, 2007 (IAD) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Totals Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast Study Area Outside of East Coast Study Area From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America

4.4.7.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on IAD With only 6% of IAD’s passengers taking trips wholly within the East Coast Mega-region, the potential for many diversions of trips onto Amtrak is somewhat low. IAD currently sends a total of 435,000 OD air passengers to the airports serving Amtrak’s NEC (including BDL). The majority of these passengers are going to BOS, 412 miles away—a distance that is difficult for even the fastest HSR serv- ices. With the understanding that modal diversion between Boston and Northern Virginia will be lower than others in this section, the same factors used in the preceding sections can be applied, gaining a range of diversions for between 43,000 and 87,000 passengers. IAD sends an additional 18,000 OD passengers to Albany and Rochester. Assuming that the Empire high-speed services were through-routed on NEC high-speed services, 2,000– 4,000 passengers could be diverted. Dulles also serves a total of 33,000 OD passengers to Nor- folk, Richmond, Greensboro, and Raleigh-Durham with direct flights. If a southern corridor HSR service were developed, rail might substitute for 3,000–6,000 air passengers. Assuming that all of these services influence travel to the Northern Virginia area, a decrease in IAD total boarding of less than 1% could be expected. 4.4.7.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports IAD is not located near proposed HSR services in the region. For this reason, a major role for rail in providing feeder ser- vices to longer segment air services is highly unlikely. As noted, IAD could benefit from the more complete integration of avi- ation and ground destination data pioneered in the NERASP program in New England. 4.4.7.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights About 1.9 million enplanements are to destinations across the Atlantic, which is higher than at BOS or PHL but lower than at LAX, EWR, or JFK. Two thirds of those Atlantic-bound passengers are from local origination, with one third from the feeder network. IAD’s role as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is significant, with about 11% of airport users transfer- ring to other airports in the East Coast study area. The IAD passenger activity summary in Appendix A shows there are several close-in airports providing feeder services to IAD. Charlottesville, VA, is 77 miles to the south; Harrisburg, PA, is 94 miles to the north; and State College, PA, is 128 miles to the northwest. 4.4.7.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at IAD will increase by about 95% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have predicted an unusual 129% growth between 2007 and 2025 at IAD. The implications of doing nothing at IAD. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at IAD are about $80 million compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at IAD in the year 2003. 4.4.8 Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA) DCA primarily serves a market of local origination, but some passengers transfer there anyway. According to the DOT’s OD sample, 18% of DCA enplanements are by travel- ers who arrived at the airport by a connecting flight. Since 2001, the airport operations have been characterized by var- ious levels of security control procedures that make it a diffi- cult airport in which to make connections (see Table 4.12). 4.4.8.1 Role of Intra-Mega-region Traffic at DCA Of all those enplaning at DCA, 23% are going to destinations within the East Coast study area: 10% are going to destinations in New England; 12% are going to New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania; and 1% are going to the Washington, D.C./ Baltimore region. Of all those enplaning at DCA, 16% are making trips entirely within the East Coast study area, which is high for this sample of major airports. 4.4.8.2 Rail as a Substitution for Air Travel: Impacts on DCA As can be seen from the data, DCA is more oriented to the travel of the East Coast Mega-region than its longer distance partner, IAD. DCA currently sends more than 1.1 million OD air passengers to the airports of Amtrak’s NEC. With the largest single portion going to NYC airports, this market is prime for diversion to improved HSR services. A range of diversions would see between 110,000 and 220,000 additional air pas- sengers diverted in this major market for HSR. To Empire Corridor destinations such as Albany, Syracuse, and Rochester, DCA currently sends nearly 70,000 OD pas- sengers. Assuming the through-routing of Empire Corridor trains to the NEC destinations, 7,000–14,000 diversions are possible. 87

If HSR were to be extended to the south, DCA might lose some present passengers to Norfolk, Raleigh-Durham, Greens- boro, and Charlotte—currently at 136,000. Such a southern corridor might divert between 14,000 and 28,000 travelers from DCA. Assuming all three HSR corridors are created, the number of diverted travelers would be 1–3% of DCA’s total boardings. 4.4.8.3 Rail as a Complementary Mode and the Role of Adjacent Airports Because DCA is near a longer distance rail line (similar in nature to EWR), rail services could possibly grow over time to serve as a feeder service to flights from DCA. For travelers approaching from a potential southern rail corridor, DCA would have ground access travel time advantages over BWI, for example. About 130,000 feeder passengers to DCA are provided by the four southern corridor airports. On the other hand, rail access as a feeder to airports prob- ably makes most sense when the subject airport is offering highly specialized services, such as international or direct longer distance domestic services. DCA is constrained in the amount of such services it can provide and, as shown in this section, it tends to focus on the moderate distance trip. Thus, the market for complicated feeder access services might be smaller than otherwise. 4.4.8.4 Feeding Longer Distance Flights DCA’s role as a transferring gateway to the East Coast study area is moderate, with about 9% of airport users trans- ferring to other airports in the East Coast study area. Consistent with its function as an OD airport, DCA is not fed by much of a local network of nearby airports. The DCA summary activity sheet in Appendix A shows direct flights to Norfolk, VA (118 miles away) and Westchester County (233 miles). All other connections are to major airports. 4.4.8.5 Conditions in the Year 2025 Demand in the year 2025. The MITRE FATE program predicts that demand for domestic originations at DCA will increase by about 77% over what the research team has reported for the year 2007. The FAA’s Terminal Area Fore- casts have predicted a 23% growth between 2007 and 2025. The implications of doing nothing at DCA. Given the definitions established in Chapter 1, the cost of not dealing with the issues addressed in this project at DCA would be about $0.6 billion compared with a benchmark condition of the delay experienced at DCA in the year 2003. 4.5 Understanding the Role of Smaller Airports in the East Coast Study Area Most of the transfer activity and international activity in the East Coast study area take place at the eight airports whose passenger flows are documented in some detail in the previ- ous sections. To better understand the passenger activity in more of the East Coast airports, Appendix C includes the complete ACRP project airport passenger activity summary tables for the fol- lowing airports (generally ordered from north to south): • Manchester, NH; • Albany, NY; • Syracuse, NY; 88 New England 10.1 928,827 597,040 331,787 21,780 301,060 1,962 6,985 NY, NJ, PA 12.5 1,147,001 752,900 394,101 34,780 347,579 3,004 8,738 Mid-Atlantic 1.0 89,456 12,360 77,096 24,460 51,421 410 805 To the South 28.8 2,651,418 2,114,310 537,108 453,220 74,918 5,878 3,092 To the West 39.1 3,601,540 3,305,320 296,220 203,250 78,052 9,475 5,443 To the North 1.8 163,605 153,365 10,240 2,200 8,030 0 10 Atlantic/Pacific 2.3 214,126 193,387 20,739 5,376 15,353 0 10 South-Central America 4.4 408,051 382,988 25,063 16,528 8,535 0 0 Totals 100 9,204,024 7,511,670 1,692,354 761,594 884,948 20,729 25,083 Washington Reagan National, 2007 (DCA) Where Are the Enplaning Passengers Going? From Where Are the Connecting Passengers Coming? Destination Zone Total (%) Total Boardings Originating Boardings Boardings from Transfer Flights East Coast StudyArea Outside of East Coast StudyArea From Atlantic/ Pacific From South- Central America Table 4.12. Origin–destination passenger volumes at DCA (1).

• Providence, RI; • Hartford/Springfield, CT; • Richmond, VA; • Norfolk, VA; and • The eight East Coast airports described in this section. The ACRP project airport passenger activity summary tables are described in the introduction to Appendix A. For each of the 15 airports covered within the East Coast study area, the summary tables reveal the following: • The absolute volumes of origination and transferring air passengers at the subject airport, from the Airline Origin and Destination Survey of the Office of Airline Informa- tion of the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (DB1B). • The destinations of all originating and transferring air passengers at the subject airport, organized by 13 super- zones of origin and 13 superzones of destination (also from the DB1B). • The volumes of total air passengers carried to the 10 clos- est airports to the subject airport, from the DOT T100 database, which includes very small commuter carriers not included in the DB1B data. • A single example of the number of such air travelers who are traveling to that destination with the subject airport as the origin (again from the DB1B). 4.6 Description of the ACRP Project Database The research team has created the ACRP project database to quickly summarize vast amounts of data and information about making aviation trips in the United States and inter- national destinations. The database incorporates both the DB1B database of the Airline Origin and Destination Survey of the Office of Airline Information of the Bureau of Trans- portation Statistics and the BTS T-100 segment volumes. In the format presented in Appendix A, the database allows the access of both data sources at once. The DB1B source is com- prehensive in its coverage of airport-to-airport OD patterns, but does not always cover all flights by very small commercial aircraft. By contrast, the T-100 source does not provide OD information, but provides solid data concerning the total num- ber of passengers on a given flight, regardless of the size of the plane. Additional information is presented in Section C.3 of Appendix C of this report. The ACRP project database has made certain simplifying assumptions to deal with limitations in the source data, partic- ularly concerning flights that originate outside of the United States. For that reason, OD volumes in the database may be slightly higher than reported in other applications built from DB1B data. The ACRP project database is so large that it is, in essence, not feasible to create simplified spreadsheets (e.g., in Excel for- mat) from which the analyst can select the information appro- priate to the region or issue being examined. Rather, the “raw” data are kept in a large server (computer) housed at the research team’s main office in White River Junction, VT. The data concerning airline passenger flows are organized by each airport located in the two study regions, as presented in Appendix C. 4.7 Implications of the Airport-by-Airport Review for a Comprehensive Strategy to Deal with Aviation Capacity in the Coastal Mega-regions A quick, preliminary assessment of the potential roles of rail substitution, rail complementarity, and better local air- port cooperation suggests that, while important, none of these represents a “silver bullet” that will eliminate the issue of lack of aviation capacity in the mega-regions, based on this airport-by-airport review. In the following chapter, the argu- ment will be made that the aviation industry needs to signif- icantly increase the role of accountability and transparency in the management of the airport/aviation system. Although the need to become more multimodal and more multijurisdic- tional is self-evident, the major opportunities to increase functional capacity in the coastal mega-regions lie within the aviation sector itself. Chapter 5 will suggest a new relationship between local and national institutions to deal with a real and present crisis in functional capacity. 89

Next: Chapter 5 - Airport Demand Management »
Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Report 31: Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues in Coastal Mega-regions examines the aviation capacity issues in the two coastal mega-regions located along the East and West coasts of the United States. The report explores integrated strategic actions to that could potentially address the constrained aviation system capacity and growing travel demand in the high-density, multijurisdictional, multimodal, coastal mega-regions.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!