Airports Bracing for Really Jumbo Jet

When it arrives in the U.S. later this decade, the world’s largest passenger jet will be quieter, less polluting and more comfortable than its predecessors, its makers boast.

The 555-seat behemoth will be able to travel 9,200 miles--or from Los Angeles to Singapore--fully loaded, without refueling. The super-jumbo jet might also provide greater profitability for airlines and cheaper air fares for passengers; not to mention more legroom and headroom, and on-board duty-free shops and cocktail lounges.

But for all the grace it’s supposed to exhibit in the air, the Airbus A380 is already causing big headaches on the ground. The nation’s largest airports worry that they won’t be ready to wedge the 239-foot-long plane into their aged and cramped facilities.

The problem is most evident at Los Angeles International Airport, where executives expect more A380 operations than at any other facility in the world.

Runways need to be separated and taxiways widened at LAX, and passenger jet ways, connecting planes and terminals, must be reconfigured to ensure that the two-deck planes don’t hopelessly clog the airfield. New methods will be needed to speedily service the huge airplane with fuel and food and to unload trash and thousands of gallons of waste.

Time is running short to complete years of planning and construction at airports from Anchorage to Miami in time for the A380’s expected American debut in 2006. As that date approaches, the stakes for both Airbus and airports such as LAX are escalating.

The European consortium has bet its future on the jumbo jet, which is 35% larger than the Boeing 747. And officials at the Los Angeles agency that operates LAX say their ability to accommodate the plane is crucial to preventing San Francisco International Airport from snatching away Los Angeles’ status as the gateway to the Pacific Rim. Bay Area leaders have been more willing to push for airport expansion than their counterparts in Los Angeles.

On one thing everyone agrees: This big bird will need a whole new kind of nest. Its enormous, 261-foot wingspan is ample enough for three blue whales to stretch out head to tail. On each flight, it can transport the weight of 37 MTA buses, or 560 tons. It’s so tall that airport firefighters will have to double the length of their ladders to reach doors on the second deck.

These revolutionary dimensions prompted federal officials, who make rules governing airport design, to review 19-year-old guidelines for larger aircraft.

The FAA had previously called for a 30% widening of taxiways and runways, but now officials say the plane might need less extra space. The agency’s final ruling, expected next year, is crucial because airports that accept federal funds must comply with the guidelines.

The delayed FAA decision makes airport officials nervous because it typically takes 11 years, from design to construction, to create airport facilities.

For now, airport managers are left to speculate about how much retrofitting their facilities will need for the A380. One estimate, provided in a recently released report by the federal General Accounting Office, predicts that it will cost $2.1 billion for 14 large airports to prepare for the plane.

Airport officials provided the cost estimates to the GAO, which tallied them and drafted the report. Researchers hoped the data would lead to more specific parameters for accommodating the big planes. Instead, the study raised doubts about how airports can prepare for the A380.

“There are some uncertainties involved in terms of what needs to be done,” said Belva Martin, an assistant director at the GAO and one of the report’s authors. “Do we have to make major changes? Can airports get waivers? Will airlines that serve our airports actually buy these aircraft and bring them here?”

The logistics and cost of accommodating the A380 are of no small consequence to Airbus, which hopes the plane can supplant Boeing’s venerable 747 as a long-haul workhorse.

Airbus is putting $12 billion into the new plane.

“It’s a huge bet,” said Richard L. Aboulafia, director of aviation consulting for the Teal Group, a Fairfax, Va.-based research and consulting firm. “They’ve made a whole lot of risky bets before and haven’t been wrong. But this time they’re really betting the company.”

In the future, Airbus expects more air travel between hub airports--tilting aviation in favor of larger airplanes that can consolidate several flights into one.

Boeing, in contrast, predicts that air travel will continue to fragment and that more travelers will want to bypass hubs, making large aircraft less necessary.

With the stakes so high, Airbus is fighting any suggestion that its double-decker plane won’t fit into America’s airports.

The company came out swinging at the GAO’s findings, saying many of the $2.1 billion in predicted upgrades are needed to accommodate more passengers, not for A380 operations. The company puts the figure needed to modernize the 14 airports for the A380 at $520 million.

“A lot of myth surrounds the A380 as far as what airports will have to do to prepare for it,” said Allan McArtor, chairman of Airbus North America Holdings Inc. “It’s a big airplane--there’s no doubt about it--but its turning radius is no larger than Boeing’s new 747.”

The GAO debate is centered largely on LAX, which expects to be among the first destinations for the A380. Los Angeles World Airports, the city agency that operates the aging facility, has estimated that it would take $1.2 billion to modernize LAX for the plane.

That figure is likely to drop by more than $500 million, after a meeting last month at which Airbus and LAX officials agreed that an extension of a runway on the airport’s north side is not needed. But with more than $700 million in other potential costs looming, LAX’s modifications still represent about one-third of all those predicted by the GAO.

LAX expects to log more A380 visits than any other airport because of its status as the principal gateway to Asia, where air carriers prefer to use aircraft that carry more passengers, said Michael DiGirolamo, the airport’s deputy director of operations.

Already, several LAX carriers--including Singapore Airlines, Qantas Airways, Germany’s Lufthansa, Virgin Atlantic Airways, Air France and cargo carrier FedEx--have said they will fly the super-jumbo to Los Angeles.

Airbus has received 97 orders for the aircraft from nine buyers.

To accommodate the plane, LAX officials estimate that it will take $400 million to move the airport’s two sets of runways farther apart, and to build parallel taxiways between them, to provide safe clearance between planes.

The cost estimates were calculated as former Mayor Richard Riordan planned a massive expansion of LAX. The numbers have not been updated since James K. Hahn became mayor last summer, and the Hahn administration has not said whether it is committed to making improvements to accommodate the A380.

The issue is of no small import to the city and the mayor. An expansion for the big planes stands to solidify the city’s substantial share of Asian trade and tourism. But airport neighbors are poised to criticize Hahn for any signs that he is backing down on a campaign promise to limit expansion at LAX.

In addition to airfield modifications, LAX officials say they must figure out how to load and unload the 555-seat aircraft. Planners are studying a terminal design that would allow jet ways from terminals to connect to each of the plane’s two decks.

There are also hurdles to servicing the A380. “The limited apron space around the plane is a major issue,” said Kim Day, deputy executive director of project and facilities development. “As it’s taking on twice the luggage, twice the meals, twice the trash is coming off. And there is not twice the apron area. This means the turnaround time will be increased.”

The airport will also have to revamp fuel facilities to fill the A380’s 81,890-gallon tanks. A fill-up will take two pumps 45 minutes. In contrast, it takes about 25 minutes to fuel a 747.

Airbus disagrees with many of the upgrades described by LAX officials. A company letter states that LAX can successfully accommodate the A380 for $177 million, or about one-quarter the cost estimated by the airport.

The company even suggests that LAX could handle the airplane today by simply adjusting its flight operations. Airport officials disagree.

“If we do nothing, the airplane will operate out of here safely,” DiGirolamo said. “But it will create delays. Airplanes will have to hold at the gates until the taxiways are clear. It will be a very inconvenient problem for the traveling public.”

If the A380 landed at LAX today, air traffic controllers would be forced to close taxiways and to taxi the jet to and from remote gates at the far western edge of the airfield to provide safe clearances.

Officials at San Francisco International Airport estimate that they will require $76 million for similar fixes and modified gates that are already being designed.

Though Los Angeles politicians waver about how to modernize LAX, San Francisco officials believe that their improvements for the big planes may help them challenge LAX for more of the lucrative Asian market.

“It is absolutely critical to our economy and to our desired position as the gateway to the Pacific Rim that SFO modernize,” said P.J. Johnston, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown’s press secretary. “And to do so, we have to address the runways.”

Even the nation’s newest airport, Denver International, says it will need modifications so the world’s largest passenger jet can land at the 7-year-old rural facility. Officials are spending an additional $11 million on the airport’s sixth runway, a 16,000-foot-long strip of concrete, said Steve Snyder, an airport spokesman.

Back at LAX, officials say that even if they do nothing to prepare for the A380, the aircraft will land here in four years.

“We can’t not address these issues and say they will go away,” said DiGirolamo, the airport agency’s deputy operations director.

“We have some time. But in long-term time sequence, we don’t have a lot of time.”

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Double-Decker Airbus

(text of infobox not included)