from the NY Post: AIRPORT BAND-AID = By ROBERT W. POOLE, JR. = December 20, 2007 -- TRANSPORTATION Secretary Mary Peters yesterday anno= unced a plan to = cut delays at New York's airports - but this "solution" just puts a Band= -Aid on = a severed artery: It might help a little bit, but doesn't fix the proble= m. = The Transportation Department's main fix is to ask airlines to move a fe= w flights out of = the busiest peaks at JFK and Newark; it may also hold auctions to alloca= te the rights to = use any new capacity that can be squeezed out of these airports in the f= uture. = In short, the plan leaves today's cockamamie system intact - and so send= s all the wrong = signals to airlines and passengers about how to make the best (most econ= omically = productive) use of these airports' valuable capacity. = We should start by asking why all three major New York airports (JFK, La= Guardia and = Newark) are overloaded with planes at certain hours of each day. The ans= wer: Airlines = knowingly schedule more flights than the airports and air-traffic-contro= l system can = safely handle, guaranteeing passengers will be stuck on the tarmac. = To compete on frequency of service over the last five years, airlines ha= ve added flights = and substituted smaller planes for larger ones. JFK is the worst: Flight= s by planes with = fewer than 100 seats having risen 128 percent. = Sure, passengers like more flight choices - but the result at capacity-c= onstrained = airports is ever-increasing delays. = The Port Authority, which runs all three airports, contributes to the pr= oblem because of = how it charges to use the runways - namely, fees based on each plane's w= eight. Despite = using the same time and resources for a take-off, a 35-seat regional jet= pays just $181, = while a 767 carrying perhaps 250 people pays $1,600 = And those fees are the same at peak periods and off-peak times. = What if the fees were instead based on how popular (i.e., congested) eac= h time period is? = If the charge for taking off from JFK during evening rush hours were $2,= 000, the added = cost for a 767 would average less than $2 per passenger. But the extra c= ost for the 30 = people on the 35-passenger regional jet would be $52 each. Passengers an= d airlines would = want that flight moved to a cheaper, less busy hour - making room for th= e 767 and reducing = delays. This approach is called airport congestion pricing. = Transportation Secretary Peters wants congestion pricing. But the Port A= uthority made it = clear that it did not - and she lacks authority to force a change. = In a major study released this week, the Reason Foundation urges the Por= t Authority to = take a fresh look at congestion pricing. The report presents evidence th= at, under this = system, airlines would move many flights out of peak periods and use lar= ger planes on = other flights - reversing the trend toward more flights on smaller plane= s, which has = helped usher in these delays. = It's important to realize that this reform would not cut back on total p= assenger volume at = the NY airports to reduce delays. Rather, it would shift passengers out = of those hourly, = small-jet flights to Boston and Chicago (which would be significantly mo= re expensive) to = less-frequent flights on larger jets. = By contrast, the new federal plan does cut back on flights - reducing pa= ssenger numbers = and thus harming the New York area's economy. = The airlines - which oppose congestion pricing - have cleverly, but wron= gly, argued the = reverse. By claiming that congestion pricing would reduce passenger thro= ughput, they've = managed to convince New York and New Jersey business and political leade= rs that it's a bad = idea. = The airlines do have one valid concern - the fear that the Port Authorit= y would divert new = revenues from congestion pricing to non-airport projects. But the way to= address this is = to set up a "lockbox" to ensure that all these revenues go to projects t= hat = expand the airport's runway throughput. = Then congestion pricing would not end up as a "tax" on air travel, but a= s a tool = to eliminate delays. It would motivate airlines to make the highest and = best use of runway = capacity, while generating the funding to expand capacity. = The new federal plan won't significantly reduce delays: You'll still be = stuck in the = terminal or on the tarmac. = The Port Authority can change that by making airlines face real conseque= nces for = over-scheduling and using those fees to create a fund that can pay for n= eeded capacity = expansions. But until the PA changes course, flights in and out of New Y= ork will still be = hours late. = Robert W. Poole Jr., the director of transportation studies at Reason Fo= undation, recently = advised the Transportation Department on airline delays. = The best slide auction on the net: http://www.auctiontransportation.com/sites/psa188/ <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you wish to unsubscribe from the AIRLINE List, please send an E-mail to: "listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx". Within the body of the text, only write the following:"SIGNOFF AIRLINE".