Bromma Stockholm Airport

Report
Stockholm Arlanda and Bromma
Airports and their future role
Reykjavik 2012-01-19
Henrik Littorin
Senior Analyst
[email protected]
+46 734 33 19 98
Topics
•
The long-term agreement at Bromma Stockholm Airport
•
The environmental permit and restrictions at Stockholm Arlanda Airport
•
The economic importance of Arlanda and Bromma Airports
•
The logic behind two airports in the capital area
•
Future strategies for the airports
2
Swedavia’s role and task
• Founded 2010 as a consequence
of the breakup of LFV Group.
• Develop the transport sector and
help achieve Swedish transport
policy goals based on sound
business principles.
• Return on equity of 9 per cent
required.
• 10 airports in the national basic
airport infrastructure, from Malmö
in the south to Kiruna in the
north.
Arlanda
19 mpax
(4,7 domestic, 14,3 international)
213 000 movements
(99% scheduled and charter)
32 domestic
140 international
Hub airport with large regional
cathment area
Bromma
2,2 mpax
(2 domestic, 0,2 international)
68 000 movements
(66% scheduled and charter)
15 domestic
4 international
4
City centre airport
Bromma Stockholm Airport - History
1936 – Inaugurated
1946 – SAS is founded and base their Swedish operations at Bromma.
1962 – International flights move to the newly built Arlanda Airport.
1983-1992 – No scheduled operations at Bromma.
1994 – Permission for operations until 2011 – domestic operations return.
1994 – 2008 Almost no investments made due to uncertainty about the future.
5
The long-term agreement at Bromma Stockholm Airport
Old permit valid until 2011
Either invest in the airport or close it and use the area for houses and
recreation purposes.
Autumn 2007
National Airport Commission releases Official Government Report which
says: ”Bromma is a strategic Swedish airport”
Spring 2008
A long-term agreement between Swedavia (then LFV) and the City of
Stockholm for the period 2008 – 2038.
Fierce debate and required a political decision to gain legal validity.
6
The long-term agreement at Bromma Stockholm Airport
•
Number of movements, emissions and noise limits determined.
•
Infrastructure in the area now being planned with consideration to the airport.
•
0,5 Euro per departing passenger paid to the City of Stockholm as ground rent.
7
The environmental permit and restrictions at Stockholm
Arlanda Airport
•
Major limitations of aircraft movements from 2018.
•
Ground transportation part of the permission.
•
No approaches over the urban area Upplands Väsby will decrease
capacity with 50 % in peak hours!
•
The airport has applied for a new permission – final decision probably
within 4 years.
8
The economic importance of Arlanda and Bromma
airport
•
Extensive research has been done in this area.
•
The major argument to justify the airports.
9
Economic importance of Bromma
•
Strengthened since Arlanda has no available slots in peak.
•
Focused on business trips and domestic accessibility.
•
The value of companies being able to travel quick and easy.
•
Value of time saved by travelling from Bromma = 10 million Euros/year.
•
Value of scheduled services at Bromma = 150 million Euros/year.
•
Commercial activity at Bromma = 2,5 million Euros/year.
•
Employment at Bromma = 35 million Euros/year.
10
Economic importance of Arlanda
•
National importance (international access and hub function).
•
20% visitors from abroad or other parts of Sweden.
•
Visitors spend more than 4 million Euro/day in the region.
•
Crucial for international accessibility  exports share of Swedish GDP = 50%.
•
Increasing importance of the airport for companies (increasing share of foreign
owned companies).
•
Catalyst for other sectors in society – economy, culture, recreation, knowledge
exchange, cultural exhange, meeting family and relatives.
•
Many factors hard to value in monetary terms.
11
The logic behind two airports in the capital area
•
Bromma is an extreme peak airport.
•
Constrained capacity in peak hours at both airports.
•
None of the airports have available slots in the morning peak.
•
Limited suitable infrastructure at Arlanda to handle the aircraft types that
operates at Bromma.
=
•
Impossible to move present operations from Bromma to Arlanda.
•
No other airport close to Stockholm that can handle business aviation.
12
The logic behind two airports in the capital area
Bromma – 70% Business, 30% Leisure.
Arlanda – 40% Business, 60% Leisure.
•
Much higher share of very frequent, commuting and well prepared
passengers at Bromma.
•
Short distances, short check-in times and almost no security queues at
Bromma.
•
Much shorter travel time door-to-door at domestic routes from Bromma
than at Arlanda.
•
Bromma caters for business aviation, air ambulance, governmental and
official aviation operations – not suitable to mix with scheduled jet
operations at a slot controlled airport like Arlanda.
13
Future challenges at Bromma Airport
•
No available slots in peak hours.
•
Maximum number of jet movements almost reached.
•
New, larger and quiter aircrafts needed to meet passenger demand.
•
Huge investment program (massive renovation and some expansion).
•
Light railway connecting the airport in 2017.
•
Hotels, conference facilities and large shopping areas being built in the
surroundings.
•
Relocation of general aviation (hostile debate and requires political decision).
14
Future challenges at Arlanda Airport
•
A new permission for the airport operations.
•
Increase the passenger experience and passenger process.
•
Large and outstretched terminal system – expensive and creates logistic
problems.
•
Improve ground transportation to and from the airport.
•
Catch the increasing passenger flow from Asia to Europe (fierce
competition with other major airports in Northern Europe).
15
Summary
•
A capital area have many different air transportation needs.
•
Difficult to mix all kind of airport operations at one airport.
•
Peak traffic is a major challenge.
•
Bromma relieves Arlanda.
•
Major challenges at Bromma: Noise, safety, interaction in the city planning and
managing general aviation and business aviation.
•
Never optimal to integrate an airport in an urban area.
•
Long term institutional stability important either if it is ”good” or ”bad”.
16
Takk!
Reykjavik 2012-01-19
Henrik Littorin
Senior Analyst
[email protected]
+46 734 33 19 98

похожие документы