International Air Rail Organisation

Submission to the Network Rail's Long Term Planning Process
Long Distance, Regional Urban and London and South East Market Studies
July 2013
Introduction
1
The International Air Rail Organisation (IARO) is a trade association of organisations involved
in air-rail intermodality and our mission is to spread best practice. Our members include
airports, rail operators, suppliers, global distribution systems and academics in every
continent and they have experience in the planning, design and operation of air-rail links.
2
This submission is made in response to the Long Distance, Regional Urban and London and
South East Draft Market Studies. Some of the comments apply to all and some to individual
studies
3
IARO has recently made a submission to the UK Airports Commission which is considering the
question of airport infrastructure. The Market Studies correctly identify the Airports
Commission's work as a significant factor and IARO supports NR's engagement with the
Airports Commission. It is not clear how much engagement there has been with airport
operators or airport rail link operators but it is vital that this is done to ensure that this
significant market is considered.
4
The remainder of this submission covers the air-rail market, a description of the types of airrail link, international best practice examples and comments on specific sections of the market
studies. An appendix lists the recommendations made to the Airports Commission about
making better use of UK airport capacity, international funding and financing experience,
some of the principles that apply to the longer term options and some suggested policy
drivers.
The Air-Rail Market
5
Rail links at airports are successful if they meet a market demand or are perceived to connect
well to existing transport infrastructure. They do not, by themselves, generate demand
although they can influence passenger behaviour when choosing where to travel to or from.
6
The key questions to ask are about the types and characteristics of passengers. Most of the
fundamental data is available through CAA passenger surveys; although these do not, of
course, predict future passenger types. Origin/destination, journey purpose and nationality
are key attributes and there is a logic for the propensity to use an air-rail link. Although some
of these might appear obvious, they are sometimes ignored when a solution appears.
•
Origin/destination is important because rail tends to be used by passengers with origins
and destinations in city centres, or in areas with good access to a rail station. These tend
to be inbound passengers – those not living within the catchment area of the airport.
Dispersed origins and destinations are difficult to serve by direct rail services because a
large flow is needed to justify a frequent service.
•
Journey purpose may be important in some circumstances, primarily because of the value
of time. A business traveller will usually seek the quickest, most reliable route and be less
concerned about the cost (time-poor, money-rich). Leisure passengers are usually less
time constrained and more budget conscious (time-rich, money-poor). Amounts of
baggage and group size are also different as between business and leisure passengers
and will affect mode choice.
•
For international passengers, nationality is a proxy for local resident or visitor. Local
residents tend to have access to a car and may be travelling from home. Visitors will not
have a car (unless they hire one) and are more likely to be travelling to a hotel. For
domestic passengers, nationality is not a proxy for resident/visitor and there is little data
available.
These rules are not universal and will vary at every airport because of the circumstances.
7
As with all transport systems, demand is related to price, journey time, frequency, reliability
and number of interchanges. The last is particularly important for air passengers who may be
anxious about catching a flight or may have baggage.
8
Airport surface access mode share modelling is fairly advanced in the UK, having been
developed over many years, but it is by no means perfect at predicting demand for individual
modes. The hierarchical nested logit model first splits passengers into public and private
modes and then subsequently splits the public share into the bus/coach and rail, or into the
various types of rail. One particular feature of the models is the use of a 'mode constant', a
factor used to correct the forecast to reflect observed behaviour which is not explained by the
quantified inputs of passengers choosing a dedicated service.
9
International experience of the relationship between passenger characteristics and mode
share is best described, in some detail, in a report entitled 'Ground Access to Major Airports
by Public Transportation', ACRP4, published by the US Transportation Research Board
(http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/acrp_rpt_004.pdf). This is the most recent in a
series of studies by Matthew Coogan, an IARO member which, although written from an
American perspective, uses much detailed information from many international sources.
Types of air-rail link
10
There are probably five main types of air-rail link: light rail, metro, network, dedicated and
long distance. Each has pros and cons. Not every air-rail link fits neatly into a category and
some have the features of more than one type. Also some airports have more than one type
of service, often using the same station: this gives choice, something appreciated by
passengers who have different needs on different types of journeys..
11
Light rail includes trams and some automatic metros. One of the most successful airport rail
links in the world is the DLR serving London City Airport. The particular circumstances at
London City (small airport, close to destination, high proportion of visiting short stay business
passengers, difficult road access) contribute to its success. Edinburgh Airport will shortly be
connected to the new tram system and mode share may be more of a challenge, given the
business/leisure, origin/destination and location characteristics. Manchester Airport will also
be connected to the Metrolink by 2016, although the likely usage will probably be mainly
airport staff, given the existing heavy rail links.
12
Light rail is also significant in other parts of the world, for example in North America, where
there are such links in Vancouver, Baltimore, Minneapolis/St Paul, Phoenix, Portland, Salt Lake
City and Seattle. In Europe, Copenhagen's light metro contributes to the Kastrup Airport's rail
mode share of 55%, the highest in the world. At Zurich Airport, the Glatttalbahn tram
complements heavy rail services at Zurich and at Lyon St Exupery Airport, the Rhonexpress
express tram service has a mix of dedicated right-of-way and street running and shares some
of its infrastructure with another tram operator. In the Middle East, the Dubai Metro is an
automated light rail line which serves the Airport. There are also light rail airport links in the
Far East, such as in Okinawa, Japan.
13
Generally, light rail is successful where the distance is short, as the speed is generally low, and
where a high frequency service is in operation to help to overcome low speed. Trams often
penetrate the city centres, making door-to-door access easier. Although modern trams have
relatively few seats, they are often low floor or have step-free access, making luggage
handling easier.
14
Metros are very common as air-rail links throughout the world. An obvious UK example is the
Piccadilly Line to Heathrow, but in Europe there are many, such as Frankfurt, Hamburg,
Dusseldorf, Munich, Istanbul, Paris, Madrid and Lisbon. The Washington Metro to Reagan
National Airport is the most successful in the US, with a mode share of 13%, and there are
others at Atlanta, Chicago (O'Hare and Midway), Philadelphia and San Francisco. In the Far
East, metros serve Tokyo Haneda Airport, Kobe, Beijing, Shanghai (Pudong and Hongqiao) and
Singapore.
15
Metros are usually high frequency and part of a network which enables, with interchange,
access throughout the city, usually on one ticket. Their disadvantage for air passengers is that
they are primarily designed for commuters or short distance passengers and may be difficult
to use with baggage.
16
Network type heavy rail air-rail links are also fairly common, the feature being that they
operate as part of a regional network. Sometimes the distinction between networks and
metros is limited other than the distances involved, but UK examples of network air-rail links
include Southern and First Capital Connect trains at Gatwick Airport, trains from Luton Airport
Parkway, London Midland trains at Birmingham International and all of the trains at
Manchester Airport. In New York, the Long Island Rail Road and New Jersey Transit links can
be described as part of a network, although a people-mover ride is required to complete the
journey to the airport (e.g. from Jamaica Station to JFK Airport). In Europe, the major rail
stations at Amsterdam, Brussels, Frankfurt, Copenhagen, Zurich and Geneva Airports all have
a number of different regional network services.
17
We are particularly familiar with dedicated air-rail links in the UK because we invented them.
Gatwick Express was the first example, followed by Stansted Express and then Heathrow
Express. Around the world, there are examples in Stockholm (Arlanda Express), Oslo
(Flytoget), Vienna (City Airport Train), Rome (Leonardo Express), Milan (Malpensa Express),
Moscow (Aeroexpress to all three airports), Hong Kong (Airport Express Line), Kuala Lumpur
(KLIA EKspres), Tokyo (Narita Express) and Seoul (A'REX).
18
The key feature of the dedicated air-rail link is that it concentrates on just the airport, thereby
focusing all its marketing, customer service and operational effort on air passengers. There
are various ownership models including franchises, concessions and divisions within network
operators, but the only airport-owned links are Heathrow Express and Vienna City Airport
Train (50% airport, 50% Austrian Railways).
19
The final type of air-rail link is long distance, which includes high speed rail. Virgin Trains from
Birmingham International, the station next to Birmingham Airport, is the best UK example,
although some of the trains from Manchester Airport also travel long distances. There are a
few examples in North America such as at Newark and Baltimore Washington Airports, and
plenty in Europe at Paris CDG, Lyon St Exupery, Brussels, Amsterdam Schiphol, Copenhagen,
Frankfurt and Cologne. In some cases the airport is a key station on the long distance network
and some of the train services can be seen as alternatives to short haul flights. This is
particularly the case at Paris CDG, Amsterdam Schiphol and Frankfurt, where airlines and
railways cooperate to provide a transfer service with through ticketing for some short haul,
but most long haul flight connections.
20
The ideal location for an airport rail station is integral with the terminal building, or a short
walk from it. Where there is some distance between the station and the terminal, or where
there are multiple terminals, some form of passenger assistance is required, such as
travellators or, most successfully, a transit system such as Birmingham Airport's Air Rail Link
which takes 90 seconds or the transit between Gatwick's North Terminal and the rail station.
Bus links, such as from Luton Airport Parkway Station to the Airport, are less attractive.
21
This rather long description shows that there are many different solutions which can be
applied to the requirement for an air-rail link with varying degrees of success. Large airports
can justify more than one type of link and, by segmenting the market, are able to attract a
higher mode share than with a single type of link.
International best practice
22
Best practice can be measured by a simple mode share figure but, as the market is different at
each airport, this is not the only measure. The following paragraphs describe some best
practice examples.
23
Vancouver's Canada Line service to the airport, which opened in 2009, is a good example of a
light rail link. The terminus of one branch is at the airport and there is a six minute frequency
with a journey time of 26 minutes between city and airport. Although the trains are not large
(334 passenger capacity) they are easy to board and move around in. The mode share
achieved is 17%, high for North America. The DLR link to London City Airport must also be
noted as very successful because of its high mode share (50%), although as noted above there
are particular market reasons for this. Copenhagen's Metro has a share of 20%, part of the
world's highest 55% rail share. At many airports, light rail may not appear very successful in
terms of air passenger mode share, but is very good for staff as the route will often be through
neighbouring communities, where staff live, with multiple stops.
24
The Washington Metro is the most successful air-rail link in the US in part because the airport
station is easily accessible from the departure and arrival areas in the terminal, and also
because it serves a number of key locations in the city for inbound visitors, particularly on
business. The S Bahn links at Hamburg and Munich, and the RER at Paris, are good examples
of how a metro can serve airports as well as being part of the city network. In these cases the
airport is the terminus of a line so that air passengers can board an empty train or alight more
slowly than if the train is stopping for a short time. We should also include the Piccadilly Line
to Heathrow in a list of successful airport metros. The Tube's share of air passengers is around
15%, which represents around 7 million passengers a year, which could be the largest absolute
number of air passengers in world carried on a metro, plus of course the significant number of
staff that it serves. London Underground have, of course, a well earned and long standing
reputation for the clarity of its information, signs and graphics, and this is clearly one element
of best practice which is particularly important for visitors.
25
The services provided by Northern and First TransPennine trains from Manchester Airport are
examples of how a wide range of destinations can be linked to an airport, increasing the
airport's catchment areas significantly. In continental Europe, this effect is seen in particular
at Amsterdam Schiphol, which is a major station on the Dutch railway network and enables
rail journeys to be made direct throughout the country. Similarly, there are large numbers of
trains to multiple destinations in Switzerland from Zurich and Geneva Airports.
26
Dedicated services pride themselves on focusing on the air passenger, so not surprisingly best
practice results in very high passenger satisfaction scores, such as achieved by Heathrow
Express, Arlanda Express, Vienna City Airport Train and KLIA Ekspres. It is also relevant to note
that these services are able to charge a premium fare and still achieve significant mode
shares, achieving best practice in terms of financial returns.
27
Best practice in terms of long distance air-rail intermodality is probably seen with the German
AirRail services at Frankfurt where through ticketing and a Lufthansa flight number are
provided when transferring from a long haul flight to Cologne or Stuttgart. This solution and
other similar solutions (Access Rail, SNCF's TGVair, Hahn Air ticket exchange etc) are facilitated
on Global Distribution Systems enabling foreign sales via around 200,000 travel agents across
240 countries. Therefore to the passenger the journey appears seamless, whether they are
flying with Lufthansa or travelling on a train courtesy of Deutsche Bahn. Some airlines provide
free onward rail travel as part of the air ticket, such as Qantas at Frankfurt.
28
Good practice in terms of air-rail sales and distribution is seen in a number of UK examples,
ranging from simple on board sales of rail tickets as practiced by easyjet to the recently
announced arrangements between Aer Lingus and Heathrow Express. However, connecting
to Global Distribution Systems means airport express operators can be fed immediately by all
participating GDS airlines that land at that airport.
29
There are some examples which are a long way from best practice but from which lessons can
be learned. The $1 billion Airtrain at New York JFK Airport is very successful as an intra-airport
transit, but less successful as a downtown connector because it is a relatively long ride which
links to a station served by already-full commuter trains. Stations remote from the terminals
or which require a bus link, such as Baltimore Washington's connection to the Amtrak Station,
or Luton Parkway, also struggle to achieve high market share. Step free access is important
for passengers with baggage, as well as wheelchair users, but double deck trains and steps up
from low platforms, such as are found on a number of trains and stations in continental
Europe, are not helpful. Some of the supposedly dedicated services do not provide a
significantly differentiated product and so struggle to justify a premium fare.
Comments on specific issues in the market studies
30
Section 2.3 of the London and South East study says that over 500 million trips are made to or
from London by rail each year. Of these, 6 million are on Heathrow Express, 5 million on
Gatwick Express, 4 million on Stansted Express and around 2 million from Luton. Together
with other network services to airports, this probably accounts for around 5% of the total (and
a higher proportion of revenue), so is not unimportant. Commuter services are dominated by
the peaks, and section 6.4.1 says that modelling is focussed on the peak. This is
understandable, but it means that priority is given to commuters over air passengers, which
has led to the current situation of Gatwick Express and Stansted Express which are a long way
from the best practice noted above.
31
Section 5.2.2 of the Long Distance Market Study says that travel by rail is more
environmentally friendly than by aeroplane. This is correct in general, but depends critically
on load factors and electricity generation. It would be prudent to note these provisos as some
domestic air journeys may result in fewer emissions than rail.
32
In section 6.2.3 of the Long Distance Market Study, the cost of travel by rail is noted as a micro
economic factor affecting demand, along with the cost of travel by air. However, it is not clear
where in the rest of Chapter 6 this is fed into the scenarios. Rail fares are also noted as a
factor in the Regional Urban and London and South East Studies but not, of course, air fares.
Section 7.11 notes that it has not been possible to reach consensus on the role of pricing and
that it is to be considered in the DfT's 'ongoing rail fares and ticketing review'. Without
assumptions about pricing, there could be a concern that the forecasts could be accused of
being 'predict and provide', about which there is so much debate when it comes to planning
other transport modes. It may be that the effect of constraining demand is to be considered in
later stages of the LTPP, but it is suggested that, at the very least, the long term forecast
scenarios should be noted as being unconstrained by price or capacity limits.
33
All three studies consider future scenarios (Section 6.3) and it is suggested that this is an area
where engagement with the Airports Commission is important, as they are also considering
alternative futures. In particular:
34
•
Prospering in global stability has common elements with the Airports Commission's
Future 1.
•
Prospering in isolation has common elements with the Airports Commission's Future 2
and in particular the 'No investment in airport capacity' matches with Future 2's
recognition that Europe is eclipsed (in aviation terms) by the Middle and Far East.
However, 'Travel time not used productively' and 'Rail products are not well matched to
consumers' needs' do not seem to align with this being a technologically enabled scenario
•
Struggling in global turmoil has no equivalent Airports Commission future scenario. This
is a technologically limited scenario, yet includes 'Travel time used productively' and Rail
products well matched to consumers' needs'. It includes investment in HS2 and airport
capacity, but there would be no business or economic case for this, given that demand
will be lower because of the lower level of GDP and higher travel taxes.
•
Struggling in isolation has common elements with the Airports Commission's Future 3.
Section 6.5.2 of the London and South East study describes the short term forecasts and notes
that Crossrail & Relief line services to and from Paddington will grow by nearly 200%, as a
result of abstraction from other rail and LUL and a stimulation of new journeys. This level of
growth is so different from anywhere else that it demands attention. In this period (to 2023)
there is no particular stimulus in this area in terms of population growth (outside of London),
or growth at Heathrow. The only Underground Line serving this corridor is the Heathrow end
of the Piccadilly Line, but this serves many places in West London which are not served by
Crossrail. Some parts of Berkshire are served by the Windsor Lines but again the central
London destinations are different from those served by Crossrail. Crossrail does of course
provide some improvement in journey time between Heathrow and places east of
Paddington, but the total numbers probably can't account for the huge increase. It is
suggested that this is noted as an anomaly and should be reviewed and checked to ensure
that the model is not working outside its limits.
Appendix - Extract from IARO Submission to UK Airports Commission May 2013
Making better use of existing UK airport capacity
1
This section seeks to meet the Commission's request for proposals which would enable better
use to be made of existing airport capacity, and in particular the rail access implications of
such proposals. IARO will not comment on any other of the arguments for or against the use
of existing capacity.
2
The rail strategy for Heathrow includes Crossrail, a western connection and HS2. The
Piccadilly Line is also due for upgrading in due course which would see an increase in the
number of trains serving the airport. From 2018, Crossrail will replace Heathrow Connect and,
in doing so will provide significant additional capacity (double the frequency with longer
trains). Crossrail will also provide a direct service east of Paddington. This is likely to increase
the overall rail mode share, although both Heathrow Express and the Piccadilly Line will lose
share. Taxi mode share should decrease. The western connection is yet to be approved but it
is noted in the 2012 HLOS for completion in CP6 (2019-2024). It would provide services to
destinations which are not currently served by direct rail links, although Railair coaches and
one-change rail services are available. Again, this link would increase rail mode share at the
expense of road modes. Phase 1 of HS2, with a station at Old Oak Common, is assumed to be
beyond the short and medium term timescale. If additional passengers are permitted to use
Heathrow, then the rail access arrangements, consisting of the existing services plus Crossrail
from 2018, an upgraded Piccadilly Line and possibly a western connection within the next ten
years, would provide sufficient rail capacity and would also moderate the demand for road
access.
3
Current rail services at Gatwick could provide a constraint on the airport's growth. The
Brighton Main Line is operating close to its capacity, both in terms of trains and passengers.
The improvements at Gatwick Airport Station will ease the congestion on the tracks, but there
are no plans to increase the number of trains. The completion of the Thameslink project will
enable additional capacity, in the form of longer trains, to be provided on this service. The
2012 HLOS also notes that capacity enhancement at Redhill should be undertaken in CP5
(2014-2019). However, the new combined Thameslink, Southern and great Northern
franchise will provide a number of opportunities for enabling the rail services to match the
airport's potential growth. First, the additional capacity provided will enable consideration to
be given to reverting to a dedicated Gatwick Express, rather than the current hybrid
airport/commuter service. The specification for rolling stock could also be different such that
it is suitable for air passengers (and also PRM compliant). Government has a choice, but it is
clear that, if it continues to specify a hybrid airport/commuter service, then the airport's
potential capacity would be constrained, and revenue would be reduced as air passengers
would not be prepared to pay a premium fare for a non premium service.
4
Stansted Airport's train services could also provide a constraint on the use of its significant
spare airport capacity. Although Stansted Express has benefitted from new trains, the journey
time is unattractively long and, at peak commuter times, trains are full because they also
serve Harlow and Bishops Stortford. The premium fare on Stansted Express and the lack of an
alternative rail service means that coach services are particularly successful at present. If
Stansted's spare capacity is to be fully used, it will be necessary to provide a faster, more
dedicated rail service. Network Rail's Strategic Business Plan suggests that the full 4 tracking
of the Lea Valley is not value for money in the short or medium term, but the Mayor's
aspiration is for better local services on this line, which may bring forward the case for
infrastructure improvements. Undoubtedly airlines would be attracted to make better use of
Stansed's capacity if Stansted Express trains had shorter journey times and were more
dedicated to air passengers. Such services would also contribute more to tax revenues
through higher franchise premium payments resulting from premium fares.
5
The Thameslink project will provide additional capacity on trains serving Luton Airport
Parkway and rail services are unlikely to be a constraint on the growth of the airport as
envisaged in its master plan.
6
London City Airport's growth will need to be considered in terms of the impact on the DLR. It
may be possible to increase the frequency of trains serving the Airport, although this may
require a reduction in frequency on other routes.
7
London Southend Airport has some spare capacity in the short term and potential for more in
the medium term. The current rail service is adequate in terms of capacity but needs
improvement in quality and operating hours. Improved rolling stock and timetable changes
can be included in the new Greater Anglia franchise from 2016 and better connections will be
available on completion of Crossrail in 2018.
8
Southampton Airport's rail station is very close to the terminal and achieves a 15% rail mode
share. The airport has potential for growth as indicated in its master plan but this will
probably require a further increase in the rail share if the airport is not to be constrained by
road access. This will require Southampton Airport Parkway Station to be served by more
trains from both local stations and the wider region. This could be achieved through the
franchise process, but the franchise specification will have to be clear that new services to the
Airport Parkway Station will have to be given priority over other demands.
9
Birmingham Airport has significant existing capacity. Its proximity to Birmingham International
Station is a significant advantage to its existing operations, with 23% of its passengers in 2012
accessing the Airport via rail services. The growth of Birmingham Airport is not constrained by
rail services, instead it could be improved with extended rail services especially on evenings
and weekends. A significant opportunity to increase rail mode share along with an increase in
passenger numbers would be realised by the relatively simple change to the name of the
station, from Birmingham International to Birmingham Airport as well as integrated ticketing
and baggage drop off facilities at Birmingham New Street station. In the longer term, the
announcement of HS2 Phase 1 and Phase 2, will see the provision of the Birmingham
Interchange station (which should also be called Birmingham Airport), which will mean a
significant improvement in accessibility from a wider catchment area. It is estimated by Steer
Davies and Gleave, that 30% of the UK population will be within one hour of Birmingham
Airport following the completion of Phase 2 of HS2.
10
The completion of the Metrolink extension to Manchester Airport will attract mainly airport
staff, but this will have a knock on effect in moderating demand for road and car parking
capacity, helping the airport to use its runway capacity. The various projects within the
Northern Hub will also help to improve rail services to the airport. The rail services are this
unlikely to inhibit the growth of passengers in the short and medium term. In the longer term,
Phase 2 of HS2 includes the provision of a station at Manchester Airport.
11
Newcastle Airport is served by the Metro which should be adequate for the airport's growth
in the short and medium term.
12
The effect of the Edinburgh Tram on the air passenger mode share is difficult to predict.
Edinburgh Airport's outbound market is dispersed and the tram journey will take 30 minutes
to the city centre. There will be a tram/train interchange at Edinburgh Gateway Station.
Buses and coaches already provide a significant public transport service and the addition of
the tram will mean that some passenger growth can be accommodated. However, it is
probable that road access will remain a potential constraint on growth.
13
Glasgow Prestwick Airport is well served by its rail station and has in the past achieved a rail
share of over 30%. Rail access will not be a constraint on the better use of this airport's
capacity.
14
Cardiff Airport is linked by shuttle bus to Rhoose Station. Although this is not entirely
satisfactory, improvements are unlikely to make a significant difference to the ability to use
the airport's spare capacity.
15
A number of airports where a rail link could be provided have spare capacity and it is often
asked if this would attract more passengers. This is undoubtedly correct in general but every
situation is different. It is clear, for example, that Easyjet would not have set up a base at
London Southend if there had not been a rail link.
16
Manston Airport has significant spare capacity but a relatively limited local catchment area.
Southeastern high speed services operate to nearby Ramsgate Station but the high speed
trains take 39 minutes from Ashford to Ramsgate having taken only 38 minutes from St
Pancras to Ashford. To make this journey attractive to the large London market the journey
time should be less than 1 hour and this would mean a significant speeding up of the Ashford
to Ramsgate line plus a new parkway station with a quick bus link to the airport. Without
these improvements, the airport's spare capacity is unlikely to be used in the short and
medium term.
17
Robin Hood Doncaster Sheffield Airport has significant unused capacity and is close to a rail
line where a station could be built in the short or medium term. The challenges here would be
because the station would still require a shuttle bus to the terminal and currently the rail
service is not very frequent.
18
Various plans for a rail link to Leeds Bradford Airport have been put forward which would
make the airport more attractive to visitors to Leeds or Bradford, compared with the situation
where the airport relies on road access. However, the proposals would require significant
new rail infrastructure which is unlikely to be possible in the short and medium term.
19
Glasgow Airport's rail link project was cancelled in 2009 although many stakeholders are
seeking to revive it in one form or another. Public transport share is low at Glasgow (around
10%) and the access roads are congested, so it is probably the case that the growth of
passengers at the airport would be constrained if there were not some form of rail link,
although the precise timing of the need is difficult to establish.
20
Better use of existing capacity could be achieved by airlines and rail services by having a
common approach to sales and distribution. Sales need to be sustained and grown beyond
the initial home market launch when they tend to level off. Air-rail services need to recognise
in their strategic thinking that their prime market is accessed through airlines, and should
therefore invest in the necessary systems that can interface, timetable, sell and fulfil tickets
for connecting airline passengers. This investment in connected sales distribution systems is
relatively small scale, but without it the major investment in rail infrastructure will not be fully
used. IATA have an interoperability programme covering seamlessness at airports for rail
services. This programme should be encouraged, so that rail timetable information, fares,
connections times, station data and other information can be delivered in airline booking
systems and journey planning engines.
21
Major new rail infrastructure is not likely to be provided in the short and medium term, unless
it is already in the current Government/rail industry plans. However, some airports are close
to stations where a bus shuttle could be provided (some already mentioned above).
Realistically, it is unlikely that such a link would result in a major change in attractiveness
which would result in otherwise unused airport capacity being used. However, where there is
the potential, the key attributes of the link should be:
•
Frequent, branded, easy access shuttle buses, free to use or with the fare included in the
rail fare
•
A frequent (minimum three times per hour) train service to the key catchment city centre
and other stations in the wider catchment area.
International Funding and Financing Experience
22
The UK is unique in the level of contribution expected from airports for the provision of
surface access infrastructure. Many airports around the world help fund rail access, but there
are particular situations which are different from the UK.
23
In the US, most transportation is provided by the public sector, with either federal, state or
city funds. Most airports are also, in effect, public sector, although airlines play a significantly
greater role than elsewhere in terms of terminal fitting out. Many rail projects are funded
with a contribution from the airport but, as the airport is often owned by the same public
sector organisations (often the city), the distinction is somewhat fuzzy. Many projects are
funded by bond issues, but these are also public sector. The one area where the private
sector aviation industry does contribute is through the passenger facility charge, a federally
imposed tax on all passengers at an airport. The best example of this was the funding of the
JFK Airtrain from a $5 per passenger charge. The airlines objected to this, as these funds are
for use for airport infrastructure, but the case was settled in favour of the use of the charge
for Airtrain. Nevertheless, this demonstrates the sensitivity of using aviation industry funds
for improvements outside the airport boundary (the Airtrain connects JFK with a heavy rail
and subway station, as well as providing internal links).
24
There are examples around the world of the private sector investing, usually through a
concession, in airport rail projects. Stockholm's Arlanda Express, Kuala Lumpur's KLIA Ekspres
and Lyon's Rhonexpress are examples. These are dedicated air rail links where the main
customers are air passengers. The metro and network types of air rail link are usually funded
as part of the city's transport system. Contributions from the airport are sometimes made but,
as in the US, the airport is usually another public sector organisation.
25
UK policy is to start by asking the aviation industry to fund rail access to airport, and to
consider if a contribution should come from the public sector if non airport passengers benefit
(Aviation Policy Framework, March 2013, paragraph 5.12). In some cases, there may be such
wider benefits, and Government has indicated for example that it is providing funding for a
western rail link at Heathrow (APF paragraph 1.94). Nevertheless, this is a fundamentally
different approach from the rest of the world which undoubtedly adds costs and gives the UK
aviation industry a competitive disadvantage.
Longer term options
26
This submission is about short and medium term measures to make better use of existing
airport capacity. IARO will prepare a submission dealing with the longer term options when
the list becomes clear. However, some of the principles outlined above can be considered in
the criteria for selecting a short list, as follows:
•
Major new airport capacity at existing airports will require equivalent new rail capacity,
although to different extents. With Crossrail and a western rail link, Heathrow will have a
good range of rail links with some spare capacity. A direct HS2 link would enhance
Heathrow by attracting more passengers. Gatwick and Stansted's rail links will need
major capacity increases if a second runways are built.
•
Significant expansions at other airports, whether in the South East or the rest of the
county, can be accommodated by enhancements of existing rail links, except for Glasgow
and Leeds Bradford which, as noted above, would need new rail links. Manchester will
be well provided for with its heavy rail, Metrolink and HS2 links. Birmingham may need
more local connections to supplement its heavy rail and HS2 links and the Airport
Company and partners are currently looking at how the reinstatement of a disused rail
line could be used to boost connectivity to the whole of its catchment area.
•
Major new capacity in the South East at a new site would, of course, require appropriate
rail links. If the site is some distance from central London, a high speed link would be
required, alongside a network link and probably a local links to serve employees. A range
of types would be required to achieve the type of mode shares for both air passengers
and staff that are likely to be required. A central London terminal would be required with
good onward connections to the Underground.
Policy drivers
27
In addition to the points noted above by which the short and medium term measures may be
judged, IARO suggests that the Airports Commission should recommend some relevant policy
drivers to Government, including:
•
Rail infrastructure and rolling stock plans should include airport links, noting the
particular needs of serving air passengers and airport staff and the financial and
economic benefits which arise
•
Rail services (and works possessions) should be planned to enable airports to better serve
their catchment areas with trains timed to match airline timetables
•
Rail franchises which are renewed in the short and medium term should seek to serve the
air-rail market and reduce the impact on other rail users
•
Franchise bidders should be encouraged to include integrated facilities in their bids, such
as baggage drop off points at airport stations
•
Relevant rail franchises should include a requirement to provide ticketing integrated with
air transport
•
Journey planning should be developed to include mixed modes (eg. taxi to station, train
to airport).