Systems II :

East London Area Aiport Feasibility Report

Chee Chenk Foo
Department of Civil Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, England

20 October 2014

1. Introduction
In the last 40 years, the commercial airline
industry has experienced rapid growth since
the introduction of the open skies policy
concept in 1979. Increasingly, flag carriers are
being privatized (i.e. Qantas, British Airways
& Iberia Air) while low-cost carriers
mushroom globally. Taking advantage of this,
the United Kingdom (U.K.) has been Europes
key aviation hub with most of the air traffic
volume concentrating in London. Handling
over 72.3 million passengers in 2013 of which
7% were domestic, 41% were short-haul
international travellers and 52% were longhaul ones[1], Heathrow is arguably one of the
busiest airports in the world. Following behind
Heathrow, is Londons second busiest airport,
Gatwick. It accommodates over 30 million
passengers annually and it is the busiest
single-runway airport in the world.[2] With
both airports operating at near maximum
capacity and all of U.K.s by 2030[3], there is
a need for new alternatives to keep London
and the U.K. as a viable aviation hub in this
$606 billion industry[4].
For the purpose of this report, the focus
will be on the aviation capacity in London,
concentrating on the viability of constructing
an entirely new airport in the East London
Area (Figure 1). The most compelling of these
suggestions is the Thames Estuary Airport
concept. However, this suggestion has been
turned down by the Airports Commission due
to the high cost incurred.[5]

Upminster

Whitechap
el

Figure 1 East London Area from Whitechapel

to Upminster

Figure 2 East London Area with most major

cities

2. Analysis

1 | Dept. of Civil Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, University College London

Chee Chenk Foo

ID No : 13031732
2.1 Cost & Socio-economic Impact
In terms of cost, the airport must be assessed
on its construction, operational and maintenance
cost, economic impact and commercial viability.
Based on a report on the Thames Estuary Airport,
for a new high capacity airport to be viable in the
South-East of U.K., Heathrow needs to be closed.
Considering that Heathrow currently employs over
70 000 people on-site, generating gross value added
(GVA) of approximately 3.3billion with a
predicted growth till 2030, a 15-20 billion
compensation is forecasted if it shuts
down.[6] In addition to that, the attitudes of
passengers, employees and airlines towards a new
airport seems reluctant without support of strong
feeder traffic as airlines might lose flight
connectivity. The new airport will also face
competition from other ones around London and in
mainland Europe (i.e. Paris Charles de Gaulle,
Amsterdam Schipol, & Frankfurt). The cost of
switching airport will be high as well (relocating
staff, negotiating slots and organizing new
schedules).[6] Today, an airport terminal in Greater
London is estimated to cost approximately 3500 to
4500/m2 and approximately 50000/m2
of runway.[7]
billion (real)
Airport cost (including land)
Risk at 40%
Optimism bias at 50%
Total cost estimate post risk
and optimism bias

29.8
11.9
20.9
62.6

Table 1. Airports Commission independent cost

assessment of Thames Estuary Airport scheme [7].

This includes the cost of land purchase

and transport links to and from the
runways. As a comparison, the Thames
Estuary Airport was estimated to cost
50-60 billion. In contrast, it costs
15.6billion to build an additional runway
at Heathrow[8]. It would also provide the
government with around 16 billion in savings
as compared to building a new airport.
[8]
Purchase of Heathrow
Basic Airport Construction(3 runways)
Enhanced Airport Construction (4 runways
Basic Rail Surface Access
Enhanced Rail Surface Access
Basic Road Surface Access
Enhanced Road Surface Access
Other
TOTAL (Basic)
TOTAL (Enhanced)
Table 2. High level cost assessment to 2030
2.2 Need
For over a decade, Heathrow has been operating at
98% its capacity that even minor snowfall could cause
huge delays. The Department of Transport forecasts that
all of Londons airports will be at maximum capacity by
2030.[9,10] Hence the necessity for greater airport
capacity for international and domestic flights. Based on
projections from the Office for National Statistics, the
U.K. population is expected to increase by 9.6 million
over the next 25 years reaching 73.3 million by 2039[11].
London in particular is expected to grow at 13% in the
following decade.[11]

To build a 4-runway airport with a

capacity of 160 million passengers, each
runway is 3900m x 50m. Hence,

Total Area of runway=780000 m

Total Cost of runway=50000 x 780000

39 billion
2 | Dept. of Civil Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, University College London

COST (
13.5 2
31.5 4
37.8 5
9.8
26.9
10.1
17.2
2.1 5
67.1 8
97.5 1

Chee Chenk Foo

ID No : 13031732
between 27 and 39 per cent of the Ramsar site depending
on the specific airport option chosen.[13]

PER QUARTER: CONFIRMED BIRDSTRIKES REPORTED TO CAA

REPORTING PERIOD 2011-2013

10

800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

15

Figure 3 % population growth by region

However, there is no data on whether this

growth in population justifies the need for a new
airport in the U.K. According to the Greater London
Authority, passenger demands for Londons airports
alone is forecasted to increase from 140 million a
year to 400 million a year by 2050. Research done
by the Airports Commission have indicated that a
third runway at Heathrow would increase its
capacity from the current 70 million to 130 million
passengers by 2025-30.[12]
2.3 Environmental Impact
Another crucial factor in is the impact of the new
airport to the environment. These include
- Morphological changes to the environment
- Disturbance effects from airport operations and
air traffic
- Compensation areas for other displaced
developments/houses
- Risk of bird strikes
The intended location of the airport must be
comprehensively researched taking into account Natura
2000 sites, Special Protection Areas (SPA), Special Areas
of Conservation (SAC) and other protected sites. Due to
the airport being closer to the Thames Estuary where
there are larger frequency of birds, it is estimated that the
airport will be at risk of increasingly high frequency of
bird strikes. The Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA alone
is estimated to host a winter assemblage waterfowl
population size of 75,019 birds of species protected under
Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive.[13] The location of a
new airport is likely to result in substantial direct habitat
loss within the Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA and
Ramsar sites: between 24 and 45 per cent of the SPA and

2011

2012

2013

Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sept Oct-Dec

Table 3. Number of confirmed birdstrikes 2011-2013

The noise benefits from replacing Heathrow with a
new airport in the East London are attractive. The closure
of Heathrow would reduce noise impacts for hundreds of
thousands of people, with only a fraction of that number
affected by noise from the new airport. Table 2 shows the
comparison in noise levels between Heathrow and an
airport in the Thames Estuary.

57LAeq
at
2030
Total
local
impact
with
schem
e
Net
local
impact
Net
system
impact

Isle of
Grain

IAAG
(Cliffe)

1400

22900

IAAG
East
(Cliffe)
14600

1400

22900

14600

22910
0

-207600

21590
0

Table 3. Numbers of people affected by noise-57LAeq

55LDen at 2030
Total local

Isle of Grain
5600

Table 4. Numbers of people affected by noise-55Lden

3 | Dept. of Civil Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, University College London

IAAG (Cliffe)
114700

Chee Chenk Foo

ID No : 13031732
Advantages:
On the contrary, the closure of Heathrow would
result in a significant increase in blight especially
among those employed by the airport.
2.4 Risk and Safety

Under certain conditions, laser light directed at

aircraft can be a hazard. The most likely scenario is
when a bright visible laser light causes distraction
or temporary flash blindness to a pilot, especially
during a critical phase of flight such as
during landing or take-off. Aviation hazards from
bright light can be minimized or eliminated in two
primary ways. First, users on the ground can
exercise caution, to prevent or minimize any laser or
other bright light being directed in airspace and
especially towards aircraft. Second, pilots should
have awareness of laser/aviation hazards and
knowledge of basic recovery procedures in case of
laser or bright light exposure. This is unless of
course that no damage has been done to the pilots
eye. The Civil Aviation Authority(CAA) recorded
153 incidents at Heathrow alone in 2011 followed
by Manchester with 148 incidents and Birmingham
with 143 incidents.[14] A new airport has to deal
with this and the threat of terrorist attacks as well.
This requires strict regulations, reporting, regulation
and control to be set in place using the latest
technologies and advancements. Due to the age of
Heathrow, constant maintenance and updates on the
existing system might cost more in the long run.

i.
ii.
iii.
iv.

Reduced noise levels in London

Lower maintenance costs as compared
to expanding existing airports
Brand new facilities and technologies
Increased capacity for London and the
UK to remain relevant as an aviation
hub.

Disadvantages:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.

vi.

Significantly high cost to construct in a

meagre economy
To remain competitive, a major airport
(i.e Heathrow) would have to shut down
There are more economical solutions
Increased risk of birdstrike may affect a
number of bird species.
Thousands of employees (i.e at
Heathrow) will experience blight and as
a result the existing economy will
dwindle.
Airlines are not persuaded to relocate
unless there is strong travel support.
(loss of flight connections)

The results show that it is impractical and not

currently feasible to construct an airport in East
London and that expanding an existing airport is
sufficient to handle Londons air traffic capacity for
the foreseeable future.
4. References

1. Heathrow Airport, Company

Information,
http://www.heathrowairport.com/a
3. Conclusion
bout-us/company-news-andinformation/companyA comprehensive study was conducted based on
information/facts-and-figures,
5 core criteria regarding airport construction in the
2013, (accessed 29 October 2014)
East London Area namely, cost, socio-economic
2. Civil Aviation Authority, Size of UK
impact, environmental impact, necessity, and risk
Airports,
& safety. Viable data showed that constructing a
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airpo
band new airport in the East of London had both
rt_data/2011Annual/Table_01_Size_
advantages and disadvantages.
4 | Dept. of Civil Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, University College London

Chee Chenk Foo

ID No : 13031732
of_UK_Airports_2011_Comp_2006.p
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/npp/
df, 2006, (accessed 1 November
national-population2014)
projections/2012-based3. Greater London Authority, New
projections/stb-2012-based-nppAviation Capacity for London,
principal-and-key-variants.html, 6
https://www.london.gov.uk/prioritie
November 2013, (accessed 4
s/transport/vision-strategy/newNovember 2014)
aviation-capacity-for-london, to
12.Airports Commission, Aviation
date, (accessed 1 November 2014)
Forecasts,
4. Air Transport Action Group, Facts &
https://www.gov.uk/government/up
Figures, http://www.atag.org/factsloads/system/uploads/attachment_
and-figures.html, April 2014,
data/file/223839/aviation(accessed 1 November 2014)
forecasts.pdf, 2014, (accessed 2
5. Airports Commission, Thames
November 2014)
Estuary decision,
13. Airports Commission, Decision and
https://www.gov.uk/government/ne
Summary: Thames Estuary Airport,
ws/airports-commissionhttps://www.gov.uk/government/up
announces-inner-thames-estuaryloads/system/uploads/attachment_
decision, 2 September 2014,
data/file/349518/decision-and(accessed 2 November 2014)
summary.pdf, 2014, (accessed 2
6. PWC, Inner Thames Estuary
November 2014)
Airport: Review of the evidence on
14. Civil Aviation Authority, Laser
socio-economic impacts,
Incidents,
https://www.gov.uk/government/up
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2372/La
loads/system/uploads/attachment_
ser%20Incidents%202009data/file/329286/socio-economic2014.pdf, 2014, (accessed 5
impacts.pdf, June 2014, (accessed
November 2014)
2 November 2014)
7. UCL Civil Engineering, Engineers
toolbox, 2013.
8. Heathrow, Why Heathrow,
http://your.heathrow.com/takingbri
tainfurther/heathrow/, to date,
(accessed 4 November 2014)
9. https://www.gov.uk/government/up
loads/system/uploads/attachment_
data/file/318211/utilisationexisting-capacity.pdf pg11
10.https://www.london.gov.uk/prioritie
s/transport/vision-strategy/newaviation-capacity-for-london
11.Office for National Statistics,
National Population Projections,
2012-Based,
5 | Dept. of Civil Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, University College London

Chee Chenk Foo

ID No : 13031732

6 | Dept. of Civil Environmental & Geomatic Engineering, University College London