Effects of departure manager and arrival manager systems on airport capacity

Paola Di Mascio, Damiano Cervelli, Alessandro Comoda Correra, Luca Frasacco, Eleonora Luciano and Laura Moretti
Additional contact information
Paola Di Mascio: Department of Civil Environmental and Building Engineering, University of Rome, Italy
Damiano Cervelli: Department of Civil Environmental and Building Engineering, University of Rome, Italy
Alessandro Comoda Correra: Department of Civil Environmental and Building Engineering, University of Rome, Italy
Luca Frasacco: ENAV (Ente Nazionale Assistenza al Volo), Italy
Eleonora Luciano: ENAV (Ente Nazionale Assistenza al Volo), Italy
Laura Moretti: Department of Civil Environmental and Building Engineering, University of Rome, Italy

Journal of Airport Management, 2021, vol. 15, issue 2, 204-218

Abstract: At an international level, interest in airport capacity has been growing in the last few years because its maximisation ensures best performance of infrastructure. Infrastructure, procedure and human factor constraints, however, should be considered to ensure a safe and regular flow of the flights. The paper presents the values of airport capacity obtained from two methodologies: the Advisory Circular AC 150/5060-5 and the Air Traffic Optimisation (AirTOp) fast time simulator (FTS). Two scenarios have been analysed: the ‘Baseline’ scenario (ie the current procedural and infrastructural airport layout) and the ‘What if ’ scenario (ie the current layout managed with Departure MANager and Arrival MANager systems). The simpler approach of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) advisory circular (AC) cannot model both the complex layout of the three-runway airport and the effects of planning tools. Its potential is limited to fast and preliminary analyses. Therefore, under knotty geometrical and procedural conditions, the use of aircraft delay simulation models or (FTS) models is the only tool that meets the needs of airport-management bodies. In particular, the current traffic volume of the examined airport is far from its Baseline capacity (−30 per cent) and is 40 per cent lower than the ‘What-if ’ capacity. The obtained results refer to the specific layout examined, but the pursued approach could be implemented at different airports.

Keywords: airport capacity; saturation; fast time simulation; airport planning; AMAN; DMAN; Coupled AMAN–DMAN (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: M1 M10 R4 R40 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://hstalks.com/article/6158/download/ (application/pdf)
https://hstalks.com/article/6158/ (text/html)
Requires a paid subscription for full access.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aza:jam000:y:2021:v:15:i:2:p:204-218

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Airport Management from Henry Stewart Publications
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Henry Stewart Talks ().