How high are landing fees?
 

In the WSJ's article on new polar routes being opened ( http://travel.wsj.com/n/SB960497494616734005-main.html ), Air Canada claims to have spent $400 million in fuel and $330 million in landing fees last year. I find it hard to believe that landing fees are anywhere close to fuel costs for any airline. Does anybody have information or links about this?

[This message has been edited by Jim_B (edited 06-21-2000).]

I don't know if it differ much from the states and Europe, but I found some data for Swedish airports. The formulae are based on MTOW, noise and exhausts and are quite extensive but by way of example a normal 767 pays about $1000 in landing and TNC ( Terminal Navigation Charge) for landing at Stockholm Arlanda.

How much is fuel? Speaking about fuel, does anyone know approximately how much the marginal cost for fuel is for an extra passenger (relative to distance of course)?

Later,
Mattis

Re: fuel cost per passenger ... a fully loaded 747 weighs something in excess of 200,000 lbs. (maybe even 500,000?). Fuel consumption difference from adding another 150 lbs. is minimal.

However, when a plane is fully loaded and trying to determine if has enough fuel to get to the destination, the extra 150-300 pounds of fuel they could carry by leaving behind a passenger can make the difference. This is usually only a factor on older planes, such as 727s, on hot days with heavy headwinds.

Absolutely.

These are a huge expense line, largely because airports and navigation systems are expensive, and need to recoup their costs.

Landing fees vary depending upon the airport and the size of the aircraft. In addition to these, the airline must also pay for gate use (which also varies by aircraft size), non-gate apron parking, security, turnaround services, office rental, lounge rental, baggage systems, vehicle parking, etc.

See, http://www.yvr.ca/generalinfo/doingb...%5Fcharges.htm for YVR's fees.

An A320 has an MTOW of 77000 kg. Every time one lands at YVR, it costs $327.25 in landing fees, $171.27 in gate fees, up to $81 in security inspection fees, up $385 in turnaround fees, for about $964 in fees for a domestic operation. An A320 can easily do 3 operations a day (some might do only 2 YYZYVR, but others could do 8 or 10 YVR YYC)

As the size of aircraft goes up, so do the costs. An international operation of a 340 (275,000 kg MTOW) involves $1721 (landing), $884 (gate), around $200 in security, and around $700 in turnaround, for $3505.

Using a conservative estimate of $3000 per day, per aircraft in the mainline fleet (excl. the RJs and the Regionals), each aircraft costs over $1m per year in direct airport fees. With around 130 aircraft, that's over $130m in direct fees.

The RJ's and regional carrier aircraft also cost (they tend to do more operations, which outweighs their cheaper fees). In addition, there are navigation fees, and the indirect airport costs (like lounges, offices, counters, use of baggage caroussels, etc.).

For Q1 2000, AC's operating statement shows $121m in airport and navigation fees.

Fuel has made a huge jump--for Q1 2000 AC spent over 200m, but Q1 1999 was a more modest 123m (as compared with $106m in airport and navigation fees in Q1 1999).

Well, I managed to interest myself in this subject, and snooped around:

First, a fully loaded 747-400 weighs in a 875,000 lbs (roughly 400,000 kg), and can carry 57,000 gals (213,000 l) of fuel.

Looking at the YVR lading fee chart, it does indeed seem that the landing fee itself is but the tip of the iceberg (about $2400 of the $8000 or so needed to land, park and deplane our hypothetical 747).

What sparked my interest in this whole issue was the fact that AC is paying almost as much in landing fees et al as for fuel. I had always been under the impression that an airline's greatest cost items were salaries, airplanes and fuel (which, it turns out, is true), and everything else didn't add up to a whole lot (bzzt! wrong answer!).

I got a hold of UAL's latest anual report and came up with the following:

For 1999, UA took in about $18 billion. Of this, $5.7 b went for salaries, $1.8 b for fuel and $0.95 b for "landing fees and other rent" (maintenance accounts for only $ 0.67 b, and I assume UA performs 100% of their maintenance).

The ratio of landing fees to fuel is significantly lower for UA than for AC. Some of this is certainly due to landing fees probably being higher in Canada than the US (I'm guessing here, don't have any numbers), and average stage length longer for UA than AC (reduces number of landings per aircraft per day).

Re: Price of fuel, the same UA annual reports lists average fuel price as $0.70 per gallon in 1997 and $0.58 per gallon in 1999. Prices this year are more than likely higher than the 1997 number.

I am interested in finding out what the landing fee to fuel ratio is for other airlines. I'll post anything I come up with.

I think UA faces higher incremental for a number of reasons:

1) Stage length. (But this is counteracted, to a degree by the higher landing costs of the A/C capable of longer stage length).

2) Congestion. On average, UA aircraft face longer approach holds than AC aircraft. While this is a marginal increment, it is, nonetheless, a direct one.

3) Scale. US airports are more crowded, and can, therefore, distibute costs accross a higher base.

4) Financing: Many US airports are financed through bond issues or other forms of private/public investor financing. They do not, therefore, have the same level of debt servicing charges as Canadian airports would.

Pull out the financial peformance figures for CX and NH. They operate out of the most expensive airports in the world, but also in jurisdictions where they have to import all their fuel. The numbers should be interesting--not only for their relative ratios, but also as indexed against RPK's.

Jim_B: Thanks for getting the weight on the 747. I knew I should look it up, but lacked the energy. Glad you did. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

landing fees in the usa are peanuts.

overseas, you pay each time you use any
air traffic control service. pay to file
a flight plan. pay to talk on the radio.
pay to takeoff. pay to land. i oncee paid
$400 to fill my o2 tank in europe. my cost
to fill the same tank is the usa is $12.

-doug

I think that the cost of the landing fees is sky high! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

For 747-400 specs...
[URL=http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747-400/product.html]

[This message has been edited by Aubie (edited 06-21-2000).]

Landing fees at European airports are much higher than the US. In the interests of competition the UK authorities allowed airlines to show the PSC (Passenger Service Charge) that is levied by the airport owner on the airline for passengers use of airport facilities. This is around GBP15 for places such as LGW and LHR.

As a private pilot (flying single engined Cessna and Piper aircraft) I have flown in many differnet countries. I have never paid a landing fee in the US, however, in the UK it is a different matter. My home airport, Edinburgh, charges around GBP7 for each landing or touch and go for aircraft based there or around GBP20 for visiting aircraft. If they charge that for a small plane just think what they charge for commercial aircraft!

According to a position papar prepared by the Foreign Airlines Association in Japan in July 1999,

Japan's three key airports -- Narita (NRT), Haneda (HND) and Kansai (KIX) -- are by far the world's most expensive international airports to operate into -- far way ahead of others ....

The paper had a list of landing charges of B747-400 (Max TOW=395T) -- not sure what TOW means -- in USD.

NRT 7,900
HND 7,900
KIX 7,571
NGO/FKU 4,031
HKG 3,916
PAR 3,251
TPE 2,933
SYD 2,710
NYC 2,654
SIN 2,459

The papar also has a list of ''total'' charges that also covers related charges such as baggage facility charges (for NRT) and terminal building charge (of HKD39 per pax at HKG), etc.

By total charges,

KIX tops the list with 8,738USD, followed by 8,367USD for NRT, 7,900USD for HND and 5,375USD for HKG.

KIX was the only Japanese airport served by AC until its acquisition of CP. I think AC now has a codeshare to NRT with CP, or is it their own service?

Chiangi, Max TOW=395T might refer to Maximum Take Off Weight as 395 Tons.

WHY2K, thanks!

Chiangi,

YYZ - NRT is AC metal with CP codeshare,
YVR - NRT is CP metal with AC codeshare.