News
Why Mattala could not take off: Here’s the plane truth
Since it opened two years ago, much was done to make Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport viable. Little or nothing has worked. Incentives have included rock-bottom handling, landing and parking charges. Businesses were offered exemptions on customs duty, exchange control and import-export regulations to set up shop in surrounding areas. Even liquor was cheaper at the duty free. Since April, there has been an open skies policy over the ailing facility. Among other things, international airlines are free to use the airport as a base for commercial operations. But there are still no takers. The possibility of turning MRIA into an aircraft maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) centre is again being discussed. This would require a further cash injection.
Experts say Sri Lanka is now saddled forever with an airport whose runway orientation is wrong. Pic by Indika Handuwala
Of the scant traffic recorded at the facility, the majority were SriLankan Airlines flights that made heavy losses on the sector. These, too, ceased in January. Others were carriers that had been constrained to operate some frequencies to Mattala as part of their air service agreements. There could be fresh moves to market Mattala as the airport of choice for migrant workers. This strategy failed in the past.
Funds were invested on building MRIA against the best advice of aviation experts. A report produced by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) in 2004 shows the money would have been better spent in adding a second runway to the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA).
The report was commissioned by the Ministry of Transport, Highways and Civil Aviation while the United National Party (UNP) was briefly in power. At the time, BIA was earmarked for development as an “aviation hub”. Competition for such status was already fierce. South East Asian airports —such as those in Hong Kong, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore —were steaming ahead.
“However, Colombo has the possibility of becoming a niche hub for South Asia,” the IATA report assessed. “It has a favourable geographic location; origin and destination traffic is growing; its tourism industry is developing; and it has a highly regarded and strong base carrier. What it does not have is an efficient airport with adequate capacity for the future.”
The Sunday Times traced a copy of the document. IATA represents the common interests of all prestigious carriers. The study, therefore, was conducted from the point of view of airlines and their expectations of aviation facilities in the country.The foremost recommendation made by IATA was that, if Sri Lanka were to be a hub, it needed a second, well-spaced runway at BIA. This opinion was arrived at after consulting airlines already flying into the country; those that were planning to do so; and even those that had no intention of doing so.
The Sri Lanka Air Force, which has a base adjoining the airport, was also interviewed. There was overwhelming consensus. The report recommended the construction of a second runway; a parallel taxiway associated with that runway; a taxiway linking the present runway to the new parallel taxiway which will be perpendicular to the runway; and relevant zoning regulations.
To date, however, BIA has only a single airstrip of 3350m long and 45m width. It was constructed in 1986. Plans for expansion include a second one. No Government has implemented them. A new wing was added to the terminal, along with much needed aerobridges. A further terminal is on the cards. But a runway would require stronger political will.
The IATA report cautioned a decade ago that the appearance of new ultra long-range aircraft (such as the Airbus A340-500, the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747-400ER) “will enable airlines to develop new and innovative services but restricted runway length will preclude the development of such services to Colombo”.
It said that any plan to extend the existing airstrip to around 4,000m — the nominal length required by these aircraft — would, on its own, be inadequate. “The Airbus A380s outer engines will be 47 metres apart, just beyond the width of the 45 metre standard runway at Bandaranaike International Airport,” it states. “The jet blast could cause serious soil erosion and destroy runway signs and lights unless runway shoulders were paved and the signs and lights were moved.”
This week, an Airbus A380 landed in BIA after smoke was detected in its cabin. One also arrived a few weeks ago with a sick passenger on board. “A380s have come around six times to BIA,” said Derrick Karunaratne, Corporate Communications Officer. “The length of the runway is not so much of a problem,” he maintained. “The width is a small issue but those pilots are trained to land accordingly. They knock off the corner engines. In future, we will be resurfacing and widening the runway.” An A380 has four engines.
This is clearly a fleeting, patchwork solution. While these large aircraft have found BIA suitable to use in emergencies, none of them makes scheduled stops there. The runway is not the only problem. “An A380 has 500 plus passengers,” commented a senior retired air traffic controller. “Are there enough seats in the transit lounge for them to sit?”
MRIA does have a runway suitable for A380s but it, too, has failed to attract scheduled operations. And whenever one of these aircraft makes an unplanned stop at BIA or Mattala, the authorities are so chuffed they notify the media. Even a rise in the number of A380s overflying Mattala makes news. Despite years of strategising and consultation, this is the best the country has achieved.
While Sri Lanka dawdled, other airports in the region continued to blossom. Trichy and Trivandrum are short flights away. With full blown operations and all facilities, including accommodation, airlines would prefer to divert to India if BIA was closed. “They don’t have to go to Mattala,” the controller said. “If they have 200 passengers on board, where can they be put up? If there is an accident, are there good hospitals?”
The IATA report was presented to the Government and acknowledged. Shortly afterwards, President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga dissolved parliament. The document gathered dust. Many industry practitioners now accuse aviation authorities of having “pussy-footed” around vital issues and of having failed to adequately inform the previous Government about the foolhardiness of prioritising MRIA. Others are more forgiving. They say that, under the circumstances, President Mahinda Rajapaksa would not have yielded.
“What happened to the IATA presentation?” asked an internationally acclaimed expert, who wished to remain anonymous. “Why was it not taken up seriously? Here were the users, the airlines, saying that a second runway was what they needed. If they had wanted a second international airport, they would have pointed that out.”
The simple principle is that two runways in two cities do not make an aviation hub. Two well-spaced runways in the same city permitting simultaneous take-off and landing, with an area in between for terminal buildings, is now established worldwide as being ideal layout for the beginning of a hub. Sri Lanka is being left behind, faster than ever.
| MRIA: Biggest insult to aviation Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport, says an industry expert, with sheer disdain, “is the biggest insult to aviation done in the name of furthering aviation by any Head of State, Minister of Aviation or anyone I have known in my entire career.” There are so many things awry with Mattala. Practitioners do not know where to begin. The runway orientation is wrong. “It is so wrong that the airport is doomed,” was the direst opinion expressed.The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO)’s manual for aerodrome construction specifies that wind speed and direction must be taken into account when building a runway. An aircraft must land into the wind (“headwind”, as it is called). As confirmed by several sources, as well as a senior retired air traffic controller, the wind blows perpendicular to the centre line of the runway at MRIA — that is, across it. This is called “crosswind” and is the worst type of condition for landing. A cursory glance at the wind sock gives indication of this.“As a matter of interest — but something that most readers would not find surprising — Sri Lankan pilots were not consulted when MRIA was constructed,” Captain G.A. Fernando, a vocal retired aviator, is on record as saying. “Today, aircraft landing there in the afternoon experience crosswinds of over 30 knots, which could be over the demonstrated crosswind limits for some aircraft.”While heavy planes might manage with a technique called “crab-landing”, these circumstances are particularly dangerous to light training aircraft which can get pushed off the runway by gusting wind. “You can never have ab initio flying training at Mattala,” declared another industry expert. “If you permit it, you are paving the way for a serious accident. We are now saddled forever with an airport whose runway orientation is wrong.”The airstrip, at 3,500m long and 60m wide, is capable of landing an A380 aircraft. But it has no parallel taxiway which is essential for big, heavy aircraft. A plane landing away from the terminal will have to do a 180-degree turn at the end of the runway and retrace its path.The wear and tear inflicted on the airstrip and on the wheels of the aircraft by this manoeuvre is immense. If, on top of everything, there are also no passengers on board, the operation becomes financially unfeasible. These factors could explain why, despite all the bragging, the expected traffic did not arrive on the longest runway in the country.Another reason could be the Government’s insistence of protecting the national carrier at the expense of its airports and aviation industry. “Introducing an open skies policy to Mattala has no meaning when Katunayake has restricted freedoms,” said an official, also requesting anonymity. “Whenever international airlines ask for more operating rights, SriLankan Airlines blocks it for fear of competition.”“But what is the return on investment on an airline?” he asked. “In contrast, what is the return on investment on an airport? Every international aviation hub is a thundering financial success.”Many of the other flaws are widely known including elephants on the access road (particularly at night, as there is no protective fencing along the route) and birds. The Civil Aviation Authority’s statistics show that as many as 15 bird strikes were recorded at MRIA in 2014, four times more than the previous year. | |