Despite all the discussions about PCN, I think that the 06/24 runway length which was raised early in the discussion needs revisiting.
The short 06/24 runway length at Edinburgh is an issue, and as I take a look at a satellite photo of it, I see that both runway ends have displaced thresholds which means that there are obstacles at both ends. It is a bit unusual to have both ends displaced at a major airport – it becomes sort of like landing in a goldfish bowl. The AIP shows me that the airport has been pro-active in trying to squeeze out every available last metre of runway, and it has probably succeeded. A closer look on the photos shows hills at both ends, which prevents any decent length increase from what is there now. This runway has an average ASDA of 2615m now which is the length of a middle-haul runway, and it is clearly going to be a middle-haul runway forever – it is not and can never be a long-haul runway. That alone will affect future international traffic.
Having spent the time studying the satellite photos, there is another point that leaps out at me.
It would be churlish and unfair to characterize Edinburgh Airport as a tight little place, quart-into-a-pint-pot, developed higgle-dee piggle-dee, compromise heaped upon compromise, jammed into a small valley surrounded by hills, with encroaching town development crowding the one runway, and limited growth potential. Unfair - because the airport has clearly done an excellent job and a lot of hard work in developing its assets to their limits despite the constraints. Churlish, because I am not Jeremy Clarkson and this is clearly not Top Gear, so these comments are boorish.
Nevertheless, the reality is that this is never going to be an attractive airport for future development. Any sort of development there is going to need large amounts of money thrown at it, for which there are not the passengers to pay. And after spending all that money, well - to paraphrase Winston Churchill – in the morning when the airport owner is sober, the airport will still be ugly.
In terms of strengthening, adding 200mm asphalt during overnight works. Yes it can be done, and such overnight work is done at airports around the world. It is complex, difficult, slow and expensive. For a single runway airport (like Edinburgh effectively is), everything is harder again. Operations are affected. The asphalt is added in multiple layers, one layer at a time, with ramps at the end of each night’s work to make it acceptable for aircraft. The runway closures are preferably 8 hours or 10 hours, rather than 6 hours. The amount of work takes months to do rather than days. The investigation and design alone will take 12 months. There is excellent guidance in the UK CAP 781 about the planning of such work, learning in part from the lessons of the monumental cock-up at Bristol Airport.
I have never been to Scotland and so cannot comment about local issues. I took a look at Glasgow Airport from the satellite, and that also looks a pretty tight airport. The two airports are pretty close together, and if you are after a genuine long haul international airport for the region, then maybe what is needed is a brand new giant-sized greenfields airport located between the two. Space for triple runways (1 x 3800m, 2 x 2750m), space for 2 terminals, multistorey carparks, rail links to Edinburgh and Glasgow, hotels, cargo/industrial areas. Get the English to pay for it as part of Scottish independence
