FAA awarded a grant to Atlanta to search for a second site. FAA has failed in it's responsibility to prepare nationwide system planning and looking at Atlanta is evidence of piecemeal planning. Atlanta has 70% passenger connections with Delta Airlines owning 85%of the business. Atlanta's need for additional capacity can be reduced by relocating, stopping or reducing connecting activity as was done at other large hubs. Pittsburgh and St. Louis were major large hubs for USAir and American and connecting operations were completely stopped. USAir went to Philadelphia and American went to Chicago O'Hare. Delta stopped connecting operations at Dallas-Ft. Worth which was sizable and moved them to Salt Lake City and other hubs. Cincinatti connecting operations have been significantly reduced. Atlanta will have to spend billions of dollars for a second site. This will impact Atlanta with more noise and air pollution not to mention allowing millions of more connecting passengers who rarely leave the airport and have little impact on the local economy. Also international passengers can be given non-stop flights to their destinations rather than connecting though Atlanta. For example, Orlando International Airport is the largest tourist destination in America and the 3rd busiest origin/destination airport (O&D) in the USA with more O&D that Atlanta. What international passenger wants to connect if it can be avoided. Someone in Congress needs to check into this. See the page on the left column titled FAA and you will see how FAA  has both supported and fought against Wayports. See the page tittled PLANNING and you can read about Orlando.

Long-term (25 year) in depth study for a Wayport System must be done. General Accountability Office (GAO) recommended this in GAO-02-185 (2001) saying long-term planning is needed and FAA should take a fresh look at Wayports. It was requested by and sent to Senator John McCain who was asked by a magazine "Do you favor wayports? Absolutely, we are going to have to build them. We would not have a problem with hub concentration if we had enough airports". 

GAO said wayports would be "located on the fringe or outside of a major congested metropolitan areas. Building wayports may not face the degree of opposition that building new airports would-especially from local communities-because wayports would be further away from large urban centers. Some studies have suggested that wayports would be less costly than comparable airports built in major metropolitan areas. They could provide more open competition among airlines and would result in less airspace congestion".

State and local governments do not have jurisdictional coverage or legislative authority to plan beyond their borders for anything, especially transportation systems.  They are competitive and protective of all forms of transportation, especially hub airports. They cannot independently plan a nationwide system of wayports integrated with air traffic control, highways and light and high speed rail that serves across state and regional borders. President Eisenhower recognized this when highways were experiencing problems as aviation is today. He knew the federal government was the only entity that could transcend state and local politics to plan a nationwide highway system. He created the "Interstate Highway System" and where would we be without it. When a nationwide air traffic control system was needed, Congress charged FAA to plan and develop it because there was no local or state entity that could build, operate and maintain a nationwide system.

Wayports has not been accepted because they are opposed by large airlines operating large hubs and the cities that host these hubs. Some professionals knowingly lied to protect reputations. They know Wayports will siphon off passengers, cargo and related revenues which is what they are supposed to do. Evidence is only 2 new large hubairports have been built in the last 60 years and both replaced existing airports. None are planned or being considered. Airlines and hub cities are backed by politically influenced USDOT/FAA who says long-term 30-year demand can be met by expanding existing large hubs. These hubs have 60-70% connecting passengers with most of the the airline operations owned by a single airline. No experienced aviation official believes the existing congested and gridlocked hubs can be economically and environmentally expanded to meet long-term growth and demand. Even if they could it would take 15-20 years to bring a new supplemental airport online.

Wayports is the alternative to indefinite use of congested hubs. It's less costly, financially and environmentally, to provide long-term nationwide system capacity. Transportation Research Board (TRB) and FAA have misrepresented wayports by saying they are exclusivelyfor connecting passengers which is not true. Wayports would serve domestic and international origin/destination (O&D) and connecting passengers, express mail, U.S. and International mail, general aviation, aircraft maintenance, manufacturing, commercial and industrial sites. Wayports will accommodate next generation 500-800 passenger large aircraft that will double in 20 years. Wayports would serve all forms of space vehicles that are used for future express passenger and cargo service or for continued testing of future space vehicles.

Passengers would use Wayports to avoid inner city surface congestion and congested hubs. Express highways, regional and high speed rail links would provide access. Wayports would be the economic nucleus of new Airport Cities. Cargo operations could be the initial activity until passenger traffic builds up. Wayports would be the cornerstone of a new system.

Those who say wayports has been given in-depth studies know this is not true. They can produce nothing. Studies directed by Congress were never done. Misrepresentations, some intentional, by those who failed to do research created misunderstandings and controversy. FAA supported Wayports initially but stopped after they could not change the name for reasons never given. The most damaging misrepresentations are "they are for the exclusive use of connecting passengers and located in the middle of nowhere". Wayports were never advocated to be exclusively for connecting passengers. They are supplemental airports located in rural areas on the fringe of urban areas and would off-load existing inner city airports. Airport delays have not improved since Wayports was first introduced and airport and airspace congestion are worse than ever.

FAA's vision is the same as it was 20 years ago; expand existing airports, especially the busiest 35 large hubs, no matter what the financial or environmental costs. Local communities and urban areas continue experiencing aircraft noise, air pollution and negative environmental impacts.  

Some say Wayports is not a worthy cause. Tell it to domestic and international travelers, pilots and crews who sit in airports or airplanes for hours wasting valuable time. Tell it to families whose physical and mental health have been affected by aircraft noise, air pollution, loss of cherished homes, schools, churches and neighborhoods. 

Also, future transportation systems must address worldwide globalization in addition to domestic demand. China, India and other countries are emerging into powerful economies making international and domestic air travel essential to America's position in world affairs and markets. Air transportation forms the framework for this trend because there are no roads and bridges linking North America to other continents and ships are to slow. A 21^st century air transportation system is needed to take America to the future.

The Interstate Aviation System is an idea that will help meet this need. It calls for integrated planningof airports and intermodal systems like highways and regional and high speed trains as nationwide and regional systems rather than planning them independently as is done now. In addition to accommodating growth, it will provide relief to populations experiencing health problems from negative environmental impacts while reducing air pollution over densely populated urban areas. 

To accomplish this requires change in planning and decision making going beyond existing political jurisdictions and traditional methods and processes. New innovative, non-traditional and cost efficient approaches must be adopted with long-term system capacity addressed in a different way than the past. Failure to do this will cause massive airline delays and congestion costing billions annually to continue. It will require the Federal Government to ration airport access using congestion management, selling slots, peak hour pricing, de-peaking, re-regulation, and banning general aviation. Rationing is an admission of failure and a disgrace to America's innovation and creativeness. Planning must start now to avoid this and bring new capacity on line when needed. 

The new airport at Peotone, Illinois meets all Wayport criteria and can be the cornerstone of Wayport system. It's a large greenfield site on the fringe of Chicago. It will reduce costs, environmental concerns and noise and emissions by off-loading O'Hare and other congested northeast hubs facing gridlock. It can conveniently be accessed by light or high speed rail systems. Former military airfields can also be used as Wayports.  

Transportation Research Board (TRB} study "Innovative Approaches to Addressing Aviation Capacity Issues" (ACRP 03-10) is a Wayports study limited to 2 coastal mega-regions instead of all 11 mega-regions as it should have been. Wayports is not being addressed in the study even though TRB published a previous report saying "No other approach appears to be capable of handling the increase in travel that could develop by 2020". The following excerpt is from the TRB scope "Traditional approaches are unlikely to address problems that extend beyond current jurisdictional and legislative authorities of existing agencies. Current master plan, metropolitan, regional and state system planning is not sufficient to address capacity limitations. New and innovative processes/methodologies are needed if aviation capacity issues are going to be successfully addressed". This confirms Wayports is a valid concept. 

National leadership and funding priorities are needed to create an aviation system with Wayports as the cornerstone. A Plan and Vision created by a Commission appointed by the President or Congress is needed.

Comment to  jsheppard@bellsouth.net a former FAA official or theway@wayports.com