IMPACT OF RUNWAY CAPACITY ON FLIGHT EFFICIENCY AND DELAY IN

MURITALA MUHAMMED INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LAGOS

BY

OGUNRINDE OLULEKE GEORGE

MATRIC NUMBER: (142054)

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT,

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES, LADOKE AKINTOLA UNIVERSITY OF

TECHNOLOGY, P.M.B 4000, OGBOMOSO, OYO STATE.

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY (B.TECH) DEGREE IN TRANSPORT

MANAGEMENT

APRI, 2020
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Background to the Study

Transportation is a vital activity in moving both freight and passengers around the world. It is

one of the tools that civilized societies need soas to bring order out of chaos, because it cuts

across every phase and facet of our existence. Air transport is relatively expensive when

compared with other modes of transport likewater, road and rail system respectively.

(Rosenberger et al., 2000). However, air transport is the fastest of thesemodes. Aviation industry

plays important role in providing for the world economies. One of the main challenges facing the

aviation industry is to develop capacity to meet demand; by reducing flight delay which is one of

the Key performance indicators (KPI) for aviation industry. (Mohleji, 2001).

Traffic delay is experienced whether in the departure, enrouteor arrival stage of flight

operations. If an aircraft arrives late at its destination, the delayed inbound flight may not only be

delayed on its next flight leg but it may also affect other flights within the airline network. Delay

as defined by the oxford leaner’s dictionary is a period of time when somebody or something has

to wait because of a problem that makessomething slow or late. Air traffic delay may be referred

to as arrival or departure flight in excess of the estimated time on the flight plan. The root cause

of delay can be either manmade or natural.( Schaefer et al., 2011). The former is caused by

airmen (personnel involved in flight movement) which could range from slow facilitation

process, technical or maintenance problems, airspace cognition, movement breakdown while the

later is caused by natural occurrence such as bad weather, natural disaster like volcano eruption,

tornados. (Hansen, 2002).

 The causal effect of these factors is that goods and passengers will not get to their

destination has scheduled. Apart from increasing the operational cost on the airline, it also

increases fatigue on airmen, passengers etc. hence, in all ramification,` air traffic delay

boilsdown to loss of resources. Prompt performance of airlines schedule is keyfactor in

maintaining satisfaction of both current and new customers in airline industry. Also,maintaining

economical operations during irregular conditions is essential to achieve expected revenues.(

Mueller et al., 2002). These require clever management of the different operation resources

(aircraft, pilots and flight attendants) to ensure their on-time readiness for each flight in the

planned schedule. However, flight schedules' are often subjected to numerous sources of

irregularity. According to Kleywegt and Nemhauser, weather accounts for nearly 75% of system

delays. In an air traffic flow management (ATFM) initiative for each controlled flight, a

controlled time of arrival or arrival slot is assigned at the regulated area or arrival airport.

Therefore, it is good to note that ATFM approach introduces a controlled flight system as a way

to manage flight delays through proper sequencing of flight strip. (Rose, 2002).

Based on filed flight plans and weather forecasts, trip times (total time it takes a flight to

move from origin airport to destination airport) can be estimatedwith reasonable accuracy and

consequently, the controlled time of departure (CTD) at the origin airport. Thus, the control time

of departure (CTD) is equal to the control time of arrival (CTA) minus the trip time, and the total

delay assigned (D) is the control time of departure (CTD) minus the estimated (scheduled) time

of departure (ETD). (Whalen, 2007).

Various studies made on airport congestion have identified several factors which generate

flight delays. Such factors include; Saturation of airport capacity (includingair transportation

control activities), airline problems, reactionary delays, passengers and cargo, weather and other
unpredictable disruptions (e.g. strikes). Among all these factors, delay time experienced by

flights and passengers can be mostly attributed to problems caused by air traffic control, airports

infrastructure, and airlineoperations. In addition stormy weather causes delays not only at

airports experiencing the inclement weather, but also at airports with flights connecting from the

airports experiencing inclement weather. (Grupta, 2006). During stormy weather, airport

capacity is reduced due to increased aircraft separations. Because of this weather condition,

instrument landing systems (ILS) are required for aircraft navigation in these conditions, this

situation is called Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC). In a Clear weather, this

condition is known as Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC).Furthermore, studies have

identified the stages of flight in which delays occur and the causalfactors that result in delays. In

a research conducted by Mueller the data shows that 84% of all delays occur on the ground (gate,

taxi-out, taxi-in), out of which 76% are prior to takeoff (gate, taxi-out), suggesting that focusing

on ground delay prediction will have the most impact on improving forecasting algorithms.Air

traffic delay has become a major problem for air traveler and airline operators. (Yahaya, 2010).

Occasional delays are part of air travel today, as much as we dislike delays; we cannot avoid

them even in well run airlines. Murtala Muhammed international Airport encounters the highest

amount of traffic movement in Nigeria. Recently, there have been series of reports related to

delays in air traffic at Murtala Muhammed airport. This delay often results in the increase in fuel

consumption of aircrafts, affects passengers getting to their destination on time. In most cases the

connecting flight is missed and the airline operators have no other option order than to take their

passengers back to their point of departure and the ticket fair refunded back to them. (Allan,

2001). Airtraffic delay cannot be averted but can be managed. Arising from the above scenario,
this, study attempts to examine the relationship between airport delay and airport capacity and

how best this relationship can be managed. (Kulesa, 2002)

1.2 Statement of Problem

Apart from the direct costs imposed on the airline industry and its customers, flight

delays have indirect effects on the national economy. Specifically, the role it plays toward

inefficiency in the air transportation sector therefore increases the cost of doing business for

other sectors, making the associated businesses less productive. There are vase records of flight

delays at many commercial airports all over the world. At Sao Paolo’s Guarulhos and Congonhas

International Airports only 41% and 43% of all flights, respectively, left on time, making them

the third and fourth worst cities for departures. Sao Paolo is also one of the worst places in the

world for arrivals. Just 54% of the flights at Congonhas and 59% of the flights at Guarulhos

arrived as scheduled.

Brazil, of course, isn’t the only country with a poor track record for flight delays. At

Beijing Capital International Airport just 33% of its flights took off on time in 2007, putting it

just behind Brasilia on list of worst departure airports. Egypt’s Cairo International, Africa’s

second busiest airport behind Johannesburg, only saw 47% of its flights take off most time with

the average wait of 43 minutes. And at sprawling Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris–the worst

place in Europe to catch a timely flight–barely 50% of its commercial passenger planes left as

scheduled.

Airport authorities typically use arrival times when tracking late flights, which are

considered delayed if they reach their destination at least 15 minutes behind schedule. According

to conventional wisdom, pilots can make up for lost time on the ground a concept referred to as

Ground holding program which is one of the basic methods of lowering the cost problem that
usually occur during delay and congestion incur due to uncertainty of future landing capacity It

means to have a flight wait on the ground at its point of origin than to have it circle the airport at

its destination, unable to land once they’re in the air. But travelers find few things more

frustrating than having to wait more than necessary at their gate or on the runway. So therefore

we can have delay at departure, arrival and enroute as components of flight delay.

In the U.S., New York City has become synonymous with delayed flights as commercial

and corporate jets crowd limited airspace over the city. With just 58% of its flights arriving on

time in 2007, LaGuardia airport beat out Newark International (slightly more than 58% arrived

as scheduled) for the worst airport in the U.S. for arrivals. They round out the top five of the

world’s worst airports for delayed arrivals. Incidentally, John F. Kennedy International–New

York’s largest airport with 44 million passengers annually–was barely behind them, with more

than 40% of its flights arriving late.

Robert Poole, founder of the Reason Foundation and a frequent adviser to the U.S.

government on transportation issues, says that, in New York, airlines have caused the delay

problem by substituting smaller planes for larger ones. At John F. Kennedy International, the

number of planes with less than 100 seats has grown by 128% during the last 5 years.

In this research we are looking at the Arrival delay based on available aerodrome

infrastructure presently at Murtala Muhammed airport. with the following questions in mind; if

an aircraft departing from origin aerodrome as scheduled why should there be Arrival delay at

the destination airport? How can this delay be best managed?

1.3 Aim and Objectives

 The Aim of this project is to study the currently available airport infrastructures, there

effects on flight Arrival delay at Murtala Muhammed airport and to proffer solution to best

manage this Arrival delays.

The objectives of this research is as follows

i. To study the available airport infrastructure in Murtala Muhammed airport.

ii. To relate these available airport infrastructure to arrival delay by creating and testing

hypothetical statements (hypotheses).

iii. Proffer possible solution to the Arrivaldelay at Murtala Muhammed airport.

1.4 Research Questions

i. Does the number of runway determines the flight efficiency and or the delay at Murtala

Muhammed airport?

ii. Does the cumulative runway occupancy time directly responsible for arrival delay at

Murtala Muhammed airport?

1.5 Research Hypotheses

Consequently, the following hypotheses were postulated:

i. The number of runway determines the flight efficiency and delay at Murtala Muhammed

airport.

ii. The cumulative runway occupancy time is directly responsible for the arrival delay at

Murtala Muhammed airport

1.5 Scope of the Study

 The study area is the Nigerian Airspace which is referred to as Kano Flight Information

Region (Kano FIR) according to International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The

aerodrome of study is Murtala Mohammed International Airport located at Ikejain Lagos state. It

is also important to note that the Nigerian Airspace is divided into two sectors by international

civil aviation organization(ICAO) which are the Northern and Southern sector. Lagos airport

(Murtala Mohammed airport) takes over the jurisdiction of all aerodromes in the Southern sector,

while Kano airport (Aminu Kano International airport) takes control of all aerodromes in the

Northern sector. Below is a pictorial representation of Nigerian Airspace (Kano FIR) as

published by Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA).

 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Flight Delay

Discussion on Flight delay is a complex phenomenon, because it can be due to problems

at the origin airport, at the destination airport, or during airborne. A combination of these factors

often occurs. Delays can sometimes also be attributable to airlines. Some flights are affected by

reactionary delays, due to late arrival of previous flights. These reactionary delays can be

aggravated by the schedule operation. Flight schedules are often subjected to irregularity. Due to

the tight connection among airlines resources, delays could dramatically propagate over time and

space unless the proper recovery actions are taken. Even if complex, flight delays are nowadays

measurable. And there exist some pattern of flight delay due to the schedule performance and

airline itself (Wu, 2005). Some results extracted from the case study of Orlando International

Airport (MCO) can help to better understand the phenomenon. Two government agencies keep

air traffic delay statistics in the United States. The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS)

compiles delay data for the benefit of passengers. They define a delayed flight when the aircraft

fails to release its parking brake less than 15 minutes after the scheduled departure time. The

FAA is more interested in delays indicating surface movement inefficiencies and will record a

delay when an aircraft requires 15 minutes or longer over the standard taxi-out or taxi-in time

(Mueller, et al., 2002).

 Generally, flight delays are the responsibility of the airline. Each airline has a certain

number of hourly arrivals and departures allotted per airport. If the airline is not able to get all of

its scheduled flights in or out each hour, then representatives of the airline will determine which

flights to delay and which flights to cancel (from http://www.travelforecast.com). These delays

take one of three forms, ground delay programs, ground stops, and general airport delays. When

the arrival demand of an airport is greater than the determined capacity of the airport, then a

ground delay program may be instituted. The airport capacity is unique to each airport, given the

same weather conditions. The various facilities at an airport can determine how much traffic an

airport can handle during any given weather event. Generally, ground delay programs are issued

when inclement weather is expected to last for a significant period of time. These programs limit

the number of aircraft that can land at an affected airport. Because demand is greater than the

aircraft arrival capacity, flight delays will result. Second, ground stops are issued when inclement

weather is expected for a short period of time or the weather at the airport is unacceptable for

landing. Ground stops mean that traffic destined to the affected airport is not allowed to leave for

a certain period of time. Lastly, there are general arrival and departure delays. This usually

indicates that arrival traffic is doing airborne holding or departing traffic is experiencing longer

than normal taxi times or holding at the gate. These could be due to a number of reasons,

including thunderstorms in the area, a high departure demand, or a runway change. Past

researches show that arrival and departure delays are highly correlated. Correlation between

arrival and departure delays is extremely high (around 0.9 for 2002 and 2003). This finding is

useful to prove that congestion at destination airport is to a great extent originated at the

departure airport. In order to understand flight delay, it is useful to consider the system

interdependencies that influence flight efficiency and delay using the flight efficiency and delay

conceptual framework as shown in figure 2.1 below.

The simplest way of reducing delays is not to increase the speed and efficiency of the system to

meet the scheduled time, but to push back the scheduled time to absorb the system delays. As a

result, one estimate put the number of scheduled delays that were built into airline schedules in

1999 at 22.5 million minutes. The number of arrival delays reported by BTS would have been

nearly 25% higher in 1999 if airlines had maintained their 1988 schedules (Wu, 2005). Sources

of airport delay include many elements, such as weather, airport congestion, luggage loading,

connecting passengers, etc. Weather is the main contributor to delays in the air traffic control

(ATC) system. Traffic volume delays are caused by an arrival/departure demand that exceeds the

normal airport arrival rate (AAR)/airport departure rate (ADR). The demand may also exceed the

airport capacity if AAR and ADR are reduced due to weather conditions at the airport,

equipment failure or runway closure. Delays may also be attributed to airline operations

procedures (Aisling and Kenneth, 1999).

2.1.1 Flight Delay Analysis and Potential Remedies

The increase in delays in the National Airspace System (NAS) has been the subject of

studies in recent years. The literature on delay analysis and its potential remedies extends back

over several decades. Levine (1969) argues that pricing is a better means of allocating scarce

airport capacity to meet the demand than other mechanisms being considered at the time, such as

slot allocation. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) describes the increase in delays and

10 cancellations from 1995 through 1999. Schaefer and Miller (2001) found that the current

system for collecting causal data does not provide the appropriate data for developing strong

conclusions for delay causes and recommend changes to the current data collection system. Allan

et al. (2001) examined delays at New York City Airports from September 1998 through August

2000 to determine the major causes of delay that occurred during the first year of an Integrated
Terminal Weather System (ITWS) use and delays that occurred with ITWS in operation that

were “avoidable” if enhanced weather detection. The methodology used in the study has

considered major causes of delays (convective weather inside and well outside the terminal area,

and high winds) that have generally been ignored in previous studies of capacity constrained

airports such as Newark International Airport (EWR). The research found that the usual

paradigm of assessing delays only in terms of Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) and

Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) and the associated airport capacities is far too

simplistic as a tool for determining which air traffic management investments best reduces the

“avoidable” delays. Schaefer and Miller (2001) use the Detailed Policy Assessment Tool

(DPAT) to model the propagation of delay throughout a system of airports and sectors. To

estimate delays, throughputs, and air traffic congestion in a typical scenario of current operations

in the U. S., DPAT models the flow of approximately 50,000 flights per day throughout the

airports and airspace of the U. S. National Airspace System (NAS) and can simulate flights to

analyze delays at airports around the world. They obtained results for local flight departure and

arrival delays due to IMC, propagation for IMC, comparisons to 11 VMC results, and a

comparison of propagated delays to entire system. Rosen (2002) measures the change in flight

times resulting from infrastructure-constant changes in passenger demand. Results indicate that

delays rise with the ratio of demand to fixed airport infrastructure, decreasing average flight

times by close to seven minutes after the sharp decrease in demand in the Fall of 2001. Flight

time differences between the airlines in the sample are small, though the larger United had

shorter average flight times in the winter quarter than America West, the smaller airline in the

data sample. Janic(2003) presents a model for assessment of the economic consequences of

large-scale disruptions of an airline single hub-and-spoke network expressed by the costs of

delayed and cancelled complexes of flights. The model uses the scheduled and affected service

time of particular complexes to determine their delays caused by disruption. During the last

decade, a considerable attention has been given to proactive schedule recovery models as a

possible approach to limit flight delays associated with Ground Delay Programs (GDP)

(Abdelghany et al., 2004; Clarke, 1997). In these models, the impact of any reported flight

delays, due to GDP or any other reason, is propagated in the network to determine any possible

down-line disruptions (Monroe and Chu, 1995). Wu (2005) explores the inherent delays of

airline schedules resulting from limited buffer times and stochastic disruptions in airline

operations. It is found that significant gaps exist between the real operating delays, the inherent

delays (from simulation) and the zero-delay scenario. Results show that airline schedules must

consider the stochasticity in daily operations. Schedules may become robust and reliable, only if

buffer times are embedded and designed properly in airline schedules.

2.1.2 Review on Methodology of Delay Analysis

Suzuki (2000) proposes a new method of modeling the relationship between on-time

performance and market share in the airline industry. The idea behind the method is that the

passengers decision to remain (use same airline) or switch (use other airlines) at time t depends

on whether they have experienced flight delays at time t-1 or not. Air traffic flow management

(TFM) (Ball, Connolly, and Wanke 2003) procedures such as Ground Delay program (GDP),

Ground Stop (GS), or Miles-in-Trail (MIT) metering are options available to the Air Traffic

Management (ATM) authority to manage airway congestion and to respond to anticipated

weather conditions (Wanke et al. 2003). The effects of such complex interactions was quantified

with either discrete event simulation or mathematical models or both. In this analysis, the authors
developed a recursive MIT penalty function to quantify the ripple effects of specific MIT

programs over relevant sets of flights and flight restrictions within the NAS. In conjunction with

discrete event simulation, it is possible to examine and quantify the total impacts of various TFM

programs for alternatives analysis and provide a comparison across several alternative TFM

programs available to air traffic flow management decision-makers. Hansen (2002) analyzes

runway delay externalities at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) using a deterministic

queuing model. The model allows estimating the delay impact of each specific arriving flight on

each other specific arriving flight. The research finds that, despite being only moderately

congested (average queuing delay only 4 min per arriving flight), individual flights can generate

as much as 3 aircraft-hours of external delay impact on other flights, with an average impact of

26 aircraft-minutes and 13 3400 seat-minutes. About 90 percent of this impact is external to the

airline as well as the flight, a consequence of the lack of a dominant airline at LAX. Shomik et

al. (2002) presents an analysis of the possible impact of the application of slot controls as a

demand management measure at San Francisco International Airport (SFO). A deterministic

queuing model that uses an actual arrival schedule as input and simulates arrival delay based on

available arrival capacity is used to estimate delay reduction potential of slot controls. The

conclusions show the overall potential of slot controls to alleviate delay at SFO and their non-

delay consequences. Mehndiratta et al. (2002) propose a simulation framework to analyze the

effects of stochastic flight delays on static gate assignments. The results of testing the framework

on actual Chiang Kai-Shek airport (Taiwan) operations were good, showing that the framework

could be useful for airport authorities to perform gate assignments. Abdelghany et al. (2004)

present a flight delay projection model, which projects flight delays and alerts for down-line
operation breaks for large-scale airlines schedules. The results show that down-line schedule

disruptions are proportional to the number of flights impacted by the GDP.

Furthermore, in the recorded GDP instances, aircraft appears to be the reason for most flight

delays predicted by the model. Hansen and Hsiao (2005) analyze the recent increase in flight

delay in the US domestic system by estimating an econometric model of average daily delay that

incorporates the effects of arrival queuing, convective weather, terminal weather conditions,

seasonal effects, and secular effects (such as half year). Results suggest that, controlling for these

factors, delays decreased steadily from 2000 through early 2003, but that the trend reversed

thereafter. 14 Hansen and Zhang (2005) investigated the interaction between LaGuardia Airport

(LGA) and the rest of the aviation system by estimating simultaneous equations of average LGA

and National Airspace System delay using two-stage least squares. The results demonstrate that

the arrival delay impact of the Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-

21) on LGA was in the form of increased Ground Delay Program (GDP) holding, and that while

delay increased markedly under AIR-21 there were also observable improvements in the ability

of LGA airport to handle traffic. Hansen and Peterman (2004) use censored regression to analyze

the delay impacts of the implementation of Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) metering at Los

Angeles International Airport (LAX) in order to assess whether and how they have affected NAS

performance. The results show that weather variables are not significant in the IMC models. In

contrast to the IMC results, weather effects are significant under VMC. Temperature, visibility,

and wind all have significant effects in at least one of the time periods. The presence of these

weather effects under VMC suggests that, as a result of the greater flexibility of VMC separation

rules, the performance of the airport is more responsive to changing conditions. It is notable that

temperature is one the influential factors.

 The current method of valuing delay in benefit-cost analysis is insufficient for

determining the distributional impacts of a technology change on users because it fails to account

for the shifts in where benefits occur and to which users. Kanafani et al (2004) propose a

theoretical framework for evaluating the distributive effects of technology changes that requires

a new approach to the evaluation of delay and understanding efficiency in light of the state of the

system. The framework defines different categories 15 of delay per flight and a method for

calculating the cost of each type of delay by stakeholder recognizing that the airlines have

different business strategies and therefore have different preferences. A case study based on a

recent study of the benefits of the Integrated Terminal Weather Service (ITWS) demonstrates

that a detailed investigation of the breakdown of delay into components can lead to more

accurate delay cost accounting. (Janic, 2003).

2.1.3 Conclusions of Literature Review

Statistical models and simulation method are used to analyze flight delay, including

deterministic queuing model, censored regression, and econometric model etc. But we can see

that the analysis on delay are carried on macroscopical data or microcosmic data with only a few

days. That is because of the huge data of flights every day. So here the flight delay are

categorized into several level, and the logistic regression models are used here to better identify

the delay pattern. In this thesis, studies on airport delay and delay influence on individual flight

are carried out, using multiple regression model, logistic regression models, neural network

models and tree model.

 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Study Area

Murtala Muhammed International Airport is an International airport located in Ikeja,

Lagos State, Nigeria. It was originally known as Lagos International Airport and was renamed in

the mid 1970s during the construction of the new international terminal, after the former

Nigerian military head of state, General Murtala Muhammed. The Murtala Muhammed

International terminal was modeled after Amsterdam Airport. This new terminal was opened

officially on -the 15th March, 1979. It is the main base for Nigeria's flag carrier airlines such as

Aero Contractor and Arik Airline.

3.2 Instrument of Data Collection

The major instruments of data collection are:

1. Flight plan

2. Method of Data collection

3. Observation

4. Aeronautical charts

3.2.1 Flight Plan

It is important to note that before an aircraft can depart from the origin aerodrome a copy

of its flight plan is submitted at the Aeronautical Information Services (AIS) office in other to

have the details of its flight operation. From the submitted flight plan data/information such as
type of flight, type of aircraft, name of pilots flying the aircraft, numbers of passengers on board

the aircraft, estimated time of departure, origin aerodrome and the destination aerodrome are

collected by the AIS officer and forwarded to the Air Traffic Controller to enable the controller

organize the movement of flight operation out of the origin aerodrome. A copy of the same detail

is sent to the destination aerodrome as well as other alternative aerodrome to prepare for the

arrival of such aircraft using Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunication Network (AFTN).

For the purpose of this research record of flight operation as documented by the AIS officer in

the selected origin aerodrome (in this context Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja)

was compiled and the relevant data/information abstracted from the record.

3.2.2 Method of Data collection

To gather other salient information which are necessary in order to understand the

problem statement of this research, interviews was adopted instead of the use of Questionnaires.

This afforded the researcher the opportunity to have a one on one interview with the personnel

involved directly in flight operations. So apart from the airline operators who were not

interviewed because of their tendency not to give vital operational information, pilots and air

traffic controllers were interviewed. The interview questions was built on the Flight Efficiency

and Delay conceptual framework in Figure 4 above. Although the conceptual framework

captured four major factors which includes ATC/ATM Performance, Capacity and airport

infrastructure, Operator schedules and flight preferences, Weather but the emphasis was on

Capacity and airport infrastructure. Pilot and Air traffic controller were interviewed to get their

views concerning Airport maintenance and Airport expansion as it relates to arrival delay in the

studied aerodrome (Murtala Mohammed airport)

3.2.3 Observation
 As a personnel working in AIS department under NAMA, the research afforded me the

opportunity to have a thorough observation of flight operation in Murtala Mohammed

aerodrome. So my observation was carried out at the two peak periods of flight operation which

are between 6am to 12 noon and also 6pm to 12 midnight to afford me the opportunity to have

firsthand observation concerning flight arriving and departing from Murtala Mohammed

aerodrome.

3.2.4 Aeronautical Charts

Three primary aeronautical charts from the department of Aeronautical Chart Services

(ACS) department under Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) were consulted in

other to derive required data/information for the research exercise.

AERODROME CHART

The latest Murtala Mohammed aerodrome charts as published by the department of ACS

was acquired in both hard and soft copy. The soft copy was simplified to depict just the airfield

facilities of the aerodrome which are the runway, taxiway and the apron using a specialized

Geographical Information System (GIS) software (Arcinfo 10.0).

Figure 3.1: Aerodrome Chart of Murtala Muhammed airport
Figure 3.1: Simplified version of Murtala Muhammed aerodrome chart
Since most of the information on the chart are limited to the annotation or labeling on the chart

additional aeronautical document known as Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) was

consulted to get the required attribute information of the airfield parameters such as the length of

runway, width of runway, strength of runway, geographical location of airport, strength of

taxiway, designation of taxiway exit/link, area of apron and types of apron available at the

Murtala Mohammed airport.

Enroute Chart

Another aeronautical chart studied for this research was the enroute chart known as Kano

Flight Information Region (Kano FIR). This is the name given to Nigeria airspace in

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) which Nigeria is a member state. This is a

mandatory chart depicting all the routes within Nigeria airspace for the purpose of controlling

and managing air traffic. Therefore before a pilot can file his/her flight plan he/she needed to

study the current enroute chart to enable he/she carry out a thorough planning of his/her flight.

The pilot in command need to decide which route to follow and the estimated distance from the

origin aerodrome to the destination aerodrome in other to calculate the minimum required fuel

for his/her flight duration. For the enroute chart both hard copy and the soft copy was collected.

The soft copy was simplified using the GIS software (Arcinfo 10.0) for easier understanding.
Figure 3.2a: Enroute chart (Kano FIR)
Figure 3.2: Simplified version of the Kano FIR chart

Just as done in the aerodrome chart, other additional data/information concerning the enroute

chart was also deduced from the AIP.

Approach chart
 The approach chart depicts the necessary procedures required of an aircraft towards safe

landing at the destination aerodrome. It shows the set of procedure a pilot in command will carry

out after given clearance from the air traffic control to descend from its holding up to the time of

landing at the particular runway. This approach procedure is usually built on the navigational

facility available at the aerodrome of concern.

Figure 3.3: Approach chart based on LAG VOR/DME/ILS 18L
Figure 3.3: Approach chart based on LAG VOR/DME/ILS 18R

These charts became necessary in order to understand the current capacity and infrastructure

existing in the study aerodrome, e.g. the aerodrome chart of Murtala Mohammed provides the

aerodrome layout, the enroute shows the preferred route from the origin aerodrome to the
destination aerodrome, while the approach chart defined the procedures established to facilitate

safe landing of an aircraft at the destination aerodrome.

Other materials consulted also include the records of flight operation into and out of Murtala

Mohammed airport from the year 2001 to the year 2016. Below is Table 2.1 showing the records.

Table3.1: Distribution of Domestic and International Air Traffic (2005 - 2020)

Passenger Aircraft Freight

  Volume   Volume   Volume  
Year DOM INTL DOM INTL DOM INTL
2005 1,687,328 1,229,621 45,699 13,638 113,501 40,190,749
2006 1,879,266 1,228,984 49,219 14,816 92,613 44,793,749
2007 2,097,860 1,264,606 46,733 15,709 73,650 51,736,782
2008 2,220,558 1,355,921 54,009 17,009 47,343 62,244,124
2009 2,255,903 1,561,435 50,945 19,948 53,450 63,754,051
2010 2,141,667 1,707,090 53,151 21,499 68,250 83,530,189
2011 1,997,346 2,165,078 56,864 24,493 23,429,753 94,257,225
2012 2,794,902 2,342,200 56,864 24,493 29,231 130,280,557
2013 3,320,103 2,342,469 59,876 24,712 42,253,258 113,945,087
2014 3,864,858 2,409,087 71,922 24,927 33,916,885 137,489,167
2015 4,127,100 2,619,190 58,211 29,200 910,293 157,505,207
2016 3,646,824 3,232,462 58,185 29,187 499,818 164,728,201
2017 3,877,840 3,383,338 67,637 31,318 53,357 186,376,985
2018 3,164,368 2,462,906 54,311 23,795 156,683 189,784,427
2019 3,778,145 3,023,478 71,556 29,993 206,084 167,804,850
2020 4,209,340 3,370,477 68,301 32,410 9,417,390 205,568,263
Source: Federal Airport Authority of Nigeria

Table 3.2: Table showing data sources and data format

 S/N Data Source Format
1 Record of flight operations Flight plan and daily flight As a text file
record
2 Data and information from Interview Oral
personnel involve with flight
operations
3 Field view of the aerodrome Observation Visual
layout
4 Graphical representation of the Aeronautical charts In both autoCAD
aerodrome layout, Nigerian (dwg) file format and
Airspace design and approach ArcGIS (shp) file
procedures format
5 Attribute data concerning the Aeronautical Information As text file
various aeronautical features Publication
6 Distribution of Domestic and Federal Airport Authority As text file
International Air Traffic of Nigeria (FAAN) record

3.2 Method of Data Analysis

3.2.1 Definition and Description of Arrival Delay

From the flight plan details the estimated time of arrival (ETA) of an aircraft at the

destination aerodrome can be calculated using the formula Speed = Distance x Time and then

deriving the formula for time as Time = Speed/Distance.

From the flight plan the speed of the aircraft is defined in knots while the distance from origin

aerodrome to the destination aerodrome as depicted in the routingfield of the flight plan

measured in Nautical Mile can be calculated. The conversion rule for converting from Nautical

miles to meter is that 1 Nautical mile = 1852 meters. Which means that the distance of 10

Nautical miles = 10 x 1852 is equal to 18520meters or 18.520 kilometers.

In other to calculate delay, it is important to determine the Estimate time of arrival (ETA) of an

aircraft and the Actual time of arrival (ATA) of an aircraft. The difference between ETA and

ATA will result into the Flight Arrival delay.

The method adopted was to calculate for delay at the Murtala Mohammed airport based on

theCapacity and airport infrastructure which according to the Flight Efficiency and Delay

conceptual frameworkis one of the key factors. This factor relates to airport maintenance and

expansion as a way to manage arrival delay. From the aspect of airport expansion a hypothesis

was deduced

H1: Research hypothesis

H0: Null hypothesis

H1: The number of runway at Murtala Mohammed airport determines the flight efficiency and

delay

 If I (increase the number of runway) then (arrival delay will reduce significantly).

H1: μ >1

H0: The number of runway at Murtala Mohammed airport does not determine the flight

efficiency and delay.

 If I (increase the number of runway) then (arrival delay will not reduce significantly).

H0: μ ≤1

H1: The Arrival delay is as a result of increase in runway occupancy time at Murtala Mohammed

airport.
 If(there is anarrival delay) then (the runway occupancy time has increased significantly) H1:

μ >15min

H0: The Arrival delay is not as a result of increase in runway occupancy time in Murtala

Muhammed airport.

 If (there is noarrival delay) then (the runway occupancy has not increase significantly)

H0: μ ≤15min

This research tries to correlate the relationship between number of runway at Murtala

Muhammed aerodrome and arrival delay at MMIA.

Dependent variable (y): This is the variable representing the process you are trying to predict or

understand. In thiscontext, that will be the arrival delay whichwe have to quantify by calculating

the average arrival delay (AAD) at Murtala Muhammed airport.

Independent/Explanatory variables (x): These are the variables used to model or to predict the

dependent variable values. In thiscontext that will be the number of runway available at Murtala

Muhammed aerodrome and the number of aircraft it can accommodate. Thisis an observed

variable based on the number of runway presently available at Murtala Muhammed aerodrome

and the number of aircraft landing at Murtala Mohammed airport.

Therefore we have x =K y

Where K is the coefficient of the direct relationshipbetween number of runwayor the number of

aircraft the runway can accommodate and Average Arrival Delay.

 REFERENCE

Abdelghany KF, Abdelghany AF, Raina S, A model for projecting flight delays during irregular
operation conditions, Journal of Air Transport Management. 2004; 10(6): 385-394.

Allan S, Gaddy G Evans J. Delay causality and reduction at the New York City airports using
terminal weather information, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lexington,
Massachusetts; 2001.

Grupta MB, Romania G. Aircraft flow management under congestion. Transportation Science
21st November. 2006; 429-253.

Hansen M, Hsiao C. Going South? An econometric analysis of US airline flight delays from
2000 to 2004, presented at the 84rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research
Board (TRB), Washington D.C.; 2005.

Hansen M, Peterman D. Throughput impacts of time-based metering at Los Angeles

International Airport, presented at the 83rd annual meeting of the Transportation
Research Board (TRB), Washington D.C.; 2004

Hansen M, Zhang Y. Operational consequences of Alternative Airport demand management

policies: The Case of LaGuardia Airport, Presented at the 84rd annual meeting of the
Transportation Research Board (TRB), Washington D.C.; 2005.

Hansen M. Micro-level analysis of airport delay externalities using deterministic queuing

models: A case study, Journal of Air Transport Management. 2002; 8(2):7387.

Janic M. Large-scale disruption of an airline network: A model for assessment of the economic
consequences, presented at the 82rd annual meeting of the Transportation Research
Board (TRB), Washington D.C.; 2003.

Kulesa G. Weather and Aviation: How does weather affect the safety and operations of airports
and aviation and how Does FAA work to manage weatherrelated effects? The FAA’s
Aviation Weather Research Program; 2002. Available:www.climate.dot.gov/documents/
worlshop1002/kulesa
Mehndiratta SR, Kiefer M, Eads G. Analyzing the impact of slot controls: The case of san
Francisco International Airport, presented at the 81rd annual meeting of the
Transportation Research Board (TRB), Washington D.C.; 2002.

Mohleji SC. Terminal airspace/airport congestion problems in US and FMS/RNAV applications

to reduce delays. The MITRE Corporation. 2001; 9-10.

Mueller ER, Chatterji GB. Analysis of aircraft arrival and departure delay characteristics,
AIAA's Aircraft Technology, Integration and Operations (ATIO), Los Angeles,
California; 2002.

Rosen A. Flight delays on US airlines: The Impact of congestion externalities in hub and spoke
networks, Department of Economics, Stanford University; 2002.

Rosenberger J, Schaefer A, Goldsman D, Johnson E, Kleywegt A, Nemhauser G. A Stochastic

Model of airline operations, Georgia Institute of Technology, TLI-00-06 working paper.
2000; 36(4):357-377.

Schaefer L, Miller D. Flight delay propagation analysis with the detailed policy assessment tool,
proceedings of the 2001 IEEE systems, Man and Cybernetics Conference; 2011

Terminal Convective Weather Forecast (TCWF) benefits analysis (National)

estimated for a national system deployed at integrated terminal weather system installed
airports; 2001).

Whalen TW, Carlton D, Henyer K, Rechard O. A solution to airport delays, economic analysis
group discussion paper series EAG 07 – 14, Antitust Division, U.S Department of
Justice. April; 2007.

Wu C. Inherent delays and operational reliability of airline schedules, Journal of ir Transport

Management. 2005; 11(4): 273-282.

Yahaya A. A gis evaluation of air traffic control volume and air passenger movements and their
effect on air safety at Muritala Muhammed International Airport Lagos. MGIS Thesis
University of Lagos; 2010.