---

This chart shows forecasted operations and "actual" operations. RAPC and SFIA have different numbers for actual operations and RAPC is not tracking SFIA since they completed their charge to say "more runways." The SFO Master Plan forecast, completed in May, 1992, was far above the current forecasts. I have included it because, on the SFIA web site, they state that the claim that new runways would not be required- made during the push for the new international terminal - was based on smaller forecasts." At the time the Master plan was being developed, the projected growth in demand for air travel was not as robust as it is today," is the exact quote.

SFIA released the "Final Report" which contains the "unconstrained forecast." On Oct. 4, 2002, they released an updated forecast that reveals they are still in a state of denial about the economic situation in the U.S., not to mention the revolution taking place in the airline business as the airlines struggle to make money. They still insist upon using 2000 as their base year- that's called wishful thinking. Be sure to note what they are forecasting from 2002 to 2007. They wish.

The graph shows the actual number of operations and various forecasts. (2004 is for the entire year) Current data is from the SFIA web site. The FAA revised an earlier report and the new report shows wild optimism again. I've plotted the points from that report also.

The table below has the percent of late flights for 2000 to 2002. SFIA was converging on 20% late flights. That's about the national average.

The table below also shows the current delay data for the three major Bay Area airports. Note that things are significantly better at SFIA in terms of delays. Bet you won't see that in any SFIA press releases. Charles River Associates noted that small changes in the number of flights will produce large changes in the delays and that's what this shows. However, the weather has been different and that would also change things so not all the reduction can be attributed to reduced flights.

Data from the Dept. of Transportation
The data is for the top ten domestic airlines; no international flights, general aviation or military flights are included. DOT's web page says the top ten airlines are: America West, American, American Eagle, Continental, Delta, Northwest, Southwest, Trans World[yes, they do say that], US Airways, and United. Only arrivals are shown. That's why it's not the same as the data from SFIA below.

You might wonder how DOT data relates to SFIA data. Me too. But only seven of the airlines listed on the DOT web page operate out of SFIA. That means the numbers are dominated by United Airlines and, as you know, United is not doing all that well. According to the DOT data, United dropped from 69,646 arrivals in 2001 to 54,684 in 2002. That's two thirds of the entire decrease measured by DOT. Clearly United's problems have a major effect on SFIA.

SFIA's oft repeated claim of having the "worst delays" in the country is nowhere near correct. The actual number varies from month to month; in June,2002, SFIA ranked 79th out of 208(1 would be the worst airport) and in July,2002, SFIA ranked 168th out of 208. (Data from the U.S. Dept. of Transportation)

With the drop in operations, delays are improving. One, again, should note that a small change in operations can, and has, produce a much larger change in delays. That's way demand management will work, if SFIA needs to manage delays in the future.

You might wonder how delays have varied over the past ten year in the U.S. The chart(late/trend) shows the trend since Sept. 1992.

Data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.