Viewing page 94 of 116

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Attachment 4 - 4

Costs of installing Category III A airborne equipment in 1,167 SST and jumbo jets exceed the benefits the airlines would derive from prevented flight disruptions by about ten-to-one. The airlines would, of course, realize additional benefits. Greater reliability of service might generate increased demand for travel, particularity on short haul flights. If the new business merely raised the load factors on existing flights, the gains to the air carriers would be appreciable. And after some experience with lower minimums, the airlines very likely would lower their fuel reserve requirements because of less need to rely on alternates. If the excess fuel could be replaced by cargo, say, the gains again would be significant. Finally, if the airlines were to equip standard and stretched jets for Category III operation, their benefits would increase proportionally, (although, if this analysis is valid, not enough to cover the costs).

Despite these additional advantages, it seems unlikely that the economic benefits of Category III would offset the costs to the airlines for the equipment if the costs were charged wholly to the all-weather landing program. The cost per additional landing in Category III weather is high:

[[4 Columned Table]]
| Minimums | Annual Airborne equipment cost | Estimated additional landings in 1980 (40 airports) | Cost per additional landing |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Category III A | $23,625 | 2.9 | $8,000 |
| Category III B |   7,875 | 2.0 |  4,000 |
| Category III C |  16,875 |  .6 | 28,000 |
_____________________________________________________________________

Even considering all the potential benefits to airlines and passengers, only Category III B seems attractive, and III B is not possible without III A.

In sum, from a total AWLS program viewpoint, it appears that if the total costs of ground and airborne equipment are assessed against the all-weather landing program, it probably cannot be justified on economic grounds alone. However, Category III A equipment will give the airlines