Frequently Asked Questions

• Click here for a printable version of FAQ's (Adobe PDF)

A. When will all this happen?
If consultation suggests that the owners are likely to receive planning approval for a replacement runway, it will take one or two years to agree to the outline plans to be put forward.

It would then take at least a year to achieve the necessary planning permission, and a further one to two years before a replacement runway and new terminal can be built. Overall, some 4-5 years before it could become operational.

B. Will we get jet aircraft operating into Shoreham?
Yes, but only in small numbers.

The planned replacement runway, at some 1,199 metres long, is only some 15% longer than the present runway of 1,036 metres. However, because it is at a different angle, there are far fewer obstacles such as the railway line to affect the operational performance of aircraft, making it a more useful runway.

A small number of corporate jet aircraft are able to use Shoreham today, but the future runway will be able to accommodate most types of corporate jets. However, the consultants do not believe there will be significant numbers of corporate jets using Shoreham - there were under 50 arrivals of such corporate jets at Southampton Airport last year, or less than one a week.

The replacement runway would be able to accommodate just two types of civil jet suitable for scheduled passenger services. One is the BAe 146, also known as the Avro RJ100, which is one of the quietest jet aircraft ever built. The aircraft has a range of variants, with between 66 and 110 seats. The consultants suspect that this will be too large for most of the scheduled passenger markets identified for Shoreham, but that one or two such routes might justify these jets in about 10 to 15 years time.

The other possible aircraft is the 70 seat Embraer 170, which is about to enter service as the newest jet aircraft capable of operating from what would still be a short runway. It is however extremely expensive to purchase new, and it is likely to be many years before it will be seen on a regular basis at Shoreham. Noise data has yet to be confirmed, but it is likely to rival the BAe146 as the quietest jet aircraft.

No other jet aircraft would find the runway length at Shoreham sufficient for regular operations. The Boeing 737, used for most scheduled services from Gatwick and for a large number of holiday flights, needs a runway length in excess of 1800 metres, while the largest jets such as the Boeing 777 and Airbus A330 need runways of around 2700-3000 metres. It is extremely unlikely to be able to provide a runway at Shoreham longer than the present proposal of 1,199 metres.

The consultants have analysed demand from the Sussex Coastal belt and concluded that a small number of domestic and near European destinations could justify scheduled services in competition with airlines at Gatwick and at Southampton.

In the end, decisions on whether or not to operate scheduled services from Shoreham will be made by individual private airlines, based on their expectation of making a profit. The decisions will not be taken by Shoreham Airport which is merely seeking to provide the appropriate infrastructure that is currently not available.

The consultants believe that airlines will concentrate their attention on the following 13 routes, with Manchester the most likely to be served first, and Aberdeen the least likely.

• Manchester  Glasgow  Dublin
• Newcastle  Belfast  Jersey
• Edinburgh  Amsterdam  Leeds-Bradford
• Aberdeen  Frankfurt  Brussels
• Paris

The present runway is too short to allow suitable turboprop aircraft to land and take off with a full complement of passengers. The most likely aircraft being used for such routes in the UK today are the DHC Dash 8 and the ATR42 with up to 50 seats; the Saab 340 and Dornier 328 with 34 seats; the Jetstream 41 with 29 seats; and the Jetstream 32 with 19 seats. These all require a runway with an effective length of at least 1,100 metres whereas - because of the limitations caused by the railway line on the current alignment of the runway - only some 900 metres is available today. Those extra 200 metres are critical.

These small turboprop aircraft operate large numbers of scheduled services from Britain’s smaller, regional airports - airports such as Plymouth, Bristol, Norwich, the Channel Isles and the Isle of Man, Aberdeen and Inverness. They are less often seen at Heathrow and Gatwick, where much higher levels of demand can support larger jet aircraft.

There have been a few attempts at scheduled services from Shoreham in recent years, but the aircraft capable of operating from the current very restricted runway - for example the 16 seat Trislander and the 19 seat Twin Otter - are both far slower than other aircraft and even more expensive to operate per passenger because of their small size.

It is expected that many residents and visitors will find the scheduled business flights to be useful for leisure purposes, but it is unlikely that fares will be able to compete with the large scheduled operators at Gatwick. Shoreham is not able to handle the larger jets used at Gatwick for holiday flights.

The airport will continue to be closed at night.

Currently the airport opens at 7am in the summer and 8am in winter. The consultants would expect that the first scheduled flights will depart from Shoreham at about 0700-0730 on Mondays to Fridays, with up to five departures before 0800, mostly by 30-50 seat turboprops. The first arrivals would probably be between 0800-0830. There would be fewer such flights on Saturdays, and probably none on Sunday mornings, when the first scheduled flights are likely to be at around 1100 hours.

These flight times are the subject of the Section 52 Agreement between the airport and the County Council. If planning permission were to be granted these opening times would be the subject of a revised agreement.

No. The catchment area for Shoreham Airport - the area from which almost all passengers at Shoreham are expected to travel - is very small, stretching along the coast from Chichester to Pevensey, and rarely venturing north of the South Downs.

These passengers currently tend to fly from Gatwick today, and the development of new scheduled services from their local airport will tempt a proportion to prefer more expensive flights from their local airport rather then endure the hassle of negotiating a major international airport for a short domestic or European flight.

We do not expect the new flights at Shoreham to attract more than a handful of passengers from areas closer to Gatwick. This analysis has been based on a careful analysis of the catchment area for Southampton Airport, which similarly competes for the Hampshire market head-to-head with Heathrow Airport.

There is likely to be a small increase in the level of car journeys to the airport associated with an increase in the current General Aviation activity. Much of this increase will be at the weekends, and will not put further strain on local roads in weekday rush hours.

As for the passengers using the predicted scheduled services, there is likely to be some increase in road traffic at peak times. With 500,000 extra passenger journeys a year to the area - all by road - this might lead to an extra 200-300 additional vehicle movements an hour for the periods 0630-0930 and 1630-1930, or around four a minute.

If a good bus service were to link the airport with Worthing, Lancing, Shoreham and Brighton this number could probably be reduced by some 20%.

Further reductions in car traffic could be achieved by the implementation of a sustainable multi-modal transport hub. This would link a park and ride scheme with the airport, a rail connection or possibly a rapid transport system.

The airport will be designed in such a way that the passenger terminal would be alongside the rail line between Brighton and Chichester, but it will be a Network Rail decision whether or not to reinstate the old Shoreham Airport Station that was closed in the 1940s. The Airport could not justify the cost of such a rebuilding itself.

It is to be hoped that the bus and coach operators will be willing to divert or extend existing bus services to serve the new passenger terminal, but this will be their decision. It will also depend upon any other road improvements that might accompany an expansion of the airport.

The expansion of the airport could act as a catalyst for a more integrated sustainable transport hub.

In the consultation papers on airport development in South East England, the Department of Transport saw a continuing need for development of airports such as Shoreham, even though they are likely to also call for major development of runways at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. There is a significant lack of runway capacity in the whole of the South East, and Shoreham is already benefiting from a shortage of other General Aviation airfields in the region - a shortage which is likely to intensify.

The Government is known to be concerned about contravening the existing agreement between West Sussex County Council and the BAA, which prohibits the construction of a second runway at Gatwick before 2019. Shoreham might therefore face competition from an additional runway at Gatwick in around 2020, but even if the Government accepts the need for a second runway before that date, it is unlikely to be built much before 2015.

The airline industry has a well-established ‘rule’ that for each increase of a million passengers per year, the local economy around an airport benefits from an extra thousand jobs. Some of these would be working at the airport, and some for suppliers to the airport. The local councils will also be expecting the existence of a local scheduled service airport to lead to regeneration and extra jobs throughout the region. The tourist industry would be expected to benefit, as well as local manufacturers and service providers.

Airports are often seen as poor neighbours environmentally, but most if not all cities with airports recognise their economic importance in terms of jobs and income.

None as yet. Most airlines only look a year ahead at most when deciding on their route network. They will however sit up and take notice if Shoreham starts to construct a more useful runway, and will then determine their own strategy.

The consultants suggest that there is sufficient potential at Shoreham for a small airline to choose to set up an operating base at the airfield.

There are a number of small airlines in the UK today who successfully operate such routes, while certain European airlines with turboprop aircraft will also be looking for new opportunities to fly to the UK.

Shoreham Airport currently handles some 75,000 movements a year, and both proposals seek to increase planning permission to allow additional movements.

If all the scheduled services operate as predicted, this will require some 20,000 movements in 2008 and 25,000 in 2018. There will still be room for 75,000 General Aviation movements a year.

There is therefore no reason for current users to feel that their existing flights will be put at risk, although it is recognised that some limits will continue to be put on their ability to grow over time.

In addition, the bulk of the scheduled flights will be at peak ‘rush hours’ on weekdays, year-round, whereas the peak demand period for GA is during summer weekends.

The number of aircraft movement is currently set out in a Section 52 agreement with West Sussex County Council. Revisions to the existing agreement or a new agreement would need to be agreed with the County Council.

The consultants do not believe so. The replacement runway will still be restrictive for commercial airlines, who would ideally like an 1800 metre runway. There are few other routes likely to be operated than those identified, and there is a limit to the number of times a day each route needs to be served. Commercial airlines will probably react to increased demand beyond 2018 by increasing the average size of the aircraft, and not by increasing frequencies.

Many of the businesses at the airport, themselves providing valuable employment and significant contributions to the local economy, are reliant on Shoreham Airport’s General Aviation activity. Even if commercial air transport operations grow to become a quarter of the airport’s throughput, the current level of GA business will remain, providing the core business for such companies.

Current development plans foresee the creation of a new passenger terminal and car park on ‘brownfield’ sites at the airport - they are unlikely to require existing tenants to relocate. Indeed, there is likely to be some additional land made available for expansion by existing tenants.

The development of a new runway and additional buildings will have an effect on the environment, however some of these effects can be mitigated and improvements can be made. At the planning permission stage an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) will be required. This will identify the potential impacts of the development and ways to mitigate these impacts.
< br/> Runway development can lead to environmental improvements. For example, during the development of the second runway at Manchester airport for every tree that was removed 6 were planted elsewhere. There was construction of new habitats, bat barns were put in place ponds, were created and improved for amphibians and an artificial badger sett was created.

Shoreham airport already recognizes the importance of the habitats on site. At present the airport is working closely with the Environment Agency to ensure that natural habitats are maintained or new habitats created permitting wildlife to flourish on the airport’s land. The airport provides an important habitat for several species including water voles.

The proposals for the airport expansion would always be mindful of the requirements of the Police to provide air support to their operations. There would be no interference with this capability.

Without a full noise assessment study it is difficult to assess the level of noise and the number of houses affected.

As part of any planning process an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) would be carried out. This would include a full noise study which would identify the changing pattern of noise and provide ways to improve noise abatement measures. Some people are likely to benefit from the re-aligned replacement runway as the existing runway, and other grass runways will only be used in exceptional circumstances. The consultants considered several runway orientations and selected one that meant the number of people overflown was minimised.

However, the pattern of noise levels may change. With the new extended runway smaller aircraft would be able to take off earlier enabling them to be at a greater height when they pass over population centres.

The larger aircraft that use the airport would be flying straight in and out. This may create less noise than smaller aircraft that often undertake circuits around the airfield.

The Owning Authorities have commissioned a noise study to consider the noise implications of an expanded airport.

No. The extended runway will only extend to 1,199 m. Larger jets would require a runway far in excess of this. For example Gatwick’s runway is 3,316 m long.

Compensation payments could be available if it is assessed that the property value has altered due to noise, pollution and other statutory defined factors from the development of a new runway. It may also be possible under certain circumstances to obtain grants for noise mitigation such as double glazing and loft insulation.

At present there are 75,000 movements per annum, reflecting the limits in the section 52 agreement agreed with the County Council. This equates on average to 205 movements per day.

If agreement can be reached on airport expansion we consider that at its full potential capacity in 15 years there would only be about 275-350 movements per day.

To a certain extent this depends on what operators are in the market. Our research suggests that will be the main business destinations as and when demand reaches a certain level. We have so far identified: Manchester, Glasgow, Dublin, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Belfast, Jersey, Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt, Brussels, Aberdeen and Leeds Bradford as potential destinations.

At present the airport is only marginally profitable. There is also likely to be requirements to spend money on the airport to upgrade the existing runway. The airport is presently unable to fund this. This could call into question its continued operation. As the airport is an important local employment centre, provides recreational and business flights, prevents development pressure on the Strategic Gap, it is important to keep the airport operating. Theproposals being presented look at ways how the airport’s future can be secured.

The Government has recently reviewed how to deal with the increased demand for air travel in the South East. The review identified Shoreham as having the potential to increase the length of its runway and to establish more commercial elements. Our research to date has confirmed that this is possible. By undertaking the expansion the airport this would increase its revenues increase, employment opportunities and secure the Strategic Gap between Lancing and Worthing.

There are many different options for improving the local public transport. This process is separate from the proposed airport expansion. However, any development at the airport would not adversely affect proposals for a multi-modal transport hub - which would enable full connectivity between air, road and rail.

The existing conference facilities, restaurants and bar provide an excellent place to work and relax. Although there will be improved security in the terminal used for commercial passengers, this would not affect the "landside" facilities. It is likely that in time new, separate terminal facilities would be required.

To service the expanded airport there would be a requirement to develop additional facilities. This would include those required under laws and regulations - for example improved fire fighting facilities, and those to service the additional flights for example flight kitchens. There will also be some development on the site to offset the costs of developing the new runway. These units will be specifically reserved for companies that are connected with airports.

Throughout the consultation process we are welcoming people’s views on the proposed airport expansion. The airport is important in many ways to the local and regional area and any proposals for it will require the active involvement and support of the local community. Therefore any views can be submitted in writing to:

Adur Civic Centre, Shoreham Tuesday 9th December 6.00 pm - 8.30 pm
or
Lancing Jubilee Hall, Lancing. Tuesday 16th December 6.00 pm - 8.30 pm

The existing runway is suitable for use by small general aviation aircraft, but not suitable for use by all but the smallest of public transport aircraft. This is primarily due to the limited length of the existing surfaced runway, but that is not the only reason.

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) Licenses aerodromes in the UK, generally in accordance with internationally agreed (ICAO) standards. Those technical standards are to ensure safe operations and are updated from time to time in recognition of changes that occur in aircraft, navigational aids and operational procedures. Changes may also arise as a consequence of lessons learnt from incidents or accidents. Quite rightly, any development of the airfield would have to comply with the latest regulations.

To enable public transport services to develop, the existing runway would need to be widened and runway end safety areas provided. Aircraft operators would also want an Instrument Landing System (ILS) to ensure that they can offer a reliable service, even during periods of poor visibility. An ILS requires a significant space beyond the runway ends for the localizer aerials. The existing surface runway is physically constrained by the access road across its northern end and the railway to the south. Therefore, the only way to provide these areas at the runway ends would be to further shorten the runway, an action which would make it totally unsuitable for the intended aircraft.

A new longer runway on a new alignment is required to permit development of public transport services and the airfield can only be expanded to the west to accommodate this.

The UK CAA classifies runways by the actual take-off distance available and the required clearances and obstacle assessment surfaces are determined by that classification. A runway between 800m and 1,200m long is classified as Code 2. Between 1,200m and 1,799m it is classified as Code 3. There is a step change in the clearances and other dimensions that apply and there is insufficient space on the extended site for a Code 3 runway of any length.

A Code 2 classification is suitable for the smaller or regional types of turboprop and jet-engined aircraft. These have between 20 and 100 seats, typically between 30 and 50 seats. Larger short-haul aircraft, such as the Boeing B737 and the Airbus A320 range could not operate out of such a runway as the payload limit (weight of passengers, baggage and fuel) would be uneconomically low.

The proposed alignment requires approaches from the northeast to be at a steeper angle of decent (4 degrees) than is normal (3 degrees). The Consultants advising the Councils examined two other alignments. These had operational advantages in that the approach from the north/east was less affected by the high ground of the South Downs (one permitted a 3.5 degree descent, the other a 3 degree descent). However each route affected progressively and significantly more homes, schools and other noise-sensitive properties in both Lancing and Shoreham. The existing surfaced runway at Shoreham has a 4.5 degree descent, so operationally the proposal is an improvement and steeper descents are permitted elsewhere, such as the 5.5 degree descent into London City Airport.

The Councils therefore accepted the recommendation that the alignment that had the least noise impact on the local community be selected for further consideration and public consultation.

It is intended that the existing surfaced runway will effectively be closed, although retaining the ability to be used as an emergency runway, with a reduced length. It would normally be used as a taxiway.

The other grass runways are used infrequently, and although provisions for use by veteran aircraft and operations in cross wind conditions would be retained, this is at present only some 9% of the total movements (averaged over the last 4 years), per year, and would likely decrease further as the re-aligned runway is closer to the prevailing winds.

The airport would offer convenience of air travel to the local population. It will be quicker to travel to Shoreham than Gatwick or Southampton, which will reduce car journey time and congestion. A small airport is able to reduce the time taken between arrival at the airport and departure.

It will also be good for everyone if people were able to create local jobs and improve the economy through using local services offering greater convenience than major airports.

The existing General Aviation users will still be the main users of the airport. Therefore Shoreham’s reputation as an important GA airport in the region would be upheld as the airport is expanded. In terms of the commercial side of an expanded airport, local businesses who were looking for the convenience of local business travel to British and European destinations would provide the main customers.

However, the airport provides more than just air travel services. The annual airshow is unlikely to be affected and people will still be able to come and use the bar, restaurant and conference facilities.