<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=PHNlYXJjaD48cGFyYW1zPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJzdWJqZWN0bG9naWMiIHZhbHVlPSJvciIgLz48cGFyYW0gbmFtZT0idGVybXNsb2dpYyIgdmFsdWU9Im9yIiAvPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJsb2NhdGlvbiIgdmFsdWU9IjAiIC8+PC9wYXJhbXM+PGZpbHRlcnM+PGZpbHRlciBmaWVsZD0ic2VyaWFsIiB2YWx1ZT0iJnF1b3Q7QUlSUE9SVCBQTEFOTklORyBJU1NVRVMuIFBST0NFRURJTkdTIE9GIFNFTUlOQVIgSiBIRUxEIEFUIFRIRSAyM1JEIEVVUk9QRUFOIFRSQU5TUE9SVCBGT1JVTSwgVU5JVkVSU0lUWSBPRiBXQVJXSUNLLCBFTkdMQU5ELCBTRVBURU1CRVIgMTEtMTUsIDE5OTUuIFZPTFVNRSBQMzk2JnF1b3Q7IiBvcmlnaW5hbF92YWx1ZT0iJnF1b3Q7QUlSUE9SVCBQTEFOTklORyBJU1NVRVMuIFBST0NFRURJTkdTIE9GIFNFTUlOQVIgSiBIRUxEIEFUIFRIRSAyM1JEIEVVUk9QRUFOIFRSQU5TUE9SVCBGT1JVTSwgVU5JVkVSU0lUWSBPRiBXQVJXSUNLLCBFTkdMQU5ELCBTRVBURU1CRVIgMTEtMTUsIDE5OTUuIFZPTFVNRSBQMzk2JnF1b3Q7IiAvPjwvZmlsdGVycz48cmFuZ2VzIC8+PHNvcnRzPjxzb3J0IGZpZWxkPSJwdWJsaXNoZWQiIG9yZGVyPSJkZXNjIiAvPjwvc29ydHM+PHBlcnNpc3RzPjxwZXJzaXN0IG5hbWU9InJhbmdldHlwZSIgdmFsdWU9InB1Ymxpc2hlZGRhdGUiIC8+PC9wZXJzaXN0cz48L3NlYXJjaD4=" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>THE HEATHROW AREA TRANSPORT FORUM</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463238</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Around 12 million air passengers per annum currently use some form of public transport to travel to and from Heathrow. This represents 33% of total non-transit passenger throughput and is higher than any other airport in the world, reflecting the good public transport links that already exist to the airport. The private car however still remains the dominant mode of transport to the airport, and Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) has set itself the target of increasing the air passenger public transport share to 50%. Moreover, it is vigorously pursuing a number of initiatives aimed at persuading more airport employees to use public transport and reduce the number of daily home to work journeys made by private car. At its second Public Transport Seminar in November 1994, HAL announced the setting up of a local Transport Forum composed of senior industry representatives, local planning authorities and major employers to lead discussions on identifying improvements in transport efficiency in the area and reduce employee private car travel. This would be concerned not only with the promotion of public transport services, but also issues such as car sharing schemes, cycling and pedestrian facilities. The current political and social climate with the emphasis firmly on environmental issues make this an opportune moment for the key players to come together to achieve a common goal.  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463238</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MANCHESTER AIRPORT RUNWAY 2 - PLANNING AND PUBLIC INQUIRY: DOES ANYONE WANT A RUNWAY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463239</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper describes the process of developing Runway 2 of Manchester Airport, the UK's third largest airport. In particular, a case study is presented of the nine months' Public Inquiry into the runway proposal. The study is of special interest, because of the wide range of environmental issues that it examined, and because the runway scheme was the first proposal of its kind in the UK. The paper concentrates on the public consultation process, but also considers the environmental assessment process, and how the environmental issues, raised in public consultation, were handled as the scheme evolved. It emphasises the iterative nature of the process. The stages of the process included: (1) publication in August 1991 of the Draft Development Strategy to 2005, and identification of the need for a second runway; (2) eight public meetings from September to November 1991; (3) consultation on the scope of the environmental impact assessment in Summer 1992; (4) public consultation on the options from January to March 1993; (5) selection, processing and presentation of the option, from March to August 1993; and (6) Public Inquiry from 21 June 1994 to 9 March 1995. Three essential principles of the project - planning, preparation, and timing - which can be applied to any major infrastructure project.  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463239</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FORECAST GROWTH IN AIR TRAVEL: A QUART INTO A PINT POT?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463240</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In October 1994 the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution presented to Parliament their report "Transport and the Environment" (IRRD 866965). In that report it was said that "(an) unquestioning attitude towards future growth in air travel, and an acceptance that the projected demand for additional facilities and services must be met" are incompatible with the aim of sustainable development. This paper reviews forecasts of future air traffic growth and the mechanism that underpins these forecasts. It continues by assessing the size and location of future capacity enhancements. The relationship between existing and future capacity and future demand is discussed. Two recently completed consultancy exercises, undertaken for local authorities assessing airport development proposals, are used as case studies to explore a number of questions, each of which are an integral part of the process of challenging the airport and airline industries belief in unrestrained growth.  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463240</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AIRLINE DEREGULATION, HUBBING AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF SUPERIOR ACCESSIBILITY FOR METROPOLITAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463241</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper aims to show how restructuring in the USA's air transport sector has had very tangible effects on the wider space economy. It begins by discussing the US experience of deregulation and restructuring of the airline industry, and the significance of this process. It then considers the US air service since deregulation, with special reference to its geographical strategies and geographical implications. The rest of the paper is mostly devoted to the effects of the concentration of a smaller number of airlines around their hub airports. Aspects of this process that are considered include: (1) the effects of hubbing on regional accessibility; (2) the immediate economic significance of hub airports; (3) direct and indirect hub impacts and the relative size of hub impacts; (4) how far induced hub impacts provide an economic stimulus; (5) competition from cities to attract new hub operations; (6) the future for hub airlines; and (7) the role of regional airlines in maintaining airline service quality. After 15 years of operation in a deregulated environment, it now appears that the future development of air service patterns in the domestic US market will be driven by short-term changes in aircraft technology as well as longer-term demographic and economic changes.  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463241</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE ECONOMIC SIGNIFICANCE OF AIRPORTS: THE CASE OF GRAN CANARIA</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463242</link>
      <description><![CDATA[One of the recommendations in the Report by the Committee of Experts for Air Transport to the European Commission suggests that the requirement of new airport capacity is vital for the success of European Union air transport policy and so the public should be informed more actively of the positive economic, social and environmental benefits of air transport. Economic impact studies try to underline the economic significance of airports, but it is not unusual to find an overvaluation of benefits that undermines value to the conclusions. In this paper, an estimation of the economic significance of the airport of Gran Canaria is carried out. Economic impacts are classified as direct, indirect and induced and a distinction is made between the concept of economic significance and economic activity of the airport.  (A)  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463242</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE COMPETITIVE ROLE OF SECONDARY AIRPORTS IN MAJOR CONURBATIONS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463243</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In and around a number of large metropolitan areas, secondary or satellite airports are to be found in close proximity to the major airport (less than about 60km). Examples of such airports include Belfast City (in relation to Belfast International), Rotterdam (Amsterdam) and Cologne/Bonn or Dortmund (Dusseldorf). This paper considers the characteristics of these airports and their possible future role, drawing upon evidence from Europe and the United States. The provision of air services is analysed, including the route network, operations, aircraft types and frequencies and the inter-relationship with services from the major airport. The operation of feeders to distant hubs is specifically addressed, using US examples. The scope for expanding this concept in Europe is discussed. Traffic growth trends are examined to identify whether satellite airports can generate additional traffic or merely weaken the ability of a region to support air services by diluting demand. Surface access is compared with the alternative airport from different parts of the hinterland, including public transport availability. The population distribution in different parts of the catchment area is considered and for some UK examples, its propensity to travel. The future role of the satellite airports is then discussed, including the extent to which they compete with and complement the major airports.  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463243</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AIRPORT PARKING - MEETING FUTURE NEEDS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463244</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Adequate parking provision for passengers is an essential element of airport operations. It is also a factor which can help give competitive advantage to an airport within a region. Even with increasing construction of rail links and improvement of other forms of public transport to airports, for most UK air passengers, 63% on average, the private car remains by far the most popular transport mode. This paper briefly examines current methods used to assess future parking requirements, makes a comparative review of current parking provision and demand at a number of UK airports, and examines the relative importance of the various factors which affect this provision. Having considered the factors which influence parking requirements, airport parking is considered from a planning policy perspective. The paper investigates how parking needs, and ways of meeting them, may change as a result of emerging trends at airports and widespread Governmental moves aimed at sustainability.  (A)  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463244</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>IMPROVING PUBLIC TRANSPORT ACCESS TO HEATHROW AIRPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463245</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The public inquiry into BAA's application to build a fifth terminal at Heathrow has stimulated debate about the role which public transport could play in surface access to the airport. Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick (SWK) and Colin Buchanan and Partners have been working on the development of plans for additional rail links to Heathrow from the South and West. These ideas originated in the SWOPTIONS study of 1990 and were taken further in the HASQUAD study carried out by SWK and published in 1993. The paper describes the model developed by SWK which stimulated peak period travel by both private car and public transport in a wide area around Heathrow. It includes travel by both airline passengers and airport workers, bringing these two important travel markets together in one model for the first time. The paper also describes the impact of various new rail links to Heathrow on promoting the use of public transport to access the airport. The effects of increasing overall road congestion in the area is explored and the influence of this congestion on modal split assessed. The implications for possible future investment in infrastructure in the area are examined, and an engineering and economic assessment carried out.  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463245</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BAA'S RAIL STRATEGY FOR HEATHROW</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463246</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Heathrow is Europe's largest airport. In 1994, there were 51 million passenger trips of which 30% were air transfers. 44 million trips were on international flights making Heathrow the largest international airport in the world. Heathrow is well served by the UK strategic road network being at the crossing of the M4 and M25 and is well served by the London Underground network with three Piccadilly Line stations on the airport. Heathrow's facilities handle more bus and coach passengers than any other bus and coach station in the UK and, in total, the proportion of air passengers using public ground transport, 33%, is one of the highest of any major airport in Europe. The missing link is a connection to the main line rail network but this is to be remedied in a couple of year's time by the completion of the Heathrow Express rail link enabling dedicated non-stop trains every 15 minutes to connect two Heathrow stations to Paddington. Applications to extend both the Heathrow Express and Piccadilly Line to the proposed Terminal 5 have also been made and are being considered by the public inquiry. Safeguarding for further potential rail improvements is included in both the initial Heathrow Express and the extensions. BAA's rail strategy then considers what further services and links could be added to provide connections to other parts of the rail network. Extensions to the west and south would be possible and additional services towards the east might also be worthwhile. BAA's policy is not to preclude any sensible alternative and to act as catalyst to bring together parties who can fund, build and operate rail services. At Heathrow, the long term vision is of an integrated intermodal interchange where air passengers can enjoy high quality access to rail and other modes as part of a twenty first century airport fulfilling its role as the UK's principle gateway. For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463246</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE COMPREHENSIVE FORECASTING MODEL FOR THE NEW HONG KONG AIRPORT AT CHEK LAP KOK</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463247</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper presents a comprehensive traffic forecasting study of passenger, cargo, aircraft, and surface access movements at Kai Tak Airport, Hong Kong, in connection with the larger new Chek Lap Kok Airport that will replace it. The study was commissioned by the Provisional Airport Authority (PAA), established to supervise the construction of the new airport, then manage its operation. The objective was to provide the PAA with its own forecasting capability, in the form of a model, that could be updated and refined in the future, and thus support PAA decision making and planning. The model was developed to produce forecasts up to the year 2040, unconstrained by capacity limits, and it was applied to forecast traffic activity in the years 1997, 2002, and 2010. The model was structured in: (1) a primary module, to forecast annual demand for passenger, cargo, and aircraft movements, to support financial forecasting; and (2) a secondary module, to guide the planning of airport capacity, and schedule infrastructure development for terminal passengers, cargo, aircraft movements, and surface access demand. The model produces both standard peak hour measures and a full profile of a typical busy day. The model system has been installed on a personal computer in the PAA's offices, whose staff have been trained in its use.  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463247</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE ARRIVE/DEPART PASSENGER SIMULATION MODEL</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/463248</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The primary function of any major transport terminal is to handle interchanging passenger movements in an efficient and cost effective manner with minimum passenger delay and congestion. The floor space required in developing a terminal is mainly related to the forecast passenger demand and the design space standards per passenger. The forecast passenger demand is usually disaggregated to a design hour. This design hour needs to be understood in the context of the peakiness of the daily passenger demand throughout the year. Empirical guidelines for dealing with peakiness and the effects on space demand cannot easily assess the effect of new processes, new process philosophies such as for European Union passengers and new aircraft sizes. Detailed simulations, as with the ARRIVE and DEPART models, allow the effect of these issues to be studied and incorporated in terminal planning.  (A)  For the covering abstract see IRRD 879900.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/463248</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>