The waiting game: Outdated infrastructure causes airport congestion 

While it is often said that the longer you wait for something, the more you appreciate it when it finally arrives, that adage does not necessarily hold true for air cargo. 

Airport congestion in the United States has reached a critical stage and will only get worse if nothing is done to resolve it, according to two recently released reports. 

“2023 U.S. Airport Infrastructure Needs Report: Growing Needs Heighten Urgency to Modernize America’s Airports,” released by Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), and “Safeguarding the Future of Air Cargo: Its Economic Importance and Critical Need for Investment,” a white paper released by the Airport Congestion Committee (ACC), a joint venture between the Airforwarders Association (AfA) and National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America (NCBFAA), both say the federal government needs to step in to provide funding for infrastructure improvements in and around airports. 

Failing framework is a growing problem 

ACI-NA estimates that U.S. airports will require $151 billion through 2027 to address infrastructure needs.  

“As our 2023 report illustrates, investment in U.S. airport infrastructure continues to lag behind the industry’s needs and is growing,” ACI-NA President and Chief Executive Kevin M. Burke told Air Cargo Next. “There is approximately $1 billion needed for air cargo projects alone, representing the largest need we’ve seen in air cargo infrastructure to date.” 

The FAA projects that by 2040 passenger traffic will have increased 158% since 2019; ACI World projects cargo traffic will increase 167% during the same time span. 

Airport operators depreciate about $8 billion of airport assets every year, according to ACI-NA.  

Outdated and insufficient infrastructure — from the roads entering and exiting airports to apron size and configuration — is leading to excessive congestion at airports, where wait times continue to grow. The ACC estimated that, for 85% of the time from the shipper’s door to the consignee’s door, a piece of airfreight is on the ground. 

The ACC conducted two surveys for its white paper: one for airports and the other for industry stakeholders, excluding airports and government agencies. Airports’ needs will only heighten as air cargo volumes grow. ACI-NA estimates a 50% growth in air cargo by 2042. 

“It’s not just about congestion — it’s about a lot of trends,” Michael Taylor, managing partner at Diakon Logistics and recently appointed senior lobbyist for AfA and NCBFAA, told Air Cargo Next. “A 50% increase from our perspective will crash [airports’] capacity here. And, so, there is a real sense of urgency. 

“Also, there hasn’t been the kind of regular investment and regular attention being given to air cargo and air cargo operations that there should have been, which is not an atypical story within the larger transportation space,” he added.

Marshalling yards a solution to idling trucks 

Cargo throughput takes too long at airports, according to experts, due in large part to outdated infrastructure in relation to trucking needs and volume.  

Roadways and truck aprons at many older airports were simply not designed for modern, 70-foot tractor-trailers. Undersized truck aprons, lack of queuing availability, constrained maneuvering space and limited truck bays all contribute to landside congestion. 

Without sufficient marshalling yards, trucks remain idling in long lines at the airport and on access roads, which increases congestion, cost and carbon emissions. 

“It’s become common practice in our industry to accept the fact that a truck should wait three or four hours to get cargo, and I don’t think that that is a good practice,” Donna Mullins, vice president of Kale Logistics Solutions and chair of the ACC, told Air Cargo Next. “That’s added cost that ends up coming to you and me, the consumer.” 

The white paper recommends creating truck marshalling yards, arguing that the cost for these yards would be relatively minor and could be partially recovered through rental fees. Airports and stakeholders should also evaluate apron and cargo facility modifications that could better accommodate larger trucks and increased cargo volume. 

Cramped, outmoded infrastructure 

Many airports have antiquated facilities that cannot handle larger airplanes; insufficient facilities for climate-controlled and/or specialized cargo; and aprons that lack direct ramp access and belly-cargo facilities accessible via restricted service road, according to the white paper. Operating requirements for supply chain integrators, such as UPS and FedEx, include different building and infrastructure configurations. The rise of e-commerce has generated substantial increases in cargo tonnages, generating new facility requirements, especially for perishables, according to the ACC. 

“Modern facilities that emphasize e-commerce and integrator traffic are best designed with greater depth to allow for sortation and with less of a focus on sensitive hold areas,” the white paper reads. “The heights of older facilities can sometimes limit the ability to introduce more sophisticated racking and/or mechanized handling system and enhance efficiency.” 

The lack of capacity in cargo facilities at many airports has required the temporary use of aprons for holding cargo and to accommodate equipment that would otherwise be stored inside. Shipments frequently cannot be located, which adds even more time to a cargo shipment’s time on the ground. 

One solution is increased use of off-airport facilities. Advantages of off-airport facilities are lower property rental costs and the ability to purchase the property, as it is less likely to face FAA land restrictions. However, security and safety concerns are heightened for off-airport facilities, and there are increased costs for moving cargo to and from the airport. 

But not all U.S. Customs and Border Protection port directors permit bonded cargo to pass through off-airport facilities. While Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport’s (ORD) port director allows it, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport’s (ATL) port director does not, Mullins said. 

Another solution to congestion is moving operations from central hubs to smaller, regional airports. Kuehne+Nagel Group began operations earlier this year at Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Airport (BHM) to avoid congestion at ATL; Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport (MKE) is building a 288,000-square-foot cargo facility to handle cargo diverted from ORD; and Chicago Rockford International Airport (RFD) has completed 95% of a $50 million cargo expansion project, also to draw cargo from ORD. 

Digitalization for urban airports 

Not all airports have room to sprawl. 

“For airports who have physical infrastructure restrictions, that’s where digital infrastructure is going to have to take a part,” Mullins said. 

The ACC urges air cargo stakeholders to develop and implement a digital platform to streamline operations and provide cargo visibility across the board, including trucking and ground handling operations. These platforms must “be sufficiently generic to be adapted to virtually every airport,” the white paper states.  

“Worldwide Flight Services, one of the ground handlers at JFK [John F. Kennedy International Airport], has purchased the Kale automation for truck slot appointment booking,” Mullins said, adding that this keeps truckers to a schedule that prevents premature arrival and congestion. “The ground handler knows in advance of the truck arriving exactly what they’re coming to get or what they’re dropping off, … which means they’re able to turn that truck around quicker.”  

In an ACC survey, stakeholders said that while there is an over reliance on technology, manual processes are insufficient and may introduce human error and that communications between all elements of the cargo operation are inconsistent, leading to scheduling difficulties. 

The first step in creating a universal digital platform, according to the white paper, is the creation of an industrywide volunteer committee to monitor and identify best practices and technology applications.  

“We do have to act like a community,” Mullins said of the air cargo industry’s stakeholders. 

More money needed 

Who should pay for these upgrades? According to the white paper and ACI-NA, the short answer is everyone: all stakeholders, to varying degrees, and the government. 

The ACC recommends the creation of a state and/or federal “Air Cargo Support Fund,” and ACI-NA calls for the government to reconsider funding levels and requirements for the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). 

AIP has remained stable at about $3.35 billion per year since 2001, though the purchasing power of AIP has nearly halved since 2001, according to ACI-NA. The use of AIP cannot, in most instances, be directed toward terminal projects. 

Virtually all airports require increased funding for infrastructure needs, according to ACI-NA.

While airports do receive federal funding, it is not enough to tackle these critical infrastructure needs. And when there is not enough money, airports tend to prioritize passenger operations over cargo. 

“Cargo, except for the two years of the pandemic, has always been the sort of stepchild of airfreight,” Mullins said, joking that passengers can complain while cargo cannot. “We’re wanting to go to [Capitol] Hill and ask for very specific funding dedicated to cargo, to cargo infrastructures, to cargo automation, to cargo facilities, to things that are strictly and specifically cargo oriented.” 

Heading to the Hill for support 

AfA recently appointed a senior lobbyist to educate lawmakers on the air cargo industry’s growing needs, with the goal of obtaining funding and certain policy changes. The lobbyist, Taylor, said the process is going well. 

Having missed the fiscal 2023 appropriations process, Taylor is in Phase 1 of his campaign: educating lawmakers and identifying individuals who can serve as air cargo champions.  

“They grasp the urgency,” Taylor said of the lawmakers to whom he has spoken. “I’m cautiously optimistic that we could get some legislation introduced even in Phase 1.” 

Phase 2, which begins with the next budgetary cycle, includes seeking funding for pilot projects at a few airports. Taylor is also pushing for a U.S. Government Accountability Office report on the topic, which he believes will bolster the industry’s requests. Phase 3 would be creating a dedicated fund for air cargo. 

No action is no option 

Not addressing these airport congestion and infrastructure issues will exacerbate existing problems. Additionally, as technology develops and planes and trucks get even larger, infrastructure will become even more insufficient. The ACC and ACI-NA stressed the need to anticipate future needs while addressing current issues. 

“Investment in U.S. airport infrastructure continues to lag behind the industry’s needs, and that gap continues to grow,” ACI-NA’s Burke said, calling for continued infrastructure investment and reduced regulatory burdens. “It’s time for Congress to make meaningful reforms in how it funds America’s critical airport infrastructure.”