Use Of Airport By Larger Planes To Be Studied

CHATHAM – With an increasing number of larger aircraft landing at the town’s airport, the airport commission is proposing a study to determine what, if any, modifications or changes to the George Ryder Road airfield may be necessary to ensure its continued safe operation.

 Voters at the May 11 annual town meeting will be asked to appropriate $7,500 from free cash for the town’s 5 percent share of the study cost, expected to total $142,500. The Federal Aviation Administration will contribute 90 percent of the study cost, with the Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission providing the remaining 5 percent.

 The commission will also be seeking a $17,500 local match to replace and upgrade navigation equipment at the airport, with state and federal funding making up the remaining 97.5 percent of the $682,500 total. The request was included in a capital spending article that was turned down at last year’s town meeting.

 Currently, Chatham Airport is designed around smaller aircraft such as the Beech Baron B-58, which fall under the FAA’s design group 1 (DG1) designation. However, in recent years, larger planes such as the Pilatus PC-12, designated as design group 2 (DG2), have been using the airport more frequently, exceeding a “regular use” standard of 500 operations annually. According to a scope of work for the proposed study, that triggers a reevaluation of the airport’s “critical aircraft,” or the aircraft around which the facility is designed.

 The study aims to determine if there is justification for changing the airport’s "critical aircraft” design to DG2 and to evaluate the physical, operational and equipment needs to do so. The study will also evaluate alternatives to address those conditions. 

 Currently, PC-12 and other DG2 aircraft are allowed to land at the airport, according to commission chair Huntley Harrison, and the study will determine if safety enhancements are necessary to accommodate the increasing number of flights by those planes. 

 “There are a variety of modifications that can happen,” he said at the Feb. 10 select board meeting. Some may not be possible, in which case the study will evaluate alternatives such as limiting the number of flights or time restrictions. The study is not meant to justify expanding the airport, he added.

 The airport is not required to do the study, he said, but the commission decided to move ahead with it due to the “hue and cry” from residents over the DG2 planes’ use of the facility.

 Airport critics have made several attempts to prohibit DG2 aircraft from using Chatham Airport. An attempt to change the usable length of the runway so that it was too short for the larger planes failed at town meeting, but a town bylaw to limit use of the airport to planes with wingspans of less than 49 feet, which would prohibit the larger craft, passed at last year’s town meeting by a 26-vote margin. It was later rejected by the state Attorney General, ruling that the FAA, not the town, had authority over use of the airport.

 Airport critic Paula Lofgren, a former airport commissioner, questioned the neutrality of the study and the sincerity of the commission. “This is already a done deal,” she said, charging that the scope of the study was weighted toward finding a way to expand operations by the larger aircraft.

 Harrison denied there was a foregone conclusion to the study. DG2 aircraft are already allowed to land at the airport, he said. “If we have to make modifications for that to make it safer, then we’ll do it. We can’t stop them.”

 Gale Associates, the airport’s consultants, met with representatives from the FAA and Mass Aeronautics Dec. 16 to discuss the critical design aircraft issue, Mark Ottariano of Gale Associates said at the Feb. 11 airport commission meeting. The study is intended to “review and justify the need” for changes to meet the standards of DG2 aircraft and propose alternatives to “nonstandard conditions” currently existing. The agencies are currently reviewing the study’s scope of work, he said.

 It’s not likely the standards for DG2 aircraft can be met, added Matt Caron of Gale Associates. But recognizing the growing number of flights by the larger aircraft, there may be changes that can be made to improve safety. Commission member Leo Eldredge said there is also a liability concern should the airport not make safety upgrades, if warranted.

 “It has to be looked at,” he said of the study, “because if not and there’s a gap, there could potentially be a liability for the airport.” He said he hoped major changes to the airport aren’t necessary to accommodate the larger aircraft.

 “It’s not anything I would support,” he said.

 The study will be valuable “if we can get over the distrust issue” between the commission and airport critics, said select board vice chair Jeffrey Dykens. Board member Cory Metters said he wasn’t convinced the article will pass town meeting. 

 With member Shareen Davis absent, the select board deferred a vote on whether to support the town’s share of funding for the study until March 3.

 The board voted to support the article seeking $17,500 to upgrade and replace navigation equipment at the airport. Field lighting, the rotating beacon and windsock will be replaced as part of the project. The work includes replacing incandescent bulbs with LED lights, which are brighter and safer, said Harrison.

 “It's time. They’ve run their course,” he said of the existing equipment. The new equipment will not expand use of the airport, said airport staff liaison Terry Whalen.