Examples of using Congested airports in English and their translations into German
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Political
-
Computer
-
Programming
-
Official/political
-
Political
Making better use of existing capacity at congested airports by ensuring a more resource-efficient slot allocation system.
The general objective is to ensure optimal allocation anduse of airport slots in congested airports.
Whereas the allocation of slots at congested airports should be based on neutral, transparent and non-discriminatory rules;
Air carriers point at the main problem thatlies at the heart of the current shortage of slots at congested airports, namely the lack of airport capacity.
For congested airports, this frees up unused capacity where traffic expansion might otherwise not have been possible.
Consists of withdrawing a percentage of historical slots at highly congested airports where new entry is severely restricted.
Congested airports are often located at the main economic centres of the Community and often constitute the main gates for connections to third countries.
Aviation is operating from smaller less congested airports the business traveller can easily reclaim entire workdays on a single trip.
The general objective of revising the Slot Regulation is to ensure optimal allocation anduse of airport slots in congested airports.
Forecasts indicate that increasingly congested airports in Europe will not be able to meet part of the air traffic demand in the coming years.
I support Amendment No 20 which restores the Commissioner's wording, partly because it adds a new paragraph encouragingthe use of smaller, less congested airports.
Continued difficulties faced by carriers trying to grow their operations at congested airports in order to provide real competition to incumbent carriers.
Local guidelines have the potential to add more flexibility to adapt to local circumstances toallow for better use of the existing slots at congested airports.
Slot commitments are particularly effective at congested airports, where access to slots is essential for airlines to be able to compete.
Together, the block exemption and the Council regulation set out the conditions under which air carriers cantake part in the scheduling conferences at which slots at congested airports are allocated.
At the same time, it gives up some profitable routes and slots at several congested airports, which creates opportunities for its competitors and reduces the competition distortions brought about by the aid.
Airlines, such as EasyJet, advocated for a strict application of the usage requirement of slots,which would open the possibilities for more competition at Europe's congested airports.
At many congested airports it is already difficult for carriers to enter the market or indeed grow their operations since airlines will do everything necessary to keep their slots from one season to the next.
Fuel consumption, for instance, can be reduced by minimising queuing before take-off, using more optimal flightpaths and reducing the extent to which aircraft must fly in holding patterns before landing at congested airports.
At severely congested airports the existing rules based largely on the“grandfather rights” principle are not sufficiently flexible to ensure availability of slots and maximise the efficient use of scarce airport capacity.
An alternative track towards better recognition of the situation at particularly noise sensitive airports could be to introduceenvironmental criteria into the rules on the allocation of slots at congested airports.
The most notable barriers to entry arethe lack of peak-time slots at London Heathrow airport- which is amongst the most congested airports in the world- the parties' frequency advantage and their control of most connecting traffic on the routes.
Provided that infrastructural preconditions do exist there is a significant potential for enhancing rail/air intermodality,thus easing pressure on ATM-systems and facilitating the situation at congested airports.
In the light of the positions taken by industry and Member States, this proposal emphasises the need forMember States to analyse the capacity situation at congested airports for which they are responsible and to consider ways and means of resolving the problems on a regular basis.
However, as this measure has never before been implemented, the potentially positive impact has to be balanced against the risk that the option could dramatically affect airlines by increasing substantially their operating costs, as a result of disruption to their schedules and hub andspoke business model founded upon a wide portfolio of slots at congested airports.
Local guidelines have the potential to add more flexibility to adapt to local circumstances toallow for better use of the existing slots at congested airports, provided they comply with the provisions of the Regulation.
However, the Commission is able to accept the common position as the new text constitutes a legally clear provision andimproves the competitive conditions at congested airports by giving more air carriers the possibility to qualify for“new entrant” status as well as to air carriers with bigger slot portfolios than those provided in the currently applicable rules.
Regulation(EEC) No 95/93 made a decisive contribution to the achievement of the internal market in aviation and to the development of relations between the European Union, its Member States and third countries,by ensuring access to the Union's congested airports on the basis of neutral, transparent and non-discriminatory rules.
The present proposal to amend the Regulation does not affect the Commission's proposal adopted on 20 June 2001 for a modification of the currently applicable Regulation.2 This latter proposal is wider in scope,aims at ensuring that scarce capacity of slots at congested airports is managed and used efficiently, albeit without modifying fundamentally the current system of slot allocation build around the so-called“grandfather“ or“historical slots”.
The new entrant rule seems to have had only a limited effect on competition at Community airports and on the best use of scarce airport capacity as some evidence suggests that the rule seems not to be widely understood andcan therefore result in creating a negligible presence at congested airports, leading to a range of small operations that do not provide effective competition in the market place.