Chapter 4 - Aviation ForecastsMASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Kalispell City Airport
Chapter 4 AVMTION F0HECA —M
+ 1 Introduction
There are two (2) key elements for determining accurate and representative aviation forecasts for a
particular airport: 1) baseline values for based aircraft, aircraft mix, local and itinerant operations, air
taxi, and military operations; and 2) realistic expectation for rate of growth of each group. Of these
two elements, determining the baseline data is both more critical and more difficult. Baseline
aviation activity at the Kalispell City Airport was established from three (3) primary sources of
information: 1) On -site data collection including based aircraft reporting, acoustic aircraft counts,
and motion sensing photography; 2) the FAA's Terminal Area Forecast (TAF); and 3) responses
obtained from a pilot's survey.
4.2 baseline Data
The primary source of information used to establish baseline operations and aircraft mix at the
Kalispell City Airport was on -site data collection. Based aircraft reporting in conjunction with
acoustic counts of aircraft operations and motion sensing photography of aircraft were used to
establish the baseline data for aircraft operations and fleet mix at Kalispell City Airport. On -site
data was then evaluated and compared to the FAA's Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), responses from
the pilot's survey, and conversations with the Sponsor and users of the airport.
4.2.1 On -Site Data Collection
4.2.1.1 Based Aircraft Reporting
Since 2007, federally funded airports have been required to report actual N-numbers (registration
numbers) of aircraft based at an airport. The FAA maintains the National Based Aircraft Inventory
Program which is a database of reported N-numbers for based aircraft and other applicable aircraft
and owner information at federally funded airports. The current report dated September 13, 2011
indicates that there are currently 82 based aircraft at Kalispell City Airport, seven (7) of which are
seasonally based or based at more than one airport over the course of the year. The database also
includes the dates when the aircraft were reported for that airport. This provides another tool for
determining newly based aircraft at an airport. Unfortunately, there is no reporting of information
for aircraft that are no longer based at that airport. A detailed listing of based aircraft with
information on aircraft type, engine, primary use, and owner is included in Appendix E. Table 4-1
summarizes key information obtained from an analysis of the based aircraft reporting.
The data in Table 4-1 indicates that there were at lease three new aircraft based at Kalispell City
Airport each year. It does not tell us, however, what the net gain in aircraft is for each year. Since it
is possible, and even likely, that one or more based aircraft were sold or moved, the net gain of based
aircraft over the past four years is more likely one or two per year.
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 37
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Kalispell City Airport
TABLE 4-1
Based Aircraft Reporting Summary
2007
49
3
3
55
2008
5
0
3
_8_
2009
2
1
0
3
2010
3
0
2
5
2011 1 11 1 1 1 -1 1 11
Total 1 70 1 5 7 82
SOURCE: National Based Aircraft Inventory Program, September 13, 2011
The data in the National Based Aircraft Inventory Program also includes the make and model of
each based aircraft. A summary of based aircraft by type is presented in Table 4-2.
4 There are currently seventy-two (72) based aircraft which are classified as Approach Category
A; and three (3) based aircraft which are classified as Approach Category B.
Sixty-nine (69) of the based aircraft owners reside in Montana; thirteen (13) reside out-of-state.
Of the State residents, thirty-five (35) are from Kalispell and additional thirty-four (34) are
spread out through the Flathead Valley; three (3) are in Missoula, and the remaining one (1) in -
State aircraft owner resides in Shelby.
All single engine aircraft at Kalispell City Airport fall into ARC A-1, the most common being
Cessna 172's and 182's.
4 One Group II aircraft, a Blanik L-13 Glider with a wing span of 53'-2" is based at Kalispell
City Airport.
Although all of the multi -engine aircraft presently based at Kalispell fall into the Design Group I
category, there is potential for growth of Design Group II aircraft if the existing B-I facilities are
upgraded to meet Design Group 11 standards.
4.2.1.2 Acoustic Counters
An acoustic counter was installed at the Kalispell City Airport on September 21, 2010 and counted
aircraft operations for one full year from the date of installation. An acoustic counter monitors
sound levels at the airport and records/classifies each sound event by amplitude, duration, and other
unique features. This process allows the counter to discriminate between aircraft takeoffs and other
sources of sound with accuracy greater than 90 percent.
Data obtained from the acoustic counter has been compiled for the full year of monitoring. The
tabulated data is provided in Appendix F. The data has been reviewed and evaluated to establish the
total baseline aviation operations at the airport. Since a qualifying sound event is consistent with a
takeoff or a touch-and-go operation, landings would not be accounted for in the measured data.
Because an aircraft operation is either a take -off, a landing, or a touch-and-go, the acoustic measured
at the airport do not include operations associated with landings. The operations estimated from the
acoustic counter data are summarized in Table 4-3.
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 38
MASTER PLAN UPDATE 1 " RIA F-
Kabspe[[ City Airport
TABLE 4-2
Summary of Based Aircraft by Type, Make & Mode[
ARC A-1 Aircraft
Beechcraft
Bellanca/Aeronca/Champion
Variants
35
19
2
150
32'-10"
32'-9"
33'-5"
1
106
7 & 11
2
90
Cessna
1201140
2
105
32'-10"
150/152
7
100
32'-9"
170/172/175
17
110
35'-10"
180/182/185
14
119
35%10"
206
3
132
35%10"
210
1
141
36'-9"
310
1
167
37'-6"
337
1
142
38'-2"
Ta larcraft
BC-12
3
100
36'-0"
Mooney
M20
3
144-170
36'-1"
Piper
PA-18
1
100
35'-3"
PA-20/22
2
100
29 %4"
PA-28
7
105-143
30'-0"
Experimental
Various
3
1
74 31'-6"
Ultra Light
ChaIlen er II
- rcraft_
Glider Blanik L-13 ! 1
53'-2"
IU ARC B-I Aircraft
Beechcraft
55 1
340 1
PA-31 1
188
37'-10"
38'-1"
40'-8"
Cessna
229
Piper
200
Notary Aircraft
Enstrom 2801^X 1 75
Schweizer/Hughes L 269C/369 3 80
Be[[ w6B 3 116
NA
NA
NA
NOTE: Total number of based aircraft reported as 68 on 5010 form.
An aircraft operation is defined as a takeoff, a landing, or a touch and go. Aircraft noise is only
generated when an aircraft is operating close to full -throttle conditions. This typically occurs during
takeoff and climb, cruise, and touch-and-go operations. Aircraft landings, on the other hand, are
normally performed near idle conditions and therefore don't produce a noise event and are not
recorded. The acoustical count data recorded 6,281 noise events at the airport during a full, one-year
time frame. To ensure that the counters were recording the operations that they were intended to
record (and not missing operations), visual observations were periodically documented during the
data collection period and compared to the counts recorded by the acoustic counter. These visual
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 39
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Ka[ispe[[ City Airport
observations served to verify the validity of the data obtained from acoustic counters. This acoustic
count number would therefore include takeoffs and touch -an -go operations only; landings would not
be counted since they do not typically include a noise event. Therefore, an estimate must be made to
account for landings and be included in the total operations estimate. This was done by assuming
that 80 percent of the noise events recorded were takeoffs and the other 20 percent were touch-and-
go's; an additional 5,025 operations were added to the count for landings. Based on this
methodology, the total estimated operations for the one-year study period were 11,306.
TABLE 4-3
Acoustic Operation COUTlts, 20I0-20II
September 22-30
388 310
698
October
392
314
706
November
99
79
178
December
46
37
83
Janwa
81
65
146
February
203
162
365
March
72
58
_
130
April
465
372
837
May
610
488
1,098
_
June
776
621
1,397
July
August !
September 1-21
1,231
1,183
_.__... _
735
985
2,216
946
2,129
1,323
588
Tota!
6�,z8i
51025
II/3o6
* Projected number of landings assumed to equal number of take -offs; take -offs
assumed to be 80 percent of total operations count.
** Counter electronics became damaged on September 1, 2011; data is not available
for September 1, 2011 through September 21, 2011. Counts for September 1, 2011 and
September 21, 2011 were estimated from the average (35 per day) of the preceding 10
days and the final 8 days of September 2010.
4.2.1.3 Motion Sensing Cameras
Motion sensing cameras were installed at each runway end to take photographs of aircraft entering
or exiting either runway end. Since most aircraft exit the runway mid -field, the photos obtained
should accurately capture predominantly the aircraft that depart the airport. The cameras can not
count every aircraft operation; however the picture counts can be compared to the acoustical counter
counts to verify rough magnitudes of operations and the types of aircraft operating at the airport.
More importantly, the pictures can be used to establish the aircraft fleet mix using the airport and
approximate the number of operations which occur from itinerant aircraft versus based aircraft.
During the period from September 9, 2010 to September 21, 2011, there were a total of 2,973
aircraft images captured. The following are some of the key observations from these photographs:
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 40
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Kalispell City Airport
95% of the aircraft using Kalispell City Airport are categorized as ARC A -I, with Cessna 172's
and 182's being the most common.
4 58% of the aircraft photographs were of based aircraft; 42% were of itinerant aircraft.
dl 34% of the aircraft photographs were of aircraft owned and operated by Red Eagle Aviation
and used for flight instruction.
4 3% of the aircraft are twin -engine aircraft categorized as ARC B-I aircraft, with Piper Chieftan,
Aztec, and Beechcraft Baron being the most common.
%6 2% of the photographed operations were by helicopters. While rotary wing aircraft are required
to use the airport traffic pattern to arrive and depart, it doesn't always happen.
4 Only two (2) turbine -engine aircraft were observed during this period, a Beechcraft 99 and a
Piper Meridian both of which are categorized as ARC B-I.
4 No ARC B-II aircraft were observed during this period.
vk No jet aircraft were observed during this period.
4.2.1.4 Fuel Sales
Fuel sales are another tool that is useful for developing aviation forecasts. Although no direct
correlation can be made between fuel sales and a specific number of aviation operations, fuel sales
are a valuable tool to correlate a forecast model which is only based on one year of acoustic counts
at the airport. Fuel sales records for both Avgas and Jet A were obtained from Red Eagle Aviation
for the years 2007 through September, 2011. A summary of fuel sales at the Kalispell City Airport
is presented in Table 4-4.
TABLE 4-4
Summary of Fuel Sales at Red Eagle Aviation
2007-08 72,034 $3.44 Avg. 22,621
2008-09 67,816 $4.50 Avg. 23,487
2009-10 62,302 $3.34 Avg. 23,254
2010-11 58,382 $3.81 Avg. 24,606
* Reported Fuel Sales Annually from October through September.
$3.99 Avg.
$4.50 Avg.
$2.66 Avg.
$3.16 Avg.
During this 4 year period, Avgas sales have steadily declined between 4,000 and 5,000 gallons each
year. Throughout the four year period, Avgas sales are down approximately 19 percent. With the
exception of the Avgas price spike in 2008, fuel prices have steadily increased throughout this
period. Jet A sales, on the other hand, have remained very consistent while prices, although
somewhat erratic, have actually fallen. Both of these trends indicate, as one would expect, that fuel
sales are inversely related to fuel price. As price increases, sales decrease which should also serve as
a trend for the direction of aircraft operations.
During 2011, the cost of Avgas and Jet A has risen past $5 per gallon in most areas across the United
States, with no signs of decline on the horizon. Given the numerous lawsuits being filed by
environmental groups against the manufacture and sale of leaded Avgas, it can only be assumed that
Chapter 4 Aviation FOR
Page 41
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Kalispell City Airport
prices will continue to increase until a suitable direct replacement alternative is certified. Rising
Avgas prices will affect future operations.
One interesting observation when comparing fuel sales data to the based aircraft inventory, motion
sensing camera photos, and the responses to the pilot's survey is that documented Jet A fuel sales are
much higher than would be anticipated based on the expected fleet mix using the airport. In
reviewing this information, there is only one (1) turbine engine aircraft and no jet aircraft based at
the airport, only two (2) turbine aircraft were photographed over the course of the year, and from the
pilot's survey, only eight (8) pilots using the airport reported flying turbine engine aircraft. This
discrepancy is likely explained by two factors. First, the single based turbine aircraft is the Jet
Ranger Helicopter operated by Red Eagle Aviation. This rotorcraft is a known "fuel hog" and is
likely responsible for a significant amount of the Jet A fuel usage. The second factor would simply
be missed aircraft operations from itinerant turbine engine aircraft. The Airport Manager has
reported observing several turbine -engine aircraft on the field during the year that were not recorded
by the cameras. These include several PC-12's, a Bonanza, a KingAir B200, and a twin -turbine
Otter. There has also been occasional use by turbine -engine aircraft by Homeland Security and the
military.
4.2.2 Terminal Area Forecasts and MSASP Inventory and Forecasting Update
The Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) is a forecasting tool used by the FAA to document aviation
forecasts at federally funded airports. Information (Query June, 2011) estimates 81 aircraft based at
Kalispell City Airport in 2011, remaining constant through 2030. Going back to 1991, the TAF
shows the number of based aircraft growing from 64 to a forecast number of 81 in 2030. This
represents an average growth rate of slightly less than one aircraft every two years.
The Montana State Aviation System Plan (MSASP) System Forecasting document (1998-1999)
estimates 74 aircraft based at Kalispell City Airport in 2010, increasing to 76 aircraft by 2020. This
represents an annual growth rate of 0.20 percent in based aircraft over the 10-year period, or one
new aircraft every 5-years. Based Aircraft Forecasts from the TAF and MSASP are summarized in
Table 4-5.
The Terminal Area Forecast separates aircraft operations into several categories including itinerant
air carrier, itinerant air taxi, itinerant GA, itinerant military, local GA, and local military. Table 4-6
summarizes the general aviation operations forecast excerpted from the 2007 TAF for selected years.
Copies of the 2011 TAF are included in Appendix G. There were no operations from air carrier
aircraft predicted at Kalispell City Airport during the planning period.
In comparison, the MSASP (1998-1999) also provides forecasts for general aviation operations.
Table 4-7 summarizes the general aviation operations forecast excerpted from the 1998-1999
System Forecast. All forecast operations are GA aircraft. No passenger, cargo, or military
operations are predicted. Copies of the 1989-1999 MSASP are also included in Appendix G.
Chapter 4 Aviation Foriecasts
Page 42
MASTER PLAN UPDATE - DRAFT
Kabspell City Airport
TABLE 4-5
Based Aircraft Forecast From TAF and MSASP
Ycar
TAF
1998-9 Mmitatia Statc Aviation Systcm Phut
Inventory & Forecast
WOMRS•
SUURCE: 'Terminal Area Forecast (Query -June, 2011) and Montana State Aviation System Plan, 1998-9
Inventory and Forecasting Update.
TABLE 4-6
Aircraft Operations Forecast From TAF
I YU RF
1995
2000
11111crallt
Alrl'�'tNi
6,000
6,400
Itinerant
G A
1
__I 4 000
...................
Itinerant
Military
1000
. . .... . ......... .
...................
lx)c;tl
A
12 00
. . . ..... ....
13,600
....
33,100
. ...... .. . .... ............
35,000
..........
2005
6,400
...............
2.000
15,000
38400
2010
5,400
15,000
2,000
2015
6.400
15 000
2.000
-1-8.,.00.0-_-,4.1.,.4.0.0.--
-1
2020
6,400
15,000
. . ..... .....
2,000
. ........... . ....
. 18000
..... ....... 7 ... . .. . ..........
41,400
. ........... . . .
41.400
2025
6,400
1,5,099-11
..... .... . *
21000
** .. ........ ****'--'--
.
18.000
2030::j
6,400
15,000
2.000
18,000
41,400
TABLE 4-7
Aircraft Operations Forecast From /NASASP System Forecasting
1998
6,100 1,000 - _�_141000
6,715 1255
... ....... ..... .
14,640
. . . . . . . . ......................
15.200
13,600
35,000 .- -
3&070
2000
2005
14,220
14,800
.
6.810 1 .260
2010
6,905
15.800
15,350
39,320
2015
2020
7,000 1,275
7.095 1,280
16,400 J�,900
16.800 16.-4-0-.
.401J75_
41.575
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 43
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Kabspe[[ City Airport
4.2.3 Pilot's Survey
Beginning in November of 2010 through early January of 2011, a survey of registered pilots in
Flathead, Lake, Missoula, Lincoln, and Sanders Counties was conducted. The survey included a
variety of questions intended to establish background information on the users of the airport as well
as their assessment of existing facilities and needs. Key observations and conclusions of the survey
are discussed in Chapter 5 of this report. As the pilot's survey pertains to aircraft operations and
aircraft mix, two questions were asked to assess these parameters. Question 6 was included to help
determine the critical aircraft using the airport. The questions were intended to determine the
number of types of aircraft using the airport and not the number of operations from each type of
aircraft. The results of these two questions are summarized in Table 4-8.
TABLE 4-B
Summary of Response on Aircraft Using Kalispell City Airport
Single Engine, Piston
-Single Engine, Turbine_
Multi Engine, Piston
. ._.... _..............___._..._
442 56 386
4 _ 0 4
- — ;--
15
4
11
Multi Engine, Turbine
4
0
4
Jet
- 0 -----
-� -0 --
0
Helicopter
Other
24
7
17
4
0
4
Total
493
67
4.26
SOURCE: Kalispell City Airport Pilot's Survey, 2010
4.2.4 Baseline Data Analysis
Based on the multiple sources of information used to analyze and evaluate aircraft operations at the
Kalispell City Airport, the baseline for aircraft operations at the Kalispell City Airport is established
as follows:
1. Determine total number of operations counted at airport from acoustic counters;
2. Breakdown total operations into local operations and itinerant operations using based
aircraft data and photographs;
3. Breakdown total operations into fleet mix using photography from motions sensing
cameras;
4. Evaluate pilot's survey and fuel sales data to validate baseline data.
4.2.4.1 Combined Annual Aircraft Operations
There is a significant discrepancy between actual field counts of aircraft operations and the forecast
data estimated by the TAF and MSASP. The actual field count of 11,306 operations is far lower
than the 41,000 by the TAF and MSASP. The big question is whether the data obtained over the
2010-2011 year is representative of a normal year; or is the lower number of operations an anomaly
for the year. There are two potential explanations for this that may explain the discrepancy between
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 44
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — ORAFT
Kafispeff City Airport
the field counts obtained during this study and the forecasts developed in the 1999 Master Plan:
1. The original operations forecast in the 1999 Master Plan was estimated from based and
itinerant aircraft operations reported on the FAA form 5010 Airport Master Record. The
operations developed for the 5010 are based on national statistics and empirical models.
For example, the number of estimated itinerant aircraft operations is the product between
the number of based aircraft and a national average of 300 operations per based aircraft.
With the current 82 based aircraft, the number of itinerant operations estimated with 300
operations per based aircraft would be 24,600, or twice the total number of operations
actually counted at the airport. In this case it is obvious that national statistics are not
realistic at this airport and will likely result in significantly higher operations estimates
than are actually occurring. Therefore it can be concluded that the original
operations estimate and forecast in the 1999 Master Plan were erroneously high and
not representative of the actual number of operations occurring at the airport.
2. Poor weather conditions and economic recession were both factors during the 2010-2011
data collection period. Poor weather conditions have a seasonal impact on aviation
operations while economic factors tend to have a more long term impact. Current
economic factors, impact both baseline and long term forecasts. It would be expected
that an economic recession combined with higher fuel prices would result in reduced
aviation operations during the data collection period as well as future aviation activity
provided the economic climate does not reverse. This distinction is important because it
might explain, to a certain degree, some of the difference between the forecasts
developed in the original 1999 Master Plan and the operations observed during the data
collection period. If these acoustic counts had been performed during a strong economic
climate, it is likely that the aviation activity during the past year would be higher. In
contrast, unfavorable or abnormal weather conditions observed during the data collection
period would result in a temporary decrease in actual aviation operations; essentially only
impacting the time frame in which the poor weather occurred. As can be seen from the
monthly breakdown of acoustic counts (Table 4-3), there were several months during the
winter (November — March) where operations were significantly down. The winter of
2010/2011 was not a good period for VFR operations. Significant snowfall, fog, and
clouds allowed for few days that were suitable for VFR flight. As a result, aviation
operations were down, as a direct result of weather, during the data collection period. If
not adjusted, the baseline data used to develop the forecast will be low and inaccurate. It
can therefore be concluded that the acoustic counts recorded from November, 2010
through March, 2011 are likely lower than what would be expected in an average
year. An adjustment is warranted for these months to correct for an abnormal weather
condition. A reasonable approach to make an adjustment to the data for poor weather is
to evaluate the data for trends during the winter months and make a reasonable correction
to the data to reflect average winter operations. Data collected during these months
generally shows that VFR weather restrictions occurred on specific days or stretches of
several days. There were many winter days where conditions did not allow for VFR
operations. Conversely, days which had VFR minimums had consistent aviation activity.
The average number of daily operations on days with VFR conditions ranged from 5 per
day in March to 13 in February. A reasonable correction to the data would be to increase
the number days during the winter that would meet minimum VFR conditions of a more
normal winter. Between November and March, there were only 55 days out of a possible
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 45
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Kalispell City Airport
151 days that operations occurred on the airport (36 percent of the time). Assuming that
a more normal winter season might provide for VFR conditions half of the time (50
percent) and using an average number for daily operations of 9.4, the estimated increase
in winter operations from November through March would be 342 (1,269 estimated — 927
actual). The total baseline number of operations should be increased by 342 to correct for
an unseasonably harsh winter for VFR conditions.
Another available tool for estimating GA operations from the numbers of based aircraft, active aerial
applicators, and active flight instructors operating on a given airport is an empirical formula outlined
in the 1989 MSASP.
This formula was based on the results of the ramp surveys taken (elsewhere than Kalispell City
Airport) in August 1987:
GA Operations = 1,000 + 175 (no. of based aircraft) + 200 (no. of
aircraft aerial applicators) + 150 (no. of flight instructors)
Applying this formula to the actual number of based aircraft (73) in 2011 and three (3) flight
instructors, yields a GA Operations forecast of 14,225. (Assuming no aerial applicators are based at
the Kalispell City Airport during the planning period.) This estimate is surprisingly close to the
number of operations arrived at using the acoustic counts and lends supporting credibility to the
counts. In consideration of the weather limitation during the 2010 to 2011 it is likely that the field
counts would have been nearly the same if the weather had been more conducive to flying during
this period.
Based on this analysis, there is strong supporting data to establish the baseline operations
forecast for the Kalispell City Airport at 14,000 per year. This is approximately 10 percent
higher than the field counts and would account for the weather limitations observed during the
counting period.
4.2.4.2 Local/Itinerant Aircraft Operations
The FAA has recommended using 450 operations per based aircraft to estimate operations at very
busy reliever airports. Rural/remote airports with little itinerant traffic should have about 250
operations per based aircraft. Kalispell City Airport, although a reliever airport, would not meet the
FAA's designation as a very busy airport. Applying this rule of thumb to the number of based
aircraft at Kalispell City Airport results in based aircraft operations ranging from 20,500 to 36,900
(using 82 based aircraft). Since this estimate far exceeds the total operations counts obtained with
the acoustic counters, it can be concluded that these statistical averages are not representative of this
particular airport.
In order to develop quantify based aircraft and itinerant operations, data obtained from the motion
sensing cameras was used to identify if photographed aircraft were based at Kalispell City or not.
Most of the aircraft photos taken included the N-numbers of each aircraft. By comparing the N-
numbers from the photographs to the based aircraft listing and quantifying the occurrence of each
based aircraft operation, an estimate can be made on the proportion of based aircraft use to itinerant
aircraft use. As indicated in Section 4.2.1.3, approximately 58 percent of the aircraft photographs
were of based aircraft; 42 percent being itinerant aircraft. There is one discrepancy with this data;
very few operations from based rotor craft were photographed. Since helicopters hover as they taxi
above the surface and may not use the two runway end taxiways, most of these operations were
missed by the cameras. Since there are six helicopters based at Kalispell City Airport and some of
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 46
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Ka[ispe[[ City Airport
them are used for flight training, there would be a significant number of operations from these
aircraft. From interviews with Red Eagle Aviation staff, it is estimated that approximately 500
annual operations from helicopters would have been missed by the cameras.
4.2.4.3 Fleet Mix and Critical Aircraft
Planning and design of an airport focuses on the airport's role, number of operations, and "critical"
aircraft using the airport. The critical, or design aircraft, is the most demanding aircraft operating at
an airport on a regular basis. Typically, a specific type of aircraft must have 500 or more annual
operations to qualify as the critical aircraft. In determining the critical aircraft operating at Kalispell
City Airport, both based aircraft and itinerant aircraft operations should be evaluated.
Three (3) sources of information were used to develop the fleet mix for Kalispell City Airport: based
aircraft inventory, airplane operation photography, and interviews with the Airport Manager and Red
Eagle Aviation personnel. Based on this information, the predominant aircraft currently using
Kalispell City Airport with at least 500 operations each year would be the ARC A-1 group of aircraft.
All based aircraft are either ARC A-1 aircraft with the exception of three (3) B-1 aircraft; a Cessna
340, Beechcraft Baron 55 and a Piper PA-31. However, the primary tool used for establishing fleet
mix was the database of aircraft photos taken at the airport which includes both itinerant and based
aircraft operations. These photos capture a few different B-I aircraft operating that the airport but
the frequency of operations was very limited; well below 100 operations this past year. In addition,
there were no Design Group II aircraft photographed this year. There is a glider based at the airport
that meets ACR A -I standards. Interviews with airport personnel indicate that historically, there has
been some use of the airport by B-II aircraft. In past years, the USFS will occasionally operate an
itinerant KingAir 200 at the airport. There have also been other reports of larger B-I1 aircraft using
this facility in prior years. Based on these accounts, some provision will be included in the baseline
fleet mix to account for some limited amount of B-II operations at Kalispell City Airport. Pulling
this information together, the estimated operations broken down by ARC and aircraft class for 2011
are summarized in Table 4-9.
TABLE 4-9
Estimated Aircraft Fleet Mix and Baseline Operations
A -I (CE-172)
A -II (PC-12)
B-I (CE-340)
7,735
0
10
4,165
0
40
11,900
(}.
50
B-1I (KingAir C90)
__......... _...... .................................... ..... _..-....._............. ....
0
_
50
50
Rotorcraft
1,500
500
2,000
Total
9i100
41900
14,1000
4.2.4.4 Baseline Data Valuation
The pilot's survey was also used in determining the aircraft fleet mix and baseline operations at
Kalispell City Airport. Two survey questions were developed to determine the aircraft use at the
airport. One question was intended to estimate the type of aircraft flown in and out of the airport;
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 47
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Ka[ispeR City Airport
the other question was intended to estimate the type of aircraft based at the airport. Responses are
summarized in Table 4-8.
The information collected from the Pilot's Survey is useful for confirming the fleet mix but has
limited value for confirming operations of itinerant and based aircraft. Both questions, specifically
asked for the type of plane flown to or based at Kalispell City Airport. Neither question asked for
the estimated number of operations flown over the past year for each type of aircraft. Thus, the
question has no value regarding frequency of operations. It does however, provide further support
for the fleet mix observed at the airport. Most of the respondents indicated their aircraft were single -
engine, piston aircraft with occasional use by helicopters and multi -engine, piston. There was also
some use by turbine aircraft, both single -engine and multi -engine and other aircraft which most
likely include gliders and ultra lights. There were no reported jet aircraft operations by any of the
respondents.
4.3 Growtk Trends anJ Aviation rorecast
The second component to developing an aviation forecast is to establish realistic expectations on the
rate of growth of aviation at the facility. This evaluation is far more subjective than developing the
baseline information and must include consideration of area demographics, population trends, local
economic factors, community development plans, airport development plans, airport expansion
capability, regulatory requirements, competition from nearby airports, and any other pertinent factors
which may impact growth at an airport. One common tool used for forecasting is the regression
analysis. A regression analysis uses historic data to establish a trend line which can then be used to
"project or forecast" future growth or decline. A regression analysis is a valuable tool provided that
the factors that drive future conditions are similar to the factors that established the historical data.
Unfortunately it cannot account for future conditions that can significantly impact demand and use.
The impact from many factors including future airport expansion, high fuel prices, or an economic
recession would not be reflected in a regression analysis. Unfortunately the only way to address
airport and time specific impacts are through subjective evaluation.
A regression analysis is a useful starting point for establishing initial projections. Historical data
was used to determine baseline growth for based aircraft, local operations, and itinerant operations.
Once a linear rate of growth for each of these components was established, local factors were
subjectively evaluated to determine if there would likely be an impact to the growth trend and, if so,
by how much. Subjective factors evaluated for the Kalispell City Airport included area
demographics, local economic outlook, nearby airports, fuel prices, regulatory compliance (low lead
fuel), and airport expansion.
4.3.1 Area Demographics and Population
Additional information including area economic and demographic statistics was also evaluated to
establish regression trend lines to predict aviation growth through the planning period.
Area population and demographics potentially affect aviation demand. Increasing population and/or
business activity typically creates increased demand for infrastructure and transportation services,
including aviation. The Kalispell Growth Policy of 2003 included a very comprehensive and
detailed analysis of population and demographic trends for the State, County and City of Kalispell.
Several key demographic indicators and trends documented in the Growth Policy that may have an
impact on aviation forecasts are summarized as follows:
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 48
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Kalispell City Airport
Documented population increase from 1990 to 2000 was 12.9% for State of Montana; 25.76%
for Flathead County; and 19% for the City of Kalispell.
4 Projected population increase from 2000 to 2006 was 4.7% for the State of Montana; 14.6%
for Flathead County; and 36.6% for the City of Kalispell.
,4 Flathead County has a projected population increase of 71% between 2000 and 2030.6
Population estimates for the County 91,750 for 2010, 108,910 for 2020, and 127,250 for 2030.
• The City of Kalispell is not expected to continue growing at the high rate of approximately 6%
per year but is likely to level off some and grow at an average annual growth rate of 3% up
until 2025.
The rural areas surrounding Kalispell are expected to grow at a slower rate of 1.2$ per year up
until 2025.
Obviously, the 2003 Growth Policy does not account for the recent recession that has had a
significant impact on the Flathead Valley. Since this recession hit in 2008, there has been an
observed housing decline in the City of Kalispell and Flathead County. This is likely an indicator
that population growth has leveled off or possibly even declined over the past three years. Although
not likely a permanent condition, it is a factor that should be accounted for in short term aviation
forecasts. It is speculated that the current slow growth rate (or decline) of area wide population is
having a similar impact to local aviation. It is expected that trends in aviation will generally
follow the trends in area growth.
4.3.2 Local Economic Outlook
The Flathead Valley and City of Kalispell supports a strong tourist industry. There are limitless
outdoor recreation opportunities and spectacular scenery found in the many nearby mountain ranges,
National Forest lands, numerous lakes, and Glacier National Park. Much of the business in the
community caters directly to the tourist industry. Major employment sectors in the Kalispell area
include health care and social assistance, accommodation and food services, construction, and
education services. The largest employers in the Kalispell area include Kalispell Regional Medical
Center, Plum Creek Timber, Semi -Tool, Flathead Community College, Kalispell School District,
and Teletech.
Area economic forecasts generally follow similar trends as population growth. The recent recession
has had a noticeable impact on area businesses. Since the recession began, there have been
numerous layoffs and high unemployment. Many of the smaller local businesses, especially retail
and food service have closed their doors. This sort of economic downturn is not expected to
continue indefinitely, however, recovery is expected to be somewhat slower than the rest of the
nation and the state. Again, this is a factor that must be considered when developing aviation
forecasts at the Kalispell City Airport. It is expected that trends in aviation will generally
coincide with economic trends in the community.
4.3.3 Nearby Airport Influence
There is one large public airport and two (2) smaller public airports with general aviation service that
are close enough in proximity to Kalispell City Airport to have an impact on aviation operations.
6 NPA Data Services, Inc.
Chapter 4 Aviation Foriecasts
Page 49
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — ORAFT
Ka[ispe[[ City Airport
Glacier Park International Airport is a large, commercial service airport located just eight nautical
miles to the northeast. Whitefish Airport and Ferndale Airport are small, public airports with grass
strips located within a 20 mile radius of Kalispell City Airport. These three airports have the
potential to impact itinerant and based aircraft operations at Kalispell City. Ronan and Polson
Airports, which are 29 and 38 nautical miles south-southeast of Kalispell respectively, also somewhat
impact airport use, but to a much lesser degree.
4.3.3.1 Glacier Park International Airport
Glacier Park International Airport, operated by the Flathead Municipal Airport Authority, is located
six miles northeast of downtown Kalispell and eight nautical miles northeast of the Kalispell City
Airport. Glacier Park International Airport is a commercial air service facility with approximately
25% of its air traffic generated from local general aviation; 39% from transient general aviation;
19% from air taxi; 13% from commercial; and 3% from military. The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) categorizes the airport as a Primary, Non -Hub under the FAA's National Plan
of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). The Airport is currently served by three air carrier and
commuter airlines: Allegiant Airlines, Horizon Air (Alaska), and SkyWest Airlines (operating
United SkyWest and Delta Connection); as well as by several all -cargo airlines: Federal Express and
UPS. The airport averages 80 landings and takeoffs per day.
In addition, two aviation businesses operate on leased airport property including:
4 Glacier Jet Center — Full Service FBO
.k Rocky Mountain Aircraft Services — Aircraft Maintenance and Avionics
GPI is serviced by two runways, Runway 2/20, a 150-foot wide by 9,007-feet long paved runway
with a full-length parallel taxiway, and Runway 12/30, a 75-foot wide by 3,504-foot long paved
crosswind runway. Runway 2/20 is rated for heavy aircraft weight 250,000 pounds with dual
tandem landing gear, 170,000 pounds with dual wheel landing gear and 80,000 pounds with single
wheel landing gear. Runway 12/30 is rated for light aircraft weighing 12,000 pounds or less. GPI
has published instrument procedures for ILS, RNAV (GPS and RNP), and VOR approaches on
Runways 2 and 30. This airport is also classified as Class D Airspace, with an operating control
tower controlling the airspace within 4 nautical miles and 2500 feet above ground level around the
airport.
Given the all weather capability and long runway at Glacier Park International, it makes an attractive
alternate airport to the larger, twin engine light aircraft (Cessna 310's, Beechcraft Baron's, Piper
Seneca's) and jet aircraft. However, the single engine aircraft that are most commonly seen at
Kalispell City Airport are likely to continue using this facility provided the facility is maintained
and/or upgraded and aircraft storage remains available.
4.3.3.2 Whitefish and Ferndale Airports
Whitefish and Ferndale Airports are two (2) nearby airports with turf runways. Both airports are
public and offer an alternative to local area pilots other than GPI or Kalispell City Airport.
Whitefish Airport is a small airport near the City of Whitefish and is owned and operated by the
Flathead County Airport Authority (Glacier Park International Airport). It is a small facility with a
75 foot by 2,560 foot turf runway; there are only three (3) based aircraft at this airport. Ferndale
Airfield is situated southeast of Big Fork and has a 95 foot by 3,500 foot turf runway; there are 35
based aircraft. Ferndale Airfield also has numerous hangars constructed at the airport with
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 50
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Ka[ispe[[ City Airport
additional capacity for more hangar development. Because both of these facilities have turf
runways, their primary attractant is location. Neither of these facilities is likely to draw users away
from Kalispell City Airport unless the facilities are not maintained and become a safety hazard.
4.3.4 Fuel Prices
It would be expected that higher fuel prices would deter aviation activity. This does apparently
appear to be the trend. Over the past 4 years, as fuel prices have steadily raised, fuel sales have
steadily declined; being down approximately 19 percent over this time frame. Jet A sales, on the
other hand, have remained very consistent while prices, although somewhat erratic, have actually
fallen. Both of these trends indicate, as one would expect, that fuel sales are inversely related to fuel
price. As price increases, sales decrease which should also serve as a trend for the direction of
aircraft operations. Since expectations are that fuel prices will continue to increase throughout the
planning period, it is likely that there will be a negative impact on aviation forecasts.
4.3.5 Regulatory Compliance
The primary regulatory concern with regard to future aviation at Kalispell City Airport is the
environmental push for national regulation that would abolish low -lead Avgas. The probability of
regulation that would prohibit low -lead fuel from being sold and used for aviation in the United
States has been driving research to develop alternative aviation fuels for several years. The impact
of an alternative fuel to general aviation is not fully known at this time but it would likely result in a
decrease in general aviation activity. The reason for this is simply cost. Any alternative fuel will
likely require costly conversions of existing piston aircraft engines that will deter many casual pilots.
Alternative fuels will likely cost more to produce which will translate into higher costs at the pump.
Although the timing of new regulations is unknown, there is certainty that it is just a matter of time
before low -lead fuel is not legally available. Any regulatory -required fuel conversion would likely
result in increased fuel prices. As concluded above, high fuel prices result in aviation trends that
reduce or limit operations.
4.3.6 Airport Expansion
The Kalispell City Airport is presently an ARC B-I facility. If the airport were expanded to B-II
requirements it would likely attract more B-II aircraft. With its present limitations in runway and
taxiway width, many larger aircraft are deterred from using the airport, especially with GPI being an
alternate airport in such close proximity. If Kalispell City Airport were upgraded to B-II standards,
it would likely attract some of these operations due to its convenience and close proximity to
Kalispell's City Center. There is not likely to be much of an impact to smaller, B-I aircraft however.
The airport's current facilities are not really a deterrent to these aircraft.
A similar conclusion would result from an increase in runway length. Kalispell City Airport's
current runway length is a deterrent to faster, higher performance aircraft using the airport. If the
runway were lengthened, it would be expected that more of the higher performance aircraft would
use the airport on a more frequent basis.
4.3.7 Aviation Forecast Trends
4.3.7.1 Based Aircraft Projections
From the past few years of based aircraft counts, the number of based aircraft appears to be growing
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 51
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — L?RAFT
Kalispell City /airport
at a rate of 1 to 3 aircraft per year. Since this rate of growth has been occurring in spite of the poor
economic climate, there does not seem to be any other, immediate factors which would cause it to
plateau or decline. Over the next 5 years, it is expected that the number of based aircraft will
continue to increase by approximately 2 new aircraft each year. Looking further out, there are other
factors that may impact based aircraft growth. The primary factor would be airport expansion. If
the airport were expanded to ARC B-1I dimensional standards, it would likely attract additional
aircraft, provided hangar and tie -down facilities were readily available. It is not unrealistic to
anticipate a doubling of the growth rate if the facilities were upgraded.
Using the linear regression tool on the based aircraft data from the TAF (from 1990 to 2010) results
in a based aircraft growth rate of one new aircraft every two years (y-intercept=-970; x-
coefficient=0.52). This rate of growth is lower than what has actually been observed at the airport
over the past few years but it is more realistic and sustainable for the duration of the planning period.
Surprisingly, the linear regression method calculates the number of based aircraft in 2011 to be 72
which is consistent with the based aircraft counts (69 full-time and 4 part-time) in December, 2010.
There has been, however, a significant increase in based aircraft over the past 12 months. During
this time frame, 82 aircraft have been verified based at Kalispell City Airport; an increase of 9 new
aircraft over the past 9 months. This increase is believed to be an anomaly as there appears to be no
external factors supporting the increase.
Total based aircraft forecasts have been extrapolated using a regression analysis from the available
data to predict based aircraft counts through the year 2030. Table 4-10 summarizes the based
aircraft forecast for the planning period. Total based aircraft forecasts were calculated from the
regression equation; the breakdown of based aircraft types was subjectively determined utilizing the
5010 data from 2011 as a starting point. An increase in multi -engine aircraft has been projected in
2020 as a result of a possible expansion to B-I1 design standards at the airport.
Ref. Table 4-1
Chapter 4 Aviation FUMCBSTM
Page 52
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — LYWAFT
Ka[ispel[ City Airport
TABLE 4-1 O
Based Aircraft Forecast
2011
70
4
0
0
7
7
1
1
82
2015 72 4
84
2020
72
7
0
7
1
87
2025
73
8
0
8
1
90
2030
75
8
0
8
1
92
2iUUAC;L rorecast number of based aircraft jor years 2010 through 2030 calculated from regression analysis (y-
intercept = -970; x-coefficient = 0.52)
4.3.8 Aircraft Operations Forecast
An aircraft operation is any aircraft movement on a runway such as a landing, a take -off, or a touch-
and-go. The number of operations, rather than the number of flights or trips, determines the level of
airport activity. No formal log of actual airport operations at the Airport exists.
The Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) is the primary tool used by the FAA for developing aviation
forecasts. However, other forecasting tools were used, for comparison purposes to the forecasts in
the TAF. In developing aviation forecasts, the FAA provides the following guidance for the forecast
review process established under FAA Order 5090.3C:
"Forecasts supplied bU the airport spovLsor should ort vary (vu.ore thaw
ion) from the FAA's forecast. VvhevL a spovLsor's forecast does vary sigmL ficavutLU
frovu. the FAA's forecast, the spovLsor's vu.ethodoLogU should be verified, the forecast
cooro( �Clted with APo-zso, avud ovLLU after the dLf ferev�ce Ls resoLved avid the FAA Cs
satisfied that the spovLsor's forecast is vaLid wiLt spovLsor's forecast be iv rLuded iw the
NPIAS. IvL the absevLce of other forecast ivy forw&atiov�., data from FAA's forecast are
i"[L,cded ivt the NT>(AS database. WhevL FAA forecast data are vLot avaiLabLe (usuaLL�
a proposed airport) the master pLavL forecast should be vaLidated 29,2ivLst FAA's
regq ov�,21 forecasts, avO if appropriate, cooro( vLAed with AP0-120."
As noted earlier in this chapter, there is a significant discrepancy from the operations forecast by the
TAF and the operations counted over the course of a full year at the airport. Actual aircraft
operation counts on -field only report approximately 11,306 operations compared to the 41,400
forecast by the TAF. Since there is no reason to challenge the acoustic counts at the airport, it is
likely that the TAF estimates have been over -projecting aircraft operations at this facility. Thus,
forecasts developed in this study will be based on the baseline data obtained in the field and adjusted
for specific seasonal anomalies as previously described in Section 4.2.4.
The operations data in both the TAF and MSASP do have value for developing trend line
information, however. Using the linear regression tool on the aircraft operations data from the
MSASP (from 1998 to 2020) results in an operations growth rate of 0.71 percent or approximately
278 operations per year (y-intercept=-518,875; x-coefficient=278). The TAF data provides for a
growth rate which is more than double the MSASP rate at 1.55 percent or 553 operations per year
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 53
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Ka[ispe[[ City Airport
(y-intercept=-1,096,440; x-coefficient=566). With a projected population growth rate for Kalispell
of approximately 3 percent per year, both projected trends are below the growth rate of the local
community; with the estimates from the MSASP being well below the local rate.
Considering the economic factors affecting aviation operations, primarily fuel prices, it is reasonable
to conclude that aviation growth trends would be less than population growth trends. The growth
trend estimated from the data in the MSASP appears to be very low which does not seem to coincide
with recent growth in based aircraft. Therefore, the growth estimated from the data in the TAF
should be more reasonable and accurate and will be used for developing the forecasts in this study.
Total aircraft operations forecasts have been extrapolated using a regression analysis from the TAF
data to predict total aircraft operations through the year 2030. The regression equation was adjusted
to modify the y-intercept in order to meet the baseline operations of 14,000 established for 2011.
Table 4-11 summarizes the operations forecast for the planning period. Total aircraft operations
forecasts were calculated from the regression equation beginning with an adjusted operations
baseline of 14,000 operations per year. This baseline value is slightly higher than the actual field
counts obtained in 2010 and 2011 to account for poor weather conditions during the counting period.
Using a y-intercept of-1,124,226 and an x-coefficient of 566 total aircraft operations were
established for the planning period. The breakdown of local and itinerant operations was based on
the ratio of observed aircraft photographed at the airport during the observation period. Sixty-five
(65) percent of the operations were estimated to be local while the other 35 percent were itinerant.
TABLE 4-1 1
Aircraft Operations Forecast
•
2011 9,100 4,900 E 14,000
2015
10, 572 1
5.692
16, 264
2020
12L411
683
19 094
2025
14, 251 _
7 673
21,924
2030 1 16.090 8,664 1 24,754
SOURCE Forecast number of operations for years 2010 through 2030
calculated from regression analysis (y-intercept =--1,124,226; x-
coeffcient = 566) adjusted for baseline operations of 14,000 per
year
4.3.9 Critical Aircraft Forecast
Although the current forecasts only support a critical aircraft consistent with ARC A -I, the number
of operations from Approach Category B aircraft is very close to the 500 operations threshold and
should be adopted as the current Approach Category for this airport. The number of estimated
operations from Design Group 11 aircraft is, however, well below the threshold to support an
increase in standards at the airport at the present time. However, conditions are changing frequently
at this airport and one new based aircraft or itinerant aircraft with substantial operations in the B-II
category would be sufficient to warrant ARC B-II standards.
Runway width and length are likely the predominant factors limiting operations from larger and
higher performance aircraft at Kalispell City Airport. Standard Operating Procedures require pilots
to calculate the required length of runway needed for their particular aircraft at each specific airport
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 54
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Ka[ispe[[ City Airport
and under the expected environmental conditions they will be flying. For higher performance
aircraft, the current runway length of 3,600 feet is a deterrent to using this airport so most pilots
would choose to use Glacier Park International Airport. This is likely true for larger aircraft also.
Although Design Group 11 aircraft could conceivably operate at Kalispell City Airport, most pilots
would prefer the wider runways and navigational amenities available at GPI. It is probable;
however, that improvements made to widen and lengthen Runway 13/31 at Kalispell City would
increase activity from larger and higher performance aircraft, possibly attracting some of the
operations from aircraft presently using Glacier Park International Airport.
A final element to consider in determining the critical aircraft to support future development at
Kalispell City Airport is the long range planning goal for this important general aviation facility.
Kalispell City Airport is presently very user-friendly to pilots flying small, single -engine aircraft.
Improvements that widen and lengthen the existing runway are likely to attract a greater number of
operations from both itinerant aircraft and based aircraft in this higher performance aircraft category.
This may not be a desirable goal for the Airport Board or current users of the Kalispell City Airport
at this time. A significant increase in activity from this group of users may result in competition for
limited facilities on the Airport and ultimately diminish Kalispell's moniker as being "small aircraft
friendly". It may be advantageous for Kalispell City Airport to continue targeting small aircraft
users by planning for development that predominantly benefits this smaller category of aircraft.
Glacier Park International Airport would be able to support the aviation needs of more demanding
aircraft users.
In summary, the critical aircraft at Kalispell City Airport with a minimum of 500 annual operations
is typical of aircraft in Approach Category A and Design Group I (ARC A-1). However, planning
should account for an increase in design standards to the next level of approach category and design
group if possible. Approach Category B standards will likely be warranted in the near future and all
planning, design, and future development should meet the requirements for ARC B-I design
standards. The timing or the need to upgrade to Design Group II standards is not as certain. During
the past year, very few aircraft meeting Design Group II standards used this airport. Documented
operations were well below the 500 annual operations needed to justify a DG-II facility.
Historically, there is reported used by these larger aircraft but it does not seem to be consistent year
to year. It is very likely though that if the facilities were expanded to DG-I1 standards that
operations from these types of aircraft would increase. Therefore, for a similar reason as stated
above, the Kalispell City Airport should plan development consistent with a future upgrade to DG-II
standards.
4.4 Conclusions
Kalispell City Airport is located in the busiest aviation corridor in the state of Montana; Kalispell to
Hamilton. This corridor includes commercial airports Glacier Park International and Missoula
International; and general aviation airports Kalispell City, Polson, Ronan, St. Ignatius, Stevensville,
and Hamilton.
The Kalispell City Airport is servicing primarily small (less than 12,500 lbs) aircraft typical of the
Cessna 170 and 180 Series. The critical aircraft is currently consistent with the criteria for ARC A-1
aircraft.
Long range planning for the Kalispell City Airport should take into consideration the present mix of
users at the Kalispell City Airport and establish development goals which continue to support this
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 55
MASTER PLAN UPDATE — DRAFT
Ka[ispe[[ City Airport
group of users. Current aviation trends in Flathead County indicate that Glacier Park International
Airport, 8 nautical miles to the north, is able to support aircraft use typical of corporate and business
jet aircraft operating without runway length limitations. Glacier Park International Airport is also
able to accommodate higher performance or heavier aircraft that exceed the facility requirements at
Kalispell City Airport.
The Sponsor should establish planning and development goals for Kalispell City Airport which
target small aircraft users typical of ARC B-I while at the same time making every effort to
protect for the necessary improvements which would allow for a future upgrade to ARC B-II.
Chapter 4 Aviation Forecasts
Page 56