Tweed-New Haven Airport. Environmental Assessment.

The discussion around Tweed-New Haven Airport is heating up. As the Environmental Assessment is finalized and is soon to be made public, let’s use some critical thinking skills.

Just as we should question public officials and policy makers, we too should question citizen action groups. Where and how we get our facts is critically important. So too is determining fact from fiction.

Speaking of fiction.
With this in mind, I do not question the validity of environmental concerns nor do I question the credentialed opinions of those versed in the environment . What I question is their public relations and methodology in communicating supposed facts about HVN. Many of their core arguments are based on blatant fallacies, mischaracterizations and an inability to understand basic aviation concepts. This leads to a convincing fear campaign.

Little has changed?

This is a classic mischaracterization of not just Tweed…but many airports. Nonetheless, to presuppose “nothing has changed” since 1931 is entirely wrong. Little has changed since? To take this statement at face value (as those at Save Our Shoreline wish for you to do) you’d think this airport was a Farmers Field just a few years ago and is now blossoming into a giant.

Little has changed since 1931? Does the development of the entire aviation industry over the course of 100+ years not count as change? Since 1931, Tweed New Haven Airport has changed immensely. Let’s see, since approximately 1931:

1. Two runways were built.

2. Numerous taxiways were constructed.

3. An Air Traffic Control Tower (two in fact) was built.

4. A passenger Terminal was built.

5. Aircraft Hangars were constructed.

6. Navigational aids and airport lighting were installed.

7. Commercial Jet service was initiated:

The Airport has seen the likes of United Airlines, Eastern Airlines, American, Allegheny Airlines and the Express (Commuter affiliate) versions of Continental, USAirways, Delta, Northwest, Trans World Airlines. All of these airlines have served Tweed over the many years of its existence using not just Turboprops, but Jets.

The statement made by “Save Our Shoreline” would have you believe Tweed New Haven Airport was a grass runway until last year. That’s a mischaracterization. It’s also mischievous. This statement plays on your empathies for neighbors around the airport. Tweed didn’t just ‘expand’ over night. Tweed has been improving since 1931. The airport developing in the way it has over the years is no “overnight” affair.

But wait, there’s more!

You tell us that the runway will be extended to a similar length to that of LaGuardia. What you fail to share however, is that LaGuardia is an entirely different airport layout, serving a market multiple times that of HVN and that LGA is used in an entirely different way than Tweed from an aviation infrastructure standpoint. You’re comparing Seagulls to to Starfish. And in so doing, you’re trying to create a public uproar. Your basis for scaring people to see your view only is false.

Tweed-New Haven Airport cannot be made to be as busy as LaGuardia Airport because the runway is lengthened. Airports don’t work that way.

You tell us the airport will cater to large jets. It already does and has in the past. AVELO’s 737 jets accommodate from 147 to 189 passengers. Tweed Airport and the market it serves have no need for bigger aircraft. Further, unless you have someone with aeronautical experience on your team ( who understands aircraft performance) , you would know that the proposed runway length (6,635 feet) at HVN is not extraordinarily long at all when it comes to the takeoff and landing performance of Large, Transport Category Aircraft. By lengthening its runway, HVN will better serve the kinds of aircraft it presently (and in years past) handles.

Simply, the new runway length at HVN will be a modest improvement in terms of aircraft performance. Such a runway length (6,635 feet) is largely inadequate for anything larger than a 737 (or similar type) aircraft. Period. Actual data and performance specifications prove this point.

Where’s my package! Not at Tweed.
The Airport will serve freight? How so? Where is your evidence? Because you say so? We need better than that. Further…and to my point above, aircraft that operate exclusively as freight aircraft are incredibly sensitive to runway performance parameters. The whole premise of a cargo-only aircraft is to operate at the maximum weight possible (weight = revenue). This in-turn makes runway length for cargo air carriers incredibly important. As proposed, Tweed Airport’s increased runway length would be highly restrictive to a cargo only jet operator. This is yet again something your staff of experts seems to be entirely unaware of…yet they have not stopped promoting this farcical idea. Show us how freight is a consideration for HVN and how it would be viable considering the above performance issues.

Rock around the clock?
The airport will be 24/7? It already is.

If you knew anything about airports, you’d stop sensationalizing this very ridiculous and needless point. Almost every single airport in the country is 24/7. Airports are rarely closed. It takes circumstances such as runway snow and ice, aircraft incidents and other unique factors to actually close an airport. When you read this article, HVN will be open. When you are sleeping, HVN will be open. Nothing is changing about this fact.

One Terminal & Six gates. Just like now.
In your third and fourth points about the terminal and airport parking, you forget to leave out one very important detail. The new Terminal and Parking lot will replace the current terminal and parking facilities. This new project will NOT BE IN ADDITION TO, BUT RATHER TO REPLACE. By failing to mention this subtle, but huge point, you are purposely misleading the public in order to promote your view. Or, like some in your camp, do you actually believe multiple terminals will be built at Tweed? In either case, shame on you for neglect of all the facts and an atrocious misunderstanding .

🛑 Stop Exaggerating the truth!
Regurgitation of simple numbers…number of gates…runway length…are entirely irrelevant until you know how to relate them to the various facets of aviation operations. From what I have seen of the HVN opposition, they make inferences without relating one single quantifiable fact to their statements about Tweed Airport.

Until you understand various facets of aircraft operations, air traffic control and the design of airports, you cannot make accurate statements on how such things effect the environment.

As to your last point, I will defer to your wisdom. I am not a Politician, A Political Scientist nor a Public Relations Expert. What I will say, is that like all public use, commercial service airports, Tweed Airport will always be under the purview of numerous regulatory agencies. The FAA and myriad other alphabet agencies will continue to oversee, monitor and enforce requirements on the airport…no matter who is running the show.

The entire Tweed New-Haven Airport dialogue has been muddled due to misinformation. Groups such as “10,000 Hawks” are the primary perpetrators of this misinformation. They continue to be…subtly now…as groups like “Save our Shoreline” have taken up their cause. The above communication I used as the basis of this article is testament to a persistent problem with Tweed (and all airports) New Haven Airport…MISINFORMATION.