The largest airport capital programmes of 2026-27 are worth a combined figure in the hundreds of billions of dollars, and every one of them is a live procurement opportunity for a supplier reading this over a coffee between meetings. The scale varies wildly depending on where a promoter draws the line around a project, which is exactly why the numbers below carry a source and a date rather than a single quoted total.
Eight programmes stand out for 2026-27: a Saudi mega-hub still finding its final budget, a Polish state airport tied to new railways, a new Australian gateway weeks from opening, two major US terminal rebuilds, two UK runway schemes stuck at different stages of approval, and a North African airport upgrade running against a 2030 World Cup deadline. Each has a named promoter, a stated budget, and a supplier list that is either public or conspicuously still being assembled.
Why this matters to anyone selling into airports
When a government or an airport group commits capital at this scale, every supplier in the sector, from terminal architects down to baggage integrators and biometric gate vendors, reorganises its sales pipeline around the announcement. The promoter wants visibility for the same reason: a national infrastructure programme needs public support, and a construction contract award is free advertising for both sides. That is why this title tracks the announcement, the funding, the design and construction awards, the systems contracts and the opening date, on a rolling basis, rather than as a single news item.
The programmes, budgets and named contractors
| Programme | Promoter | Budget (as stated, dated) | Timeline | Contractors named so far |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| King Salman International Airport, Riyadh | Saudi General Authority of Civil Aviation / Matarat Holding | $30bn for the first phase at announcement in March 2022; wider reporting on the full six-runway masterplan has put the total closer to $100bn | Phase one targeted around 2030 | Foster + Partners named masterplan architect (2023); main construction and systems contracts not yet fully public |
| CPK (Centralny Port Komunikacyjny), Poland | CPK sp. z o.o., Polish state company | PLN 131bn (around $33bn) in CPK’s own investment plan updated December 2023, a figure that includes the associated rail lines, not the airport alone | Originally 2027, now targeted for the early 2030s after government review | Foster + Partners-led consortium won the terminal design competition in 2023; construction packages not yet awarded |
| Western Sydney Airport (Nancy-Bird Walton) | WSA Co, owned by the Australian and NSW governments | AU$5.3bn per WSA Co’s published cost estimate | Opening late 2026 | Multiplex reported as head contractor on the terminal building |
| New Terminal One, JFK, New York | New Terminal One LLC (Ferrovial, JLC Infrastructure, Carlyle, Ullico) under Port Authority agreement | $9.5bn at financial close, 2022 | Phase 1 opening 2026 | Tutor Perini general contractor; Ferrovial lead investor |
| Terminal F, Dallas Fort Worth (part of the Century Plan) | Dallas Fort Worth International Airport Board | Part of DFW’s own Century Plan, which the airport’s published materials put at over $9bn since 2018; no separate headline figure has been broken out for Terminal F alone | Terminal F targeted to open 2027 | Corgan design architect; Austin Commercial named among Century Plan contractors |
| Heathrow third runway, UK | Heathrow Airport Limited | Heathrow’s own submission to government, updated in 2026, puts the runway and supporting works at more than £21bn; wider airline and industry estimates covering airspace and access works have gone as high as £49bn | No confirmed start; construction not expected before the late 2020s | None awarded; project remains in planning under the UK’s Airports National Policy Statement |
| Gatwick northern runway, UK | Gatwick Airport Limited (VINCI Airports) | £2.2bn as published by Gatwick when the UK government approved the scheme in late 2025 | Runway operational for departures targeted from around 2029 | Enabling works being tendered; main contracts not yet publicly awarded |
| Airport upgrades tied to the 2030 World Cup, Morocco | ONDA (Office National Des Aéroports) | No single consolidated budget published; ONDA has described a multi-billion-dollar programme covering Casablanca Mohammed V, Marrakech Menara and Rabat-Salé | Deadline tied to the 2030 tournament, co-hosted with Spain and Portugal | Contractor awards not yet fully disclosed |
Source: promoter statements and published programme documents as dated in each row; figures compiled by Airport Business Magazine, September 2026.
The scope-and-figure problem, in practice
Riyadh’s airport is quoted at $30bn or $100bn depending on whether the figure covers the first terminal and runway pair or the full six-runway aerotropolis. CPK’s PLN 131bn includes railways that have nothing to do with the airfield. Heathrow’s own £21bn and the £49bn figure quoted by others differ mainly on whether airspace redesign and wider access works are included. None of these is a wrong number. They are answers to different questions, and a supplier quoting one figure to a client while the promoter is using another will look sloppy in a pitch meeting. The construction firms bidding into these programmes are compared on cost basis, scale and contract type in our terminal construction firms comparison, which is worth reading alongside any of the rows above before a tender response goes out.
The second wave: systems contracts once the concrete is poured
Every one of these programmes generates a second procurement cycle once the shell is up, and that is where most of the sector’s mid-sized suppliers actually make money. Baggage handling is contested between Vanderlande, BEUMER Group and specialist integrators such as Alstef Group, a comparison we cover in detail in our baggage handling system integrator comparison. Biometric boarding and common-use platforms typically go to SITA, IDEMIA or Amadeus, alongside smaller specialists such as Materna IPS, all of which are set out with costs in our biometric boarding vendor comparison. Airfield guidance and lighting contracts on new runways such as Gatwick’s typically go to specialists like ADB Safegate, and capacity or schedule optimisation on a new gateway such as Western Sydney is the kind of work Copenhagen Optimization and self-service bag drop specialist ICM Airport Technics chase directly, rather than waiting to be found.
The UK picture and how costs actually get recovered
Heathrow and Gatwick sit at different stages of the same regulatory process. Heathrow’s charges to airlines are set by the Civil Aviation Authority under its price control framework, currently running through the H7 period to 2026 with an H8 settlement due to follow; any runway spend has to be recovered through landing charges approved under that framework, which is why airlines dispute Heathrow’s own cost figures so hard. Gatwick’s northern runway scheme went through the separate planning route under the UK’s Airports National Policy Statement before the government approved it in late 2025, and its £2.2bn figure is the number Gatwick itself is accountable for at that stage of planning, before construction tenders reset it. Both are useful reference points for any airport elsewhere weighing a government-approved runway against a self-funded one, alongside the jobs case Heathrow has made for its own scheme in our earlier coverage of the 108,000-job analysis commissioned by Heathrow.
What Western Sydney and DFW show about opening-day pressure
Western Sydney Airport’s timeline is now down to weeks rather than years, and the systems testing work on that programme, including the trial flight run 54 days before opening covered here in August, is the stage every one of the other programmes in this table will eventually reach. DFW’s Terminal F sits inside a wider campus investment that also includes new hospitality capacity, such as the Hyatt House hotel that recently topped out on the DFW campus, a reminder that a capital programme rarely stops at the terminal fence line once an airport board has decided to spend.
How is an airport “capital programme” different from routine capex?
Routine capex covers ongoing maintenance and small upgrades funded from an airport’s normal operating budget. A capital programme, in the sense used here, is a discrete, publicly announced project such as a new terminal, a new runway or a new airport, usually with its own promoter, financing structure and named budget, separate from day-to-day spend.
Why do the same project’s costs vary so much between sources?
Because promoters, governments and independent analysts often draw the boundary of “the project” differently: one figure might cover only the airfield, another the airfield plus terminal, and another the full surrounding infrastructure such as rail links or access roads. Always check what is included before comparing two numbers.
How are these programmes typically funded?
The mix varies by country. Some, like CPK, are funded directly by the state. Others, like New Terminal One at JFK, are financed by private consortia repaid through airport revenues under a long-term agreement. UK schemes such as Heathrow’s and Gatwick’s are largely funded by the airport company itself and recovered through regulated airline charges over time.
When should a supplier approach a programme, at announcement or once contracts are tendered?
Early. Design and masterplanning contracts, like Foster + Partners’ work on Riyadh and CPK, are typically awarded years before construction starts, and systems suppliers who wait for a formal tender notice are often competing against companies that built a relationship with the promoter at the announcement stage.
Why do some programmes on this list have no contractors named yet?
Because planning approval and financial close normally happen before construction and systems contracts are tendered. Heathrow’s third runway, Gatwick’s northern runway and Morocco’s World Cup-linked programme are all at earlier stages than JFK’s New Terminal One or DFW’s Century Plan, where main contractors are already at work.
What to do next
- Check the promoter’s own investor or programme page directly for the current budget figure and its scope, rather than relying on a secondary summary that may have dropped the qualifying detail.
- Register with the relevant procurement portal or investor relations contact for programmes still at the design stage, since design and masterplanning awards happen well before construction tenders open.
- Cross-check any construction shortlist against our terminal construction firms comparison and the systems vendor comparisons linked above before drafting a pitch.
- Revisit each programme’s costed figure every time the promoter issues an update, and note what scope that new figure covers, since the number moves constantly on projects of this size.
