National Academies Press: OpenBook

Common Use Facilities and Equipment at Airports (2008)

Chapter: Chapter Four - Airports Implementing Common Use

« Previous: Chapter Three - Advantages and Disadvantages of Common Use
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Four - Airports Implementing Common Use." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Common Use Facilities and Equipment at Airports. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14164.
×
Page 17
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Four - Airports Implementing Common Use." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Common Use Facilities and Equipment at Airports. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14164.
×
Page 18
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Four - Airports Implementing Common Use." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Common Use Facilities and Equipment at Airports. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14164.
×
Page 19
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Four - Airports Implementing Common Use." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Common Use Facilities and Equipment at Airports. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14164.
×
Page 20

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

17 For an airport that is fully exclusive use, common use is a major shift in philosophy. Many areas of an airport’s opera- tions will be affected when the airport operator chooses to move along the common use continuum. In doing so, the air- port operator must consider the impact of common use on all areas of airport operations. It has been shown that the pri- mary areas where airports are most affected when changing to common use include: • Technology, • Physical plant, • Competition planning, • Fiscal management, and • Maintenance and support. TECHNOLOGY Many of the solutions that help to move an airport along the common use continuum involve technology. Technology can be used to facilitate the multi-use of gates and ticket counters, as well as to manage gate assignments and bag- gage carousel assignments. In an exclusive use airport, the airport operator typically provides the basic services such as conditioned air and electricity. In an airport that is moving along the common use continuum, the airport operator becomes responsible for providing a greater number of ser- vices. As such, the airport operator is forced to become much more aware and involved in the management and sta- tus of its facility and its use. Technology offers many tools to help an airport manage the limited resources it provides to the airlines. Development of an airport’s common use strategy should include the involvement of the airport’s technology organization. Com- mon use implementations are a cooperative effort among operations, business management, technology, facilities management, and senior management. These functions need to have input into the full common use strategy for it to suc- ceed. When an airport is considering a common use strategy there is typically a need to upgrade and/or procure new tech- nologies. The airport operator must have access to people who understand technology and specifically the common use technology being considered. Although not all-inclusive, Table 2, which can be found in chapter three, presents technologies found to have various levels of use/benefit in the common use continuum and varying impacts on airport operations. It is important to note that each airport is affected differently. For example, an airport servicing 10 million or more pas- sengers a year may find great benefit in using geographic in- formation systems to help manage common use lease space, where smaller airports can be managed cost-effectively with- out the use of this technology. Also, note that each of the technologies listed are general categories that potentially include many technology systems. PHYSICAL PLANT Common use impacts the airport facility in many ways, some of which create benefits not previously available to the air- port operator. For example, common use enables the airport operator to move airlines from one gate to another to facili- tate construction and maintenance of existing gate areas. In an exclusive use airport, if construction around an ex- isting gate must be performed, the airline has to move its operations to another exclusive use gate that may already be fully utilized. Under a common use strategy, the airport op- erator can move the scheduled airline operations to another gate that is not being used, according to the resource man- agement schedule. This allows for construction to occur without interrupting flight operations and without affecting the local station manager’s already scheduled flights. Along with its benefits, common use affects an airport in ways that require additional management of the physical plant. The following general areas affecting airports that implement the common use continuum were noted: • Standardized counters; • Signage; • Off-gate parking; • Technology infrastructure closets and core rooms and Intermediate Distribution Frames (IDFs) and Main Dis- tribution Frames (MDFs); and • Passenger, concessionaire, and vendor communications. Standardized Counters Airport operators often attempt to standardize ticket and gate counters. Typically, airports migrating from an exclusive use environment have existing counters that are conventional hard- CHAPTER FOUR AIRPORTS—IMPLEMENTING COMMON USE

faced surfaces. The lengths of the counters for each airline will vary, reflecting the individual designs that were installed over time. Several of the counter positions may have been retrofitted or changed out by the airlines to include self-service units imbedded in the counters. In the common use environment, any counter (gate or ticket) specifically configured for an airline must be reconfigured in a manner that allows that counter to be used by any airline. This standardization may also reveal that although the gates and ticket counters look the same, the over- all dimensions of the gates and ticket counters can be drastically different. This podium size standardization can enable the air- port operator to gain useable space at the gates and additional ticket counters at the check-in desks. Signage Airport operators often replace static signage with dynamic signage designed for common use. The primary areas include ticket and gate counters, but also may include new areas where free-standing CUSS kiosks have been installed. Al- though it is not necessary to change to dynamic signage, it is more efficient than using static signage. The change in sign- age may require reinforcement or reconstruction of the back walls to ensure that the walls or overhead are sturdy enough to support the weight of dynamic signage. Off-Gate Parking Airport operators changing to common use often need to re- consider space needed to park aircraft. In an exclusive use airport, airlines may choose to park an aircraft at their exclu- sive use gate. In a common use airport, parking an aircraft at a gate may not be considered a valid use of the gate. When calculating physical space needs, airport operators must factor in the off-gate space required to park aircraft that pre- viously were parked at a gate. This change results in new parking formulas that allow the airport operator to calculate accurately the required off-gate parking per use of gate by a given airline. Figure 5 shows an example of off-gate parking. 18 Technology Infrastructure Closets/Intermediate Distribution Frames/Main Distribution Frames/Core Rooms Airport operators often require additional rooms and closets and utility resources for use with communications infrastruc- ture, network electronics, and computer servers/workstations to implement the common use systems. Depending on the de- cisions the airport operator makes regarding management of these rooms, access control and other security measures can also be affected. Other shared uses of space noted include training rooms and testing facilities. It should be noted that these spaces can also generate rental revenue while main- taining an overall common use approach. Passenger, Concessionaire, and Vendor Communications Airport operators need to consider the impact of common use on passengers, concessionaires, and other vendors at the air- port. When an airport is full common use, passengers can become disoriented and confused as to where to find their flight. It is important that an airport that chooses to move to a full common use model enhance way-finding and other modes of communication to passengers. Concessionaires are also affected by common use, because the products they sell are marketed based on the airlines that are operating. Airport operators need to maintain good communications with vendors and concessionaires so they will know which airlines are operating out of which terminals or concourses. In this way, they can appropriately target their product selec- tion to the airline clientele served in various airport locations. COMPETITION PLANNING As presented in previous chapters, it has been determined that there are many reasons why airport operators choose to move toward common use. For U.S. airports that receive FAA grants and passenger facility charges (PFCs), the air- port operator is obligated to ensure access for new entrant airlines. In some cases, the FAA requires the airport operator to submit a competition plan that defines how competitive access is achieved. Usually it is only a limited number of large- and medium-sized hub airports that the FAA will determine need to prepare and submit such a plan. These air- ports are characterized by having one or two airlines control- ling more than 50% of the annual passenger enplanements. For those airports that are required to prepare a competition plan, movement along the common use continuum can be a part of the strategy that is outlined in their plans. FISCAL MANAGEMENT Changes in technology, space management, and services resulting from the common use implementation affect the fiscal requirements and financial management of the airportFIGURE 5 Off-gate parking.

19 operator. Some effects are obvious, whereas others are fre- quently overlooked. The following fiscal requirements were noted: • Accounting efficiency, • Usage fee calculations, • Physical infrastructure costs, and • Capital planning. Accounting Efficiency Common use has an immediate impact on the accounting ef- ficiency of an airport. As a result of the more efficient use of existing space, the airport operator can more closely monitor the use of airport facilities. This can equal better accounting of enplanement fees, as well as other fees charged to airlines. With the use of tools such as an operational database, the airport operator can get an earlier look at the data needed to calculate fees charged to an airline. Flight information data, combined with gate utilization, provide the airport operator with real-time data and allows for closer monitoring of the fees reported by airlines. Airport operators can also “load-balance” their airport, thus creating a friendlier environment for passengers. In an exclusive use airport, there are certain times of day when all carriers in a geographically close area have peak activity. In a common use airport, the airport can spread that peak activ- ity around to different areas of the terminals, thus allowing for better passenger flow through the airport. Usage Fee Calculations Airport operators track the actual usage of gate and ticket counter assignments and charge airlines accordingly. When an agent logs into the common use system, or when the air- port operator uses gate management, data are collected that give a clear picture of when a gate or counter is occupied, and when it is not. The result is accurate charges to an airline for its specific use. The rates and charges for a common use airport become much more focused to the exact utilization of the airport, rather than simply charging an airline for a gate lease. This level of charging compels the airport operator to be more diligent in tracking an airline’s actual use of the airport’s facilities than under a non-common use strategy. The airport operator adjusts the existing financial models to account for the more detailed billing, as well as for data collected for backup of the billing process. Depending on the specific rea- sons at each airport, the airport operator determines how to charge, or if to charge, for the common use systems imple- mented at the airport. If the airport operator chooses to embed the common use operational costs into the rates and charges, the need for detailed billing is diminished, and is necessary only for the operations of signatory and itinerant airlines. Physical Infrastructure Costs In addition to any system costs incurred in common use, air- port operators must account for costs of physical infrastruc- ture that an airline traditionally installs to facilitate the use of gates. One major cost that tends to be overlooked is jet or loading bridges. At many airports, it is the airlines that own the loading bridges, not the airports. Once a gate is converted to common use, the airport operator typically assumes own- ership of the jet bridge. This could entail purchasing new jet bridges or purchasing the existing jet bridges from the cur- rent carriers. One hidden risk of such a purchase is that a jet bridge that was acceptable for use before common use im- plementation may become “unusable” after the common use implementation. Airport operators are establishing new charging models resulting from common use implementation, such as the cost of parking aircraft. Typically, once a gate is converted to common use, on-gate parking may become a nonlegitimate use of the gate, except where the gate is not needed for nor- mal operations. If a flight needs to use the gate for enplaning or deplaning, then the aircraft parked at the gate must be moved. Although the movement of the aircraft is the airline’s responsibility, the actual space used to park the aircraft may need to be accounted for in the charges to the airline. Capital Planning Finally, airport operators noted that the implementation of common use requires careful planning for the future. The air- port operator is able to defer and possibly reduce capital expenditures to build additional gates, concourses, or termi- nals. Airport traffic continues to increase, in most cases, therefore it is improbable to assert that common use will pre- vent construction expenditures. The flexibility and efficiency of common use enable the airport operator to plan better for growth, allowing for the management of landing fees, rates and charges, and other fees that increase owing to increased capital expenditures. This flexibility allows the airport oper- ator to plan future changes, utilize capital funds differently, or simply defer expenditures until absolutely necessary. In the event that land is not available for expansion, the airport operator is able to derive maximum utilization of existing physical resources through implementation of common use systems. Airport operators must also consider the planning for, and funding of, replacement of assets that were not considered before. This includes CUTE systems, CUSS kiosks, passenger loading bridges, baggage sys- tems, etc. MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT Airport operators noted the increase in requirements for maintaining and supporting existing and new items resulting

from the common use implementation. The following areas found for this report included: • New equipment maintenance, • Technology support, and • Risk considerations. New Equipment Maintenance Airport operators must be ready to maintain equipment that they may not have had to maintain previously. Jet bridges, for example, become the airport’s responsibility. The airport operator must either have the staff qualified to maintain jet bridges or contract with a vendor that can provide those ser- vices. Maintenance of equipment such as jet bridges and common use systems that are needed to operate an airline re- quires high availability of personnel to do the work. Airport operators must consider service-level agreements for main- tenance and response times that may not currently be in- cluded in existing operations. Ticket and gate counters may also require additional maintenance. If an airport does not already own the ticket and gate counters, they will have to add these areas to their main- tenance rotation and be prepared to repair any damage. If an airport operator chooses to remodel the counters, it needs to keep in mind the access of equipment and the maintainabil- ity of the counters themselves. Technology Support Technology support is also required in a common use airport. Whether an airport operator hires a third party to perform technology support, or hires its own support staff, the need for a trained tech-support staff increases tremendously in a common use environment. The diversity in types of systems 20 also requires diversity in support staff. The airport operator must consider database administrators, system administra- tors, equipment maintenance staff, and other technologists to maintain the many different aspects of the system. The airport operator also must consider the size of the staff required to provide the necessary service-level agree- ments to support flight operations. This may include 24-7 support, quick response times, and high availability. Net- work redundancy and availability also need to be factored into the technology support functions. Vendor selection is critical to technology support. When an airport operator chooses a common use vendor to supply and install its com- mon use technology, the airport operator must also evaluate the vendor’s ability to provide staff support and training. It has been indicated through interviews with airlines and air- ports that some vendors have difficulty providing training for the local support staff, and that knowledge gained at one site is not transferred effectively to other support sites. Risk Considerations As with any project, it is important for airports to consider the risks involved in moving along the common use contin- uum. Because common use affects so many areas of an air- port’s operations, there are many types of risks associated with implementing common use that need to be considered. For example, such risks can include labor contracts, impacts on other tenants, security, passenger push-back, and airline acceptance, to name a few. Airports should also consider the impact on other airline operations that could result if one air- line’s service is delayed and affects the airport operator’s ability to assign gates to other airlines. The airport operator must analyze these potential risks, determine the likelihood that any of them could become an issue, and then decide whether or not it is willing to accept these risks.

Next: Chapter Five - Airlines Operating in Common Use »
Common Use Facilities and Equipment at Airports Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Synthesis 8: Common Use Facilities and Equipment at Airports explores common use technology that enables an airport operator to take space that has previously been exclusive to a single airline and make it available for use by multiple airlines and their passengers.

View information about the February 9, 2010 TRB Webinar, which featured this report.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!