Click for next page ( 113


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 112
APPENDIX B Supplemental Information for Chapter 3 Appendix B1 Planning B-2 Appendix B2 Design and Construction B-10 Appendix B3 Terminal Operations B-12 Appendix B4 Airside Operations B-19 Appendix B5 Facilities Maintenance B-33 Appendix B6 Business Considerations B-37 Appendix B7 Business Considerations: Use Rate and B-51 Charge Models Appendix B8 Technology B-63 B-1

OCR for page 112
APPENDIX B1 Planning Initial Planning Steps The following first-step issues are presented for the airport operator when considering com- mon use: 1. Develop a Change in Airport and Airline Way of Thinking: a) Throughout the ranks of airport Management and airline Operations, common use is all too often considered as an "IT" issue. As a result, the decision to implement common use is based on justifications solely provided through the airport Technology organization. This is not to say that the technology justifications provided are not valid, but only that when common use is justified by technology alone, complete airport acceptance and buy- in may not have been achieved; especially over the long-term operations of common use. One airport operator interviewed noted that common use has always been driven from Technology up to Management. Therefore, they continually struggle with justifying the benefits of common use to Airport Management. b) Common use adds the best value when all divisions and management of the airport, along with its airline partners, contribute to the planning and business justification of the imple- mentation. As stated by one airport operator interviewed: "Success comes when culture change is from the Director on down." The following four points summarize the efforts of airport operators where common use has been proven successful over time: The decision to implement common use was driven by and supported from the Exec- utive level down Common use became a part of the airport culture Airline collaboration a must at every step of the process The decisions to implement common use were based on financial / fiscal benefit Drive more efficiencies through the facilities and keep cost down through reduction in capital. 2. Thoroughly Define the Business Reasons Behind Common Use: a) There are business reasons why an airport operator considers common use. Chapter 4 of this Reference Guide presents many of these reasons, with tool sets to help the airport operator determine its own business reasons. Important to note here, is that the business reasons should consider upfront, all airport divisional responsibilities. The airport oper- ator should work with the airport division managers to carefully evaluate each business reason and objective. In doing so, the airport operator must consider the road blocks ver- sus the benefit. A common use solution is not necessarily a fit for every airport. 3. Include Airlines as a Business Partner: a) A common mistake for airport operators is to plan the implementation of common use, without the input from its airline business partners. As noted above, successful common use installations always had the airlines as a critical and early part of the planning process. This often is not an easy decision, especially when airport operators have heard the statements B-2

OCR for page 112
Planning B-3 that U.S. airlines oppose common use. However, in considering the airline's position, often, it has been poor planning and execution that has led to the opposition. In general, airline opposition can be summarized by the following: When the common use installation opposes the airline business process. When cost of operation is higher than with a dedicated environment. When common use limits airline functionality. With that said, as stated by one airline interviewed: "We understand that there are airport locations and situations where common use can be of benefit. Where it makes good busi- ness sense, we will work with an airport. We would like to see a point where all applications (back office, agent facing, passenger facing) could be accommodated with common use. If this was achieved, costs would be reduced such that the airline's only infrastructure related role would be to go train users upon a new startup. If common use would evolve to a fully rich solution, then we would consider doing it at our largest locations as well." Noted below are statements made by airlines interviewed regarding the planning phases of airport common use installations. The airport operators must allow the airlines to be at the forefront of all discussions/ negotiations regarding common-use. Airport operators often engage in meaningful dialogue when common use issues are raised. Some airport operators are proactive and some are not. We generally discuss options with the local airport operators, once they decide to pursue common use. We then attempt to cooperate with the airport operator. Yes, most Airports Operators engage in consultation with the airlines regarding installation plans, but unfortunately there are also exceptions where the decisions are mandated and not consultative. Planning matters to us, because we deal with so many providers, that we can help pro- vide historical information on providers, and other situations. It always works better when we have the opportunity to provide consultation / input upfront. We look at the business case, and demonstrate how it will work for us. For example, increased capacity. We don't understand why common use always costs more. Airport operators typically justify common use through deferment of large capital costs, or by savings on airline operational costs, yet never has an airport operator sat down at the table and showed us these cost savings. Having prepared detailed spreadsheets producing cost comparisons of actionable data is important when trying to show an airline the cost benefit in going to common use. Even having cost avoidance issues such as, what does it cost to have a posi- tion out would be beneficial. Functionality is often based on the lowest common user which is a disincentive to those carriers who want to invest in more services and functionality. Decisions are made that we don't particularly agree with regarding equipment implemented b) Consider how best to keep the airline Partners active and participating in the on-going planning and continuous improvement process. Airlines and airport operators alike noted one of the best benefits to common use is the ability to continuously improve the process for the betterment of both parties. Constantly brainstorming ideas to do it cheaper or bet- ter is the life-blood of a common use installation. Open channels of communications are important. It is not enough, simply to set up a monthly meeting. One airport operator noted that in doing so, after time passed, no one was attending. Ideas noted included: Assign an airport staff member as liaison to the airlines. Through the liaison, various means of communication can be achieved In setting up monthly meetings, take into account the schedules of airline staff. Recog- nize that station personnel can more easily accommodate the on-site meeting, than

OCR for page 112
B-4 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports airline Properties and IT. Look ahead to when you might need airline Properties and / or IT representatives and schedule accordingly. Consider the formation of an airline consortium. This may be tied to long-term finan- cial support, and it may not. To implement a consortium effectively is challenging. As such, most airport operators have not pursued this approach. c) Establish a "loyal partner program," where criteria for the program are clearly presented to the Airlines. Such criteria may include reaching a set threshold for years of continued ser- vice. As part of the program, consider special arrangements with airlines achieving loyal partner status. Airports noted successful relationships can be formed in a positive manner, specifically regarding preferential and non-exclusive use arrangements. Some Airports extended this status to the dominant carrier. Although Airports reported good success in implementing such a program, care must be used in implementing such a program to make sure not to alienate the other airlines or violate Federal regulations regarding equal treat- ment of air carriers. d) Work with the airline partners to include not only the local station manager and staff, but also the corporate airline's staff as well. Airport Operational and Physical Characteristics 1. Airport Size: a) The FAA defines the airport size by its percent of airline passenger enplanements and cat- egorizes the airport under a "large, medium, small, or non-hub" classification. These are broken down as follows: Large hubs are all airports that account for 1 percent or more of total airline passenger enplanements. About 30 airports meet this threshold each year. Roughly 35 airports are categorized by FAA as "medium hubs" because they each account for between 0.25 and 0.99 percent of total airline enplanements. The next-busiest airports, described as "small hubs," account for 0.05 to 0.249 percent of enplanements; they total about 150. The remaining 300 or so commercial-service airports are referred to as "non-hubs," including about 100 (often only partly certificated) that are used by airlines on an irreg- ular or seasonal basis (Transportation Research Board, 2009, pp. 1112). b) Airport sizes, ranging from non-hub to large-hub are all finding benefit for common use. In fact, there is a growing trend of small-hub airports pursuing the implementation of common use. Typical factors considered, along with the size of the airport are: Capacity Constrained Airport Flexibility For medium and large hub airports, the amount of international carriers often dictate the need of some level of common use For small and non-hub airports, marketing and revenue opportunities often play a major role. For example, the small hub airport operator may determine that providing all of the ground control services, produces a revenue stream, and promotes a lower cost of entry for the airlines it attempts to attract. 2. Airport Physical Configuration: a) Airport physical configuration refers primarily to the layout of airport terminals, con- courses, and baggage handling systems. Figure B1-1, as shown on the next page, compares these configurations. b) Much like the airport size, the physical configuration does not necessarily dictate the ben- efit of common use, but it can have a significant impact on the viability of the implemen- tation of common use. In other words, for the same reasons as described under airport

OCR for page 112
Planning B-5 Figure B1-1. Physical airport configuration comparison. size, the various airport configurations can also benefit from common use. However, due to the physical configuration and limitations imposed, the cost of implementing common use may outweigh the benefit. Issues that should be considered include: Multi Terminal / Concourse configurations may limit the ability of splitting airline operations between the terminals and concourse. Issues such as signage, roadways, and baggage systems must all be taken into consideration. Certain layouts of the terminals, such as "X" Terminal layouts may hinder the ability of a common use ramp control tower's view of all operations. Airport operators have noted line of site (critical for effective airside operations) is far more advantageous with a lin- ear layout. Baggage handling systems separated and dedicated to specific areas of the terminal / concourse can also limit the effectiveness of a common use installation. 3. Airline Operations: a) Within any of the airports, an airline may operate what is referred to as "hub" operations. An airline hub operation is an airport that an airline uses as a transfer point to get passen- gers to their intended destination. It is part of a "hub and spoke" model where travelers move between airports, not served by direct flights. In contrast to an airline hub operation, airports served by a large amount of direct flights are typically referred to as "origination and destination" (O&D) airports. Many airlines also use "focus cities," which function much the same as hubs, but with fewer flights. Examples of each are shown below: Airline Hub Operations George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH). Continental services its hub operations here. O&D Las Vegas McCarran International Airport (LAS). Focus Cities Sacramento International Airport. Southwest Airlines considers this location as a focus city airport. b) Airline Operations has probably the greatest impact to both viability and benefit for com- mon use. The following considerations are included : O&D airports hold the greatest opportunity for airport wide common use considera- tions. In such cases, capacity constraints and facility flexibility issues are magnified when

OCR for page 112
B-6 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports the number of airlines operating at an airport begins to exceed the number of avail- able gates. Airports with airline hub operations show the greatest success for common use with the non-hub or spoke airline operations portions of the airport. As stated by some airlines interviewed, common use is often needed by the airline hub operations, in an over-flow situation. Counting the Costs of Common Use 1. Initial Assessment of Use Facility Flexibility: Facility flexibility is a key benefit to implementing common use. Many of the benefits asso- ciated with facility flexibility are identified in Chapter 4. In providing this flexibility, the air- port operator should also consider the following: Adding capacity during non-peak hours of operation may or may not result in new flights. Some airport operators consider non-peak hours as "dead zones," however, airport oper- ators have found through negotiations with airlines that accommodations can be made to fill the non-peak hours. Typically, airlines will consider the following: New entrant carriers - Is it the only slot(s) available? For flight times that can be adjusted, is there a cost benefit for me to do so? Other airport operational incentives Limitations in check-in counter space. A typical common use model is to maximize turns per gate, thereby avoiding "bricks and mortar" costs. Even though gate capacity may increase, an airport operator must ensure there is sufficient counter space to accommodate peak-hour operations. Key issues include: Consider gate occupancy time in comparison with available check-in counter occupancy time. Depending on aircraft size and passenger demographics (ex. number of passenger checking in before arriving at airport), the ratio between the two can change. However, typical ratios of required use per gate between check-in counter to gate counter can range from 2:1 to as high as 4:1. Consider number of check-in counters required per flight. Again, this ratio changes based on aircraft size and passenger demographics. Typical positions required for smaller air- crafts can range from 1 to 4, while larger aircrafts may require 4 to 6 check-in counter posi- tions. Some airport operators use a calculation of the number of passengers that a given aircraft type can carry divided by 50. The resultant is the number of check-in counters nec- essary to process passengers for the given aircraft type. Limitations in check-in counter operations. As with limitations in space, the airport oper- ator should consider limitations with the operations of the check-in counters. Key issues include: Counter configurations for common use, including: Millwork suitable for common use inserts Bag scales available for each counter position Counters configured for airline operations (collection of money for additional bag- gage, etc.). Counters configured related to baggage make-up areas. Even if there is a sufficient ratio of check-in counters to gate peak-operations, there may be counters dedicated to specific gates, due to the back wall belts serving specific baggage make-up areas. For an airport operator, it may be cost prohibitive to tie all baggage systems together. a) Depending on how well the original facility was balanced against peak hour usage, the air- port operator should consider the following facility limitations typically overlooked: Throughput capacity of in-line baggage screening compared with peak-operations under the planned common use model

OCR for page 112
Planning B-7 Potential choke points caused at security check points due to increased passenger flow Added congestion in hold room areas. 2. Assessing True Costs of Ownership with Common Use Assets: Common use typically results in the airport operator owning and maintaining more of the airport assets associated with the operation of a common use gate or other common use areas. As a result, the airport operator often is in a position of having to buy assets from the airline. In doing so, the following key issues should be considered: a) Ascertain the true value of the airline asset at the time of acceptance. The value of the airline-owned equipments is often times much higher than an airport operator planned to pay. Before finalizing cost estimates, it is wise to sit down and negotiate the true cost with the airline. To help with this process, one airport operator developed detailed equipment asset score cards. From the airport operator's perspective, it is important to be able to assess the value of all equipment. One specific example, where this airport operator was not pre- pared was in taking over a building. Roof conditions and other items were not evaluated, which ended up in a considerable amount of unplanned costs. b) Consider the cost of upgrade / replacement of major assets due to operational differences under common use. Boarding bridges are a good example. An airline may have purchased the boarding bridge for specific aircraft. In common use this boarding bridge may be in- adequate to service the various sizes of aircraft that the common use gate would be expected to accommodate. This one item can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars of unplanned costs. 3. Assessing True Costs of Services / Support: Throughout the sections of this chapter, service and support elements are discussed and drawn out. In planning for common use, the airport operator should consider these elements, along with the ones summarized here. This is not an easy assessment, and one that takes con- tinued re-evaluation. As one airport operator stated: "All airport divisions struggle with staffing issues. Over time, we have not had any real rationale for figuring out staffing needs: we try it to see what works." a) Consider the increase in operational hours support. Airlines are concerned that Aviation organizations are typically static and not equipped to manage the dynamic environment of common use. Increased hours of operations can affect any of the following: Operations Center some have gone to 24 X 7 X 365 Help Desk IT support Terminal Services, such as Janitorial Facilities Maintenance Airside Operations b) Consider the contract and labor issues. Organizational and contract hurdles can impact the effective support and operations of common use gates. Examples include: SkyCaps providing service to multiple airlines Wheelchair services Ramp Control Tower Operations 4. Assessing the Costs of Technology: Technology applications and infrastructure are discussed in detail later on in this Appen- dix. In planning for common use, the airport operator should carefully evaluate the impacts common use may have on its existing technology infrastructure. Key considerations include: a) Ownership of communications infrastructure and demarcation points between airport operator equipment and airline owned equipment. b) Costs of supporting technology systems such as Gate Management and others discussed later in this chapter. c) Operational costs of Technology support. d) Emerging Trends in Technology that may impact common use

OCR for page 112
B-8 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports Airport Procedural Considerations (Note: Many of these considerations are typically included as part of the lease process for com- mon use gates): 1. Use Criteria: a) Mandatory or Voluntary. Will common use be mandated or on a voluntary basis? This issue should be considered carefully. Many airports operators "mandate" common use, only to find themselves having to compromise on its own mandate. It is a good business practice to establish this in coordination with the airlines. The following issues and con- siderations have been noted: Define terms of mandatory and acceptable exceptions. Define rights in keeping an airline under common use verses preferential or exclusive use Define rights and costs of moving an airline under common use b) Take Back Criteria. What happens if an airline fails to meet the minimum use? This issue is important, since justification and costs for common use are typically determined based on a minimum aircraft turns per gate. Airport operators typically have take back defined in the airline lease agreement, but in practice, seldom reported the use of the clause. Never the less, for common use, having the right, when necessary has proven beneficial, being that the airport operator can "take back" the preferential or exclusive use gate and con- tract with the airline on a per-use basis. Take back criteria is generally based on an airline failing to meet the minimum use requirements, over a prescribed duration of time. Other basis have included, excessive dwell time per flight, airline mergers, and others. c) Give Back Criteria. Some airport operators have worked with the airlines to define a cri- terion so that airlines can give back common use facilities if the airline no longer wants them. The airport operator should determine if this approach will be appropriate for their airport, or if the take back criteria will be better or some combination thereof. d) Expansion of use. How will airlines be allowed to expand their operations into additional common use facilities if needed? 2. Use of Airline Assets and Equipment: In general, airlines prefer to maintain the right to use proprietary applications or equip- ment under prescribed conditions. One of the main reasons noted by airlines is when com- mon use hinders the airline's ability to conduct business as it requires. For example, at least two airlines have developed proprietary, sophisticated Gate Information Display Systems (GIDS). Current common use systems do not allow the display of these airline GIDS. At loca- tions where the airline has deemed it important, it has requested the right to install additional equipment and software, so that the GIDS could be displayed. Along with the above example, airport operators noted various instances where airlines use proprietary equipment at common use locations. Some of these instances are requested and approved; others are installed without the immediate knowledge of the airport operator. As with the example noted above, there can be valid situations where an airport operator may wish to allow the airline to use proprietary equipment at a common use location. To objec- tively address this situation, the airport operator should define upfront what the basis of deci- sion will be when a request of this is made by an airline. The following should be considered: a) Does the installation of the proprietary equipment interfere with the safe and/or efficient use of the common use system? b) Does the installation of the proprietary equipment go against the stated business objec- tive of the airport operator? c) Consider granting waivers when the airline business objective cannot be performed under the installed common use system. d) Consider granting the temporary use, in times of unique situations

OCR for page 112
Planning B-9 e) Consider strict guidelines of removal of equipment at each completed cycle of use for the airline. 3. Preparation of Policy and Procedural Documents: Airport Operators noted the need for the preparations of several policy and procedural doc- uments to help with the planning and operation of common use. Some of the documents may already exist; others would be specifically established for common use. Some of these include: a) Responsibilities Guidelines One stop location where airport operator and airline define the responsibilities of both parties b) Leasing Agreements modified to include specific common use requirements c) Gate Operations modified to include ramp control requirements d) Rates and Charges modified to include specific common use requirements e) Security Operations modified to include criteria for use of airport facility by one or more airline tenants f) Airline Operations Training The understanding and use of policies and procedures gov- erning common use. Airport operators noted that airline station managers are in and out at the airport. As a result, the policies and procedures put in place are not commonly understood. Continuous education would be a benefit.

OCR for page 112
APPENDIX B2 Design and Construction Initial Design 1. Coordination with Airlines: a) As is mentioned elsewhere in this Guide, coordination with the airlines operating at the air- port is paramount. In many cases, it is not just the airlines that will be initially affected by the construction project, but all airlines, as a move towards common use has the potential to impact other areas of the airport that were not considered a part of the original construc- tion project. b) Airlines should be brought in early in the initial design process so that their needs and requirements can be identified. It is important to remember that the airlines will be most affected by the decision to implement a common use strategy, and their input is important to success. c) The design manager should coordinate with the airline station, corporate, and IT person- nel, as each will have input into the initial design considerations. 2. Airport Culture: a) As discussed in the Planning section of this Appendix, the airport operator's culture will need to be considered, and possibly changed, in order to successfully implement common use. b) The airport operator's culture also can impact how decisions are made, and therefore the culture of each airport operator will ultimately affect how and if a decision to include com- mon use in the design project will be made. 3. Goals for Project: a) Not all construction projects lend themselves to include a common use element. The team must identify the goals of the project, and determine if these goals can be met implement- ing common use, or if they do not facilitate common use. b) If the project is not addressing passenger processing, then there is most likely no common use impact. c) If the project is to increase, or somehow affect passenger processing capacity, the airport operator should determine if common use will apply. 4. Non-Airport Drivers: a) It is understood that many projects have outside influences that affect the overall project. These should be identified in the initial design phase. b) If outside influences are identified, and common use is being considered, then the airport operator must determine if these outside influences will impact common use in a positive or negative way. 5. Airport Master Plan: a) As a construction project is considered, the impact to the overall airport master plan, and the airport layout plan, needs to be considered. These plans could be impacted should a con- struction project consider using common use. Future terminals, concourses, or gate require- ments may need to be reconsidered based on the impacts of a common use decision. B-10

OCR for page 112
Design and Construction B-11 6. Staffing: a) A staffing analysis should be performed to evaluate the need of IT specialists and others that will be required to properly operate and maintain the common use system. Design Cycle 1. Constructability Impacts: a) During the design cycle, the impacts of common use must be considered. For example, implementing a common cabling infrastructure will change the way that communications closets, conduit, and cable plant are designed. These affect the design in many ways, including cost. b) Coordination with other design disciplines is essential. Any technology project requires close coordination with disciplines such as electrical design, plumbing, and mechanical design. Construction 1. In-Field Design Changes: a) There is a high probability that the design of a project will be changed as the physical con- struction begins. These changes could have impacts on common use, and must be moni- tored appropriately. b) A Technology liaison should be considered for a construction project which includes common use. This technology liaison should work closely with the constructor and the designers to address any design changes, or construction issues that arise and affect the technology portions of common use. c) An Operations liaison should be considered for a construction project which includes com- mon use. This liaison should work closely with the constructor and designers to address any design changes, or construction issues that might affect the ultimate operation in com- mon use. d) Airlines should be coordinated with during the construction project to address in-field design changes. 2. Inspections: a) Inspecting is a critical part of any construction project. The inspectors will be looking for code violations, and safety violations, but there also needs to be an inspection for usability of the space. When a construction project includes common use, it is important that fre- quent inspections be conducted to ensure that the construction project is being completed in a way that meets the goals of the airport operator. Testing and Commissioning Impacts to passenger processing flow Impacts to existing facility systems and technology Test plans Commissioning plans Final acceptance

OCR for page 112
Technology B-65 Table B8-1. IATA CUPPS RFP guidelines (Sept 17, 2008). Source: CUPPS 2008. "IATA CUPPS RFP Guidelines", Sept 17 Retrieved May 16 2009 from http://www.cupps.aero/documents. c) Airlines have developed software work-arounds for the different ways platforms operate. While this makes the software appear to be one application capable of running anywhere, there are many customizations that need to be done to accommodate the kiosk devel- oper's individual approach to the CUSS 1.0 standard. This should be resolved in CUSS 1.2, however there is an open issue of how to migrate the existing base of CUSS kiosks from 1.0 to 1.2, while supporting the existing applications.

OCR for page 112
B-66 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports 2. Airport Performance Issues and Opportunities: a) As noted above, CUTE and CUSS are not always installed together. In fact, in the U.S. many airport operators are hesitant to install CUSS, primarily for two reasons: The focus for the U.S. airports has been on common use gates. Only recently have the airport operators begun to seriously investigate common use self service. The airlines have installed proprietary kiosks, which has deferred airport attentions. b) Airport operators should determine if the airline will be permitted to use its proprietary paper stock, or be required to use the common use paper stock. c) As with agent facing common use, paper stock and printers are a key component to a suc- cessful CUSS installation. The kiosks tend to need a larger supply of paper stock, as they are more difficult to re-stock than the agent facing common use printers. Because of this rea- son, the industry is beginning to favor the fan-fold paper stock, because of its higher stock capacity. d) Airline connectivity back to the host is required for CUSS kiosks. Airlines vary in the type of connectivity needed. Investigation is usually required to also determine if the existing circuits used to connect the agent facing common use can be reused for the CUSS connectivity. e) CUSS kiosks are becoming popular for remote check-in, both on the airport campus, such as rental car centers and parking garages, as well as off the airport campus, such as hotels, convention centers, and cruise ship terminals. Remote check-in presents other issues and risks, especially when baggage check-in is required. 3. Physical Considerations: Placement of CUSS kiosks is an important consideration. It is important for the airport operator to work with the airlines to make sure that the placement of the kiosks does not pre- vent the airlines from using them. As stated earlier, some airlines require that the kiosks be within sight of their agents for customer service/satisfaction considerations. Other airlines are fine with the kiosks installed further away to facilitate reducing passenger congestion in and around the check-in counters. 4. Staffing Considerations: Staffing considerations are addressed in the Technology Maintenance section. 5. Accessibility: a) Accessibility is a key issue for self-service kiosks. Several states are addressing accessibil- ity, as well as the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). According to the U.S. Access Board, a key area of interest for kiosks is that the kiosks be designed to accommo- date the ADA requirements for reach ranges, mobility, and accessibility. The state of Cal- ifornia has passed the California Civil code 54.9, which addresses the manufacturing of accessible self-service kiosks in airports. b) While self-service kiosks can be physically designed to accommodate accessibility issues, such as height, reach range, and other mobility challenges, the software provided by the airlines must also be designed to use any non-standard input devices that are added to the kiosk for better accessibility. This means the airport operator must partner with the air- lines to ensure that the applications can use the input devices to complete the check-in process. Airport Communications Infrastructure 1. Airline Issues and Opportunities: a) Airlines state that network connectivity into a common use environment is one of the key factors in poor performance of the application, and poor trouble-shooting ability. The air- port operator must work with the selected solution providers, and the airline information

OCR for page 112
Technology B-67 technology staff to ensure that the network is configured to support the airline's business processes. b) When implementing common use in an airport, the airport operator tends to not have an upgrade program in place to ensure that the technology solution remains current. Airlines have stated that many airports are so far behind in technology due to technology refresh rates of 5 years or more, that it forces the airline to keep multiple versions of the software in support due to the varying versions of the same technology solution. c) Conversely, airport operators need to work with airlines to ensure that a technology refresh in a common use environment does not adversely impact the airlines business. The airport operator needs to work closely with the airline information technology staff to ensure that the airline has software which will work on the planned technology upgrade. d) Airlines noted that airport operators should work to ensure the common use system has the necessary redundancies to ensure uptime is kept at acceptable standards. 2. Airport Performance Issues and Opportunities: a) Airport operators that provide a common communications infrastructure are able to bet- ter manage the pathways, resources, and space within the airport. Communications equip- ment takes space, which may otherwise be leasable, and adds to the overall costs of the airport. By providing a common infrastructure, the airport reduces the number of rooms required to support equipment, as the equipment can be shared by many tenants. b) Both passenger and agent facing common use systems have exhibited latency issues when using a wireless connection. This can be anything from slow response, to the system not functioning properly. Any design that includes a wireless component must be tested thor- oughly to ensure latency is not an issue. c) Support of airline connections system connectivity back to the airline host system is an issue that must be addressed early on. Some airlines allow an IP connection via a secure connection, while others require a dedicated lease line for point-to-point connectivity. Depending on the airline make-up at a particular airport, the common use systems must be able to support multiple connectivity options. d) Support of connectivity from airline back-offices to airline point of presence locations on airport campus. e) Network configurations the actual configuration of the network, and the protocols that an airport operator's network uses, has tremendous impacts on the ability to connect the common use system to the airline host system. The airport operator will need to work closely with the airline corporate information technology representatives to ensure that the network configuration will work with the airline's configuration. 3. Physical Considerations: a) IT infrastructure is supported and routed through telecommunication closets, main distribution rooms, and core network rooms. With regard to common use, the airport operator should consider the following: Will the closets and rooms require shared access by both the airport operator and air- line? If so, the airport operator should work with the airlines to establish proper access procedures. Security access control on all rooms. Will the airline tenants use the airport security access control system? b) Effective design of room spacing. To properly support a TCP/IP network, a commu- nications closet should be constructed within 300 feet of any point in the terminal where computer equipment will be installed. This is a standard in-building design cri- teria, due to the technical limitations of the cabling used. Communications closets can be connected using fiber, which allows for greater distances for TCP/IP networks. Equipment at the end devices usually requires copper cabling, and therefore is restricted to the 300-ft rule.

OCR for page 112
B-68 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports Common Use Supporting Systems and Software 1. Airline Issues and Opportunities: a) Most U.S. based airlines do not have a need for a local departure control system. This makes the business case for purchasing such a system very difficult. Many times, the LDCS is included as a part of the common use platform. Airport operators that install an LDCS do so for airport-specific customer service initiatives, to support charter airlines, or because it came as a part of the common use system. b) Airlines tend not to use airport operator supplied baggage reconciliation systems. In most cases, domestic flights do not use these services because they are not required to provide pos- itive bag matching on domestic flights. For international flights, most airlines use a propri- etary bag reconciliation system. c) Airlines provide many applications to their agents for the conducting of business processes. If these applications are not also written for common use by the airlines, the airline loses functionality at the counter to support their business process. d) Airlines today have to create data feeds for each airport specific to flight information. This creates large amounts of work and support as a new airport operator chooses to install dynamic displays for passenger information. The new AIDX standard will address this issue, and reduce overall costs and complexity for these data feeds for airlines. e) Airlines generally are concerned with problem reporting and resolution. 2. Airport Performance Issues and Opportunities: a) Local Departure Control Systems. Local departure control systems are implemented in com- mon use environments to support airlines that may not have their own departure control system to assign seats, and manage the boarding process. A charter airline is a typical exam- ple of an airline that does not normally have this capability. This is a customer service oppor- tunity for the airport operator, but is not usually a required element of common use. Other uses for an LDCS include use by an airline if the local station loses connectivity to their host system. b) Gate and Resource Management Systems. Airport operators may choose to implement a resource management system if the amount of resources that they are managing is large, or complex. Resources that could be managed by an RMS include gates, check-in counters, baggage claims, baggage make-up, hard stands, RONs, and other common use areas. RMS tends to be very complex, and can be difficult to use. The more sophisticated an operation is, managing ramp control tower, for example, will tend to use an RMS more often. Based on the particular need at the airport, a less complicated gate management system may be acceptable. c) Baggage Reconciliation System. Airport operators who install common use in their inter- national gates may consider installing a baggage reconciliation system to assist with positive bag match requirements for international flights. For domestic flights, positive bag match is not a requirement, and therefore most airport operators do not choose to install a BRS. A key concern for airport operators is how to manage the reconciliation, and if there is a need to use a local database or a global message clearing house. d) FIDS / BIDS Information Displays. These displays are a common building block system which airport operators install to improve customer service. Airport operators must work with airlines to ensure that the data feeds from the airline host systems are accurate, and that they provide the right updates at the right time. The industry is now working on a new data exchange standard, Airport Information Data Exchange (AIDX), which will standardize the data format so that airlines only have to create one data output, and airport operators can accept all data feeds from all airlines. e) GIDS Gate Information Displays. These displays are another form of information displays that provide specific flight related data at the gate, for the passenger. These systems

OCR for page 112
Technology B-69 generally are airline proprietary, and most airlines have not migrated their GIDs appli- cations to common use. Because of this, there currently does not exist a solution to sup- port proprietary GIDS on common use hardware. Airport operators need to decide if they are going to allow the airline to access their proprietary GIDs on the common use displays, or if the airport operator is going to provide a more generic common use GIDs. f) RIDS. These systems are used to provide flight information to ramp-side personnel. This information is used by those who are servicing the plane, as well as can be used by the ramp tower to help with visual verification of flight to gate status. With common use, it is critical that this flight information be driven from the operational database and the resource management system, if one is installed, so that all personnel know where the air- craft is to be parked, off-loaded, and reloaded. g) Operational Database. Operational databases are another building block that airport oper- ators install to support a migration of common use implementations. An OPDB is the underpinnings of the operational airport data that is used to operate systems such as the information displays, as well as resource management systems and other systems. Airport operators should consider installing an AODB as a key building block when moving to a common use environment. As shown in Figure B8-1 the AODB can facilitate data shar- ing, reduce data entry, and ensure that the data integrity throughout the airport opera- tor's systems is more maintainable. h) Dynamic Signage Airline Information, Wayfinding. Dynamic signage is a category of tech- nologies that includes any type of informational signage that can be updated via a com- puter. Included in dynamic signage are the flight based signage previously presented (FIDS, BIDS, GIDS, and RIDS). Other forms of dynamic signage include displays used above check-in counter to announce airline counter information, wayfinding, and visual paging displays. Dynamic signs have the ability to be used for any type of data content, but the actual use is dependent on the airport operator's business model and business decisions made by the airport operator and the airlines. i) Telephony. Telecommunications backbone, VoIP In a common use environment, telephony services are an important element. These services are provided to the airlines, either using analog or digital telephone switches, or via a VoIP system. When a VoIP sys- tem is used, it is possible to re-program the local handset to act as if it were on the airline's corporate-owned telephone switch, which reduces overall telephone charges by possibly removing long-distance charges from the service. j) Wireless. Wireless is generally provided to the travelling public by the airport operator as a customer service item. It may be free service, or paid service. Many airport operators are now considering installing wireless data services for business applications. This installa- tion includes support for operational use of airlines and other airport tenants. 3. Accessibility According to the U.S. Access Board, dynamic displays are a key item to support accessibility. Emerging Systems / Software and IT Issues Electronic Boarding Pass Scanners are now being installed in several airports to support the bar coded boarding pass initiative by IATA. This initiative allows the support of the boarding pass on handheld devices, such as cell phones. Several U.S. airlines have begun pilot trials at a limited number of airports, and are working closely with the TSA to complete the projects. The pilots allow passengers to use their cell phone or other handheld electronic device to act as a boarding pass, and the TSA has readers installed at the security check point for verifica- tion and authorization of the boarding pass and the passenger. The passenger approaches the dais, places their electronic bar coded boarding pass over the reader at the dais, and the reader

OCR for page 112
B-70 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports Figure B8-1. Air operations database (AODB). decodes the security features, and validates that the bar code is in fact a valid boarding pass. The TSA representative then performs an identification check, and the passenger proceeds through security if everything is checked as valid. One planning point for this technology is the communications infrastructure required at checkpoint areas. Common Bag Drop--IATA and ACI both have created working groups to look into a common bag drop solution. Although U.S. airport interest is growing, this emerging solution has not yet been piloted in the United States. Implementations have been done outside of the United States, and there is another ACRP report, Project 10-07, which will research common bag drop and self tagging.

OCR for page 112
Technology B-71 Self Tagging is another emerging technology that is currently in limited use outside of the United States. One of the most prominent implementations is in Montreal, Canada, where passengers are placing their own baggage tags on their luggage and then handing them to han- dling agents for induction into the baggage sortation system. Some of the issues to be resolved with self-tagging are the use of inactive/active tags, acceptance by the TSA, and quality con- trol with passenger's placing bag tags on the luggage. AIDX a subset of CUPPS, is a new data exchange standard that aims to simplify the exchange of flight data from airlines to airport operators. It is currently a subset of the CUPPS standard, and is a recommended practice from IATA, ATA and ACI. There are currently pilot imple- mentations occurring in Denver, Seattle, San Francisco, and Las Vegas. Business Continuity, PCI-DSS and Environmental Concerns Business continuity is the process of ensuring that the business can operate should a disaster occur which affects information technology systems. This is especially important for common use implementations, as the airport operator now owns information technology systems that are key to the airlines business operation. In order to meet service level expectations, the air- port operator should consider a business continuity plan that provides for redundant systems, data back up and retrieval, and even off-site duplication. It is paramount that the airport oper- ator conducts a business assessment to determine the types of risks that exist, if any of those risks are likely to occur, and the mitigation necessary to avoid critical down-time due to the occurrence of those risks. Sustainability is a key component in today's aviation environment. Sustainability can be as lit- tle as turning off monitors and computers when not in use, to full integration of building man- agement systems to reduce power consumption at low use times. Sustainability is also key in the design and construction process. ACI has created a working group under the BIT which is addressing the sustainability issues for IT. The payment card industry (PCI) security standards council, an assembly of major credit card companies (Visa, MasterCard, American Express, etc.), was formed to manage the ongoing evolution of the PCI Data Security Standard (DSS). The PCI DSS is a standard that was devel- oped to safeguard customer information and prevent credit card fraud. PCI DSS compliance is required in order to process credit cards. PCI compliance is required for those who (Security Standard Council, 2009): Collect Process Store or Transmit, Cardholder Data The standard has 12 requirements for compliance, which are: Build and Maintain a Secure Network Install and maintain a firewall configuration to protect cardholder data. Do not use vendor-supplied defaults for system passwords and other security parameters Protect Cardholder Data Protect stored cardholder data Encrypt transmission of cardholder data across open, public networks Maintain a Vulnerability Management Program Use and regularly update anti-virus software Develop and maintain secure systems and applications

OCR for page 112
B-72 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports Implement Strong Access Control measures. Restrict access to cardholder data by business need-to-know Assign a unique ID to each person with computer access Restrict physical access to cardholder data Regularly Monitor and Test Networks Track and monitor all access to network resources and cardholder data Regularly test security systems and processes Maintain an Information Security Policy Maintain a policy that addresses information security PCI DSS becomes important to an airport operator as they begin allowing systems that process credit cards to use airport operator owned equipment. Key systems for airport operators include parking, point of sales, and operations fee collections. As an airport moves into common use, the airport also needs to keep in mind that they will need to become certified to some level for PCI-DSS. All common use systems installed in airports which process credit card data, usually limited to customer self service (CUSS), and agent-facing common use (CUPPS), must be PCI DSS com- pliant. This will affect the network, the core infrastructure design, and the security of the telecommunications rooms, to name a few. Information Technology Maintenance 1. Airline Issues and Opportunities: a) The airline's primary concern is that the maintenance service is provided in a manner that meets the airline's business requirements. b) The airline's preference as to who provides the service varies depending upon the specific airline business model. Some airlines voiced strong opinions that they prefer maintenance support through the airport operator. For airlines that take this position, they believe that the airport operator is in the best position to sustain the management of the common use system while providing their tenants a high level of service, operational availability, consis- tency and coordination with all other operational entities at their airport. Other airlines voiced equally strong opinions that maintenance support be provided through third party companies contracted to the airlines through an airline CLUB or con- sortium arrangement. Through this method, the airlines have decision making power as to how the maintenance is provided on the systems they must rely on for aircraft board- ing and passenger processing. Airlines believe issues can be resolved quickly and efficiently when they are in control of the maintenance contracts. c) Some airlines stated that they have found airport operators are not always entirely knowl- edgeable on the systems and therefore, the services provided may not be adequate. d) A primary concern voiced by airlines is that the Service Level Agreements are often nego- tiated between the airport operator and the service provider with little airline input. e) Some airlines noted that when implemented properly, airport operators provide a very good maintenance service. f) Airlines noted that communication is important. Each airport can have their own poli- cies as to how maintenance is provided, which makes it difficult for the airline to stay cur- rent with how and what changes are going to be made. g) Along with communication issues, airlines noted a primary complaint is not having good communications with the airport operator regarding problem issues that may be between airline applications and airport provided technology systems and infrastructure.

OCR for page 112
Technology B-73 2. Airport Performance Issues and Opportunities: The following issues and opportunities are presented for consideration by the airport oper- ator, regarding the establishment of a maintenance program. a) Determine the maintenance model; whether it will be an airport or airline controlled model. Most likely, this decision will be determined based on the business objectives of the specific airport. At present, the airline controlled model is usually found at Large Hub Airports with common use predominately for the International traffic. Most other air- ports are selecting an airport controlled maintenance model. There are exceptions to this trend. At present, at least one small airport is pursuing an airline controlled maintenance model. b) Establish the goals of the maintenance program in coordination with the airlines. The items presented below for Service Level Agreements should be used as a starting point in the discussion. c) Determine responsibilities of support levels, where different support levels indicate a spe- cific extent of technical assistance. A typical breakdown of support levels is as follows: Level 1 First stop in attempting to answer all trouble calls. Helpdesk functions are typ- ically considered Level 1 support. These questions might include help with simple problems or general "how-to" questions. Most airports maintaining control of the maintenance program either are investigating, or already have moved to providing in-house staff as Level 1 support. Typical reasons given for this included: Providing Level 1 support is an easy addition to the already existing airport helpdesk function Economies of scale are achieved, generally with quicker response times Helps to maintain a level of in-house expertise. Level 2 Technician level generally handling more complex questions that are passed on from Level 1 support. Typically, an airport operator will outsource this level of support. However, airport operators with an experienced and skilled technician team may choose to handle Level 2 support in-house. It is important to note that Level 2 outsourced sup- port does not necessarily have to be with the system provider. Airport operators have noted very successful relations with vendors experienced with these types of applications. Level 3 Application support level, which requires knowledge of the software and hard- ware internals. Level 3 support is generally provided by the system provider. d) Determine requirements for a Service Level Agreement (SLA). The primary purpose of a SLA is for the airport operator, or airline to define what levels of service are required of the system provider. The SLA should not attempt to define how these requirements are to be satisfied. A separate document, which the supplier prepares, should detail how the SLA is executed. It is important to note that some airports have successfully provided mainte- nance support, with having a formal SLA in place. At present, 50% of the airports inter- viewed, did not have an SLA. However, the trend is moving toward using SLAs, especially with the advent of the CUPPS Technical Specifications. In preparing the Technical Speci- fications, IATA recommends the use of a SLA and provides a template SLA in the Techni- cal Specifications, to be used as a starting point. IATA presents the following reasons for establishing an SLA: To facilitate CUPPS implementations and to streamline the administrative and legal processes required of all CUPPS stakeholders Allows for quick customization by "plugging in" values into the SLA body The template has already been reviewed by airline, airport, and industry bodies, includ- ing ACI-NA's legal department, for acceptability and suitability in terms of its business, technical, and legal content The use of a template that is standardized across CUPPS sites provides the opportunity for users, suppliers, and providers to streamline their business and legal processes regarding SLA issues

OCR for page 112
B-74 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports In preparing the SLA, IATA also recommends the following subject areas be covered: Service Levels Hours of Operation Availability System Response Times Repair Levels Reporting of Faults Fault Reporting Responsibility Assignment of Security Levels On-Site and Off-Site Support Preventative Maintenance Environment and Asset Management Local Area Network (LAN) Physical Equipment Workstation Devices OS Patching Virus Protection Responsibilities Platform Provider Responsibilities Management of this SLA Performance Review Assumptions Resolution of Conflict Airport operators also noted that it was important to define what was not covered by the Platform Provider (or system provider), since aspects of the common use system, such as the IT infrastructure may already be in place and supported by others. e) Establish the Change Management Process in support of the SLA. As with the SLA, IATA recommends that the CUPPS SLA processes must be managed by a comprehensive, stan- dards-based change control process. The goal of change management is to ensure that meth- ods and procedures are used to efficiently and expeditiously handle changes to the common use platform and the applications or hardware that resides on the platform. In addition change management is used to minimize the impact of change related incidents or prob- lems upon the various systems and improve day-to-day operations. The airport operator should investigate industry recommendations, such as those produced by the Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL). Appendix A5 has also been included in the Guide for further help and information regarding change management processes and procedures. f) Implement a continuous improvement program. Through this program, establish a means to track problem calls, so as to resolve issues that continually occur. One airport operator has initiated a program similar to this. Table B8-2 shows the frequency and type of trouble calls. Note the excessive printer issues. 3. Staffing Considerations: The following list of IT Support staff members may be required. The actual number of staff may vary, depending on size and type of installation. a) Technology Liaison with airlines responsibilities include coordinating regular airline meetings, including focus meetings on problem resolution and continuous improvement; and project management. This person will help to resolve airline issues as noted in this section. b) Level 1 Technician Support Helpdesk Technician c) Level 2 Technician Support d) Training The airport operator will have to provide ongoing training as staff members are migrated in and out of support roles.

OCR for page 112
Technology B-75 Table B8-2. Frequency and types of problem calls. Common Use System Problem Calls - Issue Classifications (12 month Period)