Air Cargo Facility Planning and Development—Final Report (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 121-134
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 121... ...
Page 5-1 CHAPTER 5: TASK 3 -- DATA COLLECTION PLAN, FIELDWORK AND INVENTORY PROCESSES CHAPTER OVERVIEW This technical report explains the ACRP 03-24 study data collection plan and implementation. The research team used a two-prong approach in the data collection task.
|
From page 122... ...
Page 5-2 body international passenger service by more than one passenger airline and/or airports with international wide-body freighter service on a daily basis. Case Study Airport Selection – Our team member's geographic locations placed them in proximity to hub airports in the Ohio Valley (DHL-CVG, Rickenbacker-Columbus, and FedEx-IND)
|
From page 123... ...
Page 5-3 is one of two primary air cargo airports in the region since UPS and DHL operate cargo jet and turboprop feeder aircraft at the airport. Kansas City International Airport was added to the list of case study airports because of familiarity of the airport to the research team.
|
From page 124... ...
Page 5-4 contacted by the team member assigned to visit the airport. A cover letter was developed for team members to distribute during their initial contacts to invite airport management to participate.
|
From page 125... ...
Page 5-5 Survey Revisions – After the initial field work at AUS, members of the research team rewrote survey questions and rearranged ordering of questions for both surveys based on comments received from the airport planner and cargo businesses at AUS. Panel member comments were incorporated into the final version of the surveys as well.
|
From page 126... ...
Page 5-6 Table 5-2 Air Cargo Case Study Airports – Team Assignments. Airport Code Interview Date AUS April 18 DSM April 25 ATL May 10-12 DEN May 16-17 MSY May 29 DFW*
|
From page 127... ...
Page 5-7 • fueling, deicing, and other servicing facilities • ramps and docks • off-airport facilities • access and egress components • security and customs clearance facilities; and others, as appropriate Information on the attributes of each facility were collected such as: age of the structure, its original purpose, number of truck docks/gate access, the type of tenant and the type and density of commodities commonly handled. Additional data will include whether the facility has storage racks, slides and conveyors for sortation, ceiling height, equipment use (forklifts, belt loaders)
|
From page 128... ...
Page 5-8 Data Collection Survey Tools Since this project focuses on air cargo facilities, specifically the development of new planning metrics in their design, survey tools were developed to gather information on the utilization and traffic flow related to on airport air cargo buildings. Two surveys were developed which included a survey of airport management and a survey designed to gather information from private sector air cargo businesses.
|
From page 129... ...
Page 5-9 Table 5-3 System Airports Invited to Participate in ACRP 03-24 Surveys. Code Airport Name Emailed Response Survey Completed ABQ Albuquerque International Yes Yes ANC Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport Yes Yes BFI Boeing Field Yes Yes BHM Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International No response BNA Nashville International Airport Yes Yes BTR Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport No response BTV Burlington International Airport No response BWI Baltimore/Washington International Airport Yes Yes CAE Columbia Metropolitan Airport No response CID The Eastern Iowa Airport Yes CLE Cleveland-Hopkins International No response DAY Dayton Intl No response DLH Duluth International Declined ELM Elmira/Corning Regional Airport No response ELP El Paso International Airport No response ERI Erie International Airport No response EWR Newark Liberty Intl Airport Yes FAI Fairbanks International Airport Yes Yes FLL Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International No response FWA Fort Wayne International Airport Declined GFK Grand Forks No response GSP Greenville-Spartanburg International Yes Yes GTF Great Falls Intl No response HLN Helena Regional Airport No response HSV Huntsville International Airport No response IWA Phoenix-Mesa Gateway No response JAN Jackson-Evers International Yes Yes JAX Jacksonville International Airport Yes Yes JFK John F
|
From page 130... ...
Page 5-10 Code Airport Name Emailed Response Survey Completed PHL Philadelphia International Airport Yes Yes PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor International Yes Yes PIT Pittsburgh International Airport Declined PVD Theodore Francis Green State Airport No response Yes PWM Portland International Jetport No response RNO Reno-Tahoe International Airport Yes RSW Southwest Florida International Airport Yes Yes SAN San Diego International Airport No response SDF Louisville Regional Airport Authority Yes Yes SLC Salt Lake City International No response SMF Sacramento International Airport Forwarded internally STL St Louis Lambert International Airport Yes Yes TPA Tampa International Airport No response TUL Tulsa International Airport Declined TVF Thief River Falls Regional No response SOURCE: CDM Smith. Distribution of Airport Planning Department Surveys – The Airport Planning Department Survey was distributed to the 15 case study airports via email after they had agreed to participate.
|
From page 131... ...
Page 5-11 then targets data collection on cargo activity with three questions followed by 21 questions asking detailed questions regarding their facilities and operations. The questionnaire delves further into airside facilities with six questions covering truck parking, aircraft operations, ramp space, and GSE storage.
|
From page 132... ...
Page 5-12 given an added level of scrutiny. Approximately 20 Air Cargo Business Surveys have been completed and returned; however, surveys continue to arrive and the data entered into the database.
|
From page 133... ...
Page 5-13 Anecdotal evidence of airport planners and tenants points to "survey fatigue." One airport planner at a case study airport began our interview stating that "it is very difficult for airport planning and engineering departments to complete these types of surveys." Although many planning departments had interns or entry level personnel complete the survey it still takes considerable oversight from management and has to be fitted into their day-to-day operations and projects. Additionally, one cargo business indicated during an interview that they not only recently completed our ACRP survey, but also an Ohio Department of Transportation Freight Study survey as well as a survey for their airport's economic impact study.
|
From page 134... ...
Page 5-14 • A separate, brief two page Air Forwarders Survey was developed. This survey was sent to the headquarters of the 15 of the largest air forwarders in the U.S.; to local air forwarder stations at case study airports; and to a wide range of air forwarders in the Chicago market area.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.