ace

AIRSIDE CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT

Airport Operations

volume 3
To register your copy of the ACE package and request or
download additional material or amendments please go to
www.eurocontrol.int/airports

© 2007 EUROCONTROL
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement 2 3
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement

T
About
VOLUME 3
HIS volume contains detailed
material on all aspects of
airside capacity enhancement
relevant to airport operators.
It also touches briefly on the land-side factors that
may influence capacity through their complex
interactions with the air-side issues.
The leading role and corresponding responsibilities
of the airport operator are described and
explained.
The concept of ‘measure to manage’ is
introduced followed by detailed descriptions of how
to conduct performance studies and how to
measure performance.
A whole section deals with the analysis of the
results, highlighting the need for trust, anonymity
and a no-blame culture.
Guidance is given on how to improve the airport
infrastructure, both in terms of pavements and
facilities such as lighting, signs and markings.
The need to improve existing facilities before
necessarily constructing new ones is especially
highlighted. The subject of Rapid Exit Taxiways
(RETs), their design, location and use, is treated in
detail as is the importance of traffic mix and
scheduling.
Land-side issues and environmental aspects are
also addressed at the end of the Volume.
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
4 5
Contents
VOLUME
The role of Airport operations in the
capacity enhancement process
.............................Chapter 3.0, page 8
3 Best Practices – Runway Exits
Airport Operator
– Leading the Working Groups
...........................Chapter 3.1, page 10
Performance Management
– Measure to Manage
.............................Chapter 3.2, page11
Conducting performance studies
.................................................. page 12
Performance measurement ... page 13
Example of Runway Occupancy Time
Measurement – LVNL Amsterdam
................................................. page 15
Reaction times and runway occupancy
time analysis ............................ page 15
Disseminating the results ........ page 18
Improving the Infrastructure
...........................Chapter 3.3, page 20
Position of RETs ...................... page 22
Number of RETs ...................... page 22
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
........................Chapter 3.3.1, page 23
Sequencing and optimisation of
Airport traffic
...........................Chapter 3.4, page 24
Traffic Schedule ..................... page 25
Schedule coordination ........... page 27
Key Ground Factors
...........................Chapter 3.5, page 28
Airport access ......................... page 28
The airport facilities ................. page 29
Boarding Gates ...................... page 31
Ramp resources ..................... page 31
Environmental Aspects
...........................Chapter 3.6, page 32
Practical mitigation measures
................................................. page 33
Key Actions Checklist for Airport
Operators
...........................Chapter 3.7, page 34
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement 6 7
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement

3
Glossary of abbreviations
A/C Aircraft
ACE Airside Capacity Enhancement
AIP Aeronautical Information Publication
AIR Runway Controller

Navigating
APC Approach Control
APT Alternate Parallel Taxiway/Taxilane
ATC Air Traffic Control
ATCO Air Traffic Control Officer
ATM
AWS
Air Traffic Management
All Weather Safeguarding VOLUME
BAA British Airports Authority
CAMACA Commonly Agreed Methodology for
Airside Capacity Assessment AIRPORT OPERATOR SEQUENCING AND
CDM Collaborative Decision Making - LEADING THE WORKING OPTIMISATION OF AIRPORT
CFMU Central Flow Management Unit GROUPS TRAFFIC
CTOT Calculated Take Off Time Taking the initiative in fostering a cul- The link between traffic mix, sequenc-
FRLC Flight Crew Reaction Time to Line-up Clearance ture of working together ing and schedule coordination
FRTT Flight Crew Reaction Time to Take-off Clearance Chapter 3.1 Chapter 3.4
GMC Ground Movement Controller
GMP Ground Movement Planning (controller) PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT KEY GROUND FACTORS
HIRO High Intensity Runway Operations - MEASURE TO MANAGE The influence of landside and airside
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation The process of improving efficiency issues on airport capacity
IFR Instrument Flight Rules through operational performance Chapter 3.5
ILS Instrument Landing System measurement
LUPT Line-up Time V3/10 Chapter 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS
LVP Low Visibility Procedures Practical management of the
MDI Minimum Departure Interval IMPROVING INFRASTRUCTURE environmental impact of enhanced
NPR Noise Preferential Routing How airport infrastructure plays a key airport capacity
OJT On the Job Training role in the effectiveness of improved Chapter 3.6
PIATA Plus Performance Indicators Analysis Tool for Airports pilot and controller performance
RAT Runway Access Taxiway Chapter 3.3 KEY ACTIONS CHECKLIST
RET Rapid Exit Taxiway A quick reminder of the key actions for
ROT Runway Occupancy Time Airport Operators contained in volume 3
ROTA Runway Occupancy Time On Arrival Infrastructure Chapter 3.7
ROTD Runway Occupancy Time on Departure
plays a key role
RTF Radio Telephony
RVR Runway Visual Range
SID Standard Instrument Departure
SMR Surface Movement Radar
STATFOR EUROCONTROL Strategic Forecast
TC Terminal Control
TMA Terminal Manoeuvring Area
TORA Take-off Run Available
TRM Tower Resource Management
VCR Visual Control Room (Tower cab)
WIP Work in Progress
 ace
3.0
Airside Capacity Enhancement
The Role of Airport Operations in the Capacity
Enhancement Process
AIRPORT operators form an
important focal point for the
actions to improve airside
capacity.
Their contribution is typically threefold:
•• Convening airport partners meetings
Performance monitoring and
feedback
• Investing in infrastructure
improvements, such as rapid exit
taxiways, where appropriate
Convening Airport Partners
Meetings
Airport operators have a
particular role in fostering and
facilitating collaboration between
the partners: aircraft operators
using the airport, ground
handlers, the organisation
providing air traffic control service
at the airport as well as the
surrounding airspace, etc.
The airport operator usually
convenes an airport working
group which meets on a regular
basis to manage measurement
exercises and to monitor, analyse
and disseminate the results.
Performance Monitoring and
Feedback
The purpose of monitoring runway
occupancy and flight crew reaction
times, and analysing and distributing
this data, is to encourage all aircraft
operators to improve their performance
8 9
in this respect, while still ensuring safe
operation.
In most cases, airlines are the obvious
partners for these performance
enhancing exercises. However, at some
airports non-airline aircraft operators
may have a significant impact. The
generic term “aircraft operator” is used
to cover all cases as appropriate.
Airport operator is the focal point
Regular runway occupancy time and
pilot reaction time measurements are a
key element in capacity enhancement.
The process must be managed carefully
though, as there are particular safety
and confidentiality issues involved (see
Chapter 3.2).
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
Improve the effectiveness of existing
facilities
Investing in Infrastructure
Improvements
Airports may, where appropriate,
invest in infrastructure improvements to
increase airside capacity (see Chapter
3.3). Improvements may include
equipping runways with the required
entry and exit points together with
facilities to allow optimum departure
sequence to be established from a pool
of traffic waiting close to the runway.
Visual aids, including signs, markings
and lighting play an important role in a
pilot’s situational awareness (position
and speed) especially on and around
Rapid Exit Taxiways (RETs). They must
be used correctly and in accordance
with the applicable ICAO provisions
(ICAO Annex 14 refers).
Infrastructure improvements concern
not only investments in facilities like
new taxiways, but also investments in
improving the effectiveness of existing
facilities.
A key actions checklist for use by
airports, followed by a list of best
practices for the various studies that
may be considered is provided at the
end of this volume.
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement

3.1
Airport Operator
10 11

3.2
Performance Management
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement

– Leading the Working Groups – Measure to Manage

ALL partners at an airport (Aircraft THE purpose of monitoring confidentiality concerns that must be
Operators, Ground Handlers, Air Navigation flight crew performance in addressed.
Service Provider, and Airport Operator) terms of runway usage, and The following key principles should
have a common interest in running their analysing and distributing this be followed to alleviate or eliminate the
business safely, efficiently and profitably. data, is to encourage all aircraft concerns:
Each partner’s operations normally affect all other
airport partners. It is therefore essential that all airport
partners work together in ensuring that the available
capacity is utilised to the maximum and that new ways
operators to improve
performance to best-in-class
level, while still ensuring a safe
operation.
• The safety culture should not be
challenged, but safety should not be
used as an excuse to maintain the
are found to increase capacity whenever required and Any measure that influences the status quo. A safety based review of
possible. behaviour of flight crews on or near the performance is essential
It is essential for one of the airport partners to take runway raises certain safety and
the initiative and start the capacity enhancement
activity. The airport operator is usually in the best
position to do so. By proving to all concerned that
supporting capacity enhancement is in their direct Review the outcome of the process
interest, and by guaranteeing confidentiality of Collect data on and partners’ comments to improve
information and fostering a no blame culture, the main individual movements the process or presentation for the
obstacles to collaboration are eliminated and next round of measurements
participation can usually be secured.
The groups and forums used as part of the
EUROCONTROL Airside Capacity Enhancement
V3/15 process constitute an important platform to foster and
facilitate an attitude of working together. These must Analyse data and
include all the partners at the airport, including pilots, prepare pilot
Leading the working controllers, their respective airlines and the service performance indicators
group providers, but also ground handlers and of course the
airport operator itself. More detail of these groups and
forums are contained in Volume 2.
Review results with air traffic Arrange follow-up meetings with
control service provider: carriers and prepare material
Early involvement of partners on all Distribute results for carrier’s internal use
levels, wide buy-in and developing a how should the result
be interpreted? as required
sense of ownership is the key to the What message should
success of capacity enhancement be promulgated?
initiatives.

Figure 3-1 The process of measuring performance

 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.2 continued
Performance Management
- Measure to Manage
• An objective approach must be used
in all respects
•
In order to enable the adoption of
standard methods of measurement,
flight crews should have a common
measure of performance at all
European airports
• Confidentiality needs to be
maintained and professional
sensitivities taken into account when
comparing flight crew performance
•
Continuous improvement in the
process should be sought.
The process of measuring performance
is outlined in Figure 3-1.
Air traffic control performance (in
terms of runway usage) is covered in
Volume 4.
Conducting Performance
Studies
Obtaining the co-operation of pilots for
such performance studies is not difficult
if the objectives are clearly
defined and communicated
properly. It is important to
explain that ROT has a
direct link with runway
capacity.
Studies carried out by
EUROCONTROL show
that:
• Decreasing ROT on
departure will increase
runway capacity
ROT has a direct link with capacity
12
• Decreasing ROT on arrival has a
significant impact on capacity,
particularly for mixed-mode runway
operations during arrival peaks
Each study should at least be aimed at:
• Allowing individual aircraft operators
to compare the performance of their
fleet with other similar fleets
(determining ‘best- in-class’ in the
process)
• Allowing operators to identify areas
where time efficiencies could be gained;
• Ensuring any efficiency gains be at
the discretion of the aircraft operators,
within current safety standards;
• Raising local runway occupancy
issues and modifying procedures to
improve their effectiveness;
• Being a service to aircraft operators
(not just a management exercise).
Each study must have close and
active involvement of pilots and
13
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
Only consider time intervals representing
pilot performance
controllers. There must be a clear
understanding that the results
considered will be the performance of
the core group, and will exclude
extremes.
For the purposes of a pilot
performance study, only time intervals
that represent pilot performance should
be considered. For example, Runway
Occupancy Time on Departure (ROTD)
is a global function of controller
instructions as well as pilot performance
and cannot therefore be considered to
assess pilots’ performance.
The time intervals that can be
controlled by pilots are:
• FRLC - Flight crew reaction time to
line-up clearance
•• LUPT - Line-up time
FRTT - Flight crew reaction time to
take-off clearance
• ROTA - Runway occupancy time on
arrival
The exact definition of these time
Performance Measurement
intervals must be agreed between the
partners and the definitions applied
The actual measurements may be
consistently to ensure comparable carried out by the airport operator or the
results and credible figures in the longer
air traffic control service provider or the
term
Anonymity at both an
individual and aircraft
two in co-operation.
The important thing to remember is
that the trust based relationship must be
safeguarded irrespective of the actual
operator level is an working arrangements.
absolute necessity.
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.2 continued
Performance Management
– Measure to Manage
There are also some principles for collecting data.
A statistically significant number of samples must be
collected to enable a meaningful comparison between
fleets.
Focus on significant differences between fleet times
and the ‘best-in-class.’
Analyse trends, making sure that the effects of
variations due to weather, observer subjectivity and
incidental flight deck issues are properly eliminated.
Runway occupancy time measurements must be
accurate. Measurements can be made by a team of
observers equipped with stopwatches or by automated
means.
The team take measurements either from a central
observation point or several positions close to the
runway. Automatic systems can use in-the-field
sensors and data from surveillance systems.
Factors negatively influencing manual observation
accuracy are, among others, parallax effects,
subjectivity and perception. Hence to increase
accuracy, and ensure that the ROT statistics are
reliable, airports are increasingly looking towards
automation, especially where this can be realised cost
effectively.
Deploying dedicated sensors purely for performance
measurements is not economically viable. However,
there is an increasing need for position and movement
information on all vehicles, including aircraft, operating
on an airport for safety and traffic management
purposes. The input data of the necessary accuracy
required for automated performance measurements
will be increasingly available in the future from the new
airport surveillance and control systems (such as
Multilateration), making automated measurements
cost-effective.
Whether the measurement is performed manually or
by automated means, procedures must be in place to
eliminate data that would distort the analysis. Data
from situations in which FRLC and FRTT are not
relevant, for example when an aircraft does not have
14 15
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
to stop at the runway holding point, must also be
V3/19 V3/23 excluded from the analysis.
ROT measurements Analysis must be based Measurement accuracy is important. In
an environment where the difference
must be accurate on a no-blame culture
between the best-in-class and others is
a matter of seconds, high accuracy is
required.
Example of Runway Occupancy Time
Measurement – LVNL Amsterdam
At Schiphol Airport, ROT was measured by one
digital stopwatch per observer per runway. The
observations were made from the aerodrome control
tower which provides a clear view of both the
thresholds and the exit taxiways. The time data is
synchronised to the Dutch speaking clock service. An
accuracy of +/- 4 seconds was achieved due to the
substantial distance from the threshold and the exit
taxiways and parallax effects.
Average ROT data are classified according to runway
in use, type of aircraft, aircraft operator and other
factors. The measurements and analysis extended
also to the runway occupancy time on arrival per exit
taxiway.
Reaction Times and Runway Occupancy
Time Analysis
The analysis must be based on a no-blame
culture. The focus is to be on fleet results rather
than on individual flights.
The data is classified into different groups
representing the fleets of common, or similar, aircraft
types. The data in each group, excluding the
extremes, is then defined as the ‘core’ group (see
figure 3-2).
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.2 continued
Performance Management
– Measure to Manage
Figure 3-2 Results analysis
The measured times will be excluded
in the following cases:
• Aircraft that took an excessively long
time to react to a clearance - this may
be safety-related, for example caused
16
by additional flight crew checks.
• The most rapid responses – these
are not likely to be consistentl
repeatable and hence distort the
overall picture.
Several methods can be used to
17
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
identify extraneous results, such as
disallowing results within a given
percentile.
In order to identify ‘best-in-class’, the
results are then sorted by aircraft
operator and fleet (with separate target
times for each fleet). A calculation is
made to determine the percentage of
each core group that equals or betters
the target time. The aircraft operator
with the highest percentage is then
named ‘best-in-class’ and the remainder
are ranked against it.
Standard deviations for the core
groups can be used as a measure of
the consistency of operation of each
aircraft operator.
To evaluate the results, it is necessary
to carefully examine the trends and
determine what the actual situation
really represents.
For example, if the difference in the
average performance between the best-
in-class and the others is decreasing;
• the others may have improved whilst
the best-in-class remained unchanged
• the performance of the best-in-class
may have deteriorated;
• a combination of the two
Obviously, an unexpected
improvement in one fleet automatically
degrades the performance of the V3/27
others. Clearly, some interpretation of
the results based on trends is essential.
A case study on user performance
measurement at Gatwick and
Heathrow airports is given in Vol. 4,
Section 2.
Case studies are given in Vol.4
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.2 continued
Performance Management
– Measure to Manage
When comparing studies
on a regular basis, it is the
relative performance that is
significant.
Disseminating the Results
Before disseminating the results to
aircraft operators, the airport operator
and air navigation service provider
should review the analysis.
A thorough understanding of how the
results were obtained is essential.
For example, the core pilot group
extracted in one performance
measurement may be different from
that in another and the intention is not
to compare them as such.
The feedback to aircraft operators on
pilot performance measurements is
extremely important. Large benefits are
gained when airport operations
directors discuss survey findings with
the users to generate practical steps to
improve performance.
It is
relative
performance
that is
significant
18
Generally, the Operations Director will
write to all aircraft operators and invite,
in particular, the major airlines to review
the results of the year. At these
meetings the facilitator may also offer to
prepare further data for the airlines
suitable for presenting to its own
management and pilots.
In publishing the results, anonymity is
maintained to support the no-blame
culture but permit individual operators to
assess the merit of their own operation
in an objective fashion.
Each aircraft operator should be
presented with a copy of the complete
study report and offered a face-to-face
debrief between the study management
team and their designated
representative (typically the Chief Pilot).
The debrief focuses on the ‘best-in-
class’ graph, and will highlight any
observed practices that may have
affected the ranking.
Creation of customised reports should
be possible to enable comparison of the
V3/30
19
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
various fleets operated by the airline
(e.g. B737 versus B757). Large ranges •• Rationale for the study
Composition of the study team
in a fleet’s performance may imply
training issues. If the range of •• Data collection method used
Data analysis method used
performance of a fleet is significantly
greater than the best-in-class, the
training regime may be producing
• Results, including graphical
presentation of de-identified best-in-
class ranking and standard
inconsistent behaviour. deviation/range of core group times
The exercise should be repeated after
a period of time to evaluate the trends.
Repetition every six months would
• Operational practices or trends
observed/noted that may explain the
results or add useful information
appear to be the most appropriate from
both an operational and cost
perspective.
• Plans for follow up activities
Identifying features will at
all times be replaced by
anonymous identification.
Each aircraft operator will
be told its own
identification number only.
Recommended content of a Study
Report
Anonymity
of data is
paramount
V3/32
 ace
3.3
Airside Capacity Enhancement
Improving the
Infrastructure
THE lay-out and equipment of
an airport play an important
role in the effectiveness of the
measures to improve pilot and
controller performance.
Efforts to minimise runway occupancy
time through improved pilot and
controller performance require runways
to be equipped with sufficient entry and
exit points for the expected traffic mix
and facilities to allow the optimum
departure sequence to be established
from a pool of traffic waiting close to the
runway.
Pilots also need to be able to
determine their position in relation to
runway entry and exit points as well as
their speed (and deceleration).
Investments in the infrastructure, like
new taxiways and improved lights, do
provide substantial returns. At the same
time, improving existing facilities should
not be forgotten as these usually
represent very cost effective solutions.
Even minor changes to taxiways can
bring significant benefits. For example,
in the UK, Manchester Airport achieved
substantial operational improvements
by the addition of ‘fillets’ to improve
access to taxiways.
Visual aids
Lights, signs and markings employed
at an airport play an important role in a
pilot’s situational awareness (position,
speed, direction to follow).
To minimise runway occupancy time,
pilots need to identify their nominated
exit as early as possible during roll-out
20
Layout and equipment
play an important role
V3/33
so that they can adjust deceleration
accordingly or make an early decision
to continue to the next exit.
As soon as possible after touchdown,
a pilot needs to
• locate the preferred (or nominated)
exit
•• determine the distance to go
assess speed and deceleration
ICAO Annex 14 and the
Aerodrome Design Manual Doc
9157 contain the provisions and
guidance on providing visual
aids at aerodromes.
There is mounting evidence that
runway exit visibility may be improved
by RETILS - Runway Exit Taxiway
Indicator Lighting System. The use of
RETILS is recommended in ICAO EUR
Doc. 013 European Guidance Material
on Aerodrome Operations under
Limited Visibility Conditions.
21
Rapid exit taxiways (RET)
RET design is not simple: the RET
needs to match consistent performance
from a range of aircraft and pilot
performance. For example, exits should
not be designed and located to match
the performance of the ’best’ pilots or
aircraft type.
Rapid exit taxiways are crucial in
minimising runway occupancy time - but
only if they are correctly designed,
positioned and well marked. The
efficiency of a RET depends on how
well it is matched in design and
positioning to the performance of the
aircraft and pilots comprising the
expected (design) traffic mix.
A single world-wide standard for RET
design would promise many
advantages: pilots become familiar with
their configuration, improving
operational consistency which in turn
enables airside capacity to be
increased. The ICAO design is currently
the most widely used, particularly in
Europe, but there are other common
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
V3/34
designs such as the FAA standard as
well as site-specific designs such as
those to be found at Paris CDG.
In some cases the space between the
runway and main taxiway is insufficient
to accommodate the ICAO RET, which
has a straight portion for deceleration
before joining the taxiway system. In
such cases the FAA modified design
(widely used in the US) may be more
appropriate: it compensates for the lack
of a straight portion by enabling the
aircraft to decelerate whilst turning off
the runway. It is also wider than the
ICAO exit, giving the aircraft more
space to deviate from the taxiway
centreline.
RET exit angles smaller than the
ICAO recommended minimum of 25°,
may help compensate for shorter
straight sections, but aircraft, particularly
heavy aircraft, may take longer to
vacate the runway strip.
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.3 continued
Improving the
Infrastructure
If pilots are to be
encouraged to exit at
relatively high speeds, it is
important that the exit
design allow safe
deceleration.
Position of RETs
In order for maximum benefit to be
derived from the design of a RET, the
runway has to equipped with a series of
such exits, correctly positioned with
respect to the performance
characteristics of the expected or
‘design’ traffic mix.
The FAA estimates that a 30m
reduction in the distance between
V3/35
Exit design allows safe deceleration
22
threshold and exit reduces runway
occupancy time by 0.75 seconds.
However, the runway occupancy time of
an aircraft which overruns an exit
increases by 0.75 seconds for each
30m it has to travel to the next exit.
Guidance on the positioning and
number of exits is given in ICAO Annex
14, the Aerodrome Design Manual (Doc
9157) and FAA Advisory Circular
150/5300-13 (Airport Design). These
documents separate aircraft into four
performance bands based on threshold
speeds in the case of ICAO and aircraft
weight in the case of the FAA. However,
a better assessment of the correct
position and number of exits could
perhaps be obtained through a detailed
examination of the performance
characteristics of the actual fleet mix
expected to use the runway.
A third method for determining the
optimum position and number of RETs
is by computer simulation.
Number of RETs
The fleet mix being designed for is the
critical factor in determining the number
of RETs required. This information can
only be obtained locally, through a
collaborative process involving the
airport and aircraft operators.
The overall aim should be to have a
minimum number of exits, positioned so
as to ‘capture’ the largest percentage of
traffic, with the lowest average runway
occupancy time for each category and
for the overall runway.
23
3.3.1
Best Practices
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
– Runway Exits
WITH the exception of the final ‘stop end’
exit, all exits to be used by landing traffic
should be RETs.
RETs should be designed in accordance with ICAO
Annex 14 with reference to the ICAO Aerodrome
Design Manual (Doc 9157). In cases where the
distance between the runway and taxiway is
insufficient, the exit angle should be reduced to less V3/36
than 25° to a minimum of 20° or the
FAA ‘modified’ standard should be
used.
RETs should be positioned
according to the predicted
performance of the ‘design’ fleet
mix, accounting for potential
improvements in exit speed.
Assessing fleet performance should
be done with the major aircraft
operators, using actual performance
data relating to aircraft types, landing
weights, operating practices and
ambient conditions.
Perpendicular exits may be
retained for use by crossing traffic.
Airports should recommend preferred RETs by
aircraft type and promulgate it through the AIP.
ICAO standard centreline lights and marking
should be provided for all RETs.
Distance-to-go information should be provided to the
pilot by RETILS for night/reduced visibility and V3/38
equivalent markings for day/good visibility conditions.
Distance-to-go
information is critical at
night
 ace
3.4
Airside Capacity Enhancement

Sequencing and optimisation of Airport traffic

24 25
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement

IN theory, additional airport The traffic mix is defined for a given

capacity may be gained by
optimising the sequence of
traffic. This mainly applies to airports
that operate at maximum capacity for
sustained periods of time.
Airport slot allocation, currently being
addressed by the European
Commission, puts certain limits on how
traffic may be sequenced. Hence, in
practice, airports have little strategic
control over traffic sequencing even if
air traffic control may always sequence
traffic within the airport slot allocation
limits. It is important to understand the
effects of slot allocation on sequencing
and vice versa in order to optimise
tactical decision making.
period (peak hour / day) as the
proportion of each aircraft group.
The group classification scheme is
based on factors that affect the
required separation between aircraft:
wake vortex category, speed profile,
SID, runway occupancy time, etc.
The link between traffic mix and
sequence can be established from a
probabilistic point of view. For a given
traffic mix, there are various possible
combinations of arrival or departure
sequences. Consequently, the resulting
runway capacity is a function of traffic
sequence as shown on Figure 3-3.
Figure 3-4 Average delay versus demand

The extremes of the distribution The performance of an airport can be

Figure 3-3 Traffic mix and capacity
correspond, from a capacity point of
view, to the best and the worst final
sequences for the given traffic mix. If
several resulting capacity distributions,
obtained for different traffic mixes, are
compared, the most favourable mix can
be deduced, giving the most capacity
(mix 2 on Figure 3-3).
Traffic Schedule
Traffic schedules represent a certain
sequence of traffic and we have seen
that this has an impact on airport
capacity. Consequently, it is logical to
say that schedules will impact airport
capacity.
expressed in terms of service quality
indicators. Two such indicators are:
Average delay per aircraft: the
difference between the scheduled time
of operation and the time at which the
operation is actually performed
Punctuality index: the percentage of
operations performed within the
agreed/tolerated delay limits.
Obviously, factors beyond the control
of the airport affect these indicators and
it is therefore essential to modify the
figures to include only the effects
generated by the airport itself.
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.4 continued
Sequencing and optimisation of Airport traffic
Figure 3-5 Punctuality index and capacity
The effect of different
schedules can be explored
by modelling different
scenarios and predicting
the outcome in terms of the
above service quality
indicators.
An airport that accommodates all
scheduled traffic within agreed delay
margins, or no delay, could indicate
efficient planning/scheduling. Hence
capacity assessments tend to consider
the impact of different schedule
scenarios on delay and punctuality.
As an example, an airport might be
considering an objective that 80% of
26 27
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
activities and are
invaluable in supporting
management decision
making.
Schedule
coordination
Airport slot abuse is at
the very core of a large
number of problems.
Congested airports may
wish to be fully
coordinated in
accordance with EC
Regulation EC No
793/2004 (amending EC
No 95/93), but in a
number of cases slot
adherence monitoring is
not accurate enough to
prevent slot abuse.
flights have a delay of less than 3 Real-time management
minutes during peak hours. The of airport slots in the ATM V3/39
capacity assessment model shows the system is vital. A lot of
graph on Figure 3-5. Clearly, for the capacity is still lost
fixed conditions (80% and 3 minutes) through the inability of
there should be no more than 35 the European ATM
movements scheduled per hour. system to manage slots Airport slot monitoring is vital
The relationship between the in real time.
punctuality index and the accepted The problem will be
delay can also be plotted, resulting in addressed in part
the graph on Figure 3-5. through the new
functions of the CFMU
Again, for the same fixed conditions and the wide scale
(80% and 3 minutes) there should be implementation of Implementing airport slot monitoring
no more than 35 movements scheduled Collaborative Decision
per hour. Making (CDM) involving and CDM help eliminate slot abuse and
The results need to be fed into all partners. improve efficiency and predictability.
strategic planning and scheduling
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.5
Key Ground Factors
28
ALTHOUGH the operation of an airport can
be split functionally into a land-side and an
air-side, this division does not mean an
absence of influence between the two.
An airport is, in many ways, a just-in-time operation,
meaning that it functions efficiently only if there is a
constant flow of people and goods. If the flow is
disrupted in any direction, there is little room to buffer
the resulting queue of people, vehicles or aircraft.
Clearly, enhancing air-side capacity will not be fully
effective unless the land-side factors are also
considered and optimized.
Airport Access
Airports differ substantially, not least of all in terms of
accessibility. Major airports tend to have increasingly
sophisticated multi-modal links, including high speed
train, underground and even dedicated airport express
trains alongside the road access used by cars and
V3/40 coaches.
Even second tier airports, used primarily by low cost
carriers, will have extensive public transport access
Landside might often organised by the carriers themselves to ensure a
influence airside smooth passenger feed.
Taxi and private cars remain means of transport used
operations extensively even when excellent public transport is
available.
In all cases, blockage of the airport access road (as a
result of an accident or weather for example) will result
in substantial disruption in passenger flows.
Investments in improving access, including informing
passengers of alternatives, can result in substantial
benefits. As a very minimum, the airport partners must
be aware of incidental problems with reaching the
airport so that they may take steps to alleviate the
impact on their operation.
V3/41
29
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
Aiprorts should be efficient and user-
friendly
The Airport Facilities
Airport operators and ground handlers
together need to ensure that airports
are functional, efficient and user-friendly.
This is challenging for various reasons:
airports may have trouble meeting
demand, complying with legislation or
other requirements.
Compulsory screening of all hold
baggage, segregation of ‘Schengen’
and ‘non-Schengen’ flights, enhanced V3/42
passenger security screening, etc. all
need careful planning and good
execution to ensure that they do not
cause extra delays.
In spite of the best efforts, these Flow of passengers and baggage are
factors can have a knock-on effect on citical
airside capacity, by contributing to delay
or missed slots especially when
passengers are unable to present
themselves in time for boarding.
Constant sources of frustration to
airlines are passengers that go missing
between check-in and boarding. If
baggage has to be unloaded on
account of passengers who fail to
present themselves for boarding, the
airline concerned will be looking at
substantial costs in the form of primary V3/43
and possibly secondary delays.
Airports can do a lot to ensure that
passengers progress towards the gate
area. The flow of passengers may be
slowed or stalled also inside the
terminal if facilities and resources are
inadequate to meet demand. Poor
planning, resource allocation and
equipment can lead to congestion, slow
V3/44
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.5 continued
Key Ground Factors
Internal airport
bottlenecks must
be eliminated
processing of passengers and
consequential delays or missed slots.
While it is in the interest of airports to
see passengers do a lot of shopping at
the airport concessions, providing
prominent and unambiguous informa-
tion on the need to move towards the
gate can do a lot to help passenger
flows.
Some research projects are proposing
to track passengers in the public areas
of airports and enable airlines to locate
missing passengers quickly.
There are also new trends that can
combat land-side delay, such as the
use of self-check-in desks.
Most airports are continuously
investing in new facilities but there can
be long delays in their realisation where
the investment requires lengthy local
consultation, particularly if influenced by
environmental considerations.
Both passport and security control
also need adequate resources to cope
30
with demand. All too often, vast queues
form owing to insufficient resources in
these vital areas. Since demand is
cyclical, a flexible and anticipatory
approach is essential.
Internal airport bottlenecks can be
eliminated by Collaborative Decision
Making (CDM), with the involvement of
all partners. CDM is built on the
realisation that everyone can share
information and so contribute to solving
the problems. Of course, the airport
does not always have sufficient
influence in issues like, for instance,
security. The arrangements to be made
are often prescribed by the authority
responsible for security, which is often a
State body.
The location of the security check-
points has a major influence on
passenger flows and determines where
congestion may occur. But the location
also determines the number of security
personnel and profilers needed. Clearly,
31
a good balance is not always easy to
reach, but involving the organisation
responsible for security in the CDM
process can help in finding good
solutions.
Boarding Gates
Gate holding areas allow timely
processing of passengers. But in many
cases, even where gate holding areas
exist, passengers are not processed
until boarding time.
It is important not to limit this issue to
the presence - or absence - of contact
stands, as the need for such facilities
depends on the configuration and
operation of a given airport.
The nature of airline operations may
also have an influence on gate
management and gate allocation
policies. This is especially the case with
low-cost and charter carriers. Remote
stands may sometimes be the better
answer.
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
Boarding gates
and ramp
resources
Ramp resources
If resources on the ramp (push-back,
de-icing, electricity and conditioned air
supply, baggage loading, load-sheet
input and calculation, etc.) are
inadequate or are used inefficiently, the
likelihood of meeting approved airport
and ATC slots is reduced.
Airline policies and behaviour also play
a major role in how successful the co-
operation is on the ramp. Such
problems occur more frequently at
airports with monopoly service
providers, something that is often the
case at tourist destination airports. CDM
and peer pressure can often help even
at such places.
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
3.6
Environmental Aspects
AIRCRAFT operations on and around
airports have significant environmental
impacts.
Noise from aircraft in the air and on the ground (e.g.
taxiing & auxiliary power units);
Atmospheric emissions that affect local air quality
and add to climate change;
Adverse impacts associated with infrastructure
construction and expansion (e.g. land-take and
ecological damage);
Water and soil pollution especially from de-icing and
spillages;
Vortex strikes on local properties; and
Third-party risk.
For airside capacity, environment is both a constraint
and an opportunity. Current and developing
environmental regulations may constrain where, when
and how aircraft operate (e.g. preferred noise routes
and night restrictions). Meanwhile, proactive and
collaborative environmental practice helps to:
•• avoid environmental constraints;
ameliorate proposed constraints;
• optimise capacity within existing
environmental constraints;
• and mitigate community opposition to
change and growth.
Many airports already suffer from noise constraints
and the first examples of air quality related constraints
have recently emerged. We can expect environmental
constraints to increase in the future. If operational
stakeholders do not manage environment it will
manage them!
32 33
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement
Airports have a role in
mitigating environment
impact
Airports, airlines and ATC all have a
role to play in minimising the effects
on the environment, and this comes
hand-in-hand with increasing capacity
Practical Mitigation Measures
Any new local environmental management technique
or procedure should be designed and selected on the
basis of careful impact assessment.
V3/49 Environmental mitigation may not be straightforward.
A procedure designed to reduce noise impact may
result in a longer flight path and therefore increase
Airports have both gaseous emissions. In spite of the complexities, many
positive and negative of the busiest airports have successfully introduced
environmental impacts
environmental measures to support growth. The main
messages from these successful airports are:
Adopt an integrated approach. Collaboration with
all partners, including the local community, will
bring results;
Airport operators form a focus for collaboration. They
bring all parties together, collect and share data, drive
new methods or procedures and negotiate the licence
to operate with the local community;
V3/50
ATC providers make the procedures a reality
through analysis, simulation, safety assessment
and finally facilitation. They also interface with
airspace design and safety regulators;
Airspace users implement the techniques and
procedures and interface with, for example, FMS
software developers;
All must collaborate to win due recognition for
their proactive efforts and thereby a stronger
negotiating position, avoid non optimal solutions
as far as possible and share a common vision for
the airport’s sustainable future.
V3/51 V3/52
 ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement

3.7
34 35
ace
Airside Capacity Enhancement

Key Actions Checklist for Airport Operators

Other volumes
Set up an Airport Steering Group to lead the
capacity enhancement exercise
in this package
1
Appoint a capacity enhancement management
team
Quick Start Guide and
Collect and analyse data to determine the VOLUME Electronic Media
baseline airside capacity, ROT and reaction

2
times

Involve pilots and controllers : hold controller and Capacity Enhancement

pilot meetings, followed by a VOLUME and Planning
common forum to develop an action plan to V3/53

4
increase capacity

Organise a pilots and controllers awareness

raising campaign if required VOLUME Air Traffic Control

5
Measure ROT and pilot reaction times regularly
and recalculate airside capacity, informing pilots
and controllers of the results
VOLUME Airline Operations
Publish preferred rapid exit taxiways by aircraft

6
type in the Aeronautical Information Publication
(AIP)
Modelling and Analysis
Provide ICAO standard centreline lights and VOLUME Tools
marking on all rapid exit taxiways

VOLUME 7 Securing Capacity by

Environmental
Management

VOLUME 8 Safety and Cost

Benefit Analysis

V3/54