132 - Airport Landside Data Collection and Application

This PDF is available at http://nap.nationalacademies.
org/27403
Airport Landside Data: Collection and

Application (2023)
DETAILS
70 pages | 8.5 x 11 | PAPERBACK
ISBN 978-0-309-70924-8 | DOI 10.17226/27403
CONTRIBUTORS
Gavin Duncan, Ernest Choi; Airport Cooperative Research Program; Transportation
Research Board; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
BUY THIS BOOK
FIND RELATED TITLES SUGGESTED CITATION

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Airport
Landside Data: Collection and Application. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/27403.
Visit the National Academies Press at nap.edu and login or register to get:
– Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of publications
– 10% off the price of print publications
– Email or social media notifications of new titles related to your interests
– Special offers and discounts
All downloadable National Academies titles are free to be used for personal and/or non-commercial
academic use. Users may also freely post links to our titles on this website; non-commercial academic
users are encouraged to link to the version on this website rather than distribute a downloaded PDF
to ensure that all users are accessing the latest authoritative version of the work. All other uses require
written permission. (Request Permission)
This PDF is protected by copyright and owned by the National Academy of Sciences; unless otherwise
indicated, the National Academy of Sciences retains copyright to all materials in this PDF with all rights
reserved.
Airport Landside Data: Collection and Application
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM
ACRP SYNTHESIS 132

Airport Landside Data
COLLECTION AND APPLICATION
A Synthesis of Airport Practice
Gavin Duncan
Ernest Choi
InterVISTAS Consulting USA LLC
San Mateo, CA
Subscriber Categories
Aviation • Data and Information Technology • Terminals and Facilities
Research sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration
2023
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM ACRP SYNTHESIS 132
Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in transpor- Project 11-03, Topic S10-19
tation of people and goods and in regional, national, and international ISSN 1935-9187
commerce. They are where the nation’s aviation system connects with ISBN 978-0-309-70924-8
other modes of transportation and where federal responsibility for man- Library of Congress Control Number 2023949190
aging and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state
© 2023 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of
and local governments that own and operate most airports. Research is
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the graphical logo are trade-
necessary to solve common operating problems, to adapt appropriate new
marks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the
airport industry. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP)
serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can
develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining
Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study spon- written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously
sored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). ACRP carries out published or copyrighted material used herein.
applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agen- Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this
cies and not being adequately addressed by existing federal research pro- publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the
grams. ACRP is modeled after the successful National Cooperative High- understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, APTA, FAA,
way Research Program (NCHRP) and Transit Cooperative Research FHWA, FTA, GHSA, or NHTSA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice.
It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and
Program (TCRP). ACRP undertakes research and other technical activi- not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or
ties in various airport subject areas, including design, construction, legal, reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP.
maintenance, operations, safety, policy, planning, human resources, and
administration. ACRP provides a forum where airport operators can
cooperatively address common operational problems.
ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100— NOTICE
Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary participants in The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to
the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved
by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of
Transportation with representation from airport operating agencies, other The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the
stakeholders, and relevant industry organizations such as the Airports researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transporta-
tion Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or
Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the American Asso- the program sponsors.
ciation of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National Association of State
The Transportation Research Board does not develop, issue, or publish standards or spec-
Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for America (A4A), and the Airport
ifications. The Transportation Research Board manages applied research projects which
Consultants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) provide the scientific foundation that may be used by Transportation Research Board
TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) sponsors, industry associations, or other organizations as the basis for revised practices,
the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a contract procedures, or specifications.
with the National Academy of Sciences formally initiating the program. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport Medicine; and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse
professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names or logos appear herein solely
equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research organi- because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
zations. Each of these participants has different interests and responsibili-
ties, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort.
Research problem statements for ACRP are solicited periodically but
may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility
of the AOC to formulate the research program by identifying the highest
priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products.
Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel
appointed by TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and
research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport
professionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels
prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors,
and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the
project. The process for developing research problem statements and Published reports of the
selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing coop-
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM
erative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP
project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. are available from
Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the Transportation Research Board
intended users of the research: airport operating agencies, service pro- Business Office
500 Fifth Street, NW
viders, and academic institutions. ACRP produces a series of research Washington, DC 20001
reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other
interested parties; industry associations may arrange for workshops, and can be ordered through the Internet by going to
training aids, field visits, webinars, and other activities to ensure that https://www.mytrb.org/MyTRB/Store/default.aspx
results are implemented by airport industry practitioners. Printed in the United States of America

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non-
governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for
outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the
practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering.
Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National
Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions
to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent,
objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions.
The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase
public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through
trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The
Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from
the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by
state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation,
and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation.
Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS
CRP STAFF FOR ACRP SYNTHESIS 132

Waseem Dekelbab, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Marci A. Greenberger, Manager, Airport Cooperative Research Program
Jordan Christensen, Senior Program Officer
Demisha Williams, Senior Program Assistant
Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications
Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications
ACRP PROJECT 11-03 PANEL

Joshua D. Abramson, Barge Design Solutions, Inc., Nashville, TN (Chair)
Gloria G. Bender, TransSolutions, LLC, Fort Worth, TX
David A. Byers, Quadrex Aviation, LLC, Melbourne, FL
Brenda L. Enos, TRC, Boston, MA
Cameron Thompson, Birmingham Airport Authority, Birmingham, AL
Keila Walker-Denis, Orlando International Airport, Orlando, FL
Scott Wintner, San Jose Norman Y. Mineta International Airport, San Jose, CA
Patrick Magnotta, FAA Liaison
Liying Gu, Airports Council International–North America Liaison
Christine L. Gerencher, TRB Liaison
TOPIC S10-19 PANEL

Sheldon Eric Daisley, City of Houston–Houston Airport System, Humble, TX
Shailesh Gongal, Massachusetts Port Authority, East Boston, MA
Kimberly Howard, Nashville, TN
Margaret Martin, Martin Airport Law, LLC, Nashville, TN
Lisa Truong Nguyen, Denver International Airport, Centennial, CO
Jonathan Michael Schneider, Airport Design Consultants, Inc., New York, NY

ABOUT THE ACRP SYNTHESIS PROGRAM

Airport administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which information
already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and practice. This infor-
mation may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what
has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research find-
ings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be
given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem.
There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the airport industry. Much of it derives
from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To
provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it
available to the entire airport community, the Airport Cooperative Research Program authorized the
Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing project. This project, ACRP Project 11-03,
“Synthesis of Information Related to Airport Practices,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowl-
edge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports
from this endeavor constitute an ACRP report series, Synthesis of Airport Practice.
This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the
detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides
a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful
in resolving specific problems.
FOREWORD
By Jordan Christensen
Staff Officer
Transportation Research Board
Airports collect data to help understand the customer journey from the entrance or access points
of the airport to the boarding gates. Processes may change in order to improve the customer experi-
ence when the collected data are analyzed. The objective of this synthesis is to document landside
data, collection methods, analysis, and interpretation and discuss how that information affects air-
port decision-making. For this synthesis, “landside” was determined to be from the airport entrance
or access points to the boarding gates. This report will be useful to airport staff responsible for
making decisions about planning, design, customer experience, and day-to-day operations. Infor-
mation used in this study was obtained through a literature review and airport survey. Interviews
of nine airports shaped the case examples found in Chapter 6.
Gavin Duncan and Ernest Choi, InterVISTAS, San Mateo, CA, synthesized the information and
wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on page iv. This synthesis is an
immediately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations
of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice con-
tinues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand.

AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
To the staff of each participating airport, the authors are grateful for the data and insights they shared
during the online survey and follow-up telephone interviews:
Large-Hub Airports
Boston Logan International Airport (BOS)
Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD)*
Chicago Midway International Airport (MDW)*
Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW)
Denver International Airport (DEN)*
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport (FLL)*
John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
LaGuardia Airport (LGA)
Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR)
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX)*
Portland International Airport (PDX)
San Diego International Airport (SAN)*
San Francisco International Airport (SFO)
Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC)
Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA)
Tampa International Airport (TPA)
Medium-Hub Airports
Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG)
Indianapolis International Airport (IND)*
John Wayne Airport (Orange County, California) (SNA)*
Reno-Tahoe International Airport (RNO)
San Antonio International Airport (SAT)
Small-Hub Airports
Colorado Springs Airport (COS)
Eugene Airport (EUG)
Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport (SAV)
Non-Hub Airports
Jackson Hole Airport (JAC)*
*Indicates airports that served as case examples.

CONTENTS
1 Summary
3 Chapter 1 Introduction
3 1.1 Study Purpose and Overview
3 1.2 Topics Not Addressed in This Report
4 1.3 Why Data Are Important to Airports
5 Chapter 2 How This Study Was Conducted
5 2.1 Summary of Literature Review
6 2.2 Survey of Airports
6 2.3 Case Examples
8 Chapter 3 Summary of Survey of Airports
8 3.1 Data Collection for Ground Access (Passengers Only)
11 3.2 Data Collection in the Terminal Before Security
13 3.3 Data Collection in the Terminal Post Security
14 3.4 Data Collection for Employees
16 Chapter 4 Terminal and Landside Data Collection at Airports
16 4.1 Types of Data Collected at Airports
16 4.2 How Data Are Collected, and the Systems/Technologies Used
19 4.3 Costs of Data Collection
20 4.4 Legal Issues Encountered from Data Collection or Storage
22 Chapter 5 Data Analysis and Decision-Making
22 5.1 Why Data Are Collected
23 5.2 How Data Are Analyzed and Interpreted
24 5.3 How Data Are Used to Make Decisions
28 Chapter 6 Summary of Case Examples from Airports
28 6.1 Data Collection Methods and Technologies
29 6.2 Data Analysis
29 6.3 Legal Issues with Data Collection and Storage
29 6.4 Data-Driven Problem Solving
32 Chapter 7 Summary of Findings and Suggestions
for Future Research
32 7.1 Summary of Findings
33 7.2 Suggestions for Future Research
34 Glossary
35 Acronyms
36 References and Bibliography

38 Appendix A Survey Questions with Results

55 Appendix B Summary of Interviews with Case
Example Airports
Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing.
The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at nap.nationalacademies.org) retains the color versions.

SUMMARY
Airport Landside Data:

Collection and Application
This synthesis was prepared to provide airport operators and others with an understand-
ing of how data collection and analysis assist airport staff in making decisions. Most airport
operators have established programs to gather data throughout the entire campus. Airports
are complex transportation hubs that are critical in the global transportation system. The
efficient operation of an airport requires the effective management of landside facilities,
which, for this report, includes on-airport roadways and curbsides serving passengers and
the public areas of the passenger terminal building between the building entrances and
where passengers scan boarding passes during boarding.
The information presented in this synthesis was gathered by (1) conducting a literature
search, (2) surveying the top 100 airports (by enplaned passengers) in the United States, and
(3) conducting nine case example interviews with the airports serving Chicago (Midway
and O’Hare), Denver, Fort Lauderdale, Indianapolis, Jackson (Wyoming), Orange County
(California), Phoenix, and San Diego.
The information about data collection at airports assembled as part of this synthesis is
presented using the following categories:
1. Types of data collected
2. How data are collected
a. Vendor reporting
b. Direct observation
c. Automated monitoring
d. Focus groups
e. Intercept surveys
3. Costs of data collection, acquisition, analysis, maintenance, and other associated costs
4. Why data are collected
5. How data are analyzed and interpreted
6. How data are used to make decisions
Airport staff indicated that data collection and analysis are crucial to making informed deci-
sions and ensuring the successful operation of ground transportation facilities. Data analysis
provides insight into passenger demand patterns, enables optimized resource allocation,
improves the overall passenger experience, enhances landside operational efficiency, helps
explain ground transportation demand, and informs the design and layout of terminals.
Effective decision-making in these areas is vital in enhancing the passenger experience and
facilitating smooth operations.

2 Airport Landside Data: Collection and Application
Potential areas for further research include developing an understanding of the costs
of data collection, especially permanent collection systems such as camera-based systems
for passenger and vehicle counts. While the cost information may become obsolete due to
rapid changes in technology and cost, airport staff could benefit from understanding the
implications that data collection tools could have on staffing, training, data security, and
other aspects. This information would help airport staff make informed decisions on the
cost-effectiveness and value of potential data collection options.

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1.1 Study Purpose and Overview

Without data, understanding the passenger journey can mean relying on intuition or respond-
ing to problems and complaints only as customers reveal them. Monitoring performance by
collecting and interpreting data can proactively detect change and measure the effectiveness of
responses to change. Understanding and improving the airport customer experience requires
identifying the “who, what, when, where, and how” of the passengers’ journey, and a signifi-
cant source of that insight can be the data collected and their interpretation. This synthesis was
prepared to provide airport operators and others with information on how airports document,
collect, analyze, interpret, and apply data from their landside facilities.
The goal of this synthesis is to provide airport stakeholders with a better
understanding of (a) how many airports actively pursue data collection, (b) the For this synthesis, “landside”
data that airports consider to be important in informing decision-making, and is defined as the on-airport
(c) challenges encountered during data collection, storage, or application to roadways and curbsides serving
decision-making. This information is anticipated to assist those planning and passengers and the public areas
operating ground transportation and terminal facilities and seeking to use of the passenger terminal building
data for making decisions about planning, design, customer experience, and between the building entrances and
day-to-day operations. where passengers scan boarding
Subsequent sections of this report describe: passes during aircraft boarding.
• Why data are important to airports (Chapter 1)

• How this synthesis was prepared (Chapter 2)
• A summary of web-enabled survey responses (Chapter 3)
• Data collection at airports (Chapter 4)
• Use of data at airports to inform decision-making (Chapter 5)
• A summary of the case examples and lessons learned (Chapter 6)
• Conclusions and future research needs (Chapter 7)
• A glossary, list of acronyms, references and bibliography, and appendices containing a copy
of the survey instrument used to conduct this report, survey results, and summaries of inter-
views with airport staff.
1.2 Topics Not Addressed in This Report

This report does not address data collection and its use in decision-making for short- and long-
term parking and rental car services. However, it contains limited information on these topics.
Thus, the report does not address parking and revenue control systems and the data provided
by such systems. It does not address rental cars and the variety of data that rental car companies

provide for planning rental car facilities, such as ready and return areas or consolidated rental car
facilities (CONRAC). These topics are addressed by other ACRP publications, including ACRP
Report 24: Guidebook for Evaluating Airport Parking Strategies and Supporting Technologies (Jacobs
Consultancy et al. 2009) and ACRP Research Report 225: Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to
Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenues (InterVISTAS Consulting Inc. et al. 2021).
Additionally, this report does not address the increasing number of laws devoted to data pri-
vacy and the full legal implications of data collection at airports. However, this report does provide
a summary of legal issues. These topics are addressed in ACRP Legal Research Digests (LRDs),
such as ACRP LRD 42: Legal Implications of Data Collection at Airports (Zoufal et al. 2021).
1.3 Why Data Are Important to Airports

Airports are complex transportation hubs that are critical in the global transportation system.
Landside and terminal data collection and analysis at airports have become increasingly important
as they enable airport operators to monitor and improve numerous aspects of airport operations.
Data analysis provides an understanding of the passenger journey and requires quantitative and
qualitative data, such as airport staff intuition, in-field observations, and records of customer com-
plaints. Quantitative data can explain underlying issues that may not be visually apparent, while
qualitative information can be crucial in ensuring that quantitative data are fully understood and
applied correctly and identify behaviors that typical quantitative data collection methods cannot
capture. To enhance the airport customer experience, airport staff indicated they need to com-
prehensively understand landside travel, including the travelers, their activities, timing, location,
and overall experience. Airport staff also indicate that data are crucial in helping them improve
the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of airport operations. Collecting and analyzing data makes it
possible to address problems and proactively assess the implementation of improvements.
Survey respondents and case example interviewees indicate that data collection at their airport
is important for several reasons:
• Planning and design: Data collection and analysis play a critical role in the planning and
design of airport facilities. Information on passenger movements, vehicle traffic patterns, and
access routes can provide valuable insights into the needs of the airport and help to inform
the design of new facilities or improvements to existing ones. The data can be used to evaluate
design and operational scenarios, forecast future demand, and assess the impact of changes.
• Customer experience: Airports are increasingly focused on enhancing the customer experi-
ence, and data can greatly enhance and support these efforts. By collecting data on passenger
wait times, congestion points, and other key performance indicators, airport operators can
identify areas for improvement and make changes to enhance the passenger experience.
• Day-to-day operations: Effective day-to-day operations of airport landside facilities require
data collection and analysis. Information on vehicle traffic patterns, passenger wait times,
concessions usage, and access routes can be used to optimize operations and reduce delays,
improving the overall efficiency of the airport. Additionally, employee information is used
to understand the mode of travel to the airport by employees, optimize any shuttle services
to transport employees from parking locations, minimize the travel time for employees, and
ensure adequate parking for employees.
• Performance monitoring: The ongoing process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting ulti-
mately identifies areas for improvement and is crucial for monitoring airport landside facili
ties’ performance. Information on key performance indicators, such as passenger wait times
for ground transportation or other services and vehicular traffic patterns, can be used to iden-
tify trends and make data-driven decisions to improve the airport’s performance.

CHAPTER 2
How This Study Was Conducted
The information presented in this synthesis was gathered by (1) conducting a literature search,
including from international sources, from online search engines, personal files, and the Trans-
portation Research Information Services (TRIS) database; (2) surveying the top 100 airports in
the United States by enplaned passengers; and (3) interviewing the staff at nine case example
airports located in the United States. The following paragraphs summarize the literature review
and surveys and describe the characteristics of the airports whose staff were interviewed.
2.1 Summary of Literature Review

Published literature regarding U.S. airport programs and initiatives to collect, use, and store
data is limited. There are numerous published articles documenting academic research con-
ducted at an airport that evaluated potential innovative uses of data to evaluate and improve
airport operations. These efforts were typically one-time events testing a different approach or
method and did not reflect an ongoing airport program. The available literature on a specific
airport’s ongoing initiatives in data collection and associated analysis and use is limited to pre-
sentations made at industry conferences and workshops, which are typically not readily avail-
able to the public. Literature discussing data collection, use, and storage by airports published in
popular media and technical journals can be categorized by:
1. ACRP research related to airport planning and operations, including analysis of airport ter-
minals and roadways, execution of passenger surveys, and legal issues associated with airport
data collection. Examples include ACRP Report 25: Airport Passenger Terminal Planning and
Design, Volume 1: Guidebook (Landrum and Brown et al. 2010); ACRP Report 40: Airport
Curbside and Terminal Area Roadway Operations (LeighFisher et al. 2010), ACRP Report 235:
Guidebook for Conducting Airport User Surveys and Other Customer Research (Franz et al.
2021), and ACRP Legal Research Digest 42: Legal Implications of Data Collection at Airports
(Zoufal et al. 2021).
2. Research papers on a one-time test of a specific technology at an airport. Examples of publicly
available papers include “Collection and analysis of multi-modal airport land side probe data
from Bluetooth enabled mobile devices” (Hainen et al. 2013), which focused on an applica-
tion at Houston’s George Bush Intercontinental Airport, and “Research on temporal and
spatial distribution characteristics of passenger flow of Daxing airport line based on auto-
matic fare collection data” (Zhao et al. 2022).
3. Research papers on one-time in-field surveys regarding passenger behavior, typically focused
on pedestrian activities or passenger processing [e.g., “Analysis of Conveyance System Use
in Airport Concourses” (Chiang and Taaffe 2012), “Processing of Passengers Efficiently: An
Analysis of Airport Processing Times For International Passengers” (Pitchforth et al. 2015),
and “Data-Driven Analysis of Airport Security Checkpoint Operations” (Janssen et al. 2020)].

4. Published articles or blog posts related to the general use of data to support airport opera-
tions and commercial initiatives. Topics addressed range from privacy [e.g., “Data Privacy
vs. Personalisation for Airports” (Rezcomm 2022)] to survey methods [e.g., “Why Survey
Data is Fundamental to Developing Data-driven Strategies” (Pitters 2021)] to how data can
benefit operations [e.g., “Digital technologies in airport ground operations” (Kovynyhov
and Mikut 2019)].
In addition, there have been numerous presentations at aviation industry conferences where
the presentations were available to conference participants but not published in technical jour-
nals. These typically describe:
1. Overviews of technologies available for use by airports to monitor and measure vehicle or
pedestrian flows [e.g., “License Plate Recognition on the Airport Roadway” (Swonsen 2018)]
2. Applications of technologies to monitor and manage airport ground transportation opera-
tions [e.g., “Enhancing Operations Through Technology” (Swonsen 2015) and “What’s New
in Airport Curbside Management” (Duncan 2011)]
3. A specific airport’s approach toward collecting and analyzing data and applying them to
day-to-day operations and decision-making. Examples include “High-Efficiency Roadway
Management at LGA” (Carbonaro 2022), “Washington Dulles International Airport, Moni-
toring Ground Transportation Customer Service” (Patchan 2007), and “TNC Planning and
Operations at San Francisco International Airport” (Gubser 2016).
In summary, there are many examples of (a) published research regarding general issues
related to airport data collection and management, (b) one-time tests of potential data collec-
tion methods or uses of data to evaluate potential mathematical models, and (c) ACRP research
on data collection methods, use, and other considerations for airports. However, information on
specific airport data collection efforts and use is limited to conference presentations that are not
publicly available. Where copies of these were in the Research Team’s files, relevant information
has been included in the findings of this synthesis.
2.2 Survey of Airports

The research team conducted a web-based survey of airports in the United States using an
online survey tool seeking information regarding data the airports gather and use to improve
landside services and make other decisions about planning, design, customer experience, and
day-to-day operations. The online survey consisted of five questions with various sub-questions
addressing whether the airport collects certain data, and if so, the frequency of data collection for
each. The survey results from the 23 responding airports are summarized in Chapter 3. Appen-
dix A: Survey Questions with Results includes a copy of the survey instrument and the received
responses.
2.3 Case Examples

The staff of nine airports agreed to participate as case examples, as shown in Figure 2-1.
These airport staff were interviewed to review data collection methods; Chapter 6 documents
the case example interviews and Appendix B: Summary of Interviews with Case Example Air-
ports provides the interview questions and detailed responses.

How This Study Was Conducted 7
JAC
MDW
ORD
DEN IND
SNA
SAN PHX
FLL
Figure 2-1. Case example airports.

CHAPTER 3
Summary of Survey of Airports
The information presented in this report is based on a survey of staff at large, medium, small,
and non-hub U.S. airports directly responsible for airport planning, ground transportation oper
ations, or terminal operations. Of the airports contacted, 23 responded. As shown in Table 3-1
and Figure 3-1, the responding airports included 14 large-hub, five medium-hub, three small-
hub, and one non-hub airport.
The participating airports reflect the range of data collection efforts at airports. Of the 23 respond-
ing airports, four are operated by counties, eight are operated by cities, two are operated jointly by
city and county, and nine are operated by airport or port authorities.
Figure 3-2 through Figure 3-9 summarize the responses from the staff of the 23 airports that
completed the survey. Appendix A: Survey Questions with Results provides full individual survey
results.
3.1 Data Collection for Ground Access (Passengers Only)

Figure 3-2 through Figure 3-4, followed by a written summary of responses, summarize how
often the surveyed airports collected ground access data. Continuous data collection is an auto-
mated system that continuously collects data without pause. Regular data collection (more than
once a year or annually) refers to a scheduled data collection.
Responses are indicated here, and for instances where “other” was the response, details are
provided if the information was shared:
• Total vehicle volume data: Seven airports collect this information continuously; two collect
it more than once a year; 10 collect it as necessary; one responded “other”; three do not collect
this information.
• Mode-specific vehicle volume data: Twelve airports collect this information continuously;
one collects it more than once a year; six collect it as necessary; three collect it under “other”;
one does not collect this information.
One airport indicated that these data are collected as necessary; however, the airport
cannot distinguish between some modes.
• Vehicle classification data: Seven airports collect this information continuously; one collects
it more than once a year; two collect it annually; eight collect it as necessary; one responded
“other”; four do not collect this information. One airport indicated that these data are col-
lected only for parked vehicles.
• Passenger mode share data: Five airports collect this information as necessary; one collects it
more than once a year; one collects it annually; six collect it as necessary; three collect it under
“other”; two do not know if the airport collects the data; four do not collect this information.

Summary of Survey of Airports 9
Table 3-1. Hub size and 2019 enplaned passengers of participating airports.
Airport 2019 Operating
Airport Name Hub Size
Code Enplanements Jurisdiction
Chicago O’Hare International Airport ORD 40,871,223 Large City
Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport DFW 35,778,573 Large Authority
Denver International Airport DEN 33,592,945 Large City & County
John F. Kennedy International Airport JFK 31,036,655 Large Authority
San Francisco International Airport SFO 27,779,230 Large City & County
Newark Liberty International Airport EWR 23,160,763 Large Authority
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport PHX 22,433,552 Large City
Boston Logan International Airport BOS 20,699,377 Large Authority
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport FLL 17,950,989 Large County
LaGuardia Airport LGA 15,393,601 Large Authority
Salt Lake City International Airport SLC 12,840,841 Large City
San Diego International Airport SAN 12,648,692 Large Authority
Tampa International Airport TPA 10,978,756 Large Authority
Chicago Midway International Airport MDW 10,081,781 Large City
John Wayne Airport SNA 5,153,276 Medium County
San Antonio International Airport SAT 5,022,980 Medium City
Indianapolis International Airport IND 4,709,183 Medium Authority
Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport CVG 4,413,457 Medium County
Reno-Tahoe International Airport RNO 2,162,250 Medium Authority
Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport SAV 1,461,360 Small City
Colorado Springs Airport COS 828,429 Small City
Eugene Airport EUG 596,156 Small City
Jackson Hole Airport JAC 444,047 Non-hub County
Source: InterVISTAS Consulting USA LLC; 2019 Enplanement data from FAA.
EUG
JAC BOS
MDW
SLC ORD EWR, JFK, LGA
RNO
SFO DEN IND
COS CVG
SNA
SAN PHX Large-hub
SAV Medium-hub
DFW Small-hub
SAT Non-hub
TPA
FLL
Figure 3-1. Online survey respondents.

Continuous More than once/year Annually

As Necessary Other* Don’t Know
Do Not Collect
25
1
3 4
20 3
1
1
6
15
10 8
1
10
2
2 1
12
5
7 7
0
Total vehicle volume data Mode-specific vehicle volume data Vehicle classification data
* includes airports that indicated they collect the data but did not identify collection frequency.
Figure 3-2. Frequency of collecting ground access data (1 of 3).

Do Not Collect
25
20 5
9 10
2
15
3
1
2 1
10 6
9
1 10
5 1
5 1
1 2
0
Passenger mode share data Wait times for transportation services Curbside dwell times


Do Not Collect
25
20 5
10
2 13
15 1
2
2 1
10
5 2
1 4
5 11
3
2
3 1
0 1
Ridership of airport-owned shuttle Ridership of public transit services Staging / hold lot wait times
services
• Wait times for transportation services: One airport collects this information more than once
a year; 10 collect it as necessary; two collect it under “other”; one does not know if the airport
collects the data; nine do not collect this information.
• Curbside dwell times: Two airports collect this information continuously; one collects it
more than once a year; nine collect it as necessary; one responded “other”; 10 do not collect
this information.
• Ridership of airport-owned shuttle services: Eleven airports collect this information con-
tinuously; two collect it more than once a year; two collect it annually; one collects it as neces-
sary; two collect it under “other”; five do not collect this information.
• Ridership of public transit services: Three airports collect this information more than once
a year; three collect it as necessary; one collects it annually; five collect it as necessary; one
responded “other”; 10 do not collect this information.
• Staging/hold lot wait times: One airport collects this information continuously; one collects
it more than once a year; two collect it annually; four collect it as necessary; two collect it
under “other”; 13 do not collect this information.
3.2 Data Collection in the Terminal Before Security

Figure 3-5 and Figure 3-6, followed by a written summary of responses, indicate how often
the surveyed airports collected terminal data on the non-secure side of the terminal.
Responses are indicated here, and for instances where “other” was the response, information
is detailed if it was shared:
• Queue length at ticketing: Eleven airports collect this information as necessary; one collects
it annually; two collect it continuously; one responded “other”; one does not know if the air-
port collects the data; seven do not collect this information.
One airport indicated that data are sometimes requested from airlines.


Do Not Collect
25
4
20 7
9 2
15 1 3
1
1 1
1
10
11 9
12
5
1
1
2 3
0
Queue length at ticketing Time in queue at ticketing Queue length at security checkpoint
Figure 3-5. Frequency of collecting terminal data before security (1 of 2).

Do Not Collect
25
20 5
8
2 12
15 1
5
3
10 1 2
1
1
7
5 5
9
1
3 3
0
Time in queue at security checkpoint Passenger movement (e.g., passenger Other data (e.g., related to
counts at discrete locations and/or concessions, bag claim, restrooms,
following certain paths) etc.)
Figure 3-6. Frequency of collecting terminal data before security (2 of 2).

• Time in the queue at ticketing: Nine airports collect this information as necessary; one col-
lects it annually; three collect it continuously; one does not know if the airport collects the
data; nine do not collect this information.
• Queue length at the security checkpoint: Twelve airports collect this information continu-
ously; one collects it more than once a year; one collects it annually; three collect this infor-
mation as necessary; two collect it under “other”; four do not collect this information.
One airport indicated that these data are collected daily by TSA.
• Time in the queue at the security checkpoint: Nine airports collect this information continu-
ously; one collects it more than once a year; one collects it annually; five collect it as necessary;
two collect it under “other”; five do not collect this information.
One airport indicated that data is collected daily by TSA.
• Passenger movement: Seven airports collect this information as necessary; three collect it
continuously; one collects it annually; three collect it under “other”; one does not know if the
airport collects the data; eight do not collect this information.
• Other data: Five airports collect this information as necessary; one responded “other”; three
collect it continuously; two do not know if the airport collects the data; 12 do not collect this
information.
3.3 Data Collection in the Terminal Post Security

Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8, followed by a written summary of responses, summarize how often
the surveyed airports collected terminal data on the secure side of the terminal.
Responses are indicated here, and for instances where “other” was the response, information
is detailed if it was shared:
• Queue length at customs/immigration: Six airports collect this information as necessary;
five collect it continuously; one collects it more than once a year; two do not know if the air-
port collects the data; nine do not collect this information.

Do Not Collect
25
4
20 7
9 1
1
15 2
6
2
10 8 2
6
2
5 1 1
7
5 5
0
Queue length at customs / immigration Time in queue at customs / Concession usage
immigration
Figure 3-7. Frequency of collecting terminal data after security (1 of 2).


Do Not Collect
25
20
9 9
14
15
1 1
2 2
10
5 1
8 3
5 2
4
4 2
0 1 1
Passenger movement (e.g., passenger Passenger accumulation (e.g., Other data (e.g., related to
counts at discrete locations and/or holdrooms, restrooms) concessions, bag claim, restrooms,
following certain paths) etc.)
Figure 3-8. Frequency of collecting terminal data after security (2 of 2).
• Time in the queue at customs/immigration: Eight airports collect this information as neces-
sary; five collect it continuously; one collects it more than once a year; two do not know if the
airport collects the data; seven do not collect this information.
• Concession usage: Seven airports collect this information continuously; six collect it as neces-
sary; two collect it annually; two collect it more than once a year; one collects it under “other”;
one does not know if the airport collects the data; four do not collect this information.
• Passenger movement: Five airports collect this information as necessary; four collect it con-
tinuously; two collect it more than once a year; and two collect it under “other”; one does not
know if the airport collects the data; nine do not collect this information.
• Passenger accumulation: Eight airports collect this information as necessary; two collect it
more than once a year; one collects it continuously; two responded “other”; one does not know
if the airport collects the data; nine do not collect this information.
• Other data: Four airports collect this information as necessary; one collects it more than once
a year; three collect it under “other”; one does not know if the airport collects the data; 14 do
not collect this information.
3.4 Data Collection for Employees

Figure 3-9 shows the frequency of data collection on employees.
Responses are indicated here, and for instances where “other” was the response, it is detailed
if the information was shared:
• Mode choice: One airport collects this information more than once a year; six collect it as
necessary; two collect it annually; one collects it continuously; one responded “other”; three
do not know if the airport collects the data; nine do not collect this information.


Do Not Collect
25
1
20 5
9
15 4 16
3
10 1
6 13 1
5 1
2 3
1 1
0 1 1
Mode choice Parking / permit data Other data related to landside
Figure 3-9. Frequency of collecting employee data.
• Parking/permit data: Thirteen airports collect this information continuously; four collect it
more than once a year; five collect it as necessary; one does not collect this information.
• Other data related to landside: Three airports collect this information as necessary; one col-
lects it more than once a year; one collects it continuously; one responded “other”; one does
not know if the airport collects the data; 16 do not collect this information.

CHAPTER 4
Terminal and Landside Data

Collection at Airports
This section provides an overview regarding the different kinds of data collected at airports;
the technologies and systems used to collect data; the expenses associated with acquiring, ana-
lyzing, and maintaining the data; and the legal challenges that may arise from data collection
and storage. Information presented in this section was collected through interviews with air-
port staff based on their survey responses. Airport staff indicated that airport data collection
could be a critical component of landside operations management, providing valuable insights
into passenger patterns and flow, facility utilization, customer experience, ground transporta-
tion services utilization, and terminal operations. Airport staff also indicated that effective data
collection, analysis, and reporting can help airport operators make data-driven decisions to
optimize landside operations, improve the passenger experience, and ultimately support plan-
ning and development at the airport.
4.1 Types of Data Collected at Airports

This section provides an overview of the various types of landside data collected at airports.
Key types of data that are reportedly collected include:
1. Passenger flow and demand: These data include passenger volume, arrival and departure
times, origin and destination information, and passenger demographics.
2. Terminal and facility utilization: These data include the utilization of terminal and other
landside facilities, such as baggage handling systems, passenger processing times at specific
locations, passenger accumulation at specific locations, restroom usage, and concessions
usage.
3. Customer experience: These data include passenger satisfaction, customer feedback, and
perceptions of airport services.
4. Ground transportation: These data include information about vehicle volume, mode share,
vehicle classification, and curbside dwell times associated with ground transportation services
such as taxis, transportation network companies (TNCs), hotel/motel shuttles, airport-
operated shuttles, and public transportation operators.
5. Employee: These data include information about the mode choice for employees, parking
location, and parking permit data.
4.2 How Data Are Collected, and the Systems/

Technologies Used
Data collection at airports involves using various systems and technologies to gather and
analyze information about airport operations. These systems and technologies range from
passenger holdroom intercept surveys, Wi-Fi intercept surveys, and focus groups to vendor
16

Terminal and Landside Data Collection at Airports 17
reporting, direct observations, and automated electronic monitoring systems [e.g., automated
people counters (APCs)]. Each of these data collection methods has its strengths and weaknesses,
and airports must choose the correct tool or combination of tools to effectively collect and analyze
data that will inform their decision-making processes. ACRP Research Report 235: Guidebook for
Conducting Airport User Surveys and Other Customer Research (Franz et al. 2021) provides guid-
ance on many data collection methods, including focus groups and intercept surveys.
4.2.1 Vendor Reporting

One common method of data collection at airports is through vendor reporting. Data on
many airport-related services, such as concessions and ground transportation (e.g., Uber and
Lyft), are provided by third-party vendors or operators. These vendors are often required (as part
of their business agreement with an airport) to provide data about their operations, such as pas-
senger volume, transaction and sales data, and customer satisfaction metrics. This information
can be used to understand the demand for these services and inform future planning and invest-
ment decisions. However, relying on vendor-provided data can have limitations, as vendors may
have incentives to understate or overstate certain metrics.
4.2.2 Direct Observation

Another method of data collection at airports is through direct observation. Direct observa-
tion can involve sending teams of observers to different parts of the airport to gather information
about passenger behavior and operations. For example, teams may observe the number of pas-
sengers waiting in line at ticketing or security, the time it takes to process passengers at security,
or the number of passengers using various amenities in the terminal. Direct observation can
provide accurate and detailed information, but it can be time-consuming and resource-intensive.
4.2.3 Automated Electronic Monitoring Systems

Automated electronic monitoring systems are also commonly used to collect data at airports.
These systems can track real-time passenger movement, vehicle traffic, and resource utilization.
For example, cameras can monitor passenger processing times, and combined with artificial
intelligence (AI) software, track the number of passengers in each queue and the time it takes to
clear security. An example of this technology is CrowdVision, which uses real-time computer
vision and artificial intelligence to track and analyze the flow of people. Another example is
automatic traffic recorder (ATR) machines, such as roadway tube counters or inductive loops
embedded in the pavement, which record the traffic volume crossing the detector. Automated
systems can provide a wealth of data quickly but can also be expensive to implement and main-
tain. Busy airports (i.e., large hubs) appear more likely to invest in such systems to collect data
continuously. In contrast, less busy airports appear to deploy such systems as needed for specific
data collection efforts.
4.2.4 Focus Groups

Focus groups are another commonly used method of data collection at airports. A focus
group involves interviews with a few individuals with similar demographic characteristics or
other common traits or experiences. This method typically involves bringing a small number of
passengers together to discuss their experiences at the airport and gather feedback on specific
issues. Focus groups can be useful for gathering qualitative data to inform future planning and
investment decisions. For example, focus groups can provide insights into why passengers prefer
certain types of ground transportation or which amenities they value most in the terminal.

4.2.5 Intercept Surveys

Passenger intercept surveys are a commonly used method of data col-
Patchan (2007) describes how the lection at airports. These surveys typically involve gathering data from pas-
Metropolitan Washington Airports sengers as they wait in the holdroom before boarding their flight. Passengers
Authority used several different may be asked questions about their experiences at the airport, their satisfac-
data collection methods for tion with various airport services, their preferences for different amenities,
monitoring ground transportation their mode of travel to the airport, the duration of their trip, the purpose of
customer service, including the trip, and their location of origin. Holdroom intercept surveys can provide
focus groups, intercept surveys, extensive data about passenger behavior and preferences. Still, they may not
comment cards, mystery shoppers, be able to capture arriving passengers or those who use airline clubs or arrive
and website-based customer at the gate just before boarding.
inquiries.
Wi-Fi intercept surveys at airports involve collecting passengers’ data
through their device’s Wi-Fi connection. When passengers connect to the
airport’s Wi-Fi network, various types of information can be collected (via
brief survey questions), ranging from the passenger’s mode of travel to the airport to their use
of concessions and other facilities to demographic information. These data can help airports
understand passenger behavior, identify potential challenges, and enhance the overall passenger
experience. This method is commonly used because it is a non-intrusive and cost-effective way
to collect passenger data.
Jackson Hole Airport provides an example of a Wi-Fi intercept survey. After agreeing to the
common use agreement, passengers are directed to a Wi-Fi survey link, shown in Figure 4-1, and
continue to a series of survey questions.
(Source: Jackson Hole Airport)
Figure 4-1. Wi-Fi intercept survey introduction.

4.3 Costs of Data Collection

The costs of data collection at airports can include the costs of acquisition, analysis, mainte-
nance, and other associated expenses such as staff time and equipment. To minimize these costs
and maximize the value of data collection efforts, airport operators must use cost-effective data
collection methods, establish clear goals and priorities, and continuously evaluate and improve
data collection processes and systems.
The costs associated with collecting data at airports can vary greatly depending on the data
types and the methods used. The following are some of the key expenses associated with data
collection at airports:
• Acquisition cost: The cost of acquiring the data collection systems or technologies is one of
the most significant investments associated with data collection. The costs can include pur-
chasing or leasing hardware, such as sensors (e.g., embedded loop detectors in the pavement
or Bluetooth tracking sensors) or cameras (e.g., automated license plate readers), as well as the
cost of software, licenses, and maintenance agreements. The fees for acquiring these systems
can vary widely depending on the complexity and capabilities of the systems, as well as the
vendor or manufacturer of the systems.
Additionally, the cost of the data collection method can vary greatly. For example, a Wi-Fi
intercept survey used to collect information from customers will likely be much less expensive
than a passenger intercept survey, which typically requires a third-party contractor or airport
employee to conduct.
• Analysis cost: Once data have been collected, data must be analyzed to extract meaningful
insights and information. This analysis can be done using various methods, such as statistical
analysis, machine learning, or data visualization techniques. The cost of analyzing the data
can vary widely depending on the complexity of the data and the methods used for analysis.
In some cases, the analysis can be performed in-house using existing resources, while in other
cases, it may be necessary to hire specialized consultants or contractors.
• Storage and maintenance cost: The cost of storing and maintaining the data collected at air-
ports can be substantial, especially if large volumes of data are being collected continuously.
The costs can include the price of physical storage devices, such as hard drives or cloud-based
storage solutions, and the cost of software and hardware maintenance agreements. Some-
times, the data may need to be stored for an extended period to meet regulatory requirements
or for future analysis.
• Other associated costs: In addition to the costs associated with acquiring, analyzing, and
storing the data, there are other expenses associated with data collection that must be taken
into consideration. These can include the cost of personnel and equipment required to collect
and manage the data and the cost of any additional software or tools required to support the
data collection process. Additionally, there may be costs associated with ensuring the security
and privacy of the data, such as the cost of encryption and other security measures.
Overall, the price tag for collecting data at airports can be substantial, and it is important to
carefully consider the costs and benefits of any data collection program before proceeding. The
decision to invest in data collection can be based on the airport’s understanding of the business
requirements and the potential benefits of the data, as well as a comprehensive analysis of the
costs and risks associated with the data collection process.
Data collected at airports are critical to effectively operating and managing these facilities.
While significant costs are associated with collecting the data, these expenses can be offset by
the benefits realized through the effective use of the data. As such, it is important for airports
to carefully consider the costs and benefits of data collection and to invest in the systems and
technologies that best support their business needs and goals.

4.4 Legal Issues Encountered

from Data Collection or Storage
In addition to financial considerations, airport operators must be aware of legal data collec-
tion and storage issues. These issues may include privacy laws, data protection regulations, and
other legal requirements related to data security and confidentiality. Airport operators can avoid
costly legal penalties and protect sensitive data by complying with all relevant legal requirements.
The legal requirements surrounding data collection and storage in the United States are com-
plex and evolving. ACRP LRD 42: Legal Implications of Data Collection at Airports (Zoufal et al.
2021) offers guidelines to data collectors on the relevant laws and regulations, including federal,
state, and international, outlining the compliance obligations and potential consequences of
non-compliance. This section briefly summarizes selected relevant information but is not meant
to be exhaustive.
Several legal requirements in the United States govern the collection and storage of data at
airports. The United States data protection and privacy laws are structured to create complex
legal requirements that may differ by location, thus resulting in considerable legal and practical
hurdles for data collection and use across state boundaries. As a vital part of the international
travel industry, airports should be aware of the increasing global legal attention given to data pri-
vacy and the need to properly manage personal data. As a result, airports and their stakeholders
must seek legal counsel to navigate the laws within their state and those in other states to ensure
their data protection and privacy programs appropriately manage legal risk.
With respect to the application of federal laws, there is no comprehensive law governing the
collection and use of personal data. Still, several federal laws pertain to specific sectors or catego-
ries of data, such as public health. Legal uncertainty also exists concerning an airport operator’s
data collection on behalf of a federal agency. Accordingly, a federal agency’s request for the air-
port operator to collect personal data on its behalf needs to be scrutinized to ensure compliance
with applicable privacy laws.
In the absence of a comprehensive federal law applicable to commercial parties’ data collec-
tion, there are also numerous state laws regulating data collection and storage, including data
breach notification laws and laws requiring the encryption of personal information. It is impor-
tant for organizations that collect and store data to stay informed about the applicable laws and
regulations and to take steps to comply with these requirements.
Moreover, airport operators need to educate themselves about the application of the laws of the
state where their airport is located and other states’ laws governing the collection, retention, and
sharing of data about their residents. In other words, some states (e.g., Illinois and California)
extend legal protections to their residents’ data regardless of whether the information is collected
in or out of their home state.
It is also worth noting that the European Union has extended protections to its residents’ data
via the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Those protections can apply in several
circumstances, including where the data processing pertains to offering goods or services to EU
residents.
One of the key challenges in ensuring compliance with these legal requirements is balancing
the need to collect and store data for business purposes with the need to protect individuals’
privacy rights. For example, while collecting passenger flow and demand data can help optimize
resource utilization and improve the passenger experience, it is important to ensure that data are
collected and stored in a way that complies with privacy laws and regulations. This compliance
may involve using privacy-enhancing technologies, such as encryption and de-identification

techniques, to protect personal information and adopting policies and procedures to ensure
that data are collected, stored, and used in a manner that complies with legal requirements.
In addition to these technical measures, it is also important for airports to provide transparent
notice to individuals about their data collection and storage practices and to obtain consent for
these practices where required by law. Robust data security practices, such as regular security
audits and data backup and recovery procedures, can help airports minimize the risk of data
breaches and unauthorized access to personal information.
The legal requirements surrounding data collection and storage in the United States are com-
plex, multifaceted, and in flux. Organizations must be proactive in ensuring compliance with
these requirements. By adopting a “privacy by design” approach and implementing robust pri-
vacy and security practices, organizations can minimize the risk of legal challenges and ensure
that their data collection and storage practices are consistent with the privacy rights of indi
viduals. Multiple sources can provide legal advice and guidelines on best practices for com-
plying with applicable data protection laws and incorporating privacy considerations into the
design and development of products, services, and systems that are secure, efficient, and protec-
tive of personal data and privacy from the outset.

CHAPTER 5
Data Analysis and Decision-Making
The ability to effectively analyze and interpret data is critical for airports to stay competitive
and meet the current and evolving needs of passengers, airports, and stakeholders. Several steps
are typically involved in data decision-making at airports:
1. Defining the problem or question: This involves identifying the issue or question that needs
to be addressed and understanding the context and scope of the problem.
2. Gathering data: Once the problem or question has been defined, relevant data need to be
collected from various sources, such as surveys, interviews, focus groups, or other data col-
lection methods.
3. Analyzing data: Once the data have been collected, the information needs to be analyzed to
identify patterns, trends, and relationships. This analysis may involve statistical techniques,
data visualization tools, or other methods.
4. Interpreting results: After the data have been analyzed, the results need to be interpreted in
the context of the problem or question identified in step one.
5. Making decisions: Based on the data analysis and interpretation results, decisions must be
made to address the problem or question identified in step one. These decisions may involve
developing strategies, making policy changes, or taking other types of action.
6. Monitoring and evaluating: Once decisions have been made, it is important to monitor and
evaluate the impact of those decisions over time to determine if they effectively addressed the
problem or question identified in step one and if any adjustments need to be made.
5.1 Why Data Are Collected

The following summarizes some of the key reasons that data are typically collected:
1. Passenger flow and demand: This information is critical for understanding passenger
demand patterns, optimizing resource allocation, and improving the passenger experience.
2. Terminal and facility utilization: This information is used to understand facility utiliza-
tion, optimize resource allocation, improve the efficiency of terminal operations, determine
problem areas or bottlenecks in the terminal building, and improve overall customer service.
3. Customer experience: This information is used to understand customer needs and prefer-
ences, identify areas for improvement, and enhance the overall passenger experience.
4. Ground transportation: This information is used to understand ground transportation
demand patterns, optimize service levels on roadway systems and curbside, and improve
the overall ground transportation experience.
5. Employee: This information is used to understand the mode of travel to the airport by
employees, optimize any shuttle services to transport employees from parking locations,
minimize the travel time for employees, and ensure adequate parking for employees.
22

Data Analysis and Decision-Making 23
5.2 How Data Are Analyzed and Interpreted

When analyzing and interpreting data at airports, it is important to understand the data,
including what it represents and can be used for. This analysis requires a thorough understand-
ing of the data sources, collection methods, and quality. Data quality is critical for effective data
analysis and interpretation at airports. Poor quality data can result in incorrect conclusions and
ineffective decision-making, hindering the airport’s operations and the passenger experience.
Data quality refers to the degree to which data are accurate, complete, and relevant to the
intended use. In the context of data collected at airports, data quality is influenced by factors such
as the accuracy of the data collection methods, the completeness of the data, and the relevance
of the data to the intended use, including understanding the limitations of the data sources and
the data collection methods, as well as the potential for errors or biases in the data. For example,
data collected from passenger surveys may be influenced by how the questions are phrased, the
sample of passengers selected, and the response rate.
Once the data have been collected and data sources and collection methods are understood,
it is important to validate the data to ensure accuracy and completeness. This validation may
involve data cleaning, normalization, and reconciliation to correct errors and ensure that the
data are consistent and accurate.
Another important aspect of data quality is the relevance of the data to the intended use.
Relevance refers to the degree to which the data are useful and appropriate for the analysis and
interpretation required. For example, data collected from passenger surveys may not be relevant
for understanding the operational efficiency of an airport. In contrast, data collected from sen-
sors and cameras may be more relevant.
Data bias is another important consideration. Data bias refers to the systematic and often hidden
errors in data collection, processing, analysis, and interpretation. Data bias at airports can occur
in various ways; examples include biased data collection methods, unequal representation of
different groups in data, and the use of algorithms that reflect and amplify existing biases. Biased
data can negatively affect airport operations, passenger experiences, and safety. For example,
biased data may lead to inaccurate predictions of passenger behavior and demand, resulting in
inefficient resource allocation and service delivery. Additionally, biased algorithms used in secu-
rity screening or immigration processes may unfairly target certain groups or individuals, leading
to discriminatory practices. Airports must recognize the potential for bias in their data collection
and decision-making processes and take steps to mitigate it, such as by ensuring diverse repre-
sentation in data collection and analysis and regularly auditing algorithms for bias.
Several tools and approaches are commonly used for airport data analysis and interpretation.
Data analysis and interpretation involves several key steps, including:
1. Data cleaning and preparation involves cleaning and preparing the data for analysis by
removing errors and inconsistencies, filling in missing data, and transforming the data into
a format suitable for analysis.
2. Data analysis involves using statistical and other methods to analyze the data and under-
stand its characteristics, including descriptive statistics, regression analysis, and time-series
analysis.
3. Data visualization involves using visual representations of the data to help illustrate pat-
terns, trends, and relationships in the data. Tools such as bar charts, line charts, scatter plots,
and heat maps, among others, are commonly used to visualize data.
4. Drawing conclusions involves using the insights gained from the data analysis and visualiza-
tion to draw conclusions and make informed decisions, such as identifying trends, patterns,
and relationships in the data and making predictions about future trends and patterns.

5. Communication involves communicating the findings and conclusions from the data
analysis to the relevant stakeholders, including preparing reports, presentations, and dash-
boards that communicate the findings and their implications for decision-making.
In addition to these key steps, airport data interpretation may involve data visualization and
analysis tools, such as Microsoft Excel, PowerBI, Tableau, and other dashboards. These tools can
help airport operators quickly and easily visualize and analyze large amounts of data, enabling
them to gain insights and make informed decisions.
One of the most widely used tools is Microsoft Excel, a spreadsheet software for basic data
analysis and visualization. With Excel, airport operators can create charts, pivot tables, and other
data summaries to help them better understand their data. In addition to Excel, other business
intelligence tools such as PowerBI and Tableau are also commonly used at airports for data
analysis and visualization. These tools provide advanced data visualization capabilities, allowing
airport operators to create interactive dashboards and reports that can help support decision-
making processes. For example, a dashboard in PowerBI or Tableau can show the number of
passengers that have traveled through an airport, the average length of time they spend in the
terminal, and the most popular retail and food and beverage outlets. An example of a dashboard
summarizing airport data is provided in Figure 5-1.
In addition to using in-house tools and dashboards, many airports also utilize the services of
third-party contractors and consultants for data analysis and interpretation. These contractors
and consultants bring specialized expertise and knowledge to the data analysis process, suggest-
ing how the data can support decision-making processes. For example, a consultant may analyze
passenger data to identify trends and patterns that can help airports understand what drives pas-
senger behavior and make decisions that support growth and improve the passenger experience.
Aside from these tools, some airports also use custom dashboards and reporting tools tailored to
their specific needs and data sources. These dashboards can provide real-time data and insights
critical for effective decision-making. For example, a custom dashboard can provide data on wait
times at security checkpoints, which can help airports identify areas for improvement and make
changes to reduce wait times for passengers.
5.3 How Data Are Used to Make Decisions

Data plays a critical role in decision-making processes at airports. Data collection and analy-
sis enable airport operators to make informed decisions about their operations, enhancing the
passenger experience and overall airport efficiency. Through a combination of quantitative
and qualitative data, airport operators can identify existing deficiencies and areas for improve-
ment, which helps inform the types of solutions, strategies, and improvements that could be
implemented.
Data are used to measure various aspects of airport operations, including demand levels,
delays, and service quality. By analyzing passenger activity and behaviors, airport operators can
better understand their customers and the airport’s services. This information is crucial in deter-
mining the quality of services offered at the airport and provides insight into passenger opinions,
performance, and reliability. It helps airport operators assess existing conditions and predict
future activity, which is important in informing the solutions, strategies, and improvements that
need to be considered.
One important use of data is in understanding the customer experience. By collecting and
analyzing data on passenger activity and opinions, airport operators can better understand what
their customers need and expect. This information then informs planning, operations, and

Figure 5-1. Sample dashboard from San Diego International Airport.
design decisions. For example, data can be used to determine the locations where passengers are
most likely to congregate, such as at security checkpoints or ticket counters, which in turn can
inform the design and layout of the airport to ensure that these areas are easily accessible and
well-staffed.
Data also provide information for day-to-day operations and business processes, such as fees,
revenues, and financial planning. By collecting and analyzing passenger demand and behavior
data, airport operators can make informed decisions about allocating resources and improv-
ing their operations. For example, ground access data can be used to determine the optimal fee
structure for commercial ground transportation, ensuring that the fees reflect an operator’s use
of airport facilities and the business benefit they derive from them and that the revenue gener-
ated is sufficient to cover the costs of operating and maintaining the ground access facilities (e.g.,
roadways, curbsides, and hold lots).
Figure 5-2 shows an example of how the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey used and
distilled multiple data sources into a single page. These summaries were used to monitor traffic
conditions and service levels on LaGuardia Airport’s ground transportation system while the
airport was under continual disruption due to construction. The sheet includes information on
total vehicle volumes at key locations, commercial ground transportation activity, public transit
performance, public parking accumulations, construction activity, and airport conditions (e.g.,
weather and flight delays) that could have affected ground transportation activity.
Data provide evidence and support airport staff ’s interactions with stakeholders, senior man-
agement, the board, and the public. By analyzing data and providing clear evidence, airport
operators can make a stronger case for implementing specific solutions, strategies, or improve-
ments, which is especially important when dealing with complex issues or seeking to allocate
resources effectively. Additional examples of how airports have used data-driven problem solving
are provided in Section 6.4.

(Source: Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, presented at AAAE Parking and Landside Management Workshop, September 13, 2017.)
Figure 5-2. Daily report summarizing key ground transportation data, LaGuardia Airport.
CHAPTER 6
Summary of Case Examples

from Airports
This chapter presents the results of the nine case examples conducted with the assistance
of the staff of the airports serving Chicago (Midway and O’Hare); Denver; Fort Lauderdale;
Indianapolis; Jackson, Wyoming; Orange County, California; Phoenix; and San Diego. As part
of creating these case examples, airport staff were asked about data collection methods, their
use of data in decision-making, any problems encountered, and examples in which the airport
addressed a problem using data. This chapter documents the interview questions and summa-
rizes the information gathered through each case example. Full results are presented in Appen-
dix B: Summary of Interviews with Case Example Airports.
6.1 Data Collection Methods and Technologies

Data collection methods at responding airports vary primarily based on the types of data
collected and the availability of funds. These methods include manual observations, airport
intercept surveys, and automated data collection systems such as camera-based technology
using AI analytics. The most common methods and technologies used are summarized here:
• Aggregated vehicle volume data (i.e., does not distinguish between modes) are typically
collected using temporary roadway tube counters or permanent count stations, such as
in-pavement loop detectors or camera-based technologies. Permanent count stations allow
continuous data collection, while tube counters are typically used as needed for specific data
collection efforts.
• Vehicle volume data, by mode, are usually continuously collected for commercial vehicles
through a ground transportation management system supplemented by self-reported data
from TNCs which typically are not included in an airport’s ground transportation manage-
ment system.
• Passenger intercept surveys or Wi-Fi intercept surveys often collect passenger mode choice
data. Passenger intercept surveys are usually scheduled (e.g., annually), while Wi-Fi intercept
surveys can be conducted continuously or as needed to address a specific question.
• Wait times for transportation services are most often collected as needed through a contractor
conducting a manual survey.
• Curbside dwell times are often collected as needed by a contractor conducting a manual survey.
• Ridership of airport-owned vehicles (e.g., remote parking shuttles) is often collected through
automated people counters, which involves using sensors installed on the bus doors, ceilings,
or other areas to accurately and automatically count the number of passengers on the vehicle.
Other methods involve having airport staff do manual counts.
• Ridership of public transit is most often collected by the transit agency and provided to the
airport upon request.
28

Summary of Case Examples from Airports 29
• Staging/hold lot wait times are typically collected using ground transportation management
systems as they can identify when a vehicle enters and exits the hold lot.
• Ticket counter queue length and time-in-queue are often collected using camera systems,
video analytics, or a manual survey.
• Security checkpoint data are typically collected by TSA and provided to the airport monthly or
upon request. Similarly, customs and immigration data are typically collected by U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP).
• Passenger movements pre-security and post-security as well as passenger accumulations in
holdrooms are often collected automatically via cameras or beacons and Wi-Fi data.
• Employee mode choice data are often collected using surveys, and employee parking/permit
data are part of the airport’s standard permit system.
6.2 Data Analysis

In the case example airports, staff indicated that the primary analysis tool used is Microsoft
Excel. Staff at some airports use business intelligence tools such as Tableau and PowerBI to sum
marize the data into dashboards for easy access. Data from contractors and third-party sources
are generally accessible and available; however, airports reported occasional challenges with
timeliness and lack of holistic data.
6.3 Legal Issues with Data Collection and Storage

At all case example airports, staff indicated that no legal data collection and storage issues
have been encountered. At all the case example airports, stored data can be requested through
the federal and state Freedom of Information Acts, per public documentation statutes. Fort
Lauderdale (FLL) reported that closed-circuit television (CCTV) data are stored for 30 days for
law enforcement purposes only and are exempt from public dissemination.
6.4 Data-Driven Problem Solving

In each case example airport, staff provided examples of how the airport used data to address
problems at the airport. These examples, summarized here, include a broad range of applica-
tions, including using data to address ground transportation service levels, revise automated
people mover scheduling, and proactively adjust in-terminal maintenance staffing levels.
6.4.1 Chicago O’Hare International Airport

The airport collected traffic volume data, turning movement counts, and signal timing data to
address a roadway congestion issue at one of the terminals. A consultant was engaged to analyze
the data and model the congestion in a microsimulation model (VISSIM). The VISSIM model
was used to test and evaluate the efficacy of potential solutions.
6.4.2 Chicago Midway International Airport

Airport staff analyzed ground transportation wait times for TNCs to verify customer com-
plaints about substandard service. Data collected included the time when each vehicle left the
hold lot and when the driver reported the passenger’s ride had begun. Based on those results,
the airport identified and evaluated potential alternative hold lot locations and vehicle routes

between the hold lot and the terminal. Based on the analysis results, the airport relocated the
hold lot, identified a suggested path for drives, and significantly reduced customer waiting times
for TNCs.
6.4.3 Denver International Airport

Airport staff recently utilized interterminal train wait time data to make decisions on adjust-
ing train frequency during peak periods to ensure sufficient capacity. Peak-period boarding
and disembarking passenger volumes were collected using cameras. The collected data were
consolidated monthly to aid the operations team in adjusting the interterminal train schedule.
6.4.4 Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport

Airport staff used expected airline load factor data and traffic volume information during the
2022 holiday season to direct drivers to alternative pickup areas on the departure level during
high arrival periods and to alternative drop-off areas on the arrivals level during high departure
periods. The data were also used to determine staffing levels in the terminal building for predic-
tive and preventive maintenance.
6.4.5 Indianapolis International Airport

Airport staff recently used traffic volume data and the amount of time TNCs spend at the
curbside to guide the building of a new roadway dedicated to TNCs, aiming to have sufficient
capacity and provide better customer service. Airport staff also used results from the Airport
Service Quality survey, which indicated dissatisfaction with concessions availability, to direct
concessionaires to change their hours of operation.
6.4.6 Jackson Hole Airport

Analysis of customer survey results indicated a desire by local passengers for a public transit
option to travel between the airport and the city center. Airport staff used these results to
approach the public transit agency, which has started planning to provide the requested route.
6.4.7 John Wayne Airport (California)

Airport staff use passenger survey data to identify opportunities to improve the guest experi-
ence. Survey results guide airport staff in crafting relevant messaging for stakeholders as part of
the project approval process.
6.4.8 Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport

In 2022, PHX completed the development of a passenger flow model based on 57 different
data sources, including automated and manual sources and airline booking data. PHX uses the
flow model to be prepared for upcoming passenger activity, including staffing accordingly and
planning maintenance and other activities to minimize potential impacts to passengers. The
model development also resulted in a pilot program initially conducted with one in-terminal
concessions operator. PHX provided the concessionaire with model results regarding forecast
passenger volumes in each concourse. The forecast allowed the concessionaire to adjust staffing
levels and plan for supplies at each location. Many stakeholders receive the data to improve their
ability to allocate resources.

Summary of Case Examples from Airports 31
6.4.9 San Diego International Airport

Airport staff used traffic volume data for TNCs and taxicabs to address multiple issues. Peak-
period volumes provided the basis for estimating needed hold lot capacity and helped identify
potential hold lot locations. Historical vehicle volume data were also used to reallocate the
commercial ground transportation loading curb at the airport’s Terminal 2.

CHAPTER 7
Summary of Findings and

Suggestions for Future Research
7.1 Summary of Findings

Airport staff indicated that the collection and analysis of data are crucial for effectively man-
aging airport landside operations. This information provides valuable insights into passenger
demand patterns, enabling airport operators to make informed decisions that improve the
overall passenger experience, optimize resource allocation, enhance the efficiency of landside
operations, and inform the design and layout of terminals. With data analysis, airport operators
can ensure the smooth operation of all landside facilities and play a vital role in the global
transportation system. The importance of effective decision-making in this area cannot be over-
stated, as it directly influences the success of the airport and the satisfaction of its passengers.
The information presented in this synthesis was gathered by conducting a literature search,
surveying airports in the United States, and conducting nine case examples with the help of the
staff at the airports serving Chicago (Midway and O’Hare), Denver, Fort Lauderdale, Indianapolis,
Jackson, Orange County, Phoenix, and San Diego.
The ongoing process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting data related to airport landside
operations helps airport operators identify areas for improvement. Data are collected and ana-
lyzed through a variety of methods, including:
1. Direct observation involves collecting data through observation of landside operations,
such as passenger wait times, resource utilization, and customer satisfaction.
2. Surveys and questionnaires involve collecting data from passengers and other airport stake-
holders through surveys and questionnaires, providing insights into customer experience
and perceptions of airport services.
3. Electronic monitoring systems involve using electronic monitoring systems, such as sensors
and cameras, to collect data on landside operations, including passenger wait times, resource
utilization, and customer traffic patterns.
4. Data analytics involves using advanced analytics tools, such as data mining, machine learn-
ing, and predictive modeling, to analyze large datasets and uncover insights into landside
performance.
Data collection and analysis results inform decision-making and drive operational improve-
ments by highlighting areas of success and areas that require attention. This information allows
airport operators to stay current on landside operations, respond quickly to changes in demand
or performance, and continuously improve the customer experience.
Data are used for the following purposes:
1. Planning and design: Landside data collection and analysis play a critical role in the plan-
ning and design of airport facilities. Information on passenger movements, vehicle traffic
32

Summary of Findings and Suggestions for Future Research 33
patterns, and access routes can provide valuable insights into the needs of the airport and
help inform the design of new facilities or improvements to existing ones.
2. Customer experience: Airports are increasingly focused on enhancing the customer experi-
ence, and data can help. By collecting data on passenger wait times, congestion points, and
other key performance indicators, airport operators can identify areas for improvement and
make changes to enhance the passenger experience.
3. Day-to-day operations: Data collection and analysis are essential for effective day-to-day
operations of airport landside facilities. Information on vehicle traffic patterns, passenger
wait times, and concessions usage can be used to optimize operations and reduce delays,
inform staffing decisions, and improve the airport’s overall efficiency.
4. Performance monitoring: Data collection and analysis are crucial for monitoring the per-
formance of airport landside facilities. Information on key performance indicators, such as
passenger wait times and vehicle traffic patterns, can be used to identify trends and make
data-driven decisions to improve the airport’s performance.
7.2 Suggestions for Future Research

In-depth research is needed to understand the financial implications of collecting, acquiring,
analyzing, storing, and maintaining data for airport operations. These expenses could include
the cost of equipment and technology, staffing and training, data security, and other related
expenses. Understanding the costs associated with data collection, acquisition, storage, and
analysis will give airport operators the information to make informed decisions about their data
collection and analysis programs. Furthermore, evaluating the cost-effectiveness of different
data collection methods and technologies is important in determining the appropriate data col-
lection approach at each airport. This research could also explore the potential for cost savings
through data sharing and collaboration between airports.
Data privacy and security are becoming increasingly important issues in the modern world.
As a result, airport operators must be aware of the legal challenges they may face when collecting,
storing, and analyzing data. These challenges include complying with data privacy laws, ensuring
data security, and managing data breaches. Additionally, further research into best data storage
and security practices could provide airport operators with the tools and strategies needed to
mitigate the risks associated with data storage and ensure that their data collection and analysis
programs comply with relevant laws and regulations.
Mitigating the risk of data issues is an essential area of research for airports, as data is a vital
component of their decision-making processes. This research would focus on developing strate-
gies and processes to minimize the risk of data errors, data loss, and data breaches that could
negatively affect airport operations and customer experience.
Data-sharing collaboration is also an important area of research for airports as they work
to improve their operations and enhance the customer experience. This research would focus
on identifying best practices for sharing data between airport operators, airlines, government
agencies, and other stakeholders to improve decision-making and operational efficiencies while
ensuring the privacy and security of shared data.

Glossary
• Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATR) Machines – Equipment, often portable, that records the
traffic volume crossing a tube or detector.
• Automatic Vehicle Identification (AVI) – A system or Radio Frequency Identification equip-
ment (e.g., vehicle-mounted tags or transponders) commonly used on roadways and bridges
to collect tolls.
• Business Intelligence (BI) Tool – A software application designed to collect, analyze, and
present complex data in a meaningful and actionable way to support business decision-making.
Examples include Microsoft PowerBI and Tableau.
• Demand Capacity Ratio – A measure that compares the demand for a service or resource to
its available capacity.
• Holdroom – A waiting area in an airport associated with a gate for the staging of passengers
waiting to board an aircraft at the gate.
• Landside – For this report, landside includes on-airport roadways and curbsides serving pas-
sengers while excluding public parking and rental car facilities.
• Terminal – For this report, terminal includes public areas of the passenger terminal building
between the building entrances and where passengers scan boarding passes during aircraft
boarding.
• Mode Share – The proportion of travelers using a particular type of ground transportation
service (e.g., private vehicle, taxicab, public transit).
• Privacy by Design – A proactive approach to privacy protection that incorporates privacy
considerations into the design and development of products, services, and systems from the
outset.
• Transportation Network Company – A ride-hailing service that connects passengers with
drivers via a smartphone app. Examples include Uber and Lyft.
• Vehicle Classification – The proportion of each type of ground transportation service (e.g.,
private vehicle, taxi, limousine) in a traffic stream.
34

Acronyms
AI Artificial Intelligence
APC Automated People Counter
ATR Automatic Traffic Recorder
AVI Automatic Vehicle Identification
CBP Customs and Border Protection
CONRAC Consolidated Rental Car Facility
LPR License Plate Recognition
LRD Legal Research Digest
PARCS Parking Access and Revenue Control System
TNC Transportation Network Company
35

References and Bibliography
Arif, M., Gupta, A., and Williams, A., “Customer Service in the Aviation Industry – An Exploratory Analysis of
UAE Airports,” Journal of Air Transport Management, Volume 32, pp. 1–7, September 2013.
Booz Allen Hamilton; Faith Group, LLC; Futron Aviation; George Mason University; and Quadrex Aviation,
ACRP Research Report 222: Collecting and Sharing of Operations and Safety Data, Transportation Research
Board, Washington, DC, 2020.
Buckingham, M., “It’s Time to Talk,” AviationPros, August 23, 2017, Available at: https://www.aviationpros.com
/airports/article/12349456/collecting-traveler-data-in-airports [accessed February 1, 2023].
Carbonaro, P., “High-Efficiency Roadway Management at LGA,” Presented at the AAAE/InterVISTAS Parking
and Landside Management Workshop, Salt Lake City, UT, November 3–4, 2022.
Cassidy, M., and Navarrete, J., ACRP Report 23: Airport Passenger-Related Processing Rates Guidebook, Transpor-
tation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, 2009.
Chiang, P., and Taaffe, K., “Analysis of Conveyance System Use in Airport Concourses,” Journal of Transportation
Engineering, Volume 138, Issue 4, pp. 485–493, April 2012.
Cook, B., “Commercial Ground Transportation Vehicle Management,” Presented at the AAAE Parking and
Landside Management Workshop, Spokane, WA, September 13–14, 2017.
Dixon, M. “How Airport Data Analytics Is Changing Airport Operations,” Selerity, April 10, 2020, Available
at: https://seleritysas.com/blog/2020/04/10/how-airport-data-analytics-is-changing-airport-operations/
[accessed February 1, 2023].
Duncan, G., “What’s New in Airport Curbside Management,” Presented at the ACI-NA Operations and Technical
Affairs Conference, Kansas City, MO, April 4–7, 2011.
Franz, J., Holbert, H., Garrow, L., Gosling, G., Vande Kamp, M., Harmon, L., and Ward, S., ACRP Research
Report 235: Guidebook for Conducting Airport User Surveys and Other Customer Research, Transportation
Research Board, Washington, DC, 2021.
Gubser, A., “TNC Planning and Operations at San Francisco International Airport,” Presented at the AAAE
Parking and Landside Management Workshop, Charlotte, NC, September 19–20, 2016.
Hainen, A., Remias, S., and Bullock, D., “Collection and Analysis of Multi-Modal Airport Land Side Probe Data
from Bluetooth Enabled Mobile Devices,” 16th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation
Systems, The Hague, Netherlands, October 6–9, 2013. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document
/6728411 [accessed August 31, 2022].
InterVISTAS Consulting Inc., Walker Consultants, JLL, Innovat International, and DWU Consulting, ACRP
Research Report 225: Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 2021.
Jacobs Consultancy, Walker Parking Consultants, Mannix Group, and DMR Consulting, ACRP Report 24: Guide-
book for Evaluating Airport Parking Strategies and Supporting Technologies, Transportation Research Board
of the National Academies, Washington, DC, 2009.
Janssen, S., van der Sommen, R., Dilweg, A., and Sharpanskykh, A., “Data-Driven Analysis of Airport Security
Checkpoint Operations,” Aerospace, Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2020.
Kovynyhov, I., and Mikut, R., “Digital technologies in airport ground operations,” Netnomics: Economic Research
and Electronic Networking, Volume 20, pp. 1–30, March 2019.
Landrum and Brown; Hirsh Associates, Ltd.; Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; Jacobs Consultancy; The S-A-P
Group; TransSecure, Inc.; Steven Winter Associates, Inc.; Star Systems, LLC; and Presentation and Design,
Inc. ACRP Report 25: Airport Passenger Terminal Planning and Design, Volume 1: Guidebook. Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, 2010.
Lebegern, B., “Ground Transportation Planning and Design: Planning With and For Technology,” Presented at
the ACI-NA Operations and Technical Affairs Conference, Kansas City, MO, April 4–7, 2011.
36

References and Bibliography 37
LeighFisher, Dowling Associates, Inc., JD Franz Research, Inc., and WILTEC, ACRP Report 40: Airport Curb-
side and Terminal Area Roadway Operations, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies,
Washington, DC, 2010.
Livingstone, A., et al. “Understanding the Airport Passenger Landside Retail Experience,” DRS Bangkok –
Research: Uncertainty, Contradiction, and Value, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand, 2012, pp. 1–18.
Luo, Y., Kong, Y., Liang, Y., and Luo, X., “Analysis of passengers’ pace characteristics of horizontal passageway
in Airport Landside APM System,” 20th COTA International Conference of Transportation Professionals,
American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 3612–3621, 2020, Available: https://trid.trb.org/view/1728534
[accessed August 31, 2022].
Pastorino, M., Mantecchini, L., Malandri, C., and Paganelli, F., “Airport Passenger Arrival Process: Estimation of
Earliness Arrival Functions,” Transportation Research Procedia, January 2019.
Patchan, B., “Washington Dulles International Airport, Monitoring Ground Transportation Customer Service,”
Presented at the AAAE Parking and Landside Management Workshop, Baltimore, MD, November 6–7,
2007.
Pitchforth, J., Wu, P., Fooks, C., and Mengersen, K., “Processing of Passengers Efficiently: An Analysis of Airport
Processing Times for International Passengers,” Journal of Air Transport Management, Volume 49, pp. 35–45,
October 2015.
Pitters, F., “Why Survey Data Is Fundamental to Developing Data-Driven Strategies,” Journal of Airport Manage-
ment, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp. 258–265, Summer 2021.
Rezcomm, “Data Privacy vs. Personalisation for Airports,” International Airport Review, November 11, 2022,
Available: https://www.internationalairportreview.com/article/180742/data-privacy-vs-personalisation
-for-airports/ [accessed February 9, 2023].
Rohlf, B., and Demetropoulos, S., “LaGuardia Airport Redevelopment Transportation Management and Com-
mand Center,” Presented at the AAAE Parking and Landside Management Workshop, Spokane, WA,
September 13–14, 2017.
Ryan, P., Sood, K., Vasigh, B., Wildman, J., and D’Andrea, L., ACRP Research Report 231: Evaluating the Traveler’s
Perspective to Improve the Airport Customer Experience, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC,
2021.
Swonsen, F., “Enhancing Operations Through Technology,” Presented at the AAAE Parking and Landside Man-
agement Workshop, Dallas, TX, October 19–20, 2015.
Swonsen, F., “License Plate Recognition on the Airport Roadway,” Presented at the AAAE Parking and Landside
Management Workshop, Atlanta, GA, September 27–28, 2018.
Tan, Z., Wu, J., Zhao, B., and Qin, J., “Research for Required Scale of Departure Curbside Parking Based on Travel
Time, 20th COTA International Conference of Transportation Professionals, American Society of Civil Engi-
neers, pp. 2338–2348, 2020. Available: https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/9780784482933.202 [accessed
February 4, 2023].
Zhao, J., Shuainan, D., Bengang, G., Zhenchao, M., and Jiamin, J., “Research on Temporal and Spatial Distribu-
tion Characteristics of Passenger Flow of Daxing Airport Line Based on Automatic Fare Collection Data,”
Expert Systems: Early View, May 2022. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/exsy.13009
[accessed February 6, 2023].
Zoufal, D. R., Cusson, S., Larsen, D. J., Person, T., Hantman, D., and Maliszewski, E. A., ACRP Legal Research
Digest 42: Legal Implications of Data Collection at Airports. Transportation Research Board, Washington,
DC, 2021.

APPENDIX A
Survey Questions with Results
Survey Questions
The following questions were asked in the web-based survey.
38

Survey Questions with Results 39




Ground Access Survey Questions

1. Total Vehicular Volume: Refers to the total number of vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, buses,
shuttles, etc.) traveling on a roadway in a given time period.
2. Vehicular Volumes (for one or more specific modes): Refers to the number of vehicles of
a specific mode of transportation (e.g., taxicabs, hotel courtesy vehicles, TNCs) that
travel on a roadway in a given time period.
3. Mode Share: Refers to the portion of passengers using different modes of transportation
(e.g., private vehicles, taxis, public transit) to get to and from an airport.
4. Vehicle Classification: Refers to the categorization of vehicles based on their type, size,
or purpose, such as passenger cars, buses, delivery trucks, airport operations vehicles,
police vehicles, etc.
5. Wait Time for Transportation Services: Refers to the amount of time a passenger spends
waiting for a specific mode of transportation (e.g., taxi, rental shuttle, public transit) at the
airport.
6. Curbside Dwell Time: Refers to the amount of time a vehicle is stopped at the airport
curb to drop off or pick up passengers.
7. Ridership of Airport-Owned or Operated Shuttle Buses, APM, or Other: Refers to the
number of passengers who use airport-owned or operated transportation services, such
as remote/economy parking shuttle buses, Automated People Movers (APM), or other
modes of transportation.
8. Ridership of Public Transit: Refers to the number of passengers who use public transit
(e.g., trains, buses, light rail) to get to and from the airport.
9. Staging/Hold Lot Wait Times: Refers to the amount of time a vehicle spends waiting in a
designated staging or hold lot before being allowed to enter the airport curb to drop off or
pick up passengers.
Terminal (before security) Survey Questions
1. Queue length at ticketing: The number of passengers waiting in line to purchase or
receive their boarding pass and check bags at the ticketing counter.
2. Time in queue at ticketing: The amount of time a passenger spends waiting in line to
purchase or receive their boarding pass and check bags at the ticketing counter.
3. Queue length at security checkpoint: The number of passengers waiting in line to go
through the security screening process.
4. Time in queue at security checkpoint: The amount of time a passenger spends waiting in
line to go through the security screening process.
5. Passenger movement: The measurement of passenger counts at different locations
within the airport, or following certain paths from one location to another.
6. Other data: Data related to passenger usage of airport facilities and amenities, such as
concession stands, baggage claim, and restrooms.

Terminal (after security) Survey Questions

1. Queue length at customs/immigration: The number of passengers waiting in line to clear
customs or immigration.
2. Time in queue at customs/immigration: The amount of time a passenger spends waiting
in line to clear customs or immigration.
3. Concession usage: The measurement of passenger usage of airport concessions, such
as food and beverage and retail stores.
4. Passenger accumulation: The number of passengers who have gathered in a specific
location within an airport over a given period of time, such as in a holdroom.
Employee (and other Landside) Survey Questions
1. Employee mode choice: The transportation modes used by airport employees to
commute to and from work, such as personal vehicles, public transit, or other options.
2. Employee parking/permit data: Information related to the parking habits of airport
employees, such as the number of employee parking spaces used and the types of
permits required.
3. Other data related to landside: Any other relevant data related to the landside operations
of an airport.
Survey Results from Participating Airports

Table A-1 and Table A-2 summarize information on various aspects of airports, including
vehicular volumes, mode share of transportation services, vehicle classification, wait times,
curbside dwell time, ridership of airport transportation services, and public transit.
Some airports indicated “other” frequency and/or provided answers in the free response section.
The following is a summary of the free responses:
• An airport indicated that sometimes data collection is triggered by major project(s).

• An airport indicated that vehicular volumes are collected for roadway capacity studies.
Transit entities collect public transit ridership data.
• An airport indicated that vehicular volumes by mode are collected as necessary for
arrivals only, and the airport cannot distinguish between all modes.
• An airport indicated that only the number of registered vehicles is tracked for mode
share; curbside dwell times are not collected formally.
• An airport indicated that vehicle classification data are only available for parking
vehicles. Staging/hold lot wait times are only measured for taxicabs.
• An airport indicated that data on ridership of airport-owned vehicles are only collected for
the Airport Transit System, and public transit data are only collected for boardings.
• An airport indicated that public transit data are only collected for boardings.

Table A-1. Ground Access Data Collection.
Airport Vehicular Vehicular volumes Mode share Vehicle classification Wait time for Curbside Ridership of Ridership Staging/
volumes (for one or more (e.g., taxicab, (the type of vehicle transportation dwell airport-owned of public hold lot
(total) specific modes, courtesy used, e.g., sedan, services time or operated transit wait
e.g., taxicabs, hotel vehicle, passenger van, shuttle buses, times
courtesy vehicles, charter bus) minibus, full-size APM, other
TNCs) bus)
A Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
B Yes Yes Yes Yes Don't Know Yes Yes No Yes

C Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
D Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
E Yes Yes No No No No No Yes No
F Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
G Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No
H Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
I Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
J Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
K Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes
L Yes Yes Yes Don't Know No Yes Yes Yes Yes
M Yes Yes Yes Don't Know Yes No Yes No No
N Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
O Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No
P Yes Yes Yes No No No Don't Know No No
Q Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No
R Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No
S Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes
T No Yes No No No No No No No
U No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No
V Yes Yes Yes Don't Know No No N/A N/A No
W No Yes Yes No No Yes N/A N/A N/A
Yes 20 23 21 11 9 11 16 11 10
No 3 0 2 9 13 12 4 10 12
Other* 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 2 1
* Includes Don’t know, N/A, and blank answers.
Table A-2. Frequency of Data Collection for Ground Access Data.
Airport Vehicular Vehicular Mode share (e.g., Vehicle Wait time for Curbside dwell Ridership of Ridership of Staging/hold lot
volumes (total) volumes (for one taxicab, courtesy classification (the transportation time airport-owned or public transit wait times
or more specific vehicle, charter type of vehicle services operated shuttle
modes, e.g., bus) used, e.g., sedan, buses, APM, other
taxicabs, hotel passenger van,
courtesy vehicles, minibus, full-size
TNCs) bus)
A As necessary Continuous As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary Continuous Continuous --
B As necessary As necessary Annually As necessary Don't Know As necessary Continuous -- As necessary
C More than More than More than More than
As necessary -- Annually
More than
Annually
once/year once/year once/year once/year once/year

D As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary Continuous As necessary As necessary
E As necessary Other -- -- -- -- --
More than
--
once/year
F As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary Continuous As necessary As necessary
G Other Other Other Other -- -- Other -- --
H As necessary As necessary Annually Annually As necessary As necessary Annually Annually Annually
I More than
-- As necessary As necessary
More than
Continuous Continuous
More than
Continuous
once/year once/year once/year
J As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary
K Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous As necessary -- Continuous As necessary --
L Continuous Continuous Continuous Other Other
More than
Continuous As necessary Other
once/year
M Continuous Continuous Continuous Don't Know As necessary --
More than
-- --
once/year
N As necessary As necessary As necessary Continuous As necessary As necessary Continuous Continuous --
O Continuous Continuous As necessary Continuous -- -- Continuous -- --
P Continuous Continuous Continuous Other Other Other Other Other Other
Q Continuous Continuous -- Continuous As necessary As necessary -- -- --
R Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous -- As necessary Continuous -- --
S More than More than
As necessary Other As necessary -- -- -- --
once/year once/year
T -- Continuous -- -- -- -- -- -- --
U -- Continuous Continuous -- -- -- Continuous Continuous --
V As necessary Continuous Continuous Don't Know -- -- -- -- --
W -- Continuous -- -- -- Continuous -- -- --
Continuous 7 12 7 5 0 2 11 3 1
More than
2 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1
once/year
Annually 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 2
As Necessary 10 6 8 6 10 9 1 5 4
Other 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 1 2
Don’t Know 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0
-- 3 1 4 5 9 10 5 10 13
-- = Airport does not collect this
Table A-3 and Table A-4 summarize the types of terminal data collected on the non-secure side
of the terminal.
Some airports indicated “other” frequency and/or provided answers in the free response section.
• An airport indicated that data collection on queue length at ticketing, passenger

movement, and other data are project based. Security checkpoint wait time and queue
length are collected daily by TSA.
• An airport indicated that the airport can collect all data in this section as needed.
• An airport indicated data collection on queue length at ticketing is done when conducting
studies or master plans. Security checkpoint wait time and queue length are collected
daily by TSA. Passenger movement data are collected at check-in.
• An airport indicated that the airport collects data on transactions from concessions and
the number of bags inbound.
• An airport indicated that the airport can request ticketing queue length and wait times
from airlines.

Table A-3. Data Collection in the Terminal Before Security.
Airport Queue length Time in queue Queue length at the Time in queue at the Passenger movement (e.g., passenger Other data (e.g., related to
at ticketing at ticketing security checkpoint security checkpoint counts at discrete locations or following concessions, bag claim, restrooms,
certain paths) etc.)
A No No Yes Yes No No
B Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
C Yes Yes Yes Yes No
D Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

E No No No No No No
F Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
G No No Yes Yes Yes No
H Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
I Yes Yes Yes No Yes N/A
J Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
K Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
L No No Yes Yes Yes Don't Know
M Don't Know Don't Know Yes Yes Yes Yes
N No No Yes Yes No No
O No No No Yes Yes Yes
P Yes Yes Yes Yes Don't Know Don't Know
Q No No Yes Yes Don't Know Don't Know
R Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
S No No No No Yes No
T No No No No No No
U No No Yes Yes No No
V No No No Yes No No
W Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Yes 11 11 18 19 13 9
No 11 11 5 4 8 9
N/A, Don’t 1 1 0 0 2 5
Know, no
response
Table A-4. Frequency of Data Collection in the Terminal Before Security.
Airport Queue length Time in queue Queue length at Time in queue at the Passenger movement (e.g., passenger Other data (e.g., related to
at ticketing at ticketing security checkpoint security checkpoint counts at discrete locations or following concessions, bag claim, restrooms,
certain paths) etc.)
A As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary -- --
B Annually Annually Annually Annually Annually As necessary
C As necessary As necessary More than once/year More than once/year -- --
D As necessary As necessary Continuous Continuous As necessary As necessary
E -- -- -- -- -- --
F As necessary As necessary Continuous Continuous As necessary As necessary
G -- -- Other Other Other --
H As necessary As necessary Other Other -- --
I As necessary Continuous Continuous -- As necessary --
J As necessary As necessary Continuous Continuous As necessary --
K Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous As necessary
L Other -- Continuous Continuous Continuous Don't Know
M Don't Know Don't Know Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous
N As necessary As necessary Continuous Continuous As necessary As necessary
O -- -- -- As necessary Other Continuous
P As necessary As necessary Continuous As necessary Other Other
Q -- -- Continuous -- Don't Know Don't Know
R Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous As necessary Continuous
S As necessary -- As necessary -- As necessary --
T -- -- -- -- -- --
U -- -- Continuous Continuous -- --
V -- -- -- As necessary -- --
W As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary -- --
Continuous 2 3 12 9 3 3
More than
0 0 1 1 0 0
once/year
Annually 1 1 1 1 1 0
As Necessary 11 9 3 5 7 5
Other 1 0 2 2 3 1
Don’t Know 1 1 0 0 1 2
-- 7 9 4 5 8 12
-- = Airport does not collect this or provided no response.
Table A-5 and Table A-6 summarize the data collected on the secure side of the terminal.
One airport indicated “other” for frequency and provided answers in the free response section.
• An airport indicated data collection on passenger movement and accumulation, as well

as other data, is done when conducting studies or master plans.

Table A-5. Data Collection in the Terminal Post Security.
Airport Queue length Time in queue Concession usage Passenger movement (e.g., Passenger accumulation (e.g., Other data (e.g., related to
at customs/ at customs/ passenger counts at discrete holdrooms, restrooms) concessions, bag claim, restrooms,
immigration immigration locations or following certain etc.)
paths)
A Yes Yes Yes No No
B Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
C
No No Yes Yes Yes

D Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
E No Yes No No No No
F Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
G Yes Yes Yes Yes
H Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
I Yes Yes Yes No Yes N/A
J Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
K Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
L Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
M Don't Know Don't Know Don't Know Yes Yes
N Yes Yes Yes No No No
O Yes Yes Yes No No
P Yes Yes Yes Don't Know No N/A
Q Don't Know Don't Know Yes Don't Know Don't Know Don't Know
R No No Yes No No No
S No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
T No No No No No No
U N/A N/A Yes No No No
V No No No No No No
W N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Yes 12 14 18 11 11 7
No 6 4 3 9 10 7
N/A, Don’t 5 5 2 3 2 9
Know, no
response
Table A-6. Frequency of Data Collection in the Terminal Post Security.
Airport Queue length Time in queue at Concession usage Passenger movement (e.g., Passenger accumulation (e.g., Other data (e.g., related to
at customs/ customs/ passenger counts at discrete holdrooms, restrooms) concessions, bag claim, restrooms,
immigration immigration locations and/or following etc.)
certain paths)
A Continuous Continuous As necessary -- -- --
B As necessary As necessary Continuous Continuous As necessary --
C More than
-- -- More than once/year More than once/year --
once/year
D
As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary Other

E -- As necessary -- -- -- --
F As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary --
G -- -- Other Other Other Other
H More than More than More than
More than once/year More than once/year More than once/year
once/year once/year once/year
I Continuous Continuous As necessary -- As necessary --
J As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary
K Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous As necessary As necessary
L Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous -- As necessary
M Don't Know Don't Know Don't Know Continuous Continuous --
N Continuous Continuous As necessary As necessary As necessary As necessary
O As necessary As necessary Continuous -- -- --
P As necessary As necessary Continuous Other Other Other
Q Don't Know Don't Know Continuous Don't Know Don't Know Don't Know
R -- -- Annually -- -- --
S -- As necessary Annually As necessary As necessary --
T -- -- -- -- -- --
U -- -- Continuous -- -- --
V -- -- -- -- -- --
W -- -- -- -- -- --
Continuous 5 5 7 4 1 0
More than
1 1 2 2 2 1
once/year
Annually 0 0 2 0 0 0
As Necessary 6 8 6 5 8 4
Other 0 0 1 2 2 3
Don’t Know 2 2 1 1 1 1
-- 9 7 4 9 9 14
-- = Airport does not collect data or did not respond.
Table A-7 and Table A-8 summarize the data collected on employees.
Some airports indicated “other” for frequency and provided answers in the free response
section. The following is a summary of the free responses:
• An airport indicated that data are collected at exit toll plazas: number of transactions and
payment type (e.g., credit card, cash, QR code, toll tag); number and type of vehicle
(authorized vehicle only) at crossover gates.
• An airport indicated that mode choice data are collected for county employees only.
Table A-7. Data Collection for Employees.
Airport Mode choice Parking/permit data Other data related to landside

A No Yes
B Don't Know Yes Yes
C Yes Yes
D Yes Yes Yes
E No Yes
F Yes Yes Yes
G No Yes No
H Yes Yes Yes
I No Yes N/A
J Yes Yes Yes
K Yes Yes Yes
L Yes Yes Don't Know
M Don't Know Yes
N No Yes
O Yes Yes
P Don't Know Yes N/A
Q Yes Yes N/A
R No Yes
S No Yes No
T No No No
U No Yes No
V Don't Know Yes No
W N/A Yes Yes
Yes 9 22 7
No 9 1 5
N/A, Don’t 5 0 11
Know, no
response

Table A-8. Frequency of Data Collection for Employees.
Airport Mode choice Parking/permit data Other data related to landside

A -- Continuous --
B Don't Know Continuous Continuous
C As necessary As necessary --
D As necessary As necessary As necessary
E -- More than once/year --
F As necessary As necessary As necessary
G -- More than once/year --
H More than once/year More than once/year More than once/year
I -- Continuous --
J As necessary As necessary --
K Continuous Continuous As necessary
L Annually Continuous Don't Know
M Don't Know Continuous --
N As necessary Continuous --
O Annually Continuous --
P Other As necessary Other
Q As necessary Continuous --
R -- Continuous --
S -- More than once/year --
T -- -- --
U -- Continuous --
V Don't Know Continuous --
W -- Continuous --
Continuous 1 13 1
More than once/year 1 4 1
Annually 2 0 0
As Necessary 6 5 3
Other 1 0 1
Don’t Know 3 0 1
-- 9 1 16
-- = Airport does not collect this information.
Responses to question 5 include:
• “I was once told at a conference that data is just as important as the technology and
infrastructure. That has proven to be more than true.”
• “Data associated with passenger movements post security coming online soon in which
beacons providing continuous data will placed throughout terminals.”

APPENDIX B
Summary of Interviews with

Case Example Airports
Interview Questions
During the follow-up interview with relevant staff, the following questions were asked:
1. How data are collected, what systems/technologies are used (e.g., Passenger intercept survey?
Bluetooth? Wi-Fi access page?)
2. How data are analyzed (e.g., Excel? Other business intelligence software? Contractor?)
3. Why data are collected.
4. How data inform decision-making? The data that airports consider to be important in
informing decision-making.
5. Information on the costs and any legal issues with data collection and storage.
6. The availability of data from contractors or other third-party sources (airlines or other
stakeholders)?
7. What kind of data would you like to have that you currently do not collect or receive?
8. Challenges encountered during data collection, storage, or application to decision-making.
9. An example of how your airport fixed a problem using data.
Case Examples
The airport staff that responded to the online survey indicated their willingness to serve as
case examples. Based on survey responses and airport characteristics, the team identified nine
airports to serve as case examples. Selected airports indicated a range of data collection efforts
across landside facilities and provided diversity in airport activity levels. This section provides a
summary of the case example interviews.
Chicago O’Hare International Airport

The City of Chicago, the operator of Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD), indicated
that total vehicular volume data are collected as needed via camera systems that require manual
review, and vehicular volume data by mode are collected via several different systems. The airport’s
ground transportation management system uses license plate recognition (LPR) equipment at
the airport’s commercial vehicle hold lot and commercial vehicle lane at Terminal 1. Combined
with TNC self-reported data (provided through the Chicago Department of Business Affairs
and Consumer Protection’s PowerBI platform), this information is used for vehicle classification.
Mode share data are collected as needed by planning consultants. Wait times for transportation
services are collected on an as-needed basis. ORD staff indicated that passenger wait times for
taxis are collected manually by taxi stand staff. Curbside dwell times are collected manually by
watching footage from cameras typically used for other purposes. Ridership of airport-owned
55

shuttles is typically estimated using remote parking exit counts. The Chicago Transit Authority
collects ridership data of public transit through transit passes that can be requested by the airport
when needed. ORD staff also indicated that public transit ridership data have, in the past, been
manually captured by in-person surveys.
Ticket counter queue length and times are collected on an as-needed basis through the use
of camera footage or the use of a survey team. Security checkpoint queue length and times are
collected by TSA and through camera footage.
Customs and immigration queue lengths and times are collected by United States Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) and through camera-based technology. Passenger movement through
the terminal before security and post-security can be manually reviewed through cameras. Con-
cessionaires report their transactions and revenues to the airport. Employee parking and permit
data are collected in the standard parking permit process and placed into an online database.
ORD staff indicated that data analysis varies depending on the data type. Some data are
received through third-party PDFs and often analyzed using Excel. ORD staff reported that data
are collected for a range of reasons, but primarily to support business analytics to understand
the airport’s performance, adjust staffing, understand demand at terminals, and plan ahead by
understanding current utilization and estimating changes for the future.
ORD staff indicated that data on courtesy buses (operated by off-airport hotels and parking
operators) are lacking, and they would like more real-time data. ORD staff stated that no legal
issues have been encountered with data collection, and data must be stored for 5 years. ORD
staff also reported that data from contractors and third-party sources are easily accessible and
available. However, staff also reported a challenge with the timeliness of data and lack of holistic
data for ground access. Additionally, mobilization to gather data (especially passenger intercept
surveys) often requires extra time, delaying the request for data. ORD staff indicated that the
need for interagency coordination and cooperation contributes to the ease of access to data and
timeliness.
To address a roadway congestion issue at Terminal 5, the airport collected traffic volume data,
turning movement counts, and signal timing data. A consultant was engaged to analyze the data
and model the congestion in a microsimulation model (VISSIM). The VISSIM model was used
to test and evaluate the efficacy of potential solutions.
Chicago Midway International Airport

The City of Chicago, the operator of Chicago Midway International Airport (MDW), indi-
cated that total vehicular volume data is collected as needed via camera systems that require
manual review. Vehicular volume data by mode and vehicle classification can be collected via
surveys as necessary, but these are not done frequently. Wait times for transportation services are
collected as needed through cameras and manual review. Curbside dwell times are collected as
needed for private vehicles and TNCs and are done quarterly or during busy months. Taxicabs
and limousine dwell times are tracked through a ticketing process that identifies when vehicles
approach the curbside and when they leave. Ridership of airport-owned shuttles is typically
tracked through video counts and reviewed per the shuttle operator’s contractual requirements.
The Chicago Transit Authority collects ridership data of public transit, which the airport can
request when needed.
Ticket counter queue length and times are collected on an as-needed basis through the use
of camera footage or the use of a survey team. Security checkpoint queue length and times are
collected by TSA and through camera-based technology.

Summary of Interviews with Case Example Airports 57
Customs and immigration queue length and times are collected by CBP and through camera-
based technology. Concessionaires report the transactions and revenues to the airport. Employee
parking and permit data are collected during the standard parking permit process.
MDW staff indicated that data analysis varies depending on the data type. Some data are
received through third parties and are often analyzed using Excel. MDW staff reported that data
are collected to develop forecasting, ensure that key performance indicators are met, understand
capacity, inform capital plan updates, support decisions that affect airlines, ensure that revenue is
maximized and captured, and ensure customer service goals and standards are met.
MDW staff expressed the desire for data collection to be more automated but understood
the amount of capital investment required and the business case necessary to implement an
automated data collection system. MDW staff stated that no legal issues have been encountered,
and the city’s legal team has addressed any legal issues well. MDW staff also reported that data
from contractors and third-party sources are easily accessible and available. Staff also reported
the challenge of a non-centralized database of information and the need to reach out to mul-
tiple agencies or sources to receive information. Additionally, while data are readily available,
staff must understand the availability of all data types to determine what relevant data can be
provided.
MDW used ground transportation wait times for TNCs to validate customer complaints
received regarding the poor level of service provided by TNCs. As part of the evaluation, staff
also evaluated the location of the hold lot and the route the vehicle travels to the terminal to
have a holistic understanding of the issue. MDW staff then modified TNC operations to meet
customer service goals better.
Denver International Airport

The City and County of Denver, the operator of Denver International Airport (DEN), indi-
cated that total bi-directional vehicular volume data are collected using 20 continuous traffic
loop detector counters along Pena Blvd, the main access route to the airport. Vehicular volume
data, by mode and vehicle classification, can be collected via surveys, typically bi-annual or
annually, using Wavetronix camera and radar technology. Additionally, Gatekeeper software
processes data on TNCs. Wait times for transportation services are collected as needed through
NextGen, the parking access and revenue control system (PARCS), or through Gatekeeper.
Curbside dwell times are collected as needed by NextGen. Ridership of airport-owned shuttles
is collected annually through the rental car companies and the DEN parking team. The Denver
Regional Transportation District provides ridership data for public transit more than once a year.
The DEN parking team collects staging/hold lot wait times annually.
Ticket counter queue length and times are collected as needed through manual surveys con-
ducted by the DEN planning team. TSA collects security checkpoint queue length and times
through Livereach Media camera-based technology. Before this technology, data were collected
using beacons and Wi-Fi data.
Concessionaires report their transactions and revenues to the airport monthly. Employee
parking and permit data are collected in the standard parking permit process.
DEN staff indicated that data are typically stored in a business intelligence warehouse on a
server, extracted using Microsoft tools, and then analyzed using business intelligence tools such
as Tableau and PowerBI. After analysis, data are summarized into dashboards. Additional soft-
ware DEN staff use includes ESRI for GIS mapping and visual analysis. DEN staff reported that
data are collected to ultimately make better decisions overall and empower management to make

informed decisions. Staff indicated that all data are important in informing decision-making;
however, data are used differently depending on the airport department.
DEN staff desire passenger movement and real-time revenue data from concessionaires and
retail. Additionally, staff said they want accurate and easy-to-export traffic data, more data on
vehicle crashes, and real-time traffic safety information. DEN staff stated that no legal issues have
been encountered and data must be stored for 7 years. DEN staff also reported that data from
contractor and third-party sources are generally accessible and available. However, staff also
reported that they had some challenges in receiving flight schedule data from specific airlines
and that GIS data are occasionally delayed or in an incorrect format. While data are typically
readily available, staff must access data through an SQL server and parse through data using
Excel, which requires a detailed understanding of the data.
DEN recently used interterminal train wait time data to inform the decision on train headway
times to ensure adequate capacity during peak times. DEN used cameras to count the number
of passengers boarding and alighting during peak times. All data were aggregated to inform the
operations team monthly to meet customer experience and operational goals.
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport

The County of Broward, the operator of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport
(FLL), indicated that vehicular volume data are collected by consultants using tube counters. In
contrast, specific vehicle classification counts are collected using AVI data, a Gatekeeper system,
and self-reported TNC data. Mode choice data can be collected via passenger surveys as needed.
Wait times for transportation services are only collected for buses (through GPS) and TNCs,
which self-report the wait times between ride requests and the vehicle’s arrival at the pickup
location. Curbside dwell times are collected as needed; staff indicated that policy limits TNC
dwell times on the curbside to one minute. Ridership of airport-owned shuttles is collected
continuously through automated counters and manually supplemented as needed. Ridership
data of public transit are provided by Broward County Transit more than once a year. Staging/
hold lot wait times are continuously collected by the airport using an entry and exit automated
counter for taxis.
Ticket counter queue length and time-in-queue are manually collected as needed by FLL
staff. TSA collects security checkpoint queue length and times. Data on passenger movement
through the terminal are collected as needed using consultants. However, staff is investigating
a new system using camera tracking with AI analytics. Customs and immigration data on wait
times and queue lengths are collected continuously by CBP. Concessionaires report the transac-
tions, revenues, foot traffic, and customer wait times to the airport monthly. Employee parking
and permit data are collected in the standard parking permit process. FLL staff indicated that all
employees who work at the airport are badged regardless of work location on the airport.
FLL staff indicated that data analysis methods vary depending on the data type. Generally,
Tableau is used for daily tracking, while Excel is used for analysis. Staff reported using flight
tracking software services such as FlightAware and FlightRadar24 to supplement airline data.
FLL staff reported that data are collected for operational decision-making. Specifically, FLL used
data to inform staffing level decisions for maintenance, operations, and concessions staff.
FLL staff wanted curbside dwell time data to understand passenger behavior better. FLL staff
stated that no legal issues have been encountered, and data must be stored for 7 years. FLL staff
indicated that the greatest challenge with data collection is the multiple available data sources
and collection methods, which can result in inconsistencies. FLL staff also reported that data
from contractor and third-party sources are generally accessible and available.

FLL utilized expected airline load factor data and traffic volume information during the 2022
holiday season to direct drivers to alternative pickup areas on the departure level during high
arrival periods and to alternative drop-off areas on the arrivals level during high departure
periods. The data were also used to determine staffing levels in the terminal building for pre-
dictive and preventive maintenance.
Indianapolis International Airport

The Indianapolis Airport Authority, Indianapolis International Airport’s (IND) operator,
indicated that specific vehicle volume and classification counts are collected using AVI data as
commercial vehicles enter the ground transportation center (GTC). Wait times for transpor-
tation services are collected as needed. IND utilizes NextBus, or UMO IQ, to determine the
airport shuttle wait times and headways. Curbside dwell times are collected as needed.
TSA collects security checkpoint queue length and times using automated people counters.
Concessions report the monthly transactions, revenues, and customer wait times provided to the
airport. Employee parking and permit data are collected in the standard parking permit process.
This information is also used to estimate employee mode choice options.
IND staff indicated that data analysis varies depending on the data type. Generally, Excel is used
for data storage and analysis. Additionally, staff uses vendor-provided software (e.g., ClickView,
which is integrated with the parking and revenue control system) to analyze parking data. IND
staff reported that data are collected for adherence to records retention laws and for analysis to
improve operations management.
IND staff indicated their challenge is related to the sample size limitations of passenger surveys.
As categories get more specific, sample sizes drop significantly and may not be statistically relevant.
Staff indicated that the most important data are those that inform better operational decisions—
specifically staffing decisions—based on volume and demand data. IND staff stated that no legal
issues have been encountered. IND staff also reported that data from contractor and third-party
sources are generally accessible and available. Some third parties are occasionally less willing to
share data, requiring staff to follow up.
IND recently used traffic volume data and curbside dwell times for TNCs to inform the con-
struction of a new TNC dedicated roadway to ensure adequate capacity and meet customer
service goals. Another example is using the Airport Service Quality survey results to adjust
concessions operation times.
Jackson Hole Airport

The Jackson Hole Airport Board, the operator of Jackson Hole Airport (JAC), indicated that
mode share data are collected using an airport Wi-Fi intercept survey. Vehicle classification data
are collected continuously through self-reporting by TNCs and commercial vehicle registration
data. Curbside dwell time observational data are collected as needed by JAC staff.
Ticket counter queue length and times are collected by JAC staff as needed by manual obser-
vation. TSA collects security checkpoint queue length and times. Concessionaires report the
transactions and revenues provided to the airport monthly. Employee parking and permit data
are collected in the standard parking permit process.
JAC staff indicated that the data analysis varies depending on the data type. Generally, Excel
is used for data storage and analysis. Staff reported that data are collected to help support the
justification for decision-making.

JAC staff expressed the desire to gather data on ground transportation services with greater
detail, specifically for tracking taxicabs and courtesy shuttles using an LPR system. JAC staff stated
that no legal issues have been encountered, and data storage costs are minimal. JAC staff also
reported that data from contractors and third-party sources are generally accessible and avail-
able. The greatest challenge for JAC is staffing limitations for data analysis.
JAC recently used customer survey feedback to encourage the public transit agency to begin
service to the airport. JAC staff also recently used parking capacity and transaction data to inform
parking rate changes and justify changes to the Airport Board. JAC staff used observational data
from ticketing and security queue times and lengths to organically and situationally prioritize
passengers.
John Wayne Airport

The County of Orange, California, the operator of John Wayne Airport (JWA), indicated that
specific vehicle volume and classification counts are collected using their AVI system (which
consists of TransCore and Gatekeeper). Mode choice data are collected by the public affairs team
through a passenger survey every 2 years.
TSA collects security checkpoint queue length and times. Customs and immigration data
on wait times and queue lengths are collected continuously by CBP. Concessionaires report the
transactions, revenues, and customer wait times to the airport monthly. Additionally, JWA staff
indicated that through JBT (the airport contractor who maintains the bag belt system), the air-
port receives inbound baggage information. Employee parking and permit data are collected
in the standard parking permit process. Employee mode choice data are collected annually for
Orange County employees using surveys, but the data do not include airline or other airport
tenants.
JWA staff indicated that the analysis of data varies depending on the type of data collected and
who collects the data. Generally, Excel is used for data storage and analysis. JWA staff stated that
data are mainly collected for revenue management and generation. Data are typically used to
manage roadway operations, commercial vehicle operations, passenger/guest experience, and
overall passenger understanding. JWA staff expressed the desire for additional data to be used
for understanding customer behavior. Staff indicated that data are collected and used to inform
messaging to stakeholders and for operational decisions for tenants, concessionaires, staff, and
passenger experience. JWA staff stated that no legal issues have been encountered. JWA staff also
reported that data from contractor and third-party sources are generally accessible and available.
One of the challenges that JWA encounters is that staff may not be sufficiently familiar with the
various data to know how to act on the information.
JWA staff recently used data to improve guest experience and craft relevant messaging based
on passenger intercept survey data.
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport

The City of Phoenix, the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX) operator, indicated
that total vehicular volume data are collected as needed on a project basis. This information was
last collected 5 years ago as part of an airport roadway evaluation study. Access mode choice data
are collected via holdroom passenger intercept surveys monthly and quarterly. Vehicle classifica-
tion data are collected using an AVI system but the system only counts and classifies commercial
vehicles registered with the airport. Wait times for TNCs are provided by each operating com-
pany, while for other modes of transportation, information is usually anecdotal. PHX collects
ridership data for PHX’s SkyTrain. Ridership data of public transit are collected by Valley Metro

but are typically not requested by the airport. Staging and hold lot wait times are tracked by
TNCs, and PHX’s taxicab management contractor is contractually required to track wait times
for taxicabs in the hold lots.
Airline partners collect ticket counter queue length and times. Security checkpoint queue
length and times are collected by TSA and through a sensor-based technology installed in 2016
utilizing Bluetooth and laser/infrared technology.
CBP collects customs and immigration queue length and times. Concessionaires report the
gross revenues to the airport, but new concession contracts will require that concessionaires
provide PHX with transaction-level data in real time using airport-provided standard AVI.
Employee parking and permit data are collected in the standard parking permit process. As part
of a City of Phoenix sustainability initiative, a yearly survey of PHX’s city staff collects various
data about employees, including mode choice data.
PHX staff indicated that tools for data analysis vary, and staff often use Excel and Busi-
ness Intelligence software. PHX staff reported collecting data to understand the environment,
improve the customer journey, inform data-driven decision-making at all levels, and plan daily
operations. PHX’s main goal is to be known as America’s friendliest airport by reducing customer
stress and improving predictability. The airport is focused on understanding customer prefer-
ences and behaviors to improve the customer experience and make it as seamless and hassle-free
as possible. By better understanding what is happening in the environment, the airport can plan
accordingly and tailor the experience to meet customer needs.
PHX has access to a large amount of data, with every line of business utilizing different data
sets for decision-making. To establish a data-driven culture, PHX staff indicated that it is neces-
sary to collect and analyze customer data to understand general customer perceptions and utilize
data for operational improvements, such as staffing and predictive operations. Using granular
data to identify passenger volumes and locations can aid in staff utilization and enable proactive
decision-making. The data are utilized at the senior level for business decisions and by technical
staff for operational improvements.
PHX is currently investigating governance related to the use of customer data. While the
airport currently uses non-personally identifiable information (PII), the staff are assessing new
ways to connect with customers to understand their needs better and provide tailored experi-
ences and services. Staff indicated that as the concerns increase with PII data, the airport is taking
steps to ensure the proper use and safeguarding of the data.
PHX staff indicated that one full-time employee is dedicated to data analytics. PHX staff also
reported that data from contractors and third-party sources are generally accessible and avail-
able. However, staff have encountered bottlenecks in requesting data from concessionaires that
are not a part of the current contract or lease agreements.
PHX staff indicated that data are provided in varying formats and transmitted using various
methods. Combining those disparate sources is labor-intensive and inefficient; thus, automation
is needed to address the challenge of assembly and processing. The knowledge gap in processing
data is another challenge that needs to be addressed; for many data sources, specific expertise is
required to understand and recognize the data quality. Staff believe that with the current demand
from all lines of business, each line of business could benefit from having its own data manage-
ment expertise, allowing each to manage the data effectively.
In 2022, PHX completed the development of a passenger flow optimization model based on
57 different data sources, including automated and manual sources and airline booking data.
PHX uses the flow model to prepare for upcoming passenger activity, including staffing accordingly
and planning maintenance and other activities to minimize potential impacts to passengers.

The study also resulted in a pilot program initially conducted with one in-terminal concessions
operator. PHX provided the concessionaire with model results regarding forecast passenger
volumes in each concourse. The forecast allowed the concessionaire to adjust staffing levels and
plan for supplies in each location. Now, many stakeholders receive these data to improve their
ability to allocate resources and be better prepared to provide the needed level of service in
response to projected demand.
San Diego International Airport

The San Diego Regional Airport Authority, the San Diego International Airport (SAN) operator,
indicated that vehicular volume data are collected continuously, and traffic surveys are conducted
every 3 to 4 years using tube counters or cameras. Mode share data are collected using a passenger
intercept survey every 4 years. Vehicle classification data are provided for commercial vehicles
equipped with AVI tags. Wait times for transportation services are collected as needed and can
be requested from various contracted third parties. SAN staff indicated that curbside dwell times
are collected more than once a year and collection is done manually. Ridership of airport-owned
shuttles is contractually provided by the shuttle operators and collected using an automated system.
Ridership data of public transit are collected by the airport when needed through surveys typically
conducted by interns. These surveys are typically capable of distinguishing between employees
and passengers.
TSA collects security checkpoint queue length and times, supplemented by the airport’s camera-
based technology. Customs and immigration queue lengths and times are collected by CBP and
through the airport’s camera-based technology. Concessionaires report the transactions and rev-
enues to the airport. Passenger accumulation data are collected using beacons and Wi-Fi pings.
This system is currently limited to specific locations within the terminal. Staff have indicated that
this system will expand to monitor and collect data from the entire terminal. Employee parking
and permit data are collected in the standard parking permit process and placed into an online
database. Employee mode choice data are collected annually through a survey distributed to
employees.
SAN staff indicated that data analysis varies depending on the data type. Tableau is used for
dashboard summaries, and Excel is typically used for data analysis. SAN staff reported that data
are collected for decision-making, focusing on business cases. SAN has three to four full-time
staff dedicated to data analytics.
SAN staff indicated that data on public transit to the airport are limited and would ideally be
used to provide a business case for improved public transit. SAN staff stated that no legal issues
have been encountered. SAN staff also reported that data from contractor and third-party sources
are easily accessible and available.
SAN used traffic volume data for TNCs and taxicabs to inform the capacity needed for the
hold lot and locating the facility.

Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications:

A4A Airlines for America
AAAE American Association of Airport Executives
AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America
ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
APTA American Public Transportation Association
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
ATA American Trucking Associations
CTAA Community Transportation Association of America
CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOE Department of Energy
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (2015)
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FRA Federal Railroad Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GHSA Governors Highway Safety Association
HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012)
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials
NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program
NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NTSB National Transportation Safety Board
PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:
A Legacy for Users (2005)
TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program
TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998)
TRB Transportation Research Board
TSA Transportation Security Administration
U.S. DOT United States Department of Transportation

Transportation Research Board

500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
ISBN 978-0-309-70924-8
90000
9 780309 709248

132 - Airport Landside Data Collection and Application

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

132 - Airport Landside Data Collection and Application

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This PDF is available at http://nap.nationalacademies.

Airport Landside Data: Collection and

FIND RELATED TITLES SUGGESTED CITATION

AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM

ACRP SYNTHESIS 132

A Synthesis of Airport Practice

Research sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM ACRP SYNTHESIS 132

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS

CRP STAFF FOR ACRP SYNTHESIS 132

ACRP PROJECT 11-03 PANEL

TOPIC S10-19 PANEL

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

ABOUT THE ACRP SYNTHESIS PROGRAM

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

*Indicates airports that served as case examples.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

38 Appendix A Survey Questions with Results

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Airport Landside Data:

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

2 Airport Landside Data: Collection and Application

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

1.1 Study Purpose and Overview

• Why data are important to airports (Chapter 1)

1.2 Topics Not Addressed in This Report

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

4 Airport Landside Data: Collection and Application

1.3 Why Data Are Important to Airports

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

How This Study Was Conducted

2.1 Summary of Literature Review

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

6 Airport Landside Data: Collection and Application

2.2 Survey of Airports

2.3 Case Examples

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

How This Study Was Conducted 7

Figure 2-1. Case example airports.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Summary of Survey of Airports

3.1 Data Collection for Ground Access (Passengers Only)

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Summary of Survey of Airports 9

Figure 3-1. Online survey respondents.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

10 Airport Landside Data: Collection and Application

Continuous More than once/year Annually

Figure 3-2. Frequency of collecting ground access data (1 of 3).

Continuous More than once/year Annually

Figure 3-3. Frequency of collecting ground access data (2 of 3).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Summary of Survey of Airports 11

Continuous More than once/year Annually

Figure 3-4. Frequency of collecting ground access data (3 of 3).

3.2 Data Collection in the Terminal Before Security

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

12 Airport Landside Data: Collection and Application

Continuous More than once/year Annually

4.2 How Data Are Collected, and the Systems/

4.4 Legal Issues Encountered