Title: AIRPORT PASSENGER BUILDINGS: EFFICIENCY THRU SHARED USE
1AIRPORT PASSENGER BUILDINGS EFFICIENCY THRU
SHARED USE
- Dr. Richard de Neufville
- Professor of Engineering Systems Civil and
Environmental Engineering - M.I.T.
- Based on work with
- Steven Belin, Senior Analyst, S H E
2Shared Space and Facilities in Airport
Passenger Buildings
- Sharing between Units of Activity gt 10 to 60
improvements - either in cost reduction for overall airport
capacity - or in capacity for fixed building and facilities
3Major Improvement over Traditional Approach to
Design
- Traditional Approach
- Defines maximum capacity different units
(international, domestic, gates, etc.) - Provides facilities to meet these demands
- Overall, provides more than required
- Shared Use Approach
- Takes advantage of overlap
- Uses Space and Facilities more intensely
- Provides Capacity more cost-effectively
4Example Contrasting Shared Use and Traditional
Approach (1)
- Bangkok Phase 1 30 MAP
- Design Traffic
- International 21 to 25 MAP
- Domestic 5 to 9 MAP
- Traditional Approach Has Space for 25 9 34
MAP - But intended for 30 MAP capacity!
5Example Contrasting Shared Use and Traditional
Approach (2)
- Shared Approach Designs for
- 21 5 4 (shared) 30 MAP
- 13 savings in space
- or 24 6 4 (shared) 34 MAP
- 13 increase in capacity over traditional
- More value for money either way!
6Primary and Secondary Drivers Motivating Use of
Shared Space
7Analysis Methods Recommended for each motivating
factor
8Peak Capacity Sharing -- Short time,
needs identical
- Basic example Lounge space for aircraft gates
- people all have same needs
- Other examples
- bag claims, car parks, curb space, etc
- Sharing of Lounge Space is Common Practice in US
Airports - Not in Europe, Japan, Asia
9Example Pattern of Occupancy Shared Lounge for 4
Gates
10Sharing lounges saves Space
11Concept of Shared Lounge Space
12Shared Departure Lounge Las Vegas/McCarran
Shared Lounge
13Shared Departure Lounge Miami/International
Shared Lounge
Shared Lounge
14Percent of Lounge Space needed depends on
situation (table)
15Percent of Lounge Space needed depends on
situation (graph)
16Shared Departure Lounge,Widebody
17Shared Departure Lounge,Narrowbody
18Peak Capacity Sharing -- Longer Time, Needs
Different
- Basic examples
- Gates for Aircraft, Processing of International
and Domestic Passengers - Investment to enable flexibility (airbridges,
sterile corridors, etc) - Examples applications
- Las Vegas, Wellington, Boston...
- Kuala Lumpur, Mombasa, New Bangkok...
19International or Domestic Only
20Both International and Domestic
21International / Domestic Swing GatesLas
Vegas/McCarran
Concourse
Gate T2-3
Gate T2-2
Gate T2-1
To FIS
22International / Domestic Swing GatesWellington,
New Zealand
23Swing Baggage ClaimWellington, New Zealand
24Uncertainty Space -- Insurance for Current
Needs
- Uncertainty in Operations (Schedule delays,
maintenance) - Spare Capacity gt Insurance
- Simple Formula for Design Gates
- Design Gates Maximum scheduled (G)
Allowance for Delay (G1/2) - Sharing gt Smaller Buffer (as )
- (G1/2)/G 1/(G1/2) units together raise G
25Concept of Shared Insurance Space
26Expanded Concept of Shared Space Time Overlaps
Insurance
27Uncertainty Space -- Insurance for Future
Needs
- Uncertainty in Future Traffic Mix
- Normal Variability -- from historical record
- Extraordinary Variability -- Major Shift (airport
becomes international gateway, hub) - Insurance Flexible Future Capacity
- Adapt Capacity to Future Traffic Mix
28Structure of Decision Analysis to select
optimal shared capacity
29Flexible Space Easily Adapts to Changes in Future
Demand
30Percent Swing Gates Needed -- Normal Variability
31Percent Swing Gates ( 20 cost) --
Extraordinary Variability
32Percent Swing Gates ( 5 cost) --
Extraordinary Variability
33Practical Conclusions
- For Design
- Routine Use of Shared Lounges
- 20 to 30 shared gates, etc...
- For Analysis
- Spreadsheets do excellent job
- Existing results can be used
- Formulas also available