Peta Tomlinson takes a closer look at the development of remote check-in facilities across the Asia-Pacific region.

Ask any traveller in Asia what they like best about Hong Kong, and the chances are that after they finish waxing lyrical about its sites and sounds, they will nominate the ease of leaving it.

For Hong Kong was one of the first gateways in the Asia-Pacific region to open remote check-in facilities to make life easier and more convenient for outbound passengers.

The ‘downtown’ facilities, opened at downtown Hong Kong and Kowloon stations in July 1998, allow passengers to check-in luggage up to 24 hours in advance of their flights and proceed to the airport by fast train later on.

The service effectively makes it possible to spend a final day of business, shopping or sightseeing in the Hong Kong without having to haul luggage around or return to your hotel to pick it up before heading off for the airport.

When it opened, the remote check-in service – operated by the city’s Mass Transit Railways Corporation (MTRC) for Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) – was a first in Asia.

A total of 70 airlines are now using the system, and by 2008, around 15% of all people departing Hong Kong by air used the in-town service.

According to Wong Yiu-fai, general manager, Terminal 2 and landside, Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK), passengers love the convenience.

“On the Airport Express (AEL), passengers can easily reach Hong Kong International Airport from downtown Central in just 24 minutes.

While the AEL greatly enhances our accessibility, the in-town check-in service gives passengers greater flexibility in arranging their itinerary, allowing them to check in for their flights and drop off their luggage up to a day in advance.

It certainly adds to our continual effort to provide a pleasant and seamless travelling experience for passengers.”

It seems Hong Kong is right on the money.

According to a passenger survey conducted last year by SITA, more than a quarter (27%) of respondents said they would use remote check-in and bag drop frequently if given the chance. Almost half (42%) said they would be willing to pay for the service.

At a time when airports are operating in a very competitive environment, improving the customer experience is pivotal.

Indeed, improving customer service and satisfaction was identified as a high priority investment driver for 80% of the world's airport operators in SITA’s latest Airport IT Trends survey, with off-airport passenger processing and convenient bag-drop locations cited among the top three service initiatives airports want to meet the demands of travellers.

When combined with a train service, downtown check-in facilities are also billed as an environmentally-friendly option.

When Kuala Lumpur International Airport opened its KLIA Ekspres rail from downtown Sentral to the airport in 2007, remote check-in and baggage handling facilities were included.

It’s a trend that makes sense, says Paul Dalton, SITA’s regional vice president for North Asia and the Pacific.

Passengers want it, and airports would welcome it.

Yet despite evidence of market demand, Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur remain among the few airports in Asia-Pacific to offer a remote baggage drop service. Why? “It’s not that simple,” Dalton says.

“Self-service check-in of passengers, via kiosks, web or SMS, is one thing – but the issue of baggage quite another. It’s quite complex, particularly for international travel.”

In industry parlance, the concept of remote baggage drop is a “non-trivial process”.

In reality, it’s one of the business’ most perplexing problems: how to provide a service that people clearly want, while overcoming a myriad of hurdles.

The most obvious is security. When a passenger boards a plane, Dalton points out, you need to know that the bag assigned to them belongs to them.

“You don’t want to have stray bags around a plane,” he says.

Then there’s the logistics of transporting checked bags from an off-airport site.

In some models, such as Las Vegas and Disneyland in the US, logistics companies are contracted to courier passengers’ bags to the airport.

But in congested cities in Asia, relying on road transport to ensure an on-time delivery is not a bankable option.

This leaves the Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur examples – where the systems are linked to railway infrastructure – the most viable option.

According to Dalton, other cities in the region considering such a service include Shenzhen and Guangzhou in Mainland China, Macau, Hong Kong and Taipei in Taiwan.

Dalton believes the issues can be overcome, helped by biometric technology to progress the security of passengers checked-in remotely, and other technologies emerging to deal with their bags.

Off-site bag drop will also be facilitated by the development of common use technologies.

For example, in Zurich in March, the world’s first common-use bag drop facility – using a single counter to check in bags for passengers from different airlines – was put into operation by SITA for Swissport.

ARINC, the company that installed the common use check-in systems for Hong Kong’s Airport Express In-Town Check-In (ITCI) at Hong Kong and Kowloon Stations, believes customer demand has always been there.

Customer feedback and usage patterns observed from its remote check-in sites indicate a growing trend for such services, driven by the accessibility of travel these days and customer demands for better and more convenient check-in and travel experiences, says Randy Pizzi, vice president and managing director of ARINC’s Asia-Pacific division.

“In some places, passengers appreciate the extra time they have for shopping and business related activities, compared to the time they would have spent waiting at the airport to check-in.”

Now that the technology has become more mature, he expects it should be more readily adopted.

“Airports in Asia-Pacific are looking at this even more closely in view of increasing passenger volumes and demands for alternative check-in options.”

Pizzi believes the application can be widespread.

For example, ARINC products and connectivity solutions include a compact, inexpensive and easy-to-set up system that allows agents to check-in passengers, print boarding passes, and check baggage “from almost anywhere”.

The system can be installed at essentially any location with a standard Internet or mobile data connection, such as 3G, Pizzi says.

Downtown check-in facilities also help alleviate congestion problems at airports, save space at the terminal (thereby cutting costs), and create a competitive differentiator from other airports.

The Hong Kong model, once again, demonstrates just what is possible.

Travellers can even check-in remotely to HKIA from locations outside its borders.

“In Shekou, in the Chinese mainland, passengers check-in with their baggage before boarding a ferry that will take them to Hong Kong International Airport,” Pizzi explains.

“This way, passengers save time, are not encumbered, and enjoy a seamless and smooth travel experience.”

So remote baggage check-in improves the passenger experience, eases time and security pressures at airports, and promotes peace of mind.

Although HKIA and KLIA’s downtown check-in services are free, the concept also offers a potential new revenue stream. How far can this technology go?

ARINC’s Randy Pizzi imagines a day when remote check-in and baggage services are prevalent at locations as diverse as airports, hotels, car parks and cruise lines.

Some time in the future, he believes, passengers will literally have the airport in the palm of their hands, without the hassle of queue, payment and other complex check-in processes.

“The travel experience will be smooth, seamless and secure, in line with IATA's Simplifying Passenger Travel (SPT) initiative,” he adds.

SITA’s Paul Dalton also sees the day when a seamless remote baggage drop solution will be found.

For that to happen, he says, “it will need a level of planning, and for the end-to-end business processes to be aligned”.

The perceived ‘hassle factor’ of flying is often cited as reasons why people stay at home or use other modes of transport to travel.

Surely the opening of a few more remote check-in facilities like those in Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur would help win these people back?

Asia-Pacific Airports 2009 Issue 2

Grant Woods, Sydney Airport’s general manager airport operations, ponders the future of airport security in the Asia-Pacific region.

As aviation in the region grows there is significant advantage in major airlines, airports and governments collaborating to ensure that aviation security remains effective whilst enabling the movement of passengers and cargo.

Air traffic growth is a defining characteristic of the early 21st century and nowhere is this more significant than in the Asia-Pacific region.

The fast developing economies of China and other Asian states and the process of globalisation mean that business and leisure travel in the region is growing strongly.

One third of the 28,000 jet aircraft built over the next 20 years are destined for the Asia-Pacific region. Regional airlines are pioneering new routes and business models with varying degrees of success.

Growth in the region has involved both full service carriers and a multitude of new start-up airlines across market segments. Low-cost carriers in particular have been beneficiaries of the economic upturn. Some major airports in the region have had to invest quickly in greater capacity and supporting infrastructure.

As markets develop, more airports will be required to serve major cities across the region and the emerging role of the major regional hubs is particularly significant. As both intra and inter regional traffic rises, hub airports are becoming increasingly important ‘switching points’ between the region and the other major aviation markets in North America and Europe. If not already, these hubs are also developing into major destinations and business centres in their own rights.

Hub airports now serve destinations vastly different from those of the traditional ‘safe’ routes. Flights today link them with locations where the security threat both at home and abroad is real. As a consequence, airports must consider these risks and new security challenges, particularly from inbound aircraft.

Control and management of airport security must become ‘outcomes-focused’ and move forward towards more self-regulation, with airports taking greater responsibility for their own security coordination, allowing quicker responses to specific security threats targeted at the airport.

Border and security agencies are required to respond to the emerging risks. From an aviation perspective, Asia-Pacific holds many unique challenges. Active terrorist organisations and radicalised individuals are evident in several countries in the region. At the same time, travel patterns within the region link countries with significantly different threat profiles and perceptions of the terrorist threat. Aviation security standards vary across the region and it is likely that this variability will persist and may grow.

A key challenge will be to achieve a consistent focus on aviation security across the region. Some estimates suggest that a major aviation event in the region would likely result in tens of billion dollars in economic damage. There is growing recognition in the region that aviation security is an important contributing factor to sustaining regional growth in the short and long term.

Large airports are leading the way by integrating security more fully into business models and passenger processes. But large airports and airlines can only do so much in isolation to improve standards. Arguably new strategies are needed to manage the Asia-Pacific aviation security environment over the next twenty years.

The threat however is not simply about terrorism. As global travel grows, serious and organised crime groups are seeking to use the aviation system to move money, goods and people clandestinely.

An important objective for both government and industry is to ensure that new approaches to passenger travel and security are implemented in a timely, co-ordinated and measured way across the region – aviation security is only as good as the weakest link in the network.

There have been lost opportunities. All EU member countries jointly introduced enhanced security measures to limit the amount of Liquids, Aerosols and Gels (LAGs) passing through the passenger screening points. The US also enabled similar rules that required passenger searches to US standards. But, the LAGs response continues to be piecemeal across the Asia-Pacific region.

Evolving technology has the potential to reduce security costs, while at the same time increasing security outcomes. Although technologies may be more invasive they are likely to be accepted as providing improved security outcomes if introduced and managed effectively.

At present the region has no standards for access control and emerging technologies to consider for future implementation to assist in managing risk. However, airport security is always interested in emerging technologies that in the longer term may ensure higher levels of passenger throughput or greater security. Regional airports will need to consider the ever increasing sophisticated solutions and their applications.

There should be stronger regional ties with the overseas last port of call and destination countries and greater emphasis on harmonisation of security systems and services.

The region’s governments have a key challenge to improve regional aviation security co-ordination in an effort to mitigate risks in the system and to support the hub airports. Governments must ensure close harmonisation and learning outcomes for better practise legislation.

The role of the hub airports in this circumstance is particularly important. Hubs are key interchange points between the security systems of countries and airports in the region. Vulnerabilities in aviation security in one country may be transmitted through hubs to other countries. Hubs are also vulnerable to the disruptions associated with local and international aviation security events and changes.

The aviation industry is highly networked and the performance of hub airports affects overall system performance. Major airlines have a significant stake in the security performance at hub airports. Conversely security performance at the hubs is heavily influenced by the performance of major airlines, including their security activities.

A tripartite collaboration between government, major airports and airlines provides one possible avenue to advance aviation security outcomes in the region. By working together major government and corporate players in the region can assist one another in maintaining a secure foundation for sustained development.

As the major airports continue to grow, the present arrangements for national intelligence gathering and information sharing may not respond adequately to airport security requirements of the future.

The established hierarchy for responding to threats and the identification of risk has the potential for delay and a model of airport security co-ordination that devolves the management of security risk down to the airport operator is a sound governance regime.

For governments such collaboration is complementary to existing capacity development activities and provides a further practical avenue to improve and advance security performance. For major airports and airlines the ability to work closely with and influence governments in their approach to aviation security can assist in managing risk, passenger facilitation and investment flows. What would the collaboration seek to achieve:
• Support for high quality aviation security that balances security, passenger facilitation and business outcomes
• Share and promote good practice
• Contribute to the implementation of new security technologies and processes
• Enhance information flows to industry and passengers
• Provide coordinated support within the region for further building capability across all economies

It’s not necessary to develop a system that has global influence like the EU or TSA in America but why can’t we start with key regional airports implementing consistent measures to ease the security burden and avoid confusion?

Food for thought?

About the author Grant Woods is Sydney Airport’s general manager airport operations and chairman of ACI Asia-Pacific’s Aviation Security Committee.

Asia-Pacific Airports 2008 Issue 3

Are we about to enter a new era for the security screening of passengers at airports? Joe Bates investigates.

Investment in airport security is expected to soar this year as gateways across the world ramp up their explosive detection efforts in the wake of the alleged Christmas Day bomb plot.

Billions of dollars were spent on upgrading airport security in 2009 and the figure is expected to jump significantly this year with the introduction of full-body scanners following the alleged attempt by Nigerian, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, to detonate a bomb onboard Northwest Airlines flight 253 to Detroit.

Vancouver International Airport was one of the first Asia-Pacific gateways to install full-body scanners when it introduced a machine earlier this year.

Elsewhere, India’s government has pledged to install full-body scanners at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport by May and then roll them out across the country’s international gateways if they prove a success.

Other Asia-Pacific countries announcing plans to introduce full-body scanners in the coming months include the Philippines and South Korea.

Bangkok Suvarnabhumi has already removed its single full-body scanner after an ‘unsuccessful’ trial but Airports of Thailand (AoT) president, Serirat Prasutanond, insists that the operator will shortly launch trials of new equipment.

Australia’s airports are also set to get full body scanners as part of the government’s A$200 million plan to upgrade security at the nation’s gateways.

The controversial scanners will start appearing in airports next year alongside an increased number of police and sniffer dogs amid a wider security presence.

“No nation can afford to be complacent when it comes to security,” declares Australia’s Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd.

“The government’s highest priority is the safety and security of Australians.

” A Sydney Airport spokesman adds: “In relation to scanners, Sydney Airport will meet the implementation schedules determined by the Australian government.

The process of implementation is currently being worked through with passenger flow rates, costs and the management of departure performance being studied at present.

“As with any significant change to security requirements, we will implement this carefully to ensure we have consistency of application (the process of screening) and we fully understand how the best security outcome can be achieved.

We also need to provide appropriate standards of facilitation to passengers and make sure we sensibly address issues such as privacy matters and how passengers who are concerned about being screened by this technology are handled.”

The surge in orders has led one manufacturer, L-3 Security & Detection Systems, to reveal that it has upped production to 50 machines a month in order to keep up with demand.

The big question, of course, is would full-body scanners have detected the explosives allegedly hidden in the underpants of Abdulmutallab? Manufacturers L3 Security & Detection Systems, Smiths Detection and Rapiscan Systems insist that body scanners provide aviation with the best technological solution to the threat of concealed weapons and explosives on passengers.

However, the many variables involved in airport security ranging from operator training and performance to the physical layout of the checkpoint mean that none could categorically state that the machines are infallible.

Rapiscan’s vice president global marketing, Andrew Goldsmith, explains: “It is difficult to answer that question because detection depends on a number of non-technical factors.

What I can say with 100% certainty is that when used by trained operators, our full-body scanners significantly increase the likelihood of detecting small, well concealed non-metallic threats compared to metal detectors, physical pat-down searches or other people screening technologies.”

This assessment is supported by Smiths Detection’s director strategy and communication, Bernhard Semling, who notes: “Body scanners are capable of detecting the explosive substances allegedly used on flight 253, but while it is possible to detect such objects, providing an absolute guarantee that they would have done is not possible because of the other variables involved in the screening process.”

L3 Security & Detection System’s senior vice president, Bill Frain, simply says: “Our systems are specifically designed to find this type of threat – including a wide range of plastic, liquid and other metallic and non-metallic threats hidden on the body.”

So what kind of technology are we talking about and how safe is it? There are currently two main passenger scanning technologies available that can scan the human body for potential threats – backscatter and millimetre wave (MMW).

MMW beams millimetre wave energy over a person to create a 3D image of the human body while backscatter technology bounces very low energy x-rays off of a person to generate an image.

Both processes are estimated to take an average of 10 seconds including the time it takes security staff to assess the image.

“The timing varies depending on the system and the technology employed,” says Semling.

“Image capture can be instantaneous for real-time systems or at most take a few seconds.

Including time for assessment of the image, the process is comparable in time to the existing screening procedures based on metal detection and hand search, but has the potential to be more time-efficient and for sure is more passenger-friendly.”

One of the advantages of backscatter technology is that it has been well studied, understood and regulated for decades and, as a result, received a clean bill of health from a number of medical bodies.

They include the American College of Radiology, which recently noted “an airline passenger flying cross-country is exposed to more radiation from the flight than from screening by one of these devices.”

While the US’s National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) reports that a passenger would need to experience 100 backscatter scans per year to reach what they classify as a “negligible individual dose”.

MMW security scans pose no health risks whatsoever as unlike certain types of medical scanner, they do not use X-rays.

L3 Security & Detection System’s Frain, enthuses: “Millimetre waves are non-ionizing and do not penetrate the skin like X-rays.

The energy levels generated by our machines are a fraction of what is generated by commonly used household devices.”

Without a doubt, the most controversial aspect of full-body scanners is their intrusive nature, and public fears about their introduction have not been helped by newspaper headlines warning that passengers face virtual strip searches at airports.

Indeed, feelings about the issue are running so high that one US lawmaker recently declared “we don’t need to look at naked eight year-olds and grandmothers to secure airplanes.”

Amsterdam Schiphol, for one, is adamant that its MMW ‘Security Scan’ devices pose no privacy threat as the image shown is a stylised human figure and not their actual body.

Passengers simply walk into the device and raise their hands above their head for three seconds, and walk out again.

The machine automatically highlights any ‘foreign objects’ on the stylised human image and, if it cannot be identified, the passenger will be subjected to a hand search.

The Transport Security Administration (TSA) in the US claims that blurring faces and other body parts together with deleting images immediately after they have been viewed safeguards passenger modesty.

Undergoing a full-body scan in the US is also 100% optional, although those refusing to be screened will be subjected to a ‘full-body pat down’.

In the US, the screener that observes the images is located in a ‘remote location’ away from the checkpoint so avoiding any potential embarrassment for the passenger.

Not surprisingly, the equipment manufacturers believe that there is little foundation to the privacy concerns surrounding full-body scanners.

L3’s Frain says: “Our machines offer multiple levels of privacy protection that can be customised to reinforce privacy processes and procedures.

They include remote monitoring, silhouetted and blurred images and deletion after use.

In terms of the silhouettes, the 3D black and white image the remote analyst sees makes it virtually impossible to identify anyone.”

Semling assures: “Smiths Detection’s full-body scanning equipment is designed to fully address basic rights issues such as privacy, data security and health protection.”

Says Rapiscan’s Goldsmith: “Do I believe that they contravene a person’s basic human rights? Absolutely not! We believe that when used as part of a well-designed and well-regulated aviation security programme, full-body scanners can help protect the rights of passengers to travel safely.

In fact, many passengers find them less intrusive than physical pat downs.”

What is clear, however, is that full-body scanners should be just one of the security technologies and procedures adopted by an airport to ensure safety on the ground and in the sky.

Smiths Detection’s Semling certainly has no qualms about admitting that full-body scanners are far from the only answer when it comes to detecting explosives/weapons hidden internally or under a passengers’ clothing.

“There is no single solution to a threat situation as complex as that presented at an aviation checkpoint.

Body scanners are a major improvement over the current process that relies on metal detection and random physical search on a subset of passengers,” he says.

“Other highly reliable technologies such as trace detection provide complimentary and orthogonal capability.

Combinations of these technologies in a layered approach provide a more comprehensive detection capability and help close as many security gaps as possible.”

Although not opposed to the installation of full-body scanners at airports, the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines (AAPA) has voiced concern at the global reaction to the alleged Christmas Day bomb plot.

“Flying is widely recognised as the safest form of travel, reinforced by a robust regime of established security procedures.

Unfortunately, it is human nature that each new security incident prompts a desire to introduce yet more security measures,” AAPA says in a statement.

“There is always political pressure to react, but this often smacks of the need to be seen to be doing something rather than thinking through the appropriate action to take.

“The public understand that no society can credibly claim to provide perfect security.

It takes real political maturity to remain calm, and not fall into the trap of knee jerk reactions, such as the imposition of new security measures of unproven effectiveness.

Additional security measures are only justified when it can be demonstrated that the benefits outweigh the additional burdens they impose on society.

“Treating each of the six million passengers who fly every day as potential terrorists and subjecting them to virtual strip searches and patdowns already borders on the absurd, particularly when compared to our approach to public security in other aspects of our daily lives.

Doing so comes at a cost, already measured in tens of billions of dollars annually.

“Whilst new screening technologies are constantly under evaluation, including full-body scanners and automatic explosive detection systems, there is insufficient evidence regarding their effectiveness to justify their immediate deployment, not to mention unresolved health and privacy issues.”

The huge anticipated spend on full-body scanners this year will ensure that over $40 billion has been invested on improving aviation’s security infrastructure since 9/11, according to reports carried out by Washington-based industry tracker, Homeland Security Research Corporation.

In the US alone, recent events have resulted in an additional $1 billion being earmarked for aviation security, with a sizeable chunk of the total being set aside for the nationwide roll out of full-body scanners at airports. Elsewhere, Europe’s airports are believed to be facing a possible €1 billion bill for the new body scanners on top of the €1 billion investment they will be required to ensure that they comply with the new Liquids, Aerosols and Gels (LAGS) regulations.

Indeed, ACI Europe calculates that security expenses at the continent’s gateways have risen from an average of between 5% and 8% of an airport’s operating costs pre-9/11 to about 35% today.

It also notes that 41% of airport staff now work in security related jobs.

While Frost & Sullivan expect spending on airport security in the Asia-Pacific region to exceed $6.1 billion this year in response to the terrorist threat and rising traffic demand.

Recent events have proved that terrorism still remains a very real threat to aviation nearly a decade on from 9/11, and with that threat constantly evolving, clearly the big spend on new security equipment is set to go on for the foreseeable future.

Asia-Pacific Airports 2010 Issue 1

ACI’s annual Airport Service Quality (ASQ) survey shows that Asia-Pacific gateways once again lead the way when it comes to customer service.

BEST AIRPORTS WORLDWIDE
1 Incheon (ICN)
2 Singapore (SIN)
3 Hong Kong (HKG)
4 Beijing (PEK)
5 Hyderabad (HYD)

BEST AIRPORT BY REGION
Asia-Pacific
1 Incheon (ICN)
2 Singapore (SIN)
3 Hong Kong (HKG)
4 Beijing (PEK)
5 Hyderabad (HYD)


BEST IMPROVEMENT BY REGION
Asia Pacific: New Delhi (DEL)
Middle East: Abu Dhabi (AUH)

BEST AIRPORT BY SIZE OF AIRPORT
5–15 million passengers
1 Hyderabad (HYD)
2 Austin (AUS)
3 Cancún (CUN)
4 Nagoya (NGO)
5 Jacksonville (JAX)

15–25 million passengers
1 Baltimore/Washington (BWI)
2 Taipei (TPE)
3 Shenzhen (SZX)
4 New Delhi ( DEL )
5 Salt Lake City (SLC)

25–40 million passengers
1 Incheon (ICN)
2 Singapore (SIN)
3 Tokyo Narita (NRT)
4 Kuala Lumpur (KUL)
5 Shanghai Pudong (PVG)

Over 40 million
1 Hong Kong (HKG)
2 Beijing (PEK)
3 Denver (DEN)
4 Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW)
5 Houston George Bush (IAH)

 

In another stand out year for Asia-Pacific, ACI has announced that the top five airports in the world all come from the region.

Incheon International Airport was named as ‘Best Airport Worldwide’ for the fifth successive year while Singapore Changi and Hong Kong International Airport – themselves no stranger to picking up customer satisfaction awards – finished second and third respectively for the second year running.

However, newcomers Beijing Capital and Hyderabad–Rajiv Gandhi edged out Nagoya (Central Japan) to claim fourth and fifth positions in the top category in the 2009 Airport Service Quality (ASQ) awards.

“All hail from ACI’s Asia-Pacific region, a reflection of the region’s strong customer service culture, airport management commitment to service delivery and the high quality of modern passenger facilities at each of these airports,” says ACI director general, Angela Gittens.

“I congratulate Incheon for its singular performance, having garnered the top spot for five years running. This record is no accident, nor for the others who year after year continue to receive top honours. All have learned to focus on key performance factors that their passengers most appreciate.

All demonstrate that they fully understand that what pleases a passenger today becomes tomorrow’s expectation, and that to stay at the top, an airport must continuously refresh its offer and introduce new innovations that continue to delight the passenger on subsequent trips.

”Quite simply, no other airport in the history of the annual passenger satisfaction survey has got anywhere near matching all conquering Incheon’s winning streak, the airport also securing top spot in the 25-40mppa and Asia-Pacific categories.

In the other by size categories, ACI Asia-Pacific airports picking up awards included Hyderabad, (5-15mppa) and Hong Kong (over 40mppa) while New Delhi (Asia-Pacific) and Abu Dhabi (Middle East) won ‘Best Improvement Awards’.

Abu Dhabi International Airport actually ranked top in eight customer service categories for the Middle East region.

“Naturally, we thank our customers and passengers for affording us these ratings. They clearly vindicate the hard-work of all our staff and related agencies at the airport who are striving to ensure Abu Dhabi offers some of the world’s best airport environments,” enthuses Abu Dhabi Airports Company’s senior vice president of airport operations, Ahmad Al Haddabi.

“I thank and congratulate the whole team for their continued efforts and can promise our customers we will continue to work even harder during the coming year.

”Hyderabad International Airport operator, GHIAL, is also already thinking about further improving services to ensure that it retains its 5-15mppa category title next year.

CEO, P Sripathy, muses: “What next for us? We are motivated to continue to raise the bar when it comes to service quality and wish to create new benchmarks in the coming years.”

Also doing well, but missing out on the top awards this time, were Nagoya (4th 5-15mppa); Taipei, Shenzhen and New Delhi (runners-up 15-25mppa); Singapore Changi, Tokyo–Narita, Kuala Lumpur and Shanghai Pudong (runners-up 25-40mppa); and Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Doha and Muscat which finished behind Tel Aviv in the Middle East region.

Beijing Capital – which handled a record 65.3 million passengers during 2009 – also finished runner-up in the over 40mppa category.

Receiving an outstanding score of 4.99 points with 5 denoting a perfect score, Incheon International Airport garnered the top spot with the highest points ever awarded in the survey’s history.

Incheon’s president and CEO, CW Lee, says: “Winning the top honour in the ACI survey as the best airport in the world for five consecutive years is the result of the combined efforts of the government and 35,000 airport employees who have consistently
delivered excellent service every year.

“This will burnish the reputation of the airport as well as boost the standings of Korea on the international stage.” Lee indicated that Incheon will do all that it can to hold on to its title in 2010 and that efforts to enhance its reputation would involve offering a number of “unique services” designed to ensure that the gateway stands out from other international airports.

A faster and simpler customs procedure is now in operation at the airport, which recently expanded the use of self-service check-in technology and introduced an automated immigration clearance system.

The airport has also championed the concept of ‘sense of place’ with a mounting focus on cultural and arts facilities and performances. Arguably its prize asset is its Korean Cultural Museum – operated in conjunction with the National Museum of Korea – where visitors can view ancient artifacts and enjoy traditional music and artwork.

Other customer friendly features at Incheon include its ‘indoor gardens’ – which house a variety of flora and fauna – and facilities such as its own casino, golf course, spa and private ‘sleeping rooms’.

Singapore Changi’s Terminal 3 is one of the most impressive in the Asia-Pacific region and its January 2008 opening appears to have once again made the gateway a firm favourite of transit passengers.

The gateway boasts a total of 300 retail and F&B outlets spread across a total of 40,000sqm of commercial space making it possibly the largest shopping destination in Singapore.

Other facilities/services popular with visitors include a children’s playground, hair and beauty salons and a supermarket.

Hong Kong International Airport is also a shopper’s paradise courtesy of 240 retail outlets and 70 F&B facilities spread across its two terminals. In addition to shopping and eating, visitors can also experience a range of entertainment in Terminal 2 that include a 4D Extreme Screen, Aviation Discovery Centre and Asia Hollywood.

The airport also has its own SkyCity Nine Eagles Golf Course for those wanting to get some exercise in the big outdoors.

Last year’s ASQ survey was the most fiercely competitive yet, with the results based on the findings of 275,000 passenger interviews at 118 airports across the globe.

A reliable monitor of airport service, ASQ is used by many airports as one of the key performance indicators of the airport’s service.

“The awards recognise those airports having made the most progress in improving service quality,” says ASQ programme director, Craig Bradbrook. “The 2009 passenger ratings show that despite the economic crisis, overall satisfaction at airports
increased by almost 3% worldwide compared to 2008. It is gratifying to see that 82% of the airports were rated with stable or improved performance.”

Leading airports recognise that the most important aspect of providing great service in an airport is the provision of a spotlessly clean terminal and a relaxed, open, friendly ambience.

They also recognise that it is vital to address the basics first. Ten factors identified as essential for high customer service ratings are, by order of importance: the ambience of the airport; cleanliness of the terminal; comfort of the waiting areas; availability of washrooms; cleanliness of washrooms; courtesy and helpfulness of the airport staff; business lounges; ease of making connections; passport/ID inspection experience; and good shopping facilities.

The award ceremony will take place at the 5th ACI Asia-Pacific Regional Assembly, Conference and Exhibition that will be held in Hainan, China, on May 13.

Asia-Pacific Airports 2010 Issue 1

Jim Martin considers what service-enhancing passenger handling and security technologies airports will be investing in this year.

With the outlook appearing a little brighter this year, following several months of modest traffic growth, it is likely that airports will continue to strive to improve their passenger and security systems to ensure that they are equipped to meet future demand.

In terms of passenger technology drivers for 2010, airport operators will continue to improve capacity, while taking into consideration ways to reduce costs and improve customer satisfaction in the coming years.

These movers are driven by the changing dynamics of the airport business, where operators have to start looking at their premises as a commercial entity competing for investor and tourist dollars.

Operators will look at enhancing airport capacity by adopting new passenger processing and baggage systems such as self-service check-in kiosks and off airport baggage drop points.

These will also reduce costs in terms of deploying fewer personnel to oversee airport operations.

Airport operators will also have to cater to the new breed of passenger, who will expect to be ‘connected’ at all times within the airport.

This will result in operators working closely with IT vendors to evaluate new technologies at their airports.

In terms of security technology drivers for 2010, enhancing airport security, as we all know, has taken on a new meaning following the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States.

And the gradual awareness that business must move in tandem with security has prompted airport operators to implement new technologies such as Electronic Borders, baggage screening, passenger reconciliation systems (PRS) and cargo security, while boosting its conventional security equipment such as close circuit televisions.

These do not come without challenges, however, as operators will need to ensure that the technology is able to keep up with threat sophistication and be interoperable across multiple airports.


Current trends

The aviation industry has gone through many changes over the last decade.

The emergence of low-cost carriers, and the Asia-Pacific region’s prominence in hosting world-class events have brought about an unprecedented rise in air travellers.

Over the past decade, the region hosted the 2002 soccer world cup in Japan and South Korea, the Beijing Olympics in 2008 and soon – the Shanghai World Expo this year.

Concurrently, low-cost carriers such as AirAsia and Tiger Airways have started providing cheaper air travel for the mass market.

This has resulted in airports placing focus on improving security and deploying predeparture passenger screening systems to help identify potential threats.

In some countries, Advanced Passenger Information must be supplied during check-in or passengers will be unable to fly.

Advanced Passenger Information Systems (APIS) will increasingly be adopted by government agencies around the world because it provides pre-arrival and pre-departure manifest data on all passengers and crew, improving border security.


New airport technologies for 2010

The prime drivers of new airport technologies are twofold: lowering costs from all aspects of the business, and meeting the needs of the new and sophisticated air traveller.

Mobile applications will feature very prominently in some of the key technologies this year.

The convergence between mobile devices and passenger processing systems has become closer with technological advancement.

To explore this further, mobile devices are expected to become a focal point for passengers where they can purchase airline tickets, check-in and board an aircraft. When this becomes more popular amongst airlines and passengers, the use of paper boarding passes may eventually be phased out.

The advantages of mobile check-in are numerous; passengers will have better control of their flight itinerary while airports will be able to process passengers more efficiently.

Remote check-in is also gaining popularity with Asia-Pacific airports.

Operators see value in enabling passengers to check-in from offsite locations such as airport hotels and convention centres.

This will help to alleviate congestion at the airports and provide a new level of convenience for passengers.

A good example of this is Hong Kong’s downtown check-in service, available free for passengers travelling on many major airlines.

Finally, we will see more airports and airlines supporting the new Common Use Passenger Processing System (CUPPS) platform.

CUPPS technology is expected to provide savings for the aviation industry by introducing a uniform electronic interface for passenger applications.

It will give software developers at all airlines a common set of specifications, eliminating costly custom engineering and making passenger applications fully portable between airports.


New airport security technologies for 2010

Aviation security practices such as APIS and Passenger Name Recording (PNR) are becoming standard procedures in many countries.

With the implementation of APIS technology, airport security and immigration can perform enforcement and security checks on passengers against the databases of various law enforcement agencies before they arrive and depart.

These databases include those of the police, immigration, and customs and excise departments.

The technology will also help the airlines weed out unwanted individuals before they board the aircraft, which will eleviate the threat that they could pose on an aircraft and other passengers.

Meanwhile, ARINC’s PNR technology will enable governments to access data contained in a customs and excise or immigration automated reservation and departure control systems.

Airport operators will also need to focus on enhancing cargo security in their respective airports, given its importance as an economic contributor.

Korean immigration, customs and airport operators such as Incheon International Airport have adopted the APIS and PNR systems to prevent unwanted passengers from illegally entering and departing the country.

PRS will also feature prominently as an upcoming airport security technology.

PRS enhances passenger security checks, given that technology has enabled passengers to check-in via different modes (from home or mobile phone, for example), which may lead to the creation of fraudulent boarding passes.

PRS systems verify the authenticity and validity of boarding passes in real time with the airline database.

Singapore Changi is the first airport in the world to implement PRS at both Terminals 1 and 2 using ARINC’s VeriPax system, which is IATA’s preferred method of boarding pass validation in accordance with its Bar Coded Boarding Passes (BCBP) standards.

Other airport security technologies, like full-body scans and passenger profiling, are being developed and trialled for future implementation.

However, its success will be dependant in part on passenger privacy issues that need to be addressed.


How can today’s technology help?

The general consensus is that technology has been an enabler for airport operators to achieve cost savings and provide for a more pleasant travel experience for passengers.

However, while the focus of this article has been on the importance of technology, we should not forget the importance of making it inter-operable among countries, and having a uniformed regulatory structure to combat issues such as aviation security.

A good example of this is the implementation of APIS and PNR, which has still not achieved a 100% consensus among countries due to privacy and other issues.

This must be resolved in order for the airport and aviation community to progress.

What criteria should stakeholders consider when investing in new technology? The article has touched on new technologies such as mobile passenger applications, PRS, APIS and PNR, and the essence of these new systems is to help bring costs down for airports and airlines, while providing a higher level of convenience and security to the ever-demanding passenger.

Cost will be an important factor as airports transform into commercial entities over the next few years.

As airport operators view their companies as a business, it will be natural for them to evaluate and implement the latest technologies at the best possible price.

Other factors that also need to be considered include system maintenance, scalability and personnel training to ensure that systems implemented run smoothly and provide maximum returns on investments.


Conclusion

At ARINC, we believe that cost reduction and providing new services to enhance passenger satisfaction will be a major driving force in the investment patterns of airport operators.

In a space that is becoming increasingly competitive, airport operators and IT providers will have to work together to reap the most benefits from technology to provide the best value for investors, customers and passengers.

Asia-Pacific Airports 2011 Issue 2

What does 2010 hold for traffic growth at Mainland China’s airports? Derek Sadubin reports.

Beijing Capital International Airport’s passenger numbers exceeded 65 million in the 12 months ended December 31, 2009, making it by far the largest airport in China, and the third largest airport in the world, according to ACI.

Beijing is on track to overtake London Heathrow this year and could overtake Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta as the world’s busiest as early as 2012, if recent trends are maintained.

By then, Beijing will again be operating close to its design capacity. The pressure is now on officials to make some progress on the much-delayed second Beijing project, reports the Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation.

Beijing Capital, which reported passenger growth of 16.8% in 2009 (with passenger traffic up 170% from 2001 levels), was the only airport amongst the world’s Top 10 to report growth in the challenging year.

Only seven of the world’s 30 largest airports reported growth last year (of these, Beijing reported the strongest growth, while Jakarta and Guangzhou also reported double-digit growth).

Hong Kong (45.6 million) was 13th largest, while Guangzhou Airport was the 22nd largest airport worldwide in 2009, handling 37 million passengers.

Mainland Chinese airports A total of 14 Mainland Chinese airports reported annual traffic of more than ten million passengers in 2009, with all the major airports handling more than five million passengers per annum, reporting solid year-on-year growth

The smaller airports of Chengdu, Changsha, Sanya, Harbin and Guiyan reported growth of above 30%.

Beijing was also the fastest growing of the nation’s five largest airports (the others being Guangzhou, Shanghai Pudong, Shanghai Hongqiao and Shenzhen), driven by strong year-on-year growth in the first half of 2009, off a weaker base than in the same period in 2008.

Airports in China have been defying the weakness experienced by most of their global counterparts, as they benefit from the strong recovery of Chinese domestic travel demand, driven partly by government stimulus measures, which have buoyed the economy.

The rise in size and global importance of China’s airports is set to continue, with the CAAC now forecasting a 12% increase in passenger and freight traffic this year from 2009’s 230 million passengers and 4.46 million tonnes of cargo.

China to surge past the US Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) director, Li Jiaxiang, expects passenger numbers to grow to 700 million passengers per year by 2020 – and to double that to 1.5 billion by 2030.

Meanwhile, a forecast issued by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for the US market over a similar timeframe provides a clear window into the differences between mature and developing markets.

US mainline and regional enplanements already reached 704 million in 2009 – 11 years before China is supposed to get there.

But the growth rate tells the tale.

The FAA’s 20-year forecast for fiscal years 2010-2030 predicts domestic passenger enplanements will increase by a comparatively meagre 0.5% in 2010 and then grow at an average of an anaemic 2.5% per year during the remaining forecast period; this contrasts strikingly with the robust Chinese predictions. It also looks as though China will also outpace the US at the end of the forecast period; no surprise there, given the growing economy coupled with the differences in population.

While the FAA expects the US market to reach a billion passengers by 2023, enplanements will be 1.21 billion at the forecast period end in 2030, well shy of the 1.5 billion expected that year by Chinese airlines.

As recently as 2005, the administration projected the US market would grow to a billion passengers by 2015.

Today, a mere five years on, the FAA does not see the US market reaching that size until 2023 – eight years later than the prediction it made so recently.

There is much more to this than merely a status issue – although that is always important too, especially when it comes to marketing US aviation products, coming from a position as a world leader, as opposed to a diminishing power.

This is because the difference in growth rates translates immediately to job creation, to business activity and to tourism potential.

To support the near-term rapid growth, China plans to acquire 218 aircraft in 2010 to keep pace with passenger demand.

CAAC added that in 2010, China will invest $13.2 billion in fixed assets and will implement 25 key construction projects, following the construction or renovation of 22 airports in 2009.

Beijing is committed to maintaining this level of investment for years to come, helping China to keep moving up the global aviation league tables.

Asia-Pacific Airports 2010 Issue 2