Sunteți pe pagina 1din 724


Airport Development Reference Manual

9th Edition Effective January 2004

International Air Transport Association

NOTICE DISCLAIMER. The information contained in this

publication is subject to constant review in the light of changing government requirements and regulations. No subscriber or other reader should act on the basis of any such information without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without taking appropriate professional advice. Although every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, the International Air Transport Association shall not be held responsible for loss or damage caused by errors, omissions, misprints or misinterpretation of the contents hereof. Furthermore, the International Air Transport Association expressly disclaims all and any liability to any person, whether a purchaser of this publication or not, in respect of anything done or omitted, and the consequences of anything done or omitted, by any such person in reliance on the contents of this publication. Opinions expressed in advertisements appearing in this publication are the advertiser's opinions and do not necessarily reflect those of IATA. The mention of specific companies or products in advertisement does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by IATA in preference to others of a similar nature which are not

Airport Development Reference Manual Ref. No: 9044-09 ISBN 92-9195-086-6 2004 International Air Transport Association. All rights reserved. Montreal Geneva


Page Acknowledgement ................................................................................................................................. vii

Chapter A Introduction
Section A1: lATA's Role................................................................................................................... Section A2: Purpose of the Manual ................................................................................................. 3 5

Chapter B Planning
Section B1: Major Planning Processes............................................................................................ Section B2: The Planning Process .................................................................................................. 11 37

Chapter C Master Planning

Section C1: Principles ..................................................................................................................... Section C2: Forecasting................................................................................................................... Section C3: Land Use Planning ....................................................................................................... Section C4: Control Towers ............................................................................................................ 43 88 98 103

Chapter D Airport Economics

Section D1: Airport Management..................................................................................................... Section D2: Airport Cost Structures and Revenue Sources............................................................. Section D3: Airport Investment Decisions and Financing................................................................. Section D4: Aeronautical Charge Policies ....................................................................................... Section D5: International Cost Variations ........................................................................................ 109 114 116 120 130

Chapter E Environmental Issues

Section E1: Main Issues................................................................................................................... Section E2: Social and Political Considerations .............................................................................. Section E3: Noise............................................................................................................................. Section E4: Emissions ..................................................................................................................... Section E5: Waste Management...................................................................................................... 137 141 146 152 155

Chapter F Airport Capacity

Section F1: Capacity and Level of Service....................................................................................... Section F2: Capacity Definitions ..................................................................................................... Section F3: Airport Systems............................................................................................................. Section F4: Planning Schedule ....................................................................................................... Section F5: Runway Systems ......................................................................................................... Section F6: Taxiway......................................................................................................................... Section F7: Apron ........................................................................................................................... Section F8: Aircraft Stand ............................................................................................................... Section F9: Passenger Terminal Facilities....................................................................................... 159 161 162 165 166 171 173 174 178


Airport Development Reference Manual


Section F10: The Airport Scheduling Process ................................................................................. Section F11: Computational Fluid Dynamics....................................................................................

213 216

Chapter G Airport Flight Operations Issues

Section G1: Aircraft Characteristics ................................................................................................ Section G2: Visual Aids.................................................................................................................... Section G3: Non-Visual Aids............................................................................................................ 221 234 239

Chapter H Airport Security

Section H1: General Principles ....................................................................................................... Section H2: Passenger Operations.................................................................................................. Section H3: Cargo Operations ........................................................................................................ 245 246 260

Chapter I Airport Access

Section 11: Roads ........................................................................................................................... Section 12: Rail ............................................................................................................................... Section 13: Intermodality and Airport Access .................................................................................. 269 277 282

Chapter J Passenger Terminal

Section J1: Outline of Principle Functions ....................................................................................... Section J2: Categories of Passenger Terminal ............................................................................... Section J3: Small Airport Terminals................................................................................................. Section J4: Common Systems CUTE & CUSS ............................................................................... Section J5: Airline Communications Networks ................................................................................ Section J6: Passenger Processing Facilities Planning .................................................................... Section J7: Concession Planning..................................................................................................... Section J8: Maintenance ................................................................................................................. Section J9: Check-In ....................................................................................................................... Section J10: People Mover Systems ............................................................................................... Section J11: Passenger Boarding Bridges ...................................................................................... Section J12: Signage ...................................................................................................................... 289 301 318 320 325 331 340 344 348 356 362 370

Chapter K Passenger Facilitation

Section K1: Principles ..................................................................................................................... Section K2: Roles and Responsibilities of Governments/Airlines..................................................... Section K3: Immigration Processes ................................................................................................ Section K4: Customs Processes...................................................................................................... Section K5: Simplifying Passenger Travel ...................................................................................... Section K6: Disabled Passengers and Staff..................................................................................... 385 386 388 392 396 400


Table of Contents

Chapter L Aircraft Parking Aprons

Section L1: Current and Future Aircraft Types ................................................................................ Section L2: Physical and Functional Requirements ........................................................................ Section L3: Gate Stands and Remote Stands.................................................................................. Section L4: Ground Handling Equipment......................................................................................... Section L5: Service Roads & Storage Areas.................................................................................... Section L6: Distributed Electrical Power & Air.................................................................................. Section L7: Aircraft De/Anti-lcing Facilities ...................................................................................... 407 409 419 426 433 438 445

Chapter M Aviation Fuel Systems

Section M1: Safety Issues................................................................................................................ Section M2: Delivery to Apron ......................................................................................................... Section M3: Storage Distribution Facilities & Processes.................................................................. 453 456 458

Chapter N Contingency Management

Section N1: Aviation Crisis Management......................................................................................... 463

Chapter O Cargo & Separate Express Facilities Terminal

Section 01: Planning Principles........................................................................................................ Section 02: Forecasting and Sizing.................................................................................................. Section 03: Flows and Controls ....................................................................................................... Section 04: Expedited & Express Cargo Processing........................................................................ Section 05: Perishable Cargo........................................................................................................... Section 06: Mail Faciltities................................................................................................................ 469 471 487 492 501 507

Chapter P Airport Support/Ancillary Facilities

Section P1: Aircraft In-Flight Catering Facilties ............................................................................... Section P2: Aircraft Maintenance..................................................................................................... Section P3: Hotels and Business Centers ....................................................................................... 513 516 519

Chapter Q Landside Facilities

Section Q1: Road System and Curb Arrangements......................................................................... Section Q2: Traffic Studies & Parking ............................................................................................. 525 530

Chapter R Airport Commissioning

Section R1: Checklist for the Successful Opening of a New Airport................................................. 537

Chapter S Future Technologies & Miscellaneous

Section S1: Future Technology Systems......................................................................................... Section S2: Developing & Adopting Future Technology................................................................... Section S3: Interfaces People & Cultural Issues ........................................................................ 549 551 553


Airport Development Reference Manual


Chapter T Airport Processes

Section T1: Terminal Processes ..................................................................................................... Section T2: Apron Processes........................................................................................................... Section T3: Support Processes........................................................................................................ 557 560 562 567 573 613 618 622 631 634 638 641 647 651 659 669 677 685 688 690 692 697 699

Chapter U Airport Baggage Handling

Section U1: Baggage System User Requirements........................................................................... Section U2: Departures Systems .................................................................................................... Section U3: Transfer Systems ......................................................................................................... Section U4: Early Baggage Processes............................................................................................ Section U5: Arrivals Baggage Systems ........................................................................................... Section U6: Control Systems .......................................................................................................... Section U7: Management Information Systems (MIS)..................................................................... Section U8: Oversized Baggage...................................................................................................... Section U9: Sort Allocation Computer (SAC) .................................................................................. Section U10: Baggage Hall Design.................................................................................................. Section U11: Hold Baggage Screening ........................................................................................... Section U12: Passenger & Hand Baggage Screening ....................................................................

Chapter V IATA Airport Project Process

Section V1: Concept/Feasibility/Detail Design/Commissioning/Handover....................................... Section V2: Project Cost Management.............................................................................................

Chapter W Anti-Terrorism and Police Facilities

Section W1: Terminal Building Considerations................................................................................ Section W2: Pier Area Considerations............................................................................................. Section W3: Airfield Area Considerations........................................................................................ Section W4: Airport Police Facilities ................................................................................................

Chapter X Airport Fire Services

Section X1: Fire Response Category............................................................................................... Section X2: Fire Response Services & Equipment .........................................................................

Chapter Y Networks
Section Y1: Frontline Operational and Security................................................................................ Section Y2: Building Services ......................................................................................................... 705 710

ilk _________________________________________________
IATA gratefully acknowledges the technical assistance and input provided by IATA Members and the IATA Members Document Review Panel: Air France American Airlines British Airways FEDEX KLM LOT Polish Airlines Northwest Airlines Qantas Swiss International Air Lines Ltd. Text and Diagram Contributions: Airbus Industries Airport Design Associates (ADA) APS Aviation Inc. ARINC Boeing Aircraft Corp. Davis Langdon Everest Fabricom Airport Systems HDP Group International Air Rail Organisation Mott MacDonald Consultancy Netherlands Airport Consultants B.V. (NACO) Norman Shanks Associates International Ove Arup & Partners SITA Swiss International Air Line Ltd. Sypher Mueller Mr. Sebastien Lavina Mr. Rick Stevens & Mr. Alan Clayton Mr. Jean Valiquette & Mr. John D'Avirro Mr. Edward King Mr. Brad Bachtel Mr. Tony Potter Mr. David Reynolds & Mr. Chris Owens Mr. David Langlois & Mr. Jeremy Hill Mr. Andrew Sharpe Mr. Chris Chalk Mr. Huib Heukelom Mr. Norman Shanks Mr. Graham Bolton & Mr. Tony Barker Mr. Graham McLachlan & Mr. Peter Dalaway & Mr. Rene Azoulai Mr. Davor Frank Mr. Gordon Hamilton Ms. Catherine Lafond Mr. Eduardo Juranovic Mr. John Conlon Mr. Jim Sartin Mr. Hans Smeets Mr. Dariusz R.Sawicki Mr. Bob Lamansky & Ms. Yasuko Hashimoto Mr. Derek Sharp Mr. Davor Frank


Airport Development Reference Manual


Chapter A Introduction
Section A1: lATA's Role A1.1 IATA......................................................................................................... A1.2 IATA Airports Activities ............................................................................ A1.3 Other IATA Airports Activities................................................................... Section A2: Purpose of the Manual A2.1 Scope of the Airport Development Reference Manual ............................ A2.2 How to Use the Manual............................................................................. 5 6 3 3 4


Airport Development Reference Manual


International air transport is one of the most dynamic and fastest-changing industries in the world. It needs a responsive, forward-looking and universal trade association, operating at the highest professional standards. IATA is that association. Originally founded in 1919, IATA brings together approximately 280 airlines, including the world's largest. Flights by these airlines comprise more than 98 percent of all international scheduled air traffic. Since these airlines face a rapidly changing world, they must cooperate in order to offer a seamless service of the highest possible standard to passengers and cargo shippers. Much of that cooperation is expressed through IATA, whose mission is to "represent, lead and serve the airline industry". Continual efforts by IATA ensure that people, freight and mail can move around the vast global airline network as easily as if they were on a single airline in a single country. In addition, IATA helps to ensure that Members' aircraft can operate safely, securely, efficiently and economically under clearly defined and understood rules. IATA is pro-active in supporting the joint industry action essential for the efficient development of the air transport system. lATA's role isto identify issues, help establish industry positions and communicate these to governments and other relevant authorities. The Airports and Infrastructure Consultancy Services section of IATA, positioned in the SO&I Division, works to put this theory into practice.




IATA Airports and Infrastructure Consultancy Services is responsible for influencing airport planning and development projects worldwide to ensure that airline requirements are met with respect to appropriateness, efficiency and cost-effectiveness. It produces guidelines on airport planning and design, such as this manual, and actively promotes airline user requirements to airport authorities through Airport Consultative Committee (ACC) activity and commercial airport consultancy services on airport projects worldwide. The section works to assist airlines in the development of airport facilities that will meet airline requirements in a cost-effective manner. The mandate of the section is: To take a leadership role in influencing airport planning and development worldwide in order to achieve safe and efficient, capacity balanced, cost-effective, functional and user-friendly airports. Major activities of the section are defined within subsequent clauses A1.2.1 through to A1.2.3 inclusive.

A1.2.1 Airport Consultative Committees

Consultation with airport authorities via the Airport Consultative Committee (ACC) mechanism brings together the airlines' airport planning expertise, together with the IATA secretariat, in meetings with airport authorities worldwide. ACCs serve as a focal point for consultation between airlines and airport authorities concerning the planning of major airport expansions or the development of new airports. The airports selected for such intervention are determined by Regional Airport Steering Groups in Asia/Pacific and Europe.



Airport Development Reference Manual

A1.2.2 Airport Consultancy Services

IATA offers a wide range of Airport Planning and Development Consultancy services. It brings a global perspective to the projects it undertakes, drawing on its extensive in-house expertise and its unique access to airline experts and other specialists. Typical clients include airport authorities, private airport owners, airlines, governments, manufacturers, suppliers to the industry, consulting firms and other parties involved in airport infrastructure decisions. IATA can act as an independent consultant or provide a review of detailed work undertaken by specialised consulting firms.

A1.2.3 International Industry Working Group

The IIWG brings together IATA, Airports Council International (ACI) and the International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations (ICCAIA). The IIWG was founded in 1970 and its main goal is to review airport/aircraft compatibility issues which might improve the development of the air transport system.



In addition to the Airport Planning and Development activities of IATA, which this Manual addresses, IATA is active in many other Airport related areas such as User Charges, Fuel, Ground Handling, Security, Passenger Services and Environment. For more information on the full range of lATA's Airport related activities, please visit

Consulting enquiries should be addressed to:





The IATA Airport Development Reference Manual (ADRM) is the industry's most important guide for airlines, airports, government authorities, architects and engineering consultants who are either planning new or extending existing airport facilities. The ADRM's information is an invaluable consolidation of best industry practice with respect to the development of world class airports through better design. Its content represents the consolidated recommendations of world-renowned industry specialists and organizations seeking to promote the development of world-class airport facilities. The ADRM has been completely revised since the previous (8th) edition. These revisions and new content additions reflect recent changes within the civil aviation industry, and include entirely new chapters dedicated to security and anti-terrorism issues in particular. In addition to this, specific commercial issues have been discussed and recommended practices for running airport projects have been developed. These address the need for authorities to run projects efficiently as they seek to create unique airport environments through world class design. Environmental issues have also been updated, primarily to promote savings in operational costs for airports which would then be passed-on to lATA's member airlines. This latest evolution of the ADRM also incorporates IATA Recommendations (IRs) at the end of each content section. These recommendations have been included to focus the airport operator and designer on lATA-determined best practice design principles, and to help convey the expectations of the world's major airlines with respect to the development or refurbishing of airport facilities. To foster overall ease-of-use and help the airport planner to locate key information within the ADRM, the six chapters of the previous edition document have now been divided into twenty five more concise content sections. The following new chapters with multiple sections have been included to broaden the coverage and scope of the publication and provide further essential airport planning guidance:

Airport economics. Contingency management. Airport commissioning. Future technology & miscellaneous items. Airport processes. IATA airport project process. Anti-terrorism and police facilities. Airport fire services. Networks.



Airport Development Reference Manual

This ADRM should be used by airport planners worldwide as the primary source of best practice airport design guidance. In certain instances specified within the relevant clauses of this ADRM, it is advised by IATA to refer to further external supplementary international or national publications to aid the airport planner. Seeking additional guidance from the sources listed below will help the airport planner to ensure that best and safe practices are adhered to and built into the airport design and that national standards are observed and implemented where appropriate. IATA recognizes that national standards will vary from region to region across the world. While the ADRM should be the initial source of design guidance for airport developments, the airport designer should seek to clarify national mandatory standards and decide appropriately on any potentially conflicting standards. Professional engineering and architectural guidance should be used to assess and resolve areas of conflict between the ADRM standards stated herein and any supplementary national standards. In the event that professional guidance is not sought and used for this adjudication, which is not a recommended course of action, then the designer should seek to use the higher more onerous standards in areas of uncertainty. Particular reference should be made to national air transport and nationally recognized design standards, as well as to any pertinent national legislation or construction codes, as deemed applicable within the region. The ADRM should be used in conjunction with the national legislation pertaining to the country where the airport resides. Examples of typical national legislation for consideration for the countries of Canada, United States of America and the United Kingdom include: International and national government aviation and security authorities, to include (but not limited to): International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO), European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) Federal Aviation Authority-Transport Security Administration (FAA-TSA), United Kingdom Department for Transport (DfT) and Transport Canada-Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA). National and international legislation defining best design engineering practice to include (but not limited to) standards published by: American National Standards Institute (ANSI), British Standards Institute (BSI), International Standardization Organization (ISO). Engineering Standards Codes of Best Practices published by: Architectural: Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). Engineering: Institute of Civil Engineers, Institute of Structural Engineers (IStructE), Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE). Building Services: The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE). Fire Mitigation Engineering: Institution of Fire Engineers (United Kingdom/Canada).





For general information regarding the standards defined within this manual please refer to: Mike O'Brien Director, Airport Development and Infrastructure Consultancy Services International Air Transport Association (IATA) 800 Place Victoria, P.O. Box 113 Montreal Quebec Canada. airportdev @ Fax+1 (514) 874 2662 For consultancy assistance please refer inquiries to: Chris Mirfin Director, Infrastructure Consultancy Services International Air Transport Association (IATA) 800 Place Victoria, P.O. Box 113 Montreal Quebec Canada. Fax +1 (514) 874 2662



Airport Development Reference Manual


Chapter B Planning
Section B1: Major Planning Processes B1.1 Airline Participation................................................................................. B1.2 Airport Consultative Committee (ACC) ..................................................... B1.3 Key Planning Items .................................................................................. B1.4 "World-Class" Airports .............................................................................. B1.5 Typical Features of World-Class Hub Airport ............................................ B1.6 IATA Global Airport Monitor ..................................................................... B1.7 IATA Facilities Planning Questionnaire..................................................... B1.8 IATA Recommendations............................................................................ Section B2: The Planning Process B2.1 National Planning Considerations ........................................................... B2.2 Regional Planning Considerations ........................................................... B2.3 The Airport Master Plan ............................................................................ B2.4 Local Community Issues .......................................................................... B2.5 IATA Recommendations............................................................................ 37 38 38 39 39 11 11 15 23 24 31 32 36



Airport Development Reference Manual



As airlines are the primary users of airports and are a major source of revenue for airport authorities, it is essential that their requirements in respect of airport development projects are met effectively and at an acceptable cost. Experience has shown that the most useful and mutually beneficial course of action when considering airport development projects is to establish full, joint consultation between the airlines and an airport authority and its consultants. This should be undertaken as early as possible in the planning and design process, in order to allow operational impact assessments and/or cost benefit analysis to be determined and, if required, alternative solutions to be presented and discussed. The IATA forum for this consultation is the Airport Consultative Committee (ACC). IATA has forecast that passenger traffic will double in the next 12-15 years and it is estimated that over $400 billion will be spent worldwide to expand and upgrade airport facilities. The IATA ACC process is effective in ensuring that as many new airport facilities as possible are efficient, capacity balanced, cost effective, functional and user-friendly. In 2003, about two dozen ACCs were active mainly in Europe and Asia Pacific. IATA strives to obtain information as soon as possible regarding any proposed international airport development projects from Airline Operators Committees (AOC), Board of Airline Representatives (BAR), and other sources. Upon receipt of such information, IATA will contact the national airline and the planning specialists of the major airlines operating to that airport to determine if there is sufficient interest in the proposed airport project. If there is sufficient interest, IATA will endeavour to obtain the agreement of the airport or government authority concerned for consultation with the airlines on all aspects of the proposed development. Once the principle of joint consultation has been agreed, an ACC will be established. If it is not practicable to establish a formal ACC, the principle of airline and airport authority consultation on a local level are still valid. In such consultation, the principles and practices outlined in this manual should still be followed.



B1.2.1 ACC Objective

The objective of an ACC is to consolidate airline views and to provide a focal point for consultation between the airlines and the airport authority concerning the planning of a major airport expansion or a new airport in order to input airline functional requirements. The ACC will consolidate airline views and provide a focal point for consultation between the airlines and airport authorities concerned in the planning of major airport expansion projects or new airports in order to input airline considerations. When considering proposals for new or additional airport facilities, ACC members must constantly bear in mind that capital and subsequent maintenance and operating costs of airport developments will be ultimately reflected in user charges. Furthermore, airline operating costs are often adversely affected by inefficient airport design orterminal construction. In the analysis of an airport development project, the ACC will ensure that it provides additional capacity to meet present and projected demand in a cost-effective manner.



Airport Development Reference Manual

B1.2.2 ACC Formation

An ACC will normally be formed under the guidance of IATA in consultation with the Regional Airports Steering Group (RASG) and the Regional Co-ordinating Group (RCG where flight operations related matters are concerned, e.g. a new runway or new airport). If there are only one or two airlines interested in the development of a particular airport, an IATA Mission may be conducted to the specific location instead of convening an ACC. Normally, IATA will participate directly in ACC meetings and will maintain close contact with its activities at all times. It should be noted that ACC activity must be separate from AOC activity because of the scale of the projects involved and the facility planning expertise required.

B1.2.3 ACC Membership

Membership on the ACC is open to all airlines serving the airport involved. Airline Headquarters will be invited to nominate either a suitably qualified planning specialist or their local representative to participate in ACC meetings. The level of expertise required will be dependent upon the scope of the project concerned. If the number of airline representatives attending an ACC meeting is very large, the Committee may elect a limited number of delegates to meet with the airport authority and act on behalf of all carriers. Today, nearly all airlines are engaged in some form of partnership, code share, or marketing agreement. These have led to the formation of alliances among the world's major carriers. Four or five global alliances dominate the airline industry, each with a need to rationalise its requirements to create the most efficient airport operations possible. In order to best achieve their needs, global alliances may consider the appointment of a single representative to oversee the needs of that alliance. To ensure that local airline views and requirements are included in the ACC proposals and effect appropriate co-ordination, the AOC will be invited to nominate a representative to participate in all ACC meetings. It will be the duty of this AOC representative (usually the AOC Chairman) to keep the full AOC informed of all ACC deliberations. At airports with multiple terminal operations, individual terminal AOC Chairman will be invited to participate. The local Board of Airline Representatives (BAR) will be invited to nominate a representative to participate in all ACC meetings. Because the ACC is the primary forum for consultation with the airport authority on all aspects of airport expansion programs, it may be necessary to obtain participation of airline representatives from other related disciplines where specific problems exist, as follows:

Facilitation Facilitation representatives may be requested to participate regarding Customs and Immigration matters that affect airport terminal design and passenger/cargo flow. Security A security advisor is assigned to an ACC early in the terminal planning process to provide input on security matters, which may affect terminal design. 20 Flight Operations If ACC discussions are likely to involve flight operations matters (e.g. new runway, taxiways, docking guidance systems, etc.), the respective IATA Regional Coordinating Group will be requested to nominate a suitably qualified representative to participate in ACC meetings. A specialist working group of the ACC may be formed to undertake detailed studies of flight operational matters. Fuel Efforts in this area are directed at monitoring jet fuel costs world-wide and trying to secure reductions particularly in cases where costs are inflated by local supply or handling monopolies, or by government taxation.



Cargo Expertise is available pertaining to all air cargo areas. User Charges As airport development projects normally impact on airport user charges, a representative of the User Charges Panel (UCP), may be requested to participate in the early planning stages of major airport projects. Airport Development and User Charges staff jointly liaise regarding locations where UCP participation is appropriate. Air Transport Action Group (ATAG) The Air Transport Action Group (ATAG) is a coalition of organisations from the air transport industry, formed to press for economically beneficial aviation capacity improvements. ATAG is a leading proponent of aviation infrastructure development, advocating the economic benefits of air transport, the industry's excellent environmental performance, and the need for major improvements in airport surface access and air traffic management capacity. ATAG's worldwide membership includes airlines, airports, manufacturers, air traffic control authorities, airline pilot and air traffic control authorities, chambers of commerce, tourism and travel associations, investment organisations, ground transport and communication providers. Recognising that its goals need to be consistent with environmental expectations, ATAG:

Emphasizes the air transport industry's progress in minimising environmental impact. Promotes the environmentally responsible growth and development of air transport.

B1.2.4 ACC Scope

The ACC is mainly concerned with airport infrastructure developments, strategic planning issues and the associated capital expenditure (CAPEX) programme of the airport. These include, but are not limited to:

Airport Master Plan includes airport layout and land use. Aircraft Parking Apron aircraft layout and related docking guidance systems. Passenger Terminal planning and design of new terminals or major expansions of existing terminals. Airside and Landside Infrastructure & Surface Access Systems. Cargo Terminal Developments air freight and air express facilities. Airport Support Facilities e.g. cargo terminals and flight kitchens.

ACCs will concentrate on achieving a rational balance between:

The level of service provided for both passenger and cargo in their respective terminal areas and
fields of operation.

The long term facility footprint and land area requirements for all parties operating at an airport.

The need for efficient, cost-effective ground handling operations and the increased facility,
resource and equipment requirements to support multiple handlers.

Increasing demand and airport capacity improvement programmes. The impact and need to allocate global airline alliances within a single operating area or terminal.

The proposed capital investment and the resultant operating cost to airlines over an agreed

The need to increase concession areas and resulting revenues, and the potential impact on
passenger flows and airline operations.



Airport Development Reference Manual

The differing needs of international carriers compared with those of domestic carriers, charters and emerging low-cost carriers (LCCs).

ACC activity will include an assessment of the capacity of existing facilities and a comparison against current and projected demand. The ACC will seek as much financial information as possible to facilitate an economic assessment of various planning options in terms of layout, space requirements, labour, equipment, etc.

B1.2.5 ACC Method of Operation

Once consultation between the airlines and airport copies of the proposed airport development plans to ACC meeting. If this is not possible, then the initial a detailed presentation of the proposed plans. authority has been agreed, IATA will request circulate to participants in advance of the first ACC meeting with the airport authorities includes

The ACC will then meet independently to analyze the plans and develop an airline position including alternative proposals regarding the proposed project. The ACC recommendations, which reflect the majority point of view, are presented verbally to the airport authority following the internal closed session. Every effort is made to resolve airline differences of opinion and to agree to a joint unified position. Presentation of the airline position is made by a suitably qualified spokesperson or if desired, by the IATA representative. The ACC recommendations are subsequently confirmed to the airport authority in writing by IATA. ACC meetings normally take place at the location of the proposed project. In certain circumstances, it may be preferable for a working group meeting to be conducted at an alternative site, which is convenient to a majority of participants. The dates of all proposed ACC meetings are usually coordinated to ensure adequate airline representation. The ACC shall decide if and when specialist ACC working groups, and/or sub-consultants should be employed to study and resolve detailed problems. This is particularly important where very large airport development projects are concerned (i.e. new airports) and specialist expertise is required for specific subject areas (i.e. terminals, apron/operations, baggage handling and cargo working groups). Each working group is expected to develop its own routine and procedures, however it is responsible to the full ACC and must report to the ACC through the Chairman and IATA . IATA will only participate where this is felt to be necessary to progress activity. If working group proposals vary significantly from that approved by the ACC, details and reasons for such must be substantiated by the group to the next ACC so that they may discuss and resolve differences of opinion. These WGs will be dissolved when a solution is found or when a satisfactory answer to a problem cannot be found. IATA can employ ACC Project Managers on behalf of member airlines to more effectively monitor airport authority Capital Expenditure programmes. This position recognises the need for continuous airline consultation, as distinct from what may be limited consultation provided by formal and infrequent ACC meetings. The airlines may request the creation of an ACC PM position through the ACC, who will discuss the arrangements for airline funding and the budget to be allocated for the position.

B1.2.6 Regional Airports Steering Groups (RASG)

IATA Regional Airports Steering Groups established in Europe and Asia/Pacific. They their regions. The review includes: are meet multi-disciplinary bodies twice a year to review of airline representatives airport developments within

Review of airport development activity in the region. Updating the Core Document, which contains a profile of the main airports in the region. Status report of ACC activity within the region. Review of proposals for new ACCs. Determining the need for an IATA Mission as a first step in establishing an ACC.




Determining the need for airport traffic forecasts. Setting the priorities for future ACC activity in the region.

Membership of the RASG meetings is taken from active participants in the regions' ACC activities. This includes representation from airport planning, operations and scheduling disciplines. In addition, the RCG Chairman, User Charges Panel (UCP), Facilitation, Fuel, Environment and Security disciplines, and selected industry working groups such as ATAG, may also be invited to participate.

B1.2.7 Co-ordination with Other Groups

The User Charges Panel is responsible for representing the IATA airlines in negotiations with airport authorities regarding the charges for the use of the airport, including but not limited to landing fees, terminal building charges, passenger-related elements, lighting charges, air traffic control and monopoly-type user charges. It is therefore very important that the activities of ACCs and the UCP are closely co-ordinated so that the UCP is fully aware of costs emerging from ACC discussions to assist them in future negotiations with airport authorities regarding user charges. Airport authorities often misunderstand the difference between an ACC and an AOC. For information on the establishment of an AOC please see the guidelines for the establishment of the AOC in the IATA Airport Handling Manual AHM 073. These committees are concerned with the day-to-day operation of the airport for which they are established. Usually, information concerning a proposed airport development is first received from the airport authority at AOC meetings Liaison between the AOC and ACC is continuous and therefore the chairman or a representative of the AOC is invited to be a member of the ACC and participate regularly in all ACC meetings. ACC representatives must ensure that their local airport managers are fully briefed regarding the work covered at each ACC meeting and the planned action for future meetings.



This section provides an initial overview of the main considerations in any airport planning and development activity. Further detail on each of these elements is provided in later sections of the manual. These items impact the airport layout and the passenger terminal design and are considered to be of major importance by the airlines. These key planning items include:

1. Runway/Taxiway Layout. 2. Road/Rail Access. 3. Terminal Design. 4. Check-in Hall. 5. CUTE. 6. Signage. 7. Security. 8. Baggage Handling System (BHS) including Hold Baggage Screening (HBS). 9. Airline Offices. 10. Airline CIP Lounges. 11. Terminal Retail Space. 12. Departure Gate Lounges. 13. Baggage Claim Hall.



Airport Development Reference Manual

1. Meeter/Greeter Hall. 2. Apron Layout. 3. Aircraft Servicing Installations. 4. Location of Support Facilities.
B1.3.1 Runway / Taxiway Layout
Runway capacity is the most critical component at an airport. It largely depends upon the number of runways and their layout and spacing, the runway occupancy times of successive aircraft and the approach spacing applied by ATC to successive aircraft in the traffic mix. The key items that affect runway capacity are a combination of:

Availability of exit taxiways particularly Rapid Exit Taxiways (RETs) to minimise runway occupancy times. Availability of a dual taxiway system. Appropriate taxiway, holding bays and access. Aircraft mix/performance. ATC procedures and wake vortex approach spacing. Availability of A-SMGS systems during low visibility operations.

Where there are two or more runways, capacity is critically dependent upon the following aspects of the utilisation and configuration:

The spacing between parallel runways. The mode of operation; i.e. segregated or mixed. The intersecting point of intersecting runways.

B1.3.2 Access to the Passenger Terminal

The public road system and the non-public or service road system should be planned carefully in order to avoid congestion near the passenger terminal. Traffic for the support facility areas of the airport should be handled on a separate road system so that truck traffic can be kept away from the main road to/from the passenger terminal. All public roads should be clearly signposted. Clearly visible signs should be positioned on the roads and on the terminal curbside areas well in advance of desired destinations to allow drivers to make the necessary adjustments without abrupt changes. Signs should be properly lighted for night use and lettering and background colours should enhance clarity and visibility. Messages should be concise, quickly identifiable and easily understood. Colour coding for multi-terminals, airlines, car parks, etc. is recommended. Car park locations should be close to the passenger terminal. The connection between the car park and the terminal should have weather protection and provide a safe environment with adequate lighting. Arrival and departure curbside should provide large weather protected areas for passengers getting out of and into vehicles. It should provide dedicated areas for taxis and buses. Curbside check-in facilities may be required in some airports.



High speed rail systems should be considered for airport access. The increasing use of rail systems should be encouraged by making it as widely available and as attractive as possible in terms of relative speed, reliability, price, convenience, safety and comfort. The airport rail station should be above ground, if possible. If the airport is located close to the city centre and the city already has a subway system, then consideration should be given to extending it to connect the airport to the existing public transportation system.

B1.3.3 Basic Considerations of Terminal Design

The design of passenger terminals must be related to the runway/taxiway system, apron configuration and the airport access system. The extent and location of these areas are governed by the master plan of the airport. Certain basic criteria should be observed in the planning of passenger terminals and the selection of a terminal concept. All terminals should be interconnected to allow for horizontal passenger flows, and where walking distances may be too long for fast transfers then provision of powered walkways or other people mover systems should be considered. Provision for multi-alliance hubbing should be respected, allowing for different alliances to be located strategically under a one-roof terminal concept. As alliances are not a stable element in planning, an appropriate factor of flexibility will need to be incorporated into any terminal space planning. In situations where future growth or even the diminution of a terminal's size can be accommodated, tremendous advantages in operational continuity will be seen. Other terminal design criteria include:

Easy orientation for the travelling public approaching the terminal and within the buildings (selfexplanatory traffic flow and human dimensions). Shortest possible walking distances from car parks and rail station to the terminals and more importantly, from passenger/baggage processing facilities to the aircraft and vice versa. Minimum level changes for passengers within the terminal buildings. Avoidance of passenger cross-flows. Shortest possible distance for the transportation of passengers and their baggage between the terminals and the aircraft parking positions when walking is not possible. Compatibility of all facilities with existing aircraft characteristics and built-in flexibility to accept future generations of aircraft, as far as possible. Design should be modular to cope with future expansion of each subsystem, or to allow evolution in regulations and changes in the nature of passenger flows and alliance groupings. Terminal design must meet all regulations for handling disabled persons.

B1.3.4 Check-in Hall

The passenger terminal layout is largely influenced by the check-in concept, which is designed and installed by the airport authority. It is essential therefore that airlines and handling agents be consulted at an early stage in the planning process. The airlines' acceptance of passengers and their checked baggage takes place at the check-in facility, which consists of a number of check-in counters with appropriate outbound baggage conveyance facilities. Check-in counters may be either of the frontal type or of the island type. Within each of the two main types of counters, several variants exist.



Airport Development Reference Manual

Frontal type counters may be arranged in an uninterrupted, linear layout or be spaced so as to allow passengers to pass between the counters after check-in (pass-through layout). Island type counters are suitable for centralised check-in. Each island, the axis of which is orientated parallel to the flow of passengers through the terminal concourse, may consist of up to 16-18 individual check-in counters. The number of check-in counters per island can be doubled if two main baggage conveyor belts are installed in parallel back to back. Normally 26m separation (face-to-face) between adjacent islands is recommended. The distance passengers kept to a minimum. must carry their baggage to the closest terminal check-in point should be

Baggage trolleys should be available on the curbside, in the car park and at the railway station. Departure flight information displays must be available within the check-in area as well as information kiosks. Consideration should be given to the latest automatic self-service check-in maximising security, using biometrics, and minimising passenger check-in wait times. kiosks with a view to

B1.3.5 CUTE (Common Use Terminal Equipment)

Common Use Terminal Equipment (CUTE) is an airline industry term for a facility, which allows individual users to access their host computer(s). The basic idea of the CUTE concept is to enable airlines at an airport to share passenger terminal handling facilities. This includes such areas as check-in and gate counters on a common use basis, enabling airlines to use their own host computer applications for departure control, reservations, ticketing, boarding pass and baggage tag issuance, etc., at such counters. CUTE may also be installed in airline offices (if cost justified). CUTE provides potential savings to the airlines and airport authorities by increased utilisation of check-in counters and gate space, thus lessening the need for airports to build additional counters and gates. It may also permit an airline to automate its check-in and departure control functions when costs of installing its own equipment would be either too high or precluded by another system or equipment already installed, or not permitted by the airport authority. The CUTE vendor should be selected in cooperation with the airlines. The system may be provided either by the airport authority or directly to the airlines. A Flight Information Display System (FIDS), connected to an Airport Operational Database (AODB) should be provided and should be connected to the airlines host computer in order to provide all the users at the airport with accurate real time information. A powerful Local Area Network (LAN) infrastructure should be provided to allow data, video and voice transmission in both public and administrative areas of the passenger terminal.

B1.3.6 Signage
A well-conceived signposting system will contribute considerably to the efficient flow of passengers and traffic at the airport. It is therefore essential to consider the signposting system in the early planning and concept evaluation stages. The signage system may be a combination of fixed (boards, panels) and dynamic (monitors) signage. The signage system should be clearly separate from advertising. Airline brand name and logos should be clearly visible, allowing passengers to easily find the airline check-in or ticketing facilities. Ideally, the passenger terminal building should incorporate self-evident passenger-flow the building, but where signs are required they must provide a continuous indication of direction. routes through



The primary purpose of an airport signposting system is to move the travelling public through a myriad of roadways and corridors using a concise and comprehensible system of directional, informational, regulatory, and identification messages. Consistent use of standard terminology in airports (including pictograms) will simplify making the transition from the ground mode to the air mode (and vice versa) for the travelling public. It is important for signposting systems to adhere to a basic consistent terminology, recognisable and universally acceptable standard functions. Message content must be understandable by sophisticated traveller. Signposting should be in "mother tongue" and English. the process of

guideline of copy styles and sizes, symbols, and uniform colours for the unsophisticated as well as the

B1.3.7 Security
Security requirements must be taken into account in all new development, re-development and refurbishment of airports, as stated in ICAO Annex 17. To do this, it is necessary to have clear government security standards which can be used by airport planners in such a way as to maintain the integrity of the local security programme, yet allow sufficient flexibility for them to be matched to the circumstances of each airport and its operations. Security requirements must be realistic, economically viable and allow for a balance to be made between the needs of aviation security, safety, operational requirements and passenger facilitation. Airlines and airport authorities should take note of the latest information on this subject in the IATA Security Manual and should ensure that due allowance for the related requirements, including costs, is made in all airport terminal and apron development plans. A centralized or semi-centralized passenger and carry-on baggage favoured. They must be properly sized, and manned, in order to avoid long queues. security check point design is

The design of the outbound baggage handling system must account for 100% Hold Baggage Screening (HBS).

B1.3.8 Baggage Handling System

Baggage handling has become such a significant element of passenger processing that the baggage system is of major importance to a smooth airline operation at the airport. The baggage handling system must be able to sort large numbers of bags quickly and with a high degree of performance reliability. With larger capacity aircraft anticipated in the next few years, the automated baggage system will become the most critical system in the airport terminal. The baggage system to be installed must be considered early in the passenger terminal design process. Certain terminal concepts may require highly automated and costly systems, while others may need only simple conveyor belts. Where automated distribution and sorting systems are contemplated, it is generally desirable to select the baggage handling systems supplier early in the project. This will enable the baggage handling supplier to participate in the system and facility design process, thereby avoiding expensive redesign and time consuming delays during construction and commissioning. The following principles will contribute to an efficient baggage handling system:

Baggage flow should be rapid, simple and involve a minimum number of handling operations. Baggage handling arrangements within the building should be consistent with apron arrangements and with the type and volume of traffic expected. Baggage handling systems should incorporate the minimum number of turns and level changes as is practicable within the terminal design. Baggage flow should not conflict with the flow of passengers, cargo, crews or vehicles.



Airport Development Reference Manual

Provision should be made for the forwarding of transfer baggage to the departure baggage sorting areas. Flow on the apron should not be impeded by any form of physical control or check. Space for 100% HBS should be provided. Facilities for oversized baggage must be provided. Check-in take away conveyors should be provided at each counter. Plans for fallback handling in case of failure should be provided with all baggage handling systems.

B1.3.9 Airline Offices

Airline passenger processing support offices are required in close proximity to the check-in counters. The amount of space required by each airline and/or handling agency will vary depending upon such factors as volume of traffic ortype of handling service performed. Airlines will also require administrative and additional offices located in other areas of the terminal with convenient access to the passenger processing areas. Airline support offices are also required in the airside concourses close to their aircraft operation areas. The individual airline space requirements may be obtained using the questionnaire and procedure shown in Figure B1.3 at the end of this section.

B1.3.10 Airline CIP Lounges

At many international as well as domestic airports, the airlines have a marketing requirement to provide special lounges to accommodate their Commercially Important Passengers (CIP). This airline requirement has grown significantly in recent years to become a major customer service element in the way airlines handle their CIP passengers and set themselves apart from their competitors. Most airlines will require generously sized spaces for their exclusive use lounges. These lounges should be located on the airside of the terminal building and preferably on the departures level, with convenient access to the airlines' departure gates. Larger airlines will tend to combine their exclusive requirements into multiple function rooms differentiated by passenger categories (First Class, Business Class and others). These larger spaces normally require their own exclusive toilets and showers, and access by elevators and/or escalators. Also it should be noted that with the growth of airline alliances many future CIP mega-lounges will be shared by several airlines. Details of the airline space requirements for such lounges at a specific airport may be obtained using the questionnaire and procedure shown in Figure B1.3.

B1.3.11 Terminal Retail Space

Recent surveys on airports show that passengers want, and expect to see, shopping facilities at airports where they can browse when they have sufficient time. At some larger airports up to 10-12% of the terminal area is now dedicated to airport shops. With passengers willing to spend large amounts of money on airport shopping, concession revenues can provide the airport with up to 50-60% of their total airport revenues. The airlines support the airport authorities in their plans to expand airport concessions provided:

The commercial revenue earned by the airport authority is used to reduce aeronautical charges. The accessibility and accommodation for these facilities must be arranged so that maximum exposure to the passenger and visitor can be accomplished without interfering with the flow of passenger traffic in the terminal. 70-80% of retail concessions should be located airside.




B1.3.12 Departure Gate Lounges

The departure gate lounge area should be an open area, allowing passenger circulation. There should be seating in the area for 70% of passengers. This includes seating at F&B (food & beverage) concessions. It should be a quiet environment, with an apron view, where passengers can relax, work or enjoy themselves. It should include facilities such as working positions with modem/internet and power connections, TV sets, smoking areas, children's play areas and retail and food concessions.

B1.3.13 Baggage Claim Hall

The baggage claim hall is the area in the terminal where passengers reclaim their baggage off arriving flights. Claim units of a re-circulating type allow the passengers to remain stationary, while their bags are delivered to them. Separate claim units should be available for over-sized baggage. Passengers have high expectations that baggage delivery will be efficient and they will not have to wait an unreasonable amount of time to collect their bags. Once the first bag is delivered on the carousel or racetrack, passengers expect a steady flow of bags until the last bag is delivered on the claim unit. An 11-13m separation between baggage claim units is recommended to allow enough space for passengers, trolley storage and circulation. A sufficient number of baggage trolleys should be available at the entry to the baggage claim hall. When passengers off international flights leave the baggage claim hall, they will pass through customs inspection. Customs should use red/green channels to speed up the flow of exiting passengers.

B1.3.14 Meeter Greeter Hall

Once passengers have claimed their bags and passed through Customs formalities, they enter the Meeter/Greeter Hall where they can get organized before leaving the terminal. A well-designed entranceway or corridor out of Customs in to the Meeter/Greeter Hall is required to allow arriving passengers to avoid the congestion of greeters around the exit doors. Once in the hall, arriving passengers may purchase local currency before proceeding to the curbside, car park or the train station. Many arriving passengers are welcomed on arrival by friends or family and a meeting point should be part of the design for the meeter/greeter hall. Important features of the meeter/greeter hall include:

Meeting Point. Toilets. Currency Exchanges. Food and Beverage (F&B) facilities. Car Rental counters. Hotel and Tourist Information counters. Bus and Rail Information counters. Clear signage to taxis, buses, rail station and car parks.



Airport Development Reference Manual

B1.3.15 Apron Layout

The key aspects of aircraft stand availability are:

The number of stands provided for different types/sizes of aircraft. The availability of these stands as influenced by occupancy times. The flexibility of stands to handle different types/sizes of aircraft throughout the day. The ease of aircraft circulation and manoeuvring, including push back.

Other important issues, relating to service standards, are: Which terminal(s) are served by the aircraft stands. Whether the aircraft stands are terminal contact or remote.

Increasing importance is placed by airlines upon terminal gate stands because they provide for more rapid and comfortable handling of passengers, avoid the need for buses, and enable faster turnarounds and shorter connection times. Service roadways should be clearly marked, with the width of each lane able to accommodate the widest piece of ground equipment. Areas such as equipment staging and parking must also be clearly marked.

B1.3.16 Aircraft Servicing Installations

Fixed aircraft servicing installations reduce apron congestion and permit shorter servicing periods. However, where the apron is used by a variety of aircraft, and with wide variations in aircraft servicing points, it is recommended that only the basic services catering to the majority of aircraft be provided. Initial installation cost and the difficulty in adapting to changes in aircraft design preclude more comprehensive installations, except possibly in the case of certain aircraft stands used exclusively by one airline. Hydrant fuelling systems are preferred over mobile tankers, as they permit faster turnarounds. However, a decision to install any fixed aircraft servicing system should take place only after a careful and comprehensive appraisal of the economic (return on investment) prospects has been made. The economic viability of such systems depends on a large variety of operational factors and should be assessed only in close co-operation and agreement with the headquarters specialists of the airlines serving the airport. The following is a list of fixed aircraft servicing installations:

Hydrant fuelling system. Electric power system (400 Hz). Electric power system (50/60 Hz).



In the provision of fixed installations, the following should be borne in mind:

Cables/hoses between the aircraft and the installation should be as short as possible and should not cross one another. Operation of the fixed installations should in no way impede other aircraft servicing functions. Pits, hydrants and other facilities connected with the fixed installations should not impede the flow of apron traffic. Fixed service installations should, as far as possible, be located close to the corresponding outlets on the aircraft and there must be close liaison between the airlines, the airport authority, the fuelling companies and other suppliers concerning all aspects of design and installation.

B1.3.17 Location of Support Facilities

Cargo terminals, flight kitchens, and aircraft maintenance facilities should be located close to the terminal apron area so that service vehicles will travel relatively short distances. The location of support facilities must take into account future expansion plans of the airport as shown in the airport master plan.


"World-Class" AIRPORTS
The IATA Global Airport Monitor (see section B1.6) and several other Passenger Surveys, which are published annually, show how passengers have rated major airports around the world. The top rated airports usually have airport layouts that allow for efficient airline operations and passenger terminal designs that are passenger-friendly. These airports are called "World-Class" Airports.

B1.4.1 Key Characteristics of a World-Class Airport

A world-class airport should meet the needs of its customers the passengers and the airlines. The following lists show the items that passengers and the airlines consider important when rating an airport.

B1.4.2 A Passenger Viewpoint:

1. Easy access to/from the airport by road and rail. 2.

Short walking distances from curbside to check-in and from check-in to aircraft gate, with no level changes. Similarly short walking distances from the aircraft to the baggage claim area and then from Customs to the curbside or the rail station.

3. Attractive architecture and landscaping to provide a pleasant, relaxing atmosphere. 4. Short queues at all check points such as check-in, security, passport control and boarding. 5. Good aircraft on-time departure performance. 6. Fast baggage delivery and ample baggage trolleys. 7. Clear and concise signage. 8. Good variety of retailers. 9. Attractive CIP lounges conveniently located near the aircraft gate. 10. Good selection of moderately priced eating establishments.



Airport Development Reference Manual

B1.4.3 An Airline Viewpoint:

1. A master plan that optimises the location of key functions on the airport and allows for orderly

2. A

runway layout terminal expansion.












3. A runway and taxiway layout that minimises aircraft taxing distances. 4. An apron layout with energy efficient aircraft ground support equipment, sufficient and well-located
staging areas for baggage, cargo and ground equipment with handlers, and no cul de sacs (dead ends) that impede aircraft manoeuvring. ahead of an efficient airline operation and a terminal that airline accommodation space including the needs of alliance airlines. passenger terminal building with an efficient also supports short MCTs (minimum connecting times). enough space for several ground

5. An attractive work place for airline staff, but with a terminal that doesn't put architectural design
provides sufficient and suitably

located that

6. A





7. A passenger terminal that allows 90% of passengers to use passenger boarding bridges, with
aircraft parking on remote stands using buses to meet peak demand, and short walking for commuter aircraft. airport shopping for airline passengers between the check-in area and the aircraft gate, revenues that help reduce airline user charges. that doesn't interfere and yet provides the distances

8. Excellent

with passenger flows airport with commercial

9. An airport with reasonable user charges. 10. An airport authority that can see the mutual benefits of working with the airlines in planning major
facility changes.



It should be noted that for an airport to become a world-class airport more than just good facilities are required. The airport staff should be friendly and the public areas of the passenger terminals, especially toilets, must be clean. Also, airline and government processes must allow passengers to move quickly through the terminal building, from the departures curbside to the aircraft door and from the aircraft door to the arrivals curbside. To guide airport authorities towards of generic criteria that must be met: becoming a world-class hub airport, the following is a checklist

B1.5.1 Geographic / Political Location


A medium to large sized airport with international, regional and domestic traffic. Regionally competitive in terms of costs, facilities and convenience. Geographically world air route. situated along a major world air-route, or at the cross roads of more than one

Geographically located in a catchment area of substantial O&D traffic. Healthy regional and national economic growth. No political restraints to commercially acceptable bilateral agreements. No environmental constraints on aircraft operations.


No restrictions on airspace capacity. No conflict with other close airports or military traffic restrictions. No threat to schedule integrity or reliability from airspace or ATC issues.

B1.5.2 Airspace / ATC (Air Traffic Control)

Airfield and Infrastructure

Runways and other airfield facilities able to handle all traffic demands. Runway capacity routinely in excess of 75 movements per hour. No limiting curfews. All-weather operations. Regular and reliable transport links to closest major city; a rapid rail service is the preferred option, if economically viable. Adequate private car parking at reasonable cost including long-term parking with shuttle bus service. Capacity to handle large traffic peaks with high activity during the peaks. Reliable airport services/utilities such as power supply, water supply, fuel supply. Spacing of runways, taxiways, taxilanes to allow Code F aircraft operations. Dedicated locations for competing ground equipment parking and container storage racking.

Passenger Terminals
Sufficient airport and terminal facilities to allow airlines to meet their own airline service standards at a reasonable cost (see Figure B2.1 for airline service standards that need to be converted into physical airport facilities). IATA Level of Service C or better should be attained (subject to acceptable capital cost and resultant operational cost limitations) Refer to Section F9.1.2 Apron configuration and capacity to not inhibit scheduling and to allow airline alliance proximity parking for hubbing operations. Apron services available aircraft fuelling, ground power. Competitive MCTs (Minimum Connecting Times). MCTs must be competitive with competing regional airports. Adequate facilities to allow single airlines or alliance airlines to complex flights within published MCT. Sufficient aircraft stands to meet peak demands buses to remote stands. 90-95% of passengers (on an annual basis) should be served by a passenger boarding bridge. Terminal facilities to accommodate complex peak demand. Inter-terminal passenger and baggage transfer systems. Intra-terminal walking distances minimized.



Airport Development Reference Manual

A choice of competing passenger, baggage, ramp and engineering handling agencies. Ability to allow airlines to self-handle if required. Government agency processing times to world standards. Automated baggage sortation systems with high peak hour reliability and flexibility to cope with high levels of transfer baggage. In-line HBS system is preferred option. FIDS systems throughout terminal. CUTE systems at check-in areas as well as at the boarding gates. Airside and landside retail outlets at High Street prices, or better. Sufficient terminal space to allow airline alliances to consolidate their space requirements. Logical flow and proximity between check-in counters, airline CIP lounges, and departure gates. Sufficient space for airlines to lease administrative offices, CIP lounges and staff amenities.

B1.5.5 Air Cargo & Air Express Terminals

A choice of competing freight and catering handling agencies. Direct access from the cargo and express terminals to the cargo apron. Sufficient freighter parking positions, with tether pits (nose wheel tie-down to maintain aircraft balance during loading and unloading).

B1.5.6 User Charges

Sufficient airport and terminal facilities to allow airlines to meet airline service standards at a reasonable cost. Transparent pricing mechanisms on "single till" basis (refer to Chapter D).


B1.5.7 Conclusions
It is a challenge for an airport authority to meet all of the planning criteria required to become a 'worldclass' airport. Nevertheless, it is important that airport authorities and their airport planning consultants are aware of the airline industry's views on airport service/planning excellence. The following tables on Airport Passenger Terminal requirements for a 'world-class' passenger terminal: Planning Standards summarize airline


Planning Element

Planning Standard for Typical Busy Day 90% of passengers can access the airport within 30 - 45 minutes of the CBD. Business Class - Maximum Queuing Time of 3-5 min. Economy Class - Maximum Queuing Time of 15-20 min. Tourist (Charter/ No Frills) Class Maximum Queuing Time of 25-30 min. For additional information on minimum and maximum check-in waiting times, refer to Section F.9.8 Table 9.7. Space - for passengers waiting up to 30 minutes. 1.8 m2 per international passenger. 1.3 m2 for domestic passengers, Incl. Inter-queue space and baggage trolleys. Refer to Section F9.1.3. Seating for 5% of passengers.

Recommended Practice Express train service should be available every 15 - 20 minutes. Employee transportation plan is Island layout is preferred. 16-18 counters per side. Separation distance between islands of 2426m. T1 JFK counters - a "benchmark" design. CUTE (Common Use Terminal Equipment) system where a clear financial rationale for its implementation is apparent. Special counters for handling over size baggage. Automated baggage system using IATA 10 digit LP bar code tags or RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) tags. In-line HBS (Hold Baggage Screening) system. BRS (Baggage Reconciliation System) preferred. Ticket counters at head of each island, or located close-by, with space for back office & safe.

Airport Access

Check-in Hall

Security Screening

Maximum Queuing Time of 3-5 min. Space for passengers waiting up to 10 minutes. 1.0 m2 per passenger. Refer to Section F9.10.3 Maximum Queuing Time of 5 min. Space - for passengers waiting up to 10 minutes. 1.0 m2 per passenger. Refer to Section F9.10.2 4m2 per passenger

Outbound Passport Control

Introduction of biometrics will speed up processing.

CIP Lounges

Departures Lounge

Space - 1.2m2 per passenger standing & 1.7m2 per passenger seated. Seating for 10% of passengers where passengers do not have to wait; 60% where passengers do have to wait.

Preferred location for lounges is airside in normal passenger flow between check-in and aircraft gates. Size sufficient to be shared by Alliance partners



Airport Development Reference Manual


Planning Element

Planning Standard for Typical Busy Day Space - 1.2m2 per passenger standing & 1.7 m2 per passenger seated Seating - 70% of passengers should have access to seating, including seating at F&B (food & beverage) concessions. Walking Distance Maximums of 250 300m unaided & 650m with moving walkways (of which not more than 200m unaided). APMs for travel over 500m. 90 - 95% of passengers (on an annual basis) will be served by a passenger boarding bridge. PBB justified with minimum of 4-6 aircraft operations/day.

Recommended Practice WB aircraft should be parked close to the main PTB to reduce the walking distances for largest numbers of passengers. Gate lounge should include podium counter close entrance to PBB & include CUTE system with 2 boarding pass readers for aircraft larger than type C, a document printer & boarding pass printer. Shared baggage facility (shutes/freight elevator to apron level) at the gate Apron drive bridges with 400 Hz fixed ground power, air conditioning & potable water attached. Glass-walled bridge preferred. Code 'E' aircraft - one or two bridges 'NLA' aircraft - one bridge to upper deck & one bridge to main deck. Aircraft docking guidance system. Ramps (with slope not exceeding 1:12) should be used to connect the PBB with the departures gate lounge (upper level) and Sufficient land for twin independent (1,8002,000m separation) staggered parallel runways (3500 - 4000m length x 60m width) with space for 2 additional close parallel runways. Introduction of biometrics will speed up processing.

Departure Gate Lounges

Passenger Boarding Bridges

Aircraft On-Time Performance

Inbound Passport Control

Maximum Queuing Time of 10 min. Space - for passengers waiting up to 30 minutes. 1.0 m2 per passenger. Refer to Section F9.10.2




Planning Element

Planning Standard for Typical Busy Day

Recommended Practice Sufficient numbers to be provided to allocate at least one 85m baggage claim unit per B747 flight. Refer to Section U.5.3 Separate device(s) for handling over size baggage. An 11-13m separation between baggage claim units Sufficient baggage trolleys to be available on entry to the baggage claim hall. ATMs (Automated Teller Machines) located Recommended use of Red/Green Channels. Easy access to train station

Baggage Claim Hall

Wheel stop to Last Bag Business Class NB-15mln. WB-20 min. Economy Class NB - 25 min. WB - 40 min. Space -1.7m2 per passenger (excluding baggage claim unit) Refer to Section F9.10.6

Inbound Customs Meeter Greeter Hall

Space -1.7m2 per passenger & greeter. 20% of space for seating. Business Class - passenger on the curbside 20-25 minutes after aircraft arrival. Economy Class - passengers on the curbside 40-45 minutes after aircraft

Passenger Arrival- Wheel stop to Curbside ICAO recommended practice is 45 minutes


Airline Offices

10m2 per staff member Rule of Thumb # check-in counters x 100 m2

The PTB should incorporate selfevident passenger flow routes through the building, but where signs are required they must provide a continuous indication of direction. Signposting system should use a concise & comprehensive system of directional, informational, regulatory & identification messages. It should adhere to a basic guideline of copy styles sizes, Sufficient space to lease& to airlines & Alliances. Located landside reasonably close to check-in. Clearly signposted.



Airport Development Reference Manual


Planning Element

Planning Standard for Typical Busy Day Airport facilities must comply with national laws and regulations.

Recommended Practice

Passengers with Disabilities Retail/Concessions

MCT - (Minimum Connecting Time)

Domestic-Domestic - 35-45 min. Domestic-International - 35-45 min. International-Domestic - 45-60 min. International-International - 45-60 min. Refer to Section U1.2.6 for specific baggage connecting times. Transfer Counter - Maximum Queuing Time of 5-10 min. Space - for passengers waiting up to 30 minutes. 1.2 m2 per passenger, incl. interqueue space and baggage trolleys. Refer to Section F9.1.3. Seating for 5% of passengers.

Airport Authority should obtain 50 60% of total airport revenue from retail/concessions. 70-80% of retail concessions should be located airside. Retail/concession facilities should not interfere with passengers flows between check-in and the departure gate






The Global Airport Monitor is a customer satisfaction benchmarking programme that analyses the perceptions of international, domestic and transborder travelers and provides an up-to-date marketing index to measure the service quality of participating airports. This benchmarking tool explores passengers' 'on-the-day' experience of an airport on a wide range of service elements on a worldwide basis. The questionnaire is distributed to passengers in the departure lounges (airside) 30-45 minutes prior to departure. Each airport receives approximately 350 questionnaires per quarter. If an airport needs a more robust sample by segment, e.g. Transborder/Domestic or per terminal for more detailed analysis, an increased sample size is constructed. The survey is carried out according to a precise sampling plan constructed with the airport management, ensuring the sample is representative of the airport's traffic mix. The questionnaire covers 24 airport service attributes and 4 airline service elements as well as demographic/ travel and connecting passenger profile. The 24 airport service attributes include:

1. Ease of finding your way through the airport/ signposting. 2. Flight information screens. 3. Availability of flights to other cities. 4. Ease of making connections with other flights. 5. Availability of baggage carts. 6. Courtesy, helpfulness of airport staff (excluding check-in). 7. Restaurant/ eating facilities. 8. Shopping facilities. 9. Business facilities (i.e. computers, internet). 10. Washrooms. 11. Passport and Visa inspection. 12. Security inspection. 13. Customs inspection. 14. Comfortable waiting/ gate areas. 15. Cleanliness of airport terminal. 16. Speed of baggage delivery service, (previous experience). 17. Ground transportation to/ from airport. 18. Parking facilities. 19. Sense of security. 20. Ambience of the airport. 21. Overall satisfaction with airport. 22. Value for money for restaurant/eating facilities. 23. Value for money for shopping facilities. 24. Value for money for parking facilities.


Airport Development Reference Manual

Each year IATA publishes the results of the Global Airport Monitor surveys conducted at major airports around the world. Figure B1-2 shows the rankings of the Top 10 Airports from 1998-2002.

Figure B1-2: Rankings of Top 10 Airports from 1998-2002

Singapore Helsinki Manchester Melbourne Geneva Zurich Amsterdam Copenhagen Montreal Mirabel Orlando Copenhagen Singapore Helsinki Vancouver Manchester Kuala Lumpur Cincinnati Perth Amsterda m Hong Kong Singapore Sydney Helsinki Hong Kong Copenhagen Minneapolis Paul Manchester Vienna Birmingham Vancouver Dubai Singapore Copenhage n Seoul Incheon Helsinki Sydney Athens Hong Kong Bermuda Vancouver Dubai Singapore Hong Kong Copenhagen Kuala Lumpur Seoul Incheon Athens Vancouver Cincinnati



For information on the IATA Global Airport Monitor contact



At an early stage in an airport project, specific airline space and facility requirements must be determined. The recommended document for obtaining this required information is the IATA Facilities Planning Questionnaire. See FIG. B1.3 at the end of this chapter. It must be anticipated that the contents of the questionnaire may not be completely applicable at all airports, but it is expected that the basic document can be used at all locations, with suitable notes indicating items which should be ignored, deleted or possibly added. Therefore, before circulation, the airlines and the airport authority should agree both on the sections to be used, and any variation in their content. IATA will arrange the circulation of the questionnaire to all airlines operating at that airport, and to non-airline handling agencies (where applicable) requesting completion in as much detail as possible and return to IATA for consolidation and subsequent presentation to the airport authority. Responses from each airline are kept confidential. Estimates of rental rates for leasing space should be available to the airlines early in the planning process. The rental rates usually affect the amount of space that an airline will request. If rates are high, the airline may reduce its space requirements. At airports where more than one terminal building is involved, it may be necessary to complete separate questionnaire sections for each building. Requirements associated directly with staff numbers should be based on the maximum number of staff on duty on a particular shift. Care should be taken not to use cumulative figures of total staff employed, although provision must be included for shift changeover, when assessing car parking requirements, locker room areas, etc.


Figure B1-3: IATA Facilities Planning Questionnaire

Estimates for planning purposes only not a commitment to rent the required space Airline:_________________________________ Planning Years_____________to ______________ Airport:_________________________________

1. 1.1

HANDLING ARRANGEMENTS Passenger Baggage Handling

Do you intend to perform your own passenger baggage handling function? YES / NO

If "NO" state name of handling agency/airline now used__________________________________ If "YES" indicate whether in full or part.
handling agency/airline: FULL / PART

If "PART' indicate which functions you intend to perform and which are to be performed by the

Function Ticket Sales Passenger Check-in Seat Allocation Load Control Passenger Boarding Control Baggage Sorting Flight Operations Crew Briefing

If Self Handling Tick ()

Function Peformed by Handling Agency If Yes Name of Agency/ Tick () Airline


Apron Handling
Do you intend to perform your own apron handling function? YES / NO

If "NO" state name of handling agency/airline now used If "YES" indicate whether in full or part.
Function FULL / PART

If "PART' indicate which functions you intend to perform and which are to be performed by the
If Self Handling Tick () Baggage/Cargo Loading/Unloading Aircraft Push-back Aircraft Catering Aircraft Cleaning Aircraft Toilet Service Function Peformed by Handling Agency Name of If Yes Agency/ Airline Tick ()


Airport Development Reference Manual

Cargo Handling
Do you intend to perform your own cargo handling function? YES / NO


If "NO" state name of handling agency/airline now used If "YES" indicate whether in full or part. FULL / PART If "PART' indicate which functions you intend to perform and which are to be performed by the handling agency/airline:
Function If SelfHandling Tick () Function Performed by Handling Agency Name of If YeTick K) Agency/ Airline

Export Goods acceptance/paperwork Cargo processing Container/Pallet build-up Aircraft loading Import Aircraft unloading Container/Pallet breakdown Cargo processing Customer contact/paperwork


State your existing facilities and requirements for the forecast years specified above. Airlines intending to be handled by third parties should only specify those requirements which would not be provided by the handling agent. Function Staff Desired Location Existing Facilities Requirements Year Requirements Year

2. 2.1

No. Check-in Counters No. Self-Service Counters No. CUSS Kiosks Check-in Support Offices No. Ticket/Sales Counters (not included above) Administrative Offices Operations Offices VIP/CIP Lounge Communications Facilities (specify) Line Maintenance Offices/Stores Ground Equipment Parking Other (specify) Joint Use of Facilities Indicate below whether your airline is prepared to share any of the facilities below with another airline or agency. Facilities Check-in Counters Ticket/Sales Counters Departure Baggage System VIP/CIP Lounge Tick K) if Prepared to Share Yes No

___ 7

m' nf m^ nrr* m< m'

m' nf nV m< m< m<

m* m' m< m* rtf



Airport Development Reference Manual

Support Facilities
Function Staff Desired Location Existing Facilities m m m m Requirements Year m m m m Requirements Year m^


Aircraft Maintenance Ground Equipment Maintenance Offices/Workshops Aircraft Catering Other (specify)


Cargo Terminal (Exclusive Airline Space Only)

Function Staff Desired Location Existing Facilities

Requirements Year m* rrf m m m m rtf m< _^ m m

Requirements Year n? nf ttf m< mJ m/

Storage Area Processing Area ULD/Equipment Storage Area Office Space Bonded Area Other (specify)


B1.IR1 Experience has shown that the most effective and mutually beneficial course of action for the airlines is to establish consultation with the aiiport authority and its consultants as early as possible to explore alternative airport plans and terminal concepts. An ACC (Airport Consultative Committee) is the forum to consolidate airline views and to provide a focal point for consultation between the airlines and the airport authority concerning the planning of a major airport expansion or a nf;w airport, in order to input airline functional requirements. A successful ACC has major benefits for both the airlines and the airport authority. Where formation of an ACC is not practical due to resource limitations, airports should still have a regular detailed dialogue with the relevant airlines and handling agents

B1.IR2 The Aiiport Passenger Terminal Planning Standards table summarizes airline requirements for a "world-class" passenger terminal. An airport authority should ensure that its consultants planning the airport terminal incorporate these planning standards and recommended practices into the design of the airport passenger terminal.





It is advisable for national governments to develop a strategic planning objective for the medium and long-term development of airports within their national jurisdiction. The strategic proposal should look at existing air traffic control as well as runway and terminal capacities and then should define strategic objectives for the phased expansion or development of new or existing airports. An example whereby this holistic strategic approach has been well adopted can be cited by the British government (Department for Transport), which created and developed The South East and East of England Regional Consultation Document. This specific paper was based on the results of the South East and East of England Regional Air Services (SERAS) Study. This document included proposals for different amounts of new runway capacity as well as options that limit development in the South East of England at a strategic level. While the SERAS document is specific to the region in question, it does demonstrate the necessary level of governmental strategic thinking that is required and represents an excellent benchmark in this regard for governments worldwide. Generally the formal planning sequence which is followed is denoted by the following stages. It should be noted that national government planning sequence variations are likely to occur: Stage 1. Review of Governmental National Planning Strategy for ATC/Runways/Airport Infrastructure. Stage 2. Preparation of Initial Master Plan for Proposed International/Regional Airport. Stage 3. Review of Local Community's Sensitivities. Stage 4. Refinement of Master Plan. Stage 5. Planning Application. Stage 6. Planning Appeal (as necessary). Stage 7. Planning Decision. The national plan should be developed in consultation with all airport operators, national and international commercial interests, airlines and IATA, and should address the following issues for the perceived 30 year development period:

National commercial and political objectives where government and financial institutions seek to expand regions within a nation for development or continued expansion. Existing airline routes and the viability of new routes. Ecological and environmental impact of airport and flight operations to new or expanded existing airports. Commercial impact studies on existing airports, airlines and handling agents, including those pertaining to cargo operations. Rail and road impact studies. Impact on existing and future aircraft traffic movements. Commercial impact on local businesses and employment rate variations. Social impact on residential areas surrounding the airport. Identification and impact on areas of natural beauty, historic sites and religious monuments.



Airport Development Reference Manual

Methods that may be employed to access the national airport planning document should be published in appropriate press and government information sources. The document itself should be a realistic interpretation of the facts developed by a wide cross section of the airport and airline industry, as well as local community representatives. The document should include but should not be limited to the following detailed sections:


Statement of airport development needs for the nation. National and regional business development needs. Social needs and relevant impact statement. ATM national development plan. Airport to rail and road national development position statement. National airport development plan. High level funding options for national airport development alternatives. List of contributors to the text.


The regional planning paper should be a more regionally focused and detailed derivation of the national planning document. Typically, a regional area would contain no more than two large or medium sized airports within its boundary. The concepts presented need not be detailed construction solutions, although expert civil, structural and specialist engineering advice is still required so that any solutions proposed can be realistically developed when need be. These might include: Statement of airport development needs for the region. Regional business development needs. Regional social needs and impact statement. ATM regional plan and national overview. Rail and road infrastructure solutions to aid airport development plan. Regional airport development plan and study (concept options). Airport regional development plan objectives and option recommendations. Regional airport development funding options. List of contributors to the text.



The airport master plan is an airport-specific document which fulfills the objectives and requirements of the national and especially the regional airports plan. The concept option recommendations within the regional plan are produced for a specific airport, and should technically be more developed and expanded upon. Typically, the master plan document should be developed as a 30 year forecast of development options which would include the following topics:


Airport development long term phased objectives. Concept variations (normally 3 or more sub options developed). Social and environmental impact statement and recommendations. Runway development plan and recommendations.



Cost plan restraint objectives. Construction programme constraints. Energy consumption targets.

The airport master plan should be used as a tool in the earlier stages of negotiations with the local planning authority to explain the level of impact the various options would have, and to help generate a forum for the authority's concerns as well as those of the local community. The document should support the subsequent formal planning application produced during the ensuing feasibility design stage.



The local community will be concerned with a variety of issues and will include groups in favor of and less than amenable to future airport development. It is important that the developer addresses and listens to the concerns and issues raised by the community. The developer should endeavour to reduce uncertainty and misunderstanding by engendering regular and clear communication channels with local community groups. Often the local community can make valuable suggestions which, although simply a fine detail to the airport master planner, may be very important to the local community as a whole. Indeed, detailed suggestions can and often are put forward by community groups which might have little cost impact, but which can also dramatically improve living and working conditions in the area. The following issues should be addressed via regular discussion with local community groups:


Confirmation of night flight movement schedules resulting from proposed development plans. Development of further runway plans. Development of terminal and infrastructure facilities. Noise reduction plans. Environmentally sensitive land issues. Construction period strategies to minimize disturbance.

B2.IR1 National and Regional Planning Documentation It is recommended that governments develop National and Regional planning documents in accordance with clause B2.1 and clause B2.2 respectively. Regional planning documents should be a natural progression from any National planning strategy documentation developed in consultation with all interested parties.

B2.IR2 Master Plan When developing and producing airport master plans it is recommended that airport developers follow the philosophy and approach defined within clause B2.3 and that economic and local community issuon are discussed and fully addressed



Airport Development Reference Manual

B2.IR3 Local Communications The developer should endeavour to reduce uncertainty and misunderstanding by maintaining open, clear and courteous channels of communication with representatives from affected local communities



Chapter C Master Planning

Section C1: Principles C1.1 Introduction........................................................................................... C1.2 The Master Plan Ten Step Sequence .................................................. C1.3 Step 1 Stakeholders and Objectives................................................... C1.4 Step 2 Site Evaluation ....................................................................... C1.5 Step 3 Airfield Configuration ............................................................... C1.6 Step 4 Runway Orientation ................................................................ C1.7 Step 5 Aprons....................................................................................... C1.8 Step 6 Taxiway Systems..................................................................... C1.9 Step 7 Passenger Terminal/Apron Complex Configurations ............... C1.10 Step 8 Alignment of Terminal Building and Piers to Service Stands .. 43 46 47 47 51 67 68 70 74 76 77 77 78 78 86

C1.11 Step 9 Alignment and Provision of Support Processes...................... C1.12 Step 10 Aircraft Maintenance.............................................................. C1.12 Step 10a Cargo ................................................................................... C1.13 Master Plan Deliverable Preliminary Land-Use Layouts ..................... C1.14 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section C2: Forecasting C2.1 Introduction and Forecasting Definition ................................................ C2.2 Objectives of Forecasting....................................................................... C2.3 Forecast Data......................................................................................... C2.4 Segmentation ........................................................................................ C2.5 Demands and Trends.............................................................................. C2.6 Forecasting Methodology....................................................................... C2.7 IATA Recommendations ......................................................................... Section C3: Land Use Planning C3.1 General Introduction.............................................................................. C3.2 Long Term Vision ................................................................................... C3.3 Assessing Noise....................................................................................... C3.4 Land Use Within Noise Zones ................................................................

88 88 89 91 92 94 97

98 98 99 99



Airport Development Reference Manual

C3.5 Land Use Management........................................................................... C3.6 Land Use Control ................................................................................... C3.7 Airport Land Use Planning ...................................................................... C3.8 IATA Recommendations ......................................................................... Section C4: Control Towers C4.1 Purpose Overview.................................................................................. C4.2 Design Characteristics ........................................................................... C4.3 Control Tower Position............................................................................ C4.4 IATA Recommendations .........................................................................

99 100 101 102

103 103 105 106




The airport master plan is created to guide the future development expectations of airports and to establish their ability to expand and develop in a logical, sustainable and cost effective manner. Airline market forces are discernibly linked to the master plan development proposal; i.e. as airport traffic increases the facility's development and operations should be phased to provide the appropriate airport processes and sized infrastructure. Should an airline's operations fluctuate, then the master plan should also contain the flexibility to be able to respond accordingly. Master plans can be created for new or existing airport locations and should be considered as active, live documents which should be systematically reviewed at least every 5 years. This regular review and update process should address variations in market forces and the operational requirements of the facility's airline clients. Existing master plans can be revised to accommodate unforeseen commercial variations to the airport's or airline's operations. The master plan will provide a detailed and accurate assessment of how an airport should deliver its services to its airline and ground handling clients in an effective and controlled manner, with due consideration for safety, development costs and the resultant realistic cost and profit recovery mechanisms. In this section the major attributes and details of an airport master plan are discussed. The master plan ten point staged sequence is also provided for planners who may find themselves faced with 'blank canvas' airport development proposals. This sequence has been compiled to help airport planners systematically construct the master plan, giving due attention to the primary and secondary facilities being proposed and their subsequent placement on the airport site.

C1.1.1 Development Restrictions

There can be both natural and artificial restrictions which may limit the extent of future airport development. These need to be determined at the beginning of the planning process so that all parties are aware of any constraints that may impact on future capacity development. Restrictions may cover environmental boundaries on over-flight of neighboring countries or towns, political limitations on adjacent airport growth that may adversely distort or influence development, planning conditions that may limit airline and aircraft operations, restrictions that may determine aircraft type or time of operation, or limits on noise and quantity of emission levels that should not be exceeded. There may also be topographical or man-made features that restrict operations or impose payload limits on certain aircraft types. Such restrictions can be removed but this usually comes at a significant cost.

C1.1.2 Capacity Constraints and Developments

It is important for airport operators to know what currently constrains their airport capacity. If the constraint is an operational process deficiency or an infrastructure provision deficiency or both, it needs to be understood fully before the decision to expand or change the airport process or infrastructure is made. If no constraints currently exist then they must look to the future and predict when individual facilities or support infrastructure will fail to provide the required level of service. The reality is that improving and expanding facilities can often be very costly. As airport operational costs will ultimately be cascaded to the primary business partners of the facility, airport development expenditure should be justified with a detailed supporting business case defining the reasons why airport growth should be provided.



Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.1.3 Planning Horizons

Traditionally, the long-term planning horizon for airports extended no further than 20 years. IATA now views this as being too short-sighted. Airport authorities should always endeavour to look to the ultimate development potential and capacity of their site. Ultimate development potential may be determined when the runway system is saturated, though in other instances stand availability or the capacity limits of passenger terminals, support facilities or land-side access systems may be the determining factor. Local considerations may confine development ambitions within the boundaries of the airport perimeter. Airport authorities and companies must determine the maximum or ultimate capacity possible that can be adequately served by the existing and potential future apron and terminal provision. This knowledge should be at the core of the airport master plan for each airport.

C1.1.4 Improving Operational Efficiency and Flexibility

Airport operators and airlines should in the fist instance look at the extension of existing facilities rather than the construction of separate new facilities that may duplicate all or part of their current operations. The design of new facilities should be as flexible as practically possible, with a building's layout and construction techniques promoting variations in the operational usage of the building at some point in the future. The design of building envelopes should aid the expansion of the facility, which is almost inevitable, through the use of modular design solutions where practical. Modular design solutions can allow airports to modify their operations with minimum impact on airport clients, and the benefits of this approach should be explored fully. All new airport facilities should be planned with future expansion in mind to support the ultimate development potential of the airport. Base carriers generally need to have a single point of operation in order for them to provide an efficient and effective hub. By operating from one base, the base carrier can increase its percentage of the transfer market by maximising the number of city pairs served. Any situation where they are coerced into operating from two airports will weaken their ability to compete, as two operational bases will result in unnecessarily duplicated costs. Airport authorities and companies should liase regularly with the relevant airlines to establish their operational and business objectives so as to align the design of their airport accordingly. Multi-airport systems may only exist where there is no possibility of operating from a multi-airport system needs to have sufficient traffic volume (20 to 30 mppa) to independent operations. Success will be heavily dependent on each facility securing a major network carrier or an alliance grouping, and many high-volume individual to both airports would be needed. single base. A support entirely the support of routes operating

C1.1.5 Political Considerations

It is often the case that local political interests will seek to manipulate market conditions by restricting or forcing airlines to fly certain types of traffic from particular airports. This is principally apparent in cities where a new airport project would likely cause the closure of an existing facility, and is generally practiced to appease a local populace fearful of losing the economic conditions and benefits that are associated with large airports. The serious operational and financial implications that this course of action can have on the airlines in question should be fully appreciated by airport authorities and companies, as these factors can ultimately impact on the basic viability of the region's air travel market.


Master Planning

C1.1.6 Financial Considerations

For all airport developments large or small, the eventual benefits to the various stakeholder groups must be positive and outweigh the cost of the development; e.g. a thorough cost benefit analysis should be undertaken to support all capital expenditure (CAPEX). A financial model should be established which shows the proposed method and time scales for cost recovery, which will in turn allow the airlines to determine what the proposed impact may be on their yields and operating costs. Where relocation of the entire airfield is being considered to a new 'green-field' or 'blue-sea' location, financial support will be required from governments to offset the political costs of re-establishing infrastructure at the new site. This is particularly true of large-scale developments that include surface access system provision, primary utility supply and distribution networks, and preliminary site preparation works that may be essential to support operations in the new location. It should also be noted that any proceeds accruing from the sale of land or facilities at the former site should be used to offset the cost of new facilities. For further information on financial matters pertaining to airport development, please refer to Chapter D, Sections D1 to D4 inclusive.

C1.1.7 Existing Airports

No two existing airports are identical. While there may be similarities in certain facilities created by particular runway configurations, each will possess several unique characteristics often created through compromise. The main problem with existing airports concerns how to expand facilities that have run out of room to develop in their present locations. A common operational dilemma may arise in these circumstances whereby the airlines using an existing airport will usually want to continue to operate from that location, and yet this in turn may prevent the facility from sufficiently limiting its operations to allow for the required expansion and redevelopment. Airport operators in this case tend to take the view that the existing operation should be expanded towards its limit, while in parallel a process is begun to develop a replacement facility. The existing airport is then capable of possibly being redeveloped at a later stage for a different aviation market, or indeed sold off as general real estate once decommissioned.

CI .1.8 New Airports

At 'green-field' or 'blue-sea' sites the planner essentially has a blank canvass upon which to compose their airport master plan, which should ideally follow the ten step sequence defined within clause C1.2 below. This sequence defines the primary and logical steps that all airport developers should follow when creating a master plan. As with existing airports, the travel distance and accessibility to the new airport site are primary requirements, and the apron area tends to be the central pivot point of a balanced design approach. Refer to the development zones identified within Figures C1-1 to C16 inclusive for further details in this regard. The primary business functions and markets of the airport will need to be clearly balanced so that the correct functional emphasis can be placed on their development. function of the airport should be ranked and this should in part dictate the positioning within the airfield. It sounds obvious, but passenger processing functions should be within passengers airports. Similarly, cargo and mail processing functions should be within predominantly cargo and mail airport operations. identified and Each proposed of the process highly ranked highly ranked

There are various permutations on how these functions can be aligned but the solution has to be operationally viable from day one through to the ultimate phase. This may result in some master plans, particularly in their early phases, looking somewhat generous in their approach to land use planning. All other non-essential activities can then be positioned so that they do not interfere with either the circulation routes or expansion zones of the primary facilities.



Airport Development Reference Manual

The following sequence should be followed when developing a master plan for a typical international or domestic airport passenger terminal and apron airport operation. Step 7 and step 10 should be exchanged in sequence when a predominantly cargo and express processing facility is proposed, as the commercial and provisional bias switches accordingly. Step 1 Determine the peak aircraft movements and resulting peak passenger movements required in the final master plan design year (Refer to Section C2 for Forecasting Techniques). Step Step 2 3 Collect via survey: geographical, geological, pertaining to the proposed airport site location. meteorological and environmental data


Select the runway configuration(s) which best matches the aircraft type and movement requirements, ATC capability, geological limitations and meteorological conditions, and which satisfies the environmental requirements as closely as possible. Align the proposed runway(s) to coincide with the prevailing wind directions.

Step 4

Step 5 Determine and locate the number of aircraft stands required and the stand type (remote or gate serviced) needed to meet the service standard. Step 6 Provide the correct configuration and quantity of taxiways, ensuring that the runway(s) and stands are serviced adequately, with due consideration to the dynamics of the aircraft on the apron. Step 7 Size and position the ultimate terminal building(s), pier(s) and control tower within the appropriate development zone(s) (refer to Figures C1-1 to C1-6 inclusive). The space requirement for the terminal building will be heavily dependent on the processes required as defined within Chapter T, and the functional space requirements defined within Chapter F Airport Capacity, Section F9 Passenger Terminal Facilities, and Chapter U Airport Baggage Handling.

Step 8 Align the ultimate terminal building and piers to service the aircraft stands accordingly. Position fire services within the apron complex appropriately. Step 9 Size and position airport support processes such as (but not limited to) rail, bus, coach and passenger car access and parking facilities. See Chapter T for potential processes to be considered and included. StepIO Position secondary Cargo and Separate Express Facilities Terminal and stands, aircraft maintenance hangars as required within the surplus development zone(s) (refer to Figures C1-1 to C1-6 inclusive).

Historically, few airports worried about running out of space. Airfields were often located in relatively isolated countryside positions and had multiple runways occupying vast tracks of land. The jet age placed a reduced need on crosswind runways and as a result runways made way for aprons, small finger piers and terminals. Development tended to be piecemeal and lacked co-ordination Terminal buildings and airport support facilities merely spread out as required, with little or no thought for the future. Expansion of existing facilities was not normally considered, so newer, multiple terminal solutions were added. This situation, rather surprisingly, lasted until the late eighties. It is for these reasons that the ten point master planning sequence described above should be adopted by airport developers, so that logical airport developments can be designed and implemented in the most appropriate and efficient manner.



Master Planning
All airports, regardless of their size, can no longer ignore their impact on surrounding communities, who unfortunately in some instances may have been allowed (by the lack of land-use controls) to encroach upon the airport's boundary. Sustainability now needs to be considered and a greater emphasis needs to be placed on the airport as a junction for modal interchange. A master plan is required so that all air-side, land-side and airport support facilities can develop, expand and improve the operational flexibility and efficiency of their business in a structured, balanced and orderly fashion, without adversely impacting on the business of their neighbours on or adjacent to the airport. In so doing, the potential of the available land and the capacity of the airport's runway system can be maximized.



C1.3.1 STEP 1 a Stakeholder Consultation

Meaningful and effective consultation with all interested people, community groups, parties and organisations (airlines, major tenants, the travelling public, surrounding communities, Civil Aviation Authorities and support agencies) that may be impacted by the airport development is essential. For further details on what groups should be consulted and what staged please refer to Sections B1 and V1.

C1.3.2 STEP 1 b Background Statistical Data

All successful master plans are based on a combination of robust assumptions and facts. These must be assembled and recorded with great care in order that they can stand up to external scrutiny by those who may or may not wish that airport development should take place. Of particular importance will be the forecasted data pertaining to relevant airlines and the base carrier(s). This will serve as a sound base from which aviation market forecasts can then, at a later stage, be extrapolated.

C1.3.3 STEP 1 c Future Demand Aviation Market Forecast

A forecast of future aviation demand is required in order to determine if and when additional capacity should be developed. It should not be used to determine the overall scale of the airport required, as facility requirements should be closely matched against the chosen site's ultimate development potential so that all facility development is geared to reaching the ultimate level while maintaining balance within the overall operational system. For further details on forecasting please refer to Section C2 for Forecasting Techniques.



C1.4.1 STEP 2a Data Collection and Analysis (site visit)

A thorough study should be made of either the existing or proposed sites to determine their suitability to accommodate future traffic. All relevant and available facts should be recorded. This should include & cover:

Utility Provisions primary supplies, the position of end nodes and transition point of supply responsibility. Retrieval Systems sewage, surface water and effluent retrieval systems. Adjacent primary and secondary surface access systems. Location, size, capacity, condition and age of all air-side, land-side and airport support facilities. Condition of runways, taxiways and aprons.



Airport Development Reference Manual

Meteorological conditions. Geology and topography. Obstacles and terrain. Surrounding development & land use.

In this way, later stage evaluations can be carried out should existing facilities be considered for refurbishment, expansion or demolition to make way for development as foreseen in the master plan.

C1.4.2 STEP 2b Geology and Topography

Significant variations in site levels will need to be recorded as these will determine the amount of material that will be required to be excavated, transported or filled in order to produce a graded site capable of supporting aircraft operations. Soil conditions, particularly the ability of the site's various terrains and substrata to safely and adequately support the loads imposed by aircraft, vehicular traffic movements and building structures need to be determined. Some terrain may be of low bearing quality and may influence the planner's choice as to where best locate a major runway without incurring additional construction costs. Runways, if not constructed properly, risk early cracks due to structural damage and resulting high maintenance costs. Soil analysis and borings will be very important to determine which areas to map out for runway development. Soil composition quality plays an important cost factor in determining the type of construction materials required. The presence or absence of water on the site is also an important element to take into consideration.

C1.4.3 STEP 2c Surrounding Development & Land Use

It is important to determine what use is currently being made of the surrounding land, what development plans are proposed and what zoning procedures have been set in place to ensure that incompatible developments are not permitted adjacent to the site. Particular attention should be paid to noise sensitive developments, especially if these are located in close proximity to the airport and/or on the line of existing runways and their respective aircraft approach and departure paths. For further details please refer to Section C3 of this manual.

C1.4.4 STEP 2d Site Selection Criteria

The following site selection criteria should be considered by airport planners:

Financial considerations. Adjacent airports, ATC, airspace and routes. Environmental considerations. Operational & technical considerations. Social considerations.



Master Planning

C1.4.5 STEP 2e Methodology

There are a number of basic steps that have to be taken in turn to determine which site offers the most potential to satisfy the growth requirements of both airlines and airport authorities alike. The following need to be determined:

1. The size of site required to satisfy forecast demand. 2. Which site(s) fulfil the basic area requirement. 3. Data collection and analysis from each possible site. 4. Review of site selection criteria that affect airport location. 5. Operational relationships. 6. Preliminary land use layouts. 7. Evaluation of criteria. 8. Recommendation of which site(s) should be considered in the second stage evaluation process.

C1.4.6 STEP 2f Site and Facility Sizing

For existing and proposed airports, the land available for development either between or adjacent to the runways, when coupled with the annual capacity of the runway system, will determine the ultimate capacity of the airport. If land availability is not an issue then runway capacity is the factor that determines ultimate capacity. The total area available for development is fixed by the site's existing or proposed boundary. In order for airport planners and airport authorities to understand the scale of the site required for airport infrastructure development, the following tables have been assembled. These cover the primary facilities exclusively and should be used for rough estimation purposes only.



Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.4.7 STEP 2g Approximate Land Area Requirement

The following table highlights the land availability at 25 airports throughout Europe, North America and the Asia Pacific regions. LAND AREA REQUIREMENTS
port No. of Runways Total Annual Mvts. Total Annual Passenger (mppa) Total Annual Land Area (ha)



4 3 3 5 3 3 2 4 2 1 3 2 2 2

517,657 466,815 458,731 432,480 326,050 325,622 302,412 283,449 279,383 260,858 243,586 204,275 191,846 186,05B

48.1 64.2 49.3 39.2 21.5 22.4 22.9 26.2 18.2 31.9 25.3 14.2 18.4 (2000) 13.3

1,610,484 1,402,000 (2001) 1,613,292 1,222,594 687,384 545,423 148,018 202,400 120,535 338,246 120,638 82,383 122,143 123,397

3,238 1,117 1,900 2,678 1,245 783 1,500 1,600 3,100 683 1,530 1,300 883 1,700

4 6 5 4 4 4

915,454 908,989 837,779 783,433 426,506 345,094

80.1 71.6 60.4 65.5 28.9 32.8

655,983 1,468,553 904,994 2,038,784 344,463 1,864,423

1,518 2,833 7,658 1,443 1,810 1,995

3 2 2 2 1

307,058 193,895 184,533 133,396 122,916

25.7 32.7 28.6 27.3 19.4

573,880 2,240,585 1,680,000 1,932,694 999,692

887 1,255 1,300 1,084 510



Master Planning

C1.4.8 STEP 2h Social Considerations

The placement of airports within populated areas will have a significant social impact which must be fully assessed by airport planners. Please refer to Sections E2 and S3 of this manual for further details in this regard.

C1.4.9 STEP 2i-Environmental Considerations

It is almost essential and certainly recommended for airport developers to create a detailed environmental impact study for a proposed new airport development site. The considerations which should be taken in account are detailed particularly within Sections E1, E3 and E4 of this manual.

CI .4.10 STEP 2j Economic Considerations

It will be essential for airport planners to consider the economic viability of the proposed site in terms of the constructions costs associated within the region and resultant payback period for the development. Additionally, the regional stability of the country where the airport is to reside will be important to understand. Inflation and cost of borrowing within the region may preclude certain desirable development options from being considered for the proposed airport. Some countries provide special economic zones where major developments may benefit from less governmental taxation. These factors need to be explored and considered fully.



C1.5.1 STEP 3a Airfield Configuration Overview

The airport authority and the airport planning team must have a comprehensive understanding of the airfield configuration options that exist. There are essentially six airfield configurations for airport planners to choose from, all of which are defined within the following Clauses and Figures C1-1 through C1-6 inclusive. These all have various operational advantages and disadvantages, and it should be noted that while six airfield configurations exist to choose from, only four are deemed recommended by IATA for green-field or blue-sea situations. Please refer to the table within Clause C1.5.8 for further information. Airfield configurations are determined by the number, position and orientation of existing and proposed runways and their support taxiway networks. This factor will greatly influence the position of all other primary and secondary support facilities. When determining the position of new runways, several related factors need to be assessed in order that the new infrastructure can make best use of the existing or proposed new site's unique conditions.

C1.5.2 STEP 3b Adjacent Airports, ATC, Airspace & Routes

Each airport has to coexist and operate within much larger national or international air traffic systems. Individual airports utilise vast tracks of airspace in order to accommodate the procedures required to allow aircraft to approach, hold, land and take-off. As a result, any extensive growth plan should be discussed and carefully co-ordinated with the relevant air traffic control authority, such that feasible recommendations can be developed and impractical concepts eliminated. Other factors may also come into play, including coordination with military controlled airspace and aircraft movements.



Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.5.1 STEP 3c Meteorological Conditions and RunwayWind Orientation

The main criteria for the orientation of runways are the prevailing winds. Historical data will have to be retrieved to determine their direction, frequency and strength. As a general rule, the principal traffic runway at an airport should be oriented as closely as practicable in the direction of the prevailing winds. ICAO specifies that runways should be oriented so aircraft may land with crosswind components of 20km/hr or less at least 95 percent of the time for runways of 1500m or more. Optimum runway directions are determined by using a wind-rose.

C1.5.2 STEP 3d Visual Conditions

Visibility and ceiling heights are very much affected by weather conditions and will influence the choice of runway operations; e.g. whether to select for operations under all weather or visual conditions only. Fog, turbulence and abnormal rainfall may at times also reduce the capacity of runways. In order for airlines to maintain regular schedules during adverse weather conditions, airports are equipped with approach aids. The category of these aids depends on both the sophistication of the equipment installed at the airport and on board the aircraft. This determines the minimum visibility required for an aircraft to be able to land. Type of Approach Non-precision Precision Cat I Cat II Cat IIIA Cat NIB Cat MIC Minimum Decision Height (300 ft) 200 ft 100 ft 50 ft <50ft <50 ft Visibility Runway Visual Range (RVR) >550m >350m >200m >50m <50m


The minima herein are acceptable only when full facilities are installed and no objects penetrate obstacle clearance surfaces. Category III requires much more sophisticated equipment, which is not commonly installed at airports or in the aircraft using them. Given the small benefit that Category III gives compared to its costs, it is usually not installed at most airports. Cat III is most prevalent in Europe where it is a necessity for the airlines to maintain normal schedules in poor weather conditions.



Master Planning

C1.5.4 STEP 3f-Average Temperature and Altitude Considerations

In general terms, high temperatures will impact on the length of runway required, the rapid exit taxiway positions and the distances that can be traversed by aircraft while taxiing. High temperatures result in lower air densities which in turn cause lower engine thrust. When determining runway length a correction factor needs to be applied on temperatures above 15 degrees C or 59 degrees F. Airports that experience excessively high temperatures during the day may find that their operations are restricted due to insufficient runway length being available to support maximum possible take-off weights. In these instances, cargo volumes and/or passenger numbers may be restricted or operations may only be cost effective during cooler early morning or late evening periods. Altitude, and its resulting effects upon air pressure and other temperature factors also plays an important role in determining the most effective runway configuration for a given facility.

C1.5.5 STEP 3g Obstacles/Terrain

Obstacles often represent serious constraints to an optimal layout of runways or may in some circumstances have a negative influence on the operation to/from a runway. ICAO Annex 14 specifies that airspace around airports should remain free of obstacles so as to permit the intended aircraft operations at the airport to be conducted safely and to prevent the airport from becoming unusable by the growth of the obstacles around the airport. Criteria for evaluating such obstacles are contained in the ICAO document Procedures for Air Navigation Services Aircraft Operations (PANS OPS). Features within the natural landscape may also influence the orientation or length of proposed runways. While small obstructions can be removed, cost and the subsequent additional benefits obtained will be the determining factors when considering removal.

C1.5.6 STEP 3h Obstacle Limitation Requirements

The requirements for obstacle limitation surfaces are specified by the intended use of a runway (i.e. takeoff or landing and type of approach) and are intended to be applied when such use is made of the runway. In many countries all approaches and departures are conducted under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and limited straight-in approaches and defined departure routes.

C1.5.7 STEP 3i Runway Configuration Options

Where figures are stated in this chapter outlining possible aircraft movement rates per hour, it should be noted that the figure quoted is heavily dependent on the composition of the aircraft mix, meteorological conditions, the navigation aids available, and ATC separation standards of the country in question. For more information on runway capacity please refer to Section F5.



Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.5.8 STEP 3j Runway Configuration and Movement/Capacity Assumptions

Runway capacity is fundamentally driven by three factors these are defined as follows:-

1. Aircraft type and mix This influences aircraft spacing on final approach or departure where
wake vortices occur, as well distances are important factors. as runway occupancy time, where aircraft weight and stopping

2. Runway design Includes the length available, access to taxiways for entry and exit from runways,
the availability of high speed exits and entrances, etc.

3. Aerodrome design Considers the support infrastructure, including terminal design and access
to gates, and taxiway design, which can influence the ability to get to or from a runway, or to change runways when weather or other conditions require. This factor also includes access to precision landing or departure guidance, runway and taxiway lighting, etc. that can be expected to occur on a particular runway, or set of runways, assuming that there are no physical or practical constraints to accessing the runway(s). This means that aircraft are able to vacate a runway at a stopping point, or roll directly onto a runway without stopping. It does, however, factor the predicted wake vortex spacing for a known or assumed traffic mix, and assumes known or assumed runway occupancy times for landing or departing aircraft. It is an ideal figure, and cannot generally be achieved or sustained. achieve and sustain in normal operating conditions. Note: "Mvts/Hr" denotes Aircraft Movements Per Hour.

4. Engineered Runway Capacity This is the number of movements (landings and/or departures)

5. Operational Runway Capacity This is the maximum number of movements that a runway can

Runway Configuration Assessment Table

Runway Configuration

Runway Layout Figure Fig C1-1

Configuration Advantages

Configuration Disadvantages

Configuration Operational Runway Capacity 36-55 Mvts/Hr

Single Runway

Open "V" to "L" Runways

Fig C1-2


- Lesser impact on environment due to reduced apron area and reduced aircraft movements per hour. - Runway utilization often high. - Recommended choice of IATA (subject to capacity Increased runway Mvts/Hr yields increased airport ultimate capacity. Varied runway orientations can overcome seasonal prevailing cross wind problems. Runway emergencies and maintenance easier to manage (subject to case). Both runways can be used simultaneously (subject to ATC control limitations)

- Airport capacity restricted by single runway traffic movements capability. - Runway emergencies and maintenance more difficult to manage. - Cross wind take off and - Not a recommended choice of IATA. - Open "V" to "L" has larger impact on environment than a single runway and some parallel runway configurations. - Open "V" to "L" layout occupies larger apron plan area. - Open 'V" layout does not naturally lend itself to efficient apron expansion. - One runway will always be more compromised to prevailing

85-90 Mvts/Hr


Master Planning
Runway Configuration Assessment Table (cont'd)
Runway Configuration Runway Layout Figure Fig C1-3 Configuration Advantages Configuration Disadvantages Configuration Operational Runway Capacity 70-75 Mvts/Hr Qualification: Movements per hour based on two intersecting runways

Intersectin g Runways

- Varied runway orientations can overcome seasonal prevailing cross wind problems. - Runway emergencies and maintenance easier to manage (subject to case).

Staggered Runways

Fig C1-4

Dual Parallel

Fig C1-5

Runway utilization can be high. Runway emergencies and maintenance easier to manage. Dedicated takeoff and dedicated landing runway operations promotes safer multiple runway operations. Runway layout naturally lends itself to efficient apron expansion. Recommended choice of IATA (subject to capacity requirements). Runway utilization can be high. Runway emergencies and maintenance easier to manage. Dedicated takeoff and dedicated landing runway operations promotes safer multiple runway operations. Runway layout naturally lends itself to efficient apron expansion. Recommended choice of IATA (subject to capacity requirements).

- Not a recommended choice of IATA. - Both runways cannot be used simultaneously. - Intersecting runway layout has larger impact on environment than parallel runway as apron area increased. - Intersecting runway layout occupies larger apron plan area than single runway or parallel runway configurations. - Intersecting runway layout does not naturally lend itself to efficient apron expansion. - One runway will always be more compromised to - Cross wind take off and landing can present problems.

60 Mvts/Hr

- Cross wind take off and landing can present problems

84-105 Mvts/Hr



IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Runway Configuration Assessment Table (cont'd)

Runway Configuration Runway Layout Figure Fig C1-6 Configuration Advantages Configuration Disadvantages Configuration Operational Runway Capacity 120-168 Mvts/Hr

Multiple Parallel

- Runway utilization can be high. - Runway emergencies and maintenance easier to manage. - Dedicated takeoff and dedicated landing runway operations promotes safer multiple runway operations. - Runway layout naturally lends itself to efficient apron expansion. - Recommended choice of IATA (subject to capacity requirements).

- Cross wind take off and landing can present problems

C1.5.9 STEP 3k Runway Use

Runways and their supporting taxiway connections should observe the following characteristics:

Be linked to an efficient airspace system. Be supported by an air traffic control service provider that can maximize the potential of any given runway system. Reduce, to a safe working minimum, runway occupancy times through the provision of strategically positioned rapid exit taxiways. Provide for the shortest possible taxiing times between runways and aircraft parking positions for both arriving and departing aircraft. Avoid the need for aircraft to cross active runways.


Cl5.10 STEP 3I Runway Elements

Master Planning

Runways are made up of seven elements, all of which perform a different function. The table below provides the formal ICAO definition of the stated apron elements.

Runway Elements Definition Table

Apron Element Runway Shoulder Taxiway strip ICAO Annex 1 4 Definition A defined rectangular area on a land aerodrome prepared for the landing takeoff aircraft. An area and adjacent to of the end of the pavement so prepared so

Movement Area Manoeuvring Area Runway Holding Position

as to provide transition between the pavement and an theaircraft adjacent An area a including a taxiway intended to protect operating on the taxiway and to reduce the risk of damage to an aircraft accidentally The part of an aerodrome to be used for the take off, landing and taxiing ofof aircraft, consisting of the manoeuvring The part an aerodrome to be used for the take area. off,


landing and taxiing of aircraft, excluding theto aprons. A designated position intended protect a runway, an obstacle limitation surface, or an ILS/MLS critically sensitive area at which taxiing aircraft and vehicles shall andat hold, A defined rectangular area on thestop ground the unless end of take run available prepared as suitable area in which an aircraft can be stopped in the case of an abandoned takeoff.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

CI5.11 Definition The Single Runway Figure C1-1: Typical Single Runway Zone Diagram




Master Planning
CI5.12 Definition Two-Runway Configuration Open "V" To "L" Shape
Note: (i) Capacity changes downward when a mixed mode configuration is adopted. The main constraint is the need to protect the possible overshoot or missed approach area for a landing aircraft in relation to a departing aircraft on the second runway. (ii) With respect to the table within Clause C1.5.8, the capacity estimates for this runway configuration assume that the terminal facilities lie between the runways within the development zones defined within Figure C1-2 below.

Figure C1-2: Typical Open "V" To "L" Shape Runway Zone Diagram







IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

CI.5.13 Definition Intersecting Runways

(i) Intersecting runways are necessary when relatively strong winds blow from more than one direction, resulting in excessive crosswinds if only one runway is provided. When the winds are strong, only one runway of a pair of intersecting runways can be used, reducing the capacity of the airfield substantially. If the winds are relatively light, both runways can be used simultaneously. (ii) The capacity of two intersecting runways depends a great deal on the location of the intersection (e.g. midway or near the ends) and on the way the runways are operated. The further the intersection is from the takeoff end of the runway and the landing threshold, the lower is the capacity.

Figure C1-3: Typical Intersecting Runway Zone Diagram



Master Planning
C1.5.14 Definition Staggered Runways
Note: (i) In many circumstances it will be advantageous from an aircraft operational viewpoint to stagger the thresholds of parallel runways in line with the requirements defined within ICAO Annex 14. Airports that do not possess the capability to lay out widely-spaced parallels may opt for a close parallel alternative. In these situations the minimum amount of stagger is predetermined by recommendations as laid down by ICAO in Annex 14. The distance between the runways should, if possible, allow for aircraft to manoeuvre and hold prior to take off or to cross the other active runway. This type of staggering may be necessary because of the limited land available for runway construction. (ii) From an operational point of view, the staggering of runways is only required when the separation distance falls below 760m. For segregated parallel operations to continue ICAO recommends that the specified minimum distance may be decreased by 30m for each 150m that the arrival runway is staggered toward the arriving aircraft, to a minimum of 300m, and should be increased by 30m for each 150m that the arrival runway is staggered away from the arriving aircraft. For more detailed information please see ICAO Annex 14.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

CI5.15 Definition Parallel Runways

Note: (i) Provided parallel runways are spaced by at least one nautical mile, they may be treated as two independent runways. Runways closer than 1NM apart become "dependent" i.e. the operation on one runway affects the operation on the adjacent parallel. Procedures and equipment [such as Precision Runway Monitoring] can allow the runways to operate semi-independently up to 1034 metres apart On the condition that runways are spaced by at least 1034 metres, and are not staged by more than approximately 1000 metres, they may be treated as independent or semi-independent. Runways closer than 1034 metres are effectively the same runway in IMC however, in VMC, may be used to achieved capacity higher than a single runway i.e., land on one runway, depart on the close spaced parallel. A displaced instrument approach procedure and landing threshold on a close spaced parallel runway can achieve a slight increase in arrival rates.

Figure C1-5: Typical Parallel Runway Zone Diagram



C1.5.16 Definition Multiple Parallel Runways

Master Planning

(i) The capacity of multiple parallel runway configurations depends primarily on the number of runways and on the spacing between the runways. (ii) Airports with more than four parallel runways will represent the exception, as few locations can generate the demand to match the capacity of five or more parallel runways. Furthermore, the ability of the air traffic control systems to supply five or more runways at the same time becomes progressively more difficult, and the airspace requirement becomes very large.

Figure C1-6:Typical Multiple Parallel Runway Zone Diagram





CI5.17 STEP 3m Runway Capacity

The following table can be used as a basis for comparing differing runway options. There are a number of factors that can impact on an airport's ability to reach its theoretical maximum potential. These can include operating restrictions (night curfews or environmental limits), infrastructure deficiencies (insufficient or poorly positioned Rapid Exit Taxiway (RET) and/or holding bays) and airport layout weaknesses (crossing of active runways). Hourly and Per Annum Movement Capacities of Runway Combinations Runway Configuration Single runway, segregated mode Single runway, mixed mode Dependant close parallel, segregated Dependant close parallel, mixed mode Independent parallel, segregated 3 runways 2 segregated, 1 mixed mode 3 runways: all independent, mixed mode 4 runways; 2 pairs of close parallels Realistic Mvts/Hr 48 55 84 97 105 (105+55)=160 (55x3)=165 (84x2)=168 Realistic 70% Mvts/Annum 202,000 232,000 354,000 409,000 442,000 675,000 696,000 708,000 Theoretical 100% Mvts/Annum 289,000 331,000 506,000 584,000 632,000 964,000 994,000 1,012,000

Mixed mode is assumed to add -15% to segregated mode capacity.

Actual achieved runway capacities vary with aircraft mix. A large proportion of large aircraft or a wide range of aircraft sizes will reduce total movement capacity. The inability to clear runways to allow following aircraft to land (insufficient or poorly positioned RETs), to reposition aircraft prior to take-off (inadequate holding bays) and the need to cross active runways will significantly reduced assumed movement maximums.

Mvts/Hr denotes aircraft movements per hour. Mvts/Annum denotes aircraft movements per annum. Annual movement figs, derived by taking realistic hourly movement assumptions. 16.5 hour operating day (06:00 to 10:30), 365 day operation assumed.

The theoretical annual maximum figures stated are based on a 100% take up of slots over each day and throughout the year. 100% take up of slots is not possible or desirable. A more realistic

C1.5.18 STEP 3n Spacing between Runways

The spacing between parallel runways dictates the mode of runway operation under IFR and VFR and hence the capacity that can be obtained. The following table summarises the separation distances of parallel runways: Separation of Parallel Runways Minimum Separation Distance (Between Centrelines) 1,035 915 760 760 Minimum Separation Distance (Between Centrelines) 210 150 120 All dimensions in metres Note: (i) As a design consideration, to sustain independent parallel approaches in all weather conditions the runways should be separated by at least 1.035m. If this cannot be achieved then dependent approaches or segregated operations have to be applied, thus offering lower runway capacities. (ii) Runways may be operated in mixed mode (e.g. arrivals and departures on the same runway) or segregated mode (e.g. arrivals on one runway and departures on the other runway). Segregated mode is a simpler operation with parallel runways, but because of wake vortices from heavy jets it achieves less capacity. Mixed mode has to be used on single runways. On widely spaced parallel runways it produces an increase in capacity providing independent approaches and departures can be established. (iii) Data sourced from ICAO Annex 14. Simultaneous Use Of Parallel Instrument Runways Independent parallel approaches Dependent parallel approaches Independent parallel departures Segregated parallel operations Simultaneous Use Of Parallel NonInstrument Runways Where the higher code is 3 or 4 Where the higher code is 2 Where the higher code is 1

CI.5.19 STEP 3o Runway and Taxiway Systems

The land area required to support the movement of aircraft on and around an airfield can often be in excess of 50% of the total area requirement for an airport. The following table outlines the approximate area required given twin parallel taxiways with associated clearance to object (with code F separation) for a single runway of varying lengths:


Runway Length Area Required (ha)

2000 104.9

2500 129.6

3000 154.4

3500 179.1

4000 203.9

(i) The above table excludes the areas required to support RESA, approach/departure & missed approach surfaces, glide slope area & airside roads.

Runway Length Requirements

AIRCRAFT A300-600 A310-300 A319 A320-200 A321 A330-200 A330-300 A340-200 A340-300 A380-800 A360-800F B717-200 B737-600 B737-700 B737-800 B737-900 B757-200 B757-300 B767B767-300ER B767-400ER B777-200 B777-200ER B777-300 B777-300ER B747-200 B747-400 B747-400ER DC-10-30






170,500 164,021 64,000 77,021 83,000 233,013 233,013 275,016 275,016 592,000 590,000 54,885 65,091 70,080 79,016 79,016 115,666 123,831 151,953(179,1 186,880 204,117 247,208 297,557 299,371 344,549 377,842 396,893 412,769 263,084 288,031

2,645 2,450 2,080 2,105 2,286 2,590 2,657 3,260 3,230 "3,600 " 3,050 1,840 1,960 2,160 2,640 ____2,860 2,660 2,820 2,200 (2,640) 2,920 3,580 2,620 3,480 3,500 3,160 3,720 3,220 3,560 3,820 3,560

Notes: (i) MTOW, ISA +20C/Sea Level, no wind & a dry runway, FAA add 15% for a wet runway. ** MTOW, ISA +15C/Sea level. When considering new runways at existing airports, it is important to consider the existing and projected traffic mix. In this way the proposed runway length can be tailored to suit the predominant traffic type so that planned capacity enhancements suit the largest percentage of forecast movements. (ii) Boeing aircraft data courtesy of Boeing Aircraft Company Inc. Airbus data courtesy of Airbus Industries website, via published Airplane Characteristics Manuals. (iii) The runway lengths listed do not consider the effects of aerodrome elevation, runway slope, wind or obstacles. Airport planners should refer to the document types listed below, which are provided by the relevant aircraft manufacturer(s), and which also details the recommended landing and departing runway length data:


Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning Document.



Runways also need to be orientated (see figure C1-7) so that aircraft may land at least 95% of the time while experiencing varying crosswind strengths. Varying crosswind conditions can be accommodated but these are dependent on the Aerodrome reference field length available. A low visibility wind analysis should also be undertaken. The number of runways required is dependent on the peak hour number of aircraft movements to be accommodated, the mix of aircraft types and the anticipated annual volume of passenger to be handled. Wherever possible, land should be reserved and protected to allow airports to extend their runway systems so as to avoid imposition of aircraft operating restrictions (max. permissible take-off weight) and to accommodate changing fleet mix and traffic type, without having to impact on surrounding communities.

Figure C1-7: Generic Staggered Parallel Runway Configuration (rotated to prevailing wind direction)

The layout in figure C1 -7 also provides an indication of the large areas taken up by the primary infrastructure systems. Here the runway separation is 2,250m, the runway stagger is 1,500m and the total site area is 1,297.5 ha. The cross-over taxiways are separated by 195m. This dimension allows a further code F taxiway to be inserted between the two shown at some later date. In this example the area required to support the movement of aircraft represents approximately 53% of the total area available.

Cross-over Taxiways The area required for a twin parallel cross-over taxiway system with associated clearance to object (with code F separation) between parallel runways with varying separations is approximately:

Runway Separation Area Required (ha)

1500 17.2

1750 22.5

2000 27.8

2250 33.1

2500 38.4


An apron is an airside area intended to support an aircraft as it loads and unloads passengers and cargo or awaits entry into an aircraft maintenance facility. It also serves as a platform from which all ground support vehicles, including refuelling, catering, baggage conveyors, toilet service, ground power units, cargo loaders and transfer platforms can operate from.

C1.7.1 STEP 5a Apron Sizing

The size and extent of aircraft aprons is dependent on the forecast fleet mix. Examination of the fleetmix by type of traffic (charter, domestic, international, etc.) will provide guidance as to the number and type of aircraft to be accommodated in the peak hour, their principal dimensions and the clearances required. Gate occupancy times will also have to be factored in at this stage. Flexible-parking configurations or Multiple Aircraft Ramp System (MARS) aircraft stands should be used, as outlined in Sections G1 and L3. A degree of flexibility also needs to be built into the depth of the stand dimension to accommodate unforeseen expansion of the terminal/pier/satellite in later stages.

C1.7.2 STEP 5b Apron Positioning

In airport planning, apron areas and passenger terminal facilities go hand in hand, both heavily dependent on the other. As such, both must be planned together. When considering the location of aircraft aprons the following factors should be considered:

Aprons should be located as close to the runways as possible in order that taxiing distances and
the amount of time an aircraft spends on the ground is reduced to the absolute minimum.

The apron should allow for clearances and separation distances as indicated in ICAO Annex 14.

Aprons should provide maximum flexibility to accommodate varying aircraft types at differing
times of the same day.

Aprons should be sized to allow for differing aircraft types on individual routes as a result of
seasonal variations in demand that require increases or decreases in capacity. passenger processing complex as possible.

Aprons should be planned such that the largest aircraft are positioned as close to the main Aprons should be laid out such that aircraft always have one route in and one separate route
vehicles and forward staging areas for baggage and cargo. out, thereby reducing the need to stop and hold to allow aircraft to enter or exit parking positions.

Aprons should be capable of accommodating all associated ground equipment, aircraft servicing

Master Planning
C1.7.3 STEP 5c Apron Servicing
Aircraft, when parked on stands, require quick and efficient servicing by a wide variety of ground handling equipment, services and vehicle types (refer to Section L5 and Fig L5-1). All vehicles must be able to manoeuvre around aircraft on and off stand, between stands, and between stands and terminals. As such adequate service road provision is essential. In order to reduce delays and the potential for accidents between aircraft and vehicles traversing behind stands, IATA recommends that service road locations should be restricted to the head of stand.

C1.7.4 STEP 5d Aprons Areas

The area required for aircraft aprons, both contact and remote, with associated taxiway clearance to object for aircraft with varying wingspans is approximately: ICAO Ref. Code Area Required (ha) Contact ICAO Ref. Code Area Required (ha) Remote B 0.19 C 0.37 D 0.69 E 1.07 F 1.42 B 0.22 C 0.41 D 0.75 E 1.14 F 1.50

C1.7.5 STEP 5e Aircraft Stand Dimensions

The table below provides the generic space requirements which should be typically allowed on an apron to accommodate the indicated aircraft types.
Taxiway. Object Other Than Aircraft Stand TaxiLana, Centre Line To IerenceCode Aerodrome Jf Stand Access >ush Back Truck ice & Expansion e For Satellite y Centre Line To way Centreline if Stand Access 1 & Push Back ck Clearance

pan Criteria

tand Depth




|| CD g 3.00



Type 15 m up to but not including 24 m 24 m up to but not including 36 m 36 m up to but not Including 52 m 52 m up to but not including 65m 65 m up to but not including 80 m CRJ Length 26.78 Span 21.21 a 20.00

a .c

c 21.50 d



f 25 -35


30.00 30.00

A319 A320-200 B737-800 A310-300 B757-200 B767-300ER A340-600 B777-200 B747-400 A380

33.84 37.57 39.50 46.66 47.33 54.94 75.30 63.73 70.67 73.00

34.10 34.10 34.30




45.00 30.00

25 -35


43.90 20.00 38,06 47.57 63.45 20.00 60.95 64.94 79.80 20.00



55.00 30.00

25 -35




80,00 30.00

25 -35




85.00 30.00

25 -35


All dimensions in metres form.



Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure C1-8: Generic Apron Stand Reference Dimensions

These areas are based on the recommended separation distances for taxiways/aprons as outlined by ICAO, and head of stand dimensions as recommended by IATA. It should be noted that IATA does not recommend that a rear of stand service access road be provided for either contact or remote stands. This aids in avoiding the potential for collisions between ground support equipment and aircraft is removed.



The principal function of taxiways is to provide access for aircraft moving between runways and passenger terminal areas, cargo areas and maintenance hangars. Taxiways should be arranged so that arriving aircraft do not obstruct and delay departing aircraft. The extent of taxiway layouts is determined by the volume and frequency of traffic to be handled in the peak hour. Should peak hour movements not require a full parallel then a partial parallel layout can suffice. In so doing construction costs can be minimised. Taxiway layouts should not be unnecessarily complicated and should provide easy to follow, shortest possible routes between runway ends and aircraft parking positions. Simulation models will assist planners in determining exact taxiway system requirements. For more information on runway capacity please refer to Section F6.


Master Planning
C1.8.1 STEP 6a Taxiway Minimum Separation Distances
The following diagram and tables highlight separation distances as recommended by ICAO Annex 14. Taxiway Minimum Separation Distances Table (All Dimensions in Metres)
Distance between taxiway centreline Taxiway Taxiway, other Aircraft stand & runway centreline centre line to than aircraft taxl-lane centre ln?:rument runways Non-instrument runways taxiway stand taxi-lane, line to object

Code letter (D A B C D E F

1 (2) 82 5 87.0

Code Number 2 3 (3) 825 87.0 168.0 176.0 -

4 (51

176.0 182.5 190.0 192.5

1 (6) 37.5 42.0

Code Number 2 3 (71 475 52.0 93.0 101.0 -

centreline 4 (9) 101.0 107.5 115.0 (10) 23 75 33.50 44.00 66.50 80.00 97.50 103.00


centre lin to object 111 16.25 21.50 26.00 40.50 47.50 57.50 60.00

t12) 1200 16.50 24.50 36.00 42.50 50.50 53.00

Ref. - ICAO Annex14 - Table

Notes: (i) The separation distances shown in columns (2) to (9) represent ordinary combinations of runways and taxiways. The basis for development of these distances is given in the ICAO's Aerodrome Design Manual, Part 2. (ii) The distances in columns (2) to (9) do not guarantee sufficient clearance behind a holding aircraft to permit the passing of another aircraft on a parallel taxiway. See the Aerodrome Design Manual, Part 2. (Hi) For further information pertaining to Code F aircraft taxiway clearances please refer to ICAO New Large Aircraft Circular (Published Dec 2003). Separation Distances Table


Span Criteria


Aerodrome Reference

Type B C 15 m up to but not including 24 m 24 m up to but not including 36 m 36 m up to but not Including 52 m 52 m up to but not including 65 m 65 m up to but not Including 80 m CRJ A319 A320-200 B737-800 A310-300 B757-200 B767-300ER A340-600 B777-200 B747-400 A380

Length 26.78 33.84 37.57 39.50 46.66 47.33 54.94 75.30 63.73 70.67 73.00

Spen 21.21 34.10 34.10 34.30 43.90 38.06 47.57 63.45 50.95 64.94 79.60

e ween Taxiway Centreline A Runway Centreline Instrument Runway. a 87.0 168.0

Taxiway, Other Taxiway Centre Line Than Aircraft To Taxfway Ces .reline Stand Taxilane, Centre Line To Object b 33.50 44.00 c 21.50 26.00










All dimensions in metres.


ITA Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure C1-9: Separation Distance Reference Diagram

17 i e

n W

I " P

C1.8.2 STEP 6b Taxiway Capacity

The following table provides broad guidelines as to the range of hourly movements that can be achieved from taxiways. Taxiway Capacity Table
Number of taxiways 0 1 2 Landing only Take-off only Taxiway capacity (movements per hour) 015 16 20 Maximum capacity of the runway system would be the limiting factor. If runway 50 55was not limiting then capacity would be approximately 30


C1.8.3 STEP 6c Exit Taxiways

Master Planning

Exit taxiways allow landing aircraft to leave a runway so that it is then clear for use by other arriving and departing aircraft. At airports with peak traffic periods and continuous flows of arriving and/or departing aircraft, the capacity of the runway is dependent to a large degree on how quickly landing aircraft can exit the runway. An aircraft that has landed delays succeeding aircraft until it has cleared the runway. Taxiways at right-angles are possible but this geometry restricts the speed of exit and hence increases runway occupancy time. A RET, with exit angles between 25 and 45 degrees, permits higher exit speeds. This in turn allows succeeding landing aircraft to be more closed spaced in terms of time, or it might allow a takeoff to be sandwiched in between two successive landings. The precise location of the Optimal Turn-off Segment (OTS) should be determined after considering:

For which operational conditions runway capacity should be enhanced; i.e. peak period, special
weather conditions, particular group of aircraft, mixed mode. than 5 or 10% of the total.

The representative fleet-mix that the exit is intended to serve after eliminating those with less The separation distance between runway and taxiway; i.e. on non-instrument runways the
separation distances may not allow for design of a satisfactory RET. differing wind conditions.

The characteristics of aircraft concerning threshold speed, braking ability and turn off speed for
Should the above highlight more than one OTS, it may be necessary to consider construction of two or more rapid exits. Note that a distance between exits of approximately 450m should be observed. The OTS position should be closely related to the position of link taxiways. Reference should be made to Annex 14 to determine the precise geometry required for radii of turnoff curves and fillets, straight distance after turn-off and the intersection angle of the rapid exit taxiway.

C1.8.4 STEP 6d Dual Parallel Taxiways

When planning new runways, sufficient space should always be allowed for a dual parallel taxiway system to be located adjacent and parallel to all runways. Where availability of land does not permit dual parallel taxiways, the airport planner should note that the capacity of the single taxiway could then be the factor that determines runway capacity. Dual parallel taxiways, unless constructed for replacement airports that will assume all existing movements, should be constructed in phases, as demand requires. The absence of full dual parallel taxiways would not prevent individual airports from functioning to their fullest potential. It would merely reduce the efficiency of aircraft movements on the ground. Dual parallel taxiways should also be incorporated into a master plan to cross between two widely spaced parallel runways. The number of crossover taxiways should be related to the ultimate development potential of the site and should be checked using a simulation model.

C1.8.5 STEP 6e Taxi-lanes

Taxi-lanes are routes, bounded on either one or two sides by aircraft parking positions, by which aircraft can only gain access to these parking positions. It should be noted that for taxi-lanes the separation distances as outlined in clause C1.8.1 are less than those for the equivalent taxiway separations. When planning new airports, aircraft stand layouts that allow for only a single entry/exit taxi-lane or cul-de-sac should be avoided. The resultant delays due to constriction of free movement would place unnecessary financial inefficiencies on airline operations.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.8.6 STEP 6f Holding Bays
Holding bays are designated positions intended to protect a runway, an obstacle limitation surface or an ILS/MLS critically sensitive area, where aircraft hold. At runway ends a holding position allows queuing aircraft awaiting take-off to be re-ordered as determined by ATC. This optimised re-sequencing of aircraft (with airline approval) can assist in relieving climb and en-route ATC constraints. The holding position should be designed to accommodate two to four aircraft and allow sufficient space for one aircraft to bypass another. The area allotted for a waiting aircraft will depend on its size and manoeuvrability. Holding aircraft should be placed outside the bypass route so that the blast from the holding aircraft will not be directed toward the bypass route. Whenever possible, runway end holding positions should be orientated to permit aircraft departing them to access the runway at an angle of less than 90. These runway access points can allow aircraft a rolling start to their take-off and thereby reduce runway occupancy time. For aircraft operating at or near maximum take-off weight, the entry point should be as close to the end of the runway as possible. Small and medium sized aircraft that do not require the full extent of the available runway's length may be permitted to access the runway at intermediate access points leading up to the runway end. This provides another means by which ATC can re-order departing aircraft. Such access points should also have intermediate holding positions with all the associated and required clearances. Peak traffic volumes at many airports may exceed the capacity of a holding position, resulting in aircraft queuing on the taxiway leading to the runway end.

C1.8.7 STEP 6g Holding Aprons

Holding aprons can be placed at a convenient location on the airport for the temporary storage of aircraft. These can be required at large airports where the number of gates is insufficient to handle demand during peak periods of the day. If this is the case, aircraft are routed by air traffic control to the holding apron and are held there until a gate becomes available. Holding aprons can also permit a departing flight to vacate a needed gate and to wait near the runway without obstructing either the arriving aircraft onto stand or the departure flow, pending receipt of ATC/ATFM (slot) en-route clearance. They can also be used for aircraft with long turnaround times, where staying on stand would unnecessarily tie up capacity. This is particularly true of airports where contact stands are limited. Holding aprons are not usually required if capacity slightly exceeds demand. However fluctuations in future demand are difficult to predict, and therefore a temporary holding facility may be necessary.



The area available for the passenger terminal/apron complex is heavily dependent on the runway configuration, the land available between or adjacent to the chosen runway configuration, and the ability to handle the forecast mix of aircraft anticipated to use the airport. At existing airports, terminal/ apron options may be restricted by the type of development that has gone before or be limited by the nature and extent of support infrastructure. The choice may be limited to a few basic concepts governed mainly by the ability to park as many aircraft as possible in a limited space and still allow for aircraft to manoeuvre on their own power to and from contact stands. At new airports this should not to be the case, with the chosen configuration having been determined by the requirements of preceding sub-sections in this chapter. To understand what has happened to later generation 'green-field' and 'blue-sea' airports requires a careful analysis of the genesis of these concepts. Some new airports have adopted generous and flexible concepts of various types, with scope for built-in changes.



Master Planning
'Green-field' or 'blue-sea' airports have emerged in the past few years and most have the ability to become 'mega' airports. These new airports are sized in the 400,000 sq. m range and will generally open with an initial capacity of approximately 30 MPPA. Each airport has been designed to be a hub airport and to grow in a modular fashion, with some planned to eventually handle up to 100 MPPA. The size and extent of the terminal/apron complex will be determined by demand and, in the later stages, by the capacity of the airport's runway system. All facilities on site should be developed in balance so that the capacity in one facility is not disproportionate to others within the overall airport processing system. The airport will be capable of expansion until one of the primary facilities within the system fails to satisfy the demands imposed upon it. There are many differing types of passenger terminal/apron complex concepts. These are explained in detail within Section J2.

Figure C1-10: Hong Kong Master Plan Layout



Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.9.1 STEP 7a Passenger Terminal/Satellites

Experience has shown that, when designing facilities for purely domestic or charter passengers, the corresponding maximum sq. m/PHP figure should not exceed 25.0 sq. m and 30.0 sq. m respectively. To determine approximate building footprint requirements, the tabulated values below can be reduced by 50%; e.g. where two floors are required. Historical Airport Floor Area / Passenger Data

Asia & Pacific - Region . PHP as % of Annual Passenger 0.004 Brisbane ShenYang Taoxian Chongqing Jianbei (China) MNLT3 PHP as % of Annual SYD (Int.) NRTT2 TPET2 PVG N60 SINT3 PHP as % of Annual SINT1 SINT2 KIX PEKT2 ICN KUL BKK HKG PEK(2010) PEK(2013) PEK(2016) HKG (2020) 21.0 23.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 35.0 45.0 47.0 55.0 68.0 60.0 87.0 276,100 358,000 293,000 320,000 496,000 480,000 560,000 550,000 730,000 900,000 1,000,000 1,035,700 Average Figs: 13,148 15,565 10,852 11,852 18,370 13,714 12,444 11,702 13,273 13,235 12,500 11,905 13,462 7,000 7,667 9,000 9,000 9,000 11,667 15,000 15,667 18,333 22,667 26,667 29,000 245,000 268,333 315,000 315,000 315,000 408,333 525,000 548,333 641,667 793,333 933,333 1,015,000 39 47 33 36 55 41 37 35 40 40 38 36 45 MPPA 3.9 6.1 7.0 10.0 Floor Area 53,000 58,000 60,000 150,000 SQM/MPPA 13,590 9,508 8,571 15,000 ! .Assumed PHP 975 1,525 1,750 2,500 Assumed Floor Area 34,125 53,375 61,250 87,500 SQM/PHP 54 38 34 60

15.0 17.0 17.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

204,000 284,000 308,000 280,000 220,000 350,000

13,600 16,706 18,118 14,000 11,000 17,500

4,266 4,857 4,857 5,714 5,714 5,714

150,000 170,000 170,000 200,000 200,000 200,000

48 58 63 49 39 61


Once the desired runway configuration has been selected and the runway has been aligned and orientated correctly, the primary terminal and pier infrastructure should be located. The processes that are required which will influence the size and proximity of the terminal and pier buildings will typically included those defined within Chapter T. Section T1 deals with the terminal processes and section T2 deals with the apron processes. All of these activities need to be considered, applied and accommodated where appropriate within the correct zone as identified within figures C1-1 to C1-6 inclusive. The piers should be sized and positioned to facilitate efficient aircraft movements and passenger and baggage connection times. It will be important to 'timeline' parallel processes, which are inherently dependent upon one another. The objective should be to ensure the synchronisation of walking distances and connection times for passengers, passenger baggage movement connection times, as well as the movement times for aircraft to and from the stand.



Master Planning
In practice the distances and the location of core terminal and pier functions can be 90% accurately located within a master plan proposal without the need to perform simulations. It is however far more effective to analyse the true dynamics and obtain the 100% confirmed best position of infrastructure elements by using simulation tools at the earliest possible stage. While simulation activity has a cost, the long term advantages of having the correct infrastructure placed in precisely the most effective position can be very significant. The multiple parallel processes that interact within one another should be dynamically understood and then the terminal buildings and piers should be aligned and sized to achieve the optimum configuration, giving due consideration to the service standards that should be observed. The control tower and fire services provisions should be positioned to align with the recommendations defined within ICAO Annex 14 and with Section C4 and Section X1 respectively. The ground transportation processes need to be very carefully assessed within the master plan and the facilities required will need to balanced against the requirements of locating the terminal building and stands. The cost to provide links from national rail and road infrastructure should be of prime concern to the airport planner, as these will have a dominant cost and environmental impact. With a sound business behind it and the rail and road processes correctly matched to an efficient terminal and apron layout, the result is likely to be an airport which is favoured by both passengers and airlines alike, which should be the primary objective.



Airport planners should also take into account the numerous associated and inter-related facilities that support the operation of the passenger terminal building and the apron services. Section T3 of this manual defines some of the typical airport support processes. The location and provision of general services can have a significant impact on airport master plans. The ability to provide the correct quantity and location of electrical power, gas, water and telecommunication infrastructure can often steer airports planners to develop a terminal and piers in a particular manner. This is because of the very high costs associated within expansion of these fundamental services. The airport planner will need to understand if the existing services have the capability to provide the capacity which would be required for a new or significantly expanded airport. Major airports can be compared to small towns in their ability to consume power, water and to generate sewage and general waste. The airport planner will need to establish if the national supporting networks have the ability to meet the capacity and processing challenge. If the national supporting networks do not have the capacity, then the airport planner would need to assess the cost and practicality of installing the necessary support infrastructure. As another example, the security management systems used within airport complexes are vital to the support and effective operation and resultant planning of most airport terminals and pier facilities. The airport planner will need to account and plan for the inclusion of these systems within their designs both at a master planning level and during the detailed design stages which shall help locate and shape the final proposal.



Airports and aircraft maintenance bases have a relationship of interdependency. The maintenance capabilities of an airport play an important part in determining it's attractiveness to aircraft operators. To build up these capabilities, airports depend on the services provided by airline maintenance divisions and independent engineering companies who in turn rely on the airport's infrastructure to gain access to the aircraft that need servicing. At large airports, with widely dispersed terminal locations and apron positions, there may be a need to strategically locate smaller line maintenance facilities in more central areas to reduce the time required for towing between operational stands and maintenance areas.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

The scale of the required maintenance operation is dependent on several factors. These can include:

If the operation is restricted to a single carrier or open to others. The availability of certified engineering staff. Access to spare part holdings. If the facility is to offer a one-stop service including engine test and paint spraying.

Fleet composition in busy hour, percentage assumed to be maintained, number of aircraft

maintained per maintenance (A, B, C or D). bay, annual utilisation rate, level of maintenance check


C1.12 STEP 10a CARGO

It is important that the need for a strategic link between cargo facilities and aircraft parking positions is established at an early stage in the planning process. While at larger hub airports dedicated cargo aircraft may be accommodated on a frequent, perhaps daily basis, it is normal to find a high percentage of cargo transported solely on routine passenger flights. As such there is a strong interdependency between cargo handling and passenger processing facilities, as well as a need for the two areas to be located adjacent to one another in order that transfer distances are reduced to a workable minimum. However this adjacency requirement creates a dilemma in so far as each requires significant land to expand and exploit their full potential. Therefore for smaller airports, with less than 1.0 MPPA or 50,000 tonnes of cargo throughput, the individual facilities should be positioned apart such that each can expand without restricting the growth potential of the other. In the short term this may result in separation distances between the two being somewhat greater than appears necessary. However airports should allow for unrestricted expansion to the ultimate stage wherever possible. The distance between cargo processing facilities and dedicated cargo stands should be less than 1 km. The distance between cargo processing facilities and passenger stands (where passenger aircraft will be used for the shipment of cargo) should be less than 2.5km. It is also important to note the differing types of cargo that may need to be accommodated. These can include general freight, express freight, airmail and freight forwarders. Please refer to Chapter O, Cargo, for further clarification.



After the airport perimeter has been established, either for a new airport or for an existing airport (where the perimeter has been redefined), it is important to double check that all major components and airport support facilities can be properly located and accommodated within the overall airport boundary. Each facility should be able to expand through to the ultimate phase of the airport. The land use layout proposal should be balanced and the development strategy should be focused on optimising the land use in the most efficient and logical manner throughout the various expansion phases. Prior to assessing individual functional requirements within an airport master plan, it is necessary to subdivide the overall area into optimal sub areas, each capable of supporting an individual facility's growth towards the maximum capacity of the airport. It is important to note that detailed layout information pertaining to individual facilities is not required at this conceptual layout stage. All the individual pieces of the development jigsaw need to fit and be correctly assembled and have the right interdependencies within the operational area. However at this stage the detailed operational characteristics of each facility are not required. Airport characteristics, as shown on the Airport Land Use Plans, should be the guiding tool for local and regional authorities when determining the suitability of development on land surrounding the airport.


Master Planning
C1.13.1 Master Plan Deliverable Weighting Factors And Points
IATA uses the following method when carrying out evaluations of either the Master Plan or Terminal Development Options on behalf of airport authorities or member airlines. The weighting factors and points are defined in a table entitled the "Master Plan Deliverable-Weighting Criteria Table". When this table is completed it shall reflect the airport planners assessment with regards to their optimum site. 1. Assign weighting factors to all of the evaluation criteria (column 4). Factors are assigned such that the total adds up to 100. Each factor can then be viewed as a percentage of the total. The size of the figure allocated reflects the importance of that criterion within the overall evaluation process. 2. A second subset of weighting points is then assigned to sub-criteria (column 5). IATA uses the following range of weighting points: Weighting or Importance (scores 1 to 10): 1 (minor); 5 (important); 10 (critical). All of the above figures are specific to the criteria and sub-criteria and should not be used in order to compare one set of criteria to another. As the importance and number of sub-criteria vary, the total score possible (column 6) for each criterion will also vary. From the example given columns 7, 10, 13, 16 & 19 reflect the basic score given to each site. If possible the score should reflect the ranking of each site as given by the evaluation team for each sub-criterion. Sites can be given equal scores. The scores given cannot exceed the maximum given in column 5. Using site A as an example, the weighted score is obtained by dividing the figure in column 7 by the sub-total in column 6 multiplied by the weighting factor for the criteria in column 4. This exercise is repeated for all scores and for all sub-criteria. Individual scores for each sub-criterion should be explained within the evaluation report. This is necessary as the evaluation process can:

Be time-consuming (2 to 4 weeks on average); i.e. the reasoning should be recorded immediately after the scoring has been determined. Involve multi-disciplined teams with individual members working in relative isolation. Be open to question and scrutiny by clients, site owners and competing airport planners.

CI.13.2 Master Plan Deliverable Land Use Report

This interim report should be submitted such that base assumptions with respect to facility sizing, surrounding land-use and operational relationships can be reviewed and tested. The report should be concise & give a clear indication of any outstanding strengths & weaknesses. Recommendations for future actions should also be given. It is important to stress that information at this conceptual stage need not contain high levels of detail. The information provided need only be sufficient to allow comparative analysis; i.e. to determine which option moves forward into the next stage. As such, hand drawn information is acceptable, providing the concept is easily recognised and understood by a broad, perhaps non-technical review team. In this way preparation time and costs can be minimised.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.13.3 Master Plan Deliverable Land Use Concepts
Airport Land Use Plans drawn to scale should depict existing and phased development (including intended land uses) up to and including the ultimate development stage. These should include:

Airside infrastructure, including runways (all runway elements, taxiways, holding bays, aircraft

aprons (including de/anti-icing)), engine test enclosures, location & specification of navigational aids, vehicle parking areas, staging areas, access roads, runway lighting & markings, primary utility routes, segmented circle, wind indicators and beacon and associated buildings.

Landside infrastructure, including passenger and cargo terminals, ground transport interchanges,

hotels, primary and secondary access roads and parking structures (at grade and multi-storey), rail lines, vehicle fuelling stations.

Airport support infrastructure, including in-flight catering, aircraft maintenance, G.H. maintenance,

airport maintenance, police and security facilities, administration buildings, meteorological compounds, rescue and fire fighting facilities, general aviation, fixed base operations, helicopter operations, containment & treatment facilities and aircraft refuelling facilities.

Areas reserved for aviation related revenue producing development, such as industrial areas,
duty free zones, etc.

Non-aviation related property and land with the current status and use specified. Facilities that are to be demolished.

Airport site boundary or perimeter, facility and property boundaries, security fence lines and
control post positions.

Runway clear zones, associated approach surfaces. True azimuth of runways (measured from the true north). North point.













Prominent natural and man made features such as wooded areas, rivers, lakes, coastlines, rock
outcrops, protected areas, etc.



72"1" I " I 4 J7 | 89 ' 10 [ 112ft j u11Airport CriteriaWeightingMax. Weighting .PojntSite AStteBStteCSite DSrteE1Financial Considerations152Adjacent airports, ATC, Airspace & Routes.5Approach a Departure Traffic Patterns871.5940.9130.6640.9140.91Contingency Departure Routes520.4530.S840.9120.4540.91Local Traffic Integration651.1420.4510.2371.5971.59223.182.061.822.963.413Meteorological Conditions54Obstacles & Terrain5Geology & Topography5Surrounding Development & Land Use56Surface Access Systems5RoadRailSea7Runway, Taxiway, Holding Bay S Apron15Capacity PotentialPercentage of Remote v Contact Stands8Passenger Terminal - Apron Complex Configurations15Capacity PotentialPassenger ConvenienceAlliance CompatibilityConnections (passenger & baggage)9Environmental Impact1010Operational Efficiency1011Social Considerations512Site Conditions5Availability of Primary UtilitiesAvailability of Drainage, surface water & effluent retrieval systems100

o> 3

a 2. <"
to (D (Q ?* ( D

5 "


Criteria & figures are given as an example only

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

CI.13.4 Master Plan Deliverable Airport Layout
This stage sees the development of the preferred concept into a detailed, workable master plan. Here the optimal layout is established. All users and stakeholders will have been consulted at regular intervals as the plan developed from the initial pre-planning period to this final stage in line with the IATA Project process requirements defined within Section V1. The continuous process of reviewing and testing assumptions should continue after the plan is published. It is essential to do this, as no master plan should be viewed as the perfect solution. The changing nature of the airline business will ensure that the current solution will soon become outdated. As such, master planning must be viewed as a near continuous process, with fundamental reviews undertaken at regular intervals. The maximum assumed period between reviews should therefore be no more than 5 years, however it is hoped that the main backbone assumptions hold true and stand the test of time.

CI.135 Master Plan Deliverable Phase 1 Operational Cost

It is important that all users or air service providers of the airport are provided with estimated rental rates for the facilities that they may occupy or use in phase 1. In order to do this, the airport authority or the cost airport planner working on its behalf must possess a robust financial model that contains and defines:

How overall project financing is resolved.

All terminals and other primary and secondary revenue and cost centres, their breakdown revenue
targets and cost estimates for each cost centre. airlines and other user space requirements.

Final estimated airport capital, maintenance and operating costs and related pricing policies for
Income from non-aeronautical sources. their intended programme reassessed annually after resultant impact of the with lATA's User Charges

Existing airports should possess a 10-year CAPEX document that shows of works over two consecutive 5-year periods. The programme should be consultation with the airline/IATA airport development specialists. The development programme on user charges should be discussed and agreed Panel. In so doing the users can see that charges are:

Cost related, taking into consideration the operation of the 'single till'. Transparent and justified. Fairly and equitably applied, without discrimination or cross-subsidisation. Agreed after consultation.

Airlines, the principal users at airports, will be particularly interested in rental rates for land-side offices, ramp level accommodation, gate hold rooms, check-in positions, common user terminal equipment facilities, baggage handling systems, airline service desks and information counters. Security costs should be assessed and accounted for. In many instances airport security costs should be borne by the state.



Master Planning
Particular attention needs to be paid when new or alternate methods of operation are proposed. As an example, when a new airport proposes to switch from a 100% remote stand operation to one where 100% contact is possible, airlines, particularly if they operate within the charter or low-frills markets, may have difficulty in accommodating the additional ground handling charges resulting from the need to push back and perhaps use air-bridges. Airport operators must therefore be subject to the discipline of assuring that user charges do not drive away carriers working on the margin of profitability. Should the review of proposed operating costs indicate that the proposed development has substantially reduced the ability for users to make an adequate return, then the preferred concept should be re-evaluated to determine if there is scope for CAPEX reductions and Operating Expenditure (OPEX) savings. In extreme cases, this may require base assumptions to be re-examined and alternative, more simple and less expensive facility solutions to be brought forward.

CI.13.6 Master Plan Deliverable Conceptual Layouts

Conceptual layouts should clearly demonstrate how:

All users can operate efficient, effective and profitable operations within the proposed plan. Long term sustainable development can be achieved.

Projected growth in all types of traffic can be accommodated throughout the entire life of the
project until saturation is achieved in the ultimate stage. maintained at acceptable levels. operations.

The environmental impact on surrounding communities and stakeholders will be minimised and Additional capacity can be brought into play without negatively impacting on current user Associated surface access infrastructure systems will be introduced in staged developments to
support forecast traffic levels and demand. and staff when accessing the airport.

Public transport systems can be introduced to increase the percentage of trips made by passengers
C1.13.7 Master Plan Deliverable Development Phasing
If we assume that basic planning principals have been observed, then facility phasing and construction should be determined by demand. Facilities should be expanded in a modular fashion and at intervals to keep slightly ahead of demand and to maintain pre-determined and required levels of service. Phased expansion should allow for periods where individual facilities can settle into routines such that operational efficiencies can be maximised. In general terms this period should extend for a minimum of 4 to 5 years after project completion. Longer periods of construction inactivity will be the result of the over provisioning of facilities, with associated cost penalties that would invariably be passed on through airport charges. As master plans are drawn up, they should show the existing airport layout and as a minimum the plans showing the first phase and/or development in years 5, 10, 20 as well as the ultimate stage. Short term plans covering a ten year period should be supported by a rolling development programme that is reviewed annually by the airlines and supported by a CAPEX document. IATA has developed specific guidelines in relation to CAPEX documentation. Such guidelines are available on request.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.1&8 Master Plan Deliverable The Master Plan Report

A final master plan report should be submitted showing how the land-use option has been developed. The report should be concise and give a clear indication of any outstanding strengths and weaknesses. Recommendations for future actions should also be given. For this report, drawn information needs to be of a higher quality, with precise dimensions clearly noted such that the operational viability can be clearly demonstrated. The information must be capable of standing up to intense scrutiny and questioning. The report should identify how the phased implementation of the airport master plan will satisfy the strategic brief for the region. The main elements defined within Clause C1.2, The Master Plan Ten Step Sequence should be clearly explained within the report. The final master plan report should at least contain: Definition of the strategic objectives for the region. Executive summary. Statement on how the master plan shall meet strategic objectives. Financial Plan (development financing proposal & cost recovery and payback periods). Environmental impact. Economic impact. ATC impact. Qualifications of master planning team. Explanation of how The Master Plan Ten Step Sequence was observed. Provision of master plan phasing diagrams to ultimate airport development (in 5 year increments). Conclusions and recommendations statements. Supporting forecasting/environmental/financial data. Prospective Airline User statements. Further Information. Final reports may be subject to comparative analysis; i.e. to determine which airport planner's master plan option is ultimately successful and moves forward into the final stage. Again the master plan must be easily recognised and understood by a broad, perhaps non-technical review team. It is for this reason that airport master plans should adopt a consistent format so that comparison of master plans can be done on a like for like assessment basis.

C1.13.9 Master Plan Deliverable Location Map

This is a map drawn to a suitable scale (e.g. approximately 1:50,000) sufficient to depict the airport, city or cities near the airport, rail lines, major roads, major obstructions, terrain and geographical boundaries within 15-20km of the airport. It is also important for environmental and political considerations. A sectional aeronautical chart may be used. This may be shown on the title page in lieu of the ALP.


C1.13.10 Master Plan Deliverable Basic Data Tables

Master Planning

These tables contain data on airport conditions and information on existing and proposed runways where applicable. The following table is an illustrative example.

Master Plan Deliverable Basic Data Tables

Runway Data Runway 12 - 30 Existing Ultimate 0.19 Same 91.4 Same 3,600 605, 80D. 145DT 50:1 HIRL All Weather ILS, ALS, VASI

Effective runway gradient (in %) % Wind Coverage Designated Instrument Runway(s) Runway length (metres) Pavement Strength (see note 1) Pavement type (sod, asphalt, concrete). Approach Slopes & Clear Zones Lighting Marking Navigation & Visual Aids RETs (rapid exit taxiways) & RATs (rapid access taxiways).

3,900 Same Same Same Same Same

1. Values given are gross aircraft weight in 1,000' and type of main gear Single (S) Dual (D) &

Dual Tandem (DT) Gear aircraft using the CAN-PCN system as appropriate.

Master Plan Deliverable Basic Data Tables

Airport Data Airport magnetic variation Airport Elevation (highest point of the useable landing area) Airport Reference Point (ARP) Co-ordinates (WGS-84) Airport & Terminal NAV aids SMR/SMGCS (surface movement radar/surface movement guidance & control system) Mean Max. Temperature of Hottest Month

850.0' 30* 40* 31' 111*20'3ff 80 F

Same Same Same Same

Notes : Miscellaneous Facilities taxiway edge: lighting, centreline and sign system. Remarks: Trees to Northwest of runway 12 to be removed when runway is extended.

C1.13.11 Master Plan Deliverable Building List

All buildings should be described and numbered.

C1.13.12 Master Plan Deliverable Meteorological Information.

A wind rose should be presented, with the runway orientations superimposed. This should indicate the data source and for what period the records cover.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

C1.13.13 Master Plan Deliverable Main Title Block
A title block should show:


Drawing Description. Who was responsible for creating the plan. Who prepared, checked and approved the plan. The drawing reference number, the date drawn, scale and number of associated sheets. Revision details including number, description, who revised, who approved change and date.

C1 .IR1 Master Plan Development Airport planners should observe and follow The Master Plan Ten Step Sequence, defined within Clause C1.2.of this section. The master plan report deliverable should observe the document mm&htation requirements defined within Clause C1-14 of this section.

C1 IR2 Land Use Concepts All airports should develop land use concepts that allow all airport users to develop and expand their business in a structured, orderly fashion, without adversely impacting on the business of their neighbours on or adjacent to the airport.

C1.IR3 Master Plan All airports should possess a thoroughly vetted master plan that indicates how additional capacity can be provided in a sustainable, cost efficient, modular and flexible manner when demand is shown. A master plan is required so that all air-side, land-side and airport support facilities can develop, expand and improve the operational flexibility and efficiency of their business in a structured, balanced and orderly fashion without adversely impacting on the business of their on or adjacent to the airport. In so doing the potential of the available land and the capacity of the airport's runway system can be maximised: V_________________________________________________J

C1 .IR4 Master Plan Phased Development Strategy Master plans should include a phased development strategy that allows for expansion of all facilities in a way that does not impact on the operational viability of neighbouring facilities. As such, layouts at 5, 10 and 20-year intervals leading up-to an ultimate long-term strategic view should be provided.


C1.IR5 Master Plan Assumptions

Master Planning

All master plan assumptions should be thorougnly reviewed and tested every five years.

C1 .IR6 Stakeholder Consultation

Adequate and meaningful consultation with stakeholders should be undertaken prior to and during the master plan review period.

C1.IR7 CAPEX Plan Documentation Existing airports should possess a 10-year CAPEX document that shows their intended programme of works over two consecutive 5-year periods. The programme should be reassessed annually after consultation with the airline/I ATA airport development specialists. The resultant impact of the development programme on user charges should be discussed and agreed with lATA's User Charges Panel. ________________;__________________......................_______________i_____________J


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual




Airport traffic forecast studies use a combination of trend analysis, data extrapolation, expectation surveys and professional statistical judgement. Extensive operational knowledge and a comprehensive understanding of how the local environment in which the airport is situated is required. A close working relationship with planning and forecasting experts of all major airlines operating at the subject airport will also be necessary. Particular attention is also given to comments and forecast inputs from other sectors of the travel industry (e.g. tourist boards, tour operators, financial institutions, etc.) whenever possible to ensure that the forecasts incorporate a wide range and broad base of views. As a result, any forecast produced should reflect the views of the travel industry concerning future traffic development and likely changes in operating patterns. Air transport activity generates typical volume for a normal busy period. recommended projection periods: peak period demand that reflects user's characteristics and Traffic forecasts often are presented using the following

Short Term (> 1 Year < 5 Year Projection). Long Term (> 5 Years < 30 Year Projection). Annual (12 Month Projection).

Peak Period (Selected Months Within An Operational Year).



C2.2.1 Capacity Planning

An important input to the capacity planning process is the airport traffic forecast. An accurate forecast is essential since the sizing and the phasing of the airport project is dependant on its data. If the forecast understates demand, the facilities will be built too small and the airport will experience a capacity problem. If the forecast overstates the demand, the facilities will be over-sized and the airlines will needlessly pay for under-utilised facilities. It is therefore critical to capture the correct data from the airlines and trie IATA user groups at the earliest opportunity. Please refer to clause C2.6.2 Data Availability, which confirms some credible sources for this data.

C2.2.2 Financial and Cost Benefit Studies

Forecasts can also provide inputs for financial planning. At most airports, landing fees are determined on the basis of a unit charge that is multiplied by the aircraft maximum take-off weight (MTOW) tonnage of the aircraft. With an understanding of the likely aircraft movements it will be necessary to compile a comprehensive financial and cost benefit study to support the forecast material.


The financial plan should include but should not be limited to the following data/factors:

Landing Fee Projection. Local Community Benefits. Likely Airport Operational Costs. Alternative Transport Provision Costs.


Master Planning

There are essentially three parameters that need to be covered in the annual traffic forecast: (a) passengers and baggage volumes; (b) cargo; and (c) aircraft movements. To obtain this data will require a clear understanding of the airline user requirements and calculated usage of the facility.

C2.3.1 Passenger and Baggage

The originating, requirements of collectively within which collectively time. domestic and transfer passenger volumes will be used to determine the planning airport terminal facilities and support infrastructure. The number of passengers the building will be derived from the flight schedules and corresponding load factors shall provide the volumes of the passengers within the building at any instance in

Since various categories of passenger traffic will use different facilities in the airport, it will be necessary to forecast each passenger category separately in order to determine future requirements for passenger facilities. Accordingly, IATA forecasts three types of passenger traffic:

Embarking. Disembarking. Direct Transit. scheduled and non-scheduled passenger traffic,

These categories are further subdivided between for which separate forecasts should be produced.

Following the implementation of 24-hour landside shopping, the terminal retail complex will also see growth from the local community and casual visitors to the airport. This volume of the general public should be added to the volume attributed to the traveling passenger. The baggage forecast data will be derived by multiplying the passenger processing rates by the passenger bag ratios for the various categories of passengers within the terminal. In practice the following steps are used in this regards: Step 1 Flight Schedule Determined for Design Year. Step 2 Flight Loadings Determined. Step 3 Number of Passengers Witnessed Determined as Passenger Rate/Hr. Step 4 Passenger Bag Ratio(s) Applied to Passenger Rate(s) to determine Total Bag Rate/Hr. For existing airports, airport planners should use passenger to bag ratios determined through surveys at the relevant airport. In the absence of this data the following bag to passenger design ratios should be adopted. It should be noted that this is only useful as a first cut forecast for the master plans where the data is not readily available. Planners are advised to carefully review this data at subsequent and more detailed design levels.

Table C2-1: Typical Bag to Passenger Ratios for High Level Forecasting Purposes

Type of Pax. Traffic International Pax. Domestic Pax. Transfer Pax.

Europe 1.0-1.5 Bags/Pax 0.5-1.0 Bags/Pax 1-1.5 Bags/Pax

Asia/Africa 2 Bags/Pax 1.0-2.0 Bags/Pax 1-2 Bags/Pax

USA 2 Bags/Pax 1.0 Bags/Pax 1-2 Bags/Pax

Rest of the World 1.5 Bags/Pax 1.0 Bags/Pax 1-1.5 Bags/Pax



Airport Development Reference Manual

C2.3.2 Commercial Aircraft Movement

The forecast of aircraft movements (i.e., planning requirements of airport airside facilities. aircraft landing and take-off movements) determines the

Aircraft movements include all commercial scheduled operations. Non-scheduled, general aviation and military aircraft movements usually have little influence on the planning of runway and apron capacity. These are generally excluded from forecasts unless their impact is deemed appropriately significant.

C2.3.3 Cargo
When forecasting the perceived cargo tonnage it will be important to distinguish between the categories of cargo goods. Cargo is the combination of freight and mail and these in turn are comprised as follows: Freight Includes express and diplomatic bags but not a passenger's checked baggage. Mail Refers to correspondence and other objects tendered by and intended for delivery to postal administrations. In the forecast, the combined number of tonnes of freight and mail handled at the airport are taken into consideration. Also, in general, scheduled and non-scheduled cargo traffic are considered together, as both are handled in the same cargo terminal area. The forecast should differentiate between passenger and all-cargo operations, as each will have a specific influence in respect of apron use. Express freight, for example, will have a dedicated facility and apron area just as will perishable goods, and so it will be necessary to understand the split between these categories of cargo volume. Some of the key factors that influence the demand in cargo traffic are economic growth (both on a regional and global level) as well as the costs associated with air cargo. The GDP indicator has demonstrated a strong link to demand for aviation services, in cargo as well as passenger transport. On a regional analysis there must be an assessment of the catchment area, and what type of market segment can be captured if there is competition for the same service. As the global marketplace expands, there is also a need to assess factors on the movement of goods on a broader base, such as domestic trade policies, elimination of tariffs, etc., on a worldwide level. Other factors, such as the 'Just in time' philosophy, increase the demand for a faster air cargo service. The growth in e-commerce has also produced a new demand segment for the movement of products and the dynamic tracking of goods. Forecasters should seek data from freight forwarding and freight processing companies to understand market trends and cargo type distinctions. For airport planning purposes, cargo forecasts must be broken down into sectors differentiating the means by which the cargo is transported:

Passenger and Combi Aircraft. All-Cargo Aircraft.

It is essential to make this split in the forecast as each sector has different operating requirements, such as: apron requirements; type of terminal facility; type of aircraft stand; etc. This type of information is crucial to the planning of cargo facilities where an understanding of client's usage is required. The combined tonnage of freight and mail handled at the airport should also be taken into consideration in a cargo forecast. Scheduled and non-scheduled cargo traffic are generally considered together, as both are handled in the same cargo terminal area. It's generally not recommended to produce a cargo forecast by origin-destination or by route area, but rather by inbound and outbound cargo traffic. Because the distinction between freight carried on aircraft and freight carried on trucks is not always clear, any analysis of cargo traffic must be made with great caution. There are cases when freight


Master Planning
tonnes carried on trucks are included in air freight statistics due to this freight being covered by the same airwaybill as pure air freight.

C2.3.5 Aircraft movements

There are two ways of projecting passenger aircraft movements. One way is to project an average number of passengers per flight and apply this parameter to the projection of passenger traffic to derive the resulting movements. The second way is to project the passenger load factor and the average aircraft size as two separate steps. This approach provides a more solid projection of aircraft movements than the first one, but it requires the construction of passenger load factors for the base year for each route area. These are then projected for the whole forecast period and must reflect the potential room for improvements in airline productivity. The next step is to apply the projections of the load factors to passenger traffic projections in order to derive the projection of total seats. Following this, forecasters will need to project the average aircraft size to reflect as much as possible the expected evolution of airline fleet mix as well as airlines' strategy to either intensify frequencies, to the detriment of aircraft size, or utilise bigger aircraft if the level of frequencies is found to be suitable. In applying the average aircraft size to the projection of total seats, we obtain a projection of aircraft movements. It becomes important that, within each route area to be forecast, the projected evolution of aircraft mix by size category remains compatible with the projected evolution of the average aircraft size which is expected to take place. For example, if one projects the average aircraft size to decline during a five-year period, the projection of the mix during that period should not reflect an increased share of aircraft of the higher size categories. In regard to cargo aircraft movements, the forecast needs a different approach. It should be based on the projection of the share of total cargo likely to be carried on these cargo aircraft, and determining an assumed average number of tonnes per flight, this would lead to the construction of cargo aircraft movements. This however requires that the statistics are made available by the airport authorities in question. A distinction in cargo tonnage carried on the passenger aircraft versus cargo carried on cargo aircraft is required.



C2.4.1 Traffic Sectors

It is also important to distinguish between the different traffic sectors. Each individual airport will have different traffic sectorisation comprised from the list below:

Long Haul International. Short Haul International. Domestic. Schengen. Transborder.

C2.4.2 Passenger Characteristics

Originating, terminating and transfer passengers should be further subdivided between scheduled and non-scheduled passenger traffic, especially with the growing market of the low cost carriers. Given that air travel is a derived demand, it is essential to identify the different passenger characteristics to have a better appreciation of the impact on the future development of the different terminal facilities such as check-in, passport control, baggage handling system, business lounge, etc.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual


C2.5.1 Annual to Peak Period Demand

For the purpose of facilities planning it is essential to know the likely requirements on an hour-byhour basis. Annual or even weekly forecast figures can be almost meaningless in this respect. The relationship of annual traffic to peak period will depend on seasonal variations and passenger characteristics. This relationship is projected separately for domestic and international traffic and within each category for each route area.

C2.5.2 Seasonal Trends

Seasonal variation affects the relationship of peak month to annual traffic. Common influencing factors in this regard include:

Effect of economic growth on business or holiday market sectors (leisure traffic usually creates
peaks at certain periods of the year different from the peak created by business traffic).

Whether airlines increase capacity during peak periods.

C2.5.3 Special Events

Peaks associated with special occurrences such as national holidays, religious festivals, and sporting events should be excluded from forecasts. Plan to accommodate this above planning peak demand at a lower level of service, by means of contingency plans, schedule coordination and other sound demand/capacity management practices.

C2.5.4 Assessment Methods

Having established the magnitude and frequency of the forecasted data, it will be necessary to assess it using proven assessment rules which will be used for the sizing of airport facilities. One approach is to use a proportion (85th percentile) of the forecast profile as the basis to plan airport infrastructure. Another approach is to select frequently occurring peak days or busy hour periods which are chosen as the basis on which to plan airport facilities. These approaches can be summarised as follows:

85th percentile. 40th busy hour or day of the year (see CDG example of this method in Table C2-2 below). 30th busy hour or day of the year. The second busiest day in an average week during the peak month an average weekly pattern of traffic is then calculated for that month.

It is important that one the above techniques is used as it is inappropriate to plan the design of airport infrastructure on the occurrence of either an isolated peak day forecast or an isolated peak hour rate. Busy Day Schedule: Determining airport capacity largely depends on predicting the impact of projected airline schedules on the various airport facilities. Capacity and level of service are based on operating conditions and rules, but also upon the particular demand profiles created by the mix of flights and flight sector for a typical busy day. The amalgamated airline schedules for a typical busy day reflects the airlines strategy for an airport and how an airport is connected to the world. The production of a single day forecast requires a detailed assessment of all the operational parameters that underlie airline schedules: the operational suitability of aircraft types for given route structures; reasonable aircraft roistering compatible with a high level of aircraft utilisation; and use of commercially feasible arrival and departure timings throughout a route structure. This assessment is then incorporated to form the amalgamated airline forecast schedule. Selection of a 'Busy' Day: A typical 'busy' day is the second busiest day in an average week during the peak month. An average weekly pattern of passenger traffic is calculated for that month, and



Master Planning

peaks associated with special events such as religious festivals, trade fairs, conventions and sport events are excluded. This single day analysis should assess:

Operational suitability of an aircraft type for a given route structure. Aircraft rotations compatible with a high level of utilisation. Use of commercially feasible arrival and departure timings throughout the route structure. Airport curfews and other limitations.

The 'busy day' data for the base year is 'actual' and should come from the airport control tower (ATC) log. It should cover each aircraft movement during the 'busy' day with indication of the following attributes:

Airline Name. Flight Number. Aircraft Type. Aircraft Registration. Seating Capacity. Origin Of Flight. Arrival Time. Terminal Used. Passengers Disembarked. Direct Transit Passengers (If Applicable). Departure Time. Destination Of Flight. Embarking Passengers.

The busy day should be more than just a single witnessed statistical hour or a day within an operational calendar. The busy day should be representative of a frequently occurring 'model' busy period, representative of a realistic day within a weekly schedule.

Table C2-2: CDG Peak Passenger Traffic Analysis

CDG Airport Passenger Traffic Analysis

Punngin Par Year Per Peak Month Peek Month to Year Per Peek Day*

2000 48,246,137 4,887,000

1999 43.597,194 4.258

1998 38,628,916 3,877,000 0.10 151,461 0.04 12.927 0.09 10,980 0.07

1897 35,327,039 3,487,000 0.10 137,809 0.04 12,699 0.09 10,697 0.08

199t 31.724,035 3.057.000 0.10 128.951 0.04 12.085 0.09 10,146 0,08

1995 28,356.470 2,798.000 0.10 114,283 0.04 8,915 0.08 7,760 0.07

1994 28,880,214 2,778.807 0.10 108274 0.04 9,148 0.08 7,874 0.07

TTL 254,559,006 24,940,807 0.10 988,545 0.04 89,039 0.09 75,548 0.08


179,519 .10 0.04 16.791

168,248 .10 0.04 16,474 0.10 13,492 0.08

,00 0

Peak Day to Peak Month Per Peak Hour Peak Hour to Peak Day Per 40th Peak Hour



0.09 14,599 0.08

Peak Month to Yeat Peak Day to Peak Month Peak Hour to Peak Day 40th Peak Hour to Peak Day

10% 4%
9% 8%

0.00038 0.00032

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Table C2-3: Estimate of Peak Passenger Traffic Based on MPPA Forecast

Passengers/Year Passengers/Peak Month Passengers/Peak Day Passengsrs/Peak Hour Passengers/Year Passengers/Peak Month Passengers/Peak Day Passengers/Peak Hour

1,000,000 100,000 4,000 3S0 20,000,000 2,000,000 80,000 7,200

2,500,000 250,000 10,000 900 25,000,000 2,500,000 100,000 9,000

5,000,000 500,000 20,000 1,800 30,000,000 3,000,000 120,000 10,800

10,000,000 1,000,000 40,000 3,600 35,000,000 3,500,000 140,000 12,600

12,500,000 1,250,000 50,000 4,500 40,000,000 4,000,000 160,000 14,400

15,000,000 1,500,000 60,000 5,400 50,000,000 5,000,000 200,000 18,000



C2.6.1 Study Objectives

The objectives of the forecast study should be clearly identified prior to the collation of data. Informed decisions should be made and forecasters should be focused on having the correct representative statistics rather than a convenient series of numbers which perhaps do not convey the true behavioural patterns of the airport and its traffic in the foreseeable future. Forecasters should aim to satisfy the following high level study objectives:

There should be three sets of statistics provided by the airport facility forecaster, which should represent the low, medium and high magnitude data obtained and assessed. The forecaster must specify which influencing factors have the largest level of uncertainty in regard to their future evolution, in order to justify having both low and high projections. Operational and business assumptions should be clarified in every regard on forecasted information with qualifications as regard their impact on the forecasted data. Data should be auditable whereby the forecaster should be able to trace the history of the manipulation of data and to confirm the logic for the decisions made in every regard. Consultation groups should be identified along with their terms of reference. All of which should be clarified in the record and the presented data produced by forecasters.

C2.6.2 Data Availability

There are three main credible sources of data for forecasters to access. This includes but it is not exclusively limited to: 1. Historical Site Data Historical Site data may originate from various sources within the airport organisation and or the airlines. Care should be observed with historical data because as the name suggests it is based on past trends and may not be representative of how the existing airport or airline may function based on a changing fleet or changes in business processes. Historical data is useful in the assessment of process times and historical processing trends. 2. IATA World Wide Survey This data is sourced by IATA following extensive world wide surveys of key airline and airport infrastructures/organisations (see clause C2.6.3 Method 2 for further details).


3. User Forecasted New Data

Master Planning

This data is created by the airline or airport from first principles and may reflect a combination of historical data and new operational objectives on the use of newer aircraft or new airport processes.

C2.6.3 Methods Of Forecasting Passenger Traffic And Aircraft Movements

A combination of several methods forms the core of the traffic forecasting approach, these are defined as follows: Method 1: Computerised Regression This analysis pertains to the relationship between traffic (to/from an airport) and the major indicators of socio-economic activity in the airport's country (e.g. IATA has a comprehensive database of projections of the major economic indicators of world countries). The forecasts should draw on the wealth of experience and local knowledge available within airlines serving or likely to serve an airport. A forecast based on an econometric model should generally be revised to reflect carriers' views and the team's experience in dealing with the forecasting process. The contribution of airline yields is becoming increasingly although GDP remains usually the most important factor. on a per country basis are generally hard to obtain. important in Unfortunately, determining traffic growth, statistics on yield trends

Econometric models do not take into account non-quantifiable importance in conditioning future traffic development, therefore it entirely on a purely model-driven forecast.

factors which are of prime is recommended not to rely

The use of models implies some continuity in the level of influence of the factors considered throughout the forecast period. Forecasting experience demonstrates that this is not always the case. Method 2: The IATA World-Wide Traffic Forecast Survey This global survey is undertaken every year in August-September and covers all traffic flows around the world (nearly 2,000 unduplicated country-pairs). This survey reflects the opinions of all IATA member airlines serving these country-pairs concerning the future development of passenger and cargo traffic during the next 15 years. It takes into account the influence of the major economic variables as well as airline strategies that are intended to respond to future demand. Airlines are asked to provide their opinion on total market growth trends and not simply their own traffic. Method 3: Special Survey-Based Forecasts These are customised for specific airport traffic forecast projects. This consists of approaching each of the key airlines and tour operators to obtain their forecasts of growth trends for a particular destination compared with other similar destinations. It is important that their survey is not only restricted to the travel markets where direct services now exist, or to airlines or tour operators, but also includes other experts in the travel industry (e.g. tourist authorities and hotel chains).


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Method 4: Judgmental Forecast This method permits a wide range of information to be brought to the forefront of the forecast (national trends, political situations, etc.). It is useful in conjunction with the other methods, where there are a large number of variables for which little information is available, or where nonquantifiable factors are expected to play a major role. The judgmental element is a particularly high-value component to the traffic forecast since the team member will have gained substantial experience in dealing with airport traffic forecasts for small as well as large airports all around the world. Extrapolations of Past Trends Extrapolations of historical data can be used typically where long-term trends are likely to continue. Care should be observed with this principle as changes in operational processes, improvements due to new technology and changes in legislation can seriously undermine the projection of data into what can be realistically the 'unforeseeable' future. Extrapolated data:

Fits a mathematical line to the historical data and then a projection of this line is given to trend the data into the future. Growth patterns are fitted to smooth out data. Assumes there is an underlying pattern in historical data. Assumes that all factors influencing air traffic in the past will continue to operate in the same way in the future. Causal Methods (econometric models, regressions, gravity models) This approach relies on the assessment of socio-economic growth or decline. With this approach it will be necessary to: variables that can cause air traffic

Identify the socio-economic variable(s) cause(s) changes and ensure that historical trends for these variables are available. Determine how the variable(s) is (are) related to air traffic demand (model, equation) assuming no capacity constraints and structural changes?econometric models, equations, gravity models.

Forecast/predict socio-economic changes. Adjust forecasts when underlying assumptions. Do NOT directly correlate two long term trends.








Qualitative Techniques (market and industry surveys) This technique uses predominantly surveyed or historic data which is then subjectively assessed. The subjective assessment may take into account a wide range of real process changes, technology changes and logical factors which might affect the forecast. In summary:

Human judgment and ratings are turned into quantitative estimates. Market research, industry surveys and historical analogy is used.

When data is scarce or when there are data philosophy changes it is difficult to predict their impact. Delphi Technique: bring together data in a logical, unbiased and systematic way such that all information and judgements related to growth/decline can be calculated and assessed.



Master Planning



C2.IR1 Forecasting Periods ipata forecasts should be presented using any one or more of the forecasting period durations defined within clause C2.1. %____________________________________________________________________________J

C2.IR2 Forecasting Data When designing terminal building infrastructure, forecasting data should be presented which relates to passengers and baggage volumes and ui; craft movement data, as defined within clause C2.3.1 Similarly cargo forecast data should in most cases be produced where terminals are going to process any form of cargo, whether it be freight or mail subdivisions. Aircraft movement data forecasts must be provided prior to the planning of apron and runway infrastructure. Data should be obtained from any of the recommended data sources as defined within clause

C2.IR3 Data Assessment Techniques

Forecasters should evaluate the merits of each of the assessment techniques defined within clauses C2.5 and C2.6 and select the philosophy and approaa ich best fits the needs of the project forecast brief and then should present forecasting data accordingly.

C2.IR4 Freight Analysis Precautions

Because the distinction between freight carried on aircraft and freight carried on trucks is not always clear, any analysis of cargo traffic must be made with great caution. There are cases when freight tonnes earned on trucks are included in air freight statistics due to this freight being covered by the same airwaybill as pure air freight.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual


The need for control of development in the vicinity of airports has been recognised from the very beginning of commercial aviation. Initially, concerns concentrated on controlling the height of potential hazards or obstacles. These centred on incompatible activities that could cause:

Electrical interference with radio communications and navigational aids. Confusion of pilots by lights on approach. Reduced visibility due to the production of smoke or vapour clouds. Birds to accumulate in critical operational areas.

All of the above are still pertinent today. Noise did not enter into the equation until the introduction of turbo-jet operations in the early 1960s, and there are various measures available to alleviate noise around airports, including: reduction in aircraft noise at source; land-use planning; development control or management; operational noise abatement procedures (when permitted by air traffic control authorities); and local noise related operating restrictions. Land-use planning is central to the overall process. Properly managed, it will effectively protect public health and safety by minimising exposure to emissions and excessive noise. These management principles need to be coupled with supportive legislation. Legislative frameworks regulating surrounding land-use outside of the airfield boundary should be provided by National Governments, as they are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the airport is interwoven into the regional and national socio-economic fabric. These should set the broad policy context within which local authorities can work, and ideally there should also be a consultation process by which the various stakeholder groups (surrounding community, airport operators, and airline representatives) can comment on and suggest changes to draft policies. The airport operator should also be consulted on monitoring the effective application of the legislation. The sustainability of air transport is heavily dependent on controlling environmental impact, with a/c being noise the largest factor to be considered when undertaking land-use planning within and around



Many of the available solutions to mitigate against noise in the vicinity of airports, including those obtainable from land-use planning, can often only be realised in the longer term. However this should not be seen as a reason by those responsible for seeking reductions in noise levels to apply minimal effort. This particularly holds true for existing airports where the ability to make immediate changes in land-use is limited. For existing airports it is also important that a/c source noise reductions and the resultant contraction of noise contours and population numbers impacted do not allow local authorities to relax their guard against encroachment upon the airport boundary. It should also be noted that in this regard airlines have made significant contributions by requesting efficiency gains from a/c manufacturers. Jet aircraft are now significantly quieter than when they first entered into service over 40 years ago.

Master Planning
Many factors influence noise level exposure. These include sound pressure levels, broadband frequency distribution, spectral irregularities, duration, SIDS and STARS, frequency of operations, application of operational noise abatement procedures, a/c mix, mode of runway operation, and prevalent meteorological conditions. Sensitivity to a/c noise will vary from one country or location to the next, and be dependent on many factors. These can include land-use, building use, type of construction, distance from source, background noise levels, sociological factors, the amount of diffraction/refraction/reflection due to buildings and topography encountered on site, and the meteorological conditions prevalent at the time of exposure. All of the above can be modelled to determine anticipated noise exposure and community response.



The establishment of noise zones surrounding an airport is an important step when determining future land-use. The number of zones, noise descriptors and noise exposure calculation methods used vary from one country to the next. As a result the approach used is dependent on the individual country concerned. Whatever approach is applied it is important that local authorities apply strict controls over proposed development in the zones around the airport. It is important to stress that the zones should be calculated and based on the ultimate achievable throughput of the airport, i.e. when the runway is saturated, such that long term development flexibility is ensured. As an example, three zones could be established as follows:

Zone 1 Where most land uses and developments are not permitted. Zone 2 Where some restrictions apply. Zone 3 Where no restrictions apply.

Noise zoning serves two purposes: to protect the airport from encroachment and to protect residents. A single authority should have overall responsibility for developing land-use criteria. Zoning plans should be created as a first step when establishing an airport, as retrospective steps are difficult if not impossible to achieve. In general terms noise sensitive development such as housing, schools, hospitals, offices and banks should not be permitted in the first zone. It should be noted that building construction can be utilised as a means to reduce noise exposure.



There are many methods for regulating development or for modifying existing land uses in order to achieve compatibility between the airport and surrounding communities. Building or land acquisition can be employed, but this tends to be an expensive solution exercised in extreme cases only. As noted above, zoning and building controls should be applied in the first instance. 107 Uncontrolled development within established airport noise zones will debase local authority control and may impact on the long term development potential of individual airports. Short-term gains resulting from the either the owner or developer's desire to increase the rate of return from property and land or by increased taxes to the Government should be avoided.

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Numerous strategies can be applied to control the use of land surrounding airports. Development restrictions within pre-defined zones can secure the longer-term vision for new airports. Retrospective noise insulation measures may go some way to redressing the balance for commercial and residential properties of long standing at existing airports. However the means of control, regulation and finance will vary from country to country and be dependent on national and local characteristics. There are three differing forms of control, as outlined below.

C3.6.1 Planning
A comprehensive development or layout plan should be provided to local authorities and should be used as a guide by authorities when establishing development restrictions and controls. For existing airports this will assist in determining the compatibility of development proposals with Government policy.

C3.6.2 Mitigation
Measures can be employed that will help construction, building regulations can ensure adequate level of sound insulation. to alleviate the problems of aircraft noise. For new that building type, structure and materials provide an impacted insulation increased operating

Noise insulation programmes can also assist properties of long standing that are adversely by the development of existing or new airports. However the cost of applying adequate sound packages to housing can in some instances exceed the resale value or possible benefit from rent. Also, additional sound insulation measures produce increases in construction and costs and reduce flexibility of use to within the controlled building environment.

In extreme cases, land acquisition and relocation is a policy that can be explored by airport authorities. However it is expensive and used primarily when no alternative will provide a satisfactory solution. It may also in some instances have negative social implications. Barriers can also be used to mitigate noise generated by manoeuvring aircraft or by ground handling equipment. Barriers can be in the form of earth mounds located adjacent to runway thresholds and holding aprons. Alternatively building structures, particularly those of main terminal buildings and finger piers or satellites can be used, and sound attenuation barriers can also be employed. A particularly good example is the reinforced concrete panels bordering the apron area to the western side of T4 at London Heathrow. These have been attractively landscaped and in parts are now totally enveloped by climbing plants and shrubbery. Such barriers can also contribute by doubling as security barriers, particularly as these often occur in critical operational areas.

C3.6.3 Financial 108

Construction of new development in the immediate surrounds to the airport can be encouraged by the existence of support infrastructure such as roads, utilities and community based facilities and services. Similarly the absence of such capital improvement programmes can have the reverse effect. Government tax incentives or reduction programmes can also direct development towards areas where these are welcomed and away from those areas where it is not. Noise related airport-charging systems could also be employed. For more information in this area see section D.




After the airport perimeter has been established, either for a new airport or for an existing airport (were the perimeter has been redefined), it is important to double check that all major components and airport support facilities can be properly located and accommodated within the overall airport boundary. Each facility should be able to expand up to the ultimate phase of the airport. Balanced optimised development, throughout the various expansion phases, is essential. Prior to assessing individual functional requirements within an airport master plan, it is necessary to subdivide the overall area into optimal sub areas, each capable of supporting growth towards the maximum capacity of the airport. Airport facilities, in terms of building area, footprint and land area required to support development, should be sized from an analysis of the maximum number of aircraft movements and associated daily and peak hour passenger flows that the proposed runway system can generate. It is important to note that detailed layout information pertaining to individual facilities is not required at this conceptual layout stage. All the individual pieces of the development jigsaw need to fit and be correctly assembled and have the right interdependencies within the operational area. However at this stage detailed operational characteristics of each facility are not required. Airport characteristics, as shown on the Airport Land Use Plans, should represent the guiding tool for local authorities when determining the suitability of development on land surrounding the airport.

Master Planning

C3.7.1 Airfield Configuration

The extent of this key operational area depends on the chosen runway configuration. See Section C1.3 for specific details.

C3.7.2 Facility Location Strategy

Once specific facility and functional areas have been identified they must be positioned on and around the airport. The optimum location of these facilities must take into account the operational relationships of the different facilities. One of the primary aims when positioning airport facilities should be to minimise aircraft, passenger, baggage and vehicular movements. For specific operational relationships see Section C1.4.5.

C3.7.3 Airport Land Use Plans

Airport Land Use Plans drawn to scale should depict existing and phased development (including intended land uses) up to and including the ultimate development stage; i.e. when the runway is saturated. The plans should include:

Airside infrastructure including runways (including all runway elements see section C1.3.7.2), taxiways, holding bays, aircraft aprons (including de-icing), engine test enclosures, location & specification of navigational aids, vehicle parking areas, staging areas, access roads, runway lighting & markings. Landside infrastructure including passenger and cargo terminals, ground transport interchanges, hotels, primary and secondary access roads and parking structures (at grade and multi-storey), rail lines, vehicle fuelling stations. Airport support infrastructure including in-flight catering, aircraft maintenance, G.H. maintenance, airport maintenance, police and security facilities, administration buildings, meteorological compounds, rescue and fire fighting facilities, general aviation, fixed base operations, helicopter operations, containment & treatment facilities and aircraft refuelling facilities. Areas reserved for aviation related revenue producing development such as industrial areas, duty-free zones, etc.


Control tower placement within the airfield (line of sight requirements). IT systems provision and infrastructure. ATC access control provision. ATC staff car parking (if different to general staff car parks). Systems commissioning requirements.

ATC radar and airborne aircraft communications buildings are often provided away from the airport and in dedicated facilities. Where this facility is to be integral to the control tower facility, airport building and apron designers should consult national ATC legislative bodies for precise size and facility performance requirements FIG. C4-1 shows the internal detail of a modern control tower with views overlooking the apron.

Figure C4-1: Control Tower Facility Internal View

Photo Courtesy ofAlenia Marconi Systems Limited (UK)


Master Planning
The position of the control tower on the apron is vital to the safe operation of the aircraft. Ground aircraft controllers need to be able to see all stand perimeters, taxiways and runways and final approaches. One of the more challenging aspects of control tower design is the operational requirement to permit controllers to see the stand areas and taxiways so that they can control and coordinate push back operations where pilots are effectively blind in this regard. The control tower staff must be able to provide clear guidance to pilots by being able to know the clearance status of the stand and taxiways visually and through communications. Apron areas are often vast and can be interlaced within intricate building infrastructure. Apron, runway and taxiway control rooms should, wherever possible, be consolidated into a single elevated apron control room, with 360 unobstructed panoramic vision of the areas mentioned (subject to the requirements of the national ATC provider and local operator). Dual elevated apron control rooms maybe used (subject to the requirements of the national ATC provider and local operator) where any one of more of the following situations have been met:


Taxiways and runways are placed extra long distances away from the terminal apron stand
areas, which results in the need to raise the control tower for this purpose only.

More controllers will have a better vision of specific areas of the apron.

Typical Control Considerations Angle of Vision Dependent on National ATC Provider Requirements


Notts (i) H1 - Denotes Primary Full Apron Control Room Height Dimension Is dependent on Terminal Building Design visual (II) H2 - Denotes Secondary ApronATC Control Room Height requirements
Dimension Is dependent on Terminal Building Design ATC visual requirements (III) All stand perimeters, runways and taxiways to be visible from apron control room(s) pv) A single Apron Control Room solution is genertcally a preferred solution tnougn this ATC dependent (Designer should consultnational ATC provider/operator)


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

C4.IR1 Control Tower resign Consultation: Terminal building and apron designers must liase with national ATC providers and operators at the earliest opportunity to understand the precise operational specifications of the control tower. Designers should also consult ICAO Annex 14. \ ___________. ___________J C4.IR2 Control Tower Desigl Considerations Terminal building and apron designers must observe the design characteristics stipulated within C4.2 and the control tower positioning requirements defined within clause C4.3

C4.IR3 Visual and Non-Visual Aids Reference Material Designers embarking on the development of control towers should refer to sections G2 Visual Aids and section G3 Non Visual Aids of this manual.



Chapter D Airport Economics

Section D1: Airport Management D1.1 General Airport Management Economics ........................................... D1.2 Meeting the Capacity Demand................................................................. D1.3 Financing Airport Capacity Expansion ..................................................... D1.4 The Privatization Trend ............................................................................ D1.5 The Need for Economic Regulation .......................................................... D1.6 Airport Performance and Efficiency .......................................................... D1.7 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section D2: Airport Cost Structures and Revenue Sources D2.1 Airport Cost Structures............................................................................ D2.2 Airport Revenue Sources ......................................................................... D2.3 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section D3: Airport Investment Decisions and Financing D3.1 Airport Investment Decision-Making ....................................................... D3.2 Airport Financing Options Debt vs. Equity ........................................... D3.3 Airport Financing Options Pre-Funding Through Charges .................... D3.4 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section D4: Aeronautical Charge Policies D4.1 Aeronautical Charges.............................................................................. D4.2 Determining the Cost Base for Aeronautical Charges.............................. D4.3 Aeronautical Charging Policies ................................................................ D4.4 Market-Based Options.............................................................................. D4.5 Consultation with Users ........................................................................... D4.6 IATA Recommendations ......................................................................... Section D5: International Cost Variations D5.1 Airport Benchmarking Data .................................................................... D5.2 IATA Recommendations ......................................................................... 130 133 120 120 124 125 128 128 116 116 118 119 114 114 115 109 109 109 110 111 112 113


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



Up until the late 1970s, airports were seen as nothing more than an extension of government. Since then, however, the links with government have progressively loosened and the pressure for airports to become commercially viable enterprises has grown. This viability included running the airport as a business, able not only to cover its costs (including capital costs) through revenues, but also to arrange for the necessary financing of airport development programmes. Invariably, this challenge has been met with much success. Airports have generally been able to generate substantial profits and secure private sector financing for airport development programmes, usually at a low cost of capital. Further, airports have been able to do this despite the fact that the demand for airport capacity, facilities and services is derived indirectly from airline scheduling plans. While an airline's operating plan is more tactical, with scheduling decisions being made based on short-term traffic forecasts covering the next 6-18 months, the airport planning cycle is more strategic and long-term where the time frame from initial conception to completion may take 5-10 years. This then is the primary challenge for airport management matching capacity provision with demand while maintaining financial viability or profitability and an acceptable level of service.

D1.1.1 Issues Relating to Airport Management

In recent years government policy-makers and airport planners alike have generally been contending with two main issues:

1. How to meet the long-term growth in traffic demand with the necessary runway capacity and
terminal facilities.

2. How best to finance airport expansion in view of limited government budgets.

With respect to this latter point there has been an increased focus on developing the commercial side of an airport and improving airport financial performance, while encouraging the involvement of the private sector in both the management and financing of airport infrastructure.



Apart from the short-term influences of the economic cycle, growth in air travel demand has generally been outstripping the supply of infrastructure and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. However, passenger growth can be accommodated through higher load factors, increased aircraft size, or increased frequencies. The primary capacity concern to airport managers therefore is the composition of traffic in terms of aircraft operations; this will have an impact both in terms of the infrastructure needed and the cost recovery of related expenditures. As already discussed in the chapter on forecasting, how an airline will meet the demand through its operational plan is of significant importance to airport planners.



Traditionally, the vast majority of airports around the world were directly owned and operated by national, regional or local governments. In most cases the civil aviation authority or department, being part of the transport ministry, operated the airport(s), and in some cases the CAA would also be , responsible for providing air traffic control and aeronautical meteorological services. ICAO has, for a long time, promoted the concept of an autonomous authority that has managerial and financial autonomy from government, yet is wholly owned by government. Aside from reducing


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual
the financial burden on governments, autonomous authorities have the advantage of creating a business culture improving financial performance and quality of service. With professional management in place that is both financially accountable and able to undertake and implement long-term development plans, the government-owned autonomous airport authority has in a number of cases been a precursor to the privatized airport. Such was the case with the British Airport Authority, established in 1966, which later became a limited company (BAA Pic) with the Airports Act of 1986, owning seven airports. Shares in BAA Pic were subsequently floated on the London Stock Exchange in 1987.

IATA POLICY POSITION The airline industry generally favours the trend what is commonly referred to as the privatisation of airport and air navigation entities in that the facilities and services may be provided in a more cost efficient and effective manner. It is concerned, however, that the process often leads to increases in the cost base for charges, and thus, higher user charges. The requisites for industry support for privatisation are: meaningful consultation with the user community prior to and during the privatisation process; appropriate legislation obligating observance by the commercialised/privatised entity of the ICAO Policies on Charges; and the designation of an effective and independent economic regulatory mechanism providing oversight of charging practices.



Privatization1 of, or private participation in airport management has usually taken the form of a longterm lease of all or part of the airport facilities and services, with the responsibility for their expansion and development resting with the concessionaire. Such leasing arrangements can take the form of build-operate-transfer (BOT), build-own-operate-transfer (BOOT), build-transfer-operate (BTO), and other variants thereof. Lease payments can take the form of an annual royalty payment or down payment toward an eventual privatization. Examples of these airport leasing arrangements are most prevalent in Latin America, although we also find examples in Africa, Australia and Canada. The problem with such leasing arrangements is that government is in a position of strength vis--vis the concessionaire when it comes to negotiating rights to operate facilities that have no alternative use and charge monopoly rents. With the concessionaire in most cases being given the right to set aeronautical charges, in the absence of effective price regulation, he can recover this cost from the users of the airports facilities and services. The incentive for the concessionaire to negotiate the best deal possible with the government is therefore low. Commercialisation factors Ownership: Accounting Methodology: Capital Financing Options: Employee Status: Legal Status: Entrepreneurialism: Management Reports to: Taxation: Management Focus: 0% <-----100% State owned Cash accounts State budget Civil servants Government Little Political Low Government policies 100% 100% Public Shares Commercial practices All options Corporate Private Considerable Board of Directors As private companies Profits/Share Value


Airport Economics
Private participation can also take the form of a transfer of minority ownership through the sale of shares to a strategic partner or through a public issue. This has typically been the European model, although we also find examples in Asia and South Africa. With the notable exception of BAA pic and a few others, a fully privatized airport is a rarity. Governments have generally demonstrated apprehension toward giving up full control of their airports to the private sector. In summary, faced with budgetary constraints and the increasing financial resources required to fund airport operations and development plans, governments have felt that airports could be better operated and managed as commercially autonomous entities, having access to private sector capital. Moreover, private participation and privatization in the provision of airport services has been seen as a source of revenue. Although the large majority of airports still remain under government or public ownership, either in entirety or through a majority holding, indications are that private involvement in the ownership and management will continue to increase. As the need for airport development funding continues to grow, with governments being increasingly reluctant to contribute funds, the pressures to privatize airports will continue. These pressures will not only come from governments, but also from the airport management that desires full managerial and financial autonomy from government interference. Typically, those airports already operating profitably as private companies are seen as mature candidates for full privatization.

IATA POLICY POSITION Economic regulation is essential to improving airport efficiency and countering the potential abuse in the setting of charges. In order to gain support from the user community for the privatization of airports, it is imperative that States institute an effective and independent economic regulatory mechanism.



Due to the non-competitive nature of airports, it has long been argued and recognized that regulation of airport charges is essential, especially when the airport is privately owned and motivated by the profit imperative. Economic regulation can range from hard and administratively burdensome (for both the airport and users alike), to soft regulationwhere the authorities rely on industry approaches based on consultation and contractual arrangements (most prevalent in North America). In the case of BAA, tight controls were imposed:

It has to produce more detailed accounts consistent with the Companies Act.

The CAA, working in conjunction with the Monopolies and Mergers Commission (MMC), can
investigate complaints of discrimination or abuse of monopoly position.

Aeronautical charges, in terms of revenue per passenger, could increase by no more than the
retail price index (RPI) less an estimate of the expected increase in productivity, a negotiated X per cent. The significance of this latter condition the "RPI minus X" formula that would be revised every five years is that it would force BAA to become more efficient and diversify into other revenue generating activities that are not subject to price controls. Thus, through the 'single till' rate-setting methodology, 117 aeronautical charges could be kept within a targeted range. However, this so-called 'single till' regulatory mechanism has come under increased criticism and is not seen as shareholder friendly as airport charges at Heathrow one of the world's most congested facilities were expected to fall 30% in real terms by March 2003 (the end of the regulatory review period).

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

efficiently in the first place). Other regulatory schemes are contractual, whereby the airport comes to an agreement with the user community to cap charges at a certain level for a fixed term. Such is the case at Copenhagen. In other States a regulator may have been appointed to monitor the behavior of the concessionaire of an autonomous airport authority, but is largely ineffective in carrying out its mandate. The main reason for this is that the regulatory authority may not be sufficiently independent and entrusted with the necessary enforcement powers. In many such situations the concessionaire has the lobbying power to sway government officials and politicians, rendering the CAA virtually powerless. However in the vast majority of cases of private participation or privatization of airports, examples of effective and truly independent regulatory mechanisms do not really exist.



As airports are increasingly operated on a commercial basis, and the trend toward airport privatization continues, the need for and interest in information on financial performance will grow. Since airports enjoy a quasi-monopolistic position, demand for airport services is relatively inelastic and the potential exists for abuse in extracting high revenues from airport customers. Airport profitability, therefore, does not necessarily equate to airport efficiency. Aside from measuring airport quality of service standards, airport managers will therefore have to measure an airport's economic efficiency by assessing the relationship between inputs (labour, capital, etc.) and outputs (passengers, aircraft movements, work-load units, etc.) Not only are airport performance indicators useful to airport managers for making decisions on the best use of resources, users will insist on them and regulatory authorities may well impose them as a means to gauge whether the commercialization process is delivering on the efficiency promise. While performance indicators can be used to analyze and monitor past and current performance, they can also be used to give an indication of the overall quality of performance when compared to a standard that reflects industry best practice. However data comparability problems make interairport comparisons difficult to calculate and interpret. Every airport has its own method for charging for its facilities and services, making it difficult to assess the relevant charge and its underlying cost base. Aside from currency differences, accounting practices differ from airport to airport; some airports are recipients of government subsidies, while others have to arrange for their own financing. Nevertheless, knowledge about performance benchmarks and information on relative levels of efficiency between airports will continue to grow, and appropriate analytical techniques need to be developed. At present there exists no industry standard for measuring airport performance, although the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) of the UK is currently the only firm doing work in the area of Airport Performance Indicators and Airport Charges comparisons. Some examples of indicators for measuring airport performance are:


Total revenue per air traffic movement (ATM), passenger, or employee. Aeronautical revenue per ATM, passenger, or employee. Aeronautical revenue as a percentage to total revenue, or total cost. Non-aeronautical revenue per ATM, passenger, or employee. Non-aeronautical revenue as a percentage to total revenue, or total cost. Total cost per ATM, passenger, or employee.

D1.IR1 Privatisation Policy Statement

Airport Economics

The airline industry generally favours the commercialisation and/or privatisation of airport and air navigation entities in that the facilities and services may be provided in a more cost efficient and effective manner. It is concerned, however, that the process often leads to increases in the cost base for charges, and thus, higher user charges. The requisites for industry support for privatisation are: meaningful consultation with the user community prior to and during the commercialisation/privatisation process; appropriate legislation obligating observance by the commercialised/privatised entity of the ICAO Policies on Charges; and the designation of an effective and independent economic regulatory mechanism providing oversight of charging practices. V _ _ __________________________________. ____________________________________________ _ J

D1.IR2 Economic Regulation Statement

Economic regulation is essential to improving airport efficiency and countering the potential abuse in the setting of charges. In order to gain support from the user community for airport commercialization/privatization, it is imperative that States that will or have already commercialized or privatized their airports institute an effective and independent economic regulatory mechanism.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Capital charges (interest expense, depreciation and amortization) relating to investments in the infrastructure represent a large portion of an airport's total costs. For established airports with continuous expansion plans, capital charges account for about 25-50% of total costs. For new "green field" airports, investment-related costs are significant, with capital charges accounting for as much as 90% of total costs. In the earlier years of civil aviation, suitable land was more readily available, and the capital costs related to the construction of basic infrastructure runways, taxiways, and terminal and support facilities were more affordable compared to today's standards. Airports were simply built where it was cheapest to construct. Today, after decades of continued urbanization and environmental restriction, there is a lack of suitable land close to the city center. New airport sites are further from the cities they serve, requiring new road and mass transit infrastructure to be built for easy access. These sites are usually of poor quality, such that the pre-construction or site preparation phase has become a major component of the investment. This phase could, for example, involve leveling surrounding hills or creating a man-made island. The most extreme example of such an airport is Kansai (Osaka), in Japan. Together with the complex nature of today's airport facilities, these considerations make construction of new airports prohibitively expensive and almost always in need of some form of government financial support. Operations and maintenance costs the costs to operate and maintain the investments in infrastructure in good shape to prevent so-called capital deterioration typically make up a third of the total cost structure. Staff costs can make up as much as 40% or as little as 20% of total airport costs, depending on the region and the airport in question. Staff costs as a proportion of total costs tend to be low for US airports because they do not get involved in air traffic control or handling activities, and because the airlines are much more involved in the operational activities of US airports. Thus the unique economic, operational and financial characteristics of US airports sets them apart from their peers in other parts of the world. As pointed out in the chapter dealing with airport planning, an efficient, well-planned airport can save the airlines money. The goal of reducing capital costs in order to be more cost-effective is too restrictive an approach. The goal should be to minimize the sum of airport user charges and airline operational costs. Optimizing a master plan by organizing the runway and terminal area layout whereby taxi distances and times are minimized is recognized as good airport planning. Airline operating costs also need to be considered when determining the terminal design a sound approach to which permits optimum airline staffing and quicker aircraft turnaround times. Proper timing and phasing of an airport development programme is just as critical due to the effect this has on airport unit costs. Investments in airport infrastructure, by their very nature, are lumpy and have the tendency to produce a 'step climb' in capacity. Unit costs increase sharply and decrease again over time as traffic builds up and the facilities are better utilized. To keep unit costs low or at reasonable levels, airports may be inclined to hold off on development plans until such time that increased congestion results in an increase in related costs; e.g. the cost of busing to remote aircraft boarding sites. Furthermore, due to economies of scale, high utilization of limited capacity will also make an airport more profitable. A rather extreme example of this effect is Heathrow.



The two main sources of airport revenue come from aeronautical or traffic-related activities (i.e. landing fees, passenger service charges, etc.) and non-aeronautical or commercial activities (i.e. office-space rent, car parking, duty-free shopping concessions, handling agent concession fees, etc.). Airports have traditionally relied more heavily on aeronautical revenue sources as their main form of income typically about 50-70%, while 30-50% comes from commercial activities such as leases, duty free, car parking, airport ground handling services, etc. The smaller the airport and the more an airport relies on domestic passenger traffic, the more dependent it will likely be on aeronautical


Airport Economics
revenues as its main source of revenue. However, if such an airport is to attract, retain and develop traffic, it will have to set charges at reasonable levels. It is likely that these domestically-oriented airports will not achieve full cost recovery and typically will rely on some form of subsidization. However, as discussed in the section dealing with privatization, government subsidies are running dry and airports have been pressured to become financially viable through the development of other revenue sources. ICAO has therefore recommended for some time that airports fully develop their non-aeronautical revenue sources. Lesser reliance on aeronautical revenues is also one of the reasons why IATA has supported airport commercialization. However the development of additional revenue sources through concessions that are directly associated with the operation of air transport services; e.g. fuel throughput fees, catering concession fees, aircraft handling concession fees, etc., should not be considered as opportunities for revenue enhancement since this only increases the cost to operate at an airport and is therefore considered no different from increasing aeronautical charges.

IATA POLICY POSITION Airports should refrain from imposing non-cost-related levies on aeronautical activities directly associated with the operation of air transport services. Such levies only increase the cost of airline operations at an airport and could have discriminatory effects.

The development of commercial activities has proven to be particularly profitable for certain airports, leading some to take on more risky ventures or to get involved in non-airport-related activities. Aside from offering consulting services, some airports have been making investments in other airports or airport development projects, or getting involved in the provision of discotheques, casinos, or other real estate projects. The concern here is the potential for management distraction away from the core business of running efficient and cost effective airport facilities and services. An equally significant concern is the potential that users of the airport are exposed to the financial risk related to such ventures. Nevertheless, the development of revenues from non-aeronautical activities has become the principle means by which a growing number of airports have been able to recover their total costs in the case where losses are made on the aeronautical side of the business. Under a 'single-till' rate-setting methodology, charges can therefore be moderated and kept at reasonable levels. Further discussion on this topic is included in the sections dealing with airport cost allocation and rate-setting methodologies.



D2.IR1 Airport Revenue Policy Statement Airports should refrain from imposing non-cost-related levies on aeronautical activities directly associated with the operation of air transport services. Such levies only increase the cost of airline operations at an airport and could have discriminatory effects


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

A detailed business plan has to be drawn up as part of any airport development programme. It should contain financial projections and forecasts of future activity at the airport. The basic elements that should be included in this type of business plan are:

Forecast and composition of air traffic demand. Scope of and business case for the airport development programme.

Feasibility analysis; i.e.: will the airport's overall financial performance be acceptable; can the

airport manage the additional cash flow requirements; will the proposed programme produce an acceptable return on investment; etc.

Financial analysis of costs and revenues, including: an operating budget; a financing plan; a cash
flow forecast; a debt servicing schedule; pro forma balance sheets and income statements; financial ratio analysis; etc.

Risk mitigation assessment, the primary areas being: technical risk relating to construction
completion; commercial risk relating to changes in traffic demand; cost risk relating to changes in construction or capital and operational costs; financial risk relating to currency exchange, inflation and interests rate changes.

For investment purposes, the next step is to draw up a financing plan. Critical to this plan is an analysis of the airport's ability to generate sufficient revenues to make the required payments for operating & maintenance expenses, debt service, and other funding requirements that may be required by bondholders or other creditors. In most cases, airport management would do well by contracting with a reputable consultant with expertise in project feasibility studies and airport financing programmes. Once a detailed business and investment plan has been drawn up, an evaluation of the investment financing options can begin.



In order for airports to gain access to private finance, certain institutional and legal changes will first have to take place, usually by way of an airports act. Once these changes have occurred, an airport will have the same choices to make about capital structure as any other private firm would. The optimal or target capital structure is the desired mix of debt, preferred shares, and common equity that will cause a firm's share price to be maximized and its weighted average cost of capital (WACC) 1 to be minimized. This optimal balance between debt and equity financing has been the central question in corporate finance for some time. All-debt financing typically provides a lower average cost of capital and, in any case, for most airports the choice may be limited solely to debt. This is the case in the US where airports have access to tax-free revenue bonds.

The Weighted Average Cost of Capital is defined as the weighted average of the cost of debt, r B, and the cost of equity, rs. Taking corporate taxes into account, the appropriate cost of debt is the after-tax cost of debt since interest is tax deductible. The formula for determining the WACC is: 122

S Twacc-

g^g- rs + g-Tfg- rB U


-s Ic)

where rB (1 - T0) is the after-tax cost of debt. For regulated industries like gas, power, telephone, or railways, the cost of capital has been used to set prices so that the utility earns this rate of return. If the cost of capital is set too low, then the company will not be able to attract sufficient capital to


Airport Economics
Nevertheless, there appear to be some compelling reasons for airports to take on more debt vs. equity. Profitable enterprises with stable, predictable cash flows and safe, tangible assets can afford to take on more debt; unprofitable, risky firms with intangible assets less so. Utilities, such as airports, typically can afford much greater leverage. There is also a certain order in which firms go about seeking financing. New capital will first come from retained earnings. Only after this option is exhausted or becomes difficult due to imposed limitations on the build up of reserves, will a firm turn to lenders whether the banks for loans or lines of credit and/or the bond market. Only as a last resort does the firm turn to the equity market. This being said, it has been observed that airports have surprisingly low levels of financial leverage and, more importantly, they have significantly less debt than their peers; i.e. utility companies. Bonds issued by airports can come in a variety of forms: General obligation bonds General obligation bonds are backed by the issuing government and secured and serviced out of general tax receipts. They are sold at relatively low interest rates. Total general obligation indebtedness of the relevant government may be a limiting factor in the use of general obligation bonds. Self-liquidating general obligation bonds A variation liquidating general obligation bonds, which are secured by government, but are serviced from airport revenues. They cost, but are not subjected to debt restrictions and do not for capital funding. of general obligation bonds are selfthe good faith and credit of the issuing have the advantage of the low interest compete with other public works projects

Airport revenue bonds Airport revenue bonds, for which debt service is paid out of airport revenue, have been the major financing mechanism at large and medium size airports in the US. They are sold at slightly higher rates of interest due to greater perceived risk. Essentially, the airport pledges that its future income will be sufficient to cover the interest and capital repayment over the period of the bond issue. The coverage ratio typically ranges between 1.2-1.5 and level of risk will be dependent on this coverage ratio. Lease or special facility bonds These bonds are guaranteed by the future rental or lease payments of the airline or group of airlines that are going to use the facility, and are secured by way of long-term lease/use agreements. Bond Rating Agencies Since bond rating agencies determine how bonds are priced, it is important to understand how airport bonds are perceived. In general, bond rating agencies have historically rated airport revenue bonds quite highly. A 1990 ACI survey of 31 airports found that 8 of the airports surveyed had the best possible rating (Aaa on Moody's Credit Rating Scale), and 12 had high ratings (Aa). It is an airport's status as a critical public utility generally lacking significant competition for local traffic, as well as its ability to recover its costs, that have lifted airport ratings up to investment-grade levels. Growth of the airport sector in the bond and bank debt markets will depend heavily on the extent to which borrowers and lenders can identify and control credit risk. Credit analysis is important and will be a key element in the long-term growth of airport debt. An evaluation of an airport's credit position involves a fundamental analysis of its business and competitive position and its operations. As such, the perceived credit quality of an airport is the product of its performance in a number of analytical areas:

Competitive position O&D airports tend to carry less risk than do hub airports that rely heavily on transfer traffic. Finances operational comparables, benchmarks and financial ratios are used to assess an airport's strengths and weaknesses.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Rate-setting methodology employed a key consideration since it fundamentally determines who assumes the risk for the airport's financial operations and who has control over airport capital decisions. Debt profile the amount, type and structure of the debt being issued are reviewed when assessing an airport's credit position. Ownership structure generally speaking, direct government ownership that provides for a guarantee against default improves an airport's ability to access capital markets. Management aside from an assessment of the strength and quality of the airport management, the nature of its relations with the airlines is also considered. Environmental issues noise restrictions on runway usage have become a significant issue, particularly for western European airports, as this can hamper growth and expansion. From a credit perspective, the extent to which operational restrictions and opposition to expansion will affect an airport's position and impact its financial and strategic position needs to be assessed.

IATA POLICY POSITION Pre-funding or forward financing vehicles are becoming more prominent, increasing the cost of air transportation. In essence, the airlines and/or the passenger are made to pay for facilities that are not yet in use. It is acknowledged that major capital investments will require external financing, the cost of which should only be included in the cost base for charging purposes when the facilities



When the forementioned financing options are limited or unavailable, airports may turn to prefunding through charges as a means of financing capital investment projects. Pre-funding through charges such as the US passenger facility charge (PFC) goes against the fundamental principles of cost recovery, as does the build up of reserves from an excess of revenues over expenses. This was recognized during the ICAO Conference on the Economics of Airports and Air Navigation Services (ANSConf 2000). However, during the Conference discussion there was general support for pre-funding under specific circumstances where it is determined that it is the most appropriate or only source of funding provided that strict safeguards are in place for users who will be paying for facilities they do not use. Such safeguards should include effective and independent economic regulation, substantive consultation and general agreement with users, limited time of application of the pre-funding charge, and transparency of accounts to ensure the funds are used toward the agreed upon project. For accounting purposes, care should be taken that once the facilities become operational the related



Airport Economics



D3.IR1 Airport Financing Policy Statement

Pre-funding or forward financing vehicles are becoming more prominent, increasing the cost of air transportation. In essence, the airlines and/a the passenger are made to pay for facilities that are not yet in use. It is acknowledged that major capital investments will require external financing, the cost of which should only be included in the cost base for charging purposes when the facilities in question are operational


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

For most airports, aeronautical charges continue to generate well over half of their total revenues. On the part of the airlines, airport charges are critical because they have a direct impact on operating costs. However, due to a variety of factors, airport charges impact different airlines differently. For a short-haul carrier with a high frequency hub feeder operation, airport charges can be significant as much as 20-25% as a proportion of total operating costs. For a long-haul carrier operating large aircraft, airport charges can account for about 5% of total operating costs. Depending on the region of the world, this figure can increase to 10-12% or be as little as 2-3%. In absolute terms airport charges have more than doubled, and as new airport facilities and services become operational in some regions of the world higher user charges can be expected. In summary, since airport charges are an uncontrollable cost as compared to other costs, and have been escalating faster than any other airline cost over the last decade, they will continue to be a major cause of concern for airline management. It is for this reason that the topic of User Charges has been among the top three priorities for IATA in recent time.

Figure D4-1: Cost Breakdown Schedule

^ATA Operating Cost IATA International Scheduled services Cockpit Crew

11 US cents 3.3 6.1 4.9 4.8 2.1 1.4 5.6 6.0 8.9 2.7 45.8

per % of

Fuel & Oil SAircraft Airport

8.4% 15.4%


2JD US cents 2.8 6.1 4.9 4.0 2.0 1.9 4.4 5.5 5.9 2.0 39.5

2001 vs. 1991

% of % change 7.1% -15.2% 15.4% 0.0% 12.4% 10.1% 5.1% 4.8% 11.1% 13.9% 14.9% 5.1% 100.0% 0.0% -16.7% -4.8% 35.7% -21.4% -8.3% -33.7% -25.9% -13.8% 85.7% 164.3% 117.1%

Insurance, Depreciation & Maintenance & Overhaul Leases Landing & Related Charges Air Navigation Charges Station & Ground costs Cabin Crew & Passenger Service Ticketing, Sales & Promotion General and Administrative Total

12.4% 12.2% 5.3%

Airport Air

Landing & Related Charges


3.5% 14.2% 15.2% 22.5% 6.8% 115.9% Mln 4.2 2.8 7.0

7.8 7.4 15.2

Navigation Charges

D4.2 126


Paragraph 22(i) of ICAO's Policies on Charges (Doc 9082/6) states that: 'The cost to be shared is the full cost of providing the airport and its essential ancillary services, including appropriate amounts for cost of capital and depreciation of assets, as well as the cost of maintenance and operation, and management and administration expenses, but allowing for all aeronautical revenues plus contributions from non-aeronautical revenues accruing from the operation of the airport to its operators."


Airport Economics
The paragraph captures two important concepts for determining the cost base for airport charges. First, the meaning ascribed to the terms 'full cost' emanates from the 1991 ICAO Conference on Airport and Route Facility Management (CARFM) during which it was agreed to delete the word 'economic' between the words full' and 'cost' from previous version Doc 9082/4, ' emphasize the principle that only the costs actually incurred by the providers of airport and air traffic control facilities and services should be charged...' This recommendation was meantto reflect the growing trend toward airport autonomy and privatization, and to indicate that the ICAO Statements by the Council on Airport Charges (Doc 9082/4) was only to provide guidance on the cost recovery of the facilities and services provided to air traffic. Rate-setting methodologies The second concept is the application of the 'single-till' principle, in that the cost base for charges should be based on the cost of the airport facilities and services provided, net of contributions from non-aeronautical revenue sources. How much of a contribution should be considered has been the subject of much debate and contention between airports and airlines. The airline industry has historically been of the opinion that airports exist to facilitate air transportation services and that revenue from all commercial activities within the airport perimeter should therefore contribute to the 'single-till' in the determination of the cost base for charging purposes. Further, considering that airports are increasingly developing their commercial potential through involvement in non-core activities, it is also felt that the airline community should be consulted prior to such initiatives in regards to what extent users should be exposed to the risk involved under a 'single-till' rate-setting methodology. In the US, this trade-off between risk exposure and user-say has been captured in airline airport use agreements. The residual approach1 to setting airport charges guarantees the airport will breakeven, although some airports will ensure that an adequate surplus is made. In this case, the airlines take the financial risk, but usually have veto power over airport investment decisions by way of a 'majority-in-interest' (MM) clause, which gives airlines veto power over airport-development plans. The other rate-setting methodology is the compensatory approach 2, which on a total airport basis is not set to necessarily break-even. A profit or loss can be made depending on the level of traffic and commercial activity that is generated. In this case, the airport assumes the financial risk, but receives the benefits of the concession revenues, usually during periods of traffic growth. Airports employing this methodology have tended to produce larger surpluses and would also be in a better position to use retained earnings for investment purposes. However, US legislation limits the level of profit allowed and there have been cases when airlines have sued airports for the accumulated surpluses. Nevertheless there has been a tendency for airports to move away from the residual approach to adopt the compensatory or hybrid approach, which employs a mix of the two methodologies, usually airside residual and landside compensatory. Under the 'single till' or 'global residual' approach to rate setting, which IATA favours, big income streams from areas like parking and retail have,the effect of lowering airport charges to airlines, while the airlines, in turn, assume the financial risk and ensure the airport is kept whole. However, the 'single till' has become a topic of heated debate, with the airports arguing that it is an economic perversity since it subsidizes the airlines, especially so during times of capacity constraint, and creates a disincentive to develop new sources of non-aeronautical revenue.

Residual Methodology under this approach, which can be applied on a cost centre or total airport basis, non-airline 127 revenues are credited against costs to determine the net revenue required, which is then apportioned back to the airlines. Compensatory Methodology under this approach, rates and charges are calculated to fully recover the airlines' share of operating and capital costs without any credit for non-airline revenues. The airlines' share of costs exclude concession and public areas,

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Another paragraph of importance is 22(vii) which states that: "Airports may produce sufficient revenues to exceed all direct and indirect operating costs (including general administration, etc.) and so provide for a reasonable return on assets at a sufficient level to secure financing on favorable terms in capital markets for the purpose of investing in new or expanded airport infrastructure and, where relevant, to remunerate adequately holders of airport equity." In the context of airport privatization, airlines are of the opinion that they should not be made to pay for the (at times) speculative returns sought by equity holders. Airport management will be tempted to take on more risky ventures (e.g. international expansion through equity holdings) in order to attract and retain investors. Further, the temptation would be to reduce the contributions of non-aeronautical revenues to the cost base for aeronautical charges or abandon the 'single till' concept altogether. This is therefore yet another reason for the need of an independent and effective economic regulatory mechanism to help mitigate user exposure to such risk. Given the debate surrounding the 'single till' principle to rate-setting and its link to the regulated return an airport can generate, ACI and IATA developed a joint interpretation of sub-paragraphs 22(i) and 22(vii) which is reproduced below: ACI/IATA JOINT INTERPRETATION OF SUB-PARAGRAPHS 22(i) AND 22(vii) IN ICAO'S POLICIES ON CHARGES FOR AIRPORTS AND AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES (DOC 9082/6) In interpreting these two sub-paragraphs, the following should apply:

1. The existence of air traffic activity is a necessary precondition for the generation of airport non-

aeronautical revenues. Such revenues are then generated through management initiatives in offering suitable products and prices. All aeronautical and non-aeronautical revenues from the operation of an airport accrue, in the first instance, to the airport. Reaching a common understanding on the contributions of non-aeronautical revenues to defray the cost base for charges is an acknowledgement of the partnership between airports and users.

2. The non-aeronautical revenues in question do not normally include revenues earned by airport
operators from activities undertaken competition with other suppliers. off-airport, or those undertaken by the airport in


3. Given the different local circumstances and fast changing conditions, with respect to airport
ownership and management, as well as regulatory regimes, there are likely to be a range of different appropriate treatments of non-aeronautical income by airports. to the investment needs of airports, taking into account paragraph 24 of Doc 9082/6, which addresses pre-funding of projects, while recognizing that there may be many alternatives to finance infrastructure development.

4. When determining the contributions from non-aeronautical revenues, high priority should be given

5. The appropriate return on aeronautical activities should reflect differences in the level of risk from
non-aeronautical activities. Further, iniorder to provide incentives to the airport operator, high levels of service and efficiency in aeronautical activities may be rewarded with higher returns and vice versa. be in place to identify the relationship between costs and revenues of non-aeronautical and aeronautical activities (Doc 9082/6, sub-paragraph 17(vi) refers).

6. When defining the contributions from non-aeronautical revenues, an accounting system should 7. As stated in point 4 above, it may he appropriate for airports to retain non-aeronautical revenues

rather than use such revenues to defray charges. However, there is no requirement for airports to do so and, in appropriate circumstances, there may be solid grounds for charges to be lower, consistent with Doc 9082/6, sub-paragraph 22(viii).



Airport Economics

8. None of the foregoing should be interpreted as encouragement to airports to exploit unreasonably their market position relative to users. Agreed to February, 2001 As a final point, in the event that aeronautical charges are determined without any contributions from non-aeronautical revenue sources, then the cost allocation between aeronautical and non-aeronautical functions and among landing (runways and taxi ways), parking/apron and terminal facilities should be based on an accurate and appropriate methodology that is deemed to be reasonable and equitable to users. Cost accounting It should be evident from the foregoing that a proper cost accounting system is an essential tool, both in providing the basis for determining the cost base for charges, but also for providing information to airport management in its assessment of operating performance from a financial perspective. The cost accounting system should help achieve the following objectives:

Determine the costs of specific services, programmes, and activities. Understand the composition of these costs and what the cost drivers are.

Determine the efforts and accomplishments associated with programmes and delivery of services and their changes over time in relation to costs. Measure the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization's management of services, programmes, and assets. In the determination of the cost base for charges, special attention needs to be given to the issue of cost allocation, because so many of an airport's costs are joint costs. First, the total costs by major cost item (operating & maintenance, marketing, administrative, capital charges, etc.) have to be determined. The second step involves allocating these functional costs to the various airport areas or services and this will involve allocating certain costs that are attributable to two or more areas or services by employing a sound cost allocation methodology such as activity based costing (ABC). For example, there are many areas and facilities that are used both for passenger handling and commercial purposes, and care must be taken to allocate costs fairly and equitably between aeronautical and non-aeronautical activities. Likewise, in the case of airport networks, appropriate amounts of overhead costs need to be allocated among the relevant airports. The principles of costrelated and site-specific charges must be maintained.

IATA POLICY POSITION IATA has no objection to airport networks and airport cross-ownership or alliances charging practices as long as airport charges are cost-related and sitespecific. IATA considers that there should be no cross-subsidization between airports and finances should be strictly separated.

Finally, arriving at an equitable cost base for charges will require an allocation of costs among different user groups or categories, i.e. general aviation, military, and international and domestic civil traffic. Once the costs attributable to civil air traffic have been established, the cost base for individual charges can be estimated by determining the costs of the facilities and/or services the charge is to cover. The relevant rate for a given charge (landing fee, parking fee, passenger service charge, etc.) is then determined by dividing the relevant cost base by the estimated number of charging units. The 129 number of charging units in the case of a landing fee is generally the aggregate aircraft MTOW that is estimated to take-off from the airport in the relevant year, or the number of departing passengers in the case of a passenger service charge.

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



The User Charges Panel (UCP) is the group that leads the IATA approach to user charges issues. Its objective is to ensure charges are reasonable, cost-related, non-discriminatory and equitably applied, and the panel enters into consultations with government and their designated charging authorities for this purpose. The UCP operates within the framework of a terms of reference set by the IATA Financial Committee, to which it reports, and consists of 10 airline experts who are geographically representative of the IATA Membership. ICAO Policies on Charges While the UCP has developed IATA policies on User Charges issues ranging from privatization to market-based options to counter congestion and delays, much of its work is based on ICAO's Policies on Charges for Airports and Air Navigation Services (Doc 9082/6). These Policies on Charges are updated from time-to-time and contain the recommendations and conclusions of the ICAO Council on charges issues. They are intended for guidance to ICAO contracting States, however, IATA considers that States and their designated charging authorities have a moral obligation to observe the Policies on Charges. To assist States in the implementation of the Policies on Charges, ICAO has also developed and maintains two manuals: the Airport Economics Manual (Doc 9562) and the Manual on Air Navigation Services Economics (Doc 9161/3), which are updated from time-to-time by the Airport Economics Panel (AEP) and the ANS Economics Panel (ANSEP) to which IATA is an active member. The principles for the setting of aeronautical charges as contained in the Policies on Charges have their origin in Article 15 Airport and Similar Charges of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (a.k.a. the 'Chicago' Convention). Article 15 of the Convention requires of a contracting State that: uniform conditions shall apply to the use of airports and air navigation facilities by aircraft of other contracting States; and charges imposed for use of such facilities shall not be higher for aircraft of other contracting States than those paid by its national aircraft engaged in similar international operations. Average cost pricing The requirements that airports be open to users under uniform conditions and that charges be nondiscriminatory form the basic underlying philosophy to airport charging policies. These basic principles can also be found in bilateral air services agreements between States. It has also been widely accepted that airports are public utilities and that air transport is a service of national importance. Thus, traditional charging policies have also been based on recouping solely the costs of the facilities and services provided. These principles have lead to an average cost pricing approach to charging. However it was clear that larger, heavier aircraft needed longer and stronger runways and larger handling facilities and thus imposed a higher cost on an airport. Further, larger aircraft with their higher payloads were found to be better able to bear higher charges the ability to pay principle. Thus, many airports introduced specific charges for facilities and services such as aerobridges and security and apron services. In the case of landing fees, an aircraft weight element (usually MTOW) was included in the formula as a proxy for the cost it imposed on the airport. However, in the case of terminal navaid (approach control) and other air navigation services charges, it was recognized that larger aircraft are more efficient, able to transport more people in a single movement and requiring no more air traffic management effort than was required for a small aircraft. In the case of such charges, the practice has been to employ the square root of the weight factor as a trade-off between the ability to pay and aircraft efficiency. Rebates, discounts and incentives Of late, a number of airports have offered discounts on charges, or rebates, as a marketing tool to increase traffic volume or attract new air routes. Some such incentives are officially published, while others are not. The argument in favor of such discounts is that they are aimed at increasing the total business, thereby benefiting all users, especially where the 'single-till' principle to rate-setting is



Airport Economics
applied. Airline start-up costs for a new route can be significant, and therefore airport assistance through incentives for a limited time is acceptable and appreciated by the airline industry. IATA, however, only supports rebates or discounts that are non-discriminatory and do not contravene Article 15 of the Chicago Convention. The non-discriminatory element should include the requirement for such incentives to be published.

IATA POLICY POSITION A number of airports offer discounts or rebates, mainly as incentives to stimulate new or increased traffic. lATA's view is that discounts or rebates are acceptable only if they comply with the following principles:

Non-discriminatory any discount or rebate offered must be available to all operators under the same conditions. Do not distort competition. Are time-limited. Are not funded through increases in existing user charges. Should be published.

IATA publishes the Airport & Air Navigation Charges Manual, which is a complete compilation of upto-date information on airport and air navigation charges world-wide and is available for sale in print and CD-ROM format.



In light of the more commercially oriented environment in which airports now operate, there has been some debate in recent years as to whether the traditional airport charging schemes result in the efficient allocation of resources, and generate sufficient revenues to provide for an adequate return on investment. The traditional airport charging systems, that have developed under the auspices of ICAO guidance, aim solely to recover the cost of providing the facilities or services through a combination of average cost pricing and ability to pay, and do not provide adequate signaling mechanisms about the costs airlines impose on an airport. This debate has become particularly acute in the case of congested airports and environmental mitigation. It is argued that average cost pricing offers little inducement to operators of new aircraft types to minimize the cost they impose on the airport in terms of new facilities that are required. All users end up contributing to the cost for accommodating the new aircraft type. It has been further argued that average cost pricing offers no incentive for operators to move from peak to off-peak periods. Finally, under an average cost pricing regime, the more congested an airport gets, the cheaper it gets to operate. These arguments have lead airport managers and economic pricing principles and marginal cost pricing one additional unit of output. Economists have long most efficient allocation of resources is one where the cost of providing that good or service. regulators alike to explore the introduction of the cost that would be incurred to produce argued that the pricing policy that leads to the price of a good or service is set to the marginal

However, can such pricing policies be implemented in the airport environment and will they have the desired effect? So called market-based options have been promoted as having a possible role to 131 play in relieving airline flight delays and congestion at busy airports, thereby improving airport capacity management, enhancing competition and promoting the efficiency of the overall aviation system.

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Market-based options would therefore include all market pricing regimes that could encourage air carriers to use limited capacity in a more efficient manner, potentially bringing into balance current supply (airport capacity) and demand (number of flight operations) while longer-term capacity expansion is pursued. Such market-based options could include:

Auctions, which would allocate a fixed number of operations for some particular period of time. Congestion pricing, which contemplates charging air carriers not only for the costs they impose on an airport, but also the delay costs they impose on other airport users. Peak period pricing, which contemplates imposing fees based on the higher costs an airport incurs to accommodate demand during peak hours, or the cost an airport does not incur because flights are shifted from busy periods of the day to less busy periods. Flat fees, which would restructure existing weight-based landing fees so that total airfield costs are recovered through a higher average fee, thereby affecting the mix of aircraft that operate at an airport.

IATA has held the view that in order to relieve airport congestion and delay, the primary objective should be to improve the utilization of existing capacity and make available additional capacity, rather than ration demand through market-based options that have not proven to be effective. In regards to the specific options mentioned, lATA's views are as follows: Auctions Auctions, which would allocate a fixed number of operations for some particular period of time, would result in significantly higher costs for airlines and would not be practicable in an international context, due to issues relating to reciprocity. The current process of allocating limited capacity is done by way of slot allocation programmes in place at certain congested airports. The processes to deal with congestion problems at airports need to be fair and equitable for all air operators. Therefore, the current process of applying for and assigning international slots is being done on similar terms at all airports. Slot applications are typically assigned as requested. Auctions, on the other hand, entail a degree of uncertainty as to whether or not a slot will become available, aside from the inflated price that will have to be paid. However, neither a system of auctions or a slot allocation programme would do anything to reduce congestion, unless the number of operations are effectively capped. Congestion pricing Congestion pricing, which contemplates charging air carriers not only for the costs they impose on an airport, but also the delay costs they impose on other airport users, relies on the correct and accurate identification of externalities. These are difficult if not impossible to assess with any degree of accuracy, or to impose based on general agreement among stakeholders. It would be difficult to demonstrate that congestion prices are cost-based, a fundamental principle any airport charging scheme should adhere to as per ICAO guidance (refer to Doc 9082/6). Further, what this concept appears to assume is that air carriers do not incur delay costs. The fact is that air carriers incur significant delay costs, including the cost of extra fuel burn, catering, hotel accommodation for inconvenienced passengers, etc. Peak period pricing Peak period pricing schemes contemplate imposing fees based on the higher costs an airport incurs to accommodate peak hour demand, and lower fees based on the cost an airport does not incur during less busy periods. Such a charging scheme should inherently be revenue-neutral, however this has not been demonstrated where such schemes have been in place. Due to difficulties associated with cost identification and allocation, airports have not been able to identify with any great level of accuracy what their costs are at different times of the day. These supposed 'demand-altering' pricing schemes could only have an effect if operators had full control over their demand patterns. This is not the case. An airline's scheduling and fleet allocation decisions are based in large part on the demand for air travel at particular times of the day. An airline has therefore limited ability to adjust, in an efficient way, to a system of peak/off-peak charging due to the complex task of scheduling its operations. Scheduling is one of the most difficult tasks an airline has trying to optimize aircraft utilization within the constraints of airport curfews, increasing environmental restrictions, crew availability, and many other factors.



Airport Economics

Peak charges have therefore only increased the cost for those air carriers operating during the peak periods and raises concerns of equity and discrimination. Furthermore, at most (congested) airports it has become impossible to differentiate between peak and off-peak hours of the day peak hours could well constitute the entire operating day making it impossible to implement a peak period pricing scheme. Experience has shown that where peak/off-peak charges have existed, it has not had a significant effect on the distribution of traffic from peak periods to off-peak periods. The result has been that, while a few airports around the world have introduced peak/off-peak charging schemes, others have abandoned them. ICAO has similarly concluded, on the basis of a survey it conducted in preparation for the Conference on the Economics of Airports and Air Navigation Services (ANSConf 2000), that "...peak pricing has proved to be of limited effectiveness for capacity management." It is for these reasons that IATA has strongly opposed any such system of peak/off-peak charging.

IATA POLICY POSITION IATA objects to any system of peak period pricing, a scheme that arbitrarily redistributes costs between different users. An airline faced with peak period charges has no real opportunity to adjust to such a pricing scheme in an efficient way due mainly to the limited flexibility it has in the scheduling of its operations.

It is clear that the three previously mentioned market-based options will have the effect of increasing air carrier operating costs. Since air carrier demand for airport capacity is in fact derived demand, the question is whether air carriers operating in a competitive market can effectively pass on the increased operating cost to the ultimate consumer of air transportation services, and thus, influence his/her behavior. While the demand profile of a business passenger is relatively inelastic to that of a leisure passenger, the air travel market has also demonstrated that it has a voracious appetite for cheaper fares. This has been the basis for success of the low cost carrier and any attempt by certain carriers to raise fares is not met with similar fare increases by other carriers. It is a known fact that airfares reflect what an individual passenger is willing to pay and not a certain margin over an airline's costs effective market segmentation and the law of supply and demand dictates airfares. Thus, what these market-based approaches would accomplish is an increase in airline operating cost, with little opportunity of recovering this cost through the fare structure. Flat fees A flat fee that would recover total airfield costs through a higher average fee, or alternatively, a high minimum charge, has proven to be more effective in moving aircraft of a certain lower weightclass from congested airports to secondary, reliever airports. This was confirmed as a result of the same ICAO survey noted above. However, such a pricing scheme obviously results in limiting airport access to a certain group of users and raises concerns of equal access. Attempts to alter current average cost charging schemes with the introduction of market-based options should consider capacity costs as joint costs to all airport users. All airport users benefit jointly from the availability of an airport it has not been developed for any single user group. All users contribute their fair share of the joint costs. An average cost pricing regime, as employed in general practice, is therefore considered to be the most fair, transparent and equitable charging regime. Market-based options and any other demand-management mechanisms will distort the equity principle, inevitably treating airport users differently, while not really addressing what is essentially a supply-side capacity problem. Strategic, long-term airport development planning is therefore key to solving the capacity problem.








Consultation is the cornerstone to a meaningful relationship between an airport and its user community. The ICAO Council, in its Policies on Charges for Airports and Air Navigation Services, has recognized this. The underlying philosophy of the consultative process is transparency of information and the rational of decisions. The goal of consultation should be to reach consensus between the participants, and this requires a spirit of openness and understanding from both sides. The timely provision by the airport of financial information, including projections, and forecasts of future traffic activity, together with other relevant supplementary data or information should serve as a prerequisite for a meaningful consultative process. On their part, airlines should provide medium-to-long-term scheduling information to an airport. The ICAO Policies on Charges do state that failing agreement on charges issues, an airport would be free to impose new or revised charges. While it is recognized that agreement cannot always be achieved, decisions made by an airport on the imposition of charges should take into account airline views and concerns. In the case where airline views are not acted on, the reasons for this should be explained. In case of disagreement, and failing reasonable explanation, users should have the right of referral to the competent regulatory authority. Where significant new or revised charges are being contemplated, consultation should take place well in advance, i.e. 4-6 months prior to implementation, and may require several meetings before a final decision is made. It is important to note that consultation is a process and not an event where a decision already made is merely announced and subsequently implemented. The airport should seek comments on a proposal, take these comments into consideration and eventually come to an informed decision. Ideally, a proposal should be framed as a number of possible options or scenarios.

Mon Mont I60-day consttation period th 1 h2

Initial proposal and notice of meeting (30day lead-time)

Mont h3 Final notice of new or revised charges (30day leadtime)

Month 4

First consult ation meetin g

Possible other meetings to be held and exchange of correspondence during this 60-day period

Implementation of new or revised charges

The benefit to the airlines of a meaningful consultation process is that they get to know what they are paying for and have their opinions heard. The benefit to the airport is that it will implement changes to their charging scheme based on a well-informed decision.



D4.IR1 Airport Charges Policy Statement IATA has no objection to airport networks and airport cross-ownership or alliances charging practices as long as airport charges are cost-related and site-specific. IATA considers that there should be no cross-subsidization between airports, and that finances should be strictly separated.


D4.IR2 Discount and Rebite Policy Statement A number of airports offer discounts or rebates, mainly as incentives to stimulate new or increased traffic. lATA's view is that discounts or rebates are acceptable only if they comply with the following principles: ;6 Non-discriminatoryany discount or rebate offered must be available to all operators under the same conditions. Do not distort competition.

Are time-limited,

Are not funded through increases in existing user charges. Should be published.

D4.IR3 Pricing Policy IATA objects to any^tem of peak period pricing, a scheme that arbitrarily redistributes costs between different users. An airline faced with peak period charges has no real opportunity to adjust to such a pricing scheme in an efficient way due mainly to the limited flexibility it has in the scheduling of its operatiWs. V. ______________________^_____________________........................_________________.

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



The purpose and objective of this section is to provide a series of broad, indicative construction costs for the primary facility components of an airport campus. The given costs are drawn from historic data compiled from major aviation projects, undertaken in both the UK and internationally. All costs have been reconciled to 4th quarter 2003 rates for the UK construction market. The given costs relate to new build construction work in an environment that is not excessively affected by operational restrictions and logistical constraints. Such constraints can generate significant additional costs typically issues such as imposed phasing of the works, abnormal working hours, operational safety and security requirements and working in an airside environment. The main driver of construction cost levels for passenger buildings tends to be relate to prescribed passenger service levels and the envisaged passenger experience. A 'budget style' regional airport can easily cost less than 50% of the /m2 rate of a high profile international facility. There is a massive difference in the cost of constructing 'identical' facilities across the globe. We have provided a conversion schedule for global adjustment from the given UK construction cost levels. The adjusting factors take cognisance of labour costs, material costs, specifications and industry standards.

Fourth Quarter 2003

Facility DescriptionUnitRangeTerminal BuildingsRegional Airports/m2 GFA13002000International Airports/m2 GFA2200-3000Cargo Handling Bases/m2 GFA570850Distribution Centres/m2 GFA350-500Visual Control Towersk/m stalk75200Hangars (Types C and D)/m2 GFA1050-1350Car ParkingSurface/space12001500Multi-storey/space6700-8100Taxiways and Runways/m2170-205Stands/m2150180HotelsBudget/m2 GFA900-1100Mid Market/m2 GFA1500-1750Air Conditioned Offices/m2 GFA1100-1500

Data provided courtesy of Davis Langdon Everest (UK)



Airport Economics

These cost ranges relate to construction work in the South East of England in 4th Quarter 2003;

The costs relate to new-build construction work in an environment which is not excessively
affected by operational restrictions and logistical constraints;

GFA denotes Gross Floor Area.

For international comparison, these costs (which represent 100%) should be adjusted in
accordance with the attached International Cost Factors identified within clause D5.1.1.

D5.1.1 International Construction Cost Factors Fourth Quarter 2003

The table of construction cost factors listed within this clause have been broken down into major continents and then subdivided into the various countries within those continents. Select the factor for the correct region of the world and then multiple that factor by the cost description identified Continent Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Asia Country Algeria Cameroon Chad Cote d'lvoire Gabon Gambia Ghana Nigeria Senegal South Africa Zambia Brunei China Hong Kong India Indonesia Japan Malaysia Philippines Singapore South Korea Sri Lanka Taiwan Thailand Vietnam Factor (UK = 100) 55 67 66 71 67 74 80 65 67 26 45 40 56 72 19 47 110 29 37 59 66 21 62 43 47







International Construction Cost Factors Fourth Quarter 2003 (cont'd) Continent C America C America Caribbean Caribbean Caribbean Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Europe Middle East Middle East Middle East Middle East Middle East Middle East Middle East Middle East Middle East N America N America Oceania Oceania Country Costa Rica Mexico Bahamas Jamaica Puerto Rico Austria Belgium Cyprus Czech Rep Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovak Rep Spain Switzerland Bahrain Egypt Israel Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Oman Qatar Saudi Arabia Canada USA Australia New Zealand Factor (UK = 100) 59 70 84 65 78 80 84 46 51 80 80 72 51 96 73 79 56 52 30 33 60 89 68 57 45 60 66 66 62 66 57 56 65 54 51


Airport Economics
International Construction Cost Factors Fourth Quarter 2003 (cont'd) Continent S America S America S America S America S America S America S America S America Country Argentina Brazil Chile Colombia French Guiana Guyana Peru Venezuela Factor (UK = 100) 20 49 43 57 84 65 53 37

Data provided courtesy of Davis Langdon Everest (UK) Notes:


The factors relate to the materials, specifications and standards that are normal in the country and this should be fully understood and appreciated when comparing costs; Factors relate to national averages and regional variations will apply. Construction costs in primary

D5.IR1 Cost Evaluations And Comparisons Airport cost consultants should refer to the tables listed within this section when evaluating and comparing the cost of providing airport infrastructure facilities.


TATA Airport Development Reference Manual


Chapter E Environmental Issues
Section E1: Main Issues E1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ E1.2 Environmental Management Plan ............................................................ E1.3 IATA Recommendations............................................................................ Section E2: Social and Political Considerations E2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ E2.2 The Importance of Partnerships................................................................. E2.3 Sustainable Development......................................................................... E2.4 Airport Stakeholder Partnerships and Initiatives ....................................... E2.5 IATA Recommendations............................................................................ Section E3: Noise E3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ E3.2 Aircraft Noise ........................................................................................... E3.3 IATA Recommendations............................................................................ Section E4: Emissions E4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ E4.2 Airport Emissions from Aircraft.................................................................. E4.3 IATA Recommendations............................................................................ Section E5: Waste Management E5.1 General ................................................................................................... E5.2 Waste Treatment ..................................................................................... E5.3 IATA Recommendations............................................................................ 155 156 156 152 152 154 146 146 151 141 141 142 143 144 137 138 140


TA-HL Airport Development Reference Manual



Since the second World War, air transport has grown into one of the world's most important and innovative industries, driving economic and social progress. It has brought employment and prosperity to millions of people while expanding world trade and increasing opportunities for travel and tourism. The air transport industry is committed to meeting its customers' growing demands in a sustainable manner, thereby maintaining an optimal balance between economic progress, social development and environmental responsibility. This means balancing the needs of passengers, society, the economy and the environment, as well as making the best use of existing facilities while addressing the challenge of new developments. In delivering these benefits, air transport has had less of an impact on the world's environment than most people realise. Indeed, by continually improving its fuel efficiency, reducing noise and introducing new, more sustainable technologies, airtransport has been able to reduce or contain its environmental impact:

Carbon dioxide (C02) emissions: Continuous improvements in aircraft engine technology have reduced C02 emissions per passenger-kilometre (pkm) by 70% since the advent of the first jets in the 1960s, to the extent that the fuel consumption of most modern aircraft does not exceed 3.5 litres per 100 pkm. Industry research efforts are aiming to achieve a further 50% reduction in C02 emissions for equipment entering service in 2020. Nitrogen oxide (NOx) and other emissions: Improved fuel efficiency has also meant that other emissions (such as carbon monoxide, hydro-carbons and smoke) have come down by some 90% or more. The higher temperatures required to achieve these improvements have, however, prevented similar progress from being achieved in the reduction of NO x emissions, which have implications for both local air quality and climate change. Ambitious research goals in the European Union and elsewhere are targeting a reduction of NO x emissions of future aircraft by 70% within 10 years, and by 80% within 25 years. Noise: Today's aircraft are typically 75% quieter at take-off or landing than the first jets in the 1960s. Research efforts are targeting a further 30% reduction within 10 years and a 50% reduction by 2020. Land use: Air transport generally uses less land than other transport modes. For example, per passenger-kilometre, air transport uses less than 1 % of the land required for the entire transport network in the European Union.

In spite of these achievements, and the technological progress that lays ahead, the continuous and growing demand for air travel tends to increase air transport's absolute contribution to climate change. Aviation emissions presently account for some 3.5% of man's contribution to global warming and could grow to 5% in 2050, according to the most probable scenario as identified by the IPCC 1.

United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Airports are increasingly being held to account for their energy use, emissions and effects on the environment, and many are introducing efficiency measures in the context of planning. An environmental management plan is the first step for airports seeking to implement environmental improvements, as it provides the framework for an airport's environmental management activities. The purpose of such a plan is to ensure that activities undertaken at the airport are carried out in an environmentally-responsible manner; ensuring compliance with applicable laws, regulations and best management practices, as well as with respect for community and public concerns. The following are environmental considerations to be taken into account when developing a new airport or an environmental management plan: Airport design: The design of an airport is important, since each airport and its corresponding infrastructure is designed for specific passenger or aircraft movement capacities. Legislation and airport slot allocation subsequently control that capacity. The scope for environmental improvement at an airport is determined by its physical layout in terms of the terminal and airport buildings, facilities, taxiways, runways and their associated infrastructure. For example, the provision of high-speed aircraft exits shortens aircraft taxiing time, and thereby helps to prevent ground congestion while the provision of fixed electrical ground power (FEGP) and ground power units (GPUs) at gates and maintenance areas helps to reduce noise and emissions. Rail access to airports can help take cars off the road, thereby reducing local emissions and improving the environmental balance. Ecology and natural habitat: Airports are often located in greenbelt areas. They therefore have a role to play in the preservation and enhancement of the biodiversity of their surrounding areas by maintaining and restoring these habitats and creating new ones where they have been damaged. This could include, for example, involving local schools in a tree-planting scheme, or complementing local authorities' work in the local community. Emissions: Managing local emissions involves both technical and operational changes relating mainly to road vehicles and to aircraft operations at, and close to, the airport. Solutions can include:

Modifying road access to the airport to minimise congestion, or to provide dedicated public transport routes. Discouraging private vehicle use through the construction of remote or centralised car parks.

Encouraging greater use of public transport, providing electric charging stations for vehicles, etc. Energy consumption: Energy reductions within airports can be achieved in a variety of ways, including technical improvements and raising staff and business partner awareness through environmental campaigns. The former can include:

The removal of older, outdated equipment in buildings and its replacement with new energyefficient technology.



Environmental Issues
Monitoring electricity consumption of baggage handling systems, passenger conveyor belts, escalators, air conditioning systems and lighting, etc. Global climate change: Airports can work to reduce energy and ground fleet fuel consumption that has a beneficial effect on C02 and other emissions affecting climate change. Airports can also influence the sources and types of energy and fuel, design for lower consumption, and manage their use and storage of ozone depleting substances. For example, all CFC equipment at airports can be removed and replaced by more modern equipment. Noise: Managing and finding solutions to aircraft and ground noise is an important priority for airports. Addressing aircraft noise requires working in partnership with airlines, air traffic control, aircraft and engine manufacturers, national governments, international organisations and the local community. Voluntary agreements with partners can be successful, as can developing technical and operational measures to improve the noise environment (such as installing effective noise measuring instruments). Managing ground noise involves technical improvements to equipment. This can include: the provision of fixed servicing equipment, which avoids the use of aircraft auxiliary power units and ground power units, and; management instructions and controls to ensure that correct use is made of equipment and that construction activities do not produce excessive noise. It can also include the construction of special 'noise suppression facilities' used for engine ground running and engine testing; and the construction of 'sound walls' to reduce noise disturbance for neighbouring communities. Land-use planning and zoning, land acquisition, noise protection or insulation programmes also help to optimise the benefits from quieter aircraft, and to prevent the unnecessary encroachment of residential development into noise sensitive airport areas. Land use planning and management: Noise nuisance from overflight, take-off or landing is primarily due to the absence of adequate land-use planning and management in and around airports. In many countries, land-use planning and zoning is the responsibility of national, regional and local municipalities. Each airport has its own geographical, political, economic and historical characteristics and there is no single land-use planning and management approach. Compatible land-use planning and management helps to minimise noise impact around airports and to safeguard traffic growth. Landscaping: Landscaping can improve the quality of the environment for people who work at, travel to, or live near an airport. It can also play a role in integrating the airport into the surrounding community if partnerships are developed with local communities, local authorities, environmental charities and land owners. Materials: Particular care must be taken over the management and treatment of hazardous waste and chemicals. Environmentally hazardous materials like toxic chemicals, heavy metals, etc. should, where possible, be replaced by more responsible alternatives. Water consumption: The reduction of water consumption at an airport can be achieved by installing equipment that is water efficient (e.g. replacing old sanitary equipment) and finding ways to influence or provide incentives to airport tenants and other airport users to lower their consumption of water. Another option is to make use of rainwater or to re-circulate/recycle water. Water quality: Water quality management and the avoidance of water contamination can be achieved in a number of ways. Large infrastructure projects can be developed that protect local watercourses from flood and pollution. Staff awareness and training programmes are important to prevent careless behaviour and accidents, and clear instructions and controls can ensure that potential contaminants are properly disposed of and that drainage systems are used correctly.



Airport Development Reference Manual

Waste management: Solutions to waste management must generally involve the airport's business partners, since many airports handle waste on behalf of airlines, retailers and tenants. These partners need to be encouraged to reduce waste generation and to recycle where it is operationally practical. Other measures for consideration are how the recycled material and waste is disposed of after collection as well as specialised training and awareness programmes to minimise the risk of air, ground and water contamination from fuel, chemical waste, dangerous materials and oil spills.



Environmental Policy

1 ATA fully recognises society's expectations towards furthei environmental progress an

committed to achieving such progress through all possible means such as technological advances, more stringent standards, and operational improvements. Good practices and voluntary measures are also encouraged, as well as assessing the role of emissions trading schemes in the longer term. The industry is, however, strongly opposed to the use of environmental taxes and charges that are considered both economically and environmentally inefficient and may even be contrary to international law.


icient Apron Design Characteristics

In an effort 0 reduce fuel consumption and emissions from aircraft, the length and geographical position of runways should be optimised wherever possible. The objective should be to maximise aircraft efficiency during take-off and landing procedures. Particular attention should be given to the design of rapid exit taxiways, which should be designed in accordance with ICAO Annex 14 clause 3.8. Particular attention should be observed to the requirements of Figure 3-2, Rapid Exit Taxiway.

E1.IR3 Business Partner Environmental Strategy

Airport operators should actively work with their business partners, such as the airlines, the ground handlers, the aircraft fuel suppliers, as well as the water companies and the building electricity and gas suppliers etc, to ensure that all hazardous materials are properly used and disposed of while at the airport The airport operator and alt its business partners should collectively work together to ensure o-'dl efficiency of the airport by developing specific energy efficiency targets.



Environmental Issues


Airports worldwide must be ready to handle current and future demand. However, many are increasingly operating at full capacity. As a result, traffic must be transferred to neighbouring secondary airports to free up capacity, new runways and terminals must be built, or brand new airport sites must be found. When a new airport is planned or a major expansion envisaged, it is important to consider not only what effect the change will have on the airport within its boundaries, but also to consider what the impact will be on the surrounding community. Airports can satisfactorily be integrated into the local community fabric if due care is taken. For example, studies into private and public road traffic generated by airport activities (e.g. passengers, cargo, staff, etc.) must be undertaken and the surrounding road network designed to minimise negative effects on residential areas. Indeed, it is recognised that the negative effects (noise and pollution) of airport road traffic are often worse than the more known adverse effects of aircraft traffic. The implementation of new airport projects is becoming more and more difficult despite the fact that the lack of airport capacity is now identified as the main obstacle to future air transport growth. This is mainly because of growing opposition from local residents surrounding airports, as well as pressure groups that force governments to introduce complex approval procedures. As a result, air transport capacity lags behind demand, thereby increasing congestion and delays, energy use, costs and emissions, as well as undermining consumer satisfaction. Conflicting situations when developing an airport are quite often the consequence of a lack of proper land-use planning and management. Governments and local municipalities have the responsibility to prevent residential areas from being built around airports to avoid future problem despite the attraction to new residents of good communications and other facilities. A delicate balance must therefore be found between the interests of those affected by increased air traffic, the related effects on the environment, and the recognised and quantifiable benefits that an airport brings to a region in terms of economic wealth and employment. Long-term planning, management and careful advocacy are required by airports to ensure that they are able to secure capacity and meet demand through safe and sustainable growth. Furthermore,



Given that air transport is one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy, the challenge for the entire industry, and for airports in particular, is to ensure that aviation grows in a sustainable manner with a proper balance between economic, environmental and social considerations (see E2.3 Sustainable Development). Environmental issues arising from air transport growth are multi-faceted and complex. For this reason, joint participation in decision-making is essential, as it helps to resolve local, regional and global trade-off situations. Solutions are most likely to be found through coordinated action and partnerships between as many relevant stakeholders as possible. Stakeholders in the air transport sector are diverse and include manufacturers, airlines, airport operators, air navigation services providers, governments, civil society (neighbouring associations and NGOs), architects, planners and research organisations. A variety of partnerships can be formed between these stakeholders to address different issues at different levels. The following are some examples: Local partnerships with communities around airports in order to further reduce environmental impacts and to better distribute air transport's socio-economic benefits (in terms of employment, creation of commercial activities, cultural sponsorships, etc.).


Regional partnerships with other transport modes in order to develop seamless

intermodal solutions, in particular between rail and air. Dedicated rail links can greatly facilitate ground access to airports and also reduce road traffic emissions, while the complementary and coordinated operations of short haul flights and high speed trains leads to the most rational use of existing facilities. a global scale. Open emissions trading schemes among industries have been identified by ICAO as a potential long-term solution for aviation, subject to further assessment.

Global partnerships with other industries in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on

Universal partnerships for development in order to improve transport accessibility and

mobility in the developing world. Air transport is indispensable for the development of tourism and trade, which play a fundamental role in eradicating poverty.

By combining the complementary skills of different stakeholders and eliminating duplication of effort through partnerships, substantial results can be achieved that will enable aviation to grow in a sustainable manner.


The issue of sustainable development is gathering growing social and political importance amongst airports, airlines and governments that are conscious of the need to respond to this major public issue. In modern society we all face the sustainability challenge that requires maintaining a proper balance between economic growth, social progress and environmental responsibility the three pillars of sustainability. The air transport industry is a good example of an industry that provides a valuable and unique contribution to the sustainable development of our global society. It includes efficient and affordable - access to markets thereby improving living standards and fostering economic growth which, in turn, alleviates poverty and results in less environmental degradation and a more sustainable world. Sustainable development policies require that airports conduct their operations and undertake development in ways that " the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs1". This means that, for example, airport capacity cannot be defined solely in technical terms, and must take into account the need for environmental and social acceptance of airport infrastructure and operating decisions. Airports today, therefore, must plan for the future and take account of their sustainable development opportunities and challenges rather than proceeding with unchecked capacity expansion. The 'three pillars of sustainability' apply to airports in different ways, as outlined below. Airports should make sustainable development a high priority and assume a leadership role in its promotion and integration into airport policies, programmes and operations.

E2.3.1 Social Sustainability

Social sustainability:

Recognises direct impacts on daily quality of life: Air transport is a key ingredient in the

quality of life of many people accordingly, air transport policies have a direct effect on people and must take into account the characteristics of different communities and regions.

Definition of sustainable development according to the World Commission on Environment and Development, Brundtland Report, 1987.

Promotes greater access and choice: Air transport should provide people with a reasonable means of access to other places, goods and services which implies the promotion of improved and diversified air services, including additional frequencies and routes, improved services, more diversified air carriers, etc.

E2.3.2 Economic Sustainability

Economic Sustainability:

Recognises the need for an air transport Industry that is as efficient as possible to
support the national economy which implies that airport policies, programmes and practices should be innovative to support the economy and industry's efficiency and competitiveness.

Recognises the need for an air transport Industry that is affordable for the movement of

people and goods which implies that airport policies, programmes and practices should seek innovative financing and implement cost-effective solutions that will ensure that airport facilities and services are affordable.

Recognises the need for an air transport Industry that is priced to reflect the full costs
and benefits of facilities and services provided to users and society.

E2.3.3 Environmental Sustainability

Environmental Sustainability: Recognises the importance of protecting and conserving natural resources which implies that airports must apply sound environmental and conservation practices, and that airport development must make efficient use of land, water, energy and other natural resources, and preserve vital natural habitats, maintain biodiversity and repair damage. Recognises the importance of preventing noise, emissions and pollution before it occurs which implies that airports should work to ensure that the industry's needs are met in a way that avoids or minimises pollutants and waste; and reduces the overall risk to human health, global warming and the environment. Recognises the importance for airport management that is led by example and environmental stewardship which implies that airports should continually refine their environmental management systems so that internal operational practices support sustainable development. Furthermore, airports should consider the potential environmental impacts of new undertakings, and apply risk management and due diligence practices to their real property assets.



The sustainability debate at the local level is the most important one for airports, since preserving good relations with the local resident population in order to maintain their acceptance directly impacts upon airport and airline development. Airports produce positive effects to the surrounding community in terms of increased employment and increased economic activity. If well integrated, airports can contribute to the healthy growth of their surrounding communities. It is very important for the very survival of an airport within an area that the positive aspects be highlighted and made publicly known; e.g. advantages that would otherwise not exist without the presence of the airport.

The partnerships that are of most importance to airports, therefore, are those addressing local level concerns; e.g. partnerships between airports, local communities, NGOs and other interest groups. Local level concerns can include, for example, public concerns regarding the environment (local air emissions and noise), a desire to further reduce environmental impacts, or a better distribution of air transport's socio-economic benefits to surrounding communities (in terms of employment, creation of commercial activities, cultural sponsorships, etc.). In order to improve the local communities acceptance, several airports have launched specific initiatives to address this issue, especially in Europe where in recent years sensitivity to noise and emissions has increased. The following are some examples of typical local-level solutions to locallevel concerns:


Innovative participation procedures: these involve relevant local stakeholders, in order to overcome the trade-off between capacity improvements and noise protection measures. Discussions, mediation procedures and compensation are the main instruments used. Compensation schemes: these involve generating jobs and implementing new fund-raising mechanisms (for example via airport and related air transport revenues) to provide compensation to neighbouring communities around airports. Land use management and planning: the airport operator should be given the means to "neutralise" enough land in order to protect the airport from new residents who would be likely to complain about noise. Improving rail connections to airports: access to airports by road increases local pollution. Airport operators should explore improving their rail connections. Developing community initiatives: airports can provide support to local cultural and sporting events, facilitate sponsorship opportunities, provide scholarships for local children, provide

IATA RECOMMENDATIONS E2.IR1 Business Partnering Programs Shared Airport Capacity and Resources
By combining complemented skills and services and eliminating duplication of effort through partnerships, substantial results can be achieved that will enable aviation to grow in a sustainable manner. Airport operators arid their direct business partners should work together to share airport services in an effort to ensure that airport equipment usage, space and efficiency is maximised. A good example is the use of airport ground transport vehicies These vehicles can often be shared, and initiatives and business relationships should be developed to allow airiines and ground handling agents to do so.




Environmental Issues

E2.IR2 Sustainable Development

Airports must plan for their future using a sustainable development strategy. Airports should not just be expanded to meet year-on-year growth forecasts. Before airports embark on increasing the size and ultimate complexity of their operation they should be looking to rationalise processes and common tasks. Efficiencies in the undertaking of airport processes tasks should be refined and streamlined on an ongoing basis before the last option (to build more infrastructure) is chosen. Airports and their primary business partners should be looking to work in partnership to optimise the airport operation, in order that when true capacity expansion is required it can be provided. It should be noted that this course of action is also good commercial sense for the airport and v.. all of its users.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual


Noise annoyance is a subjective matter and can be considered to have only a local impact on the community surrounding an airport. Aircraft movements such as landings, takeoffs and taxiing, as well as ground handling activities, contribute to the airport's environmental noise impact. Efforts to reduce and mitigate the airport's overall noise impact should be managed and implemented in a balanced way by considering and evaluating all available measures.


The development of suitable ICAO standards and recommended practices (SARPS) is important to the aviation industry as it assures and maintains consistency in manufacturers' and carriers' requirements around the world. International noise standards for the certification of subsonic jet aeroplanes were first introduced by ICAO in 1969 and published as Volume I of Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention. The Chapter 2 standard was complemented in 1976 by the introduction of a more severe Chapter 3 standard. A new Chapter 4 standard was adopted in 2001 for application to new aircraft types as from 2006. Moreover, the ICAO Assembly agreed to give individual States the right to introduce the progressive phase out of Chapter 2 aircraft between 1995 and 2002. As with emissions, ICAO's international certification regime for aircraft noise has brought about significant improvements in the noise performance of aircraft through the progressive tightening of standards. Since the 1970s, noise from aircraft has come down by at least 75% and industry continues to look for further reduction. It is internationally recognised that for noise management purposes, the noise surrounding an airport should be assessed based on "objective, measurable criteria and other relevant factors 1." The results of this assessment should be handled in a manner that takes into account the methodology of the Balanced Approach for noise management at airports. Airports experiencing noise problems may levy noise related airport charges. Such charges should be based upon the aircraft certificated noise performance and should not recover more than the costs for noise mitigation and prevention measures. The application of noise-related charges should follow the specific principles developed by ICAO and contained in the ICAO's Policies on Charges for Airports and Air Navigation Services (Doc 9082), paragraph 30.

E3.2.1 Noise Management

The ICAO Balanced Approach concept provides airports with an agreed methodology to be used to address and manage aircraft noise problems at individual airports in an environmentally responsive and economically responsible way. The Balanced Approach to noise management encompasses four principal elements:

ICAO Assembly Resolution A33-7, Appendix C, Paragraph




Environmental Issues

It consists of an assessment of an individual airport noise situation, identification of potential measures available to reduce the noise impact, a comparative economic and environmental assessment to establish the most cost-effective solution among those measures, full consultation with stakeholders, adequate public notification of intended actions, oversight by national authorities, and a mechanism for dispute resolution involving all interested parties. Specifically, the goal is to address noise problems on an individual airport basis, by choosing the most cost-effective measure or measures under the four elements, using objective criteria. Reduction of Noise at the source is recommended to be regulated in accordance with the standards and recommended practices provided in ICAO Annex 8, Airworthiness of Aircraft, and Annex 16, Environmental Protection Volume 1 Aircraft Noise, to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. The ICAO environmental standards look to incorporate available technology on the aircraft and are stated in terms of aircraft performance that is to say whether an aircraft's measured noise reaches a stated level for a defined aircraft mass1. Reduction of noise at the source is not limited to the development of new standards, or new, quieter aircraft types. It can also be achieved as a result of technological improvement during the life cycle of an aircraft type. Furthermore, by taking into account the pace of fleet modernisation and its integration by the operators at an airport, it will result in improving the overall noise performance of the fleet at that airport. The noise performance trend and fleet mix operating at an airport need therefore to be considered in any noise assessment. Land use planning and management aims to direct incompatible land use such as housing, schools and hospitals away from the airport environs, and to encourage compatible land use such as industrial and commercial development. The problem of noise in the vicinity of airports can only be solved by pursuing all possible means for its alleviation, and the benefits which can be derived from proper land use planning can contribute materially to the solution. Efforts to correct situations detrimental to proper land use around airports cannot be ignored simply because of the time required for such measures to be effective. This is particularly appropriate to applications of land use planning to existing airports, where it is recognized that the ability to make immediate land-use changes is limited, but where it is also important to prevent additional encroachment of incompatible land uses as aircraft source noise decreases and noise contours retreat closer to the airport boundary. There are substantial benefits to be gained from the correct application of land use planning techniques to the development of new airports. The value to be derived from proper land use planning and management should not be underestimated and it is believed that more attention should be paid to this useful tool. Proper zoning of the airport environs is essential if encroachment is to be minimised and environmental 153 benefits maintained. Close coordination is required with local and regional authorities, as zoning does not normally fall under the competence of the airport. Zoning will be subject to the noise index selected by the airport, the noise contours developed and projected, and the number of people affected by noise. Available land use planning and management measures can be categorized as:

Aircraft mass is normally the maximum take-off weight (MTOW) for the aircraft however there are occasions where the maximum landing weight (MLW) could be used

Noise abatement operational procedures, both in-flight and on the ground, authorities should aim to minimise the number of people affected by noise by reducing the level of perceived noise at particular locations around an airport. These procedures can be used to optimize the noise contour (according to the population distribution around the airport) by changing the shape and size of the contours. Safety remains the highest priority in aviation, and besides the use of approved noise abatement operational procedures, airports must ensure that the necessary safety of flight is maintained by considering all factors that might affect a particular operation. These include, but are not limited to, weather, topography, runway conditions, available navigation aids, etc. Where a noise problem has been confirmed, the available noise abatement operational procedures can include, but are not limited to, the use of the following, provided it is consistent with the advice provided in ICAO PANS OPS1:

IATA Airport Development (b) Displaced thresholds. Reference Manual

(c) Noise preferential routes. (d) Noise abatement take-off and approach procedures. (e) Descent profiles such as Continuous Descent Approach (CDA). (f) Minimising the use of reverse thrust on landing.
When selecting procedures it should be noted that environmental benefits may vary due to the potential variation in noise distribution as a result of the type of procedure used. This may result in generating new problems elsewhere, especially if complementary measures are not taken to safeguard environmental gains. It is essential therefore that the stakeholders airports, airlines, air navigation service providers and local communities are in agreement with the noise objectives and resulting procedures. Operating restrictions are defined as any noise-related action that limits or reduces an aircraft's access to an airport. On assessing the identified noise problem at the airport, operating restrictions may be part of a set of measures to be implemented to mitigate the noise problem. However, before implementing or updating operating restrictions, the possible benefits to be gained from other measures should be fully considered. The competent authority should ensure that any operating restrictions be adopted only where such action is supported by a prior assessment of anticipated benefits and of possible adverse impacts. It is recognised that operating restrictions can improve the noise climate in the short term as they lead to the limitation or prohibition of movements of the noisiest aircraft at an airport. However, in order not to offset the benefits gained through operating restrictions, additional preventive measures, such as land-use management measures, should be taken at the same time. This combination of measures is the condition to durably improve the noise climate around an airport. Indeed, these measures will be ineffective if lack of land-use planning and management measures enable urban encroachment to continue as operating restrictions improve the noise climate. As for other measures, operating restrictions should be assessed in a coherent and objective manner with respect to the basic principles of transparency, cost-effectiveness, non-discrimination, and avoidance of competitive distortion. Particular attention should be given to the potential impact on current and future airline fleets. International policies and guidelines must be respected; i.e. ICAO Assembly Resolution A33-7, which contains the unanimous agreement by States not to introduce any operating restrictions aimed at the withdrawal of aircraft that comply with the noise standards in Volume I, Chapter 4 of Annex 16.

(a) Preferential runways.

See ICAO document titled, Procedures for Air Navigation Services, Aircraft Operations, Volume 1, Part V (ICAO Doc 8168)



Environmental Issues

Operating restrictions can be partial, global or progressive and may be classified in two categories:

(a) Restrictions of traffic such as night curfews, or a cap on movements or noise energy. (b) Restrictions on the use of aircraft with a particular noise, technical, or performance
characteristic. Ground Measures, although covered under the principal elements of the Balanced Approach, are generally considered and implemented separately. They can include, but are not limited to, the following measures:

(a) Limitation of engine ground running. (b) Designated areas for engine ground running. (c) Minimised APU operation. (d) Minimised taxi times and routing. (e) Noise barriers.
E3.2.2 Noise Assessment
The noise assessment should identify the level of noise from the airport to which the nearby community is exposed. Whether a noise 'problem' exists depends on whether noise is worsening based on the particular standard that the airport and/or the competent authority in which it resides currently employ. The noise-related standard, or noise objective that is meant to be achieved, should be identified and defined before the assessment is to begin. The baseline is the noise situation currently experienced by the community surrounding the airport and projected into defined points in the future, taking into account existing plans without revising current mitigation measures or providing additional measures. If the baseline noise situation does not meet the noise objective that has been identified, a noise problem may be determined to exist. Under the balanced approach program, in such a case, possible new or revised noise mitigation measures under the elements of the balanced approach sometimes referred to as 'action scenarios' would be considered. To determine whether any such measure under an 'action scenario' might improve the noise situation, the competent authority or airport undertaking the assessment would compare the baseline noise situation with the noise situation that would occur were the new or revised measures adopted. In light of the many factors contributing to the noise situation at a particular airport, methods to measure the noise from single aircraft events or single points in time are not considered to describe the noise situation at an airport. Instead, a noise index or equivalent parameter, comprised of aggregated noise information, often is recommended. Although a calculated noise index 155 for a particular airport is a means of reflecting noise information, by itself it is not considered sufficient to describe the noise situation at the airport. Usually one would want to place the information from the calculated noise index into a larger context, so that the exposure of people to significant levels of noise may be assessed over a given time period (preferably at least one year). One way of determining the

! ICAO Circular 2054, "Recommended Method for Computing Noise Contours Around Airports," other useful documents for reference on contours are ECAC Document 29 and SAE A21 Document AIR1845



Airport Development Reference

Noise Monitoring: Although noise annoyance generally is a subjective matter, it is recognized that the noise surrounding an airport should be assessed based on objective, measurable criteria and other relevant factors. The noise at points on the ground, caused by aircraft flying into and out of a nearby airport, depends on a number of factors. These include the types of aircraft using the airport, the overall number of takeoffs and landings, the time of day the aircraft operations occur, the runways that are used, weather conditions, and airport-specific flight procedures that affect the noise produced. Single, point-in-time noise measurements cannot be expected to represent the overall noise situation at an airport. Instead, noise monitoring and/or noise modelling may be necessary. To the extent noise monitoring is used, it should be undertaken over time to reflect noise at the airport under different conditions. A one-year monitoring period would be expected to provide noise data that is representative of the periodicity of the traffic schedule, operational characteristics such as payload changes, and meteorological data. The noise monitoring equipment should be capable of capturing noise from aircraft alone, or a method should be employed for screening out non-aircraft noise. Placement of noise monitors at different distances can identify noise energy in different areas around the airport. However their placement should not be nearer to the airport than as defined for noise certification in order to ensure at least proper measurement at the three-certification points. Identification and Assessment of Measures: When identifying the noise problem at an airport and analyzing the various measures available to reduce noise through the exploration of the four principal elements of the Balanced Approach (noise reduction at source, land-use planning and management, noise abatement operational procedures and operating restrictions), the goal is to address the noise problem using objective criteria in the most cost-effective manner. On implementing the concept of the balanced approach to noise management, particular attention shall be given to the principal elements and the analytical and methodological tools that might be needed to assess and compare those elements. Steps taken by airports to address local noise issues should be consistent with the principal elements and ensure that the relationship between them in particular in the area of noise and emission trade-offs, the impact of short term versus long term solutions, as well as local versus regional solutions are fully addressed. Environmental benefits (in terms of reduction of numbers of inhabitants severely affected by noise) associated to the measures considered should then be compared to their respective cost of implementation through the use of the cost-effectiveness analysis methodology. The measures will be ranked both by potential environmental benefits and cost of implementation. For each measure this will enable the definition of a unit cost per inhabitant that will not be further affected by noise in the future. This process will provide stakeholders with an assessment of benefits and costs associated with each of the measures being considered. The appropriate measure, or a combination of appropriate measures, should then be chosen from among the measures assessed, in consideration of the objectives set forth at the beginning of the process. Transparent Process: When developing or updating a noise mitigation program there is a need for a transparent process which will include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

(a) Assessment of the noise situation including the evolution of the problem and expected
improvements resulting from current measures and fleet renewal.

(b) Definition of the noise objectives. (c) Identification of available measures.


(e) Cost effectiveness analysis of the available measures.

Environmental Issues

(f) Selection of measures with the goal to achieve maximum environmental benefits most cost

(g) Notification and coordination in the implementation of measures.

(h) Dispute resolution for stakeholders.


IATA RECOMMENDATIONS E3.IR1 Noise Abatement Policy

Although noise annoyance is a subjective matter and noise mitigation programs are well established at many international airports, IATA recommends that airports, when assessing tbait noise climate for either updating existing measures or for the introduction of new measures, take into account the methodology for the Balanced Approach. In addition, IATA re-emphasises the ICAO policy in Resolution A33-7 where States have agreed not to permit the introduction of any operating restrictions aimed at the withdrawal of aircraft that comply with the noise standards in Volume I, Chapter 4 of Annex 16.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual


Airport emissions affect the environment in a variety of ways, most of them on a local scale. Aircraft landings and takeoffs, taxiing, ground handling, maintenance, power generation, office buildings and road traffic at and around the airport all contribute to the airport's environmental footprint. Efforts to reduce the airport's overall impact should, therefore, ideally address all sources in a balanced way.



In the immediate vicinity of airports, aircraft emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO x) unburned hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter (PM, including visible smoke) contribute to local air quality concerns. The effects on local air quality of other minor trace species such as sulphur dioxide (S02), hydroxyl radicals (OH), nitrous and nitric acids, and chemi-ions are negligible and mostly poorly understood. In spite of the relatively low levels, airport emissions are increasingly linked to respiratory health problems among the local population. As with noise, ICAO's international certification regime for aircraft emissions has brought about significant improvements in the emissions performance of aircraft through the progressive tightening of standards. Since the 1960s, emissions of HC, CO and smoke from aircraft have come down by at least 90%, to the extent that further mitigating efforts are no longer seen as a priority by regulators. The combustion conditions required to achieve these reductions as well as noise reductions have, however, led to a simultaneous increase in NOx emissions. International emission standards for the certification of turbo-jet and turbo-fan engines were first introduced by ICAO in June 1981, and published as Volume II of Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention. The ICAO standard-setting process is important to the industry because it maintains consistency in manufacturers' and carriers' requirements around the world. In 1993 ICAO subsequently increased the NO, stringency limit by 20% (effective 1995) and by another 16% in 1999 (effective 2004). ICAO's Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) is currently evaluating the potential for a further increase in NOx stringency for new engines. Additional reductions in aircraft NO x emissions require careful development and deployment of more complex and more expensive combustor designs. Major industry research programmes focus on NOx reductions of 70% for future aircraft within 10 years, and 80% within 25 years. These efforts will help to meet new NOx standards in the future, such as the European Union limits regarding NO x emissions around Community airports, expected to come into force in 2010. Besides the continuous introduction of new engine technologies in their fleets (like, for example, the DAC engine), airlines further minimise ground level emissions through a variety of operational techniques, such as one-engine taxiing, being towed instead of taxiing, minimal APU-use, pilot shutdown of engines during ground delays, and delayed engine start. As a consequence of the steadily growing number of aircraft movements at airports around the world, authorities are, however, increasingly obliged to respond to local public and political pressures to curb airport activities. For this reason, local NO x emissions are quickly emerging as a potential constraint for airport capacity expansion.


Environmental Issues
E4.2.1 Airport Emissions from Other Sources
Contrary to what is often assumed, it is not only aircraft that are responsible for NO x and other gas emissions around airports. Other important emission sources can be found within and outside the airport perimeter, such as airside vehicles, Ground Support Equipment (GSE), landside vehicles (cars, taxis, busses, trains, etc.), and stationary power generation plants. Minor sources include regular maintenance and handling activities. Ongoing monitoring and research suggests that the proportion of aircraft-related NOx emissions is relatively small compared to the total amount generated by other airport activities and road traffic around airports. The contribution from aircraft also decreases rapidly moving away from the runway. Given the multi-source contribution to local air quality around airports, and the fact that aircraft are not the major contributors, it would seem appropriate that a balanced approach is used to improve local air quality around airports, using a range of measures and involving all sources. Sourcespecific contributions to local emission levels must be accurately measured and monitored in order to separate aircraft emissions from other sources and to identify the appropriate basis for mitigation goals and measures in a balanced way.

E4.2.2 Reducing Emissions Around Airports

Airports can themselves contribute to the reduction of NO x and other emissions by taking a variety of measures, such as:

Lighting and heating/cooling of terminals, hangars, parkings, and offices. Ground transportation of staff, passengers and cargo to and from terminals and aircraft. Powering of ground service equipment and aircraft at the gate.

Action in the following areas would help to reduce airport emissions, either through energy savings or the use of cleaner energy sources:

Optimised airport design to reduce taxi times, unnecessary idling of aircraft and waiting at the gate. Cleaner and more efficient GSE operations through enhanced maintenance of equipment, optimising logistics, installation of catalytic converters, introduction of electrically powered vehicles and fuel cell technology, and conversion to fixed electrical ground power at gates. Clean airport access for passengers, visitors and staff by promoting use of public transport, trains and other electric vehicles (buses), and even bicycles; encourage employee car-pooling. Monitoring electricity consumption of baggage handling systems, passenger conveyer belts, escalators, air conditioning systems and lighting. Alternative heating methods such as the use of geothermal energy, incineration of nonrecyclable


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

E4.IR1 Air Quality Taxation Local air quality is determined by a variety of sources a? and around the airport, including aircraft. Efforts to reduce the airports overall iftipact should therefore address all sources in a balanced way, using a range of measures aimed at encouraging improvements in environmental performance in the most cost-effective way. IATA considers inappropriate the levying of taxes or charges aimed at reducing aircraft emissions.


Environmental Issues

The volume of waste in many industrialised countries has considerably increased in recent years, accompanied by an increase in the volume of materials harmful to the environment. In light of these developments, airlines and airports regard better waste management as a major concern. Waste can be classified into 2 categories, namely: Category 1 Toxins Toxins cannot be degraded by the environment naturally and should be treated before release to ensure that no harmful particulates are retained. Treatment of toxins should be in accordance with national regulations. Examples of a category 1 waste are aircraft fuel spills which must be chemically treated before controlled release into the environment, so complying with national and best practice legislation. Category 2 Biodegradable Biodegradable chemicals and produces can be naturally broken down by the environment and do not represent a hazard to the environment upon their controlled release. Again, national regulations on the volume and rate of release should be observed. Major sources of Category 1 airline and airport waste at an airport include but are not limited to the following: Aircraft spent fuels and lubricants.

Fuel farm and apron fuel dispensing equipment. Maintenance hangers and workshops. Apron vehicles. Air-bridge lubricants. Refrigeration plants. Flight kitchens. Airport power plants. Aircraft lubricant dispensing vehicles. Airport development materials.

Major sources of Category 2 airline and airport waste at an airport include but are not limited to the following:

Waste water and sewage. Food waste.

E5.1.1 Prevention of Waste

A detailed understanding of the component parts of the waste cycle is critical to the successful prevention of waste. Having a total understanding of the composite parts mapped to mechanisms for reducing the use of first generation materials and the use of recycling initiatives will be essential. All organisations operating within the airport environment should seek to actively utilise recycled materials


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Staff and organisations should be made aware of how their individual contributions will aid the plan to reduce waste, and should be given the necessary tools to achieve the reduction targets. In the context of staff within the office, paper recycling initiatives should be carried out. Drivers of apron vehicles should plan their routes to ensure that travel distances and dwell periods on the apron with engines or electric motors running will be minimised. Designers should seek in the preliminary stages to produce energy efficient facility designs which are less dependant on fossil fuel sources for seasonal heating and cooling. Buildings should be commissioned with thermal imaging cameras to confirm areas of undesirable heat loss giving rise to excessive consumption of heating fuels or electricity. Airport operators should seek to reduce energy consumption by employing smart systems on devices such as escalators, conveyor motors and lighting systems, where power down cycles should be employed in times of low or non usage. E5.2 WASTE TREATMENT Waste is by definition any material which cannot be further used or recycled. Usually waste can be categorized in the following main divisions:

Disposed waste (incineration). Recycling material (paper, wood, organic waste, polymers, metals). Hazardous waste.

The separation of waste is essential to reduce it. Therefore a whole network of collecting points across the airport with different bins for separation is necessary. A management of these collecting points will be necessary to achieve sustainable results. Cabin waste originating from international flights must be removed and destroyed in conformity with local health codes and airport authority regulations. Usually this involves incineration of the cabin waste in a properly designed facility. Local environmental rules and regulations must be adhered to with respect to emissions and proper disposal of the residue. E5.3 IATA RECOMMENDATIONS E5.IR1 Energy Efficient System Airport operators should employ energy efficient and monitored electrical systetns to ensure that power management strategies are employed. r E5.IR2 Collection of Reusable Waste Airport operators and airlines should train staff and employ initiatives to collect waste materials that can be reused. A target figure of at least 20% of office waste should be collected, sorted, managed and declared suitable for recycling. This waste should then be subsequently reprocessed.


Chapter F Airport Capacity
Section F1: Capacity and Level of Service F1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... F1.2 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F2: Capacity Definitions F2.1 Capacity Measurement Overview.......................................................... Section F3: Airport Systems F3.1 Airport Systems Overview ..................................................................... F3.2 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F4: Planning Schedule F4.1 Planning Schedule Overview.................................................................. F4.2 Schedule Input Requirements ................................................................ F4.3 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F5: Runway Systems F5.1 Runway Systems Overview.................................................................... F5.2 Runway Capacity.................................................................................... F5.3 Capacity Calculations ............................................................................. F5.4 Runway Movement Simulation ............................................................... F5.5 Rules of Thumb ...................................................................................... F5.6 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F6: Taxiway F6.1 Taxiway Overview.................................................................................. F6.2 Taxiway Functionality ............................................................................. F6.3 Simulation .............................................................................................. F6.4 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F7: Apron F7.1 Apron Overview .................................................................................... F7.2 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... 173 173 171 171 172 172 166 166 167 169 170 170 165 165 165 162 164 161 159 160


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Section F8: Aircraft Stand F8.1 Aircraft Stand Overview.......................................................................... F8.2 Aircraft Stand Capacity........................................................................... F8.3 Improved Stand Capacity ...................................................................... F8.4 Gate and Stand Assesments................................................................... F8.5 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F9: Passenger Terminal Facilities F9.1 Passenger Terminal Design: Introduction .............................................. F9.2 Passenger Behaviour ............................................................................. F9.3 Passport Control .................................................................................... F9.4 Hold Room ............................................................................................. F9.5 The Loading Area ................................................................................... F9.6 Baggage Claim Unit................................................................................ F9.7 Level of Service Balance......................................................................... F9.8 Maximum Queuing Time ........................................................................ F9.9 Capacity and Level of Service Assessment............................................. F9.10 Rules of Thumb....................................................................................... F9.11 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F10: The Airport Scheduling Process F10.1 Airport Capacity and Traffic Congestion ................................................ F10.2 Levels of Airport Activity ........................................................................ F10.3 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... Section F11: Computational Fluid Dynamics F11.1 Computational Fluid Dynamics: Overview .............................................. F11.2 When to Use CFD Software Effectively ................................................... F11.3 IATA Recommendations.......................................................................... 216 216 218 213 214 215 178 181 185 186 186 187 188 189 189 193 212 174 174 175 176 177



The problem of traffic peaking at airports has been the subject of increasing concern by airlines and airport operators around the world. This problem is a complex one and has tended to defy easy or widespread solution. Extreme traffic peaking at airports generates congestion and severe economic penalties, or delays to aircraft and passengers. These problems may become even more acute if the timely expansion of airport facilities to accommodate increasing levels of traffic cannot be undertaken, for whatever reason, but especially due to environmentally imposed runway/airport curfews. Curfews do not directly affect hourly capacity computations, but they do affect the total airport capacity. While a principal objective should be to increase airport capacity to meet increasing demand, in the interim the need to maximize the utilization of existing airport and airline resources is becoming more critical than ever before. Effectively managing available airport capacity/demand in such an environment presents a major challenge to airport operators and airlines alike. Every reasonable effort should be made by the airlines, airport operators, and involved government agencies to identify airport capacity limitations and potential congestion problems well before these problems actually occur. Co-ordinated efforts can then be undertaken to avoid such problems to the benefit of all concerned, and will require continuing and open communications and cooperation between all parties involved. Demand/capacity and level-of-service investigations at airports where congestion exists or is anticipated can be arranged in this type of co-operative climate in order to:

(a) Establish the time, degree and cause of congestion. (a)

Seek to agree on a methodology for determining the capacity of the airport, taking into account the levels of service to be provided, and compare this with typical peak demand to identify capacity limitations.


Consider means of removing such limitations in the short term, at a relatively small cost, taking account of the effect of any related delay factor. It is often possible to increase capacities significantly through relatively inexpensive changes in procedures or personnel deployment.


Where larger expansion is not possible, consider other temporary expedients, such as minor construction or lower service levels, pending improvements in capacity in the longer term or a significant infrastructure expenditure.


Where capacity can only be increased in the longer term or at significant cost, produce estimates of those measures required to increase appropriate capacity, and consider whether the capacity should be increased either to a higher level, or to a lower level involving either increased delays or the adjustment of schedules. Although various alternative methods of managing demand to match capacity limitations have been considered in the past, the most satisfactory one is that of schedule co-ordination. Such schedule


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

F1.2 IATA RECOMMENDATIONS F1.IR1 Use of schedule co-ordination to manage capacity demand
In general, schedule co-ordination represents the most effective means of managing capacity demand issues. Schedule adjustments should be made in an international forum where pertinet industry representatives can discuss the changes required at any airport concurrently with their varying repercussive effects at other airports.


Airport Capacity

Capacity measurements vary from one subsystem to another. The term capacity has many definitions, but it generally makes reference to a limit, when reached or exceeded, which affects an airport's operations and level of service. Capacity is often use to describe the variable measurement of a specific airport system or subsystem's throughput, or the system's capability to accommodate a designated level of demand. Comprehensive capacity assessments are based on five fundamental measurements, noted in the following subheadings.

F2.1.1 Dynamic Capacity

Dynamic Capacity refers to the maximum processing or flow rate of persons (i.e. occupants)

F2.1.2 Static Capacity

Static Capacity is used to describe the storage potential of a facility or area, and is usually expressed as the number of occupants that a given area will accommodate at any one moment. It is a function of the total useable space available and the level of service to be provided; i.e., the amount of space each occupant may occupy. Static capacity standards are stated as square meters per occupant (m2/occ.) for each level of service.

F2.1.3 Sustained Capacity

Sustained Capacity is used to describe the overall capacity of a subsystem to accommodate traffic demand, over a sustained period within the space and time standards of a particular level of service. It is thus a measure of the combined dynamic and static capacities of the processors, reservoirs and links. IATA recommends using level of service C to determine the sustainable capacity. The definition for level of service C is shown in section F9.1.2.

F2.1.4 Maximum Capacity

Maximum Capacity refers to the maximum traffic flow which can be achieved for the chosen time unit only, but not sustained for a longer period, in accordance with safety requirements and regardless of delay or level of service.

F2.1.5 Declared Capacity

Declared Capacity refers to site specific limiting capacities, in numeric terms, of individual facilities and resources. These capacities are forwarded to the appropriate bodies to be used in the preparation of flight schedules.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

An airport is more than a large paved area, a set of plans or an architectural concept. An airport should be seen and planned as a dynamic system that handles the flow of pedestrians, vehicles, aircraft, baggage, cargo and mail. The passengers, baggage, greeters & well-wishers, vehicles and aircraft must pass through inter-related systems to be queued, processed and circulated on various links such as taxiways, corridors, escalators, etc.

F3.1.1 Airport Facilities/Systems

Airport facilities should be planned according to the following principles:

Airports should be developed to operate in an efficient manner, taking into account the safety
of the users and clients.

Aircraft flows should be designed to operate with maximum efficiency across the airside sub
systems; i.e. the gate, apron, taxiways, runways, and airspace. proceed through the network of terminal subsystems.

Passenger flows should be designed to minimize inconvenience and confusion as passengers Baggage systems should be designed to provide an efficient, fast, reliable and cost-effective
flow of hold baggage from check-in to aircraft, from aircraft to aircraft, and from aircraft to baggage reclamation. See chapter U for information on Baggage Handling Systems (BHS).

Vehicular flows should be designed to provide an efficient and reliable access/egress to the
terminal facilities.

The passenger terminal building should be designed to provide an efficient and seamless flow
between the landside and airside elements.

Airports should be designed to offer a balanced flow through the interface points of the system.

Each system should be flexible enough to accommodate future requirements in order to

maintain the balance of the overall airport system. An airport can be subdivided into several main, interrelated systems. The airside network has a larger space requirement, while the terminal building represents the transfer portion of the overall system through which passengers move from their ground access modes to the apron, vice versa, or alternately between flights. The ground access/terminal building transition point is at the curb, while the apron/terminal building transition point occurs at the bridge/gate. These transition or interface points between the systems mark the points where the nature of the flow changes. In the deplaning process, for example,


This relationship is shown in the following schematic diagram: I
Arriving Vehicles Occupants

Airport Capacity

Aircraft Deplaning

I _L
Departing Vehicles


Aircraft Deplaning

F3.1.2 Capacity Balance

A primary objective of the planning process is to find the correct, balanced capacity and level of service between facilities, operations, rules & procedures and airline schedules. Balancing capacity is primarily required to avoid displacing a bottleneck to another critical facility. It often means ensuring the terminal, gate and apron systems do not limit the runway throughput. Six major system studies are considered when balancing capacity and determining the reliable throughput of the airport. These being: Terminal Airspace Terminal airspace studies are undertaken to determine when existing capacity and limiting factors require improvement prior to considering investment in new facilities. The maximum reliable terminal airspace throughput for landings and departures is determined separately. Runway/Taxiway A runway capacity study is undertaken to determine the exiting and maximum reliable runway capacity. The runway system is a critical component to the overall system, and runway capacity ultimately determines a given airport's maximum capacity. Every effort should be made to ensure that other airport facilities are not limiting runway throughput and performance. Apron Simulation is often required to ensure that the apron acts as an effective link between the gate and the runway systems and does not become a bottleneck. Gate The number of stands and aircraft parking positions for different types/sizes of aircraft is calculated to meet the current and future year requirements up to the ultimate runway capacity. This, information is essential to develop realistic and cost-effective airport concepts. Passenger Terminal The number of counters/processors, a building's reservoir (holding) potential, levels of service, and requirements by facility or area are calculated for the passenger and greeter/well-wisher flows for the passenger terminal. Enplaning passengers must pass through some or all of a series of subsystems, while deplaning passengers must pass through some or all of a separate series. In some cases, the same subsystems are used by both flows. Additionally transfer passengers must be considered since they utilize some of the subsystems of both passenger flows. In the case of 'hub' airports, the volume of transfer passengers may be very significant. Passenger terminals also process baggage flows. See chapter U for information on baggage handling systems.


Passenger Flow Routes A general aircraft baggage and passenger flow chart should be established. It is usually essential to show originating, terminating, transfer and transit passengers, split by domestic and international passenger flow, in order to properly analyse passenger terminals. The passenger flow routes should be flexible and should: Be as short and straight as possible, unimpeded by obstructions from cross-flows or Be capable of use by all airlines and not restricted to individual aircraft loads. Govern control positions in order to avoid bottlenecks. Be sufficiently flexible to permit the establishment of temporary channels which can be used as by-pass routes by other passengers (e.g., for individual health control processing of a particular arriving aircraft passenger load) or to permit regulation evolution. Permit processing of passengers individually or in groups. Introduce a minimum number of level changes. Allow flow separations for government regulations or security reasons. Provide one flow route for departing domestic passengers and one for international passengers. One flow route for arriving domestic passengers and one for international passengers. Separate departing passengers from those arriving after security check-points.


F3.2 IR1 Airport as a Dynamic System An airport should be seen and planned as a dynamic system that handles flow of pedestrians, vehicles, aircraft and baggage going through inter-related systems.

F3.2 IR2 Airport Facilities Airports in general should be planned in accordance with the principles defined within Clause
F3.1.1. ~

F3.2 IR3 Balancing Capacity Balancing capacity is required to avoid displacing a bottleneck to another critical facility considering runway capacity ultimately determines the maximum capacity of an airport.

F3.2 IR4 Passenger Flow Passenger flow should be planned in accordance with the principles in clause F3.1.2.


Airport Capacity


Determining airport capacity and requirements largely depends on predicting the impact of projected airline schedules on the various airport facilities. Requirements, capacity and level of service are based not only on operating conditions and rules, but also upon the particular demand profiles created by the mix of flights and flight sectors for a typical busy day. Typical peak period or peak hour demand should be used wherever possible for planning purposes, rather than annual figures. The typical peak is the maximum level of traffic, lower than the absolute peak, reached in busy periods of a typical busy day. The second busiest day in the busiest or second busiest week of normal airport traffic is a good example of a typical 'peak day', specifically excluding peaks associated with, for example, religious or other holiday festivals. De-seasonalized time series can thus be used to segregate monthly passenger and aircraft movement data into their major cycle, trend, seasonal and random constituents. It is useful to identify repeatable peak passenger and aircraft days of the week, distinguishing hard trends from random fluctuations. Historical peak period statistics such as the 30th busiest hour in the year, the 90th percentile of



Detailed planning, concept validation, level of service assessment, facility optimization and design studies should be conducted with site-specific planning schedules as a key input. Baseline planning schedule(s) by cargo and passenger traffic sector should be developed and adapted from actual schedules to reflect the existing and future fleet mix and route structure. Planning schedules should reflect the basic traffic characteristics of the users of the systems being studied. A passenger flow study would typically require more information than a runway capacity study, including: Airline flown. Aircraft type. Aircraft ID. Departure and arrival time. Origin/Destination passenger volumes, transfer passenger volumes, transit volumes. Traffic sector (International, Domestic, Schengen, etc.). Gate assignment (gating).


IATA RECOMMENDATIONS F4.IR1 Site-specific Planning Schedules

Detailed planning, concept validation, level of service assessment, facility optimization and design should be based on site-specific planning schedules reflecting the basic traffic characteristics as a key input.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

F5.3.3 ATC Procedures and Equipment
The performance of radar equipment and ATC limitations sometimes impose a separation greater than the minima shown in Table F5.1. These limitations should be dealt with prior to considering investing in new runways.

F5.3.4 The Mix of Aircraft

As shown in Table F5.1, separation between aircraft depends on the aircraft category. Therefore, the mix of successive aircraft operating will have an impact on the overall separation and the runway capacity. For example, an airport operating with a majority of medium size aircraft will have an average arrival separation of 3NM. The same airport serving a mix of small, medium and heavy aircraft will have a separation of 3 to 6NM, depending on the sequence of arrivals, and will have a significantly reduced runway capacity.

F5.3.5 The Mix of Arrivals and Departures

An airport is part of a network and has a mix of arrivals and departures during the day. Aircraft that land at an airport will eventually take-off. The distribution of arrivals and departures has an impact on runway capacity. ATC not only needs to consider separation between successive arrivals and successive departures, but also gaps between arrivals preceded or followed by departures.

F5.3.6 The Mixed or Segregated Mode

Airports with two or more runways sometimes dedicate runways to departures and runways to arrivals. However, the arrival and departure peaks rarely coincide, and the separation between successive arrivals and successive departures are different. This results in gaps on one runway when another is at capacity; in these situations mixing arrivals and departures as if operating with a single runway can increase capacity.

F5.3.7 Runway Configuration

Parallel runways with adequate spacing (1035 m or more) can process independent arrivals. Interaction between runways is a constraint that limits capacity when the distance between runways does not meet the minimum distance requirement or runways intersect. Independent parallel runways are recommended for that reason. The layout of an airport and the runway configuration is another factor having an impact on aircraft

F5.3.8 Precision Runway Monitor (FAA)

The PRM is a surveillance radar that updates essential aircraft target information 4 to 5 times more often than conventional radar equipment. PRM also predicts the aircraft track and provides alarms when an aircraft is within ten seconds of penetrating the non-transgression zone. Use of the PRM allows air traffic controllers to ensure safe separation of aircraft on the parallel approach courses and maintain an efficient rate of aircraft landings during adverse weather conditions. In December 2001, the FAA determined that the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) may be operated in the resolution advisory (RA) mode when conducting a PRM approach. The FAA has commissioned PRMs at Minneapolis and St. Louis, and at Philadelphia International Airport in September 2001. PRM's were scheduled for commissioning at San Francisco and John F. Kennedy in late-2002, Cleveland in late-2004, and Atlanta in 2006, coincident with the completion of the fifth parallel runway. The FAA has also approved procedures using a PRM to allow simultaneous instrument approaches in adverse weather.


F5.3.9 Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approaches (FAA)

Airport Capacity

The SOIA procedure would allow simultaneous approaches to parallel runways spaced from 230 m (750 feet) to 910 m (3,000 feet) apart. It requires the use of a PRM, a straight-in ILS approach to one runway, and an offset Localizer Directional Aid (LDA) with glide slope approach to the other runway. The SOIA concept involves the pairing of aircraft along adjacent approach courses separated by at least 910 m (3,000 feet) with a designated missed approach point approximately 3.5 nautical miles from the runway threshold. The pilot on the offset approach would fly a straight-but-angled approach until descending below the cloud cover. At that point, the pilot would have a period of time to visually acquire the traffic on the other approach before continuing to the runway. If the pilot does not see the other aircraft before reaching the missed approach point, the approach would be discontinued. San Francisco International Airport (SFO) and Lambert-St. Louis International Airport (STL) are the first candidate airports for SOIA. At SFO the arrival rate is 60 aircraft per hour in clear weather using both parallel runways, which are 230 m (750 feet) apart. In times of heavy fog and low-ceiling conditions, aircraft are placed in-trail to one runway, reducing the airport arrival rate by half. The SOIA procedure will enable SFO to maintain an arrival rate of up to 40 aircraft per hour with a cloud base as low as 490 m (1,600 feet) and four miles of visibility.



Simulations are strongly recommended to determine the runway capacity before and after proposed improvements, procedures and rules are implemented. Delays (including where and why they occur) are a primary indicator of level of service and that capacity is being reached or exceeded. Simulation models, such as Total AirportSim developed by IATA, are effective to predict the impact of projected airline schedules on the various airport facilities. They can be used to identify the nature, location and degree of congestion and to measure delays. Care must be exercised in the provision of accurate data and it must be recognized that operation of such software should be entrusted to highly skilled and experienced operators who fully understand airport operations. The sustainable runway throughput at airports not currently at capacity is calculated by increasing the daily demand until the runway system is saturated, and by assuming the same hourly distribution of traffic and fleet mix. Unlimited gate supply should be assumed. Figure F5.1 shows an example where departure delays are greater than the arrival delays. Departure is therefore the limiting factor.

3 0

Landings Departures

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013


ATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure F5.2 shows the excessive queuing associated with peak departure demand exceeding departure capacity. The number of aircraft queuing increases rapidly when runway capacity is reached and typically takes a long time to dissipate.

Figure F5.2 Example of Departure Bottleneck (Location and Degree of Congestion)


IATA proposes the following rules of thumb based on the ICAO departure and landing wake vortex separation and assuming a runway occupancy time of 50 seconds or less.

Table F5.2 Typical Maximum Hourly Runway Throughput Segregated Mode

% Heavy 25 50 75 % Medium 75 50 25 Departures 48 40 34 Landings(1> 39 37 36 Landings<2> +5 +3 +2

(1) based on the wake vortex separation shown in table 1 (2) additional capacity assuming a 2.5 NM separation for medium size


ER1 Runway Simulation

The simulation of runway movements is recommended as defined within the ADRiV C' use F5.4 ^SEilC^il



Airport Capacity

Taxiways provide the necessary link between various parts of the airport, including to the gate/apron and the runway system. As such, the individual elements constitute a network serving access and aircraft movement functions. Figure F6.1 shows schematically the basic functions served. The taxiways should be designed (dimensions) according ICAO Annex 14 requirements for the future critical aircraft to operate at the airport.

Figure F6.1 Functional Design of a Taxiway System Access to Cargo Main Parallel Taxiways

and G.A., etc. Area \ \


Passenger Terminal Area

R.E.T.s (Heavy, Medium and Light) for Aircraft Sequencing at Departure

Multiple Queuing


The taxiway system should be designed so as to optimise runway throughput. Implementation of taxiway functionality such as Rapid Exit Taxiways (RETs), parallel taxiways and departing multiple queuing taxiways improve the system capacity. RET vacate landing aircraft from the runway. They are designed to minimize runway occupancy time and therefore create the necessary conditions to optimise runway utilization, since a succeeding aircraft can't touch down until the preceding aircraft clears the runway. They can provide the necessary conditions for High Intensity Runway Operation (HIRO), minimizing the occurrence of 'go-around' and enabling departures in-between continuous in-coming traffic in mixed mode operation. The number and location of RETs depends on the aircraft fleet mix, the distance from the threshold to touchdown, the aircraft speed at touchdown, the initial exit speed and the rate of deceleration. De-icing pads are an integral part of taxiway systems at many airports. It is important to design and locate de-icing pads to accommodate the peak demand and to match the maximum runway throughput in bad weather conditions.


ATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Runways and taxiways are inter-related systems. The runway simulations described in section F5 should include the taxiways to get from/to the gate or aircraft stand in the model. Figure F6.2 shows an example of 'where' departing taxiing aircraft are delayed from an aircraft flow simulation. Taxiing distance and delays should be carefully studied considering their significant impact on operation costs and performance.

Figure F6.2 Example of Identification of Potential Bottlenecks from Simulation


F6.IR.1 Taxiway System The taxiway system should be designed to maximize runway throughput, minimize taxiing distance and delays and improve aircraft flow and operations.

F6.IR.2 Runway Simulations Runway simulations should include the taxiway network.




Airport Capacity

The apron provides direct access to aircraft stands for purposes of loading and unloading passengers, mail or cargo, or for fuelling, parking or maintenance. An apron's taxilanes serve two main functions:

(I) The aircraft stand taxilane, intended to provide access to the aircraft stand only. (II) Apron taxiways, intended to provide a through route across the apron.
Apron and gate design should reflect the various characteristics and volume of traffic to be handled. Significant ground delays can be experienced on aprons as they are an aircraft flow merging point and provide an entry/exit point to aircraft for pushing back and powering up engines. The traffic volume and characteristics can also change over time. Single aircraft stand taxilanes giving access to more than 6-8 high-turnover cul-de-sac gates should be avoided. Apron taxiways providing through taxi routes should be included in the ground aircraft flow simulation for runway capacity studies in order to avoid displacing a bottleneck to the next link. An apron aircraft flow simulation, including realistic gate assignment and push-back procedures, is


F7.IR.1 Apron and Gate Design Apron and gate design should reflect the various charactenstics and volume of traffic to be handled.




A single taxilane giving access to more than & to 8 cul-de-sac gatvs should be avoided F7.IR.3 Aircraft Fiow Simulation An aircraft flow simulation should be considered to verify the functionality of apron layouts.

F7.IR.4 Apron Location The apron should be located in such a way as to minimize or eliminate the need for crossing runways.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

An aircraft stand is a designated area intended for parking an aircraft where passengers can be loaded/unloaded with a bridge or by bus. The aircraft stand system is effectively an interface between passenger and aircraft flow; i.e. where passenger/baggage flow become aircraft flow and vice versa. This system should be carefully planned so as not to become a limiting factor of runways. Gate supply should be calculated to match the runway throughput, and ultimately the runway saturation schedule plus the overnight parking requirements. Stands should not be used as a buffer for late arrivals/ departures due to ATC delays. At some airports, aircraft subject to an ATC departure delay will actually vacate their stands at their scheduled departure time and absorb the delay on specially designed remote stands near the runway. Gate (contact) stands have a significant impact on the quality of service to users because they provide for more rapid and comfortable handling of passengers, avoid the need for buses, and enable better turnaround times. Contact gates are often essential to improve the quality of service and reliable MCTs, in support of airlines commercial objectives especially at hub airports. Contact gates are required at airports with frequent adverse weather conditions, and designers should keep in mind that an airport is part of airline network and therefore linked to operational commercial objectives.



The capacity of the runway, taxiway and apron systems is dynamic, as it relates to the ability to process flows. The capacity of the aircraft stand system is related to the ability to accumulate aircraft, which is a static capacity. The number of stands and aircraft parking positions by different types/ sizes of aircraft is calculated to meet the current and future year requirements. This information is essential to develop realistic and cost-effective airport concepts and to ensure capacity balance. Some schedules, particularly long-haul flights, require that aircraft remain for several hours. Homebased aircraft are likely to remain at their stands overnight, however the majority of flights seek a rapid turnaround. There could be a shortage of gates either (i) because of demand exceeds capacity (ii) because there is a higher than expected large aircraft demand or (iii) because aircraft remain in occupancy for an extended number of hours or because of the current operations and rules applied. This highlights that the key aspects of stand availability are:

The number of stands provided for different types/sizes of aircraft.

The availability of these stands as influenced by occupancy times (possibly ranging from less
than an hour to in excess of 6 hours).

Availability of multiple aircraft ramp stands. Which terminal(s) are served by the stands.



Airport Capacity
Table F8-1: Typical Aircraft Processing and Servicing Time (In minutes) at Gate
Aircraft Type B C D E 1 DOOR 2 DOORS F 1 DOOR O 2 DOORS n 470 470 55 30 30 20 80 80 60 60 165 130 350 350 40 25 25 15 45 45 45 45 110 85 Pax Load 40 130 250 Load Passenger 10 20 30 Unload Passengers 5 10 15 Aircraft Servicing 10 15 30 Through Flight 25 45 Turnaround Flight 25 45 75

(*) IATA Recommends two doors wherever possible for Code F aircraft. (**) A third door reduces the turnaround time by only 10-15 minutes to a total of approximately 115 minutes. The boarding and deboarding processing times are no longer in the critical path. The catering process is on the critical path because of the high number of trolleys to be loaded and off-loaded.



Possibilities for flexible use of aircraft operational stands (e.g. two small aircraft on one large aircraft stand) should be kept in mind when assessing the maximum capability of a layout. The parking configuration adopted, for example nose-in versus self manoeuvring, may not impact on stand capacity but could have a significant impact upon the apron capacity. Availability of facilities such as hydrant refuelling, loading bridges etc., which help to reduce congestion, should also be considered. Gate (contact) stands have a significant impact on the quality of service to users because they provide for more rapid and comfortable handling of passengers, avoiding the need for buses and enabling better turnaround times.



IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

While there is a physical limit on the number of aircraft which can be simultaneously accommodated at the airport, operational factors such as gate assignment policy, exclusive/preferential use, sectorization, and operational parameters impact the practical capacity of the system. The inputs required to conduct a gate assignment study include:

Busy day flight schedule. An apron plan indicating all contact gates and remote stands.

List of all contact gates and stands by range of aircraft accommodated and sectors accepted/

Policy regarding exclusive and/or preferential use.

Operational parameters, such as the buffer time between flights using the same gate (either

on a gate by gate basis or globally), minimum tow-on and tow-off time by aircraft, and minimum ground time before an aircraft is considered a candidate for towing. Gate assignment study results (i.e. the number of gates by class of aircraft and by sector) and gate

Figure F8-2: Example of Gate Assignment Chart


I H^ute| StatttUct| Mtug| Hsporl GanChat|

________ 3i 10H 11H

_________ '_, Gate F1 Concourse A GateF2 Concourse A GateF3 Concourse A GateF4 Concourse A Gate F5 Concourse A GateF6 Concourse A Gate 12 Concourse C Gate 13 Concourse C Gate 14 Concourse C Gate 15 Concourse C Gate 16 Concourse C Gate 17 Concourse C Gate 24 Concourse E -TkmOlfsatjO _

1GH 17H

G_FtLS 223 A33(W('2D='13.3 &(W



F8.IR.1 Gate Supply Gate supply should be calculated to match the runway throughput and ultimately the runway saturation schedule plus the overnight parking requirements. f

Contact Gates F8.IR.2 Gafes (contact) should be considered to improve the quality of service to users and to provide for more rapid and comfortable handling of passengers, avoiding the need for buses.

F8.IR.3 Gate/stand Planning When planning gate/stands, they should be designed with full consideration of the instructions stipulated in Clause F8.2. r F8.IR.4 Gate Percentage A high percentage of contact gates is required when an airline's strategy requiresWtumaround times, good quality of service, short and reliable MCTs and dealing with frequent adverse weather conditions. Designers should keep in mind an airport is part of airline network and therefore is

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



Terminal design and level of service should reflect the various characteristics and volume of passengers and baggage to be handled. Managing terminal capacity and designing with level of service in mind are key requirements in the development of competitive airports, and have longterm financial and operational implications for passenger facilities. Once a terminal is built, its size and features tend to be effectively permanent unless major additional investments are made with commensurate financial commitments. Planners and decision-makers must keep in mind that passengers visit an airport for one primary reason: to catch a flight. Passengers' expectations and needs should be at the very heart of the planning process. The mark of a successful airport is its natural and unobstructed passenger flow between objectives, easy navigation through the terminal, simplicity and cost-effectiveness. Unfortunately, terminals are not always designed to take passenger attitudes and user needs into consideration. This is partly related to how decisions are made. Too often, a maquette or elaborate 3-D drawings presenting the basic aesthetic approach or 'look' are presented to the selection committee, and a given design will be chosen before airport specialists and operations consultants can properly appraise it for effectiveness and efficiency. Changes to the chosen concept then tend to be resisted and compromises only reluctantly considered. The result is often new terminals without the required capacity and with an expensive juxtaposition of subsystems that leave users with a disappointing passenger experience.

F9.1.1 Passenger Characteristics

Different flight segments have different characteristics and needs. The amount of individual passenger space required for comfort and adequate level of service is examined from the point of view of changing passenger behaviours and perceptions. The space standards developed in the 1970's, for example, are currently being expanded to reflect newer segmented passenger behaviour and characteristics. Changes like these affect design attributes such as how much more queuing space might be required for passengers who use luggage carts and tend to carry a certain amount of luggage (this varies depending on their passenger segment). Demand always exceeds capacity at some point, and providing space for the formation of a queue is part of terminal design. A fundamental question is: How much space is required to offer an economical level of comfort? The answer should go beyond the study of operations research specialists and should be done with passengers behaviour and expectations in mind. Passengers are one source of uncertainty and thus of fluctuation not only in demand but in capacity as well. Queuing phenomena at check-in counters is a good example of this. The arrival pattern may change from flight to flight and from day to day. The time to process passengers also fluctuates and is not entirely under the control of the agent. Different passenger segments have different characteristics and needs. Space standards for a


Airport Capacity
Figure F9.3: Pedestrian Dimensions

Source: Davis and Braaksma (1987)

F9.1.2 Level of Service

Level of service can be considered as a range of values, or as assessments of the ability of supply to meet demand. To allow comparison among the various systems and subsystems of the airport and to reflect the dynamic nature of demand upon a facility, a range of level of service measures from A through to F may be used, similar to the standard employed in highway traffic engineering. The evaluation criteria and actual standards for each subsystem are developed separately.

Table F9.1 Level of Service Framework

A An Excellent level of service. Conditions of free flow, no delays and excellent levels of comfort. B High level of service. Conditions of stable flow, very few delays and high levels of comfort. C Good level of service. Conditions of stable flow, acceptable delays and good levels of comfort. D Adequate level of service. Conditions of unstable flow, acceptable delays for short periods of time and adequate levels of comfort. E Inadequate level of service. Conditions of unstable flow, unacceptable delays and inadequate levels of comfort. F Unacceptable level of service. Conditions of cross-flows, system breakdowns and unacceptable delays; an unacceptable level of comfort.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Since the traffic demand at each airport is dynamic and varies according to such factors as schedule, flight sector, and aircraft size and load factor, the level of service measures must reflect these dynamic aspects. In this sense, the nature of the traffic demand plays an important role in affecting the level of service experienced by a passenger. On the supply side there are various systems and services which comprise the airport complex. Level of service space can be considered as a range of values, or as an assessment of the ability of supply to meet demand, and combines both qualitative and quantitative measures of relative comfort and convenience. The framework of level of service measures permits comparison between often unrelated subsystems within the airport complex. This aids management in the evaluation of airport components through the use of common terminology. It is much easier to describe level of service in this manner and to achieve capacity balance. Level of Service C is recommended as the minimum design objective, as it denotes good service at a reasonable cost. Level of service A is seen as having no upper bound. The total number of passengers in an area provided for queuing tends to be fairly constant for any given flight. The space per occupant when the queue overflows is seen by IATA as the frontier between level of service C and D. Passengers manage to avoid experiencing a level of service lower than C unless forced to. Passengers queuing in corridors that are sharing space with passengers walking through can however experience a lower level of service.

F9.1.3 Check-In Queue Area Table F9.2: Level of Service Space Standards (sq. Meter/Occupant) at Check-In for Single Queue
A 1. Few carts and few passengers with check-in luggage (row width 1.2m). 2. Few carts and 1 or 2 pieces of luggage per passenger (row width 1.2m). 3. High percentage of passengers using carts (row width 1.4m). 4. 'Heavy' flights with 2 or more items per passenger and a high percentage of passengers using carts (row width 1.4m). 1,7 1.8 2,3 2,6 B 1,4 1,5 1,9 2,3 C 1,2 1.3 1,7 2,0 D 1,1 1,2 1,6 1,9 E 0,9 1,1 1,5 1,8


Many factors, such as passenger behaviour patterns, cultural backgrounds, psychological requirements and passenger comfort can affect the space required in relation to the occupancy Airport Capacity time. Passengers don't necessarily use all the space available to them at certain key points in the terminal process, and they manage to secure a good level of space comfort even under congested conditions, unless they are prevented to do so by a physical constraint or the threat to lose their priority in the queue. Figure F9.1 and F9.2 illustrate that point for 8 economy-class counters served by a single


Figure F9.1: A Queuing System not at Capacity

CQ 3


50 T3T cos eoJ

53 ~



In their attempt to maintain a comfort zone, passengers do not use all the space available for queuing. The number of passengers divided by the total area for queuing may represent a level of service better than C but in reality passengers occupy the space for a good level of comfort and experience a space level of service C.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure F9.2 (below) shows the situation when the system is congested. The passengers waiting in the queuing space area do not squeeze in, thereby lowering their level of service, to make space for the passengers waiting behind in the corridor. Instead, the queue tends to overflow. This behaviour is consistent with research showing that humans tend to maintain a buffer zone to prevent the chance of intimate contact.

Figure F9.2: Queuing System Exceeding Capacity

cos tos ~ccg 63"

This observation regarding unconstrained environments has a practical application on determining performance, capacity, level of service and requirements.

Figure. F9.4: Queuing at Check-In Based on Physical Characteristics of Passengers and a Maximum Queuing Time of 30 Minutes
Case 2

*< *fr som;

an^aiili fornam,

MJ^'aiD D * run ^amamjO gqm am^amgrj^ y

Case 3


The peak demand load and the level of service C standards are translated into recommended planning dimensions. As shown in figure F9.5, IATA recommends a 24 to 26 meter separation between adjacent islands (32 34 meters per module) to provide 2.5 meters for processing and circulating in front of the desk, 7.5 to 8.5 meters for queuing and 4 meters for circulation and passenger queue overflow. Twenty-four (24) meters provides enough space for a maximum queuing time of roughly 30 to 35 minutes for the case 1,2 and 3 of table F9.2. Twenty-six (26) meters provides the flexibility to process heavy flights, or is required when the maximum queuing time exceeds 30 35 minutes on a regular basis. More than 26 meters may be considered after a comprehensive demand/capacity study is conducted to reflect site-specific particularities. Twenty-two (22) meters is sufficient at airports with maximum queuing time of 30 minutes or less and for case 1 and 2 (see Table F9.2).

Figure F9.5: Recommended Dimensions for Check-In Island with Single


..p .p^ssi .g.^

.r .D





Corridor and Queue overflow



F9.2.1 Frontal Type Check-in Counters Figure F9.6: Recommended Dimensions for Frontal Type CheckIn Maximum Queuing Time of 30-35 Minutes
2.5 m 8.5

E o in

Processing[and ..Circulating Queuing |


Building facade 4.0 m

F9.2.2 Wait/Circulation Area

Walking distances for passengers should be as short as possible. In determining the distance between major functions in the terminal, the planner must consider whether baggage is to be carried or not, the availability of baggage trolleys, changes in levels, and the accessibility of the aircraft without resorting to ground transport. The suggested maximum walking distance between the major functions (i.e., car park to check-in/ baggage claim; check-in/baggage claim to gate lounge) is 300m. Greater distances can be accepted provided a form of mechanical assistance is made readily available to passengers. Such systems are costly and therefore a full cost/benefit analysis is necessary before installation. In all terminals where progressive expansion must incorporate a people-mover system, due provision for the necessary right-of-way and other related factors must be included in the original planning. If passengers are required to change levels when walking, escalators or moving ramps should be provided, at least in the upward direction. Passengers should not be required to move baggage other than hand baggage between levels. Experience has shown that the use of elevators to enable passengers, other than disabled passengers, to change levels is not satisfactory from a capacity point of view. Pedestrians adapt their walking speed to the environment based on the following variables:

The occupancy or flow in the corridor. The proportion of passengers with baggage and carts.

Table F9.3: Space and Speed for Level of Service C

Space (mVpax) Airside no carts Public area after check-in few carts Departure before check-in carts 1,5 1,8 2,3 Speed (m/s) 1,3 1,1 0,9


Airport Capacity

Passport control systems are similar to check-in systems. The generic comments for the check-in system apply to passport control inbound and outbound traffic.

Figure F9.7: Passport Control Desks and Queuing Space Requirements

Multiple Queues (Lines)

Single (Bank) Queue


0 0



L = Max#Q x LOS Standard / W Where: MAX#Q is the maximum number of pax queuing LOS Standard: see table F9.4 (see sections F9.9.2 and F9.9.5 for details)

L=MAX*Qx0.9/#PCD Where: MAX#Q is the maximum number of pax queuing #PCD is the number of passport control desks staffed

The main criterion for determining the queue length for multiple queue systems is the average distance between two individuals waiting in the same line (inter-person spacing). The comfort distance varies from person to person and from culture to culture. IATA recommends using 0.8 to 0.9 metres if sitespecific standards are not available. Less than 0.8 metres is possible, but could conflict with other passengers or carry-on luggage.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Space requirements for a single queue at passport control is based on the space standards shown in table F9.4.

Table F9.4: Level of Service (A to E) for a Single (Bank) Queue at Passport Control
A Passport Control (sqm) 1.4 B 1.2 C 1.0 D 0.8 E 0.6


A distinction should be made between space requirements for standing or seated passengers. 1.7 m2 is assumed for seated passengers and 1.2 m 2 for standing passengers. The occupancy rate is used to measure the level of service.

Table F9.5: Level of Service A to E in Hold Rooms

A Maximum Occupancy rate Note: 100% = maximum capacity 40% B 50% C 65% D 80% E 95%



The flow of passengers between the terminal building and the aircraft should be smooth and uncomplicated, with clearly defined flow routes which are safe and operationally acceptable. Passengers should be able to enter and leave the aircraft without steep changes in floor level and under protection from weather, blast and noise. Use of loading bridges is favoured by the airlines where they can be justified by traffic requirements, commercial strategies and weather conditions. Bridges foster smooth, undirected, embarkation and disembarkation of passengers. They have proven particularly advantageous with high capacity aircraft. At airports where loading bridges are not installed, and the aircraft is not parked in front of the exit from the terminal building, transporters (buses, mobile lounges) should be used to convey passengers directly between the aircraft and the terminal. Having groups of passengers conducted across the apron is not encouraged by the airlines, as passengers are exposed to the effects of weather and aircraft blast or noise. However in the case of small commuter aircraft which are unable to use loading bridges, or where the latter are unavailable, to minimise danger it is essential that passenger movement on the apron be constrained to clearly marked walkways with a minimum number of access points onto the apron, and that such movement



Airport Capacity

The space around a baggage claim unit serves distinct functions. Figure F9.8 shows a typical layout. The baggage claim unit frontage provides the required positions or channels for the passenger to wait and collect their luggage. The retrieval area is effectively the space required for the motion of retrieving a suitcase. The peripheral area is used: to wait for an opening in the retrieval area; for a passenger waiting for a spouse or friend to collect their luggage; to park the cart; and to circulate in/ out of the retrieval area.

The retrieval and peripheral area is a roughly 3.5 meter wide band around the unit. This area is used to measure the level of service for the passengers waiting around the carrousel and the static capacity (accumulation) of the unit. The capacity is determined by dividing the total area by the level of service C space standard shown in table F9.6. An 11 to 13 meter separation is recommended to process passengers, to circulate, and to store carts.

Table F9.6: Level of Service (A to E) for Baggage Claim Unit

A Space standard (nf/occupant) 2.6 B 2.0 C 1.7 D 1.3 E 1.0

Note 1: Sustainable capacity is at level of service C. Note 2: Assuming 40% use of trolleys.



IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Passenger departure and arrival facilities are often on different levels of the same building. The building grid/structural design may become a constraint when selecting the module's dimensions to achieve level of service C at check-in counters and baggage claim. It is recommended to select the module's width or grid to achieve level of service balance with the objective of providing level of service C at the critical sub-systems. The impact of the building grid on a module's width is shown in figure F9.9.

Figure F9.9: Building Grid and Module Dimensions


1 I"




h -

) m

Baggage Claim

11.0 m i- 17.0 m

12.0 m - 18.0 m




The occupancy patterns in various subsystems change rapidly and thereby affect the space available to occupants. In addition, the occupancy time for a subsystem can vary, resulting in a change in comfort. For this reason, time is a significant factor in determining the quality of service and must be considered as a primary variable in level of service measures. It is very difficult to establish a precise, quantified relationship between available space, time, and level of service. This may explain why time is often neglected as a factor of level of service and standards are sometimes set purely to space requirements. ICAO has set a goal of 45 minutes for the clearance of arriving passengers, from disembarkation to exit from the airport, for all passengers requiring not more than normal inspection at international airports (ICAO Annex 9, ninth edition, recommended practice 6.28). Although this includes time taken by government inspection services, it provides an indication of an acceptable time framework. Table F9.7 shows maximum queuing time guidelines. It is however recommended to use site- and airline-specific standards when available. Short to acceptable Check-in Economy Check-in Business Class Passport Control Inbound Passport Control Outbound Baggage Claim Security 0 12 03 07 05 0 12 03 Acceptable to long 12 30 35 7 15 5 10 12 18 37



Capacity is a measure of throughput or system capability. Since a terminal system is capable of operating at varying degrees of congestion and delay, capacity must be related to the level of service being provided. Capacity and level of service calculation is a key step in the following airport development processes:

1. Airline strategy, traffic assignments and forecasts. 2. Planning peak period demand and planning schedules. 3. Facility requirements and level of service assessments. 4. Balance capacity and evaluate concepts. 5. Design, land use plan, masterplan. 6. Programming. 7. Construction.

Unlike the runway, where the laws of physics are used to calculate the capacity, the capacity of a passenger terminal relates directly to the extent of congestion that will be tolerated. The sustainable capacity should be based on the level of service C standard for each subsystem for the busiest 10minute period of a typical busy day. Pedestrian flows in the terminal building are comprised of both passengers in the enplaning or deplaning process, and greeters/well-wishers. Enplaning passengers must pass through some or all of a series of subsystems, while deplaning passengers must pass through some or all of a separate series. In some cases the same subsystems are used by both flows. Additionally, transfer passengers must be considered since they utilize some of the subsystems of both passenger flows. In the case of hub airports, the volume of transfer passengers may be very significant. It should be noted that these surges tend to be sector-specific for both enplaning and deplaning activity. Studies have shown that sector-specific behaviour patterns are generally stable and can therefore be predicted. In this way, it is possible to calculate the maximum load before causing saturation.

F9.9.1 Terminal Sub-systems and Demand/Capacity Characteristics

Terminal design should reflect the various characteristics and volume of passengers to be handled. Managing terminal capacity and designing with level of service in mind are key issues in optimising terminal capacity with long-term financial and operational implications. A passenger terminal capacity and level of service study normally includes the following systems: Departure facilities, including check-in, passport control, security, departure/bus lounges and hold rooms.

Arrival facilities, including immigration, customs, baggage reclaim, and a wellwishers/greeters hall. Transfer facilities which typically include security. People movers and bus operations. Baggage handling in the areas, which directly relates to passenger processing.

Performance and level of service are based on operating conditions and rules, but also upon user characteristics. Passengers and other users are a source of uncertainty and thus of fluctuation not only in demand but in capacity as well. Demand/capacity characteristics form the basis of the analytical work needed to get a realistic evaluation of the requirements, performance and level of service. The basic characteristics by segment include:

Passenger arrival patterns. Processing class type. Processing rates. Passenger/bag ratio. Time of delivery of the first baggage. Transfer passenger ratios. Passenger path by class or type of passenger. Gate assignment. Personnel deployment schedule.

Individual subsystems can either be designed against a given level of service, or evaluated to

Airport Capacity
F9.9.2 Simulation
When a flight arrives or departs at the terminal building, there is a surge of occupants into the subsystems. As long as the arrival rate of passengers does not exceed the dynamic capacity of the various components, there will be minimal delay and queuing. However congestion will occur when demand is systematically greater than the sustainable capacity, and only simulation can properly reflect the complex dynamic overflow/saturation interaction. Airport capacity and level of service problems are usually simple to comprehend but may be difficult to solve because of the inter-related systems and flows considered. Many tools are available, including lATA's Total AirportSim aircraft and passenger flow model, to predict the impact of an airline schedule on the various airport facilities. The model was developed to reflect lATA's worldwide experience and expertise. Simulation is used to analyse passenger flow throughout the selected planning period to determine the performance, bottlenecks, level of service, Mean Connection Time (MCTs), total time in the terminal, etc. Flights are assigned to facilities and the passenger demand pushed or pulled through the inbound and outbound steps in the terminal according to the planning schedules. Information regarding passenger arrival patterns, processing rates, discretionary time use, passenger/bag ratio, rules for system operation such as the level of common check-in, rules for allocation of flights to chutes/make up belts, and information regarding terminal area allocations are considered. The first and often the most valuable benefit of conducting a simulation study is that it forces specialists and management to closely look into the functional and physical passenger flows, into the rules and procedures to define the causal problems, and to assess the impact on both upstream and downstream processes to avoid displacing the problem. The maximum reliable throughput, level of service, limiting factors and requirements of the major processors, reservoirs and links in the passenger paths can thus be identified. The terminal arrival and departure systems should be reviewed qualitatively to identify any areas in which the layout could be negatively impacted by the configuration of facilities, and through simulation to quantify the capacity of the various elements as well as the system as a whole. Where necessary, the base year busy schedule can be augmented to represent future demand volumes to push a concept or design to its limit and to optimise existing facilities. It is natural to make the basic assumption in the calculations that flow between individual elements is natural and unobstructed. However, the integrity of the capacity assessment can be compromised and result usefulness diminished if the assumption is not realistic. Good simulation models, unlike rules of thumb, do not require the making of such assumptions. Simulation should be able to consider if the pattern is disrupted by the introduction of any obstruction in the flow, such as ill-conceived concession locations and passenger cross-flows. The information usually required to conduct a passenger flow simulation study is:

Typical busy day schedule including arriving, departing and transfer passenger volumes per
sector of flights.

Floor plans in electronic format. Passenger flow chart (path).

Information regarding passenger arrival patterns, processing rates, discretionary time use,
passenger/bag ratio, passenger/visitor ratio, greeter arrival patterns, and transfer passenger



Airport Development Reference Manual

A graphic interface providing real time editing, simulation, and animation (including speed control) is an asset. Reports and graphs on time, accumulation, flow, etc., should be built into the model to provide instant results and an easy way to identify problems and bottlenecks, as well as reducing the time to develop new 'what if scenarios. Using simulation tools to design or improve facilities requires expertise knowledge. A multidisciplinary team including demand/capacity experts, operations personnel and users is recommended.


Airport Capacity

The methodologies used to conduct capacity and level of service assessments can be more or less elaborate, depending on the complexity of the system and the problem studied. Mathematical capacity assessment methods can be employed to determine relevant facility requirements if actual or forecast throughput figures are known. The capacity assessment of the elements of a terminal building is a highly complex exercise involving elements such as queuing theory, simulation and statistical analysis, together with detailed studies of people movement patterns to, within, and between these elements. Those responsible for initiating a capacity analysis, or for sizing facilities, should carry out the exercise in as much detail as possible in order to eliminate likely sources of error and bias that can result from neglecting interaction from and to upstream and downstream systems. However in some instances it may be necessary to obtain fairly quickly some idea of either the capacity of an existing facility or the size that a facility needs to be in order to handle a given throughput. A variety of simplified formulae have been developed for this purpose. The equilibrium between supply, demand and level of service is expressed in these formulae. It must be emphasized that such formulae employ many simplifications and approximations and are not intended as a substitute for the detailed evaluation referred to above. Not all formulae will be applicable to all airports since not all local factors are included.

Passport control departures. Centralised security check. Gate hold room. Passport control arrivals. Baggage claim units. Arrival hall.

3. 4. 5.



F9.10.1 Check-in Counter Requirement

The departure flight schedule generates originating passengers arriving at the terminal from several minutes to several hours before departure time. The originating passengers are first processed at the check-in counters or at electronic check-in servers. The passenger outflow from the check-in subsystem regulates the demand on the subsequent sub-system (i.e. the maximum throughput from check-in is 10 pax/min, therefore the 10pax/min is the peak demand at the next sub-system). Check-in counters are key facilities with huge footprints and significant impact on level of service, terminal development costs and operations. The following rule of thumb determines the requirements for common use check-in counters. Step A Calculate the peak 30 minute demand at check-in. Step B Step C Step D Step E Determine the intermediate result using the chart provided. Calculate the number of economy class (common use) check-in counters. Calculate the total number of check-in counters (including business class). Make adjustment for dedicated facilities.

Step A: Calculate the peak 30-minute demand at check-in. The peak 30-minute demand is a good predictor of the performance and requirements at check-in. It should be based on the site-specific planning schedule and hourly distribution of passengers arriving at check-in. The following procedure is recommended if the site-specific demand/capacity characteristics required to determine the peak 30-minute load are not available:

Peak 30-minute at check-in = PHP economy class x F1 x F2 Where:

PHP = Peak hour originating passengers economy class. F1 = % of the PHP in the peak 30-minute from table 1. F2 = Additional demand generated by the flights departing before and after the peak hour period from table 2.

Table 1 F1: Peak 30-Minute at Check-In as a Percentage of the Peak Hour Period Number of flights duringDomestic/Schengen/Long-Haulthe peak hour periodShorthaul InternationalInternational139%29%236%28%333%26%4 or more30%25%

Table 2 F2: Additional Demand Generated by the Flights Departing Before and After the Peak Hour Period Average passenger load in the hour before and after the peak hour period in % of the PHPDomesticSchengen/Short-haul InternationalLong-haul International90%1.371.431.6280%1.311.401.5470%1.261.351.4760%1.221.301.4 050% 1.061.06

Step B: Determine intermediate result, S, which takes into account the MQT using the following charts: Where: X

= Peak-30 minute at check-in. = Intermediate result.

MQT = Maximum Queuing Time (minutes).

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o T- icoN m Do i^ ncoo-C N c o -scc Do r^ ^ -o oco Ta- a cc M ^r io X T-i-T-T-^-^-T-T-^-T-CNCNtNCNCNtN

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Step C: Calculate the number of check-in servers: economy class, common use during peak period.

Where: #CIY = Number of economy class check-in servers assuming common use. PTci = Average processing time at check-in in seconds.


Airport Capacity
Step D: Calculate the number of check-in servers including desks dedicated to business class passengers.

#CIJ = #CIYx20%

#CI = #CIY + #CIJ Where: #CI = Number of check-in servers including business class counters assuming common use. #CIY = Number of economy class check-in servers assuming common use. #CIJ = Number of business class check-in servers.

Step E: Dedicated facilities Due to the widely varying applications of dedicated facilities from airport to airport, it is difficult to develop a general rule to account for the impact of dedicated facilities on supply. Experience shows the total number of check-in positions should be increased by 30 to 40% for dedicated facilities. Alternatively, planners may calculate and add up the number of check-in servers per alliance or user group if the individual peak loads are known. Example Determine the number of check-in counters for a group of airlines processing 2500 peak hour originating passengers on 10 international flights and a maximum queuing time of 30 minutes. The hour before the peak hour has 1900 passengers (80% of PHP). The demand in the hour after the peak period is 1500 passengers (60% of PHP). Most flights have business class passengers representing about 15% of all passengers. The average processing time is 150 seconds. All checkin facilities are common use.

Step A: Peak 30-minute economy class demand at check-in. No site-specific information is available for the peak 30-minute at check-in. lATA's rules formulae should be used. The average passenger load in the hour before and after the peak hour period is:

Peak 30-minute demand = 2500 (PHP) x 85% (Y class pax) x 25% (from table 1) x 1.47 (from table 2) Peak 30-minute demand = 781 passengers


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Step B: Determine intermediate result S, using the chart. MOT = 30 min

S = 31
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0


^MQT 20 ^MQT 30 ^MQT 40


_ ----1----

Step C: Number of check-in servers: economy class and common use.

#c,v = s x ( ^ )

,Y = 31 x (150^C0ndS)

#CIY = 38.7 = 39 39 economy class counters


100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500



Airport Capacity
Step D: Number of check-in servers including the desks for business class passengers. #CIJ = #CIY x 0.2 #CIJ = 7.6 = 8 business class counters #CI = 39 + 8 = 47 47 total counters including business class


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

F9.10.2 Passport Control Departures

The peak 10-minute number of passengers exiting check-in is used to estimate the peak inbound demand at passport control departure. The following rule to thumb is used to determine the number of passport control desks required for departing passengers: Step A: Calculate the peak 10-minute check-in throughput. Step B: Calculate the number of passport control desks required. Step C: Calculate the number of maximum number of passengers in queue assuming a single (bank) queue.

Step A: Calculate the peak 10-minute check-in throughput.

Where: #CIY = Number of economy class check-in servers assuming common use. PTci = Average processing time at check-in in seconds. %J = % of business class passengers.

Step B: Calculate the number of passport control desks.

#PCD = Peak 10-minute demand from A x

Where: #PCD = Number of passport control desks. PTpcd = Average processing time at passport control in seconds.


Step C: Calculate the maximum number of passenger queuing (Max # Q) assuming a single (bank) queue:


MaX#Q = i

(MQT x #PCD x 60) -------------Pfjicd--------1

Where: MQT = Maximum queuing time in minutes. #PCD = Number of passport control desks. PTpcd = Average processing time at passport control in seconds. Example Step A: Peak 10-minute check-in throughput. We know from the previous example that passengers travel business class. Peak 10-minute demand = #CIY x Peak 10-minute demand = 39 x


economy class desks are required and 15% of the

x (1+%J) x (1.15)

Peak 10-minute demand = 180 passengers

Step B: Number of passport control desks. The average processing time (PTpcd) is 15 seconds #PCD = Peak 10-minute demand from A x ^QQQ^ #PCD = 175 x

(e ol) #PCD = 4.5 = 5 desks

Step C: Maximum number of passengers queuing (Max # Q) assuming a single queue and for a maximum queuing time of 5 minutes. Ma x# Q = MQTx#PCDxA0) PTpc Max # Q = d

(5 x 5 x 60) Max # Q = 100 passengers

F9.10.3 Centralized security check

The centralized security check system is also designed to process the check-in maximum throughput to ensure overall capacity balance. The rule of thumb is used to determine the number of security servers required. The following procedure is used: Step A: Calculate the peak 10-minute check-in counters throughput. Step B: Calculate the number of security check servers. Step C: Calculate the maximum number of passengers queuing (Max # Q) assuming a single (bank)

Step A: Calculate the peak 10-minute check-in counters throughput.

Where: #CIY = Number of economy class check-in servers assuming common use. PTci = Average processing time at check-in in seconds. %J = % of business class passengers.

Step B: Calculate the number of security check servers.

#SC = Peak 10-minute demand from Step A) x

Where: #SC = Number of security servers. PTsc = Average processing time at security check in seconds.

Step C: Calculate the maximum number of passenger queuing (Max # Q) assuming a single queue:


MQT = Maximum queuing time in minutes. #SC = Number of security servers. PTsc = Average processing time at security check in seconds. Example Step A: Peak 10-minute check-in throughput. As calculated in the previous example, the 39 economy class desks plus the business class desks generate a peak 10-minute demand of 175 originating passengers. The average processing time is 12 seconds. Peak 10-minute demand = #CIY x Peak 10-minute demand = 39 x x (1 + %J)

(^^j x (1.15)

Peak 10-minute demand = 180 passengers

Step B: Number of security check servers /PTsc\ #SC = Peak 10-minute demand from A) x l"~) #SC = 180 x


#SC = 3.6 = 4 servers

Step C: Maximum number of passenger queuing (Max # Q) assuming a single queue a maximum queuing time of 3 minutes. _ (MQT x# S Cx 60) Max # Q =----------==-----------PTsc .. u r s (3 x 4 x 60) Max # Q =-------Y


Max # Q = 60 passengers

F9.10.4 Gate Hold Room

The Gate hold room space requirement is based on passenger load, the percentage of passengers seated, and the percentage of passengers standing. The rule of thumb calculates the area required based on aircraft capacity.

Gate hold room space required in m2 = (80% aircraft capacity x 80% seated pax x 1.7) + (80% aircraft capacity x 20% standing pax x 1.2)

Example Assuming an aircraft capacity of 420 passengers, 80% of the passengers seated and 20% standing. Gate hold room space required in m2 = (80% x aircraft capacity x % passengers seated x 1.7) + (80% x aircraft capacity x % passengers standing x 1.2) Gate hold room space required in m2 = (80% x 420 x 80% x 1.7) + (80% x 420 x 20% x 1.2) Gate hold room space required = 538 m2 Note: IATA does not recommend enclosed single flight holdrooms. IATA recommends open spaces allowing shared space between multiple gates. The 80% aircraft capacity expressed within the equation above should be replaced by the peak accumulation for an open hold room.

F9.10.5 Passport control arrivals

Airport Capacity

Arrival flights generate a sudden flow of terminating and transfer passengers at the opening of the aircraft door, while transfer passengers are processed at transfer desks or go directly to a lounge or their connecting flights. The terminating passengers demand arriving at passport control is concentrated over a short period of time; i.e. the time required to exit the aircraft and to walk to passport control. The number of terminating passengers and the sum of the number of exit doors from all the flights during the peak hour are the key demand inputs. The methodology to determine the number of passport control desks is: Step A: Determine intermediate result S using chart provided. Step B: Calculate the number of passport control desks required. Step C: Calculate the maximum number of passengers queuing (Max#Q).

Step A: Determine intermediate result, S, using the following chart.

(PHP x # doors used to exit the aircrafts) 100 Where: S = Intermediate result. PHP = Terminating peak hour passengers. MQT = Maximum queuing time.


200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000



Airport Development Reference Manual

Step B: Calculate the number of passport control desks required.

#PCD = S x

Where: #PCD = Number of passport control desks. Ptpca = Average processing time at passport control in seconds.



Step C: Calculate the maximum number of passenger queuing (Max#Q) assuming a single (bank) queue is: Max#Q = < M Q T x * P C D x 6 0 > PTpca

Airport Capacity

Where: MQT #PCD PTpca Example Determine the number of passport control desks for 2400 terminating passengers (PHP) on 12 flights for a maximum queuing time of 10 minutes. The average processing time (PTpca) is 30 seconds. One flight is a wide-body aircraft with two exiting doors. The total number of exiting door is thereforel 3. Step A: Determine S.
Y X _

Maximum queuing time in minutes. Number of passport control desks. Average processing time at passport control arrival in seconds.

_ (2400 terminating passengers x 13) 100

X = 312 S = 13 (see chart)

200 400 2000



1000 1200 1400 1600 1800


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Step B: Number of passport control desks. .PCD = Sx(^)

#PCD = 13 x #PCD = 19.5 = 20 desks

Step C: Maximum number of passenger queuing (Max#Q) assuming a single queue. _ (MQT x #PCD x 60) Max#Q = J--------==------------PTpca _ (1 0 x2 0 x60 )

- ^----30- - - -

Max#Q = 400 passengers


F9.10.6 Number of Baggage Claim Units
The number of baggage claim units is determined as follows: Wide-body aircraft

Airport Capacity

(PHP x PWB x CDW) (60 X NWB) Narrow-body aircraft

(PHP x PNB x CDN) (60 x NNB) Where: PHP = Peak hour number of terminating passengers, international/domestic transfer passengers, where applicable.

PWB = Proportion of passengers arriving by wide-body aircraft. PNB = Proportion of passengers arriving by narrow-body aircraft. CDW = Average claim device occupancy time per wide-body aircraft (minutes) or assume 45 minutes. CDN = Average claim device occupancy time per narrow-body aircraft (minutes) or assume 20 minutes. NWB = Number of passengers per wide-body aircraft at 80% load factor or assume 320 passengers. NNB = Number of passengers per narrow-body aircraft at 80% load factor or assume 100 passengers. "Please refer to Chapter U Baggage Handling Systems Clause U5.3 for confirmation of baggage reclaim sizes for wide body and narrow body aircraft."


Example Assume 2375 terminating passengers, 80% of these passengers on wide-body aircraft and 20% on narrow body aircraft. Wide-body aircraft BC = BC (PHP x PWB x CDW) (60 x NWB) (2400 x 80% x 45) = 4.5 = 5 devices (60 x 320)

Narrow-body aircraft BC =

(PHP x PNB x CDN) (60 x NNB)

(2400 x 20% x 20) . _ _ . . = (60 x 100) = 1 6 = 2 deV,CeS

F9.10.7 Arrival Hall

The rule of thumb to determine the arrival hall space requirement for greeters and passengers, excluding concessions, is:

A = SPP x

AOV x PHP x VPP 60

Where: PHP AOP AOV SPP VPP Example Assume 2400 terminating passengers and 0.7 greeters per passenger. = = = = = Peak hour number of terminating passengers. Average occupancy time per passenger (minutes) or assume 5 minutes. Average occupancy time per visitor (minutes) or assume 30 minutes. Space required per person (m2) for level of service C or assume 2.0 m2. Number of visitors per passenger.

A = 2080 m2

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



Due consideration for passenger expectations, needs, characteristics and behaviour should be taken into account when planning facilities and determining level of service.

L :-:< of sen/ica C should be used as the lower limit to design facilities and to determine the sustainable capacity for the end of the design year.

The level of service A to E framework should be used to balance capacity between unrelated sub-systems.

IATA s space and time standards should be used when site-specific standards are not available.

Facilities should be designed with full copsideration of the dimensions stipulated in clauses 9.2 to 9.5, unless a site-specific comprehensive study shows they can be modified to provide the required level of service.

F .IR.6
Passei' ffow simulation as stipulated in clause 9.8.2 should be used to optimise existing

facilities, to validate concepts, '0, when saturation or interaction between subsystems and overflow conditions are expected.

The passenger formulae defined in Clause F9.10 should be used as preliminary calculation reference.



Airport Capacity

The capacity of an airport is dependent on the demand for one or more of its limiting components, such as the runway system, aircraft parking positions, gates, passenger terminal throughput (e.g. check-in and baggage delivery) and surface access. Good management of these components will determine the extent to which the airport can reach its full capacity potential. The increasing demand for under constant pressure to the fact that services must be requires them. This causes demand at certain hours of the day. air transport services implies that all facilities at an airport will remain expand. The problems associated with expansion are complicated by provided to the maximum possible extent at times when the public peaks in certain seasons of the year, on certain days of the week and

Without an expansion in capacity or resolution of the problem by other means, an airport becomes congested at certain times. This occurs when the demand for one or more of its limiting components exceeds capacity in a certain time period. To resolve the situation, airports, ATC authorities, governments and the airlines must continually find the means to develop the capacity of their own elements of the system to satisfy public demand. Increases in capacity should be undertaken to the point where the cost of doing so becomes unreasonable, or where political, sociological or environmental factors form insurmountable barriers. Additionally, all appropriate measures to mitigate congestion by making more efficient use of facilities should be taken. Overall, there are relatively few airports where all components of the facility infrastructure are fully utilised over extended periods of the day. While these airports can generally meet the needs of their customers, there are others that do not have the facilities or infrastructure to meet demand. Before embarking on costly ventures to expand capacity, airports need to regularly assess the actual capacity




industry must deal with the realities of airport congestion and find ways to minimise its impact. Depending on the level of activity at airports, certain procedures to ensure acceptance of airline schedules have been developed to cover various situations. For the purposes of schedule clearance, there are three broad categories of airports: Level 1 Those airports whose capacities are adequate enough to meet the demands of users. Such airports are recognised from a schedule clearance viewpoint as non-coordinated. Level 2 Airports where the demand is approaching capacity and a more formal level of co-operation is required to avoid reaching, if at all possible, an over-capacity situation. These airports are referred to as schedules facilitated. Level 3 Those airports where demand exceeds capacity during the relevant period and it is impossible to resolve the problem through voluntary co-operation between airlines, and where after consultation with all the parties involved there are no possibilities of resolving the serious problems in the short term. In this scenario, formal procedures need to be implemented at the airport to allocate available capacity and coordinate schedules. Airports with such high levels of congestion are referred to as fully coordinated.

While airports will continue to come under pressure to maximise their capacity potential, the aviation IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



Airport Capacity


IATA RECOMMENDATIONS F10.IR1 Change of Level Status Level 1 to Level 2

Having Level 1 status at an airport is the ideal situation for airlines and in the event of facilities coming under pressure from increased demand, any move to change to Level 2 must be discouraged until all practical opportunities for facilities expansion have been exhausted} When after a thorough capacity analysis and full consultation, it is necessary to change the status from Level 1 to Level 2, the relevant authority should notify all interested parties (airlines, airport managing body, government, IATA Manager of Scheduling Services) as soon as a decision is reached to change the status. In any event, that notification in the change of status should be made no later than April 1 for the next Northern Hemisphere Winter Season and September 1 for the next Northern Hemisphere Summer Season. A change in status from Level 1 to Level 2 should only be made after a thorough capacity analysis has been completed by the relevant authority and there has been full consultation with the airlines, ground handling agents, immigration, customs and the airport authority.

Level 2 to Level 3
if elements of the airport infrastructure come under pressure from increase 'affic ievels. or if airlines to adjust their schedules in order to the schedules facilitator is unable to persuade t jf/ng the activity level of the airport to Level 3 cope with capacity limitations, the question ofch may arise. In such a situation, the following will apply:

(a) when incumbem airlines representing more than half of the operations at an airport,

and/or the airport managing body, consider that the capacity is insufficient for actual or planned operations at certain opriods or

(b) when airlines wishing to operate through the airport for the first time encounter serious
problems in securing acceptable timings at the airport in question or

(c) when the government responsible for the airport considers it necessary, then the government concerned should ure that a thorough capacity analysis is carried em out as soon as possible, organised by the airp\ methods for capacity assessment.
The analysis should examine the critical sub-systems and consider the practicalities of removing capacity constraints through infrastructure or operational changes, with estimates of time and cost required to resolve the problems. In the process of this analysis, the government concerned should ensure that z Mines, ground handling agents, immigration, customs and the airport authority are consulted on the 219 capacity situation. If there is no possibility of resolving the problems in the short-term, either through removal of capacity constraints or by voluntary adjustment of airline schedules, then the airport concerned should be designated as a fully co-ordinated airport. It is imperative that every opportunity is explored to avoid this situation. However, once the decision has been made to change the status of the airport, the government concerned should notify the airport authority, the Co-ordination Committee, the airlines using the airport and the IATA Manager Scheduling Services. In any event, thai notification shouldJ

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis can add tremendous value to the design of airport terminal buildings, where the internal and external environments can be predicted well before the airport building ever gets built. This can allow the designer to refine designs to optimize the building performance, safety and energy characteristics. CFD is extensively used to predict the behavior of fires in or around a building. Fire prediction and fire spread scenarios can be evaluated to determine the time it takes a fire to reach a critical point in a building and how long people have to escape a building before heat and smoke takes total control. It is possible to model the effects of sprinkler systems and their effectiveness using CFD software. It is also possible to model the effectiveness of fire escape signage and lighting systems using CFD where it can predict the time it takes for such items to be obscured by smoke. CFD has been extensively used to model the behavior of CO 2 from heating and cooling plants and the affects of airborne emissions from aircraft engines, in an attempt to fine tune airports to have the minimal impact on the local community and the environment. Where advantageous the environmental performance of airport buildings should be evaluated using CFD software, as it gives an approximation of running costs and extreme condition performance characteristics of airport terminal buildings.



Figure F11-1 shows a typical medium sized departures hall and the resultant CFD study graphical output (3D visualization is available) where a fire source has been placed in the airside lounge. CFD software is used to statistically and graphically represent the behavior of the fire and the 3D spread of smoke within the terminal. The results have been frozen at a specific time interval sometime after the start of the fire. As well, a people movement evacuation simulation has been produced and frozen at the same time interval, and both sets of data have been overlaid. The combined diagram explains where the smoke would be, its intensity, and what the effectiveness of the size and location of the emergency exits would be. It is likely these terminal exit variables would be changed to assess the best evacuation sequence for the terminal. This use of CFD software is recommended for terminal design. CFD software can also be used in the following areas of terminal and support infrastructure design. Please refer to the table below for areas where CFD software can be utilized effectively.

Table F11-1: Analysis of CFD Effectiveness on Infrastructure

Study Area Fire Strategy Study Objective of Study To determine the effectiveness of the fire strategy for the building. To understand what could happen within the building in a fire situation. To understand the effectiveness of the position of the heating and ventilation vents and the mass flow rates of the air and the resultant temperature and water saturation content. The C02 emissions from heating, ventilation and general power plants can be assessed. Useful to understand the effect of de-icing agents on the environment and in particular local rivers. The thermal performance of the building envelop can be assessed, taking account of the internal and external air conditions surrounding the building. Comments Highly recommended. Useful to use with a people movement simulation developed in parallel. Optional. Useful to airport wishing to minimise long term operational costs.

Heating and Ventilation System Design Study

Environmental Impact Study

Recommended. Useful where environmental issues are highly sensitive.

Building Fabric Performance Study

Optional Can produce useful energy saving design modification options.

Figure F11-1: Example of CFD Fire and Smoke Propagation Study







Fire prediction and fire evacuation scenarios should be evaluated using CFD software to determine safer terminal operation of existing terminals and better design of new terminal buildings. Where it can be demonstrated that CFD studies will provide useful data, which might ultimately improve the design and operation of the airport facility, then environmental performance of airport buildings should be evaluated using CFD software.

Chapter G Airport Flight Operations Issues Section G1: Aircraft Characteristics G1.1 Planning Parameters............................................................................... G1.2 Ground Servicing Equipment ................................................................... G1.3 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section G2: Visual Aids G2.1 Visual Aids: Introduction ......................................................................... G2.2 Facilities and Requirements for Non-Precision Approach and Landing Operations.............................................................................................. G2.3 Facitities and Requirements for Precision Approach and Landing Operations (Cat I) .................................................................................. Operations (Cat I l/l 11) .......................................................................... G2.5 Visual Docking Guidance Systems........................................................... G2.6 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section G3: Non-Visual Aids G3.1 General Non-Visual Aids...................................................................... G3.2 Facilities and Requirements for Non-Precision Approach and Landing Operations.............................................................................................. 239 239 234 234 235 236 237 238 221 232 233

G2.4 Additional Facilities and Requirements for Precision Approach and Landing

G3.3 Facilities and Requirements for Precision Approach and Landing Operations (Cat I) ..................................................................................................... 239 G3.4 Additional Facilities and Requirements for Precision Approach and Landing Operations (Cat I l/l 11) .......................................................................... 241 G3.5 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... 242


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual


The layout of the apron and aircraft stands is dependent on many factors, both technical and financial. With respect to the financial objective of an aircraft stand, it is essential for an airport to be as flexible as possible so that the stand layout can accommodate the optimum number of foreseeable parked aircraft combinations. The planning of the aircraft stand may allow for either dedicated narrow or wide body aircraft. Alternatively, certain modes of operation may require the stands to be configured to permit the mixing of wide body and narrow body aircraft on a single Multi Aircraft Ramping 1 Stand (MARS) layout. All layouts must be technically in accordance with ICAO stand and taxiway layout directives as defined

Figure G1-1: Typical MARS Arrangement

Figure G1-2: Comparable Single Stand

It is essential that the airport can provide the necessary number of stand centerlines, and of the correct type, to accommodate the perceived business forecast and need. To this extent the use of future flight schedules to assess the 'on ground, within stand' times and aircraft types is a necessity. The mix of parked aircraft on the ground and the perceived forecasted growth all then attribute to layout requirements. These requirements are then mapped to the technical limitations of the location, both from an availability of stand area, and to the more technically demanding assessment of soil mechanics. Community environmental issues will need to be addressed and the impact envelope of exhaust and noise emissions from aircraft approaching and parking on the stands will all need to accounted for. Only when all of this information has been analysed can the decision to accommodate a specific stand geometry be concluded.

Ramping refers to the centerline of the stand where the nose wheels are driven and ultimately parked.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

The aircraft apron is part of the terminal complex and is greatly influenced by the choice of terminal concept. However it must also be considered in relation to the taxiway and runway system. The apron can be divided into the following aircraft movement areas:

Aircraft Contact Stands (Terminal gate or remote positions) The area on the apron designated for parking of aircraft. Apron Taxiways A portion of a taxiway system located on an apron and intended to provide a through taxi route across the apron. Aircraft Stand Taxilanes A portion of an apron designated as a taxiway and intended to provide access to aircraft stands only. Apron Service Roads Routes designated for the movement of service vehicles within the apron area.

The apron must be planned in relation to the taxiway and runway system, as well as the terminal buildings, to ensure maximum efficiency, operational safety and allow operational users to provide cost effective standards of service.

G1.1.1 General
The airport apron and airside concourse designer should review the following items and factor them in when embarking on the design of future stand layouts:

Required aircraft stand combinations. Available stand area. Aircraft clearance criteria. Aircraft manoeuvring capabilities. Airports future master plan development strategy. The requirement to serve aircraft via airbridges. Capital costs. Airline operating schedules. Airport geology/soil mechanics. 226 Control tower line of sight requirements. Pilots line of sight for all aircraft considered. Design standards recommended by ICAO Annex 14, Part 1. Position of runway, taxiway and service road locations. Type of push back equipment available. Position of sub soil ground fuel pipelines and hydrants. Local community environmental issues (impact, planning and noise considerations). International and state safety regulations governing airline and airport operations (e.g. FAA, DfT and ACI publications). Aircraft dimensions plus resultant static and dynamic aircraft weights. The architectural concept design of airside concourse and terminal buildings.


Aircraft ground servicing equipment. Fixed servicing installations. Jet blast screening requirements.

Airport Flight Operations Issues

G1.1.2 Aircraft Characteristics

For every aircraft type manufactured in the world, the aircraft manufacturer publishes a document entitled Aircraft Characteristics for Airport Planning. This document, which may be obtained directly from the respective aircraft manufacturers, contains the minimum aircraft data required for general airport planning. The data presented by manufacturers on aircraft manoeuvring represent the maximum capability in terms of the geometry of each aircraft type. Since airline operational practices vary, it is always necessary for this information to be modified in consultation with user airlines, in order to determine values which are appropriate to the planned function of the apron prior to commencement of detailed design. The following figures listed within this section show the type of planning material that is readily available from the Aircraft Characteristics for Airport Planning documents from most aircraft manufacturers:

Aircraft Characteristics (FIG. G1-3a). Aircraft Servicing Arrangement Typical Turnaround (FIG. G1-4. & FIG G1-5). Aircraft Servicing Points (FIG. G1-6). Theoretical Aircraft Turning Radii (FIG. G1-8).


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure G1-3a: Airbus and Boeing Commercial Aircraft Key Characteristics


Airport Flight Operations Issues

Figure G1-4: Example of Terminal Operations Turnaround Station for B777 200LR


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure G1-5: Example of Aircraft Servicing Arrangement Typical Turnaround for B777 200LR



Airport Flight Operations Issues

Figure G1-6: Table of Aircraft Ground Handling Equipment
Type of Equipment IATA AHM Number 932 931 969 Length (m) 12.0 8.5 6.5 9.0 5.5 966 966 967 965 963 925 920 927 6.5 971 970 960 968 4.5 3.8 8.0 4.0 3.5 7.5 10.0 9.0 2.5 6.5 6.5 16.0 2.5 Width (m) 4.5 3.5 3.5 2.8 2.5 2.6 3.4 2.6 1.8 1.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 16.3 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.3 Area (m) 54.0 29.7 22.8 25.2 13.7 11.7 14.4 20.8 7.2 5.3 15.0 25.0 22.5 2.5 16.3 16.3 40.0 6.5 Height (m) 3.0 2.9 1.5 2.0 2.3 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.2 2.0 1.0 4.0 4.0 6.5 2.2 2.2 4.0 1.7 Turning Radius (m) 20.0 12.0 5.5 7.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 8.0 4.5 6.0 7.6 12.2 12.2 6.5 8.0 9.0 2.5

Main Deck Loader Lower Deck Loader Transporter Aircraft Tow Tractor (Wide Body) Aircraft Tow Tractor (Narrow Body) Pallet Dolley Side Loading (End Towing) Pallet Dolley End Loading (Side Towing) 6m ULD Dolly Container Dolly Baggage Cart Belt Conveyor Passenger Stairs (Wide Body) Catering Truck (Wide Body) Air Conditioning Unit Lavatory Vehicle Potable Water Vehicle ULD Transport Semi-Trailer (4 Pallet) Tugs (Ramp Tractors)

The IATA Ramp Services and Equipment Group has developed the above table of dimensions of typical aircraft ground handling equipment for use in producing the layout of airport terminal aprons. Numerous models of each type of ground handling equipment are produced by many manufacturers in at least a dozen countries. The dimensions provided should be considered as typical of each type of equipment and should be used as a 'rule of thumb' for general airport planning purposes. Airport Planning Documents published by the aircraft manufacturers give for each model typical servicing arrangements (in composite drawings) identifying each service vehicle. See FIG. G1-5


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure G1-7: Example of Aircraft Servicing Points B777 200LR



Airport Flight Operations Issues

Figure G1-8: Example of Turning Radii, No Slip, and Line of Sight B777 200LR

NOTES: DATA SHOWN FOR AIRPLANE WITH AFT AXLE STEERING ACTUAL OPERATING TURNING RADI MAY BE GREATER THAN SHOWN CONSULT WITH AIRLINE FOR SPECIFIC OPERATING PROCEDURE DIMENSIONS ROUNDED TO NEAREST 0.1 FOOT AND 0.1 METER STEERING ANGLE (DEG) 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 (MAX) R1 INNER GEAR FT M 122.4 37.3 97.2 29.6 77.6 23.7 61.7 18.8 48.4 14.7 36.8 11.2 26.7 8.1 17.5 5.3 9.0 2.7 R2 OUTER GEAR FT M 164.8 50.2 139.6 42.5 120.0 36.6 104.1 31.7 90.8 27.7 79.2 24.2 69.1 21.0 59.9 18.2 51.4 15.7 R3 NOSE GEAR FT M 168.8 51.5 147.7 45.0 132.3 40.3 120.7 36.8 111.8 34.1 104.8 32.0 99.5 30.3 95.3 29.0 92.1 28.1 R4 WING TIP FT M 253.0 77.1 228.1 69.5 208.8 63.7 193.3 58.9 180.2 54.9 169.0 51.5 169.1 48.5 150.2 45.8 142.0 43.3 R5 NOSE FT 177.4 157.7 143.6 133.2 125.3 119.3 114.7 111.1 108.5 M 54.1 48.1 43.8 40.6 38.2 36.4 35.0 33.9 33.1 R6 TAIL FT 207.4 186.1 170.3 158.0 148.3 140.4 133.9 128.3 123.7 M 63.2 56.7 51.9 48.2 45.2 42.8 40.8 39.1 37.7


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

G1.1.3 Future Aircraft Development Data
The introduction of new aircraft types can have a significant effect on apron and stand design and operations at airports. Please refer to Section L1, Current and Future Aircraft Types, of this document for further details. For comprehensive details on aircraft manoeuvring and aircraft parking capabilities please refer to the aircraft manufacturers directly. The implementation of full length of fuselage dual deck aircraft, such as the ICAO code F rated A380, will have a large impact on the planning requirements of aprons and of stands layouts. The following table details some of the differences in Aircraft Characteristic Aircraft Length (m) B747 (400) 70.7 (Part Double Deck) 64.4 19.4 421 B777 (300) 73.9 (Single Deck) 60.9 18.5 386 A340 (600) 75.3 (Single Deck) 63.45 17.3 380 A380 (800) 72.7 (Full Double Deck) 79.6m 24.1m 555 A380 (900) 79m (Full Double Deck) 79.8m 24.1m 656

Wingspan (m) Height (m) Passenger Capacity (3 class Configuration) Ramp/Stand Weight (Mass Kg) Maximum Ramp






Airport Flight Operations Issues


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

The following table is replicated from ICAO Annex 14, Table 3.1, and defines the taxiway minimum separation distances for the various code letters.
Distance between taxiway and runway center line (metres) Non-instrument runways Instrument runways Code number Code number 2 (1) A B C D E F (2) 82.5 87 3 (3) 82.5 87 4 (4) 168 176 (5) 1 4 (6) 37.5 42 (7) 47.5 52 93 101 101 107.5 115 2 (8) (9) 3 center line other than Taxiway center line aircraft to taxiway stand center line taxilane, (metres) center line to object (metres) (10) (11) 23.75 33.5 44 66.5 80 97.5 16.25 21.5 26 40.5 47.5 57.5

Aircraft stand taxilane center line to object (metres) (12) 12 16.5 24.5 36 42.5 50.5

Code Letter

176 182.5 190

Note /. - The separation distances shown in columns (2) to (9) represent ordinary combinations of runways and taxiways. The basis for development of these distances is given in the Aerodrome Design Manual, Part 2. Note 2. - The distances in columns (2) to (9) do not guarantee sufficient clearance behind a holding aeroplane to permit the



The apron must also provide for the manoeuvring and parking requirements of the various units of ground equipment employed in connection with aircraft handling and servicing. Please refer to FIG. G1-6 for a summary listing of the more common ground equipment types and sizes. For more comprehensive details in this regard please refer to the IATA Airport Handling Manual. Aircraft ground servicing equipment varies considerably according to the types of aircraft and airline methods of operations. Ground servicing equipment includes the following:

Passenger boarding All the devices used to transfer passengers between the terminal and aircraft; e.g. airbridges, stairs and transporters. Baggage, cargo and mail processing All equipment used to transport baggage, cargo and mail between the terminals and aircraft or for loading or unloading at the aircraft. Among the most widely used are tugs and baggage carts, container and pallet dollies, belt conveyors, transporters, loaders and trucks. Aircraft catering and cleaning All equipment used to provision the aircraft for passenger inflight service; e.g. hi-lift catering trucks, lavatory service trucks, water trucks, cabin service vehicles. Aircraft towing Tow tractors used for aircraft towing and push-out operations. The size and weight of this equipment is related to the size of the aircraft handled. Aircraft fuelling Including mobile tankers as well as hydrant dispensers. Other equipment Including fixed facilities and mobile equipment such as ground power units, air starters, air conditioners, de-icing vehicles, etc.




G1.IR1 Reference Material The tables and diagrams provided within this section pertaining to the B777 200LR aircraft is typical of the comprehensive data that is made available by the various aircraft manufacturers across the world, and observe the factors defined within clause G1.1.1.

Airport Flight Operations Issues IA TA recommends that airport planners review the airport planning data provided by the specific aircraft manufacturers of interest. The designer should in all instances refer to the manufacturer's latest infomiation.
Useful typical aircraft manufacturer's information can be obtained by viewing the following web sites: V

G1.IR2 Apron Design Considerations

Items such as ground handling equipment types} e.g. catering vehicles employed at airports, should be discussed with the operators of this equipment. Items such as the power and potable water provision equipment should also be specifically accounted |pf:by make, model and usage.



Visual aids are designed to increase the conspicuity of the runway, provide visual reference in the final stages of the approach and landing, and to expedite ground movement. Their importance increases as visibility becomes limited. There are three basic groupings of visual aids used by pilots for specific types of positional reference:

Approach lighting, runway centre line, and runway edge lighting and markings allow pilots to
assess lateral position and cross track velocity.

Approach lighting and threshold lighting and markings provide a roll reference.

Touchdown zone (TDZ) lighting and markings indicate the plane of the runway surface and
show the touchdown area providing vertical and longitudinal reference. The visual guidance derived from runway lights and/or markings should be sufficient to ensure adequate take-off alignment and directional control for take-off and stopping, whether after landing or in an emergency. Although additional instruments, such as head-up displays, may enhance the safety of the operation, reference to visual aids is a primary requirement even when some form of ground run monitor and displays based on the use of external non-visual guidance are being used. The criteria for approach lighting, runway lighting and runway markings are contained in Annex 14, Volume I. Visual aids are also important for the safe and expeditious guidance and control of taxiing aeroplanes. Special attention is required for taxiway lighting, stop bars and signs. Annex 14, Volume I, contains specifications for markings, lights, mandatory- and information- signs (see Annex 14 Figure 5-6 Taxiway marking, Figure 5-7 Runway Hold Position Markings) and markers. Requirements may vary, but they consist of markings and signs supplemented by taxi holding position lights to denote holding positions, taxiing guidance signs and markings on the centre lines and edges of taxiways.



For non-precision approach and landing operations the visual aids for paved instrument runways required by Annex 14, Volume I are: (a) Markings:

Runway designation. Runway centre line. Threshold. Fixed distance. Runway side stripe, where there is a lack of contrast. Taxiway centre line markings, from the runway centre line.

(b) Lights:

Airport Flight Operations Issues


Approach slope indicator system (PAPI, VASIS). Simple approach lighting system. Runway edge lights, where the runway is intended for use at night. Stopway lights, where a stopway is provided.

For Category I precision approach and landing operations the visual aids for paved instrument runways required by Annex 14, Volume I, are: (a) Markings:

Runway designation. Runway centre line. Threshold. Fixed distance. Touchdown zone. Runway side stripe, where there is a lack of contrast. Taxiway centre line markings, from the runway centre line. Taxi-holding position marking.

(b) Lights: Approach slope indicator system (PAPI, VASIS). Precision approach Category I lighting system. Runway edge, threshold and end lights.

For Category I precision approach and landing operations the following visual aids are also recommended by Annex 14, Volume I: (a) Markings: Runway side stripe.

(b) Lights:

Runway centre line lights, under specified conditions.

Taxi-holding position lights, where there is a need to improve the conspicuity of the lighting of the holding position.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Approach, threshold, touchdown zone, runway edge, centre line, runway end and other aerodrome lights are required in compliance with Annex 14, Volume I, appropriate to the category of operation for which a runway is intended. Where the runway may in future be upgraded so as to be suitable for Category II and III operations, it is advantageous to provide the necessary improved lighting during the initial construction or resurfacing of precision approach runways. This would eliminate the need for extensive future modifications. For daylight operations, experience has shown that surface markings are an effective means of indicating the centre lines of taxiways and holding positions. A holding position sign is required at all Category II and III holding positions. Signs may also be needed to identify taxiways. Taxiway centre line lights or taxiway edge lights and centre line markings providing adequate guidance are required for Category II and III operations. The conspicuity of runway markings and taxiway markings deteriorates rapidly, particularly at airports with higher movement rates. Frequent inspection and maintenance of markings cannot be overemphasised, especially for Category II and III operations. Stop bars can also make a valuable contribution to safety and ground traffic flow control in low visibility operations. The primary safety function of the stop bar is the prevention of inadvertent penetrations of active runways and Obstacle Free Zones by aircraft and vehicles in such conditions. Stop bars when provided should be used at least in visibility conditions corresponding to RVRs to less than 350 metres (CAT III). They also may contribute, in conjunction with other elements of the SMGCS, to effective traffic flow when low visibility prevents ATC from effecting optimum flow and ground separation by visual reference. It may also be advantageous to partly automate the operation of selected stop bars so that the air traffic controller will not be required to operate them manually every time, thus avoiding possible human errors. For example, manual switch-off of a stop bar after issuance of a movement clearance would be followed by an automatic re-illumination by the crossing aeroplane. Or a 'limited visibility' setting on the control panel would automatically illuminate stop bars across taxiways which are not to be used in limited visibilities. It will be possible that some lights in a particular system may fail, but if such failures are distributed in a manner that does not confuse the lighting pattern, the system may be regarded as serviceable. It is both difficult and expensive to provide monitoring of individual lights, except by regular inspection of all sections of the lighting system, and consideration may, therefore, be given to monitoring only the lighting circuits. To help safeguard recognisable patterns in the event of failure of a single circuit, circuits should be interleaved so that the failure of adjacent lights or clusters of lights will be avoided.



Airport Flight Operations Issues

With the adoption of nose-in parking and use of aircraft loading bridges, it is necessary to provide a guidance system to assist the pilot in positioning his aircraft accurately. The Civil Aviation Publication (CAP) 637 entitled Visual Aids Handbook, produced by the Civil Aviation Authority in the United Kingdom, should be referred to as current best industry practice on AGNIS/PAPA installations and their subsequent usefulness. The following are topics which must be addressed during the planning and development of visual docking guidance systems: Pilot Responsibility The pilot should be provided with a system which guides him accurately to the final parking position for his aircraft without ambiguity, and indicates to him his rate of closure with the desired stopping position. Accuracy The system must provide the accuracy of parking which is required on the particular airport or apron, and this should be established by airport authorities and airlines jointly. Points to be considered include:

The clearances involved. For some aircraft this includes distances between the pitot tube probes and the forward edge of the passenger door when open (i.e. B737). The performance of the loading bridges. The positions of fuelling hydrants and dispenser hose lengths available. The space required for all apron servicing activities including ULD loading/unloading.

When fixed loading bridges are installed, the docking guidance system must be particularly reliable as the accuracy of this system must match the tolerance of the proposed fixed bridge. On aprons serviced by apron-drive loading bridges, parking accuracy requirements may be less stringent. Multi-Aircraft Type Capability The system must accommodate as many different aircraft types as are likely to operate and this factor should be established by airport authorities and airlines in joint consultation. In a multiaircraft system the problem of providing stopping guidance is more difficult and it is important that the correct stopping position for the specific aircraft type using the stand should be clearly identifiable by the pilot, irrespective of his height above apron level.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

G2.IR1 ICAO Annex 14 Parts 1 and 2 IATA recommends the application of the ICAO Annex 14 Standards and Recommended Practices, pertaining to the design of runways, taxiways and parked aircraft stands.

G2.IR2 Precision Approach Path Indicators Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) installations should supersede or replace other visual approach sPg indicator systems as soon as practically possible. Where a visual approach slope indicator system is installed on an ILS runway, it is recognised that the signals received from the (non-precision) visual system may conflict with the ILS signals in such a manner as to cast doubt on the safety or validity of the precision approach guidance being provided by the ILS . IATA endorses the visual approach slope indicator systems specified in Annex 14, as follows: Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) As the ICAO International Standard, replacing the present VASIS Standard after January 1, 1995. VASIS and 3-bar VASIS January 1, 1995.

Specified in Annex 14 as the International Standard until

Regardless of the protection date of January 1, 1995, for VASIS and 3-bar VASIS, IATA advocates the immediate installation of PAPI. V___________________________________ . ___________________________>


Airport Flight Operations Issues


The term 'non-visual aids' refers to the approved radio and radar aids used to assist the pilot in carrying out approach and landing under cloud or other visibility-impairing conditions. In conditions of moderate cloud base and visibility, the purpose of the aid is to establish the aircraft in a position from which the pilot can safely complete the approach and landing by visual means, and in such conditions a relatively simple aid may well suffice. In very low cloud base and/or visibility conditions, visual contact may not be available to the pilot and a much more accurate and reliable system will be required to effectively locate the aircraft. Specifications for radio and radar aids are given in ICAO Annex 10, Volume I. The criteria for terminal area fixes and information on the construction of instrument approach procedures are given in PANSOPS (Doc 8168), Volume II. The non-visual aids for which standards have been defined range from non-precision aids such as VDF, NDB, VOR, surveillance radar, ILS localizer only and MLS azimuth only, to the precision approach aids PAR and complete ILS/MLS. In general terms the non-visual aids can support operations in decreasing cloud base and visibility conditions in the order listed.



Non-precision approach aids provide azimuth and/or distance information only. When using a single non-precision aid for an instrument approach, the position of the aircraft can only be fixed by overflying the facility. Position fixes may also be obtained by an intersection of bearings or radiais from more than one navigational facility, or by the use of DME or marker beacons in association with azimuth guidance. En-route surveillance radar generally may be used to provide fixes prior to the final approach fix. Terminal area radar may be used to identify any terminal area fix including step down fixes after the final approach fix. It is essential that all non-precision aids be ground- and flight-checked at the time of commissioning, and at regular intervals thereafter.


Precision approach aids provide vertical (i.e. glide path) information in addition to azimuth guidance and, possibly, distance information. The ICAO standard non-visual precision approach aids are ILS and MLS. ILS is the aid in common use while MLS is in the process of evaluation/introduction. PAR is also recognised as a precision approach aid. ILS ground equipment comprises a localizer, a glide path and at least two marker beacons, or, where the siting of marker beacons is impracticable, a suitably sited DME, provided that the distance information so obtained is operationally equivalent to that furnished by marker beacons. ILS may be used for ail categories of operations, but the beam structure specifications, monitoring requirements and continuity of service requirements are more stringent for Category II and III operations (see clause G3.4). MLS ground equipment comprises azimuth and elevation transmitters, DME and for some


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

It is essential that all ILS/MLS installations be ground- and flight-checked at the time of commissioning and at regular intervals in accordance with the requirements of Annex 10, Volume I, Part I, to ensure an adequate and uniform standard of non-visual guidance. In the event that a facility fails to meet the requirements for which it was commissioned, or if a routine flight test cannot be completed within the appropriate time interval, its status must be reviewed and the facility downgraded as necessary. Users should be advised of changes in ILS/MLS status through the AIS. Guidance material on flight testing is contained in the Manual on Testing of Radio Navigation Aids. To ensure that the integrity of the guidance signal radiated by the ILS/MLS is maintained during aircraft approaches, all vehicles and aircraft on the ground must remain outside the ILS/MLS critical areas as described in Annex 10, Volume I, Attachment C to Part I. If a vehicle or aircraft is within the critical area it will cause reflection and/or diffraction of the ILS/MLS signals which may result in significant disturbances to the guidance signals on the approach path. Diffraction and/or reflection may also be caused by one or more large aircraft or vehicles in the vicinity of the runway. This may affect both the glide path elevation and localizer azimuth signals. This additional area, outside the critical area, is called the sensitive area\ The extent of the sensitive areas will vary with the characteristics of the ILS/MLS and the category of operations. It is essential to establish the level of interference caused by aircraft and vehicles at various positions on the airport so that the boundaries of the sensitive areas may be determined. Critical areas must be protected if the weather conditions are less than 800 ft (250 m) cloud base or 3000 m visibility when instrument approach operations are being carried out. Various ILS ground installations of suitable quality are routinely used to gain automatic approach and landing experience in visibility conditions permitting visual monitoring of the operation by the pilot. They should therefore be protected by interlocks from interference due to the simultaneous radiation of opposite direction localizer beams (Annex 10, Volume I, Part I). Where this is impracticable for technical or operational reasons, and both localizers radiate simultaneously, pilots should be notified by the appropriate ATS unit, by ATIS broadcast, by NOTAM, or in the relevant part of the AIP. Similar harmful interference can occur if aircraft in the final phase of approach or roll-out pass closely in front of the ILS localizer antenna serving another runway. The provisions listed above should therefore be applied to any such installations where experience shows this to be necessary. The interim policy for MLS protection should be the same as that outlined for ILS mentioned above, until such time as more definite information is available and has been operationally validated. It is possible for ILS signals in space to be affected by the presence of signals from radio and television transmitters, citizen band radios, industrial plasma welders, spark erosion equipment, etc. The MLS system design and signal spectrum protection have been selected to protect against interference. Periodic measurements should be made, the level of any signals detected, and then these can be compared with an accepted maximum. Such measurements can be made by positioning a wide frequency band receiver in the vicinity of the middle marker. Complaints by flight crews of signal disturbances should be investigated, and special flight checks

Terminology and protection criteria for ILS/MLS critical and sensitive areas may vary between States. For example, some States use the term 'critical area' to refer to both ICAO critical and sensitive areas as specified in Annex 10. Thus, when terms used or protection provided



Airport Flight Operations Issues


The ILS ground equipment must meet the facility performance requirements specified in Annex 10, Volume I, Part I. The guidance material in Attachment C to Part I of that document also provides information for the planning and implementation of the ILS. The Manual of Testing of Radio Navigation Aids (Doc 8071) provides guidance on ground and flight testing of radio navigation aids; Volume II of the manual is concerned with ILS facilities. The quality of the ILS signals in space is not determined solely by the quality of the ground equipment; the suitability of the site, including the influence of reflection from objects illuminated by the ILS signals and the manner in which the ground equipment is adjusted and maintained, also has significant effect on the quality of the signal received at the aircraft. It is essential that the ILS signal in space is flightchecked in order to confirm that is meets in all respects the appropriate standards of Annex 10, Volume I, Part I. All facilities associated with the ILS ground equipment must be monitored in accordance with the requirement of Annex 10, Volume I, Part I. Guidance material on monitoring is contained in Attachment C to Part I of Annex 10, Volume I. ILS critical and sensitive areas must always be protected if the weather conditions are lower than 60 m (200 ft) cloud base or 600 m RVR (i.e. CAT ll/lll conditions) when instrument approach operations are being carried out. In the latter case, aircraft which will overfly the localizer transmitter antenna after take-off should be past the antenna before an aircraft making an approach has descended to a height of 60 m (200 ft) above the runway. Similarly, an aircraft manoeuvring on the ground, for example when clearing the runway after landing, should be clear of the critical and sensitive areas before an aircraft approaching to land has descended to a height of 60 m (200 ft) above the runway. The protection of these areas when the weather conditions are better than the minimum specified above will facilitate the use of automatic approach and landing systems, and will provide a safeguard in deteriorating weather conditions and when actual weather conditions are lower than is reported. To ensure that the integrity of the guidance signal radiated by the ILS is maintained during aircraft approaches, all vehicles and aircraft on the ground must remain outside the ILS critical and sensitive areas as described in Annex 10, Volume I, Attachment C to Part I, when the aircraft on final approach has passed the outer marker. If a vehicle or aircraft is within the critical area it will cause reflection and/or diffraction of the ILS signals which may result in significant disturbances to the guidance signals on the approach path. Additional longitudinal separation between successively landing aircraft contributes to the integrity of ILS guidance signals. Diffraction and/or reflection may also be caused by large aircraft in the vicinity of the runway which may affect both the glide path and the localizer signals. This additional area, outside the critical

Some States do not distinguish between critical and sensitive areas as defined in Annex 10. These States define instead an area, larger than that defined in Annex 10, but still called the critical area. In addition, this area is protected when an arriving aircraft is within the middle marker, or when cloud and visibility conditions are below specified values. This affords protection equivalent to that described above.



Airport Development Reference Manual

The reliability of the ILS ground equipment is a measure of the frequency of unscheduled outages which may be experienced. Reliability will be increased by providing on-line standby equipment and by duplication or triplication of key functions, including power supplies. The lowest value of operating minima can only be achieved with ILS that have high standards of reliability. The specifications in Annex 10, Volume I, Part I, indicate the total maximum periods of time allowed outside the specified performance limits for each ILS facility performance requirement. For Category III operations it is requested to publish the classification of the ILS ground equipment in the Aeronautical Information Publication



Specifications for radio and radar aids are given in ICAO Annex 10, Volume I. The criteria for terminal area fixes and information on the construction of instrument approach procedures are given in PANS-OPS (Doc 8168), Volume II.

G3.IR2 Specification Between ILS Critical and Sensitive Areas

Certain States fail to distinguish between critical areas and sensitive areas, or else employ these terms not fully in accordance with the definitions specified in, ICAO Annex 10. When terms used or protection provided require clarification, information should be made precisely clear between relevant operators or States.


Chapter H Section H1: Airport Security General Principles 245 245

H1.1 Airport Security: Introduction................................................................ H1.2 IATA Recommendations ........................................................................ Section H2: Passenger Operations

H2.1 Introduction and General Principles...................................................... H2.2 Site Evaluation and Layout of Facilities.................................................. H2.3 Isolated Aircraft Parking Positions ......................................................... H2.4 Support Operations ............................................................................... H2.5 General Aviation .................................................................................... H2.6 Minimising the Effects of an Explosion .................................................. H2.7 Minimising the Effect of an Attack Upon People .................................... H2.8 Passenger Terminal Building ................................................................. H2.9 Access Control ....................................................................................... H2.10 Passenger Security Screening Areas ..................................................... H2.11 VIP Facilities.......................................................................................... H2.12 Perimeter Security................................................................................. H2.13 Vulnerable Points ................................................................................... H2.14 Security Lighting.................................................................................... H2.15 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) ........................................................... H2.16 IATA Recommendations ........................................................................ Section H3: Cargo Operations H3.1 Cargo Security Overview ...................................................................... H3.2 Regulated Agent Status ........................................................................ H3.3 Known Shipper/Consignor ..................................................................... H3.4 Valuable Cargo........................................................................................ H3.5 Post Office Mail ...................................................................................... H3.6 Courier and Express Parcel Consignments.............................................

246 246 247 248 248 248 251 251 254 255 255 256 257 257 257 258

260 260 261 262 262 263


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

H3.7 Unknown Cargo...................................................................................... H3.8 Unknown Shippers ................................................................................ H3.9 Unaccompanied Baggage ..................................................................... H3.10 IATA Recommendations ........................................................................ 263 263 265 265


ICAO Annex 17 to the Chicago Convention requires that the architectural and infrastructure requirements necessary for the optimum implementation of civil aviation security measures are integrated into the design and construction of new facilities, as well as into any alterations that might be undertook to existing facilities. . .: To take adequate account of aviation security requirements in all new facilities, redevelopment of existing facilities and redevelopment of airports, it is recommended that the appropriate authority establish national criteria which should be used in planning and design so as to maintain the integrity of the nation's civil aviation security programme. The criteria should allow the architects and designers sufficient flexibility to respond to the circumstances of each airport and its operations (accomplished by allowing a range of options for achieving the desired objective), and by encouraging architects and designers to identify innovative approaches. There is also need to consider and judge the degree of exposure or risk to which a building or facility may be subjected if the threat level increases, and the steps that may become necessary to upgrade buildings or facilities and their operation to meet the increased threat. In establishing any criteria, it is essential that the security requirements be kept realistic and economically viable, and that they be able to allow for the appropriate balance between the needs of aviation security, safety, operational requirements and facilitation. The criteria should also include provisions to ensure that the airport design facilitates the implementation of contingency measures. Once the criteria are established it is essential that they be made available to designers, who will need to understand the security problem and the manner in which the criteria meet the requirements. While the designers may not be fully informed about the basis of the threat analysis, they do need


IATA RECOMMENDATIONS H1.IR1 Airport Security Programme

Each airport should develop a security development rolling master programme. This working document is intended to reflect the changes in national and international threat levels on a quarterly basis. The programme should include any field trials of new technology in the operational environment, and also propose the strategically placed updating of newer security technology and protocols within the airport. This could include but may not be limited to Hold Baggage Screening development plans and the integration of biometric technologies.

H1.IR2 Security Programme and Trial Results

Each airport is required to establish and implement a written airport security programme in accordance with the ICAO Annex 17 Standard, and should issue a report of the technical conclusions of any field trials. Field trial results of security equipment should be e-mailed to:


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual


As discussed in section H1.1, an effective airport security plan should be the extension of nationally conceived and adopted aviation security criteria, and will benefit from designers and planners being able to integrate the principles of a nation's aviation security programme into the structural as well as operational parameters guiding the development of an airport's passenger systems and other infrastructure. Key security concerns that need to be considered in the planning, design and enhancement of overall airport security should include the following: (a) Preventing the introduction of weapons, explosive or dangerous devices by any means into the airport or aircraft by:

(b) (c)

Detection. Ensuring the security of channels by which passengers, baggage, personnel, cargo, mail and other goods and vehicles access aircraft. Ensuring the segregation of passengers who have been screened from those who have not. Controlling access to and movement within the airside and security restricted areas.

Facilitating implementation of the airport emergency plan during a crisis such as a bomb alert, act of unlawful seizure or an aircraft disaster. Minimising the effect of an explosion or incendiary device on persons or facilities by incorporating design features to limit casualties and damage.



When designing or redesigning airport facilities, there are many factors which could influence site evaluation and the layout of facilities. When designing or redesigning airport facilities the security considerations and implications should take into account:

The airport location. The size and topography of the airport site. The location of adjacent transport and support facilities.

250 H2.2.1 Terminal Building (Landside Area)

In deciding the layout of the terminal building landside area, special security consideration should be given to the following: Road layout. Access control posts. Car parks. Landscaping and boundaries. Terminal forecourts. Lighting and signage. Emergency services access.

Airport Security
H2.2.2 Airside Development
Airside development should provide for the following security measures:

Physical security measures for the airport perimeter and restricted security areas. Perimeter roadways and other access roads for patrol purposes. Security and apron lighting.

Perimeter and security area vehicle and pedestrian access points, including automatic access
control systems.

Electronic intruder detection systems.

Isolated aircraft parking positions for searching aircraft subject to a specific threat or an act of
unlawful seizure.

A blast containment area for suspect explosive devices. Explosive detection equipment for cargo containers and pallets. Facilities for the kenneling and training of explosive detecting patrol dogs. A simulation chamber.

If the installation of an automatic access control system is envisaged at a later stage of airport development, provision should be made at the earliest stages of runway and taxiway construction for an automatic access control system power supply, as well as data transmission trenches and conduits. Similar provisions for the future installation of intrusion detection systems, electronic alarms, and video and data transmission networks should also be made in terminal buildings and at vulnerable point locations.



An isolated aircraft parking position should be located at the maximum distance possible from other aircraft parking positions, buildings or public areas, and the airport perimeter. Planners should keep in mind that the isolated aircraft parking position can also be used in the event of an aircraft hijacking or bomb threat. If taxiways or runways pass within this area, they may have to be closed to normal operations when a 'suspect' aircraft is in the area. Planners should seek input on ideal locations for these positions from the security or law enforcement agencies which would respond to such incidents. The isolated aircraft parking position may also serve as a 'security parking area', where an aircraft threatened with unlawful interference may be parked as long as necessary, or else positioned for the loading or unloading of passengers. It may also be necessary to remove and examine cargo, mail and stores from an aircraft during bomb threat conditions. Care should be taken to ensure that the position is not located over underground utilities such as gasoline or aviation fuel networks, water mains, or electrical or communications cables. Such parking areas would ideally be located so as to eliminate the possibility of unauthorized persons physically


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

A precise inventory of support operations and other non-aviation activities should be drawn up at the initial planning stage so that a decision can be made concerning the location of each of these activities. The following basic principles should govern this decision:

(a) Except for those which have a direct and permanent link with air transport operations, the

number of non- and para-aviation activities located on the airside should be restricted as much as possible. Hotels and freight forwarders' buildings and facilities should not be located on the airside.

(b) When facilities for support operations and other non-aviation activities do have to be located
on the airside (for example to enable them to have access to the runways), they should:


Be located away from the airport's passenger and cargo buildings and vulnerable points. Whenever possible, be isolated within the airside area.

(c) Private airside access points through those buildings or facilities should:

Here the security principle to be followed is that of segregation; the purpose of which is to keep movement of persons and vehicles between the general aviation area and the main terminal areas to the strict minimum. These movements relate mainly to fuelling operations, meteorological services and the airport control reporting office.



An explosive or incendiary device brought into the vicinity of a terminal or infiltrated onto an aircraft is likely to contain up to 5 kilograms of high-performance military explosive. Such a device can be concealed in a wide variety of containers. Explosive devices produce two types of fragments: primary and secondary. Primary fragments are created from the device and its containers (timing mechanisms, buckles and zips of bags, locks and hinges of briefcases, waste bins and their contents, etc.). The primary fragmentation effect can be enhanced by the inclusion in the device of metal objects (bolts, screws, nails, etc.). Secondary fragments are created by the blast wave destroying friable materials (glazing, masonry, false ceilings, lightweight partitions, etc.) as it travels out from the explosion's source. Typically, the distance over which primary fragments can cause casualties is approximately twice that of secondary fragments. Therefore, to be reasonably certain of preventing casualties from the fragmentation effect of a device introduced by hand into a public area, a clear zone greater than 60 metres in radius would have to be formed around the suspect object. While prevention is the ideal, it is for practical operational purposes almost impossible to achieve in a normal airport environment. The most practical position is to accept the possibility that, despite surveillance, patrolling, security awareness of all staff and the public, an explosive or incendiary device may still be brought into a public area of a terminal and a detonation can still occur. It is, however, possible to minimize the effects of, and reduce the casualties resulting from, the consequential explosion or fire by: Designing the terminal areas accessible to passengers and the public to facilitate patrols and surveillance, concealed and to reduce or eliminate places where explosive or incendiary devices may be Using the appropriate glazing securely fixed into robust frames or mullions and transoms with sufficient rebate depth. The frames or glazing support systems to be securely fixed to the structure.


Ensuring that roofing, cladding, false ceilings, etc., are securely fixed, as large panels or items which become detached can cause considerable injury and damage.

Employing materials used in the internal fitting-out of the public and retail areas of the terminal that will minimise casualties and damage following an explosion, or fail in such a way which will minimise the formation of secondary fragments.

Ensuring that items such as waste receptacles are portable, so that they can be removed in the event of an increase in threat, or be of a type which will facilitate inspection to ensure that nothing dangerous has been concealed inside. Alternatively, litter receptacles may be constructed into walls in a manner which would allow garbage to be deposited into an external container.

Ensuring that materials used within terminal buildings, for example as upholstery on seating and for false ceilings, are fire resistant and do not give off toxic fumes or smoke. A vehicle bomb is likely to contain large amounts of explosive. It is difficult to prescribe practical measures to strengthen a structure to withstand totally the force of such an explosive device. Some Distance of explosive device from building up to 5 Effect on a building using modern framed construction Severe damage to facade, Effect on loadbearing masonry Total collapse

possible local collapse in some buildings Severe damage to facade, in some buildings local to bomb Moderate damage to facade Minor damage to facade Superficial damage

5 10 10 15 15 20 20 30

Major collapse Damaged beyond repair Serious damage (but repairable) Moderate damage

It is apparent that a building of modern framed construction will experience less damage. The key elements of modern frame construction are:

(a) The building is of frame construction, having reinforced concrete or structural steel and
concrete floor slabs (precast concrete frames and floor slabs should be avoided).

(b) The frame is designed to be sufficiently robust whatever the building height. The horizontal

shear forces at a given floor level should be calculated as an equivalent of a minimum of five storeys above.

(c) In the case of steel frame construction, beam/column connections should be designed for
load reversals).

(d) Additional robustness for steel frame construction can be achieved by encasing the
perimeter beams and columns in concrete. Architectural

(e) Generally, the construction of the roof should be similar to that of the floor slabs.

Windows may be broken at distances of up to 120 metres, although glass may fall from a building at a distance of 60 metres. Unprotected normal annealed glass can break at a distance of up to 50 metres from ground zero. This distance can be reduced to 30 metres by the application of antishatter film, which has the further advantage of reducing the time required to clean up, since large quantities of the glass remain glued to the film. While some terminal designs minimize the use of glazing on their outer skin, most normally incorporate the maximum use of such materials and so it is essential to understand the failure mechanism of glass types. While it is not practical to undertake substantial re-glazing of existing facilities, there are a variety of steps which can be taken to reduce the risk of injury caused by flying glass. It is preferable that the external landside aspect of the terminal building be as low as possible and have as little glazing and cladding as possible. This may be achieved by having offices or similar facilities backing onto this aspect. It is recognized that such an arrangement is unlikely to be practical for many locations, and that many such aspects will continue to contain a great deal of cladding and glazing. Where forecourt areas are covered by canopies it is recommended that they be so constructed that structural components will remain in place in the event of an explosion, but that the All vehicles should be kept at least 50 metres away from the frontage of the terminal. Ideally, the forecourt roads should be at a lower level, creating a sloping ramp which would act as a blast deflector should a car bomb be detonated. However, this solution usually conflicts with facilitation and design and is therefore unlikely to be adopted in most locations. An alternative is to ensure that no shortor long-term vehicle parking is allowed within 50 metres of the terminal and that the forecourt roads are sufficiently policed to ensure that no unattended or unauthorized vehicle is allowed to be left on them. Efficient response and rapid vehicle removal are required, especially when short-term vehicle parking is permitted at the passenger terminal curbs. The pavement area of the forecourt should have solid posts placed at intervals or some form of barrier system to prevent any vehicle from mounting the pavement or entering the terminal.

H2.6.1 Materials
When fitting out the public areas of the terminal, materials should be used that will fail following an explosion in such a way as to minimise the formation of secondary fragments and thus casualties and damage. The following actions should be taken:

Avoid brittle materials such as glass or rigid plastics which can break into sharp fragments. Use materials which are flexible and strong (e.g. polycarbonate, metal sheet and possibly toughened glass), ductile (metal sheet, laminated glass), or weak and soft (plasterboard, hardboard wood wool, foam-filled sandwiches). Provide appropriately strong fixings, ideally with the same resistance capacity as the material being secured. This may mean recommending that inner sheets (away from a blast) be screwed rather than nailed or screwed through additional surface plates or battens to prevent screws being torn out. Minimise opportunity for collapse of light structures. This may mean that booths, concessionary accommodation, etc., should be designed to resist blast loads even though they will be within the sheltered concourse.



The concern addressed here is that of an attack against a specific group of passengers or staff, either because of their nationality or the nationality of the carrier with which they intend travelling. Such an attack would probably use automatic weapons and grenades. It is also possible for such an attack to be indiscriminate. Within multi-storey terminal buildings, the likelihood of having landside balconies overlooking checkin areas is high. It is equally likely that the public has access to them and that commercial exploitation demands that the facilities available on the first floor or balcony area be readily seen from the ground floor or check-in area. Unrestricted access to areas overlooking a check-in zone should therefore not provide a line of fire or the ability to throw grenades. As it is an unrestricted public area, the considerations already discussed in relation to glazing and building materials also apply. To allow natural light to enter the building, and so as not to diminish unnecessarily the visual impact of the balcony facilities, screening should normally be of glass, the choice being between toughened or laminated toughened. Ideally, the glazing should reach from floor to ceiling but, where this is not possible, the minimum height of such screening should be 2.3 metres. The space between the top of the screen and ceiling should be filled so as to prevent the lobbing of explosives. The manner in which this can be achieved will depend upon environmental and ventilation needs, weight constraints, aesthetics and cost. Access to the first floor or balcony from the ground floor or check-in area should be similarly protected from the balcony level down to a height above the lower floor at which line of sight and fire is no longer possible. A suitably designed 'glazed cage' can achieve the required results if the glazing is of the necessary standard. At major airports and those handling certain high-risk flights, there is a need to protect designated check-in operations against attack, by means of either a permanent, protected facility or temporary/ portable screening which can be moved into place. The screening of high-risk flights should have protective qualities capable of minimizing the effects of an attack which may involve the use of firearms and grenades as well as suitcase bombs. A normal check-in area can be converted into a protected check-in area by means of ceiling-hung bullet/blast resistant screens, which can be pulled into place when needed. The check-in screening should be opaque, lightweight, durable and easy to store, and should where possible be of specifications that would limit the possible use of lobbed explosives (at least 2.3 metres high with netting suspended from the ceiling down to the top of the screens). With advances in materials, it may be that adequate protection can be afforded by ballistic screens or curtains made



To attain the general objectives of security planning, as well as those of over-all airport planning, the key to success is the simplicity resulting from the following principles:

Passenger and baggage flow routes should be simple and self-evident.

Transit and transfer passenger and cargo flows, preferably in both domestic and international
operations, should be physically separated.

The number of security checkpoints should be minimized (this can be achieved by centralizing
the screening points at a spot where the passenger and baggage flow routes converge).

The number of points where pedestrians can have access to the airside area and, particularly, the security restricted areas should be minimized (this can be done after a rigorous analysis of ground personnel flow routes and by applying the basic principle of developing the over-all plan for the permit system). All passenger departure areas between the screening checkpoint and the aircraft are to be considered a security restricted area into which access must be controlled.

The following considerations should be given to any landside public spectator terraces or areas which overlook aircraft parked on the apron or passenger handling operations:

Access must be controlled or the area supervised by guards. The areas should be enclosed, or contain barriers to prevent unauthorized access or the throwing of objects at parked aircraft or into security restricted areas.

Access control features should enable them to be secured and closed to the public when required. Each baggage storage facility to which passengers and the public have access should be constructed in such a way as to minimize the effects of an explosion occurring in an item being handled or stored, and should be capable of being secured when not manned. Provision should be made for the hand search or screening of all items by X-ray by trained staff before they are accepted for storage. The airside and security restricted areas should be designed and constructed to prevent the passage of articles from non-sterile areas. For example, links or connections between plumbing, air vents, drains, utility tunnels or other fixtures in restricted security area restrooms and restrooms in nonsterile areas should be avoided to limit the possibility of articles being passed from one area to the other. When planning the construction of non-restricted or public access suspended walkways or balconies over or adjacent to sterile areas, it is critical to ensure that they not facilitate the passing of items into those areas. The maintenance of the security integrity of passenger areas can be enhanced by designing built-in fixtures such as railings, pillars, benches, ashtrays, etc., to prevent concealment of weapons or dangerous devices. This could help reduce the difficulties and costs associated with monitoring such areas, which also includes closets, utility rooms, restrooms, lockers, storage areas, stairwells, recesses housing fire extinguishers, and fire hose storage cabinets. Closets and utility rooms should be capable of being locked when not in use. The objectives of fire safety and crowd control provisions and those of security provisions may appear contradictory. Optimum safety aims at enabling people to be evacuated in the event of danger, while security aims at controlling people's movements and limiting their access to certain areas. Reconciliation of these objectives should be based on a search for a preferred airside to landside evacuation direction. Each airport area should be the subject of specific evacuation planning to ensure security is not compromised. In evacuating the landside area, including those areas not freely accessible to the public, evacuation should be done towards the landside curb. If architectural constraints require evacuation in the opposite direction, the emergency exits to the airside should be secured when not in use. Evacuation from the airside area to the landside area is preferred, but an effort should be made to keep the number of emergency exits and points of passage to the minimum required for safety reasons. Evacuation should only be done towards the airside area if architectural constraints or the

Signs should be installed along the curb indicating that parking is limited to the time needed to offload passengers. It is recommended that the positions reserved for private vehicles be separated from those reserved for buses and taxis. Bus and taxi parking positions should be placed away from the manoeuvring lanes to permit them to load and offload their passengers along the curb. If the airport is served by rail, outdoor or underground stations should preferably be located away from the passenger building and be connected with it by pedestrian walkways. In planning and designing passenger buildings, provision should be made for the installation of the following airport security features:

Hold baggage screening points. Passenger and cabin baggage screening points. Flight crew screening points. Staff screening points. Central security control centre. Emergency operations centre (EOC) and isolated aircraft parking position. Hold baggage control system centralized control room(s). Space required to question passengers before they reach the check-in counters. Hold baggage search room(s). The security service's offices and premises.

All security posts, offices or premises should be located so as to minimize response time to an incident and thus ensure maximum security service efficiency.

H2.8.1 Secured Passenger Routes

Secured passenger flow routes extend from the screening point to the aircraft door. Depending on the circumstances, they may cross the following areas and points:

(a) Immigration control point. (b) Departures concourse, which may include:
Rest lounges. Food and beverage facilities. Airline service counters. Duty-free shops and other retail establishments. Washroom facilities. VIP lounges.

(c) Departure lounges. (d) Connections between the passenger building and the aircraft.
In planning and designing the flow route described above, the following elements should be taken into account: (a) All doors giving access to the different areas of the departures concourse should be considered security doors and should be capable of being locked when these areas are not in use.

(b) When an automatic access control system is provided for, the following doors and exits should be secured and controlled:

(d) (e)

Departures concourse landside and airside entrance and exit doors. Access doors to the offices of the policing authorities and security service. Departure lounge access doors and exits. Passenger loading bridge access doors and exits.

(c) Emergency exits to the airside and/or landside should be secured.

Departure lounge partitions should reach the ceiling to prevent objects from being thrown over them or, if that is not possible for reasons of ventilation, protective nets should be installed. Restaurants and rest areas should in no case have terraces overlooking the aircraft parking areas unless they are equipped with fixed and sturdy windows.


Maintaining the integrity of airside/landside boundaries plays a critical role in deterring unauthorized access to, or attacks on an airport or an aircraft. Effective airside security relies heavily on the integrated application of physical barriers, identification and access control systems, surveillance and detection equipment, and on the implementation of security procedures. Consideration should be given to reducing to a minimum the number of access control points, both inside and outside, to airside and other security areas. Effective access control can be achieved by:


Having plant and maintenance facilities landside (but with controlled access) and, where ducting, piping, cabling, other plant or inspection panels (such as those provided in toilet areas) pass through the security restricted area boundary, ensuring that they cannot afford unauthorized access.


Planning kitchen and catering facilities carefully. Increasingly, airports are planning one catering facility to serve airside and landside. Where this is so, the facility should be situated landside, with the means to service airside areas via security airlock hatches rather than having staff moving between landside and airside.


Having baggage reclaim areas outside the security restricted area to reduce the risk of passengers backtracking through the exit doors. To meet customs requirements for international reclaim areas, these should be non-public areas and serve as a buffer to protect the security restricted area.

(d) (e)

Providing adequate facilities for staff within the security restricted area in order to reduce the number of times they need to pass control points in the course of their duties. Co-ordinating landside, non-public access and airside/security restricted area access control. This can be achieved by having one strategically placed point to control access to the apron, elevators to plant rooms on the roof and, by the use of parallel corridors (one landside, one airside), all landside and airside deliveries.


Having a single, suitably located access point for staff. This should, where possible, be a dedicated facility not encumbered by other forms of traffic or other distractions.

(i) Wherever possible, avoiding locating landside toilets back-to-back with security restricted area toilets, or ensuring that, if they are, they are designed and constructed so that it would be difficult to penetrate the airside boundary through the walls or roofs. Wherever possible, maintenance areas, service areas, miscellaneous activities areas, and buildings or controlled areas should be located landside with controlled access to airside. To prevent unauthorized access, doors or gates leading from landside to airside security restricted areas and to controlled areas which are not under surveillance should be equipped with locks and/ or alarms. Buildings and other fixed structures may be used as a part of the physical barrier and be incorporated into the fence line, as long as measures are taken to restrict unauthorized passage through them. Care should also be taken to ensure that roofs or other structures do not provide an easily accessible route for unauthorized access to the airside.


In the selection of suitable locations for passenger security screening areas at which walk-through metal detectors and X-ray equipment are to be used, it is essential that sufficient reliable power outlets be provided. It is also necessary to consider the possible effects of electrical fields generated by other types of equipment such as elevators, conveyor belts, etc. The mass of structural steel in terminal buildings may also have an adverse effect. It is not possible to recommend minimum distances from sources of such interference because of the variables of each location. Further guidance is best obtained from the manufacturer of the equipment to be used. The location and size of passenger security screening areas will be dictated primarily by passenger volume. Careful attention should be given to the number, type, configuration and positioning of screening areas so as to facilitate the flow of passengers through the terminal. Consideration will need to be given to the issues of queuing, physical search, and passengers requiring additional processing. Generally, international and domestic passenger flows are kept separate. However, this is not always possible, particularly at small and medium-sized airports. In such situations, passenger screening areas may be combined and the passenger flows controlled by either a door or a partitioning system to direct passengers to their boarding lounges. The international boarding lounge may be preceded


VIP facilities require careful consideration as the individuals using them may be subject to a high level of personal threat. Facilities should allow for control of the VIPs and those involved with their reception and departure procedures. The facilities should incorporate a dedicated screening area for check-in and processing passengers, and for keeping cabin baggage and hold baggage separate from the normal passenger operations. Where for ease of use the facilities straddle the landside/airside boundary, the standard of access control should be no less than at other access points and arrangements for the use of these facilities should ensure the integrity of the boundary between the landside and the airside. VIP facilities must be secured when not in use.





In deciding what form of perimeter or restricted area security is required, many factors need to be taken into account. These might include national and local threat assessment, vulnerabilities and asset values. The topography of the site should be one of the foremost considerations, together with general location, areas to be protected and the life expectancy of any materials used. It is important to note also that the physical components of perimeter security (fences, perimeter intruder detection systems, closed circuit television, etc.) should not be viewed in isolation but rather as an integrated whole. The following perimeter detection technologies should be considered and their merits evaluated as a minimum:

Radar Based Systems. Infra-red Systems. Microwave System. Thermal Imaging Systems. CCTV Systems. Taut Wire Detection Systems.

The following fence types should considered: Chain Link. Welded Mesh. Vertical Pressed or Rolled Steel (Painted or Galvanised).

Where airport perimeters are close to public walkways, roads or rivers, the perimeter should be under surveillance either by patrol or by automated detection system. Signs should be placed at 50m intervals which clearly advise the public that perimeters are under surveillance. Airport perimeters should be complete and to a consistent standard throughout the whole perimeter. Areas within the terminal complex which border with vulnerable areas such as vehicle and staff gate posts should be monitored with CCTV systems with data recorded on 24hour 365 days a year digital recordings. Other vulnerable areas recommended for CCTV surveillance which may bridge the perimeter include but are not limited to:


Airside/land-side gate post positions for vehicles and staff. Rivers bridging the perimeter. Power plants. Fuel farms. Control tower. Centralised air conditioning facilities. Aircraft approach lighting. Emergency access routes. Drinking water reservoirs (within the perimeter and serving the airport terminal and



Airport Security
When designing security systems for airport perimeters the detection systems should have full redundancy capability. If a single component fails within a system the systems overall integrity should remain intact. Field devices such as fence detectors should provide indication to the central control room that failure has occurred and where the failed field device resides. Waterways which intersect the perimeter boundary should be protected and it should not be possible for unauthorised access beneath runway or terminal complexes without prior detection.


A vulnerable point is any facility on or connected with an airport, which, if damaged or destroyed, would seriously impair the functioning of the airport. Control towers, communication facilities, radio navigation aids, power transformers, primary and secondary power supplies and fuel installations both on and off an airport must therefore be considered as vulnerable points. Communication and radio navigation aids which, if tampered with, could give false signals for the guidance of aircraft need to be afforded a higher level of security. Where such installations cannot be adequately protected by physical security measures and intrusion detection systems, they should be visited frequently by the relevant maintenance technicians or security staff. Manned installations should have strict control of access measures and admission to the installation should include the requirement to produce valid identification cards.


Security lighting can offer a high degree of deterrence to a potential intruder in addition to providing the illumination necessary for effective surveillance either directly by the guards or indirectly through a CCTV system. Security Lighting can make an important contribution to physical security but, incorrectly applied, it can assist intruders more than guard forces. Good security lighting should:

Allow guards to see intruders before they reach their objectives. Conceal the guards from intruders. Deter intruders or hinder them in their purpose.

Security lighting acts as a particularly good low-cost deterrent. Even a low level of illumination will deter most potential intruders and vandals. If CCTV is installed, the lighting level and uniformity must be such that it helps to present a clear monitor picture to security guards.


The use of closed circuit television (CCTV) for surveillance can save manpower, especially when used in conjunction with intruder detection and automatic access control systems and may supplement, extend and make more effective an existing security system. It also enhances the effectiveness of perimeter security, particularly if used to verify the alarms signalled by a perimeter intruder detection system (PIDS). It can also lead to improved working conditions for security guards who may not need


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

H2.IR1 Terminal Clearance Distance To minimise the effects of an explosive device contained within a hold or hand bag or carrier bag. placed within the terminal complex (eg. Concourse area) a minimum clearance radius of 60m should be maintained. This clearance should be maintained upon identification that a potential explosive device exists. Typically, the distance over which prirnary fragments can cause casualties is approximately twice that of secondary fragments. Please refer to clause H2.6 for further details and clarification. H2.IR2 Use of Secure Terminal Fixings To limit the effects of an explosive device located within the terminal complex it is important to ensure that terminal infrastructure is manufactured from appropriate materials and installed securely using appropriate quality fasteners. Roof cladding systems should be sized to ensure that in the event of them falling due to an explosion they are far less likely to fatally injure person(s). Ensure that the use of brittle materials such as carbori based polymer mixes or fibre reinforced structures is limited unless used in such a way as to protect against explosions (e.g. explosion proof containers).

H2.IR3 Glazed Panels Glazed panels i .sed as eithe part of the terminal complex or within the terminal complex should wherever possible be of the anti-shatter type. Where the performance of gldzed panels deters from this recommendation for whatever reason the use of anti-shatter flame r&tardant films is recommended to be used.

H2.IR4 Flame Retardam

terials and Terminals

Terminal structures and infrastructure should be manufactured and assembled using flame retardant and fire rated materials wherever possible. All beams and columns should be fire rated and structures strategically designed to withstand the placement of s passengers sized single bag containing an explosive device. These strategic structural considerations should be sufficient for baggage containing explosives being in any passenger area 01 any areas which hold H2.IR5 Steel Frame Constructions In the case of steel frame construction beam/column connections should be designed for load reversals to account for damage / displacement caused by explosion or impact damage.


H2.IR6 Perimeter Detection Systems The perimeter of international airports should be fitted with intruder detection equipment and surveillance equipment. All vulnerable areas (see clause H2.12) should be monitored 24 hours a day 365 days a year by CCTV systems. To limit false alarms CCTV systems should be used in parallel to perimeter intruder detection systems. V_____________________________________________________________________________ J H2.IR7 Land-side / Airside Checkpoints The number of security checkpoints within the terminal and residing upon the perimeter should be practically minimised.

H2.IR8 Reconciliation of Safety and Security provisions The objectives of fire safety and crowd control may on occasion appear contradictory with respect to security goals. Optimum safety aims at enabling people to be evacuated in the event of danger, while security aims at controlling people's movements and limiting their access to certain areas. Reconciliation of these objectives should be based on a search for a preferred airside to landside evacuation direction. Each airport area should be the subject of specific evacuation planning that includes adequate security measures.


The term air cargo, in the context of aviation security, includes normal freight, consolidations, transhipments, unaccompanied courier items, postal mail, diplomatic mail, company stores, and unaccompanied baggage shipped as freight on a passenger-carrying aircraft. Known shippers/ consignors, regulated agents, and their operations are closely linked to civil aviation as the expedient method of transporting cargo, globally from point to point. Cargo can be tendered for carriage by:

Another airline. A regulated agent. Courier service company. Postal service. Express parcel company. A freight forwarder.

A direct shipper. Whatever source tenders the cargo for carriage, action needs to be taken to prevent the introduction of explosives or incendiary devices into air cargo. Airlines reserve the right to examine, or cause to be examined, the packaging and contents of all cargo, courier and express parcel consignments and to enquire into the correctness or sufficiency of information or documentation tendered in respect of any consignment. The right to examine the contents of consignments does not extend to post office mail. ICAO Annex 17 requires (Standards 4.5.2 and 4.5.3) Member States to secure the operations of regulated agents concept, freight forwarders and airlines. This is achieved through the provision of the Airline Security Programme and the Regulated Agent Security Programme. Reference is made throughout this Section to regulated agents, freight forwarders, courier service companies and airlines. Although that is the case, airline operations that are away from the home base are generally handled by agents or contractors. The airline is responsible for the cargo operation regardless of what the handling arrangements might be.



For a freight forwarder to be designated as a 'regulated agent', that status must be obtained through the appropriate authority within the State where the business is conducted. To achieve this status it requests the production and continued compliance with a Regulated Agent's Security Programme. These programmes may be in one of two forms:

(1) Regulated Agent's Security Programme, written by the freight forwarder, courier service
company, etc., and its compliance acknowledged by the appropriate authority. freight forwarder, courier service company, etc.

(2) Manuscript Security Programme, published by the appropriate authority for acceptance by the
The programme details methods of meeting the provisions of Annex 17. Arising from the programme, freight forwarders, courier service companies, airlines, etc., when meeting set standards, may be registered/listed by the appropriate authority as 'regulated agents'.

Airport Security
Although reference is made to cargo, it should be understood that cargo also includes within its definition unaccompanied baggage, mail, courier and express parcels. Cargo consigned directly to an airline and not via a freight forwarder needs to be dealt with by virtue of the provisions of the Airline's Freight Forwarder Security Programme. In the case of airlines, they will also be bound by the provisions of the National Aviation Security Programme.


A Known Shipper/Consignor is the originator of property for transportation by air for the individual's own account, and who has established business with a regulated agent or an airline on the basis of the following criteria:

Establishing and registering the individual's identity and address, as well as the agent
authorised to carry out deliveries on the individual's behalf.

Declaring that the individual:

(a) Prepares consignments in secure premises. (b) Employs reliable staff in preparing the consignments. (a) Protects the consignments against unauthorised interference during preparation,
storage and transportation.

(b) Certifies in writing that the consignment does not contain any prohibited articles as
listed in the ICAO Security Manual Prohibited Goods. security reasons.

(c) Accepts that the packaging and contents of the consignment may be examined for
Once a shipper/consignor meets the necessary requirements, the regulated agent may declare the person or corporation a 'known shipper/consignor' and add the name to an official list held by the agent. The list shows the known shipper/consignor's name and address. Cargo from shippers that meet the known shipper/consignor status may be security cleared (accepted) under certain conditions:


The employee accepting the cargo is satisfied that the person delivering the cargo is or represents the regular customer.

(b) There is no sign of tampering with the cargo.

Cargo from regulated agents may be security cleared (accepted) under the following conditions:

(a) (b)

The employee receiving the cargo has examined the regulated agent's ID of the person delivering the cargo and there is no sign of tampering with the cargo. If the consignor delivers, or arranges delivery of the cargo, the employee receiving the cargo acknowledges it was delivered by the person nominated on a security declaration and there is no sign of tampering with the cargo.


The regulated agent has provided a security declaration that the cargo has been cleared in accordance with the Regulated Agents Security Programme.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Partially cleared cargo may be accepted from other regulated agents or forwarded to airlines for security clearance. Details of the partial clearance shall accompany the air waybill. The screening process may include X-ray, other approved technology or procedures including physical inspection. It is usual for an appropriate authority to introduce an audit programme for the purpose of examining compliance with the Regulated Agent's Security Programme. This should include the physical inspection of the agent's premises and an examination of the known shipper/consignor client list and other documentation.


Valuable cargo is defined in IATA Cargo Services Conference Resolution 012. Generally it includes gold bullion and other precious metals, precious stones, bank notes, valuable securities, works of art, etc. Blank airline documents, such as miscellaneous charges orders (MCOs), air waybills (AWBs) and ticket stock, should also be dealt with as valuable cargo. Valuable cargo, by the nature of its contents, should be subject to a close inspection on the part of the airline and checked against the details on the air waybill. The airline should adopt security measures for handling valuable cargo in cargo terminals, during aircraft loading, unloading and ground transportation. Local security regulations should be instituted as the result of a review carried out by the chief security officer of the airline and the cargo terminal management. This review should be ongoing and take into consideration various levels of threat in and around the airport. As a general rule, valuable cargo must be booked with the airline and any special arrangements made for it prior to its acceptance. Details of value, contents, routing and storage must be kept confidential.



Mail carried on passenger aircraft shall be subjected to security controls by airlines and/or regulated postal authorities before being placed on board an aircraft. Global postal services are members of the Universal Postal Union, which, in turn, is a sub-committee of the United Nations (same status as that of ICAO). The Universal Postal Union Convention (UPU Convention) sets security standards for the protection of mail services and specifies the standard of forms to be used for the purpose of forwarding the mail. Such forms will be completed by the post office. A postal service regulated by the UPU Convention shall:

(a) Deliver mail to the airline in a prescribed UPU mail bag. (b)
Such mail bags will be tagged with 'airmail bag labels' and secured with the prescribed secure ties.

(c) A 'delivery bill' will accompany all airmail shipments. (d)

A copy of the 'delivery bill' will be signed by the airline and returned to the postal authority, other copies of the document will be retained by the airline as a form of quittance (proof of payment/ receipt).



Airport Security
Airlines should take certain actions to ensure the integrity of the mail delivered to an airport mail centre before loading onto a flight. Those actions are:

(a) Ensure the number of bags stated in the delivery bill coincides with the number bags received
from the postal authority.

(a) Make a visual inspection of the mail bags to ensure they have not been subjected to tampering. (b) Assure that the integrity of the mail bags and seals should be verified upon the receipt of the

(b) The mail should be stored in a dedicated secure area. (c) Ensure that only persons with the necessary form of ID card and a reason to be there be
permitted into the mail storage area.

Documents handed to airlines by post offices or handed over at the point of transfer should be stowed in the flight portfolio or where flight documents are kept. They should be extracted immediately upon arrival of the aircraft at its destination. Although the airline or its agent does not normally have the right to examine the mail, the airline may refuse uplift during times of increased threat. The mail, which also incorporates 'registered parcels and registered letters', is attractive to a person intent on dishonesty and should be subject to special security handling from the point of acceptance to the point of delivery. Those involved in the movement of time definite mail should not provide booking details to shippers unless they are known shippers/consignors or regulated agents.



It is usual that courier and express parcel corporations are regulated agents. Such corporations would be expected to meet the same standards as those of other regulated agents. Courier and express parcel consignments should have an affixed courier baggage identification label. Although airlines may have IATA Recommended Security Standards within their programmes, it should be understood that Member States of ICAO can impose more stringent standards. Individual



The uncontrolled acceptance of cargo from persons unknown to the regulated agent, and its subsequent carriage on an international passenger carrying aircraft, is a security risk. Although it is not feasible that all cargo can originate from known shippers, there is a need to control the risk factors when considering the carriage of the cargo of unknown shippers.


Shippers not known to the regulated agent and/or carrier should be called upon to provide proof of identity and submit the consignment to a prescribed method of screening. Proof of identity will entail the unknown shipper providing a valid form of identification, which may include:

A valid passport. A driver's license with photograph. A photograph identification card issued by a government department or agency.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Screening of cargo includes: (a) Screening by X-ray, such that:

The equipment used must be of a type approved by the responsible authority.

The equipment should be regularly maintained and meet manufacturer and other regulatory specifications. The screeners must be competent in screening techniques and be trained to a standard required by the responsible authority. The regulated agent will keep a record of the operatives and their training in screening techniques. (b) Hand searching:

Those involved in the hand search of cargo are experienced in identifying dangerous items and explosive materials. It is preferred that the shipper/consignor or their representative should be present at the time of hand search if possible. (c) By other means:

The use of X-ray, enhanced X-ray and other detection bio-sensory technologies; i.e. centrifugal spectrum analysis. Trace detection. The use of simulation or pressure chamber. The use of trained 'sniffer' dogs.

And in some cases hold for a specified period of time (e.g. 24 hrs or flight time plus 2

hours, etc.).

(d) The multiple use of the above means of search may be best to achieve the necessary
degree of satisfaction that the cargo is not a danger for carriage on passenger aircraft. description in the accompanying documents. transportation.

(e) The search shall be as thorough as possible to verify the consignment is consistent with the (f) Cargo shall be protected against unauthorised interference during preparation, storage and
Once the consignment of an unknown shipper is screened to the satisfaction of the Regulated Agent's Security Programme, a declaration should accompany the airway bill, which contains all relevant information. Cargo from unknown shippers may be exempt from screening under special circumstances. These circumstances will need to be ascribed to by the responsible authority and should be contained in the Regulated Agent's Aviation Security Programme. Those circumstances may include:

The package is less than 5mm thick.


Vaccines and other perishable medical use items. A diplomatic bag.


Human remains and necessary packaging, if the shipper/consignor is Airport a bona fide Security funeral
director and a copy of a death certificate has been examined.

Unaccompanied Baggage is defined as baggage that is transported as cargo and is not carried on the same aircraft with the person to whom it belongs. There are obvious dangers in transporting unaccompanied baggage on passenger carrying aircraft. Stringent standards must be implemented to overcome these dangers and the shipper/consignor of the baggage will be considered as an unknown shipper. The following security measures should be implemented for unaccompanied baggage that is being

The baggage will be subjected to the same security checks as that of an unknown shipper.

The shipper/consignor must be the holder of a valid airline ticket to the destination to which the baggage is directed. The baggage will be handled by a regulated agent or directly checked into the cargo terminal of the airline on which the passenger will travel. In some cases States may exempt unaccompanied baggage from additional security screening if the passenger had no control over being separated from their baggage. This is provided the baggage

H3.10 IATA RECOMMENDATIONS H3.I11 Random Checks on Protocols

Whatever source is used for the transportation and storage of cargo at or between airports, proactive action needs to be taken to prevent the introduction of explosives or incendiary devices into air cargo. Appropriate failsafe protocols need to be produced and actively monitored by spot random checks to ensure that cargo is safely transported and that only permitted items1 are transferred between international and internal national boundaries.

H3.IR2 Compliance with Annex 17 Provision

Cargo process and system designers should observe the mandatory requirements setout in standards 4.5.1 to 4.5.4 inclusive of ICAO Annex 17. It is recommended that as a minimum all International cargo should be accounted for by a regulated agents system or screened using appropriate screening technology, which complies with the local national screening standard (eg DfT or TSA, etc.) or those recommended for use by Airports Council International. Protocols should be developed to ensure that complete end to end verification of security status of cargo can be assured.


TATT Airport Development Reference Manual


Chapter I Airport Access
Section 11: Roads

11.1 General Airport Road Considerations: Introduction.................................. 11.2 Environmental and Security Factors Associated with Traffic ................... 11.3 Traffic Data .............................................................................................. 11.4 Road System Planning Requirements....................................................... 11.5 Commercial Landside Vehicles ................................................................ 11.6 IATA Recommendations ...........................................................................
Section 12: Rail

269 270 270 271 274 275

12.1 General Considerations ........................................................................... 12.2 Typology................................................................................................... 12.3 Geography and Economics ...................................................................... 12.4 System Characteristics ............................................................................ 12.5 Good Practice .......................................................................................... 12.6 Cargo and Rail ......................................................................................... 12.7 Objectives and Benefits ........................................................................... 12.8 IATA Recommendations ...........................................................................
Section 13: Intermodality and Airport Access

277 277 278 279 280 280 280 281

13.1 Principle of Intermodal Travel................................................................... 13.2 Ferry and Jetfoil Services ......................................................................... 13.3 Interfaces ................................................................................................ 13.4 IATA Recommendations ...........................................................................

282 283 285 285


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual




Traffic generated by the airport is a major influence on the surrounding environs. The influence increases with the size and throughput of the airport and its proximity to the built up residential area. Fast, convenient, economic access is essential for the airport to function properly, but it needs to impinge on the neighbouring locality with as little disturbance as possible. At the planning stage, a full analysis of the airport access system is required, with the capacity of the system needing to match the terminal and airside capacity. Close co-ordination between airport planners, local planning authorities and local transportation providers is necessary to ensure that proper and timely provision for the requirements, current and projected, is in the local or regional transportation plan and in the appropriate capital expenditure programmes. The demand for ground transportation between the airport and the metropolitan area it serves is generated by: originating and terminating passengers; meeters and greeters and other visitors (including those shopping or on business at the airport); airport and airline industry employees; cargo, express services and mail; and airport support and supply services. Advance planning is highly important. Surface access development plans should be part of the airport masterplans and development plans for the surrounding area. The forecast modal split between rail-based access and road-based access (private car, taxi, bus and other) can either be an input to or an output from these plans. If the airport or local planning authority have a specific target split for a specific reason, it will be an input: if it emerges from constraints on transport infrastructure elements, it is more in the nature of an output. Planning for the road network will need a traffic model to forecast vehicle trips by vehicle type and their origins and destinations, as well as the peak volumes. From this will come the need for highway capacity on access roads, airport roads and on key junctions outside the airport.


Responsibilities for access provision can be divided, and can rest with organisations other than the airport authority. Hence there is the potential for a clash of priorities on the timing of capacity provision. This needs to be taken into account, and appropriate steps should be taken to ensure that construction


The objective of surface improvements needs to be accepted and understood. It can be to encourage a particular modal split (and therefore the use of public transport rather than the car), improved links to terminals (enhancing the attractiveness of the airport for passenger or cargo traffic), or merely accommodating growth in demand. The objective, especially if it is the first, needs to be an integral part of the masterplan. Surface access links are best improved in an integrated way, and in a way which furthers the objective. The most successful plans are those which improve access for both public and private modes, both road and non-road. The design of all of the facilities needs to recognise the alternatives of minimising capital expenditure, minimising running costs, or minimising construction time. An appropriate


As surface access is upgraded, increased use of public transport should be encouraged by making it as widely available and as attractive as possible in terms of speed, image, reliability, convenience, safety, comfort and cost. The transportation network provided for access will also be attractive to non airport users. In the planning stage, this needs full consideration, namely: will all demands be met, or will the design and the pricing structure be geared to discouraging non-airport traffic? Within the airport boundary, traffic is generated by the airport itself. The amount will vary in nature and volume with the size and type of airport. It will include transfer passengers where there is more than one terminal, and adequate transfer systems (moving walkways, buses and shuttles, automated people movers) need to be evaluated and developed.



Measures to meet surface access requirements should balance the need for capacity with environmental and security concerns, at both local and global levels. The airport can only grow with the consent of its neighbours, who have legitimate concerns about pollution, noise and congestion. Airport access traffic is a significant part of local traffic: ground traffic is responsible for a significant part of the total pollution from the airport. Separate road access for passenger and cargo facilities may be beneficial. To encourage use of environmentally responsible modes, an appropriate mix of incentives and disincentives should be used: passengers can be attracted by speed, reliability and comfort; employees by pricing (especially by travelcard schemes, demonstrating clear value for money for leisure as well as work trips), and also by car sharing and car pooling initiatives. Electric or low emission vehicles should be considered for on-airport traffic and for aircraft servicing. Off-airport consolidation of deliveries has also been successfully used to reduce traffic. Road design can reduce noise, severance and congestion impacts, and pedestrian routes which are designed in a way which encourages their use are more beneficial than those merely designed to minimise the interaction between foot and wheeled traffic. Security concerns may restrict vehicular access. A general rule of thumb is that unexamined vehicles should not be allowed to park within 300 feet (100 metres) of a terminal building, although this may be modified according to the specific design of the terminal (would it be screened from a blast from a bomb in a car park, or conversely are there large exposed areas of highly lethal glass?). Such considerations are less relevant with public transport access: passengers on public transport are far more likely to be under surveillance than car drivers, and have a far lower capacity for bringing in bombs. The movement of public transport vehicles is also far less predictable and far less controllable


A significant proportion of airport ground transport demand is from originating and terminating passengers. However as a rule of thumb, there are about 1000 employees for each million passengers through the airport each year, and each employee makes around 10 trips a week. So a million passengers equates to approximately 4000 passenger trips and 2000 employee trips a day. Employee traffic volumes and peaks will reflect on-airport employment situations; for instance, is it only related to day to day operations, or is there, for example, a major maintenance facility? Is it strongly peaked by time of day, days of the week, or season of the year? Is there a curfew or is it a 24 hour airport? Delivery traffic can be significant especially if the airport has a large retail and catering operation. Cargo traffic will vary with the amount of cargo through the airport, and much air cargo, especially short haul, travels by surface mode anyway.


Airport Access
Meeters and greeters may create a significant amount of traffic, according to local custom: shoppers, spotters, sightseers and business partners all contribute too. On-airport traffic hotel and car rental courtesy vehicles, transfer passengers can also be significant. If the airport is a public transport interchange point, or a convenient park and ride point, there can also be large volumes of non-airport traffic.


Data Required
For calculations of passenger-related vehicular traffic and the resulting facilities and capacity needed, the design year average day and peak hour forecasts will provide figures for volumes of originating and terminating passengers, as well as for transfer passengers for inter- and intra-terminal traffic. To estimate volumes of vehicular passenger traffic entering or leaving the airport, there is a need for forecasts of:

Arrival rates for arriving and departing passengers for the average day of the peak month. Peak hour and peak minute information may also be required. Factors can be applied to each vehicular mode if necessary: for example the number of goods vehicles or buses, which take up more space than cars, may need to be weighted more than cars and taxis. The percentage of passengers by type of vehicle (park and ride, kiss and ride, taxi, bus, rail, water) to determine the transport mix. Meeters and greeters which can be significant according to the local culture and customs.

Occupancy of each vehicle (occupants: car) relevant for vehicle numbers and curb requirements. Total passenger related vehicle trips by mode can be estimated and added to other trips to determine

11.3.2 Stationary Traffic

Additional data are required for specific requirements like parking and curb space. Average dwell times at the curb which will vary depending on whether or not there is curb check in, for example and the number of vehicles parked by meeters and greeters and kiss and ride (compared with park and ride) visitors is needed for this. In general, short term parking (less than 8 hours) should be reasonably close to the terminals Long term (over 8 hours) can be remote, with shuttle bus or people mover access. Pricing policies can have interesting and sometimes unintended effects: increasing car park charges to improve the use of public transport and decrease car trips, for instance, can backfire by encouraging kiss and ride (4 trips) rather than park and ride (2 trips). Incentives are needed. For example, ensuring that passengers leaving terminals see the train station before they see car parking and taxi/car hire areas is a valuable indicator of the priority the airport ascribes to the rail mode. Much of the necessary information can only be obtained from surveys of passengers, employees, cargo handlers and support services.



Planning of airport roads, especially for high volume airports, is a specialised subject and expert advice should be sought. At all airports there will be public (landside) roads open to all traffic, and non-public (airside) service roads restricted to authorised vehicles (for cargo, catering, maintenance, fire and rescue, fuel, baggage, security and the like).


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

At large airports, it is preferable to separate service-related traffic long before arriving at the passenger terminal curbside area. This results in a double network of roads: those for passengers, visitors and probably employees; and those for delivery of goods, services, cargo, kitchen supplies and so on.


Public (Landside) Airport Roads

The landside road system serves a number of categories of traffic, namely:

Passengers. Private cars. Taxis. Shuttle and courtesy vehicles for hotels, car rental and car parks. Inter terminal shuttles. Public transport buses including group minibuses and charter/tour buses. Limousine services. Cargo and mail. Light vans, pickup trucks and trailer trucks. Airline and airport personnel. Crew buses and staff vehicles (who can, of course, constitute a significant blockage at airside entry points because of the need to screen their baggage). Airport service vehicles.

It also needs to satisfy certain basic criteria: Basic planning requirements for landside roads. They should be designed to accommodate peak traffic volumes and have adequate expansion capacity (unless the airport takes the conscious decision not to cater for peak flows). All public roads should be clearly signposted. Clearly visible signs should be positioned on the roads and on the terminal curbside areas well in advance of desired destinations to allow drivers to make any necessary changes without abrupt changes of lane and direction. Signs should be properly lighted for night use, and lettering and background colours should enhance clarity and visibility. Messages should be concise, quickly identifiable and easily understood. Colour coding for multiple terminals, for specific airlines, or for major facilities like car parks, is recommended. Links between the external public road system and the non-public or service road system should be planned carefully in order to avoid either congestion or reductions in the potential for future expansion. Main through roads should bypass the road along the face of the terminal building. Roads running along the face of the terminal building should be wide enough to permit passing of stopped vehicles and should have a minimum of three lanes. These should be wide enough to allow space for loading and unloading bags. There should be no access to the apron, taxiways or runways from public roads.



Airport Access

Where the public road system accommodates service vehicles, it should connect with terminals for delivery of goods at designated locations only. Roads connected to cargo areas must have sufficient height and clearances to accommodate existing and projected cargo carrying vehicles. At large airports, special lanes may be reserved for high-occupancy vehicles, and the curbside area should segregate buses and taxis (inner lanes) from private vehicles (outer lanes). Provision should be made for a future people mover system (note that such systems can be elevated above highways). Adequate facilities for two-wheeled vehicles should be provided: secure parking spaces should be available near work areas and public transport stops. Safety can be improved by the provision of a segregated network for two wheeled or un-powered vehicles. Specialist vehicles like tow tractors or main deck loaders are not normally operated on public roads but are used extensively airside. Occasionally they are required to operate on landside roads and therefore proper consideration should be given to their non-standard physical dimensions.


Non Public (Airside) Airport Service Roads

Basic planning requirements for airside roads are:

Access to the non-public road network must be effectively restricted to service vehicles directly
linked with aircraft handling activities. cargo terminal and the aircraft.

The service roads must be capable of accepting ULD transporter equipment between the Adequate bearing strength, height clearances and turning radii must be provided to

accommodate existing and projected service and ground support equipment, including tow tractors, where applicable.

Airport service roads should have a minimum width of 10m, preferably 12m, and a clearance

height of 4.2m, but preferably 4.6m. The latter is of particular concern with regard to service roads directly located in front of parking positions which pass under sections of the terminal building and/or passenger loading bridges. It should be noted that the figures provided are design guidelines and should be adjusted to the local situation prevailing at the specific airport concerned. Service roads should be designed to accommodate self-propelled equipment with a swept turn radius of at least 8m.

Adequate separation in accordance with ICAO Annex 14 must be provided from runways,
taxiways or other areas where aircraft manoeuvre. support equipment must be provided.

Where necessary, adequate roadway width to permit overtaking of slow-moving ground

In planning for airside road systems it must be recognized that many restrictions exist especially in those areas where aircraft ground handling activities are in progress. Safety and security aspects together with the special needs of slow traffic (e.g. tugs and dollies), wide and very high vehicles, all need to be taken into account. Exclusive use of part of the system by some categories may be necessary. Special attention should be given to:


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

The use of private cars airside should be restricted.

Aircraft tow tractors may have to operate at right angles to service roads. Special provisions may be necessary. There are two possible locations for the service road:

Behind the aircraft. Between the front of the aircraft stand and the terminal building.

Each location has its advantages and disadvantages. Since a lot of operational activity tends to occur around the forward portion of the aircraft, a frontal service road is sometimes preferred. However the disadvantage with this type of service road is that the clearance height necessary to allow certain types of service vehicles, i.e. aircraft catering, to pass underneath may create a major problem with the height or slope of the passenger boardng bridge or the elevation of the departure gate lounge. When the service road is located in front of the terminal building adequate room must be provided for the aircraft push-back tractor to manoeuvre, i.e. the tractor which is at 90 must not encroach into the service road. However this often occurs and traffic congestion on the service road follows. Though not a recommended solution by IATA, it may therefore be in certain instances more advantageous to locate the service road to the rear of the aircraft stands. In this case the service road should be very clearly marked and must not be allowed to infringe on apron taxiway operations. Proper clearance must be defined and maintained from the rear of the aircraft to the service road to the apron taxiway. Rear service roads will involve traffic coming off the service road past the aircraft wings and engines when approaching the front of the aircraft. Movement around aircraft wings, etc.,

11.5 11.5.1


The requirement to provide a continual supply of taxis to the arrivals curbside loading area can be accommodated by creating a taxi pool staging area. This needs to be reasonably close to the terminal area, and provision for orderly staging and sequential dispatch of taxis to the curb is necessary. A means of alerting drivers to the need for taxis at the curb (and, in multi-terminal airports, which curb), is also needed.


Buses & Coaches

There are various types of buses and coaches, all of which have different needs to be catered for, namely:

Charter and tour buses need dedicated curb space. This is often provided at the end of the

terminals or in a dedicated transportation centre. There is also a need for waiting and parking space, ideally with some form of communication for drivers meeting inbound passengers.

Hotel shuttles. These also need dedicated curb space for loading and unloading, and facilities

for waiting passengers (including phones for communications with hotels). In order to reduce onairport traffic, some airports have consolidated hotel shuttles into a number of fixed route services, each one serving a number of local hotels.

Long distance buses and coaches. These are usually accommodated at a dedicated
transportation centre. This can be a valuable facility for local residents, who generally are more likely to need a bus than a plane. A dedicated transportation centre needs a good walking route or a people


IATA Local buses. These are particularly valuable for employees. A number of Airport Access airports have provided

a direct subsidy, start-up funding, or assistance with marketing for buses on core routes, especially those operating 24 hours a day. Some are demand-responsive, deviating from a fixed route if pre-booked a useful answer to personal security concerns. Some airports have introduced free or discounted travel schemes for employees to reduce car traffic and to increase their pool of labour. The reputation of the airport depends in part on the quality of (often low paid) retail and cleaning staff, and increasing the ability of all shifts to get to work at an acceptable price is useful. A few large airports have negotiated free-fare zones around the airport to encourage employees to use the bus for travel between on-airport sites (for example to meetings) rather than to use a car.


11 .IR1 Airport Access Capacity Requirements t the planning stage, a full analysis of the airport access system is required: the capacity of the system needs to match the terminal and airside capacity. Close co-ordination between airport planners, local planning authorities and local transportation providers is necessary and recommended.

11 .IR2 Airport Road Function Requirements The airport road planner should detail the routes needed for tl if? various vehicles on and aroun: the airport complex, A traffic computer simulation model should be created to forecast vehicle trips by vehicles by type, detailing their origins and destinations, and the peak volumes. The airport road planner shall then be able to quantify road sizes and provisions accordingly. "A

11 jil Public Transps t Provisions

For existing airports wanting to expand, studies or surveys should be undertaken to establish the percentage of passengers using public transport to get to the airport and the reasons for their choice. If enhancements to tfie existing public transport infrastructure were made, ii ten the usage by passengers should also be evaluated via passenger surveys. The passenger growth iates should then be factored into the expectations of the usage of facilities, it is important that computer simulation and forecasting models realistically represent the capabilities of expensive non-airport-owned rail infrastructure.

11 .IR4 Reducing Vehicular Airport Emissions Electric or low emission vehicles should be considered for on-airport traffic and for aircraft servicing.

|1 .IRS Lane Demarcation At large airports, the allocation of special lanes may be considered and reserved for higff occupancy vehicles, and the curbside area should segregate buses and taxis (inner lanes) from private vehicles (outer lanes)


ATA Airport Development Reference Manual

I1.IR6 Airside Service Road Sizes Airport service roads should have a minimum width of 10m, ideally 12m. This width is for the provision of two lanes of traffic. The preferred height clearance for these roads should be >4.2m <4.6m. The upper limit of 4.6m should be observed where airside vehicles are to travel beneath sections of the terminal building or pier or beneath the link bridges connecting the passenger boarding bridges rotundas with the terminal/pier infrastructure. It should be noted that the figures provided are design guidelines and should be adjusted to the local situation prevailing at the specific airport concerned. Service roads should be designed to accommodate self-propelled equipment with a swept turn radius of at least 8m:



Airport Access

In the planning stage, a full analysis of the airport rail access system is required: the capacity of the system needs to match the terminal and airside capacity. Close co-ordination between airport planners, local planning authorities and local transportation providers is necessary to ensure that proper and timely provision for the requirements, current and projected, is in the local or regional transportation plan and in the appropriate capital expenditure programmes. The demand for rail ground transportation between the airport and the metropolitan area it serves is generated by: originating and terminating passengers; meeters and greeters and other visitors (including those shopping or on business at the airport); airport and airline industry employees; cargo, express services and mail; and airport support and supply services. Advance planning is highly important. Surface rail access development plans should be part of the airport masterplans and development plans for the surrounding area. The forecast modal split between rail based access and road based access (private car, taxi, bus and other), can either be


There are several different types of rail access:

Metro rail. High speed dedicated. Regional and national. Light rail.

The characteristics of each type should be reviewed to decide which is best for the transfer processes in hand. Each type has evolved to meet local requirements.


Metro Rail System

The most common types of metro rail system are the subway, metro extension or station on a local commuter network. These are particularly good for employee access (because they are usually part of a network serving residential areas, and because the fare structure is geared to frequent travellers). An advantage to the railway operator is that many employees and air passengers travel out of or against the local peaks and therefore make good use of the spare capacity inherent in a commuter operation. However some North American variants of commuter rail only have a few peak trips in the peak direction only. Clearly this is unsuited to airport traffic and an expansion of service (to both directions, reverse commute, and trips throughout the day) would be required. This type is less good for air passengers especially those travelling long haul, with much baggage. There may not be appropriate accommodation on the trains, and the airport needs to be alert for problems and to be ready to liaise if necessary with the transport provider. There is a need for


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

12.2.2 High Speed Dedicated
The most popular type among passengers is the high quality dedicated airport express. There are about a dozen of these around the world, characterised by high speed limited stop services, and trains with a business class ambience and purpose built luggage accommodation. In some cases these provide in-town check-in. Many make a commitment to punctuality and reliability, with a scheme offering compensation for delays. In a number of cases, the timetable is such that there is always a train waiting for passengers they can wait for departure in the train rather than on the platform.

12.2.3 Regional
A regional rail service is valuable for increasing the airport catchment area as it can feed in traffic from nearby towns and cities. Frequency may be an issue, especially at hub airports; because trains serve a larger market than the airport, timings may not suit the classic hub and spoke operation with waves of inbound and outbound connecting flights.

12.2.4 Light Rail

Light rail is increasingly becoming a solution to the airport access problem, although as with suburban and metro systems it is more suited to employees than air passengers due to the types of rail carriages provided and their ability to deal with cumbersome baggage. However those passengers with only hand baggage especially may find its penetration into the conurbation valuable.



All types of rail access require investment plus the correct geography. If a rail line runs nearby, how easy would it be to connect it to the airport? If there is not an existing railway nearby, how can rail best be used to access the conurbation centre? New construction is costly and significant new build would require either a large airport or long distances from the centre (where the speed advantage is most beneficial) to justify the outlay. But when built, it can be highly attractive rail has a better image than bus and is therefore more efficient in changing modal share. A key lesson is that it needs to go where people want to go although if the airport is big enough and the service good enough, commercial development will be attracted to the city terminal area, making it a destination in its own right. The economic viability of different types of public transport bus, light and heavy rail will vary with the size of the market, local transportation policy and the nature of the market:

If the majority of users live locally, for example, they will be more likely to know about the
public transport alternatives but are more likely to have a car available.

If the majority are inbound tourists they will not have a car available.

If the majority are on inclusive tours, they are more likely to have buses pre-arranged for
onward travel.

The potential market share for public transport can be as high as 50%, although this needs dedication and excellence not least in marketing. Travel time on a dedicated high speed link can be significantly

Airport Access

There are a number of characteristics which airport planners should consider for the implementation of train systems. The assessment of the following characteristics should include: (i) The number of vehicles or carriages required to process the demand, (ii) The speed and frequency of the train operations required to meet the demand, (iii) Track and signal operating limitations, (iv) Compatibility with other train operating and station systems, (v) Operational flexibility of the train operating systems, (vi) Technology suitability.


Airport Station Characteristics

The location of the station(s) to serve the airport is important, especially if there is more than one terminal. If there is more than one station, there is a need for good signage and communications; although the railway can then be used for inter-terminal transport. Stations for cargo, maintenance, sightseeing or hotel areas are all possible, according to geography and demand. Here above all future expansion plans need to be borne in mind to ensure that the station a relatively fixed point will not be rendered out of date (or at least to ensure that the railway can continue to serve the airport efficiently). When planning the station, there is a need to consider the capacity of the access system. Provision for change of level needs to be appropriate for the numbers likely to be using them the likely volumes of passengers and baggage from peak trains. Facilities include:

Baggage trolleys. This can be an issue between the railway and airport. For understandable safety reasons, train companies prefer those where the brake is on unless released by a user. Many airports prefer those where the user is actually required to apply the brake when necessary.

Accommodation for change of level can include moving walkways, although here and on escalators trolley policy needs to be considered. Convenience and safety need to be balanced. Lifts/elevators are valuable especially for those with reduced mobility: they need to be designed to carry a stretcher if necessary. Ideally a choice should be provided some people are claustrophobic in lifts.

Check-in, away from the platforms but on the natural route from the platforms to the terminals, is valuable. It will facilitate passenger circulation and relieve stress by disencumbering them of their bags as early as possible. It reduces the need for trolleys and for circulation space on the route to the terminals, and may even reduce the need for check-in space in the terminals.

ln-town check-in and in-town check-out needs to be considered for the downtown terminal or at major interchanges. The facilities can range from self-service machines for those with just hand baggage via baggage drop systems, to full hold baggage check-in. Although these alternatives are popular among passengers, so far the economic case for them has been difficult to make. Everyone benefits, but matching the flow of costs and the flow of benefits can be



Good examples are in Madrid and Stuttgart (subway/metro); Heathrow, Oslo, Stockholm, Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur (high speed dedicated); Frankfurt and Paris Roissy-Charles de Gaulle (high speed network); Zurich, Geneve and Southampton (regional); and Portland (Oregon), BaltimoreWashington International and Bremen (light rail). Many high speed dedicated services charge a premium fare to reflect the premium product they are providing. There is little significant customer resistance to this, especially if there is a choice of rail service and especially if the airport has a high proportion of business users (who value their time highly). A premium fare for a non-premium service cashing in on a captive market does lead to customer resentment and resistance. Except in special cases (code-sharing, and airports with limited numbers of flights) it is not generally worthwhile attempting to co-ordinate flight times with train times. There is an unpredictable amount of time between the scheduled flight arrival time and arriving passengers finding the train flights can arrive early or late, and the need to reclaim baggage and complete arrival formalities are key factors. It is better to provide good information and a frequent service at least hourly for regional and high speed network, every 1 0 1 5 minutes for high speed dedicated and more frequent still for metro, suburban and light rail.



The scope for the use of rail for air cargo varies. Rail is well suited to carrying high bulk, low value products like building materials and most airports are building sites. Rail is valuable for bringing in fuel, where the choice is often between a pipeline (highly capital intensive but with low running costs) and a railway (lower capital cost, higher running cost). The use for pure air cargo is more complex. There have been few successes, usually where air cargo and domestic cargo can be consolidated on a single train. There is rarely enough air cargo between two points to cover the costs of a dedicated rail service: it needs to be combined and this tends to need the skills of a consolidator.



A good rail system will ease the journeys of passengers and employees, will reduce traffic on


Airport Access

IATA RECOMMENDATIONS I2.IR1 Sound Business and Environmental Case

The investment needed to provide dedicated airport rail provision can be very substantial. The business case should consider:

Cosf to the airport to provide the rail system. Cost to the airport not to provide the rail system. Public perception of the usefulness of the rail infrastructure proposed
; State of readiness from competing taxi and bus infrastructure and degree of market sales share likely. Assessment of travel times for all comparative modes of transport during normal and peak times. The environmental impact of providing or not providing a rait system should be evaluated. The effects to the local community in either situation should be established and informed decisions made accordingly.

I2.IR2 Complimentary Services The rail services proposed and provided should compliment airline short and long haul operations. Their should be no commercial conflict of interests on high speed long distance rail provisions serving the airport. .IR Promotion of Pail Services over Conventional Modes of Transport

Rail services should aim to attract staff and the travelling public by providing both cost effective and (^gyenient travel to and from airport facilities through the operational day and night period.

12.IR4 Integrated Approach Designers should provide rail facilities that: Have the capability with further investment in some cases to meet the operational requirements of the airport for the next 30 years. 'eet the needs of the passengers and the local community on opening.

Offer in-town or remote hotel check-in coordination, providing mechanisms, systems and railway carriages dedicated for moving and handling passenger check-in baggage and hand cabin sized baggage. Design systems which interact with one another thereby providing passengers seamless transition from the rail system to the airport environment.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



Passenger and staff travel via car to the airport is both attractive and convenient. Intermodal travel, which in this context means the principle of using one or more modes of transport to supplement the single mode of vehicular transport travel to and from the airport complex, is actively promoted by IATA. It is advantageous to the short and long term aspirations of airports to progress plans of intermodal travel, since it offers the airport complex the following advantages:

Passenger and staff car parking facilities become far less onerous in size and complexity. Traffic congestion and therefore road infrastructure can be correspondingly downsized. The resulting volume of road traffic and the environment impacted upon is lessened. Car parking road space saved can be used for expansion plans by the airport operator.

13.1.1 Incentives Schemes

It is difficult to change the mindset of passengers and staff, who often own expensive cars, to forego the convenience of their own vehicles for multiple modes of public transport to get to and from the airport. Clearly, to make this change viable, certain incentives should be made as a policy for the travelling staff and public:

Staff traveling at peak times could be offered discounted rail travel as an incentive. Staff which sign up to airport managed car sharing schemes could be given priority parking positions closer to the airport. Care is needed with these schemes to ensure that vehicles have the correct level of maintenance and insurance coverage. Passengers could be offered total door to door services with the use of integrated taxi and train ticket packages.

13.1.2 Disincentive Schemes

Similarly, to make this change viable, certain disincentives should also be made policy for staff travelling to and from the airport complex:

Passenger parking rates can be raised (though there are realistic limits to this, as high rates can ultimately deter passenger from travelling via aircraft). Staff car parks can be located on the airport perimeter, rather than close to passenger short and long term car parks, with bus links to the terminal. Staff APM car parking facilities can be offered to staff, but only with a payment. Other bonus schemes can be developed providing staff with a financial incentive to leave the APM car at home.

13.1.3 Developing an Intermodal Strategy

The airport operator must work with the local community, as well as with local transport companies that support the operational airport, to ensure together that a network and fare structure is advantageous to staff and passengers. The key attributes of well developed intermodal airport strategies can include:


Airport Access

Total commuter and passenger travel solutions the door-to-door approach. Optimization of all resources and facilities. A strategy than aligns with the masterplan aspirations for the developing and expanding airport operation .



This is valuable for airport access where water exists and where the geography is favourable. There is often little congestion and it is a popular way to get around especially with tourists. Boats, ferries and hovercraft are even efficient for crossing estuaries or significant volumes of water. It is important to include and consider all potential modes of transport to and from the airport and, where facets of the airport perimeter are waterways, the use of these facilities can be a favourable option for reducing road and rail traffic. Since ferry and jetfoil services require little infrastructure and no track, they are often a cheaper alternative to rail or road provision but should not be considered as options on there own. The effects of tides, adverse currents and weather can have a negative affect on services, and supplementary road and rail access provisions should be the primary mode of transport, especially for airports where passenger traffic exceeds 1 MPPA. Ferry and Jetfoil services should be co-ordinated and controlled by harbour masters and suitable water navigational services, incorporating equipment to aid safe travel to and from the airport complex.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Figure 13-1: Current Modal Split at Various International
Europe Amsterdam Brussels Copenhagen Frankfurt LondonGtw London Hrw Madrid Manchester Munich Paris CDG Paris CRY Rome Stockholm Zurich

to center



15 12 8 15 45 24 13 15 30 27 14 25 35 11

Journey time rrtn

10 20 12 10 30 16 12 13 40 29 34 35 20 10

Rank Ml pass freqrhr 2001

4 4 6 4to6 4 4 12 6 6 4 5 15 4 12 7,685,00 0 2,342,81 6 3,000,00 0 3,076,00 0 8,800,00 0 4,000,00 0 1,350,00 0 9,548,24 8 2,945,40 1 2,500,00 0 7,000,00 0

Est Mod plltfn%: 2005 Rail Bus | Taxi | Car |

9,000,00 0 3,500,00 0 33% 13% 37% 27% 21% 22% 14% 6% 28% 20% 13% 27% 15% 4200 % 4% 2% 4% 6% 9% 12 % 7% 11 % 7% 10 % 16 % 5% 17 % 5% 16% 20% 33% 19% 17% 26% 40% 28% 12% 37% 27% 32% 16% 10% 46 % 54 % 26 % 47 % 50 % 39 % 33 % 55 % 53 % 30 % 43 % 36 % 27 % 40 % 52 % 77 % 65 % 96 % 55 % 70 % 80 % 40 % 71 % 56 % 81 % 60 % 46 % 41 % 69 % 51 % 58 % 54 %

Car Total pk Parks spcos

3 6 13 2 4 9 13 10 37 7 7 5 7 29,900 9,900 6,550 36,500 27,000 18,220 15,217 17,461 31,500 15,970 14,891 16,500 16,000 20,000

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes


6,000,00 0 2,200,00 0 9,600,00 0 2,500,00 0 8,000,00 0

3% 1% 6%

25% 3%


Atlanta Baltimore Chicago ORD and rati Dallas Denver Honolulu Las Vegas Los Angeles

18 23 29 28 35 6 3 24 11 9 26 24 15 15 20 19 27


Mnreapdis Newark NY JFK NY Laguardia Orlando SanFrandsco Seattle Toronto

) ' ' ~mm

yes yes yes no no no no no yes no no yes yes no no no no no

15 34 45

15 3 6



1% 4%


45 20 40 60


0% 0% 290,000 3,800,00 0 6% 2%

4 4



12 % 14 % 8% 0% 33 % 25 % 5% 10 % 16 % 21 % 9% 4% 8% 7% 23 % 8% 1% 14 %

6% 7% 21% 1% 12% 5% 10% 50% 13% 23% 10% 29% 42% 52% 8% 11% 3% 32%

30% 1%


5 9 5 2 20 5 15 4 2 5 8 8 8 6 1 4

1% 2%

30% 38%

25,400 43,127 11,500 31,100 27,400 7,600 12,868 25,653 7,650 16,800 20.000 12000 10,400 18,800 536 11,232 14788

Bangkok Beijing Hong Kong Osaka Seoul Sydney Tokyo HND Tokyo NRT

24 25 34 38 17 8 20 66

yes no yes yes yes yes yes

23 29 55 10 16 60

6 10 3 6to12 20

15,000,0 00 6,502,12 4 7,400,00 0

34 % 24% 33 % 44% 14 30% % 35 % 8% 18 %

35% 31 % 15% 28 % 40 6% % 29 % 16% 51 %

3 1 5 7 5 25


9,024 5,616 4,200 5,553 6,460 7,573 8,405

| Mexico City


| yes |


| 10% I 15%| 25%| 50%|

| 5,902


13.3 13.3.1 INTERFACES Cars Buses And Taxis

Airport Access

Private cars, taxis and buses will need to interface with the terminals at the curbside. A major issue is curbside capacity and the potential for congestion, as well as the avoidance of queues and accidents. The following curbside facilities should be provided at the terminal complex:

Departure passengers drop off temporary stop, offload and go areas for cars and taxis. Departures passengers drop off accommodating park and ride bus schemes. Arriving passengers pick up temporary stop on load and go areas for cars and taxis. Arriving passengers pick up accommodating park and ride bus schemes.

It is essential that signage is clear to all passengers and that simple routes to and from the areas dedicated to the above functions are adequately sized and positioned. Buses usually use fixed stopping points: there is a need to ensure that these are reasonably convenient for terminals. It is advantageous to accommodate taxi standby parking remotely (off airport) and provide a dedicated holding area for taxis so that the terminal complex does not become congested with competing taxi traffic. Taxis can be controlled into the airport complex by on-demand flow management processes. This ensures the taxi areas are adequately supplied with taxis at the correct time and that all taxi companies with licences to operate at the private airport have equal opportunity to pick up fares. The


I3.IR1 Intermodality Strategy Airport Planners md operators shouldWevelop co-ordinated intermodality stiategy plans. These should present the opportunity to reduce normal road traffic by no less than 10% if implemented successfully, which should be the objective.

13.162 Taxi Processes

Airport Planners and operators should consider the provision of coordinated taxi flow monitoring^ schemes, ensunng that unused taxis are held in rank on the airport perimeter rather man adjacent to the airport terminal itself. Taxis should be called from a taxi rank on the airport perimeter,


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Chapter J Passenger Terminal Section J1: Outline of Principle Functions J1.1 General Introduction............................................................................... J 1.2 Terminal Concept..................................................................................... J 1.3 Major Functional Areas ........................................................................... J 1.4 IATA Recommendations ......................................................................... Section J2: Categories of Passenger Terminal J2.1 Centralized vs. Decentralised Facilities .................................................. J2.2 Description of Terminal Concepts............................................................ J2.3 Processing Levels .................................................................................... J2.4 Design and Construction.......................................................................... J2.5 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section J3: Small Airport Terminals J3.1 Small Airport Terminals Overview .......................................................... J3.2 Terminal Space & Functionality............................................................... J3.3 Development of Small Airports ............................................................... J3.4 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section J4: Common Systems CUTE & CUSS J4.1 Automated Passenger Processing........................................................... J4.2 CUTE........................................................................................................ J4.3 CUSS ....................................................................................................... J4.4 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section J5: Airline Communications Networks J5.1 Internet Connectivity ............................................................................. J5.2 Shared Extranet Connectivity ................................................................. J5.3 Integrated Wide Area Networks (WAN) & Local Area Networks (LAN) .... J5.4 CUTE Type Systems Connectivity............................................................. J5.5 Wireless Communications......................................................................... J5.6 IATA Recommended Practice................................................................... Section J6: Passenger Processing Facilities Planning J6.1 Passenger Flows..................................................................................... J6.2 Flow Routes ............................................................................................ J6.3 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section J7: Concession Planning J7.1 Public Terminal Retail Concession Service Areas ................................... J7.2 Location of Retail Facilities ..................................................................... J7.3 Sizing Retail Concessions ......................................................................... J7.4 Concession Servicing & Storage ............................................................. J7.5 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... 289 290 293 300 301 304 315 316 317 318 319 319 319 320 320 323 324 325 326 326 328 329 330 331 335 339 340 341 342 343 343


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Section J8: Maintenance J8.1 ICAO Requirements ................................................................................ J8.2 Preventative Maintenance Strategies ................................................... J8.3 Typical Structural / Infrastructure Faults................................................... J8.4 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section J9: Check-In J9.1 General................................................................................................... J9.2 Typical Check-In Concepts ....................................................................... J9.3 Check-In Hall............................................................................................ J9.4 Check-In Counter Design.......................................................................... J9.5 IATA Recommendations .......................................................................... Section J10: People Mover Systems J 10.1 Automated People Movers (APM) ........................................................ J10.2 APM Applications at Airports ................................................................. J 10.3 APM Planning Considerations ................................................................ J10.4 Level of Service Criteria......................................................................... J10.5 Type of APM Car Occupants.................................................................... J 10.6 APM Car Occupancy Demand................................................................ J 10.7 Characteristics of APM Car Occupants ................................................. J10.8 APM Configurations/Operational Modes.................................................. J10.9 APM Technologies ................................................................................. J10.10 APM System Integration Into Facilities.................................................... J10.11 IATA Recommendations ....................................................................... Section J11: Passenger Boarding Bridges J 11.1 Objectives of Passenger Boarding Bridges .......................................... J11.2 Types of Passenger Boarding Bridge...................................................... J11.3 The Rotunda/Link Bridge/Emergency Escape.......................................... J11.4 The Telescopic Tunnel Slope .................................................................. J11.5 Stand Setting Out Configurations ......................................................... J11.6 The Apron Slope Effect........................................................................... J11.7 IATA Recommendations ........................................................................ Section J12: Signage J 12.1 General Signage Philosophy: Overview .............................................. J12.2 Principles............................................................................................... J12.3 Wayfinding.............................................................................................. J12.4 Electronic Visual Information Systems (EVIDS) ..................................... J 12.5 Types of EVIDS ..................................................................................... J 12.6 Types of Display Technologies............................................................... J12.7 Reference Documents .......................................................................... J 12.8 IATA Recommendations ....................................................................... 344 345 346 347 348 348 349 351 355 356 357 358 358 358 359 359 359 360 360 361 362 363 364 366 367 367 368 370 371 373 374 376 378 380 380



The main objective of this chapter is to identify the principal considerations in planning the passenger terminal complex, to describe the factors which can impact on the passenger experience and level of service provided, and to offer criteria and terms for evaluation of the inputs necessary for the planning process. The terminal building, and its surrounding apron, is the primary processing interface that lies between the various modes of surface access and airside infrastructure systems; i.e. taxiways and runways. The level of satisfaction gained while passing through the structure when departing, transferring or arriving will, to a large extent, impact on the willingness of the passenger to repeat the experience of flying through that country and airport again. The experience gained will also in part influence the passenger's view of the airline flown, as the two are inextricably linked. From a passenger's viewpoint, base expectations rarely exceed the provision of quick, easy and comfortable transfers from one point in the terminal to another. Building aesthetics, while important, are just one of many factors that have secondary influence on the overall terminal experience. To the airline the terminal building is a much more complex facility. The speed in which their passengers are processed is fundamental to their overall operational effectiveness. While airlines can control delays attributable to check-in and (to some extent) on time departures and arrivals, they must also be prepared for any possible variance with respect to passenger processing at customs and passport control. The behind-the-scenes baggage-handling capabilities also influence an airline's ability to provide adequate levels of service to its passengers. Baggage that does not travel in tandem with the passenger is an expensive fault to rectify. Central to all of this is the need to keep aircraft groundtime to a safe and workable minimum. To many airport authorities the terminal building is the vehicle by which they can extract valued revenue from the airport users; namely the airlines and their passengers. While the airlines recognise and accept that a degree of commercialisation is required, particularly if this is implemented within a 'single till' user charges framework, they have difficulty in coming to terms with facilities that have the ability to adversely impact on the efficiency or effectiveness of their routine operations, or that detract from the airport level of service anticipated by their passengers. Finally, to many consultants and airport authorities, the terminal building can be viewed as an




J1.2.1 Considerations IATABasic Airport Development

Reference Manual

The design of passenger terminals must be related closely to the runway/taxiway system, apron configuration and the airport access system. The requirements of the major airline users should be fully understood. The base carrier and/or airline alliance group strategies should be equally evaluated and considered. This will play an important role in the layout and flexibility of the airport terminal building. The types and category of aircraft that can be accommodated by the runway system will dictate the permissible terminal concept layouts. The terminal concept will also relate closely to the type of airline and passenger business markets proposing to use the facility. The overall extent and location of the terminal building will be governed by the ultimate development potential of the airport, as contained within the airport's master plan. The size of the individual phases leading up to the ultimate development stage is determined through an analysis of the schedules of all the airlines serving the airport, their annual movements, the average passenger per aircraft movement measurement and the resultant total peak hour flows for departing, transfer and arriving passengers. As developed further in this chapter, certain basic criteria should be observed in the planning of passenger terminals and the selection of a terminal concept. The criteria include those considerations outlined below.

J1.2.1.1 Building Sub-systems

The passenger terminal complex should be considered as a series of interconnected subsystems, each capable of expansion when demand dictates. These are:

The main passenger processor. For departing passengers this comprises the departures
concourse and main check-in areas. For arriving passengers this comprises the baggage reclaim and arrivals concourse areas. health checks & customs control).

Outbound and inbound government inspection services (passport control, security checks,
Primary & centralised holding areas; i.e. the main departure lounge. Secondary & dispersed holding areas; i.e. finger piers and/or satellites containing gate hold

rooms. Concession areas: both land-side and airside.

J1.2.1.2 Modularity & Expandability

A modular design philosophy is required such that capacity enhancements can be easily added to



Passenger Terminal

J1.2.1.3 Wayfinding and Passenger Orientation Following from the previous criteria, it is important to mention the difficulties that can be experienced by passengers when they're presented with multiple choices in terms of the directions to be taken. In order to simplify the process as much as possible, the number of choices available needs to be reduced to an absolute minimum; e.g. one passenger terminal complex. In this way passengers and their meeters and greeters have no alternatives to choose from. Consider the difficulties inherent in facilities where passengers have multiple terminal departure variables to choose from at a single airport. Passenger orientation within the terminal can be greatly enhanced by adopting a transparent building philosophy. There is no simpler way to orientate passengers than to allow them to see their final terminal destination. For departing or transfer passengers this means partial or unobstructed views of aircraft. For arriving passengers this means sight lines towards land-side surface access systems and/or meeter/greeter areas. The clear glass approach can only be applauded in this respect. Passengers can be effectively led from one area to another through the passenger handling process without the need for extensive and expensive signage systems. Directional information should only be needed to support ancillary facilities that may be away from the primary, clearly evident circulation routes; i.e. to information/transfer counters, to CIP lounges, to toilets and associated support functions, etc. Passengers should not be subjected to changes in direction greater than 90 degrees and should not be made to perform repeated 90 degree turns within a short distance. In no instance should passengers J1.2.1.4 Passenger Cross-flows Situations where passenger flow routes cross should be avoided, as these will cause confusion and, in instances where disabled or assisted vehicular passenger transfers are also present, may be dangerous as well. J1.2.1.5 Compatibility & Flexibility Gate hold rooms in piers and satellites should be sized to accommodate the largest aircraft envisaged to be handled on the apron. Parking positions and particularly contact stands for aircraft should be designed with built-in flexibility to accommodate larger future generation aircraft. Current longer length variants such as the B737-900, A340-600 and B777-300 need to be considered. Piers and satellites should have expansion zones reserved in order to allow for this degree of flexibility.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

JT.2.1.6 Short Travel Distances The distances between aircraft for transfers, and between differing modes of surface access systems and aircraft for both departing and arriving passengers, should be kept to a minimum. Distances in excess of 300 metres should be provided with moving walkways. At all times where departing and arriving passengers are with hold baggage they should be provided with assistance in the form of baggage trolleys. Terminal systems (lifts, escalators and moving walkways) should permit passenger movement without the need to off-load and reload trolleys when changing levels. They should also permit other passengers to overtake, with or without baggage trolleys. On the airside of the passenger terminal complex, baggage trolleys should be smaller, more user friendly and reflect the need to only carry permitted cabin baggage. They should be capable of being accommodated within all concession outlets. Passenger flow routes should not be deliberately manipulated such that they are redirected through concession areas, especially when shorter, more direct routes are possible. Passengers who wish to make quick, easy and direct routings through terminals should be allowed to do so. Dedicated fast-track procedures, especially for premium traffic, may be warranted. J1.2.1.7 Minimal Level Changes If possible, departing and arriving passengers should not be required to change levels. If changes are required then these should be limited to a single level. In extreme cases, where difficult site conditions, existing operations or building structures leave no alternative, then multiple level changes are certainly required and should be achieved by unbroken escalators. Multiple escalators deliberately designed and configured to route passengers through concession areas should not be viewed as good practice. J1.2.1.8 Safe and Secure Environment Passengers transferring between aircraft or beginning or ending their journey, should at all times be visible and monitored within a controlled, safe and secure environment. Parking structures and bus and rail interchange stations should be well lit, with short, direct, easilyobserved links to terminal buildings. Payment areas and/or cash dispensing outlets should be easily recognised and be located within the main terminal building. Remote and isolated payment stations should not be considered. J1.2.1.9 Cost Effective Design Solutions Capital expenditure proposals to extend or construct new passenger terminal facilities should be substantiated by a business case and cost benefit analysis that has been vetted and agreed with the users. The business case must demonstrate clear benefits in terms of increased capacity to satisfy existing and projected demand and improved operational efficiency that result in cost savings to the user. As outlined in section J1.2.1.2., it would be preferred if new construction could be viewed as an additional module to be added to an existing but expandable operational system. Design, management and construction costs should be minimised by adopting a repetitive, low risk approach which should not adversely impact on existing airline operations. Expensive, above-average cost solutions with unique architectural fixtures and fittings or engineering features should be avoided. Simple,


J1.2.1.10 Passenger Segregation

Passenger Terminal

When developing plans for expanded terminal capacity, either through an extension to an existing facility or construction of a new terminal area, the requirement to physically separate non-secure arriving and transfer passengers from departing security screened passengers must be taken into consideration. This is particularly important where piers and satellites (that achieve segregation by positioning arriving and departing passengers on separate levels) also afford the opportunity to airport authorities to achieve a high degree of flexibility especially when needing to serve different markets and/or percentages of traffic types at differing times of the same day. For more detailed information on passenger security and screening considerations, please refer to Chapters H and K in this manual. J1.2.1.11 Centralisation In the process of planning a terminal concept, airport authorities and/or their consultants must determine the degree of centralisation of the processing activity required, or the degree that can be accommodated by the base carrier, alliance partnerships and other carriers. In centralised concepts all the major components including surface access systems, passenger processing and baggage handling systems are all located in a single passenger terminal complex, independent of any particular traffic segment. In this type of configuration airlines and alliances can avoid unnecessary duplication of activities, common facilities can be shared and associated CAPEX and level-of-user charges can therefore be reduced. As the degree of centralisation decreases the individual components become more dispersed, with functions spread out over a number of self-contained centres. In a completely decentralised



J1.3.1 Curb
(See Chapter Q for details).

J1.3.2 Departures Concourse or Check-in Hall

The departures concourse consists of various public and non-public areas. These include circulation and waiting areas, public facilities, airline ticket sales & service counters and check-in facilities (passenger and baggage). J1.3.2.1 Circulation and Waiting Areas The circulation and waiting areas extend from the front facade of the terminal up to the front of, or in some cases immediately behind, the check-in facilities. The total area includes a general circulation area parallel to the facade, a public seating area, a queuing area for passengers in front of the checkin counters, and an additional passenger circulation area either in front of or behind the check-in counters depending upon the actual check-in counter layout (linear or pass-through). This area should be completely open so that passengers arriving through the entrance doors have an unobstructed view of the check-in area and can easily locate where they should proceed for check-in. In an ideal


J1.3.2.2 Public Facilities


Public facilities include the concessions, telephones, airport information desks, toilets, etc. Such facilities should be located in areas which are not contiguous to the check-in facilities, in order to Airport Development Reference Manual promote the most efficient and uniform utilisation of the concourse areas. This policy will also assist planners in expanding the check-in hall by adding further modules to either side of the check-in area. In countries with high visitor-to-passenger ratios, appropriate arrangements should be provided to prevent the non-travelling public from approaching the check-in facilities. Directional and information signage should be prominently located in the public areas.

J1.3.2.3 Airline Ticket Sales and Service Counters Ticket sales and service counters are required for passengers who have not purchased tickets prior to arrival at the airport, and for passengers who wish to change reservations, flight class or pay for excess baggage. Such counters should be orientated along the normal line of passenger flow, but without inhibiting the flow of passengers at check-in. A good location for ticket sales and service counters is parallel to the front facade of the terminal between the entrance doorways, and on the same level within the terminal as the main check-in counter concourse. Unlike common check-in counters, airlines usually require their own dedicated ticket sales and service counters. These counters provide each airline with a sales presence in the terminal. J1.3.2.4 Check-in Facilities For maximum flexibility, space should be allocated for two inter-linked take-away belts within each check-in island. Each belt should be capable of supporting up to 20 desks (maximum). The two reversible belts should be linked by means of a 180-degree turn, thereby providing maximum flexibility and a high degree of redundancy (should feed conveyors with the BHS fail or be off-line for maintenance or repair). Check-in facilities should also take into account the needs of passengers travelling on e-tickets. Selfservice counters need to be conveniently located, with some requiring direct feeds for self tagged bags onto baggage conveyors. See sections J9 and U2 for further details. J1.3.2.5 Airline Offices Airline passenger processing support offices are required in close proximity to the check-in area. The amount of space required by each airline and/or handling agency will vary depending upon such factors as the volume of traffic or the type of handling service performed. Airlines will also require additional administrative offices, which may be located in other areas of the terminal but with convenient access to the passenger processing areas. Airline support offices are also required in the airside concourses close to their aircraft operation areas.

J1.3.2.6 Special Facilities

Special facilities may be required, depending on the kind of traffic. These may include but not be limited to:


J1.3.2.7 Area Requirements

Passenger Terminal

Area requirements for circulation, queuing and waiting and for the various facilities within the departure concourse are influenced by the following:

Number of peak hour departing passengers (including the number of transfer passengers not
processed airside).

Airline schedules and procedures. Type of traffic (international, domestic, charter, low frills; long, medium or short haul). Check-in counter configuration & the percentage of passengers using e-tickets).

Level of service required, including area allowed per passenger and permissible max. queuing

Visitor-to-passenger ratio. Average processing time.

J1.3.3 Baggage Handling Systems J1.3.4 Passport Control Outbound & Inbound
See Chapter K for details.

J1.3.5 Security Positions

See Chapter H for details.

J1.3.6 Departure Lounges J1.3.6.1 General

Common departure lounges, gate lounges and transit lounges may occur in terminals as three separate areas, in combination, or as one. The design layout depends greatly on the traffic characteristics, government controls and airline procedures, as they apply to the three main categories of passengers who use departure lounge facilities, namely:

Originating passengers arriving from the landside. Transfer passengers arriving at the airside and transferring to another flight who should be processed on the airside. Transit passengers arriving at the airside and continuing their trip on the same flight, who should always remain on the airside.

When determining the various departure lounge requirements, duplication of space and manpower should be avoided by giving full consideration to combining, where possible, the various lounge functions. Similarly, a lounge combination will facilitate the consolidation of concessions, which may


J1.3.6.2 Common Departure Lounge

At most international airports, a common departure lounge should be provided to accommodate originating passengers who have checked-in early and have cleared government controls, but who still await their boarding gate details. Transit and transfer passengers with long connecting times also tend to dwell in this area.


At small-scale airports it may not be cost-effective to provide separate departure lounge and gate lounge facilities. At these airportsReference it will, however,Manual be necessary to delineate parts of the common Airport Development lounge as boarding areas for specific flights (i.e. gate lounges within the common departure lounge). The following functions should be considered for inclusion in the common departure lounge:

Adequate seating to accommodate the forecast passenger loads; this requirement varies with the boarding procedures to be used by individual airlines.

Flight information displays to indicate the departure time, gate, and boarding status of each flight. Airline information desks to provide assistance to passengers; these may include processing counters for transfer passengers. Concessions; including restaurants, bars, shops and duty-free. Toilet facilities. Public address systems to announce gate variations and/or delays.

In order to determine the size requirements of the departure lounge, it is recommended that a passenger flow model be developed which takes into account flow rates, transit and transfer passenger requirements, availability of gate lounges, average load factors, etc. Using the passenger figures derived from the model, the space calculation for the departure lounge area (excluding concessions except bar/restaurant/snack bar) should be based on the passenger space provisions referred to in Section F9, Fig. F9.3. At airports with a large percentage of transfer and/or transit passengers, the required space allocation will be considerable. Requirements for government controls, as well as the location of these controls (landside/airside) and their effect on passenger flow must also be considered. It will be important for the main individual airport processes (check-in/immigration/passport control/


IATA Gate Lounge J1.3.6.3

Passenger Terminal

Gate lounges and their associated circulation space are the main components of both finger piers and satellites. The maximum size of aircraft handled, the maximum number of gates proposed and the maximum assumed peak hour flows of arriving, departing, transfer and transit passengers in the ultimate stage will determine the width required to support assumed flows. The gate lounge is provided as an assembly area for passengers in transition between the main processor and the aircraft, and under certain conditions for passengers in transit. Usually, concessions are not located in the individual lounges, but may be located within the pier or satellite. Where a gate lounge is designed to serve high capacity aircraft which will be boarded through more than one door, access to the lounge should be arranged so as to allow passenger a direct and simple flow through to the appropriate door. Passengers usually have access to the passenger loading bridge through a security door, after having their boarding pass checked and automatically recorded by an airline agent as part of a passenger/ baggage reconciliation process. Because of the requirement to separate departing and arriving international passengers, a ramp is often used to move passengers from the gate lounge level down to a bridge node at a lower level before entering the loading bridge. The use of escalators to move passengers from the gate lounge on one level, to the entrance, to the passenger boarding bridge on a lower level is not acceptable for safety reasons. Passenger queues will form at the entrance to the passenger boarding bridge and passengers coming down the escalator may be injured due to congestion problems at the foot of the escalator. The gate lounge may serve multiple aircraft positions and be divisible into separate areas for passengers (separation according to airline boarding procedures). In such cases, some concessions may be located in the combined lounge area. When required, the gate lounge may include those facilities necessary for the operation of a gate check-in system; e.g. communications, check-in desks, baggage acceptance, etc. Toilets are not normally required in each gate lounge but should be in a general area, conveniently located with respect to each lounge. If, however, a decentralised gate security check is to be implemented, it will be necessary to construct toilets in each gate lounge. The following table is offered as guidance in assessing the space requirements for individual departure gate lounges. The following assumptions are made:

Only 70% of passengers will be accommodated in the gate lounge simultaneously (column 2). IATA level of service A @ 1.4 sqm/passenger (column 4).

20% of available gate width is used for circulation, toilets, building services and structure
(column 9). Note: IATA level of service A @ 1.4 sqm/passenger was used instead of Level of service C @ 1.0 sqm/passenger such that a worst case scenario could be established in terms of pier width.


Figure J1-1: Table Defining Pier/Gate Lounge Widths

aircraft code & type No. % of PAX Max. no of PAX (3) Level of service scrnPAX (4) Floor area req. (5) Max. Clearance Max. % aircr between width aft aircraft of gate span (6) (7) 7.5 7.5 7.5 4.5 (8) 40.5 59.5 72.5 87.5 (9) 20 20 20 20 Depth Width available of gate req. (10) 26.4 40.6 51.0 61.0 (11) 5.6 6.3 7.7 8.9

(D (2)

150 70 105 Reference 1.4 147 Manual 36 IATA CAirport Development D (B767-300ER) E (B747-400)

281 70 400 70 555 70

183 260 389

1.4 1.4 1.4

256 392 544

52 65 80


All dimensions in metres. Please also refer to Section F9.10.4

J1.3.6.4 Transit Lounges

At most airports, transit passengers who disembark from their aircraft during servicing are accommodated in either the gate lounge or the common departure lounge. If local requirements make it necessary to provide a separate lounge for transit passengers, the area should be commensurate with demand and be equipped in a similar manner to other types of lounges.

J1.3.7 Airline CIP Lounges

At many international as well as domestic airports, the airlines have a marketing requirement to provide special lounges to accommodate their Commercially Important Passengers (CIPs). This requirement has grown significantly in recent years to become a major customer service element, and most airlines will require generously sized space for their exclusive use. These lounges should be located on the airside of the terminal building and preferably on the departures level, with views and convenient access to the airline's departure gates. Larger airlines will tend to combine their exclusive requirements into multiple function rooms by passenger category (First Class, Business Class and others). These larger spaces normally require their own exclusive toilets, showers and kitchens, and access by elevators and/or escalators, for which the airlines are generally willing to pay a reasonable rate. Airlines may also request facilities for arriving premium passengers. These are generally located land-side, adjacent to the arrivals concourse.


J1.3.8 Airside Circulation

Passenger Terminal
The airside corridor, if any, is the walkway by which passengers move between aircraft, between aircraft and the baggage reclaim area on arrival, or between the lounges and aircraft on departure. The corridor should be large enough to accommodate forecast volumes of departing and/or arriving passengers and should be unencumbered with distractions, such as displays or advertising that detract from pertinent information regarding departure or arrival areas. The design of an appropriate number of exits from the departure lounge, as well as entrances to the government control and other arrival areas, must be part of the airside corridor analysis. At airports with a large percentage of transfer traffic, provision must be made to permit the direct transfer of passengers between two international flights without a requirement to clear government controls. Circulation areas may narrow as the extremity of the pier/satellite is reached. Pier/satellite circulation areas should allow for moving walkways (one in each direction when distances exceed 300m) and sufficient space to accommodate walking passengers with baggage trolleys, wheelchairs and vehicular traffic on either side. 8 10m is an assumed maximum width for this circulation zone. In piers and satellites, moving walkway lengths should be determined with convenient gate access points in mind.

J1.3.9 Airline Operations Area

The Operations Area is frequently the designation given to the area occupied by airlines and ground handling personnel who handle the aircraft while it is on the ground. It is usually located near the apron and includes the area required for the flight crew and flight attendants as well as airline and ground handling personnel assigned to ground service operations. Certain amenities for personnel; e.g. wash rooms, lunchrooms, locker rooms, together with support areas for stores, are also located in this area. The area for flight crew and flight attendants may also include facilities for flight planning, weather, and flight information. This accommodation, which is usually provided within a pier, satellite or in the main processor, is not required at every airport. However, depending upon the number of flights per day and the type of aircraft (an aircraft may have as many as 18 crew members), the size and complexity of these facilities will be more or less as described above. The area for ground service personnel may consist of separate areas related to cabin service, line maintenance, sanitation and ground servicing equipment. Such areas may include storage and workshop facilities. Secure areas for fragile or valuable items and for the storage of volatiles (with appropriate safeguards) may also be required. Normally, it will not be necessary to locate some of the foregoing (e.g. equipment maintenance shops) in the vicinity of the aircraft parking position. Current and forecast requirements for the airlines in the operational area should be carefully evaluated in relation to the areas available or projected. Expansion requirements beyond the initial area provided are generally small.

J1.3.10 Baggage Re-claim Area

To assist wayfinding and passenger orientation, consideration should be given to having glazed partitions between reclaim areas and the meeter/greeter area.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

J1.3.11 Arrivals Concourse
This facility provides a short-term waiting area for the meeters and greeters awaiting passengers, together with a separate circulating area. Information and ground transportation concession facilities should be provided for those passengers requiring such services. Facilities for car rental, hotel reservations, currency exchange, and cash withdrawals should also be available. Area requirements are based on exit flow rates and airline schedules, greeter/passenger ratios and the geometry and relationship of waiting-to-exit areas. This latter criterion requires schematic design evaluation for comparison purposes. Further reference in this regard should be made to Chapters U and F in this manual.


J1.IR1 Passenger Terminal Design The Passenger Terminal Complex should be designed in a modular fashion such that expansion of the terminal's inter-connected sub-systems can be easily and cost effectively achieved, without negatively impacting upon existing airline operations. J1 .IR2 Passenger Considerations The Passenger Terminal Complex should be planned such that passengers can easily orientate themselves within the building complex, without need or reference to signage systems. A transparent building philosophy should be adopted. The design should promote compatibility and flexibility to accommodate the changing needs of the airlines, should be compact to reduce travel distances, have minimal level changes and feel safe and secure to the passenger.

J1.IR3 Passenger Segregation Authorities should seek and take advice from their State and make reference to pertinent ICAO material, including Annex 17 and their Security Manual, when considering the need to adopt policy with respect to passenger segregation. Appropriate Regional legislation should also be followed.


Passenger Terminal

J2.1.1 Introduction
The primary question to be answered at the beginning of the conceptual design process is whether to have a single centralised passenger processing area, or a series of multiple terminal units. The decision is influenced by many factors, including the need:

To provide and maintain facilities that allow comparable levels of service to be provided; Of the dominant base carrier(s) and of competing alliance partnerships; Of the market and the passenger types to be served; To be flexible to accommodate the changing needs of the primary user; i.e. the airlines; To recognise the economies of scale. While airlines do compete for market share, they do so increasingly by working together from common operational platforms. While they prefer to work from facilities that advertise their location and corporate identity, this does not automatically mean stand-alone facilities. Airlines need a connections system capable of delivering transfer passengers efficiently and effortlessly. The passenger of today respects no boundaries and will freely switch between airlines in a relentless pursuit of cheaper fares and better levels of service. In the same way the regular passenger will not suffer poor facilities and will quickly switch his or her preference from one transfer airport to another.

J2.1.2 Centralised System

A centralised system is usually comprised of an area that provides the processing for all passengers and baggage regardless of their originating airline. For large airlines, particularly if they are the base carrier with all-day operations, dedicated check-in facilities will be established which will in turn be used by their alliance partners. Separate shared facilities will also be provided for those airlines with infrequent operations, and services and concessions are also centralised both land-side and airside. Passengers proceed to gates via airside corridors or passenger transport systems (TTS and/or bus). The main advantage of this system is the economies of scale achieved by the intensive use of services (check-in desks, Government Inspection Services, baggage reclaim, etc.) within the main processor. The cost effectiveness of the terminal is increased by the maximum use of space that is only possible with each airline contributing into the overall system. This achieves one of the basic planning objectives, to maximise the use of all facilities. As a consequence, it is difficult to argue in favour of decentralised facilities due to the inherent benefits and economies of working under one roof or operating without the need to duplicate facilities or operating systems.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

J2.1.3 De-Centralised System
The decentralised system provides very short distances from the car park or curb to the aircraft door. The epitome of this system is the Gate-Arrival system. This system benefits commuters, who can get in and out of the airport in a short time. Passenger services (check-in, baggage claim) are usually provided at, or in close vicinity to each gate. The disadvantages of this system include separate service facilities (check-in desks, Government Inspection Services, baggage reclaim etc.) for one or a small number of gates. This increases the cost of equipment and personnel. The layout is linearly distributed resulting in long distances between gates. This can be frustrating for transfer passengers at larger airports.

J2.1.4 Corporate Identity

A major factor in deciding upon the exact type of facility is the issue of corporate identification. Many airlines, in attempting to advertise and promote themselves, choose to use exclusive facilities which range from check-in counters, CIP & VIP lounges and dedicated gate hold rooms. In North America, airlines have traditionally located themselves in unique stand-alone facilities built to support the continent's hub and spoke system. Within Europe there are moves to co-locate all alliance facilities under one roof or within one easily identifiable area, such that the alliance can monitor and maintain agreed service levels. It is therefore essential for the planners to know what the airlines require. Effective and meaningful consultation is a prerequisite in the preparation of conceptual terminal designs. Inadequate or nonexistent levels of consultation may result in abortive work, programme delays, disputes or unnecessary expense to accommodate design alterations during later stages of the design process.

J2.1.5 Alliance Strategies

A current trend that is positively affecting the sharing of facilities are airline alliances and code sharing agreements between airlines. In this scenario, all airlines publicise the flight under their corporate logo, however only one aircraft is used and the check-in for both airlines is undertaken at one counter (usually done at the more dominant airline's counter). If this is the only flight for the 'minor' airline, individual counter space may not be required at that airport. Another positive trend is that airlines are combining resources in order to build cost effective and functional terminals suited to their needs. Air France, Japan Airlines and Korean Air have developed a terminal that they jointly manage and operate out of.

J2.1.6 Passenger Needs

From the passenger's viewpoint, it is important to note what makes one terminal better than another.


J2.1.6.1 Ease Of Making Connections With Other Flights

Passenger Terminal

Increased competitive strategies have encouraged airlines to form global alliances and streamline their route operations. More and more, passengers are therefore being directed through airline hubs. This makes the transfer process and hence the ease of making connections with other flights a significant factor for travellers. This is especially true when transfer times are limited, which is often the case in sophisticated 'hub and spoke' airline networks. Ranking Under IS Over 40 mppa ?':) - w IS - 25
1 2 3 Dubai Athens Eleftherious Vienna Copenhagen Sydney Incheon Singapore Changi Minneapolis/St Paul's Amsterdam Atlanta Hartsfield Chicago Dallas Fort Worth

J2.1.6.2 Comfortable Waiting/Gate Areas With travellers spending a great deal of time at the airport before their flights depart, there is a need for a relaxing environment to ease travel stress and promote the enjoyment of the travel experience. Comfortable waiting/gate areas can make the time at airports more pleasant and enhance the overall travel experience. Under IS 15-25 25-40 )', :<>i> UUIPP.i
1 2 3 Dubai Athens Bermuda Incheon Sydney Vancouver Singapore Changi Hong Kong Minneapolis/St Paul's
Ailanta Hartsfield

Dallas Fort Worth Chicago

J2.1.6.3 Ground Transportation To/From The Airport Accessibility, transportation systems and intermodality are some of the major challenges facing airports. A first-rate, integrated transportation system can improve travelling to the airport, and in so doing the airport will also help to expand their catchment area. It should be noted that the recent tightening of airport security measures has slowed down the development of rail and airport collaborations, such as rail station check-in. MIEI' MIW P,'.r.w -i-i

- >j

25-40 Singapore Changi Hong Kong London Gatwick

1 2

Dubai Bermuda Geneva

Copenhagen Zurich Stockholm Arlanda

Over 44 mppa Atlanta Hartsfield Frankfurt Chicago

J2.1.6.4 Parking Facilities Over the last decade, air travel has increased significantly and put more pressure on airports as they continue to try to support passengers and provide at least the same level of service as before. Parking facilities are directly affected by increased passenger numbers and represents another opportunity
Ranking 1 2

Under 15



Over 40 mppa

Dubai Bermuda Athens Eleftherious

Copenhagen Taipei Vancouver

Singapore Changi Hong Kong Amsterdam

Frankfurt Chicago Dallas Fort Worth


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

J2.1.6.5 Summary of Findings & Other Categories
Atlanta, Singapore Changi, Copenhagen and Dubai rank top in their respective size categories for Overall Passenger Satisfaction. Other categories include Flight Information Displays, Availability of Flights to Cities in the Same or Other Continents, Baggage Carts, Washrooms, Government Inspection Services, Cleanliness of Airport Terminal, Speed of Baggage Delivery, Sense of Security and Ambience of the Airport.



Each airport has it own individual design characteristics. However, all these designs can be narrowed down into 5 distinctive terminal concepts:

Pier/finger. Linear. Open apron. Satellite. Compact module unit terminal.

A description and a tabulation of the major advantages and disadvantages of each of the above concepts is given in the following sub-sections. It should be noted that there are many variations in the respective shape of each of the noted major categories. In the past, airport authorities satisfied demand for new passenger processing facilities by constructing unit terminal systems. These consisted of a combination of the above concepts (i.e. satellites, piers/ fingers, linear, etc.) in various shapes and sizes. Previous thinking was that each unit could function independently. This has proven not to be the case. While in the past space was not at a premium and facilities could be placed on demand and with ease within a site, this is no longer the case. Greater attention needs now to be paid to how the airport should be planned efficiently and effectively in the longer term (see Chapter C Master Planning). In recent years there has been a tendency, certainly at 'Greenfield' and 'Bluesea' airports, to move towards mega terminal systems (e.g. Hong Kong CLK at 87 mppa). Economies of scale, functional design, compact single operational systems, modularity and expandability are now the fundamental driving forces behind modern day terminal design.


J2.2.1 Pier/Finger Concept

Passenger Terminal

Figure J2-1: Central Terminal Area of Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (AMS), The Netherlands

Description The Pier/Finger Terminal Concept consists of a main centralised passenger processor and a series of piers (airside concourses). In large examples of this type, such as Amsterdam Schiphol (shown above) with approx. 39.6 mppa in the year 2000, the main processor may consist of several semicentralised check-in/baggage reclaim areas fed by a common departures/arrivals curb. All Originating & Departing passengers and baggage are directed through the central processing area to and from the aircraft parking positions, which are connected to the central building by piers (airside concourses). Departing passengers are processed at centralised check-in facilities and walk to the respective gates, assisted by moving sidewalks installed in the piers. Baggage of all departing passengers is collected at the central check-in counters and conveyed to the baggage sorting areas from where it is transported to the aircraft by mobile apron equipment or fixed conveying systems. Arriving passengers and their baggage are processed in the reverse flow.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Pier/Finger Terminal Possible Advantages A high percentage of passengers can be accommodated under one roof. Permits low Mean Connecting Time (MCT) if flight pairs are properly co-ordinated. Allows variable expansion possibilities of the piers, independent of the main processor. Expansion can be undertaken in small incremental steps as demand requires. Centralisation of airline and government inspection services staff. Permits centralisation of major concession outlets (i.e. restaurants, duty-free, etc.). Permits use of relatively simple flight information display systems. Facilitates control of passengers, if required. Ease of movement for transfer passengers. Pier/Finger Terminal Possible Disadvantages Long walking distances, especially for transfer passengers. May require airlines to have secondary CIP facilities in piers to accommodate individual traffic segments. May require secondary concession outlets in piers. Curbside congestion in peak periods. Long taxiway routes to/from runways. If insufficient space is allowed between piers, resulting taxiway cul-de-sacs may restrict the freeflow of aircraft. Requirement to segregate arriving/departing passengers may result in need to build a secondary passenger circulation level in some piers. This in turn may increase walking distances for transfer passengers. Early check-in and close-out times. High capital, operating and maintenance costs for passenger conveyance and baggage handling systems. Potential for baggage mishandling. Clear signage systems required to overcome passenger way-finding and orientation difficulties. Unless independent development of supporting airside and landside infrastructure is possible and pre-planned, expansion of this operating system beyond a 55 mppa level will be difficult to achieve. The area of land required to support pier/gate development is large due to the need to incorporate dual taxi-lanes between sets of piers that can accommodate in excess of 10 12 aircraft total. Other examples: Bangkok, London Heathrow T3 and Zurich.


J2.2.2 Linear Concept Figure J2-2: Terminal 4 of London

Passenger Terminal



Notes: The site for T4 is constrained on all sides by one of the primary runways, the cross-wind runway and by the primary road access system. As such, expansion of the terminal has only been possible by the addition of a remote single sided pier at some considerable distance from the main processor. Description The Linear Terminal Concept consists of a main centralised passenger processor with expansion capability to either side. On the front or airside face of the processor is a finger type concourse which may be straight or in another geometrical form. Aircraft are parked at the face and in some instances the rear of the concourse. An airside corridor may be located parallel to the terminal face with access to the terminal and gate positions. Departing passenger and baggage processing can take place either in a central area or at semicentralised groups of check-in counters.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Depending on the internal layout, the walking distance between the car park and the aircraft can be reasonably short, but in the case of a centralised processing system the distance may become unacceptably long. The size of baggage conveying and sorting systems depends on the internal layout of the building. This concept is mainly used if there is only confined space available between the landside road system and the runway. Possible Advantages

Minimum walking distances if check-in facilities are semi-centralised. Easy passenger orientation. Simple construction of the main terminal with relatively easy incremental expansion. If required, separation of arriving and departing passengers is relatively easy using two levels. Adequate curb length. Reasonable check-in and close-out times. Compact baggage conveying/sorting systems if remote drop points are not utilised in

concourses. Possible Disadvantages

If system is decentralised, will require duplication of terminal facilities/amenities (i.e. restaurant, duty free, etc.) and staff. Long walking distances especially for passengers transferring between extreme ends of concourses. Long walking distances if passenger processing is centralised and the pier system (airside corridor) is extended. High capital, operating and maintenance cost if centralised passenger/baggage processing facilities are employed. Special logistics may be required for handling of transfer baggage depending upon size of building; i.e. remote baggage drop-off points required. May require airlines to have secondary CIP facilities in concourses to accommodate dispersed traffic segments. Aircraft movements to the rear of the concourse may be restricted due to the need to reduce engine noise levels.


Passenger Terminal

J2.2.3 Open Apron Concept Figure J2-3: Montreal Mirabel (YMX), Canada


Mirabel (YMX) is predicted to cease commerical passenger operations from Autumn 2004.


The Open Apron Terminal Concept consists of a main passenger processor with expansion capability on either side. Passenger transfers between the main processor and remote aircraft positions are accommodated by the use of apron drive busses or mobile lounges. There is no direct connection between the processor and aircraft parking positions. Departing passengers are processed at the central processing area and proceed through Government Inspection Services to a common departure lounge. From this point passengers can be handled in one of two ways:

They can be called to remote gate hold rooms, usually located at apron level, and then transported to the aircraft by bus. Or they can be called into mobile lounges which double as gate hold rooms and as transporters between the building and the aircraft parked at remote apron positions. The mobile lounges work with a scissor lift system that enables the lounge to operate at varying floor and aircraft sill levels. Baggage for all departing passengers is accepted at central check-in counters and conveyed to the 313 baggage sorting area from where it is transported to the aircraft by mobile apron equipment.

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Possible Advantages

Constant compatibility of terminal/apron geometry to accommodate new generation large aircraft. Ease of aircraft manoeuvrability (i.e. power-in, power-out operation). Simplified passenger movement/orientation. Reduced walking distances. Ease of expansion capability for aircraft stands. Low cost expansion capability. Operations can be expanded without significantly impacting on the existing main processor. A simpler, smaller and more efficient central processor. Separation of arriving and departing passengers can easily be achieved.

Could be used as a low cost first phase option prior to constructing remote satellites in order to increase percentage of contact stands served. Possible Disadvantages

Very low percentage of contact stands. Increased loading/unloading processing times. Very early close-out times required. Very limited last minute boarding capability. High capital, maintenance and operating costs of busses and transporters.

Requires right of way/control of transporters due to high collision potential of transporters & aircraft. Curbside congestion in peak hours. Additional cost for larger number of ground vehicles for crew and baggage transport. Increased minimum connecting times. Additional airline staff required. Creates demand surges at arrival Government Inspection Services control positions.

Other examples: Washington Dulles & Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG). Note CDG no longer mobile lounges.


J2.2.4 Satellite Concept

Passenger Terminal

Figure J2-4: Denver (DEN), USA

Description The Satellite Terminal Concept consists of a central processing building for passengers and baggage and remote concourses around which aircraft are parked. The remote concourses or satellites are connected to the main terminal by above- or below-ground links to facilitate the movement of passengers between the satellites and the main terminal. These links can be formed by either APM (Automated People Mover) systems or by underground walkways with travelators. Baggage from departing passengers is collected at the central check-in counters and conveyed to the baggage sorting area from where it is transported to the aircraft by mobile apron equipment or mechanical systems. Arriving passengers and their baggage are processed in a reciprocal flow. Possible Advantages

Normally provides for the centralisation of airline and government inspection services staff. Permits short minimum connecting times within individual satellites. Variety of incremental expansion possibilities to both the main processor and piers. Permits centralisation of major concession outlets (i.e. restaurants, duty-free, etc). Permits relatively simple flight information display system.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Linear satellites permit direct aircraft routing between stands & runways. Separation of arriving & departing passengers within satellites can be easily achieved if required. Facilitates control of passengers, if required. Short walking distances (to/from APM). Additional satellites can be designed to accommodate future aircraft design developments.

Possible Disadvantages, operating and maintenance costs of the APM system between the main terminal and satellites, especially if these are below ground. High capital, operating and maintenance costs of baggage conveying/sorting systems with potential for baggage mishandling. May require airlines to have secondary or multiple CIP facilities in satellites to accommodate individual traffic segments. Requires secondary concession outlets in satellites. Curbside congestion in peak hours if percentage of Originating Departures traffic is high. Expansion capability of the main processor is limited to either side. Due to distance and need to locate, wait and use APM system, minimum connecting times between flights in different satellites are increased. Early check-in and close-out times.

Other examples: Atlanta, Paris CDG T1, Tokyo Narita


J2.2.5 Compact Module Unit Terminal Concept

Passenger Terminal
Figure J2-5: Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG), Terminals 2A, B, C & D France

Description The Compact Module Unit Terminal Concept is a system witnessed in the past at small, medium and large airports. In the USA it has proved popular at airports where individual modules could be owned, occupied, dedicated or assigned to individual carriers. Within Europe it has sometimes been utilised to differentiate between individual traffic segments, i.e. Schengen or Non-Schengen. However, the hubbing needs of base carriers and/or the major airline alliances has resulted in this type of solution becoming increasingly unpopular or obsolete with partnerships preferring collocation under one roof. Expansion is demand driven and carried out through construction of additional modules. The transition of passenger and baggage from landside to airside and vice versa is directed through a compact facility which provides the shortest possible distance from the car park to the aircraft. Departing passengers and their baggage are processed either at a gate check-in or a semicentralized flight check-in facility. Passenger moving equipment and outbound baggage sorting devices are usually not required within each module. The gate check-in procedure allows a very late check-in and close-out time. Arriving passengers and their baggage are processed in the vicinity of the gate in the reverse flow on the lower level.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

Possible Advantages

Short walking distances from check-in to aircraft. Late check-in and close-out times (last minute baggage/passenger acceptance capability). Greater curb lengths are provided than for centralised processing terminal units. Capital investment is commensurate with demand. Construction of additional units in medium and large airports can be tailored to suit demand. Construction may not impact on existing airline operations. Moving walkways to assist passenger movement within each module are not required. Only simple baggage handling systems are required within each module. As a consequence the percentage of mishandled bags is low. Within the terminal, only a simple flight information display system is required.

Possible Disadvantages These occur when there is more than one terminal and include:

Low percentage of contact stands. Difficulties in accommodating large volumes of passengers. Individual terminal units are inflexible & incapable of major expansion. A requirement for comprehensive flight information display and sign-posting systems, including signage along the airport access routes to orient departing passengers and/or meeters & greeters to the correct terminal. A complicated system is required to transfer passengers and baggage between terminals. Depending upon volumes & the number of terminals, the high costs of such a system may also be an adverse factor. Higher manpower requirement airline and government staff members will increase in order to operate multiple terminals. This also requires more careful allocation of all manpower. Reduced ability to offer industry competitive minimum connecting times due to high number of transfer (terminal) variables & the distance between modules. An adverse impact on any high speed rail access system (local or international) due to the inability or need to serve multiple stations, the varied and complex transfer routings and the increased transfer times from/to and between inter-modal access points and terminals. The complexity of land-side road access systems.

Other examples: Budapest, Dallas Forth Worth & Hanover.


Three arrangements of passenger processing systems are possible.

Passenger Terminal

J2.3.1 Single Level

This system is represented by a single level roadway/curb/terminal building with all arrival and departure processing provided at grade (ground) level. In general terms departing passengers occupy one side of the building while arrivals occupy the other. Passengers move between the main processor and remote aircraft parking positions by either walking (along controlled/supervised routes), by bus or APM. This type of operation is normally restricted to small-scale operations under 5 mppa. The exception to this broad rule would be London Stansted airport, which employs many unique features (APM to remote satellites, fully automated BHS, building services and building supplies/servicing all located on levels beneath the single passenger level). Stansted's single level terminal building was expanded in 2002 to accommodate 16 mppa.

J2.3.2 11/2 Level

This system is represented by a single level roadway/curb serving both arrival and departing passengers. The terminal building is predominantly single level, although the airside face has two levels with the arrivals level located either above or below the departures level. The two levels on the airside face can be restricted to an arrivals corridor with simple airbridge connections to aircraft stands located along the front edge of the terminal. Alternatively the two levels can extend out onto the apron by means of twin level piers. In rare circumstances, single-level roadways can support two level terminals. Examples of this type of design solution can be found at London Heathrow in both T2 and T3. In T2 there is also a unique feature insofar as the arrivals and departures post check-in facilities are located at a level above the road access. Check-in is performed at road level and passengers move upstairs to process through outbound passport control and security channels to the gate.

J2.3.3 Two Level

This system is represented by a two level roadway/curb/terminal building with arrival and departure processing separated vertically on two levels. The upper level is usually the departure level with the lower level accommodating arrivals. This arrangement should be considered where volumes of passengers, baggage and vehicles justify vertical separation. The two levels can extend out into the piers or satellites, but this is dependent on the degree and extent of passenger segregation


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

J2.3.4 Levels within Piers and Satellites
With segregation of arriving and departing international passengers recommended by ICAO (see ICAO Annex 17 Clause 4.3.3 and clause K3.2 of this manual) it is becoming increasingly common for airport authorities to make provision for at least two processing levels in piers and satellites. To provide for greater flexibility, authorities may provide a third processing corridor to allow passengers to transfer in isolation between international and domestic traffic segments (refer to Chapter K for further details). In this way individual gate positions can accept aircraft serving both types of traffic without the need to push back and reposition aircraft as they switch from serving international to domestic or from domestic to international routes. With two or three levels possible within piers and satellites, safe, efficient and cost effective ways of delivering passengers to the required entry level to the passenger boarding bridge must be found. There are two ways of achieving this. The first relies on a combination of mechanical systems (lifts and escalators) and stairs (as a fall back in the event of mechanical failure), to transfer passengers between levels. However these systems are expensive to install, operate and maintain. All three systems are generally provided for by the necessity to provide unrestricted access to wheelchairs. A simpler solution is to rely on ramps. In this way installation, operation and maintenance costs are kept to an absolute minimum. The ramps can lie either parallel or perpendicular to the face of the pier or satellite. Perpendicular solutions have two advantages. Firstly, they do not obscure sight lines from within the building onto the aircraft apron. Secondly, they can allow differing rotunda off-load levels, thereby allowing varying bridge configurations to be employed from the same ramp and pier layouts.



The building should be designed to ensure functionality, maximum operational efficiency, passenger convenience at a reasonable cost, and be capable of further modular and incremental expansion. Such considerations as space for concessions and facilities for the general public should always be subordinate to the passenger space for processing and flow requirements. Extravagant architectural statements and/or unique structural systems should not elevate sqm rates or unit costs above accepted industry norms. The structural elements of the building should be such that it is relatively easy to undertake internal modification or overall expansion in order to meet changing demands without major interruption to daily operations. The main functional elements in the terminal building should be arranged in such a manner that the expansion of one element does not necessitate the relocation of other elements which may not require expansion. For instance, expansion of the departure baggage area should not require relocation of the check-in lobby or the baggage claim area. Wherever economically feasible, terminal design should encompass a two-level structure to shorten walking distances and allow direct access to the aircraft without change of level. Passenger boarding


J2.5 IATA RECOMMENDATIONS J2.IR1 Passenger Terminal Concept

Passenger Terminal

The chosen passenger terminal concept should provide a simple, functional, cost effective, expandable and user friendly solution that allows airlines to undertake efficient and profitable operations in one location until the airport reaches saturation in the ultimate phase.

J2.IR2 Passenger Terminal Type

The type of passenger terminal concept to be used should only be determined after the airlines have input their functional/operational requirements into the conceptual design process.

J2.IR3 Passenger Transfer from Piers/Satellites to Aircraft

Rather than relying on mechanical systems (lifts and escalators) to transfer passenger between levels a series of ramps should be used. In this way installation, operation and maintenance costs can kept to an absolute minimum.


IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

The standards defined within ICAO Annex 14 and Annex 17, as well as those noted in this manual, will need to be observed by small airports and large airports alike. These types of facilities will generally make use of the same high-level processes, though with reduced capacity, throughput and infrastructure characteristics due to the difference in the scale of the equipment being utilised. Small airports often deal with higher volumes of propeller driven commercial and privately owned aircraft. As commercial propeller (turboprop) aircraft require less automated passenger docking equipment than commercial jet aircraft, support infrastructure such as push back tugs are infrequently used since the aircraft are generally less connected to the terminal infrastructure and utilize more 'remote' stand philosophies (see Section L3). Passengers are often bused or even walk between the gate room areas and the aircraft and vice versa, using dedicated apron walk routes and staff supervised protocols. While commercial propeller driven aircraft will require tarmac runways, there is the possibility of adjacent grass runways that can be made use of, predominantly for non-commercial light aircraft. Small jet powered aircraft will also use small airports, provided that the runway specifications and support infrastructure is adequately in place. Runway management protocols and equipment should be developed and provided respectively in accordance with the requirements at larger airports, befitting the code category of aircraft being accommodated. All smaller airports will require effective and well-placed control tower facilities, which should enable them to function safely and in a commercially viable manner for the ground movement of aircraft and aircraft approach guidance. Baggage handling facilities can be limited and geared around the processing of a specific flight rather than the processing of multiple outbound and inbound flights baggage simultaneously, as is the situation in larger airports. The processes and protocols for these smaller installations will still require to be modeled on the recommendations defined within Chapter U, Airport Baggage Handling, including the same level of integrity for hand and hold baggage security screening hardware and operational practices. Ground transportation at small-scale airports can be scaled down to the requirements of the airport flight traffic requirements, which can mean less equipment redundancy in the event of transportation failure. This needs to be carefully balanced to ensure that correct service standards are maintained. Information displays may be less frequent and located at critical areas only, as passenger way finding should theoretically be less arduous given the smaller infrastructure. The flight information display signage standard should be aligned with the requirements defined within Section J12. Able and disabled passenger processing will also be required in the facility. The small airport will likely need to provide limited retail, restaurant and passenger and staff public rest areas and public toilets. Limited retail will be useful for passengers and will enable small airports to create parallel revenue streams to support and help grow their airport operation. Emergency response and emergency management should be completely aligned with the


Passenger Terminal

Aircraft fueling at smaller airports will likely be accommodated by fuel container and dispensing vehicles. Please refer to Chapter M, Aviation Fuel Systems, for clarification of physical requirements and protocols to adopt.

J3.1.1 Definition of Small Airport (<1MPPA)

A small airport is defined by its capability to process flights and passengers through its runway and terminal infrastructure provision. Typically, a facility described as a 'small' airport will be capable of processing up-to 1 Million Passengers Per Annum (MPPA).



The terminal building in the small airport will be sized in accordance with the recommendations defined within Chapter F, Airport Capacity. Section F9 will define the space requirements for the critical terminal building functions such as check-in, passport control, passenger hold rooms, passenger centralized security and baggage claim areas, etc. A listing of the processes in operation at airports can be found within Chapter T. Section T1, Terminal Processes, is a guide for airport planners embarking on the design of large and small airport terminals. Whilst rare, there will be situations where smaller airports will exploit a terminal space or equipment for multiple functions so as to maximize their utilization. An example of this is where inbound transfer flight baggage may be processed through predominantly departures screening equipment using agreed protocols. In this situation it should be noted that passengers and their baggage should be processed in accordance with the requirements defined within Chapter K, Passenger Facilitation,



The small airport should create an airport master plan, which should align to the requirements of the airlines and the traveling public communities. This master plan should be fully developed in accordance with the requirements defined within Chapter C, Master Planning, where applicable. Small airports should be designed to align with the long-term aspirations developed within the master plan. Development zones should be safeguarded accordingly.


IATA RECOMMENDATIONS J3.IR1 Consistent Airport Terminai Apron and Support Processes
When planning and designing small airports the airport planner should look to consider and include airport processes as defined within Chapter T (all sections). Where an airport process or protocol is required it should align to the mandatory requirements defined within ICAO Annex 14 and Annex 17, as well as to the processes and equipment configurations defined within this manual

J3.IR2 Consistent Airport Terminal Apron and Support Infrastructure Sizing Philosophy
Airport terminals, aprons and support infrastructure should be sized in accordance within the 323 guidance and recommendations made within Chapters C, F, H J, K, L, O.P, Q, U, W and X of this manual.

IATA Airport Development Reference Manual



The degree of automation required for passenger processing and baggage handling systems at a particular airport will be determined by the extent of the individual airline system-wide operation, as well as other criteria such as size of terminals, economic evaluations, etc. Automation implies installation of computers, printers (document printers and specific printers for tickets, boarding passes, baggage tags) at many points along a passenger's route. These may include:

Ticket/sales counters. Check-in counters. Boarding gates. Transfer counters. Information desks.

Each airline needs to connect this equipment to its own central reservations system. The requirements for self-handled airlines to use check-in counters only a few hours a day can lead to a requirement for extra check-in counters. To avoid over supply of check-in desks, the concept of CUTE (Common Use Terminal Equipment) was established. CUTE does not elim