• No results found

Airport Performance Measurement

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Airport Performance Measurement"

Copied!
20
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)
(2)

Agenda

• Airport Characteristics

• Airport Key Performance

Indicators

(3)

The Airport System

Adapted from Ashford, Stanton, Moore: Airport Operations

Approach Runway Pier Gate Apron Taxiway Arrival concourse Passenger & baggage reclaim

Ground transportation and parking

Departure Runway Pier Gate Apron Taxiway

Aircraft

Departure concourse Passenger & baggage processing Catering Mail Cargo processing

Airside Landside

(4)

US Airport Ownership

Total US airports

18,345

Open to public

5,357

Closed to public

12,988

Privately owned

1,191

Publicly owned

4,166

(5)

Airport Stakeholders

Other business

partners (e.g.

concessionaries)

Regulators

Cargo operators

Owners (public

and private)

Airlines

Individuals living

nearby

Management

Passengers

Outside

entities

Administrative

Airport Users

(6)

Agenda

• Airport Characteristics

• Airport Key Performance

Indicators

(7)

Characteristics of Profiled Airports

Passenger Enplanements and Runways

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

SFO IAD BWI DCA OAK SJC

Enplanements (million) 0 1 2 3 4 5 Runways Enplanements (2005) Runways Total Precipitation 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 J F M A M J J A S O N D Total Precipitation (mm) Washington San Francisco

Sources: FAA, Airport websites, The Weather Network

Snow 0 5 10 15 20 J F M A M J J A S O N D Snow (cm) Washington San Francisco

• Profile of six airports:

• San Francisco area:

• OAK-SJC-SFO

• Located within 34 mile

drive of each other

• Metro DC area:

• BWI-DCA-IAD

• Located within 57 mile

drive of each other

(8)

Passenger-Oriented

Airport Key Performance Indicators

Other business partners Regulators Cargo operators Owners (public and private) Airlines Individuals living nearby Management Passengers Outside entities Administrative Airport Users

Percentage flights delayed

• Uncontrollable: Weather, traffic volume

• Controllable: Efficiency of airport operations (e.g. ramp service)

Connecting times

• Uncontrollable: Airline schedules

• Controllable: Physical organization of airport, efficiency of handling operations (e.g. baggage transfer times, security screening efficiency, etc.)

Wait times at check-in, security, immigration

• Uncontrollable: “Peakness” of airline schedules • Controllable: Efficiency of airport operations

Baggage delivery (timeliness, lost bags)

• Uncontrollable: Airline schedules

(9)

Flight Arrival Status (Sept ’06)

Flights Arriving On Time

70.00% 72.00% 74.00% 76.00% 78.00% 80.00% 82.00% 84.00% 86.00%

OAK SJC SFO BWI DCA IAD

Percentage of Arriving Flights

Extreme Weather 0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00% 1.20%

OAK SJC SFO BWI DCA IAD

Percentage of Arriving Flights Delayed

• On-time: Arrival within 15

minutes of schedule

Central California Metro DC

• Extreme weather delay:

Significant meteorological

conditions (actual or forecast)

that, in the judgment of the

carrier, delays or prevents the

operation of a flight (e.g. tornado,

blizzard, hurricane, etc.)

(10)

Flight Arrival Status (Sept ’06)

Air Carrier Delay

0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00%

OAK SJC SFO BWI DCA IAD

Percentage of Arriving Flights Delayed

Source: Bureau Of Transportation Statistics – Airline Service Quality Performance

• Air carrier delay: The delay was

due to circumstances within the

airline's control (e.g. maintenance

or crew problems, aircraft

cleaning, baggage loading, fueling,

etc.)

• NAS delays: Delays and

cancellations attributable to the

national airspace system that refer

to a broad set of conditions —

non-extreme weather conditions,

airport operations, heavy traffic

volume, air traffic control, etc.

NAS Delay 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00% 9.00% 10.00%

OAK SJC SFO BWI DCA IAD

(11)

Percentage flights delayed

• Uncontrollable: Weather, traffic volume

• Controllable: Efficiency of airport operations (e.g. ramp service)

Connecting times

• Uncontrollable: Airline schedules

• Controllable: Physical organization of airport, efficiency of handling operations (e.g. baggage transfer times, security screening efficiency, etc.)

Wait times at check-in, security, immigration

• Uncontrollable: “Peakness” of airline schedules • Controllable: Efficiency of airport operations

Baggage delivery (timeliness, lost bags)

• Uncontrollable: Airline schedules

• Controllable: Efficiency of baggage handling operations

Passenger-Oriented

Airport Key Performance Indicators

Other business partners Regulators Cargo operators Owners (public and private) Airlines Individuals living nearby Management Passengers Outside entities Administrative Airport Users

(12)

Airport Security Wait Times

Average Wait Time (Monday 7 am)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

OAK

SJC

SFO

BWI

DCA

IAD

Wait Time (min)

(13)

Percentage flights delayed

• Uncontrollable: Weather, traffic volume

• Controllable: Efficiency of airport operations (e.g. ramp service)

Connecting times

• Uncontrollable: Airline schedules

• Controllable: Physical organization of airport, efficiency of handling operations (e.g. baggage transfer times, security screening efficiency, etc.)

Wait times at check-in, security, immigration

• Uncontrollable: “Peakness” of airline schedules • Controllable: Efficiency of airport operations

Baggage delivery (timeliness, lost bags)

• Uncontrollable: Airline schedules

• Controllable: Efficiency of baggage handling operations

Passenger-Oriented

Airport Key Performance Indicators

Other business partners Regulators Cargo operators Owners (public and private) Airlines Individuals living nearby Management Passengers Outside entities Administrative Airport Users

(14)

Baggage Handling Effectiveness

Baggage Handling by Airline

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Hawaiian Jetblue Continental Aloha AirTran Northwest Frontier ATA Southwest American Alaska United ExpressJet

US Air Delta Mesa

Skywest

American Eagle

Comair

Atlantic Southeast

Mishandled bags per 1000 passengers

Source: US DOT September 2006

(15)

Airport Management-Oriented

Key Performance Indicators

Other business partners Regulators Cargo operators Owners (public and private) Airlines Individuals living nearby Management Passengers Outside entities Administrative Airport Users

Cost/passenger -- Cost/ton of cargo -- Cost/WLU

• Uncontrollable: Fixed asset depreciation costs

• Controllable: Labor rates, labor efficiency, number of passengers/amount of cargo

Labor cost/aircraft movement

• Controllable: Labor rates, labor efficiency, number of aircraft movements

Aircraft movements per runway

• Uncontrollable: Number of runways, weather

• Controllable: Overall number of aircraft movements

Minimum connecting times

• Uncontrollable: Airline schedules

• Controllable: Physical organization of airport, efficiency of handling operations (e.g. baggage transfer times, security screening efficiency, etc.)

(16)

Operating Expense Per WLU

Operating Expense/Enplaned WLU (2005)

$0 $2 $4 $6 $8 $10 $12 $14 $16 $18

OAK SJC SFO BWI DCA IAD

Operating Expense/WLU

Sources: FAA, Airport websites

• 1 Work Load Unit = 1 passenger or 100 kg of cargo

• Operating expense = Cost for staff, communications and

utilities, supplies and materials, repairs and maintenance,

contractual services etc. Excludes depreciation.

(17)

Airport Owner

Key Performance Indicators

Other business partners Regulators Cargo operators Owners (public and private) Airlines Individuals living nearby Management Passengers Outside entities Administrative Airport Users

Cost/passenger -- Cost/ton of cargo -- Cost/WLU

• Uncontrollable: Fixed asset depreciation costs

• Controllable: Labor rates, labor efficiency, number of passengers and amount of cargo

Landing fee revenue/aircraft movement

(18)

Aircraft Landing Fees

Source: Air Transportation Research Society – 2006 Airport Benchmarking Report

E.g. at IAD

• Landing fee: $3.32 / 1000 lb

• B747 landing weight: Approx. 400,000 lb • Total fee: $1,328

(19)

Affected Individual

Airport Key Performance Indicators

Other business partners Regulators Cargo operators Owners (public and private) Airlines Individuals living nearby Management Passengers Outside entities Administrative Airport Users

Number of noise level infringements

Emissions/aircraft movement

(20)

Summary

• A variety of KPIs can be tracked, but which KPIs are important and

which direction is desirable varies by which perspective one takes

• Some KPIs can be optimized “locally”, but such an optimization can

lead to a sub-optimal point at the global (organizational) level

• KPIs are impacted both by controllable and uncontrollable factors. In

a comparison, one needs to adjust for the uncontrollable factors in

order to determine how to optimize the controllable factors

References

Related documents

Primitive Component Types Component user has a required port puser_r (lines 3–7) through which it makes method calls to its environment (i.e., the memory) to retrieve the value of

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui jumlah ikan yang mendekat dan rata-rata waktu respon ikan terhadap perlakuan yang berbeda yaitu pada rumpon, cahaya, dan prototype

We perform the most comprehensive evaluation of the NCEP CFSR reanalysis model hourly wind speed hindcasts to date, and the fi rst for the UK, by correlating the data against 264

Esta situación genera una gran variedad de estilos de vida y usos del espacio que se relacionan directamente con el lugar ocupado en la estructura social y tiene como

O kompaniji i politici same kompanije ovisi na kojoj razini želi zadržati formalnu komunikaciju. Neke tvrtke dopuštaju izuzetnu fleksibilnost u odnosima između

The lists should only be distributed to the site administrator, principal’s secretary, bookkeeper, student nutrition manager, HCPS Out- of-School Time Program (HOST) designee, or

The experiments in Chapter 4 and other published studies [32, 34, 35] demonstrated that iron-rich drinking water treatment residuals (Fe-WTR) show promise in

A six-person Physics Residency Committee (PRC) consists of the Program Director (PRC Chairman), the Department Chairman, one faculty medical physicist, one staff medical physicist,