ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:

MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

DRAFTED BY ACI WORLD SECRETARIAT AND DKMA

Recommended that
Airports wishing to understand passenger flows and bottlenecks around the airport by measuring
manually the passenger waiting (queuing) times and other Passenger Services Key
Performance Indicators (KPIs), apply the techniques and methodologies described in this
recommended practice.

Executive Summary
This document recommends a manual method that is easily understood and easily replicated
around the world for airports of differing sizes and types. The methodology is based on ACIs
ASQ Performance (ASQP) programme which has been developed over several years in
conjunction with 12 airports and proven to work in airports of varying size, all over the world.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 1/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

Table of Contents

Recommended that.......................................................................................................... 1
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction................................................................................................................ 3
1.1. Long term goals .................................................................................................. 3
1.2. Usage of the data ............................................................................................... 4
2. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) ........................................................................... 5
3. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 6
3.1. When to measure ............................................................................................... 6
3.2. Where to measure .............................................................................................. 7
3.3. How to measure .................................................................................................. 7
3.4. Sample sizes ...................................................................................................... 8
3.5. Measuring queue times....................................................................................... 9
3.5.1. Disney queues (one queue serving multiple counters/checkpoints) ................ 9
3.5.2. Single queues (one queue serves one counter/checkpoint) .......................... 10
3.6. Recommended practice for different areas of the airport .................................. 11
3.6.1. Check-in ........................................................................................................ 11
3.6.2. Passport control............................................................................................. 12
3.6.3. Security control .............................................................................................. 12
3.6.4. Transfer counters .......................................................................................... 12
3.6.5. Boarding ........................................................................................................ 12
3.6.6. Baggage delivery ........................................................................................... 13
3.6.7. Customs inspection ....................................................................................... 13
3.6.8. Baggage Carts............................................................................................... 13
4. Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. 14
Appendix 1: References................................................................................................. 15
Appendix 2: Passenger Counting Technologies ............................................................ 16

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 2/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

1. Introduction
There are many ways of measuring passenger process times. This document recommends a
manual method that is easily understood and easily replicated around the world for airports of
differing sizes and types. The methodology is based on ACIs ASQ Performance (ASQP)
programme which has been developed over several years in conjunction with 12 airports and
proven to work in airports of varying size, all over the world from Europe to Africa to the Middle
East.

ASQP was designed specifically to measure delivered service quality levels and the central
concept has been to ensure accuracy and comparability of results. This comparability allows
airports and the airport industry to work together to create benchmarks and identify true best
practice.

ASQP is part of ACIs global Airport Service Quality initiative and is fully compatible with the
passenger satisfaction benchmark ASQ Survey currently used by over 275 airports worldwide
the ASQ Assured airport certification, and the ASQ Retail programme.

Figure 1: ACI Airport Service Quality (ASQ) programmes

1.1. Long term goals

Create real world standards for passenger facilitation at airports of all sizes and types
around the world.
Identification of best practice
Complement the passengers subjective quality assessment by measuring the actual
objective quality of service delivered
Improve the passenger experience

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 3/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

1.2. Usage of the data

This document makes no recommendations on how Passenger Process time data should be
used. However, it is noted that Key Performance Indicator (KPI) measurements are already
being used in a variety of ways such as:

1. monitoring and incentivising teams;

2. as an input into the overall quality management process;

3. as a target or threshold in Service Level Agreements (SLA);

4. to identify key bottlenecks and poor passenger experiences;

5. in conjunction with ASQ Survey, to show how improvements in delivered levels of service
can improve customer satisfaction;

6. to calculate the investment required to improve the passenger experience.

Figure 2: Impact of waiting times in customer satisfaction

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 4/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

2. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

As all airports and management cultures are different, there are an infinite number of potential
KPIs for passenger service. This document describes the methodologies recommended for the
16 core KPIs that have been shown to be of interest to and relevant to all airports.

Airport customer service KPIs are primarily based on queuing (waiting) times. The main KPI not
based on queues is the number of baggage carts available (at various locations around the
airport). This is simply calculated as the number of baggage carts counted at each location.

ACI recommends two types of queuing KPIs:

1) Average passenger waiting time: monitors the passenger experience and identifies
bottlenecks and the amount of time a passenger spends in queues at the airport.

2) Counter & Checkpoint processing speed: monitors airport and airport employee
performance at facilitating passengers through the airport.

Figure 3: List of 16 airport customer service recommended KPIs

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 5/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

3. Methodology
3.1. When to measure

To get an accurate view of an airports performance it is important to measure all year round;
this ensures seasonal differences are captured. ACI recommends an airport measures the KPIs
every month.

Off-peak hours are rarely of interest as there are generally few queues. Therefore unless there
is a concern that reduced service levels are causing queues during off-peak, recommended
practice is that airports concentrate efforts on peak hours measurements. This focus maximises
cost-effectiveness.

Recommended practice is that definition of peak hours for sample days is based on current
Official Airline Guide (OAG) traffic schedules with input from the airport to include non-scheduled
flights.

Figure 4: Peak passenger flow based on airline capacity

In order to provide a balanced measurement of peak hours during sample days, it is

recommended to select periods of measurement using the same peak hour demand analysis
criterion as the one considered for the design of the facilities, taking into account current
passenger demand levels.

For more information on peak times and design period calculations, please check the references
in Appendix 1.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 6/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

3.2. Where to measure

To ensure accurate coverage of the airports facilities and traffic, the OAG traffic schedules
(together with airport input for non-scheduled traffic) are also used to create a specific sample
plan for each airport. The sample plan is based on the seat capacity offered by airline and
ensures that KPI measurement reflects overall airport traffic and is correctly aligned across:

Terminals
Gates / piers
Airlines / Alliances (only the most important airlines accounting for 80% of the traffic will
be measured)

Check-In is further segmented according to

First/Business
Economy
Self-Service Check-in Kiosk
Bag drop off

If there is more than one central security checkpoint, security is segmented according to the
individual security checkpoints, then further segmented into economy / business / fast track
where relevant.

3.3. How to measure

Methods used around the world include: paper based with stopwatch recording, real time live
cameras, thermal images, mobile phone Bluetooth monitoring, indoors GPS, and agent manual
counting using computer portable tablets with measurement software. Additional technologies
and automated methodologies can be used and are described in Appendix 2.

Some KPIs such as baggage delivery are routinely measured automatically by the airport.
Recommended practice is to use these measurements unless there are clear issues observed
with the results.

ACI recommended practice for manual measurement (for those airports where this methodology
is feasible and applicable) is to use agents using computer portable tablets with airport specific
measurement software for the remaining KPIs. Computer portable tablets provide a cost-efficient
measurement method without the data gathering and inputting problems of paper. The software
is based on a methodology which can be easily and inexpensively extended across the whole
airport (unlike Bluetooth or live camera which require substantial initial investments and are
subsequently relatively inflexible).

This methodology (and other tablet based software solutions), allows relatively inexperienced
observers to take consistent and accurate measurements. Further, the recorded observations
can be automatically exported via Wi-Fi connection, reducing paperwork and processing time.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 7/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

Recommended practice for observers taking measurements is:

KPIs are measured during peak times of the measurement day (sample day)

Each queuing KPI measurement is taken over a 1 hour period (60 minutes) during which
multiple observations are made. (e.g. 1 hour at Lufthansa check-in, 1 hour at passport /
personal ID control)

Each individual observation lasts for a maximum of 10 minutes

If the observation lasts less than 10 minutes, repeat observation

If no queue is observed, wait 5 minutes before the next observation

The 10 minute limit maximises the number of observations that can be taken in a given time and
promotes good coverage of the airport and its facilities. This is particularly important measuring
check-in queues as the queues wax and wane dramatically during peak hours.

3.4. Sample sizes

A minimum sample size is mandatory to guarantee representative data and useful

benchmarking. While the exact sample size is necessarily dependent on the size and layout of
the individual airport, a guideline for recommended minimum sample per survey period is as
follows:

Figure 5: Recommended minimum sample per survey period

This minimum might be appropriate for an airport with approximately 3 million passengers per
annum, but larger airports should increase the sample size where necessary to improve the
measurements of complex infrastructure or fit research requirements

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 8/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

3.5. Measuring queue times

The aim of the measurement is to be able to calculate average passenger waiting time and the
average counter/checkpoint processing speed. To achieve this, the airport needs to know:

Number of counters available to a passenger at the beginning and end of the

measurement
Time taken to progress through the queue

In order to ensure coverage over the entire hour, measurements last a maximum of ten minutes
and are structured to provide the required information.

There are typically two types of queue observed in airports:

1) Disney (one line serving multiple counters)

2) Single line (one line serving one counter)

The type of queue observed should always be recorded as the recommended practice for
measuring these queues is slightly different and the data analysis and processing required is
different.

Recommended practice for measuring the two types of queue is as follows:

3.5.1. Disney queues (one queue serving multiple counters/checkpoints)

The observer starts the observation (or records the time) when a passenger leaves the queue to
go the counter. At the same time, the observer identifies the last person in the queue. Once the
observation has started, the observer counts the number of passengers in the queue, and the
number of open counters available to passengers in this queue. The last passenger should be
included, but not the one going to the counter.

To conclude the observation, there are two possible scenarios:

1) The last passenger arrives at the counter in less than 10 minutes. The observer records
the time and the number of counters which are open for this queue.

2) If the last passenger is still queuing after 10 minutes, the observer notes that the 10
minutes has elapsed and counts the number of passengers in front of the last passenger
and the number of open counters available to this queue.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 9/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

Figure 6: Measurement process for Disney queues

3.5.2. Single queues (one queue serves one counter/checkpoint)

The observer identifies the longest queue and then starts the observation when a passenger
leaves to go to the counter. The observer counts the number of passengers in this queue, as
well as the total number of people queuing in all lines available to this passenger (in the case of
check-in, only for this airline/alliance and this class of check-in). The count should include the
last passenger, but not the one(s) going to the counter(s). Finally, the observer counts the
number of open counters available to this passenger.

To complete the observation, there are again, two scenarios:

1 If the last passenger arrives at the counter in less than 10 minutes, the observer
records the time and counts the number of open counters available to the passenger.

2 If the last passenger is still queuing after 10 minutes, the observer notes that the 10
minutes has elapsed, counts the number of passengers in front of the last passenger
and records the number of open counters.

If there is no queue:

Recommended practice is that the observer should record that the number of
passengers is zero, queuing time is zero and the number of queues is zero. The
observer should also count the number of open counters / machines
It is important to record empty queues as well as full queues. Airport queues vary
considerably even during peak hours and in order to gain a realistic view of passenger
waiting times, an average should be taken.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 10/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

After measuring an empty queue, the observer should wait 5 minutes before making the
next observation.

Figure 7: Measurement process for single queues

3.6. Recommended practice for different areas of the airport

3.6.1. Check-in

A sample plan should be created for each airport based on the seat capacity offered by airline.
The sample plan will identify:

Terminals

Airlines / Alliances (only the most important airlines accounting for 80% of the traffic will
be measured)

Check-In segmentation: First/Business, Economy, Self Check-in Kiosk, Bag drop off

Each measurement is specifically dedicated and is defined as one hour of measuring one
queue. For example, one hour is spent measuring Economy class passengers flying Lufthansa,
part of Star Alliance, in Terminal 1.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 11/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

This detail is important to gain a realistic overview taking into account the natural ebb and flow of
each type of queue.

3.6.2. Passport control

If several types of control counter (e.g. local / non-local / all passengers) exist at a control point,
measure each counter type separately during each survey.

3.6.3. Security control

Recommended practice is to measure average waiting time at each security check-point and the
average processing time at each type of security-check lane.

If the security check point has separate lanes for Business and Economy (or others e.g., Fast
Track), it is important to measure each type of lane separately for each measurement.

If applicable, Fast Track should be treated as a Business lane.

Recommendations for security checkpoint measurement process

Start the measurement: When a passenger puts his / her basket on the belt of the X-ray
machine.

End the measurement: When the last identified passenger puts his / her basket on the belt of
the X-ray machine.

3.6.4. Transfer counters

Recommended practice is to measure average waiting time per airline / ground handler and
average processing time by type of counter.

The airport should make a selection of the most important transfer service centres based on its
home carrier and the infrastructure.

3.6.5. Boarding

Measurement of the boarding times is different to other queues. Boarding measurement should
be for pre-defined flights, from opening of the gate until the last passenger enters the aircraft.

A sample plan should be created for each airport specifying which flights need to be surveyed.
The selected flights remain unchanged during the year of measurement.

To begin the observation, the observer should first set the time of observation and then write
down the flight number, 3 letter code of the flight destination, airline, terminal, gate number and
aircraft model.

The observer then asks the staff how many passengers are planned for the flight.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 12/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

The observer should record whether the gate is a:

Closed gate: passengers are no longer permitted to leave the gate and tickets have
already been swiped;
Open gate: passengers are allowed to move around freely in and out of the gate.

The observer should record how passengers will reach the aircraft and select one of:
o boarding bridge
o bus
o walking

The observer should note the time the first passenger gives its boarding pass to the staff at the
gate reader then count the number of staff and the number of gate accesses.

Finally the observer notes the time the last passenger leaves the gate:
Closed gate: when the last passenger leaves the pre-boarding area to enter the
boarding bridge, walk to the aircraft or to take the bus
Open gate: when the last passenger gives its boarding pass to the staff

3.6.6. Baggage delivery

Many airports measure these times automatically (e.g., when the baggage belt is switched on).
In these cases, these measurements do not need to be replicated.

For any other cases, for a pre-selected flight, the observer waits for the inbound aircraft to come
to a complete stop at the stand and notes the time chocks are put on.

The observer then goes into the ground handling area (airside), records the arrival terminal and
carousel number and notes the time the first / last bag is placed on the conveyor belt.

3.6.7. Customs inspection

The red channel designates the customs section where a passenger voluntary declares
importing goods or where the passenger is sent by the customs supervisor.

The channel can be treated as a single queue, and the methodology will be similar to the one
described for the security checkpoints.

3.6.8. Baggage Carts

The specific locations to be measured around the airport need to be determined before the start
of measurements. The observer counts the number of baggage carts stacked up at the pre-
selected locations in the terminal in departure and arrival areas as well as in the parking
facilities.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 13/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

4. Acknowledgements
ACI World would like to recognise the input from the following companies and entities in drafting
and reviewing this Recommended Practice:

- DKMA
- ACI World Facilitation and Services Standing Committee

--- END of version 1.0 ---

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 14/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

Appendix 1: References

For more information on peak times and design period calculations, please check the following
references:

International Civil Aviation Organisation (1977) Airport Planning Manual - Part 1. Master
Planning, Doc. 9184 - AN/902, ICAO, Montreal.
Planning and Design Guidelines for Airport Terminal Facilities. Advisory Circular
150/5360-13. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration.
(1988).
Ashford, N. and Wright, P. (1992) Airport Engineering, 3rd ed., John Wiley, New York
Horonjeff, R. and McKelvey, F. (1994) Planning and Design of Airports, 4th ed., McGraw
Hill, New York.
Airport Cooperative Research Program ACRP Report 25 Airport Passenger Terminal
Planning and Design, Volume 1: Guidebook. Transportation Research Board, 2010.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 15/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 ACI WORLD RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 300A12:
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF PASSENGER SERVICE PROCESS TIMES AND KPIS

Appendix 2: Passenger Counting Technologies

Passenger Counting Technologies - Comparison Fact Sheet (developed by ACI and SITA)

The purpose of this fact sheet is to provide an understanding of the various passenger counting
and tracking technologies currently available, as well as those technologies that are emerging.
The information presented in the following pages is a neutral view of the pros and cons of the
technologies at this point in time, and believed to be accurate, but not warranted. This Appendix
will be updated regularly, as the technologies continue to evolve.

ACI WORLD FACILITATION AND SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE Page 16/16 version 1.0 - 20130416
 -1-

APPENDIX 2

Passenger Counting Technologies - Comparison Fact Sheet (developed by ACI and SITA)

The purpose of this fact sheet is to provide an understanding of the various passenger counting and tracking technologies currently available, as well as those
technologies that are emerging. The information presented is a neutral view of the pros and cons of the technologies at this point in time, and believed to be
accurate, but not warranted. This Appendix will be updated regularly, as the technologies continue to evolve.

DISCLAIMER: Although every effort has been made to ensure this document accuracy, Airports Council International (ACI) shall not be held responsible
for any loss or damage caused by errors, omissions, misprints or misinterpretation of the contents hereof. Furthermore, Airports Council International (ACI)
expressly disclaims any and all liability to any person or entity, in respect of anything done or omitted, and the consequences of anything done or omitted,
by any such person or entity in reliance on the contents of this publication.

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

BCBP
Can provide:
(Bar Coded Boarding Passes)
Proven, stable solution Limited scan points Validation of 100% of passengers
BCBP events are captured Ability to capture up to 100% One of the less granular through a checkpoint, typically
when they are initially of passengers methods of tracking going airside from landside
generated by the DCS to be Anonymous, flight based Requires involvement from Approximate passenger counts
printed or issued to a mobile tracking available passengers (manually boarded passengers
device and then subsequently Potential to uniquely identify Off airport check-in cannot be tracked)
scanned, e.g., at security, the passenger passengers are only seen Coarse dwell time analysis, e.g., time
boarding, etc. Affordable solution when first scanned at the from airport check- in to security to
airport. boarding
Time last passenger checked in at the
airport

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -2-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

Bluetooth

Tracks on the basis of the Proven within the industry, as Maximum height from ceiling Well suited to queue management, and
Bluetooth devices address, airport deployments date back of 3-4 meters (where ceiling can be used for tracking passenger
which is typically translated to to 2006 mounting is not possible, movements and dwell time throughout
a unique, anonymous Tracking is typically sensors are typically affixed to the airport (even from the public
identifier anonymous available infrastructure, e.g., highway infrastructure exits, through
Sensors are adjustable within Potential to track and pillars) or mounted on end of to parking structures, check-in,
a range of 1 to 10 meters (3 to communicate with passengers immigration, security, retail to the final
pipes extending down from the
30m with directional uniquely, e.g., proximity destination gate)
antennas) ceiling. Ceiling height can be
marketing (though IP based up to 6-8 meters using
Typical penetration rate ranges communication is a better
from 8 to 15% of passengers directional antennas.
choice for interacting with Without an active Bluetooth
(potential to increase with the passengers, e.g., via mobile
future use of passenger facing application/connection, e.g.,
apps) hands free, Android phones
applications, e.g., flight
Bluetooth is more likely to be cannot be tracked via
updates)
electronically visible, Bluetooth as they are only in
Bluetooth devices can be assuming that it is turned ON,
probed multiple times a discovery mode during the
due the basic inquiry- response first two minutes after power-
second for very granular, functionality of the protocol
accurate tracking up
Requires virtually no In some airport locations, a
Uses the same ISM 2.4 GHz maintenance, e.g., no
frequency as Wi-Fi (802.11g), decrease in Bluetooth usage
calibration has been detected
without material interference
(given low power output, e.g.,
1/1000th the power of Wi-Fi)

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -3-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

Wi-Fi using RSSI (signal
strength) for geolocation of
passengers

Emerging Ability to uniquely track and The frequency and accuracy Well suited for zone based tracking
Tracks on the basis of Wi-Fi communicate with of detection points is limited & storing passenger movements, and
devices mac address, which passengers (opt-in only) when the phone is not in dwell time throughout the airport
is translated to a unique, Multi-purpose application active use (e.g. in sleep Preferred technology for marketing
anonymous identifier support, e.g. Wi-Fi access by mode). The rate drops off to communication via concierge type
Sensor (access point) range portable devices, and geo- once every two minutes applications on smart phones.
of 2-3 meters and up to 100 localisation of people and (depending upon the phone)
meters (depends upon assets Not suitable for granular lane
density of access points, type Sample size is expected to based queue time
of access points, type of increase as more passengers
adopt smart phones and measurements (e.g. measuring
passengers phone device queue wait times at individual
and usage of the phone) airports move to provide free
WiFi check-in, security or
Access point placement must immigration lanes)
be designed for proper Requires roughly 2.5 times
triangulation more access points to support
Best practice recommends that granular triangulation
access points should be placed Requires radio survey to
within 25 meters apart, within determine radiation in order to
line of sight of 3 other access trim the triangulation. This
points for accurate tracking survey has to be repeated if
Sample size estimates building facilities changes.
currently range from 10 to
15%

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -4-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

Video Analytics (option 1:
visual light spectrum)
Video Analytics is a broad Able to both track (within Can only track passengers Localized queue
category with many variations camera viewing area) and within a contained area, e.g., monitoring/management
(see other options below): count passengers with a security, and not throughout Most references for Video Analytics
single technology the airport, as the entire are in the area of retail and
Ability to tag and track ~ airport cannot be covered by surveillance, and intrusion detection
Tagging and tracking heads
100% of passengers (within cameras, e.g., WC
within a contained area
multi- camera viewing area, No potential to identify or
Also used for people counting communicate with the
within a contained area, e.g.,
(with movement in dual passenger uniquely
security)
directions)
May be used to augment Potential to use existing CCTV Requires regular maintenance
cameras in form of cleaning and
Bluetooth tracking with calibration check to guarantee
video streaming of tracked accuracy
individuals Light sources or sunlight
reflections can impair the
technology without being able
to centrally detect such
occurrences
Requires expensive
computing and storage
servers compared with
alternative technologies
Typically requires more
cameras than sensors of
competing solutions

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -5-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

Video Analytics (option 2:
Biometrics)

Tracking via facial recognition Can uniquely ID and track the Trialling facial tracking, one
passenger without having total airport reports a 3% sample
coverage of airport with rate across the airport
cameras

Video Analytics (option 3:

thermal/visual fingerprint)
A similar technological concept is
Evolving (future) Could uniquely ID the used to screen passengers
Passenger tracking on the passenger, and then in theory, corporal temperature to control
basis of a "thermal/visual track the passenger without outbreaks of communicable
fingerprint" using having total coverage of diseases
size/shape/thermal and/or airport with cameras
color metrics

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -6-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

GSM

Sensors can be located as far Potential for high penetration Probe time is inconsistent, as Ideal for tracking within shopping
as 100 meters apart rate 40% of phones probed within 2 malls where typical movements are
Can triangulate down to 2-5
meters minutes, and can range between casual and shoppers tend to linger
Sample rate in the range of 25- 12-20 minutes (using GSM, is
45%, which varies by not possible to force
geography transmission). Conversely,
Bluetooth and Wi-Fi devices
Sensors use the tinsey
can be proactively probed)
signal which is a temporary
address, which varies by As tracked address is
location temporary, return visits
cannot be tracked
Not suitable for short process
measurements such as security
queue time reporting, due to
low sample rate
Requires recalibration if
facility changes significantly
such as a result of store
redesign

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -7-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

Thermal Imaging
Proven Indoor use only Frequently implemented as an
Mature, robust people
counting technology No maintenance required extension of Bluetooth people
Counts passenger Sensors are small in size counting systems (60% of Bluetooth
movements in two directions compared to alternatives systems also include people
Able to count multiple Long lifetime counting)
passengers at the same time
Counting accuracy ranges
from 95-98%

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -8-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

Laser Counting
Proven Typically more expensive than Implemented as an extension of
Mature, robust people
counting technology Preferred technology for thermal imaging sensors Bluetooth people counting systems
Ability to count over outdoor counting applications Limited life time as devices (60% of Bluetooth systems also
wide areas due to resistance to have rotating parts include people counting)
interference from sun Requires regular maintenance
reflections and other light such as filter changes and
cleaning
sources
Uses more power than
alternatives
Large physical size
Expensive to install and
calibrate compared to
alternatives

RFID
Has not emerged as a viable Could be used in relation to
Used for asset tracking (over alternative for passenger temporary measurements initiatives
Wi-Fi) tracking, as it requires a where passive RFID has been applied
RFID chips now being placed relatively costly token (RFID to each boarding pass
within passports
chip)
Has very short
communication range (in
relation to passport usage)
Domestic passengers
typically do not carry
passports

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 -9-

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

NFC (Near Field
Communication)

Emerging This technology is similar to Has not emerged as a viable Used for personal identification,
SITA Lab involved in a pilot the BCBP and Passport RFID alternative for passenger like driver license, payment,
involving NFC to store as the passengers NFC device tracking, as communication access control etc.
boarding card on a device (typically a phone) has to be range is limited
(phone) and use it at security presented very close to the Technology penetration will
gates, boarding gates and reader be low for the next 1-3 years
airline lounges for automatic
entry

Wi-Fi TOA (Time of

Arrival); Time stamped
based versus current RSSI
methodology

Access points are time Requires less access points Relatively new, and
synchronized than Wi-Fi access points untested
3-5 meter triangulation using RSSI Requires proprietary
In trial phase Consistent accuracy versus access points
RSSI based tracking (to be Need to run a parallel
confirmed, via a trial) network to Wi-Fi access
Less impact by barriers, e.g., points
walls than RSSI

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416

 - 10 -

Technology (and attributes) Pros Cons Typical Application

UWB (Ultra Wide Band)

Emerging Low power, doesnt interfere Few market solutions

Wi-Fi specification (802.15) available
Allows for high precision Wi-Fi chip set in access
short terms sensing, e.g., down points needs to support
to cm needed protocol

iGPS (indoor GPS)

Emerging Lower number of sensors than Needs a chip set upgrade to

Uses Wi-Fi spectrum RSSI (less infrastructure) Wi-Fi access points
Piggy back upon GPS Less than one meter precision
protocol (enables outdoor
indoor seamless tracking)
Need fewer sensors than TOA
Trial phase

END

Copyright ACI All rights reserved Annex 2 | version 1 | 20130416