Formal Recommendation Report - Final

i

Critical Baggage Handling Solutions for Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

Key 2 Usability Research Consulting Firm Inc.Making it work for you

www.key2usability.com

Prepared for: Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta

International Airport

Prepared by:Aundrea MauldinSenior Research

Consultant

April 28, 2014

Table of Contents

List of Figures............................................................................................................ iiiExecutive Summary................................................................................................... ivIntroduction................................................................................................................6Methods.................................................................................................................... 10Results and Discussion.............................................................................................12

“In the Spotlight”..................................................................................................12Baggage Handling Systems...................................................................................12London Heathrow Airport......................................................................................12(IATA Code: LHR)...................................................................................................12

Background........................................................................................................12Issues................................................................................................................. 13Improvements....................................................................................................13

McCarran International Airport (IATA Code: LAS)..................................................14Background........................................................................................................14Issues................................................................................................................. 15Improvements....................................................................................................15

Dubai International Airport (IATA Code: DXB).......................................................16Background........................................................................................................16Issues................................................................................................................. 17Improvements....................................................................................................17

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (IATA Code: DFW)....................................19Background........................................................................................................19Issues................................................................................................................. 19Improvements....................................................................................................20

The Passengers’ Perspective....................................................................................21Conclusion................................................................................................................23Recommendation.....................................................................................................24References...............................................................................................................26

List of FiguresFigure 1 Baggage Facts for 2013................................................................................7Figure 2 Dubai BHS..................................................................................................18

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport ii

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

Executive Summaryccording to SITA’s The Baggage Report, 21.8 million bags were

mishandled in 2013, costing the aviation industry around $2.09 billion. With passenger travel expected to increase around 5%—and this is a very conservative estimate—over the next few decades; baggage handling is a shared concern for airlines and airports. This ongoing problem affects airports’ and airlines’ profits and reputations. Airlines have a more vested interest in resolving this issue as they are solely responsible for paying out claims to passengers for lost or mishandled baggage.

A

This report aims to provide insight on possible solutions for mishandled baggage and related processes at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. Four of the world’s busiest and fastest growing international airports are included in our investigative study. Airport locations include: Dubai International Airport, Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, McCarran International Airport, and London’s Heathrow Airport.

Key 2 Usability’s core objective for this report is to gather data concerning areas that are problematic in baggage handling processes at all four airports. Then analysis will be done on how each airport reacted to its baggage issues via improvements made to the baggage handling systems and processes. Using the results from the analyses of the four airports, Key 2 Usability will form a recommendation for Hartsfield-Jackson Airport that provides solutions to increase efficiency, speed, and

accuracy in its baggage handling processes—creating a win-win outcome for the airport and its passenger traffic.

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport iv

“The measure of a first-class baggage-handling system is simple: can bags reach their correct destination as quickly, safely and securely as passengers can?

If the answer is no, then, like a stack of dominoes, an entire airport operation has the potential to fall flat on its face” (Blackman, 2013, para. 2).

Introduction

ccording to SITA’s The Baggage Report, “21.8 million bags were

mishandled in 2013, costing the aviation industry around $2.09 billion” (SITA, 2014, p. 2). At the height of baggage mishandling in 2007, the total of mishandled bags peaked at 46.9 million. This number has been reduced overall in recent years with the help of advanced technology and industry initiatives—but more effort is needed.

A

With air travel continually increasing, baggage handling is a shared concern for airlines and airports. Jayaraman and O’Connell (2011) confirm, “With passenger traffic growing by 4.7 per cent per year over the next two decades, baggage will become a big issue for the industry” (Jayaraman & O’Connell, 2011, p. 325). This ongoing issue has great ramifications on airports’ and airlines’ profits and reputations. Therefore it is imperative that airports invest in their technology infrastructures to meet passenger demand— Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport included.

The analysis done for this recommendation report is set against the backdrop of four rapidly growing international airports. These locations include: Dubai International Airport, Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, McCarran International Airport, and London’s Heathrow Airport. This report provides insights on possible solutions for mishandled baggage at Hartsfield-Jackson Airport by reviewing improvements made to each airport’s baggage handling processes. At the heart of bag mishandling are complex baggage handling processes which include five key areas: check-in, security, manual handling, arrivals,

and transfers. The bulk of bag mishandling occurs during transfers. SITA confirms, “Transfer bag mishandling is therefore the main reason for baggage delays . . . . transfer bags accounted for 45% of all delayed bags files” (SITA, 2014, p. 9).

Tackling the complex issue of baggage handling is difficult as no two airports are alike—nor are their needs. However, they do share some of the same external influences such as changing weather patterns, increased passenger travel, and consumer demand for more information. SITA confirms, “These pressures are unlikely to ease as IATA forecasts there will be a 31% increase in passenger numbers between 2012 and 2017 to reach 3.91 billion” (SITA, 2014, p. 10). The report discusses the research methods used to derive the information presented here. A substantial part of this report’s structure is centered on the “In the Spotlight” section under Results and Discussion as it showcases the four airports under review in detail. This section highlights the background, world ranking for passenger traffic, issues, and improvements for each airport concerning baggage traffic and handling. Also included is a supplementary section titled “Passenger’s Perspective” for added insight into the effect mishandled baggage has on passengers and their views on airline customer service. The next section of the report summarizes the recurring issues found at the four international airports.

Lastly, using the data obtained from the investigative study, Key 2 Usability makes a comprehensive recommendation to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport regarding possible solutions for mishandled


baggage. The core aim of this report is to provide solutions that encourage speed, accuracy, and efficiency in the baggage handling processes from end-to-end at Hartfield-Jackson—making it a win-win for the airport and its passengers.

Figure 1 Baggage Facts for 2013 (SITA, 2014, p.2)


Methods his section details what methodologies Key 2 Usability

employed to obtain the facts presented in this report.

TSearch Strategies included primary and secondary resources. We used our affiliation with Southern Polytechnic State University and University of Georgia’s consortium to pull credible sources from academic databases such as ACM, IEEE, and Academic Search Complete. Filters applied when pulling sources included: date ranges (with publication dates no older than 1997), full-text, and scholarly (peer-reviewed) journals. Putting a filter on the publication date allowed for seeing topic progression to present day. Our search terms included: “baggage management”, “baggage handling at airports”, “lost luggage”,” baggage handling systems”, “aviation”, “airport management”, “security in airports”, “radio frequency identification systems”, and “RFID tags in airports”. Search strategies to be used for pulling resources included: Boolean Operators and Phrase Searching, and Field Term searches.Sources types used for this report included reports, research papers, academic journals, trade publication, and magazines. Examples of these will include:

Journal of Airport Management, Fordham Journal of Corporate and Financial Law, Motion and Emotion, Air Transport World, Mobile Radio Technology, International Journal of Information Technology & Management, Mechanical Engineering, and Work.

Additionally we researched aviation related organizations’ websites such as International Air Transport Association (IATA), Airports Council International (ACI), and SITA as they have current statistics regarding lost, stolen, or mishandled baggage according to airlines and airports by the year. We relied on their data as SITA’s information is heavily referenced in aviation related topics. The four international airport’s websites were also reviewed for statistics too.

Lastly, Key 2 Usability had the opportunity to conduct an interview with Pete Bjostad, VP Marketing with Cage Systems on baggage handling systems by email. Mr. Bjostad brings over 30 years of specialized experience in planning, designing, and implementing baggage handling systems worldwide. The goal of conducting this interview was to gain insight on the planning and deployment of baggage handling systems, stakeholder involvement and RFID technology.

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport 10

Below is the list of inquiries contained in the questionnaire:


1. I noticed that for Cage’s BHS JFK project, American Airlines was the owner of the terminal to be redesigned. Is there any difference in the administrative process if the airport or the airline is the client? If the owner is the airport, does the airline have any input as a stakeholder regarding the design?

2. When doing the analysis of the existing BHS at an airport, what are some common issues/hurdles that you run into? (E.g., Space confinements or outdated technology)

3. Where do most of the bottlenecks occur within a BHS that usually have to be addressed with your redesign or new design? Does the amount of bottlenecks directly relate to if the current system in place is manual, semi-automated, or fully automated?

4. Taken from under BHS Simulation & Modeling heading, “By validating the systems operational capability, designers were able to ensure that the system would meet current and future operational load requirements”. How do you predetermine future operational load requirements as passenger travel is expected to increase 31% through 2017—is there a specific formula used?

5. RFID technology – your thoughts on it – good, bad, too much of a hassle to implement, not enough infrastructure for it or NFCs. Does CAGE deploy this technology often? If not, what issues need to be addressed for it to work properly?

Results and Discussion

“In the Spotlight”

o stay abreast of technology and competition in the aviation

industry it is critical that airports constantly make upgrades and expand as needed to accommodate increasing passenger traffic and demand. The four Tier 2 (in excess of 25 million passengers per year) airports showcased in this section are no exception. No two airports are alike and each has different issues and needs as will be shown in the snapshots of each airport listed below.

T

Baggage Handling SystemsTo give a little background on baggage handling systems (BHS) there are three types: manual, semi-automated, and full-automated. As these featured airports are international and have a bigger budget, most is either semi or fully automated. There are three core tasks that all baggage handling systems perform. The first task is to get deliver luggage from the check-in to the departing airplane, the second is to deliver luggage from one plane to another when passengers have transferring flights, and the last is to

deliver luggage from arriving planes to the baggage claim area.

London Heathrow Airport (IATA Code: LHR) World Ranking for Passenger Traffic – 3

BackgroundEstablished as London Heathrow Airport in 1955, this aerodrome is situated on approximately 3000 acres 14 miles west of Central London in the Hillingdon Borough. Heathrow has two runways that taxi an average of 1200 flights daily totaling 469,552 for 2013. Five terminals take up most of this metropolis servicing over 72 million passengers with 82 airlines going to 180 destinations in 85 countries in 2013. The airport is a major transfer hub for international travelers in Europe and is home to British Airways (London Heathrow Airport, 2014)

Heathrow’s baggage system is semi-automated (some terminals are fully automated and others are manual) and is comprised of a total of 30 miles of conveyor belts and 2.8 miles of tunnels with 44 baggage claim stops. From check-in to airplane, the bag travels along the conveyor belts and is scanned by barcode before passing through security. Once the bag has arrived at the appropriate gate, a ground handler scans the bag tag again for confirmation and is loaded on a cart and driven to the plane.

IssuesAs Heathrow is one of the world’s busiest transfer hubs, it makes sense that transfers are the area is where the bulk of baggage mishandling occurs. In their article Jayaraman and


O’Connell (2011) reveal, “A number of years ago at Heathrow, around 40 per cent of the transfer bags had to be read manually using hand-held readers as the scanners were unable to identify them, while today, that figure has reduced to 25 per cent” (Jayaraman & O’Connell, 2011, p. 326). To combat this issue, Heathrow’s baggage handling processes overall still need to move towards full automation.

Another challenge for Heathrow is proper system integration. When new technology is introduced to the existing network—not all works well together. Regarding not having adequate infrastructure in place Jayaraman and O’Connell (2011) state, “Heathrow is a good example of such an airport, with some of its terminals still using traditional baggage systemswhile others are fully-automated. The mishandling issues in such airports arise due to poor coordination and improper system integration” (Jayaraman & O’Connell, 2011, p. 328).

ImprovementsSince 2003, Heathrow has been invested around $11 billion in expansion and upgrades to its infrastructure. Opening in 2008, Terminal 5 has received multiple accolades throughout Europe for its design, scale, and technology. This is in spite of its most notable moment during opening week when it lost 42,000 bags causing suspended check-ins and cancelled flights. T5’s fully automated bag system handles 53 million bags a year by itself and boasts to have the largest single-terminal baggage handling system in Europe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn8qogHH9bM (AirportInternation, 2013)

Construction on the new Terminal 2 also known as The Queen’s Terminal, is slated to be completed around June 2014. Anticipating 20 million passengers annually, the terminal is designed to optimize the efficiency of the airport by reducing transfer times and improving the passenger experience. Although Heathrow claims to have learned its lesson with T5’s debacle, possibilities of a repeat loom for Terminal 2’s opening day.

More improvements include upgrades to the baggage screening equipment will go from Standard 2 to Standard 3 to stay in compliance with current regulations. Additionally, the airport has plans to completely rebuild Terminal 1 sometime in 2016, and Terminal 3 just received a $22 million upgrade to its passport control and baggage reclaim areas. Key 2 Usability chose London Heathrow Airport for review in this recommendation report as it is a major transfer, high traffic hub, with similar baggage processing issues like Hartfield-Jackson.

McCarran International Airport (IATA Code: LAS)World Ranking for Passenger Traffic - 23

BackgroundMcCarran International Airport was established under its respective name in 1948. It is the first airport in the world to implement a fully automated baggage handling system that utilizes radio frequency identification (RFID) technology—and the only one state side. McCarran is situated five miles south of downtown Las Vegas on 2800 acres in Paradise, NV. This airport


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn8qogHH9bM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn8qogHH9bM

operates four runways that hosted over 40,000 planes in 2012 averaging 928 flights daily.

The airport has a total of three terminals—at this time Terminal 1 and 3 are dedicated to servicing public passengers. According to the fact facts on McCarran’s website, “Terminals 1 and 3 have a combined have a combined total of twelve miles of conveyor belts that transit bags to 31 baggage claim carousels” (McCarran International Airport, 2013) Although only two out of three terminals are operational, McCarran still managed to serve over 41 million passengers ranking 24th in passenger traffic in 2012. McCarran is home to Southwest Airlines, Allegiant Air, and Spirit Airlines.

Most of passenger traffic is either incoming (destination) or outgoing (origin). This is a leading reason why the RFID technology has been such a success at the airport. Because McCarran International Airport is not a major transfer hub, the RFID technology works better for them than it would at an airport with more transfer traffic.

IssuesMcCarran has suffered from many of the bottlenecks that baggage handling systems inherently come with from check-in through screening to departure, arrival, and claims. As the airport sees between 60,000 to 70,000 pieces of luggage daily, it is critical to alleviate the pressure placed on the system and ground handlers with automated solutions.

The numbers fluctuate on the accuracy of barcode readers, but the range is about 70% to 90%; meaning at least 6000 to 7000 bags are at risk for being mishandled daily—now multiply that by 365. Up until McCarran decided to implement the RFID pilot, it had a manually handled bag system.

ImprovementsIn 2006 McCarran decided to be proactive and be the first airport in the U.S. to employ an airport-wide baggage handling system using RFID technology. The goal was to increase the accuracy and efficiency of the baggage handling process by moving from manual handling to total automation. In Hutchinson’ (2004) article Samuel Ingalls concurs, “McCarran hopes to reduce the cost to airlines and ease the frustration of passengers by using an airport-wide bag-handling system that will check bags by radio” (Hutchinson, 2004, p.


“Furthermore, about 85%-90% of passenger traffic at McCarran is origin-and-destination, which means a high percentage of those bags are processed inside the terminals and loaded onto the 561 or so daily departures rather than being transferred from one flight to the next—as is the case at the majority of top 20 airports, which tend to be connecting hubs” (Arnoult, Thomas, and Buyck, 2007, p. 38).

43). FKI Logistics based out of Danville, KY, was one of the contractors for the three phase project that span across two years.

Normally the responsibility and liability of bag handling falls solely on the airlines however, McCarran took the initiative to manage all bag sorting processes itself as the RFID technology was being implemented. Douglas (2006) substantiates in his article, “McCarran has taken over responsibility for baggage sorting from its airline tenants” (Douglas, 2006, p. 33). This improvement made bag handling processes substantially more efficient and simple at McCarran.

The progressive airport’s biggest tenant Southwest Airlines was not initially on board with the new technology as they could not fully justify the extra cost. It is interesting to note that in the first quarter of 2006 Southwest mishandled over 109,000 bags at 35% increase over the last year. Since then the airline has adopted the newer technology and has realized many benefits from it. The core benefit of using RFID technology is that when reading bag information on the conveyor belt it does not matter what position the bag is in the data can still be captured accurately. This automation reduces the number of bags that need manual handling— not true for hand held bar code readers.

In the summer of 2012, Terminal 3 underwent a complete renovation as part of the RFID bag system expansion. The new terminal now encompasses two million square feet and is projected to handle about 10,000 pieces of luggage daily. Key 2 Usability chose to review McCarran International Airport for its aggressive stance on keeping up with technology

to tackle bag mishandling issues. Hartsfield-Jackson Airport can derive a lot of useful information regarding useful methodologies for tracking luggage accurately.

Dubai International Airport (IATA Code: DXB) World Ranking for Passenger Traffic – 10

BackgroundEstablished in 1960 Dubai International Airport is part of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) conglomerate. Located in Al Garhoud approximately three miles east of Dubai, this airport sits on 8400 acres of land. Since its opening Dubai Airport has posted staggering statistics like welcoming over 402 million visitors, operating over 3.8 million flights, and an average growth rate of 15.5% annually—making DXB a formidable competitor in the aviation industry (Dubai International Airports, 2010, p.8).

Dubai Airport is home to world class Emirates Airlines, FlyDubai, and Emirates SkyCargo. A total of 140 airlines touch base with this airbase connecting to over 230 destinations globally. This airport is comprised of three terminals that hosted over 66 million passengers in 2013. The building housing Terminal 3 for Emirates Airline’s exclusive use, boasts the largest floor space (over 1.5 million m²) and baggage handling system in the world.

IssuesDubai International Airport’s major issue is continuous unprecedented growth. With an annual growth rate of over 15% and over 42 million transfer bags handled in 2013, it is a constant


challenge to accommodate the increase in passenger traffic (SITA, 2014, p. 11). Furthermore, DXB is projecting passenger growth to surpass 100 million by 2020.

Because Dubai Airport is the transfer hub for most major cities like Europe, Asia, India, the amount of transfer traffic is dense. This fact presents another set of issues as transfer bags are under extra pressure to make it to connecting flights in a short turn-around time. SITA quoted Bernd Struck, VP of Baggage Services at dnata stating, “The challenge for dnata’s teams is to bring these [transfer] bags from the aircraft, put them through bag sort and x-ray in the bag handling area and return them to their connecting flights in a turn-around time of 75 minutes . . . . We need sufficient input capacity so bags can be put into the system, dealt with for sortation etc., and discharged again” (SITA, 2014, p. 11). dnata provides ground, baggage handling, and a host of other services to Dubai Airports.

ImprovementsDubai Airport has made tremendous strides in its bag handling processes and tracking by incorporating more automation. SITA further quotes Struck stating, “dnata has made a lot of investment in process and infrastructure . . . . It is important we use as much automation as possible . . . . We have developed a lot of internal IT infrastructure in order to optimize the processes” (SITA, 2014, p. 11).

In order to get a handle on the airport’s rapid passenger growth, Dubai contracted Siemens based out of Konstanz, Germany, to design and install the baggage handling system for Terminal 3 making it fully operational in December 2008. This BHS sets the benchmark high in terms of efficiency, accuracy, speed, and is envied by many airports. Siemens took great care to ensure that the BHS’s performance would not be compromised under difficult conditions such as flight delays due to inclement weather. Inclusive in the BHS is RFID technology with 800 read/write stations that can handle up to 15,000 bags per hour.

Below is a snapshot of the scope and complexity of Dubai Airport’s BHS:


Figure 2 Dubai BHS(Siemens, 2009, p. 4)

The latest jewel in DXB’s crown, Concourse A—part of Terminal 3—opened in January 2013, handling over 22 million bags and 50,000 flights serving 14.6 million passengers in its first year. Concourse A is the world’s only purpose built facility with multi-level boarding for the Airbus A380. Paul Griffiths, CEO Dubai Airports summarizes, “And as we prepare for the future, we are refining our business processes and putting systems in place that will allow us to meet the demands of our rapid expansion . . . . and manage the

growing number of passengers” (Dubai International Airports, 2014, p. 3).

Key 2 Usability chose to review Dubai International Airport as part of this recommendation report due to their rapid expansion and passenger growth. Growth is the impetus that drives necessary innovations in processes, systems, and infrastructure at DXB.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9K8qCk0cY (Siemens, 2013)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9K8qCk0cY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9K8qCk0cY

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (IATA Code: DFW)World Ranking for Passenger Traffic - 8

BackgroundEstablished in 1974, Dallas Fort Worth International Airport is the third largest airport in the world according to land space. Situated on approximately 17,000 acres, DFW is spread across four cities including Irving, Euless, Grapevine, and Coppell. This massive airport is notable for its own zip code, police, fire protection, and medical services on site. DFW’s seven runways commanded over 670,000 flights in 2013. Dallas Fort Worth Airport has five terminals totaling 155 gates that 24 airlines share; with just over 200 destinations. American Airlines and its regional affiliate American Eagle have a large presence at the Texas hub conducting business at four of the five terminals in the airport (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, 2014).

IssuesDallas Fort Worth International Airport saw approximately 60 million passengers and 15 million transfer bags in 2013. Ranking 8th in passenger traffic this transfer hub, the issue of how to properly deal with transfer bags reappears (SITA, 2014, p. 12). Again, concerns about bags missing intended destinations due to misread information on tags, bottlenecks in the screening system, and lack of communication between ground handlers becomes troublesome.

Another area for development at Dallas Fort Worth is inter-airline bag messaging. According to Kevin Smith, Assistant Vice President of Customer

Services at DFW, “We estimate approximately ten percent of interline transfers arriving at DFW cannot be automatically sorted through the baggage handling system, because no bag source message was received from the originating carrier” (SITA, 2014, p. 12).

ImprovementsIn recent years especially 2012, Dallas Fort Worth International Airport has made great strides to get a handle on bag processes to ensure that bags meet up with their owners as efficiently as possible. Smith also confirmed, “ . . . our key accomplishments in the way transfer bags are handled include introducing lots of automation in bag tracking – both hand-held scanners and scanners in the baggage system, plus a trial of radio RFID bag-tags; faster belts; and more input locations” (SITA, 2014, p. 12). Through its Terminal Renewal and Improvement Program (TRIP) several projects were completed including Terminal A by CAGE Inc. and Terminal B by Siemens with Vanderlande Industries as service provider.Key 2 Usability inquired about DFW for this report as this is another great example of a proactive airport keeping up with technology in order to meet the needs of the business.



It’s happened to all of us. After a particularly long and tiring flight, you wait apprehensively near the baggage carousel for your luggage to appear on the conveyor belt. As the last couple of unclaimed items circle endlessly, you realize that your bags somehow just didn't make it.

Thinking ahead to that important meeting scheduled early the next morning and knowing that the jeans and sneakers you now are wearing don't qualify as appropriate business attire, you trudge angrily to the airline baggage claim office. You start feeling this trip could turn into a disaster.

(Milo, 2006, Para. 1)

The Passengers’ Perspective

f a passenger’s bag is lost or delayed the repatriation process then begins

with filing a claim at the airline claims counter. Another scenario could be if a passenger makes their connecting flight but the luggage does not—in this case most of the work is done behind the scenes at the airlines to reconnect the bag and owner. Either scenario precludes the bag entering WorldTracer, a global database used by airlines for tracking delayed or lost baggage. This database has two sides that constantly scrub each other’s lists for reconciliation. One side contains reports of lost baggage by passengers and the other side reports lost baggage from other agencies.

I

This process can be very lengthy depending on the steps needed to reunite the bag and passenger. The first stage can

last five days as the airline attempts to send the bag to the passenger’s location. If the first stage fails the bag enters the second stage which includes being held at a search

location while further attempts to locate the owner are made for up to 21 days. There is a lot of tricky water to navigate regarding how mishandled baggage is dealt with and how the bag is returned to the passenger. All the

details are not so clear cut. Most of the rulings on these cases start with the local laws and regulations where the mishandling occurred. Franks states in his article, “Virtually everyone traveling is doing so for a reason and has a genuine need for their packed items” (Franks, 2007, p. 736).

Key 2 Usability included this section as it is imperative that Hartfield-Jackson International Airport makes its passengers first priority. Their perspective of the airport and airlines within directly affects reputation, revenue, and future endeavors for the establishment.


Conclusion recurring theme for the majority of airports reviewed is the

constant challenge of increasing passenger traffic. Transfer passengers and luggage continues to be problematic for most airports as this segment of traffic presents its own set of challenges. Some airports have a better handle on this than others like Dubai International, whereas other airports struggle more with this issue.

A

Another repeated narrative is the desire to move away from manual handling of bags to complete automation to improve speed, efficiency, and productivity in end-to-end baggage handling processes. In order to achieve the full benefits from automation, complete system integration needs to occur with the current BHS and new components. Heathrow’s Terminal 5 opening is a good example of what can happen when infrastructures are not properly merged.

RFID technology is proving to be a logistically viable technology option

for baggage handling systems as its read

accuracy is 99+%—greatly reducing the need to manually handle luggage. It also can track a bag all over the globe in real time. This allows for quicker updates and alerts to ground handlers thus affording them faster reconciliation of lost bags. DFW and McCarran are taking the lead in RFID enhancements.

As cost remains an obstacle for airports, Lenior concludes, ”However fully automated systems are not (yet) a feasible solution for all airports, not only due to cost or space limitations, but also due to required flexibility in operation” (Lenior, 2012, p. 5904). McCarran International airport stood out in this perspective by taking responsibility for the cost and management of its new BHS system.

Recommendation



ey 2 Usability is making the following recommendations regarding improving

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport’s baggage handling system and processes:

KKey 2 Usability is offering its services for further research concerning RFID

product and service providers;


Complete integration in a baggage handling project takes an airport's disparate systems, such as flight scheduling and passenger information systems, and neatly joins them to one another, yielding a system that not only sorts and conveys baggage, but also provides tracking, tracing, and detailed system performance information.

(Heacock, 2005)

1. Update existing baggage handling infrastructure in the Domestic Terminal (west) to meet the Maynard H. Jackson Jr. International Terminal’s (east) state-of-the-art bag handling standards. Operating systems to be fully integrated include: check-in (weighing and conveying), sorting, screening, explosive device systems (EDS), and tracking.

2. Ensure all systems mentioned above are regularly test for redundancy within bag handling processes. In the event of a system failure, make sure alternate routes for baggage and baggage handling information are ready for execution.

3. Upgrade all baggage screening equipment (except the International Terminal) from Standard 2 to Standard 3 to stay in compliance with current U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) regulations. We recommend Vanderlande as they have customized hold baggage screening solutions.

4. Key 2 Usability strongly recommends a testing phase of six months on RFID technology to see if it is a feasible option for Hartsfield-Jackson. The new International Terminal would be the ideal testing environment as it has the latest baggage handling infrastructure available. Our firm also recommends employing CAGE Inc. for RFID testing as they have an established relationship with Hartsfield-Jackson through prior projects.

5. Testing phase will include:a. Placing RFID tag printers at the check-in area in the International Terminal.b. Installing RFID read/write stations along the existing conveyor system for

accurate tracking.6. Compare read and tracking results at the end of six month trial between RFID and

existing bar code scanning processes—with special regard to transfer baggage

contingent on Hartsfield-Jackson’s decision to proceed with RFID installation project


ReferencesAirportInternation. (2013, June 3). London Heathrow t5 [Video file]. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn8qogHH9bMArnoult, S., Thomas, G., & Buyck, C. (2007, March). RFID in action. Air Transport

World, 44(3), 38-42. Retrieved from http://www.atwonline.comBlackman, S. (2013, March). Video feature: Baggage handling – smooth operations

at Dubai International. Retrieved from http://www.airport-technology.com Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. (2014). DWF fast facts. Retrieved from

http://www.dfwairport.com/visitor/P1_009559.phpDouglas, M. (2006, November). RFID takes off at U.S. airports. Mobile Radio

Technology 24(11), 32-33. Retrieved from http://urgentcomm.com/Dubai International Airport. (2010). Dubai airports-Strategic plan 2020. Retrieved

from http://www.dubaiairport.com/en/media-centre/Documents/Dubai%20Airports%20-%20Strategic%20Plan%202020.pdf

Dubai International Airport. (2014). Dubai airports yearbook 2013. Retrieved from http://dubaiairportsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/DXB-airport-2013-Eng.pdf

Franks, M. R. (2007). Airline liability for loss, damage, or delay of passenger baggage. Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law 12(4) 735-752. Retrieved from http://fordhamcorporatecenter.org/journal/

Gupta, A., Arif, M., & Williams, A. (2013). Measuring customer service: A case study of Dubai International Airport. Journal of Airport Management, 7, 363-375. Retrieved from http://www.henrystewartpublications.com/jam

Heacock, P. (2005, June). Smart baggage handling systems improve airport baggage operations. Retrieved from http://www.aviationpros.com/article/10384240/smart-baggage-handling-systems-improve-airport-baggage-operations

Hutchinson, H. (2004, April). Every bag in place. Mechanical Engineering 126(4), 42-43. Retrieved from http://www.memagazine.org


Jayaraman, S., & O’Connell, J. F. (2011). An investigative study into the annual US$2.5bn mishandled baggage problem. Journal of Airport Management, 5, 325-334. Retrieved from http://www.henrystewartpublications.com/jam

Lenior, O. N. M. (2012). Airport baggage handling-Where do human factors fit in the challenges that airports put on a baggage system? Work, 41, 5899-5904. doi: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0986-5899

McCarran International Airport. (2013). 2012 Annual Report. Retrieved from https://www.mccarran.com/DoingBusiness/Finance/Annual-Report-2012/2012%20Annual%20Financial%20Report/files/assets/downloads/publication.pdf

Siemens. (2009). Dubai International Airport: A baggage handling system for the gate to the Arab world. Retrieved from http://w3.siemens.com/market-specific/global/en/airports/baggage_cargo/Documents/al_dubai.pdf

Siemens. (2013, June 3). Siemens baggage handling system Dubai International[Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9K8qCk0cY

SITA. (2014). Baggage report 2014. Retrieved from http://www.sita.aero/surveys-reports/industry-surveys-reports/baggage-report-2014
