The management of the COVID crisis brings new challenges. In addition to the increased sanitation and disinfection measures, one major task is to enable passengers and airport staff to keep physical distance. In this context, airports should plan, coordinate and conduct the following activities:

The risk for air traffic leading to recurring local outbreaks is inherent as soon as airlines carry infected passengers, which are hard to identify when they are asymptomatic. This adds uncertainties for all aviation stakeholders regarding travel restrictions or quarantine measures taken by local governments. The focus is therefore on implementing risk based measures which amongst physical distancing and enhanced sanitation may include health checks for arriving and/or departing passengers.

• Thermal temperature screening
  was implemented at several airports in the initial phase of the pandemic, but has been identified by EASA as a high-cost but low efficiency measure, because passengers without symptoms (up to 75%) are not detected.
• PCR testing before departure
  could be done off-airport before travelling or at the airport with results provided 2 to 3h after the test. Some countries have implemented requirements for recent negative PCR test (e.g. 48-72 hours before departure).
• PCR testing on arrival
  has been implemented, in particular from defined “risk areas”. National authorities put rules into place but currently have difficulties with local testing capacities to ensure timely results.
• Health self-declaration
  is requested by some governments as further measure. Airlines had to ask health questions related to COVID. That was initially performed during check-in by agents, but most airlines have now integrated this to the online check-in. Some governments request this information online before travel.
• Passenger locator cards / online health forms
  have been established by some national authorities (e.g. Spain or Greece) to ask self-declaration health questions as well as enable contact tracing in a more efficient way, request passengers to fill in online forms. With an online system, a QR code can generated that passengers show during the check-in and eventually on arrival to prove that they provided the required.

Since no standard process for health checks at airports has been defined yet, several what-if scenarios have been simulated in the generic test environment, allowing an easy customization for a local airport.

The simulation model shall support the understanding and dimensioning of a health checkpoint.

Simulation of a potential Health Check

As first area in the passengers’ process chain the departure hall including check-in is considered to be one major element regarding the potential requirement for any additional COVID related early checks of the passengers. In addition, any changes regarding passenger characteristics due to COVID, e.g. different show-up behavior at the airport or number of checked luggage, will immediately have an influence on the check-in process. Next to these process related impacts, the need for physical distance while queuing for the actual check-in transaction has to be considered.

COVID-19 Impact

It is very likely that these changes will lead to prolonged waiting times and queues, although the specific numbers will certainly depend on the traffic cluster and operational conditions. In any case, the study figured out relevant issues when stakeholders (airlines, ground handler, airport) do not react to the changed conditions adequately.

Mitigation Measures

• Expansion of queuing system
• Balancing of manpower to new demand
• Adjustment of counter opening times
• Including health questions in online check-in
• Optimization of allocation

At many airports, the security checkpoint is often close to its capacity limit already. Changing conditions in times of COVID put additional pressure on that sensitive system and new factors need to be considered for ensuring both, fluent processes as well as the safety of passengers.

• COVID measures have a negative impact on security throughput
• Less capacity of available queue space due to physical distance rules
• Changing staffing requirements

Microscopic Analysis

The reduction off drop off positions is one typical initial measure airports introduced shortly after the COVID outbreak in order to comply with enforced physical distance rules. This – in combination with other measures – resulted in a significant reduction of throughput capacity.

Thus, some airports have already started to adapt measures to ensure health safety with other equivalent measures less impacting the handling capacity. In any case, some measures will remain and the simulation model can be used as valuable indicator to identify a suitable operational setup.

Security Control Simulation: Impact of Covid-19 Measures

The following video demonstrates for an example layout and operational concept, how the throughput change can be assessed.

Macroscopic Analysis

Due to physical distance requirements and decrease in throughput capacity, the requirement for a well-balanced staffing of lanes gets more relevant. This might even raise the need for an update of the regular staffing rules. For a given demand more lanes need to be opened compared to pre-COVID to overcome the reduced handling capacity and physical distancing.

Gate Holdrooms

• Use of every second seat only
• Physical distance for standing passengers
• Limited availability of retail areas
• Earlier show-up of passengers

Airports face the task of calculating new saturation capacities for their boarding gates as input for their further decisions about allocation and other operational measures. Based on 1.5m physical distance, such a new temporary saturation capacity is expected to be around 70% of the former capacity.

For single closed gates the decision whether a flight can still be allocated there is relatively easy to answer; however, the elaboration of allocation principles for open gate areas, where passengers also use space of nearby gates, can be more advanced.

The simulation model helps to get a feeling on the new occupancy level and elaborate new concepts for an adapted allocation.

Boarding Process

• Boarding by groups
  inefficiencies and idle times when calling to counter
• Health or travel document checks
  lower throughput rate at boarding counter, e.g. due to more Timatic checks
• Back-to-front boarding
  less passengers taking a seat simultaneously
• Physical distancing in cabin
  increased time for storing hand luggage

Boarding Analysis: Random vs. Back-to-Front

COVID-19 Impact

• secondary waiting areas for passengers not fitting into the primary area
• one person per travel group picking up all luggage
• delayed inflow into the baggage reclaim hall (up to a delay of deboarding, to allow a head start for luggage)

Capacity Reduction

Applying COVID-19 measures in the used example airport indicates a capacity loss of 25-40%, in particular related to physical distancing of 1.5m.  This means, considering an airport that operated close to its saturation capacity would already hit a new saturation capacity with 60-75% of Pre-COVID peaks. At this point, the airport should prepare mitigation measures to overcome the capacity constraints if health measures cannot be alleviated at the same time.

Note that the actual saturation capacity is airport specific and depends on layout, local situation and how saturated the airport was in the pre-COVID situation already.

Influence of Airports on Saturation Capacity

In general, there is a “fix” capacity loss that quantifies the capacity drop caused by COVID measures, which is mainly physical distance related. Secondly, there is also a “flexible” component defining capacity at risk. This relates to a capacity reduction dependent on layout-specifics and processes. Mitigation is in general possible, but requires a change in procedures (e.g. changed allocation principles, more processes off-site, changes in passenger flows) and might involve higher operating costs (e.g. due to increased staffing levels).

Slot Coordination Issues

• A mandatory delay / additional space provision
  predetermined by local regulations (e.g. physical distance or additional health check). The related additional time and space requirement will happen to each affected passenger. The airport would not have any chance to avoid this but can only apply the predetermined measures.
• A risk factor for delay / space provision
  Next to the above “fix” part, the COVID measures involve indirect challenges, which airport stakeholders can react to in order to prevent worse impacts (e.g. by adequate staffing). If these risk factors are not addressed properly at an early stage, they will add further delays to the passenger journey or will result in even higher space requirements at checkpoints.