Faster Aircraft? or Faster Airports?

[ExSimGuy]

Okay, we've seen the pretty pictures of the new Boeing "Concept Plane", that will fly at Mach 0.98, but is it what us Self-Loaders really want?

I reckon (without doing a lot of math) that Mach.98 might get me from London to New Tork in 6 hours instead of 7, flying time. Maybe it would cut 2 or 3 hours from a trans-pacific flight.

2 more check-in agents and an extra security X-ray at the departure airport would cut half an hour to an hour off the check-in time.

A few more customs and immigration personnel would probably cut half an hour off the time it takes to get from aircraft to taxi at the arriving end.

So where would you vote with your airline revenue? The flight that actually takes an hour less in the air, or the one which takes an hour or so less for the frustrating bit where you are on your feet in queues? http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/confused.gif

I know which way my money would go! :)

------------------
What goes around . . .
. . often lands better!

[Nihontraveller]

ExSimGuy,

No doubt in my mind that the less time spent standing in the airport has the priority. Once on board I don`t really care so much how long the flight time is. I guess that the last 1 hour of a 10 hour flight is a pain but the last hour is the last hour never mind how the long the total flight took.

When can we expect digital passports and scanners in the immigration? The technology exists and that would speed things up.

What`s next? Passport implants?

[The Sleeping Pax]

A reduction in the time it takes to board and load the aircraft would be more welcome to me. A prompt departure so that the flight can use it's allotted slot would help. I recall some time back that Lufthansa was to experiment with loading Pax by seat letter rather than by number. i.e. all Pax with window seats first and center seats if in the middle and then slowly out to the aisle seats. It was reckoned that the loading of say a 747 would take 20 mins less than cramming everone into the rear of the craft. Maybe a stricter adhereance to allowing rows 49-70 being let onto the aircraft first rather than those who are seated in 30-48 queue jump.

[Lurk R]

What has irked me in the past is travelling on a 40 minute flight and then waiting for 50 minutes at the baggage carousel. With the introduction of the A380, I maintain it isn't just the airside infrastructure (pavement / taxiway width / aerobridges, etc.) that need consideration but also the immigration, customs, ticketing capacity. Just imagine 2 of the new A380's hitting town with 10 minutes of each other and the ensuing 1000 pax descending through immigration...

[BRUpax]

In the days of no air bridges pax boarded through front and rear doors. Now, with very few exceptions, it's single door access when on an air bridge. In Europe few scheduled airlines board by seat rows. Airport air bridge designs of the future should incorporate multiple access options.

[DX Wombat]

How about both? Certainly some of the airports need to improve their passenger handling facilities. I have yet to find all six xray channels being used at LHR at any time between 05.30hrs and 07.30hrs when at least six long haul flights arrive more or less together.There are usually only three. The resulting charge to see who can get there first has to be seen to be believed. I know they introduced a single line queuing system but it didn't do much. I now prefer to make my flights to Oz from MAN via Frankfurt, an altogether less stressful experience.

[ExSimGuy]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Certainly some of the airports need to improve their passenger handling facilities. </font>

"Some"? I'd say most

Check-in queues are down to the airline. LGW has some of the most horrendous queues, LHR is bad too (BA's "snakes" at T4 - and others) Another 2 ground staff would often, I suspect, make all the difference (there's usually some spare desks for them to sit in that are currently closed)

Departure security and arrivals immigration/customs are down to the Airport Authority (and/or Government). I avoid JFK like the plague as (unless they have changed in recent years) it's hardly a "welcome to USA Sir". Give me BOS or PHL any day for a US gateway. RUH departure is often slow and arrival is more often than not horrendous - especially if 3 wide-bodys arrive within half an hour of each other and half the immigration/cistoms desks are not manned.

Come on, airlines and Airport Authorities, how about it?

------------------
What goes around . . .
. . often lands better!

[Drop and Stop]

Reminds me of a quote I recently saw:

"The Devil himself had probably re-designed Hell in the light of information he has gained from observing airport layouts." -Anthony Price

[DX Wombat]

I can only speak of the few I have actually been through, so didn't feel able to comment on the majority of airports. I'm sure there are good and bad amongst them like anything else.

[PaulDeGearup]

Major problem for airlines will always be staffing levels: take EDI for example. If you are unfortunate enough to have purchased, or have purchased for you, a bmi ticket which you wish to use on an afternoon from EDI to XXX you will find that they have 3 check in desks manned for 5 departures.

One Business classs desk and 2 economy deal with an Airbus to LHR, a Fokker to FRA, a Fokker to CPH and 2 RJs, one to MAN and another to ABZ. The queues and inevitable frustrations are dreadful. But after the peak rush, and before what would they do with extra staff if say 6 desks were available ? Now to the average homo less than sapiens one would redeploy staff, just ask them to be flexible, taking on more than one task to allow for peaks and troughs. Howver, they would probably want paying or some other kind of reward for this. If you Pax and SLF are the Captains of industry what would you propose as a solution ?

[Squawk 8888]

For all its flaws Air Canada did pull one move that was brilliant. They've set up dozens of kiosks similar to ABMs at their check-in areas and the pax pops in the plastic (frequent flyer card or the CC that was used to buy the ticket) and out pops the boarding pass and baggage tags. I checked in for a YYZ-YUL flight last week and was in my seat ten minutes later :)

Another thing- if US customs & immigration can pre-clear the pax before before departure why can't other countries? I'm sure there's enough hosers flying back home from LHR to justify such a setup.

------------------
Nuke the rainforest- it's more efficient than logging.

[Trout]

ExSim,
Please start a worldwide movement man!
Exellent idea!

[ExSimGuy]

Staffing peaks - mmm - maybe some part-time staff might be a thought; I'm sure there's people "out there" who'd like a couple of hours a day at a check-in desk during the peak departure period - perhaps combined with the benefits of ID90s for themselves and their families.

8888 - Only place I've been "precleared" for USA was from Canada, and it's a nice idea as long as it doesn't add to departure times what it subtracts from the arrival delays - it certainly doesn't add to the check-in time at YOW, where very friendly and pleasant "immigration" people check pax as they head for the departure lounge :)

Air-bridges - now how many times have I been boarded onto an aircraft where the airbridge has the facility for one corridor to the door in First Class and another for the door to the main cabin . . . and I don't think I can remember once that the first class one has been opened! Can anyone suggest why this is? It can't be due to aircraft types not being compatible with the 2-dor airbridges as I've flown on just about every aircraft in Western airline fleets http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/confused.gif

------------------
What goes around . . .
. . often lands better!

[This message has been edited by ExSimGuy (edited 12 April 2001).]

[PaulDeGearup]

My experience of ATM style check ins/ticket sales is that people prefer a people - people encounter rateh rthan a people - machine encounter cf Windows.

Kep the ideas and thoughts coming tho' any change which benefits the end user must be beneficial.
As a driver, what can I do to help ?

[Land After]

*Fly via Dublin*

US immigration checks before boarding for JFK - sailing through the queues stateside, bliss!

I also love the ATM check in machines - queues are shorter and the process a lot faster for the earlier flights.

[Squawk 8888]

Those machines were a lifesaver on a trip to the US last year- I made the mistake of booking a Saturday mid-morning departure in winter, CYYZ terminal two made your average refugee camp look appalling. Biggest problem with weekend departures is that most pax are tourists who fly maybe once every three years and don't have a clue, so I say let 'em have the human contact while I get myself to the plane with a bit less stress.

------------------
Nuke the rainforest- it's more efficient than logging.

[ExSimGuy]

Dublin does the "pre-takeoff immigration" do they? How well does this work out at the other end (where do they fly to in US?)

My usual route across "the pond" is LGW to PHL, and the airline has 3 or 4 flights a day out of Gatwick to 3 different US gateways. During one recent trip, there were 2 or 3 very harried ticket staff, and (I think) 4 or 5 check-in counters. There was also some over-booking (the reasons for which I understand, and is a normal practice for all airlines, but the Res. Control department had gone wrong with their "black art" and the factor was too high)

Result of all this was over-stressed staff (who did a superb job and remained cool and helpful all the time) and a line that went right across the departure hall to the check-in - pretty much all morning and lunch-time as the departure times of the 4 flights were pretty well spread. As I said earlier - maybe one more check-in counter?

At the risk of repeating myself, PHL is a lovely airport to arrive at - clean, modern, and above all fast! I can also recommend BOS, although I haven't been in there so often. :) :)

------------------
What goes around . . .
. . often lands better!

[Land After]

It's a couple of years since I did the trip via DUB, but you simply filled out the visa waiver and custom dec then passed through US immigration booths before boarding. The immigration officers were from the US and even smiled. No queues, no stress. I think it's the same deal ex Shannon.

I don't know which routes they run to the US, but I think they still do JFK, ORD and LAX.

[flypastpastfast]

This is such a valid point, I hope the bods in airlines read all of it. Time on the ground checking in etc... is too long.

The award for quick time on the ground must go to a recent holiday flight I took from Teeside airport.

1. Parking right outside terminal entrance (longstay) : 1 Minute from car park entrance to inside of departures.

2. Ticket collection : 5 Minutes max.

3. Check in : 5 minutes (a full charter flight, no less,on a rather shiny 737 800)

4. Security : 2 minutes or less.

5. Boarding and take off : not sure of time but very quick via front and rear steps, with immediate taxiing and take off as doors closed.

6. Return, rapid disembarkation (two sets of steps)

7. From disembarkation, luggage collection (faster than you can say Seattle Seahawks) and short stroll to car park(100 metres or less, only 32 quid for a week) took at most 15 minutes. Possibly around twenty five minutes after plane touched down, I was driving home.

Teeside and airports like it should be proud.

Other airports could improve if they were prepared to use more security points, two sets of steps and so on. I've lost count of the number of times that a huge queue is at security at Heathrow, but most of the X-ray machines are not being used. But they won't try to improve, because that would dent the profits of BAA, who are doing very nicely, thank you.

If Boeing eventually launch the new hypersonic transport, perhaps they should have the maiden flight from Teeside, so that passengers can feel the real time saving benefits.

[Irish Steve]

US pre clearance is available at Dublin and Shannon, and there are flights with Aer Lingus to New York, (JFK & EWR), Boston, Chicago and Los Angeles, Delta have flights to New York & Atlanta, and Continental have flights to New York (Newark).

Arrival in the States is a hybrid, in that there's no immigration to clear, but there is still a requirement to clear and make a declaration to Customs, but it's a lot less hassle than the full works of immigration and Customs. I've flown ex DUB several times to the States, and I reckon it can save up to 30 minutes off the arrival procedures.

Hope that helps

[Golf-Kilo Victor]

Orland Sandford, where do I begin?

Touchdown, taxi past an old connie, looks like its been therea loooooong while..hmmmmm.

enter the terminal, one X-ray per approx 300 PAX. great. plust the usual american paranoia about who you are, and the faff on with greencards and stuff

then, comin back, there was 3 check in desks for three charter transatlatic flights. they were queing out the door. Talkin to one family, , in the middle of one of the queues they were about 30 min from the front, but the plane left in 10 min. luckily we were on one of them half empty planes that was being moved back to uk.

connie was still there on the way back. Might have changed it now i dunno, but I hope the connies still there.

[ExSimGuy]

GKV - I very strongly suspect that the sort of experience you describe puts a lot more inclination towards "air rage" than a few beers do :mad:

Are the airlines blaming drinks for a phenomenum that is actually caused largely by themselves http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/confused.gif http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/eek.gif

http://www.l39.com/_borders/Ejection_seat.gif
Martin Baker - the only way to fly!

[This message has been edited by ExSimGuy (edited 23 April 2001).]

[ExSimGuy]

Interesting article re "Boeing Sonic Cruiser vs A380" on the R&N section http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/Forum1/HTML/013756.html

[separator]

Faster aircraft merely get to the holding pattern earlier.

Give me better scheduling and ground facilities.

------------------
Say again, Approach....you want us to do what???

[Blacksheep]

Here I am in Heathrow T3. Gate 55 it says here on my boarding pass. So why are there only two security check lines? That keep you waiting 35 minutes just to get into the departure lounge?

Here I am sitting in this 767 scheduled to arrive at Heathrow at 0530. Its 0550 and we are still in the hold. With half a dozen other SCHEDULED arrivals. Didn't ATC know we were coming?

Here I am at the carousel. We landed 45 minutes ago and the only bags in sight are the ones that belong to the last aircraft that arrived. If I can WALK here from the aircraft and queue up for 10 minutes at immigration how come the bags take five times longer to come by road? When they are packed in easy-on easy-off containers?

We don't need faster aircraft. We need proper infrastructure. Its 17 hours subsonic flying time from Borneo to London but it takes 23 hours kerb to kerb. It would be easy to knock 3 hours off that without any change in aircraft speed. The shorter the journey the worse the problem gets. An hour to fly from Heathrow to Frankfurt becomes 3 and 1/2 hours kerb to kerb with 3/4 of the journey hanging around in the airports.

The problem is that flying has become the standard way to travel long distance. No more ships, no more Greyhound buses. Trains? You must be joking! All those things are for the trailer park people. So, by popular request, we have become a low cost and thus poor service quality industry. If you want to get service, follow Ronnie Biggs example and go by Biz-Jet.

**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[ExSimGuy]

T4 Thursday evening actually worked quite well (outbound). Only 1 of the 2 x-rays working, but got through security in a few minutes, BA check in took only 5-10 minutes, then had an hour and a half to sit in the bar for the flight time!

If they did it like that all the time, we could have 90 mins or even one hour check in time instead of 2 hours :)

[Rongotai]

I have become so paranoid and obsessed with this topic that I have taken to keeping a log. The results are facinating. Here are my last 10 international arrivals with luggage.

LOC'N ROUTE A/L T/D TO KERBSIDE

AKL LAX-AKL NZ 16 mins
LGW BCN-LGW BA 48 mins
BCN LGW-BCN BA 32 mins
LHR LAX-LHR NZ 44 mins
LAX AKL-LHX NZ 72 mins
WLG SYD-WLG NZ 8 mins
SYD LAX-SYD UA 13 mins
LHR BOS-LHR UA 63 mins
HelsinkiFRA-HEL LH 11 mins
JFK LHR-JFK UA 102 mins

Except for LGW-BCN-LGW these flights were Business Class and with Priority tagged leggage. The two longest both involved non availability of gates plus huge immigration hall queues. 30 minutes of the LGW delay was standing at the carousel.

One day I intend to write a newspaper article, or else make a film noir, using this data.

[ExSimGuy]

A very long time since I've been into LAX, and a couple of years since I used JFK (I tend to use SFO or BOS/PHL these days), but it looks as if not much has changed - they are still the "rogues of immigration" :mad:

Pity LGW fared badly - coming in is normally okay; it's the departure hall that generally lets them down there.

Interesting to note that most of those times were for Business Class - not that a Business ticket will help where it's the immigration queue that's the problem.

Anyone care to keep a log of check-in times for various airports - especially for "Y Class" who have the longest queue http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

[CargoOne]

Hmm.. Recently was in ARN. There are several check-in machines which accepting tickets with magnetic strip and usual paper tickets as well. There were very long queues at check-in but almost every check-in machine was free! Why people not using it?

[Bird Strike]

Talking of faster airports... I think BNE airport is pulling a fast one!

1) Domestic long term car park is not too far from the terminal, but the trolleys are only available once you walked half way to the terminal, and cost $3. What do older people do with their luggage, I don't know.

2) To transfer between Domestic and International, you have to catch a train or bus, both of which charge you a fair whack.

3) Lack of decent facilities at the Domestic terminal.

-----------------------------

I would like to have BOTH faster aircraft and faster airport.

Faster aircraft reduces the flight time and therefore the length of exposure to any ill effects it may have to the health. Particularly if they don't have to fly higher to go faster.

Faster ground handling, including the check-in, baggage claim and 'official' bits, of course reduces the travelling time in general, and reduces the 'irritation factor' of feeling like I am wasting valuable time.

Oh and don't get me started on the ATC delays...