AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013

1
Achieving the perfect flight through cabin operations
Georgios Tzimourtos
1
,
Marc Nicholls
2
,
Christos Bafatakis
3
,
Christos Meintanis
4

MSc Transport Infrastructure and Logistics, CITG, Stevinweg 1, 2628 CN Delft, Netherlands


Abstract
In this paper the authors try to optimize the cabin operation procedure. The storage of carrying
luggage is the most-time consuming component of the boarding procedure and hence its
separation from the passengers is examined. Moreover, the development of a smartphone
application that will offer more personalized service to KLM passengers is proposed. The
findings reveal that several benefits could be gained by implementing those ideas both for the
passengers and the airline companies.
Nomenclature
k = number of passengers per group
I. Introduction
erfect flight; this is the name of the project, held by Dutch Airline KLM, aiming to reduce emissions and
costs during all phases of a flight. In the context of this project, KLM collaborates with several partners,
such as Boeing, Schiphol airport and LVNL, in order to optimize numerous elements (Zwan, 2012). There are
five areas for analysis and potential improvements where innovations can be realized, namely flight operation,
ground operation, cabin operation, kpis and cost index. The area, this paper will focus on, is the cabin
operation. While this area involves all operations in the aircraft related to the passengers, a more broad area will
be explored including segments of the ground operation, in relation however to the passengers, in order to
achieve a more holistic approach and conclude to more concrete solutions. The perfect flight of KLM is the
flight from Amsterdam to New York carried out with the Boeing 777-200ER airplane (Zwan, 2012).

A. Problem statement
Lack of space at departures will become an even larger issue due to growing amount of passengers and in
order for the airlines to address that increase, every handling that can be anticipated before arriving at the airport
should be addressed (Koopmans, 2012). Moreover, due to the demand growth, airport infrastructure will
become more and more scarce, leading to higher costs for the airlines (Smith, 2004). Dealing with such an
increase, requires the development of new, more efficient, processes that will allow the airline industry to
perform better than before, increase profit and meet the requirements of future air transportation demand.

B. Literature review
Literature was studied that covered several components of cabin operations, which are seen as important
areas to study, because they relate to the focus of the problem statement. In relation to boarding time, research
was done by Steffen (2008) to investigate the optimal boarding scheme. This was done under the assumption
that the main component of the total boarding time consists of the time needed by the passengers to load their
luggage. In his analysis, he found that optimality is directly related to the distance between the seats of two
consecutively boarding passengers, indicating the space needed to load luggage unhindered. Steffen and
Hotchkiss (2012) compared the previous mentioned boarding scheme (Steffen J . H., 2008) with four other
boarding methods, but they concluded that Steffen's original boarding scheme was the fastest (Steffen &
Hotchkiss, 2012). While before mentioned research had a macroscopic perspective, Tang, et al. (2012) took a

1
MSc Transport Infrastructure and Logistics, CITG, TU Delft, g.tzimourtos@student.tudelft.nl, 4185269
2
MSc Transport Infrastructure and Logistics, CITG, TU Delft, m.nicholls@student.tudelft.nl, 1234501
3
MSc Transport Infrastructure and Logistics, CITG, TU Delft, c.bafatakis@student.tudelft.nl, 4186230
4
MSc Transport Infrastructure and Logistics, CITG, TU Delft, c.meintanis@student.tudelft.nl, 4187881
P

AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


2
microscopic approach at the boarding problem. This means that each passenger has specific kinematic properties
and the time needed to load luggage varies between individuals. Their analysis identified overtaking and queue-
jumping as main delay factors, besides aisle and seat conflicts. Furthermore in the same study, the comparison
with other methods showed that random boarding is slower by a factor of 2.8, indicating that there is much room
for improvement on the Steffen method once the passengers individual properties are taken into account (Tang,
Wub, Huang, & Caccetta, 2012). Nyquist & McFadden (2008) also stated that the most time-consuming
component is the storage of carry-on luggage. The main conclusions of their research was that the best strategies
for reducing boarding time were: the usage of non-traditional boarding methods, the development of more
effective policies regarding carry-on luggage and the usage of more than one door for loading the aircraft
(Nyquist & McFadden, 2008). Also, Steiner & Philipp (2009) looked at methods to reduce boarding time. They
concluded that with a reduced number of hand luggage, the use of a pre-boarding areas and a proper boarding
strategy, reduction of the boarding time can be achieved (Steiner & Philipp, 2009).
God & Hintze (2009) studied the development of wireless internet availability in air operations, especially in
the cabin. Sever wireless technologies were investigated and concluded that can increasingly be used for crew
communication, safety and service to passengers (God & Hintze, 2009).
Catering is a major part of cabin operations according to Li, Poon, Lee, Chung, & Luk (2003). According to
their research leftover food creates a lot of waste which adds up to a significant amount of weight. This is also
the case for other forms of waste like papers and magazines. Weight savings in these categories can lead to
significant cost savings for airlines (Li, Poon, Lee, Chung, & Luk, 2003).
Carlsson (2009) investigated the possibilities of weight reduction in current aircraft and translated these
weight savings into fuel and CO
2
reductions. While the research only focused on seats and trolleys, it was
concluded that reduction in both equipment categories can be significant, but it is crucial to connect any weight
savings with the required investment costs, in order to determine the investments profitability (Carlsson, 2009).
Finally, the subject of passenger comfort in general was studied. Chan & Cheng (2005) investigated the gaps
in relation to the passengers service expectations, actual service received and the perceptions of the passengers
service expectations by frontline managers and employees from an airline. Their conducted surveys concluded
that there were significant differences between the passengers service expectations and actual service received,
(Chan & Cheng, 2005). Vink, Bazley, Kamp, & Blok (2012) investigated possibilities to improve the aircraft
interior comfort experience. They concluded that physical attributes like seat and entertainment are the most
important aspects of passenger comfort, more so than soft factors like crew attention (Vink, Bazley, Kamp, &
Blok, 2012).
According to a survey conducted by SITA for a seventh consecutive year (SITA - ATW, 2012) regarding
passengers perception towards technology used throughout an airline journey, check-in, security and transfers
are considered to be the most stressful parts of the journey. For this generated stress, three main causes can be
identified, namely: loss of time, unexpected changes and lack of information, lack of control to rearrange the
journey. It is also pointed out that passengers desire to simplify the pre-mentioned services and thus increase
comfort (SITA - ATW, 2012).
Regarding the way travellers choose to check-in for their flight, the research article written by Lu, Choi and
Tseng (2011) proves not only a strong relationship between check-in preferences of passengers and their
nationality but also shows that certain travellers like, business, online ticketing users, small groups and younger
passengers are more likely to use self-check-in services compared to the other questioned groups. According to
a second survey (SITA-Airline Business, 2012) regarding the IT trends that airlines will follow in the near
future, almost eight out of ten airlines already, or plan to, personalise communication and service offers to
their passengers. The current focus is personalisation via the direct distribution channels like websites, smart
phones and social media that offer great potential for more personalisation in travel (SITA-Airline Business,
2012).


AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


3
The main results of the two pre-mentioned surveys can be found in the table below:
Table 1. SITA surveys summarized results (SITA - ATW, 2012), (SITA-Airline Business, 2012)
Trend Survey result Surveys title
62% of passengers are active on social media; a higher penetration rate
than recorded for the general population
Passenger self-service
survey
Nine out of ten airlines are planning to sell tickets via mobile phones
by 2015, establishing mobile as a mainstream distribution channel for
airline tickets
Airline IT Trends survey
Mobile services for passengers top the list of investment programs for
airlines, with six out of ten airlines planning major investments in the
next three years
Airline IT Trends survey
The popularity of self-service for passengers is still increasing. In 2012
68% of passengers used self-service systems for check-in
Passenger self-service
survey
The survey respondents believe that beyond 2015, websites and mobile
phones will be the two dominant channels for processing passengers.

Airline IT Trends survey
83% of airlines have the ambition to sell ancillary service on smart
phones by 2015.
Airline IT Trends survey
In 2012 70% of the passengers owned a smartphone, and it is
expected that this number will increase sharply in the near future
Passenger self-service
survey

Passengers are also increasingly open to a personalised travel experience on mobile devices (SITA - ATW,
2012). Service personalisation as well as efficient operation, depends on the availability and analysis of data
(SITA-Airline Business, 2012). In the survey exploring the future airline IT trends, the airline representatives
questioned stated that among others, data warehouse, revamp of e-commerce and enterprise resource planning
are the biggest IT future challenges that airlines have to deal with.

C. Research question
Two elements were taken into consideration while developing the research question. The objectives set
during the methodology need to follow the S.M.A.R.T. principle (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic,
Time) and innovation should be present in the design, but not being the ultimate goal. (Zwan, 2012)
The research question is the following:

How to diminish the uncertainties of passengers related choice, by creating more efficient cabin
operations processes in order to reduce total costs and lower emissions, while maintaining or increasing the
level of service, within the scope of KLMs perfect flight program for the year 2013.

II. Design and procedures
In this section, an answer to the research question is presented. More specifically, in the following lines two
main designs will be explained. The first one focuses on making the boarding procedure faster while the second
one is related to the development of a smartphone application that will offer personalized services to the
passengers.
A. Design

i) Boarding
All previously undertaken research regarding the passenger boarding procedure has identified the presence
of cabin luggage as the main source of delay, regardless the boarding method used. Based on this main finding,
we designed a new boarding process that aims towards decreasing the total time needed for passenger boarding.
The concept for the new boarding procedure involves the complete separation of flows between the
passenger and the luggage. So far, hold luggage already follows a separate, airport-specific, flow that ends with
it being loaded on the cargo department of the aircraft. Since the airline industry has specific rules and
regulations regarding the weight and size of cabin luggage, it is safe to assume that this part of the process has
very low stochasticity and that uncertainty arises mainly due to the human factor; the passenger.

AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


4

Figure 1. The new airplane boarding process elements as an extension of the current situation

Splitting passengers from cabin luggage before boarding creates a new luggage flow that is measurable and
can be planned in detail by the airline. At this point, it is important to clarify that this new flow for the cabin
luggage must end with the luggage being placed in the designated overhead compartment over the seat assigned
to the owner of the luggage, in order to leave the level of service unaffected. Furthermore, the absence of
luggage in the passenger flow can lead to better performance by improving the kinematic characteristics of the
passenger, who will not be slowed down by having to carry luggage towards and inside the aircraft and placing
it in the special compartment over the seats. Additionally, any interference related to the cabin luggage will
disappear, making the process of boarding faster.
Passengers can part from their cabin luggage either at check-in or at the gate, prior to boarding the aircraft.
In the first case, the cabin luggage follows the same flow as the hold luggage. However, it should be sheltered
with cover bags for protection from bumps and dirt. Once it passes through the baggage handling system of the
airport, the luggage is loaded on the existing carts that lead to the airplane, where the working stuff undertake to
store it in the cabin. For maintaining the same level of service, airline should provide to the passengers who give
away their handling baggage, specially made bags (Fig. 9) for storing their necessary items, such as wallets,
tickets, books to name but a few. Such a solution may prove easier to automate and integrate into the current
processes of an airline, but on the other hand, it is heavily airport-dependent and will require an increase in the
handling capacity of the system. Specifically for KLM and Amsterdam Schiphol airport, where a very advanced
automated handling system is in place, such improvements in capacity might prove difficult and expensive to
implement.
The latter can lead to a process design that is not airport-bound. Considering that, in our boarding process
the passengers arrive with their cabin luggage at the gate where, after the necessary security check, they hand in
their luggage to be boarded in the aircraft. In that case, two main issues arise. First, the arrival of the passengers
(and their cabin luggage) at the gate should match the luggage loading sequence and second the cabin luggage
must be tagged with a seat number. Tagging of the cabin luggage can take place at check-in, similarly to the
hold luggage. The arrival issue can be addressed by creating time windows for gate opening, according to the
passengers seat. Assuming that the airline wishes to board the cabin luggage from back to forth in groups of k,
then the k number of passengers that are assigned to seat in the furthest back will get the earliest gate opening
time on their boarding pass. The next group of passengers will have a gate opening time that is later by exactly
the amount of time needed to process the previous group of passengers.

ii) Smartphone application
The second part of this research paper focuses, based on KLMs business model and the current trends in
self-service mentioned in the literature review part, to create a unified smartphone application that will combine
all KLM products (both airport and in-flight services) in one application and will at the same time offer more
personalized service to KLM passengers and thus increase the airlines offered level of service. This aligns with
KLMs future vision regarding passenger service as stated by Koopmans (2012): Through personal profile
preference, all services will be arranged at home prior to travelling.
The developed application incorporates the subjects addressed in Figure 2 and the way the application is
structured will be presented below. The application has a direct benefit for the airline since it will offer the

AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


5
airline valuable information on the choices passengers make regarding their flight prior to the actual flight. This
information can be used from KLM in order to organize their cabin operations and passenger handling at the
airport more efficiently and thus generates time and cost savings. Moreover, through the feedback option that
will be included in the application the gap in relation to the passengers service expectations and the perceptions
of the passengers service expectations by the airline, which now exists (Chan & Cheng, 2005), can be reduced.
The airline now has a far better picture of what the passenger expects of them. Also, by data collection within
the application, the airline has the ability to collect valuable information for reviewing service performance over
a certain amount of time. Furthermore, regarding KLMs future agent plans, this gap can also be reduced by
designing short term innovative feedback loops that will enrich both passenger and customer satisfaction
(Koopmans, 2012).
Although the development of the application is still in a conceptual design phase and requires further
research in order to be realized, the following components are considered essential by the authors. The table
briefly describes the components that can be incorporated in the design and are divided into different detail
levels as seen in the table and in the related graphs. The user can choose the desired seat, make choices
regarding food, select a movie, socialize through the existing Meet & Seat program of KLM (KLM, 2013) or
choose additional amenities in advance, provide feedback to KLM. Through these options the user is offered a
more personalized travel experience, while KLM has available data in advance reducing unused resources, like
additional meals to satisfy unpredicted demand during the flight. Taking into consideration the significant
smartphone penetration in the airline industry, as mentioned in the literature review part, KLM can substitute the
existing safety videos shown in the aircraft before the flight with similar videos reproduced in the travellers
smartphone during the flight. The same idea can also be applied to the Holland Herald magazine offered to
passengers during the flight, which can now be provided in a digital. Eliminating the magazine from the cabin
will reduce the aircrafts total weight and will lead to savings in fuels, emissions and thus operating costs.
Finally, KLM can use the application for advertising or product promotion by offering tailored products
according to the customers preferences. A recent survey shows that customers are more receptive for
advertising if they were given more control over what they receive (SITA - ATW, 2012). 61% of questions
passengers show a positive attitude towards smartphone advertisements as long as it personalized (SITA - ATW,
2012). A description of the main components is seen in the table below, where an example of all the different
levels is given, if the user chooses the following path:
Level 1: Main Menu: choose Flight options; Level 2: Flight options menu: choose Luggage; Level 3: Luggage
menu: choose hand luggage; Level 4: Hand luggage menu: multiple options possible.

Table 2. Proposed smartphone application main components
Smartphone application components divided in different levels
Level 1 Main menu (Fig.4)
Category Description
Profile Users personal profile with contact information, interests, social data etc.
Bookings The user can make a flight booking or check available schedule and fares
Flight options Numerous flight related options
In-flight mode Downloaded preferences like movies, magazines, in-flight shopping etc. can be
used during the flight. Safety videos can be viewed during the flight
Travel info Overview of any booked travel
Share your
experiences
The user can share experiences with other KLM users, upload pictures, make
recommendations etc.
Feedback Feedback provided to the KLM
Privacy Privacy options and regulations can be read and agreed by the user
Level 2 Flight Options menu (Fig. 5)
Check-in On line check-in for a booked flight
Seat selection Seat selection or seat upgrade prior to departure
Luggage Number of luggage have to be determined prior to the flight
Catering According to the seat category numerous catering options will be available
Entertainment In-flight entertainment related choices
In-flight
amenities
The user can select additional amenities like pillows, sleeping masks etc. and based
on the booked seat category pay any additional fare
Meet & Seat The existing meet and seat program is updated and incorporated with the users
profile in KLM
Flying Blue Flying Blue related options
Level 3 Luggage menu (Fig. 6)
Checked Number and size of checked luggage

AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


6
luggage
Hand Luggage Number and size of hand luggage to be boarded in the plane
No luggage The user might choose to hold no luggage
Level 4 Hand luggage menu (Fig. 7)
What kind of
luggage will
you be carrying
on board
The user can then choose among a list of different options, like cabin bag,
purse/briefcase etc. and also agree to hand in the cabin luggage prior to boarding


B. Internal Validity
Lower turnaround time is desired by airlines because then it is possible to create more flight time, creating
revenues (Wu & Caves, 2000). Considering that, the feasibility of separating the passengers from the hand
luggage depends on the airline, by how much revenues can it create by having more flight hours, and the airport,
by how much it charges the airlines for the use of the infrastructure. If there are significant gains that can
overcome costs of new system components and extra manual work needed, then this design can be deemed
feasible.
When it comes to the internal validity of the smartphone application certain aspects can be addressed.
Mobile advertisement is considered to have a certain risk since 35% of the questioned passengers were
extremely negative towards smartphone advertisements (SITA - ATW, 2012) and this might lead to a reduced
level of service. Moreover, having knowledge of passengers choices is advantageous for KLM and can lead to
more efficient use of resources, however passengers are humans that might simply change their minds just
before boarding causing problems or disruptions to KLMs operations. Finally privacy or data sensitivity issues
might rise from passengers that are unwilling or reluctant to share their personal information.
III. Results

a) Boarding
Boarding passengers without any cabin luggage can save on average 46% in boarding time (Nyquist &
McFadden, 2008). According to the terminal servicing manual for the Boeing 777-200 aircraft (Boeing, 2011),
boarding 375 passengers from two doors starts at 31.5 minutes after the aircraft is positioned at the gate and
takes 12.5 minutes, in a total turnaround time of 45 minutes. Subtracting the duration of 7.5 minutes for
deplaning of the passengers, we can conclude that in order for this process to produce time savings, all the cabin
luggage should be loaded in the cabin within 31.5 7.5 + (1 0.46) 12.5 = 30.7 minutes or 68% of the
total turnaround time.
At this point is worth mentioning that due to the competitive nature of airline business, there is a lack of
available publicly information, including both the exact procedure on luggage handling system of Schiphol
airport and the precise times of KLMs boarding procedure. Hence, no claims can be made on the innovative
nature of the suggested idea and no quantified results can be presented. However, several benefits can be
achieved by separating the flows of passengers and hand luggage. As far as the passengers are being concerned,
such a separation could increase the level of service in terms of the unstresfull and faster boarding procedure.
The passengers will be relieved from the bother of carrying their hand luggage around the airport, leading to an
increase in their satisfaction. In addition, the reduction in the boarding time achieved will offer a higher fleet
utilization leading to financial benefits for KLM.

b) Smartphone application
In relation to weight reduction, the application for tablets and smartphones has a significant quantifiable
positive result, because it replaces physical objects in the cabin. Next to that, the option to pre-order meals leads
to elimination of food waste, because the passengers now receive what they have ordered in advance. Regarding
food waste, a comprehensive study shows that the average food waste per passenger on long-haul flights is 0.55
kg (Li, Poon, Lee, Chung, & Luk, 2003). The researchers determined this by measuring the weight of food
waste in the food carts over a range of different flights. For a fully loaded KLM Boeing 777-200ER with 318
seats (KLM, 2013) the total produced food waste is 234 kg. Thus, a maximum of 175 kg of waste can be saved
per flight, resulting on significant weight and cost saving annually.
Regarding physical objects, tablets and smartphones can replace the paper airline magazine that passengers
read while seating in their seats. The authors of this paper measured the weight of the Holland Herald magazine
used by KLM (KLM, 2013). The measured weight was 0.35 kg/magazine. This means that for the previously
mentioned KLM Boeing 777-200ER, the total saved weight of these magazines in the cabin is 112 kg. This also

AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


7
leads to a significant amount of weight reduction per year. The increasing penetration of smartphones and
tablets will decrease the amount of paper waste in the cabin even more, because they can replace other types of
papers and magazines like newspapers, boarding passes, safety leaflets, etc.
The weight of the tablets or smartphones was not taken into account, because it can be said that they will
replace the current entertainment systems. It is assumed that the internal entertainment systems will be removed
in the near future, so the weight of the tablets and smartphones is at least compensated. Finally, according to
Carlsson (2009) all weight savings in the aircraft should be correlated to their costs and the break-even point of
these costs with the fuel prices should be calculated in order to see under which terms it is profitable for the
airline.
IV. Conclusions & Recommendations
The research question is answered by designs that reduce the uncertainty in passengers choices, while
increasing passenger comfort and the offered level of service. However, data scarcity and the involvement of the
human factor still cause uncertainties and increase the number of assumptions made when investigating
solutions. Hence, analysis via questionnaires to the passengers is recommended in order to obtain accurate
information about their choices and optimise the designs.









AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


8
Appendix
The figures presented in the appendix section are produced by the authors unless stated otherwise.

Figure 2. Components incorporated in the proposed application for KLM

AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


9

Figure 3. Log-in screen of the smartphone application

Figure 4. Main menu screen of the smartphone application

Figure 5. Flight options menu of the smartphone application


AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


10

Figure 6. Luggage menu of the smartphone application

Figure 7. Hand luggage menu of the smartphone application



AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


11

Figure 8. Turnaround station operations time chart for the Boeing 777-200 aircraft (Boeing, 2011)

Figure 9. KLMs bag provided to the passengers (Flight001, 2013)



AE4443 Airline Operations & Management 2012-2013


12
References
Boeing. (2011). 777-200/300 Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning. Retrieved J anuary 16, 2013, from
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/777_23.pdf
Carlsson, M. (2009). Cost-Efficient Light-Weighting wihtin the Aviation Sector. Master Thesis, Swedish
University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Department of economics, Uppsala.
Chan, F.-Y., & Cheng, Y.-H. (2005). Examining service quality from a process perspective. Journal of Air
Transport Management, 79-87.
Flight001. (2013). www.flight001.com. Retrieved 1 7, 2013, from http://www.flight001.com/f-1-
exclusives/groom-bags/f1-airplane-mode-pouch.html
God, R., & Hintze, H. (2009). Wireless communication for improved workflow and additional services in the
aircraft cabin. Selbstorganisierende Sensor und Datenfunknetze Workshop.
J ones, P. (2006). Flight Catering. In H. Becker, & U. Grothues, Catering-Management Portrait einer
Wachstumsbranche in Theorie und Praxis (pp. 39-55). Hamburg: Behr's Verlag.
KLM. (2013). Boeing 777 300-ER. Retrieved J anuary 17, 2013, from KLM Royal Dutch Airline:
http://www.klm.com/travel/nl_nl/prepare_for_travel/on_board/seating_plans/777-300ER.htm
KLM. (2013). KLM Meet and Seat. Retrieved J anuary 10, 2013, from KLM PRepare for Travel:
http://www.klm.com/travel/gr_en/prepare_for_travel/on_board/Your_seat_on_board/meet_and_seat.ht
m
Koopmans, M. (2012). KLM Hub operations: the struggle to stay the best in Europe. KLM.
Li, X., Poon, C., Lee, S., Chung, S., & Luk, F. (2003). Waste reduction and recycling strategies for the in-flight
services in the airline industry. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 37, 87-99.
Lu, J .-L., Choi, J ., & Tseng, W.-C. (2011). Determinants of passengers' choice of airline checke-in services: A
case study of American, Australian, Korean and Taiwanese passengers. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 17, 249-252.
Nyquist, D., & McFadden, K. (2008). A study of the airline boarding problem. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 14(4), 197-204.
SITA - ATW. (2012). Passenger Self-Service Survey Highlits 2012.
SITA-Airline Business. (2012). The Airline IT Trends Survey - Executive Summary. Retrieved November 29,
2012, from SITA: http://www.sita.aero/
Smith, A. D. (2004). LAGUARDIA SLOT ALLOCATION: A Clock-Proxy Auction Approach. Maryland:
University of Maryland.
Steffen, J . H. (2008). Optimal boarding method for airline passengers. Journal of Air Transport Management,
14(3), 146-150.
Steffen, J ., & Hotchkiss, J . (2012). Experimental test of airplane boarding methods. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 18(1), 64-67.
Steiner, A., & Philipp, M. (2009). Speeding up the airplane boarding process by using pre-boarding areas. 9th
Swiss Transport Research Conference (STRC).
Tang, T.-Q., Wub, Y.-H., Huang, H.-J ., & Caccetta, L. (2012). An aircraft boarding model accounting for
passengers individual properties. Transportation Research Part C, 22, 1-16.
Vink, P., Bazley, C., Kamp, I., & Blok, M. (2012). Possibilities to improve the aircraft interior comfort
experience. Applied Ergonomics, 354-359.
Wu, C.-L., & Caves, R. E. (2000). Aircraft operational costs and turnaround effciency at airports. Journal of Air
Transport Management, 6(4), 201-208.
Zwan, F. v. (2012, 18 10). Airline innovation. Delft: Technical Univercity of Delft.