1  

A Study of Passenger Behavior Pattern at

Köln/Bonn Airport, Germany

Submitted By:

Kuldeep Yadav

SAP ID: 500014518

Enroll No: R250211020

An Internship Report submitted in Partial Fulfillment of requirements

for Masters of Business Administration (Aviation Management) at

College of Management and Economic Studies (CMES), University of

Petroleum and Energy Studies’ Dehradun, India

June-July 2012

 

  2  

 

  3  

 

 

  4  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My first debt of gratitude is to Prof. K. C. Gandhi (Head of Center of

Aviation Studies, University Of Petroleum and Energy Studies), Ms.

Karla Handsley, Ms.Martina Galwas (Training and Development,

Köln/Bonn Airport), and Prof. Dr. Yvonne Ziegler (Dean,

Fachhochschule Frankfurt am Main University of Applied Sciences) for

their valuable support in organizing this internship program at

Köln/Bonn Airport, Germany.

I am extremely grateful to Mr. Andreas Fuge (Director Operations &

Traffic) and Mr. Christof T. Kontogiannis (Manager Terminal

Operations), Köln/Bonn Airport for their sustained interest, continuous

guidance and support in accomplishment of this study.

I’m thankful to Mr. Naman Joshi (MBA Aviation Management, UPES),

who worked with me at this project and this is the joint work of both of

us.

I am thankful to Mr. Florian Zender, Ms. Anja Koppelberg, Mr.

Kabeer Kudukath , Mr. Raphael Rachmann, Mr. Alexander and other

colleagues at Köln/Bonn Airport for their guidance and support during

my internship there.

I’m also thankful to Prof. Parsoon Dwivedi, Prof. Ajit Nigam, Prof.

Sabita Bhanu, Prof I Krishnamurthy, Prof Vikram Sahi and Prof KV

MohanaRao from University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, Dehradun

for their guidance and support.

I also thank to Mr. Ashwani Khanna (VP-Aviation Services, Delhi

International Airport Ltd.) for his motivation and guidance to me.

I express my gratitude to my parents and friends for their

encouragement and valuable support throughout my work.

 

  5  

Contents

Abstract

1. Introduction 6-11

1.1. Köln/Bonn Airport (CGN) – An Introduction

1.2. Objectives

1.3. Literature Review

1.4. Methodology

2. Analysis & Findings 12-27

2.1. Preferred Mode Of Transportation

2.2. Total Average Processing Time

2.3. Check-In Process

2.4. Concessionaires In Public Area

2.5. Security Clearance

2.6. Concessionaires After Security

2.7. Actual Time vs Perceived Time

2.8. Most Visited Areas Of The Terminal

2.9. Buying Behavior Based On Ethnic Background

2.10. Customer Pattern AT Concessionaires in Public Area

2.11. Factors Influencing Buying Behavior

2.12. Other Findings

3. Feedbacks By Passengers 28-29

3.1. What Passengers Like AT CGN?

3.2. What Improvements Passengers Want at CGN?

3.3. Airport Rating By Passengers

4. Recommendations 29-33

5. Conclusion 34

6. Limitations 34

7. Bibliography 34

8. Appendix A 36

9. Appendix B 38

10. Appendix C 42

 

  6  

Abstract

Passenger behavior is an important issue at any airport. The profitability

of airport business also depends on it to a large extent. It is important for

the airports to know the general behavior pattern of their passengers to

make their business profitable. It starts from the point where departing

passenger enters into the airport and continues till the time passenger

enplanes, as well as from the deplaning till the time arriving passenger

leaves the airport. Generally behavior of passengers at the airport is

determined by gender, age, ethnic background and purpose of travel

(business/leisure passenger) etc.

The effect of passenger behavior at different airport or airline

procedures at airport or visa-versa is studies here. During the study it is

found that where and how the passengers spend their time at airport,

and what they perceive about the time they spent. This study also

explores the customer pattern at different concessions in public area of

the airport. All these things are considered in study to know the general

overview of passenger behavior and how they spend their time, which

can later be utilized to install a passenger tracking system for the better

information services to the passenger and making strategic decisions

about the locations of concessionaires and other services. Passenger

feedbacks are also collected over different aspects to improve the

services. Overall this study contributes towards the enhanced passenger

experience and making strategic decisions for the airport development &

its business.

 

  7  

1. Introduction

1.1. Köln/Bonn Airport (CGN) – An Introduction

 

  8  

 

  9  

The company, Flughafen Köln/Bonn GmbH (FKB), operates

Köln/Bonn Airport (CGN). The company’s share capital amounts to €

10.821 million. The company’s earning come from three main sources:

landing fees, handling fees and income from rental and leases. The

operational area of CGN covers some 1000 hectares of land. It has three

runways. The 3,815 meter long runway (14L/32R) is the only

intercontinental runway in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia. There is

no limit on the weight and range of long haul flights taking off from here.

The airport has 9 ramps : 5 ramps for passenger aircraft and 4 ramps for

cargo aircraft. There are total 114 aircraft parking positions.

The airport has two terminals designed to cope up with 14 million

passengers per annum. The airport is a perfect example of intermodality

model where road, rail and air are remarkably combined at the airport.

CGN is linked to Deutsche Bahn national rail network. A total of 170

trains stops at the airport everyday. The airport has its own motorway

exit; this means that it is directly linked to Germany’s main North- South

and East-West axes. It has 3 car parks with the capacity of 12,400 car

spaces.

CGN handles around 10 million passengers per year but it has seen

decreasing rate in passenger traffic from past 3 years. The passenger

volume was approximately 9.7 million during the 2011. In terms of

Freight, CGN is 2nd in entire Germany after Frankfurt to dominate the

cargo market. It handled 742,347 tonnes of cargo during 2011. It is the

only airport, which has permission to operate 24 hours till 2030.

 

  10  

1.2. Objectives

The study has two major objectives; one is to analyze the passenger

behavior to find the time spent by the passengers at the airport and the

second is to find the customer pattern at the different concessionaires in

public area of airport. Gathering the feedbacks from the passengers

either directly (by asking them through questionnaire) or indirectly (by

observing them) for a better passenger experience.

The ultimate aim of these objectives is to contribute towards the

enhanced passenger experience and making strategic decisions for the

airport development & its business.

1.3. Literature Review

There is a lot of literature on passengers and visitors use of the

airport facilities and their experience against flight related services.

There is also some work done on determining the satisfaction level of the

passenger.

Caves and Pickard1 has reviewed the “physical and psychological

needs” of people in airports. Their main concern was with airport

customers, especially on the physically challenged. Taking a view

primarily from ergonomics, they identify three main problems with

passenger acceptance of the airport terminal: the space provided for

passenger movement and down-time, the time required for movement

from point to point, and the ability to navigate the terminal building

itself.

Wales et al 2 did a study on passenger interaction with flight

related services with a view of improving technologies used to process

                                                                                                                         1 Caves, R.E. and Pickard, C.D. The satisfaction of human needs in airport passenger

2 Wales, R., O'Neill, J. and Mirmalek, Z. Ethnography, Customers and Negotiated Interactions at the Airport. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 17 (5), 15-23.

 

 

  11  

passengers. In their study, they treated airline passengers as “intelligent

actors negotiating their way through the system” of the airport, with a

particular focus on passenger-service interactions. This perspective is a

perfect example where passengers are active participants in their

interaction with airlines and this active participation can both help and

hinder airline and airport processes.

Vesna Popovic, Ben Kraal and Philip Kirk3 says that there are two

levels of interaction of passengers at the airport (i) Macro Level and (ii)

Micro Level. Macro Level revolves round the entire passenger

experience at the departure level such as entering the terminal, check

in, security, customs and boarding while micro level addresses

passenger interactions at the domain level, such as the check-in counter,

currency exchange and security check. It also includes passenger’s

discretionary experiences such as their activities in the departure

lounge.

All these are done at a macro level. This study is just concerned about

the CGN. It is also important to combine with various other passenger

behavior-related factors to get a better picture of the passenger behavior

patterns like which are the areas of the terminal which are more popular

among the passengers? Which are the areas, which are isolated from

passenger attention? What is the buying behavior of the passengers of

different cultures? Learning these, one can make changes to make

airport more attractive to the passengers and enhance their experience.

1.4. Methodology

In this empirical study, which is based on experience or observation,

coming up with conclusions, which are capable of being verified, by

observation or experiment. The main objective is to identify specific                                                                                                                          3  Vesna Popovic, Ben Kraal and Philip Kirk, Passenger Experience in an Airport An Activity- centred Approach, para 2, pg 3

 

 

  12  

passenger behavior patterns. Structured observation approach is

adopted.

Cluster Sampling is used for the study; the sample of 220 passengers is

distributed into two clusters viz Terminal 1(T1) and Terminal 2 (T2),

which is further sub-divided according to the gender and type of

passengers. The primary data was collected first hand by the

researchers by tracking and analyzing the activities of each of the

passenger in the sample right from the time they enter into the terminal

till they get enplaned and all the passengers were personally interviewed

with an exclusively designed questionnaire4 too at the boarding gates.

Additionally 400 people were also surveyed for analyzing the customer

pattern at concessionaires in public area at different times and at

different days of week.

                                                                                                                         4  See  Appendix  A  

 

  13  

2. Analysis & Findings

2.1. Preferred Mode Of Transportation

As shown in the questionnaire, the first things being asked there is

the mode of transportation used to reach the airport. Out of the 220

samples collected here, we got the results as shown below:

Here we see that 55% passengers prefer train where as 25% prefer

car, but in reality it should be reverse, as there is the space for 12000

cars in the parking. But this odd result is due to the limitation of the

study5 .

2.2. Total Average Processing Time

It was observed that total average time taken for “passenger

processing” in T2 is less than that of T1. T1 takes 47 on average minutes

to process a passenger while T2 just takes 42 minutes on an average.

This is not because terminal 2 is more efficient. On the contrary, there

are long check-in queues in T2 and also there are less concessionaries in

public area for passenger to spend time there. On the other hand there is

efficient check – in system at T1 so the passengers get more time to shop

                                                                                                                         5  See  section  5.  Limitations  

 

  14  

around the before they enter the secured area. Also T1 at CGN is having

variety of concessionaires and shopping facilities before

security.

0

5047

42

T1T2

2.3. Check-In Process

Both the terminals are easy to access by the passengers and the

Entry gates are strategically located. So, on an average, it does not take

more than 2 min for the passenger to reach the check in counters from

the entrance. The check in process in T1 is more efficient than that in

Terminal 2. On an average during peak hours, the passengers spend at

least 14 minutes in their check in phase in T2 against only 4 minutes in

T1. This is mainly due to more number of self check–in Kiosks and

organized check–in process at T1. Long unorganized Queues during

 

  15  

check-in process at T2 are not an unusual sight.

2.4. Concessionaires In Public Area

An effective utilization of concessionaries at the airport is very

crucial for generating non-aeronautical revenue to the airport. T1 has

wide range of concessionaries in the public area of the airport. Thus, a

passenger spends at least 11 minutes of his total processing time in

the public area of T1. Whereas T2 has a very few concessionaires in

public area. Hence, there is no scope for passengers to spend more

than 5 minutes after their check-in in the public area.

 

  16  

2.5. Security Clearance

As far as passenger’s processing at security is concerned, it is

equally efficient for both the Terminals of CGN. Average Processing

Time at Security at both the terminals is 5 minutes. This clearly

proves that the differences in total processing times of both the

terminals are not caused due to security.

 

  17  

2.6. Concessionaires After Security

During our research we found a very interesting pattern in the time

spent by the passengers at concessionaries after the security. As

passengers spends 8 minutes on an average in concessionaries at T1 and

13 minutes in T2. This is mainly because there are very few shopping

areas T2 before security and thus the passenger do spend more time at

concessionaires after they clear security.

2.7. Actual Time vs Perceived Time

There is always a difference between the actual time taken in the

processing and the time perceived by the passenger during his or her

processing. Thus, to see the effect of perceived time on the behavior of

the passengers, we have compared the actual time taken by the

passengers with the time perceived by them. It was found that the time

perceived by the passengers in the queue is always more than the actual

time.

• For check in the ratio of actual time and time perceived is 1:2 i.e. a

passenger feels double the actual time when he is standing in the

queue during check – in.

 

  18  

• For Security the ratio of actual time and time perceived is 2:3 i.e. if a

passenger has spends 4 minutes at the security, the passenger

perceives that he/she has spent 6 minutes.

2.8. Most Visited Areas Of The Terminal

Passengers are attracted to the specific areas of the airport. We have

tried to find the top 5 areas where passengers are attracted the most.

Most visited areas of the terminals fall under the following category:

1. Restaurants and Bars

2. Duty Free shops

3. Supermarkets

4. Clothes and Apparels

5. Cafés

Banks such as Foreign Exchange and ATMs and Airport Lounges are

least visited by most of the passengers. This is because not all passengers

exchange their currencies at the airport and also not every passenger is

entitled to use the lounge.

 

  19  

2.9. Buying Behavior Based On Ethnic Background

Passengers with different ethnic background have different buying

behavior pattern. This will help airport to generate more revenue by

concentrating on needs of different ethnic groups. In this study, we have

tried to prove this concept by surveying buying behavior of passengers

based on their ethnic background and the results were very surprising.

The passengers are divided into four ethnic groups :Germans,

Turkish/Iranian, Asians and others6. From table 1, we can observe that,

only 50% of total German passengers where actual buyers; whereas only

29% of the Turkish passengers were actual buyers and surprisingly 75%

of Asian passengers are actual buyers and the chart is dominated by

Africans who are 100% buyers i.e. they atleast buy something from the

airport.

                                                                                                                         6  Others consists of ethnic groups like Africans, Australians and Americans

 

 

  20  

From table 2, we can see that 64% of Germans are actual buyers;

Turkish/Iranian category is again least among the group with only 40%;

83% of Asians are actual buyers and Africans are again dominating the

group by being 100% buyers. The buying percentages are higher than

that of terminal 1. This shows that terminal 2 have more buying

potential.

As we have clearly seen that terminal 2 has more potential buyers.

But to get the whole picture, we also have to see the buying behavior of

 

  21  

the overall airport. Table 3 gives relatively more accurate picture. It

shows that 57% of German passengers are actual buyers; Asians show

relatively strong buying behavior than that of Turkish/Iranian category;

While Africans and Americans show 100% buying behavior. Although

Germans shows an average buying behavior we also have to consider

that the number of German passengers is also high as compared to other

ethnic groups.

 

  22  

Irrespective of their ethnic group, Köln/Bonn Airport consists of 61% of

total passengers who are actual buyers. This is a positive sign for

exploiting the non-aeronautical revenue potential.

2.10. Buying Pattern AT Concessionaires In Public Area

In this study, we have also observed study passenger’s buying

behavior at Concessionaries. The major concessionaries at Köln/Bonn

Airport which attract large number of passengers are:

Cafés consisting of Starbucks and other Coffees outlet

Burger King

REWE and Supermarket

 

  23  

Kirschners

To decipher the complicated passenger patterns at these

concessionaires, we will analyze the passenger’s behavior of these

concessionaires individually. A sample of 100 passengers was surveyed

at different times, at different days of week for each of the

concessionaries.

Cafés Category:

Cafés form a great attraction point at Köln/Bonn Airport. It was

observed that all the people who enter into the cafés were 100% buyers.

The customers of cafés consisted of 55% of Departing Passengers, 20% of

Public7, 15% of Arriving Passengers and 10% of Employees8. 75% of

customers were males and rests were females.

                                                                                                                         7  All the people who are not passengers, except employees (8) are considered into the category of Public. It is to be noted that Europe airports are open free for public i.e. a non passenger can easily enter the airport upto the security check

8  Any person working at airport is considered as employee.    

 

  24  

BurgerKingCategory:

Köln/Bonn Airport has Burger King in both of its Terminals. It was

observed that all the customers who enter this segment of

concessionaire were 100% buyers and 67% of its total customers were

males and rests 33% were females.

Burger King at T1 is strategically placed at the intersection area of

Arrivals and Departures generating an opportunity to provide services

and to tap revenue potential from both Arriving and Departing

passengers. It is also near to the waiting area so it can provide facility to

all the visitors’ category of people who are visiting the airport to either

receive or send off the passenger. Customer’s of Burger King at T1

consists of 51% of Departing Passengers; 20% of people in public

category; 16% of arriving passengers and 13% of Employees.

Burger King at T2 acquires large floor space but lacks strategic location.

It is located one level above the Departure area and its visibility is

blocked by the Air Berlin check – in counters. This can be seen in form of

reduction in percentage of Departing passengers as compared to Burger

King operating in T1. Only 46% of Departure passengers are using

Burger King at T2 but this has been compensated by increase in the

 

  25  

number of people in public category, around 40% of Public visits the

outlet; 13% of Employees use Burger King at T2 and merely 1% of

arriving passengers seen as the arrivals area in terminal is two levels

below the location of Burger King

REWE and Supermarket Category:

REWE is a large chain of supermarket in Germany. It occupies huge

floor space in T1 of Köln/Bonn Airport. After the analyzing passenger

behavior at REWE, the results were; 94% of the total customers visiting

REWE were actual buyers. Out of which 55% were males and rest 45%

were females. Customers comprised of 43% of Employees and only 4% of

Departing passenger actually used REWE; while 28% of Public and 26%

of Arriving passengers used this facility.

Supermarket at T2 is located in the arrival area. Its results were

similar to that of REWE. 95% of the total customers were actual buyers.

59% of total customers were males and rests 41% were females. 42% of

its customers were employees and 40% were arriving passengers and the

remaining 18% were Public. There was not even a single departing

 

  26  

passenger noted during the survey, the reason being it is away from the

departure area.

You might be thinking that what difference does it make if there are high

numbers of employees are buying from the concessionaires as far as the

concessionaire is generating revenue for the airport? It makes a huge

difference. High employee concentration is seen because they prefer to

buy at one place after they leave from their work. The facility at the

airport is established for the passengers, since the facility is not utilized

by significant amount of passengers, it can be relocated at some other

location and its location can be replaced by some other facility, which

will generate revenue from passenger. Relocation will not affect the

present revenue generated at the airport as employee – based customers

do not mind getting things from same brand from a different location at

the airport.

Kirschners:

Kirschner Book Stores is a Flagship-Store with a 24 hour order and

collect service with Enormous selection of books, travel guides and

 

  27  

international press. It has a wide range of newspapers, magazines and

books, plus a post agency with classic postal services. Kirschners Kids is

a colorful world for little passengers with toys and clothing by

prestigious labels such as Sigikid, Lego and Playmobil. It is located in the

departure level of both the terminals at Köln/Bonn Airport.

Although only 58% of total customers who enter the concessionaire were

actual buyers but still the analysis gave extra- ordinary results. Out of

the total customers 55% were males and rest 45% were females. The

concessionaire is very profitable from revenue generation point of view

as 67% comprises of Departing passengers. It is a perfect example of

“right thing at right place” which is exactly what airport requires. 13% of

arriving passengers also avail the facility along with 12% of Public and

8% of employee based customers.

2.11. Other Findings

• Passengers in “Smoking” category spend 6 to 11 minutes of

their time at the airport in Smoking Areas.

 

  28  

o On an average there were only 15% smokers

• It does not take more than 5 min for passengers of both the

Terminals to reach the Boarding Gates after they have finished

their processing.

3. Feedbacks By Passengers

3.1. What Passengers Like AT CGN?

• Adequate Cash Dispensers placed strategically at regular

intervals throughout the terminal.

• Ample car parking space.

• Good connections with rail and road transport

• Snapshot Machine after security, T2 that forms a part of

passenger’s entertainment at the terminal.

• Organized Ambience of the T1.

• Piano Player In T1

• Self Check-in Kiosks.

• Wide Range of Travel agencies in T2.

3.2. What Improvements Passengers Want at CGN?

• Prayer rooms�

• Drinking water facilities

• More shops before security in T2�

• Not all shops are open in the morning or during the night

• Faster processing in check in and security

• More atheistic infrastructure

• Smoking Lounge in T2

 

  29  

3.3. Airport Rating By Passengers

Passengers were asked to rate their airport experience with “1 star”

being their worst experience and “5 stars” being their best experience

and the results were in the favor of Köln/Bonn Airport. For both the

terminals, the experience of the passengers was atleast average, as we

can see that none of the passengers gave less than “3 stars”. For T1, 54%

of passengers rated “4 Stars” and 15% passengers gave “5 Stars”. It has

got only 31% of average ratings. Terminal 2 received average ratings

from the passengers. 57% of passengers gave average rating to T2. Only

29% of passengers gave “4 star” rating to T2. It has also received “5

Star” from 14% of passengers.

4. Recommendations

After surveying about 220 passengers for their processing times and

more than 400 passengers combining all the concessionaires, we would

like to provide some recommendations to Köln/Bonn Airport which will

not only help the airport in their planning and development decisions but

also to increase passenger’s satisfaction and revenue generation.

1) A Prayer Room is highly recommended atleast in Terminal 2. As

Terminal 2 have more passengers from diverse cultures. But it is wiser

to have Prayer Rooms for the passengers “after the Security area” as it

will serve both the purpose of serving the Passenger and will avoid

unnecessary Crowding in Prayer Rooms. If the prayer room is located in

the public area, it will even attract non-passengers and will create

 

  30  

undesirable congestion. The Frankfurt Airport currently faces this

problem. The goodwill of the airport is adversely affected when the

passengers has to wait in a queue even for praying.

2) There is a need for installing a Smoking Lounge in T2 after

security.

3) The public area before the check – in counters of T2 is highly

unutilized and unorganized. The psychology of the passenger is

adversely affected the moment they see an unorganized long queue If

there are more number of barricades like the airport has for German

Wings than it can help to increase the passenger’s satisfaction to a great

deal.

 

  31  

 

  32  

4) It is seen throughout the Europe that there are no separate queues for

males and females at the security. The reason behind this is to give equal

treatment to both men and women. But this increases congestion at the

security area. The separate queues for males & females at security can

help in reducing average security clearance, because more number of

female passengers undergo frisking than male passengers.

5) There is a requirement to increase the number of concessionaries in

T2 as it carries a lot of buying potential. According to our research, there

is 69% buying potential in T2 against only 54% buying potential in T1.

6) Many passengers arrive to the airport after long hours of connecting

flights. They need to charge their laptops and mobiles, so Mobile and

Laptop Charging Stations should be installed. But again, it is not

recommended in public areas to avoid misuse of the facility and

congestion.

7) A minor factor, which led to huge passenger dissatisfaction. The

dustbins are placed just adjacent to the sitting area of the passengers

 

  33  

and this is the scenario throughout the airport. Passengers are really

annoyed when they see other passengers throw garbage in dustbins right

next to them. So the dustbins should be relocated.

8) The passenger tracking system can provide more accuracy in such

data as we can get the data of 27*7 for all 365 days. The passenger

tracking system can be either Bluetooth or wifi based. As CGN has

already wifi installed in both the terminal buildings, so wifi can be used

as a medium of passenger tracking system to provide better passenger

experience.

5. Limitations

The sample size of 220 is very small compared to the number of

passengers using the airport. So the results from this sample size cannot

provide a very close picture of required results. Also the time period is

the limitation. This kind study should be carried out for a longer time

with a larger sample size to find the more accuracy in the results.

 

  34  

6. Conclusion

Study of “Passenger Behavior” is a not a definite science. The analysis

has to be a continuous step in aviation processing as it gives first hand

information about what passengers really want. It has to be carried out

throughout the year so that variations during peak and off peak seasons

can be eliminated. From this research it can be concluded that ethnic

background of the passenger affects its buying behavior pattern. Asians

and Africans tend to buy more at CGN than Turkish and Germans. Also

the Time Perceived by the passenger is always more than the Actual

time taken by the passenger during their processing. Restaurants & Bar,

Duty Free, Clothes & Apparel shops, Supermarkets and Cafés are the

most visited areas of CGN. T2 has more buying potential than T1.

This research is significant as it provides new knowledge about

passenger’s buying behavior and experiences at the airport and how

these experiences are affected by the overall operation of the system. It

provides a detailed understanding of the passenger’s behavior and their

expectations during different processes, and thus has the potential to

improve passenger’s facilitation. It also provides the information, which

can be required for the installation of the passenger tracking system for

future development of CGN.

7. Bibliography

• Passenger Experience in an Airport - An Activity-centred

Approach by Vesna Popovic, Ben Kraal and Philip Ki

• Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentive

Perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, New York: Freeman

Press Bertelsen, P. (2005).

• Free Will, Consciousness and Self. Oxford, New York: Berghahn

Books.

 

  35  

• Have, P. T. (2003). ‘Teaching students observational methods:

visual studies and visual �analysis’, Visual Studies,18:1,29-35.

• Hester, S & Francis, D. (2003) ‘Analysing visually available

mundane order: a walk to �the supermarket’, Visual Studies,18:1,36-

46.

• International Air Transport Association. SPT: Ideal Process Flow

V2.0, 2006.

• Analysis and Simulation of Passenger Flow in an Airport Terminal

by Michel R. �Gatersleben and Simon W. van der Weij

• Predicting Air Travellers’ No-show and Standby Behaviour using

passenger and �directional itinerary information by Laurie a.

Garrow, PhD. Georgia institute of technology school of civil and

environmental engineering

 

  36  

8. Appendix A

Part1

Köln-­‐Bonn  Airport  

Passenger  Behavior  Survey  (Time  Spent  at  Airport)  Date:………………………                                                                                                                                                                                        Day:  ...…………………..                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Time  1.  Point  of  Entry:  …………………………………………….                                                                              ……………………………..                                                                            

� Individual              � Group � Family � Business � Leisure

� M …… � F……

2. Activities before reaching to Check-In Counter

…………………………………………………………………………………............…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….....……………………………………………

3. Time at Check-In Counter In the Queue ……………………… At the Counter (Airline ………………..) ..…....……………… Out of Queue …………………….. 4. After Check-In

………………………………………….…………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

5. Security At the Entrance …………………… In the Queue …………………… At the belt …………………... Frisking (if done) Y/N Out …………………... 6. Activities after Security Check

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

7. Boarding Announcement ….……………….. Other activities (if any)…………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………..….. 8. At the departure gate ………………….. 9. Cleared to board ..…………………. 10. Comments(If Any) …..……………………………………………………………...... …………………………………………………………………………………………………..

 

  37  

Part2

Köln-­‐Bonn  Airport  

                                                                                       Passenger  Feedback  

1. How did you come at airport? Car/Bus/Taxi/Train

2. Have you been at this airport earlier also? ………..………………

3. How much time it took for your check-in process?

� 1-2 minutes � 3-5 minutes � 6-10 minutes � 11-20 minutes

4. Which class you are travelling- � Economy � Business/First Class

5.Did you plan for shopping at airport before arriving here? Yes / No

6. How much time it took for security check?

� 1-2 minutes � 3-5 minutes � 6-10 minutes � 11-20 minutes

7. According to you, which is the best place to spend time at airport & why? ………………………………………………………………………………... …………………………………………………………………………………………..

8. Did you feel any kind of inconvenience at any part of the airport?

Yes/No (If yes, please specify …………………………………………………..

9. How was your overall experience at airport (5- best, 1–worst)?

� 1 � 2 � 3 �4 � 5

10. Do you have suggestions for any other facilities at airport?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

11. Personal Details:

Occupation:- � Business � Employee � Student � Any other (Please specify) ……………………………..

Nationality ……………………….............................................................

Purpose to visit Cologne/Bonn if you don’t belong here …………………

e-mail address: ……………………………………………………………………

Thank You Very Much For Your Valuable Time!

 

  38  

9. Appendix B

 

  39  

 

  40  

 

  41  

 

  42  

10. Appendix C

 

  43