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
1
2
3
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.
4
Contents Abstract 1. Introduction 1.1.
Köln/Bonn Airport (CGN) – An Introduction
1.2.
Objectives
1.3.
Literature Review
1.4.
Methodology
6-11
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 3.1.
What Passengers Like AT CGN?
3.2.
What Improvements Passengers Want at CGN?
3.3.
Airport Rating By Passengers
4. Recommendations
28-29
29-33
5. Conclusion
34
6. Limitations
34
7. Bibliography
34
8. Appendix A
36
9. Appendix B
38
10.
42
Appendix C
5
Â
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.
Â
6 Â
1. Introduction 1.1.
Köln/Bonn Airport (CGN) – An Introduction
7
8
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.
9
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 Pickard 1 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.
10
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 Activitycentred Approach, para 2, pg 3
11
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
12
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
13
around the before they enter the secured area. Also T1 at CGN is having variety
of
concessionaires
and
shopping
facilities
before
security.
50
47 42
0
T2 T1
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
14
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.
15
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.
16
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.
17
• 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.
18
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
19
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
20
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.
21
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
22
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.
23
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
24
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
25
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
26
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.
27
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 28
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
29
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.
30
31
Â
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 Â
32 Â
Â
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.
Â
33 Â
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.
34
•
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,18:1,3646.
•
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
35
8. Appendix A Part1 Köln-‐Bonn Airport
Passenger Behavior Survey (Time Spent at Airport)
Date:……………………… Day: ...………………….. Time 1. Point of Entry: ……………………………………………. …………………………….. Individual M ……
Group
Family
Business
Leisure
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) Out
Y/N …………………...
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) …..……………………………………………………………...... …………………………………………………………………………………………………..
36
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
4. Which class you are travelling-
6-10 minutes Economy
11-20 minutes
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 specify) ……………………………..
Student
Any other (Please
Nationality ………………………............................................................. Purpose to visit Cologne/Bonn if you don’t belong here ………………… e-mail address: …………………………………………………………………… Thank You Very Much For Your Valuable Time!
37
9. Appendix B
38
39
40
41
10.
Appendix C
42
43