LGAV 4100: Airport and Infrastructure Planning & Control

L GAV 4100: Airport and Infrastructure Planning & Control Fall 2018, MW 2:00 PM – 3:20 PM, BLB 040

Instructor: Dr. S. HONG Office: 338D Phone: Office (940) 369-8911 Office Hours: Wednesday 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM By appointment: 24 hours in advance preferred. Monday 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM; Friday 2:00 PM – 3:30 PM E-mail: [email protected]

Course Description A comprehensive inquiry into the management of airport operations. Topics include the history of airports, the roles of government agencies, hinterland development and the impact of deregulation and wide-bodied aircraft on airports. Particular attention is given to the management of the airport planning process including the general Federal Aviation Regulations about airport management and the role of government airport planning and development. Capstone course to be taken during the last term/semester of course work. Prerequisite(s): LGAV 2100, LGAV 3130, LGAV 3140.

Course Materials Primary Text: Seth B. Young and Alexander T. Wells, Airport Planning & Management, 6th Edition. McGraw-Hill: New York, NY. ISBN 978-0071750240. John D. Kasarda. (2012), Aerotropolis: The Way We will Live Next, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. ISBN- 10: 0374533512, ISBN-13: 978-0374533519.

Required Reading: You will need to purchase the following cases for this course. See Canvas for a link to Harvard Business Review to download these cases. 1. Perfect Storm over Zurich Airport (A), Harvard Business Case 9-408-023 2. BAE Automated Systems (A): Denver International Airport Baggage-Handling System, Harvard Business Case 9-396-311 3. Delays at Logan Airport, Harvard Business Case 9-102-011 4. Delays at Logan Airport Problem Set, Harvard Business Case 9-102-022

Core Curriculum This course is a critical component of UNT's Core Curriculum. This course is related to the category of Social and Behavioral Sciences and will focus on the application of empirical and scientific methods that contribute to the understanding of what makes us human. The foundations of history, economics, and public policy are required and management in the National Transportation System. This course examines several topics that promote the common good as students examine the relationship between the economic activity (jobs, investment, and businesses growth), social benefits (safety and cultural connections0, and the environmental costs of aviation (air/ noise pollution and traffic congestion).

Core Objectives As an integral part of the core curriculum, while engaging in this course students will develop and demonstrate the core objectives of Critical Thinking, Communication Skills, Empirical and Quantitative Skills, and Social Responsibility.

Critical Thinking Skills - including creative thinking, innovation, inquiry, and analysis, evaluation and synthesis of information. This course draws heavily on thinking as driven by the mathematics and composition elements of the core curriculum. Through the case analyses, students will integrate concepts and develop critical thinking skills to synthesize information, analyze complex problems, and evaluate alternatives as they gain a better understanding of airport operations in the National

Transportation System.

Communication Skills - including effective development, interpretation and expression of ideas through written, oral and visual communication. Through the case analyses, students will develop communication skills as they interpret and translate data into information so that their ideas are expressed in a manner useful to decision-makers.

Empirical and Quantitative Skills - including the manipulation and analysis of numerical data or observable facts resulting in informed conclusions. Through the case analyses, students will integrate concepts and analyze data and observable facts to solve complex aviation problems. The students will examine the relationship economic and social benefits and the environmental costs of aviation to make fact-based and data-driven conclusions.

Social Responsibility - including intercultural competence, knowledge of civic responsibility, and the ability to engage effectively in regional, national, and global communities. This course examines several topics that promote the common good. The behavior and interactions among individuals, groups, institutions, and events are explored, to include their impact on the individuals, society, and culture. Through the case analyses, students will investigate the civil role public, and private aviation organizations have in local, national, and global communities. Students will consider the influences of U.S. and international law and cultural ethics on aviation and their impact on public and private airport organizations, individuals, and the community in meeting multiple and sometimes conflicting goals.

Course Objectives 1. Provide the basic principles of airport planning and management. 2. Examine the historical and legislative foundations of the national airport system. 3. Understand the components and interoperability of an airport and its functions. 4. Understand the public administration of airport systems including the regulatory, environmental, and social issues with airport planning and management. 5. Demonstrate an understanding of the integration of business, logistics, and aviation concepts to solve complex problems facing the air transportation industry: Case analysis, gate allocation and scheduling, congestion costs, runway occupancy time and airspace management. 6. Exposure to international customs, regulations, and conventions as they relate to global aviation. 7. Develop information gathering and communication skills through written assignments. 8. Demonstrate a contextual understanding of the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of aviation.

Optional Reading American Association of Airport Executives, Certified Member Program Modules. These are available on the Canvas course site. 1. Finance and Administration 2. Legislative Affairs: Marketing, Communications, and Air Service Development 3. Airport Operations: Security and Maintenance 4. Planning, Construction, and Environmental

Course Materials Canvas: Course materials, slide presentations, assignments, quizzes, case studies, graded work, and outside readings will be available on the course web page via Canvas. Students should refer to Canvas often throughout the course to remain current. Students can access the course web page through the UNT course management system. The site is password protected. You can learn more about Canvas by reviewing the on-line student manuals.

Outside Reading: Additional readings may be assigned throughout the course as determined by the professor

Software: You will need internet access and a web browser, such as Internet Explorer or Firefox. Course materials, assignments, and some quizzes will be distributed via the internet via Canvas. You are responsible for accessing Canvas to obtain all course materials. Additionally, many of the printed materials for this course are in pdf format (adobe acrobat). Adobe Acrobat reader is required to read the pdf files. Acrobat Reader is available free from the Adobe website, www.adobe.com. All assignments will be typed and saved as a Microsoft Office file (e.g., .doc, .ppt, or .xls as applicable) or as a pdf file. At least one assignment will be required solver, an add-in to Microsoft Excel. If you do not have access to Excel, ensure you have a comparable tool that can solve a linear program. If you do not have Microsoft office, please contact the professor to ensure your file can be opened and read for grading purposes.

Course Format This course is conducted through a combination of lectures, in-class discussions, case studies, quizzes, and exams. The lectures will cover foundational material for each assigned topic, but may not necessarily cover all the material as presented in the text and outside readings. Students are still responsible for all material assigned.

AAAE Certified Member Program The American Association of Airport Executives offers a Certified Member Program (CM) for Academic Graduate members following graduation. The AAAE certification exam is OPTIONAL, but will significantly improve your resume should you wish to work for whenever possible. Additional information about the CM Program and the AAAE Learning modules is available on Canvas.

Expectations Some assignments in this course will integrate material from previous courses in the Aviation Logistics Program. You are expected to pull material from your previous courses, as needed to complete the assignments. You are expected to attend all classes and be prepared to discuss and/or apply the assigned reading. Students will be called upon to discuss the topics/concepts in class.

Grading Grading will be based on your performance on the following graded element:

Graded element Percent Points A. Resume 2.5% 25 B. Professional Development 3% 30 C. Cases (3 @ 70 = 210) 21% 210 D. Airport case (85) and presentation (100) 18.5% 185 E. Quizzes (6 @ 50) and Homework (2 @ 50) 40% 400 F. Exams (Mid-term exam: 50 points; Final exam: 100 points) 15% 150 100% 1000

Note: Students may not be allowed to retake or resubmit graded material, to include assignments, quizzes, homework, projects, and exams. See the section on grade disputes in this syllabus if you have questions about your grade.

Grading Scale The grading scale is guaranteed. You will receive no less than the grade listed within the appropriate interval and (or) class attendance based on the attendance sheet. Numerical Grades will not be rounded up to the next higher letter grade. However, I may adjust the grading scale for the class, if warranted. I will not post final grades beyond what is available on Canvas. If you provide reasonable reason with official evidence for your absence which is needed approval in advance, it would be recognizable.

Grade Numerical Range (%) Condition Class Attendance (Primary) (Secondary) A 90 - 100 and >= 80% B 80 - <90 and >= 75% C 70 - <80 and >= 70% D 60 - <70 and >= 65% F <60 or =< 50%

No Opportunities for Extra Credit: No extra credit will be available unless it is offered to the entire class.

Submitting Assignments and Due Dates: Assignments are due on the date identified in the course schedule and must be uploaded to Canvas by 2359 hours unless otherwise indicated. I will not accept hard copies of assignments. Any assignment may be uploaded to Canvas early. As a general rule, I will not accept homework that is emailed.

Correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation are expected on all graded material. All assignments will be types (25%-point penalty, if not) unless otherwise indicated.

The acceptable formats for assignments include .pdf, .doc, .docx, .ppt, .pptx, .xls, .xlsx. Exceptions to file format must be approved by the professor.

File Naming Convention: Ensure all files uploaded to Canvas include your last name and assignment title (e.g., Hong_Abstract1Part1.doc). Do not use apostrophes or commas in the file name since the file cannot be read in Canvas.

Lateness: Students are encouraged to turn in all work, even when late. Partial points are better than no points!! The number one reason for poor performance in this class is a failure to do assigned work and quizzes—zeros are not your friend!

Assignments: Late assignments will earn a 10% penalty (one letter grade) for each day past the due date. Quizzes: Late quizzes will earn a 50% penalty when completed past the due date. Any missed quiz will be available through 2359 hours the night before the exam, after which students may no longer take a missed quiz. Exams: There are no Make-Up Exams in this course, except for bona fide emergencies as noted below.

The late penalty (late assignments and late quizzes) may be waived with a valid reason beyond the control of the student and with prior approval from the professor. The professor may require documentation to waive the late penalty.

In the event of a bona fide emergency beyond the control of the student, the student should contact the professor as soon as possible. Documentation to support the emergent situation is required before the professor will consider a make-up exam.

A. Resume

Continued refinement of your resume is a habit you should develop and implement throughout your career. As your career objectives and skills change, so should your resume. It is also important, particularly as you prepare for internships and job interviews to have your resume “ready to send.” To help in this process, your first assignment is to submit your resume and release authorization form electronically via Canvas per the class schedule.

The logistics faculty will use this resume to send to companies that contact us throughout the semesters. No resume updates will be accepted during the semester after the initial submission; no exception. Make sure it is your best, no excuses. Do it right the first time! You have the right to request your resume not be distributed to potential employees. If you request “no distribution” we will not release your resume to prospective employers upon their request

To receive full points for your resume: 1. Name your RESUME using the following convention: Example: InstructorInitials_Full or Intern_StudentLastName_Semester_Year should look like HONG_Full_Burton_Fall_2019 2. Upload your resume to Canvas by the due date. 3. Complete and sign the release authorization form attached to this syllabus. This form is used to indicate whether we may release your resume. 4. Scan a copy of the signed release form and upload to Canvas with your resume by the due date. 5. Comply with expectation in the grading rubric. 6. In order to be visible to employers you must submit your resume via Eagle Careers powered by Handshake http://studentaffairs.unt.edu/career-center/eagle-careers. You need to have a profile created as well. A Student User Guide will be provided to you with instructions on how to submit your resumé. 7. Once you have your resume ready to upload into Handshake you must do the following: a. Under ‘Personal Goals’, you need to select either, ‘I want a job’ or ‘I want an internship’, then click ‘Done’ b. Now, you need to choose in the ‘Other’ dropdown ‘Has Public Resume’ If you want to have recruiters see your resumes.

B. Professional development

The UNT professional program in Logistics is very proud of its close relationship with industry and its emphasis on professionalism. You are required to participate in two categories of professional development (PD). This semester the Logistics Executive Lecture Series will feature six executive lecture sessions and four Onboarding sessions allowing students to meet and activity interchange with a logistics executive. For details, go to https://cob.unt.edu/logistics-center/executive-lecture/speakers for executive lectures or to https://cob.unt.edu/logistics-center/onboarding-program for onboarding seminars.

Students are expected to Participate in at least two first PD events during the semester (each event earns 25 points, for a total of 50 points). To receive full credit:

1. You must RSVP no later than 2359 hours the night before the event. If you RSVP and do not attend the event without informing Ms. Julie Willems-Espinoza, you will lose 10 points for the course 2. Cancel your RSVP: To cancel; please email Julie Willems-Espinoza (Julie.Willems- [email protected]). 3. Swipe your ID at the machine or sign the attendance sheet designating LGAV3130. 4. If you cannot attend two of these events due to work or class schedule conflicts, contact your instructor about attending alternative events, which is subject to approval before attending the event. For example, attendance at LogSA (Logistics Support Activity of US Army) or ISM (Institute for Supply Management) meetings with a senior guest speaker, attendance at the local CSCMP (Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals) roundtable meetings, etc. may be approved by the instructor. 5. If you have other activities that you believe qualify for consideration for professional development credit, please seek approval from the instructor before attending the event or meeting. Many of the opportunities are space-limited, so plan early! Note that you will need to attend two unique events for each logistics class that you enroll in.

6. If you swipe your ID and immediately leave, you will lose 10 points for the course. 7. If you swipe your ID without RSVP, you would not considered as an attendance.

C. Case Study Analysis

The goal of this course is to develop critical thinking skills by analyzing and solving applied problems. Several case studies are incorporated into the course addressing different aspects of Airport Systems and Airport Management. The case studies may require integration of material learned in the business core classes and prior logistics/aviation logistics courses. The case study analyses are individual efforts and due on the date listed in the class schedule with minimum three pages including executive summary as well as your personnel comments and suggestions. The executive summary is not simply an introduction to the analysis. The executive summary, or management summary, is a short document or section of a document, produced for business purposes, which summarizes a longer report or proposal or a group of related reports in such a way that readers can rapidly become acquainted with a large body of material without having to read it all. It usually contains a brief statement of the problem or proposal covered in the major document(s), background information, concise analysis and main conclusions. It is intended as an aid to decision-making by managers and has been described as the most important part of a business plan. Each case is different with different expectations. These expectations are included in the instruction for each case.

Case1: The Perfect Storm over Zurich (70 points) Case2: BAE Automated Systems (70 points) Case3: Delays at Logan Airport (70 points)

Format: The preferred format is Microsoft Word. Microsoft Excel may also be used for cases requiring more complex problem-solving.

D. Quizzes

This course includes numerous quizzes that will be administered via Canvas. You should expect approximately one quiz each week covering the assigned material. Exceptions to the weekly quiz will be noted in the syllabus or announced in class and/or Canvas. All assigned material (text, lecture slides, outside reading) and classroom discussions are fair game for each quiz. All quizzes are "open notes/open book." Quizzes will include a combination of multiple choices, true/false, and short answer.

On-line Quizzes: Once you begin taking the quiz on Canvas you will have a limited time (approximately 30 minutes) with which to complete the quiz. Therefore, you should be familiar with the material before attempting the quiz. The quizzes are designed to prepare you for the course exams. Therefore, you will see similar questions on the exams.

There will be approximately 5-6 quizzes in this course. All quizzes will count toward your final grade.

Late Quizzes: Missed quizzes will adversely impact your grade. Students who do not take these quizzes or routinely miss them and accept the late penalty can expect a 1- or 2-letter grades reduction for the course. Late quizzes will earn a 50% penalty when completed past the due date. Any missed quiz will be available through 2359 hours the night before the exam, after which students may no longer take a missed quiz.

E. Homework for Airport Location Identification and Description: See the Attachment 6

F. Examination & Preparation

This course will include two in-class exams. The exams will consist of questions drawn from the textbook, outside readings, lectures, discussions, and out-of-class assignments. You are responsible for

6 the material even if is not emphasized or covered during the lecture. Your exams are comprehensive, although each exam will weigh more heavily on the material since the last exam. The exams will be closed notes/closed book. No external reference material may be used on the exams. Exams will include a combination of multiple choices, true/false, and short answer. There are No Make-Up exams except in extraordinary situations (see the "Lateness" section of this syllabus).

Final Exam: The final exam is comprehensive, but does place more emphasis on tested material.

Exam Preparation: I strongly recommend reviewing the chapter and slide objectives and attempt to answer the review questions for each assigned chapter. Students that keep up with the reading, pay attention in class, and study for the quizzes tend to perform better on the in-class exams.

The written requirements for this course consist of your resume, case study analyses, and any short answer/essay questions on the exams. Your written assignments and exam responses should be neat, clear and concise. Electronic files of your assignments are required in Microsoft Word or PDF format. All written assignments must be typed (25%-point penalty if not typed) unless otherwise noted.

Oral Communication Skills The oral communication skills are developed through daily class discussion, participation, and presentations. Students are expected to provide well-reasoned and concise discussion or arguments, contributing to the in-class discussion.

Attendance & Tardiness Class attendance is required to fully understand the material and prepare for the homework and exams. Missing these opportunities could adversely impact your grade.

Students are responsible for all material covered in class, including changes to the syllabus, course schedule, and course materials. I will not supplement missed lecture material, even with excused absences. If you miss a class, you should arrange with your classmates for any supplementary material or class notes.

Academic Integrity Cheating, plagiarism or other inappropriate assistance on examinations, quizzes, and all graded assignments will be treated with zero tolerance and will result in a grade of "F" for the course. Any work on the graded material (quizzes, case study, presentation, etc.) is to be treated identically to an in- class exam: the work must be entirely your own with absolutely no outside help or assistance. When working on the assignments, you must not discuss your work with anyone (other faculty or other students) unless specifically approved by me. Copying or using material from assignments previously submitted by other students (at UNT or other learning institutions) or downloaded from the internet is considered plagiarism and will not be tolerated.

Written work must be written in your works. Borrow ideas and summaries of portions of the articles should also be in your word and must be fully cited. Any idea, concept, or material that was not generated by you should be fully documented with citations. All sources may be cited using numbered footnotes/endnotes or using the in-line (author year) format. Footnotes and endnotes should include the full bibliographic information. If you prefer the (author year) format, a full bibliography, in alphabetical order, should be included at the end of the written assignment. If you quote material, you must also include your source through proper citations. Large-scale "cutting and pasting" from other sources, even when properly cited, does not meet the criterion of submitting your work and will result in a failing grade.

The use of headphones is prohibited during exams.

Americans with Disabilities Act: The College of Business Administration complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act in making reasonable accommodations for qualified students with a

7 disability. If you have an established disability as defined in the Ace and would like to request an accommodation, please see me as soon as possible. I can be contacted at the location and phone number shown in this syllabus. Please note: University policy requires that students notify their instructor within the first week of class that an accommodation will be needed. Please do not hesitate to contact me now or in the future if you have any questions or if I can be of assistance.

Course Grade Appeals, Withdrawals, & Incompletes: Please refer to the UNT Undergraduate Catalog for policies governing these actions. If you have any questions, please contact me for clarification. Please note: I only use an incomplete for extraordinary circumstances. An incomplete grade will not be used simply to provide more time to complete the course requirements.

Exam & Assignment Grade Appeals: If you disagree with how any assignment or examination was graded, you must submit a written appeal by email or letter within one week after the grade was awarded or the graded work was returned. The written appeal should include your concern or question about your grade, an explanation about why you believe your answer is correct, AND documentation or evidence supporting your belief. Appropriate documentation includes references from the text, course lecture slides, or outside reading from the course syllabus. Appeals without supporting rational and specific reference(s) to the course will be returned without consideration. Under no circumstances will grades be lowered.

Course Disclaimer: The schedule, policies, and assignments contained in the course syllabus are subject to change in the event of extenuating circumstances, to accommodate class progress, to provide a more in-depth focus or discussion where warranted, to take advantage of a guest speaker, or by agreement between the instructor and students. All changes will be announced in class before the change and posted on Canvas.

Cell Phones: All cellular or digital phones and pagers are to be turned off during class.

Laptops: Laptops and other devices (e.g., iPad) in the classroom may not be used for web browsing, email, or activity not directly related to the course content for the day.

Class Schedule Required Reading, & Assignments The schedule, policies, and assignments contained in the course syllabus are subject to change in the event of extenuating circumstances, to accommodate class progress, to provide a more in-depth focus or discussion where warranted, to take advantage of a guest speaker, or by agreement between the instructor and students. All changes will be announced in class before the change and posted on Canvas.

Week # Date Topic, Assignments, and Readings Aug 27 Course Introduction 1 Mon Review Syllabus and Course Requirement W 1 Aug 29 Supply Chain Management and Transportation 2 Wed Review: Case 1 Instructions Part 1: Aviation Location Identifiers Sep 3 Labor day (No Class) 3 Mon W 2 Sep 5 Transportation Innovation 4 Wed Quiz #1 Syllabus open 10:00 am, Friday, Sep 7 Sep 10 Airport project preparation (No Class) 5 Mon Due: Resume and Release Form till 23:59, Sep 10 W 3 Sep 12 Guest Speaker (Mr. Jonathan Moreno, Safety specialist, Southwest Airlines) 6 Wed Sep 17 Part 1 – Chapter 1 Airports and Airport Systems – Introduction 7 Mon Discussion: Construction Plans for La Guardia Airport W 4 Sep 19 Part 1 – Chapter 2 Airports and Airport Systems – Org & Admin 8 Wed Discussion: Privatization of Air Traffic Control System

Due: HW - Airport location identification and description (23:59 Sep 19) Sep 24 Part 1-Chapter 3: Airport and Airport Systems – Historical, Legislative & Economic 9 Mon Aspect W 5 Sep 26 Part 1-Chapter 4: The Airfield 10 Wed Quiz #2 From Sep 28 Due: Initial Due Date for airport project [data] (23:59 Sep 26) Oct 1 Part 2-Chapter 5: Airspace and Air Traffic Control (I) 11 Mon W 6 Oct 3 Part 2-Chapter 5: Airspace and Air Traffic Control (II) 12 Wed Oct 8 Part 2-Chapter 6: Airport Terminals and Ground Access (I) 13 Mon W 7 Oct 10 In-class Movie: "Big, Bigger, Biggest Airports." 14 Wed Due: Case 1 - Perfect Storm (23:59 Oct 14) Quiz #3 From Oct 10 Oct 15 Part 2-Chapter 6: Airport Terminals and Ground Access (I) 15 Mon Case of Munich Airport W 8 Oct 17 Mid-Term Exam 16 Wed Oct 22 Discussion: Case 1 (Perfect Strom) 17 Mon Review: Case 2 Instructions W 9 Due: Final Due Date for airport’s data (23:59 Oct 22) Oct 24 Part 2-Chapter 9: Airport Financial Management & European Airport Ownership (I) 18 Wed Oct 29 Part 2-Chapter 9: Airport Financial Management & European Airport Ownership(II) 19 Mon W 10 Oct 31 Part 2 – Cost and Benefit Analysis 20 Wed Airport Video: DFW, ICN, GMP, and Youngnam Airport Quiz #4 From Nov 2 Nov 5 Part 3-Chapter 12: Airport Capacity and Delay (I) 21 Mon W 11 Nov 7 Part 3-Chapter 12: Airport Capacity and Delay (II) 22 Wed Due: Case 2 - Denver Baggage System (23:59 Nov 11) Nov 12 Discussion: Case 2 (Denver Baggage System) 23 Mon Nov 14 Part 3-Chapter 11: Airport System & Master Planning W 12 Wed Review: Case 3 Instructions 24 Due: HW 2- Queuing Simulation for airport runways (23:59 Nov 14) Quiz #5 From Nov 16 Nov 19 Part 3- Chapter 11: Airport Planning 25 Mon W 13 Nov 21 Part 3-Chapter 10: The Economic, Political, and Social Role 26 Wed Due: Airport Project Report (23:59 Nov 25) Nov 26 Part 3- Innovation of Aviation Industry / Special Issues on Airport 27 Mon W 14 Nov 28 Airport Project Presentation 28 Wed Quiz #6 From Nov 30 Due: Case 3 - Delays at Logan (23:59 Dec 2) Dec 3 Airport Project Presentation 29 Mon Discussion: Case 3 (Delays at Logan Airport) W 15 Dec 5 Airport Project Presentation 30 Wed

Final Exam: Monday, December 10, 2018, 1:30 to 3:30 pm

Attachment 1 Resume Assignment

So, you attend a professional meeting tonight and chat with a vice president with a 3PL. “Looking for an exceptional UNT graduate highly capable of doing great things for your company?” you ask. She replies, “Send me your resume by Noon tomorrow.”

Now is the time to get your resume in shape. Complete the attached resume cover sheet and post in the Assignments module within Canvas no later than 23:59 on September 10th. To avoid a reduction in participation points, name your resume file using your last name and the term and year of your graduation. For example:

InstructorInitials_Full or Intern_StudentLastName_Semester_Year Example: HONG_Full_Burton_Fall_2019

Failure to properly name your file will result in a penalty of participation points. Late submissions will receive a three-point reduction in their final grade. The logistics faculty will use this resume to send to companies that contact us throughout the semester so make sure it is your very best, no excuses. You have the right to request your resume not be distributed to potential employees.

You must complete the form on the following page and turn-in a signed copy as a scanned pdf or Word document (cut and paste out of the syllabus) and post your resume in Canvas by September 10th.

Logistics and Supply Chain Management Resume Posting Authorization

Name your resume file as follows:

InstructorInitials_Full or Intern_StudentLastName_Semester_Year Example: HONG_Full_Burton_Fall_2019

Student name: ID Number: Submit Date:

Please check the appropriate responses:

A Logistics intern position for: o Fall 2018 o Spring 2019 o Summer 2019 o I am not interested in a Logistics related internship

A part-time position in Logistics: o Fall 2018 o Spring 2019 o Summer 2019 o I am not interested in part-time employment in Logistics

Post-graduation permanent professional o Fall 2018 employment: o Spring 2019 o Summer 2019 o I will not be seeking employment in the logistics field

Release my resume: o The University of North Texas has permission to distribute my resume to prospective employers. o Please do not release my resume. It is submitted for a class requirement only.

Signed: ______

Attachment 2 Professional Development in Logistics

Professionalism: The UNT Professional Program in Logistics is very proud of its close relationship with industry and our emphasis on professionalism. This semester the Logistics Executive Lecture Series has planned at least six Friday Noon to 1 PM sessions allowing students to meet and actively interchange with logistics executives and at least four On-boarding sessions. You must complete your first professionalism activity before September 21st.

Attendance at the same event to fulfill a requirement for another course or program will not be counted. You will not receive credit if you have not RSVP’d. If you RSVP and fail to attend, 2 points will be deducted from your final grade. You can make up these points by attending another presentation.

If you cannot attend these events due to work or class schedule conflicts, you may find an alternative such as an evening professional meeting. My goal is that you can interact with a corporate executive. Attendance of a career fair or attendance of a student interest group (such as AMA, LOGSA, or SAA) will not count as a substitute unless a c-level executive is speaking and the presentation has been approved in advance. Any alternative must be approved by Dr. Pohlen and Dr. Hong at least 24 hours before attending the event, and you will be asked to provide the c-level executive’s business card as proof that you interacted with the executive. The Learn grade book will reflect your participation as soon as the signature sheets are received.

Dean Wiley is mandating that ALL CoB students attend sessions including professional dress and resume reviews before them attending any recruiting events such as the Business Fair.

You can obtain information about the speakers and their scheduled dates by accessing the logistics center website at http://www.cob.unt.edu/logisticscenter/events.php.

Logistics Executive Lecture Series Please refer to Web page: https://cob.unt.edu/logistics-center/executive-lecture/speakers

Logistics Onboarding Program Sessions Refer to Web page: https://cob.unt.edu/logistics-center/onboarding-program

Attachment 3 UNT College of Business Student Ethics Statement

As a student at the UNT College of Business, I will abide by all applicable policies of the University of North Texas, including the Student Standards of Academic Integrity, the Code of Student Conduct and Discipline and the Computer Use Policy. I understand that I am responsible for reviewing the policies as provided by the link below before participation in this course. I understand that I may be sanctioned for violations of any of these policies by procedures as defined in each policy.

I will not engage in any acts of academic dishonesty as defined in the Student Standards of Academic Integrity, including but not limited to using another's thoughts or words without proper attribution (plagiarism) or using works in violation of copyright laws. I agree that all assignments I submit to the instructor and all tests I take shall be performed solely by me, except where my instructor requires participation in a group project in which case I will abide by the specific directives of the instructor regarding group participation.

While engaged in on-line coursework, I will respect the privacy of other students taking online courses and the integrity of the computer systems and other users' data. I will comply with the copyright protection of licensed computer software. I will not intentionally obstruct, disrupt, or interfere with the teaching and learning that occurs on the website dedicated to this course through computer "hacking" or in any other manner.

I will not use the university information technology system in any manner that violates the UNT nondiscrimination and anti-sexual harassment policies. Further, I will not use the university information technology system to engage in verbal abuse, make threats intimidate, harass, coerce, and stalk or in any other manner which threatens or endangers the health, safety or welfare of any person. Speech protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is not a violation of this provision, though fighting words and statements that reasonably threaten or endanger the health and safety of any person are not protected speech.

Students Standards of Academic Integrity http://policy.unt.edu/sites/default/files/untpolicy/pdf/7-Student Affairs-Academic Integrity.pdf

Code of Student Conduct Discipline http://conduct.unt.deu/sites/default/files/pdf/code of student conduct.pdf

Computer Use Policy http://policy.unt.edu/policy/3-10

I agree:

Signature: Printed name:

Attachment 4 References: YouTube video

1. Big, Bigger, Biggest Airports (47 min 14): http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xm9r7e_national- geographic-big-bigger-biggest-airports_shortfilms 2. TRACON-Terminal Radar Approach Control (7 min 28): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILrzYv471eM 3. Discovery-Understanding air traffic control (49 min 14): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0nYEmrq1as 4. Vision of the World's Best Cargo Terminal (4 min 44): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r2slr7Ojec 5. Hong Kong International Airport Master Plan 2030 (9 min 30): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qylm5kptZ5c 6. Cargo Handling Systems (2 min 36): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kyPXHarMIk 7. How airports can adapt to the me-centric passenger (1 min 57): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHagpEJCFsc 8. Mobile devices for travel: not a buzz word -a step change (2 min 54): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idKklawinjw 9. Biometrics at Airports: Iris Recognition demo (3 min 48): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrk7hwqKCZw 10. The better way to board an airplane (2 min 35): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMgarcFkXz4 11. End the queuing at airports with Self Bag Drop (1 min 11): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=810rfjDxvTo 12. Ultimate Airport Dubai Season 1 Episode 1 Dubai Airport Full Episodes (37 min 17): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNWOfD0wkcE 13. Ultimate Airport Dubai | Season 1 Episode 2 (36 min 43): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wirxNK8Uh3c 14. Ultimate Airport Dubai - Season 2 Episode 4 (43 min 58): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWYDRABk_Yw 15. Car Parking in Abu Dhabi NEW AIRPORT (1 min 33): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTGx7ACyNsw

Attachment 5: Abbreviations

ACI Airports Council International ACM Airport Certification Manual ACIP Airport Capital Improvement Plan ADAP Airport Development Aid Program ADS-A Automated Dependent Surveillance Address ADS-B Automated Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast AGL Air Ground Level AIP Airport Improvement Plan ALS Airport Lighting System AMA Aircraft Movement Area AOCNet Airline Operations Center Network AOA Air Operations Area AOPA Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association ARFF Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting ARS Airport Radar Service Areas ARTCC Air Route Traffic Control Centers ARTS Automated Radar Traffic System ASC Aviation Safety Council, Republic of China ASDE-X Airport Surface Detection Equipment ASRS Automated Storage and Retrieval System ATC Air Traffic Control ATCSCC Air Traffic Control System Command Center ATCT Air Traffic Control Towers ATM Air Traffic Management CAA Civil Aeronautics Authority CAB Civil Aeronautics Board CAPPS Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System CDM Collaborative Decision Making CIP Capital Improvement Program CTAS Center Terminal Radar Approach Control CUTE Common Use Terminal Equipment DLAND Development of Landing Areas for National Defense DME Distance Measuring Equipment DWL Deadweight Loss ETD Explosive Trace Detection ETMS Enhanced Traffic Management System ETOPS Extended Two-Engines Operations FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAD Final Agency Decision FAAP Federal Aid Airport Program FBO Fixed Base Operators FERA Federal Emergency Relief Administration FSM Flight Schedule Monitor GARB General Airport Revenue Bonds GOB General Obligation Bonds GPS Global Positioning System IATA International Air Transport Association IFR Instrument Flight Rules ILS Instrument Landing System LAAS Local Area Augmentation System MSL Mean Sea Level NAP National Airport Plan

NAS National Airspace System NASP National Airspace System Plan NexCOM Next-Generation Air-to-Ground Communication NOTAMs Notice to Airmen NPIAS National Plan of Integrated Airport System NTSB National Transportation Safety Board NVOCC Non-Vessel Owning Common Carrier PAPI Precision Approach Path Indicator PAR Precision Approach Radar PFC Passenger Facility Charges PFD Primary Flight Display PGP Planning Grant Program PVD Para Visual Display RAPCON Radar Approach Control REIL Runway End Identifier Lights R N AV Area Navigation (Random Navigation) RVSM Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum SES II+ Single European Sky second package plus SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research SIDA Security Identification Display Area SITA Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiques SOEC Substantial Ownership and Effective Control SoIP Service over Internet Protocol TCAS Traffic Alert and Collison Avoidance System TRACON Terminal Radar Approach Control TRSA Terminal Radar Service Areas TSA Transportation Security Administration TWIC Transportation Worker Identification Credential VASI Visual Approach Glideslope Indicator VDL VHF Digital Link VFR Visual Flight Rules VoIP Voice into Data Packets VOR VHF Omnidirectional Range WAAS Wide Area Augmentation System

Attachment 6 Homework 1 - Airport Location Identification and Description (50 points)

Introduction: The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) lists the public use airports and their development programs. State and regional planning are also necessary to ensure air transportation needs are met. This project allows students to become familiar with the public use airports in North Central Texas.

Learning Outcomes: 1. Familiarize yourself with the regional level airport system planning. 2. Understand the different roles of airports within the context of a system plan. 3. Understand the airport location identifier systems.

Instructions: On the map of the North Central Texas system of airports, students will annotate the following information.

1. Full Airport Name (1 pt. each) 2. FAA Location Identifier (1 pt. each) 3. Using the legend on the map, indicate the primary purpose of the airport (1 pt. each) a. Commercial Service b. Reliever Airport c. General Aviation

Sources: You will need to refer to more than one source to find the information. These sources will get you started: 1. FAA Location Identifiers 2. North Central Texas Council of Governments 3. FAA Southwest Region Airport System Plan

Due date: 9. 19. 2018

Attachment 7: Case Study Analysis Case 1: A Perfect Storm over Zurich

Learning Objectives 1. To explore the steps leaders take to effectively lead an organization during short- and long-term crises. 2. To identify the steps needed to prepare an organization before a crisis occurs. 3. To understand organizational change during and after a crisis.

Description: This case examines crisis leadership at Zurich Airport between 1998 & 2003.

Instructions: This case study analysis is an individual effort. The case analysis should answer the following questions:

1. Problem Statement: What is the primary dilemma facing Felder at the beginning and end of the case? 2. Key Issues: What is/are the key issue(s) or factor(s) that contributed to the problem facing Felder? 3. Alternative: What are the various alternatives available to address the problem? What are the advantages and disadvantage of each course of action? 4. Decision Criteria: What decision criteria did you consider when evaluating the alternatives? (e.g., costs, opportunity costs, service, time constraints, labor issues, regulatory issue, political influence, financial, etc.) 5. Recommendation: What action(s) should Felder take? a. Rationale: Using your decision criteria, discuss why your recommendation is preferred over the other alternatives.

Deliverables: Graded Components (See following guidelines): 1. Cover Page: Include your name, course name, and case title, and date. 2. Executive Summary 3. Case write-up.

Case Guidelines:

Case write-up: While each case is different, your case write-up should follow a logical progression and explain your position or thought process.

1. A case analysis is NOT a summary of events from the case. Rather, it is an analysis of a problem or key issue(s). You may need to include some background information to put the problem in perspective or to emphasize a point. 2. Length: There is no page limit, your case analysis should be as long as need to address each point. However, you can expect your analysis to be 3-7 pages, double spaced. 3. What to include in your case write-up? Your case write-up should answer the questions in the instructions above. As a minimum, you should include the following sections. You may include other sections if needed. a. Problem Statement b. Key Issues c. Alternatives d. Decision Criteria e. Recommendation

Executive Summary: The Executive Summary is a challenge if you have not written one before. The executive summary should be written after you have completed the case write-up, even though it is the second page of your report (with the first page being the cover page). Why do you write the executive summary last? Because it is a brief and concise summary of your case analysis. A decision maker should

18 be able to read the executive summary and have enough information to understand the problem, issues, alternatives, the recommendation, and the reasons for your recommendation. If needed, the decision maker can refer to your analysis for more details, but it should not be necessary.

1. What makes a good Executive Summary? a. Does not exceed ONE PAGE. b. Is a stand-along document? c. Includes a summary of all the information. d. The reader or decision maker should be able to completely understand the issue or problem being considered, the factors that impact the decision, the alternatives available for consideration, your recommendations, and the criteria used to arrive at your recommendation (this is your rationale)

2. What makes a bad Executive Summary? a. Is too long b. Is simply an introduction to the issue or problem? c. Does not give the decision maker sufficient information to make an informed decision d. Does not make a recommendation. e. Does not explain why the recommendation is the preferred outcome

Writing Guidelines: Technical writing is a method of writing that synthesizes complex information in a concise manner for a specific audience. The following guidelines will help improve your technical writing skills. More information on technical writing can be found at Canvas - “Logistics Resources.”

1. Conciseness and Clarity: Technical writing is direct and to-the-point. Avoid lengthy and vague descriptions. Avoid obscure vocabulary and complicated discussions. Use headings to separate different parts of your report. 2. Audience: Are you writing a report for your boss, to an outside agency or group, or for general public consumption? The audience should shape the tone and wording. It is better to lean toward more formal tones, even for your boss. That way you will not have to re-write if your boss wants to forward your report outside the organization. 3. Grammar and spelling: Always important. There are many reference websites that explain the most common mistakes in grammar and spelling. A report riddled with grammar and spelling errors is unprofessional. 4. Tone: Professional and technical writing is formal. This includes word choice. We generally do not speak using proper grammar. That does not mean our writing should follow suit. You should avoid colloquialisms and slang. For example, instead of saying “the project did not work out so well” write “the project failed because...” or “the project was not successful.” 5. Vague Pronouns: Don’t be ambiguous with your pronouns. Don’t use “it” or “they” unless it is very clear to what or to whom you are referring. 6. Verb tense: Most often you will be writing in past tense when writing about events that occurred in the past. When evaluating a current project, it is acceptable to use present or even future tense. 7. Headings: Use headings to separate main topics and organize your document. Heading such as Executive Summary, Alternatives, Analysis, Lessons Learned, Conclusions, Recommendations, etc. 8. Modifiers: Use proper modifiers: Instead of using “the biggest problem” which implies size, use “the main problem” or “the most significant problem” which implies priority or level of importance.

Due date: 10. 14. 2018

Attachment 8: Case Study Analysis Case 2: BAE Denver Airport

Learning Objectives 1. To explore the steps leaders take to effectively lead an organization during short and long term crises. 2. To identify the steps needed to prepare an organization before a crisis occurs. 3. To understand organizational change during and after a crisis.

Description: This case examines the challenges with implementation and deployment of the baggage handling system.

Instructions: This case study analysis is an individual effort. The case analysis should answer the following questions:

1. Problem statement: What is the primary dilemma facing BEA and/or the Denver Airport surrounding the implementation of a large-scale, computer-based system? 2. Key Issues: What factors contributed to the failure of the project and system deployment? What was strategy or plan used for this project? a. Was there a cause(s) of failure? b. What were performance measures in place to assess progress on the project? 3. Lessons Learned: What were the lessons learned from the project? a. Evaluate the importance of these lessons learned based on data from the case (e.g., financial impact) b. What could actions have been taken to prevent failure of the project? 4. Recommendations: What recommendations would you make for any company implementing a similar project? What performance measures would you recommend?

Deliverables: Graded Components (See Attachment 7 for specific guidelines): 1. Cover Page: Include your name, course name, and case title, and date. 2. Executive Summary 3. Case write-up.

Due date: 11. 11. 2018

Attachment 9: Case Study Analysis Case 3: Delays at Logan Airport

Learning Objectives 1. To examine the factors that impact capacity, congestion, and delays at airports. 2. To examine the role of landing fees in capacity management at airports. 3. To understand the consequences of delays on other users of the airport. 4. To understand congestions costs and opportunity costs and their roles in decision-making.

Description: This case explores the causes and consequences of flight delays at Logan Airport in Boston MA.

Instructions: This case study analysis is an individual effort. The case analysis should answer the following questions:

1. Problem #1, parts a-c, in the case problem set. a. For arrival on-peak arrival rates of 50, 55, and 59, calculate the delay time using the excel file and expected delay cost for the three types of aircraft at the airport. See example in class slides to get you started. b. Answer Question 1b in the problem set. c. Answer question 1c in the problem set. Assess how much demand needs to move off-peak to get delays to a manageable level. Explain whether this is a reasonable expectation, or not? 2. Problem #2, parts a-c, in the case problem set. a. Conduct a cost analysis of the revenue to determine whether a landing fee of $100, $150, or $200 has an economic impact on each type of carrier. 3. If a new runway cost $100 million to build and Massport estimates that the new runway could reduce delays by 90,000 hours per year. a. Using the current mix of aircraft: 40% Turboprop, 18% Regional Jet and 42% Jet b. Using the future mix of aircraft: 20% Turboprop, 30% Regional jet, and 50% Jet. 4. Based on your analysis, what is your overall recommendation to the FAA for the city of Boston—Allow Massport to build a new runway? Insist that Massport institute peak-period pricing? Do both? Do neither? Follow a different course of action?

Deliverables: Graded Components (See Attachment 7 for specific guidelines): 1. The cover page 2. The executive summary (1-page single spaced). a. The executive summary should address your overall recommendation for Logan (see #4 above) and support with facts from your analysis. 3. The case write-up which includes the following: a. Answer each question above (#1 - #4) b. Make sure you explain your variables and or calculations. It should be easy to follow and understand. c. Include tables with your data and/or analysis. Tables should be labeled (e.g., Table 1: Delay Costs)

Due date: 12. 2. 2018

Attachment 10: Case Study Analysis Rubric Exceeds Meets Approaches Below Awarded/ Learning Expectations Expectations Expectations Expectations Possible Outcome Points ≥ 90% ≥ 80% ≥ 70% < 70% Writing: Problem, issues, and Problem and Problem and Provides problem Executive recommendation recommendation recommendation and Summary included; short and clearly stated; stated; executive recommendation; concise (1 page); summarizes summary not well- summary repeats decision can be analysis; organized; material contained based on executive recommendation summarizes in case; limited summary alone; identifies costs; material presented support for recommendation decision would in case rather than recommendation; no /5 clearly stated with require review of analysis performed; cost/decision data supporting supporting material recommendation not provided cost/decision data contained in write- supported with up cost/decision data

(5-4.5 pts) (4 pts) (3.5 pts) (< 3.5 pts) Writing: Problem explicitly Problem clearly Problem not well Problem not well Problem and concisely stated but little stated or unclear; stated or missing; Statement stated; factors discussion of factors little to no driving factors not driving the problem driving the problem discussion of factors identified or simply identified; identifies in the case. Case driving the case listed without root problem; write-up identifies problem. Case explanation. Case explains the root problem and write-up fails to identify root significance of the explains the tangentially problem and problem, links the significance of the addresses root addresses obvious underlying problem problem. Linkage problem--symptoms "symptoms" or to any "symptoms" to symptoms not rather than root manifestations of visible to clearly developed. problem receiving the problem. No /5 management or The argument for attention. Some linkage of other stakeholders, action present but explanation present underlying problem and makes may not be a of how problem is to other problems or compelling compelling "call to linked to symptoms symptoms. No argument as to why action." or outward argument made for this problem manifestations, but action requires action focus on symptoms precludes clear linkage (5 - 4.5 pts) (4 pts) (3.5 pts) (< 3.5 pts)

Exceeds Meets Approaches Below Expectations Awarded/ Learning Outcome Expectations Expectations Expectations Possible Points ≥ 90% ≥ 80% ≥ 70% < 70% Analysis and Each problem set is All problems are The analysis is Analysis not clearly Critical Thinking: addressed. Cost and addressed but do not superficial and does organized. Analysis Problem Set decision variables go into significant not move beyond lacks depth and (20 points each). are thoroughly depth. Cost or obvious points. No addresses only obvious evaluated. Very decision variables material outside case issues or symptoms in Analysis of limited to no errors are not fully used to support the case. Half of the Cost/Decision present in any evaluated. analysis. Errors in calculations correctly Variables calculations. The Some outside calculations detract performed. Minimal case goes beyond material used to from the accuracy of information from the the information support analysis. the analysis. case used to support contained in the Eighty percent of analysis. case and the appropriate incorporates other calculations course material or properly performed. /50 introduces outside materials when performing the analysis.

(50 - 45 pts) (44 - 40 pts) (39 - 35 pts) (< 35 pts) Writing and Recommendation Recommendation Recommendation The recommendation Critical Thinking: clearly and clearly stated; stated but not well- not clearly stated or Stating and concisely stated; analysis linked to justified or defended; missing; little to no Justifying results obtained recommendation but analysis used only to support provided for Recommendation through analysis and little to no support the final comparisons used to comparison of recommendation; no recommendation; support final alternatives-- comparison of comparison between recommendation; including costs, alternatives; effect on alternatives missing or cost and other other statistical data, stakeholders receives superficial; analysis statistical or performance; an only cursory not used to support information used to effect on mention; use of recommendation; support the stakeholders numerical or effect on stakeholders recommendation identified but not statistical data missing or lacking /10 and to draw a explained; minimal missing, not well depth. compelling use of numeric or explained, or not conclusion. Effect statistical data used successfully on stakeholders, in supporting the integrated into the service, and recommendation. recommendation. performance clearly discussed and integrated into justification.

(10 – 9 pts) (8 pts) (7 pts) (< 7 points)

Total Score /70

Attachment 11 Airport Business Analysis Case

Learning Objectives 1. To explore airport business model with operational and financial statistics. 2. To identify core competencies of the airport and compare with competitors. 3. To understand airport management and organization. 4. To find out the concept of an airport city.

Description: This case examines airport business model what you choose from a various airport located in North America, South America, Asia-Pacific, Europe, Middle East, Africa, etc. (Please avoid duplicate with other students). The case is to develop your analysis on the business model of your chosen airport including various aspect of airport operation including financial stamen as well as mission, vision, and duties’ analysis.

Instructions: This case study is an individual effort. The case analysis should answer the following questions using at least seven years’ data for operational and financial data:

1. Find out the airport’s vision, mission, business goal, key results, etc. 2. Explain the ownership of the airport. 3. Explain general aspect of the airport such as, terminal shape (structure), access road, connectivity (domestic/international routes, cities, countries) including photos. 3. How to develop hinterland (or airport city)? 4. Operational data: Make tables and draw graphs of the passenger, cargo and aircraft movement with commercial, general aviation, and others. Moreover, analyze the operational data. 5. Financial data: Analyze financial statement (Income statement, balance sheet and cash flow) with total revenue, gross profit, operating income, net income and EPS (Earning per share) from income statement; Total asset, current asset, total liability, current liability, inventory, account receivable, account payable from balance sheet. 6. Analyze major expenses. 7. Calculate financial performance such as net profit margin, ROA, ROI, C2C, currency ratio, etc. 8. What is the major revenue? Check aeronautical, non-aeronautical revenues and real estate revenue. 9. What kind an airline rate making methodology applied? 10. Airline charging system.

Deliverables: Graded Components (See Attachment 7 for specific guidelines): 1. Cover Page: Include your name, course name, and airport name, and date. 2. Executive Summary 3. Case write-up

Case for 185 points including data for 25 points, report for 60 pts, and presentation 100 pts.

Initial Due date for airport’s data: 9. 26. 2018 Final Due Date for airport’s data: 10. 22. 2018 The due date for case: 11. 25. 2018.

(Example form for airport data collection)

Airport Business Analysis - Airport Data (25 points) LGAV 4100: Airport and Infrastructure Planning & Control

Date: Airport name with three letter code: Name:

Traffic - Traffic - Cargo Traffic - A/C RWY Boarding Year Major A/C APO Category Ownership Passenger (000) (lbs) movement Direction Length (ft) Width (ft) Bridge # 2016 13L/31R (ex) 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

Attachment 12 Queuing Simulation Practices

1. Average daily sales of a product are 8 units. The actual number of units each day is 7, 8, or 9 with probabilities 0.3, 0.4, and 0.3 respectively. The lead time for delivery of this product averages 4 days, although the time may be 3, 4, or 5 days with probabilities 0.2, 0.6, and 0.2. The company plans to place an order when the inventory level drops to 32 units (based on average demand and lead-time). The following random numbers have been generated:

Set 1: 60, 87, 46, 63, 50, 76, 11, 04, 97, 96, 65 Set 2: 52, 78, 13, 06, 99, 98, 80, 09, 67, 89, 45

Use set 1 to generate lead-times, and use set 2 to simulate daily demand. Simulate two ordering periods and determine how often the company runs out of stock before the shipment arrives.

Assume an order quantity of 32.

2. Colgate-Palmolive provides 8 boxes of their product to Wal-Mart Denton per day. The sales manager likes the idea of having a large supply on hand to meet customer demand. However, he also recognizes that it is expensive to do so. He examines the sales over the past 50 days and notes the following:

Number of day this Sales per day number was sold 4 6 5 5 6 9 7 12 8 8 9 7 10 3 50 days total data

Random-Number Sales per day Probability Intervals 4 0.12 01 through 12 5 0.10 13 through 22 6 0.18 23 through 40 7 0.24 41 through 64 8 0.16 65 through 80 9 0.14 81 through 94 10 0.06 95 through 00 1.00

What is the average number of sales per day over 20-week period? Determine the expected number of sales per day. How does this compare with the answer above?

Random Simulated Random Simulated Day Day Number Sales Number Sales 1 10 4 11 08 4 2 24 6 12 48 7 3 03 4 13 66 8 4 32 6 14 97 10 5 23 6 15 03 4 6 59 7 16 96 10 7 95 10 17 46 7 8 34 6 18 74 8 9 34 6 19 77 8 10 51 7 20 44 7

Attachment 13 Homework 2 - Queuing Simulation for airport runway

The time between arrivals at an airport follows the distribution given below. The runway occupancy time (ROT) distribution is also given in the table. Use the random numbers provided to simulate the activities of the first five arrivals. Assume that the airport starts operation from 06:00 A.M. and that the first arrival is after this based on the first interarrival time.

Time Between Probability ROT Probability Arrivals 1 0.2 1 0.3 2 0.3 2 0.5 3 0.3 3 0.2 4 0.2 4

Random numbers for arrivals: 14, 74, 27, 03 Random numbers for ROT times: 88, 32, 36, 24 What time does the fourth aircraft leave the runway?

Due date: 11. 14. 2018

Attachment 14 JFK Snow Disaster and The Question of Centralizing Supply Chain Management

Forbes by Kevin O'Marah, Mar 7, 2018, 08:25am Is supply chain management a strategic function best kept close to the center of corporate power or a support function better delegated to local business unit owners? This question has no clear answer, yet we keep asking because there are penalties for overdoing it either way. Go too far in the direction of centralization and those closest to the customer often gripe about bureaucracy hindering flexible responses needed to win business. Decentralize too aggressively and costs get out of control as standards erode. It’s often described as a pendulum that swings back and forth in time, but is this instability inevitable?

Center Led Is Best Of Both Worlds An interesting test case of contrasting approaches to this question of organization design can be seen in the example of January’s blizzard and the responses of two prominent northeast airports: Boston’s Logan and New York’s JFK. The storm dropped a foot of snow on the region and both airports closed briefly in response. The recovery, however, was very different and at least one journalist concluded that much of the reason was tied up in management structure. Boston has a strong central leader in the person of Ed Freni. Freni is Director of Aviation for Massport and in this role chairs a daily morning meeting comprising all terminal operations leaders, airline management and others. Each of these has his or her own local duties, but collectively they orchestrate the system. Boston was back up and running 24 hours later. In stark contrast, JFK suffered for days with lost bags, cancelled flights and utter confusion that made news around the world. Its failing, according to the New York Times, may have been an over-reliance on delegated authority to airlines, third-party contractors and individual terminal management teams. What broke down in this case was communication, accountability and the ability to collaborate across disparate teams who share essential resources including gates, runways and equipment. The eternal question of organizational design and supply chain was illuminated for me in a quote from Massport’s CEO Thomas Glynn who observed, “Top-down management is sort of out of fashion these days, [but it] works here because people have respect for those at the top.”

Don’t Fear the Matrix SCM World surveyed over 1,000 supply chain executives on their approach to supply chain organizational structure in 2015. The data showed a strong preference for managing certain functions centrally, most notably strategy, with varying degrees of decentralization across other areas of supply chain management. The aggregate responses may reflect lessons learned in the JFK vs. Logan example in that central authority is prized when the task is orchestrating work across functions, but not so important when it comes to simply doing the work as in manufacturing, logistics and demand planning.

Delegation seems to have gone too far at JFK, leaving top management (the Port Authority of New York and

New Jersey) ill-equipped to respond to crisis at a system-wide level. The missing ingredient was strategy at the top. Boston, in contrast, had a strong voice of reason with full visibility to conflicting priorities, resource constraints and ultimate objectives at the highest level. In supply chain terms this kind of capability is often instantiated with a matrix structure or even some kind of center of excellence (CoE) organization. The approach works best when the team is led by a strong, respected individual with direct line authority to the chief executive and a substantial team that is deployed within business units driving specific change initiatives hand-picked from above.

In part these kinds of matrix structures excel at developing strategy, but in addition they provide a venue for effective crisis management. Companies as diverse as Samsung, BASF and L’Oréal use versions of this approach to continuously innovate with direction from above, but maintaining respect for local business unit needs. Many (including Unilever, Colgate-Palmolive and Microsoft) also have technology supported control towers for better real-time visibility to problems while there is still time to respond.

Resilience Matters As JFK learned, strong central leadership is essential in times of crisis. Don’t wait for trouble to learn how true this might be for you.

(Source, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinomarah/2018/03/07/jfk-snow-disaster-and-the-question-of- centralizing-supply-chain-management/#30dd964e7f5c)

Attachment 15 The dream of a privatized air traffic control system dies next week

Washington Examiner by Susan Ferrechio April 22, 2018 12:00 AM The effort to privatize the nation’s air traffic control system will officially die in the House next week when lawmakers vote on a long-term bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration. Endorsements from President Trump and Speaker Paul Ryan were not enough to usher the air traffic control privatization plan through the House, and now the plan will end up on a shelf until at least 2023. The FAA legislation, which reauthorizes the administration’s programs and spending authority for the next five years, is poised to pass next week without a provision that would have put air traffic control services under the control of a private, nonprofit board. House Transportation Committee Chairman Bill Shuster, R-Pa., authored the privatization provision and remains a staunch advocate. But he removed it from the FAA bill when it became clear significant Republican opposition would prevent it from passing without the support of Democrats, who are even more adamantly against privatization and would not have been much help providing votes.

“We built strong support for this critical reform over the last two congresses, and we had a golden opportunity to move beyond the status quo and accomplish positive, transformational change with this bill,” said Shuster, who is retiring from Congress. Proponents said privatization would speed up air traffic control modernization and a long-planned conversion from radar to a satellite-based GPS system. President Trump said the proposal would give the system access to capital markets and investors that would provide additional funding needed for upgrades. “If we adopt these changes, Americans can look forward to cheaper, faster, and safer travel,” Trump said in June. “A future where 20 percent of a ticket price doesn’t go to the government, and where you don’t have to sit on a tarmac or circle for hours and hours over an airport, which is very dangerous also, before you land.”

The proposal had the backing of major airlines and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. But lawmakers from rural districts, where general aviation is critical, feared they would be overburdened by new user fees and predicted having little say on an appointed board they believed would be dominated by commercial airlines. “Establishing a private ATC board outside the purview of Congress with the unilateral power to collect fees and distribute service would threaten safety, accessibility, affordability and pilot generation which is already in a critical state,” five Republican lawmakers wrote in a letter to House GOP leaders urging them to strip out the privatization language. “Without proper and public oversight, this threat would be most readily felt in rural communities and the general aviation industry, which could experience reduction in ATC service.” The plan was likely doomed to die in Congress, even if the House managed to pass it. The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee authored its own FAA authorization measure that excluded ATC privatization, in part because Democrats were poised to block the bill if it included such a provision.

“We should not privatize it,” Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., said as he left the Senate chamber last week. “It’s hard to find a constituency outside this building that believes it’s a good idea." With the provision stripped from the House bill, the measure is expected to clear Congress long before a Sept. 30 deadline and will provide the first long-term reauthorization of the program in three years. Over in the Senate, lawmakers are hoping to approve CIA Director Mike Pompeo. He is not expected to win the approval of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Monday night, since Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., opposes him and Republicans control that committee by a slim 11-10 majority. But Republicans will bring him to the floor anyway, and Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., has said she will vote in favor of Pompeo, which should provide the simple majority needed on the Senate floor. Pompeo, who is currently the director of the CIA, has generated significant opposition from Senate Democrats, who say he is a war hawk who will not advocate for diplomacy. Opponents include the same Democrats who last year endorsed his nomination to run the CIA.

Republicans touted Pompeo’s trip this month to Pyongyang, where he sat face to face with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in an effort to lay the groundwork for an upcoming summit with Trump. The Senate will take up Pompeo’s nomination as early as next week, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R- Texas, told the Washington Examiner. Cornyn criticized the Democrats who are trying to block his confirmation. “It’s just their antipathy for the president, is what it signals,” Cornyn said. “It makes no sense to block Pompeo when 14 Democrats voted for him for CIA director and at a time when we are engaging in the most dangerous and fragile geopolitical negotiations in recent memory.”

(Source, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/the-dream-of-a-privatized-air-traffic-control- system-dies-next-week)

Donald Trump, Meeting with Airline CEOs, Targets Air-Traffic-Control System Executives seek modernization of a system that Trump calls ‘totally out of whack’

WSJ By Susan Carey and Carol E. Lee / Feb. 10, 2017 12:11 a.m. ET President Donald Trump has suggested changes to a national air-traffic control system he described as “totally out of whack,” taking on an issue that has foiled numerous previous efforts at modernization. “We want the traveling public to have the greatest customer service and with an absolute minimum of delays,” Mr. Trump said at the meeting with aviation executives at the White House on Thursday. “And we have an obsolete plane system, we have obsolete airports.” In addition to funding infrastructure upgrades, Mr. Trump promised the executives he would reduce government regulations and announce within the next three weeks tax reform measures, both of which he said would help companies such as airlines hire more workers. He suggested placing a pilot at the head of the Federal Aviation Administration, the industry’s safety regulator and air-traffic control provider.

His agenda received a warm reception from those who attended the meeting, which included chief executives from United Continental Holdings Inc., Delta Air Lines Inc., Southwest Airlines Co., Alaska Air Group Inc., three cargo carriers and seven heads of airport operators from New York to Los Angeles. U.S. airlines operate about 27,000 flights a day that carry 2.2 million passengers and 50,000 tons of cargo, according to the Airlines for America trade association. The industry drives nearly $1.5 trillion in U.S. economic activity and more than 10 million U.S. jobs. Gary Kelly, CEO of Southwest, estimated that last year delays, air congestion, and excess fuel use cost the industry $25 billion. “I think there is near-unanimous agreement that we need to modernize the air-traffic control system,” Mr. Kelly said, according to a transcript of the meeting. “We are still using World War II-era ground-based radar to guide the aircraft. We’re not utilizing GPS satellite-delivered navigational tools.” This leads to longer trip times, he said.

The U.S. air-traffic control system, while very safe, uses radars that only track planes every 16 seconds. Telephone calls to other air-traffic controllers and radio messages to pilots can be prone to misunderstanding. Some air-traffic control facilities still use paper strips to keep track of the flights. The airlines have long complained that flight times are getting longer. In 1990, for instance, a 236-mile flight from Las Vegas to Los Angeles took 59 minutes. In 2015, the advertised flight time was 70 minutes, according to the trade group.

Since Mr. Trump’s election, airlines and airports have said they are optimistic about his plans to lower taxes and raise infrastructure spending. But it isn’t yet clear how those policies would be implemented. Air-traffic Modernization efforts have been slow-moving and over budget, many federal watchdogs have concluded. And the U.S. has been slow to adopt new technologies, like using satellites to guide planes. In a statement, a FAA spokeswoman said air-traffic control modernization already has yielded economic benefits and is expected to produce more. She said the agency has spent $7.5 billion on the initiative since 2010, which “has resulted in $2.7 billion in benefits to passengers and the airlines to date, and is expected to yield more than $160 billion in benefits through 2030.” Calling the ongoing effort one of the most ambitious infrastructure projects in history, the FAA also said it has invited airlines to “help develop the blueprint” and to “continue to have a seat at the table” in setting priorities.

Many airlines have in the past supported a plan to remove air-traffic-control operations from the FAA and place them into a not-for-profit corporation, arguing it would allow that company to raise funding from the financial markets, rather than relying on congressional appropriations. But this move has been thwarted in the past, mostly recently last year when it faced objections by the FAA, the Senate Republican leadership and business-jet and private pilot groups. The FAA’s mandate is set to run out in September, providing an opening to discuss such changes as part of its reauthorization by Congress, which has Republican majorities in both chambers. “The president recognizes that there needs to be a modernization of air-traffic control,” a senior administration official said. “It’s a decades-old system, and he recognizes that there needs to be a serious investment in that.”

The president told the gathering that he has asked White House economic adviser Gary Cohn with putting together a group to look into air-traffic-control modernization, according to Ginger Evans, commissioner of the Chicago Department of Aviation, which runs the city’s O’Hare International and Midway airports. Mr. Trump also asked the airlines and airports to provide lists of regulations that should be removed, and indicated he wanted to meet them again in two or three months. Commercial aviation was deregulated nearly four decades ago. But airlines are subject to more than 13,000 regulations across 13 federal agencies just in the U.S. They also are subject to 17 federal aviation taxes that are paid by airlines and their passengers. These taxes grew to $23.1 billion in 2016 from $3.7 billion in 1990, according to the trade group. Contentious issues such as

32 the administration’s travel ban barring citizens of seven nations from entering the U.S., didn’t come up, according to people who attended the meeting.

Also not discussed during the meeting, which lasted more than an hour, was controversy over Norwegian Air Shuttle ASA, a European discount carrier awarded a permit in December by the Obama administration to operate to the U.S. from Ireland, through a subsidiary. U.S. unions say the Irish base allows Norwegian to hire pilots and other employees on less generous terms than they would receive under Norway’s strict labor laws. The airline denies that. Norwegian says it is hiring U.S.-based pilots and flight attendants to support its expansion and expected to have 1,000 U.S.-based staff by the end of the year. There was a brief discussion about the controversy around alleged subsidies to three fast-growing, state-owned Middle Eastern carriers, according to people at the meeting. “I know you’re under pressure from a lot of foreign elements and foreign carriers,” Mr. Trump said. “I’ve been hearing that a little bit. At the same time, we want to make life good for them also. They come with big investments.” During the meeting, Mr. Trump ticked off a list of airport terminals he liked— Doha, Dubai, Singapore, Shanghai and Munich—according to Ms. Evans of Chicago. Kevin Burke, CEO of Airports Council International—North America, a trade group, who also was present, said: “He wasn’t terribly complimentary about the state of U.S. airports.”

House panel votes to privatize air traffic control USA TODAY / By Bart Jansen, February 11, 2016

WASHINGTON – A House committee approved landmark legislation Thursday to shift air-traffic control from the Federal Aviation Administration to a not-for-profit corporation, in an effort to provide more stable funding and avoid congressional politics. After more than eight hours of voting on amendments, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved the bill on a 32-26 vote. The bill now goes to the full House and must still be considered by the Senate.

“The FAA’s failure to modernize the system has been well documented,” said Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., the committee chairman who wrote the bill. “With a modern system, we’ll see more effective use of the airspace, more direct routes, increased capacities, shorter flight times, reduced delays and cancellations, and reduced pollution and noise.” The top Democrat on the panel, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, proposed to scrap Shuster’s proposal and protect FAA from congressional meddling by making its funding automatic, rather than subject to annual decisions from lawmakers, with an overhaul of personnel and procurement policies. But his amendment was rejected on a 25-34 vote.

“I think fracturing the FAA is a mistake,” DeFazio said. The air-traffic control change is part of FAA policy legislation, to replace current law that expires March 31. Other provisions in the bill would: • Require airlines to refund baggage fees for bags delayed more than 24 hours on domestic flights. • Ban the use of cell phones for in-flight voice calls on scheduled passenger flights. • Authorize the Transportation Department to establish a smartphone application for consumer complaints. • Require large and medium airports to provide private rooms in every terminal for nursing mothers. • Require airlines to notify families before tickets are booked if family members will be assigned seats that aren't together.

The air-traffic control change dominated the debate about the bill so far. Advocates contend that FAA is unable to upgrade and manage its operations as fast or efficiently as the industry needs. Government Accountability Office and inspector general reports have chronicled problems for decades about FAA modernization falling behind schedule and running over budget. But opponents worry that the corporation will ignore the interests of travelers and general-aviation pilots who share the skies. They also fear changing the system will disrupt progress being made in modernizing the system from ground-based radar to satellite- based navigation.

Most major airlines represented by the trade group Airlines for America support the change. So does the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the union representing the workers who would remain controllers under the corporation. But Delta Air Lines and the Regional Airline Association oppose the change. The Air Line Pilots Association, a union representing pilots, opposes the bill for a variety of reasons including concerns about general-aviation paying its share. The bill would change the way the system is funded, from current taxes on airlines to a user fee based on the weight and distance of flights.

The bill exempts most of general aviation from the fee changes because those pilots will continue to pay an aviation fuel tax. Business jets that charge customers would pay fees based on weight and distance like airliners,

Shuster said. But some general-aviation groups voiced concerns about the fees and that controllers would favor airliners over the pilots of smaller planes. The top lawmakers on the Appropriations Committees in the House and Senate oppose the legislation for threatening to eliminate their oversight. But Shuster said nobody is giving up jurisdiction more than his committee, and the change is necessary to keep the country a leader in aviation. (Source; http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/02/11/house-panel-votes-privatize-air-traffic- control/80234064/#)

Controversial bill aims to privatize air-traffic control USA TODAY / By Bart Jansen, February 3, 2016 N.Y. / Region

WASHINGTON — A controversial proposal that puts the nation's air traffic controls into private hands burst on to the legislative scene Wednesday, pitting pilots against many airlines and the people who manage the skies. The legislation, opposed by powerful lawmakers in both parties, drew unusual support from the air traffic controllers' union, which says the growing inefficiencies, dated equipment and unstable funding call for a drastic response. Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., chairman of the Transportation Committee, who proposed the change said it would insulate the air traffic control system from the funding whims of Congress, which, during a 2013 budget fight, shut down the government and furloughed air traffic controllers. Shuster says the air traffic control system under the FAA is safe, but "incredibly inefficient."

The problems, he said, "will only get worse as passenger levels grow and as the FAA falls further behind in modernizing the system." Lawmakers and various air traffic controller organization have proposed privatization at least eight times over the past 40 years. Dozens of other countries have privatized their air- traffic systems, but skeptics question whether private systems, such as the one adopted in Canada, would work in the larger, more complex U.S. airspace. This time, National Air Traffic Controllers Association backed the proposal, and Airlines for America, a trade group for most major carriers, airline say that a private corporation governed by representatives of the aviation industry could move faster than FAA to upgrade equipment and adopt more efficient flight paths. The opposition, however, lined up even before Schuster introduced the legislation. House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers, R-Ky., and the top Democrat, Nita Lowey of New York, said in a letter Monday to House Speaker Paul Ryan that such a move gives the public less leverage to influence how the system operations.

Senate Appropriations Chairman Thad Cochran, R-Miss., and the top Democrat, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, in a Jan. 27 letter said privatization would mean "less oversight and less accountability." The top Democrat on the Transportation Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, said the proposal gives the airlines too much power. "The same people who today determine your baggage costs would determine what you would pay to use the air-traffic control system," DeFazio said. "I don't think that gives consumers a lot of confidence." The Air Line Pilots Association, a union representing 52,000 pilots, fears airlines would shoulder the entire cost of air- traffic control rather than spreading the costs among all aircraft.

Delta Air Lines also parted ways with its industry brethren. Delta’s senior vice president for flight operations, Capt. Steve Dickson, said privatizing air-traffic control won’t reduce heavy traffic in the Northeast and could distract from current efforts to ease congestion. Delta CEO Richard Anderson called the proposal "unnecessary and unwise" in a Tuesday letter to Shuster. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx and FAA Administrator Michael Huerta have remained neutral on the proposal. Under Schuster's proposal, the private, non-profit corporation would have governed by an 11-member board that includes representatives appointed by government, airlines, general aviation and both the pilots' and controllers' unions. The group Airlines for America suggests airline taxes and fees, amounting to $13 billion a year, would easily cover the $10 billion of operating the privatized air-traffic control system. ….. (Source; http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/02/03/controversial-bill-proposes-privatize- air-traffic- control/79745638/#)

Airline executives urge privatization of air-traffic control Bart Jansen, USA TODAY 11:12 a.m. EST December 2, 2015

Airline executives urged Tuesday that air-traffic control be removed from the Federal Aviation Administration and turned into a not-for-profit corporation, in an effort to stabilize its funding. The top executives of passenger airlines American, Alaska, JetBlue and Southwest, and cargo carriers Atlas and FedEx told reporters on a conference call that a corporation with a board of industry leaders would work faster than FAA to modernize

34 equipment and adopt more efficient flight paths. “We are seeking a transformational change to the way that the air-traffic control system is financed and governed," said Doug Parker, CEO of American, the world's largest airline. “We can do much better." Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa. and head of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has said he will propose air-traffic legislation as part of the FAA policy bill expected to be completed before the end of March. He hasn't yet introduced aviation legislation.

Nick Calio, CEO of Airlines for America, a group representing most of the largest airlines, voiced confidence that legislation could be approved in the next four months while acknowledging skepticism and inertia facing such a significant change. "It’s not like it’s appearing out of the clear blue," Calio said. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx and FAA Administrator Michael Huerta have remained neutral and agreed to discuss proposed changes. The National Air Traffic Controllers Association also is open to talks, saying the status quo is unacceptable. But Delta Air Lines has opposed privatizing air-traffic control and quit the airline trade group for that and other reasons.

One open question is whether the U.S. could adopt a system like Canada’s private air-traffic control, which is often held up as a model. The U.S. has many more flights each day and a much more complicated system. Delta’s senior vice president for flight operations, Capt. Steve Dickson, has argued that privatizing control won’t reduce heavy traffic in the Northeast and could distract from current efforts at easing congestion. After studying Canada’s system, Dickson found there is no data showing it is more efficient or less costly. Delta's planes flew an average of 89% full during the Thanksgiving holiday and arrived within 15 minutes of their schedule 92.1% of the time, Dickson said. “You can’t just perform like that during the busiest time year if the system is broken,” Dickson said. “We see the air-traffic organization doing a better job at handling weather events.”

NextGen improvements will take time, whether overseen by the FAA or a private entity, he said. “It is by definition a long slog,” Dickson said. “It’s not like we’re going to flip a switch and everything will be all right.” Robin Hayes, CEO of JetBlue Airways, disputed as "quite astonishing" the characterization that things are going well in New York, where airports consistently rank in the top five for delays. “In our country, aviation infrastructure is outdated and in need of modernization," Hayes said. Calio said 50 countries have adopted corporate air-traffic control, so there is no credibility for arguments about a lack of savings in Canada and elsewhere. "It’s a good system," Calio said. "It can be used here."

Despite Delta's qualms, supporters of privatization contend it will lead to faster adoption of NextGen technology and training. Brad Tilden, CEO of Alaska Airlines, said 73 flights per day land at Seattle with NextGen flight paths allowing each plane to begin idling about 100 miles from the airport, saving 87 gallons of fuel, 1,900 pounds of carbon emissions and 9 minutes of flight time. The contrast is to a stair-step descent used at most airports. “People have compared it to sliding down the banister rather than going down the stairs," Tilden said. “The point is that this stuff does work." Airlines now pay about $13 billion per year to the government in taxes and fees, while the air-traffic control organization within FAA costs about $10 billion. But airline executives recommending a corporate model say they are aiming for savings in more efficient flights and reduced delays more than direct spending reductions. …... (Source; http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/ 2015/12/01/airline-executives-urge-privatization-air-traffic- control/76604766/#)

House transportation chairman: Privatize air-traffic control Bart Jansen, USA TODAY 10:25 p.m. EDT June 15, 2015

WASHINGTON – The air-traffic control system should be removed from the Federal Aviation Administration and converted into a private, not-for-profit corporation, a key House chairman said Monday. Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., who is chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, told the Aero Club of Washington that privatizing air-traffic control with aviation fees would save billions of dollars and provide more stable funding than congressional appropriations. "Now is the time for transformational change that provides a safe, reliable modern aviation system for our future," Shuster said. One reason for privatizing is to separate air-traffic control from the FAA's regulatory duties making sure planes and pilots are safe to fly. But the more vocal argument is to make funding more predictable after congressional bickering led to FAA furloughs during a partial government shutdown in 2013. …… But FAA Administrator Michael Huerta has said the project is moving forward after delays in building its foundation, such as completion of a network of more precise plane-tracking stations across the country. Paul Rinaldi, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, has repeatedly called for more predictable

35 funding. He told the Aero Club in April that the controllers' union would discuss privatization so long as it didn't involve a for-profit corporation. In comparisons to Canada's private air-traffic control, Rinaldi questioned whether that smaller system might not work as well in the sprawling United States. Canada has 12 million takeoffs and landings a year, compared with 140 million in the U.S., he said. Canada has 42 control facilities compared with 342 in the U.S. A significant question for privatization is how much participants will pay. The FAA's air-traffic organization is budgeted about $7.5 billion for 30,000 workers. Air-traffic control is now paid largely by fees that airlines pay the government. But the corporation would determine who pays what share among airlines, business jets, and small private planes. …… (Source; http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/06/15/faa-air-traffic-control-rep-shuster-privatization-aero- club/71244404/)

Air-traffic control union chief: Privatization possible, but funding crucial Bart Jansen, USA TODAY 5:39 p.m. EDT April 20, 2015

WASHINGTON -- The union chief for air-traffic controllers said Monday he would negotiate with lawmakers and the aviation industry over whether to turn the system over to a private company, as it is in Canada, rather than insisting it remain a government function. But Paul Rinaldi, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, told the Aero Club of Washington he would oppose any effort to make air-traffic control a profit- making corporation. And he said stable funding is more important than organizational reform because funding disputes delay improvements. "I'm willing to have those conversations and move forward on it as long as we find a stable, predictable funding stream," said Rinaldi, who represents 20,000 controllers, engineers, and other professionals. "We will fight and oppose any model that strives to make a profit from air-traffic control services." Despite broad agreement that the Federal Aviation Administration deserves stable funding, congressional budget tightening and political disputes have prevented that. …… "The bottom line is, after three decades of various modernization attempts and billions of taxpayer dollars spent, we're nowhere near where we need to be," Shuster said. Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., proposed legislation April 16 to privatize air-traffic control, rather than have it within a federal agency. His goal would be for at least 95% of the current staff to take control of the system through a employee stock-ownership corporation. "The U.S. economy loses tens of millions of dollars annually as the transition to a next-generation air-traffic control system falls further behind," Mica said. As lawmakers raised concerns in hearings, FAA Administrator Michael Huerta asked what problem they are trying to solve. Huerta has argued that improvements such as NextGen, upgrading plane tracking from ground-based radar to satellite-based GPS, depend on close coordination between controllers, airlines, airports and local governments.

"What the FAA needs in reauthorization is stability and predictable funding," Huerta told the Senate transportation committee April 14. "We also need the flexibility to identify priorities and to match our services and infrastructure with the needs of our users." Rinaldi said in his speech that Canada's system is intriguing but that it might not work for the larger and more complex system in the USA. Canada has only one of the top 30 airports in the world, compared to 16 in the U.S., Rinaldi said. Canada has 42 air-traffic control facilities, compared to 342 in the U.S., he said. And Canada has 12 million flights a year, compared to 140 million in the U.S. "No system is like the United States' airspace system," Rinaldi said. "No model used elsewhere is perfect, much less suitable for a system this large and complicated as ours." Rinaldi said improvements are needed to keep expanding the number of flights handled. He said 20 regional control centers across the country are all 50 years old, but that funding isn't apparent to replace one of them, much less all of them. …... (Source; http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/04/20/air-traffic-control-rinaldi-natca-aero- club/26072065/#)

Attachment 16 New Airborne Technologies Promise to Better Link Planes and Satellites

Wall Street Journal By Andy Pasztor / Sept. 21, 2016, 5:30 a.m. ET

Efforts by Hawaiian Airlines and FedEx would improve communications but raise cybersecurity concerns.

Hawaiian Airlines and FedEx Corp. are trying novel airborne technologies that promise to cut the cost, reduce the weight and exponentially increase the capacity of communication systems connecting aircraft with satellites.

But the moves also raise cybersecurity issues, because experts say such links eventually could blur longstanding distinctions between the way information is sent to cabin entertainment devices versus transmission of safety- related data to cockpits.

Combining Inmarsat PLC’s High-Earth orbit satellites with advanced antennas and other onboard equipment supplied by Cobham PLC, the in-flight demonstrations are intended to showcase the speed, cost-effectiveness, and reliability of the new connections. Hawaiian seeks to use them to give pilots updated weather information and automated messaging capabilities, while also sending systems-monitoring data and air-traffic control position reports from aircraft.

By relying on internet protocols instead of older, more-restrictive digital formats, Inmarsat said the average speed for delivering some messages to the ground now runs between two and four seconds, compared with some 45 seconds using conventional links. Capacity has increased at least 200-fold. The latest antennas have shrunk to the dimensions of an iPad tablet versus a typical surfboard, with overall weight of receiving and processing equipment on planes now down to about 18 pounds from roughly 265 pounds.

Currently, cabin and cockpit communications on commercial airliners are completely separate. They use different equipment and different frequencies, plus there is a physical gap between hardware that processes cabin signals and electronics reserved exclusively for the cockpit.

But as jetliners steadily become more connected to the internet—and carriers hunt for less expensive, more flexible ways to ship various types of data—many experts envision those digital firewalls eventually will erode. Frequencies now used for cabin services, which are less expensive and boast substantially greater bandwidth, may end up serving other applications.

Before that occurs, airlines will be able to improve flight planning and trim fuel use with Inmarsat’s enhanced Swiftbroadband cockpit links, according to Mary McMillan, a former airline captain and the global satellite operator’s vice president for safety and operational services. But she noted “there is still much work to be done to develop the standards” spelling out “what data can be safely pulled from aircraft cabin networks.” A spokesman for FedEx didn’t have any comment. Cobham said the Hawaiian system is “performing at or above the prescribed performance standards consistently.”

In a statement, Ken Rewick, Hawaiian’s vice president of flight operations, said that in addition to avoiding weather, “benefits of the installation will include enhanced safety, improved passenger comfort and reduced fuel costs.”

If the Federal Aviation Administration agrees, Inmarsat’s new network will be authorized for routine traffic control transmissions and surveillance. The Swiftbroadband-Safety system also is intended to provide both voice and data links, offer capabilities for telemedicine and replace or supplement conventional “black box” recorders by instantaneously streaming essential operating data off planes during emergencies or crashes.

Some believe that ultimately current distinctions may disappear entirely, with airlines largely relying on the same large “pipe,” or space-based conduit, for virtually all messages sent to and from aircraft.

Industry trends are “going to create convergence at some point in time” between cabin and cockpit transmissions, according to Patrice Caine, chief executive of France’s Thales SA . There is “much more frequent discussion” of the general topic now, he added, “given the level of data that is required” by increasingly connected aircraft.

Such a shift will require years of regulatory debate and industry flight tests before both sides can feel

37 comfortable about the extent of protection from potential hackers or other unauthorized users. Also, regulators still need persuading that creation of a single data stream won’t be negatively affected by weather conditions, or extended signal delays due to the more than 20,000-mile altitude of the satellites.

But already Inmarsat, Airbus Group SE, and other industry players are looking at authentication safeguards— similar to digital passwords and codes used to prevent hacking of typical corporate computers—that eventually could make it feasible to have a single protected network serving an entire plane.

Preliminary discussions about prospective cybersecurity protections have involved possible assistance from Alphabet Inc.’s Google Inc., according to one-person familiar with the talks. A Google spokeswoman didn’t have any comment.

“Airbus is really at the forefront of looking at security protections” for aviation links, according to Tom Schmutz, chief executive of Flyht Aerospace Solutions Ltd., a Canadian data services provider.

Rockwell Collins Inc., a leading cockpit equipment supplier, also sees changes on the horizon. “For the near term, there will continue to be two separate systems” for cabin and cockpit data, Kent Statler, who heads up the company’s commercial businesses, said in an interview during the summer. But in coming years, he predicts, at least parts of those systems are bound to merge as new techniques “will allow for digital separation of the same data stream.”

Both cybersecurity and safety, Mr. Statler said, “will reside in the encryption that comes off the aircraft.” Thales and Honeywell International Inc., another big cockpit-system maker, are expected to offer their own satellite terminals.

Yet others see huge remaining challenges. Matt Desch, the chief executive of Iridium Communications Inc., a rival satellite operator with a different approach that uses a separate set of broadcast frequencies, predicts combined data transmissions are inherently problematic from a cybersecurity standpoint. He predicts there won’t be any such commercial offerings for at least a decade—and likely longer.

“It’s not a technical problem” to combine cockpit and cabin data, Mr. Desch said in an interview last month, But considering escalating cybersecurity concerns throughout aviation, “I don’t think you’re going to see that come into operation in the near future.”

Attachment 17 Construction Plans for La Guardia Airport do not Faze Its Neighbors

The New York Times By KIRK SEMPLE, JULY 30, 2015 One cannot live any closer to the terminals of La Guardia Airport than the residents of East Elmhurst, Queens. Some homes sit only a few hundred yards away from the control tower, on the opposite side of the Grand Central Parkway. The new $4 billion airport hub envisioned for the site, announced this week by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and Vice President Joseph R. Biden, would be even closer. So it might be assumed that the promise of years of heavy-duty construction and the associated noise, traffic and dust would fill residents with dread. Not quite.

“We live in New York City, honey,” said Michele Mongeluzo, 56, whose house sits on a rise just south of the parkway, offering an unobstructed view of the airport and the proposed construction site. “If you want country living, move to the country.” In interviews this week along the blocks closest to the airport, residents almost universally said that they not only had no trepidation about the construction but that they also actually welcomed it. Improvements, they said, were long overdue. Furthermore, they suggested, what was a little construction on top of the aural challenges — the roaring jet engines, the chop of helicopter rotors, the incessant highway traffic — that they had already contended with and apparently overcome?

“If it is noisy, I am used to it,” said Freddy Fuhrtz, 75, who retired as an employee in the cargo division of Pan Am and still lives in the two-story house on 92nd Street where he grew up and raised his children. “It is progress.” The seemingly broad support for the project and the willingness to deal patiently with any related inconveniences appears to be rooted in an abiding loyalty to the airport. Some residents seem to regard it with the same sort of fondness that residents elsewhere might view a beloved local restaurant or bar. La Guardia has always been part of the economic fabric of the neighborhood, providing employment for residents; pilots and flight attendants rent apartments in the area to use during layovers. Some residents recall playing in the terminals as children, back when security was light and they could easily roam as far as the departure gates.

“I love La Guardia!” said Winston Liao, 30, an Asia Bank employee who has lived nearly all his life in East Elmhurst. “Growing up, we used to spend our days there.” Tanzila Rahman, 39, who moved to the neighborhood with her family two years ago, said she and her relatives occasionally took walks over to the terminals. They particularly enjoy strolling in a grassy area near the terminal. “It’s like a little meadow,” said Ms. Rahman, who is from Pakistan. Neighborhood pride runs deep in East Elmhurst. Sitting north of Jackson Heights and Corona, the neighborhood is a mostly residential area of modest two- and three-story homes. Once people settle there, they tend not to leave.

Because of the trajectory of flights, airplane noise for much of East Elmhurst mostly amounts to the periodic and muffled whoosh of a departing flights or the faint whine of taxiing aircraft. As for the traffic on the Grand Central Parkway, the buffers of distance, vegetation and acoustically designed walls have insulated much of the neighborhood from the noise. But even where aircraft and vehicle traffic is plainly audible, residents do not seem terribly bothered. “I don’t hear airplanes,” Juan Amalbert, 65, said as a commercial jet took off from a runway near where he sat on Ditmars Boulevard drinking tea and eating chocolate chip cookies. He shook his head: He had not noticed the plane.

“At first there seemed to be a lot of noise,” said Blanca Segovia, 36, a hairdresser, who moved with her family into a two-unit house on 100th Street a decade ago. “We’re used to it now.” Planes taxiing on the runways are visible from her front steps. “My son has friends stay over, and they are like, ‘There’s so much noise!’ And I’m like, “What noise?’ ” said Ms. Mongeluzo, who has lived nearly all of her life in East Elmhurst or neighboring Jackson Heights, the last 21 in the house overlooking the airport. Her unsentimental advice for anyone troubled by it? “You’re in the city. Get over it!” Also, “Move further away.” The development plan calls for the demolition of the central terminal, the parking garage and surface lots; the relocation of other terminals; and the construction of a new, unified hub. Renderings show a sleek, sweeping arc of steel and glass hugging the north side of the parkway. Construction is scheduled to begin next year and to be completed by 2021.

Judging by the renderings, some residences may be about 400 feet from the new hub. State Senator Jose Peralta, whose district includes East Elmhurst, said his office had already received calls from residents in Astoria Heights, a neighborhood to the immediate west of the airport, who were concerned about the project’s effects on flight patterns and aircraft noise pollution. However, the residents of East Elmhurst, the neighborhood closest to the planned construction site, have been relatively quiet.

In interviews with East Elmhurst residents, however, nearly all said they did not anticipate any problems associated with the construction. “They have got to do what they have got to do,” said Serge Desvarieux, 67, a school bus driver. On a recent afternoon, he was cleaning the forecourt of the two-unit, two-story house he bought on 93rd Street nearly two decades ago. The project, Mr. Desvarieux said, will be “an upgrade to the neighborhood.” A federal review of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s environmental assessment for the project concluded that the state’s plan, which is loaded with mitigation measures, would cause “no significant impact” on traffic, air quality, and noise pollution.

Construction equipment noise is expected to be “well below” state and city “significance thresholds,” according to the review. Most of the construction activities would go unnoticed compared with “the normal background noise levels in the area.” Mr. Liao, who lives with his sister and parents in a house on 23rd Avenue down the block from Ms. Mongeluzo, said neighborhood residents seemed more troubled by other matters, like the scores of Uber drivers who parked illegally along the neighborhood’s streets waiting for calls, or the proliferation of homeless shelters (there are already three).

“Shelters and cabs: problem,” Mr. Liao said. “Airport: not a problem.” Only one person encountered along East Elmhurst’s streets seemed put off by the potential nuisance. One afternoon this week, Mobassera Brodhan, 40, a real estate agent, was hauling a bag of trash from a house on 23rd Avenue. She recently closed on the house and was preparing to move in with her family. But Ms. Brodhan, who is from Bangladesh, had missed the news about the airport overhaul. The new hub would rise about 800 feet from her front door. “Oh, wow!” she exclaimed. She started to laugh: the good-natured victim of some kind of cosmic joke. “What a surprise!”

She asked when the construction was supposed to begin. Would it be during the daytime only? “One more year we have here,” she said. “I know construction. Construction makes so much noise.” She laughed some more. “We can rent it out. Or sell it.” But she found it hard to entertain the possibility that the noise might not be so bad or that she might get used to it in time. She was new to the neighborhood. “Until it starts, we don’t know,” she said. (Source, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/31/nyregion/construction-plans-for-la-guardia-airport-dont-faze- its-neighbors.html?_r=0)

(Source, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/22/nyregion/engaging-in-a-softer-conversation-about-the-roar-from- new-yorks-airports.html?action=click&contentCollection=N.Y.%20%2F%20Region&module=RelatedCoverage ®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article)

Attachment 18 Don’t overlook the potential of airport micro hotels

Hotel News Now By Sean McCracken, 30 MARCH 2018 7:29 AM A recent hourslong stop at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport served as a vivid reminder of just how valuable having your own small space can be at times. That’s value the hotel industry shouldn’t pass up. The idea of any sort of micro hotel located past the security checkpoints at hotels isn’t a new or particularly novel one. But surprisingly it’s not something you see represented in the massive portfolio of some of the industry’s largest players like Marriott International and Hilton.

I had a recent experience at one of these airport micro or pod hotels recently that reminded just how valuable of a service they offer, and how it’s not strikingly different than what those large hotel players already do well. Just to set that stage for you: I was at the end of a days-long work trip and through a combination of circumstance and my own poor planning, I was facing down an hourslong period (running on relatively little sleep) stuck at the beehive known as Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

Just as I was resigning myself to sitting uncomfortably and unhappy in some neglected corner of that busy intersection of humanity (or trying to drink enough to numb myself to the constant stream of noise and interruption), a coworker pointed out to me the existence of just such a micro hotel called “Minute Suites.” So instead of wallowing in my traveling misery, I spent the next three hours sitting in a quiet, softly lit room by myself, napping on a comfortably large couch for a bit before relaxing watching some TV from my Netflix account on a screen embedded on the wall of the room.

This serenity was only interrupted about 15 minutes prior to the boarding of my flight as a front desk attendant peeked in to ensure I didn’t miss my flight home. This much needed serenity ran me roughly $60. Even from my brief encounter, it didn’t take an MBA to discern this is a pretty successful business model. The “hotel” my mini-stay was at had five rooms, from what I could tell, each rented out by the hour. They were each occupied the entire time I was there with a waiting list of people trying to get in.

If you assume my stay was average (I have no evidence one way or another if it was) and extrapolate that across the day but assuming a dip in demand during the night hours, you’d end up with something like 500% occupancy.

That’s some admittedly fuzzy math, but it helps illustrate the point that there’s a clear demand for this kind of product. And the fact is, I’d never heard of or interacted with Minute Suites before that moment. If you had offered me an alternative with some tie in to Marriott or Hilton, with the trust that comes with those flags and the perhaps even the possibility to either earn or spend loyalty points with that stay, I would be all over that in a second.

So can we please make this happen like yesterday? A world where I can find this sort of wonderful airport oasis in my time of greatest need just by opening the Marriott or Hilton apps (or maybe those apps would be able to geolocate me and let me know a room at one of these things was available) is the world I want to live in.

(Source, http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/Articles/282397/Dont-overlook-the-potential-of-airport-micro-hotels)

Attachment 19 The Longest Walks at the Airport As terminals expand and moving walkways disappear, you could be in for a serious hike to your gate WSJ By Scott McCartney Updated Sept. 28, 2016 3:53 p.m. ET

Would you walk a mile for an airline flight? You may. Airport terminals are getting longer for bigger planes, more gates and extra retail space. Connecting flights are sometimes located farther away because airlines have spread operations over more terminals. In Philadelphia, that means a literal walk over the county line. And in Chicago, Newark, N.J., and Orlando, Fla., moving walkways have been removed recently to make room for seats, bars and restaurants. Several airports now report their longest potential walks stretch more than a mile, with some much longer. Trams, buses, carts and wheelchairs can shorten those hikes.

“The bigger airports are getting bigger. The medium airports are getting bigger. The aircraft are getting bigger,” says Wilson Rayfield, head of the aviation practice at Gresham, Smith and Partners, a Nashville, Tenn., architecture firm that has worked at airports in Atlanta, Denver, San Francisco and others. As airlines have moved to larger planes, gates have been spaced out more. It Can’t Really Be This Hard to Board an Airplane American, Delta and United can’t figure out how to get people onboard quickly and without drama.

Mr. Rayfield says walking distances grow because airports extend concourses to add gates or build new concourses that are more remote. Walking between Atlanta’s new international terminal and domestic terminal check-in is 1.67 miles, for example. There’s a train, but the walk has “some of our most interesting art displays,” an airport spokesman says.

The U.S. Department of Transportation has no specific rules for travel distance at airports. But airports must have policies and procedures to assist disabled people, a spokeswoman says. Architects involved in airport projects say the industry works off a loose rule of thumb that if a walk is longer than 1,000 feet—more than three football fields—some assistance, such as moving sidewalks, carts or trams, should be provided. You can’t reliably check gates until 24 hours before a flight, and even then they can change. The safest thing to do is give yourself plenty of extra time in case you get stuck with a longer hike, or request wheelchair or cart assistance in advance.

Long, linear terminals like American’s mile-long facility in Miami mean passengers sometimes have to hustle to get to gates on time. Anne Llewellyn, a 62-year-old nurse from South Florida, travels frequently for vacations and family visits, but now has trouble walking long distances after treatment last year for a brain tumor. Like many people faced with stretched terminals, she routinely requests wheelchairs, especially when she has tight connections.

“Airport walks are murder. Even before I was sick, I noticed how long they were getting,” Ms. Llewellyn says. She’d prefer some walking between flights to stretch legs before sitting a couple of hours in tight airplane seats, but can’t handle very long walks without assistance.

Airports are well aware of the long hikes, but the tools to compensate are dated and limited. Some airports have expanded wheelchair and cart service into orchestrated networks of shuttle service, annoying walking passengers as they clear paths in crowded concourses. Moving walkways have their own drawbacks: Some people stand and slow up speedier travelers. Others stumble getting on or off. And walkways keep people from visiting stores they pass.

Earlier this year, Orlando International Airport removed moving walkways from its main terminal, which is handling 70% more passengers than its original design capacity, to make room for new seating, spokeswoman Carolyn Fennell says. United removed moving walkways from concourses at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport, also to create more space, spokesman Rahsaan Johnson says.

At Newark Liberty International Airport, the walkways were old and removing them added only 2 minutes to average walks, Mr. Johnson says. That space was used to open bar and restaurant areas, “which we need during peak periods,” he says. Both Chicago and Newark airports identify the United terminals as their longest walks.

Moving walkways can shorten long walks, but some have been removed in Chicago, Orlando, Fla., and Newark, N.J., to create more retail and seating space. Philadelphia International Airport has one of the longest hikes of any U.S. airport: 1.5 miles from Gate F39 to Gate A26. A secure corridor opened last winter to make the walk possible without going outside security.

Terminal F houses American commuter flights and the A-West gates, where A26 is located, are used mostly by American for widebody jets, most of them international trips. Connecting passengers actually cross between Philadelphia and Delaware counties. American does run shuttle buses between the terminals. The airport’s long- term plan calls for a people-mover.

“The signage and everything else steers people to the shuttle bus. If someone wanted to walk, it’d take a long time. Some choose to because they want to get the steps,” says American spokesman Josh Freed. At Miami International Airport’s mile-long Terminal D, American parks widebody planes in the middle to minimize walks. Terminal D also has its own train with four stops. Veteran travelers say if you’re only one stop away, it’s faster to walk. But two or three stops on the train and you’re better off riding. In New York, Delta added 11 gates to Terminal 4 at JFK last year, extending the building 600 feet, or two football fields. The concourse is about a half- mile long end to end, Delta spokeswoman Elizabeth Wolf says. A bus runs between stops at each end of the long terminal.

Florida’s Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, in the midst of a major rebuilding, will convert Terminal 4 from a perpendicular pier that heads away from the terminal building to a longer, linear concourse. The plan calls for increased gate capacity. “They’ll create longer walking distances because they’ll have a single concourse with aircraft gates on only one side,” says Mr. Rayfield of GS&P, which is working on other parts of that airport. “To get that capacity, a lot of times it is a sacrifice of efficiency and shorter walking distances.”

Some airports years back were designed with multiple circular or semicircular terminals—think Newark, Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth—that had lots of room to nose in airplanes but shrinking capacity inside the building for seating, bathrooms and restaurants. Now terminals are built as long rectangles, with gates for single- aisle planes about 150 feet apart and wide body gates 200 feet apart. The long design creates space for retail stores and premium lounges. It’s more economical to operate one large building instead of three smaller ones, notes Jonathan Massey, leader of the aviation sector at Corgan, a Dallas-based architecture firm.

Mr. Massey’s firm has done projects in the U.K., Middle East and China, along with recent new terminals in Dallas, Houston, Miami and Los Angeles. He thinks separate corridors for carts might creep into airport design, or maybe even drivable wheelchairs for passengers or trains that you could jump on and off easily. All have costs, but cart and wheelchair use will only increase as the population ages and airports grow. “Nobody’s quite got the answer yet,” Mr. Massey says.

Attachment 20 The Traffic Messes of LAX and LGA

Wall Street Journal by Scott McCartney / Sept. 14, 2016, 1:45 p.m. ET

In New York and Los Angeles, two of the most important airports in the U.S. are causing major headaches while undertaking much-needed improvements

Sometimes the airport is the hardest part of the trip.

Airports have experienced a huge construction boom as they’ve expanded and modernized. But the toughest jobs got saved for last: The most complicated projects in the most important U.S. airports are snarling travel for millions of passengers this year.

At Los Angeles International Airport, the already-congested single roadway that loops in front of all nine terminals has become traffic molasses. The number of cars jumped 9% this year, faster than passenger growth, according to LAX police. The horseshoe-shaped road has seen lanes closed for construction. Changes inside the newly expanded international terminal have created jams at the curb.

It will likely get worse before it gets better: A complete rebuilding with a people-mover to shuttle in passengers from remote parking and drop-offs is scheduled to break ground in 2018, with more disruption probable. The entire airport rebuilding is estimated at $14 billion.

Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport has had construction on roadways around the airport and some lane closures in front of terminals earlier this year. In New York, the new $5.3 billion project to rebuild La Guardia Airport’s central terminal forced roadway changes that led to a traffic meltdown in August.

“Traffic is crazier than usual. It’s been a rough summer,” says Cheryl Berkman, chief executive of Music Express, a limousine service operating in several cities. At LAX, it’s taken some cars 45 minutes or more to loop 1.3 miles around the terminals. Parking limousines to pick up passengers is almost impossible because of construction in garages, she says.

Similar problems have started at La Guardia, Ms. Berkman says, and drivers have had long delays in Chicago and all three airports around Washington, D.C. She says she understands the airports are doing the best they can.

Airline profits and increased passenger traffic are funding long-neglected renovation work and terminal expansion. Airports are competitive, and a shiny new terminal at one pressures other communities to keep up.

“From Boston to Fort Lauderdale to Los Angeles, airports have a lot of work going on,” says Richard Smyth, the Port Authority executive in charge of the La Guardia rebuilding. “The aviation industry has been very healthy these last couple of years.”

Deborah Flint, CEO of Los Angeles World Airports, which oversees LAX, says peak traffic in the summer of 2014 was 89,000 cars in one day at the airport. In 2015, the peak day was 95,000 cars. This summer, there were only 12 days when traffic didn’t exceed 95,000. The loop is handling far more traffic than it was ever designed for. And the airport has already warned of traffic delays in September.

Almost every terminal is under renovation or has been expanded, Ms. Flint notes. At the same time, the number of people boarding planes is at record levels, with a bevy of new international and domestic flights pouring into LAX.

Garage areas have been shut down for elevator replacement. Construction has forced lane closures. Customs and Border Protection reduced hours in two terminals, forcing the airport to bus some passengers to the main international terminal. That has created a traffic chokepoint at the curb when more people exit at the same time, airport officials say.

Ride-hailing services Uber and Lyft, which started legal operations at LAX around the beginning of the year, have added to congestion. Uber and Lyft have an estimated 15,000 cars daily in the central terminal area, according to LAX police. And outside the airport, work on a commuter rail station has required shutdowns of lanes on Century Boulevard—one of the main routes into the airport.

The airport has hired additional traffic officers and now is routinely staffed to holiday levels. A new camera system was installed to measure the flow of cars and predict trouble spots. The airport created what it calls its CALM team—Construction and Logistics Management—to coordinate work and avoid nightmarish problems.

The ultimate solution, LAX contends, is a massive rebuilding of the entire area in front of terminals. The plan calls for a central rental-car building and two separate buildings off-site for parking, drop-offs and pickups, linked by a 2¼-mile people-mover. Three garages in the traffic loop will be torn down and rebuilt. The project estimates 40% of cars and buses will be taken out of the flow.

“It will not get better unless we improve the infrastructure,” Ms. Flint says.

Rebuilding in limited space while still operating is the same challenge at La Guardia, an airport only one square mile in size. Denver International Airport has 50 times more land and only twice as many passengers. “If it was easy, it would have been done years ago,” says the Port Authority’s Mr. Smyth. He’s overseen terminal construction projects for Continental at Newark Liberty International and JetBlue at New York’s Kennedy International.

Traffic rerouting started Aug. 7 and hit gridlock on Aug. 22 when some people abandoned slow-moving cabs and buses to walk from Grand Central Parkway to the central terminal. “It was complete mayhem,” says Jeremy Sherby, an energy consultant who sat for 45 minutes to get from the airport entrance to the terminal. The construction won’t prompt him to start using Newark or Kennedy for his frequent flights from Houston. But he now plans extra time on top of the extra time he’d already needed for La Guardia.

La Guardia officials say they made changes to traffic flow after the Aug. 22 meltdown. A taxi-loading area was moved from the front of the terminal, a cellphone lot opened to get waiting cars out of circulation, a mobile command center was set up, and traffic flow was improved with adjustments to barriers to make lanes wider. Since Aug. 22, traffic has been more manageable, and officials say they have people, communications and technology in place to address problems early. “We’re optimistic,” says Stewart Steeves, chief executive of La Guardia Gateway Partners, the consortium of companies handling construction. “Passengers should plan on La Guardia as business as usual.”

The La Guardia rebuilding will stretch out six or seven years, but some of the most disruptive work is happening now with the roads. More changes are coming—roadways will shift as new buildings take shape. “Now is definitely the most challenging time,” Mr. Smyth says.