IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i23p16476-d1292166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Boarding Strategies on an Airbus A320 Using Discrete Event Simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Hélio Moreira

    (ISEP—School of Engineering, Polytechnic of Porto, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal)

  • Luís Pinto Ferreira

    (ISEP—School of Engineering, Polytechnic of Porto, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal
    INEGI—Instituto de Ciência e Inovação em Engenharia Mecânica e Engenharia Industrial, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal)

  • Nuno O. Fernandes

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco, 6000-767 Castelo Branco, Portugal
    ALGORITMI Research Unit, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal)

  • Ana Luísa Ramos

    (Competitiveness and Public Policies (GOVCOPP), Industrial Engineering and Tourism (DEGEIT), University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal)

  • Paulo Ávila

    (ISEP—School of Engineering, Polytechnic of Porto, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal
    INESC TEC—Instituto de Engenharia de Sistemas e Computadores, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

Boarding time constitutes a critical element of turnaround time, which is used to measure the efficiency of airline operations. Therefore, to reduce boarding time, it is imperative to reconsider traditional passenger boarding strategies to make them more efficient. In this sense, this study seeks to analyze the impact of different strategies on boarding times using discrete event simulation on an Airbus 320. Seven boarding strategies have been identified and considered in our study, as follows: random, back-to-front, outside-in, reverse pyramid, blocks, Steffen, and modified optimal. The impact of carrying hand luggage and the presence of priority passengers has been considered, as well as the impact of having a continuous arrival of passengers during the boarding process versus having all passengers available at boarding time. In general, simulation results have pointed out that the outside-in and reverse pyramid strategies are the most effective, improving boarding time by up to 15%, when compared to the random strategy. Moreover, the back-to-front strategy, which is generally implemented by airline companies, has been shown to be the most inefficient strategy. Efficient boarding strategies are expected to contribute to the sustainability of air travel by minimizing the turnaround time, improving operational efficiency, and reducing emissions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hélio Moreira & Luís Pinto Ferreira & Nuno O. Fernandes & Ana Luísa Ramos & Paulo Ávila, 2023. "Analysis of Boarding Strategies on an Airbus A320 Using Discrete Event Simulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-12, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16476-:d:1292166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16476/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16476/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Menkes H. L. van den Briel & J. René Villalobos & Gary L. Hogg & Tim Lindemann & Anthony V. Mulé, 2005. "America West Airlines Develops Efficient Boarding Strategies," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 191-201, June.
    2. Van Landeghem, H. & Beuselinck, A., 2002. "Reducing passenger boarding time in airplanes: A simulation based approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 294-308, October.
    3. Nyquist, David C. & McFadden, Kathleen L., 2008. "A study of the airline boarding problem," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 197-204.
    4. Steffen, Jason H., 2008. "Optimal boarding method for airline passengers," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 146-150.
    5. Ren, Xinhui & Xu, Xiaobing, 2018. "Experimental analyses of airplane boarding based on interference classification," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 55-63.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Camelia Delcea & Liviu-Adrian Cotfas & Nora Chiriță & Ionuț Nica, 2018. "A Two-Door Airplane Boarding Approach When Using Apron Buses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Hélio Moreira & Luís P. Ferreira & Nuno O. Fernandes & Francisco J. G. Silva & Ana L. Ramos & Paulo Ávila, 2023. "A Simulation Study of Aircraft Boarding Strategies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-13, October.
    3. Camelia Delcea & Liviu-Adrian Cotfas & Mostafa Salari & R. John Milne, 2018. "Investigating the Random Seat Boarding Method without Seat Assignments with Common Boarding Practices Using an Agent-Based Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-28, December.
    4. Milne, R. John & Delcea, Camelia & Cotfas, Liviu-Adrian & Salari, Mostafa, 2019. "New methods for two-door airplane boarding using apron buses," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Camelia Delcea & Liviu-Adrian Cotfas & Liliana Crăciun & Anca Gabriela Molanescu, 2018. "Are Seat and Aisle Interferences Affecting the Overall Airplane Boarding Time? An Agent-Based Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, November.
    6. Ren, Xinhui & Zhou, Xiyu & Xu, Xiaobing, 2020. "A new model of luggage storage time while boarding an airplane: An experimental test," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    7. Zeineddine, Hassan, 2021. "Reducing the effect of passengers’ non-compliance with aircraft boarding rules," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    8. Salari, Mostafa & Milne, R. John & Delcea, Camelia & Kattan, Lina & Cotfas, Liviu-Adrian, 2020. "Social distancing in airplane seat assignments," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    9. Wittmann, Jürgen, 2019. "Customer-oriented optimization of the airplane boarding process," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 31-39.
    10. Steffen, Jason H. & Hotchkiss, Jon, 2012. "Experimental test of airplane boarding methods," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 64-67.
    11. Michael Schultz & Jörg Fuchte, 2020. "Evaluation of Aircraft Boarding Scenarios Considering Reduced Transmissions Risks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-20, July.
    12. Tang, Tie-Qiao & Yang, Shao-Peng & Ou, Hui & Chen, Liang & Huang, Hai-Jun, 2018. "An aircraft boarding model accounting for group behavior," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 182-189.
    13. Camelia Delcea & Liviu-Adrian Cotfas & Ramona Paun, 2018. "Agent-Based Evaluation of the Airplane Boarding Strategies’ Efficiency and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    14. Jaehn, Florian & Neumann, Simone, 2015. "Airplane boarding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(2), pages 339-359.
    15. Zeineddine, Hassan, 2017. "A dynamically optimized aircraft boarding strategy," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 144-151.
    16. Notomista, Gennaro & Selvaggio, Mario & Sbrizzi, Fiorentina & Di Maio, Gabriella & Grazioso, Stanislao & Botsch, Michael, 2016. "A fast airplane boarding strategy using online seat assignment based on passenger classification," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 140-149.
    17. Gwynne, S.M.V. & Senarath Yapa, U. & Codrington, L. & Thomas, J.R. & Jennings, S. & Thompson, A.J.L. & Grewal, A., 2018. "Small-scale trials on passenger microbehaviours during aircraft boarding and deplaning procedures," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 115-133.
    18. Milne, R. John & Kelly, Alexander R., 2014. "A new method for boarding passengers onto an airplane," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 93-100.
    19. Schultz, Michael & Evler, Jan & Asadi, Ehsan & Preis, Henning & Fricke, Hartmut & Wu, Cheng-Lung, 2020. "Future aircraft turnaround operations considering post-pandemic requirements," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. R John Milne & Liviu-Adrian Cotfas & Camelia Delcea & Liliana Crăciun & Anca-Gabriela Molănescu, 2020. "Adapting the reverse pyramid airplane boarding method for social distancing in times of COVID-19," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-26, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16476-:d:1292166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.