Category: Uncategorized

Clement Zhang, Managing Director, FlightBI

A Rhode Island traveler planning a trip to Denver finds a round-trip fare of $527 from Rhode Island T. F. Green International Airport (PVD) and $306 from Boston Logan International Airport (BOS). Looking at airfare alone, the choice seems obvious: driving to Boston saves $221.

But airfare is only part of the cost of choosing an airport.

When round-trip driving, parking, and the economic value of the traveler’s time are included, the comparison changes. In one recent calculation, the estimated total trip cost was $632 through PVD versus $691 through BOS. Despite an airfare that was $221 higher, flying from PVD saved an estimated $59 overall.

Putting a Dollar Value on Convenience

Airports have long marketed themselves as closer, easier, and more convenient than larger airports in surrounding markets. The challenge is that these benefits can feel abstract when travelers are comparing them with a clearly displayed airfare.

True-cost analysis reframes the question from “Which airport has the cheapest flight?” to “How much cheaper would the competing airport’s airfare need to be before the entire trip is actually less expensive?”

Driving and parking costs are relatively straightforward. Time is more challenging – and potentially more powerful. Additional driving, security screening, terminal processing, and walking all consume time. Assigning an economic value to those minutes allows airports to translate convenience into something travelers can directly compare with airfare.

In the PVD-BOS example, the estimated value of the traveler’s time was $41 through PVD versus $141 through BOS – a $100 difference invisible in an airfare-only comparison.

The Data Behind the Calculation

Credible true-cost analysis requires more than adding mileage and parking to an airfare.

Consider security screening. Rather than assigning every airport a fixed security-time assumption, historical MyTSA security wait-time observations can be weighted by hourly airport passenger throughput, giving greater importance to the periods when passengers are actually traveling. Driving distance and time vary by traveler origin. Parking rates vary by airport and trip duration. Airport processing times differ. These inputs also change over time.

Collecting, integrating, and regularly updating these data points is what turns a simple web calculator into a meaningful decision tool.

From Passenger Leakage to Traveler Action

Airports already invest considerable resources in understanding catchment areas and passenger leakage. But knowing where passengers leak does not necessarily change their behavior.

A personalized true-cost comparison can bring that analysis directly to the traveler, showing what choosing the local airport may be worth for their specific trip. Connecting the result to flight search can then shorten the path from understanding that value to acting on it.

The interaction creates another opportunity: customer intelligence. Aggregated engagement data can help airports understand where interested travelers originate, which destinations they search, when they intend to travel, party size, parking duration, and where the airport’s true-cost advantage is strongest. Airports can use those insights to better understand demand and refine future marketing.

At FlightBI, our work analyzing airport catchment areas and passenger leakage led us to explore how these traditionally separate activities could be connected.

The opportunity goes beyond another “fly local” message. Airports can identify leakage, quantify the value of flying local, communicate that value to individual travelers, provide an immediate path to flight search, and learn from how travelers respond.

That creates a feedback loop between market intelligence and traveler engagement – and turns airport convenience from an abstract marketing claim into a measurable, actionable value proposition.

Clement Zhang has 26 years of experience building IT solutions and consulting in the travel and transportation industry. He is the founder of FlightBI, served as Director of Business Intelligence at Cirium and Vice President at MergeGlobal, and holds an MBA from Georgetown and a Ph.D. from Xi’an JiaoTong University.

DISCLAIMER

This article was provided by a third party and, as such, the views expressed therein and/or presented are their own and may not represent or reflect the views of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), its management, Board, or members. Readers should not act on the basis of any information contained in the blog without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without appropriate professional advice.

By Jim Collins, Chief Executive Officer, Fruition

Three hours before a traveler’s flight, they have three questions: how long is the security line, where is the shuttle right now, and is anything open near the gate? Most airport websites don’t provide this information. They do, however, offer a lovely page about the airport’s history. Airport websites need search capabilities that provide the information passengers want at their fingertips, on a phone, when they are headed to the airport.

What Passengers Ask

Search logs from major North American airport websites tell a consistent story. The most common queries are not campaign taglines or route maps. They are parking rates, security wait times, lost and found, pet relief areas, ground transportation, and which terminal an airline uses. Travelers treat the search box like an information desk, and they expect it to answer the way a person would: with what is true right now.

The Answers are Already Inside the Building

Here is what’s uncomfortable. Wait times, parking counts, flight status, and shuttle locations already exist in operations, information technology, and vendor systems. The website usually lives with marketing and communications. Nobody owns the seam between the two, so live data stays locked away while the passenger refreshes a static page. That is a data silo problem, not a technology problem. Accuracy fears make it worse because a stale “10-minute wait” damages trust more than no answer at all. Try it yourself: open your phone and search your airport’s website for “security wait time.”

What AI-Enhanced Search Changes

AI-Enhanced Search closes that gap. Instead of matching keywords to pages, semantic search understands what a traveler means, then assembles the answer from live operational feeds: flight status, security wait times, parking counts, and amenity hours. The answer appears in the search bar itself, rather than requiring a deep search within the site. Just as important, the technology drops into the website that an airport already runs, alongside the existing content management system, WordPress included, with no replatforming. Airports adopting AI-Enhanced Search follow four principles:

• One source of truth: the same live feed powers the website, the mobile experience, and on-premise screens, so channels never disagree.
• Freshness beats polish: a plain, up-to-date answer earns more trust than a beautiful page that is stale.
• Staff stays in control: Airport Communications’ teams update answers and tune results without opening a developer ticket.
• Measure it like a service channel: track deflected calls and information desk visits, not page views alone.

AI-Enhanced Search at Denver International Airport (DEN)

DEN, the third-busiest airport in North America, lived this problem. Travelers struggled to find restaurants, flight status, parking, and security waits through a costly third-party search tool that failed them when it mattered most. DEN replaced it with FlyFruition AI-Enhanced Search, integrated into the airport’s existing WordPress website. Search “burger,” and results show restaurants with gate locations and live open status. Search for an airline, and live arrivals and departures appear beside current security wait times. DEN’s team boosts priority pages and tunes rankings through a self-service console; no developer required. The move took search from failure to relevant, actionable answers, and the website earned an Airports Council International award in 2024. Type a question into flydenver.com and watch what comes back.

The 10-Question Audit

Pull yesterday’s top 10 passenger questions from your airport’s website search logs, information desk, and phone line. Count how many questions the website answered with live data. That number, more than any redesign plan, is your digital roadmap for the year ahead.

Author BIO

Jim Collins is the CEO of Fruition, a woman-owned digital agency founded in 2003 and focused on the airport industry. Fruition holds the largest market share in the US airport website and operations platforms. Its FlyFruition platform (flyfruition.com) powers the digital experience for more passengers than any other vendor in its category. Fruition is SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, and FedRAMP Ready certified.

DISCLAIMER

This article was provided by a third party and, as such, the views expressed therein and/or presented are their own and may not represent or reflect the views of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), its management, Board, or members. Readers should not act on the basis of any information contained in the blog without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without appropriate professional advice.

By Molly Waller, CEO and co-founder, Centurion Planning & Design

Airport projects are moving faster than they did even a few years ago due to aging infrastructure and the need to keep pace with travel needs. Funding, operational requirements and increasing construction costs are pushing airports to move from planning to design and ultimately construction on much shorter timelines.

The planning process needs to keep pace.

Traditionally, airport planning has focused on identifying needs, evaluating alternatives and establishing a preferred development concept. Those things remain important, but they are no longer enough. If a project is expected to move quickly into design, the planning effort also needs to consider the engineering and operational realities that will ultimately determine whether the concept works.

That does not mean designing the project during planning. It means getting far enough into the details to answer some important questions before handing the project to the design team.

Are there geometric constraints that affect the concept? Drainage or utility issues? Airspace implications? How will the project be phased? What has to happen first? Most importantly, can it actually be constructed while the airport continues to operate?

These questions have historically been addressed later in project development. The problem is that when they change the project, the design team has to revisit decisions that were supposedly settled during planning. Time is lost, costs increase and, in some cases, the project is effectively planned twice.

There is a better opportunity to connect the two disciplines.

One example is the Project Definition Document, or PDD, process used at multiple airports, including Dallas Fort Worth International Airport. During the PDD for Runway 17L, the planning effort included meaningful engineering involvement and a greater level of technical development than is typical of a traditional planning study. Engineering considerations, project requirements, implementation and phasing were addressed before the project was handed over for design. The project subsequently advanced to 90 percent design in less than six months.

That is an important outcome, particularly for an airfield project of this scale. The design team could move quickly because it was able to build upon the decisions and technical work completed during planning rather than reopen them.

The same principle applies well beyond a runway project.

Phasing, in particular, deserves more attention during planning. Airports do not stop operating while we build. A preferred alternative may look very different once temporary conditions, aircraft movements, construction access and enabling projects are considered. In some cases, understanding how a project will be built may actually change what should be built.

This is where airport planning is evolving. Planning and engineering do not need to become the same discipline, but the line between them should be less rigid.

As project schedules continue to compress, the industry should expect planning to carry a project further toward implementation. The goal is not more planning. It is better-informed planning that allows design to start where planning ended.

Engineers should be able to design the project without needing to replan it first.

 

Molly Waller, CEO and co-founder of Centurion Planning & Design, has over 27 years of aviation industry experience. Her expertise includes airport planning, CIP development, funding strategies, and complex airport projects nationwide, ranging from general aviation facilities to large hub airports. Molly is passionate about strengthening the connection between planning and implementation, helping airport projects move more efficiently and effectively from initial concept through construction.

DISCLAIMER

This article was provided by a third party and, as such, the views expressed therein and/or presented are their own and may not represent or reflect the views of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), its management, Board, or members. Readers should not act on the basis of any information contained in the blog without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without appropriate professional advice.

By Tim Walsh, Co-Founder and CEO, ThinkGov

The stack of unread leadership books on your nightstand probably grew taller this spring. Before you head out for a well-earned break, move one title to the top: Geoff Woods’ “The AI-Driven Leader.” It is the most relevant book an airport director can read right now, and not for the reasons you might expect.

Woods makes a deceptively simple argument. Most leaders who have started using AI are applying it to the wrong work. They draft emails faster, clean up spreadsheets, and summarize reports. Those are fine productivity gains, but they leave the real value on the table. The transformative shift happens when a leader treats AI not as a task automator but as a strategic thought partner, one that challenges assumptions, stress-tests decisions, and surfaces blind spots before they become costly mistakes.

For airport leaders, that distinction matters enormously. Our operating environment is unlike any other corner of the public sector. We manage FAA certification, TSA security coordination, airline negotiations, capital programs funded through AIP and PFC, noise-sensitive communities, and concession portfolios, often simultaneously. The decisions that shape an airport’s trajectory over the next decade are not the ones that can be reduced to a template. They require judgment, context, and the kind of rigorous thinking that benefits from a capable sparring partner.

Woods offers a practical framework for getting there. Assign AI a role, a board member who asks the uncomfortable question, a finance director who pressure-tests your rate methodology, a community advocate who surfaces concerns you haven’t anticipated. Engage it iteratively, one question at a time, asking it to explain its reasoning so you sharpen your own. Focus it on the twenty percent of your work that drives eighty percent of your results: strategic planning, air service development strategy, capital prioritization, workforce investment. The rest can follow.

The book’s core message resonates with leaders already moving in this direction. Dr. Perry J. Miller, President and CEO of the Richmond International Airport, put it this way: “Leveraging AI is no longer optional — it is essential to shaping and executing a forward-looking strategy.” Dr. Miller has backed that conviction with action, ensuring every employee at Richmond International Airport has access to an AI thought partner, not as a pilot program, but as an organizational commitment tied directly to the airport’s five-year strategic plan. That is the kind of leadership Woods describes: intentional, inclusive, and anchored to mission.

The practical question, of course, is where to start. Reading the book gives you the leadership mindset. Translating that mindset into an actionable governance framework for your airport is the next step. ThinkGov recently published a free AI Governance Starter Kit built specifically for airport CIOs and leadership teams. It walks through establishing an AI governance charter, inventorying the AI tools already embedded in your vendor systems, classifying use cases by risk tier, and building the policies your organization needs before scaling adoption. You can download it at https://thinkgov.ai/resources

The combination is powerful. Woods gives you the strategic lens to understand why AI matters for your leadership, not just your operations. The Starter Kit gives you the practical roadmap to bring your organization along responsibly.

 

Airport directors have never lacked for complexity. What has been missing is a tool that matches the pace and breadth of the decisions we face every day. AI is that tool, but only if we use it the way Woods describes: as a thought partner that makes our thinking sharper, our strategies more resilient, and our teams more capable.

Pack the book. Download the Starter Kit. And when you come back from the beach, you will be ready to lead differently.

Tim Walsh is the Co-Founder and CEO of ThinkGov, an AI-native technology company purpose-built for airports and the public sector. A former airport director, Walsh, brings firsthand operational experience to the challenge of responsible AI adoption. In 2025, ThinkGov was recognized with an ACI World Airports Innovate Award in South Korea for its work advancing AI governance and workforce empowerment across the airport industry.

DISCLAIMER

This article was provided by a third party and, as such, the views expressed therein and/or presented are their own and may not represent or reflect the views of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), its management, Board, or members. Readers should not act on the basis of any information contained in the blog without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without appropriate professional advice.

By Stephanie Czaplicki, Senior Vice President of Account Management, Boingo Wireless

Twenty-five years ago, Wi-Fi in an airport terminal was a novelty. Today, Wi-Fi and cellular networks are essential infrastructure at airports of all sizes, supporting everything from biometric identity verification and digital boarding processes to real-time flight information and wayfinding. Passengers move through increasingly connected journeys without a second thought, but behind the scenes, airport networks power the systems that keep operations running. Staff credentialing, concessions, baggage handling, public safety communications and a fast-growing ecosystem of AI-powered applications all depend on secure, reliable connectivity.

When connectivity becomes foundational to airport operations, resilience matters just as much as coverage.

This summer’s FIFA World Cup provided a powerful demonstration of why that resilience matters. As 48 national teams and roughly 6.5 million fans moved through North American airports, U.S. carriers reported combined data volumes in the hundreds of terabytes across host-city stadiums and airports. GSMA Intelligence’s post-tournament analysis found that the most successful host cities approached connectivity not as a capacity challenge, but as infrastructure supporting critical services across the entire fan journey. From New York to Dallas to LA, airports managed surging passenger volumes and data demands without compromising critical services because their network infrastructure strategy was designed to accommodate growth, new technologies and periods of extraordinary demand.

Connectivity Planning Is Infrastructure Planning

That trend extends well beyond the World Cup. Airports raised IT spending to $14.8 billion in 2025, according to SITA’s Air Transport IT Insights report. Connectivity solutions have grown to match: Wi-Fi 7 for high-density passenger areas, private 5G for data-sensitive environments like the apron, and neutral-host Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS) ensuring reliable 5G cellular coverage from every major carrier, with a robust cybersecurity platform. These networks are also what make AI possible. From computer vision at security checkpoints to predictive analytics for baggage handling, every AI application is only as good as the network carrying its data. Increasingly, airports are integrating all wireless technologies into a broader infrastructure strategy.

Deploying Wi‑Fi, DAS and private wireless networks in active airport environments requires coordination across carriers, construction projects, airport operations and cybersecurity requirements. As a result, airports increasingly seek partners that can oversee connectivity as a unified system from design and deployment through long-term operations.

Powering Connectivity Across Different Airport Environments

The connectivity challenge looks different at every airport, but the underlying principle remains the same.

At Newark, JFK and LaGuardia, connectivity upgrades are being integrated into large-scale terminal redevelopment programs as part of a broader, long-term infrastructure strategy. At Hollywood Burbank, connectivity planning is being incorporated into a brand-new terminal, including one of the nation’s first airport Wi-Fi 7 deployments. At Austin-Bergstrom, where passenger traffic has surpassed original terminal design assumptions, network capacity continues to evolve alongside airport growth.

Different starting points. Same priority: building connectivity into the foundation of airport modernization.

The Infrastructure Lesson from the World Cup

Twenty-five years after passenger Wi-Fi first arrived in airports, the World Cup put real-world scale behind a shift many airport leaders have been ahead of: wireless connectivity has become critical operational infrastructure.

As airports continue investing in terminal modernization, automation, AI, digital services and next-generation passenger experiences, the most successful projects will be those that plan connectivity from the outset. Wi-Fi, DAS, private wireless networks and cybersecurity can no longer be considered separate technology decisions. They are increasingly part of the same infrastructure conversation.

The airports best positioned for today’s demand and the future are those that treat connectivity as critical infrastructure.

About the Author 

Stephanie Czaplicki is senior vice president of account management at Boingo Wireless, the largest provider of airport Wi-Fi worldwide, marking its 25th year connecting airports and transit hubs. Stephanie leads client success for more than 130 transit venues, including major airports such as JFK, LAX, ORD and DAL. With 15+ years of engineering and management experience, she helps airports design, deploy and manage wireless infrastructure.

DISCLAIMER

This article was provided by a third party and, as such, the views expressed therein and/or presented are their own and may not represent or reflect the views of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), its management, Board, or members. Readers should not act on the basis of any information contained in the blog without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without appropriate professional advice.

By Tom Murphy, Director, Human Resiliency Institute.

Tomorrow’s airport leaders are showing, once again, that the lessons of 9/11’s aviation heroes still shape how they work and live. ACI-NA is proud to announce the three winners of the 2026 “Reclaiming the Sky” Essay Competition, which asks young aviation professionals to reflect on those stories of resiliency and what they mean for their own careers. The winners will be honored at ACI-NA’s Annual Conference and Exhibition in Philadelphia on September 17.

At the heart of the program is the book “Reclaiming the Sky,” which tells the stories of airport and airline employees who came to work in New York, Boston and Washington, D.C. on the morning of September 11, 2001, expecting an ordinary day. Instead, “just doing my job” became the creed of heroes. Those front-line workers responded with courage and selflessness that morning, and in the weeks and months that followed, they helped rebuild their industry, reclaim hope, and get America moving again.

Now in its fourth year, the “Reclaiming the Sky” Resiliency Program is a partnership between the Human Resiliency Institute at Fordham University, Airports Council International-North America, and SSP America. Young Professionals, those age 40 and under employed at ACI-NA member airports and industry partner organizations across the U.S. and Canada, receive a free e-book copy of “Reclaiming the Sky” and take part in a workshop with aviation mentors to explore its lessons. Afterward, they are invited to enter an essay competition sharing what they took from it.

Twenty-five Young Professionals participated in the 2026 essay competition. A panel of aviation leaders selected three winners:

• First Place: Camille Ramsingh, Manager, Commercial Land Development and Leasing, Greater Toronto Airports Authority
• Second Place: Leon Sniegowski, Managing Consultant, Ricondo and Associates
• Third Place: Brianna Covarrubias, Airport Compliance Coordinator, Port San Antonio

The first-place honor, the Susan M. Baer Award, is named for Susan Baer, who was General Manager of Newark Liberty International Airport on 9/11. Along with cash prizes of $1,000, $500 and $250, all three winners receive free registration at   ACI-NA’s Annual Conference and Exhibition, where they will connect with today’s aviation leaders and grow their professional networks. Their winning essays can be read at ReclaimingTheSky.com.

The other Young Professionals who participated in the 2026 competition were Lauren Brown, Robert Oliver, Caroline Wylie Hamilton, Jonathan Hanna, Sam Marsland, Soren Ceyrolles, Sabrina Khater, Alex Sterling, Jen Liu, Christa Phillips, Kyle Dorf, Kate Scott, Nakiba Karedia, Aswath Sridhar, Brianna Rountree, Julia Cypher, Aireyanna Kennedy, Antonette Chambers, Julie Boulos, Avril Shakiiira and Emalee McRae.

For more information, or for airports and industry partners interested in joining the program’s 2027 expansion, please visit ReclaimingTheSky.com.

By Cory Mathews, Sales Director Americas, Aviation Week

For years, the aviation industry has worked to answer a seemingly simple question: Where are passengers actually coming from?

While the question may sound straightforward, the answer is far more complex. Understanding passenger origins influences everything from air service development and airline recruitment to infrastructure planning and tourism strategy.

To better understand passenger behavior and market demand, airports and consultants have traditionally relied on settlement data, credit card transactions, mobile device information, and cookie tracking. While these data sources provide useful insight, they also come with significant limitations.

Corporate card and settlement data can look impressive—millions of transactions, polished dashboards, and charts that make for compelling presentations. The challenge is that billing locations are often nowhere near the actual traveler.

For example, I live on Vancouver Island. If my corporate card is registered to a company office in Sarasota, Florida, and I take the ferry from Victoria to Tsawwassen, some traditional datasets can suddenly conclude that Sarasota is generating passenger demand to and from Vancouver Island. Congratulations—Florida is now apparently helping drive Canadian ferry traffic.

Then came mobile data, arguably the biggest trend in post-COVID aviation analytics. For a while, it felt like the industry had found the silver bullet. Airports, airlines, and consultants were leaning heavily into mobile datasets to explain passenger behavior and forecast demand.

While this provides valuable insight, it also has weaknesses—especially since a device is not necessarily a passenger. Other limitations include strict privacy regulations in parts of Europe, limited representation in rural markets, small sample sizes in certain regions, and inconsistent visibility across international borders. Looking at some mobile datasets, you could almost believe the Canada-U.S. border had turned into The Wall from Game of Thrones. Except, of course, passengers absolutely cross.

After evaluating a wide range of data sources, one approach consistently stood out: search data modeling. Why? Because search behavior offers something many traditional datasets struggle to provide—global scale, strong geographic visibility, and privacy-compliant insight into traveler intent. When people search online for flights, airport parking, hotels, rental cars, or destinations, they generate valuable geographic signals about where demand originates and how travelers plan their journeys.

A good example can be seen through analysis of Toronto Pearson International Airport (YYZ). Using Aviation Week’s Catchment Analyzer platform, the visualization tool highlights passenger activity extending across Southern Ontario and into Western New York, demonstrating how major hub airports often draw traffic from well beyond their immediate metropolitan areas.

The dashboard reveals where passengers are located, which competing airports they use, how far travelers are willing to drive, and which international markets are generating demand. In the YYZ example, strong international demand can be seen for destinations including London, Hong Kong, Manila, Paris, Seoul, Rome, and Istanbul.

Because the information is presented visually and interactively, complex travel patterns become significantly easier to identify, understand, and communicate. This allows airports and stakeholders to move beyond static spreadsheets toward more actionable, data-driven decision-making.

For airports, this matters more than ever.

The industry continues to face operational and strategic pressures ranging from workforce constraints and infrastructure demands to changing passenger expectations and evolving airline networks. At the same time, competition for air service development opportunities continues to intensify.

The future of catchment analysis is not about choosing one dataset over another. The strongest methodologies combine multiple perspectives to build the clearest picture possible.

As airports continue adapting to changing traveler behavior, data sources that better capture real passenger intent will become increasingly important to long-term planning, network development, and understanding the true reach of an airport’s catchment area.

With over two decades of experience in aviation, travel, and data intelligence,

Cory Mathews is passionate about helping aviation and aerospace stakeholders transform data into actionable insight — and results. He joined Aviation Week, the industry’s most trusted source of data, insight, and intelligence, in 2019. As part of Informa, Aviation Week benefits from access to deep expertise and resources across a global network of industry

specialists, enabling comprehensive solutions for clients. Cory has also held senior commercial roles at Cirium, strengthening his expertise in aviation analytics, fleet intelligence, and market forecasting. He brings strong experience in commercial aerospace, aircraft leasing, MRO, OEM strategy, and defense. cory.mathews@aviationweek.com

DISCLAIMER

This article was provided by a third party and, as such, the views expressed therein and/or presented are their own and may not represent or reflect the views of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), its management, Board, or members. Readers should not act on the basis of any information contained in the blog without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without appropriate professional advice.

By Clement Zhang, Founder & Managing Director, FlightBI

Airport catchment analysis has evolved dramatically over the past decade. What was once driven primarily by passenger surveys and limited ticketing samples is now increasingly powered by digital datasets capable of estimating airport choice behavior at the ZIP-code level.

Today, the most common data sources used in airport catchment studies include:

• Mobile location (cell phone) data
• Flight search data

As airports compete more aggressively for passengers and airline service, data quality has become increasingly important. Poor-quality datasets can distort leakage estimates, misrepresent airport market share, and lead to flawed strategic decisions.

Why Mobile Location Data Has Become the Preferred Source

Among modern catchment datasets, mobile location data has emerged as the strongest primary source for airport catchment analysis.

Unlike search datasets, mobile location data measures actual movement behavior. By analyzing anonymized device movement patterns between residential areas and airports, analysts can estimate:

• Passenger origins by ZIP code
• Airport leakage to competing airports
• Cross-border airport usage
• Airport switching behavior

This is especially valuable for air service development because airport choice is heavily influenced by drive time, nonstop availability, fares, and airline preference.

Flight search data has major limitations for catchment analysis. Searches may indicate travel intent, but they do not necessarily translate into ticket purchases or airport usage. Travelers may compare multiple airports, search repeatedly without booking, or search on behalf of others. As a result, search data often reflects shopping activity rather than true passenger flows.

Mobile Data Alone Is Not Enough

Despite its strengths, mobile location data has one major weakness: mobile data panels are not stable over time.

The size and composition of mobile panels can change suddenly due to:

• Privacy policy updates
• User permission changes
• SDK removals
• App partnership changes
• Data provider methodology updates

These changes can create artificial traffic fluctuations unrelated to actual passenger demand. Without calibration, airports risk making decisions based on panel instability rather than true market behavior.

Why Aviation Data Is Required for Calibration

The most reliable airport catchment methodologies combine mobile location data with aviation passenger datasets.

Aviation data provides:

• Stable passenger benchmarks
• Market validation
• Historical consistency
• Carrier-level normalization

This hybrid approach preserves the geographic precision of mobile data while correcting for panel fluctuations and sampling distortion.

The Limitations of MIDT Data

MIDT data, sourced from Global Distribution Systems (GDSs), has historically been widely used for airline planning. However, it has important limitations for airport catchment studies.

Many low-cost carriers (LCCs), such as Allegiant and Avelo, do not participate in GDS systems. MIDT also excludes much of the growing direct airline booking market because it primarily reflects agency bookings. In addition, MIDT represents reservations rather than actual flown passengers, meaning no-shows and itinerary changes can overstate demand.

For airports with substantial low-cost carrier traffic, these limitations can significantly distort catchment analysis.

DDS datasets provide broader ticketing coverage in some markets, but many LCCs still do not participate because they prefer not to share proprietary sales data with competitors.

Why DOT Data Is the Strongest Calibration Source

For U.S. airport catchment analysis, DOT Origin and Destination data remains the strongest aviation calibration source, especially following the transition from DB1B to DB1C.

DB1C increases the ticket sample size from 10% to 40% and moves reporting from quarterly to monthly.

Most importantly, DOT data includes all major U.S. low-cost carriers. This is critical because LCCs play a major role in airport leakage behavior, with passengers often willing to drive farther for lower fares and nonstop service.

The strongest modern airport catchment methodology therefore combines:

• Mobile location data for geographic precision
• DOT aviation data for passenger calibration and market validation

As airports continue investing in data-driven decision-making, the industry is increasingly recognizing that data quality matters just as much as analytical sophistication.

Dr. Clement Zhang, C.M., has more than 25 years of experience developing IT solutions and delivering consulting services for the travel and transportation industry. He is the founder of FlightBI, previously served as Director of Business Intelligence at Cirium, VP of Product Development at Diio, and Vice President at MergeGlobal. Dr. Zhang holds an MBA from Georgetown University and a Ph.D. from Xi’an Jiaotong University

DISCLAIMER

This article was provided by a third party and, as such, the views expressed therein and/or presented are their own and may not represent or reflect the views of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), its management, Board, or members. Readers should not act on the basis of any information contained in the blog without referring to applicable laws and regulations and/or without appropriate professional advice.