SFO's new international terminal soars proving where true beauty lies: in the software

America's largest international gateway now has a new home, and it is absolutely gorgeous. But it's the speed of your trip through this terminal that will truly impress.

Soaring rooflines, vast skylights, an art collection, and the world's largest installation of certified, sustainably harvested cherry wood paneling–the new $2.4 billion International Terminal at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) is breathtaking. It is also extremely functional–offering 24 international gates, more than any other international terminal in the United States, and the capacity to process 5,000 passengers per hour through customs and immigration. The terminal boasts 168 high-tech, multi-use check-in counters, offers state-of-the-art security systems, has enough room for 50 world-class restaurants and retail stores, and is the largest building ever constructed on base isolators, allowing it to withstand a major earthquake.

But what really sets this new terminal apart is what you can't see–a network of intelligent software modules called the SmartAirport Operations Center that continually monitors the status of gates, baggage belts, check-in counters, and other resources–allocating each one to ensure optimum passenger flow throughout the 1.8 million square foot facility. Operations personnel–not software programmers–input the rules by which the SmartAirport Operations Center makes decisions. If a plane is late, if a piece of equipment breaks down, the terminal can adjust automatically, reducing the waiting time for bags, assigning the gates closest to the terminal entrances first, and making sure the lines at check-in counters are evenly distributed.

SFO's new International Terminal was designed from the ground up to take maximum advantage of this kind of state-of-the art technology–and to speed the passenger's journey from planeside to curbside. Its architecture, for example, employs a sophisticated multi-layered design that facilitates traffic flow in a non-conflicting way. Even more to the point, all of the terminal's equipment–everything from computer terminals to baggage belts–is designated "common use". That means it can be assigned to any flight of any airline at the terminal, enabling SFO to derive maximum utility from every asset with less waiting by passengers. That flexibility, combined with the intelligence of the SmartAirport Operations Center, gives the new International Terminal a functional edge that rivals its aesthetic appearance.

"If we look at the automation and common use components, we are certainly looking at efficiencies," states Robert McKinley, the new terminal's director. "At most domestic airports, equipment is proprietary and most space is under long-term lease to the airlines–allowing them to maintain control of the facility throughout the day. That can be somewhat inefficient, particularly with carriers that can have lower utilization of those facilities, which can also lead to more expense for those carriers. What common use provides us with is the ability to optimize use of the facilities and accommodate more activity including ticket counters, gates, and support facilities."

Allan Huber, operations coordinator, is even more blunt. "In the old terminal, there were many times during the day when we would have lines out the door on one side of the terminal and totally vacant counters on the other–and the same can be said for the baggage makeup units, and the claim areas, and so forth. So one of the factors that went into the design of the terminal is that we wanted it to be common use in every way. This terminal is, for the first time in San Francisco, a truly common use terminal.

"We needed a system to manage that," he continues, "to tell operators in the tower which facilities to assign to which flights on an hour-by-hour basis."

Two major issues

Ascent, it turns out, was actually the second vendor SFO chose to automate the management of its common use terminal equipment. There were two issues, according to Huber, that led them to abandon the initial effort–issues he believes other airports might want to consider before committing to a system.

"The first was the inability to respond dynamically to schedule changes. The second was lack of smooth integration. Although the original system did very well for long-term schedule planning, it fell short when responding dynamically to last minute changes in a flight schedule. We also needed a system that was entirely integrated - so that, for example, the flight information display system, the baggage handling system, and the ticket counter allocation system–so all of it would appear to the user as one seamless product. With Ascent, even though there may be multiple applications, all the applications look and work the same way, and they all talk to each other. It's a single environment for managing everything."

Looking back, Huber now believes, the airport should have realized the importance of integration sooner.

"If I had to be totally honest I would say that I probably underestimated the value of total integration. I really thought that the schedule that we had - and that we have right now–was something that, if worse came to worse, we could just work out with a paper and pencil. And the rest of these things - like baggage claim and counter allocation–we could handle manually just by entering the data into the FIDS [flight information display system]. Well, now that we are in here I can see that was pretty naïve of me at the time. I really don't honestly believe we could run this terminal if it were not integrated."

The terminal's director agrees. "We have 20 active gates," McKinley says. "And a little over four flights a day out of each gate. So, okay, maybe we could have assigned those gates manually. But when you add 168 ticket counters, 16 baggage carousels, and 500 or so dynamic signs to that formula, management becomes much more problematic. Ascent provides a pretty critical system because it shows how one event, such as a half hour delay in a flight departure, will impact the utilization of resources like, say, a ticket counter that happens to be shared by two airlines–and the baggage belt for the arrival of the flight–as well as the signage associated with that baggage belt and ticket counter. Then it makes the appropriate sign changes to facilitate the whole operation."

And there are other complications to consider, Huber states. "Every time an airline gets new equipment, that also affects the gates and has to be reflected on the FIDS. Ticket counter assignments may change because today one airline may want more counters than they had yesterday."

By the time the SFO team fully realized what their actual needs were, there was little time left to act. "Our problem," McKinley says, "was that after we had worked so long with the other vendor we suddenly found ourselves in need of a dynamic and integrated solution, as well as one that could be installed in a very tight timeframe. That's when we called in Ascent."

Three months to implement

SFO contracted with Ascent in late August 2000 to implement the SmartAirport Operations Center Gate Management, Baggage Belt Allocation, and Check-In Counter scheduling solutions-about three months before the International Terminal opened in early December. "We started the actual physical integration of some of these systems while we were moving airlines into the terminal December 5th," McKinley says. "We really have to hand it to Ascent for being very supportive, and also for some level of risk taking. There were a huge number of activities involved just with the connectivity between various databases, and that process was pretty dynamic and continuous for a three-month period between September and December."

Huber paints a picture of what that was like: "What we ended up doing is turning on this new system, which was Ascent–and, oh, by the way–integrating it with all the other systems and doing it at one time while we were also opening the terminal. It went a lot more smoothly than it might have."

For which he credits Ascent's experience and also its level of support to the project. "I think the thing that made it easy was that Ascent has done this before. It was one of the things we discussed at our first meeting with Ascent. I said, `Here are the things I want,' and Ascent said, `Well, that sounds very much like what we've already done in Toronto.'

"I said, `Let me see what you've already done in Toronto,' and the more we talked the more I could see that 95% of what they had done in Toronto was exactly what we needed in San Francisco."

When asked if he received good support from Ascent, Huber says, "I sure did. I have had a couple of other airports call and ask me that, and I have to say that yes, I did."

Another factor in Ascent's favor (McKinley calls it "Huge!") was how easy it is for the Ascent SmartAirport Operations Center solution to accommodate the constantly changing physical environment. Like most airports, SFO is continually under construction. And now that the new International Terminal is open for business, space in the old terminal is being refurbished, much of it with common use equipment that will also be managed using Ascent's SmartAirport Operations Center. "Because we have the foundation in place now, changes will be incremental. If we add a group of gates, let's say, or if we add parking positions or parking locations to overnight aircraft–or if there is something else that we suddenly want to start managing–we now have the systems and processes in place. It's really cookie cutter from here on out."

Sophisticated architecture: physical and virtual

Huber says there is a major reason why SmartAirport is easy to extend and adapt–the product suite has a rules engine that allows non-programmers to change the rules by which resources get assigned. As the airport continues to evolve, airport operations personnel, rather than Ascent technicians, will be able to put the intelligence into the system to allow for change. Huber–who has used the rules engine himself–describes it as "amazingly simple." That's good; especially in light of the new terminal's own architecture–for example, the non-conflicting traffic flow pattern previously mentioned. SmartAirport is the only software suited to take full advantage of that sophisticated terminal design. Not only are the various software modules integrated with each other, but the physical airport and the logical airport are effectively integrated as well. That's because every decision SmartAirport makes is really an extension of what is the best way to take advantage of the terminal's physical space.

Huber cites an example: "The terminal is quite large, so you can write a rule that says, `Don't use the outboard gates if an inner gate is available' - or you can assign weights that give priority to specific gates during certain times of the day. That means that people will only have to walk the minimum possible distance from the front door to their gate. With SmartAirport, you can write any rule you want." The rules engine is a great way to "clone the best managers we have," Huber says. "We can take the knowledge of our best minds, express that knowledge as a set of rules, and then have those rules consistently applied."

All of this, of course, begs one very important question: if traffic is so backed up in the nation's skies, why the urgency to speed up traffic on the ground? It turns out that on the ground is exactly where the bottleneck is–not just for improving air travel, but also for improving the region's economy in general.

"San Francisco is not a slot controlled airport, it is a gate constrained airport," Huber says. "At the old terminal, the way we increased capacity was to bring airplanes out to what we call remote pads and have buses take passengers between the terminal and the planes. That's not very convenient for the customer, especially when it's raining, and it's not very efficient for the airlines either. It also brings up a lot of issues like remote fueling and serving handicapped passengers. That was the whole impetus behind using common terminal equipment–and the reason we brought in Ascent–so that we could move more passengers." San Francisco is the natural departure point to the Orient from the U.S., Huber says. "We are located much closer to the Orient than Los Angeles is, for example. But that advantage won't matter unless we can move more people through the airport faster."

One look at the new terminal's extraordinary design will convince you: San Francisco has overlooked no detail to deliver the ultimate air travel experience.

"We just spent $2.4 billion making sure we can," says the proud director. "In that light, SmartAirport seemed like a smart idea."