Airport systems enhance air travel efficiency and operations
ECAT101 Assessment Project 1
Introduction
The main aim of the airport systems is to support the 5 key elements of airport operations, namely airport capacity, operational efficiency, aviation security and safety, customer service and financial sustainability.
The main objective of this project is to provide the opportunity to better appreciate how various airport systems could enhance the key elements of airport operations and understand how to plan for their introduction to a new airport.
It also provides an opportunity to demonstrate how the various airport systems, with the incorporation of some existing technologies such as information technology, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology, biometric technology, artificial intelligence technology, etc. could further enhance seamless air travel.
This is an individual project. You are required to compile a written report (25% of subject marks) and prepare an oral presentation (25% of subject marks).
Project Description
Alpha Airport, an international airport, is experiencing rapid traffic growth and is planning to build a new airport with a single passenger terminal, to replace the current terminal. The concept layout plan of the terminal is shown below. The size and dimensions of the terminal (landside) as indicated.
Landside- Landside (1000 sq. metre)
You are required to give your proposal with good justification on the following airport systems/facilities required for the new airport terminal using the following parameters.
- Airport passenger capacity: 10 million passenger movements per annum (10 mppa)
- Hourly peak departure passenger capacity – 1900
- Hourly peak arrival passenger capacity – 1700
- Hourly peak aircraft movements – 21
- Hourly peak departure movements – 18
- Hourly peak arrival movements – 16
- Historical baggage / passenger ratio – 1.3 : 1
- Expected number of operating airlines – 17 (9 full-service carriers and 8 low-cost carriers)
- Expected main aircraft types – B777 (10%), B787 (15%), B737 (20%), A350 (15%), A330 (10%), A320 (25%), ATR72 (5%)
- Approximate size of a check-in counter – 6 sqm
- Rate of counter check-in process – 15 to 20 passengers per hour
- Approximate size of a self-service kiosk – 1.2 sqm
- Rate of kiosk check-in process – 30 to 40 passengers per hour
- Approximate size of a self bag drop – 2.5 sqm
- Self-service kiosk / self bag drop ratio – 2 to 3 : 1
- Expected passenger profile – 30% young travellers
Report Submission Requirement
The report consists of the following sections. The report shall not be more than 3000 words , and you may include diagrams in your report if you deem it relevant.
Include a short introduction and conclusion in your report. Attach the provided Declaration of Originality as the front page of your report submission.
Passenger Check-in System (PCS)
- Considering the passenger profile, proposed the type(s) and calculate the number(s) of passenger check-in facilities (counters and/or kiosks) and number of self bag drop, if required. Support your proposal with clear calculations and state your justifications.
- Proposed the type(s) of passenger check-in concept (dedicated and/or common check-in) for Alpha Airport and state your reason(s) from the viewpoint of an airport operator.
- Proposed the layout(s) of the check-in facilities and support your proposal with clear justifications.
Baggage Handling System (BHS)
- Describe briefly the 5 levels of security screening process for check-in baggage commonly adopted by most airports.
- Proposed the number of baggage security screening machines (Level 1 EDS) needed. Add in 20% capacity to support screening of transfer bags. Support your proposal with relevant calculations and state the model of recommended. In addition, explain whether more or a smaller number of Level 3 CT-x-ray machines are required.
- Propose the type of baggage handling sortation system for Alpha Airport and state the justifications for your recommendation.
- Calculate the number of baggage make-up conveyers (departure) and show your calculation clearly.
Passenger Loading Bridge (PLB)
- Calculate the number of PLB required, if each PLB can handle about 0.5 mppa and show your calculations clearly.
- Propose the type(s) of PLB for Alpha Airport and state the rationales for your recommendation.
- Besides having contact gates, explain your rationale whether you would be recommending for Alpha Airport to have non-contact gates as well.
Presentation Slides Submission Requirement
The video presentation shall not be more than 15 PPT slides and not more than 10 minutes of presentation recording to include the video of the presenter.
Automated People Mover System (APMS)
- Provide your recommendation on the need for an APMS and state the justifications of your recommendation. If yes, which part of the airport would the APMS be connecting. If no, what alternate mode of passenger movement facilitation would you be recommending.
Schematic diagram
- In your PPT slides, present a schematic diagram showing how the bags flow from the check-in area (counters, kiosks and bag drop area) through the various BHS components including inline security screening machines (only Level 1 required), sortation system and finally the make-up conveyors. Your schematic diagram should accurately reflect the proposal you have made for Alpha Airport in your report.
Seamless Travel Concept
- Evaluate and propose how the travel through Alpha Airport could be made seamless when incorporating certain technologies such as information technology, biometric technology, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology and artificial intelligence (AI) technology, etc. where applicable.
Project Submission Due Date
You may use AI for planning, idea development, research, and language improvement, but it is important to fact-check the information. Your final submission should demonstrate how you have developed, refined, and verified these ideas.
Please submit a soft copy of your declaration form, project report and PPT slides, through the submission links in PoliteMall by the respective due dates.
- Project report submission due on 2 Aug 2026 @2359h
- Project presentation submission due on 9 Aug 2026 @2359h Please note that late submissions will be penalised as follow
| If you submit … | You will be awarded |
| Within the next 7 calendar days from the deadline | 80% of the actual mark for work done |
| After 7 calendar days from the deadline | 0 mark |
ECAT101 Assessment Project 1 Rubric
Report
| Criteria | Excellent | Very Good | Good | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Passenger Check-in System (PCS) | Accurate calculation of the required PCS numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are logical and practical, and supported with clearly explained justifications. | Accurate calculation of the required PCS numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are somewhat logical and practical, and supported with justifications are not well articulated. | Accurate calculation of the required PCS numbers with some working shown. Recommendations are somewhat practical, and supported with briefly explained justifications. | Inaccurate calculation of the required PCS numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are somewhat practical, and supported with briefly explained justifications. | Inaccurate calculations of the required PCS numbers with incorrect or no working shown. Recommendations are impractical, and supported with incorrect or no justifications. |
| Baggage Handling Systems (BHS) | Accurate calculation of the required BHS numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are logical and practical, and supported with clearly explained justifications. | Accurate calculation of the required BHS numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are somewhat logical and practical, and supported with justifications are not well articulated. | Accurate calculation of the required BHS numbers with some working shown. Recommendations are somewhat practical, and supported with briefly explained justifications. | Inaccurate calculation of the required BHS numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are somewhat practical, and supported with briefly explained justifications. | Inaccurate calculations of the required BHS numbers with incorrect or no working shown. Recommendations are impractical, and supported with incorrect or no justifications. |
| Criteria | Excellent | Very Good | Good | Average | Poor |
| Passenger Loading Bridge (PLB) 30% | Accurate calculation of the required PLB numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are logical and practical, and supported with clearly explained justifications. | Accurate calculation of the required PLB numbers with clear and complete working shown. Recommendations are somewhat practical, and supported with briefly explained justifications. | Accurate calculation of the required PLB numbers with clear and complete working shown, Recommendations are somewhat practical, and supported with briefly explained justifications. | Inaccurate calculation of the required PLB numbers with incorrect or no working shown. Recommendations are impractical, and supported with incorrect or no justifications. | — |
| Organisation and language 10% | The report is expertly structured with a clear and logical flow. Sections are well-organized, with smooth transitions between ideas, making the report easy to follow. | The report is well-organized with a clear structure. Sections are logically ordered, and transitions between them are mostly smooth. There is minor room for improvement in flow or coherence. | The report is organized but may have some structural issues (e.g., weak transitions or unclear section order). The main ideas are present but could be more logically ordered or developed. | The report has some organization, but sections may be poorly ordered or lack clear transitions. The structure is difficult to follow at times, making it harder for the reader to understand the flow of ideas. | The report lacks a clear structure. Sections are disorganized, and transitions between ideas are unclear. The report is difficult to follow, and the overall flow is confusing. |
Presentation
| Criteria | Excellent | Very Good | Good | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Automated People Mover System (APMS) 30% | Complete and comprehensive description of APMS and excellent justifications on recommendation. | Complete but lack details in description of APMS and good justifications on recommendation. | Incomplete and superficial description of APMS and good justifications on recommendation. | Incomplete and vague description of APMS and fair justifications on recommendation. | Poor or no description on APMS and poor or no justification on recommendation. |
| Schematic diagram 30% | Complete and accurate drawing of the required process with all the details captured. | Complete and accurate drawing of the required process missing details. | Complete but inaccurate drawing of the required process with a few (1 to 2) inaccuracies in the steps. | Complete but inaccurate drawing of the required process with more than 2 inaccuracies in the steps, with a few details captured. | Incomplete and inaccurate drawing of the required process with a few details captured. |
| Seamless Travel Concept 30% | Complete and comprehensive description of Seamless Travel concept with appropriate use of technologies. | Complete but lack details in description of Seamless Travel concept with appropriate use of technologies. | Incomplete and superficial description of Seamless Travel concept and application of technologies. | Incomplete and vague description of Seamless Travel concept and application of technologies. | Poor description of Seamless Travel concept and poor application of technologies. |
| Oral Presentation 10% | Presentation is orderly and visually appealing. Use of fluid speech and consistent inflections. Meet apportioned time interval. | Presentation is orderly and visually effective. Use of fluid speech or consistent inflections. Meet apportioned time interval. | Presentation is orderly and visually effective. Display some level of inflections throughout. Delivery is in burst and does not meet apportioned time interval. | Presentation is orderly but not visually effective. Display some level of inflections throughout. Delivery is in burst and does not meet the apportioned time interval. | Presentation is disorderly and/or visually ineffective. Consistently use of monotonous voice. Delivery is either too quick (by 2 min) or too slow to meet the apportioned time interval. |
cta_question_1
The post ECAT101 Airport Systems Assessment Brief 2026 | Temasek Polytechnic appeared first on My Assignment Help SG.