Airport Planning & Infrastructure

Airport Intelligence Series From Reactive to Predictive: How AI Is Transforming the Airport Operations Control Centre May 2026 7 min read Walk into the Airport Operations Control Centre (AOCC) at any large US hub today — Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Chicago O’Hare, Los Angeles — and you will find a room designed around coordination. Airline duty managers, ramp tower controllers, ground handler dispatchers, ATC liaisons, customs and TSA representatives, and airport operations staff sit shoulder to shoulder, sharing screens and radios to manage the day as it evolves. The architecture of that room — physical and procedural — is built on a single assumption: that disruption is unpredictable, and that the best the operator can do is coordinate quickly once it occurs. Though that assumption still largely holds true, but it is no longer adequate. That assumption was reasonable in an era of lower traffic volumes, and less integrated supply chains. Bureau of Transportation Statistics data for 2025 shows that more than one in five of US domestic flights arrived more than 15 minutes late, generating systemic inefficiency costs estimated at over $30 billion annually[1]. A meaningful proportion of those delays does not originate in the air or with the carrier — it originates on the ground, in the airport-controlled environment that the AOCC is supposed to govern: stand availability, ground handling resource allocation, ramp congestion, baggage system throughput, and the dozens of small dependencies. What AI Changes — And How Traditional AOCC tools — A-CDM dashboards, AODB feeds, gate management systems — describe what is happening now. A traditional form of representing gate utilisation was using Gantt charts (see example below) which clearly depicted the aircraft gate assignments for a design or busy day and where the gaps were to squeeze in additional slots. This was done iteratively and was a very manual and time-consuming process. Representative Gantt Chart The representative Gantt chart — a static, deterministic gate plan with visible utilization variance, long buffers on some gates and tightly stacked turns on others. With Machine Learning and AI, tools are being adopted that can bring in a host of additional layers for the airport operational managers to make decisions in a live environment. Real-time predictive re-allocation. Combining live chocks-on/off-block data with predictive turnaround completion models lets the system reassign downstream gates 60–120 minutes ahead of conflict, before the duty manager has to scramble. ML models trained on historical actual-vs-scheduled distributions assign gates based on probability-weighted on/off-block windows, not single-point estimates. Visible white space between aircraft turns is insurance against uncertainty. ML can shrink buffers where the data supports it and unlocking 5–10 percent additional stand capacity at the peaks. Resource optimisation. The real bottleneck is often GSE, pushback tugs, or staff. Co-optimise gate, equipment, and crew allocation as an overall KPI — reducing equipment idle time without compromising service levels. Predictive AI systems, trained on historical flight performance, real-time weather feeds, passenger flow models, ground service event logs, and stand allocation histories, can model the state of an airport’s operations not just now, but two, four, or six hours from now — to drive pre-emptive decision-making rather than reactive coordination. Measurable Value Deployments now in the field — Heathrow, Schiphol, Changi, Frankfurt, and a growing set of US hubs — are generating consistent operational improvements across several categories. What is clear is that the European hubs and Changi are one step ahead at the AOCC backbone layer; US deployments are concentrated at the apron/turnaround layer. SEA, JFK T4, and CVG (Assaia) and JFK NTO (Searidge) all sit on the same architectural layer. DFW is the closest US analogue to the European AOCC-stack programmes but is earlier in the cycle. Heathrow’s. AIRHART integrates data across the full airport ecosystem and applies machine learning to generate operational forecasts and decision support in real time. At around 480,000 aircraft movements annually and capacity utilisation exceeding 98 percent, Heathrow is the most demanding test environment in global aviation. US deployments are catching up. Several major hubs have predictive AOCC programmes in evaluation, pilot, or early deployment, and the integrator-driven cargo hubs — Memphis, Louisville, and Anchorage. The gap is not technology availability. It is the willingness to commit to the multi-stakeholder transformation that extracts the value. The Business Case for US Airport Operators The economics are straightforward at the major hubs. At Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson, where the operation handles roughly 800,000 aircraft movements annually, a one-percent improvement in operational efficiency translates to estimated order-of-magnitude $10–14 million[2] in direct cost and delay-related economic value per year. At Dallas/Fort Worth, with over 700,000 movements, the equivalent figure is $8–12 million. Even at smaller hubs — Seattle, Denver, Charlotte, Minneapolis-St. Paul — the math holds: the upside from a working predictive AOCC is in the high seven figures annually, against an implementation programme that is typically a multi-year, mid-eight-figure investment. The case is even stronger for airports in active terminal development. Miami International, Nashville, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, Salt Lake City, and Kansas City all have terminal programmes in flight or recently completed. Each has the opportunity to design predictive operational capability — sensor coverage, data infrastructure, control room layout, stakeholder data sharing — into new facilities at a small fraction of the cost of post-opening retrofit. Avinia’s View: This Is an Operational Transformation Airport operators often approach AI in the AOCC as a technology procurement exercise — identify a vendor, run a proof of concept, buy a platform. The results are consistently disappointing. The platform works; the organisation does not change; the outcomes do not materialise. The harder change is the operating model the technology enables. The shared-data agreements that underpin predictive operations require carriers, ground handlers, and airport authorities to commit to a level of operational transparency that most US stakeholder relationships are not currently structured for. The airports extracting real value started with the operational use cases — what decisions do we want to improve, by how much, and what would it be worth — and built the data infrastructure, governance frameworks, and change

Airport Intelligence Series Building Smart: The Case for Low-Cost Terminals April 2026 4 min read India’s aviation story is not just about metro hubs and large, glass‑and‑steel terminals. The growth is actually in the smaller places: the tier‑2 and tier‑3 cities providing regional connectivity beyond the metros. As the Centre pushes ahead with a modified UDAN scheme and a pipeline of roughly 100 new and revived airports, one question will determine whether this expansion is sustainable: can we build and run truly low‑cost terminals that are lean and efficient? For too long, “low‑cost airport” has been heard as cheap and low quality terminal. In reality, a low‑cost terminal is best understood along three dimensions. Lower CapEx Lower OpEx Higher Efficiency By no means – lower level of service. The starting point, therefore, is not a drawing but a strategic business model. Any tier‑2 or tier‑3 terminal must first answer three basic questions. What is its positioning? What are its constraints? What level of service is it promising? Once the economic logic is clear, sizing and phasing become the crucial design decisions. Many of the new airports risk repeating a familiar mistake: building for a 15‑year horizon based on the opportunistic forecasts. A low‑cost approach does the opposite. It uses realistic, conservative traffic projections to size processing areas and takes seriously the idea of modularity: building an initial 0.5–1 million passengers per annum (MPPA) module that can be replicated or extended as demand grows, instead of a single oversized structure that stands half‑empty for years. Site planning is done with future phases in mind, ensuring that additional halls or fingers can be added without tearing up aprons or access roads. In physical terms, this often leads to a simple linear terminal, especially for the 0.5–5 MPPA band where most Indian regional airports will sit for some time. A single‑storey, linear hall with aircraft parked parallel on the airside allows short walking distances, intuitive flows, and easy incremental expansion. We have examples of such flexible modular design terminals in India. Terminal 1 of Kempegowda International Airport initially designed for 11 MPPA, incrementally expanded and optimized for 30 MPPA. It is a single level linear terminal built on the concept of modularity and functionality, whose capacity could be easily augmented basis the demand growth. More complex typologies—fingers, satellites, hybrids—only make sense when aircraft stands or land are genuinely constrained. For most tier‑2 and tier‑3 locations, they are unnecessary complications that add cost without benefit. With the typology in place, the design philosophy should be to strip down to essentials, then add selectively where the business case is strong. Essentials are non‑negotiable: level of service, safety and regulatory requirements, accessibility and passenger flows are a must. Efficiency enablers come next: consolidated processing zones rather than scattered islands, minimal level changes, and clear wayfinding can shrink the footprint and staffing levels while actually improving the passenger journey.Good-to-have elements like retail, premium lounges, large parking structures, etc enter the conversation in the end. Operating cost and resilience are where low‑cost terminals can truly differentiate themselves. In India’s hot climates, there is no reason every square metre of a building must be mechanically cooled. A more intelligent approach uses high roofs, deep overhangs, shaded verandahs and cross‑ventilation to keep public halls comfortable for most of the year, could be looked at. This not only reduces energy spend but also cuts the complexity and maintenance burden of HVAC systems. Operational flexibility is another underrated design parameter. Smaller airports tend to see peaky, unpredictable traffic, often driven by a handful of scheduled flights, charters and seasonal tourism. Designing processing areas, seating and ancillary spaces to be reconfigurable, may be by using movable partitions, multi‑use halls and flexible counters allows operators to cope with these peaks without overbuilding. With technology emergence and adoption, like DigiYatra, self‑service check‑in and bag drops, body scanners in security, such flexibility will also make it easier to retrofit without major civil works. Another important aspect of making low-cost terminals appealing is their identity. Using local materials—brick, stone, timber, traditional screens—in simple forms gives a sense of identity at modest cost. Programming retail and F&B with regional brands rather than generic chains can support local economies while creating non‑aeronautical revenue streams. Most importantly, the airport must be thought of as part of a wider urban and economic system. Its master plan should align with city land‑use, industrial corridors and logistics nodes, with an emphasis on affordable surface connectivity—buses, shared mobility, eventual rail—rather than just private cars. For many smaller cities, getting this interface right will have more impact on usage and public perception than any architectural flourish. Taken together, these elements can be distilled into a simple strategic playbook for India’s next wave of airports. Right‑size and phase capacity by designing for what you realistically need in the next five to seven years. Default to simple, linear layouts and only move up the complexity ladder when forced. Treat non‑negotiable level of service, safety and regulatory needs as sacred, but challenge every other line item for its impact on lifecycle cost and service. Design for low operations and maintenance (O&M) through climate‑sensitive architecture and robust systems, and keep operational flexibility at the heart of spatial planning. Finally, give each terminal a grounded sense of place and connect it tightly to the city it serves. If Indian planners, state governments and private operators can internalise this mindset, the country’s regional aviation push has a chance to be both expansive and financially sustainable. It can bring the benefits of air connectivity to dozens of emerging cities without saddling future taxpayers and operators with infrastructure they cannot afford to run. Share Share Share

Airport Intelligence Series India’s First Dual Airport Case Study: Goa’s Dabolim/MOPA System – Redistribution or Real Growth? February 2026 6 min read The story of Goa was that of a suppressed system for air travel – road taking the dominant share of domestic tourist activity – with seasonal activity driven by the charters from Europe. MOPA (GOX) opened in January 2023, and Dabolim (GOI) /MOPA (GOX) became the first dual-airport system in India. The two airports are about 60 km apart. Technically, being part of a state and not a city/metropolitan region creates distinct catchment preferences due to the geographical spread. However, due to lack of serious competition from any other airport in the neighbouring states – the dual airports represent a competitive scenario with the incumbent, state-owned Airports Authority of India (AAI) operating Dabolim International Airport (GOI), and the 2nd airport, Manohar International Airport (GOX), at MOPA, operating under a 40-year concession model with GMR Airports owning 100% of the equity. 90 mins catchment area With distinct catchments, the two airports appeal to a very different type of customer. South Goa generally attracts local domiciled population and high-end tourists who prefer luxury resorts and personalised hospitality experiences, while North Goa draws more tourists focused on entertainment and nightlife. This difference in tourist profile and location makes both airports important for the state’s connectivity and tourism economy. The success of a dual airport system (for both parties involved) hinges on the positioning of each airport and the scale that the airports can grow to. Unlike many other dual airport systems globally, the traffic allocation at Dabolim (GOI) /MOPA (GOX) is not a result of any government mandate but purely on market dynamics (and incentives). Through the lens of demand and supply, we look at how the overall pie has changed and the market share the two airports have been able to garner supported by the role some of the heavy-hitter airlines have played in the traffic distribution. System Demand – Has the overall pie grown? For the GOI/GOX system, one airport was never meant to be a replacement for the other. Since overall market size is not a zero-sum game, the expectation is that the new airport will create new customers and tap into latent demand. The overall pie should grow for the following reasons: With GOX helping ease congestion and representing an option for airlines and passengers who don’t want to be limited by the operational restrictions at GOI and sync up travel to coincide with hotel check-in and check-out times Improved access to North Goa (party place with serene beaches) The two-airport system creates more supply and provides room for future growth.   Prior to the opening of MOPA (GOX), there was a sharp recovery after the COVID-19 pandemic with total passenger demand rebounding to 7.8 million in CY 2022 (representing a year-on-year growth of 50.3% from 2021). International recovery lagged while domestic travel rebounded aggressively on the back of revenge travel. Post MOPA (GOX) commissioning, the dual system traffic increased sharply in 2023 due to post pandemic revenge travel surge and the new supply. The pace of growth slowed after 2023 as demand stabilised. The passenger demand for the dual airport system grew from 11.16 million to 11.62 million passengers from 2023 to 2025 – a relatively modest 2% CAGR largely concealing the redistribution beneath the headline number. This growth is lower than the overall growth seen in the Indian aviation market during the same period- India aviation market grew at 1 x multiplier of GDP (6.6% CAGR). Overall, there hasn’t been much growth system wide – the cumulative supply of seats at GOX and GOI has only grown 3.6% from 2023 to 2025.  What’s going on, Goa? Have you lost your MOJO? There could be several reasons for the insipid demand growth in recent times including the following considerations: Overtourism – Crowding and low value tourism eroding the cultural identity of Goa Choice – Are Indians opting for other destinations including reasonably priced scenic destinations in South-East Asia? Airlines are not complaining as they map the Eastward surge. Cost – Has the state become too expensive due to the lack of affordable accommodation and transportation? Room tariffs in Goa have increased with the average daily rate (ADR) of about 10,900 INR in 2024 (Source: horwathhtl 2024 report) Overtourism has been the bane of the state once known for its casual and easy-going lifestyle. The crowds thronging the beaches of Goa are not respectful of the beach surroundings. Choice was expected and as the numbers of Indians traveling internationally continue to grow exponentially, the Indian carriers are lapping up slots at places such as Bali, Vietnam, Cambodia to name a few. Scheduled seats from India to Southeast Asia in 2025 are projected to be 29% above 2019 levels. The third issue is a structural problem that is not just confined to Goa in the post pandemic world. Goa used to be known as the cheaper Maldives for our East European and Russian friends (who would come and stay for months sometimes). That’s not the case anymore. Goa’s overall average daily rate (ADR) has roughly doubled over the last decade — from around ₹7,000 in FY2016 to over ₹10,000 by FY2023, consistently making it among the highest-ADR hotel market in India. In 2024, Goa slowed but did not decline — its 2.4% RevPAR (revenue per available room) growth remained positive but was very modest compared to the high growth rates of the previous two years. Foreign Tourist Arrivals (FTAs) into Goa by air are currently about 71% lower than 2019 levels on the back of fewer charter flights. In 2019, there were around 800 international charter ATMs. By 2025, this number had fallen to around 190 ATMs, representing an 81% traffic decline compared to 2019. For Goa to get its MOJO back, there needs to be a recalibration of the price point and service offerings that competes with the Balis of the world. Consider removing this filler

Airport Intelligence Series Beyond Airport Real Estate: Building Airport cities for Speed January 2026 5 min read In recent times, airport cities or aerotropolis[1] are increasingly embedded in airport visions, concession documents, and development plans. Yet outcomes vary dramatically. Some evolve into productive economic clusters generating billions in annual value, while others remain fragmented real estate developments disconnected from the very airports they were meant to leverage. The difference lies not in ambition but in execution. Specifically, in understanding that airport cities are fundamentally about time-cost optimization, not traditional location advantages. In this article we explore how an airport city[2] can be planned successfully by aligning to its tenants’ value proposition. The Time-Cost Paradigm Traditional real estate planning measures value in distance—kilometers from the urban core or major infrastructure. But airport city planning demands a different calculus: time and cost of connectivity supersede space and distance. A firm located 30 kilometers from an airport with 10-minute highway access possesses superior competitive positioning to one situated 5 kilometers away with 45-minute congested travel time. Consider the pharmaceutical supply chain. Kenya’s logistics improvements reduced customs clearance time for air shipments from 2.5 days to 1.8 days resulting in more timely delivery of life-saving HIV/AIDS drugs. For fashion retailers like Zara, supply chains move from concept to store display in weeks, turning time into competitive currency. Similarly for high-value electronics, biomeds, and perishables, air transport provides what economists term “economies of speed”, competitive advantages that emerge from velocity, not scale. For airport city businesses, a 15-minute accessibility enables just-in-time logistics while maintaining schedule reliability. A manufacturer needing to ship high-value components can move from factory floor to aircraft in under an hour. A consultant can leave the office, clear security, and reach the departure gate within 45 minutes. This rapid, reliable connectivity defines the competitive advantage of an airport city and commands premium pricing. Delhi Airport city exemplifies this value creation. It has attracted ₹30 billion in investment demonstrating that aerocities generate returns far exceeding traditional real estate when properly executed. Strategic Tenant Curation It is imperative that product mix and zoning are planned with time-cost optimization as the primary criterion. Not all businesses benefit equally from airport proximity, and indiscriminate leasing dilutes airport city value proposition. Premium airport city pricing is justified for high time-sensitivity segments like express logistics and e-commerce fulfillment (Amazon, FedEx, DHL), pharmaceuticals requiring cold chain and rapid delivery, high-value electronics where obsolescence risk demands rapid throughput, fresh produce and perishables where every hour affects quality and price, and advanced manufacturing with global supply chains. Moderate time-sensitivity tenants like business services with frequent air travel, exhibition and conference centers may value airport proximity but won’t pay the highest premiums. These should occupy secondary rings with good connectivity rather than premium adjacent to airside zones. If an industry doesn’t genuinely benefit from rapid airport access, they’re seeking lower land costs rather than time-cost advantages—and won’t sustain premium rents. To maximize airport city value, Indian airports must avoid common planning mistakes that undermine the fundamental value proposition 1: Prioritizing Aesthetics Over Functionality Many airport city plans emphasize architectural grandeur and landscaping at the expense of traffic flow optimization. Beautiful boulevards with traffic circles may be good urban design features but create bottlenecks that undermine time-cost advantages. Function must precede form in aerotropolis planning. Prioritize grade-separated intersections over picturesque roundabouts, fast-moving traffic lanes over wide pedestrian plazas in freight zones. 2: Ignoring Peak-Hour Performance Infrastructure that works during off-peak hours may fail precisely when businesses need it most. If manufacturing shift changes coincide with airport passenger peaks, congestion costs multiply. Planning must take into account the operating hours of the facilities planned and provide enough capacity in design, along with flexibility to expand. 3: Confusing Proximity with Accessibility Being “next to the airport” means nothing if travel time is unreliable or routes are congested. Always measure accessibility by actual travel time under realistic conditions. Plan surface access infrastructure accordingly, prioritizing reliability over just proximity. 4: Not Planning for Multi-Modal Integration Transfers between modes should take less than 5 minutes with clear wayfinding. Paris CDG, Amsterdam Schiphol, and Frankfurt demonstrate how proper integration multiplies the value of each individual mode. Traffic management systems, grade separations, and modal integration are expensive but they create defensible competitive advantages. Case Study: Amsterdam Airport Schiphol Amsterdam Airport Schiphol stands as a compelling case study in how strategic planning can transform an airport into a powerful economic development engine. Firstly, the creation of specialized development entities like Schiphol Real Estate (SRE), and public-private partnerships through Schiphol Area Development Company (SADC)[3] enabled coordinated action that would be nearly impossible with fragmented governance. This structural innovation may be as important as any physical infrastructure investment. The airport functions as a truly intermodal hub. Nederlandse Spoorwegen operates high-frequency rail services connecting the airport to Rotterdam, The Hague, Amsterdam, and international destinations via high-speed rail. High-speed rail integration is particularly important for European contexts. It also has direct access to major European highways enabling efficient road freight distribution. This multimodal integration creates powerful network effects. A business executive can fly from Singapore, clear customs, reach a meeting in central Amsterdam within 30 minutes, and return to the airport for an evening flight to New York, all without needing a rental car. Similarly, high-value air cargo can transfer seamlessly to road or rail distribution networks, minimizing handling time and maintaining cold-chain integrity for pharmaceuticals and perishables. The airport city, Schiphol Central Business District (CBD) has passenger terminals, retail galleries, office buildings, hotels, conference facilities, dining establishments and entertainment venues. This 2-million-square-meter mixed-use core houses corporate headquarters of major multinationals including Microsoft Europe, Citibank, and Samsung, alongside 578 different businesses ranging from Fortune 500 companies to innovative startups. The Strategic Imperative In an era where business competitiveness depends on supply chain velocity, manufacturing flexibility, and rapid market response, accessibility has replaced location as the paramount consideration. An airport city with 15-minute terminal access and 95% travel time reliability can charge premium rents and

Airport Intelligence Series The Evolution of Airport Passenger Terminal Design December 2025 4 min read Imagine standing on a grassy field in 1903, watching the Wright brothers’ first flight. Now fast-forward to today, where you walk through a stunning glass terminal filled with natural light, preparing to board a flight to anywhere in the world. This remarkable journey from open fields to architectural marvels tells the story of how airport terminals evolved alongside human ambition and technological progress.   The Beginning In the early days of aviation, flying was entertainment, not transportation, and the infrastructure reflected this reality. The shift from spectacle to service began after World War I when European cities like London, Paris, and Berlin converted their military airfields into civilian airports, but these facilities lacked proper spaces for passengers. The first glimpse of modern airport design appeared in 1922 at Königsberg Devau in Germany. Architect Hanns Hopp placed a passenger building flanked by hangars at the corner of an airfield. This simple arrangement separating passengers from aircraft while keeping them close, became the blueprint for future terminals.  The Golden AgeThe 1930s and 1940s transformed airports into glamorous destinations. Terminals were built in the fashionable Art Deco style, featuring sleek lines, geometric patterns, and optimistic designs that celebrated the future of flight. Some of the notable ones being Croydon and Gatwick in London. While Croydon had an integrated terminal, control tower, and hotel adopted the language of civic architecture, Gatwick had a circular form, integrating passenger processing and baggage handling into a single building. The Beehive as it came to be known, was a circular building allowed aircraft to park around its entire circumference, reducing walking distances while maximizing gate positions.  It reflected early thinking about efficiency and spatial organization, ideas that would later become central to airport design. What’s remarkable about this period is how airports functioned as social destinations too. In 1939, New York’s La Guardia Airport attracted nearly 250,000 visitors each month—far more than the number of actual passengers. Families dressed up to watch planes arrive and depart from observation decks, ate at airport restaurants, and spent their weekends experiencing the magic of aviation. Airports were probably places where the future felt tangible and accessible. Form Follows Function The 1960s brought a paradigm shift with the arrival of jet aircraft. Passenger numbers increased, travel distances expanded, and airports became national gateways. Functionality and cost efficiency became important. Amsterdam Schiphol Terminal, completed in 1967, offered a thoughtful approach. Designed to expand in modular fashion, the terminal could grow by adding box-like sections as needed. This flexibility proved remarkably successful. The original terminal remains at the heart of Schiphol even today. San Francisco International Airport played a key role in reshaping the passenger experience. Among the first airports to introduce jet bridges, SFO eliminated the need for apron boarding, allowing passengers to move directly from terminal to aircraft in a controlled, weather-protected environment.    Even as this happened, there were moments when architectural design took center stage. Eero Saarinen’s TWA Flight Center at JFK. Its sweeping concrete shells, dramatic interiors, and sculptural form embodied the optimism of the Jet Age. The terminal was designed to make air travel feel futuristic, elegant, and aspirational. Architectural Expression From the 1980s the design space saw dramatic transformation as concrete boxes gave way to glass designs. Architects embraced natural light and transparency, creating terminals that felt open and welcoming. The designs incorporated concepts of “light” and “air,” using advanced engineering to build soaring glass structures that challenged the boundaries between inside and outside.This shift wasn’t merely aesthetic. Glass terminals improved passenger experience by creating better wayfinding through natural light, reducing energy costs through daylighting, and providing emotional uplift during what could be stressful journeys.In parallel, there was further experimentation with forms, with few iconic terminals like Paris Charles de Gaulle Terminal 1 and Heathrow’s early terminals. While forms were innovative, they were frequently criticized for disorienting circulation for passengers. Chicago O’Hare International Airport developed by SOM, had long concourses, had a structural grid pattern and a deliberately neutral design. Security Reshapes the Terminal The events of 9/11 permanently altered airport terminal planning. Security screening moved from the periphery to the centre of the passenger journey, reorganising circulation, space allocation, and architectural priorities. Architects attempted to counterbalance the rigidity of security processes through daylight, large volumes, and improved wayfinding, as seen in Richard Rogers’- Heathrow Terminal 5, where a vast, column-free hall, exposed steel structure, and abundant daylight created legibility and calm. Architecture became a psychological buffer, mitigating the stress of surveillance-heavy environments. Architect Renzo Piano can also be credited with the influence, through his emphasis on lightness, human scale, and clarity, principles adopted by many terminal architects.     Modern Masterpieces Today’s airport terminals place passenger experience at the forefront and balance the architectural ambition with the help of technology. Buildings like Beijing Daxing Airport designed by Zaha Hadid, Jewel Changi by Moshe Safdie, and many more function as cultural gateways that express national identity and technological prowess. Modern terminal design needs to balance multiple competing demands: efficiency and experience, security and openness, local character and global standards, sustainability and grandeur. Architects are now studying data on consumption, passenger behavior, technological advancements amongst other things to design spaces that are iconic, yet remain flexible enough to accommodate unforeseen changes.  Looking Forward From grass fields observation stands to modern efficient designs, airport terminals have evolved dramatically over the past century. Each generation of designers learning and adapting solutions to new technologies and needs. A terminal building is not about solving immediate problems but anticipating the future also, because these structures outlive generations. The next time you walk through an airport terminal, take a moment to look around. You’re standing in a building type that didn’t exist 100 years ago, shaped by a century of experimentation, failure, and innovation. Share Share Share

Airport Intelligence Series How Infrastructure Planning is Evolving in the Age of Resilience September 2025 4 min read   With climate, technology, and mobility transforming how infrastructure is built and used, long-term master plans are no longer enough. We explore: How to integrate agility into 30-year infrastructure visions Resilient planning frameworks for airports and logistics hubs Lessons from leading airports From Predict-and-Provide to Adapt-and-Evolve Old Paradigm:Infrastructure Master Plans were built on stable growth assumptions and linear demand forecasts, aiming to “predict” future capacity and “provide” infrastructure accordingly. New Paradigm:In an era marked by volatility (pandemics, climate change, geopolitical shifts), planners are now focusing on adaptive frameworks—planning infrastructure that can scale up, shift purpose, or delay activation based on actual needs. Resilience used to be a synonym for flood protection or earthquake readiness. Today, it’s multidimensional: Climate resilience, to withstand extreme weather events Operational resilience, to anticipate and recover from disruptions, whether physical or cyber. Financial resilience, built on agile capital expenditure strategies and diversified revenue streams. Social resilience, ensuring equity, inclusivity, and adaptability for local communities. Traditional master plans were static documents. Now, infrastructure planning is becoming a real-time, data-enhanced process using: Digital twins to simulate terminal operations Scenario modelling to test resilience to disruptions AI/ML-based forecasting for dynamic demand evolution (more on this in the second featured insight in this newsletter) Smart monitoring for real-time asset health and user feedback What This Means for Airport Leaders Masterplans should be living documents—flexible, digital, and regularly reviewed. Design thinking must prioritize resilience over rigidity—allowing future reconfiguration. Investment strategies should be phased, blended, and ESG-aligned to reduce future exposure. Stakeholder engagement should focus on trust and transparency to enable durable outcome Engage in strategic partnerships and public-private collaborations to drive innovation and economic growth beyond traditional passenger services. Avinia spoke to senior industry leaders in India to gauge their thought process and how they are planning to adapt to the changing dynamic. This insight from Suman, who leads the Capacity and Master Planning function, and the Project Coordination Group at Bangalore International Airport Limited (BIAL), highlighting Bengaluru Airport’s evolution from a 40 MPPA plan to 100+ MPPA within the same footprint is evidence of why masterplans must be flexible, scalable, and future-ready.  “While Masterplans are built on linear demand forecasts, adaptive infrastructure frameworks is not just timely, but its essential. At Bengaluru International Airport we are embedding flexibility into every planning and design decision—whether in masterplans, terminal layouts or airside development—so that capacity can scale up, pivot, or pause as conditions demand. Just as an example, our first masterplan in 2008 was developed to handle a saturation capacity of 40 MPPA for the year 2028. Recently we updated our masterplan to handle an upward of 100 MPPA capacity in the same footprint, considering we are already at 43 MPPA today. Looking ahead, planners must also anticipate technology disruptions—biometrics, eVTOLs, and other breakthroughs—so today’s infrastructure can adapt to tomorrow’s innovations.” – Suman Ramasundaram, Associate Vice President, BIAL. Kiran Jain from Noida Airport emphasizes on the need for sustainable development while integrating net zero ambitions and modular design. “Infrastructure planning is evolving to meet the demands of a rapidly changing world. Traditional master plans, built on fixed growth expectations, are giving way to flexible, adaptive frameworks that respond to real-time conditions. Today’s infrastructure must be designed to scale, pivot, or delay implementation based on shifting needs and uncertainties such as pandemics, climate change, and geopolitical factors. A prime example is Noida International Airport, which features phased development allowing capacity to expand from 12 million to 70 million passengers as demand grows. The integrated passenger terminal is designed for seamless phasing, enabling adjustments to both the scale and nature of demand as it evolves. Its focus on sustainability through net zero emissions, renewable energy, and modular design ensures it can adapt operationally and environmentally. This approach epitomizes the shift towards resilient, future-ready infrastructure—capable of delivering value while managing risk in an unpredictable world”. – Kiran Jain, Chief Operating Officer, Noida International Airport Sapan Gupta, head of master planning and design at GMR Hyderabad Airport, provides a holistic view of his priorities in shaping the vision for the new terminal at Hyderabad. “The focus is no longer only on efficiency, capacity, or visual appeal. Today the key question shaping master plans and investment decisions is whether infrastructure can withstand the unexpected. At Hyderabad Airport, the pandemic disrupted demand just like everywhere else, yet it was among the first to bounce back to pre-COVID levels and even record double-digit passenger growth. This kind of volatility forces airport planners to think differently: Can facilities be repurposed quickly? How can technology enable more adaptable spaces? I am a strong proponent of data-driven design approach, especially for large public infrastructure like airports. At Hyderabad’s Airport Operations Control Centre (APOC), we have an AI-powered digital twin platform that integrates airside, landside, and terminal operations that provides real time data which not only improves day-to-day operations but also generates valuable insights that inform long-term infrastructure design”. – Sapan Gupta, Head- Master Planning and Design, GHIAL. Share Share Share