Health risks of airplane boarding methods with apron buses when some passengers disregard safe social distancing

Abstract

Many airlines instituted social distancing practices to keep passengers safe during the pandemic. The practices include keeping the middle seats empty, reducing the number of passengers taking an apron bus from the terminal to the airplane, and prescribing that passengers maintain 1 m social distance of separation from other passengers in the aisle while advancing to their seats. However, not all passengers comply with a prescribed 1 m aisle social distance. Through agent-based simulations of passenger boarding when apron buses are used, we examine boarding policies adapted for the pandemic when the level of passenger compliance varies. To compare policies, we consider the duration of time that passengers are too close to other passengers while walking or standing in the aisle. We consider other health metrics from previous research and the time to complete boarding of the airplane. We find that the WilMA–Spread and Reverse-pyramid–Spread boarding methods provide favorable outcomes. Airlines should use WilMA–Spread if their primary concern is the risk to passengers while walking down the aisle and Reverse-pyramid–Spread if they want faster times to complete boarding of the airplane and reduced risk to aisle seat passengers from later boarding passengers. The level of the passengers’ non-compliance with the prescribed aisle social distance can impact a health metric by up to 6.75%—depending on the boarding method and metric. However, non-compliance reduces the time to complete boarding of the airplane by up to 38.8% even though it increases the average time an individual passenger spends boarding.