Airports across the world quietly lose time, fuel, and goodwill whenever a parked jet waits for ground power while crews juggle tight schedules, heavy cables, and unpredictable apron conditions under mounting operational pressure. The delay is small in isolation yet compounding in effect: every extra minute on an auxiliary power unit means more fuel burned, louder stands, and higher emissions during an already noisy part of the operation. At Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, that friction point has become a test bed for automation. ARC, an autonomous robot developed with KLM and Neura Robotics, is tackling the labor‑intensive hookup of ground power units, a task that blends navigation, dexterity, and safety in a cluttered environment. The pilot sits within a broader plan to orchestrate a seamless inbound flow, where docking tasks hand off cleanly and predictably, and where reliability comes not from heroics on the ramp but from systems that simply do the right thing every time.
Why automating ground power matters
The turnaround bottleneck and sustainability pressures
Turnarounds depend on choreography, not heroics, and ground power is one of the earliest cues that sets tempo for everything that follows. When the GPU connects quickly, cabin services come online, maintenance staff gain stable power, and flight crews shut down the APU without hesitation. When it does not, time bleeds across roles and resources: galley prep slows, inspections stretch, and fuel burn drifts upward as the APU hums. That drag lands on cost sheets and sustainability reports alike. Moreover, repeated exposure to variable connection times pushes planners to pad schedules, which numbs operational responsiveness. Automating the task reframes it from a variable to a constant, which is exactly what complex ramp operations need. ARC’s purpose is not novelty; it is to remove randomness, lower energy use, and let people focus on exceptions rather than routine hookups.
Labor constraints and ramp safety dynamics
Staffing remains a delicate balance in ground handling, where shifts must match peaks, weather complicates tasks, and ergonomic risks accumulate over time. Dragging and positioning a heavy cable is precisely the kind of repeat strain that organizations try to engineer out of the job, yet the alternative must be as safe as it is effective. ARC’s pilot addresses both sides of this equation. The robot navigates among vehicles, cones, chocks, and workers, observing safety envelopes that do not bend to expedience. A key compromise would have been unacceptable: if cable tension tripped safety systems too easily, the robot would stop incessantly; if it ignored tension, it might endanger nearby staff. The solution—suspending the cable in a parabola to preserve the safety zone—dignifies human presence while making autonomy practical. In effect, the robot becomes a patient helper, not an unpredictable newcomer.
Inside arc and the path to deployment
Autonomy stack, hardware tricks, and safety case
ARC’s technical recipe is less magic than an orchestration of proven parts combined with careful assumptions. Lidar and computer vision map and classify a living apron, while mobility systems steer with the restraint expected around aircraft. The manipulator handles a tricky sequence: locate the access panel, open it cleanly with a “pricker” tool that uses suction, align the connector, and seat it without scuffing the skin. Each step carries distinct failure modes, and the robot’s behavior reflects that reality—slower near hazards, decisive when conditions are clear. The suspended cable resolves a particularly knotty issue, removing parasitic force from safety sensors so the robot does not fight its own payload. Neura Robotics’ approach favored short cycles of risk retirement using off‑the‑shelf capabilities, tying AI, navigation, software, mechanics, and compliance into a single safety argument that an airport operator can actually govern.
Stakeholder response, scale-up plan, and what comes next
Demonstrations matter on ramps because credibility is earned in context, not in a lab. A live showing at Schiphol brought airlines, handlers, airports, and international partners into direct contact with ARC as it executed the full routine. The reaction was pragmatic rather than starstruck: if it connects reliably, coexists with ramp traffic, and cuts APU minutes without slowing anything else, it deserves a place in the playbook. That tempered enthusiasm is what unlocks scale. Schiphol aligned the pilot with its seamless inbound flow program and invited collaboration through technical briefings, including webinars in December and January, to detail interfaces, safety procedures, and operational envelopes. The next phase depended on larger trials across aircraft types, weather, and stand layouts, with performance measured on connection time, exception handling, and APU savings. The path forward had been framed as practical adoption, not futuristic aspiration, and the emphasis stayed on operational proof.
