ratio of id stands to scanners to detectors

[Plato]

What's the best ratio of the above to one another?

I currently have 1:1:1 but it seems to create a queue at ID checks.

[Scifiwriterguy]

Security just went through some changes, so ratios are still getting settled again, but a popular ratio seems to point to 1:2:2 for metal detectors and 1:2:3 for bodyscanners, but metal detector throughput seems to have been nerfed so you may want to go to 1:2:3.

That said, there are a lot of different schools of thought, and ratios are definitely in flux with recent changes.

[Plato]

So, judging by what you've said, it's unusual for me then that the ID checks are holding me up despite having a 1:1:1 ratio?

[Preditorian]

Plato, I have never seen that issue you are having. Have you tried to just add more 1:1:1 lines to ease the flow?

[sonar1313]

I've liked 1:1:2 the best of everything that I've tried. Having the same number of metal detectors as bag scanners seemed to cause huge gaggles at the bag scanners. But I haven't done much with the new security changes yet.

[Scifiwriterguy]

Originally posted by Preditorian:

Plato, I have never seen that issue you are having. Have you tried to just add more 1:1:1 lines to ease the flow?

Agreed; if your backup is at ID check, it's because you just don't have enough capacity.

Originally posted by sonar1313:

I've liked 1:1:2 the best of everything that I've tried. Having the same number of metal detectors as bag scanners seemed to cause huge gaggles at the bag scanners. But I haven't done much with the new security changes yet.

You'll probably have even more trouble with the backup, sorry to say.

But it's worth noting that two pax use a bagscanner at once - one on the in-side and one on the out-side - whereas all other security stops are single pax only. ID Check is also the shortest part of the process, so as a result, a bagscanner can overwhelm paxscanners pretty easily. A 1:2:3 might give you a more efficient throughput. But this is definitely one area where experimenting is a good idea. :)