Industry experts from BermudAir, Alaska Airlines (Hawaiian Airlines) and Turkish Technology on how the Departure Control System is moving into the background.
The usual steps of air travel aren't going away. Instead, they're moving into the background, replaced by ongoing identity checks, earlier document checks, and systems that assume you'll travel unless you say otherwise.
We asked industry experts to describe how passenger processing could evolve over the next decade. Here is a snapshot of perspectives from George Henderson, co-founder and COO at BermudAir; Jan Fogelberg, an IT and PSS expert consulting for Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines; and Turkish Technology’s Yasin Kadakal (Product Owner, Modern Airline Retailing) and Özgür Akman (Procurement Category Lead).
Check-in will not disappear. It will stop looking like a check-in.
People talk about “removing” check-in. That ignores why it exists. Airlines still need weight and balance inputs, a verified passenger list, and proof that travel requirements are met.
Jan Fogelberg argues that intent is already captured at purchase. “I think the intent to travel is making a booking.” In her view, the check-in step is increasingly redundant as a customer action:
“So what is check-in? It’s letting the provider know you’re on the way. And as time goes on, this step will become unnecessary. Today’s check-in systems are more about regulatory compliance and airline systems (Weight&Balance) than the individual’s intent to travel.”
George Henderson expects airlines to rely more on signals of presence and readiness.
“For weight and balance purposes, perhaps the fact that the customer has dropped off a bag is enough of a signal of intent to board, or some other biometric check can be considered as an acknowledgement of their presence at the airport, moving to a passive check-in experience.”
Yasin Kadakal summarises:
“Traditional check-in may disappear, but some form of intent confirmation will remain, increasingly automated rather than an explicit passenger action.”
Özgür Akman agrees on the shape of change:
“Check-in as a concept will likely remain; however, its scope and execution will evolve significantly. Traditional counter-based processes will continue to diminish, with digital and automated solutions increasingly taking precedence.”
Two constraints keep check-in from simply “vanishing”.
First, airlines remain responsible when passengers do not meet entry requirements. Henderson notes that “currently the airline remains responsible” for validating travel documentation. Fogelberg puts it: “Airlines are taking on the validation of government requirements for international travel.” If governments do not accept earlier, machine-verifiable checks, airlines will continue to perform manual checks along the journey.
Second, airlines cannot ignore no-shows and overbooking. Henderson asks the practical question: “Then, what about airlines that overbook? How would they know when to start offering standby seats?” Fogelberg points at the same gap: “We then need to solve for those who simply don’t show up. Those who change their minds will cancel.”
So the likely outcome is not “no check-in”. It is to have fewer explicit steps for most passengers, plus clearer exception handling for the rest.
Boarding passes stay as a function, not a document
None of the experts argues that boarding passes must remain documents that passengers present. They treat boarding as a permission state tied to identity, not a piece of paper or a screen.
Fogelberg defines the boarding pass in functional terms: “Boarding passes are ID validation and passenger count mechanisms.” Her view is that boarding passes become unnecessary wherever identity checks and automated gates already do the job. One example she refers to is US Global Entry, with no “facial recognition - no forms, almost to a point where a physical passport is no longer needed.”
Henderson is direct about what replaces the boarding pass:
“Face recognition, Iris scanning, or the palm vein scanning… will replace boarding passes, physical or digital.” But “this will take a long time… small regional airports in developing countries will take time to find/make the necessary investment in technology.”
Kadakal describes the same shift from a system perspective: “The concept will remain, but not necessarily as a document - boarding authorisation will be embedded in identity, biometrics, and real-time system validation.” Akman expects a gradual transition driven by investment decisions across the ecosystem: boarding passes “may gradually be replaced by biometric identification and passenger processing technologies.”
Passport-free travel depends on governments, not airlines
Technically, the experts see passport-free travel as plausible. They are much less confident about how quickly it will become normal because the bottlenecks lie in law and cross-border trust.
Henderson points to the policy: “EU Digital Identity Wallet is already taking us in that direction.” He also mentions trials “where, if you have an ETA, a camera is asked to match one's face against an image on file.” But the adoption is uneven: “Some countries will take time to introduce this technology.”
Kadakal narrows the claim to where it is most defensible: “Yes, for certain corridors, as digital identity and government-to-government trust frameworks mature, though physical passports will persist as a fallback for a long time.” Akman makes the same point through a governance lens: “from a technical standpoint, this is a plausible development”, but “border control laws, immigration policies, and multilateral agreements” make timing hard to predict.
DCS shifts from gatekeeper to orchestrator
The visible changes depend on back-end changes. All experts describe DCS becoming less of a single “moment” system and more of an orchestration layer that continuously validates readiness.
George Henderson is explicit: “DCS as a standalone system will cease to exist.” He describes a model that does not “wait for triggers (for check-in)”, but runs “a more passive approach happening in the background”. Identity could be checked at the airport entrance, travel documentation validated before a passenger goes airside, and gate work reduced through automation.
“AI tools should be developed to replace the manual reallocation of seats at the gate.”
He also points to better operational data replacing assumptions: “Perhaps sensors in the hold and on landing gear can inform an automated ‘Load Sheet’ process. The gatekeeping function of the DCS we know today will shift to more of an orchestration function.”
Kadakal makes the same point:
“DCS will evolve from a transaction-centric system into a real-time orchestration layer, continuously validating identity, entitlement, and readiness to travel across the journey.”
Fogelberg lists what DCS has to handle today: document checks, passenger counts for “souls on board” and weight and balance, backend security clearance, manifest transmission, and sometimes “downline boarding passes”. If those checks move earlier and become more automated, she argues, “notifications could be sent of a failed process well in advance of arrival at the airport.”
Akman stays pragmatic: more self-service, more automation, and passengers managing more through integrated digital platforms while airline systems run in the background.
One challenge underlies all of this: orchestration needs data sharing, standard systems, and clear responsibility across airlines, airports, security, and border agencies. This is often where progress slows, no matter how good the technology is.
The "train" model
The main goal is to make flying, especially internationally, feel as easy as taking a local train or bus.
Jan Fogelberg:
"Taking a flight would start to look like taking a train... if we collect required documentation at the time the booking is established, then DCS can be fully automated."
The experts agree that the future of flying is not about flashy new gadgets. The goal is not to make kiosks better, but to get rid of them altogether. The less you have to do at the airport, the better the industry is at meeting passengers' needs.
