How safe are 30 minute turn-around times

[sheppey]

There are many operators of twin engine jet transports that schedule 30 minute turn-around times. This includes refuelling. The crew are flat out with organising the refuelling, walk-around inspection, flight deck administration, flight plan entries into computers, performance calculations, pre-flight checklists and passenger boarding that occurs in between.

Inevitably this policy must push acceptable boundaries of flight safety - one of which is the well published risks of rushed/hasty checks.

Short turn-arounds such as 30 minutes was unthinkable 30 years ago; so what has changed in the intervening years that makes this policy acceptable to regulators in terms of flight safety improvement. Is the policy potentially dangerous or should crews be expected to consistently cope without undue stress to get airborne?

[fa2fi]

I do up to four a day. Perfectly safe. Although there is a lot to do even on a. Short turn around I would never describe our flight deck crew as being "flat out". In the cabin security and safety is out number one priority. We do all checks and searches then tidy the cabin. I feel 30minute turnarounds are safe and sustainable. The only time it is tight is when pax leave the cabin in a mess. His ever safety/security take priority over cleaning up after ignorant people.

In the flight deck the work load is shared so when one pilot is doing the walk around/supervising refuelling the othe is preparing the cockpit for the return flight. As with legacy carriers, computerised systems and ops support reduce workload. The flight deck have longer to do their turnaround formalities too as they can continue with pax boarding and disembarking. Whereas the cabin must be free of pax when security checks are being performed.

[sevenstrokeroll]

listen, FWIW I was doing five 30 minute OR LESS turns a day in a DC9 almost thirty years ago. yes I was moving along pretty fast, but always had time to take a LEAK and smile at the flight attendants. And we used VOR nav, not FMS. Also had to drop handwritten flight plans in company office.

DO you stand over the fueler while he fuels the plane?

The ONLY problem I can see with SOME carriers in thirty minute turns has to do with brake cooling.

try to get organized, hit the ground running.

[paulsalem]

Turn time is about the ground crew not about the flight crew. It's perfectly safe. I used to go into terminals in the US to use a real bathroom, grab some take away food to eat in the cockpit and still wait on pax boarding or the ground crew.

[750XL]

I wouldn't say that the flight crew have to work 'flat out' for the turnaround, as most of the time for 50% of the turnaround they're playing on their phones etc

[VijayMallya]

30 mins is more than enough for ATR, 737/320 category airplane... Even less depending on how good an airports infrastructure is capable of delivering it...


Probably not possible on bigger planes like the 330/767 category...

[Airbus_a321]

It's just amazing to read the comments of the brainwashed-LOCo-kids. :D

so let's reduce further and add 2 more flight pairings, Why not 6 sectors each day? Get more squeezed, you are strong and young you can do also 25min turnarounds or 20...no problem...:D

Guys if you ever want to see your well-earned pension and enjoy some few years after your retirement with...let's say at the age of 70 or so........assumed you survive this VERY SAFE hamsterwheel flying:D..then.....:=

Good Luck !

[VijayMallya]

Yawn :zzz:

[de facto]

It's just amazing to read the comments of the brainwashed-LOCo-kids

What? You need an extra 30 mins to have your turnaround coffee or what?:rolleyes:

[Denti]

15 years ago we were doing routinely 30 minute turnarounds flying for a major Big Airline. If needed to catch up delay it was easily doable in 20 during summer (winter needs more time during boarding, all those coats). On most turnarounds i had at least 10 minutes of free time to myself to chat up the girls or just do whatever i liked to do.

Nowadays we do turnarounds in a same sized aircraft for a supposedly low-cost'ish operator in 40 minutes and even that is quite often not enough. I still have at least 10, in most cases 20 minutes of free time during those turnarounds. Why do we need 10 minutes more? Simply, piss poor organization and not enough money spend on service levels.

[VijayMallya]

:D well said my friend! Well said... The LCC today are usually penny wise pound foolish!

[Junkflyer]

We do 30 minute turns all day long. B 717-118 to123 pax, goes well unless a lot of wheelchair/aisle chair types. Bad wx may throw off the schedule, otherwise really no big deal or hurry.

[Los Endos]

I think I'll side with Airbus_a321 on this one. Many turns end up as rush jobs. Mistakes in perf planning, SIDS and checklists are all too common and thank God for the config warning push button. Fiddling around with mobile phones and chatting up the girls on a 30 min turn with 180 passengers to load and unload ? What cockpit worlds do you come from ?

[de facto]

Los endos,

What cockpit world?
The Airline i work for now is not a low cost and walk around are scheduled for 50 mins to allow the dozens yes dozens cleaners to do their 'job' in a B737 which takes them 20 mins.
If you cant do a proper flightdeck turnaround in 30 mins let alone 20 then maybe ?....:E

[Denti]

Pure flight deck turnaround takes all of 10 minutes. Add a walkaround and you have maximum 15 minutes spend. The rest is of the time is not for the flight deck, however the cabin is a different thing.

[Piltdown Man]

Assuming everything is normal and you have "rapid" passengers, a 10-15 minute turnaround is totally acceptable. Unfortunately, most flights have one or two "slow" passengers (five bags each, belongings strewn around the plane, with passports left in seat pockets, shoes two rows in front and coats in lockers ahead and behind (on a 45 minute flight). And then you have to deal with the knuckle draggers employed by airport handling companies because of their apparent cheapness. It's a big enough challenge to get them to the right airport every day let alone getting them to do something worthwhile... and they have to be managed. There are very few Dispatchers (UK terminology) who have the stomach to stand more than one season working on the Apron.

So the factors limiting a quick turnaround are the passengers and the system. With one door, disembarkation takes just under 10 minutes and two doors reduces that by about 1/3rd. Boarding takes approx. just over 10 minutes and again, using two doors gives a 1/3rd reduction in time. But then you have to be cleaned. It's hard to imagine what some people's houses are like judging the state they leave aircraft. And even quick cleaners take about 10 minutes. So realistically, a turnaround will take a minimum of 25 minutes. And we haven't discussed waiting for fuelers, toilet trucks, ambulift, pushback trucks, GPU's etc. Basically, airlines don't pay enough to get quicker turnarounds. Pay more and they could have a dedicated turnaround crew.

PM

[Piltdown Man]

...and if ever we need more time, we take it.

PM

[Lookleft]

The LoCo I work for now has a target of 25 minutes on the turn around. Seeing as they can't even get 50% of their first flights out on time 25 minutes is a pipe dream.

[750XL]

The LoCo I work for now has a target of 25 minutes on the turn around. Seeing as they can't even get 50% of their first flights out on time 25 minutes is a pipe dream.

They really need to look at their turnaround procedures if that is the case :sad:

25minutes is easily achievable for 200 pax in and out

[darkroomsource]

You get 30 minutes?
I know guys who get 10.
And they have to handle the baggage themselves.
(they do only have 5 pax though)

[Popgun]

30 minute turns are DEFINITELY rushed at my company. They induce a constant cycle of hamster-wheel fatigue...especially combined with successive very early morning starts.

I make mistakes. My colleagues make mistakes.

They are less than optimally safe and, were costs not a factor, definitely undesirable.

25 minute turns are just foolish and asking for an accident.

PG

[Lookleft]

750xl- what is your airlines policy on checked in bags do they charge for it? Who does the load control? Do you have engineers readily available if you have a problem? What do you record as off blox engine start or brakes release? You are right in saying the procedures need to be looked at but simply to say that we do it therefore you should be able to could be like comparing apples and oranges.

[750XL]

750xl- what is your airlines policy on checked in bags do they charge for it?

All checked items are charged

Who does the load control? #

Manual loadsheet completed by the dispatcher, the bag distribution is standard

[QUOTE]Do you have engineers readily available if you have a problem?/QUOTE]

If requested engineers will attend.



25minute turnarounds are possible up to around 200 pax in my opinion, if the airport infrastructure supports it. Passengers need a 'holding pen' type area (Amsterdam do this great on the lo-co pier), with all boarding cards pulled ready to open the door and release the pax

[Lookleft]

Thanks for that 750. Our airline requires the pilots to be load control and although we have a nifty PDA we are still responsible for making sure the paperwork is in order and that any discrepancies are resolved before we turn our attention to FMS entries. I totally agree with your qualification that the airport infrastructure needs to support it. I think that you also need to have the staff understand and accept the reasons for reducing the turnarounds to 25 minutes. Simply saying that they do it overseas therefore you should do it ignores the complete lack of frontline staff engagement that exists where I work.

[HZ123]

As a ground handler I agree with much said here. However, it does rely on good and efficient handling and I can assure you that in many airports that is not the case.

Those servicing the a/c at ground level also need to be committed to the safety factors at all times and often it does not happen as it should.

This is reflected in the numerous incidents of loading 'dangerous' cargo incorrectly, damage, chute deployment.

There is still a culture of 'wing and a prayer' I fear.

[old,not bold]

In the 1970's all our BAC 1-11 and F27 turn-rounds were scheduled as 25 minutes. In my area we handled some 25-30 a day at 3 airports.

Typically, about 30% of passengers would remain on board in transit. Baggage volumes were quite large.

The ground equipment was of the technology of the time; much cruder than modern stuff.

Not all turn-rounds would include fuelling but if they did it was not a problem, partly, I suppose, because the quantities were small due to the short sectors.

I have no recollection at all of any problems stemming from turn-rounds being too short, or of crews saying that their job was difficult because of it. I always believed that the 25-30 minutes turn-round was an economically necessary industry standard for short-haul operations. A typical rotation would have 6 20 - 40 minute sectors, and 5 25-minute turn-rounds. An additional 10 minutes, say, on turn-rounds would cost dearly in terms of aircraft utilisation. I'm sure the same applies today.

Incidentally, I think that VC10s and L-1011s were allowed 45 minutes for a transit stop, but perhaps that's my failing memory at work.

[autoflight]

There can be a huge difference between scheduled turnaround and actually achieve time. It should be up to the captain to take a good part in the management of the turnaround if a short one is desired.

Assuming a B737 / A320 type, it would be foolish to schedule 30 minutes at an airfield with shortage of handling staff or equipment with possible wait for refuelling. On the other hand, if there is a turnaround where minimum effort is required, perhaps re-fuelling not needed, small numbers of disembarking and joining pax, no freight etc a shorter turnaround could be scheduled.

There are ways to reduce turnaround time, like fuel tankering to minimise the time needed for any necessary re-fueling, keeping through pax on board and re-arranging the way cleaning is conducted.

We have all experienced fast turnarounds at times, with a bit more consideration and effort when running out of crew duty time etc. At these times we realise what can be achieved. I have seen a safe 6 minute DC9-30 turnaround at a country airport with a small refuel in 6 minutes. Also a pre-planned 10 minute B727-200 turnaround without refuelling with centre engine running.

Safety is always the major consideration at such times and I considered the 6 minute turnaround met all the then existing safety requirements, but I was less satisfied with the 10 minute one due I do not like the idea of continued engine operation.

[Mikehotel152]

25 min turnaround is no problem and not unsafe for a reasonably experienced crew at a familiar airport.

We don't often manage it but 95% of the time any delay is due to slow disembarkation or boarding.

Scheduling turnarounds longer than 25 minutes would ensure a more relaxing time but we don't get paid for the turnaround anyway... :(

[Propjet88]

Sheppey's original question shows some lateral thought in questioning whether what has become "normalised" due to the Loco movement has compromised safety in any way.

I am surprised that the tone of some of the responses appears to be more indicative of demonstrating "big cahoonas" rather professionals looking at a question on safety, objectively.

Many an error made at the pre-flight stage does not come around and bite one's bum until later. e.g. load-sheet error, take-off data calculations, wx forecast change, new notam, error in programming FMC etc. Hands up anyone who can say that they have never made an error in any of the above?

The basic principle of CRM is to avoid single - point failures (human error) becoming consequential, by ensuring that all safety critical activities are independently cross - checked / monitored by another. Personal experience indicates that it is this cross - checking that goes out the window when things are rushed. Sure, everything gets done - but cross-checked??? I couldn't help but smile when the first response to Sheppey was from a flight attendant who "would never describe our flight deck crew as being flat out" as the pilots have different tasks.

The pre-flight stage is high risk in light of the importance placed on "on time performance" by many (most?) companies. Anything that places a tight fixed time limit on, without being too sensationalistic, safety critical activities deserves to be at least open to questioning.

Fly safe
PJ

[Tu.114]

On my type, it seems the limiting factor is usually not the cockpit preparation and the walkaround, but rather the often slow disembarkation of the passengers, cabin preparation and embarkation thereafter. Often, the FMS setup and chart preparation is ready and checked when the inbound passengers have not even left the aircraft; allowing the cockpit crew to even lend the cabin a hand in e. g. relocating the cabin divider. Normally, the allocated 30 minutes are working quite well; a high speed turnaround is feasible in a bit less than 20 minutes if no refuelling is required and nothing untoward happens.

But nevertheless, who says that one needs to rush oneself to meet the turnaround time, however much of it may have been allocated? Every once in a while, more time is needed to obtain proper flight documentation, dive into the MEL, check the catering or whatever else may happen - and then one will simply take the necessary time. If this results in a delay, this is regrettable, of course, but priorities have to be set. Still, not all is lost then. Much can be done by adjusting the cruise speed or selecting a faster, less economic flight level for example.

And finally, if one finds the turnaround (or block, for that matter) times insufficient in one rotation, why not report this to the company. If a trend is discernable, on occasion the schedule will be adjusted in the next period.