20 min turn-around unrealistic!

[bruppy]

Good Boarding calls

Surprised that Baby.com states that at EMA (Sorry NEMA is too much of a mouthful & in my opinion should never have been changed) the CSA's do not direct pax to the rear steps, a good boarding call & pro-active instructions when "pulling the card" should ensure that’s not required?
At our base we have the luxury of holding lounges & can "pen in" the pax even before the inbound arrives, if we use 2 sets of steps then telling the pax seated in rows 14-26 to use rear steps & all other rows to use the Fwd normally means a smooth departure, even if we use the bridge (as we do most times) sending down 14-26 first ensures they get onto the aircraft & get settled far quicker. Having allocated seating is a godsend though as when FR boards its a rugby scrum & we normally have to waste having a staff member at the top of the ramp to stop businessmen from trying to get on before those with small children, after that its normally "every man for themselves" despite calls for Seq no's 1-60 1st, (normally you get lots of blank looks & "where's me number"). Traveling FR last year REU/LTN & it was a nightmare they called pax with children 1st & we all stood up (was during school hols) was let through the gate & then held by a rope across a very wide pathway, when the A/C was ready the rope dropped & it was like the grand national start, not good if your traveling with 2 kids & a slow walker. Never again.
Talking of FR look at airlinequality.com for loads of bad experiences of their dubious customer service.

[bmibaby.com]

bruppy, I don't ever remember flying as pax with bmibaby, sitting in the lounge and distinctly hearing the CSAs include in their announcement that pax should use a particular flight of steps, surely this could be incorporated into the boarding call? With regards to the Ryanair boarding procedure, I think it all depends on the handling agent as to how well it's dealt with. Open-seating will always be uncomfortable as you're anxious to get a good seat, but the CSA at the podium will make the difference as to how well-enforced the rules are.

[TotalBeginner]

EZY ran a few trials using steps and a Jetway. They found that with the wider aisle of the 319's, a jetway made no difference to the turn around time, and was much more beneficial for wheelchair passengers. They have now made it clear that their preference is for a jetway on all international turn-arounds. It is taking a while to get all of the dispatchers trained up, but it's a definate improvement!

[midjet]

From the flight deck point of view……….

These short turn around times are a complete and utter risk to safety. To be honest, I’m so tied up in what I’m doing in preparing the next sector that I had not given what you people do much thought…………. It’s totally un safe.

Im usually an easy going and calm person but I’ve been so stressed out with these 25 min turnarounds that the other day I found myself arguing and pissing off the dispatcher. I felt like a right idiot afterwards. It was not the dispatchers fault we were late. Not my fault either. It’s the fault of the low cost competition that means even if a particular airline would increase its turnaround times to lets say 45min ( which isn’t long enough really either) you guys will no doubt be poached to go help the airline that’s still insisting on 25min. Guys and girls,….. The only people benefiting from our increased stress and reduced safety are the people counting the ££.

What’s worst is I cant see it changing.

[TotalBeginner]

Midjet, I know exactly what you mean. It puts pressure on everyone involved!

EZY have increased the pressure once again by introducing INET check-in. This means that passengers who have checked-in on-line, have to have a full document check at the departure gate. In my opinion this is ludicrous, I am already complaining that I don't have time to check the name and photograph, and now they want me to check for VISA's!!!!!!

What makes me so angry, is that Easyjet think that every airport is like Luton. Their agents have 2 computers per gate, and so can enter the INET sequence number as the passenger comes through. Not all airports can do this, for whatever reason. The combination of a CR@P reservation system, copied from Navitaire, and the fact that no thought has gone into this process means that we all have to run around like idiots to try and make it work.

Last week we discovered that there was an error with the check-in system, and that Infants who are checked in on-line, are included in the M,F,C, headcount!!! I mean for god sake, don't those idiots put these changes into practice and check that everything is working properly before bringing them online????????????????

[Captinbirdseye]

20 min turnaround

i used to work for FCA at STN and i cant imagine how u guys do a 20 minute turnaround safely. It was bad enough turning round an a/c in an hour! Fair enough their are diffrences in cleaning and seat pockets etc. But the one thing is that b4 the aircraft left i knew that a/c had left safely and that all security had been done.
I Flew with FR on Friday and as soon as the last pax disembarked the a/c then we boarding!
Come on how can proper security checks can be completed??

[bruppy]

Baby, I obviously did not make my last post clear as we do actually inform pax through the boarding call (as well as telling them) which steps to use. how often do you fly with baby through Brum?, Flybe are also a stickler for front & rear steps so we are well versed with boarding calls.
FR are bringing in INET check in throughout, luckily we only have a DUB flight to contend with, god help those at STN & LPL who will have all & sundry destinations to try & board. KLM also do INET & the cock up's that have occurred because of that are numerous, we also had all the infants checked in as adults & one day all the INET pax offloaded? can see tears with this one?

[FougaMagister]

In the same order, Flybe introduced "return check-in" whereby a PAP checks-in for his day return at the same time as his outbound flight. The result: you end up waiting at the gate at, say, 1800Z for someone who may have checked-in at 0630Z in the morning! These are usually business people, but how can they be sure that they'll make their return flight? Then we have to wait until STD-5 before offloading them.

Also, Flybe procedures say that the handling agent HAS to accept LMC PAX until STD-10; the dispatcher is not asked, rather TOLD, that an LMC is on his/her way to the gate! What about the day when the aircraft has a few empty seats but is overloaded? We will have to refuse boarding (the check-in staff have no indication of what the underload is).

Mad...

[bmibaby.com]

bruppy, I'm crew at EMA so rarely experience the bmibaby service from a passenger perspective, however when I've done so through my own base, I've never heard an announcement be made regarding the correct set of steps or when having my boarding pass pulled either.

Be advised that besides open seating there are other ways that airlines are trying to cut down on their turnaround times. In America, Ted the low-cost product from United board passengers firstly by their frequent flyer status, then rather by row, their actual seat position ie window then centre then aisle. Not sure how well it works or how it affects parties like families, but generally it seems to get everyone on the plane quickly.

[New F/O]

Turn Around Time

Just my 2 pence worth.....

I feel the CAA has as much to blame for this as management, they accepted a 20 min turn around to be OK.

I think a turn around of 20 min does put pressure on staff and therefore compromises safety in all the mentioned above situations not forgetting cabin crew and flight crew.

My view is that the CAA should change this time as a legal minimum limit to lets say.... 30 mins..... and that's any a/c or operator who lands or operates from the UK.

Cheers

[aw8565]

[quote=Aloon]Do handling agents and airlines sit down and look at the airport facilities when they make a deal??

In my experience the guy in charge of new contracts says 'yes' a lot. Pier stands, a set or rear steps, staff.... you name it you got it.

It's then up to the poorly paid and overworked middle staff to try and provide it. And then get moaned at by same when it JUST CANT HAPPEN.

Great thread...

[Opssys]

I have followed this thread with considerable interest and sympathize with anyone attempting 20/25 Minute Turnarounds on Medium Haul Aircraft as standard practise.

Somewhile ago, when I had access to the tools I did some analysis and the reults are:

The critical path analysis of the 'generic' Turnaround which includes Cleaning and Cabin Grooming would not show Flight Deck Checks as a problem.
In very general terms would give a turnaround as being 30 to 40 minutes, with the Cabin Cleaning and Grooming Standard required being the main variable.

However once you feed in a time for turnaround of 20 Minutes, then Midjet is right that Flight Deck procedures are now a critical element and it is a 'close run thing' and if the checks result in 'a tech query' then a delay is inevitable.

If you take out cabin Cleaning/Grooming then 25 Minutes is achievable as a standard, but it allows no real margin for any section involved (difficult cargo offload/onload, special needs passenger group etc), but this works on the 'generic airport', i.e. No account of any special circumstances at that station (including Security Requirement bottlenecks etc).

If you now move to the Transit Case where you are just dealing with Pax and Baggage On/Off (no Cargo, No Crew Change and slightly less required in the way of checks, No Scheduled Fuel Uplift, Catering change, Cleaning etc) Then at the 'generic airport' 20 Minutes is feasible. But this makes 'huge assumptions'.
The first being the Passengers are called to the Gate prior to Aircraft Arrival and the Security and Pax Services Team have effectively processed the bulk of them prior to the Aircraft Arriving on stand. The bulk of the outbound baggage is pre-positioned a the stand holding area.

Of course when planning 'real' Turnarounds, the actual Airport circumstances must be factored in and that should not just include the basic Facilities set, but probable Stand/Gate allocation, coaching, steps only, etc, and at busy airports time of day.

But this case still (normally) assumes no real limitation on Airport Staff Resources.

There have always been exceptions, one from what most of you would consider ancient history was at the height of the 'The Troubles' the planned Turnaround at BFS was 14 Minutes Chock to Chock with Full Load of Pax and Mixed Belly load Cargo. But everyone was fully resourced and geared up to do it (including the Passengers :-)

Now to close this bit of the post out, when planning at Main base/Hub add 10 minutes to your to full turnaround analysis, mainly to give Engineers time to deal with the accumlated minor 'snags' but also to give a 'punctuality' margin!

But the real world isn't like this, well not anymore:
The Handling Negotiations are purely Cost based and the Turnaround Time is planned on the Transit Time which as near as damn it defines the minimum possible ground time and this is applied globally to the Route Network. So all the above analysis (even if the airline bothered to do it) goes out of the window.

The Airline will be asking for the world for 50p and the Handling Agent (aware of the competition) will agree to it.

As this thread proves:
Regardless of how professional the Handling Agency staff are, the end results are Delays which accumulate as there is little, or no recovery planned into the programme. Good people deciding it's time to leave aviation, Passenger and Crew frustration and finally but most importantly Concerns that the 'holy grail of safety' is being undermined.

As this trend has been going on for a number of years, I have come to the sad conclusion that unless the CAA do become involved and regulation is enacted, nothing will change, except that working on the ground in Passenger Services, Load Control/Dispatch etc will become something only the financially desperate, or otherwise unemployable will want to do!

As for Delays and allocating Delay Codes:
I once worked for an airline (as a dispatcher) that at various times worked to +5, +3 and Zero tolerance delay standards. The Zero Tolerance period was I later found out (when I put on a suit), to prove a serious point. However as being part of the Airline rather than an Agent we were in a position to allocate the delays as we saw them and not have to fudge to preserve anyones feelings/jobs/contract. I am NOT saying that on (too many) occasions we didn't operate rubber watches.

The most contentious delays were those down to Flight Deck, which were fought tooth and nail by Flt Ops every morning at the Delay Committee. Sometimes (as I later discovered) even when proof was available the rest of the committee gave in (life too short)!

But when I was working as a relatively junior member with a group tasked with reducing Handling delays (we ignored the Delay Commitee findings as being 'over processed'), we found that because in general terms the dispatcher reports were accurate (if in many cases cynical), that once the statistics guy had put them through various tools, the patterns that emerged enabled root cause problems to be isolated and in time many were resolved.
From memory a lot of them were not resourcing problems, but getting resources where required, when required. The result was a significant reduction in delays with a positive financial benefit.

A similiar analysis on route Airports was less successful, but did change the schedules for the Scottish and French departures at certain times of day.

Inaccurate delay reporting, in the long term doesn't benefit the Handling Agency (although proving this is the case to their Management is almost impossible) and it doesn't benefit the Airline nor the travelling public.
But from this thread it appears that currently the Airlines don't care, the Handling Agencies daren't care (if they are to stay in business), the Staff who do care are being worn down and Joe Public is resigned to it.

Hmm for some reason reminds me of the last years of British Rail!
Sorry for 'rambling on for so long'
DIH

[TotalBeginner]

Great post Opssys! You've totally summed it up!

[OpsSix]

I worked for Swissport at STN for just under 2 years on the FR side.

FR paid Swissport (then Groundstar) for 2 agents per flight to check in and 1 agent to board. The boarding agent was asssited by a cabin crew member who made the announcements and usually ripped the cards whilst the gate agent marked the cards off.

Whilst I was thurough at check in, the most I did at the gates was to check that the boarding card was for the flight I was actually boarding and maybe have a look at the passport/ID photo if the picture was being shown to me. It all came down to how good the cabin crew member was that you worked with. Some were great, knew what to do and did it quickly whilst those that insisted on checking every detail (name, picture, flight etc) HAD to be helped to prevent a delay on the flight. 20-25 min turnarounds were common and to be honest weren't difficult (for me anyway).

With regards to the comment made on Visas, it only adds seconds onto the passport check apart from the odd occasion when you would need to do a further check.
The team I worked in had between 60-80 PSA's on shift at any given time and there weren't many that you could work with who could close a fully booked flight on time. 189 people between two in 1 hour 20 was beyond most staff especially those that insisted on charging excess baggage.

I was constantly bollocked for not charging enough (it was monitored) but at least I could close a flight on time.

The major difference between FR and EZY @ STN is that EZY are computerised whereas FR are manual.
I preferred the manual way because it was just as fast as using a PC and when EZY had computer issues, their operation almost ground to a halt whilst we continued as normal. The only time manual checkin became an issue was during the peak periods when you had to call checkin for pax names. 1 phone, many flights and missing pax = delays.

Anyhow, I think I've strayed off topic there but I felt totally comfortable with the way I worked during the turnarounds.

[Opssys]

The check-in Process and the Excess Baggage Problem

Although not central to this thread, the Check-in Process has come up frequently, especially in regard to 'new' ways of remote check-in, coupled with round-trip check-in etc.

Although the use of the internet as the medium is recent, many of the 'new' methods can be traced to trials (and tribulations) carried out from the mid-1970's onwards. These were all marketing driven and inevitably even the most carefully planned (not many) uncovered problems and pitfalls that the designers of the scheme had not-forseen (usually in part because they had never monitored sufficiently, nor understood the processes involved and rarely if ever sought the advice of people who worked on check-in).

Many of these methods have been revived in recent years and some are now mainstream, at least with certain carriers. But the lessons learned in the original trials have in the main been forgotten, or lost. So again the designers have started from scratch and it appears made exactly the same mistakes again (ranging from Equipment Siting, fully integrating the additional method into the processes, exception handling, etc) An example of history teaching us nothing if we aren't listening.

So I am not surprised that route stations in particular have and are experiencing problems with some of the new 'methods' as the requirement definitions and design would, if it even considered the Check-in and Gate Area ergonomics at all, have concentrated on Main Base, and/or Main Hubs (and therefore any project costs involving Check-in/Gate Equipment would ignore the route stations) Plus any late alpha and beta testing on a realistic scale with involve high cost. So final 'beta' would tend to be as part of the production implementation and as implementation support is concentrated at the critical points (i.e. High Volume), a Route Station can feel pain, with no locally available asprin to ease it.

As SLF I have experienced most of the 'new' versions in action and in the case of some Airports reverted to the Check-in Queue. Where well implemented, they can be extremely convienent for the Passenger, where however the equipment is badly sited, or in the case of remote check-in the software is not 'robust' normally because it is a 'quick and nasty bolt-on' rather than being designed and project managed as a major change. As an example which happened to me: From the Hotel the Web Front End of the System Consistently Refused to check me in, but when I arrived at Airport Check-in I found that it had a total 5 timesm something impossible to do from a CUTE, or Networked PC/Terminal - As the PSA took it well I suspect this was not the first time it had happened!

As a Passenger, because of the Stamps in my Passport, I am now resigned for being selected for additional Security checks, but from observation (and going through some checks does give time to observe :-) once an enhanced security process has been implemented for a while, if properly resourced and the staff have gained experience, overall it doesn't cause any major impact on Ground Time, it is the implementation and immediate afermath that causes a problem (Although immediately Post 9/11 was extreme, I went through 4 Security Checks on one Flight - The Normal Check and Three Personal Checks, although I scored the Maximum, I wasn't alone and it was partly a case of left/hand right hand and the queues were mega - A couple of Months later same flight - I scored three checks, but the process was smooth and as painless as one could expect).

As someone who has spent much of their career in Airline Systems (mainly Operational rather Passenger Related) I was disappointed to hear that something as basic as POB+Infants wasn't handled correctly in Production, even if this appeared to be a one-off glitch.

Excess baggage: From Opsix' Post once again an example of cost based handling resulting in a problem. If a route has a high level of excess baggage (e.g. LGW/LHR LOS) then you either resource (and pay for) check-in to handle it (i.e NOT two Agents/Desks), or you wave it through (unless it is so gross that ignoring it is impossible) as long as the weights and/or pieces are correct.

If you are not going to resource for it and still 'discipline' staff for not dealing with the excess then your going to cop late closeouts and delays (and still not get the real amount of excess owed).

189 People in 80 Minutes, through two desks would be good throughput for a DCS based Check-in. A 2 Desk Manual Check-in can in certain circumstances achieve higher rates, but only if the desks are prepared with Pre-written/printed Tags, Cards and Shared Seat Plan. But an all Manual System does require A Coupon Control and is from a Back-office viewpoint less than ideal

Sorry gone (even) further off topic than intended
DIH

[TotalBeginner]

As someone who has spent much of their career in Airline Systems (mainly Operational rather Passenger Related) I was disappointed to hear that something as basic as POB+Infants wasn't handled correctly in Production, even if this appeared to be a one-off glitch.

This was not a one-off glitch. It was something that had been overlooked. And even though it had been pointed out, it was not rectified until it actually caused a delay. Which in my opinion is totally crazy!

But an all Manual System does require A Coupon Control and is from a Back-office viewpoint less than ideal

This is exactly what I can't understand about FR. Not only does their manual system restrict passengers to specific desks, they also require two memembers of staff to go through the process of checking in the passengers again on their DCS post departure??? I've taken part in this process myself, it's extreemly time consuming, and very rarely do the two match up.

[Opssys]

From the 'sound of it' the Requirements Definition probably didn't cover the Infants Case and despite the 'checks and balance' which should have picked this up it went through Alpha Testing (the Developers own test process) and Beta (Customer testing Process) without be spotted (Not very good to say the least), Once in production and the fault reported, then depending on the design, a fix could take time, I suspect the Delay put down to the problem was a catalyst to 'a sort this now' demand and resources were thrown at the problem. Whilst this speeds the fix, there is often a price (not just financial) to pay as the change cannot be tested for possible cause/effects elsewhere in the Application/Module whatever!.

Gosh Manual Check-in with DCS reconciliation. A permanent parallel run (where manual and automated systems are run together normally prior to the sutomated system going live) - A you say TB a process that 'eats' staff resouces and the reconciliation is going to throw up anomalies almost every flight.

Life just doesn't get any easier in the world of Airport Handling does it!
DIH

[LPLDispatcher]

hey all, just had a quick flick through this thread and felt the need to add a moan of my own, im a dispatcher at lpl (points at name) and i find that the 25 min turn around puts pressure on despatchers to skip secruity messures, aircraft departing with out the AAA forms filled in completey etc etc, yet if a dispatcher does the paper work correctly and the flight goes out late they then have to try and explain to the ops control that your job takes 25 mins just to wade thru the paperwork, that ontop of the cabin crew havin a natter between flights and departures takin 10 mins to get the pax on the ramp after reqested it does seem to get a bit heavy. i understand the need to get the a/c off asap when its low fares but manegement and the airlines need to think of ways to improve saftey and abilty of staff. think i need to move to a bigger airfield and do some hour turnarounds, can grab a brew then!!

[OpsSix]

Originally Posted by TotalBeginner

This is exactly what I can't understand about FR. Not only does their manual system restrict passengers to specific desks, they also require two memembers of staff to go through the process of checking in the passengers again on their DCS post departure??? I've taken part in this process myself, it's extreemly time consuming, and very rarely do the two match up.

I don't see how FR are checking in the pax again at the gate. All you do is mark off the pax that have passed through so you can see who exactly is missing.
The 2 desks per flight also works pretty well but only if both staff members are up to the job. If they are slow then you get issues.

[VNAVSPD]

I think it refers to what happens in the back office after the flight has left. All the passengers are checked in on the reservation system, and the no-shows removed, so that FR have an accurate record for revenue management, and resevation changes, refunds etc.