____________________________________________

Special Topic Paper on

IMPROVING ON-TIME PERFORMANCE
AND OPERATIONAL DEPENDABILITY
____________________________________________

Prepared by
Imran Asif
for Ph.D. (Aviation) in Operations at ERAU

12 August, 2013

Page 1 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
The foundation of commercial air service is the promise of an airline to get you to your
destination based on the schedule it publishes. Today the public perceives that promise to be of
dubious integrity, with excuses and maybes added after the fact. Passenger surveys show that
on-time performance contributes the most to the satisfaction with a flight, followed by smooth
and fast passenger check-in at the airport. On-time performance (OTP) is without a doubt the
most discussed operations topic that is visible to the public. The government agencies promptly
release OTP data to the public, which then becomes material for the press.

The press likes to report bad news stories and has a feeding frenzy when traffic volumes soar,
bad weather moves in, or when an airline seems to have a consistent problem with OTP. With
articles in the pres coming out nearly every week, airlines have been under pressure for some
time to improve performance.

Underlying the exposure OTP has seen is the fact that it can easily be measured. When OTP is
correctly measured and understood, attention can be focused on determining ways to improve
OTP. Airlines use operational statistics to measure performance and productivity as well as for
marketing purposes.

Improving OTP can be accomplished by managing the variables within an airline’s control and
though the proper use of operations analysis tools. Dependability can be improved if an airline
establishes and follows guidelines that govern its operating policy. The elements of success are
consistency and diligent management. Many airlines do not necessarily strive to be first, but
they want to rank at least in the top tier. Most airline management believes that if performance
is consistent, the public will know what to expect before they take their next flight with the
airline.

In this paper, we will look at the building blocks of dependability and OTP. We will present an in-
depth look at operations analysis, the group within the airline that is responsible for setting and
reviewing performance standards. We will also look at policies that airlines have used to
motivate their front-line people to prepare flights for on-time departures. Most of these
strategies try to build teamwork in some way, involving employees in initiatives to help the
airline run more reliably. The focus on this paper is to help international, medium-sized, and
rapidly growing airlines gain an appreciation of and learn the policies and techniques developed
by airlines that have taken major, long-term steps to improve dependability and OTP.

Why is Dependability Important?

An airline ticket is a contract between the airline and the customer. The airline promises to
transport the passenger from point A to B, based on specific published departure and arrival
times. In consideration for this service, the passenger pays and agreed-upon fare. One
important question in determining whether the terms of the contract have been met is, ‘Did the
customer arrive at or before the promised time’? Since the airline cannot control all aspects of
its flight between departure and arrival, its customers will judge its performance mostly based
on whether the flight departed on time.

Whether they are avoidable or not, if departure delays cannot be made up en route, they
impose costs on an airline’s customers. Delays take away time that the passenger could be

Page 2 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
spending at his/her destination, and this time has some value to the customer regardless of
how little time is involved. Extensive delays can result in missed appointments and other painful
consequences to the customer. In general, the magnitude of the consequences is proportional
to the length of the delay. Even a five-minute delay should not be viewed as meaningless,
although the passenger’s perception of the impact of such a delay may be very minor.

Equally important, delays impose costs on the airline. Every minute that an aircraft is delayed –
whether at the gate or in the air – costs money. Crews have to be paid, engine hours are
accruing on the airplane, and airport staff is collecting overtime pay. To mitigate these delays,
an airline may choose to add extra slack in the schedule in the form of block time or ground
time, wither of which will reduce equipment utilization and therefore aircraft productivity.

The benefits of running a dependable airline, although not directly observable, are quite
significant. Customers value reliability in schedules. All other things being equal, customers will
prefer an airline with a consistent record of dependability. An airline with superior dependability
performance will experience repeat business and earn an increased market share because of
higher customer satisfaction. Over time, this good record can result in a “virtuous cycle,”
wherein an airline develops a reputation for quality on-time product, which in turn spawns
growth markets and further introspection of how to expand its customer base. Part of the result
may be subsequent investments in dependability-related initiatives to ensure that on-time
performance stays high.

In addition to the fact that passengers value on-time flights, another good reason for an airline
to be concerned about dependability is that dependability is almost complete controllable. Most
aspects of on-time performance fall under the control of the airline, the major exceptions being
adverse weather conditions and air traffic control (ATC) problems. There are many things that
an airline can do to improve its chances of running on time. These include closely monitoring
and correcting the operational elements such as the block time and ground time data files used
in preparing the schedule, establishing company standards for performance, creating guidelines
to deal with irregular situations, and using decision support tools to assist the airline in
recovering from both major and minor disruptions. Many of these strategies will be discussed in
detail later in this paper.

Even though on-time performance may be controllable, engineering solid performance is not a
simple task. Since different groups and many employees are involved in the operation of an
airline every day, effective communication and feedback must take place to make the
operation work. Motivating employees to attain a consistent level of performance and tying this
performance to company standards is a goal that most airlines strive to achieve.

Dependability and consistency need to go hand in hand since the reputation of the airline and
repeat business are at stake. That is why airlines have invested heavily in OTP improvement.
The old phrase still applies: it takes a lifetime to win a customer and seconds to lose one. If
airlines can keep their operations reliable, they will win more customers than they will lose.

Planning Functions that Affect Airline Dependability

Operational dependability may be tallied up on the day a flight departs, but many management
activities drive departure performance well before departure day. On-time performance is a

Page 3 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
form of product quality. It must be designed into the product from the beginning. Prior to the
day of operation, the airline must develop its schedule, sell its inventory, and allocate resources
to operate the flights. The schedule alone, in terms of time allotted for the flights and for
preparing the aircraft for the next flight, is one of the most important factors in managing a
dependable airline. Although a good schedule does not ensure a dependable airline, a flawed
schedule will preclude any chance of a successful operation.

Block Time Development

Having the right block time on each flight is key to running a smooth operation. But forecasting
block times is not a static process. Based on a recent US Department of Transportation report,
flights on nearly three-quarters of all major routes are taking longer than they did ten years ago,
owing primarily to increased airport operations and congestion. The lengths of some long-haul
routes have increased by as much as 20 minutes. An underlying cause is the rapid growth in
demand for air transportation services, which is straining airport infrastructure and air traffic
control systems.

According to one report, in response to pressure to avoid delays, airlines have increased the
amount of block time scheduled on nearly 75 percent of the two hundred highest-volume
domestic routes between 1988 and 2008. The same report points to several routes where up to
20 minutes were added.

In setting up a block time function, an airline should initially develop block times for two
seasons each year. The summer season runs from April to October, and winter runs from
November through March. These two periods correspond to seasons established by the
International Air Transport Association (IATA). Later, as an airline’s sophistication with handling
block times grows and the need for greater accuracy affects other areas of the company, the
airline may want to add two more seasons.

Block performance will differ from one year to the next owing to factors that might or might not
be foreseen at the start of the bock season. One approach to estimating block time is to use
actual averages for a season and the scheduled block times for that season to produce a
composite set of scheduled block times for the next season. For example, last winter’s actual
times as well as scheduled times are used to generate forecasts for the upcoming winter’s
times. For new routes, an air time should be generated from a sample flight plan, and
estimates of taxi-out and taxi-in times typical for the departure and arrival airports should be
added.

For large airports, especially where significant passenger connection activity occurs, block times
can vary within “windows,” or increments of time during which a bank of flights may operate.
These windows of time are created to account for congested activity at a hub where an airline
may have to increase taxi times because of queuing.

An airline’s operations planning group should be the “owner” of block time files and the
gatekeeper of changes to it. As such, this group must also weigh the implications to the airline
of making changes to the block times. At the extremes, pilots may want longer block times –
because one component of their pay is based on how long they fly – but the scheduling
department may want shorter block times in order to squeeze in one more flight or to make a
tighter connection to improve how the schedule displays in reservations systems.

Page 4 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
Ground Time
The scheduled minimum ground time is important for ensuring that the operation stays
punctual. Like block time, minimum ground time is a scheduling standard. The minimum
standard should be the time required to prepare the airplane for its next departure under
normal circumstances. It is to be hoped that the ground time will be short enough to provide a
sense of urgency for the ground crews but long enough that diligent ground crews have enough
time to do a quality job and to keep the operation on track.

Ground time standards differ depending on whether an airport operates as a hub or as a spoke
airport. At a spoke airport, where activity is usually limited, there are few, if any, simultaneous
operations, and staffing is determined by how many employees are required to turn an aircraft
efficiently. A hub station, by design, has multiple operations. Aircraft are generally required to
be on the ground longer at a hub in order to accommodate connecting passengers and ramp
and taxi congestion.

In general, the scope of work to be performed while an aircraft is between flights includes
deplaning passengers and off-loading baggage and cargo; transferring baggage to other flights;
cleaning, catering, provisioning, and refueling the airplane; and enplaning passengers and
loading baggage and cargo. Certain flights may also require time for minor maintenance
checks, and some international arrivals may require time for security and related inspections.
Time for all these items must be factored in when an airline establishes ground standards. The
ground times must be reviewed and approved by station management since these managers
will be responsible for overseeing the work. Station management may request adjustment to
ground time to account for and reflect unusual activity such as flight with a high volume of
passengers and baggage, or simultaneous arrivals with limited personnel to do the work of
servicing two aircraft.

For scheduling purposes, there needs to be a buffer built into the minimum ground time in
order to provide some contingency time to counter a late arrival or typical small problems in
unloading and loading the aircraft. For example, the minimum scheduled ground time might be
set to the nominal aircraft turnaround time, for example, 25 minutes, plus a 10-minute buffer,
for a total of 35 minutes. This buffer should be longer if:

 the inbound flight is a long-haul flight (that is, the longer the block time, the greater the
variability in arrival time); or
 the inbound flight requires clearance from customs (servicing is required by an external party
that is outside the airline’s direct control); or
 there is a crew change (new crew is required to be briefed and to inspect the airplane); or
 the outbound flight requires special preparation (for example, international flights may
require lengthy catering, cleaning, or provisioning).

Because the airport minimum ground time affects aircraft utilization, operations staff should
reach agreement with the airline’s planning department as to the appropriate minimum ground
time. Too little time will degrade the operation, and too much will result in lost market
opportunities. Ground times that are greater than the company’s minimum standard
requirements can be viewed as a resource. In theory, this “surplus” time is available to the
airline and could be used to increase utilization of its assets through the scheduling of more
flight time, or to recover from a delay on a previous flight.

Page 5 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
At a hub, the minimum time required for passengers to transfer between flights can be greater
than the minimum ground time required for the aircraft, and planes will have to remain on
ground longer than us required from an operations perspective. As more aircraft are added to a
bank of flights at a hub, and as the sequencing of flights becomes critical owing to runway and
other capacity limitations, hubs become inefficient in that aircraft are sitting on the ground
rather than flying in the air, where they generate revenue. These considerations are particularly
important for operations that rely on significant volumes of passenger connections, since longer
connect times result in longer elapsed times, which degrades the airline’s flight displays in the
Computer Reservation Systems (CRSs). Passengers need to feel that a connection is workable;
an airline that develops a reputation for stranding its connecting passengers too often will
suffer in the marketplace.

Dependability Standards
Operations should have the responsibility for publishing and tracking dependability standards.
These standards should be tracked for the entire system by region, equipment type, and time of
day. Standards are expressed in terms of a target percentage of flights meeting the standard.
Some of the most important variables to be tracked are:

 departures: D+0, D+5, D+15 (shortened for departures at 0, 5, or 15 minutes after schedule
or earlier; usually expressed as a percentage);
 block time;
 arrivals: A+0, A+5, A+15 (arrivals within 0, 5 or 15 minutes of scheduled arrival time);
 completion factor (percentage of scheduled flights completed).

Initially the standards should be the same for all stations (airports of operation) and equal to
the system standard. Over time, these standards can be modified as conditions change and the
airline’s understanding of station operations increases. The stations themselves should focus
on departure performance since the other measures are out of their direct control. Stations with
more than 1,000 operations per month can also look at a functional breakdown of delays. With
fewer than 1,000 operations per month, the delay counts can be so small that they are usually
not meaningful, but it is still meaningful to analyze functional groups for an airline’s entire
system. Like station standards, functional standards should initially be based on historical
performance and subsequently modified as new data become available.

Standards also need to be internally consistent. That means that the sum of allowable delays
for all functional groups must equal the allowable system delays. Also, the average of individual
station standards, weighted by number of operations, must equal the system standard.

Other Commercial Scheduling Issues

The schedule planning department plays a key role in dependability and on-time performance
of airline operations. Given its responsibility for developing future schedules, this department
has the ability to take certain corrective measures for the next schedule change, especially if it
gets timely feedback from operations groups. The schedule planning department is required to
respect the company’s block time and ground time standards as well as any other operational
constraints as it builds the schedule. The schedule planning department can benefit the
company by understanding how to incorporate these variables through working closely with the
airline’s operations department to improve performance.

Page 6 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
The schedule planning department should have a good working relationship with the operations
analysis department. These two areas should work together as needed to review on-time
performance with an emphasis on block time performance as well as performance of new
routes. As the principal users of the block time file, the people in the schedule planning
department must also provide relevant inputs as well a request changes during the block time
construction and review process. These requests for changes in block time center on meeting
slot requirements, airport curfews, and certain exceptions for competitive reasons.

The hub-and-spoke networks operated by many major airlines favor the schedule structures
that compress arrivals and departures at the hub airports into short intervals known as banks.
Although banking offers an airline the ability to efficiently transfer passengers, it can also strain
the capacity of hub airports. The number of aircraft needing either to take off or to land during a
bank can exceed the airport’s ability to accommodate air traffic. The result is long queuing
delays experienced by planes arriving at and departing from a hub airport.

There are a number of strategies that a schedule planning department should employ in order
to improve scheduling dependability. These include:

 understanding and using aircraft flow rates (the number of arrivals and departures within an
increment of time) to its advantage at its hub airports;
 carefully sequencing aircraft within banks;
 using bank separation – allowing sufficient time between the departures of one bank and
the arrivals from the next bank to avoid or minimize overlapping use of the facilities
(generally manifesting itself as an “awaiting gate delay” in the arriving flight);
 making sure that inbound flights from pacing spokes do not rotate to outbound flights to
another pacing spoke (a pacing spoke is a station that sets the departure or arrival time of a
bank because it has the longest block time);
 grouping together those flights with heavy connections at proximal gates;
 including commuter partners as part of the network when developing scheduling strategy;
 for airlines operating more than one hub, looking at how aircraft flow between hubs in order
to get clues to improving dependability;
 performing feasibility checks before closing the schedule;
 working with operations personnel in the department to create a team approach to
developing solutions and communicating problem areas in the schedule; this includes
publishing a schedule allowing sufficient time for feedback from operations groups.

Operations Control
Anywhere between two days and two weeks prior to departure the Operations Control center
(OCC) group takes responsibility for executing the schedule. This responsibility entails managing
the daily operation of the airline and coordinating among the various operating groups.
Operations control is responsible for ensuring that operating guidelines are followed and for
coordinating with other departments to operate the airline. It is responsible for directing the
operational resources of the carrier so as to maximize the long-term interests of the airline as a

Page 7 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
whole. This function involves tangible short-term cost in return for soft benefits such as higher
customer satisfaction.

Operating guidelines should cover events such as delays, cancellations, consolidations, en route
landings and diversions. Operating guidelines assist airline operations personnel in making
decisions oriented to achieving consistency for on-time performance. The objective of the
guidelines is to create a high level of dependability by enabling operations personnel to make
timely decisions that will cause the least impact on passengers while keeping passengers
informed of any changes to flights. An airline’s operating guidelines are not intended to cover
all situations, but they should be used along with good judgment in making decisions that are
the best for the airline. Operating guidelines also address problem resolution. In those
situations where problems adversely impact the airline’s customers, emphasis should be
placed on defining and implementing solutions that minimize the disruptive impact on the
customer. This usually means finding the solution that affects the fewest passengers, although
it could also mean disrupting a larger number of passengers for a shorter amount of time.

For instance, if a delay involves a mechanical failure, the maintenance department needs to
quickly evaluate the time required to perform any work and pass this information on to the
OCC. In the same way, the OCC must take into consideration ATC effects and adverse
meteorological conditions to establish an estimated time of departure/arrival with as much
accuracy as possible.

Airlines need to develop policies to deal with recurrent problems. For example, an airline must
define as part of its operating guidelines what its policy is regarding delaying a flight for on-line
connecting passengers. The airline’s policy may be based on passenger volume and frequency
of service. A hypothetical guideline could contain the following provisions:

 Do not hold for fewer than ten passengers.

 Hold up to 20 minutes for more than ten passengers – domestic.
 Hold up to 30 minutes for more than ten passengers – international.

These hypothetical policies regarding on-line connecting passengers exemplify how an airline
might cope with the critical recurring trade-offs between passenger comfort and convenience
and on-time performance.

Other guidelines may also be needed to address flight cancellations and/or the need to
consolidate two flights into one if there are insufficient crews or aircraft available to operate
both flights. Some of the considerations might be:

 Evaluate the number of passengers affected and confine the impact to the least number.
 Accommodate passengers on other flights of the same airline or ensure that they are
accommodated on other airlines’ flights.
 If feasible, coordinating ground transportation may be appropriate. But when contemplating
ground transportation, existing infrastructure, distance, and weather conditions also should
be considered.

Establishing such policies does not really constitute contingency planning. Contingency planning
would involve anticipating an event and planning for the consequences of that event. Since
most operational events are driven by weather, useful contingency planning would require
Page 8 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
weather forecasts that are accurate in terms of predicting the severity, duration, and timing of
the weather event. Minor errors in any of these forecasts can result in major changes to an
airline’s operational integrity and major changes in the approach to dealing with the event.
Other types of disruptions, such as mechanical problems and ATC delays, are often less
predictable than weather events. As a result, most airlines’ operations control functions operate
primarily in a reactive mode. As the capability to analyze and control airline operation improves,
contingency planning processes will improve as well; at present, however, what an airline can
accomplish in this area is severely limited.

The OCC plays a vital role in communicating among operations groups. It has access to
information that should be passed along to station personnel and passengers alike. For
example, when a flight has a delay, the OCC should immediately advise all operating
departments (including reservations) in order to facilitate communications with passengers and
to advise them of the new departure/arrival time of their flight.

When major irregularities occur as a result if adverse weather conditions and/or ATC
constraints, the OCC should also contact the liaison office of the air traffic control regulating
agency. Such communication allows an airline to discuss problems and negotiate solutions on
an ongoing basis. Additionally, since these types of irregularities affect all airlines that are
operating in the shared environment, it behooves the operations personnel of all the airlines,
even if they are competitors, to initiate the sharing of ideas and information that may result in
an improved system of operation for all. Some airlines hire retired air traffic controllers to
perform this work.

The OCC’s decisions are made in real time, with impacts to the airline spanning one to two days
into the future at most. As such, the OCC has little ability to influence dependability because its
focus is always on getting the airline back on its published schedule as quickly and as cost-
effectively as possible. Although the OCC is certainly critical to the successful operation of an
airline, generally it cannot be proactive. The task of analyzing past performance to improve
future performance generally falls to a staff group removed from the minute-to-minute
operation of the airline.

The Analysis Process

Many airlines have an operations analysis department, a back-office function that operates
separately from operations control and that typically reports to the vice president/deputy
director of operations planning. The role of operations analysis is to understand the airline’s
production capabilities and to improve future dependability. This is a tactical planning function,
typically addressing problems with time horizons varying from about one month to a year. A
successful operations analysis group is responsible for:

 developing dependability standards,

 monitoring and analyzing operational performance,
 identifying resource bottlenecks and developing plans to eliminate them,
 publishing block times that properly trade off operational integrity for aircraft utilization,
 assisting the airline to improve customers’ perception of the airline’s on-time performance,
and
 reducing costs by deploying operational resources more efficiently.

Page 9 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
There are several distinct differentiations between the OCC and operations analysis that are
worth noting. Unlike the managers in the OCC and at the airports who must cope with
irregularities and react on a real-time basis, the operations analysis people make
recommendations that generally cannot be implemented immediately. Whereas within the OCC
the nature of decisions tends to be limited and reactive, in operations analysis the process is
much more proactive and broader in scope, and as a result, it also has higher cost leverage.
Both groups are important in promoting effective and efficient airline operations and are most
effective if they can work as a cohesive team, making use of one another’s skills.

The operations analysis function consists of a number of recurring subspecialities, each

designed to identify problems in the operation that can be analyzed and corrected. Some of the
most common of these are discussed in the following paragraphs:

 Executive dependability briefing. Top management requires a periodic briefing on recent

system dependability performance, weather impacts, trends, and any special operational
events. The briefing should provide management with a comprehensive summary of airline
operations on a weekly/monthly/year-to-date basis.

 Ad hoc dependability analyses. Ad hoc analyses might be done to identify potential

operational bottlenecks in future schedules or to analyze the impact of proposed operational
strategies for the company. Whenever a dependability problem arises for which the cause is
not obvious, ad hoc queries can be used to pinpoint the cause and other possible side
effects.

 Performance standards for the airline. Performance standards should be established for
each station and functional group using a historical base period. Actual dependability
performance by station or functional group can then be measured against these standards.
Whenever a group falls below the standard for a significant period of time, operations
analysis can analyze the cause of the problem and recommend corrective action. Standards
should be updated to ensure that they reflect the most current operating environment.

Delay Coding
Delay coding is an important part of the operations analysis function. Trends in delays cannot
be picked up unless there is a company-wide effort to code the cause of every delay and
document why the delay occurred. Although a single delay may mean little, many delays with
the same or a similar code may indicate a trend that needs to be analyzed. Delay coding will
not turn a delayed flight into an “on-time” flight, but it can provide insight into aspects of the
operation that need management’s attention.

Delay coding is fundamentally the responsibility of the station where the delay occurred. But
operations analysis should review codes and change them if they are recorded incorrectly.
Station managers have a natural tendency to code the delays in a manner that reflects well
upon them and may not necessarily give a complete picture of what has actually occurred.
Operations analysis should seek missing delay codes and correct the database as needed.

Table 1 shows typical delay codes with simple descriptions.

Reporting
One of the major functions of operations analysis is to provide various operational reports for
the airline as a whole. These reports provide feedback on how well the airline is doing relative to

Page 10 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
its internal standards or compared to its competition. Individual departments can use
operational reports as a vehicle for identifying and solving dependability problems within that
department’s specific domain. Senior management can also use the reports to understand how
well the airline is doing from a dependability perspective, similar to the ways that financial
reports are used to provide a high-level look at the company’s profitability and cash flow.

Weather:
Delays awaiting improvement in local weather
Damage to airport facilities caused by weather
Downline delays caused by en route weather
De-icing

Air traffic control:

Traffic flow control and related problems
Failure of ATC computers
ATC equipment failure, including communications, navigation, meteorology, Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs)

Mechanical:
Ground equipment
Aircraft unserviceable
Minimum Equipment List (MEL) items

Field service:
Passenger boarding
Additional stop to pick up passengers
Connecting passengers
Catering
Flight closeout
Cabin cleaning

Airport:
Airport facilities out of service
Baggage facility out of service
Fueling delays
Ramp congestion delays

Crew delays:
Crew late reporting from home
Crew late from connecting flight
Late flight attendant

Airline planning:
Delays caused by insufficient block time

Upline delay – delays caused by late inbound aircraft

Security

Customs, immigration, and quarantine

Safety:
Aircraft damage
Incident or accident
Removal of baggage by request of captain
Removal of restricted articles

Other factors:
Failure to code delay
Entertainment systems
Dispatch –late release of flight plan
Routing aircraft for needed maintenance
Automation
labor-related problem

Table 1 Explanations of Sample Delay Codes.

Page 11 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
Analysis Procedures
Most operations analysis procedures recur as daily, weekly, or monthly tasks. The primary
activities fall into three general categories:

1. Data maintenance. Operations analysis databases must be kept clean, and any missing or
incorrect data must be corrected. There should be constant vigilance regarding the daily
collection of all data, the monthly archiving of operational summary data for month-to-
month and year-to-year comparison purposes, and the seasonal archiving of block time
data.

2. Reports. Operations analysis should generate standard reports for its own use as well as for
the use of other departments within the airline.

3. Analysis. Unstructured, ad hoc analyses are a key part of the value generated by the
operations analysis group. These analyses should be structured to identify a problem,
pinpoint the root cause of the problem (not just the symptoms), and then operations
analysis should work with the appropriate operating departments to develop a solution.
Where possible, the operations analysis department should compare results with those of
other airlines and assess whether the airline is doing a better job in managing that
particular problem.

The general analysis process involves generating reports periodically and analyzing them for
variances in standards. These variances can be either positive or negative, although negative
variances are generally of more interest, because they are evidence of an operational problem.
Statistics may suggest that part of the operation is not working as it should, but they seldom
point to a solution or even a cause. That work is left to an analyst, who must draw upon his or
her knowledge and experience to pinpoint the cause of the problem and a likely solution.

Process Model for Operations Analysis

Operations analysis can monitor the performance of the airline, identify problems or
bottlenecks, and suggest changes that will improve performance. The process described in the
following paragraphs involves observing the operation, strategizing improvements, and
implementing changes in a continuous circle of evolution.

The methodology used in operations analysis involves measuring performance with the
frequency of observation varying between daily and semi-annually. With daily observation it is
possible to obtain a deep understanding of what happened in the operations on a particular
day, including the causes of any problems that occurred. But a single day’s observation is too
anecdotal: there is too little data for any trend to be detectable, and the ultimate, underlying
causes of systematic dependability problems will not necessarily be obvious. Semi-annual
observation encounters the opposite problem: a good statistical sample but not enough insight
into what might have happened on any particular day because the details are missing.
Furthermore, even if it did provide such insight, addressing problems twice each year is not
nearly frequent enough.

For many measurements, a monthly analysis cycle is a god compromise because it is still a
short enough amount of time to provide some insights on causes of problems but also long
enough to provide a good statistical sample. Therefore the proposed operations analysis
business process uses daily, monthly, and semi-annual observations. The daily observations are
primarily useful for understanding what happened, whereas the monthly and semi-annual

Page 12 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
observations are useful for analyzing long-term trends. All of these observations are needed to
obtain a complete picture of the airline’s operations.

It is appropriate to begin working on solutions only after the operations analyst feels he or she
has a complete picture of the problems. Developing solutions is an unstructured activity, usually
requiring working with the general managers of the stations and with functional experts on the
airline’s staff. Generally, operations analysis is most effective in addressing problems that cut
across several areas of the airline (given that if a problem is in only one area, the manager of
that area should be able to solve it her/himself). The solutions for such problems always require
coordination among departments, and operations analysis should facilitate this cooperation.

It is also important to work on the problems whose solutions will have the greatest impact on
the airline as a whole. Operations analysis should generally focus on problems that affect a
large percentage of flights so as to create maximum value for the resources expended by the
operations analysis organization.

Finally, operations analysis is not totally a desk job. Operations analysis personnel should be
encouraged to visit airports frequently to obtain a firsthand look at how the stations are being
managed. These visits can be invaluable for uncovering well-hidden problems that are
damaging operational performance, as well as for learning more about how the airline
operations are working.

Daily Activities and Process Much of the daily work done in operations analysis is a routine
examination of data from the previous day’s operation. Any errors in the data must be corrected
before the employees’ memory of the underlying events is lost. An erroneous flight time or
delay code will remain in the database forever unless it is identified immediately and fixed.

In addition to ensuring that the system data are as clean as possible, operations analysis
personnel must begin by examining data dependability on a daily basis. The focus of the daily
process is to understand what happened in the previous day’s operation. One day should be
considered a thin slice of time, sufficient to understand only the issues facing the operation that
day and not sufficient to understand long-term trends. The large volume of flight data coming n
every day necessitates developing a method for scanning the operating data quickly to derive a
sense of how well the operation ran. Deeper probes lead to greater understanding of specific
events or flights and begin to paint a picture of the underlying causes of both good and bad
performance.

The process described in the following paragraphs is one way to analyze daily operations. It is
assumed that a daily traffic and dependability report has been generated and is available for
review. The various analyses described below may be done independently. As more analyses
are performed in greater depth, the understanding of what happened in the operation will be
better, and it will be easier to pinpoint root causes of problems and possible solutions to those
problems.

 Review system dependability numbers. Look at primarily departure performance relative to

standard (generally D+5 or D+15), arrival performance (A+5 or A+15), and block time. All
other thing being equal, high performance may indicate minima ATC problems and perhaps
light traffic as well. Low performance may indicate a major weather event or an ATN
problem somewhere in the system.

Page 13 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
 Review station dependability. For this task investigate any performance that differs from
standard by ±10 percent. If dependability is more than 10 points above standard, this may
indicate either that a station is managed better than most or that it is hiding its problems.
Similarly, if dependability is 10 percent below standard, the short-term cause is likely to be a
one-time event that hurt performance for that station on that day.

 Correlation analysis. Look for correlation between dependability problems and station,
region, time of day, and city-pair to determine the dominant functional cause of delay.
Investigate these factors if measurements are significantly different from standard. Where
possible, relate dependability problems to known events, such as weather, ATC, or local
airport issues. Such events will manifest themselves as weather delays, passenger handling
problems, late inbound flights, and possibly mechanical delays. It is not unusual for a single
event to generate many different types of delays that do not, on the surface, appear to be
related.

 Examine downline impacts. Where an known event has caused dependability problems,
trace the downline consequences of those delays. These disruptions are often followed by a
recovery phase, during which operations control personnel tried to bring the airline back on
time, often with the use of decision support tools. Operations analysis should assess how
good a job operations control did in rebuilding the airline, as well as try to learn from such
events so as to improve the operations control process in the future.

 Review “catastrophic” delays and cancellations. A catastrophic delay is when a flight is

either two hours or more late, is diverted from its destination airport, or is cancelled. Such
events should be random. But if any patterns are seen in these delays / diversions /
cancellations, inform the station personnel of what you have observed and/or make an entry
into the “Problems” section of the daily traffic and dependability report.

Monthly Activities A monthly analysis period is generally long enough to observe real trends.
The focus of the analysis should be on performance versus standard, and extremes should be
explored in more detail. Aircraft or crew turns that meet planning standards may be found to be
unworkable in the actual operation. On the other hand, flights whose block times or ground
times are well above standard may be found to have excess resources assigned to them and
represent a potential area for cost savings. The general goal should be to enhance operational
performance while reducing the variance between the best and worst performing flights.

Monthly analyses can still be skewed by a small number of major dependability events. The
analyst must still ask whether poor performance is a trend or a fluke – a flight or flights falling
victim to events beyond the airline’s control. Having a full month of data to analyze reduces but
does not eliminate the possibility of an event-driven problem that skews the overall statistics;
the analyst’s judgment must determine whether skewing is happening. It should be kept in
mind that the statistics observed are merely symptoms; they do not by themselves indicate
problems. Finding the underlying causes of problems requires detailed analysis. Following are
some possible ways to perform monthly analyses.

 Examine those flights with the worst dependability. Order all flights from best to worst
departure dependability (D+5 or D+15) and then look at the worst 10 percent. Examine
whether or not there were any consistent causes of delay. If so, determine what was driving
these delays. Explore if it was the lack of resources or a consistent failure to service the flight

Page 14 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
 properly. If the dominant cause was up-line, the analyst needs to explore why the up-line
flight(s) consistently arrived late.

 Examine those flights with the highest dependability. Flights with dependability consistently
above standards are above standard because there are consistently favourable
circumstances (for instance, these flights may be the first flight of the day or the only
operation at that station), or because local management is putting extra focus on that flight.
If the explanation is determined to be the latter, then the general manager at that station
should be encouraged to share his or her methods with personnel from other, average-
performing stations.

 Look at all functional causes of delays. Compare delay percentages by functional group
standards, and further examine any functional area that is better or worse than standard by
10 percent or more. For poorly performing functional groups, pinpoint the root causes(s) and
work with the appropriate personnel to address the problems.

 Look at block performance by flight. Order flights from best to worst. For the worst-
performing flights, examine the process by which the block times were determined.
Determine which assumptions were wrong, if any, and modify the planning or operational
process as appropriate. If the process is not at fault, then there may be some other
underlying cause on the ground, such as long taxi times, or the problem could be ATC-
related. High-performing flights should be considered for a block reduction for next year, but
this change must be made carefully. If the system block performance was on standard, then
every block addition should be balanced with a reduction somewhere else.

 Monitor aircraft turn performance. Motivating ground staff to turn flights in a timely fashion
is one of the more difficult problems for station management. Operations analysis can help
by examining the actual time required to turn the aircraft relative to standard. If the ground
time is long, stations are entitled to divert resources to other flights that may have more
urgent requirements. If an inbound flight is late, however, it is important to turn the airplane
quickly to reduce the outbound delay. If stations fail to turn a flight within the allowable
standard after a late inbound arrival, it is almost certainly because they perceive that the
outbound flight will be delayed anyway and they are therefore not focused on the minimum
turn time.

The Semi-Annual Process It is appropriate to review long-term dependability trends at least

twice each year. The ideal timing would correspond to the IATA semi-annual schedule change
dates that most airlines use. If the airline has more than two schedule seasons per year, then
this activity should be done for each major schedule change. Using a six-month time span of
data, any chance of seeing individual events or even patterns lasting up to several weeks is
completely gone. But performance over an entire schedule season is a good indicator of long-
term dependability performance, and such a period is long enough to observe subtle chronic
problems.

The seasonal changes represent an opportunity to make long-term adjustments to the

operation. Any action taken is primarily of a tuning nature; that is, resources are reallocated
from flights and stations that have done well to those flights and stations that have shown poor
dependability. Standards should be recalibrated based on the season’s performance as well. To
the extent that additional resources will help, those stations or flights receiving more resources
should show improvement. This is also the time to adjust block times for the same season the
Page 15 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
following year, although if block times are found to contain a large error, adjustments may
sometimes be made earlier in the process. That is, adjustments could be made for the winter
schedule based on summer performance. But managers should be aware that any proposed
action would not necessarily apply to the opposite season.

Operations analysis should perform the following semi-annual analyses:

 Examine the flights and stations with the lowest and highest dependability. Order all flights
from best to worst departure dependability (D+5 or D+15). Then look at the worst 10
percent, as was done in the monthly analysis. The variance between the bottom 10 percent
and the mean should be much less than when one is looking at only one month. The flights
in the bottom 10 percent group should be examined for common characteristics that would
indicate a systemic problem.

 Recalibrate block times for the same season next year. Flights would again be ordered from
best to worst block time performance. The worst performers should be compared to other
flights in the same market, return trips in the same market, other departures from the same
originating station, at roughly the same time of day, as well as to other flights of comparable
mileage. The highest-performing flights in terms of block time should also be compared to
the performance of similar flights. In this case, however, the presumption is that the
scheduled block time is excessive and should be cut for the next season.

 Examine year-to-year trends. The operations analysis group must do what it can to
encourage continuous improvement of operational performance. This is particularly
important for an airline that may be growing rapidly or may be introducing complexity into its
daily operations through adding new fleet types or additional equipment. One way to
encourage ongoing improvement is to publish comparisons of year-to-year differences in
performance. On a quarterly or semi-annual basis, operations analysis can look at year-to-
year differences in departure and arrival performance and block performance.

These comparisons will show whether there has been improvement in these functional areas
over a long period of time. If the comparison is unfavorable, then the appropriate managers
need to explain the worsening performance and correct whatever problems are uncovered.

Ad Hoc Analysis From time to time, operations analysis may be asked to do a one-time study
on a particular operational issue. These analyses are separate from the analyses described thus
far, although they may draw some common elements from them. Whether the request comes
from station management or from senior management, it is an indication that there is a real
problem that is perceived but not fully understood. By their nature, such requests are difficult to
characterize; an example of a study that may be requested is a competitive analysis designed
to find ways to reduce head count or increase productivity and improve station performance.

For example, suppose a station’s departure performance report shows that its departure
performance is 10 percentage points below standard. Here is a list of some of the possible
factors to investigate:

 Scheduled ground times may be unrealistically low.

 Flights could be consistently arriving late.
 There may be insufficient ground personnel to load and unload the aircraft in the given time.

Page 16 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
 Ground personnel may not have received adequate training.
 Recent prevailing weather conditions may have deviated significantly from historical data.
 Pilots may be requesting extra fuel because of a difficult takeoff pattern.
 Cargo or baggage may be loaded on the airplane too late to get the flight out on time.
 There may be more ATC delays at this station than elsewhere owing to the unreliability of
ATC equipment or computers.
 There may be terminal ramp congestion that the airline may or may not be in a position to
impact/control.

The solution to such problems generally involves adding resources so some kind, which could
take the form of providing additional block time or ground time, scheduling the flights
differently, or adding more personnel. Operations analysis generally does not implement the
solution, but it should make recommendations to line managers, who then take responsibility
for implementing changes.

Feedback, Enforcement, Incentives

Motivating Employees Getting employees motivated to do their jobs with speed and
consistency is a goal that all airline share. Following are some examples of airlines and
methods that stand out.

At Southwest Airlines, perennially top-ranked as the nation’s best in customer service, new hires
are treated to parties and barbecues to “get them pumped up about being here,” according to
the airline’s customer service training department. The airline hires its personnel based on
attitude, a trait that cannot be learned on the job.

Continental’s “worst-to-first” success story is well known. One element the airline tried was
establishing incentives for employees to improve their performance. Each time Continental
finishes in the top five in monthly on-time performance, each employee receives a bonus check.
If Continental finishes first, the bonus is greater. In addition, employees who have perfect
attendance have a chance to win a new automobile.

In the runner-up category, it is interesting to see that Northwest Airlines, once known for poor
operating performance, appears to be incorporating some elements of Continental’s formula
for customer service. In the game where on-time statistics and customer complaint counts
determine the score, Northwest has changed the way it operates, giving its planes a better
chance of leaving on time. The airline added more staff at its busy hubs. Northwest got a few
passenger-friendly ideas from alliance partner Continental Airlines. Northwest had also drafted
a plan to address irregular operations and that thinking has carried over to its customer training
program called Passport to Success. The focus was on how to prepare for the unexpected, how
to keep cool when things go wrong, and how to make customers happy when the unexpected
happens. The Passport program cost Northwest US$ 8.5 million back in 1999 when it was
launched.

By changing how it operates, Northwest could boost its on-time performance to the top of large
hub-type carriers. Northwest lengthened its “flight day,” meaning that planes had more time at
gates to be cleaned and prepared for the net flight, increasing the chances that they will depart

Page 17 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
on time. Northwest cut down on cancelled flights by adding spare planes, to cover for planes
experiencing mechanical problems.

In addition to major corporate initiatives, there are standard procedures that should be initiated
at the station level to focus on employee performance. Station managers need to meet
routinely with their direct reports to review current operations, discuss problems, and find ways
to better resolve them the next time. These meetings should include key station personnel from
the airline and also external service providers such as catering and fueling agents.

Some airlines have created “reward and punishment” schemes to encourage consistency in
operating performance. The rewards range from recognizing an individual employee for superior
performance, to a station-of-the-month program, and so on. Punishments for sub par
performance, excluding those requiring discipline, include requiring the station manager to
send a written explanation of all operations that had a delay greater than 5 minutes, the idea
being that station personnel abhor paperwork and will do anything to avoid it, including doing a
better job the next time.

Special Programs Airlines have put into place a number of corporate programs o improve
dependability. These programs put special emphasis on operations groups, since these
employees are carefully monitored by the airline. Here are some ideas that have been used:

 Ensuring superior performance for the first fights of the day. The idea is that if the first flights
are on time, there is a better chance that the flights for the rest of the day will be on time as
well.

 Special alerts (like “red zone”) or notifications are given by dispatchers that a flight is
running behind and a special effort will be required by pilots and operations agents to make
up time.

 Use of “early birds,” or flights that depart ahead of scheduled time. This procedure can be
done only if all passengers and cargo are boarded and no more of either is being processed.
This practice is most common on international flights that are not full.

 Feedback systems are created and used so that pilots and operations areas have the ability
to communicate problems and make suggestions.

Changing the Ground Rules

There are also other methods airlines have used to improve OTP, namely, by changing the rules
of the game for flight departures. At one end of the scale, some airlines have policies to leave
before the actual scheduled departure time or to close the flight to passenger boarding five
minutes before scheduled departure. US Department of Transportation (DOT) investigators
found that airlines, under pressure to boost on-time performance, are sending off many more
flights before their schedule departure times. Other airlines use more favorable ways of
determining when a flight actually departs. One airline actually set its terminal clocks three
minutes ahead. Passengers seeing the time on these clocks would think they had less time
before departure that they really did, so they hurried to board.

Although US airlines are required by DOT to records exact departure times, the means of
marking those times was not standard throughout the industry until 1999. The DOT office in
1999 found in an audit that airlines determined the departure time of a flight based on

Page 18 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
different events. Listed below are some of these methods, along with some of the airlines that
used these methods:

 wheels rolling (Alaska, America West, and Southwest),

 releasing the parking brake (Northwest, United, and American),
 closing passenger and cargo doors (Continental and Delta),
 a combination of closing doors and releasing the parking brake (US Airways).

Although most airlines use the ARINC’s Aircraft Communications and Reporting System
(ACARS), a widely available air-ground data link, to determine the components of block and taxi
times, some airlines rely on flight crews to report departures, and they averaged three minutes
earlier on departures than the DOT office recorded. Airlines that manually record times can
manipulate that information more easily than can airlines using an automated systems,
according to the DOT.

Each of these methods of determining departure times resulted in shaving or adding a minute
or two to the actual departure time. For example, carriers that used the parking brake or door-
closing definitions reported departures one to four minutes earlier than the DOT id when it
looked at wheels rolling.

The DOT has since then amended its regulations to include specific definition for departure
time. Now, as per Part 234 of the DOT’s “Airline Service Quality Performance Reports”
regulations, under procedures set forth in 234.8 and 234.9 and the Technical Directive # 15,
the definition of ‘Gate Departure Time’ is defined as “the instance when the pilot releases the
aircraft parking brake after passengers have loaded and aircraft doors have been closed. In
cases where the flight returned to the departure gate and departed a second time, report the
first gate departure time. If passengers were boarded without the parking brake being set,
record the time that the passenger door was closed.”

The Next Frontier

Customers value dependability more than any other aspect of airline service. Airlines have
recognized this and have made great efforts to improve OTP. When properly established,
scheduled block times and ground times contribute to developing a reliable schedule. Every
airline strives for consistent quality in its product, and dependability is a major contributor.
Policies, procedures, and standards are necessary to determine the airline’s response to
operational situations that arise in the normal course of doing business.

Diligent airlines are constantly looking at historical performance to discover insights that can
help their operations run better in the future. Establishing a separate staff group to focus on
dependability provides a way for the airline to analyze complex issues more thoroughly. Daily,
weekly, monthly, and semi-annual analyses can provide insights to specific incidents as well as
identify long-term trends. Without this function, an airline will be limited in its ability to
understand and resolve all but the simplest OTP issues.

Although many of the factors of OTP are within the control of the airline, some are outside its
control. These include primarily weather, ATC, and sometimes airport facility problems. An

Page 19 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/
airline can do a superior job in managing the factors within its domain of control yet have a
poorly run operation if any of these uncontrollable factors adversely impacts its operations.
Airlines can partially counteract the uncontrollable factors by increasing both ground and block
times. In fact, this trend has been ongoing in the industry.

Increased schedule density has been part of the problem. This increase, together with little or
no growth in ATC capacity owing, in part, to the lack of sufficient investment by governments
around the world, has made it more difficult to maintain or improve on-time performance. A
lack of technological improvements within the ATC environment has inhibited some airlines
from making their own investments in technology that can improve dependability.

Nevertheless, most airlines have been making investments technology, such as flight
management systems (FMS) equipment that is viable for reasons other than dependability. Air
traffic control authorities will be encouraged to invest in new equipment and procedures to take
advantage of new technologies. The concept of free flight has been widely touted as the
solution to ATC congestion, but it is not yet technologically feasible. In addition, the investment
requirements would be staggering. Nevertheless, the travelling public is clamoring for
significant improvements and is already providing funding through ticket taxes and user fees.

Despite these problems, air travel remains a product that is in great demand. For most long-
distance travel, the alternative forms of transportation are onerous in terms of the time
required to reach one’s destination. Lack of an adequate air transportation infrastructure will
impede economic growth, since air travel has always been a catalyst of economic development
around the world. For all these reasons, there will be increased attention on OTP by airlines, ATC
operators, and the public for years to come.

Page 20 of 20

“Improving On-Time Performance and Operational Dependability” – by Imran Asif imran.asif@gmail.com http://bd.linkedin.com/in/imranasif/