Aircraft IT Operations by The Magazine Production Company

ISSUE 3 • AUTUMN 2011

Tablets for the Crew

iPads and Androids: fashion or business tool?

Projects: what is there to manage? Control is easier with the ‘i’ factor Rostering: optimizing for a fair outcome White Papers: Conduce Consulting, Closed Loop, Lufthansa Consulting, Betley Bridge PLUS NEW IN THIS ISSUE: Vendor Flight Log with Flight Focus

Are you ready to balance your next fuel budget? Do you understand all the factors that can affect the budget? Do you know where variance occurs in your operation?

In today’s environment fluctuating fuel costs are a major challenge. We know. We help our customers maximize their fuel savings ― and achieve more accurate reporting every day!

With an accurate budget based on good assumptions, you’ll be able to cut out unnecessary expense, save money, and take intelligent action when variations occur. When constructing your budget, what do you base your assumptions on? Do you allow for load factor, changes in aircraft type, the effect of fuel savings initiatives, and the latest business imperatives such as On Time Performance? Get the insight you need to make better budget decisions:

• • • • • • •

Ensure you have consistent, accurate baseline data. Identify and account for all the factors that affect fuel burn. Understand the effects of fuel initiatives on the budget. Understand the effects of business imperatives on the budget. Highlight department-specific targets. Recognize which factors contribute to budget deltas. Improve carbon credit and fuel hedging activities.

Optimized Systems and Solutions (OSyS) has been helping airlines improve their efficiency for a decade, utilizing data to provide expert insight, delivered as value-added IT services. View our Fuel Management webinar at www.aircraftit.com (search for “Optimized Systems and Solutions” within the Operations section). Contact us: tel: +44 (0) 1332 771 700 • email: civilaviation@o-sys.com • www.o-sys.com

Optimized Systems and Solutions • U.S. • U.K. • Singapore • Qatar

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | CONTENTS | 3

04 News

Editor’s comment Growing in every way: Aircraft IT Operations just keeps getting better and now there’s an app for it.

Nothing stands still and nowhere is that more true than in the world of Aircraft Operations IT. There is no need to fear change but there is a need to keep up; which is why those who need to know regularly check for the latest developments on www. aircraftit.com/Operations and here in the AircraftIT Operations e-journal.

10 White Paper: Tablets in Flight Operations Are tablets just fashion for trendy consumers or will there be real business applications to harness their power and convenience? With the likes of United Continental, American and Alaska Airlines already putting tablets on the flight deck, it’s about time to weigh up the pros and cons.

This has been one of the most exciting times yet for Aircraft IT Operations. We already know that our growing readership values the organised access in Aircraft IT Operations. Access to evaluate the products of some of the best Operations IT systems vendor’s; read the thoughts and research results of gurus and consultants looking into the future; and participate in regular vendor hosted webinars. But we want to deliver even more.

16 White Paper: Integrated Operations and Hub Control Management

In this great issue, we ask the big question: iPads, fashion fad or powerful business tool? Some have made up their minds; this will help you to do so. Also, in this issue you can find what value the ‘i’ factor can bring to the complex operations of an airline Control Center. Plus we consider those perennial management challenges, rostering that’s fair to all and, apposite in today’s environment, how to manage a project and not let it manage you.

24 White Paper: Why start in the middle?

There are also exciting new developments to add interest and utility to your Aircraft IT. In this e-journal you’ll find a new Q&A feature asking the same questions of different people and businesses for each issue. We call it the Vendor Flight Log and our first vendor is Ralf Cabos; Managing Director at Flight Focus. The really big development reflects the fact that so many readers now use iPads. So we now have had an Aircraft IT iPad app. Download it by clicking here. To find out more about this exciting development, click here [should be a live link here to the iPad App item in the News section]. The app is now live and ready to read Aircraft IT e-journals. And let us not forget the Aircraft IT live demonstration webinars which have already attracted hundreds of participants to find out about the software packages out there from the people who know those packages best. Readers can now access past webinars and add them to their own market intelligence library as well as being able to participate in future webinars – the schedule is already set until mid-2012. That’s probably enough good and new stuff for one issue but keep on coming back to Aircraft IT Operations website and e-journal for everything that’s new and important in Operations IT. Ed Haskey, Editor, Aircraft IT Operations

CLICK HERE: Send your feedback and suggestions to AircraftIT OPS CLICK HERE: Subscribe for free

Airline control centers handle a multiplicity of inputs and situations, some process driven, some predictable and some unexpected or unplanned. They also have to satisfy multiple regulators and agencies as well as corporate objectives. So the introduction of IT (the ‘i’ factor) can add real value to their operations.

Airlines need to change with new and future developments in the operating environment: but change means a project and projects too often fail or fail to match expectations. However, by understanding what can be done, managing projects thoroughly and starting from the beginning, change can be successfully achieved.

30 Vendor Flight Log In our new series of Q&A pieces, we ask Ralf Cabos, Managing Director at Flight Focus to open his ‘Vendor Flight Log’ for AircraftIT Operations

31 Upcoming live Operations software demonstration webinars A preview of the live Operations Software Demonstrations of FuelPLus’ fuel management solution on the 17th of November 2011 and FLYHT’s ACARS over Iridium for iPad on 8th December 2011.

32 Past webinars: knowledge transfer and access for industry experts View Video Recordings of our Past Live Operations Software Demonstration Webinars. Full information on our past Live Operations Software Demonstrations, including: AMT, BYTRON, Flight Focus and Aviaso.

34 White Paper: Rostering Optimization Made Simple Rosters can either generate conflict and disharmony or be the epitome of collaborative working. Optimizing rosters should lead neither to inhuman efficiency nor to inefficient pandering; it should simply deliver fairness.

40 Operations Software Directory A detailed look at the world’s leading Operations IT systems.

AircraftIT OPS is published bi-monthly and is an affiliate of Aircraft Commerce and part of the AviationNextGen Ltd group. The entire contents within this publication © Copyright 2011 AviationNextGen Ltd an independent publication and not affiliated with any of the IT vendors or suppliers. Content may not be reproduced without the strict written agreement of the publisher. The views and opinions expressed in this publication are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of their companies or of the publisher. The publisher does not guarantee the source, originality, accuracy, completeness or reliability of any statement, information, data, finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, or view presented.

AircraftIT Operations

Publisher/Editor: E-mail: Telephone: Website: Copy Editor/Contributor: Magazine Production: E-mail:

Ed Haskey ed.haskey@aircraft-commerce.com +44 1403 230 700 or +44 1273 700 555 www.aircraftIT.com John Hancock Dean Cook deancook@magazineproduction.com

4 | WELCOME | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

AircraftIT to launch an iPad app Another award for developed by Conduce Software Air Canada Smart

In September 2011, Conduce Software confirmed its selection to develop an iPad app to complement the vendor neutral aviation IT website AircraftIT. AircraftIT, launched earlier this year as a spin-off from the highly successful series of Aviation MRO and Operations IT Conferences, is the brainchild of Aircraft Commerce’s Ed Haskey and was developed by Conduce Software’s sister company Dreamscape Design. Having analyzed the number of visitors accessing the website through iPads, it made perfect sense to provide an app with optimized content that would allow for offline access to media and resources that the website provides to its users. The first version of the app will allow users to download and view the MRO and Operations eJournals which are published every two months. Future versions will include access to the weekly software demonstration webinars and much more besides. Ed Haskey, founder of AircraftIT said: “It seems that everyone in aviation is talking about iPads. Visitors to the AircraftIT website are using iPads, they are looking for iPad apps, they are finding our website by searching for iPads and whenever there is a software demo of an iPad app there is a marked upturn in visitor numbers. It makes perfect sense to cater for that demand and release an iPad app of our own. With more and more airlines equipping their staff with iPads we hope that ours will be one of the first apps to be on their download list.” Conduce Software who have developed a number of aviation specific apps for iPhone and iPad advised AircraftIT to adopt a phased approach to development and release, to allow for a rapid deployment of an initially small but useful app which would be able to build a following as future versions and features are released. AircraftIT for iPad is planned for launch as a free app on Apple’s iTunes App Store later this year. As well as the new app, AircraftIT Operations has made strong progress on several important fronts. First of all, six new Vendors, Air Support, Arconics, Evoke Systems, PACE, AviIT, ETS Aviation and InfoTrust Group, have joined the Operations Portal: readers can visit the website for more information on all of them. The web site also now has the facility for AircraftIT members to sign up and view video recordings of all the Live Software Demo webinars to date, including hugely successful demos from OSyS, Aviaso and Smart4Aviation. See page 32 for more information. Readers who have not already done so can join over 4000 other key executives in signing up as AircraftIT members. Membership is free and allows members to take part in all the website’s interactive features such as participating in the Live Software Demonstration Webinars and asking questions of authors: it will also guarantee they receive their copy of the eJournal on the day of publication direct into their inbox. Click here to order your membership. Looking at the Live Software Demonstration Webinars, they are going from strength to strength. With the Webinar calendar now set until June next year, these sessions provide airlines, and aircraft operators with a great chance to view a live online demo of the major systems on the market with no sales pressure and from the comfort of their own home or office. See page 31 for details of upcoming Webinar sessions.

Brief Cabin

At the recent AGIFORS meeting of the Crew Management Study group in Dubai, the prominent award ‘Best Technical Innovation — Airline’ went to Air Canada and its Smart BRIEF CABIN and Smart BRIEF CABIN Mobile applications. Earlier this year the Smart Cabin applications were awarded a Mercury in the processes and systems category at the yearly ITCA conference held in Nice. The applications tailor and provide operational information for cabin crew relevant to their flight schedule including passenger details, crew lists, destination — and aircraft specific forms.

Smart Suite modules enhanced with ash information display Smart4Aviation delivers enhanced volcanic ash information as part of its Smart BRIEF briefing and Smart VIEW+ flight watch modules. Based on data from the Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers, ash information is displayed on interactive maps, including vertical profile. The information can be dynamically adjusted showing ash concentrations at different flight levels With the flight route being displayed on the map one can immediately see whether a flight is affected by ash or not.

Smart4Aviation and DW International partnership agreement on RAIM check functionality In July 2011, Smart4Aviation and DW International announced a partnership agreement encompassing the provision of RAIM/RNP check functionality. Thanks to data provided by DW International and Smart4Aviation technology the RAIM (Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring) check functionality allows a quick and reliable check of RAIM availability. The service allows flight planners, dispatchers and aircrew to plan around periods of reduced GNSS availability by taking all route details from the flight plan and calculating RAIM availability for all route types – oceanic, en-route, terminal, and approach – on a leg-by-leg basis, including destination and alternate airports for RNAV and RNP operations anywhere in the world. Whenever the system detects a GPS outage for any part of the planned flight route, flight dispatch and the flight crew is alerted by the system presenting details of the outage (time, location, and duration). Dirk-Jan Baas, Managing Director and CEO of Smart4Aviation says, “Smart4Aviation is very pleased to be working with DW International in providing RAIM predictions to our customers. This is a great opportunity for DWI and Smart4Aviation to work together to provide a seamless service to the end user. With GRPS integrated into Smart4Aviations flight-planning system, RAIM coverage is predicted automatically as a route is being planned,” says John Wilde, CEO of DWI. The RAIM check functionality can be easily integrated with the Smart4Aviation’s Smart BRIEF, Smart COMM and Smart OPS modules.

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WELCOME | 5

Monarch Airlines selects Flightman and Evoke for fleet wide Electronic Flight Bag software implementation Monarch Airlines has selected the Flightman EFB (Electronic Flight Bag) software to provide a cockpit data solution to improve operational efficiency and reduce costs. In a July 2011 announcement Monarch Airlines confirmed that it will install the Flightman EFB software suite of applications across their entire fleet of aircraft. The airline first launched a Class 2 Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) demonstration trial, consisting of the Goodrich Class 2 Smart Display and a suite of applications including Evoke System’s EFOS Class 2 Reporting Module. Monarch will become the first UK mainstream airline with a Class 2 EFB. The project is developing the traditional Class 2 EFB concept of pilot-related software applications into a complete Cockpit Data Management Solution, whereby the aircraft becomes a node on Monarch’s IT network while on the ground. The EFB has an intimate interface with the aircraft avionics and uses a variety of technologies to exchange information with the Company network anywhere in the world. The close partnership between the main stakeholders has allowed development to progress rapidly. Monarch’s EFB project was initiated in March 2010; main signatures were signed in June 2011; and the EFB hardware was installed on the first aircraft two weeks later. The EFB architecture is ‘future proofed’ ready for the installation of future navigation requirements such as ADS-B and CPDLC. The Flightman platform will connect to Monarch Airlines’ existing ground-based enterprise systems using secure 3G communications technologies. The core set of applications include eJourney Log, Electronic Flight Folder, eReporting and Aircraft Data Management together with the ground based Flightman EFB management system. These applications will be installed on Class 2 EFB devices. Commenting on the selection of Flightman, Nils Christy, Operations Director at Monarch Airlines, said, “Flightman will enable Monarch Airlines to achieve a paperless cockpit and streamline our operational processes. This will allow our

aircraft to operate to maximum efficiency and achieve significant cost savings.” This EFB software solution manages both the delivery of cockpit data and content between the aircraft and Monarch Airlines’ ground systems. It also allows flight crew to retrieve and submit pre-flight and post-flight information directly from the cockpit. The elimination of paper from the flight deck reduces operational crew workload by ensuring single point data capture and ensures all information is readily available to flight crew, flight ops, engineers and management in quasi real time. Commenting on the commencement of the project, Joe McGoldrick, Chief Executive Officer of Flightman said, “We are really excited about delivering an EFB solution to Monarch Airlines that meets their operational objectives to streamline the flow of cockpit data on and off the aircraft. It will also allow Monarch Airlines to achieve significant reductions in costs within their current operation.” Flightman, the award winning provider of EFB software solutions, has continued to expand its operations in the international aviation industry and boasts an impressive customer portfolio of charter, commercial and cargo airlines.

Want to keep up with IT developments? Subscribe for FREE to AircraftIT eJournal Operations today to receive all future eJournals! • For case studies, keynote white papers, latest news & technology; all the knowledge you need

Subscribe here for free – it takes a few moments. AircraftIT: All about Solutions for Airlines and Aircraft

ISSUE 1 • APRIL/MAY 2011

An EFB Special

ISSUE 2 • SUMMER 2011

Aircraft Data Special

• Getting the right data transmission • Realise a return on investment within 12-24 months • Data as a global business asset • Norwegian Case Study: A year operating a Class II EFB Fuel savings from EFB implement

ation Realtime Business Intelligence for Decision Pre-flight information supports service The Paperless Cockpit – Myth or Reality? Making IT tools to minimise EU ETS compliance costs How IT systems can save fuel consumptio n White Papers: Lufthansa Consulting, TFM Aviation Aircraft IT OPS V1.1 April-May 2011.indd

and Flight Guidance • Case Studies: Bangkok Airways

White Papers: LinkSMART • Aviintel • Tasc4Aviation Case Studies: Lufthansa Cityline • Thai Airways

and Norwegian Air Shuttle

Aircraft IT Operations V1.2 June-July

2011.indd 1

27/04/2011 11:56

07/07/2011 08:49

6 | NEWS | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

AeroMechanical Services win contracts around the world AMA sets up OC’s for Nigeria AMA established its first operation command center in Nigeria in April 2011, and opened a second as announced on August 15, 2011. The facilities provide real-time weather and flight tracking information to Nigerian airlines. AMA will provide equipment and services to the airlines over a five year contract. All installations were scheduled to be completed in October and November 2011. AMA holds all necessary certifications for the Boeing 767 and has commenced the approval process for the 747. In August, AeroMechanical Services Limited (AMA) received payment for the establishment of a second Operations Centre (OC) at a new state-owned and operated airport in Nigeria. The airport will use the OC for real-time weather information and forecasting. Operators at the facility will be able to observe up-to-date weather within Nigeria and configure their displays to identify different weather layers. The system will aid aircraft flying into and out of the airport and will provide weather information to assist air traffic control on the safety of flying conditions. Nigeria is continually working to improve its aviation industry and OCs provide vital information on operating conditions and the location of aircraft in flight. AMA’s responsibilities include the layout and design of the operations room, and provision of the equipment, installation, software, and training for OC staff to use the system.

AFIRS 220 for Mid-East 737 operator Also in August, AMA signed a contract with a Middle Eastern Boeing 737 operator for the Automated Flight Information Reporting System (AFIRSTM) 220. The contract requires AMA to install the AFIRS 220 on two Boeing 737-300 aircraft serving the Middle East and North Africa. This airline’s original interest in AFIRS was for satellite voice and flight following features only. Upon learning of the other AFIRS 220 capabilities, the airline will also utilize the engine trending, airframe and engine exceedances, and Out, Off, On and In times (OOOIs). AMA, which holds all the necessary certifications to provide services to this customer, will be providing equipment and services over a five year contract. Installations are scheduled to begin before the end of the third quarter.

US charter 767 fleet equipped with AFIRS 220 Later, in September 2011, AMA signed a contract with an international charter airline based in the United States for a further AFIRSTM 220. The contract requires AMA to install the AFIRS 220 on seven Boeing 767-200/300SF aircraft. The airline has been in business for over two decades, operates international routes, and prides itself on being in constant contact with ground support for flight planning, up-to-date weather and scheduling information. AFIRS will enable real-time flight following and 24/7 connectivity between the aircraft and operations through the Iridium satellite

communications system. The carrier will also utilize AMA’s other services including engine trending, airframe and engine exceedances, and OOOI times. AMA will provide equipment and services to the airline over a three year contract. Installations are scheduled to begin immediately. AMA holds all the necessary certifications to provide services to this customer.

AFIRS 220 helps established Nigerian carrier meet Demuren recommendations Also in September 2011, AMA signed a further contract to install (AFIRSTM) 220, this time with a Nigerian airline. The contract requires AMA to install the AFIRS 220 on a total of five Boeing 747 and 767 aircraft for a well-established airline with over 30 years of operations in Nigeria, North Africa and the Middle East. The airline is one of the first to implement the recommendations of Dr. Harold Demuren, Director General of the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority, to implement a flight tracking system to increase safety and improve airline operational efficiency in the country. The airline will primarily use the AFIRS 220 for global flight tracking and satellite voice communications. AFIRS’ other functions including engine trending, airframe and engine exceedances, and OOOI times, are available to the customer at any time.

AFIRS 228 Approaches Major Milestone in Development and Certification Process AMA reports the next generation Automated Flight Information Reporting System (AFIRSTM) 228B is nearing completion of DO-160F Environmental Certification testing. DO-160F tests are conducted on production standard AFIRS 228 units manufactured by AMA to determine their performance characteristics in extreme environmental conditions similar to those that may be encountered in airborne operation such as temperature, altitude, humidity, vibration, and electromagnetic interference. In total, AFIRS units have passed over 300 individual tests, conducted to test different settings, voice and data modes and transmission frequencies to help ensure AFIRS does not interfere with communication, navigation or flight control systems on any aircraft. With the completion of the tests, AMA’s Transport Canada manufacturing certificate will be updated to allow the manufacturing and sale of the AFIRS 228B. “The equipment has performed as expected to date,” commented Bill Tempany, CEO at AMA. “Our customers and the marketplace have been waiting with anticipation for the 228’s release. AFIRS contributes to operational effectiveness, dispatch availability, and compliance with evolving Air Traffic Control regulations, saving both time and money with a multi-function single Line Replaceable Unit (LRU) that can handle many functions.” The DO-160F testing is the final process before completion of multiple Supplemental Type Certificates (STCs). With these first-article approvals in hand (STCs and a manufacturing certificate),

AMA can then obtain follow-on STCs, which will allow for AFIRS 228 installation on additional aircraft. AMA will complete STCs for the Hawker Beechcraft 125 series, the Bombardier CRJ 900 and Challenger 300, Boeing 737 NGs, 757-200, 767, 777, Airbus 319, 320, 321 and A330 series and the others in progress. Provisions STCs have already been received for the Boeing 777 and the Hawker 987 series and a launch installation has been completed. The equipment must undergo a flight test to complete each STC. The 228B is the first release in the series of 228 products, which are a new generation of AMA’s AFIRS product line that has been delivered to over 35 customers globally for installation on over 300 aircraft on all seven continents. When the full AFIRS 228 series is completed in early 2012 (as currently anticipated by management), the AFIRS 228 family will be fully certified to provide safety services, voice, data, text, and electronic flight bag (EFB) integration, including support of ACARS over Iridium and FANS over Iridium. It is anticipated that one version of the 228 – the 228U – will provide Link 2000+ Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) compliance for some aircraft types and will be available before the EU deadlines. The AFIRS 228 will be the first safety services certified platform to provide real-time data streaming through FLYHTStream, the Company’s patent pending triggered data streaming facility.

AFIRS 228 for US carrier’s 777s Moving into October, AMA signed a contract with an existing customer to install AMA’s next generation product, AFIRSTM 228 on board Boeing 777-200 aircraft. The contract requires AMA to install the AFIRS 228 on two Boeing 777-200 aircraft. The established carrier based in the United States uses the two aircraft for international and inter-continental routes. The customer will use the full suite of AFIRS features including engine trending, airframe and engine exceedance reporting, OOOI times, as well as real-time flight following and 24/7 connectivity between the aircraft and operations through the Iridium satellite communications system. The system has no gaps in coverage, which allows the customer to fly polar routes with full communications ability, and it assures that all messages are delivered to the airline in real time to maximize safety, and improve operations and maintenance. “We are pleased to see interest in the new generation of AFIRS from current customers who use the AFIRS 220,” said Bill Tempany, CEO of AMA. “The Boeing 777 is equipped with leading technology and the AFIRS 228 will enhance the aircraft’s capabilities and the information the customer can retrieve off the aircraft.” The agreement for the AFIRS 228 equipment and services is over the five-year contract term. A provisions only Supplemental Type Certificate for the AFIRS 228 from Transport Canada has been received and the Company is waiting for validation from the Federal Aviation Administration before installs begin in the first quarter of 2012.

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | NEWS | 7

United Airlines Launches Paperless Flight Deck With iPad United Continental Holdings, Inc. announced in August 2011 that it is converting to paperless flight decks and deploying 11,000 iPads to all United and Continental pilots. The electronic flight bags (EFB) replace paper flight manuals and, as a first for major network carriers, provide pilots with paperless aeronautical navigational charts through an iPad app. Distribution of iPads began earlier this month, and all pilots will have them by year end. “The paperless flight deck represents the next generation of flying.” said Captain Fred Abbott, United’s senior vice president of flight operations.”The introduction of iPads ensures our pilots have essential and real-time information at their fingertips at all times throughout the flight.”

Navigational Charting App Breaks New Ground The iPads are loaded with Jeppesen Mobile FliteDeck, the industry’s premier app featuring interactive, data-driven en-route navigation information and worldwide geo-referenced terminal charts. The enhanced full-color, high-quality information display ensures the right information is displayed at the right time.

Saving 16 Million Sheets of Paper and 326,000 Gallons of Jet Fuel a Year Each iPad, which weighs less than 1.5 pounds, will replace approximately 38 pounds of paper operating manuals, navigation charts, reference handbooks, flight checklists, logbooks and weather information in a pilot’s flight bag. A conventional flight bag full of paper materials contains an average of 12,000 sheets of paper per pilot. The green benefits of moving to EFBs are twofold—it significantly reduces paper use and printing, and, in turn, reduces fuel consumption. The airline projects EFBs will save nearly 16 million sheets of paper a year which is equivalent to more than 1,900 trees not cut down. Saving 326,000 gallons of jet fuel a year reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 3,208 metric tons.

iPad Improves Efficiency and Safety With iPad, pilots are able to quickly and efficiently access reference material without having to thumb through thousands of sheets of paper; it will also reduce clutter on the flight deck. United and Continental pilots’ work will be streamlined as they can immediately download updates on iPad to their electronic flight materials, rather than waiting for paper updates to be printed and distributed. In addition, by eliminating bulky flight bags loaded with paper, pilots will have less to lift and carry through airports and onboard the aircraft, reducing the risk of injury while on duty. Click here for full SOFTWARE details and for a demo

Aviation Fuelsaver™ – a ground-breaking software and consultancy service designed to maximise fuel efficiencies and save operators $$$millions Aviation Fuelsaver™ integrates seamlessly with existing flight data systems, and identifies fuel-saving opportunities by analysing over 80 ground and flight operating parameters. It gives you the fuel-saving experience of the big operators for a low cost subscription which includes fuel saving experts on hand all year round. And then it allows you to accurately track your savings. CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION CLICK HERE TO MAKE AN ENQUIRY

Email: info@etsaviation.com or visit: www.etsaviation.com

8 | NEWS | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

A busy and successful October for Flight Focus as the low cost translates to low fares,” said Daniel Barcenas, Flight Operations Director for VivaAerobus.

Tune Box partners with Flight Focus

Flight Focus PLATFORM for VivaAerobus At the beginning of the month, Mexican carrier, VivaAerobus signed a letter of intent for Flight Focus’s enhanced electronic flight bag (EFB). Flight Focus will implement the Flight Focus PLATFORM, an encompassing solution that will integrate fully with VivaAerobus’s Flight Operations, Engineering, Maintenance and Finance Departments’ business processes, and allow ‘always on’ connectivity between their aircraft and ground stations through Iridium® Satellite Communications (enhancing operational efficiency and supporting flight safety). VivaAerobus will also use the Flight Focus Fuel Management Application which will help them significantly reduce their fuel costs. Flight Focus’s Vice President Global Sales & Business Development, Mr. Stef Slavujevic commented; “We are very pleased to be working with VivaAerobus, to implement the Flight Focus PLATFORM across their entire fleet of aircraft. With the global reach and cost benefits of Iridium®, the Flight Crew of VivaAerobus will have a real-time messaging and alerting system that helps to support proactive decision making processes and maintain excellent on-time performance”. With our regionally based staff and 24/7 support network we look forward to a long and successful relationship. “With this new partnership with Flight Focus, VivaAerobus will continue to improve its efficiencies using the best technology that will allow us to save fuel and improve operation processes and that will be beneficial for our passengers

Also in October, Flight Focus partnered with Tune Box, the new digital media arm of Tune Group. At the recent Paris Air show, the companies jointly launched a highly robust IFE (In-flight Entertainment) extension to the Flight Focus-certified Class III EFB PLATFORM. With the addition of Iridium OpenPort-Aero to its products, it has found the perfect match between EFB, IFE and global connectivity. “Iridium was selected for its truly global satellite network, which is known for its proven reliability and cost-effectiveness. We have enjoyed a great working relationship for several years, and with the addition of global high-speed IP connectivity, provided by Iridium OpenPort-Aero, our customers will benefit even more from our EFB and IFE products,” said Ralf Cabos, Managing Director of Flight Focus. “We believe the ability to provide affordable worldwide internet access in-flight will not only be valuable for travellers but also, by adding email, social media access, gaming support, and online payment communications options, we will provide a fully optimized IFE experience.” “Connectivity is a key element enabling airlines to reduce operational costs and generate ancillary revenues using our new next generation IFE/EFB platform,” said Sami El Hadery CTO and Co-founder Tune Box. “Flight Focus has already demonstrated the benefits of adding connectivity into the cockpit and is saving airlines up to five percent on fuel. We are also looking to this new solution as an opportunity for carriers to generate revenue in the cabin by offering value added services and secure online payment options. Iridium is the perfect choice because of its robust global network, which is affordable to install on both a single aisle and wide body aircraft.”

IT Vendors: want to get your message out? Want to publish your latest news and technology updates where they’ll be seen? Looking for the best place to showcase your best solutions? Why not join AircraftIT Operations? • Host Live Software Demo Webinars or receive Private Demos • Educate the aviation IT world about your products Click here to find out how to join AircraftIT AircraftIT: All about Solutions for Airlines and Aircraft

ISSUE 2 • SUMMER 2011

Aircraft Data Special

• Getting the right data transmission • Data as a global business asset

Fuel savings from EFB implementation Pre-flight information supports service IT tools to minimise EU ETS compliance costs White Papers: LinkSMART • Aviintel • Tasc4Aviation Case Studies: Lufthansa Cityline • Thai Airways Aircraft IT Operations V1.2 June-July

2011.indd 1 07/07/2011 08:49

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | NEWS | 9

InfoTrust Group launches new consulting and advisory services practice, hires industry veteran as Vice President Consulting In October 2011, InfoTrust Group, the aviation, aerospace and defense industry leader in content management products and services, announced the appointment of Michael Wm. Denis as Vice President Consulting, bringing over two decades of Michael Wm. Denis aviation experience and as Vice President Consulting leadership. An industry veteran from both large and small consultancies, Denis will lead corporate strategy and business development for InfoTrust’s new consulting and advisory services practice. “Strategic consulting and corporate advisory services are critical elements for our clients evaluating transformational change,” InfoTrust President and CEO Geoffrey Godet stated. “Along with InfoTrust’s current products and services and those of our alliance partners, a premier consulting capability was the next logical step in our expansion. “Michael is a recognized global thought leader

P&W EcoFlight Solutions signs exclusive Aviaso Licensing Agreement

and practitioner in the area of aircraft lifecycle sustainment,” Godet explained. “His experience within the industries we serve as well as his knowledge of transformation planning are second to none and represent an excellent fit to our existing team.” “We’re seeing a blurring of lines between the services that OEMs, MROs and technology vendors are delivering to the aviation, aerospace and defense markets. Bundling of financing, products, services and technology is becoming the norm rather than the exception,” explained Denis. “The trends and issues that technology is addressing today include mobile, social, cloud, big data, unstructured content, and mass collaboration. After evaluating several companies offering bundled aviation services for my clients, InfoTrust stood out as the market leader and the exact company I wanted to work for.” Prior to joining InfoTrust Group, Denis was a principal at several niche aviation consultancies, a Fortune 500 global consultancy and a veteran of the U.S. Navy, where he served as a surface warfare officer and gas turbines engineer. Denis currently lives in Atlanta, Georgia with his wife Jackie, and will relocate to InfoTrust’s Boulder, Colorado office and center of excellence.

In November 2011, Pratt & Whitney and Flight Sciences International signed a software licensing agreement with Aviaso to provide innovative data analysis software for EcoFlight™ Solutions, a comprehensive fuel conservation program; saving fuel and reducing emissions. Aviaso will provide data analysis software for EcoFlight Solutions, offering customers customizable reports, alerts and dashboards including an application summarizing current fuel savings and opportunities for further reductions. EcoFlight Solutions can typically save an airline 3 percent to 8 percent in fuel costs annually, even for airlines with fuel conservation programs already in place. Pratt & Whitney offers EcoFlight Solutions in collaboration with Flight Sciences International, a leading provider of fuel conservation programs. EcoFlight Solutions leverages Pratt & Whitney and Flight Sciences International’s proven services, including aircraft fuel consumption optimization, EcoPower® engine wash, advanced engine monitoring and line maintenance support -- all of which can help airlines reduce fuel consumption and improve environmental performance.

Click here for full SOFTWARE details and for a demo

Integrated Ops & MRO Solutions On the Cloud...

Why ARMS®? Low IT Investment Footprint Low Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Speed of Implementation Ready Out-of-the-Box; yet all Modules are fully Customizable Freedom of Mobility Flexible Ownership/ Usage Plans: Pay-per-Use or Pay-per-Month Fully Scalable; from large intercontinental Fleets to small Charter Operations Seamlessly Integrated Ops Crew M&E MRO, etc. Deployed as a Turnkey Solution: Aviation IT Products + Services + Support ARMS® Sub-Systems include: Commercial Planning Flight Operations Flight Planning & Dispatch Crew Management & Web Portal Engineering & Maintenance Logistics & Inventory Management Flight Data Monitoring & Analysis Document Management System - InfoPrompt® Now available Cloud-based Optimizers for Crew Trips and Aircraft Routing.

www.sds.co.in ARMS® and InfoPrompt® are Registered Trademarks of Sheorey Digital Systems Ltd. Mumbai, India.

A V I AT I O N R E S O U R C E M A N A G E M E N T S Y S T E M

V2 ARMS®: Aviation Resource Management System

10 | WHITE PAPER: CONDUCE CONSULTING | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Tablets in Flight Operations Are tablets, asks Paul Saunders, Operations Director at Conduce Consulting, a Technology fashion trend or a permanent solution?

ince the launch of the iPad 2 in March 2011, you may have heard the words ‘post-PC’ used quite a lot. Indeed these words appear in nearly all Apple Inc. marketing blurb, e.g.... “We are approaching a post-PC era.” “The majority of our revenue now comes from postPC devices.” “We are living in a post-PC world.” The idea of a world without PCs is debated ‘adnauseum’ in tech blogs and journals. Analysis of PC and laptop sales certainly indicates that there is a major shift underway. It is clear that the netbook appears to have had its day, analysts are revising their predictions downwards for the growth of desktop PC sales and the demand for certain tablets completely outstrips supply. Not all tablets though… the Blackberry Playbook is a half-baked flop having only shipped to date the quantity that the iPad sells in 48 hours whilst HP’s abandonment of WebOS has left TouchPad owners with an expensive rectangular Frisbee. Despite Microsoft seemingly hedging their bets with a mobile and tablet friendly new operating

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: CONDUCE CONSULTING | 11

system in the shape of Windows 8 on the horizon, I tend to think that we are not going to see an end to PCs and specifically laptops for a while yet… having said that, five years is an infinity in technology terms. If Microsoft, ‘defenders of the faith’ for PCs, are preparing for a possible decline in PC sales then you’d better believe that a change is coming. What is certain is that interest in tablets, and especially the iPad, in the Flight Operations arena is very high indeed. I mean, the fact that you’re reading this paper indicates something doesn’t it? Dozens of airlines across the world are either evaluating tablets, building business cases, piloting tablet use or have rolled out tablets in a limited form. I’ve not seen a paradigm shift like this in aviation IT since the late nineties with the mass adoption of email and the internet. Are tablets a passing fad, or do they represent a viable long term technology solution for Operations IT? A recent study suggested that 92% of Fortune 500 companies in the USA are either deploying or piloting iPads. Whilst presenting during the Airline & Aerospace MRO & Operations IT Conference at Darmstadt in July this year I posed the question to delegates “how many of you are currently deploying or piloting tablet devices?” Although highly unscientific I was interested to see that approximately 25% of the audience raised their hands. Anecdotally I know that many airlines are making initial steps to roll out tablet devices for a variety of use cases. There is trepidation though largely due to the lack of appropriate useful and Evoke half page ad AW 10.11.pdf

connected apps. Some people seem to be waiting for the tablet market to stabilize before committing to a particular hardware, software or operating system choice under the belief that the wrong decision at such an early stage in the market life cycle could lead to a failed return on investment, or worse, a complete waste of time and money. Even innovators and early adopters are proceeding with real caution. I can’t point to a single airline that has yet fully rolled out an entire mobile IT landscape which includes tablets, complete with a full suite of apps and connected systems. Even the most advanced innovators such as Alaska Airlines have built a business case for investment based on a tightly focused set of functions where they have simply replaced paper flight manuals with PDF versions of the same documents. Presumably a broader vision which includes a complete Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) and a full set of connected business apps will come at a later time. Other early adopters, such as United Continental, Delta and BA are wisely following a similar path. So why aren’t we seeing a bolder and more rapid adoption of the sort of mind blowing, awesome apps and hardware that we use at home or for generic business purposes? Where is the killer app that is going to radically change aviation in the same way that Angry Birds radically changed the way that we waste our time? OK, so imagine you’re the CIO for an airline wanting to build a business case for the deployment of tablets for your flight and cabin crew.

11/10/2011

09:54

Actual airline CIOs wanting to build such a business case should take notes. Let’s assume for a moment that we’ve already made a decision about which hardware we’re going to buy. Let’s also assume that I’ve got a fantastic deal for the bulk purchase of my devices. We should further take for granted that we have managed to convince IT that this is a worthwhile pursuit and that I’ve made all of the necessary assurances that they going to be given adequate resources to support the vast expansion of their support network and capability requirements.

Click here for full SOFTWARE details and for a demo

order in cab s w e n t form repor AP AS C

locat train e reco ing r last ds for mont h

online, reliable, flexible Innovative software to make your airline more efficient. Solutions for: Library & Notices Training Management

CMY

crew send es to notications outst

e Collat for dataS return! EU-ET

Expenses & Leave Bidding Fuel Analysis & EU-ETS Safety Management Crew Reporting Journey Log EFB & iPad

evoke systems +44 (0)3456 521240 www.evoke-systems.aero

12 | WHITE PAPER: CONDUCE CONSULTING | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Now what? Obviously, I need to decide on the functions for which we will be using tablets. That should be easy right? We’ve all seen the adverts about how tablets will revolutionize our lives. We’re going to be ultraconnected with simple yet sophisticated software that will connect to and from anything, which means we can do anything for which we used to have to be in the office, but at any time of the day or night from anywhere in the world. Right? Wrong! OK, maybe if my job involves reading magazines, video-conferencing with my grandchildren, watching videos, sending emails, writing articles for my blog and that I work from my local coffee shop equipped with perfect Wi-Fi and 3G connectivity, as seems to the case for the tablet users on the TV adverts, then yes, that’s all possible. However, the current crop of tablet devices and most specifically the iPad were designed purely as consumer devices, not business devices. The tablet market as we know it today is not even 18 months old and the business sector has barely started to bridge the gap that the consumer market has left in its wake. If you are expecting to find a bewildering array of software choices for aviation when you log on to any app store, then you have a rude awakening. Today, there are very few tablet apps that have been specifically designed and developed for the commercial aviation sector. Of the first 100,000 apps that were launched for the iPad, less than 4% are aimed at business and there are only a tiny handful of those apps that are readily available

to be purchased and used for my imaginary airline business case. Furthermore, of the pitiful number of commercial aviation targeted apps, there is nothing available that isn’t already offered on other platforms. In aviation we simply don’t see the mind blowing, plentiful and cheap innovation that we have seen for other consumer markets. Why is this? First of all, it’s very hard to make money developing and selling mobile apps to aviation. The prospect of developing an app for what is a limited aviation market that has a minefield of regulatory approvals to negotiate is simply too big a risk for most independent technologists to even consider. Compare the aviation app market to the consumer app market and I know where I’d be committing my talent if I were a young developer looking to make my fortune in software development. The software engineers of tomorrow aspire to become successful by developing the next Angry Birds or the next social media craze, which technically is a fair bit simpler than writing something as complex and sophisticated as a crew rostering system. Why would you spend months writing an app for such a limited market that you then have to spend time actively selling and marketing to airlines that have existing legacy solutions to the specific problem that you have solved with your app, when you can spend two nights making a sound board app for the latest comedy catch phrase, put it on the app store for 99 cents and watch the cash roll in. Consider the developers of GoodReader, a five dollar PDF reading app that synchronizes with a web facing file repository. This app was purchased

by Alaska Airlines and rolled out to the iPads purchased for their pilots to help replace the paper flight manuals that they had been hauling around since time immemorial. Assuming that Alaska Airlines has 1400 flight crew; this works out that, after Apple’s 30% cut, GoodReader’s revenue for this gig was a staggering $5,000. Cue, ironic cheers. Secondly, it is very hard indeed to change platforms and retrofit a tablet or mobile enabled front end to your existing aviation software product. Focusing, for a moment, on developing for Apple’s iOS iPad and iPhone platform, there are a couple of pre-requisites that you will need. To develop for the iPad you will need an Apple Mac and an iPad, plus Apple’s Software Development Kit which will set you back $99 a year. No big deal I hear you say…. For around $3000 that’s you tooled up for one developer. One other small but significant investment you will need to make is around $15 on a book like ‘Objective C for Dummies’. Your existing developers may well be proficient in a number of programming languages such as Java or one of the various flavors of C, but unless they have already been exposed to Objective-C which is the proprietary language used to develop for iPhone and iPad, then there is an awful lot of unlearning and relearning that your developers will need to go through. Objective-C is a completely different beast from any programming language in which most modern aviation software products are written. Cross platform support and reskilling for some of the latest generation tablet and mobile devices is a major undertaking for any

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: CONDUCE CONSULTING | 13

software vendor and should not be underestimated. This factor alone may account for the forecasted success of more familiar programming platforms such as Android, Windows and HTML5. Consider also the amount of effort needed to retool an existing aviation software system for use in a mobile tablet environment. Most of the enterprise level aviation software packages that we use today have occupied hundreds of thousands of man-hours of development and contain millions of lines of code. Even the most up-to-date systems are likely to be based on a technical architecture that pre-dates some of the modern techniques and procedures that would preclude a near-total rewrite to bolt on a tablet user interface. I have seen at first-hand the draining of color from the cheeks of software vendor CTOs and CEOs with the shock of realization at just how much resource they are going to have to sink into a major rewrite just to provide today’s technology buyers with something they are growing to expect – their software available on a free iPad app. Lastly, the general lack of openness in the aviation industry is a major barrier to innovation. From an outsider’s perspective there is a laughable level of opposition to and anxiety about the idea of open and semantic data, open architecture and open source technology compared to equivalent industries. This antiquated attitude to protection of data and intellectual property in aviation by airlines, MROs and software vendors alike is preventing independent technologists from innovating and extending the capabilities of existing software. Instead talented developers are turning their attention to building cheap, simple but lucrative add-ins for social media platforms which tend to have a potential market size measured in millions of users, not thousands. These factors combined mean that often there is no alternative but to directly commission your own suite of apps. I do not foresee this situation changing in a hurry. It is going to take many Click here for full SOFTWARE details and for a demo

14 | WHITE PAPER: CONDUCE CONSULTING | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

months, or even years in some cases, for software vendors to catch up with user demand and release tablet apps of their own or APIs to allow third parties to easily develop apps. With a meager selection of commercial aviation apps on offer, for what purposes should we be thinking about using tablets in Operations IT? To answer this question I believe that we have to refer back to what the latest tablet devices were originally designed for and translate the intended use cases for the consumer market to our industry and their potential applications in flight operations. The iPad and the majority of the latest Android tablet devices were designed specifically for the consumer market and operate best as a means to consume media, for internet browsing, for reading and for staying connected through smart working (using email and other productivity apps). Choosing the best business applications for tablets involves translating those device strengths into practical use cases. Doing so in the typical flight operations environment poses a number of specific challenges due to the environmental constraints. Right now most operators have restricted, at best, or zero communications in flight and potentially limited connectivity on the ground. We may also have to rely entirely on a single battery charge for the duration of a flight and beyond. Having said that, certain tablet characteristics are well suited to flight operations making them seemingly a more suitable device compared to existing EFBs and other devices which have gone before. Most tablets really do have an all-day battery life. I use an iPad, and this device can go days on end without the need to be charged. Even with continuous use, the batteries should last a full working day with no problem. Today’s tablets are lighter, smaller and more easily stowed than a laptop, a netbook or other equivalent devices. They are also amongst the most desirable items on the technology market today and this, for me, is a vital factor when it comes to usability and user adoption. Let’s take it for granted that users will be working smarter using tablets through the usual suite of productivity apps, such as email, calendar, to-do lists, and office apps hooked in to cloud based document storage. That’s pretty obvious and each airline and individual will have their favored methods of working here, as the concept of remote working for flight and cabin crew is already well established for many airlines. The next most obvious application for tablets, which most early adopting airlines have used as their primary business case driver,

is technical publications. For most airlines it should be a fairly routine and cost saving exercise to convert the current distribution of paper manuals to an electronic distribution of PDF documents saving ample time for pilots, crew and technical librarians alike. Cutting down on crew admin time to receive and incorporate manuals into their already heavy flight bags has a double effect on productivity. Saving time that pilots and crew, in the crew room, spend faffing around with manual revisions not only increases their productivity, but reduces the number of duty hours that they consume. A saving in the order of minutes per crew member per month soon factors up to a decent return on investment over a span of years. Some airlines have factored the reduction of the weight of paper being brought on board into their business cases and have calculated attributable fuel savings. Others have included the number of lost productive days based on injuries brought about by lugging around such heavy tomes of manuals in their business cases, and still others have included the cost of mitigating against industrial action by the unions for the alternative of retaining paper manuals for the foreseeable future. It will not be too far in the future that we see more sophisticated technical publication apps which are highly contextual providing a smart way of recognizing the aircraft being boarded and presenting only the necessary documents for the user. There is a lot of scope to move beyond a simple set of synchronized PDF files in future. The acquisition of data is perhaps the most obvious solution that you would wish to implement via a tablet device in flight ops. We see reams and reams of paper forms being filled in during a flight, gathered up and sent back to base via 19th century technology, where it is then manually loaded to central systems. Wouldn’t it be great if we could capture that information on a tablet device and auto-magically transmit the data back to base once we re-establish communications on the ground? Having a full suite of apps that hook into an existing central system is the holy grail of tablet ROI, but it is

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: CONDUCE CONSULTING | 15

less than straight forward to realize. As I mentioned before, most software vendors of existing aviation business systems simply aren’t geared up to provide such apps, and, worse still, their software does not possess the requisite infrastructure to make third party application development a straightforward or inexpensive proposition. Secondly, most enterprise level business applications require a bi-directional flow of data to operate normally. As well as acquiring data from the user, we normally need to interrogate or validate against data held and maintained in the central repository. In these times, prior to ubiquitous and inexpensive inflight Wi-Fi, it is a much simpler proposition to plan for asynchronous data acquisition. Rather than looking to provide wall to wall offline capability of existing systems, I would encourage software vendors and airlines to start small and provide apps with limited features for use in cases where validation or cross checking of latest data sets is relatively immaterial. Consider an aircraft maintenance repair system where we are recording vast amounts of data relating to aircraft maintenance, journey logs, defects, maintenance forecasts and so on. None of this data is relevant to a pilot who simply wants to raise a single defect. He has little interest in previous defects or maintenance history, he simply wants to record a fault and have it rectified at the earliest opportunity. The same would apply to cabin defects, crew fatigue reports, cabin safety reports and other safety occurrences. ‘Always connected’ applications are a long way off, so airlines should think about starting small with one eye on the future. Charts and navigation apps have come a long way in just a few months. The Jeppesen and Lido charting apps which were essentially glorified proof of concepts for the iPad at the beginning of 2011 are now almost fully featured with enough functional and content coverage to meet the needs of the majority of mainstream airlines. Their business models for monetization make great sense, where the app is given away on iTunes, acting as a shop window of capability, whilst content is distributed through subscription services. This is a business model being copied by similar software subscription services. It is unlikely that we will see iPad apps acting as primary navigational devices instead of onboard systems, but it is widely believed that tertiary navigation and weather charting apps might be on their way. We should expect to see a whole host of niche utility and productivity apps springing up with OEMs, MROs and aviation service providers actively evaluating how they can extend their service capability through technology. Performance

iPads in a pilot study. Would you expect to see a similar willingness to ‘bring your own technology’ for some of the hardware and software trends that have gone before? Eighty per cent of the same airline’s flight crew are existing iPhone users, so the roll out of iPads to an eager set of users is expected to go without too many hitches and minimal familiarization training. Analysts predict a bright future for the fledgling tablet market. Apple currently has a 61% market share and has sold nearly 30 million iPads to date. Recent Gartner studies suggest that by 2015 there will have been approaching 300 million iPad sales and it is hard to believe that they will have held off the might of Android to have such a strong market share by that time. Even with the most conservative market estimates, it is widely believed that tablets will be pretty abundant. Combining this with ubiquitous Wi-Fi, in-flight connectivity and the next generation of aviation and business apps on the horizon, could we really be seeing the advent of a technology revolution? I’m not sure about the demise of the PC, but I do think that tablets represent a long term technology solution rather than a simple trend..

Paul Saunders

Managing Director, Conduce Consulting

optimization and diagnostic apps, which currently need a PC on which to operate, have the potential to be tweaked to run on tablets. The promise of tablet devices running Windows 8 that are just as good as the current forerunning tablets cannot come soon enough for some software vendors. The consumer IT industry has been characteristically swift to seize upon the technology trend of tablet devices. Unsurprisingly Apple’s iPad is at the forefront of a revolution that is leading to the consumerisation of business software. Airlines around the world have recognized that iPads and other tablets are here for the long haul and have made sensible baby steps towards adopting such technology. In spite of the current limitations that I have mentioned, many airlines have already effectively and creatively constructed business plans for the acquisition of iPads or other tablets, whilst keeping one eye on long term plans for further roll out and utilization. User adoption of such devices and systems is excellent. One airline that I have worked with had no fewer than twenty volunteer flight crew who signed up to use their own personal

About Conduce Consulting

Conduce Consulting is the consulting arm of Conduce Group. Their focus is on the relationship between IT and corporate strategy. They provide high quality professional services in a number of fields including Enterprise Architecture, Project Management, Data Services and Business Consultancy in the Aviation IT sector.

Paul works in the UK for Conduce Consulting and Conduce Software developing and implementing aviation software. He has spent the past 13 years working in Aerospace IT within MROs, OEMs and Software Companies in the UK and the Middle East. In recent years he has been heavily involved in developing software with a focus on user experience and user centric design. He regularly writes and present on trends within aviation IT, being described by some as ‘visionary’. Paul has recently worked on the design and development of a number of tablet and mobile apps for aviation and has assisted airlines, MROs and software vendors devise and implement mobile and tablet strategies.

Ask the Expert In addition to being available now to answer any questions you have arising from this White Paper, Paul Saunders and his colleagues Wayne Enis and Rachel Andrews are available all year round for one-to-one consultancies via the Ask The Expert feature at www.aircraftIT.com. They will be happy to assist you with your queries.

INTERACTIVE

ASK THE AUTHOR A QUESTION

CLICK HERE to leave YOUR QUESTION

INTERACTIVE

JOIN THE DEBATE

CLICK HERE to leave your feedback about this article and start or join a discussion

16 | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Integrated Operations and Hub Control Management The i changes everything. Gesine Varfis, Managing Consultant, Lufthansa Consulting offers solutions on squaring the circle in Operations by generating cost savings simultaneously with safety and service quality.

ver recent decades airlines have implemented numerous cost cutting initiatives, While becoming ever leaner as opportunities to enhance performance and cut cost at two digit rates become increasingly difficult to achieve. At the same time customer expectations have risen and the product life cycles have grown relentlessly shorter. These expectations translate into an accepted product standard: the seamless travel experience via the complete value chain. Many airlines support it by setting cross functional management targets based on commercial, operations and service excellence. On time performance is one of the key service or product components that an airline needs to deliver today: at the same time, customers take for granted the highest safety and security standards. In this environment, balancing cost cutting with enhancement of quality and safety has

become increasingly difficult to achieve. However, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;squaring the circleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; has been achieved in the area of Operations. Particularly with the establishment of Hub Control Centers airlines have managed to generate double-digit savings while enhancing the service for customers at the same time. To gain more leverage in terms of faster and cost effective decision making, airlines have developed quite individual solutions on how they run their Operations Control Centers (OCCs). Although all airlines run more or less sophisticated crew planning, flight dispatch, flight watch, operations and maintenance control systems, amongst other things, the organizational set-up of their operations centers differ. Airlines introduced Operations Control Centers in the 1990s and today the OCC is an accepted industry standard. One of the cornerstones of best practice operations management is that airlines have

introduced collaborative decision making to their operations philosophy which compromises different capabilities in one location in either a matrix or single line of reporting organization.

On time performance is one of the key service or product components that an airline needs to deliver today: at the same time, customers take for granted the highest safety and security standards

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | 17

Figure 1: Operations Control Center and Hub Control Center Development

For many airlines the Operations Control Centers were the initial installation followed by a solution for Ground Operations. Today, Operations Control Centers comprising capabilities for operations control, flight dispatch, crew control and maintenance, all under one roof, are industry standard. The Hub Control Center has been one of the more recent innovations which airlines have developed to run their ground operations in close cooperation with the key players they need for fast decisions. These days, airlines run different types of control centers just as other aviation stakeholders have developed their own control centers. Today the following operations control centers are run by airlines in combination or as standalone solutions: • Operations Control Center OCC (flight dispatch, operations control, crew control, maintenance control); • Hub Control Center HCC (Airline plus key stakeholders) Airlines or MROs; • Maintenance Control Center MCC (Maintenance control, trouble shooting, AOG Desk, etc.) Also airports run their own control centers: • Airport Control Center ACC (Airport customers and stakeholders). Ground Handlers run their operations control centers alone or in cooperation with one of their main customers; • Ground Handling Control Center GCC (The Ground Handler and airline customer are located together — applied in secondary hubs). The focus of this white paper will be on HCC and OCC, only.

Figure 2: Overview over the different Operations Control Center solutions

The Hub and Operations Control Center are at the heart of an airline’s daily business. These centers coordinate day-to-day and minute-to-minute flight and ground operations. The OCC provides centralized, real-time operational control and management of the airline’s overall flight operation, including aircraft movement control, dispatch, maintenance control and crew tracking. While the HCC focuses on the seamless travel experience on the ground by supporting passenger and baggage connection management and at the same time ensuring the on-time turnaround of the aircraft. HCC and OCC are established to manage irregularities: in times where there are no problems these centers do not intervene into daily operations. The HCC

and OCC engage only when complex and uncertain operational situations occur, in which multiple players are involved. This is the time for not only applying defined standard solutions, but individual solutions to ensure the turnaround or ensure that the flight can be operated as seamlessly as possible. Therefore the HCC and OCC must be viewed as a dynamic and open system which supports the development of suitable solutions for any irregularity arising. These centers are empowered by the inclusion of strong decision makers and, apart from emergencies, it is the OCC which has the final decision on realization of the product. The HCC and OCC bring airline strategy to life and secure a seamless travel experience for the customer every day: hence, they are the heart of the airline. The prime focus of all decisions has to be the customer. Any operations control arrangement has to ensure that all options become available to cope with whatever disruption the control team faces. Clear key success indicators for integrated interoperations control are the quality and speed of the decisions. The OCC is responsible for various combinations of the following functions: • Planning and executing the daily operational plan and flight operations for all scheduled and non-scheduled aircraft movements with the objective of ontime operations within the parameters of official rules and regulations as well as corporate policies and requirements. • Monitoring, coordinating and controlling the airline operation and its resources on the day of operations. • Managing operational control of the airline when unplanned operations occur, such as those caused by adverse weather, aircraft or other technical problems, airport or air traffic control problems, and labor issues. • Minimizing passenger disruption during irregular operations by operating the schedule as close to the original program as possible and providing alternatives for passengers when flight delays and cancellations occur. • Serving as the coordination point during emergencies. The objective of the HCC is an on-time and safe turnaround of the aircraft in the hub and at the same time to assure a seamless travel experience and connections for passengers and their luggage. State of the art hub management comprises the following responsibilities: • Passenger Connectivity: • Passenger Minimum Connecting Times (PAX MCT); • Passenger Connection Flows; • Short Connection procedures (e.g. ramp transfer, transfer passenger assistance procedures). • Baggage Connectivity: • Minimum Connection Times (BAG MCT); • Direct baggage transfer procedures. • Optimization of approach and taxiing. • Optimization of resource assignment: • Gates; • Aircraft parking positions; • Staff; • Short turnaround procedures (e.g. short / quick cleaning procedures). • Ground event status monitoring with Reference Models and MinGT models based on a HCC concept. Furthermore, the coordination of hub and flight operations with the department responsible for Network Management and Scheduling is a key task of the HCC. The objective is to evaluate the flight program and the compatibility of scheduled ground and turnaround times with operations. It is the objective to evaluate and analyze ground and flight operations constraints with network management in regard to slot- and peak-management, as well as the fleet structure. In particular, the importance of the overall working environment is often underestimated. Therefore it should not only be a room with office furniture, but a location and infrastructure which supports the HCC and OCC processes and the staff working in the OCC or HCC in the respective fields of: • Communication; • Insight in related work areas; • Speeding up of coordination process; • Enhancing the decision quality; • Optimal work environment for the employees… • … to evaluate complex situations under pressure; • … to stay fit while working in two shifts; • … to provide a stress decreasing design; • … to support and create a team work enforcing environment.

18 | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Control centers need an infrastructure which decreases stress, translates the corporate identity into action and, at the same time, motivates staff to generate the extra effort on a daily basis. However, the evolution continues and the i-factor is now the driving change factor, which changes everything again.

Figure 4: Overview over the CDM development path

Operations Control Center responsibilities Figure 3: Next generation of Operations Control Centers driven by the i-factor

Today airlines consider the ‘re-invention’ of their solutions in terms of improvements via the following i-factors…

Collaborative decision making — the key to success Putting power in the hands of the people best placed to take decisions Collaborative decision making (CDM) and empowerment in the OCC and HCC environment is about improving the way decisions are made. For both control centers this means the following: • Decisions are kept and taken in the HCC and OCC; • Operations decisions are taken at the operational level; • Decisions in the defined time window are taken by OCC (72h, other airlines take weeks up to a month) and HCC (24 h); • Decisions are taken together after consulting all relevant operations areas. The target of CDM is the reduction of the necessity for information and communication sharing with all stakeholders by having the core stakeholders all in one location with one common set of data and the same information to hand. This allows them to focus on solutions instead of the communication of status updates. In the OCC this should translate into cooperation so that the Operations Controller does not need to forward or repeat to the departments involved information such as VHF data or questions received, but directly receives an answer from the parties concerned because they have heard the information directly and the team has settled the matter. Therefore staff need to be empowered and qualified to be able to take decisions where the information is shared and evaluated by the operations parties involved. The concept will only work if HCC and OCC decisions are not escalated to management (except in defined cases and emergency). CDM improvements will deliver the following benefits: • Improved information sharing and common situational awareness; • Generation of better information quality in the HCC and OCC through… • … faster updates and better access to new information; • … pooling of information generates better and safer results; • … better prediction and improved reliability; • … more complete, accurate information. • Collaborative decisions allow better and more sophisticated evaluation of information and better anticipation of requirements for resources, leading to more efficient use of resources; • CDM improvement is a tool driven approach. Less communication needs more and better system integration and automation. Tomorrow’s i-factor for iCDM will be about having the same information and guiding principles for HCC and OCC. The aims are the sharing of realtime information via one database or ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) solutions, while at the same time the change in decision making is facilitated by change management.

OCC Management The OCC Manager is responsible for making the final decisions while considering the integration of various aspects and information to combine them into a holistic view of the running flight operation. The OCC Manager must reach and assure the best operational solution for the company at any time. The Operations Control unit within an Operations Center has a clear transactional leadership within the operation’s control process. In smaller organizational structures they have to act as the OCC Manager. Larger airlines certainly need the functional position of an OCC Manager. OCC / Operations Control Operational control is the real time tracking of flights from departure to arrival. However, on any given day, events might occur that prevent the schedule from operating as planned. OCC / Operations Control ensures that disruptions are identified and corrective action is taken to return the flight schedule to normal. Advanced operational control permanently watches the whole operational environment to detect even the smallest evidence of a change which might later develop into a disruption. As far as it is possible, ry OCC / Operations Control tries to avoid critical situations. But, if the current flight operation cannot be prevented from moving into a critical situation, appropriate actions will have to be taken in advance to minimize the impact on flight operations. Therefore OCC / Operations Control is not only reactive but also proactive in the way it works. Finally, it ensures the effective execution of business processes and therefore determines how well an airline handles and recovers from these events. OCC / Crew Control As with aircraft, scheduling and managing flight crews is essential for efficient operations. In the OCC, Crew Control takes over a working plan for a large number of crew members which was previously created by Flight Scheduling, considering individual qualifications, legal and other requirements. The term ‘flight crew’ refers to multiple crew members, including cockpit and cabin crew for a single aircraft. OCC / Crew Control also tracks crew members as they check in and begin their duty assignments. It has to respond quickly to schedule and operational changes maintaining or providing efficient and legal crew rosters. Finally, OCC / Crew Control has to manage the impact on crew members during operational disruptions. When disruptions occur this task may become complex and monumental as crew controllers have to take immediate corrective actions for the many crew members involved to help maintain on time performance or to get back to the airline’s schedule as soon as possible. OCC / Flight Dispatch In order to navigate, a pilot needs a flight plan to provide direction for the flight’s route from departure city to destination city, altitude at which to fly, speed at which to fly, fuel to carry and certain aircraft performance factors. The flight plan is supported by a briefing package that includes local, en route and destination weather information, navigational data for the route of flight and appropriate airport and aeronautical data.

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | 19

The flight planning process can have a dramatic economic impact through optimization of route, altitude, speed, payload and fuel. Therefore it is rather complex and dependent on several environmental parameters. OCC / Flight Dispatch works closely with OCC / Operations Control and OCC / Maintenance Control to have available all changes in a flight’s status which could influence the flight planning process. During the operation of the flight IOCC / Flight Dispatch monitors the constant flow of aeronautical information in order to identify any important changes which might affect or harm the operation. If necessary, inflight assistance will be given to support the crew in difficult environmental situations. OCC / Maintenance Control Generally OCC / Maintenance Control oversees the maintenance operation. Furnished with a strong maintenance background and understanding of the airline’s maintenance requirements and procedures, OCC / Maintenance Control is an integral part of the OCC. OCC / Maintenance Control works closely with OCC / Operations Control in order to monitor flight status and potential problems that may occur when technical problems arise. In addition, they serve as liaisons between the OCC and the ground maintenance organizations at the airports and at the airline’s home base. Keeping the maintenance program at the center of the decision making process IOCC / Maintenance Control contributes significant benefits for the airline. It ensures that the right corrective actions are taken the first time in order to minimize delays for the maintenance process. OCC / Maintenance Control oversees the whole maintenance program schedule and coordinates maintenance activities in the right place at the right time and with the right resources. Finally it coordinates the deployment of aircraft back into service to optimize the utilization of the aircraft.

At the same time all key or critical functions of ground operations need to be physically integrated, based on a collaborative production strategy. If not integrated, they should have a direct counterpart / process owner who represents them in the HCC in order to allow optimization of hub quality.

Figure 7: Integration of stakeholders a sample

The target of the HCC is to include as many parties as are necessary to arrive at a fast and efficient decision. This could comprise just a core team of event controllers, gate management and a connection management team. While there are HCCs which comprise the main proportion of stakeholders in one location (30 seat — 60 seat operations or more). There are also airlines which integrate the disposition of resources into the HCC. However the leaner it is, the easier the CDM (Collaborative Decision Making). CDM is the principle for the coordination of managing growth efficiently according to the following principles:

Figure 8: HCC objectives Figure 5: An example of an OCC organization set-up:

Hub Control Center responsibilities The HCC focuses on the Ground Operations. However its priority is to assure the on time performance of flights, while the execution is performed by Ground Handling. The decisions are performed on a holistic company wide basis together with the OCC while the ground staff makes the decisions on how the action details are performed and by whom.

Figure 6: HCC and OCC collaborative operations approach

Additionally, the objective is to create a state of the art hub with the following targets: • Handling of irregularities: • Reaction; • Taking preventive actions; • Planning for upcoming irregularities; • Optimization and continuous improvement of measures; • Coordination and matching of important interfaces with the objective of reaching the best decision for the company and the customer; • Effective crisis management; • Better resource allocation; • Improvement of understanding and personal contacts. In particular, it is the personal interaction and the understanding of each other as a team that creates and allows faster and better decisions. It is critical that the HCC staff can act as part of the decision team within the HCC. On the other hand, they should not lose the contact and understanding of the basic relevant issues they represent in the HCC.

20 | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

An example of an HCC organization set-up

Figure 9: Faculties / functions which could be integrated in the HCC

Smarten and speed up your business with IT i-factor

Greater scope of information

All operations control activities are time critical and demand quick decisions. Operations Controllers in the OCC for example are responsible for many hundreds or even thousands of crew-members, many aircraft and numerous passengers, baggage and connections. The work in the OCC and HCC is complex, collaborative, encounters numerous standards and laws and at the same time it requires quick responses to a constantly changing operational environment. In order to carry out their work, the OCC and HCC need to filter and analyze large volumes of data, both dynamic operational data, as well as static information. This information has to be presented in a form that makes it easy to access and analyze. The work must be coordinated within each department, of the HCC and OCC teams, as well as between OCC and HCC and the process relevant stakeholders. All team members depend on the decisions and information available in the different IT solutions. Therefore interoperations and collaborative decision making define specific demands for the technology applied, which is beyond stand-alone solutions. The IT infrastructure should be fast, trustworthy and easy to handle so that the complexity of the work is reduced. Pressure to generate the capacity to handle a greater number of flights in the future, and to maintain high levels of efficiency, have led to proposals to provide more reliable and powerful equipment, and at the same time increase the level of automation in airline traffic control facilities. Finding correct information and overseeing changes are the most fundamental part of the HCC and OCC team tasks. If a new interface would present too much information about an alert or inconsistent flight, reading time and interpretation difficulty will increase. If too little information is presented, time will be spent finding that information from other sources, which increases the controllersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; mental load to retain the necessary details.

Cross-functional teams require a wide range of information to reach their decisions. They need to draw on information from all parts of an organizationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s information base. This includes information from all functional departments from the internal environment as well as from all stake holders from the external environment. System integration becomes important because it makes all information accessible through a single interface.

Greater range of information Cross-functional teams inside an Operations Control Center may consist of people from different divisions or operational departments. Information must take a form that all team members understand. This involves sorting information based on importance, withholding complex procedures from the team, offering interpretations of operational figures, and providing clear explanations of complex operational situations. Slicing and dicing techniques may prove useful in providing different views of the information to different team members. Data visualization systems should present complex results in an intuitive manner.

Getting information to people involved in a problem is extremely important, and at present one of the major ways to achieve this is to physically speak to them, as IT systems usually do not support many means of communication.

Information

One of the largest problems and also one of the most essential parts of the work is to receive correct and up-to-date information. The HCC and OCC receive the information they need from many different sources. Information will be exchanged between team members orally or information comes in by phone, by telex etc. Time stamps of different sources alone challenge the system capacities and interfaces which need to be developed individually. Getting information to people involved in a problem is extremely important, and at present one of the major ways to achieve this is to physically speak to them, as IT systems usually do not support many means of communication. Since information concerning the actual problem is not always received on time, it affects how the problem is handled and increases the amount of stress.

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | 21

Decision making

Click here for full SOFTWARE details and for a demo

Because of the way the information is communicated, it is difficult to make proactive decisions. In the majority of cases, the team reacts to disturbances as they are reported, disregarding disturbances later in time while they solve the current one, even if the latter may be of higher priority. The decisions made are often the result of events that have occurred recently, and are therefore reactive in character. Working more proactively might lead to better solutions and fewer resources being used.

Quality After having created a solution, the teams do not extensively consider the quality of it. This is mainly due to lack of tools, and the fact that there is limited time for creating different solutions and evaluating them. Currently, the team members use their experience and intuition to find a more or less effective solution, and stick to it. According to the development of best practice IT solutions many large airlines have developed their own in-house IT solutions. They have exchanged them in a time and effort consuming manner which may take more than a couple of years of implementation. Crew planning systems, in particular, can take extensive periods to implement. There have been projects scheduled for six months which have ended up taking six years. Many airlines still stick to their legacy systems, due to the fact that they are too afraid to change their IT systems in running operations. Moreover, there are still business models where no solutions are available on the market. Where the i-factor kicks in again is in how airlines set up their interfaces — the automation of real time decision support. Today, airlines need to run their operations on a CDM basis and provide all stakeholders with real time information. This can be performed by phone, interfaces or database and ESB solutions. The airline which manages the integration of systems the best will lead in decision making solutions. Automation and fast ‘what if?’ scenario analyses will ultimately determine the competitive advantage.

EU-ETS

Emissions Trading System Full compliance Full compliance with EU regulations. Software is continuously extended according to new legislation.

Automated data collection Extracts the data from your existing IT systems. No manual entry of data required. Figure 10: IT solutions development

The future of HCC and OCC solutions will be integrated systems which will bridge the interfaced systems as described in the example of the OCC, but the same applies for HCC interfaces.

High data quality Sophisticated data verification. Over twenty readymade validations and cross-check routines.

Comprehensive reporting Includes all standard EU-ETS reports and many additional reports for further analyses and auditing.

Aviaso connecting aviation and software

www.aviaso.com Aviaso Inc. · Huobstrasse 10 · CH-8808 Pfaeffikon · Switzerland Phone: +41 55 422 0000 · www.aviaso.com · info@aviaso.com Figure 9: Integrated IT solutions the way ahead

22 | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Figure 11: OCC solutions need to take economic decisions into account

Next generation IT systems will be more intelligent. They will take economic decisions into account for all leverages and actions of the OCC and HCC. State of the art OCC and HCC managements support decision making via integrated optimizers and ‘what if?’ scenario options. At the same time airlines will run their operations and decision making based on KPIs and KDIs which are either integrated into the operative systems or supplemented by business intelligence solutions.

Next generation operations Where will the i-factor drive the ‘i’volution of OCC and HCC. Today, airlines run their operations control via the final decision of the OCC which focuses on the stabilization of the network. However with the establishment of the HCC the ivolution is kicked off, due to the fact that there are delays produced to safeguard the seamless passenger experience and assure passenger satisfaction. Therefore the dominance of facilitating passenger needs will grow further where

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: LUFTHANSA CONSULTING | 23

Gesine Varfis

Managing Consultant, Lufthansa Consulting

Figure 12

the HCC will take a more dominant role in the decision making process. Decisions will be more economically driven as well as customer value added driven. This will translate into a detailed activity based costing approach which will allow the real-time analysis of actions, whereas today airlines integrate estimates, but not real-time costing. Tomorrow’s enterprise resource planning systems will need to provide activity based costing information to facilitate this type of decision making. Moreover the separation between the OCC and HCC will diminish. Tomorrow’s airlines will run more integrated centers, where OCC and HCC are located together to further improve the CDM between the parties. To allow this, airlines need to establish state of the art IT solutions which will facilitate a cooperative set-up in one location to allow fast CDM with an even larger group of stakeholders without jeopardizing the individual CDM of OCC and HCC. Numerous airlines today focus on combining / merging the HCC and the OCC into one location (centralization) and at the same time provide leaner CDM via smart IT. However, many airlines still operate huge centralized OCCs. To circumvent a CDM collapse with too many stakeholders to be integrated some airlines have split up their OCC-HCCs into lean decentralized centers which will facilitate faster CDM. The future will show how the i-factor will continue to drive the change of Operations Control. But certainly the evolution will continue.

Gesine Varfis heads the Operational Excellence Department at Lufthansa Consulting. She is an expert in Ground Handling, Operations Control and Management Accounting, and was responsible for route analyses, route profitability, market potential analyses and business plans – based on her long experience in management accounting, budgeting, performance and cost management. Gesine was involved in several controlling projects, where she re-designed controlling concepts and defined cost cutting potentials for clients. As project manager, she was responsible for, among other things, restructuring projects, activity based cost cutting and the design of a cost and revenue simulation tool. She brings a broad aviation process and product background in operations, IT applications, CRM, traffic forecasting, market potential analysis and business planning for airlines, ground handler, maintenance and engineering and airports. Before working for Lufthansa Consulting, Gesine was a process and operations’ consultant for ABB Airport Technologies. She focused on sales consulting, after sales implementation, and customizing of ABB’s airport management systems. She was part of the team which established the complete IT network for Athens new International Airport and the implementation of Athens airport readiness program. Furthermore, she was responsible for the operational evaluation and product enhancements. For Globe Ground, Gesine was working as a financial controller. She gained her BA (Bachelor of Arts) in North American Studies and Master of Business Administration (MBA) from the Free University Berlin. She also gained a Commercial Air Transport Certificate with a focus on marketing, management and operations

Ask the Expert

Figure 13: Next development steps

About Lufthansa Consulting

Lufthansa Consulting is an aviation and management consulting company which is dedicated to globally assist clients from the aviation industry and related industries to successfully meet the challenges of the future. As an entirely owned subsidiary of Lufthansa Aviation Group we are in the unique position of developing and offering customized management consulting services and comprehensive business solutions for all participants of the aviation industry such as air carriers, airports and airport authorities, governments, investors, financial institutions, manufacturers and other industries as well as services related entities. As a management consultancy with confirmed aviation background we are able to offer a combination of proven industry expertise and skilled professional staff from 17 countries to support clients proactively.

In addition to being available now to answer any questions you have arising from this White Paper, Gesine Varfis and her colleagues at Lufthansa Consulting are available all year round for one-to-one consultancies via the Ask The Expert feature at www.aircraftIT.com. Lufthansa Consulting specialise in all aspects of commercial aircraft operations as well as IT related issues and will be happy to answer your queries.

INTERACTIVE

ASK THE AUTHOR A QUESTION

CLICK HERE to leave YOUR QUESTION

INTERACTIVE

JOIN THE DEBATE

CLICK HERE to leave your feedback about this article and start or join a discussion

24 | WHITE PAPER: CLOSED LOOP | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Why start in the middle? When there is a project to be carried through, Michael A. Bryan, Principal at Closed Loop suggests that starting at the beginning is best

t the MRO Americas Conference in Phoenix last May, Scot Kirby, President of US Air said that airlines had to continue to identify and remove costs from the business. It was a matter of survival. The sentiment is of course valid, but to what point? Kirby went on to note that unrelenting pressure to remove costs put the industry on a race to the bottom with ‘inevitable’ results: a race that no one could win; yet we were all in it. What happens when there are no more costs to remove, when the effort to save the next dollar costs more than the dollar it is seeking to remove? The answer is of course revenue. Mr. Kirby went on to trumpet ‘ancillary revenues’, suggesting they were now a “permanent fixture of the industry”. Unbundling, he said, was here to stay. However, simple unbundling of the ticket and recharging more for each component has already raised consumer ire. In a recent paper, L. E. K. Aviation and Travel Practice boss John F. Thomas discusses the value and the

necessity of ancillary revenues. He points out that some are, or may be, unpopular, particularly those the embattled consumer has forever associated with the price of the ticket (Executive Insights Vol IX Issue 3: Creating Ancillary Revenue Opportunities, Rethinking the Airline Selling Proposition). Indeed. At the above conference, pushback against ancillary fees was cited by the CFO of IATA. His view, inter-alia, was that the silver bullet had become a poisoned chalice. For this conference, the cost of transporting display material, even in this era of ever lower fares, was pushing folk, particularly groups, back to their cars. Conference statistics, according to figures quoted in speaker presentations at the function, was that those inside a six-hour drive from Phoenix got in the car. Of course, John is right on several fronts. His article addresses strategies for reversing the slide of yield and collapsing margins. For too long the focus has been cost competition at the

expense of attention to the revenue side of the profit and loss (P&L) account. However, the article’s title provides further insight – the Executive Insights banner is addressed squarely at the C-Office strategists and while a lot is not written in the article, a lot can be inferred from John’s words – it is one strategy for airlines to consider for changing the business model but its success will all be about how it is implemented. So, here we are in an unwinnable race to the bottom on cost control, supplemented increasingly around the world, with unpopular, poorly implemented revenue tactics that have yet to gain broad traction and are being avoided in an ever-widening radius. Airline management is hoping that, if one brand introduces an unpopular fee, the potential exodus of custom will be plugged because everyone will eventually do it to get a share of the new revenue, rather than seek to differentiate on price, value or utility.

The industry is nearing the bottom of the curve in its ability to shave further costs from the business without affecting its ability to operate. The so-called, low hanging fruit – the easy targets of waste and slack within the organization have, largely, been removed. On the revenue side, ancillary revenues and unbundling of fares are being tested but consumers are letting the industry know there will be a limit on how far that tactic can be pushed. Particularly when they are enforced by less service oriented outcomes. Picture the selfservice kiosks that whistle and wail when your bag is a gram over the limit. While intended to ease the queuing and pain at airports, actual implementation has been less than perfect. What’s left? The differentiator requires looking inward, to the business, not over the fence at what others are doing. It is called innovation and when openly discussed with industry management there is tacit agreement that it is a key tool necessary for the very survival of some: but, for all its necessity, it is deemed too hard. Why? for several reasons. The L. E. K article poses innovative ideas, strategies for an airline to consider; the latest MRO and operations systems such as electronic flight bag (EFB), promise and can deliver, step changes in business efficiency. Yet, organizations still struggle with them because many (most) are not successful at making the transition from strategic ideas to successful implementations. The tool to move strategy to practice is called a project (or program – but let’s stick to one term and infer both for the rest of the article). There is an abundance of authoritative and academic material available in the public domain regarding the science and art of project management. Yet, industry wide anecdotal evidence supported by embarrassed and hushed admissions, in quiet corridors of airlines all over the world, suggest that the industry is generally not pleased with its success rate for developing, managing and implementing (delivering) projects, putting us all in a Catch-22 cycle of having no appetite for innovation for the reason that we are unsuccessful at consistently delivering the very change that is necessary because we get it wrong, or not quite right, most of the time. The problem is exacerbated in innovation or high-technology programs because excitement about

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: CLOSED LOOP | 25

some sort of widget tends to focus attention on that, at the expense of careful, rational and strategic analysis at the project level. The result is too often a ‘square pegs in round holes’ approach; forcing on ingrained business processes, procedures or policy, something that does not quite fit. Personal, departmental and, sometimes, organizational pushback occurs to the degree that the intent of the strategy or project, its potential value and the business case all suffer. Cracks develop in the project and it becomes bogged down in organizational issues, scope and functional disagreements, wish lists, etc., that send the project into a doom loop spiral of constant requirement changes, change requests and the value debate, resulting in project failure in some cases but certainly costing money and time well in excess of the original estimates. Dollar values aside, the cost to the organizations involved in terms of lost relationships and opportunities have long term detrimental effects on the industry’s ability to learn, innovate and grow. In an industry where commentators are increasingly promoting the premise that the

… excitement about some sort of widget tends to focus attention on that, at the expense of careful, rational and strategic analysis at the project level. The result is too often a ‘square pegs in round holes’ approach… industry needs to re-invent itself for survival in the volatile landscape in which it exists, consolidation of the organization into a united whole, built on strategically important relationships, is vital for the success of the pan-organizational, transformational programs that will become more necessary as the pace and depth of change accelerates. Right about now, I can hear the cries of indignation

from those who have closed successful projects. Congratulations, you are of the fortunate few. Asking the question another way; how was the business case evaluation after final implementation? Does it look like it did when it was sent to the VP Finance, CEO or Board for approval? When we discuss this question with airlines, there tend to be only two responses: “No, it doesn’t,” or, “we don’t know.”

Click here for full HARDWARE details and for a demo

The navAero

...the Class 2 EFB-of - Choice for Today’s Flight Decks The navAero t·BagC22 has proven itself as a durable and robust hardware platform that meets the most demanding deployments for airlines and commercial operators. The system’s open design seamlessly integrates with various communication systems and is flexible to support future upgrades. With STCs issued on Boeing, Airbus, Embraer and Bombardier TCs, navAero has more certifications available and systems flying than any other EFB manufacturer. • Avionics - grade EFB hardware • Innovative system installation • Multiple aircraft data bus and wireless connectivity options • Partnerships with all major EFB software providers • Global service and support

Contact navAero today. 866.628.2376 www.navAero.com

26 | WHITE PAPER: CLOSED LOOP | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

We end up with impossible to achieve, unrealistic financial requirements such as projects must ‘payback in 12 months’ while demonstrating that they return at least the cost of capital over some arbitrary cash flow period It is rare indeed to hear that everything went as foreseen. Projects are simply not like that. Mostly, airlines have the new thingummy up and running and simply don’t want to know what it really cost in terms of effort and money. There are the next crises to solve just now. Discussion usually surfaces about ‘oh, we added this and that or changed tack here and there and it didn’t quite turn out the way it was planned’. The reality is, few rarely do and for larger, technical, innovation and change projects it is almost an impossible dream. Nearly always, they cost more than the planned and approved budget. Why? Whether or not the project or program is eventually successful, the cracks and additional costs add to the perception of difficulty and lack of success delivering with projects in the industry. These additional costs, for very little, if any, additional utility, are a burden or a ‘premium’ on projects that cause organizations to retreat from the very solution to what ails them. A mantra of ‘simple is best’ develops – whether it is implementing some new widget or fundamental business change such as those suggested by John’s article above.

They become used to the fact that additional funds are almost always necessary, so confidence falls in the ability of the organization to deliver successful projects: the premium is added, here and there, as the project is developed, almost as a type of risk mitigation. But simply adding to the financial hurdle, by making the business case harder to clear, only reduces risk by ensuring projects don’t go ahead in the first place, the organization is, in reality, no better off. The problem becomes a cyclical one of great innovation not being able to clear growing financial hurdles that become necessary for approval, not the financial hurdles necessary to test the viability of a project. Investment is curtailed, the cost of capital rises inexorably, and the cycle is complete and more difficult to break. Organizations become averse to future programs, which results in organizational stagnation, or worse. Discussion suggests that the industry premium on projects is somewhere in the order of 150% to 250 – alarming figures. In the same hushed manner as they were provided to the author, the sources of these estimates cannot be provided here. However, as a program is analyzed for potential

benefit, one must ask what does the assumption of a premium of these magnitudes or, come to that, any premium when it surprises the business, mean as the organization assesses later programs? What does it mean for the business case when these premium assumptions are added-in? We end up with impossible to achieve, unrealistic financial requirements such as projects must ‘payback in 12 months’ while demonstrating that they return at least the cost of capital over some arbitrary cash flow period. For strategic, panorganizational change, is 12 months really realistic? It is highly unlikely. Consider those projects that can be squeezed into a 12-month turnaround. How likely are they to be well integrated with the business and its systems, processes and overarching strategy to really resonate to the bottom line? Of course it is true that small, narrowly focused projects, may be appropriate to a critical issue in the business, but the ones that are really going to change the direction or future state of an airline will have many technical and personnel dependencies. Exacerbating the difficulties with the cycle described above, most organizations have adopted a single Project Management methodology to drive the process for any project to follow. Methodologies such as the System Delivery Method, 8 Step, Agile Development, Iterative and Incremental Development, Rapid application Development, the Spiral model and the Cascade or Waterfall methods are all project cycle models that airlines adopt to guide the project process. But, are they all relevant? Each of these has its strengths, but also weaknesses [note the footnote here – see end of article for the notes]. Just like the focus on the widget alone, it is also true that many of these prescribed methodologies are less than suited to the projects on which they are unilaterally imposed. These methodologies primarily relate to software development, not the implementation of new ways of business. The issue often arises from the notion that projects that have an IT component ought to be project managed by the IT department. It would be an accurate observation to suggest here that most transformational projects, particularly those that are organizational in nature, have an IT component; probably a significant one. In many attempted implementations, the process tends to become the focus. Business drivers, desired outcomes and organizational strategy slip to into the background in the same way as focus on the widget can cloud the problem it is trying to solve. Looking more deeply, examination tends to demonstrate that projects become viewed as a strategy and then organizations bind the project to a fixed model of how it should be done. Taking EFB again, the emphasis has grown over time, for good reason, that it should be viewed as an IT system, not an avionics system. There are significant pros to this argument, but also quite a few cons. This debate is still continuing and in the opinion of this author, neither position is correct. Considering the process as a whole; someone gets a great idea – from a magazine like this one, a trade show or the latest great idea for rearranging deck chairs. Presentations are made and papers are written to get it moving and excitement builds.

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: CLOSED LOOP | 27

Analysis is undertaken, but it focuses on what the organization will look like when the widget (or new way of being) is part of the day-to-day routine. Requirements tend to be developed to suit the widget. To ensure it is all done properly, there are the project standards mentioned earlier, the way that projects will be managed in an organization to ensure due process is followed. Both the focus on the widget and the one-size fits all project cycle formula mandate ignore a vital aspect; not many strategic ideas are the same and neither are the projects that are necessary to guide the journey of implementation. These issues are symptomatic of jumping into the project process in the middle. Taking the proverbial solution (the widget) and going to find a problem to which it relates or, worse, imposing a solution on the status quo. At the same time, a ‘due process’ is imposed to ensure the widget (or business change) is implemented in accord with an IT process that was designed with something else in mind. Many industry projects suffer from ‘cart before the horse’ syndrome. They are squarely an issue that defines the way the organization develops and implements strategy. Remember; projects (and broader programs) are just the tools by which strategy is delivered, particularly where the strategy involves any change to the status quo of the organization. So, the importance of how the project is defined and how a strategy integrates with the organization’s broader strategic direction becomes a key determinant in reversing the trend

and realizing more project successes within the industry. By way of example, let’s do a walk-through of, say, an EFB program implementation, although it could be any change program for the organization. Where does it begin, with whom? What is the usual process for realizing it within the organization? What comes first, the widget (in this case, the EFB) or an examination of some business issue to which EFB may form a component of the solution? What process might be followed to make sure everything is considered. In too many examples, the process is one of picking the box and trying to implement it forward. This process leaves behind the necessity of making sure it fits a problem that exists in the organization and that it is assisting some higher level strategy. The process becomes laden with other issues as it moves forward too. Does this choice of box and the applications that will be deployed really fit the organization’s needs, or answer some problem? It is here where scope creep, that insidious nagging that something has been left out – so let’s make sure it is in – occurs. This happens because proper analysis was not completed. The euphoria and enthusiasm takes over. It is not an isolated occurrence. By way of example, let’s look at two similar and real projects. The first is a long way in to the implementation process. Hardware and software have been chosen, but with little consultation and in the absence of a rigorous comparison against a set of business,

functional and non-functional requirements to ensure business fit. As aircraft deployment approaches, work is taking place to ensure regulatory readiness. Consideration of normal and contingency procedures is taking place, very late in the process and, with it, a discussion about possible back up procedures or systems. During that discussion it is realized that the deployment of EFB will potentially lead to an increased workload on some of the types destined for fitment of the system. Discussion has since become focused on a software functionality wish list – further scope change requiring redefinition of requirements. This is a revisit to a much earlier time in the project and, at this juncture, will potentially add considerable further expense. It is not the work necessary to ease the implementation of the system. Additionally, discussion about back-up scenarios turned to a debate about another device to provide a back-up to a back-up. The suggestion being made now is that the back-up device might be issued to all pilots and could mean that some aspects of the initial hardware and software specification will not now be required. This aspect is confusing the project further as it approaches a vital milestone. The second example illustrates a project where a single department within an airline is pressing for the deployment of a personal issue device to its pilots. The premise being that with this widget, EFB is no longer a necessary consideration. The reality is that this conclusion is not a simple (or necessarily sensible) one to draw, however it exemplifies the

Click here for full SOFTWARE details and for a demo

The World’s Leading Electronic

Flight Bag Software Solution Improving Operational Performance in Flight Operations, Cabin & Maintenance

AMT www.flightman.com Flightman HPH 0411.indd 1

28/04/2011 17:37

28 | WHITE PAPER: CLOSED LOOP | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

example where requirements are written to suit an outcome, rather than as a part of a process that will to lead to one. The widget has been chosen and the Statement of Requirements (SoR) requires suppliers to deliver applications that will run on the device but at the same time, are compliant with standards and already deployed systems that cannot run on the device. Significant expense will be incurred by the organization while adjustments are made to existing infrastructure to support a particular device, but adding little value to any other aspects of the business. Certainly there is a business case structured around the device, but because the implementation it is not well integrated back into the business, the reality will likely be that one department saves, while others struggle to cope with the necessary changes to required process. While not an inevitable conclusion, typically these arrangements save expense in one department while adding to effort and expense in other departments, i.e. it costs the organization more overall. Quite simply, focus on a widget, however it might be incarnated, and prescribing a one-size-fits-all approach to the formula for implementation, does not work and these two issues are symptomatic of the problems surrounding projects in the aviation industry. To address these issues and make a positive turnaround to our project success rate, a reusable, repetitive manner of structuring our projects that provides a higher likelihood of success, a template or methodology, is necessary, but it must be appropriate to the type of projects and the environment to which it relates. Following a proper project analysis, we can then choose the most appropriate parts to fit a given solution rather than the one-sizefits-all of the single IT methodologies. In other words, we need to develop a system that is designed to suit the steps required for changing the business from one state of being, to another. This is not as simple as it sounds because most projects are trying to solve many different issues. Consider then a system analogous to aviation and with which I am sure we are all familiar: standard operating procedures (SOPs) are the bedrock on which aircraft operation is based. The alternative is chaos. With no clear delineation of who was needed or required to do what and when and moreover, who is in charge and where the boundaries of authority and accountability reside, the industry would not be able to boast the safety record it rightfully trumpets. SOPs vary by aircraft type because every type is different. That is, they are designed to optimize the operation of the particular equipment within a particular airline environment. SOPs also serve to support the crew as a team, defining roles and responsibilities, accountabilities and recognition, and they are a safety valve, ensuring early recognition of things that might not be normal or that require attention or action in a particular situation. So too, must the project template be appropriate to the requirements of the scope, quality and timing of our change requirements. It becomes easier to see why each project might be different. Similar to the project Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) let’s now consider the business steps necessary to ensure our project has all the necessary pieces so that it can more likely conclude successfully or counter the reasons for failure. First, let’s examine some reasons for project failure. In no particular order and also widely available in the public domain, these points suggest reasons for the 70% failure rate in managing change: • Lack of analysis of precise business needs. • Lack of definition of business benefits. • Failure to identify tangible deliverables. • Too much attention on the end goal, rather than the journey. • Lack of accountability provided to the Project Manager. • Poor leadership on the part of the Project Manager. Recognize any? When our organizations focus on the outcome and do not provide the people in the team the proper role

definition with commensurate responsibility and authority, we are inviting failure. An unwillingness to provide the team with basic accountabilities suggests the organization is not fully behind the change and failure to understand the reasons for a proposed change, the benefits to the business is an absolute recipe for failure. Often, the ‘start in the middle’ syndrome is driven to a degree because of the methodology chosen by the business. Consider an iteration of the waterfall model:

Requirement

Design Implement

…we need to develop a system that is designed to suit the steps required for changing the business from one state of being, to another. This is not as simple as it sounds because most projects are trying to solve many different issues

Verify Maintain

This model invites jumping in at the requirements level and ignores to a large degree, necessary examination of the proposed strategy and implementation project before this point, that is, concept and definition. It also exemplifies a shortfall in this type of model for many innovation implementations. It is very expensive to climb back up a step if requirements change once the next step has begun. Indeed, project management texts convincingly demonstrate how rapidly cost, risk and time escalate as changes are introduced later into the project. So, a framework needs to be developed that recognizes the key requirements of a projects ability to manage several aspects moving an organization from one state, to the next. There is the technical aspect. What has to be done to implement the widget, whatever it is? These phases are variously identified but generally follow the following outline: 1. The idea! With little or no structure, this is where the idea happens; where the light goes on above someone’s head. Discussion begins and usually this is where decisions are made about jumping right in. Slow down, consider moving on to… 2. Concept and definition: this is where the project is aligned with the organization’s priorities, strategic objectives and alignment requirements. This phase helps ensure that the organization is going to be behind the project. Deliverables are brainstormed, alternatives are considered and initial financial with other tangible or intangible benefits are identified. Potential stakeholders are engaged. 3. Planning: in this phase, the project structure is decided. The deliverables, back office process changes, training and IT needs are analyzed. Project Management and reporting structures, personnel availability and assignment, roles and responsibilities are decided. Regulatory authorities (if required) are engaged in this phase. Project and new business process risk analysis is completed here. An initial timeline is developed. Management are required to ‘pull the trigger’ in this phase. 4. RFI / RFP: this phase forces the organization to develop some boundaries and detail to their requirements because they have to be articulated to and understood by a wider audience. A significant consideration in innovation and projects with a high technical component is the collective knowledge of the industry at large. Who is doing what? What are the options available and implementation options that will suit the identified need? The RFI process provides a market analysis of suppliers and leads the organization to appropriate demonstrations and discussions with suppliers who are highly likely to be able to provide an appropriate part of the solution. 5. Proposal analysis: this phase helps the organization reassess its

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: CLOSED LOOP | 29

requirements. Are some too expensive? Which will provide the most organizational benefit? This is where weightings are appropriate to level the playing field. Stakeholder involvement in the analysis phase ensures buy-in. Detailed costing surfaces during this phase, particularly if the requirements were sufficiently detailed. 6. Supplier selection: negotiation of favorable terms and conditions occurs in this phase. The importance of this phase in the relationship between the preferred supplier and the company cannot be understated. This relationship will be where the success of the project will be forged. Differences between company and supplier imperatives like Legal and Terms and Conditions must be ironed out in this phase in a professional and ethical manner by both sides. In this phase, a joint development plan will be constructed to integrate into the company project plan and final adjustments will be made to requirements if there are any supplier dependencies. 7. Project implementation: this is where the rubber hits the tarmac. The major body of work starts here. A final review and confirmation of the project plan occurs here. Final adjustments are made to the business case and the assumptions therein are confirmed and signed off. Any regulatory path should be finalized here. A review of the risk management status of the project should be undertaken to confirm earlier assumptions. In partnership with the supplier(s), testing plans should be developed to underpin the implementation assumptions. By now, plans that will be parallel to and underpin the technical implementation to ready the business for the changed way of being and communicate the changes broadly to excite and engage the organization should be complete. Documentation requirements should be identified and agreed. The plan now gets moving. 8. Operational readiness and program finalization: final regulatory approval occurs in this step. Implementation phases if necessary are decided and implemented against the plan. Importantly, this phase includes a post project review to learn for the next time and audit the assumptions against reality and the accuracy of the business case. Closure documentation is completed. As can be seen from the last seven steps, there is a lot to consider and importantly there is a great deal of work up front, before the project starts costing real money. It is in these steps where the battle for project success can be won or lost. It can be seen, as one examines the above outline, selecting the widget (or the supplier) and back-filling requirements to suit, or having no up-front requirements at all leaves a lot out of the process but does not really short cut it due to the elevated levels of risk to the project and the business in poorly developed strategy implementations. While it appears at first glance that there is a significant overhead to get through before the rubber hits the tarmac, investment in the process will yield successful projects more often, which will cost less in the long run. Think of the cost of failure, or not quite getting the outcome that was assumed, when rework has to be done to get it right: particularly when the business invests in change for survival and it does not work. The money is spent, there is no benefit and it is harder to get approval next time because the premium applied to the failure just got bigger. The benefits of investing in an appropriate process become clearer. While the process may seem daunting the first time, think of how a learning organization will adapt. It will come with less effort next time and the time after that. Consider also that there are a number of organizations in the industry that can assist you to structure this type of approach and coach you along the way. Success in your projects is vital. Organizational confidence increases, the premium reduces and those changes you once thought impossible to clear the hurdles become possible. Innovation, in the form of properly implemented programs like EFB, MRO systems and many any other business opportunity strategies are now possible. The organization becomes less averse to projects heralding change because they can see positive benefit in adapting with success. Successes breed new thinking and a new, positive cycle is established. And your organization thrives. Rapid, agile, spiral methodologies are not suited to projects where significant infrastructure, such as EFB hardware and installation is required as part of the deliverable. It is too expensive to revisit these types of developments in an iterative fashion. It is opposite to the cascade method, where all decisions that can be taken are made before moving to the next phase of a project. This approach also has it’s downsides such as ballooning project scope, long timelines and technology creep.

About Closed Loop Closed Loop draws on over 100 years collective aviation industry experience, bringing industry knowledge and consulting skills to support guidance, mentoring and empowerment to project teams. Or, if preferred and appropriate, a turnkey approach to programs from concept development to post implementation, including a unique change management philosophy. Closed Loop’s Principals are all well recognized and the team’s skills range from piloting the most advanced jet transport fleets, flight operations management, aviation systems and standards development to flight information systems such as dispatch and operations control, avionics design and development, EFB implementation and EFB and other industry standards and concept developments, as well as implementation and management of change. They continue to participate in regulatory debate and industry activities to ensure their knowledge remains up to date – and always available to clients. Closed Loop provides a paradigm shift in program development, integration and implementation methods, including contract management and logistics.

Capt. Michael Bryan Principal, Closed Loop

Michael has enjoyed a full and diverse aviation career spanning 36 years. Currently in his 27th year with a major airline, he now commands the Airbus A380 aircraft. Michael has a broad base of experience in both the Airline and, General Aviation sectors, including training, development, management and corporate operations. He has also provided Technology Consulting and, Project Management Services, to the Aviation, Oil Exploration and the Marine Service sectors, through his private company. During the last 15 years, Michael has been appointed to various Management roles within Qantas Flight Operations, primarily involved in strategic technology development within the global airline industry. These have included various Electronic Library Systems (now Electronic Flight Bag, EFB) programs, three years as Chairman of the ATA/AIA “Digital Data” (SGML/ XML FOWG) effort and, as a delegate to the ATN (PETAL II) and initial ATNFANS harmonisation efforts, sponsored by Eurocontrol and Boeing. He was involved with Qantas’ early Electronic Flight Bag developments for the Boeing and Airbus fleets. Michael has, for over a 20 year period, been involved in the development and advocacy of information management standards, systems, applications and, process improvement initiatives for the Industry. Michael has Chaired the early ATA/AIA FOWG committee. He has experience in Formal Strategic Planning (UTS Sydney), Project Management (University of Adelaide) and SGML/XML (Exoterica Corporation) qualifications to support his work in this area; and finally Michael was as a consultant in the earliest EFB specification and functional developments and project management.

Ask the Expert In addition to being available now to answer any questions you have arising from this White Paper, Capt. Michael Bryan is available all year round for one-to-one consultancies via the Ask The Expert feature at www.aircraftIT.com. He will be happy to answer your queries.

INTERACTIVE

ASK THE AUTHOR A QUESTION

CLICK HERE to leave YOUR QUESTION

INTERACTIVE

JOIN THE DEBATE

CLICK HERE to leave your feedback about this article and start or join a discussion

Vendor Flight Log

30 | VENDOR FLIGHT LOG | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Director of Ralf Cabos is currently Managing . Prior to this, Flight Focus Pte Ltd in Singapore thansa Systems Ralf was Managing Director of Luf ore, and Asia Pacific Pte Ltd, also in Singap ent of PT held responsibility for the establishm the overall sales Lufthansa Systems Indonesia, and oup AG for the portfolio of Lufthansa Systems Gr Asia Pacific region.

Secrets of Flight Focus’ success AircraftIT: Your name, your job title and the name of the business? Ralph Cabos: Ralf Cabos; Managing Director; Flight Focus. AircraftIT: How did Flight Focus get started? RC: I have a background in avionics system and architecture design, and have been part of the industry for a long time. When I was with Lufthansa Systems, I was involved in the dispatch back office, flight planning and navigation optimization. Already then I felt fascinated by the idea of how we could better support integration of aircraft and ground based systems and help the airline and the industry save money with newly designed business processes and reduced operating costs. At the time the technology to do this was not available and there was still a lot that systems on board and on the ground could not do. Having a PC on board was just a dream; we actually only had ACARS [aircraft communications, addressing and reporting system] and system integration with the ground did not exist. The first serious mention of an Electronic Flight Bag must have been around the year 2000, but was still only about going ‘paperless’. The designs were incapable of integration, slow and not in any sort of way connected to aircraft systems or ground facilities. So, around 2005, I discussed this with someone who later became my partner. We found that our concept of an open platform, fully integrated and connected EFB was well received; and we found our first investors. That’s how Flight Focus was born. AircraftIT: What is the guiding business principle that drives Flight Focus? RC: Being able to deliver an end-to-end solution, not just a piece of hardware, not just an application but a complete solution; that is a true Open Platform. No two airlines are alike and each of them has their own focal points on where and how they see the need and the possibility to optimize the operational processes, find new efficiencies, reduce cost and even increase revenue. That’s why we strive to be a long-term partner and include all aspects of the process in our business model, from certification through support and system upgrades. We commit to deliver a working integrated solution, as long as the aircraft flies. We are a partner; taking full responsibility for what we have delivered and continuing to support and upgrade it. AircraftIT: What has been Flight Focus’ greatest business achievement to date, and why? RC: Well, to get the product up and certified was a major achievement in the first place. To convince certification authorities that we can put all of this into one single box and stretching the boundaries by linking up EFB, data recording, communications, and ultimately IFE [In-flight Entertainment] and ground systems, which no one had really done, was quite a challenge. To have our platform now being installed and flying is something everybody in the company can be really proud of, every day. Of course, signing a large customer such as Air Asia and having the industry confirm that what you do is right is also a big thumbs up for all of us here.

AircraftIT: What have been Flight Focus’ disappointments and what have you learned from them? RC: Maybe not a disappointment but certainly a challenge that we face is that we need to improve in getting the right message across to the industry in terms of the value we provide to the airlines. Because we offer so much more than just an EFB, it sometimes is hard for the airline to understand that we can deliver a complete solution and business process. What we do by integrating the on-board and back office processes is so much more than putting a box on board and now with our new wireless IFE&C [IFE & Communications] system we have taken it even a step beyond. For the airline who wants just an EFB, this might be hard to grasp and pitching our company and solutions in the right way, where we are not considered to be over qualified is one of our challenges. AircraftIT: What is new on Flight Focus’ development horizon? RC: As I mentioned, we have recently developed a Wireless IFE system. Leveraging on our knowledge and experience from our current offering, we have set the bar extremely high for ourselves and came up with an innovative design with a much lower price point and significantly higher capacity. Much more for less, as it were. It comes as a fully dual redundant system with scalable streaming capacity, impressive online gaming power, and a delivery capability to 100% of the passengers. We wanted to design a system that is low in cost, easy to install and very low in maintenance; this time not focusing on potential saving but ancillary revenue for the customer instead. To make it more complicated for our design teams, we have designed it as an avionics solution, not at all like a classic IFE system. Only this way can we guarantee the robustness that a customer would and should expect from Flight Focus. AircraftIT: What will be the next big thing in Operations software and hardware? RC: That depends what you consider to be Operations. In a way we don’t deliver operations software, we provide the service instead. Service such as flight planning, flight monitoring and support, and data streaming capability to the cockpit. In that capacity, I see a further development in the dynamic flight route optimization as well as proactive fuel management solutions – a field in which we have a proven capability. From a hardware perspective, we are constantly striving for improvement and one thing that I can see happening is the use of Android as an operating system for on board EFB use. AircraftIT: What do you want your customers to say about Flight Focus? RC: That they see us as the provider of a complete turnkey solution. Nothing is missing and all is taken care of, delivered, supported and maintained: you can rely on Flight Focus and ‘Robust’ is a key feature. Complete and total delivery and support: we do as we say. AircraftIT: Ralf Cabos, thank you for your time.

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WEBINARS | 31

Upcoming Live Software Demonstration Webinars at www.aircraftit.com November–December 2011

Sign up to free live online software demonstrations for a perfect introduction to the world’s leading Flight Operations Software vendors and to learn how they can assist and add value to your operations.

FuelPlus’ Fuel Management Solutions

FLYHT’s ACARS over Iridium for iPad

17th November 2011

8th December 2011

n Session 1: 6:30am GMT/UTC n Session 2: 3.00pm GMT/UTC n Duration: 1 hour plus Q&A

oin FuelPlus as they provide a live demonstration of their integrated fuel management, consulting and support service solution. You will see a live demonstration of their industry leading Fuel Management solution: FuelPlus EFM. The EFM solution supports all aspects of today’s modern airline fuel management activities by combining airline best practices in fuel planning, tendering, purchasing, inventory and supply chain management, operations and accounting. You will see how a fully integrated Fuel Management tool can assist airlines and aircraft operators to massively reduce fuel costs and increase efficiency.

INTERACTIVE: JOIN THE WEBINAR

CLICK HERE to VIEW FULL DETAILS AND SIGN UP FOR THIS FREE WEBINAR

n Session 1: 6.30am GMT/UTC n Session 2: 3.00pm GMT/UTC n Duration: 1 hour plus Q&A

his Webinar will show you an excellent live demonstration of an ACARS over Iridium system that can be accessed via an iPad in the Flight Deck. You will see how adopting an ACARS system can bring a huge number of benefits to the airline or aircraft operator and can quickly realise a return on investment. FLYHT will provide a live demonstration of their AFIRS 228 Iridium Global Communications System which provides aircraft crew with reliable voice and data services for ATS, AOC, and AAC communications using Iridium’s global satellite network. The AFIRS 228 has two Iridium channels. One transceiver provides global voice and data communications using standard Satcom cockpit controls from the Audio Control Panel and the MCDU. The second modem is dedicated to datalink services using standard ACARS and FANS message sets (e.g. CPDLC and ADS-C). The AFIRS 228 offers telecom flexibility via conventional 2-wire ‘Tip and Ring’ telephony devices. Up to two wired or 8 cordless handsets can be added in the cabin providing intercom, call transfer, conference calling, camp-on calling and noise cancelling features. This provides the crew with worldwide access to MedLink or other emergency medical services. MCDU Dialing, Integrated Cockpit Audio, Remotely Programmable, FANS & CPDLC Messaging, EFB in-flight connectivity (Including iPad)

INTERACTIVE: JOIN THE WEBINAR

CLICK HERE to VIEW FULL DETAILS AND SIGN UP FOR THIS FREE WEBINAR

Want to keepup with IT developments? Click here to subscribe! It takes a few moments.

32 | PAST WEBINARS | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

View Video Recordings of our Live Flight Operations Software Demonstration Webinars at www.aircraftit.com Sign up for free to view video recordings of the live Flight Operations Software demonstration Webinars hosted by Aircraft IT over the past few months.

AMT Live EFB Software Demonstration Webinar

Live eFB iPad and Software Demo of BYTRON’S Skybook EFB Software Suite

30th June 2011

21st July 2011

n Session OVERVIEW

This Webinar session recordings shows you how to optimise an airline’s operational performance through EFB applications with a live demonstration of a complete EFB software Suite including: Electronic Flight Folder, eJourney Log, Performance Calculations, Weight & Balance, Large Content Manager, Integration with 3rd Party Chart Provider, eTechlog, Business Intelligence Tool, Ground Administration Manager.

Your chance to view a recording of this extremely popular live webinar. You will see a demonstration of an eFB software suite designed specifically for the iPad including the following modules: Techlog, Flight Folder, Cabin Crew, Document Library. See how an eFB iPad solution can work for your airline.

INTERACTIVE: VIEW WEBINAR DETAILS

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | PAST WEBINARS | 33

About the Live Software Demonstration Webinar Recordings These Live Software Demonstration Webinar recordings provide airlines and operators with the perfect chance to view, at a convenient time of their own choosing, the different Flight Operations Software solutions on the market. Each webinar is an hour long and offers an excellent overview of that IT Vendor’s software solution with the cost savings and increased efficiency they can deliver. The different software demonstrations include: EFB, iPad technology for the Flight Deck, Fuel Saving Solutions, plus more.

How it Works? Sign up for all the sessions or pick and choose your preferred Vendors. Once approved the video recording will appear in your Member’s Area at the Aircraft IT website and you will be able to view it as many times as you like.

Aviaso Live Fuel Efficiency Software Demonstration Webinar

4th August 2011

18th August 2011

n Session OVERVIEW

This Webinar will show you a demonstration of a complete end-to-end Class III EFB Solution including: how to build a business case, hardware selection and implementation and software selection and application. You will see how a Class III EFB can offer an airline a unique and complete solution with company-wide benefits.

This Webinar recording will show you how IT Systems can support you in saving fuel. You will see a live demonstration o f the Aviaso Fuel Efficiency software solution explaining how to discover fuel savings and how to manage a fuel efficiency improvement program.

INTERACTIVE: VIEW WEBINAR DETAILS

34 | WHITE PAPER: BETLEYBRIDGE | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Rostering Optimization Made Simple It’s a case of aligning all of the inputs, says Dean Stewart, Managing Director, Betley Bridge Consulting; that and using a fair process

ostering is the simple art of selecting which crew member to put on what flight. In its purest form, it’s a logistical question — ‘Which resource best matches my need, based on the rules and constraints I have placed on the puzzle?’ Most pilots would probably object to being called ‘a resource’, but the best rosters are produced when the constraints are applied absolutely equally to all resources, and this becomes more difficult the more human the resource gets — and when the planner is also a human. So we look to automate the process, after all, isn’t that what computers are designed for? The basic definition of what a computer program does is to carry out an instruction on a predefined set of data, subject to rules and protocols, to achieve a desired result. So putting a qualified and well rested First Officer on the Friday morning Tenerife should be the simplest act for the most basic of computers. For this article we have made some assumptions. We will use airlines as the basic industry, and Captains to represent all crew members. The exact same solution applies to train drivers, ferry chefs, parole officers, university lecturers — anyone who’s working life is subject to timetables and different duties and rules. We will also assume that everyone is based in the UK, and works under vanilla CAP371 whose purpose is, in the words of the UK CAA itself, “[to] set a work pattern for flight crews and cabin staff designed to prevent the onset of fatigue, and yet allow an operator to pursue business interests.” We will also discuss union agreements and local arrangements and how they affect this.

What does Roster Optimization mean? Rostering is a job conducted in several phases, and each airline seems to find a slightly different way of organizing its resources. Most companies have at least a planning and tracking section. The former organizes everything needed to construct the initial roster — basic data, vacation, requested days off, training requirements and the creation and maintenance of the rules. Members of the crew then receive their roster, and it becomes ‘published’.

Figure 1: A very basic rostering process

The tracking team — Pre-Ops, Crewing, Crew Control and Crew Tracking — then monitor changes and disruption and ensure, on the day, that flights go out with the right crew still on board. There are many more people than this involved in any sizable airline, whereas some small startups or business jet operators may have one person or a team combining all the roles. However the teams are set up, the individual steps remain fairly similar. Defining optimization is not as simple. To a mathematician, and that is essentially what a computer programmer is, optimization means the absolute best result possible. And when dealing with mathematical problems of the type ‘What is the least number of x to achieve y?’ or ‘How should I arrange a sets of resources to ensure maximum coverage of b requirements?’ then the most efficient solution is not only the target, it is the only target. Computers don’t care

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: BETLEYBRIDGE | 35

whether resources do or do not have feelings. With humans involved it becomes more complicated. Perfect solutions become impossible as soon as the first requested day off is added into the consideration. And then a new pilot needs more training than a returning one. And a long serving Captain has five days more vacation to take. So if we can’t make the roster absolutely efficiently perfect, what should we aim for? Optimization then moves away from the best solution, to the fairest. If you have seven flights a week to Sharm-el-Sheik and 10 Captains, then they cannot have one each. And even if you had seven of each, you could have a week’s leave or training and not be eligible for one: so we look for fairness over a longer period. One month is never enough, so most rostering teams will look for at least six months of balanced rosters. If Captain Smith has 17 flights to Sharm in that period, and Captain Jones has 16, it doesn’t look unfair. If Captain Evans has 11, then he has the right to question why. Automation is not optimization. Flights can be stuffed onto rosters in a way that is legal, but without any balance or semblance of fairness. Rostering can be automated, but we need to be careful not to confuse an automated tool with an optimizing tool. Most rostering staff are not scientifically trained programmers. They nearly always have experience of managing rosters, and are able to glance at a roster and declare it ‘good’ or ‘bad’. We need to find a way to transfer that knowledge into binary so that computers can understand it.

Who has an interest? The rostering team wants an easy life. They want to take the flights, put crew on them, and send out the results. Automation can greatly assist the rostering team, but if they have to pull apart the results to make them fair and add lifestyle changes, then the automation is pointless. Crew members have an enormous interest — it is their lives being manipulated. It may be only a red blob on a Gantt chart, and it may count as one early duty and one less available standby, but to the crew member it means driving around the motorway at 0400 or missing Parents’ Evening or simply just another start at a bad time of day. Unions have seen their powers diminish over the last 30 years but, in the UK at least, they remain very strong in the aviation sector. Most airlines now have scheduling agreements that sit on top of the basic rule set and restrict what can be done with crew members. Good airlines help to draft these agreements and set them up in partnership with the union, rather than waiting for the dispute and then having to accept unpalatable changes. A typical example would be the avoidance of rest periods between 18 and 30 hours long. This is quite acceptable under CAP371, but does not allow the crew member to rest properly between duties. Sleeping twice in a 24 hour period is not natural behavior, and the stresses of often being away from home, or having to drive at uncomfortable hours when tired is not pleasant. It can work in the company’s favor sometimes. For example CAP371 mandates a minimum of eight days off per month. Some airlines give pilots 10 or more days off per month, so why not offer them a guaranteed nine days off: more than they legally need, but less than they could have? Pilot management has to deal with unhappy crew members. This usually falls into one of two patterns — either the crew member is told to stop whining and deal with it, or the rosterer is told that the series of duties is unfair, unworkable, or fatiguing. The man hours lost to aviation by Crewing Managers arguing with Chief Pilots on the merits of legal against niceness are uncountable. Also, there is a cultural difference between scheduled and charter operations, with the latter more likely to accept unpleasant working patterns on the understanding that there are usually less pilots so less flexibility, and the idea that the ‘favor will be repaid.’ A pilot moving from 20 years at a large scheduled airline to a medium sized charter outfit often has to dramatically realign their expectations as to what is a good roster. Crew management therefore wants fair and balanced rosters which take lifestyles and human factors into account so that their team stays happy and focused. There is also a cost to operating the flying program. Sudden, dramatic costs occur when there are technical problems or disruption and you have to unexpectedly put 300 passengers in a hotel. Crew costs tend to be more insidious — they sneak up and surprise even the most experienced finance director. Crewing costs need to be budgeted for, and they need to be monitored and controlled. Lack of pilots in one base can quickly turn into thousands of pounds on taxis and hotels. Inefficient rostering can add more problems. And clever rostering, where crew patterns combine trips, save ferry flights or get aircraft back to base can save money too.

How do you optimize rosters? Most of the work is done before any rostering starts. Flights are built into ‘pairings’ or ‘patterns’ which create a series of duties. It could be one flight; it could be a combination of different flights and / or ground activities. Most systems today can create these pairings based on simple rules that the airline can edit — longest trips, most hours in day, most sectors in a day etc. — and check them against the rules to ensure they are possible.

Figure 2: The different inputs to rostering

These rules are created from basic CAP (Civil Aviation Publication) rules, with different local agreements layered on top. In addition some rostering departments add their own restrictions on top of even that. Making a roster with more restrictive rules gives more flexibility to make changes further on. Crew data is assembled, and the program is told to look at a certain amount of historical data. This is to ensure that any new roster is assembled legally, and to ensure that any parameters that have been identified in terms of fairness have been taken into account. These parameters are the key to computers’ measuring fairness. All systems contain predefined measures to balance. These are normally standard definitions of duties such as days off, early starts or night duties. A good system will allow the user to define their own labels — such as days which are more than 14 hours long; duties that include landing in a certain airport; weekends off; patterns longer than three days.

Figure 3: An example of rostering parameters

‘Block or Sprinkle?’ is a good question which relates to the two basic ways to approach rostering when using mathematics. ‘Blocking’ simply allocates duties to the same crew member until something being added to his roster makes him illegal. So in the example below Smith is given duties on days 1 -4, but needs the 5th day as a legal day off. So any duty added here would be illegal. As the next available pilot is Brown, he is given that duty.

…a system needs to combine the two approaches. It needs the fairness of sprinkling with the efficiency of blocking. This is normally achieved by adding weights or percentages to the requirements. However, by now there is a very complicated set of requirements that have been built up

36 | WHITE PAPER: BETLEYBRIDGE | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Figure 4: Example of ‘Block’ approach to rostering

‘Sprinkling’ is different in that everyone is given a duty in turn. This produces a much fairer result than blocking, but is not as efficient as there could be a leave day or training duty on the roster when it is your turn for a flight, and the system simply moves on. Blocking covers the flying program much more efficiently, but is not so concerned with fairness. Many automated systems simply block the roster which covers the flying, but are in no sense optimized.

Figure 5: Example of ‘Sprinkle’ approach to rostering

So a system needs to combine the two approaches. It needs the fairness of sprinkling with the efficiency of blocking. This is normally achieved by adding weights or percentages to the requirements. However, by now there is a very complicated set of requirements that have been built up. In the example below we are now looking to meet the following requirements:

ISSUE 2 • SUMMER 2011

Aircraft Data Special

• Getting the right data transmission • Data as a global business asset

2011.indd 1 07/07/2011 08:49

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: BETLEYBRIDGE | 37

Figure 6: By now there is a very complicated set of requirements

• • • • •

Ensure all rosters are legal under CAP371; Ensure all rosters comply with union rules or agreement; Ensure that all pre-assigned training is honored; Ensure that all pre-assigned vacation or days off are honored; Ensure that any company rules are honored (for example new pilots flying together); • Try to cover all pairings with the correctly qualified crew; • Try to assign standbys as required; • Minimize and equalize number of days off on rosters; • Minimize and equalize number of weekends off; • Minimize and equalize long trips (voyages); • Minimize and equalize night flights; • Minimize and equalize trips to SSH which last more than 14 hours (SSH14). It is impossible to meet every one of these aims. A true optimizing tool would just keep running until the machine died trying to find that perfect solution. We are looking only for the best available solution, so need to use the weighting to explain to the computer how to prioritize our requirements. The balancing of Weekends Off has here been given a weighting of 50% compared to Night Flights, which has been given 10%. So the program knows the penalty for not balancing weekends off is five times greater than that for not sharing night flights out fairly. The user can change these numbers, and play the system like a mixing desk. Raising the number of one means the priority of another must fall. This gives us our ideal outcome, so now it is up to the computer to find it.

Figure 7: Balancing the selection process

And this is why it is necessary to simplify the process. Look up the ‘Hungarian Matrix’ on the internet and you will discover that the computer performs this task by doing the following on the right. Don’t worry if you don’t understand a word of it — it is a consultant’s job to translate what you need into language that the programmer can understand. As an airline decision maker you only need to judge the outcome. Whatever program we use to run the rosters, we need to aim for a solution

The algorithm in terms of bipartite graphs During the algorithm we maintain a potential y and an orientation of Gy (denoted by ) which has the property that the edges oriented from T to S form a matching M. Initially, y is 0 everywhere, and all edges are oriented from S to T (so M is empty). In each step, either we modify y so that its value increases, or modify the orientation to obtain a matching with more edges. We maintain the invariant that all the edges of M are tight. We are done if M is a perfect matching. In a general step, let and be the vertices not covered by M (so RS consists of the vertices in S with no incoming edge and RT consists of the vertices in T with no outgoing edge). Let Z from RS by a directed path only be the set of vertices reachable in following edges that are tight. This can be computed by breadth-first search. If is nonempty, then reverse the orientation of a directed path in from RS to RT. Thus the size of the corresponding matching increases by 1. If is empty, then let Δ . Δ is positive because and there are no tight edges between . Increase y by Δ on the vertices of and decrease y by Δ on the vertices of . The resulting y is still a potential. The graph Gy changes, but it still contains M. We orient the new edges from S to T. By the definition of Δ the set Z of vertices reachable from RS increases (note that the number of tight edges does not necessarily increase). We repeat these steps until M is a perfect matching, in which case it gives a minimum cost assignment. The running time of this version of the method is O(n4): M is augmented n times, and in a phase where M is unchanged, there are at most n potential changes (since Z increases every time). The time needed for a potential change is O(n2). A leading software supplier to the aviation industry gave a presentation at a prestigious conference where they proudly showcased their optimizer, explaining it used the algorithm:

38 | WHITE PAPER: BETLEYBRIDGE | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

that is as complete as possible, and as fair as possible. Any solution which falls in the green section in the diagram (Figure 8) is acceptable — the further it moves to the top right the better. Anything which is deemed ‘unfair’ or ‘incomplete’ cannot be published. And a roster that is incomplete and unfair is simply not finished.

Figure 8: A matrix of rostering fairness and flight completion

Automation is a word that provokes a human response – almost challenging the machine to do a better job than the specialist. This emotional response should be removed by using the term ‘assisted rostering’ Why should you use computers? The simple answer is that it’s quicker. Hardened old rosterers will tell you that no machine can replicate what they do. And it’s true that given unlimited time and no interruptions, a hand written roster is very difficult to beat. But time and flexibility are key factors today. These days, even the largest legacy carriers are changing fleets, changing routes and attacking costs wherever they can. So there is no single perfect solution any more. I have seen rosters with office days which start with a simulator session and allow 17 minutes of travel back to the office (yes the rosterer drove it to check) and had union meetings scheduled for 3.15pm to finish at 4.45pm to allow an 04.45 report the next morning for a flight. Today, unions frown upon multi-duty days, making crew duty pairings even easier for computers to construct. And the savings are made by constructing, comparing, destroying and rebuilding the solution over and again. Calculations are instant, and a workable solution to any roster problem can usually be reached in less than an hour: fully costed and with full reporting. And it is no great hassle to throw it away and start again when the rules, schedule or personnel change. Automation is a word that provokes a human response — almost challenging the machine to do a better job than the specialist. This emotional response should be removed by using the term ‘assisted rostering’. It needs to be remembered (and widely advertised) that the optimizer is there to help and assist the rostering team, not replace them. The last few flights to be squeezed in, the sudden extra training requirements, the pilot grounded immediately... these are all problems with which the computer can help, but that need the oversight of a seasoned professional. The assistance of rolling out the pairings, sprinkling standbys where needed, checking legality and displaying the results instantly gives the rostering team a chance to deal with the most complicated and reactionary airline.

Management information systems (MIS) are becoming increasingly common, and are potentially the most underused, neglected, and misunderstood part of any system. Few airline decision makers really understand the sheer amount of data they have at their fingertips. Any software company working on a database can present this information simply and in any number of ways. Decision makers should be checking and running reports before problems occur. Why does the Friday flight always go late? Look at the data, and take action to rectify any trends before next Friday. And the same is true for the rosterers. Now the planning team has more time, they can study the numbers; they can check that the distribution of duties is fair and make any necessary adjustments; they can pay more attention to crew bids and requests, and deal with more management and commercial requests. Scenarios can be run, and management can be shown the reasons for turning down requests, rather than it seeming to be an opinion that the request isn’t possible. Aviation is a long way behind some other industries in using the information it collects. Marketing departments understand the value of the data they hold, but Operations, Crewing and Crew Management have yet to grasp the power of the numbers they own. Supermarket loyalty cards can predict what you will want for dinner next week and send you a coupon before you know you want it; airlines sit on enormous volumes of data and ignore most of it.

Managing Optimization The new rostering systems require a new approach to running rostering departments. There is a piano in the corner and you need someone who can play it. You need an understanding of the rostering process, but you do not need to be an expert. An appreciation of how the optimizer works is just as important, but you do not need to be a programmer. You need to understand the reports and statistics that are generated, and you need to learn how to adapt the system to satisfy the needs of the other rostering team. Checklists become invaluable, to remember which groups have been run, to which parameters, and the stage they are at in the process. Communication becomes more important, as management begins to understand how much more information you can produce and starts to take more of an interest in what the previously mysterious rostering department are up to. As more of the system becomes automated, at the same time crew bidding can become increasingly complicated. Most systems start with days off and asking for short trip or long trip preferences. As complexity builds crew can request individual pairings, a run of duties and in some systems an entire roster period of duties. If the airline has robust, accepted and logical rules, then there is no limit to how much of the process can be automated. What if I don’t optimize my Rosters? There really is very little point in not optimizing rosters. All respectable systems today offer a form of optimization, and the airline can decide how far down the automation route they travel. Using optimization tools to distribute the bulk of the flying is not diminishing the planning department, and should be used by management to get more from their planning team. Crew will appreciate the extra tools and control that they are able to, exercise. The ability to bid, to then more often get what they bid for, and to know that the rosters are produced fairly and without prejudice, greatly increases crew morale.

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | WHITE PAPER: BETLEYBRIDGE | 39

Summary Adoption of optimization in the aviation business has not happened at the same speed as in other industries. The aviation industry has been slow to embrace technology in the Operations world. The ops team is moving assets worth $20 or $100 million dollars around, using technology based on RAF wall boards from the Second World War. Systems have been updated and refined, but always on the same model of Gantt charts and yellow stickers for crew roster changes. There remains a natural suspicion among some that computers cannot share out flights as well as a planner who has been doing it for 30 years; and yet, the same people casually accept that an aircraft can carry out an auto-landing without any human input. Systems are designing versions for the iPhone or onboard handhelds, but they are still just smaller (and often ‘read only’) versions of the big system. Software providers have a duty to provide easy to use solutions that can be applied in the real world — less mathematics in the GUI (graphical users interface) and more innovation in how the user works the optimizers. Optimization is a good first step that seems obvious. If there is one thing computers are better at than humans, it is logistics challenges of allocating duties to a group of resources who are constrained by logical rules.. Acknowledgements Screen prints are from Acrobat R3 optimiser by Acrobatico www.acrobatico.com. Diagrams produced by the author. Hungarian matrix definition from www.wikipedia.org The author recommends the following optimising tools: Crew Rosters R3 by www.Acobatico.com. Operations Procedures Skybook by www.bytron.com. Airline seamless operations: Avaio by www.sysaio.com

About Betley Bridge Consulting Ltd. Betley Bridge Consulting Ltd was set up after a review of the market place showed that there was a lack of affordable IT / Business consultants with Airline and Tour Operator specialism knowledge. Their business philosophy is to provide high quality knowledge based business analysts and project managers providing cost effective end to end solutions. Betley Bridge understands the unique requirements of the travel industry, and has enjoyed great success by adapting and applying proven methodologies and techniques. All of their team are Prince 2 and ITIL qualified, and have experience in charter, scheduled and military operations. They are comfortable working with administration staff and Chief Executives, and able to deliver documents and training which can be used on the front line, and reports and advice that can be used to great advantage in the boardroom.

Dean Stewart

Managing Director, Betley Bridge Consulting

Dean is the founder of BetleyBridge Consulting Ltd, and the Business Solutions leader. An experienced strategic thinker he looks at how any solution will effect all other areas of the organisation, not just the immediate area of impact. He has spent the last year working mainly with a group of airlines based in Gatwick, Stockholm and Athens installing, setting up and managing the reservations, passenger handling, Operations and Crewing systems. He has also been responsible for the entire IT department overseeing the network infrastructure, user services and supplier management. Since this contract finished he has been working with a selection of software providers giving them expert insight into how to position and market their products, and working with them to produce documentation and training materials, and representing them with their existing customers and exploring new opportunities with them. With more than 10 years of rostering management at XL Airways, National Jet Italia and British World, Dean’s main passion remains crew rostering and resource planning.

ASK THE EXPERT In addition to being available now to answer any questions you have arising from this White Paper, Dean Stewart is available all year round for one-to-one consultancies via the Ask The Expert feature at www.aircraftIT.com. He will be happy to assist you with your queries.

INTERACTIVE

ASK THE AUTHOR A QUESTION

CLICK HERE to leave YOUR QUESTION

INTERACTIVE

JOIN THE DEBATE

CLICK HERE to leave your feedback about this article and start or join a discussion

40 | SOFTWARE DIRECTORY | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

Operations Software Directory Key ‘at-a-glance’ information from the world’s leading Operations software providers. From Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs) to Fuel Management Systems; From Flight Planning Solutions to Operations Cost Management — the leading IT vendors below can cater for all requirements.

Aircraft Management Technologies

W: www.flightman.com T: +353 1 8061000 E: info@flightman.com

Company formed...................................................................2000 Office Location.............................................Dublin, Ireland (HQ) Name of Product Marketed • Flightman™ Electronic Flight Folder Number of Modules..................................................................11 Five Key Business/Software Areas • Flightman™ connects aircraft to airlines’ backend systems via onboard EFB software applications and provides airlines with significant costs savings in both Flight Operations and Maintenance • Flightman™ runs on all classes of hardware (FAA EFB Class 1, 2, or 3) • Is independent of hardware vendor • Supports all aircraft types • Is able to host third party applications and is independent of operating system AMT (Aircraft Management Technologies) was founded to address the need in the market for an electronic means of capturing and reporting data between aircraft and central back office systems. Flightman™ represents a common sense application of emerging technologies that can automate existing processes in the cockpit, cabin and on the ramp, in turn reducing costs. AMT’s Flightman™ product is a complete Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) software solution. Flightman™ enables airlines to be compliant in all aspects of onboard flight operations in a cost effective manner and provides a platform for future revenue generation applications in the cabin. AMT’s patented, award-winning Flightman™ software comprises three main elements: 1) a set of onboard software applications, 2) a ground server for the management of EFBs, and 3) capabilities for optimized communications between the onboard software and ground systems.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

AIR SUPPORT A/S

W: www.airsupport.dk T: 0045 7533 8889 E: pps@airsupport.dk Company formed...................................................................1988 Office Location................................................. Billund, Denmark Name of Product Marketed • PPS - Preflight Planning Solutions, CrewBriefing Five Key Business/Software Areas • Flight Planning • CrewBriefing facilities AIR SUPPORT specializes in the provision of pc-based flight planning software systems with integrated web-based CrewBriefing – PPS and CrewBriefing - services to private and commercial business aircraft operators, regional/charter/cargo/national airlines, military/utility operators and flight service providers. Today, PPS is used by aircraft operators throughout 32 countries operating more than 3000 turboprop and jet aircraft daily consisting of more than 350 different aircraft types and versions. PPS is powered by LUFTHANSA Systems FlightNav worldwide navigation data including all global route restrictions, worldwide updated NOTAMs, Surface Weather data and Wind and Significant Weather charts based on original source data.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

Arconics

W: www.arconics.com T: (00353) 1611 4625 E: info@arconics.com Company formed...................................................................2001 Office Location.................................................7 Westland Court, South Cumberland Street, Dublin, Ireland Name of Product Marketed • Manual Manager, AirPortal, EFB Viewer Number of Modules....................................................................5 Five Key Business/Software Areas • EFB Document Management • Airline content management • Flight crew notices management • Mobile document viewer apps • EFB document viewer Arconics is a leader in content management software and services for airline operators. Our team has over 10 years of world-class expertise in airline operations and document standards, web and mobile applications and XML data processing. Arconics provides EFB Document Management for Notices, Manuals and Forms on EFB Class 1, 2 & 3, Web and Mobile. Arconics products reduce costs, improve efficiency, and ensure regulatory compliance. Thousands of flight and ground operations staff, pilots and cabin crew depend on Arconics products to help safely and efficiently operate their fleets every day.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

Aviaso Inc.

W: www.aviaso.com T: +41 55 422 0000 E: info@aviaso.com Company formed...................................................................2003 Office Location........................................Pfaeffikon, Switzerland Name of Product Marketed • Fuel Efficiency, EU-ETS, Airline Portal, ART - Aviation Reporting Tool, CCP - Crew Capacity Planning Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • Fuel Efficieny • EU-ETS • Airline Portal / Intranet • ART - Aviation Reporting Tool • CCP - Crew Capacity Planning Aviaso is an international software company developing products exclusively for the aviation industry. The first product – the Airline Portal – has been deployed at Belair Airlines in 2003. Since then, the product-portfolio has been continuously extended into various areas of the aviation industry. Besides developing its own products, Aviaso is also developing customspecific software and realizes system integration projects for aviation companies. Furthermore, Aviaso maintains datacenters in Switzerland and Sofia and provides customized hosting-solutions for aviation companies. Aviaso has its head office in Switzerland and software development centers in Sofia/Bulgaria and Kharkiv/ Ukraine. Please, visit our website www.aviaso.com for more information about the Aviaso products and services.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

BYTRON

W: www.bytron.com T: +44 (0)1652 688626 E: info@bytron.aero Company formed...................................................................1984 Office Location.................... Kirmington, North Lincolnshire, UK Name of Product Marketed • skybook®eFB, skybook.aero, skylightES, Slot Management, Fuel Monitoring, AIS Notam Management Number of Modules....................................................................6 Five Key Business/Software Areas • Electronic Flight Bag • Pre-flight Briefing • Airport CDM • Flight Data Management Systems • Air Traffic Control & Operational Management Systems BYTRON is a UK based company specialising in aviation data systems that provides totally integrated flight data management solutions, delivering operational data reliably to aircraft operators, airports and air traffic control. We provide a wide range of products and solutions, including EFB (Class I & II) solutions, Airport CDM, and much more. The company’s design philosophy is, and has always been, to provide highly flexible, technically innovative, and compliant user-oriented solutions. With over 25 years of experience supplying aviation systems, we are experts at getting the right data, to the right place, at the right time.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

ETS Aviation Ltd.

W: www.etsaviation.com T: +351 91 580 1007 E: dscarlisle@etsaviation.com Company formed...................................................................2009 Office Location.........................................................Gibraltar, UK Name of Product Marketed • Aviation FuelSaver™, Aviation Footprinter™, ETS Support Service Number of Modules....................................................................2 Five Key Business/Software Areas • Fuel-efficiency Software Solutions • EU ETS Data Management and Reporting Verificiation Software • Fuel Saving Consultancy • ETS Data management consultancy ETS Aviation Ltd. are specialists in fuel-efficiency programmes and emissions data management. Since early 2009 our team of aviation specialists and software designers has helped hundreds of aviation operators all over the world. We work with airlines, business aviation operators and trip support companies. And we make their life easier. We created the ground breaking Aviation FuelSaver™, software and consultancy programme - the easiest to use and lowest cost fuel efficiency system on the market - having already launched a software and consultancy solution called Aviation Footprinter™, for managing EU ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme) requirements..

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

AUTUMN 2011 | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | SOFTWARE DIRECTORY | 41

Evoke Systems

W: www.evoke-systems.com T: +44 (3)456 521240 E: info@evoke-systems.com

Flygprestanda AB

W: www.flygp.se T: +46 40 642 00 10 E: sales@flygp.se

FuelPlus Software GmbH

W: www.fuelplus.com T: +49 (511) 496050 E: info@fuelplus.com

Company formed...................................................................2001

Company formed...................................................................1969

Company formed...................................................................2000

Office Location.................................................Norwich, England

Office Location...................... Malmö/Sweden, Connecticut/USA

Office Location........... Hannover (Germany), Brasov (Romania), Johannesburg (South Africa), Boston (USA)

Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • Training Records and Expiry Management • Cabin Crew Flight Reports • Journey Log and Fuel Analysis • EU-ETS Management • Document Library and Notices Evoke Systems is a British software company founded in 2001 to provide innovative, cost effective solutions to the airline industry. EFOS (Electronic Flight Operations System) is a web-based crew portal and flight operations management system with supporting mobile device software for use as part of an EFB solution. Evoke Systems has clients in both the commercial and business aviation sectors operating from the UK, Europe and the Middle East. They include start-ups and established airlines looking to streamline their processes. Our customers tell us that we provide exceptional levels of support and provide creative solutions to their problems.

Click Here for Software/Product Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

Flight Focus

W: www.flightfocus.net T: +65 6419 5299 E: sales@flightfocus.net Company formed...................................................................2007 Office Location......................................Singapore (HQ), Jakarta, Bandung, Kuala Lumpur Name of Product Marketed • The Flight Focus PLATFORM™ Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • Electronic Flight Bag • Avionics Systems Integration • Flight Operations Support Services • Applications Services Provider (ASP) • Flight Operations Consultancy Flight Focus has been a supplier of innovative, leading edge Avionics and Electronic Flight Bag solutions and associated Flight Operations Support Services to the global aviation industry since 2007. Flight Focus employs over 130 staff who are engaged in a wide range of activities directly related to the design, development and delivery of its avionics solutions; this includes hardware and software design & development, manufacturing and maintenance, Flight Dispatch services & support, and global Sales & Marketing teams. Headquartered in Singapore, Flight Focus has further office locations in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and Indonesia (Jakarta and Bandung) dedicated to research and development, software and hardware design, and technical support.

Name of Product Marketed • Airport Analysis, Performance GURU, FOCS Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • Aircraft Performance Services • Flight Planning Software • Performance Engineering • Special Performance Calculations • Engine Failure Procedures Flygprestanda AB, a pioneer in aircraft performance calculations, was founded 1969. For over 40 years Flygprestanda has been in the forefront of providing aircraft operators of all kind with high quality services. Today Flygprestanda is serving around 200 customers worldwide from the head office in Malmö, Sweden and continues to lead innovation in this part of the aviation industry with its well known Airport Analyses, Performance GURU and Flight Operations Control System (FOCS). High quality performance calculations for take off and landing are essential for safe flight operations and a modern flight planning solution is the key to achieve the most cost efficient operations possible.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

FLYHT - AreoMechanical Services

W: www.flyht.com T: + 1-403-250-9956 E: sales@flyht.com

Company formed...................................................................1998 Office Location...................................... Calgary, Alberta Canada Name of Product Marketed • AFIRS 220, AFFIRS 228, FLYHTStream, FIRST Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • ACARS over Iridium • Global Communications and Flight Following • Accurate and automated OOOIs • Real-time FDM for FOQA • Real-time Fuel Management System FLYHT’s AFIRS™ 228 is the only system to bridge gaps in ACARS coverage using the Iridium® global satellite system while also being Future Ready™. AFIRS goes beyond ACARS data with Configurable Intelligence on Demand™. No longer is your investment in ACARS connectivity restricted to accessing only ACARS data. Your aircraft is rich in non-ACARS data that if accessed can significantly improve operational efficiency and profitability. Through our on-demand capability we ensure that additional connectivity and functionality is available at your fingertips - enabling your ACARS over Iridium investment to do more than just offer global coverage.

Click Here for Software/Product Details

Click Here for Software Details

Click Here to Request Private Demo

Name of Product Marketed • FuelPlus Number of Modules..................................................................15 Five Key Business/Software Areas • Fuel and Operational Analysis • Emission Monitoring & Reporting • Fuel Supply Management • Fuel Operations Support • Fuel Accounting FuelPlus, a leading provider of fuel management IT solutions for the global aviation industry, enables airlines to implement and operate sophisticated fuel management processes which improve internal efficiencies, and achieve substantial savings. FuelPlus consists of a set of modules to handle fuel planning, tendering, contract management, inventory and supply chain management, operations, tankering, EU ETS emissions monitoring and reporting, prepayment, and accounting.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

G-AERO division of GrandTrust InfoTech Pvt Ltd

W: www.g-aero.com T: +91 9995801266 E: raju.v@grandtrustinfo.com

Company formed...................................................................2008 Office Location.........................................................Cochin, India Name of Product Marketed • G-COMS Airline Cost & Contract Management System • G-RPS Airline Route Profitability System • G-ARMS Airport Revenue & Contract Management System • G-GRMS Ground Handling Services Revenue & Contracts Management System Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • Airline Contract Management • Airline Cost Management, Budgeting and MIS/ Dashboard Reporting • Airline Route Profitability • Airports / GHA Contracts Management • Airports / GHA Revenue Management G-AERO offers a suite of innovative software products for Airline, Airports and Ground Handling Agents for their Contracts, Cost and Revenue Management. G-AERO product suite not only helps to implement proven industry best practices but also assures direct financial benefits. G-AERO uses latest, secure Microsoft .Net technology in developing its solutions. G-AERO believes in providing best value for money for their customers and there by ensures quick ROI.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

42 | SOFTWARE DIRECTORY | AIRCRAFT IT OPERATIONS | AUTUMN 2011

InfoTrust Group, Inc.

W: www.infotrustgroup.com T: 949-732-7532 E: loster@infotrustgroup.com

Company formed...................................................................1994 Office Location.................. Irvine, CA, Boulder, CO, Phoenix, AZ, Austin, TX, Shanghai, China, Paris France Name of Product Marketed • TechSight/X S1000D, TechSight/X ATA Number of Modules.............................................................. 10+ Five Key Business/Software Areas • Content Management System (CMS) • Interactive Electronic Technical Publisher (IETP) • Technical Operations Edition • Technical Publications Edition • Flight Operations Edition InfoTrust Group is a recognized leader in the aerospace industry for more than 25 years. InfoTrust delivers solution to hundreds of companies for their information processing, conversion, authoring, content and change management, publishing and distribution objectives. InfoTrust’s wide range of end-to-end solutions that increase productivity by taking advantage of XML capabilities and content reuse, and that produce more accurate and reliabile information for compliancy. Its solution support all flight ops, engineering, maintenance, engine, component and training manuals. InfoTrust currently services major airlines, OEMs, suppliers and MRO s worldwide. To learn more about TechSight/X and InfoTrust Group’s full range of products, services and solutions, please visit www.infotrustgroup.com.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

navAero

W: www.navAero.com T: +46-60-66-41-00; 305-358-0065 (USA) E: info@navAero.com Company formed...................................................................2002 Office Location............. Sundsvall, Sweden; Miami, Florida USA Name of Product Marketed • t Bag™ EFB System; t Bag™C22 EFB; t Pad™ Display; t Pad™ 1100; t Pad™ 1500; t Pad™ 2000; t Cam™ Cabin Surveillance System; t Manager™ EFB Communications Management Software Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • Low cost-of-ownership retrofit EFB computer and display platform suitable for most any aircraft type with high operational reliability • Software-neutral Windows™-based operating system allows the operator to decide on software applicable to their needs • Experienced Airport Moving Map integrator • Advanced EFB features: optically enhanced LCD displays, solid state components, multiple wireless connectivity options, certified ARINC 429 bus connectivity systems • Experienced Integrator with more Supplemental Type Certifications (FAA and EAS) for the navAero EFB systems than any other EFB manufacturer navAero is the industry leader in providing Electronic Flight Bag Systems to commercial airlines around the world and is the platform-of-choice for the deployment of Airport Surface Area Moving Map applications on a Class 2 EFB system. The navAero tBag™C22 is a robust yet affordable EFB that features the latest in technology and communications interfaces. navAero’s EFB systems are designed and manufactured to the highest levels and meet aerospace industry standards and are certified to all applicable sections of RTCA/DO-160E insuring high reliability. For more information, please visit: http://www.navAero.com.

Optimized Systems and Solutions (OSyS)

W: www.o-sys.com T: +1 703 889 1300 E: osysaviation@o-sys.com

Company formed...................................................................1999 Office Location............................... HQ Reston, VA; Houston, TX; San Diego, CA; Indianapolis, IN; Derby, UK; Bristol, UK; Gateshead, UK; Singapore; Qatar Name of Product Marketed • Fuel Management and Optimization; Emissions Trading Scheme MRV; Electronic Flight Bag (EFB); Asset and Equipment Health Monitoring; MRO Business and Parts Management; JetSCAN® Engine Health Monitoring Number of Modules................................................................ n/a Five Key Business/Software Areas • Fuel Management/Optimization • Emissions MRV • Electronic Flight Bag/EFB • Equipment Health Monitoring • MRO Business and Parts Management With a heritage of providing IT value-added services for the Rolls-Royce aftermarket, and delivering services commercially since 1999, Optimized Systems and Solutions (OSyS) has proven solutions for commercial aviation and defense. OSyS provides a complete range of best-in-class aviation services to enhance fleet performance and business operations. OSyS monitors more than 9,000 engines belonging to hundreds of civil aviation customers, helps meet compliance requirements with our products and services. Customers are able to increase availability of their critical assets, minimize risk and operational disruption, simplify data management to gain more value from IT investments, and improve operational efficiency.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

PACE GmbH

W: www.pace.de T: +4930293620 E: info@pace.de Company formed...................................................................1995 Office Location..........................Berlin (Germany), Seattle (USA) Name of Product Marketed • “Pacelab CI OPS, Live View, Trajectory Designer, EFB Data Recorder, Post Flight Server” Number of Modules....................................................................3 Five Key Business/Software Areas • Cost Index Operations • Fuel Efficiency Monitoring • Electronic Flight Bag • Takeoff and Landing Performance • Cabin Configuration Working with leading OEMs, engine manufacturers and airlines for more than 15 years has enabled PACE to develop a range of innovative products that directly respond to the trends and challenges of the international aviation community. PACE closely collaborates with performance engineers, senior training captains, fuel conservation and operational efficiency managers and consultants to deliver real solutions for real people. PACE’s portfolio of flight operations solutions is designed to support airlines’ universal efforts to improve their daily operations, strategic planning and operational efficiency and to offset high fuel prices and environmental demands with a more effective fuel management.

Click Here for Product Details

Click Here for Software Details

Click Here to Request Private Demo

Sheorey Digital Systems Ltd.

W: www.sds.co.in T: (+91-22) 2281 9198/ 2281 1086 E: rohit.jha@sds.co.in; vicky.sheorey@sds.co.in Company formed...................................................................1993 Office Location...........................Mumbai, Bangalore, Singapore Name of Product Marketed • ARMS®: Airline Resource Management System; ARMS® Lite: Aviation Resource Management System-Lite; InfoPrompt®: Integrated Document Management System Number of Modules....................................................................8 Five Key Business/Software Areas • Commercial Planning Sub-System (ARMS® - CPSS) / Flight Operations Sub-System (ARMS® - FOSS) • Flight Planning & Dispatch Sub-System (ARMS® - FPDS) / Crew Management Sub-System (ARMS® - CMSS) • Digital Flight Data Recorder Analysis Suite (ARMS® - DFDR-AS) / Charter Sales Manageent Sub-System (ARMS® Lite - CSMS)* • Computerized Reservation & Requisitioning Sub-System (ARMS® Lite - CRRS) • Departure/ Boarding Control Sub-System (ARMS® Lite DCSS) Sheorey Digital Systems Ltd., (SDS), is an established, fast growing, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Software Company, focused on providing Software Solutions to the Aviation Industry. ARMS® is an internet rich, current-generation, state-of-the-art Information Technology System that effectively addresses the extremely critical and cost sensitive nature of Commercial Airlines/ Air Transport operations. It is a unique combination of (a) an Enterprise Resource Planning System (ERP) (b) Decision Support System (DSS) (c) Workflow Automation Solution (WFA) (d) Executive Management Information System (EMIS) (e) Integrated Document Management System (IDMS) viz., InfoPrompt®. These cutting-edge information technologies are seamlessly interwoven to provide the civil aviation industry with a cost-effective integrated solution, which is modular, scalable & highly user-customizable. ARMS® is a robust and well-proven system..

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

Smart4Aviation

W: www.smart4aviation.aero T: +31 20 654 1824 E: info@smart4aviation.aero Company formed...................................................................2009 Office Location.............................Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Kraków, Poland; Gdansk, Poland; New Delhi, India Name of Product Marketed • Smart BRIEF, Smart BRIEF CABIN, Smart NOTAM MANAGER, Smart FUELING, Smart VIEW, Smart MET, Smart OPS, Smart DOC, Smart EFF, Smart EFB, Smart eFORMS, Smart PERFORMANCE, Smart ALERT, Smart COMM, Smart VIEW+, Smart ULD MANAGER, Smart LOAD, Smart HUB, Smart ONTIME, Smart FUEL MANAGER, Smart MISSION MANAGER Number of Modules..................................................................21 Five Key Business/Software Areas • Smart BRIEF • Smart COMM • Smart FUEL MANAGER • Smart EFB • Smart PERFORMANCE Smart4Aviation was founded to provide web based products and services to optimize, simplify and improve airline operations. The Smart4Aviation’s goal is high quality, cost-effective solutions backed up with 24/365 support service. It offers 21 modules which are interoperable, compatible and can be freely composed into the one system as well as software developed on demand, which are used with success by pilots, crew, dispatchers, ground ops and many different departments. The modules work as basic building blocks that can be used to build the system that will meet exactly customer’s requirements, that are tailored to the customer’s needs.

Click Here for Software Details Click Here to Request Private Demo

ISSUE 3 â&#x20AC;˘ AUTUMN 2011

To Build or Buy? AirAsia MRO solution dilemma

Mobile devices and wireless

Where they come from; what they do

Business analytics and process model ling

Better business through knowledge

Shop floor to regulator

A look inside manage/mÂŽ

Case Studies: AirAsia, Lufthansa Technik, Turkish Technic White Papers: CKK Solutions LLC, Aviro AB, Hexaware

Interested in IT systems for MRO? Click here to read the AircraftIT MRO eJournal.

Case Study New IT for MRO, the build or buy dilema for AirAsia Juswil Adriani, Schedule Maintenance Analyst, AirAsia

White Paper Mobile device considerations for Supply Chain, MRO and ERP Systems Byron Clemens, President / Principal Consultant, CKK Solutions LLC

Case Study The application of Wireless Sensor Network Technology to improve resource utilization and efficiency. Dr. Orkun Hasekioglu, CIO, Turkish Technic

White Paper Continuing improvement through process modelling and adaption Peder Falk, Aviation Systems Professional, Aviro AB

Case Study A look inside manage/m

Dr. Falk Kalus, Director of manage/m Division, Lufthansa Technik Maintenance International

White Paper

Business Analytics for the Airline MRO Industry

Lakshmi Narasimhan, AVP Travel & Transportation, Hexaware Technologies Sunhil Joshi, Subject Matter Expert, Hesware Technologies

Click here to subscribe for free now to reserve your copy Contact us for further details Visit: www.aircraftIT.com email: ed.haskey@aircraft-commerce.com or call +44 1403 230 700 / +44 1273 700 555

MAINTENANCE or ENGINEERING INFORMATION SYSTEMS PROBLEMS? At any given moment, over 100,000 technicians, engineers and pilots depend on InfoTrust Group solutions. With over 20 years of experience solving back office maintenance and engineering systems problems, we offer a wide range of applications and service offerings designed specifically to meet your needs: •

Widely deployed end-to-end solutions for authoring, change management, publishing and delivery

•

Services including aircraft records, technical writing, engineering, change authoring and conversion

•

Consulting, program management, hosting and outsourcing

To learn more, call us at +1 949.732.7500 or visit our website at www.infotrustgroup.com