TITAN is an EC 7th Framework project and the acronym stands for “Turnaround Integration in Trajectory and Network”. As its name suggests, TITAN is looking at ways of optimizing the turnaround process while integrating it in trajectory based, net-centric operations.
The Workshop held in Brussels on 17 March 2010 had two objectives: on the one hand it presented the project to the community and on the other it collected stakeholders’ needs and requirements in the context of the turnaround process. All the actors (airspace users, airports, ANSPs and handling companies) who would be affected by the new TITAN concept had been invited to attend the workshop and the turn-out was very good. It was therefore possible to capture their daily concerns, needs and proposals in a representative manner.
The format chosen for the workshop was that of focused brainstorming with selected facilitators making sure that the time and scope objectives were observed. As it turned out, the format was very successful and participants contributed actively in the general sessions as well as in the group sessions.
The introductory session
Work started with an introduction of the project followed by the SESAR Joint Undertaking giving an overview of their main activities in the context of turnaround and the input they expected from TITAN to fill the gaps identified in the relevant parts of the SESAR work packages.
Next, an analysis of the current situation was presented, highlighting the potential bottlenecks. An initial turnaround model was also sketched to seed and start the discussions.
The stakeholders’ needs and problems session
The introduction was followed by a “stakeholders’ needs and problems session”. Participants were divided into four groups, each equipped with a facilitator and each taking on the role of airline, airport, ANSP and ground handler respectively with the members being from the assigned area. Each group was charged with discussing the main problems, needs and gaps that existed in their particular area both in terms of their individual activities and in the interactions with others.
Group members went after the task with gusto. Their time was strictly limited to one hour but they managed to list all the issues as well as requests, proposals and even some solutions.
While the groups came up with a very wide range of issues and problems, there were also commonalities between what they provided, among them the need for better information management, avoidance of last minute changes and the proper addressing of legal/institutional issues.
The output from the groups consisted of a set of post-its containing their observations. These were then placed on a wall chart depicting the time-line of a modal turnaround process. The facilitators provided a verbal description of the results.
The possible solutions session
Next the workshop turned its attention towards defining possible solutions to the problems and issues identified. Again four groups were created but this time they were mixed so that every stakeholder area was individually represented in each of the groups. They too had one hour to discuss and develop solutions but they were also free to go back and re-discuss the problems if they wanted to.
These groups also used post-its to write up their proposed solutions which were then placed on the time-line poster in the position most appropriate for the item concerned.
Here again the range of proposals was fairly wide with, not surprisingly, some common themes like improving information management and sharing, redefining the scope of turnaround, better education about the turnaround process and the promotion of a win-win culture.
Conclusions
This workshop once again highlighted that a very large number of problems in the turnaround occur as a result of a lack of what was termed the CDM mentality and the consequent limited or non-existent sharing of information. This is a very significant message because better information sharing is only partly a matter of investing in the necessary technology. Having the right attitudes and actions (the CDM mentality) spread system wide is the real challenge and requires specially tailored effort that is not an engineering paradigm.
All participants recognized that achieving better information sharing would require investment but there was no clear agreement on who should be paying. Clearly an item to address in the coming years.
There were also legal issues involved which will need to be addressed if things are to improve sufficiently.
Participants also felt that replacing the current penalty based approach with one focused more on incentives would be a significant improvement.
It was also clear that a lot could be done to improve the situation by having an optimized passenger handling process addressing the issues encountered as passengers proceed through the airport towards the boarding gate.
There was also clear evidence that stakeholders would prefer to see an extended handling view where processes hitherto not, or not fully, considered in CDM are also included. This was paired with the clearly expressed concern about the impact of factors external to the turnaround proper, like for instance gate allocation.
One point of disagreement was the definition of the start and end of turnaround. In the end it was proposed that the start and end definition may in fact be different for the different stakeholders but the trajectory would in all cases be used to tie together all the actors and processes. This will result in a shared view of the trajectory and all the issues that may surround it and the transparency so achieved would make the start and end point of the turnaround less important as such.
And what is next?
Although a one day workshop cannot hope to capture absolutely everything that may be relevant to such a complex process involving so many partners as the turnaround, the good attendance of this workshop and the very active participation of those present ensured that the subject was discussed and explored to the maximum extent possible and sufficient guidance was provided from all areas for TITAN to start its work on a very sound basis.
The information obtained in the workshop and the knowledge available from the project partner’s’ experts will be combined to develop the TITAN deliverables in the quality expected from such an important project.
Without a doubt stakeholders attending the next workshop where results will be presented will be able to recognize their original input being used in a truly forward looking application to improve he turnaround process.
You can obtain the Workshop Report here.
1 comment