Predictability vs Punctuality. Air Transport cognitive dissonance !

Back in March 2023 , I published the Article ”Dear Passengers, punctuality or predictability… what do you want for dinner ?”.

At that time, clear evidences already existed that, as we moved away from covid-19 effects, air transport stakeholders – special emphasis made to regulatory agencies were heading towards an utopia !

Air transport activity would resume an endless growth path ! More aircraft being ordered, more flights being scheduled, more people having access to air transport… and magic concepts and technologies being developed, to supersede the laws of physics.

Given that airspace and airport physical dimensions are limited, their integrated capacity is not limitless.

Moreover, airspace capacity increases, achieved by means of initiatives, such as reduced vertical separation, point merge and so forth, do not change the fact that flights will still need to approach, land, taxi-in and park, making use of non expandable resources, such as RWYs, TWYs, Apron, Gates, etc.

And yet, passengers remained being promised all of that would be done, targeting 100% on-time performance.

That′s an absolute cognitive dissonance – air transport stakeholders wishing to do something they know to be impossible, regardless of how many creative conops and acronyms, the industry may come up with.

As more passengers need to fly and airlines wish to increase their frequencies, to their preferred destinations, at premium times, sooner or later, PREDICTABILITY will need to become air transport′s new paradigm.

Under a realistic approach, any growing activities making use of finite resources, call for predictability as efficiency indicator.

A flight is composed of various phases – check-in, boarding, pushback, taxi-out, takeoff, cruise, approach, landing, taxi-in, arrival... before passenger may reach their objective of being somewhere at a given time. ?

While predictability may be indefinitely enhanced by means of innovative concepts and technologies, punctuality of the various flight phases will always depend of the level of demand / capacity balance, at every given time.

ICAO Doc. 9971 (2012) pointed in this direction by proposing the Collaborative Air Traffic Flow Management, deliberately (and predictably) holding flights on the ground, whenever demand exceeded capacity – that was the GDP (Ground Delay Program), rejected at regions still attached to the 100% door close punctuality utopia, no matter how much fuel would be wasted, before passengers could finally reach their only goal – disembark at the destination.

Last but not least, important capacity improvements have been promoted by ATC en-route and within the maneuvering area (RWYs/TWYs). Likewise, innovative processes and technologies helped airport operators to increase passenger/baggage/cargo processing capacity.

But who owns the Apron (non-movement area, in US) ?

Who is in charge of ensuring capacity increases achieved, airborne and at passenger terminals will not be simply jeopardized in between, with aircraft, vehicles and ground staff randomly moving, within an airport zone, managed by no one, in blind mode ? That′s a question which has not been answered yet, at some regions, such as Latin America.?

So, 18 months have gone since my Article on Predictability vs Punctuality, but it seems air transport decision makers are still stuck to the cognitive dissonance of wishing the impossible!

And the dream becomes a nightmare when passengers sue airlines in court, for not delivering the promised level of on-time performance !

Passengers don′t expect airlines to waste fuel (and damage the environment), just to get them onboard, as scheduled.

All they want to know, sooner rater than later, is what time they will be at their destination !