Graduate Student Works WW Campus for Central & South America

11-2019

Correct Delay Code Assignment

Alessandro Conconi
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Anderson da Silva Serafim

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Vitor Cordeiro Silva

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Thais Vieira Haberli

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Follow this and additional works at: [Link]

Part of the Management and Operations Commons

Scholarly Commons Citation

Conconi, A., Serafim, A. d., Silva, V. C., & Haberli, T. V. (2019). Correct Delay Code Assignment. , ().
Retrieved from [Link]

This Capstone is brought to you for free and open access by the WW Campus for Central & South America at
Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Works by an authorized administrator
of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact commons@[Link].
Correct Delay Code
Assignment
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Aviation Management Program – Class of 2019
 CORRECT DELAY CODE ASSIGNMENT

by

Alessandro Conconi
Anderson da Silva Serafim
Vitor Cordeiro Silva
Thais Vieira Haberli

Capstone Project Submitted to Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Aviation Management Certificate Program

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Sao Paulo, Brazil
November 2019
 CORRECT DELAY CODE ASSIGNMENT

by

Alessandro Conconi
Anderson da Silva Serafim
Vitor Cordeiro Silva
Thais Vieira Haberli

This Capstone Project was prepared and approved under the direction of the
Group’s Capstone Project Chair, Dr. Leila Halawi
It was submitted to Embry-Riddle Aeronautical
University in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the Aviation Management
Certificate Program

Capstone Project Committee

___________________________________________
Dr. Leila Halawi
Capstone Project Chair

___________________________________________

Subject-Matter Expert

________________
11/20/2019

ii
 Acknowledgments

This Capstone Project was developed under efforts of the four members of this

group and was possible due to the support of our families and the organizations around us.

We would especially like to thank our Company, our President and Vice-Presidents,

as well as all the employees who supported and sponsored our participation at this course.

We are also grateful for Embry Riddle Aeronautical University that structured and

ministered this course. Fabio Campos, Maria Ritter, Frederico Estante, and Israel Treptow,

thank you for all your support on this journey. You were the best!

We would like to express our special appreciation and thanks to Dr. Leila Halawi

for her knowledge and time dedicated to our group project. Your availability and support

were decisive to make this project possible. You have been a tremendous mentor for us.

A special thanks to our families. Words can not express how grateful we are for all

of the sacrifices that you all have made on our behalf.

iii
 Abstract

Group: Conconi, A
Haberli, T
Serafim, A
Silva, V

Title: The Correct Delay Code Assignment

Institution: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Year: 2019

The air transport market requires high investments, has elevated risks, and low financial

return. The competition requires airlines to differentiate themselves by offering better

services. On-time Performance (OTP) is an essential service; lack of punctuality affects

company costs and revenues. An on-time company generates more satisfaction for

travelers, retaining them. Flight delays are identified and reported by airlines through delay

codes that are standardized by IATA.

A detailed and specific analysis of an airline's processes was performed to verify the quality

of delay code allocation information. It also features the complete mapping of this

company's delay code allocation processes and the current quality of the delay code

allocation information. In the analysis, comparing the same scenarios for the flights, routes,

and departure and arrival times, we found process failures, information divergences, code

allocation errors, and differences in the reasons for delays between airlines.

This study generated new proposals for improving the current processes of this airline,

ensuring data quality and integrity, process improvement. Other airlines can also use this

study to identify and improve their delay code allocation processes.

iv
Table of Contents

Page

Capstone Project Committee............................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iii

Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iv

List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vii

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... ix

Chapter

I Introduction ............................................................................................... 10

Project Definition .......................................................................... 11

Project Goals and Scope ............................................................... 17

Definitions of Terms ..................................................................... 19

List of Acronyms .......................................................................... 20

II Review of the Relevant Literature ............................................................ 22

Flight delay, cancellation and refused boarding - ANAC............. 23

Current delay code assignment practice of one Brazilian Airline 25

Culture........................................................................................... 30

III Methodology ............................................................................................. 32

Survey ........................................................................................... 33

Experimental Design ..................................................................... 35

Data source, collection, and analysis ............................................ 37

IV Data Analysis ............................................................................................ 38

Network......................................................................................... 39

v
 Delay code allocation .................................................................... 40

Delay Code analysis ...................................................................... 43

Survey Analysis ............................................................................ 44

V Recommendation of a General Policy ...................................................... 46

Recommendation to create a new department .............................. 47

Recommendation to reduce the number of delay code allocation

per flight leg .................................................................................. 50

Scenario 1...................................................................................... 52

Scenario 2...................................................................................... 53

Scenario 3...................................................................................... 53

Scenario 4...................................................................................... 54

Recommendation of a turnaround system..................................... 55

Appendix
Survey ....................................................................................................... 56

References ............................................................................................................. 59

vi
 List of Tables

Table 1 - 2018 average cost of aircraft block (taxi plus airborne) time for U.S. passenger

airlines. .............................................................................................................................. 12

Table 2 - Delay cost management by phase of flight........................................................ 13

Table 3 - Major Brazilian Airlines Delay Codes (2013-2018) ......................................... 17

Table 4 - Minimum turnaround time per aircraft model defined by one Brazilian airline 26

Table 5 - The fleet of the three major airlines in Brazil in September/2019. ................... 38

Table 6 - The fleet of the three major airlines in Brazil in January/2013. ....................... 39

Table 7 - Top 5 routes with the most significant biggest number of operations in Brazil’s

domestic network (both ways) between January/2013 thru September/2019. ................. 40

Table 8 - Top five routes with the most significant number of operations in Brazil’s

domestic network (both ways) October/2019. .................................................................. 40

Table 9 - Number of times each code was allocated for the route CGH-Congonhas to

SDU-Santos Dumont and SDU-Santos Dumont to CGH-Congonhas between 2013 and

2018................................................................................................................................... 41

Table 10 - Code allocation amount for the routes CGH-Congonhas airport to CNF-

Confins airport and SDU-Santos Dumont airport to CNF-Confins airport, between 2013

and 2018. ........................................................................................................................... 41

Table 11 - Code allocation amount for the routes CGH-Congonhas airport to BSB-

Brasília airport and BSB-Brasília airport to CGH-Congonhas airport, between 2013 and

2018. Source ANAC ......................................................................................................... 42

vii
Table 12 - Code allocation amount for the routes GRU-Guarulhos airport to POA-Porto

Alegre airport, and POA-Porto Alegre airport to GRU-Guarulhos airport, between 2013

and 2018. Source ANAC .................................................................................................. 42

Table 13 - Code allocation amount for the routes GRU-Guarulhos airport to SSA-

Salvador airport, and SSA-Salvador airport to GRU-Guarulhos airport, between 2013 and

2018. Source ANAC ......................................................................................................... 43

Table 14 - Total investment to create a new department. ............................................... 529

Table 15 - Delay code identification to allow only one delay code assignment for

different reasons. ............................................................................................................... 52

Table 16 - Delay code identification to allow two delays code assignment for three

different reasons. ............................................................................................................... 52

Table 17 - Delay code identification to allow one delay code assignment for two different

reasons............................................................................................................................. 553

Table 18 - delay code identification to allow one delay code assignment for two different

reasons............................................................................................................................... 54

viii
 List of Figures
Figure 1 - Flight main stages ............................................................................................ 22

Figure 2 - Summary of delay code assignment process .................................................... 27

Figure 3 - Actual delay code assignment of one Brazilian Airline ................................... 28

Figure 4 - New Organogram of VP Operacional and Technical ...................................... 47

ix
 Chapter I

Introduction

There are several indicators that airlines can use to measure their performance and

the quality of services offered to travelers.

One of the key indicators for the Airline Industry is On-Time Performance (OTP)

(Asif, 2013). Airlines focus on On-Time Performance (OTP), mainly due to customer

satisfaction, the need to honor the airfare contract, and the costs involved for each minute

delay (Cook, 2009).

IATA and official aviation regulators worldwide do not have consolidated data on

financial impacts due to flight delays and cancellations.

Due to the high costs involved in flight delays or cancellations, airlines need to

have the correct reason information for delays and cancellations.

Correctly identifying the reasons for the delays allows the airline to work on the

causes of the delays.

The reasons for flight delays are standardized by the IATA (International Air

Transport Association) through codes, which are called Delay Codes. Airlines use these

codes to assign the delay of a flight.

In Brazil, the ANAC (National Civil Aviation Agency) responsible for regulating

and standardizing the procedures of airlines flying in Brazil, follows the standards set by

IATA. The ANAC also determines other delay codes that are not on the IATA list.

In Brazil, airlines send to ANAC monthly the list and reasons for all flights that

have been canceled or delayed.

In Brazil, the traveler protection law requires airlines to pay travelers

compensation for any delay and flight cancellation, even when the situation is beyond the

10
control of the airlines (e.g., bad weather). ANAC Resolution 400/2016, regulates the

obligations of airlines with their travelers.

According to Mazareanu (2019), if we consider a delay of 15 minutes, which is

still considered as punctual by the consulting company OAG which supports the “Oscar”

of airline’s punctuality every year, we are talking of a cost of $ 811,530,000.00

additionally to all airlines. Due to all this, the companies should have a deep

understanding of its operation and the reasons for a delay to have a better On-Time

Performance (OTP) and reduce costs.

According to IATA data, in 2018, 4.3 billion people were transported around the

world, a total of 46.1 million flights. ([Link]

[Link]).

There are no consolidated statistics or studies in the world that measure total

delayed or canceled flights.

Project Definition

Several components can comprise the delayed costs of an airline. Cook (2009)

defines that the costs involved in flight delays may be hard and soft.

Hard costs are those that can be quantified. Examples include accommodation in

hotels, transfers, issuing a new air ticket, food, etc. "Soft" costs are those that are not

easily measured. For example, it is when the customer experiences a new service from

another airline due to flight delay or cancellation and realizes that the other company

offers excellent service. Another example is the passenger posting on social networks.

11
 According to Airlines for America (A4A), in 2018, the average cost of aircraft

block (taxi plus airborne) time for U.S. passenger airlines was $74.20 per minute, as

demonstrated in table 1.

Direct Aircraft Operating Cost

Calendar Year 2018
per Block Minute

Fuel $ 27.01

Crew – Pilots/Flight Attendants $ 23.35

Maintenance $ 11.76

Aircraft Ownership $ 9.28

Other $ 2.80

Total Direct Operating Costs $ 74.20

Table 1 - 2018 average cost of aircraft block (taxi plus airborne) time for U.S. passenger airlines.

Note: Adapted from A4A website: [Link]

Airlines have opportunities to improve the delay cost management, as illustrated

in Table 2.

Phase Description Example

Buffers in schedules: large
Resources committed at
enough to absorb
planning
Strategic tactical delays, but without over
stage: advance contingency for
compromising utilization of
delays
aircraft/crew

12
 Slot management process. Re-route: accepting/filing a
Pre-departure (Also decision point for fuel longer route to
uplift.) bring a departure slot forward

Speed/route adjustment; Change of cost

Tactical

Airborne depends on ; request to ATC for

ATC, weather, fuel uplifted change to filed plan

Re-booking delayed
Aircraft, crew, and passenger passengers.
Post-flight
delay recovery (Potential of associated ‘soft’
costs.)
Table 2 - Delay cost management by phase of flight
Note. Adapted from website

[Link]

200905_D2Y1_Cost_of_delay.pdf

To reduce flight delay, the airlines must know what is causing a delay.

The process starts with reviewing the delay codes that ideally should be assigned

properly. This review process permits the company to act on each cause delay situation

and take corrective actions.

To work precisely on the leading cause of these delays, airlines use IATA, local

regulators codes (such as ANAC), and company delay code. Once identified, the airlines

address this internally.

To standardize of delay codes, IATA publishes and recommended the delay codes

as a reference for airlines to reference. However, airlines in their processes may add other

codes of delay.

ANAC, through publication (ANAC Ordinance 791/2012), follows IATA

recommendations and standardizes delay codes following the same recommendations. It

13
also allows the airline to be able to determine more delay codes within the airline's internal

process.

The main objective of this study is to analyze whether the current delay code

allocation processes of a Brazilian airline are safe, ensuring data quality. There is a

suspicion that the allocation of the delay codes is not correct.

If delay codes do not reflect the reality of actual situations, the airline's action

plans to mitigate delays will be inefficient.

The relevance of this study is to ensure the high quality of delay data to allow

Brazilian airlines building action plans for mitigating the delay genuinely efficient and

effective.

The purpose of this study is not to focus on cost savings due to improved on-time

performance and customer satisfaction. The target is the quality of delay data analysis

that will help the airline build efficient and timely action plans with data collected

correctly.

During the review of current processes, a report may be proposed for improvement

if faults or insecurity about allocation code information or procedures.

The quality and security of the data you enter will allow this airline to work out

the real reasons for flight delays, and work to improve On-Time Performance (OTP).

In table 3, ANAC data from 2013 to 2018 show the number of delayed flights and

the reasons for the delays. According to the ANAC 791 Ordinance, ANAC (2012)

airlines report the reasons for the delays, using as reference the delay codes published by

ANAC.

Code Description Type Laram Gol Azul Total

14
 Operational Restrictions at
AR External 112.444 48.830 1.144 162.418
the Airport
ATC restriction en-route or
AT External 86.264 9.631 49.404 145.299
capacity
Aircraft rotation, late arrival
RA of aircraft from another Internal 21.192 45.537 17.103 83.832
flight or previous sector
Aircraft Rotation/Return -
Non-Penalized outbound
RI External 283 41.661 24.079 66.023
flight due to interdicted
airport
TD Aircraft defects Internal 14.623 7.162 35.478 57.263
Aircraft Rotation/Return -
Non-Penalized outbound
RM External 17.802 19.598 19.705 57.105
flight due to metheorological
conditions
MX Non specific delay – Others Internal - 28.005 19.450 47.455
Automotive and Pax Service
MA Internal 6.538 24.857 5.404 36.799
Failure
AS Mandatory security Internal 16.132 9.055 4.281 29.468
WO Departure station – Weather External 10.076 9.813 5.444 25.333
Interdicted Destination
AJ External 2.328 22.457 - 24.785
Airport
WT Destination station - Weather External 8.644 6.265 4.455 19.364
Airport Facilities, parking
AF stands, ramp congestion, External 784 9.960 2.955 13.699
buildings, gate limitations, ...
TC Aircraft Change Internal 2.792 2.459 7.845 13.096
Special test flights -
VR Internal - 1.196 8.534 9.730
Returning to origin
Alternate airport bellow
WA External 9.702 - - 9.702
meteorological minimums

15
 Flight plan, late completion
FP or change of flight External 2.148 1.349 243 3.740
documentation
AI Interdicted Origin Airport External 2.731 527 115 3.373
Fuelling, Defuelling, fuel
GF Internal 2.201 597 361 3.159
supplier
No Info No Info No Info 2.809 - - 2.809
AO Authorized Delay Internal 2.333 7 32 2.372
En route or Alternate –
WR External 6 - 2.234 2.240
Weather
Authorized Antecipation
HI Time Change - Only Internal - 1.495 - 1.495
International Flights
Delay on alternate airport -
AA External 461 866 - 1.327
Technical Demand
AG Immigration/Customs/Health External 380 385 477 1.242
Failure during flight
DF Internal 107 203 554 864
operations
Specific for special test
VE Internal - 1 621 622
flights
Removal of
WS snow/ice/water/sand from External 347 4 7 358
airport/runway
Failure during ground
DG Internal - 144 42 186
operations
De-Icing of aircraft, removal
WI Internal 43 19 90 152
of ice/snow, frost prevention
HÁ Authorized Time Change Internal - 1 62 63
Delay on alternate airport -
AM External - 45 - 45
Metheorological Conditions
Addition of flight leg due to
IR Internal - 8 18 26
returning special flight

16
 Return of flight due to
WP Internal - 1 - 1
technical order
323.170 292.138 210.137 825.445
Table 3 - Major Brazilian Airlines Delay Codes (2013-2018)
Note. Adapted from ANAC, period 2013-2018, website

[Link]

Table 3 above indicates that most of the delay codes used by Brazilian Airlines

are related to external facts. The AT code is under the responsibility of a third-party agent

and does not allow the airline to act directly on the cause. In Brazil, DECEA – Air Traffic

Control Department, which is a subdivision of the Brazilian Air Force, controls the air

traffic.

Even flying at the same airports, and having flight departures at equal times, there

is a significant divergence between the reasons for the delay.

Considering the divergence of the delay codes allocated by the airlines in Brazil,

the researchers will compare the airline network and find domestic flights in the main

airports operated by the three airlines.

Although IATA and ANAC have standardized delay codes, each airline can use

the codes differently.

We will challenge the misuse of the codes and the impacts, and present the actions

needed to mitigate future delayed flights.

17
 Due to the complexities in the identification and measurement of delays, it is

essential to carry out a careful review of the delay code allocation.

An increasingly accurate and high-quality data must be available to management

for decision-making purposes. Reliable data on the reasons for the delay are essential to

analyze the facts and factors and to define an operational improvement strategy.

Project Goals and Scope

The purpose of this study is to streamline and re-engineer the process to ensure

the right use of the delay codes.

Uncertainty about whether the delay codes are correct will leave the company

vulnerable and will not be able to act on the cause of the delays, which severely affect

airline profitability. The correct assignment of the delay codes, as well as ensuring the

correct operation of the system, allow airlines to act on the exact causes of the delays.

This would result in a significant saving in resources and costs of the delay to the airline,

crew, fuel, maintenance and fleet costs (Cook, 2009).

18
Definitions of Terms

Air carrier means a regular Brazilian or Foreign air transport companies with a valid

operating license.

Block time the total time between the aircraft engines starts work and stops work.

Cancellation the non-operation flight which was previously programmed.

Delay an operation flight which the departure time occurs after the previously

programmed.

Delay Code means the identification code to determine the reason for the delay.

Disruption means an interruption in the airport process that could cause flight

cancellation or flight delay.

External responsibility identification of the delay, it is outside the company

control.

Turnaround time means the time between the time the aircraft arrives and

the time the aircraft departs on the next flight.

Flight a journey using an aircraft to connect two cities to transport passenger.

Internal responsibility identification of the delay, it is inside the company control.

Taxi in means the period between the aircraft engines stars work and the takeoff.

Taxi out the period between the landing and the aircraft engines stops of work.

19
List of Acronyms

A0 means an operation flight that arrives on time.

A15 an operation flight that arrives delayed no more than fifteen minutes from

previously arrive programmed.

A30 an operation flight that arrives delayed at least thirty minutes from

previously arrive programmed. This code is used to identify the arrives

delayed after sixteen minutes once A15 identifies the arrives delayed until

fifteen minutes.

ABEAR Brazilian Association of Air Carriers.

ACARS Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System.

AHM Airport Handling Manual

ANAC Brazilian National Civil Aviation Agency

D0 means an operation flight that departs on time.

D15 an operation flight that departs delayed no more than fifteen minutes from

previously departs programmed.

D30 an operation flight that departures delayed at least thirty minutes from

previously departs programmed. This code is used to identify the

departures delayed after sixteen minutes once D15 identifies the departures

delay until fifteen minutes.

DECEA Airspace Control Department in Brazil

FAA Federal Aviation Administration.

IATA International Air Transport Association.

Nextor Consulting Company

OAG Consulting Company

OCC Operations Control Center

20
OTP On-Time Performance.

U.S. United State of America

21
 Chapter II

Review of the Relevant Literature

For airlines, flight delays are one of the significant challenges to be mitigated on

the operation due to several factors, such as identifying the actual cause of the delay, the

impacts of the delay on the airline networking, and the consequences of the delays for the

passengers (Sarseshiki et al., 2010).

Conceptually, a flight delay occurs when an airline flight takes off and lands later

than its scheduled time. According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the

delay occurs when it is 15 minutes later than its scheduled time. A cancellation occurs

when the airline does not operate the flight for a precise reason.

Delays occur at any stage of the airline operations, as illustrated in Fig. 1.

Figure 1 - Flight main stages

Most airlines follow the IATA coding system for meeting the requirements of

delay data reporting to aviation authorities in different counties. High-quality delay data

are essential in post-operation analysis to guide future operational and scheduling

improvements. For airlines, this data is used mostly for schedule improvements to reduce

operating costs (Truong and Wu, 2014).

In Brazil, as required by IAC 1504, airlines use the delay codes defined by ANAC

(Resolution 218).

22
 There is no recommendation or guidance from IATA or ANAC, indicating the

situations and which codes the airlines must consider defining the reason for a flight

delay.

The absence of guidance gives airlines the freedom to assign the delay code. There

is no rule or enforcement over the reasons for the delay, not even a charge from the

regulatory authorities requiring airlines to act effectively on the reasons for the delay,

reducing its occurrence.

In Brazil, as ANAC defines the compensation should be offered to passengers in

case of flight delay or cancellation, as follows.

Flight delay, cancellation and refused boarding - ANAC Resolution 400/2016

According to ANAC Resolution 400/2016, in cases of flight delays, flight

cancellations, or refused to board, passengers who attend the boarding are entitled to

receive assistance by airlines.

Assistance is gradually offered, according to the waiting time, counted from the

moment of the delay, cancellation or refused boarding, as follows:

• one hour: communications (e.g., internet, phone calls);

• two hours: catering (e.g., voucher, snacks, water);

• four hours: accommodation/lodging and transportation to and from

local accommodation facilities.

If the passengers are in their domicile, the airline may only offer transportation to

their residence and from there to the airport again.

If a flight delay exceeds 4 hours (or if the airline is already aware that the flight

will be delayed for more than 4 hours) or in cases of cancellation or refused boarding, the

airline must also offer the passenger options of rerouting or refund.

23
Passenger rights in case of more than 4 hours of delay.

If passengers are at the airport of origin:

• Receiving a full refund, including airport tax. In this case, the airline

may suspend assistance;

• Rebooking the flight to any date of your convenience, without any

cost. In this case, the airline may suspend assistance;

• Boarding on the next flight, offered by the same airline, to the same

destination, if there are seats available. The airline must offer

assistance.

If passengers are at stopover or connection airports:

• Receiving a full refund and returning to the airport of origin without

any cost. The airline must offer assistance.

• Staying at the location where the interruption occurred and receiving

a refund of the unused portion. In this case, the airline may suspend

assistance.

• Boarding on the next flight, offered by the same airline or by another

one, to the same destination, if there are seats available. The airline

must offer assistance.

• Concluding your travel by other means of transportation (bus, van,

taxi, etc.). The airline must offer assistance.

• Rebooking the flight at no cost for date and time of your convenience.

In this case, the airline may suspend assistance.

Flight delays are costly for airlines. The cost impact varies depending on the

reason and stage at which delays occur. However, compensation for passengers for delays

is not always caused by the airline (e.g., weather) increases these costs.

24
 Operation without delay will help to honor the contract between the traveler and

the airline, avoiding additional costs in case of flight delay.

To keep operations running without delay, companies must have flight delay

information entered correctly. Confidence of information will allow for solutions to the

real causes of delays.

Current delay code assignment practice of one Brazilian Airline

The ground handling department typically performs delay recording. The air

traffic control authorities and airports may also record their data for airspace/airport

capacity for monitoring purposes (IAC 1504).

For this study, we analyzed the delay code assignment process of one airline in

Brazil, as published in its internal policy (B-COV-001/2017).

The policy provides a set of information to explain the importance of the correct

assignment of the delay code. The purpose of this policy is mainly to inform the process

for the continuous improvement of On-Time Performance (OTP).

The policy emphasizes that there is an opportunity for a better evaluation of the

causes of flight delays by obtaining more details and better targeting the action plan of

each area. A different matter that the document also deals with is transparency for the

operation.

As a standard for the delay code assignment, the airline opted to allocate a

maximum of three delay codes per flight: two delay codes related to direct delays and one

related to a consequent delay.

The direct delay means that the delay occurred during the flight stages and was

not affected by the previous flight.

25
 The consequent delay means that the flight was affected by the last reason flight

why the flight departed late (e.g., the previous flight arrived late).

To calculate the direct delay of delayed flight, the airport agent needs to know the

minimum turnaround time of each aircraft. The airline used as an example in this study

considers the minimum turnaround time, as demonstrated in Table 4:

Minimum Turnaround Time - Domestic Flights

Aircraft Type ATR E90/E95 A320 A330
Turnaround time 00:30 00:30 00:40 01:35

Minimum Turnaround Time - International Flights

Aircraft Type ATR E90/E95 A320 A330
Turnaround Time 00:35 00:30 00:40 02:00
Table 4 - Minimum turnaround time per aircraft model defined by one Brazilian airline
Note: retrieved from the delay code assignment policy of one Brazilian Airline (F-CCO-

002/2019).

According to the airline general airport manual, the airline works with push back

time for on-time performance purposes and also considered when the aircraft doors

closing.

The airline classifies the delay code as follows:

D0 - Delays from 1 minute, for company control only.

D15 - Delays from 15 minutes for company control and ANAC (Brazilian

National Civil Aviation Agency).

D30 - Delays from 30 minutes to control the company, airport managers, and

INFRAERO.

Fig. 2 illustrates the process to assign the proper delay code:

26
 Delay Reason Analyze Code Disclosure

Update McWeb Sabre system

Yes? No?
Aircraft ARR delay
Assign RA code Without RA CODE

First Direct Delay Investigate the reason and delay time Assign direct delay code

Second Direct Delay Investigate the reason and delay time Assign direct delay code

Figure 2 - Summary of delay code assignment process

Note: adapted from the delay code assignment policy of one Brazilian Airline (F-CCO-
002/2019)

In the airline analyzed, the airport department is responsible for the delay codes

assignment. Airport agents are responsible for identifying the cause of the delay and

defining the appropriate delay code. Airport agent assigns the delay codes manually in

the aircraft control system only after a consensus among the various operational

departments, (B-COV-002/2017).

Part of the process aims to ensure code assignments for all delayed flights.

Identification must occur on all flights.

After 30 minutes of flight take-off, if no delay or divergence code is assigned, an

alert shall be issued by the radio station to the flight captain, who shall indicate the code.

(POP-CCO- 001/2018).

If there is no agreement on the delays between the departments, the disagreeing

operational department shall contest the delay by e-mail to the airport manager involved

in the delay. The manager evaluates the assigned delay code by changing or confirming

what was previously assigned.

Flight coordination has no action in the assignment of delays and cannot change

any assigned delay code previously entered into the system by the airport agent.

27
 • Flight coordinator monitors the flight network and the takeoff and landing
OCC time assignment into the Sabre system.

• Airport agent monitors the day of operation and determines the delay codes
Airport together with operational areas.

• Airport agent enters flight times and delay codes into the system through
Airport MC Web.

Ops • Operational departments heed or contest the delay assigned.

Dep

Figure 3 - Actual delay code assignment of one Brazilian Airline

Note: retrieved from the airline policy (B-COV-002/2017)

During the turnaround time, many activities take place between landing and

takeoff. Passengers who need to disembark from the aircraft, aircraft cleaning, scheduled

maintenance, documentation, crew change, refueling, load, and unload luggage, are few

examples of the multiple activities that that coincide. It is well-known that low-cost

carriers strongly focus on short turnaround times and an absence of turnaround buffers

(Wu, 2010).

The airline expects to operate on-time, as scheduled, except when uncontrollable

conditions and adverse weather result in delayed operations. In the case of a flight that

does not run on time, it is the responsibility of the company airport agent designee to code

it.

The aircraft arrived on time, no consequent delay of the previous flight code is

assigned. If there is a delay due to a prior flight delay, the delay code assigned is the same

as the last flight.

If the aircraft arrives late, and there is a new takeoff delay, the flight will receive

more one code. Under these conditions, there will be two codes, one from the previous

trip and one from the current flight.

28
 According to the General Airport Manual (MGA) M-APT-001/2019, the airline's

airport agent is responsible for identifying the cause of these delays and assigning the two

delay codes in the system.

Defining the cause of the delay depends on the interpretation of the airport agent.

This process is not automatic. The delay code allocation policy does not guarantee that

the allocated delay code accurately represents the event that caused the delay.

Another policy has been published by the Flight Ops to ensure pilots enter the

delay code in the logbook, which is called divergence in the delay codes assignment.

According to document RT-OPS-49/17, when there are differences in the attribution of

the delay code between the captain and company airport agent, the captain shall report

the divergence in the logbook.

According to the internal airline policy, the captain, can assign in the logbook the

delay code without debate or discuss it with airports. In this case, the delay code allocated

by both (captain and airports) may differ. It shows evidence of possible incorrect

allocation of delay codes.

Another evidence of weakness in the process is the possibility of the airline works

with push back time or doors closing for on-time performance purposes. In this case, the

interpretation of the company airport agent is free.

The other evidence of weakness in the document RT-OPS-49/17 is the captain has

the prerogative to assign the code he considers most appropriate in logbooks. In this case,

for the same delayed flight, two variables are considered.

The purpose of this study was to investigate delay code allocation to propose a

robust delay code assignment policy.

We also consider automating the entire process to provide data automatically.

29
 The departments will only develop action plans to mitigate the delays if they

receive accurate information on the reasons for the delay.

This practice is costly and time-consuming and brings the opportunity for process

improvement.

This company allowed field research to study the perception of its employees in

the areas directly involved with On-Time Performance (OTP).

Culture

Another objective of the study is to understand if there is a culture of guilt hidden.

Some studies looked at people's behavior when the culture of guilt impacted them.

“A New Perspective on Culture of Guilt: An Experimental Study” (Gorini, 2012),

“Creating a Culture Without Guilt through Medical Education: A UK Perspective”

(Elmqvist, 2016) and “Nature of Culpa in Incident Reports Patient Safety: Mixed

Methods Analysis of a National Database ”(Cooper, 2017).

In these studies, there is evidence that, although aware, most people have attitudes

to remove the cult about themselves. It is more defensive behavior.

Malone (2019), Mohammed (2014) and Dekker (2016) performed a work “Just

Culture,” the opposite of “Blame Culture.”

The goal of these researchers to understand the benefit to organizations of

implementing a culture is not to blame. Mistakes should not focus on people but on

situations.

Companies should understand that attitudes that lead to process errors or failures

are the result of unresolved issues.

Examples could be process errors, lack of proper tools, lack of training, lack of

synergy between areas, reward plan for quantitative and non-qualitative results only.

30
31
 Chapter III
Methodology

This chapter presents the methodology applied to demonstrate the divergences that

occur in delay code allocation and to propose a solution to mitigate or solve problems.

Current processes are detailed, and flow is presented to demonstrate divergences

in allocated codes between airlines.

Airlines can be more efficient if they are confident and confident in the quality of

the information presented, demonstrating the real reasons for the delays.

As Cook, Tanner, and Enaud (2010) stated, the costs of delayed flights severely

affect the profitability of the airline.

According (Ishikawa, 1989), companies should be aware of the causes that have

negative impacts on their business. For airlines, correct delay code allocation allows you

to focus on solving the problems that cause and hinder On-Time Performance (OTP).

The study focused on developing and analyzing available support information and

demonstrating possible divergences in delay code allocation.

In our study, we demonstrated the need to establish new secure delay code

allocation processes to address the possible reasons that affect On-Time Performance

(OTP).

In the analysis of ANAC data, it is possible to notice significant differences in

delay code allocation. An airline flying the same day, route, and time have different delay

codes.

In our study, we will present the following methodologies:

• Research of academic literature in an airline conducted with the teams of

Airports, Maintenance, OCC - Operational Control Center, and Pilots.

32
 • ANAC provides data showing the total number of domestic scheduled flights of

all airlines in Brazil, which gave the reasons for the delays.

• The above data is issued by ANAC and also contains relevant information such

as route flown, date, and time.

Survey

The survey we made was looking to have more evidence about the feeling of the

usage of delay codes by the people who work directly to the flight. The intention was to

understand if we are in front of a broken system in terms of confidence from users.

We conducted a field survey for one of Brazil's airlines, which flies to over 100

destinations. Approval for the survey was from the airline president.

The internal communication area guided the entire research process to ensure

compliance with compliance rules and policies.

The research was allowed for teams that are directly part of the delay codes

allocation process, which are Airports, Maintenance, OCC, and Pilots.

The survey was anonymous, could not exceed eight questions, and the answers to

the questions were multiple choice. It was also requested seven days from the beginning

of the research for completion.

The platform used for the search was from Google company. Independent forms

were created for each team to identify the outcome of each unit. The Study Group

prepared the questions and approved by the airline's communications department.

Search results were automatically generated by the Google platform that allows

extraction into the Google Sheets tool, and graphical or tabular displays the results of

each question for each area.

33
 The survey had eight questions, seven with yes or no answers, and one with an

answer: Not important; It is important; Very important.

Directors from each of the four areas held meetings with the group. The group

presented the organization Embry-Riddle, the summary content of our course, the purpose

of the work (Capstone).

Following guidance from the communication area, the survey was sent from the

area director's email to the group of people eligible to respond.

In the director's message to the team, there was a text summarizing the reason for

the survey and the direct link to the answers. Hello Crew, all right? I want to share with

you a very cool initiative led by some Crew who are finishing a course promoted by

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, the largest aviation university in the world. In the

concluding study, this group had the idea of conducting research among some areas of

our company to know a little better the level of knowledge and perception about the delay

codes used here at Azul, as well as their impacts on our operations. With this, I share

here the link of this survey and invite you to participate and help us in this data collection.

There are eight multiple-choice questions, quick to answer. The survey is anonymous and

will be available until 09/13/2019. The exemplo of link

[Link]

qF_htcw59J8L34PnA/viewform.

The group surveyed from September 6 to 13, 2019.

Because it is a large group of people, it was decided to use the stratified sampling

technique.

Three departments were sent to the leadership group because they are the

professionals who work in the allocation of the delay code.

34
 The airport director sent the survey to the managers. A total of 106 managers

received the survey, and 67 answered.

The maintenance director has sent to regional managers, base managers, and base

coordinators. A total of 205 managers and coordinators received the survey, and 175

answered.

The pilot director referred them to commanders with more than five years in the

company, and instructors with any company time. Altogether 658 pilots received the

survey, and 275 responded. The most significant number of people and with the lowest

proportion in the answers because they are professionals who are performing their

function in flight without access to the questionnaire.

The director of the OCC forwarded it to the entire department team as people

interact directly with the other three departments in the allocation of delay codes. In all,

255 people received the survey, and 167 responded.

The total number of people who participated in the survey were 1274 people, and

684 answered the questions, a total of 53.69% of the sample.

Experimental Design

The data released by ANAC, related to the delay codes of the three airlines

operating in Brazil, were consolidated and analyzed. Analysis of these data aims to

demonstrate whether there are logical reasons for code delays.

Data refer to the years 2013 to 2018 with 8,482,781 flights. In all, in this period,

5,580,134 had no delays, i.e., 71.65% operated at the scheduled time. More details on the

analysis of these data are in chapter IV.

We identified discrepancies regarding the reason for airline delay codes. Two

people in the group analyzed this study.

35
 The other suggestion and option for the aviation market is the hiring of new

technologies to support the entire system comprising the processes that can influence On-

Time Performance (OTP).

The analyzed airline requested a study, and the objective is to investigate whether

there is a need to revise the entire current delay code allocation process. The airline's

interest is to ensure the integrity of the delay code information so that the reasons for the

delay are correct. The company intends to develop new projects to improve the ideas that

present the highest delay rate.

The research allowed us to study the perception of its employees in the areas

directly involved with On-Time Performance (OTP).

The airline wants to understand through research

The drug developed the studies to understand the culture of guilt. We cite some

readings on the subject, “A New Perspective on a Culture of Guilt: An Experimental

Study” (Gorini, 2012), “Creating a Culture Without Guilt through a Medical Education:

A UK Perspective” (Elmqvist, 2016), and “ Nature of Guilt in Patient Safety Incident

Reports: Mixed Methods Analysis of a National Database ”(Cooper, 2017).

In these studies, there is evidence that, although aware, most people have attitudes

to remove the cult about themselves. It is more defensive behavior.

Malone (2019), Mohammed (2014) and Dekker (2016) performed a work “Just

Culture,” the opposite of “Blame Culture.”

The goal of these researchers to understand the benefit to organizations of

implementing a culture is not to blame. Mistakes should not focus on people but on

situations.

Companies should understand that attitudes that lead to process errors or failures

are the result of unresolved issues.

36
 Examples could be process errors, lack of proper tools, lack of training, lack of

synergy between areas, reward plan for quantitative and non-qualitative results only.

Three types of data were collected, data from the Brazilian aviation market, and

two from a Brazilian airline.

ANAC data is information from the three airlines, which are reported monthly to

ANAC. This data is publicly available.

Information is available on the ANAC website.

Data source, collection, and analysis

This study analyzed data from Airlines; Delays; Reasons for the delays identified

by the delay codes; Airports of origin and destination; Flight departure time. Data are

from 2013 to 2018.

With this information, it is possible to identify whether there is consistency in the

use of delay codes between airlines. By comparing company flights on the same route

and similar departure time, you can analyze whether the reasons for the delays are

equivalent or divergent.

37
 Chapter IV

Data Analysis

To start our analysis, proving the misallocation of delay codes, we analyzed

ANAC data among the three main airlines in Brazil: Azul, Gol, and Latam.

This data series began in 2013 when airlines had nearly the same number of

aircraft, and their network overlap is consistent to ensure they are operating at the same

airports, with a similar fleet and similar system.

We observed the same operating conditions, and they allocated a vast and different

code configuration.

Based on internal research on ANAC data, the actual fleet of three major airlines

in Brazil are:

AIRCRAFT GOL LATAM AZUL TOTAL

737-400F 0 0 2 2
737-700 22 0 0 22
737-800 95 0 0 95
737-8MAX 7 0 0 7
767-300W 0 13 0 13
777-300ER 0 10 0 10
A319 0 22 0 22
A320 0 69 1 70
A320NEO 0 4 36 40
A321 0 31 0 31
A330-200 0 0 8 8
A330-900 0 0 1 1
A350-900 0 7 0 7
ATR72-600 0 0 33 33
E190 0 0 6 6
E195 0 0 50 50
E195E2 0 0 1 1
TOTAL 124 156 138 418
NARROW-BODY 124 126 129 379
WIDE-BODY 0 30 9 39
Table 5 - The fleet of the three major airlines in Brazil in September/2019.
Source: ANAC – RAB ONLINE
Note: For Latam, we do not consider all aircraft registered in Brazil only

38
As we can see, the number of the narrow-body fleet is similar to the three airlines. In 2013
our internal research found the following numbers:

AIRCRAFT GOL LATAM AZUL TOTAL

737-700 37 0 0 37
737-800 91 0 0 91
767-300W 0 4 0 4
777-300ER 0 8 0 8
A319 0 26 0 26
A320 0 89 0 89
A321 0 10 0 10
A330-200 0 20 0 20
A340-500 0 2 0 2
E175 0 0 5 5
ATR42 0 0 9 9
ATR72-600 0 0 40 40
E190 0 0 22 22
E195 0 0 45 45
TOTAL 128 159 121 408
NARROW-BODY 128 125 121 374
WIDE-BODY 0 34 0 34
Table 6 - The fleet of the three major airlines in Brazil in January/2013.

Source: ANAC – RAB ONLINE

Note: For Latam, we do not consider all aircraft registered in Brazil only

The three airlines have almost the same number of aircraft and Narrow-Body. In

our analysis, we consider the Turbo-Prop ATR as a Narrow Body. They are smaller

aircraft compared to other planes, but for routes that we will analyze, they are not

operating.

Network

The top five routes in Brazil in the number of flights were used to compare the

delay codes each is allocating.

39
 ROUTE SUM OF FLIGHTS
CGHBSB 116,754
CGHCNF 103,035
CGHSDU 283,444
GRUPOA 99,064
GRUSSA 93,302
GRAND TOTAL 695,599
Table 7 - Top 5 routes with the most significant biggest number of operations in
Brazil’s domestic network (both ways) between January/2013 thru September/2019.
Source: SRS Analyzer – Cirium Group

SUM OF OPS/WEEK
ROUTES Azul Gol Latam Grand Total
SDUCGH 206 334 333 873
GRUPOA 90 104 147 341
CNFCGH 82 102 123 307
BSBCGH 136 162 298
GRUSSA 56 60 150 266
TOTAL 434 736 915 2,085
Table 8 - Top five routes with the most significant number of operations in Brazil’s
domestic network (both ways) October/2019.
Source: SRS Analyzer – Cirium Group
Note: During September/2019, Santos Dumont airport (SDU) passed through a major

runway novation, and in that period, the flights from Congonhas (CGH) were moved to

Galeão (GIG), so because of that we chose October as the reference to compare the

network.

Delay code allocation

Considering the fact of the narrow-body fleet is equivalent, 4 out of 5 top routes

in Brazil are operated by the three airlines. We analyzed the allocation of delay codes

informed to ANAC to understand if there is a discrepancy.

We analyzed route by route the Top 5 allocated delay codes for each airline:

40
CGH-Congonhas and SDU-Santos Dumont (both directions)
DELAY CODE GOL LATAM AZUL TOTAL
AR 6,633 11,359 17,992
RI 12,604 25 5 12,634
AJ 7,900 131 8,031
AT 1,696 5,637 4 7,337
RA 4,558 1,532 2 6,092

Table 9 - Number of times each code was allocated for the route CGH-Congonhas to
SDU-Santos Dumont and SDU-Santos Dumont to CGH-Congonhas between 2013 and
2018.
Source ANAC.
Note: Before August/2019 Azul just had weekly flights in this route

As we can see, equivalent equipment, number of flights, networks, and airlines

are allocating different delay code settings for the same route. We may observe a

discrepancy regarding the RI code when the aircraft cannot land at the destination airport

and returns to the departure airport. In our data series, Latam allocated this code only 25

times, while Gol allocated 12,604 times, which represents a difference of 50,416.00%.

CGH-Congonhas and CNF-Confins (both directions)

DELAY CODE GOL LATAM AZUL TOTAL
AR 2,922 7,167 13 10,102
HD 340 7,284 7,624
RI 3,246 15 211 3,472
AJ 2,993 79 3,072
AT 632 1,868 513 3,013
Table 10 - Code allocation amount for the routes CGH-Congonhas airport to CNF-
Confins airport and SDU-Santos Dumont airport to CNF-Confins airport, between 2013
and 2018.
Source ANAC

In this route, the most interesting difference we can see is the usage of the code

HD, which is the anticipation of the authorized departure time. Latam never used this

code, but Azul, by far, informs this anticipation for ANAC. The code AR, which is

41
operational restrictions at the airport, is also impressive because it is the biggest one, but

Azul just allocated 13 times while Latam and Gol allocated 10089 times. Also, the

difference between Gol and Latam is 245%.

CGH-Congonhas and BSB-Brasília (both directions)

DELAY CODE LATAM GOL AZUL GRAND TOTAL
AR 113,96 3,605 15,001
AJ 65 3,190 3,255
RI 9 3,188 3,197
RA 972 1,868 2,840
AT 1,991 731 2,722

Table 11 - Code allocation amount for the routes CGH-Congonhas airport to BSB-
Brasília airport and BSB-Brasília airport to CGH-Congonhas airport, between 2013 and
2018. Source ANAC
Note: Azul does not fly in the route CGH-Congonhas to BSB-Brasília airport

In this case, the major difference is in the allocation of the code RI; 35,422.00%

of difference between Latam and Gol.

GRU-Guarulhos and POA-Porto Alegre (both directions)

DELAY CODE LATAM GOL AZUL GRAND TOTAL
AR 6,258 1,870 19 8,147
HD 379 6,972 7,351
AT 1,787 345 763 2,895
RI 1 2201 393 2,595
RA 692 1,531 138 2,361
Table 12 - Code allocation amount for the routes GRU-Guarulhos airport to POA-Porto
Alegre airport, and POA-Porto Alegre airport to GRU-Guarulhos airport, between 2013
and 2018. Source ANAC

Here we have another proof of discrepancy, but we would like to bring attention

to the number of allocations on AT (Air Traffic Services – ATC). In this example, the

difference in the allocation of AT for Latam and Gol is 517%, and Latam and Azul are

234%. Considering the similarity of fleet and network is possible to conclude all three
42
airlines are subjected to the same impacts of delay on ATC because they are flying in the

same environment with equivalent fleet and network but, Latam has much more impact

on their flights than the others.’

GRU-Guarulhos and SSA-Salvador (both direction)

DELAY CODES LATAM GOL AZUL GRAND TOTAL
AR 7,913 2,239 1 10,153
RI 2 2,732 180 2,914
RA 775 1,982 96 2,853
AT 1,606 504 247 2,357
AS 1,263 474 16 1,753
Table 13 - Code allocation amount for the routes GRU-Guarulhos airport to SSA-
Salvador airport, and SSA-Salvador airport to GRU-Guarulhos airport, between 2013 and
2018. Source ANAC
In this case, we have Azul allocating just one time the code AR (restrictions at the

airport) and Latam assigning only two times the code RI (which is when the flight is

penalized due to restrictions the on destination airport due to the rotation of the aircraft

delaying the subsequent flight)

Delay Code analysis

In this initial analysis, it was not sufficient to prove the incorrect allocation of

delay codes of these three airlines.

We do not have all the information necessary to understand whether the

assignment was correct or not. The purpose of the analysis was to show that there are

significant differences in the allocation of delay codes by airlines in a similar situation.

There are situations where reduction occurs when there is no allocation of a

specific airline code. In other cases, it happens the opposite condition, the growth of the

assignment of a specific code. We can observe the HD code on the route CGH-Congonhas

Airport to CNF-Confins airport. Notably, there is something related to the strategies on

43
understanding the delays for each airline, and maybe they are different, resulting in an

information discrepant delay codes for the authority.

Inside the airlines, as we already described, is very important to the have the

information about the delay codes to act as a condition to improve the operation quality

and to save money due to the impacts of not being on-time on the operation (lost

passengers connections, extra fuel, diversions, and others).

To have more pieces of evidence of this situation, we did a survey that will be

explained in the next part.

Survey Analysis

Of all questions, question number 4 is the most important for our thesis, for almost

75% of the participants of this survey does not think the allocation of codes is correct.

This a representative number because it supports our initial thought about the wrong

assignment of delay codes. The same percentage considers the allocation of something

essential or significant for the process of understanding the delay of a flight (question 5).

Also, research has shown that people who work directly for the operation know

the delay coding process, but at the same time, 42% do not know the meaning of codes

(question 2).

Some survey respondents know the codes, but recognize that they are unfamiliar

with the meaning of the codes. Almost 93% feel responsible for On-Time Performance

(OTP) (question 3), which is a good thing. The most significant part of them understand

their roles in the operation and the impact they cause because of a delay due to their

process. Questions 6 and 7 showed us the airline is trying to work on the cause of delays.

57% of the respondents already work in a project or something to improve the On-Time

Performance (OTP). But the airline is not 100% transparent because almost 95% does not

have any information about the costs for the airline because of a delay.

44
 This kind of behavior could repel the engagement of all actors on the operation

side masking problems because of a flat knowledge of all impacts in terms of cost, stress,

lost connections, extra hours, and mainly the passenger satisfaction.

Question number 8 has almost a tie on the opinion of the usage of the codification

to act on the delay. More than half of the respondents does not believe the airline is using

the codification to act on the flights' delay. This is a big number considering the

importance of them to realize where is the cause of delays.

An interesting point here is to notice we are probably talking about a broken

system with old concepts. IATA process of coding delays is not the best solution

nowadays with all technology, which could lead us to have big data to understand each

operation of flights and the causes of delay. Reduce all the complexity of a flight to a

single code is not the best option. They do not have the desirable reliability forcing the

airline to use other sources to act on the causes of delay. This could let the airline to use

unreliable data to take decisions not acting precisely on the cause.

This situation could cause a poor choice of alternatives to have a better On-Time

Performance (OTP). An example would include enlarging the planned block time to the

aircraft arrived earlier than the expected or having a longer turnaround time to support

the delays eventually from the lasts flights. All of this reduces the utilization of the main

asset of the airline: the aircraft.

It increases the cost of taxes for the usage of the airport due to the extended turnaround

time waiting for the next flight. This could also create a problem of the rotation of planes

on the airport gates creating other potential situations that could lead to another delay in

different flights.

45
 Chapter V

Recommendation of a General Policy

The airline expects to operate on time, as scheduled, except when uncontrollable

conditions and adverse weather result in delayed operations. Nevertheless, one

controllable process provides poor data quality regarding delay code assignment. 74,7%

of the population interviewed do not believe the delay codes are being allocated correctly

based on their perception. The way Company "A" manages the delay code allocation is

by dividing all the processes into three departments. These are responsible for publishing

the processes assigned to the delay code allocation. The departments involved are flight

operations, airports, and CCO - operational control centers.

The General Airport Manual (MGA) M-APT-001/2019, which is the policy used

by airport agents of the airline, allows the interpretation of the agent to identify if the

delay occurs during the pushback or aircraft door closing. This management model

creates conflict in the conceptual identification of delays. On the other hand, the RT-

OPS-49/17 flight ops procedure allows the flight captain to allocate the delay code he/she

considers most appropriate in his logbook. This is also an official policy used by the

company. The Operational Control Center that coordinates the operation and needs real-

time information is responsible for publishing the delay code allocation policy as well.

To prevent further system breakdown and create more robust processes, the first

recommendation is to set up an independent department to handle all issues related to

delay identification, delay time, and reasons for each delayed flight. This department

needs to be responsible for publishing processes containing a general policy, philosophy,

culture, and automation to investigate and allocating delay codes correctly.

The independent department that the company chooses to handle the delay code

process needs to be responsible for identifying the correct causes transparently and

46
reliably. This department must also act independently to generate reliable data for all

areas involved with delays and rescue the reliance on the process.

The management of the delay code allocation process should be handled by only

one department and followed by all staff involved in the process. It should be published

following the airline manuals publication process. It is also recommended that the other

manuals of departments involved in delay code allocation activities refer to the general

policy.

Recommendation to create a new and independent department

As suggested in this study, there are currently three departments involved in the

delay code allocation process, being a recommendation to leave only one department.

Centralization of the delayed code allocation process requires the creation of a

new, independent department capable of managing the entire allocation code process and

control.

This new department will be managed and will be under the leadership of VP

Operational Technical, with decision-making autonomy, without interference from other

departments.

Below, describing the organizational chart of the Operational Technical VP.

Figure 4 – New Organogram of VP Operacional and Technical

47
 This new department will consist of one manager and coordinator, one senior

analyst, three Pleno analyst, and sixteen junior analysts.

The scope of activities of this new department comes down to:

• Ensure the correct allocation of delay codes considering the actual reason for the

delay;

• Monitor ground and flight activities that may reflect delays;

• Issue management reports regarding delays and causes;

• Work full time (24x7);

• The commercial workload for Manager, Senior Analyst and Full;

• The workload for Junior Analyst that allows on-call duty and full-time operation

monitoring.

Job Description

Manager: Lead the team that will take care of the allocation of delay codes; work

with operational area teams to identify potential process improvements to improve

operational performance; report the actual reasons for delays to company leadership

Senior Analyst: Generate strategic information about delays; promote technicians

to identify the causes of delays.

Pleno Analysts: Track operations to ensure codes are correct; generate reports to

the aeronautical authorities; broker potential conflicts of the operational areas when one

of the departments disputes the delay code allocation.

Junior Analysts: Enter the delay codes on the flights in operation, report any

abnormalities in service.

Although other departments perform the delay code insertion activity, the

professionals who perform this delay are also responsible for other activities.

48
 Even if this activity becomes centralized in one department, it is not possible to

transfer people to this new department, requiring the hiring of a new team.

We propose a team below to work on this activity and to ensure that operations

monitored and codes allocated online at all times. A part of the team will attend full time

and on duty.

Total
Salary People Total Taxes and Benefits Investment
Manager $3,000 1 $3,000 $2,580 $72,54
Coordinator $2,425 1 $2,425 $2,086 $58,64
Senior $1,950 1 $1,950 $1,677 $47,15
Pleno $1,375 3 $4,125 $3,548 $99,74
Junior $0,950 16 $15,200 $13,072 $367,54
Total $7,275 22 $26,700 $22,962 $645,61
Table 144 – Total investment to create a new department.

A study by the FAA-sponsored Nexton consultancy 2010 describes that, on

average, for every 1 pp loss in OTP – On-Time Performance can cost up to $ 10,000

annually for aircraft with up to 170 seats.

According to Ishikawa, 2009, the simplest and fastest way to find the root of a

problem is the concentration of activities and processes. On average, centralization allows

you to find quick solutions that can initially generate up to 15% gains by applying these

solutions.

The airline analyzed, achieved in 2018 a punctuality of 85%, and has more than

100 aircraft. Considering a total of up to 100 aircraft, and up to 15% punctuality gains,

the centralization of delay code allocation activity would enable the company to achieve

almost 86.28% punctuality in one year.

Considering Nexton's study, 1.28 pp in gain on time would result in a savings of

$ 1,270 million.

49
 Considering a conservative scenario, the payback time of this new department

would be two years.

Recommendation to reduce the number of delay code allocation per flight leg

During turnaround time, the airline's airport agent needs to make sure that all

activities are going as planned. When the aircraft engages on the bridge, the agent needs

to know if the aircraft arrived at the scheduled time and was docked at the scheduled time

or if the ground staff had the stairs ready for the disembarkation of the passengers and if

the airport buses are available in the case of aircraft parked off the bridge. The most

common activities during solo time are as follows.

• Coupling of the aircraft to the bridge.

• Door opening.

• Unloading of luggage.

• Disembarkation of passengers.

• Crew change if needed.

• Aircraft cleaning.

• Fuel supply.

• Catering for passengers and crewmembers.

• Loading of luggage and cargo.

• Boarding of passengers.

• Passenger accommodation in their seats.

• Passengers count.

• Maintenance.

• Door closing.

50
 The airline works with two conceptions of delay code types, direct delay and

consequent delay. The direct delay occurs when the aircraft lands on the scheduled time

and delays the takeoff. The consequent delay occurs when the aircraft lands delayed and

delays the takeoff without any other direct delay during the turnaround time. But, on the

same delayed flight, the airline allows assigning the maximum 3 (three) delay code per

flight, one consequent and two direct delays.

In this recommendation, the company needs to consider the maximum of two

delay codes per flight. The actual process allows three delays code per flight, and two

directs and one consequent.

The delay management process the company has adopted allows assigning three

delays code per flight, two direct delays that occur during the turnaround time and one

consequent delay of the previous flight.

In guidance should be assigned only two delays code per flight leg, only one direct

delay that occurs during the turnaround time and only one consequent delay of the

previous flight. In the case of two different delays or more during the turnaround time,

the responsible department of the last process that releases the aircraft to start the flight

operation delayed needs to be responsible for the total direct delay. And only one delay

code needs to be assigned.

Some airlines use more than one delay code to identify the causes of the delay.

Multiple codes help to broaden and detail the various reasons for delays, and to build

broad action plans to mitigate problems.

According to Wu, the practice of using multiple delay codes increases the

complexity of processes, the chances of errors, the difficulty of identifying the biggest

51
reasons for delays and increases the time it takes to elaborate and execute actions in search

of solutions. (Wu, 2016).

The relevance of this paper is to generate delay data with accurate and reliable

information. The airline will make the supported and scenario-based decisions presented

as part of the recommendations to identify all opportunities to reduce flight delay code

assignment.

Scenario 1

Only one delay code assignment for two different reasons, the previous flight

landing on time, and two direct delays occur during the turnaround time, the first delay

of 6 (six) minutes due to and another delay with 10 (ten) minutes due to boarding

passenger. In this case, the boarding passenger takes more time than maintenance. The

delay code allocation must be 10 (ten) minutes due to boarding passengers.

Turnaround Time Activities Landing delay - Min Take off new delay-Min
Coupling of the aircraft to the
0 0
bridge.
Door opening. 0 0
Unloading of luggage and cargo. 0 0
Disembarkation of passengers. 0 0
Crew change. 0 0
Aircraft cleaning. 0 0
Fuel supply. 0 0
Catering. 0 0
Loading of luggage. 0 0
Boarding of passengers. 0 10
Guest accommodation in their
0 0
seats.
Passengers count. 0 0
Maintenance 0 6
Door closing. 0 0
Push back 0 0
Table 15 - Delay code identification to allow only one delay code assignment for

different reasons.

52
Scenario 2

It is considering up to two delay codes assignment for three different reasons, the

previous flight landing with a delay of 10 (ten) minutes due to crew change, and a new

delay of 10 (ten) minutes due to maintenance. In this case, the delay code allocation

should be 10 minutes due to the crew change, and 10 (ten) minutes due to maintenance.

Although the loading time of the luggage was 6 (six) minutes handling staff releases the

aircraft first than the mechanic. The delay code allocation should be 10 minutes of crew

change due to the previous flight and 10 minutes of maintenance.

Turnaround Time Activities Landing delay Take off new delay

minutes minutes
Coupling of the aircraft to the 0 0
bridge.
Door opening. 0 0
Unloading of luggage and cargo. 0 0
Disembarkation of passengers. 0 0
Crew change. 10 0
Aircraft cleaning. 0 0
Fuel supply. 0 0
Catering. 0 0
Loading of luggage. 0 6
Boarding of passengers. 0 0
Guest accommodation in their 0 0
seats.
Passengers count. 0 0
Maintenance 0 10
Door closing. 0 0
Push back 0 0
Table 156 - delay code identification to allow two delays code assignment for three

different reasons.

Scenario 3

It is considering up to one delay code assignment for two different reasons, but in

this scenario, one consequent delay and one direct delay are the same reasons. The

previous flight landing delay with 10 (ten) minutes due to maintenance, another

53
immediate delay of 10 (ten) due to maintenance occurs. In this case, the delay code

allocation should be 20 minutes due to maintenance. It does not matter the 6 (six) minutes

delay of Loading the luggage because the handling staff completes their task before the

maintenance staff.

Turnaround Time Activities Landing delay Take off new delay

minutes minutes
Coupling of the aircraft to the 0 0
bridge.
Door opening. 0 0
Unloading of luggage and cargo. 0 0
Disembarkation of passengers. 0 0
Crew change. 0 0
Aircraft cleaning. 0 0
Fuel supply. 0 0
Catering. 0 0
Loading of luggage. 0 6
Boarding of passengers. 0 0
Guest accommodation in their 0 0
seats.
Passengers count. 0 0
Maintenance 10 10
Door closing. 0 0
Push back 0 0
Table 17 - delay code identification to allow one delay code assignment for two

different reasons.

Scenario 4

Only one delay code assignment for two different reasons, but in this scenario, the

airport agent of the airline needs to focus on the real reason for the delay. The previous

flight landing on time, and two direct delays occur during the turnaround time. The first

delay with 10 (ten) minutes due to crew change and another delay with 5 (five) minutes

that seems to be due to air traffic control. The air traffic control agent needs to rearrange

the slots to approve the takeoff because the flight was no more on time. In other words,

54
this 5 (five) minutes delay also needs to be allocated for a crew change. So, 15 (fifteen)

minutes for a crew change.

Turnaround Time Activities Landing delay Take off new delay

minutes minutes
Coupling of the aircraft to the 0 0
bridge.
Door opening. 0 0
Unloading of luggage and cargo. 0 0
Disembarkation of passengers. 0 0
Crew change. 0 10
Aircraft cleaning. 0 0
Fuel supply. 0 0
Catering. 0 0
Loading of luggage. 0 0
Boarding of passengers. 0 0
Guest accommodation in their 0 0
seats.
Passengers count. 0 0
Maintenance 0 0
Door closing. 0 0
Push back 0 5
Table 168 - delay code identification to allow one delay code assignment for two

different reasons.

Recommendation of a turnaround system

“It is well-known that low-cost carriers strongly focus on short turnaround times

and an absence of turnaround buffers” (Wu, 2010). Automating turnaround time

processes can reduce the chances of human error and conflict in identifying a delay. There

are in the market software companies offering systems to help manage the ground

handling process effectively and efficiently.

Honeywell has released an intuitive and user-friendly system, with simple-to-use

screens and graphical prompts. The service gives ground handlers a powerful mobile

application to manage every aspect of the turnaround process. The system can assist the

55
ground handler in managing the aircraft turnaround process while providing accurate,

real-time information to operations.

AIM company designed a similar system that allows the user to be analytics. Built-

in calculation services focusing on statistics, operational performance, process

performance, delay analysis. Out of the box graphical reports with drill-down capabilities.

Measure performance in real-time with, benchmark against goals, and essential

information.

The focus of this recommendation is not to show the suppliers but to present

systemic opportunities for turnaround time management and correct delay code

identification. The airline decides to select and choose suppliers that best meet their

expectations. What is wanted is for delays to be allocated correctly and for the data to

translate exactly the event causing the delay.

56
 APPENDIX
Survey

Question 1: Do you know the delay codes used by the company?

Yes 650 95.0%
No 34 5.0%
Total 684

Question 2: Do you have a deep knowledge of the meaning of each delay code?
Yes 397 58.0%
No 287 42.0%
Total 684

Question 3: Do you feel responsible for your airline’s On-Time Performance (OTP)?
Yes 631 92.3%
No 53 7.7%
Total 684

Question 4: In your perception, the delay codes are being allocated correctly?
Yes 173 25.3%
No 511 74.7%
Total 684

Question 5: In your perception how is the importance for the airline of the right code
allocation?
Not Important 166 24.3%
Important 317 46.3%
Very Important 201 29.4%
Total 684

Question 6: Does the airline already showed or informed you of the cost of a delay in a
flight?
Yes 39 5.7%
No 645 94.3%
Total 684

57
Question 7: Do you ever participate in an action plan or project intending to increase
On-Time Performance (OTP)?
Yes 391 57.2%
No 293 42.8%
Total 684

Question 8: Does the airline uses the delay code to act on the causes of delays?
Yes 321 46.9%
No 363 53.1%
Total 684

58
 References

Airlines, A. B. (2017, August 9). The policy of Assignment Delay Code. Retrieved

Intranet Internal Access October 12, 2019, from [Link]

[Link]/Biblioteca de Documentos/CCO - Centro de Controle

Operacional/COV - Coordenação de Voo/Boletim/[Link]#search=B-COV-

001/2017.

Airlines, A. B. (2017, September 30). Differences in the Assignment of the Delay Code

- Email. Retrieved Intranet Internal Access October 12, 2019, from [Link]

[Link]/Biblioteca de Documentos/FLT - Operações de Voo/OPS -

Operações/Revisões Temporárias/RT-OPS-49_17.pdf#search=RT-OPS-49/17.

Airlines, A. B. (2018, September 10). Flights without delay codes. Retrieved Intranet

Internal Access October 12, 2019, from [Link] de

Documentos/CCO - Centro de Controle Operacional/EST – Estação de Rádio/POP-

[Link]#search=POP-CCO- 001/2018.

Airlines, A. B. (2019, May 13). General Airport Manual. Retrieved Intranet Internal

Access October 12, 2019, from [Link] de

Documentos/APT - Aeroportos/Manuais/[Link]#search=M-APT-001/2019.

America, A. for. (2019, April 24). U.S. Passenger Carrier Delay Costs. Retrieved

October 12, 2019, from [Link]

s-airlines/.

59
Asif, I. (2013). Improving on-time performance and operational dependability. Special

Topic Paper for Ph.D. (Aviation) in Operations at ERAU.

Aviation Agency of Brazil, A. N. C. (2000, January 1). Flight History of National Civil

Aviation Agency of Brazil. Retrieved October 12, 2019, from

[Link]

Aviation Agency of Brazil, A. N. C. (2012, April 26). Ordinance 791/2012. Retrieved

from [Link]

2012/portaria-no-0791-sso-de-26-04-2012/@@display-file/arquivo_norma/PA2012-

[Link].

Aviation Agency of Brazil, A. N. C. (2016, December 13). Ordinance Nº 400. Retrieved

October 12, 2019, from [Link]

1/resolucoes/resolucoes-2016/resolucao-no-400-13-12-2016/@@display-

file/arquivo_norma/RA2016-0400 - [Link].

Ball, M., Barnhart, C., & Dresner, M. (2010, October). Total Delay Impact Study.

Retrieved November 16, 2019, from

[Link]

pdf.

Bond, J. (2008). The blame culture—an obstacle to improving safety. Journal of Chemical

Health & Safety, 15(2), 6-9. doi:10.1016/[Link].2007.07.002

60
Civil, D. A. (2000, January 19). Instrução de Aviação Civil - Normativa. Retrieved

October 12, 2019, from [Link]

is/iac/iac-1504/@@display-file/arquivo_norma/[Link].

Cook, A., Jovanović, R., Lawes A., Tanner, G. (2009). The cost of delay to air transport

in Europe – quantification, and management. 13th Air Transport Research Society

(ATRS) World Conference, Abu Dhabi, June 27-30, 2009. Retrieved August 20, 2019,

from [Link]

ment/200905_D2Y1_Cost_of_delay.pdf

Cook, A., Tanner, G., & Enaud, P. (2010, July 6). Quantifying Airline Delay Cost – The

Balance Between Strategic and Tactical Costs. Retrieved October 12, 2019, from

[Link]

Cooper, J., Edwards, A., Williams, H., Sheikh, A., Parry, G., Hibbert, P., . . . Carson-

Stevens, A. (2017). Nature of blame in patient safety incident reports: Mixed methods

analysis of a national database. Annals of Family Medicine, 15(5), 455-461.

doi:10.1370/afm.2123

Chow, C. K. W. (2015). On-time performance, passenger expectations, and satisfaction

in the Chinese airline industry. Journal of Air Transport Management 47 (2015) 39-47.

Dekker, S. (2016). Just culture, 2nd edition (2nd ed.) CRC Press.

Dynamic System. Transportation Journal 57.1 (2018): 24+. Business Insights:

Essentials.

61
Efthymiou M.; Njoya E. T.; Lo P. L.; Papatheodorou A.; Randall D. (2019). The Impact

of Delays on Customers’ Satisfaction: an Empirical Analysis of the British Airways On-

Time Performance at Heathrow Airport. J Aerosp Technol Manag, 11:

e0219. [Link]

Elmqvist, K. O., Rigaudy, M. T., & Vink, J. P. (2016). Creating a no-blame culture

through medical education: A UK perspective. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare,

9(1), 345-346. doi:10.2147/JMDH.S111813

Gayle, P. G.; Yimga, J. O. (2018). How much do consumers really value air travel on-

time performance, and to what extent are airlines motivated to improve their on-time

performance? Economics of Transportation 14 (2018) 31-41.

GoDirect Ground Handling Service. (n.d.). Retrieved October 3, 2019, from

[Link]

plans/ground-handling-service.

Gorini, A., Miglioretti, M., & Pravettoni, G. (2012). A new perspective on blame culture:

An experimental study. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 18(3), 671-675.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01831.x

IATA Releases 2018 Airline Safety Performance. (2019, February 21). Retrieved

October 12, 2019, from ([Link]

Ishikawa, K. (1989). Introduction to quality control. Tokyo: 3A Corporation.

62
Malone, G., & Darcy, C. (2019). Perceptions of 'just culture' - the case of aircraft

maintenance. Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability, 14(1), 48-65.

Mohammed, L. A. (2014). An analysis of students' perceptions to just culture in the

aviation industry: A study of a midwest aviation training program (case study).

Neto, D. C. (2012). Flight information and sending of electronic flight record system

data files. Retrieved July 13, 2019,

from [Link]

2012/portaria-no-0791-sso-de-26-04-2012/@@display-file/arquivo_norma/PA2012-

[Link]

Product. (2019, June 9). Retrieved October 2, 2019, from [Link]

[Link]/product/.

Sarseshiki, F., Arjroody, A.R., Zamani, K. (2010). Determination of delay factors in

domestic passenger flights using AHP technique. In: 12th World Conference for

Transportation Research (WCTR).

Suzuki, Y. (2000). The relationship between on-time performance and airline market

share: a new approach. Transportation Research Part E 36 (2000) 139-154.

Truong, T.; Mark A. F.; Hongyun C. (2018). Applications of Business Analytics in

Predicting Flight On-time Performance in a Complex and

63
Truong, T; Wu, C-L. (2014). Improving the IATA delay data coding system for

enhanced data analytics. Journal of Air Transport Management 40 (2014) 78 - 85

Yimga, J. O. (2017). Airline code-sharing and its effects on on-time performance.

Journal of Air Transport Management 58 (2017) 76 - 90.

Yimga, J. O. (2017). Airline on-time performance and its effects on consumer choice

behavior. Research in Transportation Economics 66 (2017) 12-25.

Wu, Cheng-Lung (2016). Airline Operations and Delay Management: Insights from

Airline Economics, Networks, and Strategic Schedule Planning. Routledge.

Wu, C.L. (2010). Airline Operations and Delay Management. Ashgate Publishing

Limited, Surrey.

64
2

Avenida Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 4300

Torre FL Office – CJ 616
São Paulo, SP 04552-040

+55 (11) 4410-ERAU

wweraucsa@[Link]