Focus on Europe

No post image

In this latest in a series of Airside International articles looking at how handling conditions and GSE usage differs across the world, we assess the particular challenges of ramp handling in Europe. The answer is complex, not least because the continent’s gateways differ so fundamentally

According to Paul Drever, network manager technical standards and compliance at Menzies Aviation, the way in which the handler’s GSE is used is pretty much the same across its worldwide network, although the standards required vary significantly according  to location. Each continent, and within them, each country has its own requirements and standards, he points out. In mainland Europe and in the UK, for example, a CE certificate is required which basically certifies that the GSE unit has been made to the European standard.

“In Europe, without the CE marking and certification, you simply cannot use the equipment,” Drever explains. Beyond this continent – in the US for instance – CE certification is not required, but the country has its own standard requirement.

Menzies’ operating procedures differ little in Europe compared to elsewhere, he informs, although the handler does have distinct Local Operating Procedures (LOPs). Thus, for instance, in Europe only pushbacks and airport vehicles are fitted with rotating beacons while, in the UK, all motorised GSE is fitted with a rotating beacon. “This is an LOP for the UK and also has to be taken into account when ordering GSE for the UK,” he remarks. However, beyond that – as far as GSE acquisition is concerned – it appears to be much less about regional issues and all about the specific airport and the particular customer. Certainly Menzies’ GSE purchases for a particular station are based on the nature of the operation at that individual airport and the customer’s own requirements, Drever informs.

Regional characteristics

One of the big advantages of European operations, perhaps, is the comparative moderation of the climate. When using GSE in very cold climes, the need for particular winter packs, different hydraulic oils and so on must be taken into account, whereas in countries where a lot of sand is an issue, additional air filter systems are required and they must be changed on a more frequent cycle. Thus, Drever, highlights: “It is important to specify for different geographical regions when purchasing GSE.”

Another advantage of operating within Europe is the quality of the labour on offer, Drever explains, although he also notes that the high cost of salaries there “has an impact”.

In terms of the quality of the facilities available, he considers: “The infrastructure at most European airports is of a good standard but there could be environmental benefits to them and the handler if they were to be able to provide for more electrical GSE.” That is an important issue in Drever’s eyes. In Europe, environmental concerns play a major role in handling operations and the way in which a handler goes about acquiring GSE – concerns that are not necessarily at the forefront of people’s minds elsewhere. “The European and UK standards of operation are of a high level and a lot of Scandinavian stations are already demanding GSE with the latest type engines fitted for (minimal) environmental impact,” he observes.

Plus: “Moving GSE from station to station where required can be a problem as what is accepted at one airport environmentally speaking may not be accepted at another. Environmental demands vary at each airport but probably the Scandinavian airports are requesting the highest levels,” he adds.

Some of the existing GSE types have problems with the latest engine models, because the ‘burn off’ needed to stop the catalyser from clogging is not reached as the GSE operates on short distance driving and the engine does not get the chance to ‘clear itself’. “Electric GSE is a good alternative but many airports – including numerous gateways in Europe – still cannot offer the infrastructure required to charge electric GSE,” Drever warns.

Congestion

At the main European and UK hubs, congestion can be a problem – especially at peak times – as each handling agent has its own fleet of equipment.

There have been discussions about pooling of GSE, but at most airports each handler shares the same peak times so all of their equipment is required to be on the ramp at the same time. Moreover, questions arise with pooling such as – Who is responsible for any damage caused? Who pays the preventive maintenance and repair costs, fuel costs, and so on? Tracking systems can be fitted to manage this to some extent, but then you need someone to manage the tracking system, Drever remarks. Nevertheless, at some airports, equipment such as buses, bag carts and dollies is supplied by the gateways and pooled for a fee.

Of course, there are few hard and fast rules covering GSE usage across all European gateways, beyond the CE requirement mentioned by Drever. Each gateway is different and handlers must cut their cloth according to where they are operating.

And while he is clearly correct in asserting that, at the macro level it can be fairly said that one of the biggest problems facing handlers at Europe’s main gateways is that of congestion, the space available to a GSE user differs widely according to the airport at which it is operating. For example, Maurizio Beni, ramp operations manager at the London Heathrow-based Azzurra Ground Handling Services, points out that many European gateways are newer than LHR and offer more space for a ramp handler to work.

“In the UK, space is limited, whereas in Europe airports have larger areas in which they operate,” Beni notes. As a result, he considers, generally more GSE is required for the mainland European operators, and “proper planning” is required if they are to operate efficiently.

At London Heathrow, one of Europe’s and the world’s busiest airports, GSE needs to be of high quality and sufficiently flexible to cope with all types of aircraft. And given the confined spaces within which a handler’s GSE must be used at a gateway such as this, equipment must be easy and quick to manoeuvre, he remarks.

Plus, another facet of a European handler’s business model must be the ability to add the very latest GSE for newly required tasking – handling the A380, for example.

Busy times: the Frankfurt experience

Another of Europe’s biggest and busiest airports is Frankfurt-Main International, Germany’s most visited and home to the national carrier, Lufthansa. Ground handling there presents many challenges, which have only increased in recent times with the opening of a new, fourth runway in October 2011 and a legal ruling to impose a night-time curfew at the gateway imposed at much the same time. Increasing capacity while decreasing the available time available to use that capacity is a sure-fire way to increase congestion and Frankfurt’s handlers have had to come to terms with peak time operations that would challenge any company.

According to Alexander Stern, managing director of Lufthansa Engineering and Operational Services (Lufthansa LEOS) – the Lufthansa Technik subsidiary that provides handling services at Düsseldorf and Munich as well as at Frankfurt-Main – there is an enormous volume of traffic through the hub during peak times and the handler has to cope with this while avoiding any significant impact on efficiency.

This is not easy, he admits. It is difficult, for example, to keep costs under control when the handler is working to such levels, while having sufficient GSE available to cope with these difficult peak times inevitably means that some of the equipment stands idle at other, less busy, times of the day. Because of this problem of resources being under-utilised at less busy times, Stern is keen on the afore-mentioned idea of ground handlers pooling their GSE resources. He thinks that it can definitely work in principle, though it is a concept that is difficult to put into action in a competitive, hectic, business environment.

A further issue for a handler such as Lufthansa LEOS, Stern confesses, is that the incredibly high work rate that must be catered to during much of the day inevitably leads to a higher frequency of aircraft damage on the apron; this means more repair and maintenance work and higher associated costs – and keeping costs down in the wake of the surge in traffic during the day has proved exceptionally difficult.

Options

But Lufthansa LEOS has the resources to cope. While at Frankfurt-Main its main responsibilities relate to crew transport and aircraft towing, at its other gateways it provides further aviation services (de-icing, for example), while as a company it has many, varied strings to its bow. Thus, for example, it provides engineering services for GSE maintenance and overhaul, not only for its own assets on site but also for those of other handlers.

As well as ground power units, air starts and the like that it owns and uses itself in its workshops, Lufthansa LEOS also provides a marketplace for new and used GSE. As such, Stern notes, Lufthansa LEOS has developed close relations with numerous GSE manufacturers over the years, the likes of Goldhofer, TLD and Denge to name just a few.

The nature of Frankfurt as an airport has an effect on the types of GSE that are procured and used there, Stern points out. Although large in total land area, space is very limited at the hub, especially at and near the gates. For a ground handler operating there that tows huge numbers of aircraft, big and small, tractors that can pull the biggest of widebodies quickly and efficiently yet can still manoeuvre in confined spaces are vital. Lufthansa LEOS is one of many handlers – not just at Frankfurt but at many other European gateways – that has looked to square this particular circle at least to some extent by providing the latest in driver assistance systems, especially ones that improve his/her situational awareness. When the handler can’t acquire exactly what it needs off-the-shelf from a manufacturer, Lufthansa LEOS can also make its own modifications in its own workshop, he informs.

Technology to the rescue?

Lufthansa LEOS is one of the many companies playing a front-and-centre role in the development of TaxiBot, the pilot-controlled tow tractor that has been developed primarily by Israel’s IAI and GSE manufacturer TLD. The hope is that TaxiBoting – using the TaxiBot vehicle to tow an aircraft to or from the runway in preference to using the aircraft’s own engines – will save significant amounts of fuel and the associated costs (primarily financial, but also environmental).

The biggest savings can be made when towing big, four-engined fuel guzzlers and at those airports where taxi distances are long and the number of take-offs and landings is large.  Thus, it seems, an airport such as Frankfurt is ideally suited to TaxiBot efficiencies, Stern muses.

The first TaxiBots are, at the time of writing, undergoing tests at Frankfurt with Lufthansa B737 training aircraft. Lufthansa LEOS is operating the equipment, and Stern is enthusiastic of the possibilities for TaxiBot, which could prove a key component of a handler’s fleet at gateways as large and as busy as Frankfurt.

The case for economic viability has not yet been completely proven – all the concrete data needed is yet to be collected and assessed, Stern warns – and TaxiBot won’t in any case prove a complete panacea for the ills of ground handlers operating at busy European gateways; but there is a good deal of excitement about the potential for such a ground-breaking piece of equipment.

Share
.