The demands placed on GSE are longstanding – severe operating conditions, for instance. Prevention of damage goes some way to reducing the burden of equipment maintenance, and stakeholders are taking this a step further as they seek to develop predictive maintenance. Megan Ramsay reports 
In 2016 Swissport International decided to take a global approach to managing its vast GSE fleet by establishing a new Global Fleet Management programme. David Burgess, vice president Global Fleet Management at the handler, explains: “It had become clear that there were aspects of fleet management that needed to be further improved so that we were able to manage our assets more effectively and most importantly to capture, manage and, in the fullness of time, reduce fleet maintenance and fuel costs.
“Our goal is to deliver safe, fit-for-purpose equipment, maximise availability, optimise resources and reduce the total cost of ownership of equipment through life.”
Swissport follows a comprehensive approach to preventive maintenance and inspection (PMI). Standard preventive maintenance comprises the periodic routine servicing of GSE, including the regular maintenance tasks recommended by manufacturers in their technical publications – such as checking or changing oils, oil filters and air filters.
The secondary aspect of PMI is technical inspection, something Swissport is increasingly focused on because, as Burgess says, “a high standard of inspection will ultimately lead to improved serviceability, less equipment breakdowns, reduced corrective maintenance and – in time – reduced maintenance costs”.
One of the numerous airports where Swissport has a presence is Washington Dulles in the US. A spokesperson for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority confirms that while the authority does not itself manage GSE operations at Dulles (Swissport and Textron are responsible for this), it does have a custom snow barn for all snow ploughs, blowers and brushes to protect them from adverse weather.
Airport Operations provides regular updates to GSE contractors and airlines, enforces policies related to GSE airfield operations, movements and safety, and works to ensure that GSE equipment is properly stowed and secured to prevent damage to facilities in severe weather.
On top of that: “Both GSE contractors have on-site facilities – and provide consolidated support services to numerous airlines operating at the airport,” the spokesperson explains. “Additionally, United has a maintenance facility and hangar on-airport, which supports many of their GSE activities.”
Elsewhere, handlers operating at airports in Greenland have to contend with extreme cold on a regular basis. A spokesperson for Greenland Airports says simply: “We purchase equipment that is adapted to our climatic condition. So the cold weather has no influence on our GSE.”
Knowledge and experience of the operating conditions guides purchasing decisions, so that any GSE is adapted for use in extremely cold weather – for instance, is capable of operating at temperatures as low as -40°C.
Normal maintenance and checks are carried out, and some de-icing is of course necessary; but vehicles are kept in warm garages during winter when they are not in use.
Some of the basic requirements of GSE maintenance in cold climates include checking tyre pressure, greasing moving parts and using winter weight oil (with a lower viscosity).
Other locations present an entirely different challenge when it comes to GSE maintenance. At Doha’s Hamad International Airport in Qatar, the local climate consists of high temperatures, humidity, sand, a high level of sun exposure and dry conditions.
Taner Ozkan, vice president of engineering at Qatar Aviation Services (QAS), explains: “These severe conditions force GSE components to work harder than normal and the rate of wear is faster. All of that, combined with the operational workload, can result in maintenance and equipment challenges.”
QAS combats these challenges in several ways. First, like airports that experience severe cold, it selects equipment designed to cope with prevailing local conditions – for instance, GSE equipped with heavy duty air, fuel and oil filtration systems.
“GSE equipped with engine or hydraulic protection systems which are activated in the event of low oil pressure, or high engine coolant temperature, or high hydraulic oil temperature, will prevent serious breakdowns due to overheating,” Ozkan adds.
Also, in order to avoid damage to the engine turbocharger – especially in hot weather conditions – operators must let the GSE engine idle before shutting it down. GSE should be equipped with an automatic engine shutdown delay system to ensure this occurs.
Second, QAS carries out daily inspections of equipment. These inspections cover coolant and hydraulic fluid levels; hydraulic, fuel, air and coolant hoses; tyres and tyre pressure (tyres wear out faster in hotter temperatures); radiators and other cooling packages (which must be clear of any debris to function properly); and engine hood inlets and outlets, where again a build-up of debris can impede airflow and lead to overheating.
Going further
A preventive maintenance strategy that combines manufacturer recommendations and practical experience of working in the local conditions is also part of the QAS approach. Performing preventive maintenance tasks thoroughly and according to the manufacturer’s checklist is critical in such a challenging climate.
QAS uses Oracle Enterprise Asset Management Software for planning and scheduling its maintenance activities, and has a comprehensive technical training module for its technicians, which also includes OEM (original equipment manufacturer) training from the handler’s GSE suppliers.
Telematics, meanwhile, play an important role in catching potential faults or defects before they develop into serious issues.
Ozkan considers: “With new machinery standards, environmental aspects, safety regulations and automation, GSE is becoming more and more complex, which requires revisiting maintenance strategies to consider more protective and predictive maintenance.
“In the past, the primary objective of maintenance was to optimise GSE availability at minimum cost. But, today, maintenance also affects all aspects of operational effectiveness and risk – safety, environmental integrity and energy efficiency. Due to this complexity the cost of maintenance has also been rising over the years.”
He believes telematic technologies, which are becoming ever more advanced and predictive, will have a major role in enabling maintenance organisations to overcome these challenges.
“Getting alerts from the GSE for part failures and maintenance alerts will give us a better understanding of what parts we will need, well ahead of actually needing them.”
Swissport, too, is working with GSE manufacturers to extend the preventive maintenance cycle of new-generation GSE. Using the ‘Maximo’ Enterprise Asset Management tool, the company captures repair data for analysis with its partner manufacturers.
The aim of this collaboration is to move towards predictive maintenance – which Burgess is confident will reduce GSE maintenance costs significantly.
Responsibility
One gateway that has an unusual approach to GSE is London Luton in the UK. The airport began to introduce GSE pooling a few years ago, with trials starting in 2015 and rollout of phase one being completed in September 2017.
Liam Bolger, head of airside at the gateway, remembers: “When we tendered in December 2015, we wanted someone to provide and maintain the equipment. We wanted to resolve the issues we had on the ramp in terms of congestion. Not doing so would have restricted our ability to continue to grow: two sets of equipment was bad enough, and with continued growth three simply wouldn’t work – so we couldn’t take on another handler as things were,” he explains.
There are potential pitfalls, though. Burgess is concerned that at its current level of maturity, GSE pooling models may not provide sufficient safeguards for the “safety integrity” of equipment, particularly motorised units, used by more than one ground service provider.
He considers: “Whilst the responsibility for routine and emergency maintenance should sit with the equipment provider, and therefore the cost, there is still a concern about where the liability lies when accidents arise from malfunctioning GSE.
“The operator is responsible for doing a pre-use check of any equipment, including pooled equipment, but quite often these operators do not have the experience to identify technical issues. In the event of an accident involving Swissport-owned equipment the liability would sit with us, but for pooled equipment that has potentially been used by multiple GSPs since the last technical inspection, it is unclear where liability would sit.”
This doesn’t seem to be a problem at Luton, however. Bolger explains: “We have a full service contract with TCR and then the handlers contract with TCR on a lease basis – which they already did before, so they are just maintaining an arrangement that was already in existence,” he goes on.
“The contract we have with TCR covers full and scheduled maintenance, and reasonable wear and tear. It also includes insurance to cover up to the first £500 of damage, and the handlers get a rebate if there is no damage. So far the damage rates have been very low.”
TCR UK invested around £250,000 (US$328,790) in a new six-bay workshop facility at Luton Airport in preparation for the pooling project, including tooling, offices, spare parts storage and staff crew room. And that spend has paid off. The company aims to ensure >98% availability of equipment, and that is “good for the partnership”, Bolger notes. TCR staff come out onto the apron early in the mornings for the first wave of flights, so they can give reactive attention in situ there and then to any equipment that needs it.
“Early morning is our busier spell and you can’t have a workshop opening at 9am when you’re flat out busy from 5am!” Bolger points out.
While the pooling model at Luton has proven successful, things were slow to begin with when it came to reporting defects with the shared equipment. “This has taken time but we are getting there now, and the telematics on the GSE ensures that reporting is very effective,” Bolger says.
Kristof Philips, general manager UK at TCR UK, agrees that pooled equipment “benefits from far lower damage rates compared to traditional leased GSE as it’s not being moved around the ramp as much.
“Whilst this doesn’t change the maintenance plan per se, it means we spend less time on damage repairs, which increases up time for the fleet and allows us to better plan our resources to concentrate on planned and corrective maintenance,” he says.
On that issue of moving shared GSE about: “People have also had to get used to not towing equipment around the airport: they used to employ staff, and have vehicles, just to tow GSE around, which was expensive.
“Before pooling, we used to get at least 40 calls a day asking us, the airport, to get one of the handlers to move some equipment – and we only had two handlers at that time. We’ve only had two or three calls like that in the last year, even though we have more equipment now than we started out with. We also carry a 10% float to cover times when equipment is being maintained and we also have spares for maintenance. TCR is very good about that.”
Luton’s GSE is kept on stand, and there is no overnight storage. In cold weather, operators turn the equipment on 15 to 20 minutes before the first flight to warm it up – and TCR staff are always on hand just in case. Moroever, TCR runs a winter preparation programme across the fleet, checking and replacing batteries, anti-freeze, anti-slip paint or tape and so on to help reduce downtime and increase safety for its customers and passengers during periods of inclement weather.
“We have various projects running to improve asset reliability and performance, such as the fitting of solar panels to assets such as passenger stairs and ASUs [air start units] which top up the batteries and reduce the number of non-starters, particularly in cold weather,” Philips says.
Plus, improved anti-corrosion treatment of the materials used to manufacture GSE (such as tread plates, sub-frames, bodywork and chassis) has helped increase the lifetime of the equipment.
Pooling GSE has certainly enabled Luton to prolong the longevity of the equipment in use at the airport. Bolger considers: “We went for a shorter contract with TCR (three years initially) because usually after a year GSE can look like it’s 10 years old. But the telematics provide accountability, so people are more interested in keeping the equipment in good shape. It’s surprised us, the handlers, TCR and the rest of the industry as well.
“If you think of a five-star hotel, there’s a certain standard of behaviour required and everyone knows that, whereas in a lesser establishment there are different expectations. What pooling has done is change the way people look at the airfield; they see that it’s managed, and that someone cares about the equipment, so their behaviour is different,” he concludes.
The potential of predictive maintenance
TCR’s Philips expects that predictive servicing “will have a large impact on the way maintenance providers operate and will reduce the amount of time spent on service compared to the historical service plan models.
“I also expect that as we see more automation in GSE, this will also reduce maintenance requirements as the equipment will be subject to less damage and utilisation levels will reduce as the equipment will only be ‘live’ whilst it’s in operation and not left idling,” he adds.
