Karolin, I understand you played a key role in developing the Calibration functionality for the Jeppesen Crew Pairing solution. Could you explain, in simple terms, what Calibration does?
-Sure! Calibration is about strategically placing buffers where they are most needed. When airlines plan their crew pairings, they need to leave some margin—both to meet regulatory requirements and for operational feasibility. For instance, buffers are necessary to ensure crew members can connect between flights at an airport. Without these buffers, real-world disruptions, like flight delays, can ripple through the operation. A delayed incoming flight might not only affect the outgoing flight for that aircraft, but also disrupt other flights awaiting the crew from that flight.
So, Calibration essentially adds buffers to make operations more stable?
-Exactly, but adding buffers is the easy part. Airlines can usually identify areas where their plans are too tight and add buffers without needing overly complex analysis. We provide robust tools to support this, ensuring decisions are data-driven rather than rely on experience, intuition, and opinions. The real challenge lies in reducing buffers where they are excessive. Buffers, while important, are very costly. If an airline has added buffers in the past due to specific circumstances, it can be difficult to recognize later when those buffers are no longer needed. Proper allocation is critical to ensure buffers are used effectively.
Redistribution seems to be the key here. But how can you tell if you’re over-buffering? It must be tricky to spot when nothing breaks “too often.”
-Absolutely, and that’s where Calibration provides a structured approach. We use tools and methodologies to conduct what we call “relaxed runs.” In these runs, buffers are reduced, and the adjusted pairings are tested against the airline’s actually operated flight timings. This process highlights where buffers are most needed and where they can be trimmed. Calibration offers a framework for performing this analysis regularly, using historical data on typical delays to make informed, data-driven decisions.
How often do airlines use this functionality? And besides connection times, what other types of buffers are addressed?
-The buffers are utilized continuously, but the frequency of their re-tuning can vary significantly. Some airlines fine-tune their buffers every planning cycle, while others do it seasonally if their flight schedules are more stable. In case of the latter, they also use Calibration when significant changes occur mid-season. Apart from connection times, Calibration considers other buffer types, such as those for minimum rest periods, maximum flight duty periods (FDP), and maximum duty times. Similar risks apply for these—buffers might be insufficient in certain areas based on typical delay patterns, while excessive elsewhere.
Thank you! It seems indeed like addressing over-buffering has great potential for operators to improve cost control and operational robustness. Does Calibration integrate with the schedule analysis tools we discussed earlier with Mattias, and how does it align with BAM usage?
-Yes, it works combined with those capabilities as well. Additionally, I should mention that Calibration includes a business intelligence tool for follow-up. It provides reports, visualizations, and key performance indicators (KPIs) that seamlessly integrate with JCP. This greatly simplifies analysis and follow-up. It is fairly straightforward to assess the improvement potential for airlines already using JCP, should an airline consider Calibration usage.
Fantastic! Thank you, Karolin, for sharing these insights. For my final interview on JCP, I’ll need to cover also the “rosterability” of crew pairings. Who would you recommend I speak to about that?
-You should reach out to Åsa Bergström—she’s an expert on that topic.
Will do. Thanks again, Karolin!
Comments