Low maintenance

Question: How can you maintain your aircraft for less?

Expert: IBA Group business development manager David Rushe

As with many high-profile air crashes, the Air France A330 crash off the coast of Brazil will have raised questions about the operational safety procedures within airline maintenance facilities. In the current downturn airlines are striving to reduce running costs and this certainly applies to the maintenance of aircraft. There are undoubtedly trends developing that lead to diverse patterns of MRO activity. The principal drivers in choosing an MRO facility are cost, quality, expertise on type, availability of slots and location.

Typical hourly rates for heavy check activities can range from US$50 to $80 per man hour, therefore operators have an impetus to shop around for different providers. The reputation of the facility is a key component and operators will often pay higher hourly rates for heavy checks in order to ensure minimum difficulties, and a smooth return of the aircraft and technical records.

Sourcing expertise on type is particularly prevalent now as many aircraft are coming up to their first 12 year check, e.g. late 1990’s Boeing 777s and the 737 Next Generation (NG) family. There may be a trend for operators to go to airline MRO subsidiaries such as BA Engineering or Air France/KLM Engineering for expertise on the Boeing 777 for instance. Indeed, AF/KLM has a market share of 14% for 777 MRO work.

Airlines are warned that finding available slots to meet with the 777 and 737NG requirements over the next few years may be difficult. Recent conversations with a well-known Irish MRO reveal that, nowadays, airlines are often relaxed about the time aircraft spend in an MRO as many face over-capacity issues. Of course, MROs want to maximise productivity and get the aircraft turned around as efficiently as possible.

Then we come to the issue of location. Ferry flights can be an expensive logistical operation so airlines will want to ensure this cost is kept to a minimum. Recently, with the increasing numbers of aircraft being parked, airlines will wish to ensure that storage locations have the requisite onsite continuing airworthiness capabilities. IBA has seen instances where the language in documentation i.e. technical records, has proven to be a huge barrier in MRO facilities. This is a factor that must be taken into account when contracting an MRO facility in another location.

The advent of the low-cost carrier has had the knock on effect that all carriers are looking to reduce turn around times (TAT). Ryanair, for instance, operates a 25 minute turnaround time, helped by disembarking and boarding passengers at the front and rear of the aircraft and operating from airports with less congestion, while relying on the efficiency of ground handling staff. In some cases reducing TAT can increase the daily utilisation of a short-haul aircraft by up to 10% and improved onboard diagnostics also enable line maintenance staff to anticipate problems during the turnaround period. IBA has recently published a full article on this subject in our quarterly ‘Maintenance Cost Journal’.

Recent industry data suggests that just 6.5% of all European-based wide body aircraft are maintained by the airline themselves. This illustrates the preference that clearly exists for cost savings from an outsourced maintenance function. In order to ensure that MROs are completing procedures in the safest possible manner, it is imperative that the airline places a representative at the facility to oversee any work carried out and ensure all processes are in line with manufacturer directives. Wide body aircraft have the advantage that they can be shipped for longer distances to take advantage of less expensive maintenance facilities, whereas airlines will try and avoid sending narrow body aircraft to distant MROs that will require expensive refuelling costs.

As consolidation, strategic alliances and mergers become practical and in many cases, necessary, it is extremely important that the airlines involved form a fully coherent and seamless maintenance department. Air France/KLM Engineering is an example of such a successful transition.

The reality for operators in the current climate is that lessors who may not be able to place aircraft immediately following the end of a lease period, will be paying close attention to lease return conditions. Operators must ensure that technical records are in order so as to prevent the possibility of late penalties. Naturally safety will be of prime concern to the lessor and local authority to ensure the airworthiness and commercial operation of the aircraft. Effective and regular monitoring of the aircraft and documentation by all parties concerned will ensure the utilisation of the aircraft is maximised.

Print | Email | Discuss this article

| Share |

READERS' COMMENTS

Click here to post a comment

Add your Comment All posts are sent to the administrator for review and are published only after approval. ArabianBusiness.com reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Arabian Business would like to point out that only comments relevant to the story will be published. Any containing personal insults or inappropriate language will not be approved.
Name *
Remember me on this computer
Email *	(Your email address will not be published)
City
Country
Subject *
Comment *
Notify me of further comments
Enter the words above *
Please click post only once - your comment will not be published immediately.

MORE FROM ARABIANBUSINESS.COM