Predictive Intelligence & Business Disruptions – the Airport’s Dilemma
Airport operations are systemic and Heathrow’s despair had a knock on effect on other European airports. Frankfurt airport, Germany’s biggest, was clear of snow and ice but officials cancelled about 300 of 1,340 flights because of problems elsewhere in Europe. During the period of crisis, French civil aviation authorities requested airlines to reduce their flights at the two main Paris airports by 30 percent.
by Dr. Ruwantissa Abeyratne
( October 6, 2016, Montreal, Sri Lanka Guardian) The media reported on 8 August 2016 that at least 451 of Delta Airlines flights were stranded around the world, cancelled for nearly six hours and nearly half a million passengers were facing delays on Delta Airlines flights due to what a spokesman for the airline called “a major systems collapse worldwide affecting passengers trying to check-in/board.” The disruptions came at an inopportune time when Delta Airlines was riding high with a sustained reputation of on time departures and a good chance of attracting more corporate and leisure customers. Worse still, Delta joined the band of carriers, including rivals Southwest Airlines Co and American Airlines Group Inc., that have suffered flight disruptions during the past year due to data system malfunctions.
The Guardian of 17 December 2010 reported that heavy snow and ice threatened severe travel disruptions both in air transport and road transport in Britain, urging authorities to prepare for the upcoming chaos. The Guardian further reported that Gatwick Airport was monitoring the situation and if the snowfall was too severe, the runway would be closed. On 19 December The Guardian reported: “Britain remained paralysed by snow today, with airport schedules heavily disrupted, trains delayed and roads coated in black ice as the government said it would ask its chief scientific adviser whether the country was experiencing a “step change” in weather patterns. Heathrow said it would not be letting any flights land on its runway, with only a “handful” of departures taking place, piling on the misery for hundreds of stranded people who were forced to spend the night in terminals”.
From 17 December 2010 for a week or so, heavy snow and ice pounded Europe, grounding air travel across the continent and leaving thousands of passengers stranded as airports struggled to clear a backlog of flights cancelled or delayed by snowfalls. London’s Heathrow, one of the world’s busiest international airports, operated a limited schedule as one of its two runways was open and advised passengers not to travel to the airport unless their flight is confirmed. According to airport operator British Airports Authority (BAA) airlines worked to move aircraft and crew back to their normal positions as severe winter weather continued to cause disruption.
Airport operations are systemic and Heathrow’s despair had a knock on effect on other European airports. Frankfurt airport, Germany’s biggest, was clear of snow and ice but officials cancelled about 300 of 1,340 flights because of problems elsewhere in Europe. During the period of crisis, French civil aviation authorities requested airlines to reduce their flights at the two main Paris airports by 30 percent. Thousands of travellers were stranded after about 400 flights in and out of Roissy-Charles de Gaulle were scrapped, with some 30,000 travellers’ plans disrupted by the cancellations and delays. Throughout Europe hundreds of holiday flights were cancelled, as freezing rain and widespread snowfalls caused travel chaos. Repeated snowfalls stranded travellers in Ireland and Denmark and shut Dusseldorf airport in Germany for hours. Elsewhere, in the Netherlands and Spain the same problem ensued with numerous flights cancelled and passengers stranded. EUROCONTROL, Europe’s air traffic supervisory body which supports its member States to achieve safe, efficient and environmentally-friendly air traffic operations across the whole of the European region, reported that approximately 3,000 flights had been cancelled across Europe in a single day on 21 December.
Meanwhile a few days later, In John F. Kennedy International Airport, a severe snowfall effectively crippled equipment at Terminal One, which necessitated passengers on an Alitalia flight coming in from Rome to stay in the aircraft for 7 hours with no food or drink as the aerobridge could not be connected to the aircraft. In the case of Vumbaca v. Terminal One Group Association L.P decided in April 2012 by the United States District Court, E.D. New York. Vivian Vumbaca – the Plaintiff – an Italian citizen who was a permanent resident of the United States who arrived in New York during the snow storm of 26-27 December 2010 from Rome on the said Alitalia flight, alleged that she was kept locked in an aircraft on the ground without food, water, or adequate sanitary facilities for seven hours, suffering mental distress. She sued Terminal One Group Association, L.P. (TOGA), which operates Terminal One, and sought to represent similarly situated passengers claiming emotional harms resulting from negligence, false imprisonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress under her contract of carriage on the ground that Terminal One Group Association did not afford her the facility of disembarking at her destination and kept her on board the aircraft for seven hours causing her mental distress.
Predictive intelligence, or anticipatory intelligence is an essential factor in minimizing or eliminating the adverse effects of risks that threaten airports. A report released by Booz, Allen, Hamilton in August 2014 states: “Predictive intelligence combines tradecraft, big data and analytics, technology and workforce to help clients, anticipate, detect, prevent and respond to global threats and global opportunities with real time actionable insight about their environment – internally, externally, globally and socially – so that they can take action to be ready, to manage risks, to protect assets, and to thrive”. The necessity for corporate foresight stems from the continuing and rapid development of science and technology which are the drivers of social and economic change. Using these two knowledge- based and fact intensive fields, airports would be able to obtain a clear picture of challenges and opportunities confronting them. Airports are a complex, big business and their business environment is highly dynamic. Therefore, they need proactive measures to respond to the uncertainties of their business as well as a long term orientation to remain stable amidst imponderables. Airports need think tanks to mesh their technology trends and market trends to meet a growing demand for air travel. Foremost in this process is a far reaching and forward looking communications strategy as well as a good team of scientific and economic forecasters.
The first step to corporate foresight is to know what the future is going to be like by adopting a foresight-awareness culture. There are two aspects to the issue of preparedness for disruption to business at airports. The first is airport responsibility and the second is the need for corporate foresight. As regards corporate foresight, an airport has to start with a culture of corporate foresight. Emergency management is a dynamic process. Planning, though critical, is not the only component. Training, conducting drills, testing equipment and coordinating activities with the community are other important functions. More importantly, airports should work jointly, and in partnership with airlines and air navigation service providers in furthering their corporate foresight.
The author is former Senior Legal Officer at the International Civil Aviation Organization. He currently heads is own aviation consultancy company in Montreal and teaches aviation law and policy at McGill University. He is the author of 32 books and over 400 journal articles on international law which have been published in law journals worldwide. 