Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
39 CHAPTER ELEVEN PITTSBURGH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORTâPITTSBURGH JETWAY REHABILITATION FACILITY converted an abandoned US Airways cargo building into a jetway rehabilitation facility (see Figure 32). The Pittsburgh Midfield Terminal, which opened in 1992, was designed to function as a large connecting hub airport. At the time, US Airways provided the majority of connect- ing passengers. US Airways operated the hub for 10 years. But after the first bankruptcy, it reduced hubbing operations at PIT; after 3 years, the airport was completely dehubbed. Figure 33 shows the change in passenger levels. Between a peak in 2001 and 2009, Pittsburgh lost half of its total pas- sengers, half of its domestic flights, and two-thirds of its international flights. The US Airways dehubbing of PIT had a significant impact on airport revenues and facilities, and ACAA began a multiyear assessment of what airside and landside facilities were needed and would be maintained. (This effort culmi- nated in the âComprehensive Facility Requirements Studyâ prepared by Ricondo & Associates, Inc. et al. 2010.) However, the idea to create a PBB rehabilitation shop did not happen overnight but grew out of an earlier long- term plan to maintain and refurbish the 76 PBBs that were installed during construction of the Midfield Terminal. In 2000, ACAA knew that all of the PBBs had reached half of their life expectancies (20 years). The ACAA did not want AIRPORT SPONSOR AND INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS Airport Name Pittsburgh International Airport (PIT) City, State Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Airport Sponsor Allegheny County Airport Authority (ACAA) Persons Interviewed Stephanie L. Saracco, A.A.E., Chief Operating Officer Paul L. Hoback, Jr., Manager, Maintenance Administration and Planning THE SITUATION US Airways went bankrupt twice, once in August 2002 and again in September 2004. During bankruptcy proceedings, US Airways discontinued hub operations at PIT, released many skilled airline management and technical personnel, and turned over to ACAA the maintenance responsibility for its passenger boarding bridges (PBBs) and automated baggage system. This case study describes how the ACAA leveraged the capabilities of local aviation personnel and FIGURE 32 Jetway rehabilitation facility, Pittsburgh International Airport.
40 to face major overhauls or replacements simultaneously. The goal was to phase the work and capital required over time. ACAA began with an assessment of the condition of each PBB. The expectation was that maintaining the PBBs would require outside contractors and expertise. Inspections began in May 2001 and ACAA received a detailed report in Febru- ary 2002. PBB conditions were prioritized with repairs and costs divided into three types: an immediate repair, a stan- dard repair, and an upgrade to the PBB. In the midst of the PBB inspection program came the September 11 attacks, followed by US Airwaysâ first bank- ruptcy 11 months later. For Pittsburgh, it was a period of great uncertainty, and ACAA elected to delay any major repairs, overhauls, and replacements until the status of the US Airways hub operation at PIT was known. In the mean- time, ACAA transmitted the inspection reports to each air- line because it was the airlinesâ responsibility under existing operating agreements to maintain PBBs at their respective gates. Airlines were given the option to complete repairs themselves (or to subcontract the work) or to provide fund- ing to the ACAA, which in turn would package all the repairs and seek a better price on a larger scale project. However, because of the 9/11 turmoil, only the most immediate repairs were addressed. After US Airways filed its second bankruptcy in late 2004, it abandoned maintenance responsibilities for its PBBs and automated baggage system at PIT. ACAA mobi- lized an outside contractor to assume these duties. However, ACAA realized that it was paying a premium for this work and developed a plan to bring these maintenance functions in-house. To achieve economies of scale, ACAA formed a new Airline Service Maintenance (ALS) Department and took over the maintenance of all airline baggage systems and PBBs. ALS recruited many former US Airways employ- ees to work in the department and by May 2005, all regular maintenance activities for baggage systems and PBBs were handled in-house. Four years had passed since the initial inspections of the PBBs. The ALS Department began work on immediate repair items, with the highest priority going to safety. Efficiency was the second priority. Any work order that shortened the time of reduced availability of a PBB was given a higher priority. The crews also began to upgrade PBBs with newer technol- ogy. However, at the time, there was huge pressure to operate more efficiently. The ALS Department reduced utility costs and evaluated staffing levels to size the department. DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS Now that the ALS Department was up and running, the next step was to address major PBB overhauls and the purchase of new PBBs to spread out future end-of-life cycles. The original plan called for outsourcing major overhauls and the purchase of two to three bridges per year over the next 5 years. ALS staff first tackled the overhaul specifications and to do this, staff visited various PBB manufacturing facilities, including ThyssenKrupp Airport Services and JBT (for- merly known as FMC Technologies). Following these visits, ALS began to consider the possibility of doing all Pittsburgh PBB overhauls in-house with a goal of extending the life expectancy of PBBs at least another 20 years (zero-timed). The ALS Department pursued two simultaneous paths: plans to outsource major overhauls and a detailed analysis of FIGURE 33 Pittsburgh International Airport enplaned passengers, 2000â2009. (Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics T-100 Market Data.)
41 what was required to internalize this function. Labor, mate- rials needed, equipment, and cost estimates to rehabilitate passenger bridges were all considered. The analysis showed that even accounting for ALS labor rates, rehabilitation would save the ACAA 38% of the cost of a new PBB. The executive team of the ACAA approved the plan and stopped the procurement process for new PBBs until the overhaul plan was tested and proven. REUSE DECISION, BUILDING MODIFICATIONS, AND STAFFING Two years had passed. To move forward, the ALS Depart- ment needed a facility to work on jetways because major overhauls could not be done while a bridge was in place next to the terminal. In 2007, US Airways terminated the lease on its cargo building and the space reverted back to ACAA. This was the perfect facility for the PBB overhauls (see Fig- ure 34). A few minor modifications were required: ⢠Removal of older equipment used by US Airways, ⢠Reorganization of the space, ⢠Installation of 480-V electrical drops and compressed air drops, ⢠Modification of the overhead door to a 16-ft opening, ⢠Addition of an improved exhaust and ventilation sys- tem to address air-quality issues, ⢠Upgrade of the furnace, and ⢠New restrooms. The facility also needed additional tooling and equip- ment, so the ALS Department worked closely with a local fabricator to design and construct support stands and a PBB lifting mechanism. Also needed was equipment to move the PBB around the facility. ALS considered an overhead crane, but the cost to modify the building and install the crane was too large. Thinking creatively, ALS shopped around for a crane that was used to lift boats from the water and found a used Tami-Lift mobile gantry crane that had been used at a marina in Boston Harbor (Figure 35). This proved to be an excellent way to move PBBs around the facility. FIGURE 35 Tami-Lift mobile gantry crane. The other aspect of setting up the shop was to figure out the optimum crew size and specify the makeup of trades that would be required to complete individual tasks in the overhaul process. Based on site visits to other facilities, ALS estimated an initial crew that included a lead mechanic to oversee the work, another mechanic, an electrician, a painter, and two laborers. Other trades were drawn from different FIGURE 34 US Airways cargo building, Pittsburgh International Airport.
42 ACAA maintenance departments as needed. After complet- ing the first overhaul, a carpenter was added to the team. The crew of seven could complete an overhaul in 5 weeks, assuming five 8-hour days per week. INNOVATIONS TO PBBS AND PARTNERSHIP WITH JBT AEROTECH The PBB rehab crew members took great pride in their craftsmanship and began to work closely with the original manufacturer, JBT Aerotech, on safety and operational improvements to the PBBs. These included improved energy-efficient lighting, a new radius strip in the PBB rotunda that eliminates a tripping hazard, and changes in the mounting position of cameras to improve visibility of apron-level activity for operators. The crew also worked with JBT to develop kits and modifications that make bridge maintenance easier and reduce downtime. Many materials and fixtures were purchased from local vendors to decrease shipping costs and support the local economy. The ongoing working relationship with JBT continued to develop. After the first eight PBBs were overhauled, JBT was impressed with the quality of work. JBT and ACAA began discussing a partnership whereby JBT would pursue jetway rehabilitation work at other airports and deliver the PBBs to Pittsburgh; ACAA then would offload the PBB into the facility, complete the overhaul, and place the PBB back on a truck for delivery. JBT would supply all the parts, using stock and materials from regional vendors. A formal agreement between ACAA and JBT was signed in 2010. JBT will deliver bridges east of the Mississippi to the Pittsburgh Jetway Rehabilitation Facility for overhaul. ACAA is optimistic about this unique venture and oppor- tunity for a new revenue source for the airport. The venture makes it possible to use in-house staff and expertise to help other airports extend the lifetime of their passenger bridges. For PIT, the saving on PBB overhauls is considerable. OPERATIONS TODAY ACAA is now responsible for the maintenance of all PBBs at the airport. The ALS Department coordinates with the airlines and adjusts its schedule based on their needs. Regu- lar maintenance activities can take place while the bridge is hung and in place on the Airside Terminal (see Figure 36). There is no need to take it to the overhaul facility. The overhauls are planned a year in advance and coordinated with the airlines. ALS determines the schedule based on the PBB condition and discusses this with the airlines. To date, no airline has turned down ALS for overhauling one of its PBBs. When an overhaul is required, it typically impacts the airline gate for only 1 to 2 weeks because the overhaul process begins with a nonexclusive gate. Within 2 weeks, ALS replaces the airline PBB with the previous overhaul; therefore, the downtime to the gate is the time required to remove the old bridge and install a new bridgeâthe previ- ously overhauled bridge (not the time to overhaul). In other words, a particular PBB does not go back to the same jetway, but a similarly overhauled PBB in the âzero-timedâ condi- tion is installed. FIGURE 36 Truck delivery of a passenger boarding bridge for overhaul. As of fall 2010, the first two bridges from other airports had arrived. If the schedule increases sufficiently, the over- haul facility is large enough to accommodate a second track. The second track would be operational during the day shift so that managing staff can oversee both tracks. LESSONS LEARNED The Pittsburgh Jetway Rehabilitation Facility is an excellent example of ingenuity, careful planning, and reuse. There are several important takeaways from this case study. Pittsburghâs experience demonstrates that out of a major shift in the airportâs operating paradigm came innovation and entrepreneurial opportunities. The Jetway Rehabilita- tion Facility is a business that grew out of a Pittsburgh air- port initiative to reduce costs. The ACAA had the foresight to have a passenger bridge inspection and overhaul program in place prior to when US Airways discontinued hubbing operations at the airport. A willingness to explore options, to analyze and make a business plan, to employ a skilled (and available) workforce, and to continue excellent relationships with contractors made it possible for ACAA to take on main- tenance of the airportâs jet bridges and automated baggage system. What started as a cost-reduction program led to an entrepreneurial effort that continues to develop. As the Jet- way Rehabilitation Facility developed a track record, deliv- ered a quality product, and the capacity to handle steady
43 demand, ACAA entered into a publicâprivate partnership with JBT. Use of available technical expertise, skilled workforce, and local suppliers can provide both key personnel and com- munity economic benefit. The Jetway Rehabilitation Facility is an excellent instance of a difficult situation turned around. The expansion of the US Airways hub at PIT resulted in a highly skilled and experienced aviation workforce that was eliminated during US Airwayâs two bankruptcies and dehu- bbing. The PBB rehabilitation project re-engaged some of this workforce and provided an important platform to sup- port local vendors through the purchase of needed materials and products. The transition of functions from private capacity to gov- ernment capacity required time and patience. The evolution of the Pittsburgh Jetway Rehabilitation Facility took more than 5 years. During that time, ACAA enhanced its relation- ships with suppliers, contractors, and vendors and was not afraid to ask questions about how to overhaul PBBs and to explore component and process improvements. The Jetway Rehabilitation Facility was a start-up venture that began as an in-house cost-reduction program. Overhaul of its own PBBs made it possible to calibrate the staff and resources needed for each rehabilitation project and to better under- stand the economics of the business. It was this detailed experience and a good relationship with JBT that made it possible for ACAA to market this service to other airports. The commitment of the management team and staff is a key ingredient for success. The ALS Department with the support of ACAA pursued innovation, quality workmanship, lower cost, creative equipment solutions, and determination to make the venture work. That no airport had ever taken on PBB overhauls seemed to inspire and allow the team to analyze carefully, ask good questions, continually improve processes, and motivate each other.
