The Uptime blog

Recently, I was drawn into a debate regarding the future of offline applications. (For my purpose, an offline application is one that continues to operate properly even when disconnected from the network.) The person I was debating took the position that offline applications will vanish within two years as Web-based and SaaS applications grow in popularity. Furthermore, they contended that current/real-time data is the only data of any real import to business. As a result, this person claimed that offline capabilities for software applications were truly unnecessary. I disagree and firmly believe that offline applications will actually flourish in the future. Using the maintenance environment as a background, I will explain why:

1. Connectivity is not pervasive. No matter how much the wireless and cable companies want us to believe that the world will be fully-connected in the not-too-distant future, a large portion of the world will remain disconnected. Whether the connection is wireless or wired, access to the network is dependent on the number of customers that will pay for it. (Anyone that has driven through a rural/remote area can tell you how unreliable the cell-phone connection can be.) Furthermore, when it comes to fixing equipment, mechanics must often work in poor conditions where network cables are unavailable and wireless is slow and/or nonexistent. (Think about weather-related outages; isn’t it funny how often networks fail at the worst time possible?) Failover is critical to customer support and so having a disconnected-mode is key to delivering services in the real world.

2. Offline processing, online storage. In all things, performance is critical and offline processing leverages the power of the workstation, providing faster results. (This is especially true when problems and solutions are unclear, requiring multiple iterations to properly identify and resolve.) Once complete, results can be uploaded/synchronized to online repositories for use by other users.

3. Backup and archiving. In any regulated industry, companies often choose to save older versions of maintenance information, which provides a snapshot to a point in time. In the case of a recall or investigation, the ability to restore or view maintenance history is invaluable.

4. Intellectual property. Offline applications allow local storage of proprietary information that must always be at hand. This is critical for collecting maintenance notes and best-practices, where user-generated content can only be understood within the context of the specific equipment configuration and service procedures that were being performed. This is also important for field engineers that service multiple clients and must guard proprietary data from exposure.

5. Connectivity costs. Unless information changes daily (hourly?) it doesn’t make sense to make online access exclusive. Given the volume of data required to service complex equipment, local/offline applications make perfect sense.
 
Enigma is not the only company to recognize the importance of offline applications. I see a trend of classic web applications developing frameworks that enable them to work in offline mode and combine desktop and internet functionality: 

1. Google Gears
2. Adobe Air
3. Ebay (Perhaps the biggest web application ever, Ebay developed a desktop/offline application for power users.)
4. Wikipedia offers DVD and offline downloading.

The issue can be further highlighted using this simple metaphor; in a world that has reliable public transportation systems, people still use cars. A sense of security and predictability are what influence companies to retain control over maintenance data through the use of offline applications. The pendulum has shifted many times from the days of mainframe computing to desktop applications, to client (fat) and server applications, and back to the web and back again. Offline and online applications have survived the test of time, each for different reasons. It appears there will always be room for both.

In response to our recent blog post titled, “The Future of Airline MRO Technology”, we received an interesting comment, which I’d like to address here. The assertions that were made in that comment have been underlined. (Please note, these are only the major points on which we disagree. Perhaps in a future blog we will address the additional disagreements as well.)

Do all OEMs make it difficult to use their data? No. The original blog post focused on Boeing and Airbus because they claim to be helping airlines by offering restricted/proprietary software solutions for a very low cost (sometimes free). Boeing and Airbus try to convince airlines that the best way to receive regular maintenance updates is to use these proprietary solutions. We disagree with this assertion. However, unless an airline is big enough to pressure Boeing and Airbus to give them usable MRO content (SGML), the only way to get it is to pay extra. Many small to medium-sized airlines have little purchasing power over Boeing and Airbus and so are forced to give away a key MRO advantage because they can’t afford the additional charges. The engine OEMs typically author their content in SGML and then publish it in PDF format. Airlines can often get the engine PDF content for free but again, they have to buy the SGML. The reason aircraft and engine OEMs obstruct access to usable MRO content is to protect their aftermarket parts and services revenue. (Airlines tell us it’s more about protecting parts revenue than service revenue but either way we’re all getting stuck with a higher bill.)

Isn’t MRO really the airline’s problem? It’s true that airlines have legal responsibility for the quality of maintenance on their aircraft but there are many examples throughout history where the responsibility and ability to comply with a law don’t go hand in hand. In this case, since the airlines have a hard time getting usable MRO content it makes compliance more difficult and drives up maintenance costs and delays. The fact is, aircraft data is so complex and so inconsistent that huge IT efforts are needed to operate an airplane safely and most of the problem is created by the OEMs trying to guard their profits against third party suppliers.

Why isn’t software-as-a-service (SaaS) the answer? If there’s an empty buzzword in aviation MRO it’s “software as a service.” Suggesting that SaaS is a superior option to fully integrated enterprise software is interesting but incorrect. Various outsourcing initiatives have been attempted over the last 20 years with the result that technicians must often rely on data that is 3-9 months old which, in some cases, results in maintenance errors, dangerous situations and costly (FAA) fines. Our customers tell us that for aviation MRO, the SaaS model has resulted in inefficiency, inconsistency and higher costs.

Many airlines modify the MRO content because they know better than the OEM how to operate and maintain their aircraft. (That’s why they’re certificated by the FAA.) The SaaS model of sending this customized information to a third party vendor, who then provides an electronic application that sits outside their network and doesn’t integrate well with all the other in-house systems is basically saying “let’s stick with the status quo.” (i.e., the stand-alone business processes used in MRO for the last 20 years should work for the next 20 years.) Airlines are trying to become more efficient and more profitable; therefore, they must integrate maintenance operations with other enterprise systems. How else can planners dynamically generate job cards? How else can inspectors use digital sign-offs? How else can engineers automatically update aircraft status and configuration? How else can technicians issue non-routine job cards (from the flight line)? Should the airlines continue doing business the way they have for the last 20 years until they go out of business?

To make a long story short, airlines are smarter than this. They understand total cost of ownership and they understand that the benefits of integrating the MRO content (manuals, IPC, job cards, COC and SB) with configuration, inventory, scheduling, etc. will create significant efficiencies in personnel, parts and uptime. The key to greater maintenance efficiency, consistency, quality, safety and compliance is access to usable MRO content. This is what is essential for the airlines’ survival.