Most delays in the air transport occur at the airport. A particular reason is the complexity of managing the large number of supporting flows in airport logistics. We consider the optimisation problem of scheduling de-icing vehicles that is one of the key supporting logistic flows in the turn-around process of aircraft. The objective is to minimise the delay of flights due to de-icing, and the travel distance of the de-icing vehicles. We study the complexity of the problem, and develop a solution algorithm using greedy randomised adaptive search. A case study of real-life data from Stockholm Arlanda Airport shows that optimised schedule leads to significantly better performance in comparison to intuitive and simple scheduling strategies. The benefit of optimisation in reducing the waiting time for de-icing is further demonstrated via dynamic simulations.

Despite various planning efforts, airspace capacity can sometimes be exceeded, typically because of disruptive events. Air traffic flow management (ATFM) is the process of managing flights in this situation. In this paper, we present an ATFM model that accounts for different rerouting options (path rerouting and diversion) and preexisting en route flights. The model proposes having a central authority to control all decisions, which is then compared with current practice. We also consider interflight and interairline fairness measures in the network. We use an exact approach to solve small- to medium-sized instances, and we propose a modified fix-and-relax heuristic to solve large-sized instances. Allowing a central authority to control all decisions increases network efficiency compared with the case where the ATFM authority and airlines control decisions independently. Our experiments show that including different rerouting options in ATFM can help reduce delays by up to 8% and cancellations by up to 23%. Moreover, ground delay cost has much more impact on network decisions than air delay cost, and network decisions are insensitive to changes in diversion cost. Furthermore, the analysis of the tradeoff between total network cost and overtaking cost shows that adding costs for overtaking can significantly improve fairness at only a small increase in total system cost. A balanced total cost per flight among airlines can be achieved at a small increase in the network cost (0.2%–3.0%) when imposing airline fairness. In conclusion, the comprehensiveness of the model makes it useful for analyzing a wide range of alternatives for efficient ATFM.