Safety First, Schedule Second: Rethinking OTP in Airline Operations

By Capt Santosh Kumar Tripathi

In the theatre of airline operations, On-Time Performance (OTP) is the ever-watchful critic, stopwatch in hand, eager to applaud or frown. Boarding becomes a choreography of rolling suitcases, impatient beeps from scanners, and cabin crew politely urging, “We’ll have plenty of time to chat once we’re airborne!” Pilots eye their watches, ground staff hustle like a well-rehearsed pit crew, and passengers wonder if the aircraft might just take off without them.

But sometimes, just as the stage is set for a flawless on-time departure, the spotlight swings to a minor technical snag; a light that shouldn’t be on, a gauge reading that begs for a second look. The clock may not be impressed, but safety is. After all, in aviation, arriving a few minutes late is an inconvenience; departing with doubt is a gamble no one should take.

The OTP Obsession: The Industry’s Unyielding Focus

On-Time Performance (OTP) has evolved into one of the most scrutinised benchmarks in the airline industry; often treated as a shorthand for efficiency, reliability, and even brand reputation. By definition, OTP measures the percentage of flights departing or arriving within 15 minutes of their scheduled time, and in many competitive markets, carriers proudly advertise figures exceeding 85–90% as proof of operational excellence.

The drive for high OTP is fuelled by a mix of factors: fierce competition in price-sensitive markets, passengers’ growing intolerance for delays, and, in some regions, regulatory audits that publicly rank airlines by punctuality. In India, for example, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) publishes monthly OTP data for major airports, effectively pitting carriers against one another in the court of public opinion. A dip of even a few percentage points can translate into lost market share or a dent in customer perception.

But this relentless chase for punctuality comes at a cost. In the push to keep schedules immaculate, ground operations can be compressed to razor-thin margins. Boarding is hurried, catering and refuelling are expedited, and crew checklists — while rarely skipped; are sometimes completed under palpable time pressure. This time compression elevates the risk of human error, particularly in critical safety tasks such as walk-around inspections, system checks, or cross-verification of flight plans.

Operational ripple effects compound the problem. Modern airline schedules operate as tightly interlocked networks, where the delay of one flight can cascade into missed connections, aircraft rotation disruptions, and crew duty time violations across multiple sectors. A single late departure during peak hours can disrupt dozens of onward flights in the same day. This network sensitivity means operational managers often feel intense pressure to prioritise OTP; sometimes subconsciously weighing it against less visible but equally critical safety margins.

Industry data underscores the balancing act. While ICAO and IATA stress that safety must remain the “non-negotiable cornerstone” of aviation, the fact remains that the top five airlines globally by OTP in 2024; as tracked by OAG, also operate some of the most compressed turnaround schedules in the world, with turnaround times as low as 25–30 minutes for narrowbody aircraft. That efficiency is impressive, but it leaves little room for the unexpected — and in aviation, the unexpected is inevitable.

Safety vs. Schedule: When Minutes Can Cost More Than Money

In the best-run airline operations, safety and schedule discipline should work hand-in-hand. Yet, history shows that when the scales tip too far toward punctuality, the results can be costly; not just in delays, but in safety margins.

Several incidents in recent decades have been traced back, at least in part, to operational haste. A notable example is the 2008 Spanair Flight 5022 accident in Madrid, where a combination of procedural lapses and inadequate checklist discipline; partly under the shadow of schedule pressure, contributed to a fatal take-off configuration error. While OTP was never cited as the sole factor, the compressed turnaround and rushed decision-making created conditions in which critical errors went unnoticed.

In India, DGCA’s own safety audits have repeatedly flagged “shortened or incomplete” pre-flight inspections during peak hours, often linked to the pressure of avoiding OTP penalties and customer complaints. Flight safety officers in multiple airlines acknowledge, off the record, that certain minor technical discrepancies are sometimes deferred; perfectly legal under the Minimum Equipment List (MEL), but primarily to prevent schedule slippage rather than because the deferral is operationally optimal.

Even subtle psychological pressure matters. Research from NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) indicates that pilots under tight departure deadlines are more likely to exhibit “decision narrowing”; focusing on a single goal (departure on time) at the expense of a broader safety assessment. This cognitive bias is particularly risky in time-critical situations such as technical troubleshooting, adverse weather decision-making, or last-minute runway changes.

Global regulators have consistently emphasised that safety is the industry’s “immovable priority.” ICAO’s Annex 19 on Safety Management explicitly warns against operational targets; such as punctuality metrics, that may create “latent conditions” for unsafe acts. Yet in many airline control rooms, the live OTP dashboard still looms as large as the safety board, and managers are judged daily on its colour codes.

The takeaway is clear: A five-minute delay may inconvenience passengers, but a lapse in safety can cost lives, reputations, and millions in losses. The industry must resist the subtle slide into equating an on-time departure with a “job well done” unless it’s accompanied by the quiet confirmation that every safety gate has been fully secured.

How OTP Pressure Manifests in Indian Airline Operations

Our industry-wide obsession with On-Time Performance (OTP) doesn’t just remain a corporate scorecard; it filters down into every layer of airline operations, including the cockpit. In India, this pressure takes on a tangibly serious hue.

In recent audits, the DGCA identified 263 safety and compliance lapses across eight domestic carriers. Notably, Air India recorded 93 of these findings, including seven Level 1 violations; classified as direct threats to flight safety. These lapses occurred alongside CEO warnings for repeated pilot duty-time violations, where flights exceeded the legal 10-hour limit on long-haul sectors, reflecting a direct clash between schedule fidelity and regulatory compliance.

Hot on the heels of a fatal 787 crash near Ahmedabad in June, investigations uncovered further compliance breakdowns; overdue inspections of emergency slides and delayed equipment checks, leading to the grounding of affected aircraft.

In another sign of mounting concern, the DGCA has issued four show-cause notices over 29 safety-related violations at Air India. These included breaches in crew rest norms, use of unapproved simulators, and failure to assess route risks; cornerstones of both operational safety and pilot readiness.

These pressures; born of compressed turnarounds and networked scheduling, create a potent tension: organizational goals to protect OTP, or the pilot’s obligation to not compromise safety. With systemic lapses now drawing regulatory punishment and public scrutiny, it’s clear: the cockpits of our airlines cannot afford to view punctuality and safety as competing priorities.

Lessons from Military Aviation: Timing Yields to Safety

Military aviation, despite its high-risk and time-sensitive missions, never sacrifices safety-critical steps to meet schedules. Consider a training sortie in the 1980s involving an Indian Air Force pilot operating with a Soviet counterpart—despite multiple delays for weather and technical checks, the mission prioritized safety. When engine trouble surfaced at low altitude, an emergency ejection was executed successfully, underscoring the uncompromising safety culture even under operational pressure.

This contrasts with civil operations where OTP pressures may encourage crews to expedite or omit steps, potentially increasing risk.

The Domino Effect of Small Delays

Managing OTP while prioritizing safety presents a puzzle: minor delays can cascade through airlines’ networks, disrupting onward connections and schedules. Yet, aggressively avoiding these delays through rushed operations often leads to incidents causing significantly longer disruptions. Balancing these dynamics requires recalibrating OTP targets to accommodate safety-related delays without punitive consequences.

Balanced KPIs: Prioritizing Safety Alongside Timeliness

To navigate this paradox, airlines need safety-weighted key performance indicators (KPIs) alongside traditional OTP metrics. These could include:

• Completion rates for critical safety procedures

• Frequency and quality of hazard reports and safety observations

• Near-miss and incident rates linked to operational rush

• Compliance with maintenance and training standards

• Monitoring of crew fatigue and workload

Integrating these metrics fosters a culture where safety is an integral measure of operational effectiveness, not an afterthought to schedule adherence.

A Personal OTP vs. Safety Moment

During one particularly tight turnaround, when every minute seemed to echo on the departure clock, I was preparing to push back for an on-time departure when a subtle but suspicious hydraulic system anomaly caught my attention during pre-flight checks. The schedule was already strained, and the operational pressure to “make the slot” was unmistakable—calls from dispatch, glances from ground crew, and that quiet but persistent mental clock ticking in the background.

Instead of brushing past the irregularity, I made the call to halt the departure and request a thorough technical inspection. It meant stepping into that uncomfortable space where schedule and safety clash head-on. The engineers quickly traced the cause, rectified it, and cleared the aircraft fit to fly. We left the gate a few minutes behind schedule, but with a fully serviceable aircraft and a clear conscience in the cockpit.

When I explained the reason for the short delay over the PA, there was no chorus of groans—only nods, a few smiles, and even a round of polite applause from some passengers. That day reaffirmed an enduring truth: timetables may drive airline operations, but in the cockpit, safety is the captain’s only stopwatch. The few minutes “lost” on the ground were, in reality, an investment in the safety and trust of everyone on board.

"In aviation, you can always make up for lost time; but you can never make up for lost safety."

Embracing Operational Resilience Over Rigid Timetables

The lesson is as clear as a freshly issued NOTAM: punctuality is valuable, but safety is priceless. OTP may win applause in quarterly reviews and glossy investor presentations, yet one high-profile lapse can erase years of goodwill, undermine regulatory trust, and; most critically, put lives at risk.

Airlines must pivot from a "departure-at-all-costs" mindset to a "depart-when-it’s-safe" ethos, embedding resilience into every operational decision. That means building schedules with buffers for thorough safety checks, empowering pilots to make delay calls without fear of commercial backlash, and aligning corporate performance metrics to reward safety-driven decisions.

As global aviation leaders increasingly adopt Safety Management Systems (SMS) and Fatigue Risk Management Systems (FRMS) to balance efficiency with safety, Indian carriers must follow suit; integrating real-time risk assessment, transparent reporting, and crew empowerment into their OTP strategies.

Because when the wheels finally lift off the runway, passengers remember far more about arriving safely than arriving precisely on the minute. In aviation, it’s better to be remembered for a safe landing than a punctual accident.

The cockpit, already a high-stakes decision hub, becomes even more pressured when the stopwatch looms larger than the safety checklist. Pilots may find themselves torn between the airline’s clock and their own professional compass; a tension that can’t be resolved by simply “working faster.” Every minute saved by rushing can quietly erode layers of safety that took decades of regulation, training, and hard-won lessons to build.

Conclusion: OTP Is a Customer Promise, Safety Is a Life Promise

On-time performance may well be the industry’s trophy metric; gleaming in quarterly reports and marketing campaigns, but safety remains aviation’s unshakable oath. You can explain a delayed arrival; you can’t explain a preventable tragedy. The so-called “passenger safety paradox” is really no paradox at all: customers want to get there on time, but they need to get there alive.

Airlines, regulators, and crews should treat small, managed delays not as blemishes on their record, but as badges of judgment and care. A five-minute delay might ruffle a few tempers in the terminal; a safety compromise could leave an empty seat forever. In the long run, the flight worth remembering isn’t the one that landed before schedule; it’s the one that landed without a headline.