INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Aircraft ground service records for AI handoff review
Several vendors may work on an aircraft turnaround.
NAICS 488190 · Other Support Activities for Air Transportation
Several vendors may work on an aircraft turnaround. A message that someone accepted a service request does not establish that the service finished. FAA’s ground handling, servicing, and marshalling advisory material provides the operational context. Use a simulated packet to see whether an assistant keeps requests, acknowledgments, completion, and later corrections apart. FAA ground handling and servicing advisory circular
Make a fictional turnaround with two generic service tasks and a change of assignment. Give one task an authorized completion record. Give the other an acknowledgment and a later message about a different flight. Ask the assistant to assemble a status report with evidence and flag the open task. Include an ambiguous clock or reused ID to make the test harder.
Use no real tail numbers, restricted operating procedures, access credentials, or live ramp footage. Get approval from the airport and handler before discussing any existing data. Keep aircraft release decisions outside the exercise.
Describe a ground-service handoff
Original Fiund exercise
A vendor acknowledgment does not establish turnaround-service completion
A simulated turnaround uses invalid flight aliases and generic task labels. It contains no aircraft details, ramp footage, procedure or release decision.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| AGS1 | Task assignments | Turnaround T1: task A reassigned from vendor V1 to V2; task B remains V3. Original change authority supplied. |
| AGS2 | Completion and acknowledgment | Authorized completion names T1/A/V2. V3 acknowledges T1/B request but gives no completion event. |
| AGS3 | Later message | V3 reports task B complete for T2, a different turnaround. Its timestamp uses a local clock without conversion to T1's reference clock. |
Question for the model
Which T1 task is documented complete, and why cannot the later V3 message close B or establish a precise interval?
Show the reference answer and checks
AGS1 and AGS2 support T1/A's reassignment and authorized completion by V2. T1/B has only V3's request acknowledgment. AGS3 belongs to T2 and lacks a clock conversion, so it cannot close T1/B or support a precise cross-clock interval. Preserve turnaround, task, vendor and time basis instead of treating an acknowledgment or similar later message as completion. No aircraft readiness or release conclusion follows.
- Reporting a task complete from vendor acceptance alone.
- Matching across turnarounds or calculating elapsed time across unaligned clocks.
Fields to preserve
- Turnaround, task and current vendor
- Defines the assignment.
- Acknowledgment versus authorized completion
- Separates stages.
- Source clock and event target
- Limits timing and association.
Test another case
Provide T1/B completion but leave its clock basis unknown. Require completion identity to resolve while the exact interval stays uncertain.
Use invented offline records. Exclude tail numbers, credentials, restricted procedures and live ramp material; airport and handler approval govern real records.
Discuss a contribution
Describe the sources you control, the task they could support and what has already been checked. Use the existing-data assessment for an archive or the collection brief for a new recording project. The contributor agreement defines Fiund’s licensing authority and compensation. A guide or fictional exercise does not establish an accepted collection or a sale.