Burgin adds: “Also, the
software houses were not
prepared to write programs
for both XML and all the
various different versions of
Cargo IMP.”
Worse, while the airlines
initially appeared to be rather
gung ho, for some reason their
enthusiasm faded, and the
projects were not pursued.
Playing a new Record
However, three decades on, all
that could change with IATA’s
latest initiative, ONE Record.
Its aim is to create a single
system that would include
all players in the airfreight
supply chain and allow
information to be quickly,
easily and economically shared
between parties. It would use
the Jason platform, which
is designed to allow a high
degree of customisation of
multi-agent systems (and is
already used in many other
industries), along with API
(Application Programming
Interface) technology, which is
extensively used elsewhere to
support the exchange of data
via the Internet.
IATA says that there should
be no licence fees, as all
software will be free domain
and hardware costs should also
be low, as ONE Record will use
businesses’ existing computers
and Internet connections.
It should run on existing
hardware, though with the
proviso that if ONE Record
does lead to wider uptake
of e-AWBs and electronic
messaging, servers may of
course have to be upgraded to
cope, though this is relatively
inexpensive these days.
Many companies now use hosted software, so there would be
no need to install new software at their premises.
It will open up communications to a much wider range
of participants than the old messaging systems, including
shippers and freight forwarders. ONE Record could also give
genuine traceability throughout the airfreight chain; at the
moment, there are too many players, such as handling agents,
that are not party to much of the information and the process
is too dependent on the different parties actually forwarding
information on shipments.
One issue is the need to develop adequate security protocols,
though airfreight is not unique in this respect and other
industries have already tackled similar problems. IATA is currently
examining how sensitive data could be shared so that only those
who need it can get access to it.
Endorsements a-plenty
Gordon Tutt at the UK’s Association of Freight Software Suppliers
believes that ONE Record could manage the transition from the
original Cargo IMP system much more effectively and affordably
than XML ever did – and would be able to pull in data from
various systems.
Moreover, the airline’s objection, that making the transition
from legacy systems was too difficult and expensive, would
be assuaged because ONE Record would use existing, widely
understood and adopted systems and software.
It might also be possible to make a gradual cutover to ONE
Record, Tutt adds. It should be possible to keep existing Cargo
IMP and XML systems operational while transitioning some
information (HAWBs, for example) to ONE Record.
IATA Head of Digital Cargo, Henk Mulder, points out also that
ONE Record can achieve very rapid results, citing the example of
a pilot scheme in Finland where Finnair was able to achieve an
interface between its passenger and cargo systems in just 24 hours
to exchange information on pets in transit. Participating in ONE
Record is no more complex than setting up a website, something
that most of us could do in a couple of hours these days; as
such, it is a world away from the complexities of the earlier IATA
e-freight scheme.
He adds that one of the benefits of the ONE Record stepby
step, “cluster” approach is that by exchanging information
between themselves, participants in the pilot schemes can realise
a return on investment immediately, unlike before. “One of the
problems with earlier schemes, such as e-freight, is that you are
waiting for a thousand forwarders to sign up to it, and if one
doesn’t sign, you’re still waiting and still using paper.”
As well as finally dragging the industry into the digital age, it
could offer a whole host of added-value features, Tutt continues.
One of the problems with existing electronic documents is that
they cannot easily be altered where necessary; for example, if
goods are damaged in transit or it is found that two pallets,
rather than one, are needed. In contrast, a paper AWB can always
be annotated.
However, says Tutt: “With ONE Record, one party could
www.airlogisticsinternational.com August 2019 19
/www.airlogisticsinternational.com