Network-aware scheduling

Flags when a tail's due check won't reach a capable station before its limit. Advisory — it surfaces the risk, it doesn't block dispatch.

As pairings and aircraft routing are built, the board checks each tail's next-due maintenance check against the stations that are both reachable and rated for that check, and flags any tail whose check won't fit a capable station before its limit. The at-risk chip surfaces on the routing view so the crew desk catches a stranded check while there's still time to swap the routing. It is advisory: it flags the risk on the board, it does not block or prevent a dispatch. It composes with — never replaces — the FAR 117 / 121.467 legality the scheduler already enforces at assignment time. It replaces discovering a misrouted check after the line is already flying.

Surfaces deadhead and out-of-base overnights so pairings can be built to originate and terminate at a crew member's base.

Pairings are scored against your crew bases, surfacing deadhead legs and out-of-base overnights, so the desk can favor pairings that begin and end at a crew member's domicile and feed that into the bidding award run. It replaces judging which pairings strand crew away from base by reading the lines one at a time.

A configurable weighted score (abstract points, lower = better) over deadhead, overnights, repositioning, and maintenance-fit slack — set your own weights.

The board rolls the soft factors — deadhead legs, out-of-base overnights, aircraft repositioning, and maintenance-fit slack — into a single weighted score, shown as abstract points where lower is better. The weights are configurable per center, so the operation decides what to optimize; the score is a planning signal, not a dollar figure. It replaces comparing pairing constructions by gut feel.

Deterministic aircraft-swap and re-base proposals that improve the score — every suggestion shows its reasoning. Not AI, not a guaranteed optimum.

When an aircraft swap or a re-base would lower the efficiency score without creating a maintenance-routing risk, the board proposes it and shows the reasoning behind it — what it changes and how many points it saves. The suggestions are deterministic and explainable heuristics: the same inputs always produce the same proposals, and each one traces back to its inputs. They are not AI, not a solver, and not a claim of the single optimal schedule — they are ranked, transparent improvements you choose to apply. It replaces rebuilding pairings by hand just to test whether a change helps.