Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Extra Frequency Or Larger Aircraft?  
User currently offlineKLM exel From Netherlands, joined Feb 2001, 41 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2234 times:

In what situation an arline makes the desision to increase frequency on a route and in what situation they choose to pute a larger aircraft on that route?

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2209 times:

I'd say length of the flight (the shorter, the more likely they'll go for frequency - longer route, more likely to have a larger aircraft) as well as, obviously, slots: if you simply cannot obtail slots that make sense for your operations, then you'll most likely opt for a larger aircraft as well...

But that's just me guessing...



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2168 times:

Landing slots, gate space - both size and number, length of route, need for matching with a flight bank at a hub, type of traveler on that market (business travelers prefer more options on WHEN to travel), landing fees (is it per operation or by weight?), all sorts of decisions. Also, keep in mind that you just don't have a stack of planes to pull from whenever you want. Everything you put on a route needs to be taken from somewhere else!

Sounds like you are ready for our game (in development)!



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineKl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 5084 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2146 times:

InnocuousFox ,

Any idea when the game will be on the market? Is there already a site where we can see previews etc? At least it's nice of you that the game is for free for A.net members.....  Laugh out loud



Next trip : DUB-AUH-CGK-DPS-KUL-AUH-CDG-ORK :-)
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2120 times:

I thought that it was a shameless plug at first - but, wow, the game free for a.net-members? That's great!!!  Big grin

Nonetheless - drop me a line when it's available, will you? Thanks!



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineMbmbos From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2597 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

The advantage to offering a larger aircraft with less frequency is improved economy of scale (such as only having to pay a landing fee once, only having to pay for one slot, etc., as mentioned above).

Whereas offering greater frequency attracts more passengers and allows greater potential to feed other flight segments.

So, it's a balance between these two tensions.


User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2086 times:

Actually, it was a shameless (yet topical) plug.  Smile Anyway, we are in the process of putting together the playable demo right now and will be presenting it to publishers at the Game Developers Conference in March. If we can secure the publisher funding, it will be out on shelves by next fall. You can see a lot of the information on the game, some screen mockups, etc. on the web site. There is also a message board there for news and questions. Just go to the company url in my profile and you will find it all.

Anyway, I've been doing the Airline AI for the past 2 weeks now and I am dealing with EXACTLY that decision formula right now. I just thought it was amusing to see the subject heading of what I'm working on. It actually is kinda spooky!



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineGeg2rap From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 847 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2049 times:

Seem airlines are going for the greater frequency to keep employees busy and meet the demands of high margin travelers.
For example, delta has gone to 5x per day with crj, seemingly timed for when a business traveler would need a flight, we will see how it works out for them. Southwest is able to dominate a route by frequency. After all the name of the game is profit.


User currently offlineKl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 5084 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2035 times:

InnocuousFox ,

That site looks absolutely COOL!!! To bad Europe isn't included (yet).
Guess you have to start somewhere..... Can't wait till it comes out..

KL911



Next trip : DUB-AUH-CGK-DPS-KUL-AUH-CDG-ORK :-)
User currently offlineYegbey01 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1721 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1980 times:

Frequency is more attractive especially to business travelers. If you are running a flight o Cancun.. you know that the majority of pax are going for a vacation. You don't need to have a very convenient scehdule...


If the flight is out of a hub, then it may be taken into consideration whether running a larger plane is beneficial versus flying a number of flights instead.

I am not sure there's a clear cut answer to this question, it really depends on a number of factors


User currently offlineJaws707 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1950 times:

Some routes like from Europe to Asia need to depart at certain times to keep the flight within reasonable departure/arrival hours. Routes like these will require larger aircraft because it is very difficult to increase frequency to other times.

User currently offlineYegbey01 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1721 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1906 times:

Frequency is more attractive especially to business travelers. If you are running a flight o Cancun.. you know that the majority of pax are going for a vacation. You don't need to have a very convenient scehdule...


If the flight is out of a hub, then it may be taken into consideration whether running a larger plane is beneficial versus flying a number of flights instead.

I am not sure there's a clear cut answer to this question, it really depends on a number of factors


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1894 times:

Higher frequencies are better for the customer, bigger aircraft are better for the airline, in general.

For short routes with low trip costs, it could make business sense to do a.

For long routes with high trip costs (like tip-to-tip flights LHR-SIN) a larger aircraft clearly makes sense.

N


User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5066 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1832 times:

AA wrestled with this question in the early 90s. It used to be that almost every flight out of ORD to beyond the Rockies was a wide-body, either 767 or DC-10. This included, SAN, LAS, LAX, SFO, PHX, and SEA.

When the airlines started losing money, a lot of DC-10s were grounded. So, a number of 767s were pulled out of domestic service and switched to trans-Atlantic routes. This meant that some 757s and a lot of MD-80s started flying long-haul domestic routes out of ORD. A lot of cities then saw their frequencies increase. For example, ORD-LAX went from 10 or 12 round trips per day to 16. ORD-DFW went from 14 to 23 round trips daily.

The only reason this worked was that a lot of MD-80 pilots, particularly F/Os, were on B-scale for wages. Between the B-scale for the F/O, a typical MD-80 captain making less than a DC-10 captain, and no F/E on the MD-80, it made economic sense to drop DC-10s from a route and operate a larger number of flights with MD-80s.

Once AA got rid of the two-tiered pay scale for pilots, then the advantages of flying so many narrow-bodies on a route decreased.


User currently offlineEx_SQer From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1435 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1728 times:

Don't forget, bilateral agreements often limit number of flights as well, hence the usage of larger aircraft on high density routes when frequencies are restricted.

User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5552 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1686 times:

Jaws707's point is very important on the true long hauls. For example on SYD-LHR pratical departure times from SYD are limited to about 6 - 10am and 5 - 9pm taking into account curfews, transport to/from airport etc, but not slot constraints. Add slot constraints at both LHR & SYD and bigger aircraft make more sense than more frequency.



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1673 times:

Don't forget the role of the market and passenger demand. In the US, a business traveler is usually more time-sensitive. He doesn't care if he's flying on a 777 or a 757, he wants several options to get from point A to point B. In Asia, however, people prefer widebodies (and widebodies in some of the most densely populated routes aren't the enemy of frequency). Most Asian airlines have very few widebodies in their fleets, simply because people prefer them.


"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1619 times:

Do you realize that like 4 of us talked about the business passenger and timeliness of flights?  Nuts


Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
PUW Cleared For Larger Aircraft posted Tue Sep 12 2006 06:57:38 by RwSEA
Larger Aircraft Now Allowed In Pullman-Moscow posted Mon Aug 21 2006 01:54:34 by AirlineBrat
Frequency Of Delta's Aircraft Per Concourse At ATL posted Mon Aug 7 2006 22:38:27 by 1337Delta764
SBA Runway Length..can It Handle A 737 Or Larger? posted Thu Mar 23 2006 09:17:14 by Stealth777
Explain Lack Of Larger Aircraft-India Domestic Rte posted Mon May 30 2005 10:33:01 by LAXDESI
Acceleration On Larger Aircraft? posted Wed Apr 13 2005 11:44:29 by 3green
Ever Extra Traveled To An Aircraft Plant? posted Wed Mar 23 2005 11:03:39 by GodBless
No Aft Engines On Larger Aircraft? posted Wed Nov 17 2004 03:12:43 by Aerohottie
MSY Runway Closure = Larger Aircraft? posted Wed Jul 21 2004 18:13:01 by MSYtristar
Which Is Better, Frequency Or Size? posted Fri Mar 5 2004 13:14:17 by Horus