Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Point To Point Or Hub And Spoke?  
User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3828 posts, RR: 7
Posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3605 times:

which is better to you, and wchch is better to the overall prosperity of the airlnes and all cities with at least a 300,000 pop. base.

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineElwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3574 times:

Each system has its own merits. It depends entirely upon how that system is utilized. A P2P airline run poorly will fail. A hub-and-spoke airline run poorly will fail.

Personally, I prefer hub-and-spoke, but I don't dismiss P2P airlines. Hub-and-spoke allows one to travel to those tiny destinations that wouldn't be served otherwise. P2P gives one the option of more direct and n/s flights.

Again, it's all dependent upon how the airline actually operates.



Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3546 times:

Think about your question. If you believe that it is remotely possible that it has been pondered by someone else in the past, search for it.



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3540 times:

Just for fun, I will repost something from one of those archived threads here:

*****

People are continuing to talk about the efficiency for the airline and yet we skip over the efficiency for the passenger. THAT is the whole reason the concept of a banked hub system came into being. The premise was that a passenger from any feeder city could fly to a hub and, within the same bank, find a connection to any other feeder city on the network.

If you have 50 feeders (+ the hub = 51 cities), you need 50 gates at the hub... 50 arrivals in a short period of time, a long enough waiting period to turn the aircraft and allow pax to connect and then 50 departures. That simple example leads to 2500 O&D pairs where the pax has a maximum of 2 legs and a reasonably short connecting time. In a PtP network of 51 cities, you aren't going to be able to tell a pax that he can get to all 50 destinations in 2 legs at all much less with a "reasonable" connecting time.

The reason that a rolling hub is able to work now is a side effect of the demand for more frequent flights. As airlines increased the number of smaller aircraft and increased the frequency of flights, they were able to begin spreading out the bank because passengers were no longer waiting for "that big airplane to ---". Instead, they were waiting for "one of the smaller airplanes to ---".

One of the reasons that people are under the impression that PtP works so well is that it is being done in a largely hub-based environment. Southwest specifically tried to connect large O&D pairs that were not served directly - thus catering to people with shorter (direct) flight times. If there were no hub systems, point to point would be a disaster to get from A to most of the Bs out there. It is simply mathematically impossible to generate the same number of O&D connections using solely point to point systems.

What is the answer? Obviously for the larger airlines that serve the most markets, they must continue to operate hub-based airlines... else no one will ever be able to get to places like Enid, OK and Pocatello, ID. Whether that be rolling hubs, RJ hubs or both, the hub and spoke system cannot go away without taking a large number of potential pax out the door with it.



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineTungd From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 103 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days ago) and read 3531 times:

In my opinion, medium to small markets (250k to 500k base population) are under-served by the traditional hub system. Here in Texas, if you live anywhere other than Dallas-Fort Worth or Houston, for the most part you have to connect through either DFW or IAH to go anywhere else in the U.S. (or the world). The only exception is Southwest Airlines, which is great at what they do, but the only smaller markets they serve in the state are 5+ hours drive-time from the hubs (MAF, LBB, AMA, CRP), and even then the majority of their flights are to DAL or HOU (which are many miles from the DFW and IAH hubs).

Regional jets offer a real point-to-point alternative for smaller markets, but it's doubtful that will happen anytime soon. My hometown airport, ABI, is currently served by AE and COEX/SkyWest, with 4 RJ and 5 prop round-trips daily to only DFW and IAH. The average load factor is 80-90% or more, and a recent study indicated that the top out-of-state destination is ATL; however the chances that Delta/ASA will initiate at least one RJ ATL-ABI round-trip a day are negligible for the foreseeable future.

I know this is not the best example; ABI's 300,000 base population extends 80 miles from the city center, and DFW is only a 2 1/2 hour drive from downtown. However, point-to-point service utilizing at least RJ's would definitely benefit the economies and quality-of-life of small-to-medium markets such as ABI.


User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 4 days ago) and read 3515 times:

"However, point-to-point service utilizing at least RJ's ..."

Connecting to how many points, though? I think you are needing more connections to hubs. No offense to ABI, but NO ONE is going to connect you P2P with 100+ other cities around the country. It would be impossible to fill even ONE RJ to each of the 100 cities per day.

For cities your size on down, the ONLY way you are going to be adequately served is by a hub-based network.



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineCoronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1603 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3476 times:

I have a 1962 OAG. I think most people agree that there was a pt to pt system back then. What would be interesting is if someone would throw a couple of city pairs at me, small to mid-size, and I'll post the routing and schedule from 1962. Then we can compare which system is better. Remember there are probably only one fourth the flights back then, but I have a feeling most will turn out pretty efficiently. Certainly more fun.

For example...Pocatello to Enid:

WA 5
DC-6B
PIH 7:43a
SLC 8:31a

UA 592
DC-7
SLC 9:40a
DEN 11:20a

CN 95 (Central Airlines)
DC-3
DEN 11:40a
WDG 4:48p*

* via Colorado Sprs, Pueblo, Guymon & Liberal.



Uncle SAN at your service!
User currently offlineTungd From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 103 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3451 times:

Very true, Innocuous....

After reviewing my previous post, I was more focused on long-range hub operations, rather than true point-to-point. P2P flights between small-medium markets will probably never be feasible, and I realize that. It's just wishful thinking on my part that RJ's will someday expand non-stop options between smaller markets and hubs nationwide.

BTW, I currently live only 15 miles from IAH; so I don't even know why I'm complaining, since I can fly almost anywhere non-stop, including my hometown! LOL


User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3374 times:

The primary use of P2P should be to connect the spokes of high-volume city pairs, thereby bypassing the hub. If you have a large number of people going between A and B, why force them to connect? You know they are doing it anyway. However, that is still a hybrid system based mostly on the hub concept.


Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineLogos From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 794 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3353 times:

Good example, Coronado. What people who pine for the "good old days" of point to point forget is that, prior to 1978, under the CAB, airlines couldn't have "comprehensive" networks because every route was subject to route authority granted by the CAB. I remember clearly the lobbying that went on between Eastern and Delta to get authority for the Atlanta-Denver route (which was granted to Delta). Before airlines were allowed to offer joint pricing (which happened sometime in the early 70s), the cost of going from one small airport to another was astronomical, but you still generally had to change airlines as well as planes.

That's part of the reason flying was seen as such a luxury outside of places like Texas and California which were large enough to spawn intrastate carriers (PSA & Aircal for California, Southwest & Trans-Texas, later Texas International, for Texas) that avoided CAB regulation. Also, the idea of a subcontracted "express" or "commuter" line that flew for your network didn't exist other than Allegheny Commuter.

Innocuousfox has laid out pretty well the case for the hub & spoke system that has made this kind of flying affordable under deregulation. It's not going away - what's currently at stake is exactly how many survivors there'll be left doing it in a couple of years.

Cheers,
Dave in Orlando




Too many types flown to list
User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3828 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3324 times:

i agree with all of you. Its all about management. I think that if an airline has the right amount of both then it can prosper. Like run maybe 70 to 100 passenger planes to places like CRW, ROA, TRI, to hubs. But on some routes like JFK-LAX, LAX-DFW, LAX-ORD, ORD-IAD, those could be point to point cities, with no connecting flights.
Good answers people .  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineElwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3299 times:

The primary use of P2P should be to connect the spokes of high-volume city pairs, thereby bypassing the hub. If you have a large number of people going between A and B, why force them to connect? You know they are doing it anyway. However, that is still a hybrid system based mostly on the hub concept.

You didn't just complete Dr. Coleman's Operations Management class, did you? I gave a presentation where I said basically exactly that!

But on some routes like JFK-LAX, LAX-DFW, LAX-ORD, ORD-IAD, those could be point to point cities, with no connecting flights.

More accurately, I'd say it's "with the option of connecting or non-stop flights, depending on when the passenger wishes to travel."



Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3258 times:

"You didn't just complete Dr. Coleman's Operations Management class, did you? I gave a presentation where I said basically exactly that!"

With the aviation reference materials I have sitting around here, I could GIVE that presentation.




Trust me, when you have to write the computer Artificial Intelligence routines to completely duplicate the thought process behind market entry/exit, route network design, load management, fleet assignment and scheduling, you learn a LOT about how it works.  Smokin cool



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineFrugalqxnwa From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 565 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3250 times:

I must agree with all of you, the hub-and-spoke system is here to stay and is the better of the two systems for large airlines erving smaller cities. The one item I must throw a monkey-wrench in is the statements that smaller markets do not get as good as P2P service as other markets. Not true. BOI has a mardet of less than 500k and has a good WN presence as well as being a mini-hub for QX, and WN has a larger presence at BOI than OMA, a market twice the size.

Personally, I prefer the hub system because the passenger has many more options for a better price. Whenever I try to get a quote from WN for flying OMA-BOI, they are usually the most expensive option. NW, UA, F9, DL, and HP are far cheaper and use the hub system.

If I were to run an airline, I would use a hybrid system based primarily on the hub system. The highest yield markets would have the option of bypassing the hub while the other markets would need to connect. HP is the best example I can think of off the top of my head of such a system being set up right now.


User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3828 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3197 times:

BOI is an exception. My local airport is CRW, the city is onlt 60,000 people but the total market it serves is 600,000 people. And we dont have any P2P.

User currently offlineElwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3200 times:

Innocuous Fox:

Wanna' get together and build an airline?

WN has a larger presence at BOI than OMA, a market twice the size.

OMA also has more mainline competition than BOI.




Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3172 times:

"Wanna' get together and build an airline?"

I need to focus on continuing to build and airline management simulation/game. I will be happy with that for now.  Smokin cool



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineElwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3126 times:

Mark,

When you're ready to invest in an airline, let me know... Believe me, you and I could work magic together!

How's MD-87s-come-717s out of MCI sound? Simulate that one in your game!

:D Cheers!



Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3828 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3120 times:

when that games's done will anyone here get a discount, or will it not be expensive


User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (10 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3055 times:

"when that games's done will anyone here get a discount, or will it not be expensive"

That would largely be up to the publisher. I'm not thinking that far ahead yet.



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...
Hub And Spoke Versus Point To Point posted Tue Sep 12 2006 17:39:36 by Ikarus2006
AA Or DL Vs. Jblu Hub And Spoke posted Fri May 27 2005 20:38:06 by Pmg1704
Who Started "Hub And Spoke" System posted Thu Jun 9 2005 04:06:26 by Toksans
Aviacsa Returns To JFK Or EWR And Opens DFW! posted Fri Jan 7 2005 05:03:37 by Ghost77
Mulally: Hub-And-Spoke Causes Airport Congestion posted Wed May 26 2004 23:53:41 by AvObserver
Hub And Spoke: Victim Of Its Own Success? posted Sat Jan 17 2004 08:23:42 by HB-IWC
Hub-and-Spoke Vs. Network posted Fri Nov 7 2003 14:07:01 by Avion346
Hub And Spoke For SkyTeam posted Mon Oct 6 2003 00:00:48 by Dtwintlflyer
Hub And Spoke Vs. Southwest Style posted Mon Aug 4 2003 07:23:41 by DeltaBoy777
Hub And Spoke History posted Fri Sep 27 2002 18:29:00 by AM744