Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Flight Capacity Stats Amaze Me  
User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5226 times:

Looking at the stats below for flight capacity it is very interesting to see that some of the really big hitters in terms of market cap and profit are WAY down the list.

What do you guys think the list tells us when we consider what we know about the airlines on it ?

No wonder I got flamed for suggesting mega-hubs in the U.S......legacy domestic must be HUGE !!!

http://www.oagaviation.com/Solutions.../Flight-Capacity-w-c-9th-July-2012


Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9806 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5184 times:

Well, that is a list of number of flights. Your thread that there should be fewer flights on larger airplanes is justified by this data.

However, I think it is useful to realize how big the US market is. The US airlines truly are huge corporations. While they don't have 10 times the capacity, Delta and United are managing more than 10 times more flights on a daily basis than Emirates is. For reasons like this, we see threads about diversions and major events happening more frequently on Delta or United than anyone else.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinexjramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2473 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4996 times:

Just compared to this Top 30 list of the busiest airports in the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's...iest_airports_by_passenger_traffic

With the exception of China on that list, all international airports outside the US are hubs for one or more airlines. And over 30% of that list are airports based in the US.

This begs a different question. Could non US-based airlines sustain a reliable business model (one that maintains RASM over CASM) day over day in the US? And vise-versa?

One thing that cracked me up when I worked for an airline and was taking care of European citizens, was that when we offered paper vouchers and that was it, they looked at me like i was crazy for not offering the EU standard in compensation. This should give an insight as to how much money a US airline would have to give out vs any given european carrier.



Look ma' no hands!
User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4820 times:

Quoting xjramper (Reply 2):
Just compared to this Top 30 list of the busiest airports in the world:
http://www.oagaviation.com/Solutions...y-Seat-Capacity-w-c-16th-July-2012

There are many parameters to consider I guess.

LHR handled 237,000 people today. (Olympics and all that)

All ran smoothly.

(phew)



Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1349 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4543 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
However, I think it is useful to realize how big the US market is.

Try - how big the US is. Physically. What would be multi-national flights in Europe are not even transcon. So you really can't compare domestic in Europe to domestic in US. You may be able to compare all "intra europe" to US domestic.



rcair1
User currently offlinepanpan From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 104 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4421 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
Well, that is a list of number of flights. Your thread that there should be fewer flights on larger airplanes is justified by this data.

There should be fewer flights by larger airplanes in the US. I'd love to see slot controls in a bunch of US airports (like SFO) and reduction of slots at some of the most congested ares (like all the NYC airports). In fact, I think it would be a good idea for ALL US airports to be slot controlled so that it's very clear how many flights an airport thinks it can handle and whether they are approaching or at capacity. I think it's crazy the way we have a system that gets scheduled so tight that a little weather in the northeast translates to lengthy delays all over the country. I keep hearing that Americans want frequency but I think what Americans really want is fewer delays and the frequency is more about airlines afraid of losing business to their competitors. Flame on!


User currently offlineSeeTheWorld From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1325 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4363 times:

Quoting panpan (Reply 5):
There should be fewer flights by larger airplanes in the US. I'd love to see slot controls in a bunch of US airports (like SFO) and reduction of slots at some of the most congested ares (like all the NYC airports). In fact, I think it would be a good idea for ALL US airports to be slot controlled so that it's very clear how many flights an airport thinks it can handle and whether they are approaching or at capacity. I think it's crazy the way we have a system that gets scheduled so tight that a little weather in the northeast translates to lengthy delays all over the country. I keep hearing that Americans want frequency but I think what Americans really want is fewer delays and the frequency is more about airlines afraid of losing business to their competitors. Flame on!

Nice in theory, but the unintended consequences, including to the economy, wouldn't be worth it .... The fact of the matter is, the U.S. aviation system is a marvel ... While flying in the 1960s and 1970s was something truly special, you had to be rich, on business, or an airline employee to afford it .... When we look at the how much safer, less expensive, and more utilized it is many times over, it's truly remarkable. It's a commodity now, and with that comes some added inconvenience, but that inconvenience comes with a system that literally offers flights all day long in any direction ...


User currently offlinepanpan From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 104 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4106 times:

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 6):
Nice in theory, but the unintended consequences, including to the economy, wouldn't be worth it

I hear that all the time but I just don't believe it. I don't see how slowly moving from narrowbodies to widebodies on highly trafficked routes would lead to the collapse of the economy and the end of democracy. What I do think is that the airlines think that the way they do things makes them more flexible and makes the most economic sense but that's short term reasoning. In the longer term people are getting so sick of all the drama that is flying today that they are opting not to.


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4009 times:

Quoting panpan (Reply 7):
In the longer term people are getting so sick of all the drama that is flying today that they are opting not to.

Yet, planes are fuller now than they've every been. Overall capacity is down which is driving LF and yield but the fact of the matter is that despite the TSA and all the "drama" that comes along with flying; people are still flying and will continue to do so.

Now to the point of what you're saying. Yes, to a point frequencies are driven (a small part) by some sort of prestige or pride and market share but mostly because of $$. The people want the 8x daily LAX-JFK (that's Delta alone). That's approximately 1,392 seats each way. That would be 5x daily 763s (domestic config) if we were tying to match capacity.

LGA-ATL and MCO-ATL are DL's two busiest sectors in their entire system; Both at 16x daily. MCO offers more capacity due to the mix of 752s and 753s. LGA @ 2,880 seats each way and MCO @ 3,018 seats each way. That's 11x daily and 12x daily respectively. So the change is not that huge unless we're talking about using the like of T7s and A330s which is not going to happen.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10645 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3950 times:

Quoting panpan (Reply 5):
In fact, I think it would be a good idea for ALL US airports to be slot controlled so that it's very clear how many flights an airport thinks it can handle and whether they are approaching or at capacity.

The U.S. government has more than enough control over the airlines, now........they don't need any more.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9700 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3929 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 9):

truer words have never been spoken.

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 8):

This. Want to see what a route like ATL-LGA would look like if the capacity model was used? look at ATL-LAX. 11x daily most of which is on 767s. It wouldn't do a lot. It would also just kill markets like the Shuttle.



yep.
User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3899 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 8):
Yes, to a point frequencies are driven (a small part) by some sort of prestige or pride and market share but mostly because of $$.

Quite right.

So start charging airlines on a per movement basis at airports like JFK & LGA and watch them change their tune. If such charges exist, they clearly aren't high enough to cause a change in policy.


User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9700 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3848 times:

Quoting thegeek (Reply 11):

So start charging airlines on a per movement basis at airports like JFK & LGA and watch them change their tune. If such charges exist, they clearly aren't high enough to cause a change in policy.

how about we just have the airlines become loss making companys, have the government pay for there losses and maybe the employee's can go back to pre-9/11 quality of life?

anyone? anyone?

Or maybe the market should decide, and if people dislike the NYC area airports they should fly there? like that idea too(though i think i do much better with option A)



yep.
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3743 times:

I don't necessarily have an issue with slots per say, especially at airports like LGA/JFK/EWR were the number of movements do need to be controlled else the taxi delays would be worse than what it already is but the whole notion of perimeter rules is so antiquated it isn't even funny. When that goes away i'll start to take US Aviation legislation seriously.


What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3667 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3726 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 13):
the whole notion of perimeter rules is so antiquated it isn't even funny.

Why are they antiquated? At LGA, at least, they still do exactly as they are intended to do, which is push the long distance traffic to EWR and JFK.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3706 times:

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 14):
Why are they antiquated? At LGA, at least, they still do exactly as they are intended to do, which is push the long distance traffic to EWR and JFK.

I understand the purpose just fine..but why? Why should people be forced to fly from a certain field? A HUGE inconvenience to much of the NY population. Everything has a reason. It doesn't mean the reason makes sense. Just like IAD/DCA, the rule was set up to protect the other airport.; JFK-LGA, IAD-DCA. I've yet to see a good reason as to how this promote the free market.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3612 times:

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 12):
Or maybe the market should decide, and if people dislike the NYC area airports they should fly there? like that idea too(though i think i do much better with option A)

That's exactly what I was saying, that a mechanism for charging appropriately should be implemented and then the market can sort it out. When there are common assets, it doesn't make sense for one particular airline to use less of them as all airlines would get the benefit.

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 13):
the whole notion of perimeter rules is so antiquated it isn't even funny.

Fully agree. The difference in the noise of a 737 vs 767 isn't even that pronounced. (someone is probably about to post that it is X dB)


User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3523 times:

Of those 40K appox UA and DL flights does anyone know what percentage are intercontinental ?


Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
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...
Help Me Track A Flight! posted Mon Dec 28 2009 08:33:37 by Eugegall
BA's June Traffic Stats/Future Capacity posted Fri Jul 3 2009 07:09:46 by BALHRWWCC
LHI And * Flight Stats MXP+Express Vastly Improved posted Thu Mar 12 2009 16:48:18 by WAC
LAX-BOS: Over Capacity. AA Adds Additional Flight. posted Fri Feb 6 2009 04:12:25 by LACA773
Can Someone Help Me Find The Reg Of An FL Flight posted Thu Dec 25 2008 19:05:07 by Tony Lu
AF/ME 4th CDG-BEY-CDG Flight Confirmed posted Fri Dec 5 2008 05:47:39 by MEA330
Help Me Find My Very First Flight! posted Sat Aug 23 2008 08:38:25 by Horvik89
AA Guys: Please Help Me Plan For A Canceled Flight posted Wed May 14 2008 01:59:41 by PennStation
Help Me With A Reg For A CX Flight? posted Sat Mar 22 2008 21:43:49 by Bombayhog
FA Tried To Have Me Removed From The Flight! posted Thu Jan 17 2008 21:00:28 by Brick