Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
YVRbud
Topic Author
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:38 am

Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:11 am

I've been a long-time lurker on Airliners and figured it is finally time for me to contribute!
I thought it would be interesting to take a look at the data published by the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics and see how the major international carriers are doing at the 30 largest U.S. airports in terms of load factors. The spreadsheet linked below is quite large, but contains some interesting information. The most recent data available are for October 2017. Inbound/Outbound refers to the individual U.S. airport.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 1359521280

Themes:
    - ME3 tend to have among the lowest load factors at the featured airports
    - Carriers may continue to operate routes even if load factors reach the 30s or 40s in non-peak periods
    - Load factors tend to increase as new routes mature

It is important to note that load factors are only a part of the equation when it comes to the success/profitability of a route. Just because load factors are high/low, doesn't necessarily mean a route is profitable/unprofitable.

Let me know below if you find this interesting. If there's enough interest I could turn it into a recurring monthly/quarterly thing.
733 734 736 737 738 739 744 752 753 763 772 77E 77L 77W 788 789 E75 E90 CR2 CR7 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 388
 
User avatar
Zoedyn
Posts: 789
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:46 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 9:14 am

Definitely interesting!
Just hope more aviation authorities around the world could follow the examples of US DOT, UK CAA or Eurostats by having such aviation data publicly available and accessible
 
peanuts
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:17 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:25 pm

Load Factor wise I'd have thought Edelweiss ZRH-TPA-ZRH would be a lot higher. This one is all over the board...
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:45 pm

peanuts wrote:
Load Factor wise I'd have thought Edelweiss ZRH-TPA-ZRH would be a lot higher. This one is all over the board...

I find the same with Royal Jordanian on the AMM-DTW-AMM flight. One month its 31%, another it's 83%, another it's 40%.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
User avatar
deltadawg
Posts: 1014
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 2:56 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:15 pm

This is very interesting. However, I did not see Turkish listed on ATL or am I missing something? Thanks for posting and welcome!
GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
 
airtrantpa
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 2:53 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:27 pm

They have AM and LAN listed for TPA. Those airlines dont serve TPA unless i am missing something. Only thing i can think of is maybe they flew a charter to TPA at one point ti be included on tbis list.
AirTran: Go there's no stopping you!
712,722,732,733,735,73G,738,739,752,753,762,763,764,772,A318,319,320,320,343,L1011,D8,M82/88/90

flown on all U.S based carriers that have existed since 1991
 
User avatar
gdg9
Posts: 1035
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:29 pm

Very nice!
@dfwtower
 
Nimish
Posts: 2969
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:46 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:30 pm

Fascinating data. I was comparing IAH vs. SFO and noticed that SFO had higher LFs across the board (mid 80s) vs. IAH (late 70s). SFO seems to be missing data on Air India - I wanted to get a sense of how they are doing.
Incredible India!
 
Sightseer
Posts: 1004
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:32 pm

deltadawg wrote:
This is very interesting. However, I did not see Turkish listed on ATL or am I missing something? Thanks for posting and welcome!

And AC only has numbers for one month.

QR in ATL also had quite the drop-off those last two months. Wonder what that's about.
 
User avatar
YVRbud
Topic Author
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:38 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:02 pm

Sightseer wrote:
deltadawg wrote:
This is very interesting. However, I did not see Turkish listed on ATL or am I missing something? Thanks for posting and welcome!

And AC only has numbers for one month.

QR in ATL also had quite the drop-off those last two months. Wonder what that's about.


Unfortunately, the BTS database only contains whatever the carriers actually submit to the agency, so there's no guarantee of completeness.

Anything that was incomplete or obviously wrong was left as a blank!
733 734 736 737 738 739 744 752 753 763 772 77E 77L 77W 788 789 E75 E90 CR2 CR7 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 388
 
User avatar
QuawerAir
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:44 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:40 pm

Finnair's HEL-SFO service had surely a load factor of more than 90% last year. The airline has said that the HEL-SFO is one of their "best performing routes". Also, the load factor of HEL-ORD might be good (over 80% I assume). HEL-JFK had a load factor of 83% between January and September 2017 (Eurostat). I'm not sure about MIA.
ATL, AYT, FRA, FUE, HEL, JFK, LCA, LHR, MUC | AY, BA, DL, FH, LH, LO | A320, A321, A333, 752, 764, 772, 788
 
RainerBoeing777
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:31 pm

wow ! Cathay Pacific has strong load factors!
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG - UA
 
leftyboarder
Posts: 908
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:38 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:39 pm

Actually TK is completely missing, which is sad as I'd love to see their data.
 
xwb777
Posts: 1105
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:13 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:55 pm

WoW didn't expect to see Emirates in the 40s for some airports!!!
 
dmstorm22
Posts: 633
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:49 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:55 pm

Man, Philippine Airlines is strug-a-ling at JFK. Can't believe their plan is to now go non-stop.
 
User avatar
IrishAyes
Posts: 2449
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:04 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:08 pm

I'm questioning the accuracy of this data. It has Varig listed for ATL....extremely odd.
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2541
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:13 pm

Since the airlines are sending in the data is it possible that they could be sending in false numbers to make the LFs look better than they really are?
 
User avatar
SANFan
Posts: 5617
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:10 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:21 pm

Thanks for your efforts! I'm still comparing these numbers to those I collect. Some strange airlines (to me) that I'm still trying to figure out. (I assume there are charters included.)

Lots of interesting things to look at and think about.

bb
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 797
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:33 pm

BTS information is solid information. It is illegal for an airline to falsify any submission, so if they were to do so it would cause big problems for them. Where you see strange things or things dont make sense is when there are diversions. sometimes a flight may be diverted for weather or what not to a city the airline doesnt normally serve or a destination they dont normally serve, but BTS counts that. So you just need to know to weed these things out. I've double checked this with BTS data and it is accurate. And no, AY at SFO is correct. High 80s load factors are good, and if the yield is good then it could very well be one of the best performing routes.
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:34 pm

dfwjim1 wrote:
Since the airlines are sending in the data is it possible that they could be sending in false numbers to make the LFs look better than they really are?


It is entirely possible, however having done some of this work myself in relation to BOS, I've spoken to the in-house person who does the work for Massport and to be honest they are not that far off. However one HUGE caveat that I was told with the T-100 data is that it only reports revenue passengers, not ALL passengers, so these numbers will be a little on the lower side.
In addition the reporting can a bit hit/miss. I found gaps in the data for DY back in 2014, EI had a bad couple of months around June last year, even BA missed a month once.
In terms of the data files, it all depends on which database you actually use, as they are slightly different. Sometimes the International only database does not contain all the international pieces (i've found that out before) and the main database includes diversions, some of which are easy to figure out, some of them are not, so trying to figure out route metrics is not great. Lastly 2 airlines have major issues in reporting, they are QR and EI. QR only reports everything as a 773, when it's been a 350 to BOS pretty much since inception apart from a couple of months, also their seat counts don't always match as a result, forcing incorrect %'s if you don't review. EI has a similar problem, they list everything as a 332, even though we know they fly 757's and 333's at the least and the odd leased in 767 as well. Their seat counts also don't always tie very well, meaning they are shorting it by having 1 line as the 332, but reporting a mix of 757's and 333's in there too. I've tried analyzing using thelingussource.com (which is a great resource site) and i've still not really been able to figure out exactly what they have reported.

Upshot, the T-100's are what they are, they are a snapshot, are they the most accurate numbers, no absolutely not and all quoting of numbers from them should be taken a grain of salt and should be considered directional at best. Some airlines are very good and accurate I feel, B6 for example is almost always spot on the seat counts due to their limited aircraft types, but others are all over the place. My feeling is that they are good as somewhat of a guide, but they cannot be used to extrapolate true performance. They are the only statistics this comprehensive that are available for free and that's why a lot of folks use them (myself included) but it comes at a cost and let's not forget they speak nothing to yields or profitability either and nor should they. The only sense you can get from that is the limited data that comes from a different data table that analyzes a portion of ticket prices between city pairs. But even in those cases it's tough to narrow down, because they are grouped in a lot of cases by market, not by airport.

Hey, I am not knocking the OP, because I love this stuff and have spent a lot of time working on my own versions relating to BOS and its arriving airlines, but like many others have said in the past you have to be careful drawing conclusions based on these stats, there are just too many wildcards and variables involved.
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
Sightseer
Posts: 1004
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:55 pm

YVRbud wrote:
Sightseer wrote:
deltadawg wrote:
This is very interesting. However, I did not see Turkish listed on ATL or am I missing something? Thanks for posting and welcome!

And AC only has numbers for one month.

QR in ATL also had quite the drop-off those last two months. Wonder what that's about.


Unfortunately, the BTS database only contains whatever the carriers actually submit to the agency, so there's no guarantee of completeness.

Anything that was incomplete or obviously wrong was left as a blank!

Interesting. I didn't know these reports weren't required.

Regardless, many thanks to the OP. Is there a good way to get this data for US carriers? I'd be happy to do it if I knew how.
 
SonaSounds
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:16 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:58 pm

jasoncrh wrote:
BTS information is solid information. It is illegal for an airline to falsify any submission, so if they were to do so it would cause big problems for them. Where you see strange things or things dont make sense is when there are diversions. sometimes a flight may be diverted for weather or what not to a city the airline doesnt normally serve or a destination they dont normally serve, but BTS counts that. So you just need to know to weed these things out. I've double checked this with BTS data and it is accurate. And no, AY at SFO is correct. High 80s load factors are good, and if the yield is good then it could very well be one of the best performing routes.


Looking at SFO's own website self reporting the flights and seats you can calculate AY's load factor yourself being 92.8% in 2017. BTS data is less accurate than T-100 which is less accurate than MIDT which is less accurate than PAXIS. An over simplified view is BTS & T-100 are different forms of self reported data, MIDT is tickets purchased, and PAXIS is tickets issued. Obviously tickets issued is the most accurate way of looking at it as a whole but if the airports themselves publish the data, that is going to be your go to source i.e. SFO publishes here: https://data.sfgov.org/Transportation/A ... /rkru-6vcg
 
User avatar
YVRbud
Topic Author
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:38 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:26 pm

Sightseer wrote:
YVRbud wrote:
Sightseer wrote:
And AC only has numbers for one month.

QR in ATL also had quite the drop-off those last two months. Wonder what that's about.


Unfortunately, the BTS database only contains whatever the carriers actually submit to the agency, so there's no guarantee of completeness.

Anything that was incomplete or obviously wrong was left as a blank!

Interesting. I didn't know these reports weren't required.

Regardless, many thanks to the OP. Is there a good way to get this data for US carriers? I'd be happy to do it if I knew how.


The database I used contains information for the U.S. carriers as well, I just thought it would be more interesting to look at the int'l ones. You can find the link to the BTS database at the top of the spreadsheet.

Like many of you have mentioned, certain carriers are showing up at airports that don't provide scheduled service there. This is because BTS is sorted by operating carrier, not marketing carrier and because ALL operated flights are included, even diversions or charters. Also, some of the operating carrier names might also be outdated.. you could look into these in more detail online. I also had to sort through a lot of noise to isolate the carriers of interest (to me), so I might have omitted a few interesting ones in the process.
733 734 736 737 738 739 744 752 753 763 772 77E 77L 77W 788 789 E75 E90 CR2 CR7 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 388
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:43 pm

Sightseer wrote:
YVRbud wrote:
Sightseer wrote:
And AC only has numbers for one month.

QR in ATL also had quite the drop-off those last two months. Wonder what that's about.


Unfortunately, the BTS database only contains whatever the carriers actually submit to the agency, so there's no guarantee of completeness.

Anything that was incomplete or obviously wrong was left as a blank!

Interesting. I didn't know these reports weren't required.

Regardless, many thanks to the OP. Is there a good way to get this data for US carriers? I'd be happy to do it if I knew how.


There are 12 main databases and they only show the point to point pieces.

https://transtats.bts.gov/Tables.asp?DB ... 20Carriers - this has all carriers reports, there are 2 each for domestic, international and combined with both segment and market versions (so 3 market, 3 segment).

https://transtats.bts.gov/Tables.asp?DB ... 20Carriers - this is US carriers only, same things as above.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Domestic only routes are available to Jan 2018, anything International will only be available to Oct 2017, that goes for the separate database and the combined one and also check my previous comment for some of the caveats you need to consider in addition.
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
mcogator
Posts: 593
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:51 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:49 pm

dfwjim1 wrote:
Since the airlines are sending in the data is it possible that they could be sending in false numbers to make the LFs look better than they really are?

I would think opposite. They would send in false numbers to make the LF look worse, to discourage competition.
“Traveling – it leaves you speechless, then turns you into a storyteller.” – Ibn Battuta
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1433
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:55 pm

IrishAyes wrote:
I'm questioning the accuracy of this data. It has Varig listed for ATL....extremely odd.

Possibly those are charters or diversions?
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6540
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:56 pm

lavalampluva wrote:
IrishAyes wrote:
I'm questioning the accuracy of this data. It has Varig listed for ATL....extremely odd.

Possibly those are charters or diversions?


Those charters must be in a time machine. Varig hasn't existed for a long time. I think that was his pont.
 
User avatar
jbpdx
Posts: 895
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:01 pm

Of the top 30 US airports TPA is ranked No. 29; PDX is No. 30 and is not listed.
^
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 797
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:19 pm

This is a little off. BTS produces T100 data. So BTS and T100 are basically the same thing.

MIDT is booking data. Although it's often very off as it only includes tickets booked through GDS. If you're in a country/ market where there are substantial bookings through other channels, or airlines' own web sites (like any market southwest serves, or markets where there's large penetration of direct bookings), there will be substantial issues with the data. If you're working for an airline, your airline either purchases adjusted MIDT data from sources such as DIIO or SABRE that take MIDT booking information and add in estimates for direct bookings, or you have an in-house team that adjusts the MIDT data for you. I'm not familiar with PAXIS, though I know there's a push to make it more widely adopted and it's reputed to be good.

In general, if you want to know load factors, T100 will report actual enplanements and arrivals, so it's very accurate.

SonaSounds wrote:
jasoncrh wrote:
BTS information is solid information. It is illegal for an airline to falsify any submission, so if they were to do so it would cause big problems for them. Where you see strange things or things dont make sense is when there are diversions. sometimes a flight may be diverted for weather or what not to a city the airline doesnt normally serve or a destination they dont normally serve, but BTS counts that. So you just need to know to weed these things out. I've double checked this with BTS data and it is accurate. And no, AY at SFO is correct. High 80s load factors are good, and if the yield is good then it could very well be one of the best performing routes.


Looking at SFO's own website self reporting the flights and seats you can calculate AY's load factor yourself being 92.8% in 2017. BTS data is less accurate than T-100 which is less accurate than MIDT which is less accurate than PAXIS. An over simplified view is BTS & T-100 are different forms of self reported data, MIDT is tickets purchased, and PAXIS is tickets issued. Obviously tickets issued is the most accurate way of looking at it as a whole but if the airports themselves publish the data, that is going to be your go to source i.e. SFO publishes here: https://data.sfgov.org/Transportation/A ... /rkru-6vcg
 
SonaSounds
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:16 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:06 pm

jasoncrh wrote:
This is a little off. BTS produces T100 data. So BTS and T100 are basically the same thing.

MIDT is booking data. Although it's often very off as it only includes tickets booked through GDS. If you're in a country/ market where there are substantial bookings through other channels, or airlines' own web sites (like any market southwest serves, or markets where there's large penetration of direct bookings), there will be substantial issues with the data. If you're working for an airline, your airline either purchases adjusted MIDT data from sources such as DIIO or SABRE that take MIDT booking information and add in estimates for direct bookings, or you have an in-house team that adjusts the MIDT data for you. I'm not familiar with PAXIS, though I know there's a push to make it more widely adopted and it's reputed to be good.

In general, if you want to know load factors, T100 will report actual enplanements and arrivals, so it's very accurate.

SonaSounds wrote:
jasoncrh wrote:
BTS information is solid information. It is illegal for an airline to falsify any submission, so if they were to do so it would cause big problems for them. Where you see strange things or things dont make sense is when there are diversions. sometimes a flight may be diverted for weather or what not to a city the airline doesnt normally serve or a destination they dont normally serve, but BTS counts that. So you just need to know to weed these things out. I've double checked this with BTS data and it is accurate. And no, AY at SFO is correct. High 80s load factors are good, and if the yield is good then it could very well be one of the best performing routes.


Looking at SFO's own website self reporting the flights and seats you can calculate AY's load factor yourself being 92.8% in 2017. BTS data is less accurate than T-100 which is less accurate than MIDT which is less accurate than PAXIS. An over simplified view is BTS & T-100 are different forms of self reported data, MIDT is tickets purchased, and PAXIS is tickets issued. Obviously tickets issued is the most accurate way of looking at it as a whole but if the airports themselves publish the data, that is going to be your go to source i.e. SFO publishes here: https://data.sfgov.org/Transportation/A ... /rkru-6vcg


As stated, an over simplified version, but you basically said the same thing I said. Almost everyone I know stopped using T-100 data and MIDT data back in 2013 as much as they could as most Airports (and some airlines) use PAXIS now as it is the most accurate mass purchasable information available when you cannot get the data from in-house sources or publicly available information published by airports/airlines. T-100/BTS data has numerous flaws and can be accurate but can also be off by over 8-10% (see you Finnair example). There is too much of a variance in self reported data and even the best airlines have months missing or wrong seat counts being used. Even using it for load factors calculations has its shortcomings as airlines make unintentional mistakes in this reporting all the time. Furthermore, T-100 is not intended to be an O&D data source so it has very specific limitations when using it to forecast traffic between city pairs.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9434
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:15 pm

mcogator wrote:
dfwjim1 wrote:
Since the airlines are sending in the data is it possible that they could be sending in false numbers to make the LFs look better than they really are?

I would think opposite. They would send in false numbers to make the LF look worse, to discourage competition.


Carriers don't want to file false reports with the U.S. government. That is not a good plan.

There are some areas where firms can ask the Feds to mask data based on competitive needs. They still need to submit correct data. I can't imagine asking to block T100s generally would be granted.
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:49 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
mcogator wrote:
dfwjim1 wrote:
Since the airlines are sending in the data is it possible that they could be sending in false numbers to make the LFs look better than they really are?

I would think opposite. They would send in false numbers to make the LF look worse, to discourage competition.


Carriers don't want to file false reports with the U.S. government. That is not a good plan.

There are some areas where firms can ask the Feds to mask data based on competitive needs. They still need to submit correct data. I can't imagine asking to block T100s generally would be granted.


Actually confidentiality is why the international numbers are 3 months behind the domestic ones. BTS state that themselves. They have the numbers at the same time, they just choose not to release the international ones until 3 months later
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
LH658
Posts: 1285
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:35 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:30 pm

Your missing Turkish on IAH
 
User avatar
SRQKEF
Posts: 1976
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:10 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:45 pm

jbpdx wrote:
Of the top 30 US airports TPA is ranked No. 29; PDX is No. 30 and is not listed.


I see PDX there too...
Nothing compares to taking off in an empty 757 with full thrust!
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2541
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 9:13 pm

What is interesting too is that international cargo carriers are included in the sheet too. For example in the case of DFW, Air China, Singapore Airlines and Asiana are listed even though they serve DFW with cargo flights only.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8995
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 9:27 pm

Excellent work YVRbud. It would nice to see by carrier if possible.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
legacyins
Posts: 1960
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 1:11 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:25 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
I didn't see SJC on the list. Is it not in the top 30?


Nope. Per 2017 numbers, SJC is #40
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6540
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:26 pm

I didn't see SJC on the list. Is it not in the top 30?
 
mcogator
Posts: 593
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:51 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:33 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
mcogator wrote:
dfwjim1 wrote:
Since the airlines are sending in the data is it possible that they could be sending in false numbers to make the LFs look better than they really are?

I would think opposite. They would send in false numbers to make the LF look worse, to discourage competition.


Carriers don't want to file false reports with the U.S. government. That is not a good plan.

There are some areas where firms can ask the Feds to mask data based on competitive needs. They still need to submit correct data. I can't imagine asking to block T100s generally would be granted.

I was thinking more along the line as another poster stating that QR reports everything that flies as a 773, when in reality, they're not, which results in lower LF.
“Traveling – it leaves you speechless, then turns you into a storyteller.” – Ibn Battuta
 
SonaSounds
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:16 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:17 pm

mcogator wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
mcogator wrote:
I would think opposite. They would send in false numbers to make the LF look worse, to discourage competition.


Carriers don't want to file false reports with the U.S. government. That is not a good plan.

There are some areas where firms can ask the Feds to mask data based on competitive needs. They still need to submit correct data. I can't imagine asking to block T100s generally would be granted.

I was thinking more along the line as another poster stating that QR reports everything that flies as a 773, when in reality, they're not, which results in lower LF.


Exactly. The actual number of passengers flown is about as accurate as they can get. What is not accurate is the aircraft types used, when a flight was canceled, etc so when calculating load factor the numbers tend to be off. I.E. your QR example saying they had 20k passengers on 20 flights on a B773 but in reality it was 20k passengers but their were only 19 flights as one was canceled and a B772 was swapped in for 2 of the other flights. Now the load factor calculation is all off. Anyone who has worked with this data has seen this problem countless times as why MIDT data and now PAXIS data is more widely used.
 
CHI2DFW
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 1:44 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:36 pm

Big difference on QF at DFW vs. the dfwtower report (blocking seats).
 
SonaSounds
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:16 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:27 pm

CHI2DFW wrote:
Big difference on QF at DFW vs. the dfwtower report (blocking seats).


Posting load factor after blocking seats is like cooking the books. The aircraft could be used on numerous other routes where it would not have to block seats. Knowingly flying a route that they will always have to block seats is taken into account when determining the route's feasibility. For example, QF might be ok knowing the max load factor they will ever hit for DFW-SYD is 80% because of the number of seats they have to block. The know their minimum route viability load factor and make it work with the blocked seats. No aviation professional would ever determine load factor after blocked seats.
 
AAtakeMeAway
Posts: 502
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 8:59 am

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:37 pm

Regarding the blocked seats on QF @ DFW, every time I've been on this flight (including in the 747 days DFW-BNE-SYD-DFW) there's been a butt in every single seat.
So, does anyone have any details on when and how many seats are blocked? Is it only during certain seasons they block seats?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13918
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Int'l Carrier Load Factors at Top 30 U.S. Airports

Thu Apr 19, 2018 6:36 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
lavalampluva wrote:
IrishAyes wrote:
I'm questioning the accuracy of this data. It has Varig listed for ATL....extremely odd.

Possibly those are charters or diversions?

Those charters must be in a time machine. Varig hasn't existed for a long time. I think that was his pont.

The only thing I can think of, is that they're somehow counting data from DL/G3's relationship... the latter of whom purchased RG.

Have run ops under its certificate since 2006 though, so still quite the head-scratcher.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos