JonesNL
Topic Author
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:38 am

When comparing planes from A against B in the threads a lot of post mention Cost Per Available Seat Mile (CASM) as an important denominator. The purpose of this topic is to gather actual data regarding the CASM of different planes and airlines, so it is possible to do an factual comparison regarding CASM.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4151
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:28 am

Gov't used to post CASM numbers, I don't think they do anymore

Oliver Wyman is the only place I have been able to find CASM information:
https://www.planestats.com/
https://www.planestats.com/bhs_archive
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13990
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:31 am

Most of the world uses CASK.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
drdisque
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:01 pm

true airline specific all-in CASM are considered proprietary trade secrets.

When the DOT used to report them, they were backing into them based on 10K filings and their estimations of ASM from the known flights and equipment that were operated.

However, it was an estimate. It can't accurately deal with the allocation of fixed costs, fuel burn numbers across different routes and aircraft types, airport costs that vary by airport, properly allocating catering costs across flights where they were actually incurred, adjusting crew costs for the actual seniority and scale of the crew that operates the flight, attributing deadheading and reaccom expenses to routes and aircraft that actually incurred them, etc.
Last edited by drdisque on Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:01 pm

zeke wrote:
Most of the world uses CASK.


Which is just CASM/1.60934...no?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13990
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:09 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
zeke wrote:
Most of the world uses CASK.


Which is just CASM/1.60934...no?


No, most airlines in the world in their public reporting use CASK, no one I ever speak to use CASM.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
rrbsztk
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:48 am

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:38 pm

zeke wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
zeke wrote:
Most of the world uses CASK.


Which is just CASM/1.60934...no?


No, most airlines in the world in their public reporting use CASK, no one I ever speak to use CASM.


And 1.60934 would be the correct way to convert between kilometers and miles.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:08 pm

rrbsztk wrote:
zeke wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:

Which is just CASM/1.60934...no?


No, most airlines in the world in their public reporting use CASK, no one I ever speak to use CASM.


And 1.60934 would be the correct way to convert between kilometers and miles.


Exactly. I'm not sure why Zeke says I'm wrong or is being condescending to OP.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:09 pm

zeke wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
zeke wrote:
Most of the world uses CASK.


Which is just CASM/1.60934...no?


No, most airlines in the world in their public reporting use CASK, no one I ever speak to use CASM.


That wasn't my point, my metric-unit friend.

My point is that CASM divided by 1.60934 = CASK :)
 
ITSTours
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:24 pm

US Airlines' CASM is literally their operating cost divided by their ASM, or at least that is how they calculate it.
 
drdisque
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:31 pm

ITSTours wrote:
US Airlines' CASM is literally their operating cost divided by their ASM, or at least that is how they calculate it.


Yes, but without context that's a totally useless number. For example, just because Frontier has a lower overall CASM than Spirit, doesn't mean they are outperforming them with regards to cost on a particular route. Spirit could have higher total CASM because they fly more internationally or fly to more airports with high real estate costs or because they have a different fleet mix. That doesn't mean anything when comparing them head-to-head on DEN-ORD.

The useful cases are to compare between fleet types or mainline vs. regional which is where the nuance comes in.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5847
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:15 pm

drdisque wrote:
ITSTours wrote:
US Airlines' CASM is literally their operating cost divided by their ASM, or at least that is how they calculate it.


Yes, but without context that's a totally useless number. For example, just because Frontier has a lower overall CASM than Spirit, doesn't mean they are outperforming them with regards to cost on a particular route. Spirit could have higher total CASM because they fly more internationally or fly to more airports with high real estate costs or because they have a different fleet mix. That doesn't mean anything when comparing them head-to-head on DEN-ORD.

The useful cases are to compare between fleet types or mainline vs. regional which is where the nuance comes in.


I don't know where you acquired your analytical skills. Do please tell us, so people can avoid that and search for better.

CASM is CASM, whether driven by employee wages, employee productivity, real estate costs, fuel burn and maintenance from old aircraft, or whatever. The OP didn't ask for route-specific CASM, nor crew-seniority-adjusted CASM (which is absolutely, utterly ridiculous: look at the difference between 6-yr wage rates and 9-year wage rates on DL 757 with 199 seats on a 1500-mile route). There has been some history of average stage-length adjustments (CO had an affinity) but not much agreement on how distance adjustment should be applied. See the MIT Airline Data project for discussion. CASM systemwide isn't a bit of a secret: it gets disclosed quarterly by U.S. carriers in SEC filings and press releases. You may find a breakout of mainline vs. regional ops, too.

As for the dude that doesn't know CASM from CASK, I can point out that the 3 largest airlines in the world use CASM, not CASK, so he needs to expand his base of knowledge. The post noting CASK is CASM/1.61 is mocking that lack of understanding.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 9620
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:41 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
drdisque wrote:
ITSTours wrote:
US Airlines' CASM is literally their operating cost divided by their ASM, or at least that is how they calculate it.


Yes, but without context that's a totally useless number. For example, just because Frontier has a lower overall CASM than Spirit, doesn't mean they are outperforming them with regards to cost on a particular route. Spirit could have higher total CASM because they fly more internationally or fly to more airports with high real estate costs or because they have a different fleet mix. That doesn't mean anything when comparing them head-to-head on DEN-ORD.

The useful cases are to compare between fleet types or mainline vs. regional which is where the nuance comes in.


I don't know where you acquired your analytical skills. Do please tell us, so people can avoid that and search for better.

CASM is CASM, whether driven by employee wages, employee productivity, real estate costs, fuel burn and maintenance from old aircraft, or whatever. The OP didn't ask for route-specific CASM, nor crew-seniority-adjusted CASM (which is absolutely, utterly ridiculous: look at the difference between 6-yr wage rates and 9-year wage rates on DL 757 with 199 seats on a 1500-mile route). There has been some history of average stage-length adjustments (CO had an affinity) but not much agreement on how distance adjustment should be applied. See the MIT Airline Data project for discussion. CASM systemwide isn't a bit of a secret: it gets disclosed quarterly by U.S. carriers in SEC filings and press releases. You may find a breakout of mainline vs. regional ops, too.

As for the dude that doesn't know CASM from CASK, I can point out that the 3 largest airlines in the world use CASM, not CASK, so he needs to expand his base of knowledge. The post noting CASK is CASM/1.61 is mocking that lack of understanding.

All in CASM is totally calculable from an airline’s quarterly release, if it’s not explicitly spelled out.

The issue you need to deal with is stage length variation. Shorter flights cost more per mile. Longer flights cost less all other things being equal. This happens because airport costs and the process of taking off and landing don’t vary with distance.

The industry adjusts for this using root of the miles stage adjustment. You can probably google the formula, but it involves taking the square root of the stage length.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:50 pm

enilria wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
drdisque wrote:

Yes, but without context that's a totally useless number. For example, just because Frontier has a lower overall CASM than Spirit, doesn't mean they are outperforming them with regards to cost on a particular route. Spirit could have higher total CASM because they fly more internationally or fly to more airports with high real estate costs or because they have a different fleet mix. That doesn't mean anything when comparing them head-to-head on DEN-ORD.

The useful cases are to compare between fleet types or mainline vs. regional which is where the nuance comes in.


I don't know where you acquired your analytical skills. Do please tell us, so people can avoid that and search for better.

CASM is CASM, whether driven by employee wages, employee productivity, real estate costs, fuel burn and maintenance from old aircraft, or whatever. The OP didn't ask for route-specific CASM, nor crew-seniority-adjusted CASM (which is absolutely, utterly ridiculous: look at the difference between 6-yr wage rates and 9-year wage rates on DL 757 with 199 seats on a 1500-mile route). There has been some history of average stage-length adjustments (CO had an affinity) but not much agreement on how distance adjustment should be applied. See the MIT Airline Data project for discussion. CASM systemwide isn't a bit of a secret: it gets disclosed quarterly by U.S. carriers in SEC filings and press releases. You may find a breakout of mainline vs. regional ops, too.

As for the dude that doesn't know CASM from CASK, I can point out that the 3 largest airlines in the world use CASM, not CASK, so he needs to expand his base of knowledge. The post noting CASK is CASM/1.61 is mocking that lack of understanding.

All in CASM is totally calculable from an airline’s quarterly release, if it’s not explicitly spelled out.

The issue you need to deal with is stage length variation. Shorter flights cost more per mile. Longer flights cost less all other things being equal. This happens because airport costs and the process of taking off and landing don’t vary with distance.

The industry adjusts for this using root of the miles stage adjustment. You can probably google the formula, but it involves taking the square root of the stage length.


I would point out just one more thing: cargo operations.

In US Airlines' quarterly reports, their CASM is literally operating cost divided by total ASMs. This is fine for primarily passenger airlines.

For Airlines like Korean Air which operates multiple cargo-only freighters, the total operating cost divided by total ASK skews the CASK upward.

So we cannot calculate, or compare with an equal standard, their CASK/CASM unless we have a passenger-specific operating costs...which I assume to be confidential.
 
drdisque
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:46 pm

Like I said, an all-in CASM number, on its own, is completely useless.
 
Kilopond
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 10:08 am

Re: CASM numbers

Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:52 pm

drdisque wrote:
Like I said, an all-in CASM number, on its own, is completely useless.


You are prefectly right if you take into account airlines with multiple cabin classes. And even if you would just compare the notorious locust swarms among them, the measurement unit CASM would be extremely blurry.
 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:05 am

Cost per Available Mile in cents 2nd qtr 2019
American 14.94
Delta 14.51
United 13.56
Southwest 12.36

Southwest's CASM number of 12.36 cents (second 3 months of 2019) is probably the most useful since their markets and equipment is very similar.

The legacy carriers would be much more helpful if they reported CASM for different markets TATL, TPAC, Latin America, Domestic but they are not about to give that much information.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:16 am

Is the mile in CASM the nautical mile or the weird mile?
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:23 am

PacoMartin wrote:
Cost per Available Mile in cents 2nd qtr 2019
American 14.94
Delta 14.51
United 13.56
Southwest 12.36

Southwest's CASM number of 12.36 cents (second 3 months of 2019) is probably the most useful since their markets and equipment is very similar.

The legacy carriers would be much more helpful if they reported CASM for different markets TATL, TPAC, Latin America, Domestic but they are not about to give that much information.


simplistic CASM/CASK or however you want to tag it is
strongly dependent on seat maps.
Take an A330 with 9 across cattle class only versus a premium heavy setup.
I'd expect CAS* to vary by a factor of up to two or even more?
Murphy is an optimist
 
toobz
Posts: 848
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 6:33 am

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:28 am

PacoMartin wrote:
Cost per Available Mile in cents 2nd qtr 2019
American 14.94
Delta 14.51
United 13.56
Southwest 12.36



Interesting that DL cost is higher than UA, given that UA is more premium heavy. What would this mean? DL spends more in pay or DL spends more money on the service on board?? I would think that UA would spend more based on the fact that they have more C seats in general. Or is it because UA has longer flights in general?
 
waly777
Posts: 727
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:11 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:40 am

JonesNL wrote:
When comparing planes from A against B in the threads a lot of post mention Cost Per Available Seat Mile (CASM) as an important denominator. The purpose of this topic is to gather actual data regarding the CASM of different planes and airlines, so it is possible to do an factual comparison regarding CASM.


Hmm, CASK (or CASM) alone as a comparison between different AC or airlines doesn't really give valuable information in terms of efficiency. A short haul airline with only narrow bodies would tend to have a higher CASK than a long haul only airline with wide bodies as the ASK being the denominator would be larger on the latter airline, so an apples to orange comparison. Most airlines have different configurations of the same AC type, e.g 2 class, 3 class, 4 class 777 and the CASK would vary significantly and doesn't give valuable info as they would fly different missions.

CASK would need to be measured in addition to RASK, Yield, BELF for meaningful comparison and they are relatively easy to calculate if an airline releases their financial statement publicly for cost. Seat, route distance data is also available for ASK.
The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
 
User avatar
TheFlyingDisk
Posts: 1848
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:43 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:11 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
As for the dude that doesn't know CASM from CASK, I can point out that the 3 largest airlines in the world use CASM, not CASK, so he needs to expand his base of knowledge. The post noting CASK is CASM/1.61 is mocking that lack of understanding.


The 3 largest airlines may use CASM, but there are plenty of other airlines that uses CASK & not CASM. Case in point

The AirAsia group uses CASK, and for Q2 2019 their group CASK (meaning total CASK for their Thai, Malaysian, Indonesian & Philippine affiliates) is 3.78 cents (USD).
Singapore Airlines' CASK for 2018 with fuel is around 6 cents (USD).
Japan Airlines' 2017 CASK is around 9.3 cents (USD).
Lufthansa's CASK for 2018 is around 6.3 cents (USD)

Also technically the Lufthansa group is the 3rd largest airline by revenue, so yeah....

https://newsroom.airasia.com/news/airas ... al-results
https://www.singaporeair.com/saar5/pdf/ ... fy1819.pdf
https://www.jal.com/en/investor/library ... 0427en.pdf
https://investor-relations.lufthansagro ... ensson.pdf
Last edited by TheFlyingDisk on Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
I FLY KLM+ALASKA+QATAR+MALAYSIA+AIRASIA+MALINDO
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3937
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:14 am

CASM is now calculated with Available seat Kilometers and the Numbers can be gleaned from Air Transport world Magazine. or ATWOnline.com
 
United1
Posts: 3862
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:26 pm

toobz wrote:
PacoMartin wrote:
Cost per Available Mile in cents 2nd qtr 2019
American 14.94
Delta 14.51
United 13.56
Southwest 12.36



Interesting that DL cost is higher than UA, given that UA is more premium heavy. What would this mean? DL spends more in pay or DL spends more money on the service on board?? I would think that UA would spend more based on the fact that they have more C seats in general. Or is it because UA has longer flights in general?


UAs lower CASM has more to do with UAs stage length than anything else. The CASM (and the US4 do report it as CASM) numbers above really can't be used for a "who has lower operating costs" analysis unless you adjust them for stage length.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 9620
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:14 pm

ITSTours wrote:
enilria wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:

I don't know where you acquired your analytical skills. Do please tell us, so people can avoid that and search for better.

CASM is CASM, whether driven by employee wages, employee productivity, real estate costs, fuel burn and maintenance from old aircraft, or whatever. The OP didn't ask for route-specific CASM, nor crew-seniority-adjusted CASM (which is absolutely, utterly ridiculous: look at the difference between 6-yr wage rates and 9-year wage rates on DL 757 with 199 seats on a 1500-mile route). There has been some history of average stage-length adjustments (CO had an affinity) but not much agreement on how distance adjustment should be applied. See the MIT Airline Data project for discussion. CASM systemwide isn't a bit of a secret: it gets disclosed quarterly by U.S. carriers in SEC filings and press releases. You may find a breakout of mainline vs. regional ops, too.

As for the dude that doesn't know CASM from CASK, I can point out that the 3 largest airlines in the world use CASM, not CASK, so he needs to expand his base of knowledge. The post noting CASK is CASM/1.61 is mocking that lack of understanding.

All in CASM is totally calculable from an airline’s quarterly release, if it’s not explicitly spelled out.

The issue you need to deal with is stage length variation. Shorter flights cost more per mile. Longer flights cost less all other things being equal. This happens because airport costs and the process of taking off and landing don’t vary with distance.

The industry adjusts for this using root of the miles stage adjustment. You can probably google the formula, but it involves taking the square root of the stage length.


I would point out just one more thing: cargo operations.

In US Airlines' quarterly reports, their CASM is literally operating cost divided by total ASMs. This is fine for primarily passenger airlines.

For Airlines like Korean Air which operates multiple cargo-only freighters, the total operating cost divided by total ASK skews the CASK upward.

So we cannot calculate, or compare with an equal standard, their CASK/CASM unless we have a passenger-specific operating costs...which I assume to be confidential.

CASM is still CASM. or CASK is still CASK. It's expenses divided by ASM/ASK. Different airlines have different expenses. I would agree they should probably split out freighters, but it would only be a huge problem if they excluded cargo revenue from RASM/RASK and included cargo cost in CASM/CASK.
 
User avatar
usdcaguy
Posts: 1338
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 12:41 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:40 pm

It's important to remember that the LH Group, Singapore Airlines, IAG, AFKL and the like are going to have lower CASM than US carriers because they fly more long-haul lights as a percentage of total trips than the US4. It can be hard to compare US airlines to European ones as each region has its goldmines and headaches that are difficult to compare. That is why investors always compare the US4 more to each other than to foreign airlines. If you were compare AA and AF for example, it would be like comparing Macy's to Gap Stores. Same industry but different business models and market conditions.
 
stiner62
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:01 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:02 am

I assume you are likely an airport employee or an airline employee trying to figure out if route X is making money.

A couple of points regarding the comments above stating CASM for X carrier is Y. Those reported CASM numbers are not stage length adjusted. Those numbers are comparing apples to oranges to bananas and grape fruit. Those numbers are worthless.

Further, CASM is a non-linear, semipower curve driven by cost allocations within each finance department within the airline. How any single carrier prorates costs throughout its network is proprietary to that carrier and is updated often as better data to tie direct costs are evaluated and agreed to. How one carrier prorates the cost for maintenance or airport costs, might be completely different from another carrier.

Even if you were able to have the actual curve for an airline, it would be completely worthless outside that specific time period. CASM is not online nonlinear, it is seasonal. As carriers increase and decrease utilization throughout the seasons, indirect costs spreads change which have a direct impact on CASM.

While I don't know what your goal is, I would recommend you maybe look at RASM curves. There are only a handful of ways ticket revenue is allocated (IATA prorates and mileage square root are the main methodology). For non-ULCC carriers, this will give you a general idea if a route is performing well or not. While it does not include the ancillary information, you cannot find good data to prorate ancillary fees across carriers anyway.
 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: CASM numbers

Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:35 pm

toobz wrote:
Interesting that DL cost is higher than UA, given that UA is more premium heavy. What would this mean? DL spends more in pay or DL spends more money on the service on board?? I would think that UA would spend more based on the fact that they have more C seats in general. Or is it because UA has longer flights in general?


It is because UA has longer flights in general.

The statistic 13.56 CASM for United Airlines doesn't mean much because RASM is very dependent on which market you are in. For very long TPAC flights RASM is very low compared to domestic flights.

United Passenger revenue per available seat mile (cents)- Market- Passenger Revenue (Million $)- Available Seat Miles (Millions)- % Total ASM
15.78 Domestic $6,547 41,484 56.64%
13.65 Atlantic $1,927 14,114 19.27%
12.73 Latin America $877 6,889 9.41%
10.56 Pacific $1,135 10,753 14.68%
14.32 United Airlines across all markets

CASM may be useful when comparing an airline quarterly results to the previous year's results, but it is almost useless when comparing one airline to another.

Volaris likes to compare its CASM to several different groups which it handily beats by a large percentage. However, Volaris targets passengers who are visiting friends and relatives, cost-conscious business people and leisure travelers in Mexico and to select destinations in the United States and Central America. So they expect very low ticket prices and Volaris has no premium seats at all.

Latin American carriers: Avianca, Azul, Copa, Aeromexico, LATAM and Gol
U.S. LCCs: Southwest, Allegiant, Jet Blue, Spirit.
US Legacy carriers Delta, American Airlines, Alaska Airlines and United Airlines

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