17 replies to this topic

[Boranga]

Hi Everyone!!!!! ♥

 

Usually i'm not one to start up a post for anything really but one thing that just absolutely bothers me is the current system of passengers per airport. 

 

A prime example would be London. We have Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, City, and Southend Airports. Now realistically if each of these airports have direct flights say 3x a day to Boston well then we would be looking at 18 flights a day to Boston. Of course different airlines operating them but regardless, a whopping 18 flights a day. 

 

Now I think it's fair to say that in any reality or universe, that is oversaturated and completed unrealistic.

 

My solution to the problem? Simple. Instead of giving each airport demand for a destination, put that demand into a giant pot so to speak. 

 

Example:

 

London (total demand all airports) 

 

Not only does this give us more flexibility in terms of where we want to fly from because some of us don't want to fly from Heathrow but sometimes HAVE to because the demand there is significantly higher. This would also help spread out some of the demand you have at these mega airports because then every player would have the option of saying "I want to fly to Amsterdam i'll use London City as my airport." 

 

This puts a realistic in depth analysis of using demand to calculate the amount of flights a city should have to another city and would finally break the current thought process of having 10 players at Heathrow, 3 at Gatwick, and no one really interested in Southend. Of course this idea would be transferred to any city with multiple airports.  

 

Just my two sense and obviously if there are like any unclarifities, just ask and i'd be more than happy to reply ♥♥♥

[KJS607]

nice idead but I think London is a bad example as each London airport (minus Stansted & Luton) each has very different demand and serves very different crowds. For that reason I'm not keen on the idea.

[Boranga]

Ok then use Paris as your example. Two large airports and a LC airport in the middle of nowhere. But let's for the sake of making an argument use Orly and Charles de Gualle. Both not exclusive low-cost airports and both with their share of domestic and international flights. 9 times out of 10 Charles de Gaulle is preferred over Orly simply because the demand is much greater at CDG. Combine the two (or three if you want to include that little Low-Cost airport) and you solve the problem. No more preferential treatment and a much more balanced city. 

 

You could use Paris, Berlin, Tokyo, Shanghai, New York, Washington, Sao Paolo, Rio, and MANY MANY MANY more as example if the above one doesn't suit you though. ♥

[Northern]

Unfortunately Kai is right. the markets at all of these airports are totally different, no longer haul airline would want to serve New York from Southend airport as its quite a way out, use Newcastle and Tees Valley for example, they cut cross their catchment area however airlines prefer Newcastle to Tees Valley as it offers far superior facilities, hence forth competitive routes from Tees Valley have lower demand as people are more keen to use Newcastle and with the good transport links such as the T&W Metro or the national rail services to reach the airport.

 

Also there is allot of catchment spill off, so in the UK large sectors of the country under your idea would have shared pax stats, therefore decreasing realism dramatically

[Mobeer]

see below..

[Mobeer]

The markets aren't totally different for London - they partially overlap. For example a business traveller in Essex might prefer Southend over Heathrow.

I like the idea of airports having overlapping cachement areas; problem is the demand calculation would be incredibly difficult. For example frequent flights Gatwick might take passengers from Heathrow, then low fares from Southend takes demand from Gatwick and Stanstead, etc, etc. I just don't see how to quantify the likely effects of such actions in any reasonable way.

[Will101]

This is partly going to be in AE4, though I think some airports will keep their own demands, but will be affected by the airports nearby

[Hake.]

I think it's a bad idea. Luton - Newark would not work as a replacement for Heathrow - JFK

[Boranga]

I think it's a bad idea. Luton - Newark would not work as a replacement for Heathrow - JFK

As a travel agent in the business I can tell you it would. A lot of people especially people travelling international tend to not be able to fly from Birmingham or East Midlands because the airfare is much too expensive so they tend to travel to London. Considering that Luton is closer and easier to get to for them than Heathrow, they'd wouldn't mind a connection (even if it's only seasonal)

 

Plus unless you are a business traveller (which most people are not) whether the airport is Newark or John F. Kennedy makes almost no difference to the average joe.

 

Also you have to know that the only reason LHR - JFK sounds better is because it's been flown for what 40 years? Had British Airways decided to base itself in LTN, STN, or LGW (just THEORY now), then we wouldn't consider LHR - JFK quite so normal. People are used to constants but that doesn't mean alternatives are set to fail. ♥

[Pineair]

.?

[TNT88]

?

[Yoshi]

How about Las Vegas?  There's McCarran Airport and North Las Vegas Airport.  The two airports are completely different.  McCarran is a major international airport that serves as a focus city for Southwest and Allegiant.  Therefore, demand is greater.  North Las Vegas, on the other hand, is small and only handles flights to the Grand Canyon.  Demand is significantly lower.  It would not make sense to have both airports have the same demand.

[Hake.]

Actually, Boranga, I can give a counter example. Ryanair , BA and Aer Lingus all fly Dublin - London, right? Aer Lingus, while still they have 14 daily flights DUB - LHR. Why? Irish people will pay more to fly to a more central airport. In 2013, EI and BA carried 1,664,000 pax. Meanwhile, only 937,000 people flew to LGW, flown by EI and FR.

[Yuxi]

Irish people will pay more to fly to a more central airport.

On the flip side, the primary airport for a city is not always the most central airport. Take DFW/DAL and IAH/HOU for example: passengers and airlines would have preferred the smaller, more central airport but had to be forced to move through legislation due to capacity constraints. As for LCCs flying to different airports, that's due to lower costs at those airports the fact that the market segment they're targeting are more willing to travel longer to the airport in exchange for lower fares. So the reasons the current airport usage patterns came to be are more complicated than just distance to the city/population center.

[iquit]

I would think implementing real connecting pax and allowing them to connect via ground transport would partially mimics the situation.

 

 

My solution to the problem? Simple. Instead of giving each airport demand for a destination, put that demand into a giant pot so to speak. 

 

Example:

 

London (total demand all airports) 

 

Not only does this give us more flexibility in terms of where we want to fly from because some of us don't want to fly from Heathrow but sometimes HAVE to because the demand there is significantly higher. This would also help spread out some of the demand you have at these mega airports because then every player would have the option of saying "I want to fly to Amsterdam i'll use London City as my airport." 

 

This puts a realistic in depth analysis of using demand to calculate the amount of flights a city should have to another city and would finally break the current thought process of having 10 players at Heathrow, 3 at Gatwick, and no one really interested in Southend. Of course this idea would be transferred to any city with multiple airports.

Can you show how the demand will be calculated in equation form?

[Boranga]

Sorry that I haven't replied to everyones queries ♥

 

- First of all what needs to be considered with LHR being the choice airport for Irish people is well, British Airways and Aer Lingus have an codesharing agreement which means since BA's larger hub is in LHR, most people from DUB go to LHR to fly on to somewhere else. Of course I do accept that some people do strive to be as central as possible as well. ^^

 

- Ok first of all let's not compare cities with dead Airports that never had service. But this is a game right so if someone wants to fly from the North Las Vegas airport with demand then I guess they should but i'm talking about multiple airports with actual passenger numbers here. 

 

- Now for all you naysayers saying "STN and LTN are Lowcost Airports". You're not exactly right. Scheduled flights from Stansted can be found with Air Berlin, Air Moldova, and Pegasus Airlines. Luton has scheduled flights from Tarom, El Al, & Atlasjet. 

 

- And lol I'm absolutely terrible at math so I can try to give a calculation but it probably won't make any sense. 

 

Ok so let's use LHR as our example as it seems to be the big example we've been using the entire time. 

 

LHR + LGW + STN + LTN + LCY + (SEN if you want) = Total number of passengers in the London metro area.

 

As the total number of passengers also give demand. Typically the higher the number of passengers, the higher the demand (except when the airport is next door). 

 

LON (in total) = 134,997,486 which in turn would give a very high demand. 

 

To better calculate this the best I can (because i'm honestly math retarded) LHR composes 69,983,174 of that 134,997,486 which is about 51.84% of the total. 

 

Now I decided to use a route from LHR - AMS and the demand at the moment is 2103. Since 2103 is only for the data LHR, in order to get the amount for ALL London Airports, we need to realize that 2103 = 51.84%. In order to get the value of 100% we multiple 2103 * 100 then / by 51.84 which = 4056.71 or 4057. This represents the total demand for all LON airports. So if my idea were implimented you would see this number from any London Airport to Amsterdam. Gives you the option of where you want to fly from within London. 

 

I'm not going to say anymore at the moment...i've already said WAY too much so i'll just wait for your feedback and um yeah thanks for taking the time to pay attention to my topic. ♥

[TNT88]

but the cost for operating from different airport is quite different you see

combining all the airport like that would take lots of time, especially calculating the other essentials things you haven't take consideration of, like runway requirements, special rules, LGA airport for example doesn't have international flights, taxes, gate availability, etc.

[Hake.]

This idea just made it worse. 4000 pax a day is not realistic from Lydd, Oxford or Southend alone. Scammers with 10 daily B744D serviced from Lydd or Southend would have a field day. This would also ruin the pricing system. Taking London as an example, say I want to fly Waterford - Luton. But what's this? A scamline charges $1 for daily flights? On this game, I would move on to Stansted. But wait, these $1 seats mean that charging normal prices still gives me low load factors because if the passenger doesn't care where they fly from/ to, they're not going to pay $140 to fly to the same area. Just noting, people from the east midlands, where Luton's passemgers come from, are not going to fly from Gatwick or Lydd.
I'm also doubting that most people going DUB -LHR are connecting to other airports. The bulk of people I know have gone to London, not connevting.