Current Status of Airlines

Current Status of the
Airport / Airline Industry
Dr. Richard de Neufville
Professor of Systems Engineering and

Civil and Environmental Engineering
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Current Status of the
Air Transport Industry
y Objective: To define
4 currentsituation
4 major new factors
y Topics:
4 Airline
and Airport Rankings
4 Current Trends
• Shake-up / Disappearance of Network Airlines
• Coming and Going of Transfer Hubs
• Commercialization / Privatization of Airports
Principal drivers of air
transportation industry
y Long-term 6% annual decrease in air fares:
4 Driving comparable annual worldwide traffic growth
y Commercialization:
4 market economy management replaces government ownership
and control in a regulated environment
y Low-cost carriers
4 Southwest, AirTran, Jet Blue, Westjet, Ryanair, easyjet, etc
y Globalization:
4 transnational airline alliances and airport groups
y Technical innovation:
4 e-commerce, RJs, A380 NLA, satellite-based navigation

Major Recent Events
y Disappearance of Major Airlines
4 TWA, Swissair, Sabena
y Mergers of
4 Japan Airlines and Japan Air Systems (2002)
4 Air France and KLM (Sept 04)
y Major Bankruptcies
4 United, US Airways, Air Canada – others near!
y Surge by Low-Cost Passenger Carriers
4 Air Tran, Ryanair, easyjet
y Surge by Chinese Carriers
4 Cathay Pacific, China Airlines, EVA
y … also by Fedex
World Traffic, (Pax-Km x 109)
World and IATA
Year Pax-km, Billions IATA Annual Growth %
IATA World share, % IATA World
2003 2704 3236 83.5 (0.4) 1
2002 2770 3196 86 (1) (1)
2001 2652 2912 91 (4) (4)
2000 2757 3018 91 4 (2)
1999 2657 3074 86 6 6
1998 2514 2888 87 7 4
1990 1600 2186 73 18 8
1987 1042 1763 59 9 8
1982 712 1263 56 4 4
1977 600 1036 58
Source: IATA World Air Transport Statistics
Note: Change in Series; now includes charter travel
IATA Members’ Traffic,
Revenues, Yield, and CPI
Traffic Revenues Yield Inflation
250
200
Percent of 1991
150
100
50
0
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
Interpretation of Trends
y Over past 13 years…

4 Yields (revenues/unit distance) have
dropped about 20%
4 While inflation has risen about 50%
4 So: costs on a constant basis cut in half
4 Thus: traffic doubled
4 Implying price elasticity about -1.3 > -1.0
4 So total revenues grow as price drops

Airports by millions of pax., 2003
(IATA data; US- Bold, hubs- italics)
Rank Airline Millions of Passengers Annual %
2003 2002 2001 2000 1993 1993-2003
1 Atlanta 78.8 76.6 75.9 80.2 47.8 6.5
2 Chicago / OHare 69.4 66.5 66.8 72.1 65.1 0.7
3 London / Heathrow 63.2 63.0 60.7 64.6 47.6 3.3
4 Tokyo / Haneda 63.2 61.1 58.7 56.4 41.5 5.2
5 Los Angeles / Internatl 55.0 56.2 61.0 68.5 47.8 1.5
6 Dallas / Ft. Worth 53.2 52.8 55.2 60.7 49.7 0.7
7 Frankfurt / Main 48.1 48.1 48.6 49.4 31.9 5.1
8 Paris / de Gaulle 47.9 48.1 48.0 48.2 25.7 8.6
9 Amsterdam / Schiphol 39.8 40.6 39.5 39.6 20.1 9.8
10 Denver / International 37.5 35.7 36.1 38.7 32.6 1.5
11 Phoenix 37.4 35.6 35.5 35.9 23.5 5.9
12 Las Vegas 36.3 35.0 35.2 36.9 22.5 6.1
13 Madrid 35.4 33.7 34.0 32.8 17.3 10.5
14 Houston / Bush 34.1 34.4 34.8 35.2 20.3 6.8
15 Minneapolis / St. Paul 33.2 32.6 35.2 36.7 23.4 4.2
16 Detroit / Metro 32.7 32.4 32.3 35.5 24.2 3.5
17 New York / Kennedy 31.7 28.9 29.4 32.8 26.8 1.8
18 London / Gatwick 29.9 29.5 31.2 32.1 20.1 4.9
19 Miami / International 29.6 30.1 31.7 33.6 28.7 0.3
20 New York / Newark 29.6 29.0 30.5 34.2 25.8 1.5
4 In 2003, airport traffic mostly stagnated
4 Big drops in
• Asian market (Hong Kong, Beijing, Singapore,
Tokyo – also Hawaii and San Francisco)
• St Louis, Pittsburgh and Zurich as hubs close
4 Several airports have fallen lower in rankings

(e.g. due to failures of TWA, Swiss, Sabena)

Changes in Transfer Hubs
y Big changes in recent years
y New Hubs
4 Big: Paris/de Gaulle, Amsterdam, Munich
4 Small: London/Stansted
y “Close” of old hubs

4 Pittsburgh (US shrinking to Philadelphia)
4 St Louis (TWA merged out of existence)
4 Zurich (collapse of Swissair)

21 Bangkok 29.1 30.5 30.6 29.6 17.1 7.0
22 San Francisco / Internatl 28.8 30.7 34.6 41.2 32.0 -1.0
23 Orlando / International 27.3 26.7 28.2 30.8 21.5 2.7
24 Seattle / Tacoma 26.7 26.7 27.0 28.4 18.8 4.2
25 Hong Kong / C L K 26.4 33.5 32.6 32.7 24.4 0.8
26 Rome / Fuimicino 25.8 25.0 25.6 25.9 18.8 3.7
27 Toronto / Pearson 24.7 25.9 28.0 28.8 20.5 2.0
28 Philadelphia 24.7 24.4 23.9 24.9 16.5 5.0
29 Beijing / Pudong 24.4 27.2 24.2 21.7 *
30 Sydney 24.2 23.4 24.3 23.5 16.6 4.6
31 Munich 24.0 23.0 23.6 23.1 12.5 9.2
32 Tokyo / Narita 23.5 25.8 25.4 27.4 20.0 1.8
33 Singapore 23.1 27.4 28.1 28.6 18.8 2.3
34 Charlotte 23.1 23.6 23.2 23.1 17.3 3.4
35 Boston / Logan 22.8 22.6 24.2 27.4 24.0 -0.5
36 Barcelona 22.5 21.2 20.7 19.8 *
37 New York / LaGuardia 22.5 21.3 21.9 25.2 19.8 1.4
38 Paris / Orly 22.4 23.1 23.0 25.4 25.3 -1.1
39 Mexico City 21.7 20.3 20.6 20.7 *
40 Cincinnati 21.2 20.9 17.3 22.5 12.3 7.2

41 St. Louis / Lambert 20.4 25.6 26.7 30.5 19.9 0.3

42 Seoul/Gimpo 19.8 21.0 22.0 36.7 22.6 -1.2
43 Washington/Baltimore 19.7 19.0 * * *
44 Manchester (UK) 19.5 18.6 19.5 12.8 5.2
45 Honolulu 19.4 21.1 21.1 22.7 22.0 -1.2
46 Palma de Mallorca 19.1 17.8 19.2 12.4 5.4
47 Osaka / Itami 18.8 * 19.3 20.5 *
48 Fukuoka 18.8 * * * *
49 London/Stansted 18.7 * * * *
50 Jakarta 18.6 * * * *
Zurich 17.0 17.7 21.0 22.7 13.1 3.0

Washington / Dulles 17.0 17.9 20.0 *
Brussels 15.2 19.6 21.6 *
Pittsburgh 14.2 18.0 19.9 19.8 18.5 -2.3
Washington / Reagan 14.2 16.1 -1.2

Current Major Airport Projects
4 Bangkok, Guangzhou Major New Airports
4 Nagoya/Chubu Airport in the Sea
4 Osaka/Kansai New Island for 2nd runway
4 Toronto Buildings, Runways, etc
4 London/HRW Terminal 5 ($8 billion)
4 Washington/Dulles Mid-field Pax Bldg, etc
4 Madrid ; Miami/Intnatl Runway, Buildings
4 NY / JFK; SFO; Singapore; Rail transit
4 Boston/Logan ; Pax Buildings, Roads
Airline Rankings
(Pax-Km, billions)
Airline 2003 2002 1995 1992 Annual % 95-03*
American 193 196 165 157 2.1
United 167 176 180 149 (0.9)
Delta 144 153 137 130 0.6
Northwest 110 116 101 94 1.1
British 100 99 94 72 0.8
Air France 99 99 50 37 12.3
Lufthansa 97 94 62 49 7.1
Continental 91 91 57 69 7.5
Southwest 77 71 22 22.7
JAL 76 83 70 55 1.1
Qantas 69 73 52 31 4.1
Singapore 64 74 48 37 4.2
USAirways 61 64 61 56 0.0
Air Canada 59 69 * * NA
KLM 57 59 44 31 3.7
ANA 52 54 43 38 2.6
Thai 45 * * * NA
Cathay Pacific 43 49 * * NA
Sources: IATA World Air Transport Statistics, Southwest press release
Southwest growth since 1992
Note: Southwest continues to grow spectacularly. Also Air France has been
growing by acquisitions, first of Air Inter and in 2004 of KLM.
In 2003, Air Canada, Singapore and Cathay Pacific each lost over 10%

Airline Rankings
(Passengers, millions)
Airline 2003/4 2002/3 1995 1992 Annual % 95-03*
American 89 94 80 86 1.4
Delta 84 90 87 83 (0.4)
United 67 69 79 67 (1.9)
Southwest 66 64 * 28 12.3
Northwest 53 54 49 44 1.0
Lufthansa 44 44 33 27 4.2
Air France 44 43 * 14 19.5
ANA 43 44 38 35 1.6
US Airways 41 47 58 55 (3.7)
Continental 38 40 35 38 1.1
British 35 34 32 25 1.2
JAL 34 34 29 24 2.2
Iberia 25 24 * * NA
Qantas 24 24 * * NA
Ryanair 23 21 NA
Alitalia 22 22 21 20 0.6
eastjet 22 21 NA
Korean 21 22 22 20 (0.6)
Air Canada 20 23 * * NA
SAS 20 23 19 14 0.7
America West 20 19 17 15 2.2
Japan Air Sys 19 21 * * NA
Westjet 7 6 * * NA
Sources: IATA World Air Transport Statistics, airline press releases * Rates for 92-03
Note: The low-cost carriers continue to grow -- the legacy carriers stagnate
US Airways and SAS lost over 10% in 2003

Airline Rankings
(Freight Tonne-Km, Billions)
Airline 2003 2002 1995 1992 % Change 00-02
Fedex 13.2 13.0 7.0 5.8 11.1
Lufthansa 7.3 7.2 5.8 4.3 3.2
Korean 6.9 6.0 4.3 2.7 7.6
UPS 6.7 6.6 * * NA
Singapore 6.7 6.8 3.7 2.9 10.1
Cathay Pacific 5.2 4.8 2.8 1.7 10.7
Air France 4.9 4.9 4.4 3.3 1.4
China Airlines 4.7 4.5 * * NA
EVA 4.7 4.1 * * NA
Japan 4.4 4.4 3.8 3.2 2.0
Cargolux 4.3 4.2 * * NA
British 4.2 4.1 3.3 2.5 3.4
KLM 4.1 4.0 3.6 2.4 1.7
Northwest 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.7 0.9
Emirates 2.6 * * * NA
Asiana 2.6 2.6 * * NA
American 2.6 2.6 2.4 1.6 1.0
United 2.4 2.8 2.5 1.9 (0.5)
Nippon 2.3 2.2 1.5 1.1 6.7
Note: About 20% increases in 2003 for Korean, Cathay Pacific, EVA, Emirates

Airline Rankings
(Freight Tonne, millions)
Airline 2003 2002 1995 1992 % Change 00-02
Fedex 13.2 13.0 7.0 5.8 11.1
Lufthansa 7.3 7.2 5.8 4.3 3.2
Korean 6.9 6.0 4.3 2.7 7.6
UPS 6.7 6.6 * * NA
Singapore 6.7 6.8 3.7 2.9 10.1
Cathay Pacific 5.2 4.8 2.8 1.7 10.7
Air France 4.9 4.9 4.4 3.3 1.4
China Airlines 4.7 4.5 * * NA
EVA 4.7 4.1 * * NA
Japan 4.4 4.4 3.8 3.2 2.0
Cargolux 4.3 4.2 * * NA
British 4.2 4.1 3.3 2.5 3.4
KLM 4.1 4.0 3.6 2.4 1.7
Northwest 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.7 0.9
Emirates 2.6 * * * NA
Asiana 2.6 2.6 * * NA
American 2.6 2.6 2.4 1.6 1.0
United 2.4 2.8 2.5 1.9 (0.5)
Nippon 2.3 2.2 1.5 1.1 6.7
Note: About 20% increases in 2003 for Korean, Cathay Pacific, EVA, Emirates

Main Freight Airports
(ACI data; US- Bold, hubs- italics)
Airport Tons, Millions Growth, % Hub
2000 2002 2003 3-yr rate
Memphis 2.45 2.63 3.39 12.8 Fedex
Hong Kong / CLK 2.27 2.10 2.68 6.0
Anchorage 1.88 1.69 2.10 3.9
Tokyo/Narita 1.93 1.68 2.15 3.8
Seoul / Incheon 1.87 1.20 1.84 (0.5)
Los Angeles 2.05 2.12 1.83 (3.6)
Paris/de Gaulle 1.38 1.48 1.72 8.2
Frankfurt 1.71 1.61 1.65 (1.2)
Miami/Internatl. 1.64 1.64 1.64 0.0
Singapore 1.71 1.53 1.63 (1.6)
New York/Kennedy 1.83 1.50 1.63 (3.6)
Louisville 1.49 1.47 1.62 2.9 UPS
Chicago/O'Hare 1.46 1.28 1.51 1.1
Taipei 1.21 1.19 1.50 8.0
Amsterdam 1.27 1.23 1.35 2.1
London/Heathrow 1.40 1.26 1.30 (2.4)
Shanghai/Pudong * * 1.19
Indianapolis 1.17 1.15 0.98 (5.4)
Dubai * * 0.96
Bangkok 0.87 0.82 0.95 3.1
New York/Newark 1.09 0.80 0.84 (7.6)
Atlanta 0.87 0.74 0.80 (2.7)
Main Freight Airports
(ACI data; US- Bold, hubs- italics)
Osaka/Kansai 1.00 0.87 0.79 (7.0)

Tokyo/ Haneda na 0.72 0.72
Dallas/Fort Worth 0.90 0.79 0.67 (8.5)
Beijing * * 0.66
San Francisco 0.77 0.56 0.61 (6.9)
Dayton 0.83 0.55 CNF/Menlo
Source: ACI web 2004 and World Report Mar/Apr 2001, 2002; Airport reports
US Airports in Bold, Cargo hubs in Italics
Major increases at: Memphis, Paris/de Gaulle, Taipei,

Shanghai/Pudong, Dubai, Beijing
Major decreases at: Los Angeles, Indianapolis, Osaka/Kansai,

New York/Newark, Dallas/Fort Worth, San Francisco/Inter.

Airline Rankings
(Employees, thousands)
Employees Pax / Emp Pax-km / Emp
Airline (thousands) (thousands) (millions)
%Change
2003 1992 '92-'03 2003 1992 2003 1992
American 78 91 (14) 1.1 0.9 2.5 1.7
United 63 84 (25) 1.1 0.8 2.7 1.8
Delta 60 79 (24) 1.4 1.1 2.4 1.6
Air France 60 43 40 0.7 0.3 1.7 0.9
British 50 47 6 0.7 0.5 2.0 1.5
Continental 40 36 11 1.0 1.1 2.3 1.9
Northwest 39 46 (15) 1.4 1.0 2.8 2.0
Lufthansa 39 48 (19) 1.1 0.6 2.5 1.0
Southwest 33 11 200 2.0 2.5 2.4 2.0
US Airways 27 47 (43) 1.5 1.2 2.3 1.2
Qantas 27 15 80 0.9 0.3 2.6 2.1
Iberia 26 26 0 1.0 0.6 1.6 0.9
Thai 26 19 37 0.7 0.5 1.7 1.1
KLM 25 26 (4) 0.8 0.3 2.3 1.2
Malaysia 23 20 15 0.7 0.7 1.6 0.8
Indian 20 * * 0.4 * 0.8 *
Norm ~1.1 ~0.7 ~2.3 ~1.4
Sources: IATA World Air Transport Statistics, 99 data for Southwest from www.southwest.com
Note: Major airlines have shed employees and improved labor productivity rapidly
over decade. Air France is toward bottom end, Southwest is at top.

Aircraft Inventory
(Jet Fleet)
Airline 2003 2002 1995 % Change 95-03
American 783 822 635 2.9
Delta 550 573 539 0.3
United 532 567 556 (0.5)
Southwest 388 378 224 9.2
Northwest 364 438 380 (0.5)
Continental 342 352 314 1.1
Fedex 339 328 249 4.5
Lufthansa 303 324 234 3.7
British 282 319 222 3.4
US Airways 279 280 394 (3.6)
UPS 257 250 166 6.9
Air France 230 252 156 5.9
Air Canada 208 244 * NA
China Southern 191 122 * NA
JAL 189 131 126 6.3
Iberia 149 147 * NA
ANA 149 * * NA
Qantas 144 141 * NA
Saudi 143 127 * NA
KLM 142 * * NA
SAS 131 * 128 0.3
Alitalia 94 132 144 (4.3)
Aeroflot 90 102 * NA
easyjet * 72 * NA
Ryanair 67 67 * NA
Sources: IATA World Air Transport Statistics, airline web sites
Note: Biggest innovative airlines continue to grow and advance in
rankings. Legacy airlines stagnate or shrink, absent consolidation.

Economic Deregulation
y Deregulation
4 Full:
USA, Canada, Australia, South Africa
4 Mostly: European Union
y Result: Competition, Cost Cuts

4 Existing Airlines have difficulty with staff
4 New Airlines start with new, younger staff
with lower pay, more flexibility, less sense
of entitlement...

Innovations originating in
the U.S.
Decade Type of Innovation
Legislative Operational Airport Design
Economic Deregulation: Shuttle Services People Movers: eventual
1970s US Airlines can fly where Integrated Air Cargo wide use at transfer hubs
they want at any price Services: Fedex, UPS
Transfer Hubs: Atlanta, Midfield Concourses:
1980s Dallas/Fort Worth, etc. Atlanta, Pittsburgh, Denver,
Yield Management Chicago, Detroit, etc.
Systems: Sabre, etc.
Airline Franchising:
Branding of Commuters
1990s Open Skies Policy: US Airline Alliances: Star, GPS: Satellite Positioning of
Government promotes free Oneworld aircraft for air traffic control
access between countries Electronic Tickets

Privatized status of airlines,
previously publicly owned
Airline Comments Stock sign Price, Sept 04
Aerolineas Argentinas
Air Canada Near bankruptcy AC.TO 0.07
Air France Govt. owns 44% AKH 16
Air New Zealand Govt. owns 74% ANZFF.PK 0.26
Alitalia Near bankruptcy ALRMF.PK 0.25
British Airways BAB 41
Iberia Govt owns 5% IBRLF.PK 3
and Gold Share
Japan Air Lines Took over JAS JALSY.PK 14
Lufthansa (Germany) DLAKY.PK 11.5
Qantas Owns Australian QUBSF.PK 2.5
SAS (Scandinavia) Govts own 50% BASDF.DK 5.6

Airline Market “Caps”
(=price/share x shares)
Airline Symbol US $/Share Market Capitalization
2004 2001 Feb-03 Sep-03 Dec-03 Aug-04 US $, billions, Aug 04
UPS UPS 55 59 63 75 72 80.8
Fedex FDX 42 52 66 70 82 24.5
Southwest LUV 18 13 18 16 15 11.7
Ryan Air * RYAAY 25 39 45 51 30 4.5
British BAB 48 19 29 42 41 4.4
Lufthansa DLAKY.PK * 9 14 16 11.5 4.4
Air France AKH * * * * 16 3.4
Jet Blue * JBLU 12 31 27 26 2.7
American AMR 32 3 13 13 9 1.5
easyjet EJETF.PK 3 4 4 5 3 1.2
AirTran AAI 17 12 12 1.1
Northwest NWAC 21 6 10 13 10 0.8
Continental CAL 44 6 18 16 10 0.6
Alaska ALK 33 19 29 28 22 0.6
KLM KLMR.PK 15 7 11 16 12 0.6
Delta DAL 38 9 14 12 4 0.5
Westjet * WJA.TO 18 11 16 19 13 0.4
America West AWA 10 2 10 12 7 0.2
Hawaiian HA 3 2 1 3 7.8 0.2
JAL JALSY.PK 6 11 13 13 14 NA
USAirways UAIR 13 0.2 Ch 11 6 2 0.1
Air Canada ac.to 6 3 1 1 0.07 0
United 33 1 Ch 11 NA 0 0
Airborne Freight 14 15 merged
TWA 0 merged
Sources: Yahoo Finance and Google *Adjusted for Stock Split
Airport Market “Caps”
(=price/share x shares)
Airport Share Price, Local Money % Change US$, Billions
2001 2002 2003 2004 2001 -2004 Market Cap
BAA 6.13 6.2 5.1 5.5 (10) 10.70
Fraport * 25.6 19.6 23 NA 2.51
Copenhagen 770 589 460 885 15 1.31
AIAL (New Z.) 3.46 4.54 5.27 6.75 95 1.27
Beijing 2.03 1.82 1.65 2.33 15 1.15
Vienna 39.1 34.6 31.5 43.8 12 1.11
TBI 0.81 0.62 0.52 0.64 (21) 0.65
ASUR (Mexico) 18.1 13.4 13.9 18.4 2 0.55
Malaysia 1.54 2.15 1.46 1.41 (8) 0.41
Zurich 201 124 34 101 (50) 0.39
Florence * * 15.8 9.8 NA 0.11
Source: Jane's Airport World, Summer issues
Many airports are economically more powerful than airlines!

Airline Alliances
Star Alliance -- United, Lufthansa, Air Canada, Varig,
ANA, Singapore, Thai, Air New Zealand,
SAS, Asiana, Bmi, LOT
Austrian, Tyrolean, Spanair
oneworld -- American, British, Aer Lingus, Finnair,
Iberia, Qantas, Cathay Pacific, Lan Chile
Wings -- KLM, Northwest, Continental
SkyTeam -- Air France + KLM, Delta, Alitalia, Korean,
Aeromexico, Czech
Aeroflot? China Southern? Wings???

Alliances’ Market Shares
Alliance
Measure Year
Star Oneworld Sky Team KLM/NW
Pax 2002 123 86 57 29
Millions 2003 118 84 56 28
Pax-Km 2002 441 309 198 110
Billions 2003 417 306 193 104
Employees 2002 278 244 176 72
Thousands 2003 255 219 169 64
% of IATA 2002 24 18 13 7
Traffic 2003 25 18 13 7
Relative strength of Alliances has been stable. However, Air France

KLM merger may lead to consolidation of Sky Team with KLM/NW

New Types of Airlines
y Cargo Integrators
4 UPS, Fedex, DHL
4 Role of “Post Offices” ??
y Low-Cost Carriers
4 Point-to-point:
Southwest, Ryanair
4 “Network”: Easyjet, AirTran
4 Quasi-Network: Southwest??
y The innovators are the most
profitable and valuable airlines

Challenge to Traditional
Network Carriers
y Is their business model working?
4 Will people pay enough for convenience of
• easy connection at hubs
• big expensive passenger buildings
• travel agents
y If not, what will they do?
4 Squeeze out costs (wages, standards) and
survive on a more modest scale?
4 Manage by having “cheap” partners
• Delta -- Song; United -- Ted…
4 Or disappear? Swissair, USAir? United?
Consequences for Airports
y Cheaper travel will increase traffic
y Where will it go?
4 To traditional hubs of legacy majors?
4 To/from leisure locations and homes?
• Malaga, Faro, Bali, etc
4 To secondary airports?
• London/Stansted, Frankfurt/Hahn,
Rome/Ciampino, etc.
y Airport customers likely to demand
new locations, cheaper facilities

Meanwhile...
y The nature of the Airport Business
is changing dramatically
4 More Commercially oriented
4 Less Government control
4 More competition from “new” entrants
• Providence, Cincinnati, Lübeck, Liverpool...
y Not at all clear that current

generation of airport professionals
fully recognizes what this means

Current Status of Airlines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Current Status of Airlines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Current Status of the

Airport / Airline Industry

Dr. Richard de Neufville

Professor of Systems Engineering and

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

y Over past 13 years…

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

4 Several airports have fallen lower in rankings

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

y “Close” of old hubs

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

41 St. Louis / Lambert 20.4 25.6 26.7 30.5 19.9 0.3

Zurich 17.0 17.7 21.0 22.7 13.1 3.0

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Osaka/Kansai 1.00 0.87 0.79 (7.0)

US Airports in Bold, Cargo hubs in Italics

Major increases at: Memphis, Paris/de Gaulle, Taipei,

Major decreases at: Los Angeles, Indianapolis, Osaka/Kansai,

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

y Result: Competition, Cost Cuts

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Many airports are economically more powerful than airlines!

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Relative strength of Alliances has been stable. However, Air France

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

y Not at all clear that current

Airport Systems Planning & Design / RdN 

You might also like