This paper reviews the conceptual basis of the heuristic model for frequency and route planning for small size airlines developed by Ghobrial et al (1992). Particularly it is referred to scheduling issues for airline hub operations as outlined by Dennis (1994).
Consequently a number of critical issues are raised that could improve the heuristic model above. A number of additional variables could influence scheduling decisions and should be incorporated into the model. For instance, small size airlines can be affected by the scheduling necessities of hub-and-spokes operations of larger carriers, when they are providing services into major hubs. Furthermore, the optimal network for a small size carrier can be hub-and-spokes type network constructed around a
regional hub. This case is not specifically included into the model.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Characteristics of model developed by Ghobrial et al (1992)
3. Innovative points of the model
4. Critical considerations of the model
4.1 Identifying routes (links) above the break-even level
4.2 Flight-time variations
4.3 Aircraft type
4.4 The ‘ground-time minimisation’ objective – cost of time
4.5 The ‘ground-time minimisation’ objective – total cost driver
4.6 Congestion and concentration
4.7 Creation of flight banks or waves
4.8 Pivot - First daily flight
4.9 Demand stimulation
4.10 Competition & partnerships
5. Conclusions
6. References
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This paper aims to critically evaluate the heuristic model developed by Ghobrial et al. (1992) for frequency and route planning within small airlines, specifically examining its limitations and applicability in the context of post-deregulation market shifts and hub-and-spoke operational requirements.
- Review of heuristic planning models for small-scale airline operations.
- Analysis of decision-making variables in route and frequency assignment.
- Identification of critical operational limitations such as aircraft type diversity and network congestion.
- Evaluation of hub-and-spoke integration and its impact on small airline scheduling efficiency.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1 Identifying routes (links) above the break-even level
The scanning procedure applied to delete the links (and routes) with a load factor smaller than the break-even load is run after the passenger allocation in the network. It deletes ALL routes with an unsatisfactory load factor before the next iteration is run (Ghobrial et al 1992). The question is, how much the load factors on other routes change if only ONE of those unprofitable links was deleted. As the demand on adjacent routes influences the demand on a given route (Ghobrial et al 1992), it cannot be ruled out that load factors previously below break-even can be increased above break-even by selectively deleting single routes. In fact a selective elimination procedure might result in a different optimal network.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the strategic importance of frequency planning and aircraft routing in the deregulated airline market, highlighting the shift towards complex network compositions.
2. Characteristics of model developed by Ghobrial et al (1992): Describes the two-phase approach of the model, focusing on economic equilibrium for demand and ground-time minimization for aircraft scheduling.
3. Innovative points of the model: Discusses how the model effectively adapts to deregulation by focusing on revenue-cost drivers and market-based fare determination.
4. Critical considerations of the model: Provides a comprehensive critique of the model's limitations, including its exclusion of hub-related networking effects, aircraft diversity, and congestion.
5. Conclusions: Reiterates the utility of the model while calling for further research into integrating demand-side variables and hub-and-spoke operational complexities.
6. References: Provides a comprehensive bibliography of academic and industry literature utilized for the review.
Keywords
Aviation Management, Frequency Planning, Route Planning, Ghobrial et al, Small Airlines, Hub-and-Spoke, Airline Scheduling, Air Transport Deregulation, Aircraft Utilisation, Network Equilibrium, Load Factor, Ground-time Minimisation, Feeder Services, Airline Economics, Operational Research.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper evaluates the heuristic model for route and frequency planning developed by Ghobrial et al. (1992), specifically regarding its suitability for small airlines.
What are the central themes discussed in the analysis?
Key themes include route optimization, aircraft assignment, the impact of market deregulation on planning, and the limitations of heuristic models in complex hub-and-spoke networks.
What is the core objective of the research?
The objective is to identify critical issues and potential improvements for the Ghobrial model when applied to the operational requirements of contemporary small airlines.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The work utilizes a literature-based comparative review and a critical analytical approach to dissect the mathematical and logical assumptions of the Ghobrial model.
What topics are covered in the main body of the work?
The main body examines the specific phases of the Ghobrial model, its innovative features, and ten distinct critical areas, such as aircraft type limitations, congestion, and demand stimulation.
Which keywords characterize this study?
Important keywords include Aviation Management, Route Planning, Hub-and-Spoke operations, Airline Economics, and Frequency Assignment.
Why does the author argue that aircraft type is a limitation of the model?
The model assumes a single aircraft type, whereas most real-world airlines operate a fleet with a diverse range of 5 to 12 different aircraft types.
How does airport congestion impact the validity of the Ghobrial model?
The model does not account for congestion, which the author argues has a direct, negative impact on ground-time and frequency cycle reliability.
What role does the 'first daily flight' play in the model's logic?
The first daily flight serves as an anchor for the schedule, but the author suggests it is an arbitrary choice that may not represent the best pivot point for feeder service providers.
- Quote paper
- Paul Freudensprung (Author), 1998, Aviation - Frequency and Route Planning, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/186327
