4 ms·

It’s interesting that the airlines seem to be jumping at the opportubity to cut flights (or at least that is the impression that the article gives with words li

It’s interesting that the airlines seem to be jumping at the opportubity to cut flights (or at least that is the impression that the article gives with words like “authorized” and “opportunity”). Does anyone know why?

icegreentea2 4y ago
Slots at the busiest airports are subject to a "use it or lose it" rule. Historic slot allocations are also part of what decides future slot allocations. The FAA is saying that they're waiving the "use it or lose it" rule for this time/airports. If airliners feel that can consolidate enough of their passengers into larger flights without losing out on future slot allocation rounds, then this is an overall win for them (especially if they can couch the move in terms of safety and cooperation with the FAA). In a sense, part of the value of holding a slot is just denying it to your competitors (in addition to directly making revenue off of it). This waiver allows airliners to gain this portion of the value of the slots, without partaking in the risk of actually trying to generate revenue off it is (which is why exactly the use or lose it rule is usually in effect).
CydeWeys 4y ago
Take-off/landing pairs are use them or lose them. Presumably they're being given the option here to not use them all without suffering any penalty for it. This allows them to drop only their least profitable flights
mathogre 4y ago
From the article: "The FAA is encouraging airlines to use bigger aircraft with fewer take-offs and landings." I worked in ATC R&D for many years. NY Tracon, N90, is crazy busy and very complicated. DCA handles lots of Regional Jets. Each aircraft is an "operation". If you're an airline and can carry the same amount of passengers in fewer aircraft, re: fewer operations, you're at an advantage, and the system continues to work. The airspace and airports with the available controllers can handle only so many operations, and the FAA will limit operations accordingly. The airlines can either let the FAA randomly deny flights, or they can say to the airlines, as they apparently did, "We can only handle so many operations. How do you want to do this?" In situations like this, airlines themselves can decide how they're going to change their operations. In NY, it's probably easier to use/lease larger aircraft. Yes Teteboro, TEB, could take some traffic if this were just airport operations limited, but I suspect it is an N90 issue, so offloading to TEB really isn't an option. With DCA, it's more likely the airport. Airlines like United can offload to Dulles, IAD. Additionally, the airlines could even work with each other to some degree to get through this. They do that in significant weather events, though this is a much bigger event than a snowstorm at someplace like O'Hare (ORD).

icegreentea2 4y ago

Slots at the busiest airports are subject to a "use it or lose it" rule. Historic slot allocations are also part of what decides future slot allocations. The FAA is saying that they're waiving the "use it or lose it" rule for this time/airports. If airliners feel that can consolidate enough of their passengers into larger flights without losing out on future slot allocation rounds, then this is an overall win for them (especially if they can couch the move in terms of safety and cooperation with the FAA). In a sense, part of the value of holding a slot is just denying it to your competitors (in addition to directly making revenue off of it). This waiver allows airliners to gain this portion of the value of the slots, without partaking in the risk of actually trying to generate revenue off it is (which is why exactly the use or lose it rule is usually in effect).

CydeWeys 4y ago

Take-off/landing pairs are use them or lose them. Presumably they're being given the option here to not use them all without suffering any penalty for it. This allows them to drop only their least profitable flights

mathogre 4y ago

From the article: "The FAA is encouraging airlines to use bigger aircraft with fewer take-offs and landings." I worked in ATC R&D for many years. NY Tracon, N90, is crazy busy and very complicated. DCA handles lots of Regional Jets. Each aircraft is an "operation". If you're an airline and can carry the same amount of passengers in fewer aircraft, re: fewer operations, you're at an advantage, and the system continues to work. The airspace and airports with the available controllers can handle only so many operations, and the FAA will limit operations accordingly. The airlines can either let the FAA randomly deny flights, or they can say to the airlines, as they apparently did, "We can only handle so many operations. How do you want to do this?" In situations like this, airlines themselves can decide how they're going to change their operations. In NY, it's probably easier to use/lease larger aircraft. Yes Teteboro, TEB, could take some traffic if this were just airport operations limited, but I suspect it is an N90 issue, so offloading to TEB really isn't an option. With DCA, it's more likely the airport. Airlines like United can offload to Dulles, IAD. Additionally, the airlines could even work with each other to some degree to get through this. They do that in significant weather events, though this is a much bigger event than a snowstorm at someplace like O'Hare (ORD).