3 ms·

I wonder about statistics for hub vs pairs Airlines line Turkish seem to do well, with their shinny new super hub in Istanbul. There can only be so much pair

I wonder about statistics for hub vs pairs Airlines line Turkish seem to do well, with their shinny new super hub in Istanbul. There can only be so much pair to pair flight, so we will always have some hub airlines. I took Nice to Manila last year. Friends of mines flew from random town in France to Abu Dhabi, through Istanbul. On my flight to Istanbul, I talked to passengers going to a random town in Egypt for diving & friends holiday. And I also saw students (or at least young ppl) going to Japan on my flight. A stopover probably made the flight more fuel economic, hence cheaper, which is great for a lot of flyers. I was also glad to stop midflight to wait at the warm water fountain with Chinese ppl (who were wondering why a gringo was having a warm glass of water), to stretch my legs, and to change and everything. More than 10 hours of a single flight is unbearable. I have no doubt that city pairs flights are hotter atm, and you will always have flights between your home city and trendy destinations like the famous Montréal or the infamous USA from now on. But for all of these reasons and more, I don't believe hub airlines are doomed.

bobthepanda 3y ago
It’s not just about hubs but about frequency as well. If given the choice flyers often prefer the airline flying 3 or 4 737s at varying times of day over the one big airplane.
- hinata08 3y ago
  which flyers ? I'm not sure they spread evenly tourists all want the earliest and last flights to arrive early and leave late, and not waste a day of vacation ppl who go on a weekend want the last trip on sunday that arrives not so late so that they can sleep, or the earliest trip on monday And when you're going on a journey in the middle of the day, you're sometimes feeling alone in there. Beyond offering more trips, there will still be that slots issues where you have to propose capacity at popular schedules. You would see the same fare on all the flights, if capacity wasn't an issue for airlines. So it's not an open and shut debate. Both types of planes should still exist. Also, IMO, "Increasing the frequency" "at varying times of the day" with 737s only is another sign of the airline industry not really caring about what users want, because of the economics. Most travellers really want that Friday evening flight. It's the same as with the luggages that are a premium and a nightmare to checkin with most airlines. But it's unfortunately the system we want. We choosed to have profitable businesses, instead of costly public services like trains in Europe. They have unlimited capacity anytime of the day, lose money, but are convenient. That should be a model again for airlines.
  - bobthepanda 3y ago
    tourists and travelers are hardly a uniform group. A young single person, is different from a family with kids, which is different from a group of young people on a party trip. A young single person can often have a bag ready and depart directly from work; a family with kids may want to depart in the morning to be there super early; a group of young people hungover from last night's bender may want an afternoon flight. Not to mention, often you are picking between an optimal departure time and an optimal arrival time. For instance, I know people who love redeye flights to fly across the continental US, but I hate them because they mess up my sleep. The A380 is essentially a really big bet on a one-size-fits-all plane, for travel segments that rarely are.

bobthepanda 3y ago

It’s not just about hubs but about frequency as well. If given the choice flyers often prefer the airline flying 3 or 4 737s at varying times of day over the one big airplane.

hinata08 3y ago
which flyers ? I'm not sure they spread evenly tourists all want the earliest and last flights to arrive early and leave late, and not waste a day of vacation ppl who go on a weekend want the last trip on sunday that arrives not so late so that they can sleep, or the earliest trip on monday And when you're going on a journey in the middle of the day, you're sometimes feeling alone in there. Beyond offering more trips, there will still be that slots issues where you have to propose capacity at popular schedules. You would see the same fare on all the flights, if capacity wasn't an issue for airlines. So it's not an open and shut debate. Both types of planes should still exist. Also, IMO, "Increasing the frequency" "at varying times of the day" with 737s only is another sign of the airline industry not really caring about what users want, because of the economics. Most travellers really want that Friday evening flight. It's the same as with the luggages that are a premium and a nightmare to checkin with most airlines. But it's unfortunately the system we want. We choosed to have profitable businesses, instead of costly public services like trains in Europe. They have unlimited capacity anytime of the day, lose money, but are convenient. That should be a model again for airlines.
- bobthepanda 3y ago
  tourists and travelers are hardly a uniform group. A young single person, is different from a family with kids, which is different from a group of young people on a party trip. A young single person can often have a bag ready and depart directly from work; a family with kids may want to depart in the morning to be there super early; a group of young people hungover from last night's bender may want an afternoon flight. Not to mention, often you are picking between an optimal departure time and an optimal arrival time. For instance, I know people who love redeye flights to fly across the continental US, but I hate them because they mess up my sleep. The A380 is essentially a really big bet on a one-size-fits-all plane, for travel segments that rarely are.