Tag Archives: Airlines

Air Travel CO2 Emissions Poster

Fly.co.uk, a European website that compares over 140 well-known airlines and suppliers to find cheap flights for consumers, created this graphic with statistics primarily on the airline industry’s carbon emissions.  (Click the graphic at the bottom to enlarge).

How are airlines and manufacturers doing with bio-fuels? Aircraft manufacturers, a mix of airlines and engine manufacturers have teamed up to progress forward with implementing bio-fuels into commercial flights. Virgin Atlantic, perhaps one of the more vocal airlines on the matter, tested a coconut / babassu based bio-fuel on a Boeing 747 General Electric engine in February of 2008. Other airlines, like Air New Zealand, Continental Airlines, and Japan Airlines (JAL), have flown successful test flights with Rolls-Royce, CFM, and Pratt & Whitney engines, respectively, on Boeing airplanes.

The latest news? Airlines, manufacturers, and other aspects of the aviation industry are evaluating options to determine the sustainability of biofuels for expanded and broader usage. On Monday, it was announced that Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, Portland International Airport, Spokane International Airport, Boeing, Alaska Airlines, and Washington State University will spend six-months studying how biomass sources might produce aviation fuel. According to the BusinessWeek article, Boeing has said that by 2015, it and other aircraft makers and airlines want to use biofuels for 1 percent of annual fuel consumption – about 500 million to 600 million gallons. Possible fuel sources are algae, jatropha oil, coconut, camelina, and babassu.

It will be quite some time before a fair amount of major airline flights are flown solely on bio-fuels, but this is still in the testing phase, and it will be interesting to watch as time moves forward.

Editorial: Re-Regulation of the U.S. Airline Industry

If the U.S. Justice Department approves the proposed merger of United Airlines and Continental Airlines, two U.S. House members said they plan to re-regulate it.

According to The Associated Press, Representatives James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and Jerry Costello (D-Ill.), chairman of the panel’s aviation subcommittee, said they will attempt to re-establish a government agency responsible for overseeing the airline industry if the merger goes through.

“I do think it’s going to pass regulatory muster, but I do think it’s going to be tough,” said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX.) on the Continental-United merger during a Senate Commerce Committee (Wall Street Journal). The merged airline’s headquarters is planned for Chicago, which would relocate Continental’s headquarters out of her home-state of Texas. Some politicians, like Sen. Hutchinson, believe that the merger will hurt consumers.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) reportedly said it is “increasingly clear” that the current structure of the U.S. airline industry is not financially sustainable (Wall Street Journal). Rockefeller said that he supports airline consolidation as long as it “creates the conditions not only to survive, but also to thrive in a competitive global industry.” However, Sen. Rockefeller did not say whether or not he supports re-regulation.

Allow me to address a few of the key points politicians, like Rep. Oberstar, are using to attempt to persuade congress.

Airline Deregulation

The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 removed governmental control over fares, routes, and market entry from commercial aviation. This dissolved the Civil Aeronautics Board, commonly known as CAB, which piloted the entire U.S. airline industry. Airlines were operated as a public utility and competition on routes was limited.

Following 1978, airlines became a market-force driven industry. Rates of return were no longer overseen by the government, and price became the name of the game. Fare wars and “peanut fares” drove down the cost of flight for consumers, making it affordable for almost everyone to fly.

How cheap is cheap?

The earlier article quotes Susan Kurland, the U.S. Transportation Department’s assistant secretary for aviation and international affairs, saying that consumers have “reaped enormous benefits” due to the steps taken in the 1970s to deregulate the industry (Wall Street Journal).

Adjusted for inflation, air fares have fallen 25 percent since 1991, and are 22 percent lower than they would have been had regulation continued (Morrison and Winston 2000). According to the Air Transport Association, airline prices have fallen 44.9 percent in real terms since airline deregulation. Robert Crandall and Jerry Ellig (1997) estimated that when figures are adjusted for changes in quality and amenities, passengers save $19.4 billion dollars per year from airline deregulation. These savings have been passed on to 80 percent of passengers accounting for 85 percent of passenger miles (Competitive Enterprise Institute, George Mason University’s Jerry Ellig / Robert Crandall, and Library of Economics and Liberty).

Loss in quality

An argument for re-regulation, or restoring the U.S. airline industry to pre-1978, is a loss in quality. According to studies by TripAdvisor, travelers have voiced their concerns with airline fees (also known as ancillary revenue), specifically checked baggage fees, and expect airlines to add additional fees.

Rep. Oberstar said the $2.7 billion earned by U.S. airlines in ancillary revenue is evidence that consumers are no longer benefiting from deregulation (Star-Telegram). Yet, as Boarding Area’s Dan Webb points out, Rep. Oberstar’s arguments “don’t seem to make a lot of sense” since carriers only averaged $3.84 per passenger in ancillary revenue for 2009. Additionally, Webb noted the Department of Transportation’s report of a $7.40 drop in average airfares for 2009.

Service and quality wise, some believe they should get more. On nearly all domestic flights, meals are only served to first class passengers. Passengers seeking those precious inches of extra legroom, in coach, book exit-row seats. Some airlines charge premiums for the special seats in coach. For those looking for a pillow and blanket, that too has its own fee. Yet these drops in quality tend to be appropriate, considering the prices of airfare.

Passengers have options and can easily vote with their wallet. Although airline food may not be as good as it used to be, booking a first class ticket could land you a meal (depending on the duration of the flight) and extra comfort. On long-haul flights, most airlines fly a nice variety of seat types, ranging from coach to premium coach to business class to first class and so forth (maybe even more options).

Some airlines, like American Airlines, added “more room in coach” to “ease the crowded conditions faced by most passengers,” (The New York Times). American took out two rows of seats to add extra legroom for passengers. To make up for the lost seats, ticket prices on American increased, but consumers were not willing to pay the extra dollars and the campaign was scraped.

It is fairly clear that price is important to consumers, but have airlines done the best job at marketing a flight as more than a flight? What about telling customers exactly what they’re getting — like satellite television — when they book? The Cranky Flier’s Brett Snyder seems to think airlines need to give travelers a better sense of what they’re booking.

Southwest Airlines is a clear example. When customers book with Southwest, they know exactly what they’re getting – two free bags, the rapid rewards credits, etc – because Southwest clearly states it when you select the fare.

Conclusion

Airline deregulation has significantly helped consumers. Air travel was once exclusive to the wealthy, but has slowly transformed into a service all can enjoy. Competition was fairly limited during the days of pre-deregulation, but now consumers have a vast variety of options to get from Point A to Point B, and they can get there affordably. Sure, the industry could use a few minor changes, but nothing else has been more beneficial to consumers than deregulation.

TripAdvisor Survey: Passengers Have Little Confidence in Tarmac Delay Rule

Results from a recent TripAdvisor survey suggest passengers support the U.S. Department of Transportation’s new tarmac delay rules. The new regulations go into effect today and airlines could face penalties of up to $27,500 per passenger for aircraft left stranded on the tarmac for more than three hours. The survey of more than 1,050 U.S. respondents asked travelers for their thoughts on the new regulations, as well as regulations currently in the works.

An overwhelming 99 percent of respondents said passengers should be given the opportunity to get off an airplane if the flight has been delayed for three hours or more. However, 53 percent of respondents believe the new rules could increase flight cancellations. Only 30 percent of respondents believe the new rule will help.

On delays in general, 58 percent of respondents said they have experienced ground delays of one to three hours. Eighty-two percent of respondents said airlines do not do a good job on explaining ground delays to passengers. More than half of respondents, 61 percent, believe that government needs to do more to protect passengers’ rights.

Some airlines, like Continental Airlines, have already publicly stated that they will cancel flights at 2 hours and 45 minutes to avoid the potentially massive fines – see Airlines More Likely to Cancel Flights to Avoid Fines.

“While some aspects of the new limit on ground delays enacted by the DOT are good for travelers, it places all of the responsibility for delays on the carrier and includes significant financial penalties without addressing the underlying issues with the air traffic infrastructure,” said Jami Counter, senior director of TripAdvisor Flights. “Because of this, airlines are likely to be more cautious in the near-term and may cancel more flights at congested airports and during poor weather in order to avoid hefty fines. This could cause additional headaches for many travelers – something I’m sure the DOT didn’t intend.”

“In the long-term, this rule could serve as a step forward on the issue of airline passenger rights, especially if it leads to further changes,” Counter continued. “For instance, modernizing air traffic control operations could help alleviate delays. Also, pushing for more transparency in airfare pricing would help untangle the maze of airline fees for travelers. TripAdvisor Flights, for example, has taken a step in this direction by allowing travelers to factor in the cost of fees for checked baggage and other amenities into their ticket prices before they book.”

Do you think the new rules will be helpful? Why or why not?

Aviation-Buzz Stories of the Week: January 4-8

This is the first post in a series of Friday posts covering the top airline / aircraft manufacturing / airport related news stories throughout the week. Here you’ll find links to a variety of aviation news stories, including posts from my blog at the Seattle-PI and from other aviation bloggers / news sources.

  • Boeing may reportedly cut the 787-3 from the 787 line-up, after the variant’s sole customer, ANA, decided to switch orders to different variants of the model – BusinessWeek. In addition, Boeing saw their stock soar this week about 10-15%, but that ended when their stock was downgraded on Friday – Aubrey Cohen-Seattle PI.
  • American Airlines increased their offer to keep JAL a member of Oneworld by $300 million – totaling a $1.4 billion offer. JAL is being courted by Delta Air Lines as well – JetCheck-Seattle PI.
  • Recent terror threats have increased worry, and a few aircraft were “pulled-over” by military aircraft due to disorderly passengers. A Hawaiian Airlines flight returned to Portland, OR, and an AirTran flight was diverted to Denver, CO – FoxNews.
  • Boarding Area’s Dan Webb wrote a post on December’s PRASM (passenger revenue per available seat mile) estimates – find out which airlines are optimizing their schedules / capacity and show signs of improvement – Things in the Sky.
  • Continental Airlines‘s new CEO, Jeffrey Smisek, said he will not take a salary or a bonus until the airline records a full-year profit – JetCheck-Seattle PI.
  • Allegiant Air‘s parent company, Allegiant Travel Company, plans to purchase 18 MD-80 aircraft from the SAS group (Scandinavian Airlines System) for about $28.3 million in cash; not a bad deal! – Aviation Week.