12.07.2015 Views

PDF: 5191 KB - Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional ...

PDF: 5191 KB - Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional ...

PDF: 5191 KB - Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

BITRE | Report 1153.2.1 Flight frequencyAs discussed in Chapter 2, flight frequencies <strong>of</strong>fered by an airline in response toa market change are implicitly constrained by its existing aircraft fleet in the shortterm. Aircraft size <strong>and</strong> fleet size are <strong>of</strong>ten linked to the presence <strong>of</strong> economies <strong>of</strong>scale. Economies <strong>of</strong> scale are cost advantages accruing from larger scale operations.Theoretically, as an airline exp<strong>and</strong>s, the average cost <strong>of</strong> production falls. However,expansion beyond a certain point may subject an airline to the onset <strong>of</strong> diseconomies<strong>of</strong> scale.For an aircraft <strong>of</strong> any given size, costs per passenger fall as more seats are filled. In asituation where an airline is not in a position to appropriately match the aircraft sizewith the characteristics <strong>of</strong> dem<strong>and</strong>, it is possible for the airline to fly bigger planes onroutes with few passengers. However, it may need to reduce flight frequency to fillenough seats to cover costs <strong>and</strong> make a pr<strong>of</strong>it. While airlines need to trade <strong>of</strong>f theseeconomies with flight frequency, passengers on the other h<strong>and</strong> prefer a wider range<strong>of</strong> travel options. Maintaining the benefit <strong>of</strong> economies <strong>of</strong> scale could mean trading<strong>of</strong>f the quality <strong>of</strong> services which may subsequently affect the dem<strong>and</strong>.In Figure 3.7a, regional air routes were disaggregated into those with an average flightfrequency <strong>of</strong> three or more return flights a week <strong>and</strong> those with fewer than threereturn flights a week. The number <strong>of</strong> air routes with an average <strong>of</strong> less than threereturn flights per week has always been higher than those with an average <strong>of</strong> morethan three return flights per week (Figure 3.7a). However, the gap between thesetrends has reduced significantly between 1989 <strong>and</strong> 2005. As shown in Figure 3.7a, thenumber <strong>of</strong> air routes with an average <strong>of</strong> less than three return flights per week hasfallen sharply since 1990, while the number <strong>of</strong> air routes with an average <strong>of</strong> at leastthree return flights per week has remained relatively stable.In Figure 3.7b, air routes were further disaggregated according to the followingfrequency groups:• once a week or less• two to four return flights per week• five to six return flights a week• one to four return flights daily• more than four return flights daily.An examination <strong>of</strong> Figure 3.7b reveals that regional air routes with an average <strong>of</strong> oncea week or less return services accounted for most <strong>of</strong> the decline in the number <strong>of</strong>regional air routes over the years.68

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!