Programs: AA Advantage, Milage Plus, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles
Posts: 215
Potential hubs for new airline and time to replace seats on an aircraft
For a school project, I am designing an airline and I was wondering what airports might make sense for hubs (close enough to major population centers, but able to handle a new major carrier, also not too much competition from already established airlines such as Chicago, DFW, LAX or JFK).
Some airports I am thinking of are SJC (or OAK, though I am not sure they have much space for expansion, same with SFO); AUS; TPA; STL and maybe somewhere on the east coast (BOS, PHL or CLE). Would these make any sense, or is an airport like MDW, something near LAX or DAL able to take more traffic and be closer to major population centers.
Also, I am looking at potential charter operations. How long does it take to remove the seats from a plane and install new ones (such as switching an A319 from a y+f config to all j). Is there an advantage of the A320 or 737 family to switching seats out more quickly? (NOT intended to become an a vs b thread).
Without in-seat IFE swapping out a few rows of seats should be possible by a trained crew in just a few hours. If there is IFE wiring or other major system (lavs, galley, etc.) then it takes much longer.
As for airports which can support a hub operation, there are many where the facility can handle it. The bigger question is how much business you can push through it and if that's enough to build a business.
CVG obviously has a large amount of capacity available. Ditto for PIT. GSO was a hub once and PHF is the supposed hub for a revitalized PeoplExpress.
UPS use to convert cargo planes into passenger charter flights on weekends back in the late 90's. They had quite a system going
The flights would be chartered by travel companies that sell vacation packages and could begin in early 1997. Destinations would be determined by the travel companies.
To convert a brown-and-white cargo plane into a charter flight, UPS would load a platform fitted with carpeting and seats through the plane's extra-wide cargo doors.
Overhead storage compartments, reading lights and ventilation controls would be attached permanently and folded up during cargo flights, Shapero said from UPS' airline headquarters in Louisville, Ky. Two permanent restrooms would also be added.
gives some details on how many passengers they were carrying, a bit more as to the actual process to convert, and says they scheduled three hours to convert the plane, but they were usually done in two.
Programs: AA Advantage, Milage Plus, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbm12
Without in-seat IFE swapping out a few rows of seats should be possible by a trained crew in just a few hours. If there is IFE wiring or other major system (lavs, galley, etc.) then it takes much longer.
As for airports which can support a hub operation, there are many where the facility can handle it. The bigger question is how much business you can push through it and if that's enough to build a business.
CVG obviously has a large amount of capacity available. Ditto for PIT. GSO was a hub once and PHF is the supposed hub for a revitalized PeoplExpress.
Thank you so much, I had not thought about PIT, GSO CVG or PHF. My concern with CVG would be competing with DL, but they have cut back a lot there so there is potential there.
I was thinking it would be with IFE and replacing all of the seats in the aircraft. Could that be done with a large crew overnight? Or would it take mroe time?
I think it depends on what kind of airline you are designing from the ground up. If you are building a mainstream domestic airline, I'd start with looking at STL and CVG, both of which have plenty of excess capacity right now.
If you're hoping to build an international carrier, I'd look at more at TPA, FLL, AUS, SAT, and perhaps PHX. I'd avoid the North East because of the already congested space.
For a low cost or charter carrier, I'd look at ONT, or perhaps even PDX. PDX is interesting because it often seems to be on the cusp of mainline service all over the country, but routes keep getting added and disappearing. Of course, that could just be my SEA bias showing...
Programs: AA Advantage, Milage Plus, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cromely
I think it depends on what kind of airline you are designing from the ground up. If you are building a mainstream domestic airline, I'd start with looking at STL and CVG, both of which have plenty of excess capacity right now.
If you're hoping to build an international carrier, I'd look at more at TPA, FLL, AUS, SAT, and perhaps PHX. I'd avoid the North East because of the already congested space.
For a low cost or charter carrier, I'd look at ONT, or perhaps even PDX. PDX is interesting because it often seems to be on the cusp of mainline service all over the country, but routes keep getting added and disappearing. Of course, that could just be my SEA bias showing...
Thanks that is good advice. I would think that PHX would be a problem with US but they are mostly domestic from there it seems so it would be good for international service.
Haha, when I was younger designing virtual airlines was my favourite!
I remember having a couple of ideas that are all pretty silly but would be cool to see-
A mega hub in Kangerlussuaq, Greenland with a giant fleet of A320NEOs flying to all major cities in North America and Europe.
And of course a giant SYD based airline that would eventually drive QF out of business. I actually just had a look for the books where I used to write all these ideas and they're still there so I'll just copy and paste all the routes I had "planned" and written down
Norfolk Island E190
Noumea A319
Port Vila A319
Nadi A319
Honiara A319
Nukualofa A319
Apia A319
Rarotonga A319
Aitutaki E190
Niue E190
Nauru E190
Kiribati E190
Papeete A330-200
Port Moresby A319
Denpasar A330-300
Jakarta A330-300
Singapore A330-300
Kuala Lumpur A330-300
Bangkok A330-300
Manila A330-300
Ho Chi Minh City A330-300
Brunei A330-200
Taipei A330-300
Hong Kong A330-300
Guangzhou A330-300
Shanghai A330-300
Beijing A330-300
Seoul A330-300
Tokyo A330-300
Osaka A330-300
Nagoya A330-200
Singapore-London A340-600
Bangkok-Frankfurt A340-600
Phuket-Rome A330-200
Hong Kong-Paris A340-600
Macau-Stockholm A330-200
Hanoi-Athens A330-200
Kuala Lumpur-Berlin A330-200
Honolulu A330-200
Los Angeles A340-600
San Francisco A340-600
Vancouver-Toronto A340-500
Mexico City A340-500
Chicago A340-500
Seattle-New York A340-500
Sao Paulo-Rio de Janeiro A340-500
Buenos Aires A340-500
Santiago A340-500
Programs: AA Advantage, Milage Plus, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by belfordrocks
Haha, when I was younger designing virtual airlines was my favourite!
I remember having a couple of ideas that are all pretty silly but would be cool to see-
A mega hub in Kangerlussuaq, Greenland with a giant fleet of A320NEOs flying to all major cities in North America and Europe.
And of course a giant SYD based airline that would eventually drive QF out of business. I actually just had a look for the books where I used to write all these ideas and they're still there so I'll just copy and paste all the routes I had "planned" and written down
Norfolk Island E190
Noumea A319
Port Vila A319
Nadi A319
Nukualofa A319
Apia A319
Rarotonga A319
Aitutaki E190
Niue E190
Nauru E190
Kiribati E190
Papeete A330-200
Port Moresby A319
Denpasar A330-300
Jakarta A330-300
Singapore A330-300
Kuala Lumpur A330-300
Bangkok A330-300
Manila A330-300
Ho Chi Minh City A330-300
Brunei A330-200
Taipei A330-300
Hong Kong A330-300
Guangzhou A330-300
Shanghai A330-300
Beijing A330-300
Seoul A330-300
Tokyo A330-300
Osaka A330-300
Nagoya A330-200
Singapore-London A340-600
Bangkok-Frankfurt A340-600
Phuket-Rome A330-200
Hong Kong-Paris A340-600
Macau-Stockholm A330-200
Hanoi-Athens A330-200
Kuala Lumpur-Berlin A330-200
Honolulu A330-200
Los Angeles A340-600
San Francisco A340-600
Vancouver-Toronto A340-500
Mexico City A340-500
Chicago A340-500
Seattle-New York A340-500
Sao Paulo-Rio de Janeiro A340-500
Buenos Aires A340-500
Santiago A340-500
And that was only the international side!
Also, no this wasn't for a school project, I just had a lot of spare time and not much of a childhood
Sorry for hijacking this thread a bit, but I couldn't help but share that. But good luck and dream big!
Thanks, designing an airline has proved to be very enjoyable (which makes sense considering I love flying and fly out of the way as much as possible such as ORD-JFK-SFO or SLC-DFW-DCA-MIA-PNS or MIA-LAX-DFW-SLC, all trips I have coming up, but I digress...)
How about an airline based in ANC focusing on North America to Asia flights? Pretty much like FI.
Lots of cargo operations do something similar to this. Your project could show how ANC is well positioned for efficient routings, with good visuals from GC Map.
There are some reasons why this wouldn't be a great idea in reality, but that is pretty much the case with any hypothetical airline's new hub (otherwise one would be there already). But this idea would make logical sense to your teacher, is easy to explain/understand, and has some real-life evidence of it being viable (it works for cargo operators, and FI on the other ocean).
Sounds like a fun project. I used to spend hours playing Aerobiz on SNES. Too bad an airline investor wouldn't hire me based on this experience.
Thanks, designing an airline has proved to be very enjoyable (which makes sense considering I love flying and fly out of the way as much as possible such as ORD-JFK-SFO or SLC-DFW-DCA-MIA-PNS or MIA-LAX-DFW-SLC, all trips I have coming up, but I digress...)
Haha one of my all time favourite pastimes. I'm sure you've heard of Airline Mogul where you can start a virtual airline- it's an all text based game. There I'm a big fan of building megahubs and having one hub only (whereas most other players go with building the 7-8 hubs). It's a very easy game haha as in it's very easy to "profit" and make money (even flying routes like Memphis to Antalya for example ). I think my MEM mega hub went up to about 1200 destinations at one stage!
Now that I'm finished high school I've got a lot more time to fly a lot more just for fun. Recently took a trip back to visit family on SQ/TG/CA J (with lots of interesting routings, of course ) and in March off on a 6-day trip flying SQ/OZ J again where I'm in each city for less than 24 hours. Told a couple of friends about it and now they want to come along too!
How about an airline based in ANC focusing on North America to Asia flights? Pretty much like FI.
Because there aren't enough passengers willing to add the extra flight time to make the stop now that planes can make the trip without. Just like why no one (save HA) flies Mainland US - Oz via HNL anymore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zgscl
What about LAS? I know WN and G4 have a major presence there, but it is a major destination and they have limited international service.
Not close enough to a coast for the international service to make sense, just like DEN.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryFF
I've often thought MSY would be a good hub. And they really could use more nonstop flights for their O/D traffic.
MSY isn't too far from IAH in terms of serving LatAm. Other regions could make it rather out of the way. NYC-MIA via MSY would suck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zgscl
My concern with CVG would be competing with DL, but they have cut back a lot there so there is potential there.
DL has cut back so much at CVG that I don't think that's the problem you'll face.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zgscl
I was thinking it would be with IFE and replacing all of the seats in the aircraft.
I'd do streaming media IFE rather than in-seat. Passengers can use their own devices or you can rent out a tablet. WAY easier/cheaper to install, maintain and operate.
Programs: AA Advantage, Milage Plus, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbm12
Because there aren't enough passengers willing to add the extra flight time to make the stop now that planes can make the trip without. Just like why no one (save HA) flies Mainland US - Oz via HNL anymore.
Not close enough to a coast for the international service to make sense, just like DEN.
MSY isn't too far from IAH in terms of serving LatAm. Other regions could make it rather out of the way. NYC-MIA via MSY would suck.
DL has cut back so much at CVG that I don't think that's the problem you'll face.
I'd do streaming media IFE rather than in-seat. Passengers can use their own devices or you can rent out a tablet. WAY easier/cheaper to install, maintain and operate.
Thank you, all good ideas. My only complaint about the tablets is that it is generally a pain in the a** to fit anywhere if you are eating. The premium cabin could always have in seat IFE with the main cabin renting tablets. As you say it is much cheaper to maintain.
Programs: AA Advantage, Milage Plus, Rapid Rewards, Sky Miles
Posts: 215
Thank you, all good ideas. My only complaint about the tablets is that it is generally a pain in the a** to fit anywhere if you are eating. The premium cabin could always have in seat IFE with the main cabin renting tablets. As you say it is much cheaper to maintain. LAS might make a good focus city with something like SJC a base for international operations to Asia and the South Pacific. Possibly limited international service from LAS. Perhaps PDX has some potential for international service.
As far as in seat entertainment goes, I found this on price which indicates that for a new airline it would be far easier to rent out tablets or make pax BYOT:
"The constraints are largely financial. Outfitting a typical wide-body plane with seat-back screens can cost $3 million or more per plane, airline executives and consultants say.
Emirates Airline, for example, spends an average of $15,000 per seat on embedded screens. For an Airbus A380 with 517 seats, the total cost to install seat-back monitors would be approximately $7.8 million. And that doesn't include the content."
) and in March off on a 6-day trip flying SQ/OZ J again where I'm in each city for less than 24 hours. Told a couple of friends about it and now they want to come along too! 
