Cancelled/Diverted flights in Germany
 

Dear all,

First of all I'm not sure if this is the right forum to post. Nevertheless, I am currently working on a project for my university course and I would appreciate some suggestions from your part because I think some of you may be competent to answer my question. So the main aim of the project is to structure a derivative product (kind of financial insurance) that will be eventually offered to the main airports in Germany. This product will cover these airports in case of bad weather(snow, fog etc.), when flights have to be either cancelled or either diverted. So as the flights are cancelled/diverted, the airports lose a huge amount of money, therefore we would like to structure a product that will be like an insurance for them, and in case of heavy snow and a major flight cancellation this insurance will compensate them for the loss of profit.

Therefore, we are looking for the data which will tell us the number of flights that were cancelled on major German airports per year during the past years, due to weather reasons. We need this information for German airports, specifically: Frankfurt, Munich, Dusseldorf, Berlin, Hamburg, Stuttgart, Cologne, Hanover, Nuremberg and Bremen.

Does anyone by chance know a way how to find this type of data?

Thank you very much and have a nice evening!

So, you're going to university and have no clue how to approach a solution for your questions? Do you think, one could contact those airports and ask for the data / information you need?

If it was this easy, do you think I would post here? Already contacted all the airports, none of these want to share the information needed.

But thanks

I'd expect the national or EU aviation regulation government agencies would have this type of information and likely be required to publish it. I know the US does.

What university (and location), what course, what major/minor subjects and degree program (if any)?

When a flight from AAA to BBB is cancelled, the passengers from this flight generally spend more time in airport AAA (being rebooked and waiting for the new flight) and eventually arrive at BBB, generally a bit later. So airport AAA should gain rather than lose business while BBB doesn't lose much business. You seem to be assuming that when the flight is cancelled, the passengers just don't fly and don't spend time at the airport either.

By this reasoning, wouldn't airport businesses want to be insured against the LACK of flight delays and cancellations at that airport?

Flightstats.com has the diversion data, normal people can access about 60-90 days of it.

That's an interesting question.

1. As you said, you have those who spend more time at the airport while they wait to be rebooked onto another flight, which makes them more likely to frequent the shops and restaurants, driving up revenues.

2. On shorter routes, people will be rebooked onto trains or drive, reducing revenues at the airport.

3. People might rebook to other nearby airports, reducing revenues at the initial airport.

Regardless whether the net effect between the three is negative or positive, I would find it hard to believe that airports could not carry the risk as part of their daily operations and would require insurance.

Insurance premiums = expected payout + business / administrative expenses of the insurance provider + profit of the insurance provider.

Check out BTS data in the US which is generally more comprehensive than what you find in the EU. Not the airports you're looking for, but may be good enough to validate your model.

OTOH US airports tend to overschedule flights and usually the impact is more severe.

Are you assuming they haven't built this factor into their business model already?

If OP (based in GVA) has to use data from EU (or even DACH) airports, that data will not be of any use.

I wouldn't automatically assume that airports make losses. The flights still have to leave at some point as you can only substitute only a small number of flights. A DUS-FRA can easily be replaced by a bus/train. It's a little more difficult to make a bus/train go TATL.

Furthermore, it's probably useful to differentiate between punctual cancelations (individual flights) and massive cancelations (weather, volcano ashes, etc...).

In the former situation, chances are that airports and their merchants are going to make a little more profit (people have to eat/drink, be entertained and sometimes even have to sleep somewhere. Given that the stranded PAX make up only a marginal fraction of all passengers, an airport can expect that there will be no additional costs (such as garbage disposal, cleaning, electricity, wear and tear of seats in the departure hall, etc...) Conclusion: More consumption = more money).

In the latter situation, profits might be only marginal. There will be a lot of stranded passengers, that airlines are going to accommodate. Airports and Airlines usually set up camp beds (as hotels can't simply stomach the huge demand). The passengers need 24/7 help, which is at least unusual for most European airports that close down for the night. The increased number of passengers in the terminal are going to create more garbage and sanitary installations have to be cleaned at higher rates to maintain the service level, we are used to. Conclusion: A profit would seem surprising.

I would imagine that both airlines and airports take this risk into account and make adequate budgetary appropriations for such cases.