Anyone managed to get a 1 bar airport as a mega hub by 99.99% connections?
I don't know if there even is a 1 bar airport with connections enabled :huh:
I don't know if there even is a 1 bar airport with connections enabled :huh:
This might be the main problem! :) No transfer paxes ...
Ive found Manston in the UK, thats why I was asking, 45min transfer!
Mogadishu (MGQ) in Somalia is also a 1 bar airport with 45 min of transfer time.
If it's one bar and non-transferable airport, i think one way to survive is using the fact you can make PAX stay on one aircraft to somehow get some connection PAX. but it means the traffic is highly depended on the number of PAX between destinations on both sides of the flights (your hub as a via point).
I'm not an expert on this, but i don't see people running large hubs over three bars or less demand airport. You can certainly create a small airline, like the case in Somalia, but not too much. It's always a plus when you have more demand at your hub airlines when you started your new airline, it might be fine for you to dump tonnes of money on it and forcefully form a hub, but i believe this type of structure is quite fragile especially for low demand periods.
Hum, 4-Bar Airport with 95 Percent transfer Pax also ok? Visit FAI on Kaitak.
I know your four bar hubs, :) that's the reason i was saying three bars or less. My point was using one bar to obtain 99% connection sounds too fragile to me.
If it's one bar and non-transferable airport, i think one way to survive is using the fact you can make PAX stay on one aircraft to somehow get some connection PAX. but it means the traffic is highly depended on the number of PAX between destinations on both sides of the flights (your hub as a via point).
I'm not an expert on this, but i don't see people running large hubs over three bars or less demand airport. You can certainly create a small airline, like the case in Somalia, but not too much. It's always a plus when you have more demand at your hub airlines when you started your new airline, it might be fine for you to dump tonnes of money on it and forcefully form a hub, but i believe this type of structure is quite fragile especially for low demand periods.
Eh, it's kind of self-evident that it's possible if you look at some of the more razor's-edge hubs that exist - I know I have Oklahoma City at 92% transfer traffic and a 96% load factor, so take away every last bit of local demand and it'd be, what, 88% or so? I'm sure there's more marginal ones than that out there, too...probably more a question of the lack of airports that have zero traffic but transfers available and reasonable infrastructure so you can actually get a reasonable number of aircraft in and out.
I reckon its only possible to set up as a sub with 20-30 million and run at a loss for a while until you find the right number of connections. Manston has 6 slots per 5 minutes as well. More than Gatwick!
I reckon its only possible to set up as a sub with 20-30 million and run at a loss for a while until you find the right number of connections. Manston has 6 slots per 5 minutes as well. More than Gatwick!
and thats more than:
... Birmingham
... Luton
... Stansted
... Edinburgh
... Glasgow
... Bristol
... East Midlands
... Leeds/Bradford
... Newcastle ^_^
From this point of view (and with a connecting time of 45min), Manston could be a good choice for an UK-based hub. An unworldy, but maybe proftiable hub with even longhaul possibilities. Give it a try and report to us ;) I've thought about months ago, but it was too risky for me :ph34r:
ill give it a go, doubt itll work!
I'm really interested in the feasibility of this plan! Let us know how it goes!
Why has this airport been reopened in AS. It was, quite rightly, given zero bars sometime ago as it had closed to traffic in 2014. There are plans to try to reopen it as a cargo hub but its a long way off. www.aircargoweek.com/riveroak-opens-consultation-revive-manston-cargo-hub/
I know your four bar hubs, :) that's the reason i was saying three bars or less. My point was using one bar to obtain 99% connection sounds too fragile to me.
Always depends…
If you see AS as a bunch of algorithms and data, math will tell you that the smaller the hub-demand, the better it is for profitable transfer operations. Thing is, you barely find an airport in the geographical situation needed. There are some like FAI (wonder where Kahael got the idea from;) ) being a decent hub for North-America <··> Asia ops.
Though most of those brilliant spots require some cash to start with. Only a few are good enough to make it with 10m$.
As for Manston, I like it and have a transfer ratio of 99-100% there. It’s that1% that actually costs money.
Though again: You might need to bend the system to the limit to start a profitable ops there with 10m$. There’s too many connections within Europe and 10m$ is not enough to go intercont - for a European carrier anyways.
The answer is easy to this one: Yes, it works. If you have a perfectly timed and located transfer hub it doesn't matter how big the airport is. It could be an airport with no demand at all. All what matters are the opponents which ofc have an advantage if they're located in an airport with maybe 1:30h but 50 million local PAX as support for their business. :D
As an example this airline I made to exactly answer the topic's question for myself. Based in Apia (2 bars, 45 mins transfer). I myself am most surprised about the freight LF. 80%+, wow. :D
1 Like
Uhm ... dont know :DThere are some like FAI (wonder where Kahael got the idea from;) ) being a decent hub for North-America <··> Asia ops.
Just wanted to understand how the concept worked and liked it (because it was profitable)