Economics of the end of growth in passenger air

Quote: Pacomartin

UK is undergoing the same sort of stagnation in their flights. They are down 6.5% from 5 years ago.

Of course, the bulk of their flying is international. You can get a train from London to Edinburgh (5 hours each way) for £60 ($95) one way. That's cheaper than New York to Boston (5 hr, 20 min) for $122 each way

The train is also much nicer, and goes from centre to centre. No early check in required. It's normally faster for me door-to-door than flying.

Landing and take off "slots" are basically crowd management. Its not as bad as Japan that makes it a crime to fly into Tokyo without a parking place for the plane.

Free Flight refers to the major phase of the trip, not the take off or the landing. Currently airlines fly certain "routes". A nonstop NYC to SanFran flight flies a series of designated zigs and zags well north of its destination. These zigs and zags are to certain places in the sky designated by specific radials from air navigation radios.

Free Flight involves a pilot choosing his own route to get from city to city. Usually the choice would be a direct route rather than a series of required zig zags that take time and require fuel. Free Flight involves each plane broadcasting its direction and speed so that computers resolve traffic conflicts. The skies are not crowded... except around the airports.

Free flight will make most flights shorter in duration since the planes fly directly to their destination.

Quote: Fleastiff

Landing and take off "slots" are basically crowd management. Its not as bad as Japan that makes it a crime to fly into Tokyo without a parking place for the plane.

Free Flight refers to the major phase of the trip, not the take off or the landing. Currently airlines fly certain "routes". A nonstop NYC to SanFran flight flies a series of designated zigs and zags well north of its destination. These zigs and zags are to certain places in the sky designated by specific radials from air navigation radios.

Free Flight involves a pilot choosing his own route to get from city to city. Usually the choice would be a direct route rather than a series of required zig zags that take time and require fuel. Free Flight involves each plane broadcasting its direction and speed so that computers resolve traffic conflicts. The skies are not crowded... except around the airports.

Free flight will make most flights shorter in duration since the planes fly directly to their destination.

I don't see how this is really possible. The zigs and zags are to keep the plane out of crowded airspace, not just some kind of full-employment act for the air traffic controllers. If you are flying from say Boston to Washington you have to zig away from NYC and zag away from PHI to keep out of their patterns.

And interesting side note to this is curvature of the earth on long flights. Way back when the Steelers had an American Bowl in Japan the paper mentioned how their flight was not much longer than the 49ers but the Steelers would "zig" to Alaska then "zag" down to Japan because this was shorter than what would look like a direct flight on a flat map. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that is what I remember the paper saying, thought I added the zig and zag.