Airlines should stop ghost flights during Winter
By Darren Cronian on Monday, July 21st, 2008

Interested to read that a number of airlines will be running “ghost flights” through the winter i.e. flights with very few passengers on board to ensure that they keep the route. It doesn’t sound very environmentally friendly.

Airlines should stop ghost flights during Winter

It’s no wonder that passengers are having to pay higher taxes on flights if the airlines aren’t taking the environment seriously.

I suspect that the airports turn the other cheek when this is happening because it’ll have a massive impact on the airport if the airline lost the route. Surely, it makes sense to have routes which start and end during peak periods of the year, rather than waste fuel, increase carbon emissions.

It infuriates me.

» The government won’t do anything because it means less revenue from taxes.
» The airports won’t do anything because it means staff and revenue loss.
» The airlines won’t do anything because they can get away with it, and it’ll mean revenue loss.

Let’s see an end to these ghost flights, rather than wasting money which could be spent reducing ridiculous airline surcharges, what do you think.


Similar posts


Keep up-to-date by subscribing to our weekly newsletter or RSS feed



10 responses to “Airlines should stop ghost flights during Winter”

foxnomad | 21 July, 2008 at 3:33 pm

It must be more expensive for them to lose the route than all of the wasted gas vs. loss of ticket sales. Why not make routes secure for 1 year periods except under extraordinary circumstances?

Nick | 21 July, 2008 at 3:40 pm

Darren

Do you hand out tips to Ryanair often as the just grounded aircraft and closed bases across europe?

jetsetter | 21 July, 2008 at 5:09 pm

Airlines have paid good money to fly certain routes and they need some way to keep them during quiet times. As you mention neither airports, governments or airlines want to do anything, but here is an opportunity for all stakeholders to get together and help each other as well as saving the environment. May be airlines should have the option to lease out routes.

Darren Cronian | 22 July, 2008 at 6:50 am

@ Nick

I’d like to think that Travel Rants has the power to make Ryanair ground it’s airlines, but no, I don’t offer a consultancy service to them haha. I think it was BMI that got the headlines that I read.

I’m also trying to remember which airline it was that hired actors on one route to ensure that they kept the route. I think it was a route from Norwich to Belfast. Could be wrong though.

@ Jetsetter

What’s your real name? It’s so impersonal putting a business name or keyword as your name on a blog comment :)

@ Anil

Good question. I have no idea. I know one low cost carrier called Jet2 here in the UK who only operates flights during peak periods. So it’s Leeds to Milan route is not available between November and February.

This makes sense to me. It has many other routes though that it operates between November and February to ensure that it doesn’t loose too much revenue. What am I though.. certainly not an expert in aviation or airlines.

Richard | 22 July, 2008 at 7:29 am

Your are right Darren.

Airlines should stop or at least reduce ghost flights, but they won’t because the loss in revenue is so high in an era where profits are dwindling. The cost of fuel is really hitting airlines hard. No matter how much they put a brave face on it.

Darren Cronian | 22 July, 2008 at 12:43 pm

@ Richard

Thanks for commenting. If the cost of fuel is hitting airlines as hard as they say it is, then stopping ghost flights is a good reason to isn’t it.? I am sure all of the airlines do it, no matter if they’re low cost or national airlines.

MarkH | 23 July, 2008 at 12:36 am

As foxnomad said, it must be cost effective -v- the loss of the route to do this. There are a number of stories in local (Australian) newspapers about planes flying different trajectories and changing their takeoff and landing routines to save a few gallons of fuel. Also a number of stories about weight reduction exercises (how much water is carried, the seat design, the weight of in-seat videos etc) which saves gas as well.

Surely they’d save a lot more by NOT flying empty planes - this seems a fairly easy one to fix to me.

Darren Cronian | 24 July, 2008 at 1:33 am

@ Mark

I can understand changing take-off and landing routines as a way of saving fuel and helping the environment. In a recent interview with Southwest Airlines, they mentioned that it’s something they are doing to help the environment.

Not flying planes though, your right is an easy fix.

Rohan | 26 July, 2008 at 1:06 pm

I had never heard of the term ‘ghost flights’ until today. I agree with you Darren that it is disgusting that the government makes us pay extra air passenger duty (green tax) when it allows this sort of thing to go on.

Darren Cronian | 27 July, 2008 at 7:11 pm

@ Rohan

It annoys me too, I’m starting to think that the government, airline and travel industry are hypocrites when it comes to the environment.

Please post a comment