airlines – Page 2 – The OM Blog by Heizer, Render, & Munson

OM in the News: From Alaska to Allegiant–Airlines Differ in Efficiency

Airlines are always obsessing over fuel costs. It’s a crucial aspect of their business, after all, and accounts for 1/3 of their operating expenses. So you might think that all the major airlines do roughly the same things to minimize their fuel use. But that doesn’t seem to be true. The Washington Post (Sept. 21, 2013) reports that there’s actually a surprising amount of variation in how airlines burn fuel. It ranked the 15 biggest U.S. airlines by fuel efficiency and found very large disparities, as seen in the attached graph.

The least efficient airline, Allegiant Air — a low-cost carrier that targets smaller airports — used 26% more fuel than the most efficient, Alaska Airlines, to achieve a similar level of transport.

So why is there such a huge disparity? Here are a few possibilities:

— Differences in technology: About 1/3 of the variation likely comes from the fact that different airlines use different technology — they don’t all deploy the most advanced, efficient aircraft. Allegiant, for instance, has a fleet of McDonnell Douglas aircraft that dates back to the 1970s. Alaska Airlines, by contrast, uses newer Boeing planes that have technologies like “winglets” to reduce fuel burn.

— Differences in operations: Technology can’t explain all the disparity in fuel efficiency. Some airlines, like Southwest, manage to operate older aircraft quite efficiently. Other airlines, like Virgin, have newer aircraft but are relatively inefficient.

— High oil prices don’t necessarily drive fuel savings. The most efficient airlines aren’t necessarily the most profitable. Allegiant was the least-efficient airline in 2010 but also the most profitable. That’s because it tends to serve airports that other airlines neglect, giving it more leverage to raise prices on routes.

Classroom discussion questions:

1. What is the difference between efficiency and effectiveness? (see p.13 in Chapter 1)

2. Why does this issue matter?

OM in the News: Air Berlin’s Service Implosion

How could a passenger plane take off without a single piece of luggage? That’s the question from 200 Air Berlin passengers on flight AB 8109, whose bags were left sitting at the airport when their flight took off, and then apparently vanished. Nearly a month later the airline still doesn’t know where all the bags are, reports Slate.com (Sept.4, 2013).

Passengers’ inquiries were met with endless redirects. One email to Air Berlin reads: “ NONE of the checked luggage was loaded on the airplane—almost 200 missing pieces missing among the passengers. We filled out forms and were given baggage service numbers to call, but the phone line has no answer. Days later, still no information whatsoever, nobody to call, not sure what to do. Baggage company says to contact airline; airline says to contact baggage company. Why did the captain decide to take off before any pieces of luggage were loaded? We need support from Air Berlin. This isn’t one lost bag, it’s a whole plane of lost bags!”

And, in a separate event, here is twitter bot over a 2-day period earlier this month between a frustrated passenger and the airline:

@5Foot1: “Arrived in Dusseldorf without my bag. @airberlin are useless. No apology, no idea. What happened to German efficiency?”

@airberlin: “We’re sorry for the inconvenience caused. Did you contact the Lost & Found?”

@5Foot1: “Of course. Bag left in LDN. No assurance it will be on the next flight. I’m here for business meetings with no clothes.”

@airberlin: “We understand how annoying this is and apologise! Unfortunately we can’t help you right now. Lost & Found will contact you.”

@5Foot1: “Do you have a number I can call and speak to a human being. The tracking number is giving me no information.”

@airberlin: “Unfortunately there is no number I can give you. Lost & Found will get in touch as soon as they found your bag.”

Concludes Slate: “Air Berlin’s total inability to transport a suitcase from point A to point B can’t be a good sign”.

Classroom discussion questions:

1. In Chapter 6, Managing Quality, we list the 10 Determinants of Service Quality (see Table 6.5). On which of the 10 service determinants did Air Berlin fail?

2. Why did the pilot of AB 8109 leave without any baggage?

OM in the News: New Looks at Loading and Boarding Planes

Loading an airplane quickly and efficiently isn’t an easy task. “It should be, and could be, but the humans involved can’t seem to get with the program,” writes Wired Magazine (Aug. 28, 2013). Better loading means more time in the air – which is where airlines make their money. The boarding process is far from standard – there are almost as many boarding procedures as there are airlines. This problem has long been pondered by operations managers, without a definitive answer. But there have been a few promising experiments.

The most unusual and deceptively simple idea is opening the door at the rear of the plane in addition to the door at the front. Alaska Airlines is trying this. The idea isn’t entirely new–many airlines open the front and rear doors at those airports where there is no jetway, only a staircase leading to the tarmac. Alaska has a new tool to help facilitate using both doors–a solar-powered ramp. Mounted on wheels, the ramp can be driven to the backdoor of the airplane, and passengers make two switch-back turns down the ramp to the ground, providing an alternative to stairs for easy suitcase rolling and wheelchair access. Using the aft door to unload passengers can reduce the turnaround time by 10 minutes.

One of the big reasons boarding has slowed to a crawl is people are carrying more bags aboard to avoid baggage fees. So American Airlines is experimenting with letting those who checked their bag board first. Ideally, these passengers will simply walk to their row and sit down. The airline says that overall it has shaved a few minutes off the boarding process.

Although airlines commonly board by sections, it’s generally a free-for-all with regard to where in that section you are. United uses the “outside-in” method of seating window passengers first, then middle, then aisle seats. The airline has been organizing passengers in better defined lines at the gate for each group, with the hope is there will be less of a bottleneck.

Discussion questions:

1. Why is boarding an important OM issue?

2. What else can airlines do to speed the process?

OM in the News: Cockpits Go Paperless

Airline pilots, who fly some of the world’s most technologically advanced machines, have long relied on paper navigation charts and manuals, which clutter the cockpit and have to be lugged around in cases that can weigh as much as a small child. Now, however, airlines are catching up with the tablet era, reports The Wall Street Journal (June 27, 2013).

JetBlue Airways just received FAA clearance to provide its 2,500 pilots with Apple iPads that will store digital copies of the heavy paper manuals they refer to during flights. American Airlines said its 8,000 pilots had largely gone paperless now that the carrier has completed the rollout of its own iPad program. By storing manuals and navigation charts on iPads, American figures it has eliminated 3,000 pages of paper per pilot. In April, United started requiring its 10,000 pilots to carry iPads. Southwest started an iPad trial with 150 pilots this month and expects to expand it to an additional 550 pilots in the third quarter.

The volume of paper traditionally required by cockpit crews is almost overwhelming in the confines of a cockpit. American estimates that removing the bags from all its planes saves about 400,000 gallons of fuel annually, worth $1.2 million at current prices. One Alaska Airlines pilot said having the approach plates, arrival charts and runway diagrams available at the touch of a tablet is a lot quicker and more user-friendly. “It’s about information management, the human factors of managing charts,” he said. The change helps pilots be “safe and compliant” and helps the airline run a “better business.”

This is a great article to share with your class when you are discussing Technology in Services in Chapter 7.

Discussion questions:

1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the paperless cockpit?

2. What are the operations issues involved here?

OM in the News: Speeding Up the Airline Boarding Process

airline arrival rates “The forecast calls for heavy frustration with a 50% chance of innovation at U.S. airports this summer,” writes The Wall Street Journal (May 23,2013). Airport crowds are expected to be the largest in the U.S. since 2008. There’s already concern that budget cuts in TSA overtime will lead to longer security-screening lines. But travelers will find new boarding procedures at both United and American airlines that pack planes faster. The idea is to increase the percent of flights that arrive within 15 minutes of schedule, currently around 76%.

In an effort to get more flying out of planes and crews, a topic we discuss in Chapter 15, United is introducing new boarding lanes at gate areas this summer. Five different boarding groups will line up in different areas, akin to how Southwest lines up customers by groups, so that instead of a crush of people pushing toward the gate, each group will have a designated place to wait. After elite-level customers, the rest of the coach cabin will board window-seat passengers first, then middle seats, and aisle seats last. With the “Wilma” system, as United calls it, seats fill faster because people already seated don’t have to get up as much to let a row mate in. United says Wilma boarding is about 20% faster than boarding from the rear of the plane to the front.

American set its own new change in boarding this month. It joined Alaska Airlines in offering early boarding to customers who don’t have large carry-on bags. American offers Group 2 boarding, right after elite-level frequent fliers, to passengers without overhead-bin luggage. American tested the idea in seven cities earlier this year and found getting people without overhead bin luggage on early sped up boarding time and improved on-time arrival performance.

Discussion questions:

1. Why has Southwest’s management of scheduling been so successful?

2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the “Wilma” system?

OM in the News: How to Keep Planes Flying 24 Hours a Day

Airplanes don’t make money sitting on the ground, so airlines do everything they can to keep planes in the air on as many as flights as they can, writes Conde Nast Traveler (March 4, 2013). If they can cut the turnaround time between flights throughout the day, they can probably add an extra flight at the end of that day. But into the late-night hours, things change. Overnight flights are routine for long-haul distances. But not many people want to fly at night for domestic or regional travel. Airlines also use overnight hours to perform maintenance, but not all planes that sit overnight need work. So airlines have been getting creative in order to increase their aircraft utilization. Here’s what some are trying:

Going Cheap Spirit is known for extremely cheap fares. But to keep those fares low, it has to run its airplanes more frequently. That has resulted in some brutal red-eyes, including the Phoenix to Dallas flight leaves at 1:55 a.m. and arrives at 5:05 a.m. If people want cheap flights, they’ll put up with the pain.

Following the Family JetBlue is known for great service, but is also earning a reputation among Caribbean families who travel back and forth between their homes in the northeast U.S. and their relatives in the islands. It is increasing its service this summer to include 16 daily flights from NY to the Dominican Republic– effectively a 24-hour operation, with flights arriving at 12:50 a.m., 2:15 a.m., and 3:30 a.m., with similarly painful departure times. Seeing family means flying whenever you can get an affordable fare.

Venturing North Demand to Alaska explodes during the summer, and fares are high. So Jet Blue and Virgin America are adding flights there and still making good money. What’s more, people generally expect to fly at night in this market. You can leave the Continental U.S. when the sun is shining, see the sun set, and then see it un-set as you reach Alaska and its 24-hour daylight.

Discussion questions:

1. Why is capacity such an important OM issue for airlines?

2. What other strategies can the industry use to increase utilization of aircraft?

OM in the News: How Delta Manages Airline Capacity

The Wall Street Journal’s (Oct.25, 2012) two articles describing how Delta Air Lines is effectively addressing capacity issues are useful classroom tools as you cover Capacity Planning in Supplement 7. In the first, Delta describes its plan to cut $1 billion from its costs through a revamp of its domestic fleet, maintenance savings and productivity initiatives–with no layoffs. Delta has been one of the most aggressive in the U.S. industry at cutting capacity to retain pricing power. In the 3rd quarter, it offered 1.5% less capacity than a year earlier, and it expects its capacity to fall by 1% -3% in this quarter.

Delta is also the first U.S. carrier to buy its own jet fuel refinery to reduce the volatility of its largest expense. And as part of its realignment, Delta will begin taking delivery of used Boeing 717s next year, along with new Boeing 737-900s. It will reduce the number of unprofitable 50-seat regional jets.

The second article describes how Delta uses sports charters to help keep planes occupied in the winter, when regular passenger travel slows. The planes fly regular service in the busy summer months, then convert to charter planes. This year, Delta has been flying 21 of the 30 NBA teams, 15 of the 30 Major League Baseball teams and 15 of the 32 NFL teams. The airline also carries 2 NHL teams, 35 college football teams and 40 college basketball teams. “We wanted planes for only four months a year. It was a perfect fit,” says Delta. Delta takes 8 of its Airbus A319 jets out of regular passenger service in October and installs special interiors. Instead of 126 seats, there are only 54. The plane is segregated into three cabins—the front for players, with seats that fold out into beds, seats in the middle for coaches, and the rest in the rear for team staff, security and reporters.

Discussion questions:

1. Why is capacity a critical OM decision for airlines?

2. What are the dangers of vertically integrating, such as buying a refinery?

OM in the News: How Airlines Match Capacity to Demand

When we think of capacity issues at airlines, it is often in the context of buying enough planes to meet forecast demand. But the Wall Street Journal (Feb.29, 2012) makes the important point that “many fewer people fly in the winter than during school breaks, major holidays and summer vacations.” In fact, US airlines filled just 77% of their seats last January, compared to 87% in July. Basically, for decades, airlines have earned a lot of money in summer and then lost it in winter when they had too many planes, gates, and employees.

What OM strategies can airlines use to break the cycle? Here are 4 ideas: (1) Schedule more airplanes for maintenance and renovations during winter months; (2) Offer workers voluntary leaves; (3) Fly the planes fewer hours; and (4) Trim the number of daily flights to many destinations.

With fuel prices hitting record highs ( fuel is more than 1/3 of operating expenses), “it becomes more and more important not to fly that airplane if there’s no demand,” says Alaska Air’s VP-Revenue Management. Delta has made a goal of providing 20-25% less capacity in winter than in summer–a big oscillation by industry standards. But seasonal downsizing is tricky. Airlines can’t afford to park their planes in low season, and union contracts don’t allow them to impose staff cuts.

Alaska Air smoothed out it schedule recently when it added flights to Hawaii from its Seattle hub in winter. Delta loads up on sports charter flights and adds more flights to the Caribbean, Mexico, and Australia in the slow season. US Airways offers red-eye flights from its Phoenix hub in summer, squeezing more hours a day out of its planes, then discontinues the flights in winter. Ryanair, Europe’s big discount carrier, simply parks 80 of its 280 planes from November to March. It still bears the ownership costs, but doesn’t have to fuel up.

Discussion questions:

1. Discuss each of these capacity strategies. Which is best?

2. What other cost-saving ideas can students suggest to deal with seasonality?

OM in the News: Qantas Airways Turns to RFID to Eliminate Queues

The Wall Street Journal (Dec.29,2011) writes: “Qantas has created practically paperless airports, rolling out new technology that eliminates many long lines and speeds passengers all the way to their seats. No paper itinerary. No sticky luggage tag. No boarding pass.” Says one frequent business traveller: “I think this is the best check-in in the world. It’s incredibly efficient”.

The system, built around RFID, is similar to toll tags used on highways. Fliers get an ID card that they flash at a kiosk in the ticketing area. The system assigns a seat and checks the passenger in. To check luggage, the passenger goes to a baggage drop area and flashes the card again. Personalized RFID tags are placed on the bags, which are scanned for weight and size.. Finally, the ID is flashed at the gate–no boarding pass needed– and agents hand the flier a receipt with the seat number printed on it.

Qantas started building the system a few years ago when it was running out of room in its large Sydney terminal and faced long backups at counters. It concluded that to eliminate lines, it needed to eliminate the “pain points” at the airport–checking in, checking bags, and boarding. So it decided to invest in technology rather than floor space. With kiosks positioned in 4 V-shaped patterns, it’s almost impossible for long queues to build up. The system is largely self-service for customers, sp ground workers now roam the lobby to assist with things like directions and kiosk help.

Discussion questions:

1. Why did Qantas decide to use RFID technology?

2. How does this system benefit both fliers and the airline?

OM in the News: Is Boarding the Most Annoying Airline Delay?

I guess the answer is yes, given that yesterday’s New York Times (Nov. 1, 2011) ran a front page article on the woes of airline boarding. Airlines have been complicating the process of boarding for decades, writes the Times. First travelers have to be sorted by priority: 1st class, frequent flyers, elite cardholders, military in uniform, families with kids, and so on. Then there is the issue of seats for those who paid priority boarding fees, the matter of more roll-ons in the aisle from checked-baggage fees, and of course, the fact that planes are fuller. Boarding time has actually doubled— and it now takes 30-40 minutes to board 140 passengers, up from 15 minutes about 20 years ago.

Operations scheduling techniques (Ch.15) have been used by every airline to find creative solutions to speed boarding. Spirit Airlines says the answer is to charge $20-$40 per carry-on bag. This “stress-free” boarding saves 6 minutes on average. American Airlines switched a few months ago to boarding passengers earlier who pay $9-$19 extra (and hence find a space for their bag). The rest of the passengers are brought in as 3 groups, sorted out in a spread throughout the plane. This method has cut boarding by 4-5 minutes.

US Airways hired ASU profs to develop a “reverse pyramid” to save time. Passengers with window seats in the back board first. Then, gradually, passengers are brought on to the front of the plane in a staggered pattern. Southwest, which can board its planes in 15 minutes, claims the root of delays is the practice of assigning seat numbers. So it assigns passengers to one of 3 boarding groups.

The conflict: all the extra fees for early boarding and baggage will add $12.5 billion to the bottom line of US airlines this year, up 87% from last year.

Discussion questions:

1. Research has shown that “back-to-front” boarding is the slowest method. Why is it still used?

2. How else can OM help solve this problem?

OM in the News: Adding Capacity at Lufthansa Airlines

Every airline needs to manage capacity constraints (Supp.7) and there are a variety of ways to do so. Southwest, for example, squeezes seven flight segments out of its average plane schedule per day–one more than most competitors. Quick ground turnaround has long been its strength. Delta, with excess seats since its recent merger, has cut flights to keep existing planes full. And now The Wall Street Journal (Oct.6,2011) describes how the German carrier Lufthansa has come up with a financially attractive option of adding 5-10 more seats –and fare paying passengers– per flight. How did it squeeze 8% more seats into planes without creating a rebellion among already sardined passengers?

It did so by squashing rows of new seats 2 inches closer together. But with a new generation of ultra-thin seats, passengers find even more leg room available. Using a strong mesh, similar to that in fancy office chairs (instead of inches of foam padding), and moving magazine pockets to the top of seat backs, there is actually more space for knees than with the old chairs. The new seats look ultra-skimpy–worse than almost anything flying in the US or Europe–with a seat pitch of 30 inches. The thinner seats, though, mean the pitch is better than the traditional 32 inches. (AirTran has 30 inches, while Delta, Continental, US Air, and American have a 31 inch pitch. Jet Blue has a 34 inch pitch.)

The new configuration saves Lufthansa hundreds of millions of dollars in new-jet purchases. On the A320, for example, the carrier added two rows of seats, giving the plane 174 seats, instead of 162. For its European fleet, this is the equivalent of having 12 more Airbus A320 jets.

The Journal article also has a 5 minute video clip on the strategy embedded in it.

Discussion questions:

1. Why don’t US and other carriers follow suit immediately?

2. What was the role of operations management in this change?

OM in the News: Running an Airline with No Scheduled Flights

Scheduling crews, planes, flights, and fuel at Delta (722 aircraft), United (710), and American (618) is a topic we discuss in Ch. 15, as well as in Module B (LP) in our texts. But what about OM and scheduling at the nation’s 4th largest domestic air carrier–NetJets– with over 600 planes, 2,500 pilots, and 270 flight attendants? Air & Space Magazine (Aug.1, 2011) reports today how NetJets produces a flight schedule based on the unpredictable travel needs of its 7,000+ well-heeled fractional jet owner customers.

“An insane ballet that requires constant attention to detail”, is how a NetJets manager describes a flight schedule that will likely be reduced to little more than junk before the sun sets. Whereas ordinary airlines operate flight schedules that change little from day-to-day, at airlines on demand, no two days are the same. This ” is one of aviation’s most logistically complex endeavors”, company execs assert.

In the early days, NetJets tracked aircraft on metal boards with a 24-hour grid. Today, a proprietary software program, maintained by 200 IT employees, factors in every conceivable variable– from plane weight to weather to sunset restrictions—at every airport. It makes sure the client’s limo and hotel are coordinated and will downsize a plane if a runway is slippery.

But no amount of software can account for curveballs the customers throw. “I think I might want to leave at 8, but it could be 10. I may have 4 people, but it could be 8. I may have a dog but I may not. By the way, I don’t want to go from Palm Beach to NY. I want to go to Moscow”, are just some of the calls to customer service reps. ” We don’t say no–ever”, says the VP-Scheduling. An aircraft is guaranteed 4-10 hours after a request is made. The crew work schedule: on 1 week, off 1 week, with no idea where they are flying till minutes before takeoff.

Discussion questions:

1. Compare OM at NetJets to a traditional airline.

2. What is the most difficult aspect of operating an airline with no fixed schedule?

OM in the News: Pilots and the iPad–Efficiency in the Airlines, Part 2

Yesterday’s blog was on building efficient airplanes that weigh less and pollute less. With jet fuel prices at near record high prices, we noted that every pound lighter a plane can be made saves 30 gallons of fuel a year. It’s interesting that the very next day, The New York Times (July 5, 2011) reported that 1.5 pound iPads are replacing 60 pounds worth of flight manuals that pilots currently drag around. The FAA has started to authorize airlines to use the tablet computer as an electronic flight bag to take the place of bulky paper manuals that contain operations instructions, checklists, log books, navigation charts, weather information and airport diagrams.

The flight director at Alaska Airlines says: “The iPad allows pilots to quickly and nimbly access information. When you need to make a decision in the cockpit, 3 to 4 minutes fumbling with paper is an eternity”. Every one of Alaska’s pilots is now using the device — and American Airlines, which just got FAA approval, is not far behind. The e-manuals include hyperlinks and color graphics. And pilots skip the tedium of updating manuals by swapping out old pages with new ones. Switching to the iPad is also expected to reduce absenteeism from shoulder and back injuries associated with hoisting the heavy bags (which also tear up the seats, according to one AA pilot).

There are now over 250 aviation apps for the iPad, including some that are easier to use than avionics technology installed in the planes. As we discuss in Ch.7, technology can play a major role in increasing operational efficiency. With American’s fleet at about 620 planes, the airline stands to save over 1 million gallons of fuel per year just with the iPads!

Discussion questions:

1. How else does technology save the airlines time and money?

2. Can the iPads be used when the plane is in flight?

OM in the News: Making Airplanes More Efficient

With airlines hemorrhaging billions of dollars a year, largely because of soaring oil prices and environmental regulations, building more efficient jets has become Boeing and Airbus’s biggest OM challenge. Pressured by airline execs, manufacturers have already begun making lighter planes to reduce fuel consumption. In 1980, for example, it took 46 gallons of fuel to fly a passenger 1,000 miles. Today it is down to 22 gallons–and could drop to 18 within a decade. Still, a decade ago, fuel accounted for 15% of an airline’s budget. Today, it’s 35%. And airlines worldwide may have to spend an extra $3.3 billion a year to meet new E.U. carbon dioxide restrictions on planes flying into Europe.

So when we talk about product design and sustainability considerations in Ch.5, airline OM managers are desperate for any improvements that can reduce weight and emissions. The Miami Herald (July 4, 2011) reports on some the efficiency gains that were dreams just a few years ago. Both the Boeing 787 and Airbus A350 are new long-range jets with 1/2 their bodies made of carbon-fiber composites (which weigh 20% less than traditional aluminum alloys). Engine manufacturers are unveiling brand new engines for single-aisle planes (which are 75% of the 22,000 jets worldwide) that promise to cut fuel use by 15% (or $1 million per plane per year).

The Herald also lists more ways to save on fuel: (1) a satellite-based air traffic control system (several years away) that could cut fuel use by 12%; (2) “winglets” added to the tip of each wing to prevent drag; (3) carrying less weight in the plane– (American is replacing 19,000 catering carts with ones that weigh 16 lbs. less. Southwest is looking at lighter weight seat covers, while Jet Blue is using thinner seats. Every pound saves 30 gallons of fuel/year); and (4), replacing older jets faster (American is replacing aging MD80s with 737 that use 35% less fuel).

Discussion questions:

1. Why is efficiency a product design issue?

2. What other changes can be made to improve operational efficiency?

OM in the News: Airlines and the Capacity Issue

Because of my early career experience in the aerospace industry (design team for McDonnell Douglas’ DC-10, then the engine for that jet at GE), I have always followed the airline industry closely. Capacity issues have haunted airlines for 6 decades now, going back all the way to 1942, when demand plummeted during that recession. Buying planes is a long term decision, but difficulties after 9-11 and during our current trying times created dramatic drops in demand for seats. This is a great classroom example when you are teaching Capacity in Supp.7.

How do airlines respond? As today’s New York Times reports, airlines trim capacity by grounding planes, reducing the number of flights between cities, and flying smaller planes. At the nation’s largest parking lot near the California Mojave Desert, some 200 aircraft of all sizes (from A320s to 747s) sit tip to wing tip. The dry air keeps the planes from rust and corrosion. Students will enjoy the photo in Supp. 7 showing this image.

The cost, up to $60,000 per month per plane. But the 7% cut in capacity last year helped raise ticket prices modestly. Airlines now fly at 80% of seat capacity, a full 10% higher than their traditional measure.

With the mergers of Delta with Northwest, United with Continental, Midwest with Frontier, and Southwest with AirTran, there is little growth in demand for more jets forecast in the US. Only 38 wide body planes are on order for delivery in this country by 2015. By contrast, 627 are going to be delivered to foreign carriers during that same 5 year period.

Discussion questions:

1. Why are airlines willing to spend enormous sums to park their planes in the desert?

2. Who can benefit from airline overcapacity?

3. The new Boeing 787 Dreamliner has run into such bad supply chain problems (Ch.11) that it is now 2 years late. How does this impact the airlines that ordered them?