What damn flight patterns, you might ask. If W-patterns, is it something new? Ryanair has just a few W-patterns in the entire schedule and doesn't seem to like them at all. But no, I don't mean exactly that, I have built quite a different model. Why bother? Because if the load factors should be better, the carrier can win some passengers not only by rethinking its route policy (where to fly and which airports to use), but also by making some changes in the flight schedule philosophy. So hereby I present you with ”the delta revolution” or a triangle flight pattern model.
Let's assume we have an airport in X-town, it will be our base. Then there are two other non-base airports Y and Z that are in the cities big enough to be linked with X with a once-daily flight. The LF's on these routes are meagre however, probably still good enough to continue flights between the cities, but far from the target set for the routes. The cities Y and Z are served by the X-airport based planes, flights are carried out around mid-day. A group of tourists living in X-city has a day-off and would like to visit either Y or Z-town. It would, however require 2 days off and a hotel. No way, the potential passengers resign. What the carrier can do? In my theory, the schedule could be changed to accommodate that kind of passengers as well. It would require that X-based aircrafts make its early-morning and late-evening flights according to a triangle pattern, e.g.
dep. X 6:30 – 7:30 arr. Y; dep. Y 7:55 – 8:55 arr. Z; dep. Z 9:20 – 10:20 arr. X.
dep. X 19:30 – 20:30 arr. Z; dep. Z 20:55 – 21:55 arr. Y; dep. Y 22:20 – 23:20 arr. X.
What do we have here? Still once-daily flights, but now you can depart from X in the morning, you can spend the entire day in the Y- destination city (arr. 8:55 dep. 21:55). Moreover, without the long W-patterns you are able to easily connect 2 non-base airports (Y and Z) – a new link without a new base.
Let's continue: From X you can make a day-trip now, but to Y only, not yet to the Z-city. We can try to make it happen, however.
If the schedule above were valid on Mondays and Wednesdays, you can change the flights' directions on Tuesdays and Thursdays
dep. X 6:30 – 7:30 arr. Z; dep. Z 7:55 – 8:55 arr. Y; dep. Y 9:20 – 10:20 arr. X.
dep. X 19:30 – 20:30 arr. Y; dep. Y 20:55 – 21:55 arr. Z; dep. Z 22:20 – 23:20 arr. X.
Now the passenger living in X can make a day-trip to Y on Mondays and Wednesdays or to Z on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The dweller of Y-town can spend an entire day in X on Tuesdays and Thursdays or in Y on Mondays and Wednesdays. The day-trip from Z could be made to X on Mo, Wed and to Y on Tue and Thu. Load factors rise.
This example is meant to show you that there are many other ways to fill the planes than 1 penny flights. MOL is a visionary, undoubtedly. But the vision should involve much more than just money-guard issues. Some finesse, please!