Category: ✈️ Air Travel

A landing slot, takeoff slot, or airport slot is a permission granted by the owner of an airport designated which allows the grantee to schedule a landing or departure at that airport during a specific time period.

While it’s kept mostly hush-hush, a leaked document revealed Oman Air set a record by paying £58 million for a pair of take-off and landing slots at Heathrow in early 2016. The Gulf carrier is understood to have bought the pair, which includes a highly prized early morning arrival, from Air France-KLM.

A year later, Scandinavian Airlines made news when it revealed that it sold two slot pairs at Heathrow for almost £60 million.

Pre-pandemic, European and airports instituted an 80/20 policy. That is; the airline allocated a slot must fly at least 80% of the allocated slots over a year. If you’re interested in the full details of the policy, here’s the full text of the EU Slot Regulation EEC 95/93.

There is good reason for this. It ensures the aviation market remains competitive and airlines are incentivised to trade or hand back unused slots so that other airlines can fly them instead, including new market entrants.

However, along came COVID-19 and an almost blanket ban on international travel. The 80:20 rules were suspended for six months in March 2020 to stop airlines running empty flights to hold on to their landing rights. This was extended for another six months in September 2020.

More recently, the UK government is operating a 70% rule throughout the summer of 2020, expecting passenger volumes to be somewhere similar to pre-pandemic levels.

So now these restrictions are back in place, at least in the UK, I wanted to take a look at the impact of so-called ghost flights over the past 2 years.

Methodology

I recently came across a Freedom of Information request detailing the of the number of empty or almost empty flights that have left the UK by airport in each month since March 2020.

“Empty or almost empty” has been classified as flights with a load factor of 10% or less for this question. This means that the number of terminal passengers on the flight was no more than 10% of the number of available seats. Scheduled and chartered flights are included, as are flights to Oil Rigs.

Results

Count of passenger flights operating from UK airports with load factor less than 10%

Download graph.

You can see in March 2020, for most of which the 80:20 rules was in place, the number of ghost flights (1772) was at it highest during the pandemic, as airlines couldn’t fly passengers but were tied to the 80:20 rule before it was paused.

As travel started again in the Autumn of 2020, you can see the total number of ghost flights increasing again (1544 in September 2022, the second highest month for ghost flights). The assumption here is passengers simply didn’t want to travel but airlines ramped up the number of flights, thus load volumes were below 10% on operating flights.

In total there were 14,472 ghost flights over the period of Mar 2020 and Sept 2021.

Total ghost flights by airport Mar 20 – Sept 21

Reporting Airport	Total (Mar 20 – Sept 21)
Kirkwall	0
Dundee	3
Exeter	10
…	…
Gatwick	1044
Manchester	1548
Heathrow	4910

View full table.

Kirkwall had no ghost flights, whereas Heathrow had 4910 over the period Mar 20 – Sept 21.

Though Kirkwall handled 14,247 flights in 2019. Heathrow handled 80,886,589.

Ghost flights Sept 20 – Sept 21 as % of normal flight volume (2019 (top 20 UK airports)

 

Download graph.

Looking at the top 20 airports, Aberdeen has the largest percentage (0.019%) of ghost flights (Sept ’20 – ’21) versus 2019 (pre pandemic) total aircraft movements. One reason for this might be due to the types of flights. In the dataset I am using

Scheduled and chartered flights are included, as are flights to Oil Rigs.

Aberdeen serves oil rigs in the North Sea, and is therefore likely to operate transfers for workers which might usually have a load factor of less than 10%, even pre-pandemic.

Bristol (0.0047%) and Liverpool (John Lennon) (0.0046%) are the second and third respectively when it comes to worst offenders for total ghost flights as a percentage of normal operation.

Ghost flights estimated c02 emissions

Let’s assume a ghost flight operates on the same averages I used for my post on aircraft emissions for delegates travelling to last years COP 26 summit;

On average, passenger aviation emitted 90 grams of CO₂ per passenger-kilometer in 2019

International Council on Clean Transportation

Ghost flights also fly planned routes (to ensure slots are kept at both airports). So let’s also assume the average flight distance used for calculations in the COP 26 post too; 3000 km (6000 km for both legs).

Download graph.

Note, we’re assuming the average flight lengths to be identical across airports. In my calculation the major international airports cause the most emissions from ghost flights simply because the ran more of them.

The reality is that emissions will be much higher from these airports. This is because departing and arriving flights tend to fly much longer distances when compared to regional airports (where real emissions will likely be lower than my calculation for the same reason).

In total, I’ve estimated total emissions from ghost flights between March 2020 – Sept 2021 from listed UK airports was 7152.84 tons of CO2.

Ghost flights cost to the airline

Current jet fuel costs about $0.95 / litre.

According to this Wikipedia article, jet fuel weighs 0.81 kg/l.

A Boeing 787-9 burns 5.77 kg of fuel per km.

Therefore, per km, a 787-9 burns $6.77 worth of fuel per km ((5.77/0.81)*0.95).

Download graph.

Operating an airline is not cheap!

Assuming the average ghost flight flew 6000 kms, and the airline paid current costs $0.95/litre (total $40,620 per flight), airlines flying ghost flights out of Heathrow paid almost $200 million in fuel costs to operate these empty or almost empty flights.

In total I estimate over half a billion dollars ($538,052,520) was spent by airlines operating ghost flights from these UK airports during the pandemic.

Improvements

This post only considers UK airports. Ghost flights are not unique to the UK. As noted previously, the 80:20 rules applies to US and EU airports too. Lufthansa has apparently operated over 18,000 ghost flights — if true, 4,000 more than all UK airport ghost flights combined.

It would therefore be a logical next step to compare ghost flights worldwide, and by airline (whilst also factoring in the improvements to my calculations as noted throughout this post).

tl;dr

I estimate over half a billion dollars ($538,052,520) was spent by airlines operating ghost flights from UK airports during the pandemic resulting in a total of 7152.84 tons of CO2 emissions.

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

We already know airplanes don’t have enough toilets.

But where does all the waste go once the vacuum has sucked the waste out of the toilet bowl?

No, it doesn’t get ejected.

But on a busy flight recently (Easyjet, many drunk tourists, lots of trips to the toilet) I started to think; how big is the waste tank? Can it ever get full?

Plane waste tank sizes

Manufacturer	Model	Total waste capacity (L)
Boeing	747-400	1135
Boeing	787-8	1628
Airbus	A380	2096

Using publicly available data sheets for aircraft, I found the above specifications for each waste tank.

Waste capacity per passenger

Let’s assume the toilets are exclusively for urination to simplify the calculations.

According to Healthline:

The normal range of urine output is 800 to 2,000 milliliters per day if you have a normal fluid intake of about 2 liters per day.

Let’s take also assume this is passed during waking hours, so 16 hours (960 mins), and that people are awake on flights.

At the lower estimate (800ml) that’s 50ml per hour. At the higher estimate (2000ml) that’s 125ml per hour.

The planes for which I have collected statistics for all fly predominantly long haul routes. Let’s assume that to be 6 to 11 hours.

Download graph.

Hour	Low (urinate vol ave ml)	High (urinate vol ave ml)
1	50	125
2	100	250
3	150	375
4	200	500
5	250	625
6	300	750
7	350	875
8	400	1000
9	450	1125
10	500	1250
11	550	1375
12	600	1500

Full table.

Assuming a full 11 hour flight, best case, each passenger will pass 550 ml, worst case, 1375 ml.

Manufacturer	Model	Total waste capacity (L)	Total pax (typical)	Total wast capacity per pax (L)
Boeing	747-400	1135	416	2.73
Boeing	787-8	1628	467	3.49
Airbus	A380	2096	525	3.99

Even on the 747-800 which has the lowest waste tank volume per passenger, this still leaves room for 1 extra litre in the tank per passenger. On the A380, there’s over 2.5 spare litres of waste tank capacity per passenger.

It’s unlikely they’ll overflow, even on a particularly boozy flight.

Dealing with waste

When a plane lands, most of you would have noticed a fuel truck and the baggage carts arrive to empty the plane and prepare it for the next flight. You might not have seen the waste disposal truck arrive to empty the tank (generally at the back of the plane).

Let’s assume the average flight time for planes arriving at airports is 4 hours (so planes are carrying between 200ml – 500ml of urine per passenger).

Download graph.

Airport	Country	Passengers Apr 2021 (mil)	Total waste low Apr 2021 (urinate vol ave l)	Total waste high Apr 2021 (urinate vol ave l)
Guangzhou (CAN)	China	2.572	5144000	1286000
Atlanta (ATL)	United States	2.459	4918000	1229500
Dallas (DFW)	United States	2.364	4728000	1182000
Chengdu (CTU)	China	2.329	4658000	1164500
Denver (DEN)	United States	2.182	4364000	1091000
Beijing (PEK)	China	2.061	4122000	1030500
Shenzhen (SZX)	China	2.055	4110000	1027500
Shanghai (PVG)	China	1.994	3988000	997000
Charlotte (CLT)	United States	1.889	3778000	944500
Shanghai (SHA)	China	1.863	3726000	931500
Chicago (ORD)	United States	1.768	3536000	884000
Hangzhou (HGH)	China	1.669	3338000	834500
Orlando (MCO)	United States	1.637	3274000	818500
Phoenix (PHX)	United States	1.585	3170000	792500
Los Angeles (LAX)	United States	1.537	3074000	768500

Full table.

Let’s assume the upper end of the estimates, the world’s busiest airport by passenger volume, Guangzhou, would have handled 5.14 million litres of pee from 2.57 million passengers in April 2021. At that rate, they’d be dealing with over 60 million litres of pee every year.

For reference, an Olympic sized swimming pool holds 2.5 million litres.

According to ICAO:

the total number of passengers carried on scheduled services rose to 4.5 billion in 2019

Assuming that low estimate (200ml per pax), that equates to 900 million litres of waste from all planes in 2019.

If we consider each passenger passed an average of 500ml, that’s 2.2 billion litres (or 880 Olympic swimming pools… which to me doesn’t sound that much!).

tl;dr

The world’s busiest airport by passenger volume, Guangzhou, could have handled 5.14 million litres of pee in April 2021. On a worldwide scale, airplane yearly toilet waste is estimated to be 900 million – 2.2 billion litres total. Despite this volume of pee, it’s unlikely the waste tank on a plane will ever reach capacity.

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

At this years G7, it was only a matter of time before news stories relayed the climate outrage of politicians and their entourages flying (sometime only 100’s of km’s) into Cornwall, UK.

I share the outrage at such stories.

I expect the same at this years COP 26 conference in Glasgow this year.

According to the Energy and Climate Intel Unit:

It will involve upwards of 30,000 people in the city, representing over 200 countries, businesses, NGOs, faith groups and many more.

With such a large number of delegates in attendance, the climate footprint will be significantly greater than the G7. As my mind started whirring, I wondered if it was possible to quantify just how much impact to the environment travel to and from the conference could cause.

Methodology

In 2019, the UN published the list of all delegates attending the COP 26 Summit.

In summary;

	States/organisations	Participants
Parties	196	11406
Observer States	1	8
United Nations Secretariat units and bodies	28	306
Specialized agencies and related organizations	23	400
Intergovernmental organizations	76	652
Non-governmental organizations	1049	7417
Media	844	2165
	2217	22354

Download full dataset.

I’ll make a very rough assumption that half the attendees will come from the UK, so let’s round down and say 11,000 attendees will come from outside the UK.

Analysis

CO2 per passenger

Now we know 11,000 will be flying into Glasgow, lets calculate average fuel consumption.

One way to calculate CO2 emissions is from fuel consumption per flight. Using old data (published 2010) comparing a Boeing 737-400 (short haul) and Boeing 747-400 (long haul) and average load factors (note passenger load factors will always vary);

	Boeing 737-400	Boeing 747-400
Distance (kms)	926	5556
Fuel used (tons)	3.61	59.6
Seats	164	416
Ave load factor %	65	80
Ave pax	107	333
Fuel use (g) per pax km	36.57118312	32.23299828
CO2 emissions (g) from aviation fuel per gram of fuel	3.15	3.15
Total CO2 emissions (g) per pax km	115.1992268	101.5339446

OK, so both of these planes are quite old (both have many newer versions). Fair point. I used them as the above statistics were freely available.

According to enviro.aero:

The aviation sector’s short-term goal to improve fleet fuel efficiency by an average of 1.5% per annum from 2009-2020 is on track, with current analysis showing a 2.3% improvement on a rolling average − an efficiency improvement of 17.3% since 2009.

Let’s assume then that newer planes are 17.3% more efficient, we get an emissions figure of 89.316 g CO2 per passenger km ((101+115)/2)*(1-0.173).

This figure is very close to on reported from the International Council on Clean Transportation:

On average, passenger aviation emitted 90 grams of CO₂ per passenger-kilometer in 2019

Both calculations will be a little optimistic for COP 26, as the original calculations were based on high load factors, which have reduced significantly, and still remain so, because of COVID. But let’s go with it for now…

Average travel distance per passenger

Attendees travel from all over the world, but it would appear from reports most travel will be from European delegates given location. I wasn’t able to easily break the 2019 delegate list by country (although that was held in Chile, so the delegate count by country will no doubt be quite different this year).

There has already been coverage that some nations not being able to field delegates this year due to travel restrictions. Namely in Asia, Oceanic, and African countries.

Given the above, I considered the edge of Europe, Istanbul as a rough guess for “average distance” attendees will travel.

Let’s assume then, that on average, delegate travel the distance of Istanbul to Glasgow (shortest distance = 2912 km, rounded up to 3000km, and doubled for the return journey 6000km).

Delegate emissions from flights

We now estimate delegates will have a round trip to Glasgow of about 6000km. Therefore, one passenger will produce 540kg CO2 pin CO2 emissions flying to and from the conference (0.09*6000).

For all 11,000 delegates, that’s 5,400,000 kilograms of CO2 or roughly 5400 tons of aviation CO2 emissions to fly international delegates in and out of Glasgow.

Note, this does not factor in the increased warming effect other, non-CO2, emissions, such as nitrogen oxides, have when they are released at high altitudes can also make a significant difference to emissions calculations.

What if…

Due to Glasgows position in the UK, and the fact that the UK is an island, it’s likely most people will fly into to Scotland directly.

Perhaps some Europeans will take advantage of the Eurostar to London, and then a 5 hour train journey to Glasgow, but my assumption is that a very small number of attendees will choose this route owing to the low cost, much faster air routes.

However, let’s compare aviation to other available methods of transport.

Download chart.

According to DEFRA research, driving alone is almost twice as bad as flying (11,286 tons of CO2 emissions if all international delegates drove alone)!

However, remember, we have ignored +50% of attendees, assuming them to be UK residents… many of whom will be very likely to drive (probably alone)! The 11286 tons represents a 6000km round trip. Dividing this by 10 (600km round trip for UK residents), still leaves 1128.6 tons of CO2 emissions for the driving domestic delegates.

Car sharing (assuming 4 delegates) almost cuts emissions in half from driving alone. Though, roughly, two people to a car (probably more realistic) delivers the same emissions as a comparable plane journey, per passenger, over the same distance.

Unsurprisingly rail is much more efficient when it comes to CO2 emissions per passenger (lets hope most UK delegates choose this over a solo car car journey as rail is 6.3 times more efficient). Sadly, the UK doesn’t have a highly efficient rail infrastructure like that of the Eurostar (which is over 4 times more efficient than general rail). Is HS2 still happening?

Improvements

This really is a “back-of-the-napkin” analysis. Journalists, please don’t credibly cite these figures unless you make this clear!

tl;dr

The 22,000+ delegates (under-estimate) travelling to the COP 26 conference in Glasgow are likely to generate over 10,000 tons in CO2 emissions.

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

269 billion litres of jet fuel was burned in 2017 — Enough fuel to fill 5.4 billion VW Golfs

We’ve all seen the headlines; commercial aviation is bad for the environment.

If the industry bounces back to pre-COVID growth, which most analysts believe will be the case, an alternative to fossil fuels is desperately required to stop the devastating impacts of global warming.

Whilst electric cars are now at a point where they can compete (and out-do) oil powered cars, the size and power requirements of planes have meant further improvements to battery technologies are required before we see electric aircraft.

According to Elon Musk in 2019:

FWIW, based on calcs I did 10 years ago, cross-over point for Li-ion beating kerosene is ~400 Wh/kg. High cycle batteries are just over 300 Wh/kg today, but probably exceed 400 in ~5 years.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 30, 2019

But two years is a long time in battery technology.

How close are we to electric powered commercial aviation? I decided to take a look at the current state of the market.

Methodology

For this analysis I used a report produced by Roland Berger in 2020 on the electric aircraft industry which reported detailed information about 218 planes. The numbers include planes across all stages of development from concepts to airworthy models (albeit there are currently very few).

Results

Count of Aircraft by Market (2020)

Download chart.

Download full table.

Urban air taxis still dominate the scene, representing about 45% of all aircraft, though general aviation (typically recreational planes) is close behind, comprising 85 projects globally.

Count of Aircraft by Type (2020)

Download chart.

Download full table.

48% of all projects are VTOL (vertical take off and landing) craft. Given most projects are focused on short range / intercity aviation, likely operating in cities, VTOL makes most sense.

Count of Aircraft by Power Type

Download chart.

Download full table.

Battery power (including hybrid battery / oil) powered planes account for 97% of all projects.

Solar and hydrogen make up the rest. Solar being employed in concepts for general aviation for small recreational planes. Hydrogen seems to be attractive to manufacturers building autonomous craft, like HES developing the Element One.

The majority of all these planes are using propellors for propulsion although a tiny number of projects like Airbus’s E-Fan-X are using turbofan engines.

Pax capacity of battery powered aircraft (2020)

Download chart.

Download full table.

Looking at the 122 battery powered plane projects that report passenger capacity, the maximum capacity is 19, touted by Heart Aerospace’s concept.

The mean/median passenger load is 2, which highlights how most planned aircraft are aimed at consumers (potential replacements for cars).

Range of battery powered aircraft (inc. estimates) (2020)

Download chart.

Download full table.

Looking at the 53 battery powered planes that have reported range in distance (keep in mind these are for the most part estimates), all but 4 have ranges below 1000km. The median advertised range of these aircraft is 150km (mean is 298km).

The aircraft with the longest range, 2000km, is Avioneo’s conceptual 2345 craft. Wether it makes it to market is questionable, but it currently boasts costs of 0.12EUR per/km with a cruise speed of up to 300 km/h.

Improvements

Many of these projects are small and will probably never enter the market. Most information being reported is estimated (and in many cases not even estimates, e.g. for range, are provided), as the planes are still mostly in conceptual phase.

At best this post can be considered a projection on the market. It needs revisiting in one years time, when it is likely a good number of viable planes will be entering early construction and some certifications being conducted.

tl;dr

The median advertised range of battery powered aircraft is 150km… most are still in concept phase. Electrically powered international commercial aviation is still some way off. On the other-hand, city based short-haul aviation is looking like a brand new market that might be realised in the near-future.

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

Four years ago I wrote how larger airlines (by fleet size) tend to offer worse service than their smaller counterparts.

In last months post I looked at the oldest commercial planes still operating (tl;dr, some are very old).

Many older planes are unnoticeable from their newer counterparts with newer interiors fitted.

Though can redecoration really hide 40 years of use? How does the age of a fleet impact customer satisfaction?

Methodology

I took Skytrax 2019 World’s Best Airline rankings to get an ordered list of 100 airlines.

For aircraft count and ages for planes operated by these airlines I then used data from AirFleets.

Results

Average age of airline fleet

Download chart.

Skytrax rank	Airline	Airline year started	Average age of fleet (yrs)	Count of planes in fleet
88	Air Seychelles	1979	1.6	2
69	Vistara	2014	3.1	47
51	Air Astana	2001	3.5	19
94	LEVEL	2017	3.9	3
86	Peach	2011	4.2	34
…	…	…	…	…
68	United Airlines	1931	16.4	807
100	Icelandair	1937	17.9	25
73	AtlasGlobal	1992	23.3	69
85	PAL Express	1972	25.8	14
28	Asiana Airlines	1988	33.1	85

Download full table.

The median age of planes in Skytrax 100 fleets is just 9 years (mean age is 9.7 years).

Asiana Airlines, ranked 25th in the Skytrax ranking (and last by average fleet age) has an average fleet age of 33.1 years. They are the only airline in the bottom 10 for aircraft age to have a Skytrax ranking above 50th!

It’s also worth noting the divide between old and new airlines. The newest fleets are operated by airlines established post 2000, whereas the older fleets tend to be operated by some of the oldest airlines.

Correlation between Skytrax rank and fleet age

Download chart.

A cursory glance at the graph above shows no correlation between age of aircraft and Skytrax rank.

Some of the newest fleets have the worst scores, which is understandable as they are generally smaller with less money to spend on overall customer experience (a factor of Skytrax ranking).

Improvements

I’ve used aggregate stats on each airline for the analysis. The next step for me would be to look at each airline and see the spread of ages for each aircraft. For instance, in United Airlines fleet of 807 planes; are there very old planes? Lack of new planes? Or a spread of all ages that contribute to the fleets overall average age of 16.4 years?

tl;dr

The median age of planes in Skytrax 100 fleets is just 9 years (mean age is 9.7 years).

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

Airbus announced that it would cease production of the A380 a few years ago with the final plane rolling off the production line this year.

248 A380’s have been delivered since it entered production in 2003, the first order being delivered in October 2007, fourteen years ago.

Boeing also recently announced the end of production of its 747 in 2022… though its life stretches back an impressive 50 years with over 1500 delivered!

50 years!

Which got me thinking; what are the oldest planes still flying commercially? Are there any 50 year old 747’s still in service?

Methodology

I used airfleets.net production list search for each major aircraft type still flying. airfleets.net reports the status of the plane, including the last flight recorded, however, it seems these dates are manually submitted by users (some are very old). Therefore, I verified dates with flightradar24.com.

I consider planes still in service if they made a flight in 2020 — my assumption being many have been temporarily taken out of service due to the reduction in air travel during the COVID-19 pandemic. Only planes that had first flights before 1990 are considered.

I do not consider military or non-commercial passenger operators (e.g. military or shipping).

Results

Difference between first flight ever and oldest commercial model in operation first flew

Download chart.

Manufacturer/model	First commercial flight of model	Oldest plane still in operation first flew	Years between first and oldest
Boeing 737	1967-05-13	1974-05-09	6
Boeing 747	1969-05-10	1984-02-28	14
Airbus A300	1972-10-28	1986-12-31	14
Boeing 767	1981-11-04	1982-09-25	0
Airbus A310	1982-04-03	1989-03-08	6
Boeing 757	1982-10-25	1988-02-19	5
Embraer 120 Brasilia	1983-07-27	1986-03-21	2
De Havilland Canada Dash 8	1983-10-26	1985-09-11	1
Airbus A320	1987-02-22	1989-04-25	2

Download full table.

Older 747’s and A300’s seems to leave service quickly, relatively speaking — the oldest planes still flying are 14 years older than the first models that flew.

Conversely, the 737 has remarkable longevity with some of the oldest versions still in operation delivered only 6 years longer than the first ever commercial flight of the model (and first delivered before the 747 and A300).

Age of oldest commercial model still flying

Download chart.

Manufacturer/model	Oldest plane still in operation first flew	Todays date	Age (years)
Airbus A310	1989-03-08	2021-05-31	32
Airbus A320	1989-04-25	2021-05-31	32
Boeing 757	1988-02-19	2021-05-31	33
Airbus A300	1986-12-31	2021-05-31	34
De Havilland Canada Dash 8	1985-09-11	2021-05-31	35
Embraer 120 Brasilia	1986-03-21	2021-05-31	35
Boeing 747	1984-02-28	2021-05-31	37
Boeing 767	1982-09-25	2021-05-31	38
Boeing 737	1974-05-09	2021-05-31	47

Download full table.

C-GNLK, a 737 currently operated by Nolinor Aviation has been flying for over 47 years — almost 10 years longer than any other model.

By aircraft type

Boeing 737

• First commercial flight of type:
  • Registration: N701PJ
  • First flight: 1967-05-13
  • Status: Scrapped
  • AirFleets info
• Oldest plane still in commercial service:
  • Registration: C-GNLK
  • Operated by: Nolinor Aviation
  • First flight: 1974-05-09
  • Age: 47.2 years
  • AirFleets info
  • FlightRadar24 info

Boeing 747

• First commercial flight of type:
  • Registration: N474EV
  • First flight: 1969-05-10
  • Status: Scrapped
  • AirFleets info
• Oldest plane still in commercial service:
  • Registration: EX-47002
  • Operate by: Aerostan
  • First flight: 1984-02-28
  • Age: 37.4 years
  • AirFleets info
  • FlightRadar24 info

Boeing 757

• First commercial flight of type:
  • Registration: G-BIKA
  • First flight: 1982-10-25
  • Status: Scrapped
  • AirFleets info
• Oldest plane still in commercial service:
  • Registration: G-LSAE
  • Operated by: Jet2
  • First flight: 1988-02-19
  • Age: 33.5 years
  • AirFleets info
  • FlightRadar24 info

Boeing 767

• First commercial flight of type:
  • • Registration: N601UA
    • First flight: 1981-11-04
    • Status: Scrapped
    • AirFleets info
  • Oldest plane still in commercial service:
    • Registration: 9M-RXB
    • Operated by: Raya Airways
    • First flight: 1982-09-25
    • Age: 38.8 years
    • AirFleets info
    • FlightRadar24 info

Airbus A300

• First commercial flight of type:
  • • Registration: F-OCAZ
    • First flight: 1972-10-28
    • Status: Scrapped
    • AirFleets info
  • Oldest plane still in commercial service:
    • Registration: EP-MNJ
    • Operated by: Mahan Air
    • First flight: 1986-12-31
    • Age: 34.5 years
    • AirFleets info
    • FlightRadar24 info

Airbus A310

• First commercial flight of type:
  • • Registration: N450FE
    • First flight: 1982-04-03
    • Status: Stored
    • AirFleets info
  • Oldest plane still in commercial service:
    • Registration: YA-CAV
    • Operated by: Ariana Afghan Airlines
    • First flight: 1989-03-08
    • Age: 32.4 years
    • AirFleets info
    • FlightRadar24 info

Airbus A320

• First commercial flight of type:
  • • Registration: F-WWBA
    • First flight: 1987-02-22
    • Status: Stored
    • AirFleets info
  • Oldest plane still in commercial service:
    • Registration: ZS-GAR
    • Operated by: Lift
    • First flight: 1989-04-25
    • Age: 32.2 years
    • AirFleets info
    • FlightRadar24 info

De Havilland Canada Dash 8

• First commercial flight of type:
  • • Registration: C-GGMP
    • First flight: 1983-10-26
    • Status: Stored
    • AirFleets info
  • Oldest plane still in commercial service:
    • Registration: VH-QQF
    • Operated by: Skytrans regional
    • First flight: 1985-09-11
    • Age: 35.8 years
    • AirFleets info
    • FlightRadar24 info

Embraer 120 Brasilia

• First commercial flight of type:
  • • Registration: PT-ZBA
    • First flight: 1983-07-27
    • Status: Stored
    • AirFleets info
  • Oldest plane still in commercial service:
    • Registration: EC-JBD
    • Operated by: Swiftair
    • First flight: 1986-03-21
    • Age: 35.5 years
    • AirFleets info
    • FlightRadar24 info

Improvements

The McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and MD-11 didn’t quite make this list, but only because I considered commercial, passenger carrying commercial airlines. Currently, these planes are only operated by Air Forces and logistics companies. FedEx operate N303FE, a DC-10 that’s 48.1 years old!

I’ve also only included major manufactures I am aware of and is listed on AirFleets. It would be worth validating if there are airlines flying from other manufacturers I am unaware of (I suspect there might be some in Russia).

Finally, I’ve only considered a single plane of each model. Keep in mind, 26% of all commercial airliners are 737’s — there will be many other of these old models still flying.

tl;dr

C-GNLK, a 737 currently operated by Nolinor Aviation has been flying for over 47 years — almost 10 years longer than any other model.

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

This year felt a little odd (said everyone, everywhere).

I usually fly a lot for work. 2 or 3 times a month. So far this year, no business flights.

I’m torn on this fact. On one hand, I believe such face-to-face interaction with teams is vital (at least to me), on the other I realise I am part of the environmental problem.

As a human, I try and wrestle with my moral conscious. “I’m not as bad a Sarah”, “I don’t take flights for the sake of points“, I tell myself in a weak attempt to justify my flights.

It got me thinking, how do I compare to the average person?

Methodology

Global Environmental Change (Volume 65, November 2020, 102194) recently released a study titled; The global scale, distribution and growth of aviation: Implications for climate change.

This report used industry statistics, data provided by supranational organisations, and national surveys to develop a pre-COVID understanding of air transport demand at global, regional, national and individual scales.

Whilst I stress these are pre-pandemic estimates (although many suggest air travel will soon bounce back to normal levels).

Some of the processed data detailed in the report is used in this post alongside directly cited data.

Results

% of population that travel

According to IATA (2019), there were 4.378 billion passengers in 2018 (international and domestic). This is not equivalent to trip numbers or individual travellers. Most air trips are symmetrical, i.e. they will involve a departure as well as a return.

As ten percent of all flights involve a transfer, 4.378 billion passengers would thus represent a maximum of 1.99 billion trips.

The share of the global population participating in international air travel is even smaller, as a significant share of all air travel takes place within countries. Domestic air travel included 2.566 billion passengers in 2018, out of this 590 million in the USA, 515 million in China, and 116 million in India (IATA, 2019).

International air travel consequently only comprised 1.811 billion passengers, who are also more likely to move through hubs. On the basis of the conservative assumption that one international trip comprises 2.2 flights (IATA, 2019), some 823 million international trips were made in 2018.

Non flying population

This does not consider that there is a significant share of the population in every country that does not fly, while some air travellers participate in one, two, or multiple trips.

Download chart.

	% non-flying pop est. (2018-2019)
United States	53
Germany	65
Taiwan	66
UK	59

Full table.

For example, data for the USA suggests that 53% of the adult population do not fly (Airlines for America, 2018). In Germany, 65% of the population do not fly (IFD Allensbach, 2019), while this share is 66% in Taiwan (Tourism Bureau Taiwan, 2019). In the UK, the non-flying share of the population 16 years or older is 59% (DEFRA, 2009).

These national surveys indicate that in high income countries, between 53% and 65% of the population will not fly in a given year. The share of non-fliers is likely larger in low-income, lower-middle and upper-middle income countries. The share of non-fliers is likely larger in low-income, lower-middle and upper-middle income countries.

International multi-trip flyers

An alternative way of calculating the share of the population participating in international air travel is to divide the number of international trips by an average trip number per traveler.

For example, Airlines for America (2018) suggest that the average air traveler makes 5.3 trips per year, with a relatively large share of travellers participating in only one or two trips, and a rather small share accounting for large trip numbers.

Applying the US average of 5.3 trips as an indication of skewed demand, 823 million international trips involved only 155 million unique air travellers, or 2% of the world population (world population of 7.594 billion).

Similarly, for domestic trips, applying this logic, 5.3 trips for the average traveller with 2.566 billion domestic passengers in 2018, means about 6% of the world’s population (456 million) travelled domestically.

Global distribution of aviation fuel use (2019)

Download chart.

Type	% share of aviation fuel use
Commercial aviation: Passengers	71
Commercial aviation: Freight	17
Military	8
Private	4

Full table.

There’s some guesswork here, as there is no global data for military operations or private flights.

It has been suggested that military aircraft consumed 22% of US jet fuel in 2008 (Spicer et al., 2009), though a lower recent estimate for the US in absolute numbers is 18.35 Mt CO2 (in 2017; Belcher et al., 2020). In a global estimate for 2002, Eyers et al. (2004) concluded that global military operations required 19.5 Mt of fuel, leading to emissions of 61 Mt CO2, or 11.1% of global emissions from aviation.

For an estimate, the current contribution of military flight to global emissions from aviation is assumed to be 8%. This estimate is uncertain, but highlights the importance of military flight in aviation emissions.

Data on private aviation is equally limited. The global business aviation market is estimated to have included 22,295 jets, 14,241 turboprops, and 19,291 turbine helicopters in 2016 (AMSTAT Market Analysis, 2018). Assuming an average of 400 h of flight time per year for the global fleet of private jets, with an estimate of a 1200 kg/hour fuel use (Gössling, 2019), jet fuel burn was 10.7 Mt in 2016, corresponding to 33.7 Mt of CO2.

Adding the fuel use of turboprops and helicopters, overall emissions from private transport may be in the order of 40 Mt CO2. This would suggest that private aviation accounts for about 4% of global emissions from aviation

At first glance the military and private aviation fuel use might seem low, but considering it on a per passenger basis, this share of fuel is actually comparatively high.

Fuel use Mt CO2 by aviation travel type (2017)

Download chart.

Estimates of global fuel use vary. More recent estimates presented by IATA (2018) suggest that civil aviation – including international and domestic, passengers and freight – emitted 859 Mt CO2 in 2017.

Assuming this is 88% of total consumption (71% passengers + 17% freight), then global fuel consumption in 2017 was 976 Mt CO2.

Therefore, commercial aviation (passengers) contributed 693 Mt CO2 in 2017.

The International Energy Agency (IEA, 2019a) specifies that about 60.4% of this for international aviation (416 Mt CO2), and 39.6% for domestic aviation (277 Mt CO2).

Over the past 20 years, global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and industry have been steadily increasing, and by 2018 reached a record high of 36.6 billion metric tons (Statista).

Looking at all emissions, commercial aviation (passengers) contributed 0.693 Bt CO2 emissions in 2017, which is 1.9% of all global emissions (0.693/36.6).

Thus, 2% of all CO2 emissions (0.693 Bt CO2) are caused by an estimated 6%-8% of the worlds population (from air travel).

Improvements

In many cases the data in the post considers data reported over different time periods, or uses aggregated data. Being able to access like-for-like raw data would improve accuracy.

tl;dr

823 million international trips involved only 155 million unique air travellers, or 2% of the world population

2.566 billion domestic trips involved only 456 million unique air travellers, or 6% of the world population.

Together, these passengers created 2% of all CO2 emissions.

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

Belt. Off.

Shoes. Off.

Phone out of pocket. Yes.

Laptop and iPad in separate trays. Done.

Guns. Ermmmm…

Methodology

Travellers who bring firearms to the checkpoint are subject to criminal charges from law enforcement and civil penalties from TSA.

Even if a traveller has a concealed weapon permit, firearms are not permitted to be carried onto an aeroplane.

However, travellers with proper firearm permits can travel legally with their firearms in their checked bags if they follow a few simple guidelines to transport firearms and ammunition safely.

The data reported in this post covers all guns identified, which includes both those authorised to be carried on-board as well as guns seized.

Results

Guns identified at US airports

Year	Nationwide
2008	926
2009	976
2010	1,123
2011	1,320
2012	1,556
2013	1,813
2014	2,212
2015	2,653
2016	3,391
2017	3,957
2018	4,239
2019	4,432

View full table.

Download chart.

Transportation Security Administration officers caught more firearms at checkpoints nationwide in 2019, more than ever recorded previously.

In total, 4,432 firearms were discovered in carry-on bags or on passengers at checkpoints across the country last year, averaging about 12.1 firearms per day, approximately a 5% increase nationally in firearm discoveries from the total of 4,239 detected in 2018.

What’s more, eighty-seven percent of firearms detected at checkpoints last year were loaded.

Worst airports

Airport	Weapons Identified
Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International (ATL)	323
Dallas/Fort Worth International (DFW)	217
Denver International (DEN)	140
George Bush Intercontinental (IAH)	138
Phoenix Sky Harbor International (PHX)	132

View full table.

View chart.

Firearms were caught at 278 airport checkpoints in the US.

The top five airports where TSA officers detected guns at checkpoints in 2019 were: Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International with 323; Dallas/Fort Worth International with 217; Denver International with 140; George Bush Intercontinental with 138; and Phoenix Sky Harbor International with 132.

Improvements

As noted, there is no distinction between guns authorised to be carried on-board and guns carried illegally. Being able to extrapolate how many guns were seized would add a different perspective to the analysis.

tl;dr

4432 guns were identified at US airports security checkpoints in 2019 (compared to just 926 in 2008).

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.

Waiting at a baggage carousel is never enjoyable.

You’ve stepped off the plane, cleared security, and then, the 300 plus people who have just disembarked the plane rush to get as close to where the bags enter the carousel with latecomers forced to pack tightly around its perimeter.

If you’re lucky, or have paid for the privilege, your bag will arrive first. If you’re unlucky, me, you’ll be waiting until the very end.

If you’re really unlucky, your bag won’t arrive at all, and you’ll spend the next hour or two waiting at the baggage information desk to find out what to do next.

In many cases, your bag just wasn’t loaded on your flight, and in such cases the bag will be carried on the next flight.

Though even with highly computerised baggage processes, bags do still inevitably go missing — from hand baggage at security checkpoints to checked luggage at the destination.

But why?

Methodology

The Transport Security Administration (TSA) are responsible for the security of the travelling public in the United States.

This includes everything from checking passengers are not carrying prohibited items into the cabin through to checking bags going into the hold.

The TSA periodically publish claims made against them during a screening process of persons or passenger’s property due to an injury, loss, or damage.

The latest in Excel format is for 2015, and is the version used in this post (I guess it takes them a long time to process and publish claims, as you’ll see even claims from 2015 are still showing as open…)

Results

Overview of claims

Question	Answer
Total claims	8667
Total open claims	2066
Total closed claims	3027
Value of all closed claims USD	611,137.05
Mean average payout USD	201.90
Highest claim USD	5,403.46
Lowest claim USD	2.00
Total rejected claims	3574
Most claimed for category	Passenger Property Loss (4551)
Most claimed for item type	Baggage/Cases/Purses
Most claimed for site	Checked baggage (6261)
Most claimed for airport	John F. Kennedy International (523)

Full table.

Over $611K USD has been paid out representing just over 3000 claims. 3500 we’re rejected. 200 claims remain open (outcome undecided) for the year 2015.

JFK (New York), the 6th busiest US airport (61 million pax/yr), is the airport that received the most claims from passengers.

Months with most claims

Download chart.

Unsurprisingly the busy summer months (July and August), where passenger traffic is generally at its highest level, saw the most claims.

Most common items stolen

Item Category	Count of claims
Baggage/Cases/Purses	1004
Computer & Accessories	736
Clothing	723
–	663
Other	570
Personal Electronics	561
Jewelry & Watches	509
Travel Accessories	454
Personal Accessories	347
Cosmetics & Grooming	310

Full table.

Computer & accessories, after suitcases and purses, are the items that go missing the most.

Worst airports

Airport Code	Airport Name	Count of claims (all, inc pending)	Value of paid claims USD
JFK	John F. Kennedy International	523	50635.31
LAX	Los Angeles International Airport	495	28864.61
MCO	Orlando International Airport	372	25795.49
ATL	Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport	362	17725.27
EWR	Newark International Airport	312	32630.15
MIA	Miami International Airport	306	22801.2
ORD	Chicago O’Hare International Airport	261	17446.55
LAS	McCarran International	256	9533.35
PHX	Phoenix Sky Harbor International	245	22239.19
SEA	Seattle-Tacoma International	244	18362.59

Full table.

The TSA at JFK has the highest number of claims made against them (523). Those claims that have been paid out represent $50k total so far.

Improvements

My assumption is many claims go straight to insurance companies and never reach the TSA (I’d love to see a data set covering claims made to insurers). I estimate no more than $1 million will be paid out by the TSA for all claims made in 2015 — significantly lower than the figures I would expect after analysing other data sources.

If the latest data is 2016/2017, there is a significant lag in publishing statistics. I also wonder how much data is actually missing. It would be interesting to see a longer timeseries of data to see changes in the number and types of claims.

tl;dr

Avoid JFK airport in the summer months if you’re travelling with particularly valuable items.

Footnotes

1. Data sources + data used in this post.