Timothy L. Jacobs, Elizabeth Hunt and Matt Korol Operations Research and Decision Support American Airlines May 2001 Scheduling and Revenue Management.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PowerPoint Presentation
Advertisements

Capacity Planning. How much long-range capacity is needed When more capacity is needed Where facilities should be located (location) How facilities should.
Objective Our objective is to provide tailored business solutions to Airlines, Airports, Civil Aviation Authorities, and other aviation service providers.
Strategic Decisions (Part II)
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2007 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 5 Capacity Planning For Products and Services.
Operations Management Aggregate Planning Chapter 13
Aggregate Planning.
PODS Update Large Network O-D Control Results
OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT INTEGRATING MANUFACTURING AND SERVICES FIFTH EDITION Mark M. Davis Janelle Heineke Copyright ©2005, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Multi-Channel Revenue Management Shankar Mishra & Vish Viswanathan AGIFORS RYM Study Group Berlin, April 2002.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2003 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Chapter 10 The Role of Costs in Pricing Decisions.
Airlines and Linear Programming (and other stuff) Dr. Ron Lembke.
Airlines and Linear Programming Dr. Ron Tibben-Lembke.
Pricing and Customer Value
For Products and Services
Optimization in Airline Planning and Marketing Institute for Mathematics and Its Applications November 2002 Barry C. Smith.
OPSM 405 Service Management
Airline Revenue Management
Chapter 10 Pricing and Customer Value
Airline Schedule Optimization (Fleet Assignment II) Saba Neyshabouri.
Airline Schedule Planning: Accomplishments and Opportunities Airline Schedule Planning: Accomplishments and Opportunities C. Barnhart and A. Cohn, 2004.
Luis Cadarso(1), Vikrant Vaze(2), Cynthia Barnhart(3), Ángel Marín(1)
Operations Planning Horizons
Route Planning and Evaluation
ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK FOR OPERATIONAL EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT CONGESTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES AT CLUSTERED AIRPORTS Loan T. Le Research Sponsors: NASA ARC, FAA.
Content : 1. Introduction 2. Traffic forecasting and traffic allocation ◦ 2.1. Traffic forecasting ◦ 2.2. Traffic allocation 3. Fleeting problems ◦ 3.1.
1 e-Commerce Challenges to Traditional Revenue Management Brenda Barnes Vice President, Revenue Management Delta Air Lines.
Aggregate Planning and Master Scheduling Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior.
Yield Management
Operations Management
PowerPoint presentation to accompany Heizer/Render - Principles of Operations Management, 5e, and Operations Management, 7e © 2004 by Prentice Hall, Inc.,
1 Copyright © 2002 by PROS Revenue Management  Fare class rationalization is the process of aligning fares within fare classes so that leg/class revenue.
Airlines and Linear Programming (and other stuff) Dr. Ron Lembke.
1 Where to Next? E. Andrew Boyd Chief Scientist and Senior VP, Science and Research PROS Revenue Management.
Chapter 2 Management accounting: basic terms and concepts.
Route and Network Planning
Capacity Planning. Capacity Capacity (I): is the upper limit on the load that an operating unit can handle. Capacity (I): is the upper limit on the load.
Improving Revenue by System Integration and Cooperative Optimization Reservations & Yield Management Study Group Annual Meeting Berlin April 2002.
Click to edit title. REVENUE MANAGEMENT AND DYNAMIC PRICING IN BRUSSELS AIRLINES.
Lufthansa Update on LH´s Path of O&D Control AGIFORS, New York, March 2000 Werner Tauss.
Lufthansa Looking for Feedback Performance Measurement in Revenue Management Stefan Pölt Lufthansa German Airlines AGIFORS Reservations & Yield Management.
Intelligent Supply Chain Management Strategic Supply Chain Management
Capacity Planning Pertemuan 04
Copyright © 2014 by McGraw-Hill Education (Asia). All rights reserved. 13 Aggregate Planning.
Chapter 10 Sales and Operations Planning (Aggregate Planning)
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2011 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved Chapter 16 Sales and Operations Planning.
© 2008 Prentice Hall, Inc.S7 – 1 Operations Management Supplement 7 – Capacity Planning PowerPoint presentation to accompany Heizer/Render Principles of.
Aggregate Planning and Master Scheduling Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior.
© 2006 Prentice Hall, Inc.S7 – 1 Operations Management Supplement 7 – Capacity Planning © 2006 Prentice Hall, Inc. PowerPoint presentation to accompany.
03/31/2010 v.20 DRAFT – DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE For NPC Study Discussion Only 1 Summary of Demand Perspective Hard Truths provided evaluation of baseline.
Operations Management
LOGISTICS NETWORK.
A Modeling Framework for Flight Schedule Planning
Profit Planning Master Budget Chapter 7
13 Aggregate Planning.
Tell me when you want to stay,
Consulting Services Aircraft scheduling. Block hour analysis.
1.206J/16.77J/ESD.215J Airline Schedule Planning
1.206J/16.77J/ESD.215J Airline Schedule Planning
Capacity Planning For Products and Services
Capacity Planning For Products and Services
1.206J/16.77J/ESD.215J Airline Schedule Planning
Profit Planning Master Budget Chapter 7
Airlines and Linear Programming (and other stuff)
Stevenson 5 Capacity Planning.
Capacity Planning For Products and Services
Production and Operations Management
Capacity Planning For Products and Services
1. 2 Operational Efficiency and Business process Performance Operational Efficiency and Business process Performance Just in Time Systems (J I T) Reductions.
Presentation transcript:

Timothy L. Jacobs, Elizabeth Hunt and Matt Korol Operations Research and Decision Support American Airlines May 2001 Scheduling and Revenue Management Process Integration: Benefits and Hurdles

OR&DS 2 Presentation Overview Process Integration - What theory tells us. Practical First Steps and Their Impact – Consistent Scheduling and Revenue Management (O&D FAM). –O&D-based Demand Driven Dispatch (D 3 ) Benefits and Hurdles to Implementation Summary

OR&DS 3 Scheduling Product Pricing Yield Management Sales and Distribution Long-TermShort-Term Strategic Tactical Customers Airline Business Overview

OR&DS 4 Typical Scheduling and RM Process Flight Scheduling (Leg-based) Revenue Management (O&D-based) Time 12 + Months9-6 MonthsDOD3 Months45 Days O&D Demand Forecasts Revenue Management Process & Controls Capacities / O&D Forecasts Network Scheduling & Planning Flight Demand Forecasts Fleeted Schedule (Fixed Capacities) Data Source Informal Feedback

OR&DS 5 Proposed Integrated Process Causal Effect Data Date Specific Data Steady-State Industry Forecast O&D Daily Forecast O&D Time Series Forecast Revenue Management Process & Controls O&D Network Planning O&D-based Scheduling Near-term Aircraft Assignment (D 3 Process) Flight Scheduling Revenue Management Forecasting Data Sources Time 12 + Months9-6 MonthsDOD3 Months45 Days Forecasts Controls/Capacities O&D Forecasts/Capacities Forecast Data and Control Information

OR&DS 6 Provides a better balance between supply and demand and improves current practice by explicitly considering passenger flows in the scheduling process. –Multiple O&Ds –Multiple Classes Consistent with Yield Management seat allocation and controls Extensible to consider network recapture and pricing effects Consistent Scheduling and RM Benefits - O&D Fleet Assignment

OR&DS 7 Consistent Scheduling and RM Benefits - Theory Integrated Scheduling & Revenue Management Process No Revenue Management Revenue Management Only Reference: Jacobs, Ratliff and Smith;1997, 2000

OR&DS 8 No RM O&D RM O&D RM & Pricing O&D Fleeting and RM O&D Fleeting, RM & Pricing Extension to Consider Pricing Effects Reference: Jacobs, Ratliff and Smith;1997, 2000

OR&DS 9 Estimate O&D market forecasts. Fleet schedule with a Segment- based Fleet Assignment Model (Leg-FAM). Improve fleeted schedule using O&D FAM application. Evaluate Leg-FAM and O&D FAM schedules using the O&D revenue mix model. O&D Fleeting and RM Benchmark Process - Practice O&D Forecast Leg FAM O&D FAM O&D Evaluation: Revenue Mix

OR&DS 10 O&D Fleeting and RM Benchmark General Information –4,500 flight legs. –26 sub-fleets. –800 aircraft. –150,000 total O&D markets (Including International Markets). –No Jet-Prop Swaps. –International Fleeting Maintained.

OR&DS 11 O&D Fleeting and RM Benchmark Results

OR&DS 12 Observations and Conclusions Benchmark results using existing forecasting methods and a consistent O&D Fleeting and RM approach illustrate significant potential benefits over segment-based FAM. Additional benchmarks showed annual improvements ranging from 0.54% to 0.77% of revenue. O&D Fleeting and RM process provides a better balance between available resources (capacity) and the O&D-based demands. O&D Fleeting produces a schedule fleeting consistent with the RM process used to manage the seat inventory. This provides better opportunities to increase the overall schedule yield. Potential benefits from a consistent O&D Fleeting and RM process will increase as forecasting capabilities improve.

OR&DS 13 Objective: Increase overall profitability by making strategic near- term aircraft swaps between crew compatible equipment. Driving Forces: –Paradigm shift: Many airlines fleet the schedule using leg-based methods while managing the seat inventory using O&D-based methods. This leads to an inconsistent matching of supply and demand. –Daily forecast variability: D 3 exploits opportunities created by the systemic daily variation of ODF demand flowing through the network. These effects are not captured when schedules are built using typical day forecasts. –Forecast Error: D 3 improves schedule profitability by using improved forecast data nearer the day of departure. O&D-based Demand Driven Dispatch (D 3 )

OR&DS 14 Obtain remaining O&D Fare Class (ODF) demand forecasts, firm reservation holds, capacities and itinerary fares from RM for a specific reading day and departure date. Improve fleeted schedule using O&D FAM and allowing only crew compatible RJ swaps. Evaluate resulting schedule using the RM model and forecast data. Demand Driven Dispatch (D 3 ) Process RM Model O&D FAM Evaluation: Revenue Mix

OR&DS 15 Demand Driven Dispatch Benchmark Benchmark Information –Reading Day 13. –Potential swaps: 566 candidate flight legs. –4800 total flight legs in schedule. –115,000 total O&D fare classes (Including International Markets) considered in analysis. –All other fleets held constant.

OR&DS 16 D 3 Benchmark Results - Max Profit Measure* Input ScheduleD 3 Solution Incremental Profit Gain (% of Revenue) 0.64 Switched Flights Segments Flown 114 RJ3 RJ4 230 * All measures are for a daily schedule 10:31 9:37 Utilization RJ3 RJ :02 10:14

OR&DS 17 Swap Limit Daily Profit Increase (% of Revenue) Cumulative Percent of Total % 56% 78% 94% 100% D 3 Parametric Analysis Results - Swap Limit

OR&DS 18 A Closer Look - 25 Swap Limit Flight No Reservation Holds Incremental Traffic Input Output Fleet Input Output RJ4 RJ3 RJ4 Total Traffic Input Output Profit Change (% of Rev)

OR&DS 19 D 3 Benefits and Timing - What the theory tells us.

OR&DS 20 D 3 Benefits and Timing - The Practice

OR&DS 21 Results clearly illustrate the potential benefit associated with D 3 swaps of crew compatible aircraft near the day of departure. D 3 effectively exploits the daily variations in ODF demand forecasts to identify revenue opportunities not realized during the schedule planning process. D 3 provides an added degree of freedom to the RM process. This added flexibility allows the airline to adapt to better forecasts near the day of departure. A portion of these benefits are likely due to inconsistencies between the scheduling and RM processes (Leg-based planning vs. O&D-based control). Must account for M&E, crew and operational issues. D 3 Summary

OR&DS 22 Benefits and Hurdles to Integration Benefits: –Consistent scheduling and RM processes can uncover significant revenue opportunities not realized in today’s process. –Implementation facilitates a natural and systematic feedback mechanism between scheduling and RM processes. –Provides opportunities for further process integration (pricing, M&E, Crew). Hurdles: –Paradigm shift will require analysts to think about the scheduling problem in a much different way. –Process integration raises a host of process and schedule ownership issues that must be resolved. –Integration puts added emphasis on the importance of forecasting at the Leg and O&D level. –Timing of D 3 highly dependent on ability to market added capacity.