Cost per passenger

[t_bergman]

Does anyone know of a way to enable a cost per passenger per flight expense?

[Heritage1]

Just a quick reply on this one,  That would be another whole world of programming for a customized Module as I have yet to see anything of that nature. Not only would you have to break down all of the math in phpvms, you would also as Admin, Enter all of the Data yourself I'm Sure ! But, who knows, maybe in the future.

Good Luck with this one.

[servetas]

This is not offered by phpVMS but it is a module idea. What kind of costs would you like to have?

[t_bergman]

3 hours ago, servetas said:

This is not offered by phpVMS but it is a module idea. What kind of costs would you like to have?

Servetas.

I would nice to have the ability to differentiate costs based on a few different things:

-Cost per passenger

-Cost per aircraft based on tail number (ground handling is different for a 737-800 than a small turboprop)

-Cost per flight hour dependent on the tail number (for maintenance expenses)

-Single cost items such as a purchase of a new hangar etc.

[Nabeel]

2 hours ago, t_bergman said:

Servetas.

I would nice to have the ability to differentiate costs based on a few different things:

-Cost per passenger

-Cost per aircraft based on tail number (ground handling is different for a 737-800 than a small turboprop)

-Cost per flight hour dependent on the tail number (for maintenance expenses)

-Single cost items such as a purchase of a new hangar etc.

So some of these are done on the basis of a "subfleet" in RW ops, which is model I'm looking at for the next version. Per flight-hour costs are a good idea and I'll add it to the list. So are capital costs.

It might be more work to do this on an automated basis, I'm thinking of a register-type system.

[t_bergman]

3 hours ago, Nabeel said:

So some of these are done on the basis of a "subfleet" in RW ops, which is model I'm looking at for the next version. Per flight-hour costs are a good idea and I'll add it to the list. So are capital costs.

It might be more work to do this on an automated basis, I'm thinking of a register-type system.

Nabeel,

 

What do you mean by subfleet? Would this be a group of AC grouped by type? I'm trying to think how this could be easiest to implement; I'm familiar with php but not at the level of most people on this forum. By linking a cost to the tail number instead of type, its more work on the airline administration but you could also implement cost differences based on small nuances in the fleet.

CRJ700 1 has airstairs and CRJ700 2 doesn't. Each time you fly 2 ground handing would be $200 vs each flight on 1 would be $150 based on the tail number.

Food for thought, let me know if I can be of any assistance with the new version. 

[Nabeel]

On 6/29/2017 at 8:08 PM, t_bergman said:

Nabeel,

 

What do you mean by subfleet? Would this be a group of AC grouped by type? I'm trying to think how this could be easiest to implement; I'm familiar with php but not at the level of most people on this forum. By linking a cost to the tail number instead of type, its more work on the airline administration but you could also implement cost differences based on small nuances in the fleet.

CRJ700 1 has airstairs and CRJ700 2 doesn't. Each time you fly 2 ground handing would be $200 vs each flight on 1 would be $150 based on the tail number.

Food for thought, let me know if I can be of any assistance with the new version. 

So how actual airlines work are with aircraft grouped into subfleets. Each subfleet is generally based on types, but maybe 1 subfleet for all CRJ with the stairs, and another subfleet for without. Now, these fares and expenses are attached to a subfleet. So someone can go into as much detail as they want - just a single subfleet for all aircraft, no matter the type, or let's say 10 different subfleets with varying fares and expenses.

Schedules are also attached to subfleets, so you can dictate that flight from airport X to Y is assigned the subfleet for the CRJ with stairs.

Ground handling, etc, will be based on a general landing fee, I think. These can also differ by airport, but I think the way I'm going to do it is by some modifier. I haven't thought it through yet, but there might be a few different expense types that you can assign to the subfleet. Landing fees are generally done by weight, and I believe they can include ground handling.

I'm still trying to figure out the best way for these. It gets pretty complicated very fast  Maybe a price per 5-tonnes or something at the airport level. I have to see how this is actually charged and handled.

[t_bergman]

On 7/4/2017 at 4:03 PM, Nabeel said:

So how actual airlines work are with aircraft grouped into subfleets. Each subfleet is generally based on types, but maybe 1 subfleet for all CRJ with the stairs, and another subfleet for without. Now, these fares and expenses are attached to a subfleet. So someone can go into as much detail as they want - just a single subfleet for all aircraft, no matter the type, or let's say 10 different subfleets with varying fares and expenses.

Schedules are also attached to subfleets, so you can dictate that flight from airport X to Y is assigned the subfleet for the CRJ with stairs.

Ground handling, etc, will be based on a general landing fee, I think. These can also differ by airport, but I think the way I'm going to do it is by some modifier. I haven't thought it through yet, but there might be a few different expense types that you can assign to the subfleet. Landing fees are generally done by weight, and I believe they can include ground handling.

I'm still trying to figure out the best way for these. It gets pretty complicated very fast  Maybe a price per 5-tonnes or something at the airport level. I have to see how this is actually charged and handled.

That makes sense, definitely it seems easier to implement a cost based on subfleet rather than tail number and a lot less work for virtual airline administration. As far as landing fee categories, one way to differentiate airports is via the FAA classification based on the size and traffic the airport sees. 

Quote

FAA airport categories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

The United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has a system for categorizing public-use airports (along with heliports and other aviation bases) that is primarily based on the level of commercial passenger traffic through each facility. It is used to determine if an airport is eligible for funding through the federal government's Airport Improvement Program (AIP). Less than 20% of airports in the U.S. qualify for the program, though most that don't qualify are private-use-only airports.^[1]

At the bottom end are general aviation airports. To qualify for the AIP, they must have at least 10 aircraft based there, but handle fewer than 2,500 scheduled passengers each year. This means that most aircraft are small and are operated by individuals or other private entities, and little or no commercial airline traffic occurs. Nearly three-quarters of AIP-funded airports are of this type.

Most of the remaining airfields that qualify for funding are commercial service airports, and are more dependent on regularly scheduled commercial airline traffic. This is subcategorized into primary airports, which handle more than 10,000 passengers each year, and nonprimary airports, which handle between 2,500 and 10,000 passengers annually.^[2] These categories account for over 15% of AIP-funded airports in the U.S.

Primary airports are further subcategorized by category and another categories into:^[2]

• Nonhub primary – airports handling over 10,000 but less than 0.05% of the country's annual passenger boardings
• Small hub primary – airports with 0.05 to 0.25% of the country's annual passenger boardings
• Medium hub primary – airports handling 0.25 to 1% of the country's annual passenger boardings
• Large hub primary – airports handling over 1% of the country's annual passenger boardings

A third major category contains reliever airports, which are essentially large general-aviation airports located in metropolitan areas that serve to offload small aircraft traffic from hub airports in the region. These account for the remaining 10% of AIP-funded airports.

Under 10,000 still may have commercial service however if I remember correctly from a few of my college classes these are most likely non type 121 airports and utilize the FBO type environment as opposed to a terminal. 

[Nabeel]

13 hours ago, t_bergman said:

That makes sense, definitely it seems easier to implement a cost based on subfleet rather than tail number and a lot less work for virtual airline administration. As far as landing fee categories, one way to differentiate airports is via the FAA classification based on the size and traffic the airport sees. 

Under 10,000 still may have commercial service however if I remember correctly from a few of my college classes these are most likely non type 121 airports and utilize the FBO type environment as opposed to a terminal. 

Yeah, it's usually a fee based on weight, but the fee itself is calculated by the airport based on their own traffic and size. Airports that handle larger aircraft themselves have larger costs for maintenance of things like runways and ground equipment, aside from them wanting to make a profit.

[t_bergman]

On 7/6/2017 at 11:04 AM, Nabeel said:

Yeah, it's usually a fee based on weight, but the fee itself is calculated by the airport based on their own traffic and size. Airports that handle larger aircraft themselves have larger costs for maintenance of things like runways and ground equipment, aside from them wanting to make a profit.

This makes sense. Let me know if you need any assistance on the financial side of the system. I'm not the best programmer but can test and debug.