View Single Post
Old 07-01-2025 | 02:07 PM
  #224  
FTv3's Avatar
FTv3
Social Media retired.
5 Years
 
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 44
Default

Originally Posted by Flybynight101
I disagree. Our network is definitely NOT the main reasons our schedules are garbage. Other than the postal contract, our network hasn’t changed much in a very long time. What has changed was the solver. We need new language to combat the solver. We’ll never change the network.
Not sure why you disagree, you seem to be agreeing with almost everything I said:

1. Airlines optimize: even before the optimizer airlines were getting more and more efficient in their scheduling practices. PBS is a major example. Pairing constructions were being tweaked all along but the Optimizer kicked it into overdrive. The good schedules of days past were nothing more than scheduling inefficiencies they weren’t able to avoid due to unavailable technologies. Think multi day layovers, extensive positioning and depositioning, city purity, etc. Schedules we have now are what companies have been dreaming of but couldn’t figure out how to achieve. It all starts with the network. That’s the baseline everything starts from.

2. we get what the (network) + (optimizer) - (contract language) gives us. No, we can’t change the network but the postal contract certainly did.

3. Contract language forces the optimizer towards our preferences. Contract language is the only solutionfor ameliorating what the network + optimizer spits out. The problem is N+O and obtaining appropriate language in the next contract.
Reply