A Dynamic Model for Airline Fleeting and Scheduling
Open accessAbstract
COVID-19 has reshaped the global airline industry. Travel demands are volatile, and passengers have more flexibility in bookings and cancellations. More than ever, airlines have to be agile and adaptive while making operational decisions. We introduce a dynamic model to help airlines make adaptive fleeting and scheduling decisions based on stochastically evolving bookings and contextual signals. The model incorporates both arrivals (new bookings) and departures (cancellations), and the contextual information affecting future demand. This significantly generalizes and strengthens previous modeling attempts. We develop a Lagrangian relaxation framework that decomposes the dynamic program defined on a large time-space network into separable flight-level problems. Owing to the complexities of this network, our Lagrangian dual problem is not straightforward to solve. We therefore develop a tailored and simple projected subgradient algorithm that exploits the structure of this network for efficient solutions. We establish the correctness and convergence properties of this procedure. Our analysis yields new theoretical, algorithmic, and managerial insights into the dynamic fleeting and scheduling problem. We present computational experiments based on real-world airline data to demonstrate the potential benefits of this approach.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Scheduling problems in aviation call for methods that are adaptive, providing solutions at a given time that can be easily adjusted or revised later based on emerging information and improved visibility into uncertain inputs.
“This, in turn, calls for methods that are adaptive, providing solutions at a given time that can be easily adjusted or revised later based on emerging information and improved visibility into uncertain inputs ( Sherali and Zhu, 2008; Yan and Ghate, 2022 ).”
From Status quo and challenges in air transport management research (2024) · cites this paper as Yan and Ghate, 2022
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Status quo and challenges in air transport management research
Wandelt, S., Antoniou, C., Birolini, S., Delahaye, D., Dresner, M., Fu, X., Gössling, S., Hong, S.-J., Odoni, A. R., Zanin, M., et al. (2024) · Journal of the Air Transport Research Society · doi:10.1016/j.jatrs.2024.100014 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
- Authors
- Yan, C., & Ghate, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Yan, Chiwei
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022
- ISSN
- 1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4296880356
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Air Traffic Management and Optimization
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Vehicle Routing Optimization Methods
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Aviation Industry Analysis and Trends
- Keywords
- airline fleet management, flight scheduling, dynamic programming, Lagrangian relaxation, time-space network, flight cancellations, COVID-19 pandemic, demand uncertainty, airline operations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review