基于拥堵收费的时段分配效率与基于调度的时段分配效率比较

S. Neyshabouri, V. Kumar, L. Sherry, K. Hoffman
{"title":"基于拥堵收费的时段分配效率与基于调度的时段分配效率比较","authors":"S. Neyshabouri, V. Kumar, L. Sherry, K. Hoffman","doi":"10.1109/ICNSURV.2012.6218410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When airport arrival slots are scheduled in excess of the available capacity, the scheduled flights are assigned slots by a rationing scheme. The traditional approach is to ration slots by schedule (RBS) on a first-scheduled/first-assigned basis. This approach, although meeting equity criteria, can result in inefficient use of the arrival slots in terms of passenger throughput and fuel burn; however, it does not reflect the business decisions with respect to the value of a given flight to an airline. An alternative approach is to allocate the slots based on an airlines' willingness-to-pay a congestion fee, set a priori by a regulator, for use of the slot. This paper describes a comparison of the allocation of arrival slots using RBS and Congestion Pricing (CP) for flights scheduled into PHL on 10-Jul-2007. The analysis indicates that rationing by CP yielded improved performance in the reduction of average passenger delays by 39.14%, total Passenger Delays by 37.65% and cancelled flights by 66.66% (9 cancellations in RB to 3 cancelled flights in CP). However, rationing by CP decreased average airline equity metric by 34.81%.","PeriodicalId":126055,"journal":{"name":"2012 Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of efficiency of slot allocation by congestion pricing and ration by schedule\",\"authors\":\"S. Neyshabouri, V. Kumar, L. Sherry, K. Hoffman\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICNSURV.2012.6218410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When airport arrival slots are scheduled in excess of the available capacity, the scheduled flights are assigned slots by a rationing scheme. The traditional approach is to ration slots by schedule (RBS) on a first-scheduled/first-assigned basis. This approach, although meeting equity criteria, can result in inefficient use of the arrival slots in terms of passenger throughput and fuel burn; however, it does not reflect the business decisions with respect to the value of a given flight to an airline. An alternative approach is to allocate the slots based on an airlines' willingness-to-pay a congestion fee, set a priori by a regulator, for use of the slot. This paper describes a comparison of the allocation of arrival slots using RBS and Congestion Pricing (CP) for flights scheduled into PHL on 10-Jul-2007. The analysis indicates that rationing by CP yielded improved performance in the reduction of average passenger delays by 39.14%, total Passenger Delays by 37.65% and cancelled flights by 66.66% (9 cancellations in RB to 3 cancelled flights in CP). However, rationing by CP decreased average airline equity metric by 34.81%.\",\"PeriodicalId\":126055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2012 Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2012 Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNSURV.2012.6218410\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2012 Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNSURV.2012.6218410","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

当机场到达时间超过可用容量时,定期航班通过配给制分配时间。传统的方法是在先调度/先分配的基础上按调度(RBS)分配插槽。这种方法虽然符合公平标准,但在旅客吞吐量和燃油消耗方面,可能导致到达时段的使用效率低下;但是,它不反映与给定航班对航空公司的价值有关的业务决策。另一种方法是根据航空公司支付拥堵费的意愿来分配时段,拥堵费是由监管机构预先设定的。本文描述了2007年7月10日飞往PHL的航班使用RBS和拥堵定价(CP)分配到达时段的比较。分析表明,CP的定量配给使平均乘客延误减少了39.14%,总乘客延误减少了37.65%,航班取消减少了66.66% (RB取消9次,CP取消3次)。然而,CP的配给制使航空公司的平均股本指标下降了34.81%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of efficiency of slot allocation by congestion pricing and ration by schedule
When airport arrival slots are scheduled in excess of the available capacity, the scheduled flights are assigned slots by a rationing scheme. The traditional approach is to ration slots by schedule (RBS) on a first-scheduled/first-assigned basis. This approach, although meeting equity criteria, can result in inefficient use of the arrival slots in terms of passenger throughput and fuel burn; however, it does not reflect the business decisions with respect to the value of a given flight to an airline. An alternative approach is to allocate the slots based on an airlines' willingness-to-pay a congestion fee, set a priori by a regulator, for use of the slot. This paper describes a comparison of the allocation of arrival slots using RBS and Congestion Pricing (CP) for flights scheduled into PHL on 10-Jul-2007. The analysis indicates that rationing by CP yielded improved performance in the reduction of average passenger delays by 39.14%, total Passenger Delays by 37.65% and cancelled flights by 66.66% (9 cancellations in RB to 3 cancelled flights in CP). However, rationing by CP decreased average airline equity metric by 34.81%.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信