The slot system that airports and aviation regulators use to give airlines permission to use runways, gates and terminals at a certain time on a certain date sounds about as interesting as waiting for your luggage to reach the carousel at T5. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just take a look at the headlines.
“Ecological outrage over BA ‘ghost flight’ scandal,” the Telegraph reports. British Mediterranean Airways, which operates as a franchise of British Airways, wasted £2 million by flying empty passenger planes between Heathrow and Cardiff, it has been revealed. Recently the Guardian has gone further. “Data shows there have been 5,000 empty ‘ghost flights’ in the UK since 2019,” it said on its front page. The report added: “A further 35,000 flights flew almost empty as climate campaigners described the revelations as ‘shocking’.”
Slots are among the most valuable assets in aviation, especially in Britain where our major airports are so congested. Heathrow is operating at almost 100 percent capacity. Airlines will do almost anything to keep them. To protect their slots, carriers must use them at least 80 percent of the time; This is where ghost flights come into play.
Sometimes there are dips in demand but airlines want to preserve a slot, so they fly empty or near empty planes; but carriers argue this is rare. Sometimes, for example, they cannot use their slots due to war. Neither British Airways nor Virgin Atlantic flies to Tel Aviv these days. But it’s not always clear whether an airline must continue using the slot on another route to satisfy “use it or lose it” rules. Slots are the “neutral route”.
It was the clashes that triggered the infamous BA Heathrow to Cardiff ghost flights, where no tickets were sold, all 124 seats on the Airbus jet were empty and flights did not appear on arrival and departure boards. The airline came up with this plan after it was forced to cancel flights due to civil unrest in Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan, but wanted to preserve the gap.
Could the slot system work better for airlines, passengers and the environment? The government thinks so too. Last week he announced plans to reform the regime. Aviation minister Anthony Browne wants to curb the monopolies of “major airlines” at certain airports, increase competition and reduce fares.
Restricting slot rentals would prevent larger airlines from “monopolizing slots at particular airports and ensure that these slots can be allocated to competitors if they are not used frequently enough.” This, he says, “will help newer or smaller carriers offering cheaper fares obtain more advantageous slots.” He argues: “Increased opportunities for new airlines will encourage greater competition and increase productivity among airlines.”
It also wants to ensure regulators and airlines act faster in response to crises such as war, make clear that airlines can hold on to slots without using them, and “make the industry more resilient and efficient in times of uncertainty”.
Will Browne’s reforms work? One person who knows is John Middleton of the International Air Transport Association, nicknamed “the gambling man” by colleagues at the organization’s Geneva headquarters. He notes that the congested nature of airports in Britain means competition for slots between airlines is fierce, promoting efficient use of slots. But a review could improve services for passengers in what he calls the “three Cs” of accuracy, connectivity and competition.
To be sure, regulators can tell airlines faster that they can let slots fill up due to war or disruption. “Passengers need and deserve to know which flights will be operating when and as far in advance as possible,” says Middleton.
On connectivity, regulators need to better monitor how airlines use slots to make sure they aren’t cheating the system or running ghost flights. “We don’t think airlines are playing slots or flying empty planes or whatever the allegations are,” he says. “But proper monitoring will quickly reveal the truth.”
In competition, airlines already operating from an airport first decide on a new flight schedule, if appropriate. So, if a slot becomes available at, say, Heathrow to New York JFK at 11am, BA or Virgin Atlantic are likely to secure it. Newcomers can try only when established rulers have a chance to catch up with the new time. This must change. “Competition is strong in the UK. Look at how EasyJet has become dominant at Gatwick. But an adjustment to margins could help new entrants compete and compete a little faster than they already do,” says Middleton.
If the review works as Browne intends, passengers could see greater service reliability, new entrants and lower fares, but there are limitations, Middleton said. The biggest problem facing UK airports is the number of slots, not the way they are arranged. “There is not enough capacity at airports in the UK to meet the huge need for consumer choice. Slot reform means we can get better at dividing the pie. But at the end of the day, the question is: Is there enough cake?”
The biggest improvement in air travel will come from a third runway at Heathrow; this would allow, for example, EasyJet to operate from central England and Virgin perhaps to restart short-haul services. A second runway at Gatwick would also be a boon; Gatwick is applying to use an existing emergency runway as a second runway. But Heathrow’s chances of gaining a third runway are as remote as ever.