Codeshare synchronicity within the major alliances

Codeshare co-operations between airlines are reflected in the schedules with different Data Element Identifiers (DEI). The operating carrier labels its own operating flight wanted to be offered for a certain partner with a DEI 010 identifying the respective marketing flight. The codeshare partner has to build the according marketing flight as a kind of mirror image using the Data Element Identifier 050.

Example:

  • LH’s operating flight on December 1, 2017 is LH 400, DEI010 to UA 8841
  • UA’s marketing flight on December 1, 2017 is UA 8841, DEI050 to LH 400

The operating and the marketing flight build a logical unit. In the example, the operating flight LH 400 shows to marketing flight UA 8841 and UA 8841 has a reference back to LH 400. This co-operation is correctly reflected in both airlines’ schedules leading to a seamless and correct offering and booking process. But if the marketing flight is not correctly build as an image of the operating ideal problems in the processes are in all probability causing needless efforts and costs. In worst case, booking might fail and the passenger is looking for alternatives on the market.

Schedules of airlines in co-operation should be aligned among each other

The synchronization between operating and marketing flight seems to be an easy task. However, there are a lot of stumbling blocks in the processes which might result in discrepancies between operating and marketing flight finally – there are various reasons possible: schedule data exchange problems, gaps in the in-house processes, missing efficiency due to manual work, or just missing tools. Especially for airlines in close co-operations, e.g. an airline alliance, the alignment of the member’s schedules among each other is essential to realize the optimum out of this exclusive club of partners.

Schedule synchronicity of major three alliances analyzed

Based on the OAG schedule from January 24, 2017, we created an analysis of all major alliances for the upcoming six months.

In the analyzed period, the members of the Star Alliance have with 3,224,310 legs the highest amount of legs in co-operation, followed by SkyTeam (2,627,593) and Oneworld (1,899,882).

The values in terms of major discrepancies range from 0.47% to 11.22% over all, whereby the figures regarding minor errors go from 1.24% to 4.25%, as visible in the chart below.

 

Codeshare analysis / Codeshare synchronocity report

 

Good schedule quality leads to the base for success

The schedule is the base for nearly every process in an airline environment. A good schedule quality is therefore essential as a factor for the success of an airline. If there are airline partners, the weakest link of a chain regarding schedule quality influences the co-operation negatively. Under consideration of the volatility, volume and complexity of airline schedules, it is nearly impossible to reach a 100% synchronicity in a partnership.

Therefore, the target is to be as best as possible, as far as possible near to 100% - with the business knowledge, with alignment and streamlined processes and with the according tools supporting it.

With a powerful and modern schedule and codeshare management solution airlines in co-operation are able to create high quality schedules.

 

Related blog articles:

Best practice in Codeshare Management
https://www.lhsystems.com/blog-entry/best-practice-codeshare-management

Codeshare Management: Obstacles to getting it right!
https://www.lhsystems.com/blog-entry/codeshare-management-obstacles-getting-it-right

Comments

Mike Asboe's picture

Hey,
Thanks so much for this info about Codeshare! I love that you included a bar graph with your data - this makes it much easier to read. Synchronicity is very important, especially if you want an all in one pc!
Best,
Dennis