Researching

Journals
  • Advanced Photonics
  • Photonics Insights
  • Advanced Photonics Nexus
  • Photonics Research
  • Advanced Imaging
  • View All Journals
  • Chinese Optics Letters
  • High Power Laser Science and Engineering
    • Articles
  • Optics
  • Physics
  • Geography
  • View All Subjects
    • Conferences
  • CIOP
  • HPLSE
  • AP
  • View All Events
    • News
    About CLP
    Search by keywords or author
    Journals >Progress in Geography >Volume 39 >Issue 7 >Page 1160 > Article
    • Progress in Geography
    • Vol. 39, Issue 7, 1160 (2020)
    Estimation of time delay cost of hub airports in China, air routes effect and comparison with the United States
    Xinru DU1、2, Zi LU1、2、*, Renjie LI1、2, Yaqing DONG1、2, and Wei GAO1、2
    Author Affiliations
  • 1School of Resource and Environment Sciences, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang 050024, China
  • 2Hebei Key Laboratory of Environmental Change and Ecological Construction, Shijiazhuang 050024, China
    • show less
    DOI: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.07.009 Cite this Article
    Xinru DU, Zi LU, Renjie LI, Yaqing DONG, Wei GAO. Estimation of time delay cost of hub airports in China, air routes effect and comparison with the United States[J]. Progress in Geography, 2020, 39(7): 1160 Copy Citation Text show less
    24 h中国枢纽机场航班延误时长变化Fig.1
    Fig. 1. 24 h中国枢纽机场航班延误时长变化Fig.1
    Download full size | View in the Article
    中国枢纽机场6种机型3个航班执行阶段时间延误总成本Fig.2
    Fig. 2. 中国枢纽机场6种机型3个航班执行阶段时间延误总成本Fig.2
    Download full size | View in the Article
    中国枢纽机场时间延误总成本聚类等级注：本图基于自然资源部标准地图服务网站下载的审图号为GS(2019)1823号的标准地图制作,底图无修改。下同。Fig.3
    Fig. 3. 中国枢纽机场时间延误总成本聚类等级注：本图基于自然资源部标准地图服务网站下载的审图号为GS(2019)1823号的标准地图制作,底图无修改。下同。Fig.3
    Download full size | View in the Article
    中美枢纽机场间航线网络模式比较注：资料来源于参考文献[32],有修改。Fig.4
    Fig. 4. 中美枢纽机场间航线网络模式比较注：资料来源于参考文献[32],有修改。Fig.4
    Download full size | View in the Article
    中美空中廊道特征路径宽度和航迹交叉点数量对比Fig.5
    Fig. 5. 中美空中廊道特征路径宽度和航迹交叉点数量对比Fig.5
    Download full size | View in the Article
    机型/座位容量(成本标准值/(€/min))*A319/122(0.6/2.6/7.1)A320/158(0.6/2.6/7.7)A321/185(0.7/3.0/9.5)B737-800/162(0.5/2.9/7.8)A333/370(1.8/4.5/27.6)B777-300ER/300(0.6/10.6/14.2)
    PEK配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)2.930.12/0.47/1.2617.590.70/2.81/8.0923.280.93/4.19/13.2723.620.71/4.02/11.1020.342.24/13.02/33.7612.240.49/3.30/10.40
    SHA配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)1.090.04/0.17/0.4721.680.87/3.47/9.9821.680.87/3.90/12.3639.781.19/6.76/18.7012.481.37/7.99/20.723.280.13/0.88/2.78
    PVG配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)3.470.14/0.55/1.4930.111.20/4.82/13.8524.090.96/4.34/13.7325.360.76/4.31/11.926.200.68/3.97/10.3010.770.43/2.91/9.15
    CAN配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)6.130.25/0.98/2.6423.24(0.93/3.72/10.6915.630.63/2.81/8.9143.031.29/7.31/20.227.120.78/4.56/11.824.850.19/1.31/4.12
    CKG配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)19.120.76/3.06/8.2251.392.06/8.22/23.6413.940.56/2.51/7.9513.940.42/2.37/6.551.20.13/0.76/1.980.400.02/0.11/0.34
    CTU配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)14.770.59/2.36/6.3533.861.35/5.42/15.5724.580.98/4.42/14.0119.870.60/3.38/9.346.670.73/4.27/11.070.260.01/0.07/0.22
    WUH配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)4.550.18/0.73/1.9521.210.85/3.39/9.766.440.26/1.16/3.6766.291.99/11.27/31.160.760.08/0.48/1.260.760.03/0.20/0.64
    CGO配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)2.160.09/0.35/0.9323.740.95/3.80/10.923.240.13/0.58/1.8570.502.12/11.99/33.140.360.04/0.23/0.6000/0/0
    SHE配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)4.330.17/0.69/1.8647.991.92/7.86/22.0714.860.59/2.67/8.4731.580.95/5.37/14.840.620.07/0.40/1.030.620.02/0.17/0.53
    XIY配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)10.030.40/1.61/4.3138.191.53/6.11/17.5715.860.63/2.85/9.0434.951.05/5.94/16.430.970.11/0.62/1.6100/0/0
    KMG配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)5.990.24/0.96/2.5826.651.07/4.26/12.263.310.13/0.60/1.8862.401.87/10.61/29.331.650.18/1.06/2.7400/0/0
    URC配置比/%延误成本/(€/min)19.710.79/3.16/8.5024.420.98/3.91/11.2315.120.60/2.72/8.6237.211.12/6.33/17.492.330.26/1.49/3.861.160.05/0.31/0.99
    Table 1.

    中国枢纽机场6种机型配置比及3个航班执行阶段单位时长延误成本

    比较内容美国中国
    机型/机场单位时长延误成本/(€/min)机型/机场单位时长延误成本/(€/min)
    登机口滑行空中维持登机口滑行空中维持
    机型A3190.62.67.1A3190.31.33.4
    A3200.62.67.7A3201.24.813.8
    A3210.73.09.5A3210.63.28.4
    B737-8000.52.97.9B737-8001.26.618.4
    A3331.94.6227.8A3330.62.88.7
    B777-300ER0.610.614.3B777-300ER0.10.814.3
    复合枢纽机场ATL179.6176.855.9PEK71.9280.1424.7
    PHL117.077.466.8CAN77.2253.8357.4
    JFK201.698.188.6SHA66.9146.2291.4
    ORD118.4132.4104.3PVG76.3112.9310.5
    机场首位联系强度ATLCLT(19)、JFK(11)、PHL(21)、DFW(21)、ORD(25)、DEN(20)/16.58%*PEKSHA(59)、PVG(20)、CAN(42)、WHU(15)、CTU(33)、XIY(43)、SHE(23)、URC(18)/32.4%
    PHLJFK(7)、ORD(16)、DEN(10)、LAS(6)、LAX(9)、SFO(8)/11.56%CANSHA(60)、PVG(25)、WUH(23)、CTU(60)、KMG(18)、CKG(25)、URC(21)、XIY(2)、SHE(12)/25.6%
    JFKDFW(6)、ORD(9)、ATL(10)、LAX(37)/7.72%SHACTU(38)、KMG(15)、CGO(4)、WUH(79)、CKG(18)、SHE(43)、URC(16)/14.72%
    ORDCLT(15)、DFW(26)、ORD(2)、PHX(12)/7.51%PVGKMG(15)、WUH(21)、XIY(36)、URC(3)/6.17%
    Table 2.

    中美复合枢纽机场6种机型3个航班执行阶段单位时长延误成本和首位联系强度比较

    美国中国
    航线时间延误成本航线时间延误成本
    登机口滑行空中维持总计登机口滑行空中维持总计
    DEN-CLT144997197276086162557PEK-KMG1654762979169572249098
    LAX-JFK43668167542156062267272PEK-SHA2959234487173140337219
    SFO-DEN227195259331354106666PEK-CAN1764168828241567328036
    ATL-DFW502077023227704148143PEK-CTU2435259329248979332660
    CLT-ORD30354111835187679229868PEK-XIY4798341140133639222762
    JFK-CLT2358826520045255334043CTU-CAN2109529069201833251997
    JFK-SFO27699125408156253309360CTU-SHA4061156130145523242264
    ATL-DEN551281455236169206820CTU-WUH295545511575821160490
    ATL-PHL3545717468835380245525KMG-XIY1100714764181690207461
    LAX-ORD115361182317632130991CAN-SHA283234470791317164347
    Table 3.

    中美前10位枢纽机场间(航线)3个航班执行阶段时间延误总成本比较

    Abstract
    Get PDF(in Chinese)
    Figures&Tables (8)
    Equations (0)
    References (35)
    Get Citation
    Copy Citation Text
    Xinru DU, Zi LU, Renjie LI, Yaqing DONG, Wei GAO. Estimation of time delay cost of hub airports in China, air routes effect and comparison with the United States[J]. Progress in Geography, 2020, 39(7): 1160
    Download Citation
    Tools
    Share
    Save the article for my favorites
    Paper Information
    Recommended Topics
    Resource Economy
    Research Articles