The landing slot system needs complete reform. Surely we have the technology now that every flight is tracked and its data recorded to implement a system that doesn’t require phantom flights.
And I’m supposed to feel guilty driving into town to pick up my son when he misses the bus.
The flip side of this is that if you book a flight and can’t travel yet the flight still goes you are not eligible for a refund. If they cancel the flight everyone gets a refund hence why changing it to 50% made no difference.
Ghost flights don’t mean the aircraft is empty, it just means it is flying with under 10% of the passengers it can carry.
> The Department for Transport said: “We acted swiftly [during the pandemic] to prevent empty aircraft needing to fly to retain their slots, however some flights may operate with low passenger numbers for a whole range of reasons, including carrying key workers or vital cargo.”
I was talking about this with one of my AME lecturers. At what point is a passenger flight a passenger flight? Does filled with seats, or does it need a single passenger? What about if you leave the seats and other provisions in for passengers, and then [use those seats to carry freight, as was regulated by EASA during the pandemic.](https://www.easa.europa.eu/downloads/113496/en) In that case, the aircraft is still a passenger aircraft, and it can still safely accommodate people, but you’re putting a box on the seat instead of a person.
The reality is that there is no legal distinction between a passenger and freight flight, only between a passenger and freight aircraft. As long as it is a passenger aircraft, then the airline can say it is a passenger flight. You could take out 95% of the seats, fly the aircraft full of cargo and still class it as a passenger flight. The aircraft is full, but because it’s not carrying passengers, it is classed as a ghost flight.
Ghost flight do still indeed happen, but the idea that it means airlines are flying aircraft around with absolutely nothing in them is not true.
There are something like 40,000 flights a month from the UK. This represents some like 1.25% of flights.
here is a link to the parliamentary petition to debate this. What’s the point of us plebs trying to reduce carbon when we’ve got nonsensical rules that literally set money on fire. Cool, we’ll ban new combustion cars, bring in ULEZ around the country and raise road tax. But don’t worry we’ve got 500 empty flights because of policy decisions, nothing else.
That seems surprisingly low to be honest. Is there not a point at which planes are being flown simply to ensure regular use for their safety?
Yeah, well they need to reposition the planes. The only way to entirely eliminate ghost flights would be abolishing airport slots, but this would lead to anarchy in the sky as atc wouldn’t know when to expect how many planes. Or building so much airport and ATC capacity that slots aren’t needed (worst option of all)
In any case the majority of these flights are likely still carrying cargo. They just have very few people on board.
The whole of the aviation industry is a tiny proportion of global emissions. These flights are annoying to hear about but they are very much a piss drop in the ocean emissions wise.
In other news, motoring taxes to be raised again to reduce pollution
The aviation industry is such and easy target for climate change activists. They are constantly making improvements to their aircraft, through reducing fuel use and now beginning to use sustainable fuel etc.
It contributed less than 5% to climate change too. What about shipping? How are they changing? Just as one example.
Of course something should be done to make sure flights made are more efficient – but I imagine part of the reason these planes have to fly even if “empty” is that they are scheduled to make another flight from their next destination.
If you cancel the flight entirely, how are people/cargo booked on to the planes next flight supposed to get where they’re due to go?
Air cargo is booming because sea freight is not fully operational. While these flights have no passengers, they are packed with freight, sometimes the passenger deck has loose loaded freight on it as well as the palletised or container freight on the below deck compartments….they are not truly ghost flights, they are earning revenue and moving goods, but not always passengers as well
The logistics of making sure aircraft are in the places they need to be when they are needed are complicated and sometimes requires an aircraft to fly without any passengers. There’s nothing wasteful about it.
It’s not the airlines fault that the International Air Transport Association (IATA) decides if you don’t fly today you won’t fly tomorrow.
14 comments
The landing slot system needs complete reform. Surely we have the technology now that every flight is tracked and its data recorded to implement a system that doesn’t require phantom flights.
And I’m supposed to feel guilty driving into town to pick up my son when he misses the bus.
The flip side of this is that if you book a flight and can’t travel yet the flight still goes you are not eligible for a refund. If they cancel the flight everyone gets a refund hence why changing it to 50% made no difference.
Ghost flights don’t mean the aircraft is empty, it just means it is flying with under 10% of the passengers it can carry.
> The Department for Transport said: “We acted swiftly [during the pandemic] to prevent empty aircraft needing to fly to retain their slots, however some flights may operate with low passenger numbers for a whole range of reasons, including carrying key workers or vital cargo.”
I was talking about this with one of my AME lecturers. At what point is a passenger flight a passenger flight? Does filled with seats, or does it need a single passenger? What about if you leave the seats and other provisions in for passengers, and then [use those seats to carry freight, as was regulated by EASA during the pandemic.](https://www.easa.europa.eu/downloads/113496/en) In that case, the aircraft is still a passenger aircraft, and it can still safely accommodate people, but you’re putting a box on the seat instead of a person.
The reality is that there is no legal distinction between a passenger and freight flight, only between a passenger and freight aircraft. As long as it is a passenger aircraft, then the airline can say it is a passenger flight. You could take out 95% of the seats, fly the aircraft full of cargo and still class it as a passenger flight. The aircraft is full, but because it’s not carrying passengers, it is classed as a ghost flight.
Ghost flight do still indeed happen, but the idea that it means airlines are flying aircraft around with absolutely nothing in them is not true.
There are something like 40,000 flights a month from the UK. This represents some like 1.25% of flights.
here is a link to the parliamentary petition to debate this. What’s the point of us plebs trying to reduce carbon when we’ve got nonsensical rules that literally set money on fire. Cool, we’ll ban new combustion cars, bring in ULEZ around the country and raise road tax. But don’t worry we’ve got 500 empty flights because of policy decisions, nothing else.
[https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/605749](https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/605749)
That seems surprisingly low to be honest. Is there not a point at which planes are being flown simply to ensure regular use for their safety?
Yeah, well they need to reposition the planes. The only way to entirely eliminate ghost flights would be abolishing airport slots, but this would lead to anarchy in the sky as atc wouldn’t know when to expect how many planes. Or building so much airport and ATC capacity that slots aren’t needed (worst option of all)
In any case the majority of these flights are likely still carrying cargo. They just have very few people on board.
The whole of the aviation industry is a tiny proportion of global emissions. These flights are annoying to hear about but they are very much a piss drop in the ocean emissions wise.
In other news, motoring taxes to be raised again to reduce pollution
The aviation industry is such and easy target for climate change activists. They are constantly making improvements to their aircraft, through reducing fuel use and now beginning to use sustainable fuel etc.
It contributed less than 5% to climate change too. What about shipping? How are they changing? Just as one example.
Of course something should be done to make sure flights made are more efficient – but I imagine part of the reason these planes have to fly even if “empty” is that they are scheduled to make another flight from their next destination.
If you cancel the flight entirely, how are people/cargo booked on to the planes next flight supposed to get where they’re due to go?
Air cargo is booming because sea freight is not fully operational. While these flights have no passengers, they are packed with freight, sometimes the passenger deck has loose loaded freight on it as well as the palletised or container freight on the below deck compartments….they are not truly ghost flights, they are earning revenue and moving goods, but not always passengers as well
The logistics of making sure aircraft are in the places they need to be when they are needed are complicated and sometimes requires an aircraft to fly without any passengers. There’s nothing wasteful about it.
It’s not the airlines fault that the International Air Transport Association (IATA) decides if you don’t fly today you won’t fly tomorrow.