The Hubs and Spokes of our Airline Industry

In the summer of 2019, my family went on a weekend trip to Toronto, ON. Google Maps told us that it would be around a 3-hour drive, so with no other viable option we drove. However, a 3-hour drive turned into a stressful 4-hour drive due to congestion all the way from the end of Lake Ontario to the center of the city. During the drive, several GO Transit trains passed us on rail lines paralleling the highway, and numerous planes passed overhead. This made us consider alternative ways to reach the city to alleviate the stressful drive. Our first thought was flying. Rochester and Toronto are located close to each other, so it makes sense there would be a flight connecting them. We punched the two locations into Google, and we were shocked to find out how impractical flying to Toronto would be for us. Instead of having a direct flight, it was going to instead have us fly to JFK, in the exact opposite direction of our destination, before then heading off to Toronto. On top of this, it was going to cost over $500 per person. How could it be that this was the best option for us to fly there?

The answer is due to the hub and spoke model. This is the framework of how our current system of flight patterns are created and determines which airports are connected and which ones are not. The system consists of two main entities, the hub, such as JFK, and the spoke, such as Rochester. To connect airports between smaller cities, you first fly to a much larger airport, the hub, then to your destination. If you map out all the routes to smaller cities from these connecting airports, you get a drawing that resembles the hub and spokes of a bicycle tire, hence its name. This is opposed to the point-to-point model, which as the name suggests has you flying direct from your airport of origin straight to your destination. The point-to-point model used to be dominant in the industry, but since the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, the hub and spoke model has reigned supreme, at least in the eyes of most airlines.

This is certainly not the case in the eyes of consumers, however. This approach results in greater inconvenience for travelers across the board, including increased travel time, increased frequency of layovers, increased cost unless traveling between two major airports, and often, increased pollution and emissions. The main benefits of this model are to the airlines themselves, not those flying. This model has led to increased profit and made it easier for airlines to manage their fleet.

Unfortunately, there is not a lot that can be done about this, other than contacting your local and national politicians to advocate for at least the partial re-regulation of the airline industry. Nevertheless, the hub and spoke model is the method of how our airplanes are routed and how they fly. This will continue to be how our airplanes will fly for the foreseeable future without intervention. While it’s impossible to have every city airport connected with a direct flight, there are certainly improvements that can be made to improve user experience and decrease harmful emissions. Through all of this, the wheels of the hub and spoke model will keep on turning, just like the wheels on a bike.