Schedule Frequency Analysis

The Schedule Comparison Frequency Analysis identifies changes in flight frequencies for a specific airline and departure station between two published schedule versions over a given period. In addition to frequency deltas, it supports free-form interrogation of risks and opportunities relative to competitors.

Prompt Examples

Perform a schedule comparison frequency analysis for KM at MLA between datasets ssim_published_2025w45 and ssim_published_2025w46 for Dec 2025 – Jan 2026.

Compare UA's outbound flight frequencies from EWR to all destinations between the latest two published schedules for January 2026. Exclude codeshares.

Provide a schedule comparison frequency analysis for EK from DXB over the next two months, showing weekly frequency changes.

Keywords

• Schedule Comparison Frequency Analysis
• frequency comparison
• schedule comparison
• weekly comparison

Variables and Filters

• Airline IATA Code — airline whose schedule you want to compare (e.g. KM, UA, EK)
• Departure Station — IATA code of the origin airport (e.g. MLA, EWR)
• Date Range — start and end dates; only flights departing within this range are included
• Exclude Codeshares (optional) — removes codeshare flights to focus on operating carrier frequencies
• Competitor Carriers (optional) — include competitor airlines for benchmarking

Process Overview

1. Identify Datasets — retrieves all available published schedule datasets and selects the two most recent versions unless others are specified
2. Define Scope — user specifies airline, departure station, and date range
3. Prepare Parameters — all parameters are compiled for the comparative frequency tool
4. Execute Comparison — analyses both datasets, calculating weekly frequency differences for each route
5. Generate Results — output includes route-level frequency deltas (e.g. week_1_diff, week_2_diff)
6. Format for Presentation — each week labelled by Monday start date; displayed as table or chart with option to drill into summarised differences

Outputs

Returns structured data showing frequency changes between schedule versions:

• Frequency growth or reduction by market
• Newly added or dropped destinations
• Seasonal or operational adjustments between datasets

Results can be displayed as a markdown table, chart, or CSV export.

Worked Example

The following is an end-to-end example of this analysis for KM at MLA.

Perform a weekly schedule comparison frequency analysis for KM at MLA between datasets ssim_published_2025w45 and ssim_published_2025w46 for Dec 2025 – Jan 2026.

Maestrow performs the comparison including competitors BA, W6, U2, FR, W4, TO, EW. Results:

Carrier	Arrival	Wk 1	Wk 2	Wk 3	Wk 4	Wk 5	Wk 6	Wk 7	Wk 8
KM	FCO	0	0	0	0	0	0	+1	0
KM	LGW	0	0	0	0	0	0	-1	0
KM	LHR	0	0	0	-1	0	0	-1	0
KM	MUC	0	0	0	0	0	+2	+1	0
KM	ORY	0	0	0	0	0	-1	0	0
U2	BHX	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2
U2	BRS	-3	-3	-3	-2	-3	-2	-2	-2
U2	BSL	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-1	0	0
U2	GVA	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-1	-1
U2	LGW	-8	-13	-13	-11	-13	-4	-4	-4
U2	LPL	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2
U2	MAN	-5	-6	-6	-6	-6	-3	-3	-3
U2	SEN	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2	-2
W6	BEG	+4	+5	+6	+6	+6	+6	+3	+3
W6	BUD	+4	+4	+4	+4	+4	+4	+3	+3
W6	KTW	+6	+6	+7	+7	+7	+7	+5	+5
W6	SKP	+3	+3	+3	+3	+3	+3	+2	+2
W6	WAW	+7	+7	+7	+7	+7	+7	+7	+7
W6	WMI	0	0	+6	+6	+6	+6	+4	+4

Display the differences for each carrier, arrival station, and week reported.

How do changes by each carrier impact KM?

KM observations

• FCO: +1 in Week 7
• LGW: -1 in Week 7
• LHR: -1 in Week 4 and Week 7
• MUC: +2 in Week 6, +1 in Week 7
• ORY: -1 in Week 6

EasyJet (U2)

Consistent, often significant decreases across UK destinations (BHX, BRS, LGW, LPL, MAN, SEN) and Swiss destinations (BSL, GVA). LGW shows reductions ranging from -4 to -13 across weeks.

Wizz Air (W6)

Consistent increases across all reported routes from MLA, primarily to Eastern European destinations (BEG, BUD, KTW, SKP, WAW, WMI). Increases range from +2 to +7 weekly frequencies.

Potential impact on KM

• MLA-LGW — both KM and U2 are reducing frequencies, suggesting a general softening of demand or strategic adjustment on this route
• Increased competition from Wizz Air — W6's aggressive expansion from MLA increases overall capacity and may put downward pressure on fares
• Reduced competition from EasyJet — U2's widespread reductions, particularly to the UK, may create capacity gaps that KM could address

Do these changes create opportunities for KM?

EasyJet's reductions to UK destinations present the most direct opportunity for KM. If underlying demand remains, KM could consider:

• Increasing frequencies on existing UK routes (e.g. LHR, LGW)
• Exploring routes to UK cities where EasyJet has significantly reduced service
• Positioning to attract passengers looking for alternative carriers

Wizz Air's expansion into Eastern European markets could also indirectly benefit KM by increasing overall passenger activity at MLA, generating potential connecting traffic onto KM-operated routes.

A full opportunity assessment would require analysis of market share, passenger flows, and pricing to quantify the impact.