Scientific Reports

Table 6 Size of RCEP international airline networks of different carriers from 2010 to 2019 (top 20).

From: Layout analysis of the RCEP international airline network based on hub identification using improved contribution matrix

Rank	2010			2013			2016			2019
Rank	Carrier	Routes number	Stopover routes proportion (%)	Carrier	Routes number	Stopover routes proportion (%)	Carrier	Routes number	Stopover routes proportion (%)	Carrier	Routes number	Stopover routes proportion (%)
1	CZ	160	17.50	MU	221	20.81	MU	326	23.31	MU	375	13.87
2	MU	154	16.88	KE	160	0.00	CZ	254	15.75	CA	310	9.03
3	KE	146	0.00	CZ	141	18.44	KE	148	0.00	CZ	294	6.12
4	OZ	124	0.00	OZ	138	0.00	OZ	144	0.00	SQ	229	7.86
5	CA	112	30.36	CA	103	24.27	CA	142	14.08	NH	212	3.77
6	AK	92	0.00	AK	100	0.00	AK	128	0.00	JL	206	5.83
7	MH	91	18.68	VN	96	12.50	VN	122	4.92	OZ	190	0.00
8	TG	76	13.16	JQ	80	30.00	9C	119	10.92	QF	179	4.47
9	VN	76	18.42	MH	80	5.00	MI	98	18.37	KE	168	0.00
10	CX	71	28.17	MI	76	13.16	MF	92	32.61	VN	164	3.66
11	JQ	62	32.26	TG	74	5.41	KA	81	0.00	MF	161	14.91
12	MI	62	16.13	CX	69	26.09	TG	80	7.50	VA	159	3.77
13	JL	56	3.57	KA	66	0.00	NH	74	0.00	CX	148	6.76
14	NH	56	0.00	NH	64	0.00	FD	72	0.00	MI	141	9.93
15	NZ	52	1.92	5 J	62	0.00	5 J	70	0.00	EY	134	1.49
16	QF	52	11.54	JL	52	0.00	PR	70	5.71	AK	132	0.00
17	SQ	50	0.00	SQ	52	0.00	MH	68	2.94	9C	129	18.60
18	GA	48	16.67	QF	48	8.33	JQ	66	12.12	GA	124	3.23
19	PR	45	13.33	GA	46	8.70	CX	64	21.88	HU	120	6.67
20	KA	42	0.00	NX	46	0.00	TR	62	0.00	TG	117	3.42

Back to article page

Search

Advanced search

Quick links