Business Aviation Saves Average 127 Minutes Per Trip Versus Commercial Options, EBAA Data Shows

The European Business Aviation Association (EBAA) reports that business aviation travellers gain an average of 127 minutes compared with the fastest available commercial option. The association also calculates that business aviation serves more than 1,500 European airports, approximately 1,000 of which have no scheduled airline connections.

Luca Zinnemann, who leads Private & Commercial Jets DACH at Chapman Freeborn, said client priorities are shifting: many customers now view charter flights primarily as a tool for managing time and logistics instead of as a status symbol. He listed common objectives including avoiding overnight stays, using smaller airports closer to the final destination, fitting multiple appointments into a single day, and securing fixed departure and arrival times.

Zinnemann cited a case in which six travellers visited three regional locations in Central and Eastern Europe over two days, keeping a chartered aircraft with the group to remove the need for connecting flights, lengthy transfers and an additional hotel night. He noted that access to regional airfields is particularly valuable for teams travelling to factories, construction sites or towns outside major transport corridors, and that the financial value of reclaimed hours increases when client meetings, contract negotiations or firm project deadlines are involved.

This case illustrates a recurring split in how charter competes with scheduled airlines: on heavily served routes, commercial carriers remain competitive on time and cost, while charter's advantage grows on multi-stop itineraries, remote destinations and trips bound by fixed deadlines. The EBAA figures on airport reach underline why this split exists — with roughly 1,000 of the 1,500-plus airports served lacking scheduled flights at all, charter is often the only direct option, not merely the faster one.

The segment's economics depend on how a buyer frames the trip. Zinnemann's account describes charter being justified as a business decision when a missed appointment could cost a client relationship, delay a project or force a team to travel twice, moving the calculation away from ticket price and toward the cost of lost time. That framing is what determines whether a given itinerary is treated as a discretionary expense or a logistics necessity.

What remains to be seen is whether operators and brokers extend this time-value argument into fixed pricing or guarantees tied to schedule control, since the case for charter here rests on multi-stop and regional-airport scenarios rather than single-city trips where commercial options already compete well.