Methodology
We use what we call a Structural Impact framework. Every story we publish is evaluated against three questions before it runs. If a story can't answer all three, we don't publish it.
We publish less than aviation news aggregators do. We don't rewrite press releases. We don't chase breaking news for the click. We publish when we have something to add — a constraint to explain, a consequence to map out, a contradiction to surface.
What operational or regulatory constraint is driving this?
Most aviation news has a structural cause that the headline doesn't name: an engine parts shortage, a crew duty-time rule, an airport slot constraint, a maintenance bottleneck, a financing covenant. We start every story by identifying the constraint — the thing that made this news inevitable, not just the thing that made it newsworthy.
When we can't name a real constraint, the story usually isn't one. Press releases without a constraint behind them get set aside.
Who benefits and who absorbs the cost — including passengers?
Every aviation decision distributes cost and benefit. A new route benefits some passengers and forces others to rebook. A pilot contract raises the floor on labor cost and reshapes which routes are economic. A maintenance directive grounds aircraft for some carriers and barely touches others.
We name those parties explicitly. If a story can only describe what happened without explaining who paid for it, it isn't finished.
What does this signal about the next 6–12 months?
Aviation news is rarely a single event — it's a leading indicator for fleet decisions, route economics, labor pressure, or regulatory tightening over the next several quarters. We connect the single story to the trajectory it implies, with the evidence that backs the connection.
We avoid speculation that isn't grounded in operational mechanics — but we won't stop at "this happened." The reader came for the "and so what."
Out of scope
We don't publish standard travel tips, seat reviews, lounge ratings, or destination guides. Those are well covered by consumer travel sites that do them better than we would.
We make exceptions when something genuinely interesting is going on — a new business class cabin that signals a strategic shift, a lounge closure that hints at a hub realignment, a destination opening up because of a route economics change. If we cover the consumer side of aviation, it's because there's a structural story underneath worth telling.
Related policies
- Editorial Standards — sourcing, fact-checking, and bylines.
- Corrections — how errors are reported and fixed.