Global airlines cut about 2 million seats from May schedules as fuel costs surged after airstrikes on Iran in late February, pushing carriers to cancel flights, trim routes and swap in smaller aircraft.

Available seats for May fell from 132 million to 130 million between mid and late April, while airlines also canceled thousands of flights and shifted to smaller or more fuel-efficient aircraft to conserve fuel, based on Cirium data cited in the report.

Gulf carriers and Turkish Airlines posted the biggest reductions. Lufthansa said it canceled 20,000 flights between May and October because some routes had become uneconomical.

The changes followed a sharp jump in operating costs after the US and Israel launched airstrikes on Iran in late February. Jet fuel prices doubled after those strikes, adding pressure across long-haul networks that rely heavily on fuel-sensitive routes.

That pressure hit at the same time that carriers were also facing weaker demand and higher operating costs. Airlines responded by cutting capacity rather than holding schedules in place and absorbing higher losses.

Cirium data showed the seat reductions spread across global schedules rather than one isolated market. The May total slipped by 2 million seats in a matter of weeks, a measurable retreat in an industry that typically treats published schedules as a signal of expected demand.

Turkish Airlines made the largest reduction in seats over the previous two weeks, according to Cirium. The report also pointed to Gulf carriers as among the biggest cutters as disruption around the Persian Gulf rippled through network planning.

That matters in practical network terms because airports in the Persian Gulf handle up to one-third of travel connections between Europe and Asia. Any sustained disruption in that corridor reaches far beyond the region itself, affecting transfer traffic, aircraft assignment and the economics of long-haul flying.

Airlines did not rely on one remedy. Some cut flights outright. Others kept routes on sale but reduced capacity by assigning smaller aircraft or more fuel-efficient jets, limiting the number of seats without fully abandoning markets.

Those moves can reshape schedules quickly. A carrier that switches aircraft may preserve a route while cutting exposure to fuel costs, while a carrier that cancels flights entirely removes capacity from the market at once.

Lufthansa stood out on cancellations. The airline said it had canceled 20,000 flights between May and October, the highest number of cancellations in recent months, after concluding that some routes no longer made financial sense under current conditions.

That scale offered one of the clearest signs of how airlines are responding to the oil shock. Rather than waiting for seasonal demand to recover or for fuel markets to calm, some carriers moved early to reduce flying they considered uneconomical.

The reduction from 132 million to 130 million seats in May also showed how quickly global schedules can contract when fuel markets swing. Airlines often publish schedules months in advance, but capacity can still move sharply when costs change faster than fares.

Fuel is one of the largest expenses in airline operations, and a sudden doubling in jet fuel prices leaves carriers with limited options. They can try to pass costs to passengers, cut frequencies, shrink aircraft gauge, or exit weaker routes. The May schedules show many chose some combination of those steps.

The Persian Gulf disruption adds another layer because it affects more than point-to-point traffic. Airlines that depend on connecting passengers between Europe and Asia face pressure on both timing and network efficiency when a major transfer region comes under strain.

That helps explain why the largest reductions appeared among Gulf carriers and Turkish Airlines. Both play central roles in connecting long-haul passengers across continents, and both can feel changes in transit flows quickly.

The May pullback also underlines a divide in airline responses. Some carriers concentrated on cancellations. Others tried to preserve network presence with aircraft substitutions, using smaller or more fuel-efficient planes to keep routes operating with less fuel burn.

Each choice carries trade-offs. A cancellation cuts costs more directly but can disrupt passengers and remove revenue opportunities. A smaller aircraft protects market access but leaves fewer seats to sell at a time when overall availability is already tightening.

Reduced supply can feed back into the market. Fewer seats in May mean less slack in booking systems, especially on routes where carriers have already trimmed schedules or downgauged aircraft.

The report said reduced seat availability may affect ticket prices and availability. That is a direct consequence of capacity cuts in a market where airlines are also dealing with higher costs and weaker demand at the same time.

Those twin pressures can produce unusual results. Weak demand would normally push carriers to discount more aggressively, while higher fuel costs argue for tighter schedules and firmer pricing. The May response suggests airlines chose to defend margins by removing capacity first.

Cirium’s data also showed that airlines were not treating the problem as temporary enough to ignore. Thousands of cancellations and widespread aircraft changes amount to an operational response, not a minor schedule clean-up.

The focus on more fuel-efficient aircraft may also outlast the immediate crisis. Once airlines have tested lower-capacity or lower-burn options on certain routes, those choices can shape future planning even if fuel prices ease.

That does not mean every route will disappear. The report described a mix of cancellations, smaller aircraft and route reductions, indicating that carriers are adjusting market by market rather than making one universal cut.

Still, the broad numbers show the industry moved in the same direction. Global airlines cut about 2 million seats from May schedules after jet fuel prices doubled, and the total number of seats fell to 130 million by late April.

Turkish Airlines led the recent reductions in seats. Lufthansa recorded the heaviest cancellations in recent months. Gulf carriers also ranked among the biggest cutters as disruptions in a region central to Europe-Asia travel added strain to already rising operating costs.

By May, the combined effect was visible in schedules worldwide: fewer seats, thousands of canceled flights, more use of smaller aircraft, and a network built around caution as airlines confronted an oil shock that spread from the Persian Gulf into global aviation.