You digressed right off of the topic. But at least we got to hear the Boeing vs. Airbus arguments again...and again....
Airline Showdown at the CA Corral
- Thread starter yeogeo
- Start date
JB can't take on SWA. Yet.
SWA's pockets are far deeper, SWA's D/E is far better.
Will Live TV be a difference maker? IMO JB should have eaten their TV losses and gone to personal DVDs. Now they have to make TV happen and no one will help them out by buying into the program.
SWA's pockets are far deeper, SWA's D/E is far better.
Will Live TV be a difference maker? IMO JB should have eaten their TV losses and gone to personal DVDs. Now they have to make TV happen and no one will help them out by buying into the program.
KCFlyer
Veteran
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/15/2002 10:24:05 AM Farley wrote:
[P]Fords are reliable? Is that the moral of the story? You guys are losers.[BR][/P]
[P]---------------[/P]
[P]No Farley, it goes back to the aquisition cost versus the operational costs. I own a couple of newer Fords and they aren't too bad at all. But 1995 was a very, very bad year. While the upfront costs looked very appealing, the long term costs were not. I believe this is what AOG is saying about Airbus versus Boeing. And swinging this back towards the topic, the article that was referenced seemed to indicate that JetBlue had an advantage since their planes were new and could be flown often. My point was that Southwest has some 20 year old Boeings that are not hangar queens, and are in service pretty much every day. [BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/15/2002 10:24:05 AM Farley wrote:
[P]Fords are reliable? Is that the moral of the story? You guys are losers.[BR][/P]
[P]---------------[/P]
[P]No Farley, it goes back to the aquisition cost versus the operational costs. I own a couple of newer Fords and they aren't too bad at all. But 1995 was a very, very bad year. While the upfront costs looked very appealing, the long term costs were not. I believe this is what AOG is saying about Airbus versus Boeing. And swinging this back towards the topic, the article that was referenced seemed to indicate that JetBlue had an advantage since their planes were new and could be flown often. My point was that Southwest has some 20 year old Boeings that are not hangar queens, and are in service pretty much every day. [BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][BR][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
KCFlyer
Veteran
[P]Not many 20 year old 1995 Fords on the road either.[/P]
[P]Interesting that you should mention 1995 Fords busdriver...Certain 1995 Fords (Windstar minivan in particular) had a very, very big problem with blown head gaskets and transmission problems. That was the intro year for the Windstar, and as a result, the aquisition costs were pretty low. But the blown engines and tranny's meant that their operational costs was very high. You said on another thread that my other car must be a 10 year old Ford pickup...wrong....it was a 1995 Ford Windstar. [/P]
[P]Interesting that you should mention 1995 Fords busdriver...Certain 1995 Fords (Windstar minivan in particular) had a very, very big problem with blown head gaskets and transmission problems. That was the intro year for the Windstar, and as a result, the aquisition costs were pretty low. But the blown engines and tranny's meant that their operational costs was very high. You said on another thread that my other car must be a 10 year old Ford pickup...wrong....it was a 1995 Ford Windstar. [/P]
Farley, just to be sure, are we losers because we understand that the upfront cost of buying a durable product (like aircraft or Fords) doesn't always reflect what the true cost of ownership will be over the long run, or is it just because you fly the A320 and know better?
KCFlyer
Veteran
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/15/2002 2:34:54 PM Farley wrote:
[P]Actually, I was only referring to the drift the conversation took away from the subject. You can hardly ever have a discussion on the boards without rehashing the same old tired arguments, or changing the subject entirely. All we ever see posted on our threads is negative. It gets old. Sorry.[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]It wasn't my intent to be negative...merely to point out an absurdity in an article (of which many exist).[/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/15/2002 2:34:54 PM Farley wrote:
[P]Actually, I was only referring to the drift the conversation took away from the subject. You can hardly ever have a discussion on the boards without rehashing the same old tired arguments, or changing the subject entirely. All we ever see posted on our threads is negative. It gets old. Sorry.[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]It wasn't my intent to be negative...merely to point out an absurdity in an article (of which many exist).[/P]
Actually, I was only referring to the drift the conversation took away from the subject. You can hardly ever have a discussion on the boards without rehashing the same old tired arguments, or changing the subject entirely. All we ever see posted on our threads is negative. It gets old. Sorry.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/15/2002 2:34:54 PM Farley wrote:
You can hardly ever have a discussion on the boards without rehashing the same old tired arguments, or changing the subject entirely.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Uh, welcome to the internet...
This same Boeing is better than Airbus argument has been happening since at least 1993 or 1994, except it was taking place in rec.travel.air and sci.aeronautics.airliners.
----------------
On 10/15/2002 2:34:54 PM Farley wrote:
You can hardly ever have a discussion on the boards without rehashing the same old tired arguments, or changing the subject entirely.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Uh, welcome to the internet...
This same Boeing is better than Airbus argument has been happening since at least 1993 or 1994, except it was taking place in rec.travel.air and sci.aeronautics.airliners.
Interesting, the most active B6 thread I have ever seen here, and it is because US people are involved.
One thing that will be interesting to note in the longer term (next five years or so), is how JetBlue will be able to properly support their aircraft without the network behind it that the majors have. AOG-N-IT correctly pointed out the issue regarding Non-Procurable parts. While the majors that fly the Airbus product (UA, NW, US) have shops in house, I do not believe B6 does. If we really need that hinge that is Non-Procurable, or U Channel which is only in Hamburg, the majors have the ability to get a repair drawing to the sheetmetal shop and go to work. At the same time, the low cost carrier without shop support in house has pulled up the part number for wheel chocks and awaits the part from across the pond. This flies in the face of the low cost carriers model of high aircraft utilization. Parking an aircraft for two or three days is much more painful to JetBlue than it is ever to a major. As AOG-N-IT has noted, the lack of corrosion protection is a huge issue here, and it will be seen in the near term at B6, and only get worse, not better.
As for the CrownVic, the explosions noted remind me of the side saddle fuel tanks on the Chevy Silverado pickups, where Dateline added expolisve materials to Get the image to look better on film. It is the media chasing something which does not exist.
BTW AOG-N-IT, if JetBlue adds proper stock out West, that would be a first, considering how many times they call US for parts in their hometown.
One thing that will be interesting to note in the longer term (next five years or so), is how JetBlue will be able to properly support their aircraft without the network behind it that the majors have. AOG-N-IT correctly pointed out the issue regarding Non-Procurable parts. While the majors that fly the Airbus product (UA, NW, US) have shops in house, I do not believe B6 does. If we really need that hinge that is Non-Procurable, or U Channel which is only in Hamburg, the majors have the ability to get a repair drawing to the sheetmetal shop and go to work. At the same time, the low cost carrier without shop support in house has pulled up the part number for wheel chocks and awaits the part from across the pond. This flies in the face of the low cost carriers model of high aircraft utilization. Parking an aircraft for two or three days is much more painful to JetBlue than it is ever to a major. As AOG-N-IT has noted, the lack of corrosion protection is a huge issue here, and it will be seen in the near term at B6, and only get worse, not better.
As for the CrownVic, the explosions noted remind me of the side saddle fuel tanks on the Chevy Silverado pickups, where Dateline added expolisve materials to Get the image to look better on film. It is the media chasing something which does not exist.
BTW AOG-N-IT, if JetBlue adds proper stock out West, that would be a first, considering how many times they call US for parts in their hometown.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/15/2002 8:24:29 PM N628AU wrote:
Interesting, the most active B6 thread I have ever seen here, and it is because US people are involved.
Keen Eye, Amigo!! But someone had to bring the JBLU crowd into a hard banking reality check!!
BTW AOG-N-IT, if JetBlue adds proper stock out West, that would be a first, considering how many times they call US for parts in their hometown.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Very True...but the part that really amazes me is this. They are burning up the phone lines calling us for this , that and the other thing in thier own backyard (JFK)..but if we should happen to call them? The excuses range from We Don't Recognize that part number...all the way to I'm sorry, the computer shows stock..but the shelf is empty! We do tend to remember those that help..and those that are just parasitic. As the old saying goes..What comes around , Goes around!! These folks can boast about thier over-inflated stock prices till hell and half of Georgia freezes solid...but the reality of business...and Airbus support is going to make believers out of these folks in due time. Then another old saying comes to mind...I Told You So!!
----------------
On 10/15/2002 8:24:29 PM N628AU wrote:
Interesting, the most active B6 thread I have ever seen here, and it is because US people are involved.
Keen Eye, Amigo!! But someone had to bring the JBLU crowd into a hard banking reality check!!
BTW AOG-N-IT, if JetBlue adds proper stock out West, that would be a first, considering how many times they call US for parts in their hometown.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Very True...but the part that really amazes me is this. They are burning up the phone lines calling us for this , that and the other thing in thier own backyard (JFK)..but if we should happen to call them? The excuses range from We Don't Recognize that part number...all the way to I'm sorry, the computer shows stock..but the shelf is empty! We do tend to remember those that help..and those that are just parasitic. As the old saying goes..What comes around , Goes around!! These folks can boast about thier over-inflated stock prices till hell and half of Georgia freezes solid...but the reality of business...and Airbus support is going to make believers out of these folks in due time. Then another old saying comes to mind...I Told You So!!
Very True...but the part that really amazes me is this. They are burning up the phone lines calling us for this , that and the other thing in thier own backyard (JFK)..but if we should happen to call them? The excuses range from We Don't Recognize that part number...all the way to I'm sorry, the computer shows stock..but the shelf is empty! We do tend to remember those that help..and those that are just parasitic. As the old saying goes..What comes around , Goes around!!
Interesting information. If you have details of when/where/how this has happened at B6, you ought to let me know, either on this forum or via email. I'm sure Dave Barger would want to hear it as well. There's a sense of do what's right at JetBlue, so I believe an episode of stinginess might warrant attention, if indeed it has happened.
On the other note, I for one am not bragging about anything, except that I'm happy working for this company. That says enough for now.
Interesting information. If you have details of when/where/how this has happened at B6, you ought to let me know, either on this forum or via email. I'm sure Dave Barger would want to hear it as well. There's a sense of do what's right at JetBlue, so I believe an episode of stinginess might warrant attention, if indeed it has happened.
On the other note, I for one am not bragging about anything, except that I'm happy working for this company. That says enough for now.
