New F/a Satellite Bases

Ed,
In determining the advantage of making a station a satellite base, you have to ask the question, where is the station located and what is the financial advantage to the company?

1. A co-terminal is a station within a major metropolitan area. EWR is part of the NYC metro area. SAN is not part of the LAX metro area.
2. If the station is a co-terminal like EWR, the company has much greater flexibility in crew scheduling than if it is a satellite. If the company needs to start a sequence at LGA and end it at EWR or JFK, they can do that. Granted it's a pain in the kiester for the crew, but it can be done. At a satellite base, all trips must begin and end at that station and usually on the same day(or in the case of a night flight, the next morning). Satellite trips are strictly turns--though they may have 2-4 legs--they do not have overnight layovers.\
3. There needs to be a sufficient number of f/as actually living in the satellite base area. There may be a number of f/as who prefer EWR for reserve assignments, but I bet that some percentage of those are also f/as who commute to NYC. F/As in a satelllite base can not commute into the base.
4. The advantage to having a satellite at SAN is that there are a number of flights into and out of SAN which can be "reconfigured" to appear to originate and terminate at SAN. In other words, before the satellite base you might have a sequence that included a DFW-SAN leg on Monday, layover in SAN, and a SAN-DFW leg on Tuesday morning, or it could have been a DFW-SAN-DFW turn. Instead it is "reconfigured" to a SAN-DFW-SAN daily turn. No f/as run the risk of not getting on their commuter flight, no reserves have to sit standby at SAN, and there are no hotel layover costs for the company. If a f/a is sick or can not make the flight for some reason, the f/as in the satellite base are responsible for seeing that someone covers the flight. Crew scheduling does not get involved.
5. EWR is too important an O&D station for AA to limit trips from there to strictly turns. For all practical purposes you wouldn't be able to do much of anything except turns to DFW, ORD, or MIA.
 
Flyboy4u said:
I dont need to look at my last posting because you are there to constantly bring them up. You really do need to grow up and stop harassing those who are merely asking a simple question, and asking for feedback. Instead, you would rather ridicule me about asking stupid questions.

Moderator: Please remind FA Mikey that these forums are here for information rather than a place to vent ones personal dislikes for individuals who post.

Mikey

All I was asking is why it couldnt be done?...It seems that if AA wanted to make EWR a satellite base or even a regular base it could be done. Instead I get harsh responses from you. Are you having trouble sleeping, or maybe flying too much?
What Unity?
[post="191106"][/post]​
Please dont tell, and please dont cry. You dont ask a simple question you post mis-information and out right lies. I either correct you or as in the questions am asking you to post facts to your Arguements. You cant so you disappear or cry moderator.
 
Flyboy4u said:
OOOOHHH

Are we a little testy tonight or did I hit a nerve Mikey!

What Unity?
[post="191486"][/post]​
Try re-reading your own post. If you have a min we would all love for you to fill in the facts on the absurd statments of the past. You know the one I provided a link to. Seems you are big on talk and lacking in fact. You could prove us all wrong, but we all know that wont happen, will it?
 
F/AMikey

Why do you continue to bring up old posts? Do you really not have a life. Again grow up and move on.


What Unity?
 
Funny how Flyboy, with all of his vituperative sputterings, tells others to grow up.

Seems to me that he may have told on himself, and got caught in the lie. Has anybody given any thought to the fact that, perhaps, Flyboy, is not even really a working AA flight attendant? How can he not know that EWR trips appear on the NY bidsheet?

Unfortunately, the nastiness displayed in his posts on this thread are representative of the venom and misinformation evident throughout all of his posts.

Kudos to FA Mikey for maintining his professionalism and dignity in dealing with this individual who resorts to insults and name-calling when others catch him in his lies.
 
To be fair, asking the question, "Why can't EWR be a satellite?" does not automatically indicate an ignorance of the fact that EWR is a co-terminal to LGA and JFK. Flyboy never said that he didn't know that EWR is a co-terminal except sarcastically.

If a station is a co-terminal, it doesn't mean that it must be a co-terminal forever and ever, Amen. The fact that as long as EWR is that close to NYC it will always be a co-terminal notwithstanding. :lol:
 
jimntx said:
To be fair, asking the question, "Why can't EWR be a satellite?" does not automatically indicate an ignorance of the fact that EWR is a co-terminal to LGA and JFK. Flyboy never said that he didn't know that EWR is a co-terminal except sarcastically.

If a station is a co-terminal, it doesn't mean that it must be a co-terminal forever and ever, Amen. The fact that as long as EWR is that close to NYC it will always be a co-terminal notwithstanding. :lol:
[post="191999"][/post]​
Its redundant, They All ready build lines out of EWR, there is no point of making it a satellite. They can build as few or as many lines from EWR.
 
Flyboy4u said:
F/AMikey

Why do you continue to bring up old posts? Do you really not have a life. Again grow up and move on.
What Unity?
[post="191924"][/post]​

I am just asking for justification of statements of your past posts. So Can you either answer and justify your posts, or tell us everything you posted was made up and unfounded.
 
jimntx said:
To be fair, asking the question, "Why can't EWR be a satellite?" does not automatically indicate an ignorance of the fact that EWR is a co-terminal to LGA and JFK. Flyboy never said that he didn't know that EWR is a co-terminal except sarcastically.

If a station is a co-terminal, it doesn't mean that it must be a co-terminal forever and ever, Amen. The fact that as long as EWR is that close to NYC it will always be a co-terminal notwithstanding. :lol:
[post="191999"][/post]​


Jimntx,

Why would the company then make EWR a satellite when it already is a coterminal?

If SAN was already a coterminal of LAX, they would not have had to make it a satellite. Seems to me that making EWR a satellite would make it even less favorable for flight attendants as the company would no longer have to provide coterminal transportation. It would be your own problem getting there.

Flyboy just doesn't get it and he never will.
 
Did I say that say that EWR should/could/would be made a satellite? No.

Did Flyboy indicate in any way that he did not know that EWR is a co-terminal? No.
All he was asking was a hypothetical question; i.e., Why couldn't EWR be a satellite?

Of course, if EWR were a satellite, crews based there would have to provide their own transportation. However, you missed the point with your comment about co-terminal transportation. If EWR were a satellite, there would be no need for co-terminal transportation because all trips would begin and end at EWR.

Let's just drop the subject. Some people will always read something not there into anything posted by certain other people. And, it's all totally off the subject of the original thread topic.

Geez.... :blink:
 
Thank you Jim.. At least somebody understands the hypothetical questions I was posting. I can tell you there are a lot of F/A's who would rather only fly out of EWR and not JFK/LGA. Also, vice-versa. Instead, it seems that those who want EWR always endup at JFK and LGA ( Yes this is a reserve situation ). However, if EWR were a satellite or a seperate base all together then co-terminal transportation wouldn't be needed ( perhaps this would be a cost saver to the company ). Of course this is all washed up and under the bridge.


What Unity?