airportman said:
Yes and those flights were FULL! Full and on noisy,crappy,no beverage service J41's.
New Shuttle Competition
- Thread starter Light Years
- Start date
Yes and those flights were FULL! Full and on noisy,crappy,no beverage service J41's.
Hopefully Doug Parker and Scott Kirby will establish a "FOCUS GROUP" of Shuttle Personnel.....(Pilots/Agents & F/A's) from the three Shuttle cities/crew bases with emphasis of restoring the Shuttle to being the Premiere Product it was and CAN be! For the US/West folks the Eastern Shuttle is something as a crewmember you either Love it or Hate it (personnally I would do it FOREVER- short & sweet, creme de la creme of the travelling sector-lots of good lookers and MINIMUM DRAMA!). I agree with the idea of rebranding the a/c with the "SHUTTLE" logo- it is different and needs to be marketed as such (we have a lot of dedicated Shuttle veterans< be they Eastern/Trump/US> let them restore the Glory of the Shuttle! And speaking of SHUTTLEs why not restore the SFO-LAX routing or encompass a Shuttle program in the West with a LAX/PHX/LAS/SFO network........just whatever YOU do , DO IT WELL!
LD3
Veteran
The LCC's cry about oversaturation, there must be capacity reduction, bla bla bla that is the only way this industry will survive!! All of a sudden Blue is ramping up for 50 something flts a week between BOS/JFK, seems to me the LCC's are also part of the industry problem...
And eliminate the F/C cabin on the Shuttle segments.........doubtful ANYONE pays for it (and if YOU do, I'd like to see the fare/receipt). Many of the Shuttle pax easily make incomes in the six figures and have no problem sitting in Coach. Back in the day when we had a/c in Shuttle (ALL Coach configurations) ALL PASSENGERS were treated the same and the product was CONSISTENT across the board. I clearly understand WHY USAirways reconfigured the cabins and the necessity to rotate the fleet (due to excessive cycles) but what it did in the process was have their "Top Talent" (and I say this in jest) further demonstrate THEIR clueless nature in managing the operation. And integrating the Shuttle flying within regular pairingswas/is ridiculous......probably Crellin & Company screwing up one more facet of the airline.
Several points here......
1) By making the shuttle fleet type all coach class, you created a sub-fleet type that made changing aircraft difficult and confusing. By standardizing the seat configuration, we improved reliability as there are more options available when there are unexpected ETR's and ATC delays.
2) Having a "First Class" product gave us a marketing tool to seal very lucrative contracts by offering F seating for a Y price.
3) It takes 13-14 airplanes to operate the Shuttle markets.
4) Seat width difference between the A319 and the E170 is one inch, definitly not something that someone is going to truely recognize.
5) Looking at todays Shuttle flying, if we were to use the E170 to fly all of the 94 weekday Shuttle flghts, 54 of them would have been oversold (and that does not take into account the walk up ticket sales). Some of those oversales would be in excess of 40 customers. So do we give up market share to operate the Shuttle with a smaller airplane?
Yes there are certain off peak times of the day that the E170 would be the perfect airplane to fly the Shuttle route. But to replace mainline flying in the lucrative shuttle market with the E170 would not be a wise move.
LightYears......are you sure you are not a salesperson for Embraer? Your obsession with this airplane is on the verge or unhealthy!
1) By making the shuttle fleet type all coach class, you created a sub-fleet type that made changing aircraft difficult and confusing. By standardizing the seat configuration, we improved reliability as there are more options available when there are unexpected ETR's and ATC delays.
2) Having a "First Class" product gave us a marketing tool to seal very lucrative contracts by offering F seating for a Y price.
3) It takes 13-14 airplanes to operate the Shuttle markets.
4) Seat width difference between the A319 and the E170 is one inch, definitly not something that someone is going to truely recognize.
5) Looking at todays Shuttle flying, if we were to use the E170 to fly all of the 94 weekday Shuttle flghts, 54 of them would have been oversold (and that does not take into account the walk up ticket sales). Some of those oversales would be in excess of 40 customers. So do we give up market share to operate the Shuttle with a smaller airplane?
Yes there are certain off peak times of the day that the E170 would be the perfect airplane to fly the Shuttle route. But to replace mainline flying in the lucrative shuttle market with the E170 would not be a wise move.
LightYears......are you sure you are not a salesperson for Embraer? Your obsession with this airplane is on the verge or unhealthy!
- Thread Starter
- #37
LOL... you never know.
The company did have the 170 scheduled to fly the Shuttle a few months ago, it was even in MidAtlantic pairings. ALPA grieved it, so they never flew them but the 170 crews were paid for the scheduled flights.
The company did have the 170 scheduled to fly the Shuttle a few months ago, it was even in MidAtlantic pairings. ALPA grieved it, so they never flew them but the 170 crews were paid for the scheduled flights.
Similar threads
