OK, I know that you have heard me rant on and on about making PHL a rolling hub versus a banking hub. In my mind this is just so crystal clear that it would be an all around plus for the company. Is there anyone out there that can give me valid reasons why it wouldn't work?
Here is my take on how things could work.
In the coming months we will begin to receive approx 5 RJ/SJ aircraft a month thru the combination of deliveries to various express carriers and MDA. If we were able to curtail the retirement of some of our prop planes for just 2-4 months we would be able to add 10-20 airplanes to the active fleet. If each plane flew on average 8-10 flights a day, that gives us the ability to add anywhere from 80 to 200 flights a day to the schedule.
Markets such as PHL-ALB, SYR, ROC, BUF, ORF, GSO, RIC, YYZ, PWM and IND could see a mixture of service between mainline and express. Markets that may have 4-5 mainline flights a day could boost service to 6-8 flights a day and time them every 2-3 hours.
Markets such as PHL-ORD, BOS, ATL, MCO, TPA, FLL, DFW, IAH, MSP and LGA (the more popular business and leisure destinations) could see a combination of service between mainline and express but have service every hour to every 90 minutes.
Couple the additional flight frequencies with the right fare structure and you could create a boom in demand. I don't buy into this theory that the system is plagued with over capacity issues. What the system is plagued with is value conscious consumers that refuse to pay extordinairily high fares for transportation that they may be able to get with a LCC. Why do you think all of these airports and cities are knocking down WN's door? How many cities or airports are vying for our service besides caribbean islands?
Now for the operation fo the rolling hub. Every negative aspect of the PHL operation would come to a dramatic hault if we would roll the PHL hub. ATC delays, ramp congestion, long taxi lines, low aircraft utilization rates, crew productivity breaks could all be improved with a rolling hub. In a typical PHL bank, let's say that there are 60 aircraft (mainline and express) in a bank. If you are the first airplane to arrive, you have to wait for all 60 airplanes to arrive, plus 30 minutes for minimum connecting time until you leave. If the arrival rate is 50 planes an hour, that first airplane is going to be sitting on the ground in PHL for 90+ minutes before it leaves. How is that efficient? Then when the departures start to leave, they depart the gates in clumps of 10+ airplanes every 5 minutes. Now we have created a long conga line for the end of the runway, and the next bank is starting to arrive. Add to that the staffing you have to have for 60 arrivals and departures. That is gate agents, ramp agents, mechanics, utility, crews, etc.
With the rolling banks you stop the peaks and valleys for arrivals and departures. You make the flow in and out of the hub continuous. First airplane arrives, has a 35-40 minute ground time and it is off the gate and back in the air. Since PHL has such a high O&D market, this rolling hub concept should work. With service to most destinations every 1-3 hours you would still be abel to connect a large volume of traffic in PHL and do it more effectively. Your employee utilization rates would skyrocket. If I were a gate agent or ramp agent in PHL and I had a flight on my gate every hour versus 1 every two hours, I am doing twice the work at the same level of pay. Imagine seeing a plane pull into the gate and watching ground crews swarm all over it and turn it back out in 35 minutes. Very similar to the way WN operates. A plane pulls in, everyone not doing something attacks the airplane. Whent he next one pulls in, they move to it, leaving a skeleton crew behind to finish the job. Crews would be more productive due to the reduced ground times. Even if the crew had to change airplanes, the wouldn't be connecting from one bank of flights to the next, so you would hopefully eliminate the 3 hour productivity breaks.
If we reduce the peaks and valleys of the hub and create a more even flow to the operation and place less stress on ATC. As flights depart the gate we no longer have the long lines for the departure end of the runway, so we could adjust block times and reduce the amount of fuel we needlessly burn sitting in line waiting our turn to depart. The same can be said for inbound holding for PHL if we reduce the arrival peaks.
In my eyes this concept is a win-win for everyone. We increase employee productivity, reduce ATC, reduce fuel costs, lower block times, increase aircraft utilization and hopefully decrease costs to that competitive cost structure we hear so much about! If you couple this initiative with a revamped fare structure that would spur demand I can't see why it wouldn't work.
Throw in the ability to keep a spare mainline jet and a spare express jet with OPR crews and we have a real winner. This is similar to what they had on Shuttle prior to 9/11. You have a ready crew and airplane sitting there and if a flight is running late upline for any reason, you could utilize the crew and airplane to pick off the line of flying. This will help to improve schedule reliability while giving you options to deal with flight irregularities.
Can anyone give me valid reasons why a rolling hub won't work in PHL? Growing, not shrinking the airline is what is going to help us get our cost structure down. Without a growth plan we will continue to widdle away to nothing.
Here is my take on how things could work.
In the coming months we will begin to receive approx 5 RJ/SJ aircraft a month thru the combination of deliveries to various express carriers and MDA. If we were able to curtail the retirement of some of our prop planes for just 2-4 months we would be able to add 10-20 airplanes to the active fleet. If each plane flew on average 8-10 flights a day, that gives us the ability to add anywhere from 80 to 200 flights a day to the schedule.
Markets such as PHL-ALB, SYR, ROC, BUF, ORF, GSO, RIC, YYZ, PWM and IND could see a mixture of service between mainline and express. Markets that may have 4-5 mainline flights a day could boost service to 6-8 flights a day and time them every 2-3 hours.
Markets such as PHL-ORD, BOS, ATL, MCO, TPA, FLL, DFW, IAH, MSP and LGA (the more popular business and leisure destinations) could see a combination of service between mainline and express but have service every hour to every 90 minutes.
Couple the additional flight frequencies with the right fare structure and you could create a boom in demand. I don't buy into this theory that the system is plagued with over capacity issues. What the system is plagued with is value conscious consumers that refuse to pay extordinairily high fares for transportation that they may be able to get with a LCC. Why do you think all of these airports and cities are knocking down WN's door? How many cities or airports are vying for our service besides caribbean islands?
Now for the operation fo the rolling hub. Every negative aspect of the PHL operation would come to a dramatic hault if we would roll the PHL hub. ATC delays, ramp congestion, long taxi lines, low aircraft utilization rates, crew productivity breaks could all be improved with a rolling hub. In a typical PHL bank, let's say that there are 60 aircraft (mainline and express) in a bank. If you are the first airplane to arrive, you have to wait for all 60 airplanes to arrive, plus 30 minutes for minimum connecting time until you leave. If the arrival rate is 50 planes an hour, that first airplane is going to be sitting on the ground in PHL for 90+ minutes before it leaves. How is that efficient? Then when the departures start to leave, they depart the gates in clumps of 10+ airplanes every 5 minutes. Now we have created a long conga line for the end of the runway, and the next bank is starting to arrive. Add to that the staffing you have to have for 60 arrivals and departures. That is gate agents, ramp agents, mechanics, utility, crews, etc.
With the rolling banks you stop the peaks and valleys for arrivals and departures. You make the flow in and out of the hub continuous. First airplane arrives, has a 35-40 minute ground time and it is off the gate and back in the air. Since PHL has such a high O&D market, this rolling hub concept should work. With service to most destinations every 1-3 hours you would still be abel to connect a large volume of traffic in PHL and do it more effectively. Your employee utilization rates would skyrocket. If I were a gate agent or ramp agent in PHL and I had a flight on my gate every hour versus 1 every two hours, I am doing twice the work at the same level of pay. Imagine seeing a plane pull into the gate and watching ground crews swarm all over it and turn it back out in 35 minutes. Very similar to the way WN operates. A plane pulls in, everyone not doing something attacks the airplane. Whent he next one pulls in, they move to it, leaving a skeleton crew behind to finish the job. Crews would be more productive due to the reduced ground times. Even if the crew had to change airplanes, the wouldn't be connecting from one bank of flights to the next, so you would hopefully eliminate the 3 hour productivity breaks.
If we reduce the peaks and valleys of the hub and create a more even flow to the operation and place less stress on ATC. As flights depart the gate we no longer have the long lines for the departure end of the runway, so we could adjust block times and reduce the amount of fuel we needlessly burn sitting in line waiting our turn to depart. The same can be said for inbound holding for PHL if we reduce the arrival peaks.
In my eyes this concept is a win-win for everyone. We increase employee productivity, reduce ATC, reduce fuel costs, lower block times, increase aircraft utilization and hopefully decrease costs to that competitive cost structure we hear so much about! If you couple this initiative with a revamped fare structure that would spur demand I can't see why it wouldn't work.
Throw in the ability to keep a spare mainline jet and a spare express jet with OPR crews and we have a real winner. This is similar to what they had on Shuttle prior to 9/11. You have a ready crew and airplane sitting there and if a flight is running late upline for any reason, you could utilize the crew and airplane to pick off the line of flying. This will help to improve schedule reliability while giving you options to deal with flight irregularities.
Can anyone give me valid reasons why a rolling hub won't work in PHL? Growing, not shrinking the airline is what is going to help us get our cost structure down. Without a growth plan we will continue to widdle away to nothing.
