RJ's on Mainline Gates

[BoeingBoy]

I certainly wouldn't bet against you on that, diogenes. Possibly one minor change - more 70 to 100-seaters if we can concurrently get rid of some of the 50-seaters we have too many of.

Jim

 

[tadjr]

if we can concurrently get rid of some of the 50-seaters we have too many of.

Jim

Why get rid of them? There are many markets that could use nonstop flights (the ones with high $ customers) that would pay for a nonstop flight (even if its on an RJ) that currently have to connect. It would be a way to get some of the nonstop routes of the past back and get some that used to be or still are props back to jets. I know we dont want 100s of 50 seaters clogging up the NE again, but there is a lot of the country that could use new service or restarted service where a 50 seater would be a good plane to get the traffic feed started bypassing the hub if the traffic warrants and then build up to the 70-100 seaters over time.
An example would be TPA-ORF. We used to have it during Metrojet, then they started a Sat only flight a year or so ago that was usually good. In the afternoon we have 5 flights between 330 and 7 (2 CLT, 1 DCA, 2 PHL) that combined probably have close to 40-50 people conx to ORF on any given day that I'm sure could handle a nonstop. I'm not sure you'd want to throw a 319 on that route, but a couple of 50 seaters a day would probably be ok, especially since we are limited in the 70-100 seaters now. Take away some of the FL/DL conx in the market even maybe and build it up where eventually mainline could get it back?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Good thought, Tad. The only questions I'd have are 1- would those folks pay enough extra for the nonstop to cover the 50-75% higher CASM of a 50-seat RJ vs a 319/737, and 2- would we be able to sell those seats then available on the CLT, DCA, PHL flights in your example (otherwise those flights could then become unprofitable)?

I'll freely admit that I don't have those answers.

Jim

 

[aquagreen73s]

I'd bet large now that labor costs are permanently lowered at US, you will see the trend away from small jets and towards 100 seaters and 250 seaters.

With some wiggle room that express employees can work mainline metal in 'emergencies.'

One thing that has always interested me is the importance bankers and accountants place on "good will." It's huge. I wonder if our whiz kids have ever considered the loss of good will from a decade of horrendous oursourcing. I'd like to see the true CASM with those losses in good will included...

 

[john john]

I guess it's that executive lingo - when they talk about lowering costs they really mean labor costs. Apparently total costs don't matter......

Jim

Every one has forgot to mention the unreliable factor of the RJ’s and there staff

 

[ItsJustAJob]

Every one has forgot to mention the unreliable factor of the RJ’s and there staff

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but if you could check the statistics, at least for PSA, you will see that the we exceeded all of the goals for on time departure, arrivals, and completion factor (May 2006). We do this on a regular basis.

On the other hand, my only option for getting to work is commuting on Mesa and Air Wisconsin.....so I know where the backlash is coming from.

Please remember that as Express crewmembers, we often have to rely upon "other" airlines to do our ground work, ticketing, and gate boarding. It's unfortunate that we all have to fly under the same "US Airways Express" banner.

 

[diogenes]

There is a mission for RJ's at US. Start new markets, thin but profitable routes, direct flights bypassing hubs, and protecting frequencies.

OTOH, if a market will support 6 B737's, (roughly 780 seats), why run 15 50 seater's thrugh it (750 seats)?

'Cause the 15 RJ's will cost MORE to operate than the 6 737's.

That example is the story of the FAY's, AVL's and OAJ's of the world.

Ask any of those passengers if they prefer today's air service over what was available as little as 5 years ago.

And if you could find an aviation accountant willing to level with you, ask him if total costs of said example are higher now than five years ago.

One more example. Those markets had thriving air cargo service that was on top of the passenger service. A revenue two-fer. That's all gone.

I do not subcribe to notion execs are stupid. Why we had one that graduated Hahvaad! So the only way this makes sense is union-busting. And given what has gone on at steel, the airlines, and now automakers, I think I'm onto something.

 

[ItsJustAJob]

There is a mission for RJ's at US. Start new markets, thin but profitable routes, direct flights bypassing hubs, and protecting frequencies.

As of right now, every flight that we do (PSA) touches a hub. Departing from, or arriving at a hub (to include PIT & DCA). We would love to see some point to point flying. But it hasn't happened in the past, and nothing right now leads us to believe that will change.

 

[Stuka Luva]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but if you could check the statistics, at least for PSA, you will see that the we exceeded all of the goals for on time departure, arrivals, and completion factor (May 2006). We do this on a regular basis.

John john is not interested in facts like this, he's far too preoccupied with finding opportunities to bad mouth Express. Maybe someone jumped him in the parking lot and took his juice money today? Who knows...

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

John john is not interested in facts like this, he's far too preoccupied with finding opportunities to bad mouth Express. Maybe someone jumped him in the parking lot and took his juice money today? Who knows...

Let's give him the benefit of doubt and assume (yes, I know what "assume" means) he was referring to contract carriers and not the WOs. There is a world of difference.

I agree that point to point service would be a good use for 50 seaters (then again, so would be turning them to beer cans 😀 ) but Boeingboy make a good point about revenue dilution from hub flights. Even so, there must be some place they could be used in that role.

 

[john john]

Maybe someone jumped him in the parking lot and took his juice money today? Who knows...

No just stole the planes from Piedmont and gave them to PSA at a very low rate of pay

 

[Stuka Luva]

Let's give him the benefit of doubt and assume (yes, I know what "assume" means) he was referring to contract carriers and not the WOs. There is a world of difference.

I agree that point to point service would be a good use for 50 seaters (then again, so would be turning them to beer cans 😀 ) but Boeingboy make a good point about revenue dilution from hub flights. Even so, there must be some place they could be used in that role.

John john does not differentiate between WOs and Contract Carriers. He has genuine distain for all of them and their employees.


I'd love to see: Piedmont with Q400s. PSA with CRJ 700s only, no contract carriers (after the contracural obligations are met i.e. Air Wiskey and Republic) ANYTHING greater than 70 seats at mainline. Dash and CRJs on expansion route to serve more markets and NOT flying between major metro areas that could easily support mainline A/C. But what I want or anyone else wants is largely irrelevant. Tempe will do what Tempe wants and that's that.



@JJ
"Stole" Piedmonts airplanes? Care to clarify with (brace yourself) facts?

 

[john john]

Care to clarify with facts?

http://www.ainonline.com/publications/RAA/...scontentp3.html

Jets for Jobs plan, he asserts, “rewrites entire sections of the regional labor contracts, and then basically says to the pilots of the wholly owned carrier that they have to accept these terms or they’re not going to get jets.

 

[Stuka Luva]

The whole Jets-for-Jobs thing is a convoluted mess...

I didn't vote for it, but it's in place, I'm going to work under it. *shrug*

If your beef is with Jets-for-Jobs, you are barking up the wrong tree. I sure didn't write the thing and yes it was for all intents and purposes "imposed" on the PSA pilot group. What would you like me to do about it?

I fail to see how this means PSA "stole the planes from Piedmont".

If you had any knowledge of how things actually happened instead of simply reading what one reporter wrote you would know this:

As Jets-for-Jobs was being written and negotiated (with protests from much of the PSA pilot group), it was leaked that someone from the Piedmont MEC (AFAIK unbeknownst to the Chair and Vice-Chair) was in talks with USAir Mgmt to receive the RJs instead of PSA. The PSA Neg Comm and much of the MEC freaked out and hopped aboard with Mgmt as soon as they could. Dornier was bankrupt and they saw no future unless they got into step with Mgmt right away with an unfinished and shoddy agreement that would wind up causing confusion and ill will for years to come. Personally I think it was BS because USAir Mgmt had every intention of placing RJs (which they wanted to do all along) at PSA because of our weaker contract and thus lower operating costs than PDT. To give in to this agreement in its present form was foolish, but nothing can change that now. With the Neg Com. and most of the MEC scared, they convinced the senior majority of the pilot group that it's this or we're done, they got scared as well. As current events and history shows...if you get people scared enough, you can get away with anything. So J4J shamefully passes 60/40 if memory serves and here we are. Most J4Jers and PSAers are good hard working people and we are trying to make the best of an odd and difficult situation.

And yes the pilot group was so dissatisfied with what the MEC and Neg Comm did, they were replaced.


None of this really matters at all to you though, does it?

If Piedmont had jets and PSA still had props (yeah right) you'd still be upset, so to assert that this is the reason you are so negative and belittling is nonsense.

 

[john john]

at PSA because of our weaker contract and thus lower operating costs than PDT. To give in to this agreement in its present form was foolish, but nothing can change that now. With the Neg Com. and most of the MEC scared, they convinced the senior majority of the pilot group that it's this or we're done, they got scared as well. As current events and history shows...if you get people scared enough, you can get away with anything. So J4J shamefully passes 60/40 if memory serves and here we are..

PSA lower the bar on RJ’s pay just to have a chance to fly them. My beef is with express bringing the industry down and ALPA helping and allowing it.