Whew...

[insp89]

Let's see. The only profitable airline in this country flies one type of A/C. They pay more than any of the legacy carriers. They don't fly overseas. They fly mostly point to point. They have a rational fare structure. They don't interline. They don't have first class. They don't fly RJ's or EMB 190's.

And they have never lost money. Ever.

And NWA, U, DAL, UAL, CAL, AMR, and the rest seem to ignore the successful formula. Pretty silly if you ask me.

pilot

pilot, Southwest also has fuel hedges in place,

Which is the primary reason they have been profitable the last few years.

These fuel hedges will continue to erode year over year.

 

[pilot]

True. I wonder if they lose money once that is done.

My guess is they continue to be profitable.

pilot

 

[PhillyAir5]

Whats the need to have a fleet of A321's A320's and A319's when you have 737's and 757's. Its always made me scratch my head when looking at this topic.

You can't help but look at Southwest, and their reasoning for flying one aircraft.

IMO, I'd like to see the new USAir fly 737's on their medium to short range routes. 757's on coast to coast and heavy traffic routes, and 757's and 767's overseas. Wouldn't a shorter fleet save serious cash?

 

[insp89]

True. I wonder if they lose money once that is done.

My guess is they continue to be profitable.

pilot

Yes, it will be interesting to see what the aviation industry will look like after all the bankruptcies and mergers take place.

Not to mention the "Open Skies" agreements.

 

[PhillyAir5]

Let me correct my post, I just recieved info that USAIR hadn't bought a boeing aircraft in 10 years.

They wont fly 737's and 757's in the future, but my point was that they should fly aircraft of that size on those routes. It just seems to make more sense both systematically and financially.

 

[insp89]

Let me correct my post, I just recieved info that USAIR hadn't bought a boeing aircraft in 10 years.

They wont fly 737's and 757's in the future, but my point was that they should fly aircraft of that size on those routes. It just seems to make more sense both systematically and financially.

PhillyAir5,

You are probably correct that Usairways has not bought a NEW boeing in 10 yrs.

But they just recently bought 3 used 757-200's from ATA.

I agree with you, It would be nice to buy Boeing instead of Embraer.

I'm sure it all boils down to cost.

 

[Old PSA]

US has reduced it fleet types, remember MD80s, DC-9, F-100, F-28, BAE-146, B737-200. The big plan of Wolf was to replace everything with Airbus. However, since the rest of his plan failed, US is left with half a plan and a mixed fleet. I sure Mr. Parker would like to standardize the fleet on Boeing or Airbus but its more expensive in the immediate future to do a fleet conversion. Even though it would be cheaper in the long run, survial now is the concern. I think this comes under "best laid plans...."

 

[PhillyAir5]

I'm not opposed to E-170 and E-190's but I personally prefer flying larger aircraft. Its more comfortable in my opinion.

 

[insp89]

Whats the need to have a fleet of A321's A320's and A319's when you have 737's and 757's. Its always made me scratch my head when looking at this topic.

You can't help but look at Southwest, and their reasoning for flying one aircraft.

IMO, I'd like to see the new USAir fly 737's on their medium to short range routes. 757's on coast to coast and heavy traffic routes, and 757's and 767's overseas. Wouldn't a shorter fleet save serious cash?

PhillyAir,

You can thank our illustrious former CEO Stephen Wolf for the Airbus Fleet.

He reportedly got a sweetheart deal on them, and probably a nice little kick-back for himself. 😉

I regretably believe the Boeings will slowly be phased out.

 

[BoeingBoy]

US has reduced it fleet types, remember MD80s, DC-9, F-100, F-28, BAE-146, B737-200. The big plan of Wolf was to replace everything with Airbus.

Tending to give Wolf the benefit of the doubt on the fleet, I agree. Just a shame he picked Airbus - getting 737NG's and 767-300's would have given pre-merger US a two-type fleet and post-merger US a three-type fleet. Now we've got four types plus the upcoming 190's.

Jim

 

[SegmentKing]

I'm not opposed to E-170 and E-190's but I personally prefer flying larger aircraft. Its more comfortable in my opinion.

Most passengers prefer the larger jets.

What I don't understand is why we don't put CLT up against ATL/DL.

Lets look at how DL operates. They fly all these people into ATL, with a huge chunk going to FLA destinations (not ALWAYS LOW YIELD, MIND YOU!). DL used to fly to even the smallest FLA cities with 767s... on an average day a few years ago, you'd see nothing but L1011s in MIA, MCO, TPA, and FLL. What they did was FUNNEL traffic from other cities, filling up those planes, to connect to the Fla markets with massive seats. So you'd have a 100 seat jet connecting with a 300 seat monster.

At CLT, it seems like we're connecting too many 50 seat jets to 180 seat jets.

I really REALLY wish we could follow DL's suit, even today, and at least throw some wide body lift to FLA. Even on MCO, DL flies a mix of 767s/777s and a handful of narrowbodies. We could easily pick up a few A330s somewhere and make them a slave-ship, filled to the brim with paying customers, and probably even make a few bucks off of it.

While a poster mentions Southwest, remember, that WN isn't an airline for everyone, and we can't be everyone's airline.

 

[The End]

Is it just me or has anyone noticed that everything that we do Northwest is asking for now? All my friends at northwest keep saying that that is all they hear on their side...Usairways, Usairways, Usairways. They want our contract, payscales, and equipment types. Remember when this happened to us with America West. Is it to much out of the realm to think that something else might be happening here. Now they are even consulting the company that gathered all the money for our merger. Is it too early to put my transfer in for DTW?

The real story here is that UsAir found a way to use the courts to rape the employee's. Now the rest of the airlines are following suit. BK is just another tool for corporate America to maximize their wallets while they steal your pension. Where were the courts when the pensions went under funded and by law were suppose to be at a certain level? Usair is the scourge of this industry. You can thank them for your poverty. The End

 

[qwerty]

Pilot: raising ticket price seems like an obvious choice, but simple economics explains why that doesn't work. Higher prices mean less passengers and less revenue overall. I agree that at some point a company must decide it is just no longer economical to be in business (re: FlyI).

But airlines like US are still a very valuable entity, if you look long term and assume you can wait out the slow times, improve what you do well, and REDUCE costs where you can. And until a workgroup decides they no longer work for the salary offered, costs can be reduced. Obviously the NW techs chose that route, they just did not get the result they had hoped for. The piolts on the other hand, seem to have held on to their key issues, yet also agreed to reduce their cost to the company.

 

[PhillyAir5]

SegmentKing,

Great post. I just recently flew to Orlando on a 767, and flew back on a 767 connecting through CLT.

And I would agree that "most" passengers prefer larger aircraft as well. Their is less turbulence and an overall smoother flight.

But here's another thing that blows my mind. We have to book flights to CLT all the time, and a round trip ticket to CLT from Philly is around $350...Hub to hub, how does that make sense?

BTW: Great discussion. Alot of valuable info being thrown around here.

 

[insp89]

Pilot: raising ticket price seems like an obvious choice, but simple economics explains why that doesn't work. Higher prices mean less passengers and less revenue overall. I agree that at some point a company must decide it is just no longer economical to be in business (re: FlyI).

But airlines like US are still a very valuable entity, if you look long term and assume you can wait out the slow times, improve what you do well, and REDUCE costs where you can. And until a workgroup decides they no longer work for the salary offered, costs can be reduced. Obviously the NW techs chose that route, they just did not get the result they had hoped for. The piolts on the other hand, seem to have held on to their key issues, yet also agreed to reduce their cost to the company.

qwerty, Just what key issues did the pilot's of Northwest hold on to ?