I'm not sure you read what I wrote. While these numbers can be used for comparing companies they are not an apples-to-apples comparison. Also, excluding fuel hedging losses and special items we are far better off than our own numbers show (look at the 2Q 2009 report).

One reason SWA numbers have been low is due to their fuel hedging. On average for 2008 they paid $600/hr less for fuel than other carriers that operate 737-700s and $900/hr than Delta 737-800s.

For comparison SWA reports a fuel burn avg of 697 gal/hr @ $1612/hr for their 737-700s and 783 gal/hr @ $2510/hr for the Delta 737-800s. Even if you account for the 737-800s higher burn rates you are still left with a $700/hr difference in fuel cost for 2008. On the other hand SWA crew cost is $584/hr and Delta's is $577/hr.

Maybe DALPA should be focusing some attention on the poor business decisions that are affecting the company rather then telling the pilot group how "frightening" our CASM is. Are you trying to lower expectations with your comments?

Maybe you are implying that with a CASM as high as ours we can't compete with the cost structure of DCI for 69+ seat flying?

Of course it is impossible to break down the cost of DCI currently since most of their cost are pass-through cost which Delta is already paying. One very eye-opening set of numbers from the Form 41 data are the Pinnacle and Mesaba block hour cost for their RJs. It appears from the data that they do not report any cost they aren't paying (pass-throughs). Here are the block hour cost the above airlines are reporting:

ASA = $2245/hr
Comair = $2065/hr
Pinnacle = $665/hr
Mesaba = $950/hr

The biggest reason for the disparity is that Pinnacle and Mesaba don't report fuel cost, which is a pass-through cost. My guess is that they don't report other pass-through cost as well. If true this gives a pretty good idea of the cost Delta is already paying per block hour that is hidden in our System CASM cost giving the appearance that Mainline is even more expensive.