Originally Posted by
newKnow
Geeze Bar,
Did Delta have a recruiting fair at Harvard for their MBA's with pilot liscense's.
.
Harvard? eh' no Wharton's a much better school in my opinion.
Originally Posted by
Mesabah
If DAL was serious about fuel burn it would be in the market for a 100 seat high efficiency turboprop on the 500 mile or less segments. You just can't get that kind of CASM out of a 100 seat jet at that stage length. The DOT stats don't compare RASM over a standard stage length say 100 miles vs 1000 miles, that's why a 753 that flies farther more efficiently than say an a320. The A320 may actually be burning less fuel per ASM on the shorter routes than the 753; in fact it is.
The DOT repeats the information straight from the operator. I don't know how NWA operated the 757 and if there was a difference in stage lengths between the -300 and -200.
I agree a turboprop is more fuel efficient. There were other problems that prevented DAL from buying large turboprops instead of RJ's aside from consumer preferences. One issue was the footprint a large, straight wing, aircraft has on the ramp. A Dash 8 - Q400 is a 737-800 sized airplane when it comes to ground servicing. There is also the slightly higher block time against headwinds and the fact the Brazilian and Canadian governments were heavily subsidizing the financing of these airplanes while the French / Italians were sitting on their hands.