Compass Updates - Saga Continues
#6481
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Posts: 143
I'm sure their was but that doesn't make you immune to the same thing. If they want planes back for their WO what's to stop them? They already took 9 from you. If AA wants them back for the same reason.. ?
Reliability doesn't mean anything (you aren't though really). XJT was extremely reliable. You are a staffing company. If you can't staff, you lose planes.
Oh, and you're not getting a PHX base..
Reliability doesn't mean anything (you aren't though really). XJT was extremely reliable. You are a staffing company. If you can't staff, you lose planes.
Oh, and you're not getting a PHX base..
#6482
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,107
Those 6 170s had absolutely nothing to do with our performance,I can guarantee that. It was a business decision made internally to return the planes to DL. As for AA taking our flying back,not happening,we are exceeding the performance metrics set by AA so there would be no legal way they'd take the flying back.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#6483
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Position: On the right hand side
Posts: 665
Those 6 170s had absolutely nothing to do with our performance,I can guarantee that. It was a business decision made internally to return the planes to DL. As for AA taking our flying back,not happening,we are exceeding the performance metrics set by AA so there would be no legal way they'd take the flying back.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#6484
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,107
They wanted those planes on the east coast but weren't willing to help facilitate a base out there for us. It wasn't feasible to DH crews across 3 time zones just for 6 planes
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#6485
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Position: On the right hand side
Posts: 665
The argument that the 170s were better for certain east coast destinations is pretty hokey to me. Especially since XJT has been operating (34) CRJ700s for Delta mostly out east. Hell, SkyWest seems to make the CRJ700 fly out west for Delta.
#6486
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2016
Posts: 377
Not sure where you're getting your facts from there bub...but that koolaid must taste mighty good
#6487
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2017
Posts: 343
It goes directly to why MSP was closed too and the SDF is being moved... it doesn't work for west coast airline. That's why mx is being moved out west too, we were all over the place and it made things a nightmare. If all of our departures are now out of LAX and SEA it's a lot easier to be more efficient and when something breaks it's less of a disaster. Yeah it friggin sucked losing 6 planes but just wait til the MX is out west and this airline will run 100% better.
#6488
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Position: On the right hand side
Posts: 665
It goes directly to why MSP was closed too and the SDF is being moved... it doesn't work for west coast airline. That's why mx is being moved out west too, we were all over the place and it made things a nightmare. If all of our departures are now out of LAX and SEA it's a lot easier to be more efficient and when something breaks it's less of a disaster. Yeah it friggin sucked losing 6 planes but just wait til the MX is out west and this airline will run 100% better.
So if the average load factor for August is 77% that means running an all 76 seat jet airline, on average 59 of those are occupied.
If we had a 70 seat jet (the E170) that's an 11 seat margin on average. So yes you'll have days where it would be 70 people and a jumpseater, but you'd also have days where it's 50 or less. It would actually increase load factor for Compass to run 170s.
Downgrading from a 175 to a 170 is only a problem if it's on a route that requires more than 70 seats. But in my opinion if they had come out west to a SJC and PHX maintenance base, the likelihood of swapping into one unscheduled would be much lower.
#6489
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2015
Posts: 73
Everyone can agree on losing the planes sucking. I agree that moving to a west coast operation ditching MSP and SDF makes sense. But where I disagree is that an airline running an average load factor of about 77% (August MTD) has a problem with using a 70 seat jet.
So if the average load factor for August is 77% that means running an all 76 seat jet airline, on average 59 of those are occupied.
If we had a 70 seat jet (the E170) that's an 11 seat margin on average. So yes you'll have days where it would be 70 people and a jumpseater, but you'd also have days where it's 50 or less. It would actually increase load factor for Compass to run 170s.
Downgrading from a 175 to a 170 is only a problem if it's on a route that requires more than 70 seats. But in my opinion if they had come out west to a SJC and PHX maintenance base, the likelihood of swapping into one unscheduled would be much lower.
So if the average load factor for August is 77% that means running an all 76 seat jet airline, on average 59 of those are occupied.
If we had a 70 seat jet (the E170) that's an 11 seat margin on average. So yes you'll have days where it would be 70 people and a jumpseater, but you'd also have days where it's 50 or less. It would actually increase load factor for Compass to run 170s.
Downgrading from a 175 to a 170 is only a problem if it's on a route that requires more than 70 seats. But in my opinion if they had come out west to a SJC and PHX maintenance base, the likelihood of swapping into one unscheduled would be much lower.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post