Originally Posted by tennisguru (Post 3683424)

We’ll there’s also the staffing part of the equation. How many long/thing routes out of ATL does the 319 operate? If you did start running 220s on those few routes you’d open up a can of worms by needing to run NYC or other bases crews through there to cover the flying with no immediate reserves available. With the Airbus however you’ve got tons of pilots in base minutes from the airport ready to cover a broken rotation via WS or GS. On the 717 a lot of the cancellations occur on flights from MSP simply because it is difficult to DH in pilots with short notice. So it makes sense to not dilute ATL 319 flying with the 220.

Originally Posted by Iceberg (Post 3683463)

I get that, I was just trying to wrap my mind around the fuel reasoning.

Originally Posted by Lou Reed (Post 3684605)

Any ideas why a 1.5 hour flight (Bos-Rdu) would be pay optimized, where the agents make a point of saying they can't check any bags as that would count as more weight, for an airplane that's touted for it's efficiency, and ability to do transcons?

I get that the flight is full, and might have an alternate, but still seems odd.

Originally Posted by Lou Reed (Post 3684605)

Any ideas why a 1.5 hour flight (Bos-Rdu) would be pay optimized, where the agents make a point of saying they can't check any bags as that would count as more weight, for an airplane that's touted for it's efficiency, and ability to do transcons?

I get that the flight is full, and might have an alternate, but still seems odd.

Originally Posted by Jp8burner (Post 3684627)

Probably MLW, especially if there’s an alternate.

Originally Posted by Lou Reed (Post 3684605)

Any ideas why a 1.5 hour flight (Bos-Rdu) would be pay optimized, where the agents make a point of saying they can't check any bags as that would count as more weight, for an airplane that's touted for it's efficiency, and ability to do transcons?

I get that the flight is full, and might have an alternate, but still seems odd.

Originally Posted by TegridyFarms (Post 3686216)

It is odd and most of the times payload optimized flights are not even close numbers wise when we receive a WDR. Last one I had that was payload was on this exact route, and we landed 1900 below MLW.

No clue where we are at in the process, but the A220 is a Tesla. Delta is paying $$$ to unlock higher MLWs. I know they’re more aggressive on this on the -300 side than they are with the -100s, but it is happening.

Originally Posted by Jaxs170 (Post 3682952)

1) It's the wrong sized airplane for ATL (the 220 is meant for 2-5 hour routes, not 1-2 hour routes like the 717)
2) The engines take so long to start and have so many wind limitations they don't want it clogging up the ramp

Originally Posted by CBreezy (Post 3686444)

Don't the 321 NEOs also have long engine start times?

Originally Posted by OOfff (Post 3686476)

yep. And our coming 737max orders will, too. Even longer without dual cooling. Better keep them out of ATL

Originally Posted by OOfff (Post 3686476)

yep. And our coming 737max orders will, too. Even longer without dual cooling. Better keep them out of ATL