Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-30-2012 | 07:57 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Market development requires competitive equipment. We can't develop a market with inferior equipment and high costs. We are sitting ducks for Jet Blue and even Southwest Airlines.
Delta management intends to acquire market share and then constrain capacity until it is profitable.
Someone used the phrase "MBA death spiral." It is apt with the use of 50 seat RJ's to develop markets with too few seats to spread the fuel and trip costs amongst. The E175 is a mainline equivalent. Really, what we need is to fill the scope gap with mainline equipment operated by new hire mainline pilots at reasonable (market) costs.
Delta management intends to acquire market share and then constrain capacity until it is profitable.
Someone used the phrase "MBA death spiral." It is apt with the use of 50 seat RJ's to develop markets with too few seats to spread the fuel and trip costs amongst. The E175 is a mainline equivalent. Really, what we need is to fill the scope gap with mainline equipment operated by new hire mainline pilots at reasonable (market) costs.
01-30-2012 | 08:14 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
From: SWA F/O
I remember riding on a DAL 767 from DFW-MCO back in the early 90's.
Heck, AA used to fly DC-10s...FULL between DFW-LGA!
01-30-2012 | 08:30 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Likes: 0
No trying to start an issue, but what was the cost of fuel than and what was the fuel burn on the 10?
01-30-2012 | 09:55 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
I gotta absolutely agree with you. Market development is something like CHS-BNA or ROC-ORF.
Market destruction is putting RJs on what used to be a full widebody route, or connecting MAJOR hubs with RJ only service then calling it feed. I dont care what anybody says, when I commute on a 50 seat RJ, it is uncomfortable... Poor mainline service beats great 50 seat service. Bigger than 50 seat should be a mainline aircraft.
Market destruction is putting RJs on what used to be a full widebody route, or connecting MAJOR hubs with RJ only service then calling it feed. I dont care what anybody says, when I commute on a 50 seat RJ, it is uncomfortable... Poor mainline service beats great 50 seat service. Bigger than 50 seat should be a mainline aircraft.
01-30-2012 | 10:18 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,724
Likes: 0
From: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Maybe some Diesel-10 drivers can chime in on the hourly burn, pax count for the domestic DC-10s and some guys familiar with the RJ can throw out the same numbers...
Cheers
George
01-30-2012 | 10:18 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,724
Likes: 0
From: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Market destruction is putting RJs on what used to be a full widebody route, or connecting MAJOR hubs with RJ only service then calling it feed. I dont care what anybody says, when I commute on a 50 seat RJ, it is uncomfortable... Poor mainline service beats great 50 seat service. Bigger than 50 seat should be a mainline aircraft.
I'm surprised in his slot swap defense, Dickson pointed out LGA MSY because the top market for LGA is Chicago by far. Here's how we have been "developing" that market recently:
In 2010, Delta ended Midway-LaGuardia service and replaced it with O’Hare flights. Prior to that the MDW-LGA flights replaced O’Hare-LaGuardia flights in 2007...
Chicago is a market more than 5 times the size of MSY (2800 vs 440 daily originating pax)
Delta has been serving it for years.
It was promoted as one of the crucial HVC heavy routes.
What equipment is flying that?
Cheers
George
Last edited by georgetg; 01-30-2012 at 10:23 AM. Reason: Gotta quote Scambo!
01-30-2012 | 10:54 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,324
Likes: 53
I think 292 pax
01-30-2012 | 11:10 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
80 point bucket range.
I have a question, if we're going to make a system that results in senior pilots not flying on reserve while pilots a few % points below them, or even 1 number below them, pick up all of their flying why don't we make a system where the senior regular pilots get paid alv but don't work and their flying is done by a pilot a few % points below them for no pay? If its fair for reserve why not regular line holders?
I have a question, if we're going to make a system that results in senior pilots not flying on reserve while pilots a few % points below them, or even 1 number below them, pick up all of their flying why don't we make a system where the senior regular pilots get paid alv but don't work and their flying is done by a pilot a few % points below them for no pay? If its fair for reserve why not regular line holders?
Last edited by forgot to bid; 01-30-2012 at 11:32 AM.
01-30-2012 | 11:41 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
CRJ200 ..3,200/50=64 PPH/PX
737-700 ..5,000/130=38 (published is 34.46 so my swag is fairly close)
That's why we can't win this fight with the wrong equipment. Richard and Ed made it sound (during the Winter quarter conference call) that LGA isn't expected to be profitable. It allows us to reallocate airplanes from markets which lose more, into a market where they will lose less. Still, the long term answer has to be something like this that closes the scope gap.
Lufthansa sees CSeries fuel burn per passenger bettering A380, 747-8 | ATWOnline
01-30-2012 | 11:57 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
From: Moved up to the M88 from the 767
80 point bucket range.
I have a question, if we're going to make a system that results in senior pilots not flying on reserve while pilots a few % points below them, or even 1 number below them, pick up all of their flying why don't we make a system where the senior regular pilots get paid alv but don't work and their flying is done by a pilot a few % points below them for no pay? If its fair for reserve why not regular line holders?
I have a question, if we're going to make a system that results in senior pilots not flying on reserve while pilots a few % points below them, or even 1 number below them, pick up all of their flying why don't we make a system where the senior regular pilots get paid alv but don't work and their flying is done by a pilot a few % points below them for no pay? If its fair for reserve why not regular line holders?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
