Who is still hiring?
05-16-2020 | 07:32 AM
#81
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,127
Likes: 796
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Regardless of the answer there are a lot more to consider than variable operating expenses. Question now isn’t what makes most sense longterm but what is feasible right now given the hand you’re dealt. Maybe they cost more than an XXX, but that fleet is running up on C checks so it makes more sense to use the RJ’s. Maybe they cost more but someone is willing to pay nicely to acquire the cheaper fleet.
In normal times, frequency/convenience trumps the higher incremental cost of RJ's.
During the COVID recovery, not sure how that will play out. When they get to the point where they can mostly fill up a couple daily NB's, they might prefer to do that over more frequent RJ's... if the pax put up with it. They might put up with it for a while anyway.
05-16-2020 | 11:23 AM
#82
SrFOorJrCAisthe?
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,647
Likes: 300
The great benefit of RJ's (especially 50's) is frequency. If you have 200 pax daily you can put them on 4x RJ flights and offer convenient frequency. One stretch narrowbody could carry all those people with a far lower CASM, but no schedule choice.
In normal times, frequency/convenience trumps the higher incremental cost of RJ's.
During the COVID recovery, not sure how that will play out. When they get to the point where they can mostly fill up a couple daily NB's, they might prefer to do that over more frequent RJ's... if the pax put up with it. They might put up with it for a while anyway.
In normal times, frequency/convenience trumps the higher incremental cost of RJ's.
During the COVID recovery, not sure how that will play out. When they get to the point where they can mostly fill up a couple daily NB's, they might prefer to do that over more frequent RJ's... if the pax put up with it. They might put up with it for a while anyway.
05-16-2020 | 12:37 PM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Quicker to board/deplane too. I’d rather be in a -200 than anywhere except an exit row or a premium seat on a 737.
05-16-2020 | 12:44 PM
#84
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 249
Likes: 48
Not being able to stand up straight is what bothers me most. I think 175 has the best of both worlds in terms of comfort on board and quick deplaning.
05-16-2020 | 01:18 PM
#85
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 1
05-16-2020 | 01:58 PM
#86
SrFOorJrCAisthe?
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,647
Likes: 300
05-17-2020 | 03:39 PM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
05-17-2020 | 04:16 PM
#88
SrFOorJrCAisthe?
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,647
Likes: 300
05-22-2020 | 04:55 PM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 5,565
Likes: 229
From: UNA
-AC does not work
- have to gate check their bag
-last 6 rows smell like the lav
-hit their head walking down the aisle if over 5'10"
-no wifi
-limited snack/service options
I flew the 200 for 3 years and even I hated being a pax on plane more than any other NB. always thought the crj-7/9 was a toss up with the 737/md80 and the 175 comparable to a 320/757. havent flown on a E145 in years
05-22-2020 | 07:29 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,107
Likes: 0
Gate checking is fine,what’s not is when the arrival station sends them to baggage claim just because. Had that happen multiple times at DGS stations over the past couple years
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
