It is fact that the CRJ burns less fuel than the 170.

It is fact that RAH has around an 21% lower operating cost per seat mile than SKYW.

Fuel is an issue but it isn't the only one. On a 2.5hr leg where are they saving more money? Using rough numbers for quick math lets say there is a 1000mile trip.

RAH would be break even at about $5320.
SKYW would break even at about $6790.

As you can see there is a $1470 difference. So JetJock lets take your 200lbs per hour of fuel saved and say this trip. That's 500lbs of fuel. Using 6.767 as our base weight for fuel that's 73.88 gal that CRJ saved the company. Lets double that amount and say you saved 1000lbs of fuel. You saved them 147.78gal of gas. A considerable amount yes, but do you think it still offsets the $1470 difference? Jet fuel would have to be around $10.00 a gal to make the difference. So who's actually cheaper? These are just break even points and obviously both companies charge more per ASM. However this does give RAH a HUGE advantage even if the 170/175 burns more per hr. These are based on 70 seats.

 

I know you're a pretty level headed dude and won't take this as flame. But that's a pretty funny statement to make.

I'm not ripping RAH either.

 

I don't think there is such thing as an iron-clad scope.

 

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, which could defiantly be the case, but you mention RAH breaking even. Doesn't UAL pay for the fuel for both these companies? Unless RAH passes these savings on operating costs directly to UAL which I don't think they do there is no real benifit. So even if RAH has a lower break even point UAL still has to pay the gas bill on the E-jet which as we all seem to agree upon, is higher than the CRJs

 

Business as usual? I feel bad for you guys!! How is it you go to work everyday?

 

No sir you are reading correct. I don't know if RAH passes the savings on to UAL or not but my point is the option does exist. If SKYW gives them a proposal of .xx cents per ASM then RAH could give me a price of .yy cents per ASM(21% less) where they are still making the same profit margin as SKYW. Am I making sense? SKYW could say we can do it for $.12 per ASM and RAH could say $.09 per ASM and while having the same margin of profit RAH would still pass the $.03 amount of savings to UAL. Our management skimps on everything from who does our paperwork to our contracted training to keeping us constantly a little understaffed to no ACARS and this is where it shows. A lot of people have made statements how their company gives them XX amount 401k an other possibly better benefits and this is where the nose meets the grindstone. It's not that RAH is sticking it to it's pilot group and doing all it can to underbid. This is survival mode time. Oil hit $130 per barrel today. The once affordable regionals that had the higher operating cost are now an issue. With a decent contract we're still able to keep our ASM cost very low compared to many others. Frontier, for example, is trying to get their cost down to roughly $.051 per asm in bankruptcy. Judging by that I'd say are capable of offering one hell of a deal if that's what it takes.

 

I guess this RFP is just between Skywest and RAH.............

 

I'd say other companies have a better chance than SKW and RAH...just have the feeling

 

I think he was making a joke about this thread as its mostly RAH and SKYW guys debating why they would/wouldn't get the flying when its stuff none of us have control over.

 

I think you're correct...