|
My post were to serve only as an example on how fuel cost isn't the only thing people look at. It might be a sore spot but the fact still remains that operating cost per ASM is a large factor. I chose to use RAH and SKYW for this example because SKYW flies the 70seaters and RAH flies the 70 seat E-jets which is what these are being compared to. Both companies also have the prices they operate at per ASM in their Q1 earnings report. I don't know what Compass operates at so that left only RAH with the EJETs.
|
I wouldn't worry about it too much fellas. With oil prices skyrocketing, now at over $130 per barrel, there won't be any flying for any of us in the very near future.
The whole "my airline is going to win it over your airline" is a foolish game to play. Besides, we all know good and well that Comair is going to win all this flying, so let's end the arguing and just all get along. |
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
(Post 387549)
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.
In 2007 there was a holding company with three airlines, one of which was an acquisition that involved a divesting a fleet. They operating three (six) different types in the 135/140//145, CRJ2, and 170/175. They have ONE seniority list across all three airlines. Its not perfect arrangement as evidenced by their upgrade bypass issue a while back, but I'd say their scope against alter-egos is indeed iron-clad. Look no further than TSA/GoJet or Pinnacle/Colgan to see the downside of NOT having such language. It cost CHQ pilots a hell of a lot of negotiating capital for work rules and hourly pay to buy that language to defend against a non-union Republic Airlines flying 145s for US Airways in 2003... |
IF the RFP actually gets awarded I suspect you will see it split between 3 carriers maybe 4... I have no basis other than a gut feeling.
|
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
(Post 387769)
In 2003, there was only one airline (Chautauqua) and no "Republic Airways Holdings".
In 2007 there was a holding company with three airlines, one of which was an acquisition that involved a divesting a fleet. They operating three (six) different types in the 135/140//145, CRJ2, and 170/175. They have ONE seniority list across all three airlines. Its not perfect arrangement as evidenced by their upgrade bypass issue a while back, but I'd say their scope against alter-egos is indeed iron-clad. Look no further than TSA/GoJet or Pinnacle/Colgan to see the downside of NOT having such language. It cost CHQ pilots a hell of a lot of negotiating capital for work rules and hourly pay to buy that language to defend against a non-union Republic Airlines flying 145s for US Airways in 2003... XJT has an "ironclad scope". We'll see what happens to it in the near future. Point I was making is this; As we've seen in a post 9/11/high oil price world, EVERYTHING is subject to renegotiation. |
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
Point I was making is this; As we've seen in a post 9/11/high oil price world, EVERYTHING is subject to renegotiation.
I agree... |
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
(Post 387822)
Well then why didn't you just say that? :p
I agree... |
Supposedly today was the deadline for bids... anyone heard anything yet?
Mostly joking. |
If the bids were due today and if any RFP was issued to begin with it would take several weeks for the powers that be to review and construct analysis on the offers. Of course UA would not be obligated to actually hand awards out if they choose not to, or the could be feeling out what it would cost them to maintain express feed in the event a partner became unable to service there flights.
|
Originally Posted by ToiletDuck
(Post 387482)
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. Look, this isn’t a ****ing match about whose airline is better so don't start that BS. It's about your above #'s which are a little ............... errrrrrrrrrr a lot ............ over the top so just show your sources and if they pan out then great but don't expect anyone on here to just take your word for it? :rolleyes: |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:32 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands