United RFP???
05-20-2008 | 01:53 PM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 0
From: SkyWest Capt.
Now if you’re talking about only moving 37 PAX then yes the CRJ/ERJ/737/A320 and all others are not as efficient as the Q. Can you imagine how inefficient a 747 would be with only 37 PAX on board going between DEN and DUR?
Now let’s think about moving 30 or 130 or 230 PAX and how much of a premium or not are those PAX willing to pay? Many other factors must be included; do you see what I’m getting at?
05-20-2008 | 01:54 PM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
This says nothing about CRJ's..... and even if it did, in the 70 seat arena UAL seems equally happy with both the -700 and the -170 product..... again, we shall see....... S5 already has 10 E170's slated to be added to our UAL operation by the end of the year or so.... i guess we will all have to sit back and see what happens.
05-20-2008 | 02:02 PM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 0
From: SkyWest Capt.
This says nothing about CRJ's..... and even if it did, in the 70 seat arena UAL seems equally happy with both the -700 and the -170 product..... again, we shall see....... S5 already has 10 E170's slated to be added to our UAL operation by the end of the year or so.... i guess we will all have to sit back and see what happens.
05-20-2008 | 02:57 PM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
RAH has proven to at least UAL and DAL that they are able to operate the 170 as economically as the -700.
05-20-2008 | 07:03 PM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,772
Likes: 1
From: 744 CA
While I know you would love to believe it ALL about fuel burn its not. Personally I dont mind dh'ing on the -700.
I think UAL likes both of these platforms and will continue to use them. The seating is a bit better in the 170 ..... other than that I would call it a wash. But what do I know I just fly them.
Again...just have to see what happens and the chips fall were they may.
I think UAL likes both of these platforms and will continue to use them. The seating is a bit better in the 170 ..... other than that I would call it a wash. But what do I know I just fly them.
Again...just have to see what happens and the chips fall were they may.
05-20-2008 | 07:18 PM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 0
From: SkyWest Capt.
While I know you would love to believe it ALL about fuel burn its not. Personally I dont mind dh'ing on the -700.
I think UAL likes both of these platforms and will continue to use them. The seating is a bit better in the 170 ..... other than that I would call it a wash. But what do I know I just fly them.
Again...just have to see what happens and the chips fall were they may.
I think UAL likes both of these platforms and will continue to use them. The seating is a bit better in the 170 ..... other than that I would call it a wash. But what do I know I just fly them.
Again...just have to see what happens and the chips fall were they may.
But what do I know, I just fly them.
05-20-2008 | 07:36 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 0
From: SkyWest Capt.
But what do we know and for that matter, what do they know? It’s not like they’re making perfect decisions. UAL seems to be more “reactive” while DAL's more “proactive.” We’ll see which style pays off in the future but my money’s on DAL.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
