Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-29-2012, 10:23 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Sorry I didn't explain it in terms simple enough for you to understand.
Thankfully i think others could follow the rather simple logic that we could free our slots and gates up so as to use them on other places.
It's a thought on how to raise mainline from a mere 8% of the new flying to something higher, like maybe 16%!!!! Or is that aiming too high? Out of touch?
Probably. I don't think you believe a double digit percentage increase in anything good for mainline is possible.
Thankfully i think others could follow the rather simple logic that we could free our slots and gates up so as to use them on other places.
It's a thought on how to raise mainline from a mere 8% of the new flying to something higher, like maybe 16%!!!! Or is that aiming too high? Out of touch?
Probably. I don't think you believe a double digit percentage increase in anything good for mainline is possible.
I guess you didn't see the part in the piece on hub building about us having to compete for passengers, right? Meaning we swapped slots and got terminals, but the terminals don't connect...yet. That USAirways old pax can still get around going through DCA, PHL, and CLT and don't have to use us. Just because we got the slots and facilities didn't mean we got their pax. You understand that, right? That everything won't be together for a connecting hub until next year? And that after everything is together network will match capacity with demand, because it's a slot constrained airport, so the only growth is through upgauging. Right?
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
01-29-2012, 10:41 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Typing slowly doesn't matter on a post. When you hit submit it all posts at once. Typing slowly just makes you look... like a slow typer. Just saying.
Each E145, CRJ200, CRj700 and CRJ900 takes up space. Do we need direct E145 service from LGA-ALB and CRJ700 LGA-BTV. BTV is on the way to ALB, take a MD88, take up 1 gate and 1 slot. What to do with the extra slot? Sure we could always use extra slots in LGA.
In simple terms you'd allocate 8 first class and 67ish coach seats to each city, although you could play with that I'm sure. So on CRJ900 type routes it's almost a direct replacement, on others we add a little non-rev space and lots of cargo capacity.
Now competitively what are we offering when we do that? Mainline service plus you don't have to go south on a 2 hour block flight to connect to go back north or west of LGA where a lot of these flights are going. And mainline one stop (not connecting though) should win over passengers over a Dash 8, E145, CRJ200, CRJ700, CRJ900 (maybe not E-jets but thats a different story). Works for SWA.
Hence, clear the unnecessary congestion. Service 3 or 4 airports from 2 gates and 2 slots and free the rest to make money elsewhere.
I guess you didn't see the part in the piece on hub building about us having to compete for passengers, right? Meaning we swapped slots and got terminals, but the terminals don't connect...yet. That USAirways old pax can still get around going through DCA, PHL, and CLT and don't have to use us. Just because we got the slots and facilities didn't mean we got their pax. You understand that, right? That everything won't be together for a connecting hub until next year? And that after everything is together network will match capacity with demand, because it's a slot constrained airport, so the only growth is through upgauging. Right?
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
In simple terms you'd allocate 8 first class and 67ish coach seats to each city, although you could play with that I'm sure. So on CRJ900 type routes it's almost a direct replacement, on others we add a little non-rev space and lots of cargo capacity.
Now competitively what are we offering when we do that? Mainline service plus you don't have to go south on a 2 hour block flight to connect to go back north or west of LGA where a lot of these flights are going. And mainline one stop (not connecting though) should win over passengers over a Dash 8, E145, CRJ200, CRJ700, CRJ900 (maybe not E-jets but thats a different story). Works for SWA.
Hence, clear the unnecessary congestion. Service 3 or 4 airports from 2 gates and 2 slots and free the rest to make money elsewhere.
01-29-2012, 11:13 AM
seeing the large hubs...
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 73N A
Posts: 3,722
Each E145, CRJ200, CRj700 and CRJ900 takes up space. Do we need direct E145 service from LGA-ALB and CRJ700 LGA-BTV. BTV is on the way to ALB, take a MD88, take up 1 gate and 1 slot. What to do with the extra slot? Sure we could always use extra slots in LGA.
In simple terms you'd allocate 8 first class and 67ish coach seats to each city, although you could play with that I'm sure. So on CRJ900 type routes it's almost a direct replacement, on others we add a little non-rev space and lots of cargo capacity.
Now competitively what are we offering when we do that? Mainline service plus you don't have to go south on a 2 hour block flight to connect to go back north or west of LGA where a lot of these flights are going. And mainline one stop (not connecting though) should win over passengers over a Dash 8, E145, CRJ200, CRJ700, CRJ900 (maybe not E-jets but thats a different story). Works for SWA.
Hence, clear the unnecessary congestion. Service 3 or 4 airports from 2 gates and 2 slots and free the rest to make money elsewhere.
In simple terms you'd allocate 8 first class and 67ish coach seats to each city, although you could play with that I'm sure. So on CRJ900 type routes it's almost a direct replacement, on others we add a little non-rev space and lots of cargo capacity.
Now competitively what are we offering when we do that? Mainline service plus you don't have to go south on a 2 hour block flight to connect to go back north or west of LGA where a lot of these flights are going. And mainline one stop (not connecting though) should win over passengers over a Dash 8, E145, CRJ200, CRJ700, CRJ900 (maybe not E-jets but thats a different story). Works for SWA.
Hence, clear the unnecessary congestion. Service 3 or 4 airports from 2 gates and 2 slots and free the rest to make money elsewhere.
You could also make that flight a CVG-JAN-SHV-ATL, and sell tickets JAN-SHV (prob not a lot of takers but...) and JAN-ATL (with a stop in SHV). I think it's an untapped market our of LGA.
Sure - someone will pipe up and say that why do what we can operated with a 70/76 seater to both places at once. Well - those things cost a lot more than a mainline jet and don't generate the revenue premium anymore.
01-29-2012, 11:13 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Typing slowly doesn't matter on a post. When you hit submit it all posts at once. Typing slowly just makes you look... like a slow typer. Just saying.
Each E145, CRJ200, CRj700 and CRJ900 takes up space. Do we need direct E145 service from LGA-ALB and CRJ700 LGA-BTV. BTV is on the way to ALB, take a MD88, take up 1 gate and 1 slot. What to do with the extra slot? Sure we could always use extra slots in LGA.
In simple terms you'd allocate 8 first class and 67ish coach seats to each city, although you could play with that I'm sure. So on CRJ900 type routes it's almost a direct replacement, on others we add a little non-rev space and lots of cargo capacity.
Each E145, CRJ200, CRj700 and CRJ900 takes up space. Do we need direct E145 service from LGA-ALB and CRJ700 LGA-BTV. BTV is on the way to ALB, take a MD88, take up 1 gate and 1 slot. What to do with the extra slot? Sure we could always use extra slots in LGA.
In simple terms you'd allocate 8 first class and 67ish coach seats to each city, although you could play with that I'm sure. So on CRJ900 type routes it's almost a direct replacement, on others we add a little non-rev space and lots of cargo capacity.
I don't know the cost benefit of adding 34 additional seats between those two markets by upgauging to an 88 from the planned RJ combo. They are currently USAirways serviced by 50 seat RJ's and 34 seat turboprops, so they're already getting a signficant capacity increase.
01-29-2012, 12:19 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 581
A couple dozen pages ago Slow posted something about a decrease in RJ flying and alluded to a significantly less rosy future for Regional Jets.
I asked him to elaborate, but he didn't....
Could you please explain (in a little bit of detail) what you mean by the portion of your post I quoted.
I'd really like to know what the minimum number of RJs operating as "Delta Connection" will be for the next few years.
Thanks.
01-29-2012, 12:41 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,946
I'll type slowly for the Auburn grad...
I guess you didn't see the part in the piece on hub building about us having to compete for passengers, right? Meaning we swapped slots and got terminals, but the terminals don't connect...yet. That USAirways old pax can still get around going through DCA, PHL, and CLT and don't have to use us. Just because we got the slots and facilities didn't mean we got their pax. You understand that, right? That everything won't be together for a connecting hub until next year? And that after everything is together network will match capacity with demand, because it's a slot constrained airport, so the only growth is through upgauging. Right?
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
I guess you didn't see the part in the piece on hub building about us having to compete for passengers, right? Meaning we swapped slots and got terminals, but the terminals don't connect...yet. That USAirways old pax can still get around going through DCA, PHL, and CLT and don't have to use us. Just because we got the slots and facilities didn't mean we got their pax. You understand that, right? That everything won't be together for a connecting hub until next year? And that after everything is together network will match capacity with demand, because it's a slot constrained airport, so the only growth is through upgauging. Right?
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
We understand - it will take time. But do you also understand why a large number of DAL pilots are very skeptical about this? We have been hearing about RJs growing markets for mainline since at least 2000. For the most part it has not happened.
We also understand there have been a number of complicating factors: 911, BK, merger etc and maybe this time it will be different, but until it happens, I will remain skeptical about management growing mainline.
Scoop - Skeptical
, yet hopeful. 
01-29-2012, 01:15 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Slow,
We understand - it will take time. But do you also understand why a large number of DAL pilots are very skeptical about this? We have been hearing about RJs growing markets for mainline since at least 2000. For the most part it has not happened.
We also understand there have been a number of complicating factors: 911, BK, merger etc and maybe this time it will be different, but until it happens, I will remain skeptical about management growing mainline.
Scoop - Skeptical, yet hopeful.
We understand - it will take time. But do you also understand why a large number of DAL pilots are very skeptical about this? We have been hearing about RJs growing markets for mainline since at least 2000. For the most part it has not happened.
We also understand there have been a number of complicating factors: 911, BK, merger etc and maybe this time it will be different, but until it happens, I will remain skeptical about management growing mainline.
Scoop - Skeptical
, yet hopeful.
01-29-2012, 03:21 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
ACL,
A couple dozen pages ago Slow posted something about a decrease in RJ flying and alluded to a significantly less rosy future for Regional Jets.
I asked him to elaborate, but he didn't....
Could you please explain (in a little bit of detail) what you mean by the portion of your post I quoted.
I'd really like to know what the minimum number of RJs operating as "Delta Connection" will be for the next few years.
Thanks.
A couple dozen pages ago Slow posted something about a decrease in RJ flying and alluded to a significantly less rosy future for Regional Jets.
I asked him to elaborate, but he didn't....
Could you please explain (in a little bit of detail) what you mean by the portion of your post I quoted.
I'd really like to know what the minimum number of RJs operating as "Delta Connection" will be for the next few years.
Thanks.
http://images.delta.com.edgesuite.ne...s/2010_10K.pdf
01-29-2012, 03:22 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
01-29-2012, 04:42 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 581
Thanks for the link. Unfortunately all I got out of it were the number of aircraft being operated by each of the DCI carriers at the end of 2010 and 2011, as well as how many are under contract when the contracts expire.
It's my understanding that the number under contract typically decreases in the intervening years.
For example ASA and Skywest had 245 aircraft under contract as of 12/31/2011. One of their contracts (for 12 aircraft) expires 12/31/2012. The other contracts don't expire until 2020 and at that time they will have 53 aircraft under contract. I would think they don't go from 245 (2011) to 233 (2012) and stay at 233 until say... 2019.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
