279 A/C Limit Question

[Oliver Twist]

I would like to know if anyone has a rational opinion here on the issue of a min fleet size of 279. If you take out the international (Europe, Carib.) and spare A/C''s I suspect we should have about 250 +- aircraft to use per day.[BR][BR]Using that assumption - unless we plan to run that many aircraft between the big 10 cities (CLT,PHL,PIT,LGA,BOS,DCA,LAX.SFO,SEA,MCO) only, I suspect we will find that all those mainline planes have to go somewhere else in addition to the big 10. [BR][BR]250 planes times 5 average trips per day (2.5 round trips which I think is conservative, very conservative) = 1250 trips per day divided by 2 = 625 rountrips per day divided by 3 hubs equals 208 round trips per hub per day.[BR][BR]How many flights a day does PHL have to the other 9 cities listed above per day? I suspect its below 85 total. 208-85 = 123 roundtrips per day per hub that have to go somewhere OTHER than the big 10. That means [STRONG]369 ROUNDTRIPS[/STRONG] per day Total to go to OTHER cities and/or between other cities. Correct me if I am wrong, but leaves a whole lotta mainline flying that needs to go to the RDU''s, MIA''s, ROC''s, BWI''s, MSY''s, DEN''s, PHX''s on USairs system. Not to mention the rest of the cities that are mainline now.[BR][BR]I do believe if your city has 5 or less Mainline jets per day, packing is a good idea for you. It''s no fun I know. Been there done that. But to say that all the cities will go Express except the big boys is just not supported by the numbers supplied. As I said earlier, my figures are [STRONG]VERY[/STRONG] conservative as to A/C usage (RT''s) per day I think. I just don''t believe that we will fly all those jets between the big 10 cities, there is just to many planes to do that. That being said, [STRONG]Anyone[/STRONG] [STRONG]who tells me that all is lost and only the Big 10 will be mainline is either lying or is uninformed. [/STRONG]In either case, I''m not intrested in what liars and the unimformed have to say. The numbers just don''t support the doom and gloom they predict.[BR][BR]I''m sure that someone out there in US land has more accurate number''s but I suspect the answer will remain the same or improve my numbers. Most mainline cities that we have now will remain mainline based on 279 aircraft. [BR][BR]OK -- your turn, my hide is pretty thick after 20 years in customer service.

 

[sdavis29]

dont forget all the carribean dest.....many of which tie up a plane for at least 8 hrs rountrip..[BR]there is also the shuttle...bos/dca/lga...how many aircraft are on those roots..i would guess quite a few....[BR][BR]just a thought[BR][BR]

 

[MrAeroMan]

Great post Oliver. I applaud you for at least thinking for yourself and your numbers are very conservative. While you don't have the same number of jets you use to 279 is nothing to sneeze at and will support many cities above the threshold to keep it mainline.
I think you hit the mark! You interested in management?? ha ha

 

[diogenes]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/3/2003 1:30:13 PM Oliver Twist wrote:

I would like to know if anyone has a rational opinion here on the issue of a min fleet size of 279. If you take out the international (Europe, Carib.) and spare A/C's I suspect we should have about 250 +- aircraft to use per day.

Using that assumption - unless we plan to run that many aircraft between the big 10 cities (CLT,PHL,PIT,LGA,BOS,DCA,LAX.SFO,SEA,MCO) only, I suspect we will find that all those mainline planes have to go somewhere else in addition to the big 10.

250 planes times 5 average trips per day (2.5 round trips which I think is conservative, very conservative) = 1250 trips per day divided by 2 = 625 rountrips per day divided by 3 hubs equals 208 round trips per hub per day.

How many flights a day does PHL have to the other 9 cities listed above per day? I suspect its below 85 total. 208-85 = 123 roundtrips per day per hub that have to go somewhere OTHER than the big 10. That means [STRONG]369 ROUNDTRIPS[/STRONG] per day Total to go to OTHER cities and/or between other cities. Correct me if I am wrong, but leaves a whole lotta mainline flying that needs to go to the RDU's, MIA's, ROC's, BWI's, MSY's, DEN's, PHX's on USairs system. Not to mention the rest of the cities that are mainline now.

I do believe if your city has 5 or less Mainline jets per day, packing is a good idea for you. It's no fun I know. Been there done that. But to say that all the cities will go Express except the big boys is just not supported by the numbers supplied. As I said earlier, my figures are [STRONG]VERY[/STRONG] conservative as to A/C usage (RT's) per day I think. I just don't believe that we will fly all those jets between the big 10 cities, there is just to many planes to do that. That being said, [STRONG]Anyone[/STRONG] [STRONG]who tells me that all is lost and only the Big 10 will be mainline is either lying or is uninformed. [/STRONG]In either case, I'm not intrested in what liars and the unimformed have to say. The numbers just don't support the doom and gloom they predict.

I'm sure that someone out there in US land has more accurate number's but I suspect the answer will remain the same or improve my numbers. Most mainline cities that we have now will remain mainline based on 279 aircraft.

OK -- your turn, my hide is pretty thick after 20 years in customer service.
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------------------------
Under the current proposal, two mainline jets can be flown, on a permanent basis, into any express city and handled by express personnel. Additionally, four mainline jets can be flown, on a seasonal basis, into any express location.

Will 279 withstand the war contingency language? Maybe, but I wouldn't bet the farm.

Mainline jets will fly into plenty of places other than the big 10. Mainline pilots will fly them. In a lot of places, express agents will handle them.

The proposal is clear regarding pay, pensions and benefits if you are designated mainline 'express.' If that's acceptable to you, vote yes.

 

[ITRADE]

I think Oliver did account for Caribbean flying.[BR][BR]Assuming you're looking at destinations like AUA, you're getting maybe 4 segments a day out of them.[BR][BR]BOS 7:00 PHL 8:30[BR]PHL 9:45 AUA 15:00[BR]AUA 16:00 CLT19:15[BR]CLT 20:05 BOS 22:10[BR][BR]Repeat that pattern for every Caribbean route, and you've probably eaten up a good 15-20 aircraft.

 

[Oliver Twist]

[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/3/2003 1:41:17 PM sdavis29 wrote:
[P]dont forget all the carribean dest.....many of which tie up a plane for at least 8 hrs rountrip..[BR]there is also the shuttle...bos/dca/lga...how many aircraft are on those roots..i would guess quite a few....[BR][BR]just a thought[BR][BR] [/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]If I'm not mistaken, we have fewer than 15 a/c in the shuttle markets. But I was including them as well as the Island destinations. All I took out were the European and Spares.The extra flights i mentioned did include the shuttle as non hub flying.[BR][BR]As for the Island flights taking up 8 hrs or more per plane, thats true, but the CLTRDU or CLTORF flights could run 6 or 7 a dayas an example. The short ones make up for the long ones I think. Nothing is written in stone here, but I think I made the point.[BR]

 

[Oliver Twist]

[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/3/2003 2:35:32 PM diogenes wrote:
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE]------------------------------------------------------------[BR][STRONG]Diogenes says: [/STRONG]Under the current proposal, two mainline jets can be flown, on a permanent basis, into any express city and handled by express personnel. Additionally, four mainline jets can be flown, on a seasonal basis, into any express location.[BR][BR][STRONG]Oliver says: [/STRONG]That is true Diogenes, but how many of those cities can even support a jet that size?? Not nearly as many as you infer. The CHS/MYR/HHH and similar markets may fit your bill here, but the PGV/EWN/ISO/CHO and smiliar markets will never need mainline jet service. If they did, they would have had it already. Those markets are simply too small to warrant a big jet and are, will be, or will remain express stations.[BR][BR][STRONG]Diogenes says: [/STRONG]Will 279 withstand the war contingency language? Maybe, but I wouldn't bet the farm.[BR][BR][STRONG]Oliver says: [/STRONG]Your guess is as good as mine or anyone else's there, but then the sky may fall too - do we act like chicken little all the time? Not me.[BR][BR][STRONG]Diogenes says: [/STRONG]Mainline jets will fly into plenty of places other than the big 10. Mainline pilots will fly them. In a lot of places, express agents will handle them.[BR][BR][STRONG]Oliver says: [/STRONG]I disagree for the reasons I stated above. There are many more markets that are large enough to support mainline jets outside of the big 10. RIC/ORF/BWI/RDU/MIA/FLL/ALB/ROC/BDL/PVD/IND/CMH/JAX. There are many more if I put my mind to it.[BR][BR][STRONG]Diogenes says: [/STRONG]The proposal is clear regarding pay, pensions and benefits if you are designated mainline 'express.' If that's acceptable to you, vote yes.[BR][BR][STRONG]Oliver says:[/STRONG] It is not what I want for myself. I want to remain mainline. I do however understand not all of us will get that wish. [/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]

 

[ITRADE]

[BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/3/2003 4:32:45 PM sfb wrote: [BR][BR]Don't forget that anything west of DFW/IAH/MSP will necessarily be all-mainline given the distances to CLT, PIT, and PHL. So LAX, SNA, SAN, SFO, LAS, PHX, SEA, and DEN will stay mainline-only (and cooperative handling agreements with UA could allow US to begin service on the cheap with a couple of daily frequencies to places like PDX, SLC, AUS, SAT, etc.). Moreover, service to DFW and IAH from PIT or PHL is outside the range of the RJ's currently available to US. The company's strategy regarding Florida seems to also involve larger mainline jets (757's) to keep overall costs down.[BR]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]I think most of the flying via DEN or ORD is going to be via United. On the flip side, US may be handling more of UA's flying on the East coast.

 

[diogenes]

OT,

The company says, fleet we need an additional $14 mil a year, and CWA, $11 mil.

The additional costs we're bearing on medical coverage is about 10% of the total.

In view of the fact there is no additional givebacks in wages, pension, etc., and in view of the fact MDA/express language has been added, how do we reach our respective bogey numbers? Numbers, I might add, that the company says is important enough that they will liquidate if they don't get them.

Will mainline remain in locations other than the big ten? Obviously so. But I find it intriguing that 141m has a spreadsheet, prior to their vote, outlining upcoming furloughs. If the damage to fleet/cs were so minimal, you'd think they'd get it out there.

We'll see what we'll see.

 

[sfb]

Don't forget that anything west of DFW/IAH/MSP will necessarily be all-mainline given the distances to CLT, PIT, and PHL. So LAX, SNA, SAN, SFO, LAS, PHX, SEA, and DEN will stay mainline-only (and cooperative handling agreements with UA could allow US to begin service on the cheap with a couple of daily frequencies to places like PDX, SLC, AUS, SAT, etc.). Moreover, service to DFW and IAH from PIT or PHL is outside the range of the RJ's currently available to US. The company's strategy regarding Florida seems to also involve larger mainline jets (757's) to keep overall costs down.

I did notice that BHM goes all-Express in February, and I saw it previously mentioned that AVP was also going all-Express. This might allow the return of one or two daily mainline flights (subject to enough demand) to places like AVP, BHM, ISP, BGM, etc. I do agree that the proposal is targeted both at cities like ABE (with 1 daily mainline flight) as well as CLE (3 daily mainline flights, which could be reduced to 2). I also wonder if there's any applicability to the Caribbean -- after all, most stations there see two or fewer daily mainline flights. Same for SRQ and SNA which both have two daily mainline flights.

 

[sdavis29]

[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/3/2003 3:44:31 PM Oliver Twist wrote:
[P][BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/3/2003 1:41:17 PM sdavis29 wrote: [BR][BR]dont forget all the carribean dest.....many of which tie up a plane for at least 8 hrs rountrip..[BR]there is also the shuttle...bos/dca/lga...how many aircraft are on those roots..i would guess quite a few....[BR][BR]just a thought[BR][BR] ----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]If I'm not mistaken, we have fewer than 15 a/c in the shuttle markets. But I was including them as well as the Island destinations. All I took out were the European and Spares.The extra flights i mentioned did include the shuttle as non hub flying.[BR][BR]As for the Island flights taking up 8 hrs or more per plane, thats true, but the CLTRDU or CLTORF flights could run 6 or 7 a dayas an example. The short ones make up for the long ones I think. Nothing is written in stone here, but I think I made the point.[BR]
[P][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]point taken...just pulled up feb schedule to florida....flying from 4 cities..dca pit phl and clt[BR]to jax,pbi,fll,mia, mco, rsw,srq,tpa amd pns...[BR][BR][BR]ttl daily flts 119.....rsw will be getting 2 more flts from dca..average flt is a little over 2 hrs...[BR]even if the same a/c are used back and fourth..there has to be a good number of a/c dedicated to just the florida market.[BR][BR] [/P][img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/10.gif']

 

[apofurlough]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/3/2003 423 PM ITRADE wrote:





I think most of the flying via DEN or ORD is going to be via United. On the flip side, US may be handling more of UA's flying on the East coast.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Itrade if we handle UA's flying will that count as mainline and keep a station from going express?

 

[deltawatch]

If only a couple of cities are going express then why don’t they put it in the language.

Remember this: We have No plans to close Tampa maintenance! Then corporate security shows up at midnight and says pack your tools boys and hit the highway.

 

[PLANES333]

These are te hub airport flight stats.

mainline/exp/shuttle/total
Charlotte/Douglas (Hub) 260 200 460
Pittsburgh Int'l. (Hub) 157 254 411
Philadelphia Int'l. (Hub) 211 172 383
New York LaGuardia 19 150 31 200
Ronald Reagan Washington National 38 98 29 165
Boston Logan Int'l. 29 40 30 99
Baltimore/Washington Int'l. (BWI) 15 29 44

 

[RedOne]

Being from a small station, I feel I have the following decision to make...those in large cities are not faced with this same decision.
1. Vote NO...look for another job, because MAY liquidate
2. Vote YES..look for another job, because in a few months my station will become commuter station...then (IF they offer me a job) I can work 2 or more mainline daily flights plus comutters at commuter wage. (Will they start me off at the top of their pay scale...or at the bottom as a new-hire?) I don't think so. I ain't gonna work under this pressure/hours/mgr that I have to put up with/etc for the same thing that I can work somewhere else for. Oh, and by the way, Chip will continue to fly his mainline flight into my commuter station making his mainline salary while my fellow employees who decide to stay, get a major pay cut (should they decide to work for commuter) Wonder how many other stations are going commuter? YOURS? As Dio. has pointed out, company won't tell us at this point what stations they plan to convert into commuter stations. Wonder why they wont?
Not decided yet on how I will vote. (No Chip...I ain't gonna just quit!) Leaning towards YES and then hoping for severance pay when the station is closed as a mainline sta(if they don't do away with severance pay later). I figure they will try to do away with it too...cause as many stations as I suspect will be converted to commuter stations will cause a hardship on them to pay us all severance pay. Howevcer: a NO vote could mean no severance pay.
Either way I vote, I figure my career is short lived with US.