Hidden Rj Costs

[diogenes]

This topic was broached on another thread, and I thought it worthy of additional examination.

Weight restriction season is upon us, and will get worse as temperatures rise. The EMB 145's are performing abysmally.

Recently, a Chautauqua captain announced a restriction of 50 pax (the flight was booked to 52) and 0 (yes, that's ZERO) bags (so far, I fail to see how RJ's are 'saving' US).

We are routinely seeing reduced pax/cargo allowances on these birds, on short (where landing limits prevail) AND long (where max takeoff is generally the limitation) hauls.

The revised FAA estimates for passengers and baggage do not fully explain this. I have seen Dash 8's follow a 145 90 minutes later, with the 145 restricted, and the Dash carrying 50 pax and 80 bags. As an aside, those estimates are still a joke. The standard pax weight of 175 includes carry-on items. Next time you're on a flight, look your fellow travelers over. How many come in at 175 lbs WITH the rollaboard? And don't get me started on a 30 lb average bag weight - it's as realistic as the 175 lbs.

More coming.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Very astute observations, diogenes. I look forward to "more coming".

Since I don't know the answer, does anyone know if the CRJ's are having the same weight restriction problems?

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Not exactly on topic, but along the same vein, it seems that the "new reality" facing the regional airline industry is controlling cost:

"The regional airline industry faces impressive growth in the coming decade, and its greatest challenge--maintaining or reducing costs while providing efficient service. Failure to pass the economics test means operators will vanish, as will air services to small communities."

Article

Jim

 

[diogenes]

Now, let us consider some safety aspects of this.

Every weight restricted flight that takes off is at the legal weight and balance limit, with little margin for error. Every passenger aircraft is designed to takeoff with an engine loss at rotation, but you do NOT want to fly in this part of the graph.

Now, take into account human error, and you have a recipe for trouble.

There can also be other factors at work.

I am aware of a situation where a mainline manager, to avoid leaving military duffles off an overweight flight (the mainline average bag weight for these is 70 lbs) asked for them to be shown as standard (30 lbs) baggage. In this case, the request was refused, and an offer was made to settle the dispute with a call to the FAA.

The point is, there is considerable pressure to move the bags along by whatever means. How many employees, let alone the $8 an hour wonders, will do the right thing? I know for a fact some haven't. I know for a fact some flights have operated overweight, out of balance, or both.

Along with this, how many employees even KNOW when a flight is off the graph? That comes with experience and training.

The way it is going, the sole person with the training and knowledge is going to be the captain, and he is relying on a piece of paper handed to him, not what he has seen to be the case.

I believe every safety minded aviator would want an experienced hand, knowledgeable about weight and balance, on that piece of paper.

Next, the costs.

 

[whlinder]

*cough* Q400 *cough*

 

[diogenes]

When bags are left behind, they must be delivered. Interim expenses are incurred.

I have been reliably informed mainline absorbs these costs.

That is just the beginning.

When Chatauqua and Mesa came to town, they did not bring a single piece of ground support equipment - air starts, deicing rigs, tugs, carts, etc. All are furnished by mainline. The costs for agents to handle these flights are absorbed by mainline, not allocated to the affiliate. The cost of the jetway rental? - mainline covers it.

I wonder who covers the landing fees?

I wonder how mainline CASM would compare to WN, if the costs of operating the affiliates were properly allocated?

The unions should insist on these numbers before they give the company the time of day.

And oh, by-the-bye, the company knows they have a capacity/payload problem with the express operation. Consumer affairs was calling around the stations last week, trying to get to the bottom of baggage left behind. They allowed as how the problem is sizeable. The sad thing is, any front-line grunt could (and did) have told them BEFORE the fact.

 

[RedOne]

We are routinely seeing reduced pax/cargo allowances on these birds, on short (where landing limits prevail) AND long (where max takeoff is generally the limitation) hauls.

Diogenes....point of clarification may be needed.
.
We are seeing restrictions on the RELEASES of these flights as to the number of pax and baggage that will be allowed. I do not remember seeing any flights "capped" with say 40 pax because of repeated restrictions. The computer will allow the flt to be booked to capacity. Then, you will see on the release... restrictions pax 40....bags 20, etc

 

[ClueByFour]

If CCY thinks people like RJs better than props, just wait until someone has their luggage left for W&B reasons on "the jet."

I also like the fact that you can't "planeside check" stuff on the -170, but that's another bag of worms.

 

[flyin2low]

I also like the fact that you can't "planeside check" stuff on the -170, but that's another bag of worms.

The E70 has a full sized overhead compartment and more than enough room under the seats, so why should you have too?

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

Overheard recenlty at the express gate in a "focus city": The gate agents asking for 17 volunteers due to w/b on a flight to JAX!

 

[StatioRat]

CRJ’s and Weight Restrictions????? I thought that was the norm!


I work in CHS and nearly ever RJ that go further north than DCA has a weight restriction. Last Thursday we went out with fifty passenger and no bags. We sent the bags via CLT to there final destination. Yesterday the same thing, except we could only go with 39 passengers and 6 bags. I call our inventory Analyst almost every week to get the authorization lowered to a number that is manageable. Our load factor out of CHS on Sunday and Monday are 100%. I wonder myself what amount of money the company is saving by using RJ’s in markets that aren’t able to handle passenger and their bags. The cost of delivering bags in NYC must be one of the highest delivery cost on the system. I only look for this situation to get worst once the weather gets warmer.

Now if someone could explain this to me………..

Delta fly’s the same route to LGA, using the same type A/C but they don’t seem to have the weight restrictions as US. WHY????????????????????

Also, what good is load control? Why can’t our ops people go back to doing the weight n’ balance. How much $$$$ would that same if we did away with that department???? Just a thought.

 

[aerosmith]

US routinely trucks baggage from pit/erie(don't know code).

 

[matika]

Hmmm...I work with RJs every day and (with the notable exception of Trans States, who flies the slightly older and less streamlined 145) generally the restrictions are 50/80 or some such. CRJs tend to be more like 50/65. There are occasionally tighter restrictions than that, but not often.

Where are you seeing this trouble?

 

[Furloughedagain]

There are only two times that i've seen significant weight restrictions on the CRJ.

#1. Short flights where max landing weight is the limiting factor. (MGTW: 53000, MLW: 47000)

#2. Flights where weather has required the use of two alternates and this excess fuel causes payload limits. That is one of the reasons that Comair has applied for and in is in the process of being approved for Cat II. It should, hopefully, eliminate the need for the second alternate in many cases.

We also did the paperwork shuffle to increase MGTW from 51,000 to 53,000 on most of the airplanes which makes a HUGE difference in being able to carry a full load.

We have a number of extremely long flight segments where weight is not a problem such as CVG-MIA, CVG-NAS, OMA-SLC, BHM-LGA, ATL-Monterey Mexico, CVG-COS.

All in all, its a nice machine as far as payload is concerned.

 

[WSurf]

Oh my GOD! I would not want to be stuck in a CRJ on those long hauls!!!!!!!! Those are 3 to 4 or more hour flights, and thats CRAZY! Those should be mainline airplanes, not stuck in a Lawn Dart on routes like that. Even if its a CRJ7!

Anyway, wait till the middle of the summer, when those ERJ's take a big heat in the performance. Had a mainline rampy tell me he would rather work 100 dash 8 flight in a day, then the 4 erjs they get each day