Looks like pilot error?

[N924PS]

luvn, requesting direct is the only intelligent approach. It saves gas and time. If traffic flow does not permit direct routing, then ATC won't approve it.

When given direct we still fly Econ/LRC to conserve fuel.

You should try it sometime. Your airline would be less unprofitable.

Actually, direct is not always the intelligent approach. And it certainly does not always save gas and time. Especially on transcontinental flights.

My airline's fuel conservation team monitored specific flights against what was actually flown and the flight plan time/fuel burn.

In many instances going direct was more costly in time and fuel because a direct routing would negate the advantage of a tailwind component or be adversely affected by more headwind.

You should try it sometime. Especially when your fuel hedge expires.

 

[KCFlyer]

Hmmm....the LAS flight I was on (the one the pilot thanked us for), It was announced that we were cruising at 24,000 feet...apparently headwinds were a bit of a bugger up higher. But don't worry about LUV pilots after the hedges run out...perhaps you didn't notice that they would have been profitable last quarter even if the hedges weren't there?

 

[tulswa]

924,

SWA does consider wind effects on direct routing. If direct will burn more fuel, the dispatcher informs the Captain via the flight release remarks section.

 

[Busdrvr]

Hmmm....the LAS flight I was on (the one the pilot thanked us for), It was announced that we were cruising at 24,000 feet...apparently headwinds were a bit of a bugger up higher. But don't worry about LUV pilots after the hedges run out...perhaps you didn't notice that they would have been profitable last quarter even if the hedges weren't there?

I'd recommend you take a closer look at what they filed with the SEC. It indicates that they would NOT have been. Simply the facts.

 

[KCFlyer]

I'd recommend you take a closer look at what they filed with the SEC. It indicates that they would NOT have been. Simply the facts.

My bad....allow me to rephrase, they still would have lost less money than an airline operating for 3 years under bankruptcy protection.

 

[Busdrvr]

My bad....allow me to rephrase, they still would have lost less money than an airline operating for 3 years under bankruptcy protection.

And then killed more people this Quarter....

 

[Rhino]

Still the same class act, Bus.

 

[Busdrvr]

Still the same class act, Bus.

Same classless SWA and supporters, valuing "who made money" over who killed somebody. I' think from here on out, I'll remind you of this kid every time one of the trolls mentions BK or "who made money". Deal?

 

[tulswa]

How about if everyone go spend some quality time with those you care about. It's Christmas, or whichever holiday or non-holiday you choose to celebrate. Let's come back in a few days and try to be a bit more civil to each other.

Merry Christmas to each and every one of you who find some joy working in and around aviation. We are all very fortunate indeed.

 

[KCFlyer]

Still the same class act, Bus.

Yep...that's bussie. You know, when a UAL flight goes down, and given that aviation is what it is, it will happen, bus can rest assured that SWA employees and supporters won't make such crass statements.

BTW bussie...I wonder how SWA's SEC filing would look if they didn't have to pay their bills.

I' think from here on out, I'll remind you of this kid every time one of the trolls mentions BK or "who made money". Deal?

That's the good old Christmas spirit, isn't it Bus? Merry Christmas...scrooge.

 

[Rhino]

Bus, when you chose UAL over SWA, you did two things: 1) Ensured I continue to fly with professionals. 2) Demonstrated your intellect and consummate knowledge of the airline business.

Every time you remind me of the tragic death of that 6 y.o., I'll remind you of how many pax UAL has killed over the years vs. WN. As of now, WN's is zero. I'll also mention the stellar V1 cut in SFO/the STUPIFIED CA's performance (thank God for a jumpseater with a grip) and the "Where the Fu## am I" routine UAL pulled in PVD (no JS this time, just a US crew with a clue).

I had guys like you in my squadron. I ensured they never drove anything but a jeep afterward.

 

[Busdrvr]

Yep...that's bussie. You know, when a UAL flight goes down, and given that aviation is what it is, it will happen, bus can rest assured that SWA employees and supporters won't make such crass statements.

BTW bussie...I wonder how SWA's SEC filing would look if they didn't have to pay their bills.
That's the good old Christmas spirit, isn't it Bus? Merry Christmas...scrooge.

Come on KC, you can't be that slow to think that UAL doesn't pay it's bills. Here's a little clue bird for you. NO ONE HAS TO DO BUSINESS WITH UAL. Being in BK actually results in LESS favorable business arrangements. The gas truck won't put in gas until he gets CASH. But since you've got it figured out, which bill didn't UAL pay in the third Q?

BTW, so that you don't continue to wallow in ignorance re SWA's current financial performance vs those evil safety concerned legacy carriers.

UAL reported third-quarter operating earnings of $165 million, $245 million better than the same quarter last year, despite higher fuel prices for the mainline and regional affiliates negatively impacting fuel expense by $405 million year-over-year. The company believes the best indicator of United's post-reorganization financial performance is provided by reviewing operating and net earnings excluding restructuring charges. Excluding the reorganization items, UAL earned a net profit for the third quarter totaling $68 million.

Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV) today reported third quarter 2005 net income of $227 million, or $.28 per diluted share, compared to $119 million for third quarter 2004, or $.15 per diluted share. The Company's third quarter 2005 results included $87 million (before income taxes) in unrealized gains, included in "Other gains", associated with derivative instruments that will settle in future accounting periods, recorded as a result of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard 133 (SFAS 133), "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities," as amended. Excluding these unrealized gains, third quarter 2005 net income was $174 million,
"We continue to mitigate record-high jet fuel prices with our successful hedging program, which resulted in a $295 million benefit from settled contracts in third quarter 2005.

So as you can see, without the non cash BK costs in Q 3, UAL posted a SIZABLE NET AND OPERATING PROFIT.

Meanwhile, without the hedges SWA LOST MONEY. And before you say that shows a strong business for SWA, it doesn't, it shows a good investment. If the airline lost big money on flying but made money shorting Dell stock for the Q, would you be telling us about the strength of the underlying business? Times are changing (QUICKLY), and if I were you, I'd get out of that SWA stock by the middle of January.

 

[KCFlyer]

if I were you, I'd get out of that SWA stock by the middle of January.

Been out of airline stocks for a couple of years now, thank you very much. Tell me, when UAL finally emerges from bankruptcy after it's three year protection period, what do current shareholders stand to gain? If I were YOU I'd get our of UALBK before next year.

 

[Busdrvr]

Bus, when you chose UAL over SWA, you did two things: 1) Ensured I continue to fly with professionals. 2) Demonstrated your intellect and consummate knowledge of the airline business.

Every time you remind me of the tragic death of that 6 y.o., I'll remind you of how many pax UAL has killed over the years vs. WN. As of now, WN's is zero. I'll also mention the stellar V1 cut in SFO/the STUPIFIED CA's performance (thank God for a jumpseater with a grip) and the "Where the Fu## am I" routine UAL pulled in PVD (no JS this time, just a US crew with a clue).

I had guys like you in my squadron. I ensured they never drove anything but a jeep afterward.

First, let me reiterate, SWA employs some of the finest pilots I've ever had the priveledge of working with. No one has better stick and rudder guys.

Now as always, here are my "beefs" with SWA. As an old wise Ops Officer once told me, "there is a BIG differance between a mistake and a crime. If you make a mistake while do the best job you can do, I'll back you up 100%, if however you commit a crime, I'll hang you".
That is the differance you can't seem to comprehend. And frankly, that's the part that scares me the most. If an engine comes apart, or if a pilot, while doing his best, simply makes an error that causes a mishap, I can't fault him. But when a pilot INTENTIONALLY violates either the FAR's or company SOP for the purpose of getting there faster, or so that he can get that one additional trip for pay that day, then he should be hung, and if the airline fosters that type of culture, then they should be fined/sued until they either go out of business or catch a clue. There are now THREE instances in the last few years where SWA landed a jet they shouldn't have landed. One is tragic, three is CRIMINAL.

Now to your other points:
the V-1 cut? When you fly your first jet over 100 tons, I'll let you comment. FWIW, when it happened at UAL (And nobody died BTW) the company IMMEDIATELY took action to ensure that "bunkies" would have better currency and training (at considerable expense, so I doubt SWA would have done the same)
PVD incident: The pilots made a mistake. They stopped and FESSED UP. The controller should have been fired. Again, see mistake vs CRIME. Would you rather they have done the SWA cowboy thing and just sped around the airport til they found the runway?

And so you had guys like me in your squadron? Guys concerned with safety? And you GROUNDED them?

About theose "professional" SWA pilots.
What about the SWA pilot (buddy of mine) who was so hammered at an Air Force training program that someone called an ambulence for him when they found him naked and passed out with the door open the next morning and couldn't wake him. nothing like a hospital stay for being drunk. Is that they type guy you put in the cockpit while putting me in a jeep? Thank goodness you got out then....

 

[Busdrvr]

Been out of airline stocks for a couple of years now, thank you very much. Tell me, when UAL finally emerges from bankruptcy after it's three year protection period, what do current shareholders stand to gain? If I were YOU I'd get our of UALBK before next year.

I've been out of the UALBK since about a day after the filing. I had a fairly large holding (large by my modest standards....maybe not yours ) prior to the filing. I was "playing the lotto" under the assumption that if the loan came through, I'd score, if not, I'd lose it all. I lost, and unfortunately didn't have the guts to try it again as AMR was going down and threatening BK. Hindsight....

But no need to worry about the stockholders at UAL. A vast majority of those hurt the most were us greedy employees <_< . We'll hopefully get some back with the post BK allocation. If the company performs even close to what they filed, I'll be ok

and MERRY CHRISTMAS KC. Too bad it's not a little colder so you guys could have a White Christmas. A little snow seems to be so much nicer than a cold drizzely day