MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
More Seats On USAir Aircraft
- Thread starter MetalMover
- Start date
More seats? US planes will get AA's Main Cabin Extra, which involved removing one row of economy (recall the Timco loose 757 seat fiasco?). Last year, however, AA changed tack and decided to reinstall that removed row and gain the extra space by squeezing the remaining seats closer togethter, including tightening up First Class seat pitch.
RJcasualty
Advanced
- Jun 29, 2004
- 187
- 67
More fodder for cabin rage.
jimntx
Veteran
If we keep this up (reducing most passengers' space to benefit a few), people will start deciding that a comfortable, leisurely 5-day trip by train from New York to LA fits into their business plans quite well. Particularly now that Internet and cell phone access are available pretty much everywhere. 
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 584
- Banned
- #5
I'm wondering how this would effect non-reving? ------- If at all?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #7
AA and other airlines are capable of revenue managing the added seats just as well as they revenue manage the seats they do have now.
Other airlines have added seats and passengers still keep flying them. Some passengers will resist having to squeeze into tighter seats but many are capable of doing it and will do it.
Adding seats to existing aircraft is about the easiest way to reduce unit costs and increase revenue with minimal investment.
Other airlines have added seats and passengers still keep flying them. Some passengers will resist having to squeeze into tighter seats but many are capable of doing it and will do it.
Adding seats to existing aircraft is about the easiest way to reduce unit costs and increase revenue with minimal investment.
RJcasualty
Advanced
- Jun 29, 2004
- 187
- 67
Wondering if the added seating and belly baggage--- plus the usual weather variables might actually make certain equipment more prone to weight restrict. That happened to me at least once on a '73.PullUp said:
PullUp
Veteran
- May 22, 2010
- 820
- 736
Must have been on a long route in the summer with a short runway. Even the underpowered -400's can take a full load 99.9% of the time. I doubt that the higher thrust and lighter framed -800's will have problems.RJcasualty said:
Airbii are just as capable. The only time I can think of is severe widespread weather events that require large reserve fuel loads. You don't want to be out flying in that stuff anyway though.
Cheers.
nycbusdriver
Veteran
PullUp said:
I understand your sentiment, but I would rather the company be hugely profitable so they can pay me enough to purchase a ticket when I need to go somewhere. IOW, the Henry Ford philosophy of wage rates: He paid his workers a very high salary for the time because he felt they should be able to purchase the Ford automobiles they were assembling.
PullUp
Veteran
- May 22, 2010
- 820
- 736
That is perhaps the most mistaken understanding of Ford's philosophy, and it is become a popular notion today, but it is untrue. Ford paid his workers just enough to keep them from quitting because factory working conditions were boring, repetitive, and dangerous. He had a 32% annual turnover rate because it sucked to be a worker in his factory. To keep workers he paid above the average wage available at the time, but the workers were by no means 'highly compensated' and Henry did not pay them out of some altruistic ideal - he simply had to pay a wage that workers could not easily walk away from. The turnover and cost of training new workers more than outweighed the wage increase. It had absolutely nothing to do with being 'able to purchase what they produced'. That was a fabrication invented to bolster Ford's image by a PR firm.nycbusdriver said:
Cheers.
Here's a Forbes article that's enlightening and entertaining on the subject: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/04/the-story-of-henry-fords-5-a-day-wages-its-not-what-you-think/
Similar threads
