Planes May Fly Longer

[SVQLBA]

You've piqued my curiosity here. What makes a large number of flights necessary to roll a hub successfully? My sense was that the benefits of rolling a hub are:

1) Reduced turn times (this is where the "extra aircraft" metric shows up)
2) Reduced ground crew, since you have fewer aircraft to service at a time
3) Reduced load on the runway infrastructure, due to fewer movements at a time

Unless you're talking about, say, ten gates in use at a time, I'd think you'd be able to extract these benefits even at a smaller operation.

Could you help me understand what makes PIT too small for this?

Thanks!

You do get all the benefits you note, even at spokes. Some of the articles on AA's experience discuss in detail the benefits at the spokes. What you could lose at a sub-scale hub like PIT is connection times, if you are not intelligent. Becaiuse there are far fewer flights than at PHL or CLT, if you have a flat load of flights through the day the avg connect time will go up much more than the 7-12 minute figures that have been quoted.

However, if it hasn't been done already, there are intelligent ways to "de-peak" a hub like PIT to keep connectivity that is almost as good as it was, but still capture most of the operational efficiencies. You still see waves of flights, but activity os less peaked.

 

[GeezLouis]

For those of us that don't know, could someone explain how a "rolling hub" works?

 

[PITbull]

A320av8r:

Your point is valid, but Tom Olsen was referring to tonight’s working dinner meeting between Bruce Lakefield, the ALPA MEC Officers, ALPA NC, ALPA Advisors, and US Airways management personnel.

This meeting will be the first of a series of upcoming discussions regarding the "Going Forward Plan" and is designed to establish a framework for future talks.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

ahh, how cute... Just curous...what's Brucey's contribution to the discussions??? He didn't even know what casms and RAsms were until he came to U... Must be a quick study on airline theories..LOL....

Must be a "feel good" thing to have a board member sit beside you during these discussions. You know, rub elbows and stuff.. you scratch my back/I scratch your back etc... Let's have lunch, eat drink and be merry, empty out your pockets..etc..

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

Sorry it took so long to get to your question...April 15 is starting to loom.

On the PIT hub operation with it's fewer flights, there would be a bigger penalty in connecting times since the more flights per day to a given destination the better a rolling hub works. Likewise, the fewer flights means less gain in efficiency with the ground operation.

Unlike PHL & CLT (to a lesser extent), PIT does not have the congestion-caused delays that the rolling hub helps reduce.

It comes down to a trade-off. How much gain vs passenger inconvenience of longer connections. Someone with the detailed info on passenger traffic patterns at PIT would have to look at it to really determine if it could work.

Jim

 

[MarkMyWords]

For those of us that don't know, could someone explain how a "rolling hub" works?

Geez -

The concept of a rolling hub is to take the peaks and vallyes out of the exsisting banking hub. Instead of everyone arriving within an hour and leaving at about the same time, you create a more consistent flow of traffic all day long. In a station like PHL, when the first plane arrives, it may wait up to 90 minutes until it departs because you have to wait for all of the other connecting airplanes to arrive, allow 30 minutes for connections, then everyone leaves. Having an airplane sit idle on the gate for 90 minutes is highly unproductive, as is the crew who is on board, waiting for customers and departure. That gate utilization and agent productivity suffers because the airplane sits there for so long before it departs. Once the push beings to depart, if you are the last man off the gate, you could wait up to 45 minutes from pushback to take-off - thus wasting fuel and additional crew time expesnse, as the crew is being paid for that additional 45 minutes while they are still on the ground and off the gate.

Roll the hub and you have airplanes coming and going all day long. Picture it sort of like how WN operates. An airplane comes in, is on the ground 35-40 minutes and it is off and running again. You increase your airplane and crew utilization by reducing sit times. You increase agent and gate utilization because you are no longer sitting there waiting for the banks to arrive and depart. You reduce fuel consumption because you reduce the taxi out time as there is a constant flow of traffic in/out of the airport. You could reduce ATC issues by taking the peaks and valleys off the Air Traffic system. These are just a few examples of the beenfits of "rolling" a hub versus banking.

Add to the increased productivity of the airplanes and employees, you also have the added benefit of reducing your CASM.....which is all the rage in CCY.

Hope that helps

 

[cavalier]

Add to the increased productivity of the airplanes and employees, you also have the added benefit of reducing your CASM.....which is all the rage in CCY.

Hope that helps

If it doesn't eliminate jobs exactly why does it save a dime other than fuel wear and tear etc? Or, does it eliminate jobs?

 

[ITRADE]

PHL is the ideal place for this. You've probably got the highest percentage of flights to a given city with the highest volume of frequency, coupled with a tight gate/alley issue, coupled with high O/D traffic.

This should work out fine - assuming the schedulers and route planners can get it right.

 

[MarkMyWords]

Cav -

It could very well eliminate jobs. But throw in the possibility of adding 60 additional airplanes and I think you offset the job losses, with job gains. Also, from a crew prospective, I believe that you would need additional crews because you are increasing their productivity and reducing sit time, meaning they would accrue hard time faster and trips would be worth more. You would need the same number of mechanics, because the total fleet count numbers haven't changed. In PHL, you may need less agents, but you would need more full-time agents since they would go from working 3-4 flights in an 8 hour period to working 6-7. Again this may be a wash if we gain additional airplanes.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Hi Cav,

It doesn't necessarily save a dime - in fact it might cost a little money. Why?

The airplanes are flying more rather than sitting - higher fuel burn flying than sitting. More flying might mean more landings, therefore more landing fees. Etc.

What it does is lower cost per available seat mile - that extra flying is producing extra seat miles at very low incremental cost. This lowers your average cost per available seat mile. The gates can handle more flights per day, hence less cost per passenger. The agents/rampers handle more flights per day - hence more productive. Etc.

Jim

 

[cavalier]

Thanks guys...I have my A@P and a couple other trades under my belt but business never interested me, until now, when we are in dire straights.

I wonder how much the, casm, ezlu, rasmatas, etc would come down if Dave would give up all his parachute money and not hand out bonuses to people we MUST keep for some strange reason?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Cav,

Probably very little - we produce seat miles in the billions so a few million wouldn't make much difference.

But, as they say....

Everything's on the table.

Jim

 

[MarkMyWords]

Cav -

I wouldn't look at the merit raises as bonus money. If you are an employee on the MSP, you are given raises based on merit and employee evaluations. If I am an outstanding employee, I may get a 3-4% raise, if I am a marginal employee I may get a 2-3% raise. These should be viewed in the same context as the "snap back" raises that are in all of the contracts.....they are more like a cost of living raise (that is being eaten up by the additional burden of higher contributions for insurance).

I agree with you 100% if we are talking about executive bonuses and golden parachutes. But please don't tie the merit raises to the executive bonuses and golden parachutes. Those 2 items are for the luxury of the select few at the top and not for everyone on the MSP.

 

[BillLumbergh]

Lets discuss bonii in the merit/bonus thread. Thanks

-Darth

 

[ktflyhome]

Does anyone remember several years ago we were really into doing "Quick Turns"?? I seem to recall many trip pairing where every leg had a 30 minute or less turn. Everyone was scrambling to get on clean, cater, and board. :huh:

 

[cavalier]

But please don't tie the merit raises to the executive bonuses and golden parachutes. Those 2 items are for the luxury of the select few at the top and not for everyone on the MSP.

FINE...but what about the employees left standing MMW? They want more; WAY more cuts and our insurance will climb to the stratosphere as well and we are NOT receiving 3 or 4 percent increases.

My point was a simple one and exactly what Bronner pointed out. CEO compensation should not be in the millions to just survive, but to profit which at this point flying to mars would be an easier task.