Anyone familiar with the west operation already knew when this merger occured, the configuration on the East side was going to be modified on some a/c. Closets removed to add more seats on some a/c and a reduction of first class seats on some a/c to allow for more coach pax. This airline has to continue to remain competetive and keep its revenue stream maximized..that is the survival mode that is necessary for todays airlines. This airline wasn't named LCC because of its high cost of operating.
US Airways - new changes of Seat configurations
- Thread starter Diamondbacks2004
- Start date
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
All this whinning and whaling over F seats. Did we have the same rants when they reconfigured the 757's? They are still flying full, nearly every leg. No huge drop in revenue on the LAS runs with only 8 seats in F. If there would have been a significant drop in revenue due to the seat reconfiguration, they would have reconsidered it by now.
In my opinion, 16 seats in F are more then enough, as long as we do not compromise the performance of the airplane by adding additional coach seats.
I thought I had heard something in the spring about them reconfiguring the A330's to eliminate the old F seats and to reduce Envoy seating - eliminating rows 6 and 7.
In my opinion, 16 seats in F are more then enough, as long as we do not compromise the performance of the airplane by adding additional coach seats.
I thought I had heard something in the spring about them reconfiguring the A330's to eliminate the old F seats and to reduce Envoy seating - eliminating rows 6 and 7.
Flying Titan
Veteran
- Oct 14, 2003
- 773
- 0
MMW -
Most of the US elite pax avoid the 757 like the plague now. It used to be the aircraft of choice on just about any given route. From my anedcotal experience, now, if FF's see a 757 listed, many will look for alternatives. OTOH, they jump at the 321 because they know they have a good chance to be upgraded.
If LCC keeps reducing their elite pax's chance for upgrades, what's the incentive for FFs to stay? There aren't a whole lot of other benefits for loyalty.
Most of the US elite pax avoid the 757 like the plague now. It used to be the aircraft of choice on just about any given route. From my anedcotal experience, now, if FF's see a 757 listed, many will look for alternatives. OTOH, they jump at the 321 because they know they have a good chance to be upgraded.
If LCC keeps reducing their elite pax's chance for upgrades, what's the incentive for FFs to stay? There aren't a whole lot of other benefits for loyalty.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
So if your theory is correct, then we should be looking to ADD seats to the F cabin to entice people to join DM for the "status" upgrades. How do you balance the need to premium seats with the need for enhancing revenue opportunities? What about when we fly the A319 or A320 on the transcons? Show we reconfigure them to the 26 seats also? Where do you draw the line?
When changes like this are mentioned, FF's like yourselves hunker down and prepare for battle because you feel as if the company is "taking" something away from you. There will still be plenty of F seats on the airplane. We are not eliminating F/C on the aircraft. What if the airplanes were delivered with 16 seats, would you be screaming to have them increased to 26? What about the reduction in F seats on the A320? They will be going from 16 to 12 if the AWA fleet configuration is standard.
Take a wait and see approach and don't automatically start that whaling that you will take your revenue elsewhere. If they do reconfigure and you are no longer able to upgrade, then you have a vaild complaint. At this point it is all a guessing game.
When changes like this are mentioned, FF's like yourselves hunker down and prepare for battle because you feel as if the company is "taking" something away from you. There will still be plenty of F seats on the airplane. We are not eliminating F/C on the aircraft. What if the airplanes were delivered with 16 seats, would you be screaming to have them increased to 26? What about the reduction in F seats on the A320? They will be going from 16 to 12 if the AWA fleet configuration is standard.
Take a wait and see approach and don't automatically start that whaling that you will take your revenue elsewhere. If they do reconfigure and you are no longer able to upgrade, then you have a vaild complaint. At this point it is all a guessing game.
BuffaloJoe
Veteran
- Aug 17, 2005
- 2,873
- 18
Taking away 10 F seats on the A321 can mean more cost of operating it. Take those 10 F seats and convert them into 15 Y Seats. 5 extra seats= about 3000 lbs. extra weight. Plus doesn't the A321 have range issues when hit with the winter headwinds westbound? More weight, means more chances of a stop. If they have range issues now with the current configuration, what makes them think that will get better with the new? Take away those extra seats will be more costlier with those CP Members jumping ship.
Maybe they will take those 10 seats out and not replace them with Y Seats. Giving all more legroom, but I don't think so.
Maybe they will take those 10 seats out and not replace them with Y Seats. Giving all more legroom, but I don't think so.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
Buffalo....
adding 5 seats adds 3000 lbs of weight? I don't think so. Taking out the 2.5 rows of F seats will allow you to add approx 21 coach seats for a net gain of 11 seats. Would an additional all cusotmers and bags cause a weight/balance or performance issue? I am not sure, but I am sure that all of that will be reviewed before the decision is made.
Bob -
It has been my understanding that the coast to coast long hauls have always had marginal to negative revenue performance. If I recall correctly, there was even discussion during BK2 of dumping transcon flying all together because they did not generate positive cash flow with the price of fuel. It was decided not to suspend transcon flying because it would make the route system much less attractive and we ran the risk of alienating many in our FF'er base.
If, in today's environment, removing 10 F seats and adding 21 Y seats could make operating the A321 profitable, then why would we not do it? A 16/163 configuration still offers ample opportunities to upgrade.
adding 5 seats adds 3000 lbs of weight? I don't think so. Taking out the 2.5 rows of F seats will allow you to add approx 21 coach seats for a net gain of 11 seats. Would an additional all cusotmers and bags cause a weight/balance or performance issue? I am not sure, but I am sure that all of that will be reviewed before the decision is made.
Bob -
It has been my understanding that the coast to coast long hauls have always had marginal to negative revenue performance. If I recall correctly, there was even discussion during BK2 of dumping transcon flying all together because they did not generate positive cash flow with the price of fuel. It was decided not to suspend transcon flying because it would make the route system much less attractive and we ran the risk of alienating many in our FF'er base.
If, in today's environment, removing 10 F seats and adding 21 Y seats could make operating the A321 profitable, then why would we not do it? A 16/163 configuration still offers ample opportunities to upgrade.
FCYTravis
Senior
26 F is *not* too much when you're talking about the transcon trunk routes to and from San Francisco and Los Angeles. As a San Francisco-based Gold and Plat preferred, I have failed to clear SFO-PHL several times. These are elite-heavy, full-boat routes where the F-cabin is very often packed, not flights where 10 F seats are going empty every flight.
Pulling F out of these planes will boot elites to the back - and frankly, if I don't get upgraded on the transcons, there's really no reason to stay loyal to US Airways. The transcons are the only US flights where there's anything resembling F-cabin service anyway (hot meals, etc.)
If I'm going to be sitting in coach for five-hour flights across the country, I'm going to do it in Economy Plus. Simple as that.
Pulling F out of these planes will boot elites to the back - and frankly, if I don't get upgraded on the transcons, there's really no reason to stay loyal to US Airways. The transcons are the only US flights where there's anything resembling F-cabin service anyway (hot meals, etc.)
If I'm going to be sitting in coach for five-hour flights across the country, I'm going to do it in Economy Plus. Simple as that.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
I agree with you 110% Bob.
My personal feeling is that the A321 and B757 should be configured to 16 F seats. In my opinion, 8 is to few seats for an airplane that size. Commonality goes a long way. Having one "fleet" of airplanes that are, for the most part, interchangable (airbus) with 3 different first class capacities was a mistake.
My personal feeling is that the A321 and B757 should be configured to 16 F seats. In my opinion, 8 is to few seats for an airplane that size. Commonality goes a long way. Having one "fleet" of airplanes that are, for the most part, interchangable (airbus) with 3 different first class capacities was a mistake.
hp_fa
Veteran
- Feb 19, 2004
- 3,290
- 178
F Class is always full of what? That is the question. Full fare F class tickets? Nope. Frequent fliers? Yep.
Frequent flyer upgrades are not a given. If you want to be sure to ride up front you need to pay the fare. Otherwise it is a crapshoot. But, you don't really expect the airline to configure FC with seats it will never fill on a full revenue basis, do you? 26 FC seats on a transcon? No way unless an exclusive group is onboard. Otherwise there are FC seats being given away for coach prices.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
Hp fa
With all do respect, you have no idea the revenue that having F seats brings in, regardless of whether or not anyone "pays" for them. They are used as a tool to entice our Very FF'ers to stay with us. They are used as a reward for those that spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on US annually.
If Bob spends 100K a year flying with us and we elect to remove the F cabin, we have removed one more "perk" or reward for his loyalty. The problem here is, having the right number of seats on the right airplanes to ensure the right balance of revenue to make the flight profitable.
Don't ever open that can of worms about people "paying" for F class seats. These guys will eat you alive!
With all do respect, you have no idea the revenue that having F seats brings in, regardless of whether or not anyone "pays" for them. They are used as a tool to entice our Very FF'ers to stay with us. They are used as a reward for those that spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on US annually.
If Bob spends 100K a year flying with us and we elect to remove the F cabin, we have removed one more "perk" or reward for his loyalty. The problem here is, having the right number of seats on the right airplanes to ensure the right balance of revenue to make the flight profitable.
Don't ever open that can of worms about people "paying" for F class seats. These guys will eat you alive!
SS255
Veteran
Let's do a comparison:
UA
EQM & RDM mileage bonuses for Y/B tickets
Free access to US Clubs when traveling on US
40% of the 757 cabin is premium seating (E+ or F)
UGS for highest revenue customers
US
No elite mileage bonuses for Y/B tickets
$120/year to access UA RCC's when flying on UA
16.6% of the "reconfigured" 321 cabin is premium seating (F or bulkhead/exit row, assuming 14 exit row/bulkhead seats listed on Seatguru)
No special recognition for highest level customers
If you were a high revenue/high volume customer, to whom would you give your business?
I'm in agreement with some of the others that if it makes the difference between profit and loss, by all means take out the 10 F seats and revel in your black ink. But first consider the differential between revenue lost by elites taking their business elsewhere, vs. the 11 extra tickets you may or may not be able to sell to Grandpa and Grandma Kettle, who couldn't give a rat's patootie what airline they are flying, as long as it's the cheapest. If you are going to go ahead with it, do us a favor and power-wash the cabins while you're at it!!!
UA
EQM & RDM mileage bonuses for Y/B tickets
Free access to US Clubs when traveling on US
40% of the 757 cabin is premium seating (E+ or F)
UGS for highest revenue customers
US
No elite mileage bonuses for Y/B tickets
$120/year to access UA RCC's when flying on UA
16.6% of the "reconfigured" 321 cabin is premium seating (F or bulkhead/exit row, assuming 14 exit row/bulkhead seats listed on Seatguru)
No special recognition for highest level customers
If you were a high revenue/high volume customer, to whom would you give your business?
I'm in agreement with some of the others that if it makes the difference between profit and loss, by all means take out the 10 F seats and revel in your black ink. But first consider the differential between revenue lost by elites taking their business elsewhere, vs. the 11 extra tickets you may or may not be able to sell to Grandpa and Grandma Kettle, who couldn't give a rat's patootie what airline they are flying, as long as it's the cheapest. If you are going to go ahead with it, do us a favor and power-wash the cabins while you're at it!!!
First they are not getting rid of first only looking at the posability of standardizing!
And that is a huge operational issue. Right now w/ 2 fleets and 2 route systems you guys don't see it much but once integrated and we switch a West A320 w/ a East A320 and have to unseat evryone it is a huge nightmare and you guys would be screaming!!!! The west has had some different 737 for years and it has been a huge problem. This topic has been openly discused by the execs since day one as something they would like to do (cost of refitting be the key stumbling block). Even better than having all fleets identical to themselves would be having a standard first config. Then you have much less disruption when AC changes go across fleets. This is something being done (actually being considered) for the FF's. The average pax won't complain about a AC swap near as much as it impacts the FF, becuase you are in first or have a prime aisle seat and might loose it during a swap! A standard config helps you guys the most, then you know your expectaions and don't have to worry about that wild card of an A/C swap. Also keep in mind any interior refit takes years as these will be done usually at their scheduled heavy check.
And that is a huge operational issue. Right now w/ 2 fleets and 2 route systems you guys don't see it much but once integrated and we switch a West A320 w/ a East A320 and have to unseat evryone it is a huge nightmare and you guys would be screaming!!!! The west has had some different 737 for years and it has been a huge problem. This topic has been openly discused by the execs since day one as something they would like to do (cost of refitting be the key stumbling block). Even better than having all fleets identical to themselves would be having a standard first config. Then you have much less disruption when AC changes go across fleets. This is something being done (actually being considered) for the FF's. The average pax won't complain about a AC swap near as much as it impacts the FF, becuase you are in first or have a prime aisle seat and might loose it during a swap! A standard config helps you guys the most, then you know your expectaions and don't have to worry about that wild card of an A/C swap. Also keep in mind any interior refit takes years as these will be done usually at their scheduled heavy check.
I'm not an elite, and haven't been for 2 years. I don't travel as often as I once did, and when I do I'm permitted to book a paid F fare by my employer. So, I believe I represent a passenger of value to Tempe since I'm not pining for an upgrade on every flight.
But it's funny - at 1 month out I couldn't book an A fare on any PHL-LAS flight to get instant upgrade. None available. THat segment is notoriously full of paid fares weeks, if not over a month, out. That is a $1400 or so roundtrip fare, too. So I booked an A fare on AA with the connection.
And you know what - with their Gold challenge (6000 EQM's = instant Gold status), I earned it in those 4 segments. Had US been operating the 757's with more F seats I would have probably been able to snag them and stuck with US. But they can't get their yield management in order, so I walked and bit the bullet on the connection. I'll be happy to send Doug my receipts and explain my thought process, because I'm sure I'm not alone.
But it's funny - at 1 month out I couldn't book an A fare on any PHL-LAS flight to get instant upgrade. None available. THat segment is notoriously full of paid fares weeks, if not over a month, out. That is a $1400 or so roundtrip fare, too. So I booked an A fare on AA with the connection.
And you know what - with their Gold challenge (6000 EQM's = instant Gold status), I earned it in those 4 segments. Had US been operating the 757's with more F seats I would have probably been able to snag them and stuck with US. But they can't get their yield management in order, so I walked and bit the bullet on the connection. I'll be happy to send Doug my receipts and explain my thought process, because I'm sure I'm not alone.
