I remember with Metrojet (the last time we had BOS-Florida nonstops for the most part), the loads were hit and miss. Maybe a couple a day would do, but not a lot, especially since B6/Song also flies in the maarket and the yields probably arent very good for the most part. I would think that some point to point one stops might work in the right markets. If you cant fill a 319 BOS-RIC/ORF/GSO and RIC/ORF/GSO-Florida, maybe a one stop BOS-RIC-FLA would work. Get away from all the hub offerings that cost the $ and open up some seats for a direct flight and fill the rest with locals to/from RIC/ORF/GSO. There are quite a few cities along the East coast where this could possibly work given the right equipment and fare structure. The key would be to find out which ones and implement them.
US Airways Operations at JFK
- Thread starter AL-PS-PI-AW
- Start date
nycbusdriver
Veteran
Of course!
After all, we're LCC.
And what does THAT stand for?
If they moved express to the theoretical new extension, what would they do with the extra gates? Gates don't do any good without slots at LGA. The mainline gates aren't exactly overburdened right now anyway. I've had to wait for an occupied gate only once since being based here the last couple of years. Gates are not the problem.
LCC_#1
Veteran
- Nov 16, 2005
- 1,771
- 0
I don't know about now, but there was a time when express flights were not slotted. That's what caused the horrible delays a few years ago..pre 9/11. I lived and was based there at the time. I just don't think the money was there and well the rest is history.
ringmaruf
Veteran
That's no longer the case, thanks to the massive congestion caused when the removed the slots for Express flights and US/AA/DL/CO all overran the airport with RJs to everywhere.
There are, though, seperate pools of slots for mainline flights and commuter flights. Commuter flights can of course use mainline slots, but not vice versa. At LGA, I believe US owns 226 air carrier (mainline) slots, good for 113 roundtrips. As US only flies about 51 daily mainline roundtrips at LGA, they're using over half of their mainline slots to fly Express flights. You can clearly see that they've got more than plenty of excess mainline slots should they decide to revert back to mainline on some route, the slots would not be an issue. AA and DL, on the other hand, use the vast majority of their mainline slots to fly big planes, which is why US/AA/DL are all almost exactly the same size at LGA, when US has far more slots.
And, of course, just to be completely clear, US no longer *owns* any commuter slots at either LGA or DCA, having sold them to and leased them back from Republic as part of the -170 sale/disaster. They are guaranteed the right to lease those slots (at I'm sure a healthy profit for Republic), though, so they won't be used by another airline, and US has the right to buy the slots back (at I'm sure a healthy profit for Republic) in two years.
And the other thing--the commuter slots at DCA may be used for 72-seat equipment and below, like the EMB-170, which US makes good use of, as they use their mainline slots at DCA for actual mainline flights. At LGA, on the other hand, the commuter slots can only be used for 50-seat equipment and below, so any 70/72-seat planes at LGA would need to use mainline slots. Again, not a problem for US, but that's why you don't see AA or DL flying CRJ-700s into LGA.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
I hear Lebanon, New Hampshire is a profitable market.
usairways85
Senior
- May 18, 2003
- 262
- 0
thanks for that correction. I meant to say the perimeter rule yet wrote slot rule.
ringmaruf
Veteran
I agree with some of the other posters, don't think US really needs more gate space at LGA with its current schedule. They seem to be pretty good at boarding several Express flights at the same time at the same gate. That would likely become a problem, though, with space becoming an issue, if they do what is suggested and increase average aircraft size.
Where US could really use a nicer Express facility is at DCA. Bussing from Gate 35A to the planes I'd imagine gets old pretty quick for many people. I know there was an RJ terminal planned there for US at one point, does anyone know the status of that?
ringmaruf
Veteran
I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but it is indeed a profitable market for US. Colgan flies it under an EAS contract, so Colgan makes money on the route. And Colgan uses their own slots for the service, so it's not like US could be better using those slots itself in another market. And Colgan pays US for the right to operate as US Airways Express, last I saw it was something like $12 per pax plus 6% of revenue, plus Colgan reimburses US for the costs of ground handling at stations where US (or Piedmont or PSA) handles Colgan, like at LGA. The $12 per pax is supposed to cover the cost of US handling reservations and such for Colgan, and the 6% of revenue that goes to US is pure profit.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
That stands for Low COST Carrier which should not be mistaken for Low FARE Carrier. The route would need a FARE level that would ensure profitability, not just high load factors. But I am sure you already knew that.
US1YFARE
Veteran
- Mar 31, 2004
- 3,932
- 54
True, but your good company does advertise itself to consumers as being a low FARE carrier....people on these boards ignore the fact that this proclamation is seen on banners advertising the merger at the airport and on the website where US states that US and HP are JOINING TOGETHER TO CREATE THE WORLD'S LARGEST LOW-FARE AIRLINE. Check out www.usairways.com and look in the upper right-hand corner.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
Once again, the route would need a FARE level that would ensure profitability, not just high load factors. Competeing against JetBlue, AA and DL in a market out of JFK wouldn't make as much sense as using the airplane to expand our Caribbean reach to under served destinations or destinations that we don't serve yet. Places that ensure a sufficient revenue stream to make the route profitable. I just don't see a JFK expansion - beyond possible hub bound flights - as a viable plan.
flyingcat
Veteran
- Oct 10, 2005
- 658
- 0
US1YFARE
Veteran
- Mar 31, 2004
- 3,932
- 54
FWIW, I totally agree. I just was pointing out that your company does hold itself out as a LFC and a LCC.
Where else in the Carib would you propose expanding?
