Us Cuts Flights At Phl, Fll, And Clt

[MrAeroMan]

and you won't see them bankrupt because they take so much from their members.

 

[ClueByFour]

Some of the Fort Lauderdale service is being pulled down, but the company is expanding its airport facilities and ground work force, thus it appears that part of the move could be seasonal and the Panama City and San Salvador service is poor performing. In regard to Panana City and San Salvador, the announcement was likely due to poor bookings. Over all, it’s my understanding much of the Fort Lauderdale plan is a success with strong bookings and obviously some is not as successful.

Except for those locations trying to run 1x/day versus the mammoth AA operation at MIA. Wait. That's most of the operation.

Separately, the Passenger Baggage Call Center in PIT is closing. Baggage-related calls will be directed to a new call center operated by a company called Atento in El Salvador. Atento has begun the training for the US Airways group and they will be servicing calls beginning this week. US Airways currently has a Website Technical Support Center in San Salvador and is likely to open a new reservations center there too.

It's amusing, because this will guarantee a few things: folks will be driven away from US, since anyone connecting in PHL who checked bags has a very good chance of talking to these folks at some point, and it's no huge secret that Dell, Amex, and others are starting to bring back their call centers from offshore locations. US, once again, is lagging the curve in understanding customer service and satisfaction trends: nothing new here.

It's worth a note that leading LCCs (notably B6 and LUV) have the vast majority (and I believe all in LUV's case) of their call centers firmly onshore. CCY might want to take a look at why that is, but creativity and competition research have never been mainstays of the current crop of morons in the executive suite.

In seperate news, you can assume that's why the SAL flight will run for a few more months--get the training worked out.

Separately, I wonder how much the Air Wisconsin agreement effected the decision to pull down B737 flying.

Tons. In fact, it shows just how desperate US is for cash--since on an CASM basis, you go from a mainline aircraft (with a "relatively" low CASM) to a fee-for-departure setup with a guaranteed profit margin to Air Whisky on extremly high seat-CASM equipment. Not the move of anyone thinking about the future.

 

[700UW]

By cutting the pay rates of the A320 Family Captain's salary.

Maybe have the CEO take a paycut.

Layoff management like they are laying off rank and file, but yet US has not cut management where they are laying off workers.

 

[unit4clt]

Looks like another failed Transformation Plan, no wonder they US did not file the POR on 2/15/05, they once again have shown they have no clue on how to run an airline.
Get Ready for ROUND FOUR!

[post="250848"][/post]​

Just like rounds 1,2,3 the IAM will accomodate the company!! :down: :down:

 

[USA320Pilot]

The 11 B737s being returned is in addition to the 25 aircraft being returned to GECAS in 2005 through 2007, thus the mainline fleet could be reduced from 282 pre-bankruptcy II to 246 aircraft. In addition, the company is still trying to build Fort Lauderdale as a focus city.

Management is trying to make prudent decisions given the continued excess capacity, high fuel costs, and depressed revenue environment.

If my memory serves me correctly, US Airways pays its aircraft leaseholders about $90,000 per month for a B737. Thus, 11 B737s cost the company about $10 million per month in aircraft ownership fees plus operating and maintenance costs.

Separately, NYMEX Crude Oil is trading at about $51.50 per barrel for front month delivery, which costs US Airways about $15 million per month over its Transformation Plan budget.

Nobody likes to see aircraft and service reductions, but the company said, “the return of aircraft will result in a net reduction of only 14 flights systemwide compared to the February 2005 schedule, as most service will be replaced with regional jets or by increased utilization of the mainline existing fleet. Even with the May 2005 capacity adjustments, systemwide available seat miles (ASMs) are expected to increase between 4 and 6 percent year-over-year.

Moreover, the company said, “US Airways does not foresee employee furloughs as a result of these actions.â€￾

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[Hope777]

Gotta love it.
Why build a Market except to destroy it. This is why so many passenger left USAirways years ago in EWR to go to CO. The EWR-FLL was doing very well. Just gotta love it. Sounds like MetroJet,Business Select, Project High Ground, and the list could go on. While we are at it, lets pull the First Class seats since we DO NOT offer a First Class Product.

Marketing still has no clue. Northest to Fla in the Summer is always full, good time to pull down service.

 

[motnot]

If my memory serves me correctly, US Airways pays its aircraft leaseholders about $90,000 per month for a B737. Thus, 11 B737s cost the company about $10 million per month in aircraft ownership fees plus operating and maintenance costs.

[post="250874"][/post]​

Might want to check that math again, captain.

 

[FWAAA]

I count 9 fewer flights at PHL; with USAir's gate utilization rate, what is that - 2 gates? Anyone still wonder where WN will get additional gate space at PHL? 2 gates is enough space for WN to operate a couple dozen more flights.

 

[TheLarkAscending]

Marketing still has no clue. Northest to Fla in the Summer is always full, good time to pull down service.

What?! Why sure they do! They've put up banners, taken out newspaper ads and had thousands of little plastic buttons made up just to prove it!

 

[wnbubbleboy]

We are hearing rumors over here that we are going to get 30 leased jet 737-300's. As Boeing gives us one -700 jet the -300 is returned to the lessor. The rumor was they were to be coming from U.

See this only strengthens that rumor.

 

[mweiss]

ahhhh...lemme guess...we're going to shrink back into profitability??

[post="250857"][/post]​

There's shrinking and then there's shrinking.

If you "shrink," in the sense of reducing the amount of metal you have on hand, while still maintaining or increasing ASMs, you can, in fact, increase profitability.

If you "shrink," in the sense of making no operational changes other than reducing total ASMs by the same amount that you reduce total seats in the fleet, you are likely to reduce profitability, due to the loss of value in the network itself.

 

[ClueByFour]

Management is trying to make prudent decisions given the continued excess capacity, high fuel costs, and depressed revenue environment.

Then cut pilot salaries and find a way to keep the mainline aircraft. Replacing that lift with RJs that have a higher CASM is not prudent. It's burning furniture. There is no spin for this--it is what it is.

Nobody likes to see aircraft and service reductions, but the company said, “the return of aircraft will result in a net reduction of only 14 flights systemwide compared to the February 2005 schedule, as most service will be replaced with regional jets or by increased utilization of the mainline existing fleet. Even with the May 2005 capacity adjustments, systemwide available seat miles (ASMs) are expected to increase between 4 and 6 percent year-over-year.

The problem is that the cost of that extra 6% of lift is now higher. And the revenue environment won't support a fare increase to pay for it.

Not prudent. Desperate.

 

[justaumechanic]

Are these aircraft in addition to the 25 reductions previously announced?
Didn't we just start FLL- SJU, EWR, Panama City, San Salvador?
:down:

[post="250843"][/post]​

Yep.. Its an additional 11 on top of the 10 Airbus and the 15 320's..

Remember Lakefield told the world we are going to kick Southwest's ass because we now have lower costs than they do.. So with lower costs we will have a flight reduction to compensate for the increased productivity of the aircraft..

More like "We aint got no money jack"..

Southwest is getting ready to add more capacity to PHL and is going to put the hurts on US Airways..

The loss of 25 737's, what will that do to CLT mtc? More like "Ooops, Airbus in PIT is a mistake, time to move the rest to CLT and call it a day".

 

[Heinrich]

One solution to returning the 11 aircraft would be to spring into a location such as Portland Oregan, or Reno, Nevada, or Albuquerque, or Omaha nebraska.....

 

[justaumechanic]

We are hearing rumors over here that we are going to get 30 leased jet 737-300's. As Boeing gives us one -700 jet the -300 is returned to the lessor. The rumor was they were to be coming from U.

See this only strengthens that rumor.

[post="250881"][/post]​

Your post is a little confusing.. Could you clear up what you mean?

Is Southwest going to get an additional 30 -300's? Is that what you are saying?

Well US Airways is getting rid of 26 Round Dial -300's, want them?

Southwest could use them in PHL and PIT.. They planes know those airports pretty well so they won't mind flying for WN..

Word of advice.. Don't take US N384AU, N573US and N350US.. They all have issues.