Why Roll The Phl Hub

[USA320Pilot]

Dear Fellow Employee:

Rolling the hub is smoothing out take off and landings throughout the day instead of having banks. It only works at airports with high O&D traffic because of the schedules. For example, at peak times US Airways schedules 92 take off and landings per hour at PHL. Let’s say they do that from 0900 to 1000 and 1000 to 1100 for a total of about 180 flights.

When they roll the hub you could have 60 flights between 0830 and 0930, 60 flights from 0930 to 1030, and then 60 more flights from 1030 to 1130. Therefore, you have 180 flights from 0800 to 1130 and 180 flights from 0900 to 1100.

By spreading out the flow you cut your peak utilization by 50% and dramatically improve your traffic flow with 50% less metal trying to use the same concrete.

The first question that comes to mind is why have they not used this in the past? That’s a good question.

Historically, airlines catered to the business traveler and worked to keep connecting times low, but the business traveler is no longer paying high fares, therefore, you get what you pay for. There will be longer connecting times, but they will not be huge.

The big savings occurs in ground staff and facilities. Instead of unloading and reloading a plane and the going to the break room and watching TV, ground personnel will continuously work flight after flight that will require less people and more productive use of people. There could be ground staff changes in PHL, dependent upon the increase in aircraft utilization.

Management has said the point-to-point flying will increase in the three focus cities, BOS, LGA, DCA, but as Southwest increases their PHL presence I suspect Frank Cortez and Ben Baldanza will increase PHL flights too to further average down unit costs.

The same thing holds true with gates, where the company can lower its lease expense by getting rid of excess gates and using more flights per gate, which is also a more productive of fixed assets.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[deltawatch]

A New Business Model

Today's hub-and-spoke model was originally developed in the late 1970s to provide passengers quick and convenient connections through hub cities. The market is now mature enough that you don't need to design your operational structure around the connecting passenger. The local traffic to and from traditional hubs (LGA,BOS,DCA, PHL) is so large that you can afford to adopt much more efficient point-to-point operating procedures and still provide connections as a by-product of the system.

Transitioning to a new business model could close 70-80% of the cost gap that exists between hub-and-spoke and low-cost carriers. Key steps include compressing aircraft turnaround times, moving to a random hub concept, increasing crew and aircraft productivity by 30%, doubling ground staff productivity, and simplifying and automating check-in and gate procedures as well as the distribution system.

Automated Passenger Handling

Apply the principle of tailored business streams to streamline passenger-handling operations. What the airlines are doing at check-in and at the gate, it's a bunch of rework that has very low value-add. Automation of passenger handling and Internet check-in have accelerated to the point where 'minimal-touch' airport processing for 80-90% of passengers could soon become a reality. By converting 80% of check-in to self-service, the whole passenger handling operation can be redesigned for orders of magnitude, higher productivity, and improved service.

New Industry Structure

Traditional carriers will either adopt fundamentally lower cost business approaches or perish, near term or in the next economic downturn. A new industry structure may emerge, with two to three new network-based carriers operating with a new production philosophy that focuses on non-stop service and one or two random hubs (CLT,PHL). One or two traditional low cost carriers may remain and there is a chance that a separation of intercontinental and continental operations develops.

 

[USA320Pilot]

US Airways "Going Forward Plan" will add significant point-to-point mainline service in BOS, LGA, and DCA.

The rolling hub concept is similar in scope to what Southwest does in every key city: Phoenix, Dallas, Nashville, St. Louis, Midway, BWI, etc.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[oldbscaler]

It is interesting to see management only now talking about rollong PHL. AA started to roll or "depeak" ORD and DFW almost two years ago. DL did it at ATL long before that. Where have the US bean counters been all this time? This is not a new idea.
Just an observation.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Two fallacies....

1) You do not need as much O&D traffic as some seem to think to roll a hub - AMR is rolling MIA where their O&D numbers are approximately the same as PIT & CLT. What matters is the COMBINATION of O&D traffic and number of banks. For example, a hub with 2 banks of flights a day (morning & afternoon timed for the business traveler) would need most of the traffic to be O&D since depeaking would interfere with many of the connections (though if there aren't many connection possibilities is it a hub?). But a hub with 10 banks a day is easily depeaked while preserving connections, hence depends a lot less on O&D traffic.

2) LGA, BOS, & DCA are not traditional hubs - they are more point to point operations, unlike PHL. And with the large amount of O&D traffic these cities generate - considerably more than PHL - they are effectively depeaked by being the "spoke" cities of the various airlines' hubs and /or one end of a point to point operation.

Jim

 

[MarkMyWords]

Couple the rolling of PHL with the simpliefied fare structure and your O & D traffic could sky rocket.

I have touted the rolling of PHL for eons....I wish they would get on with it already. There is nothing that I can see that prohibits then from being able to do this now.

 

[Harry Callahan]

I wish USA320pilot would come and "watch some television with me".
I don't think you have clue what goes on on the ramp or what it is like to off load 10,000 lbs & turn right around & load 10,000 lbs right back on.
If I were a betting man, I bet on more ojis in PHL.(Maybe a PHL person can comment) with this continous pounding....USA320pilot come join us for a day !

 

[MarkMyWords]

Coach....


Not to be antagonistic, but WN agents do it. Everyone wants a WN style contract....then you better be able to work like a WN agent. Go over to BWI, HOU or MDW and see how hard a WN ramp agent works. In PHL, if you are a full time agent, you will work 3-4 flights in 8 hours and genereally will only work "your" gate. Check out WN. Their ramp agents end up working 7-8 flights in an 8 hour shift and will actually help the gates next to them. You can't have a WN style contract without the WN style of productivity.

 

[BoeingBoy]

MmW,

I think you & coachrowsey both have valid points.

With the rolling hub concept (assuming it is done right - a big assumption with this management) there will possibly be more flights per shift to work - just like WN.

coachrowsey's point becomes valid when you travel around the system and look at the average age of out "bag slingers" as compared to WN. With the shrinkage of the airline our average ramper is much older than WN's - hence more susceptible to sustaining an OJI.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Jim

 

[MarkMyWords]

Jim -

I agree. Plus with US we carry mail and freight as well as bags. Add to that the bigger aircraft like the 321 and 757 and they do work harder when they are working. I didn't mean to sound like I was belittling their job at all. If it came out that way, I am sorry. I just meant that everyone wants a WN contract and hopefully with the rolling of PHL you will get the increased productivity too. Pay and productivity are two different beasts.

 

[Harry Callahan]

Jim&Mark
Thanks for both your comments. The age is one of the big things. The ojis are sky high. Most of my coworkers only make it through the shift with the help of pain medications. I guess all I am trying to say is no matter what any one of our personal opinions may be, we are just maxed out......I just am not sure how much more the bulk of us can do...thanks

 

[BoeingBoy]

MmW,

No offense taken - at least by me. I understand what you were saying. Somehow I don't think we will be looking at "WN type contracts" when the details come out, but that is a whole different discussion.

Jim

 

[MarkMyWords]

I agree.....it is amazing how we went from being compared with UA, AA, DL and NW for parity + 1, to CO and HP in bankruptcy and now to WN, B6 and FL. My how the mighty have fallen!

 

[robbedagain]

all this talk about the rolling hub in phl sounds good but will mgmt actually implement it??? why not get clt as a rolling hub too?

 

[Oliver Twist]

As a former employee, take these comments with a open mind. They are meant to make my stock and yours worth more.

Why not use the second and third tier cities for much more connections. That will give the hubs the chance to realign their staff, gates etc. I see little reason that cities like ILM, MYR, RDU, IND, BNA and the like have but a few Mainline flights a day and a few commuters. Those agents are on site all day, why not use them and take some pressure off the hubs??

In a simplistic example, if you are going from the N.E. to MIA/FLL/PBI, connect more passengers through ILM. If your going to TPA/MCO/SRQ connect some of them through MYR. These cities have lower landing fees and costs of doing business in general. Keep some of the HUB flights to be sure, but spread the costs over a greater area of cities and REDUCE delays (and costs of delays) by reducing (NOT ELIMINATING ENTIRELY) traffic to an extent through highly congested and expensive hubs.

Have tiny (20-60 flights per day) hubs all over in underused facilities throughout U's system. Each current hub can no longer be all things to all people. Apparently it works quite well for WN and their passengers have little trouble waiting for connections in out of the way cities. Costs drop, fares drop and loads rise. I do not advocate dismantling the hubs, rather reducing U's dependance on them and reducing costs and delays.

Keep the INTL and Carib markets of course and the long hauls and the connecting cities, but pick market pairs and reduce them instead and shift them to the other cities that get little traffic. How great or often would delays be between ROC or ALB and ILM with a connection to MIA/FLL/PBI? Certainly less than going through a big hub! Keep those particular A/C's out of the hubs entirely so they can't get delayed from a hub to a ROC type city to begin with.

Anyone see a problem with this? More flights = lower costs = more passengers = more jobs = more profits = higher stock prices = black eye for WN/JB/FL! No one wants to see those three get their "just rewards" from, of all compaines US AIRWAYS more than I!

Is it perfect? NO and I'm sure many will point out it's flaws. But one thing I do know. MORE creative thinking is needed, not just the doomsday hackers griping and ripping everyone and everthing to shreds.

Think bold, think big, THINK!!!!