Post #287,211
6/18/07 11:38:56 AM
|
Ok Mr Euro
Do you know how many airports are in operation in the US? Even "big ones".
Lets see, Newark, Kennedy, Philly, Washington (BWI, Dulles, Reagan) RDU, ATL, TPA, MCO, ORD, LAX, IAH, HOU, DFW, BOS, SLC, SeaTac, SFO, MSP, MIA, TPA, CLT, DEN, PHX, CVG...take a breath cause I'm not even at the "small" airports yet.
Quite different from the 1 per country you are used to.
Its not feasible.
So much for your "obvious error".
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #287,214
6/18/07 1:07:45 PM
6/19/07 9:58:45 AM
|
There are ways around these problems.
Airlines know they don't have spare planes to push to the gates. But they also know that there's no slack in the system. And they know that people are getting fed up with delays over relatively simple things like this. (On another leg of my recent trip, the departure was delayed about 20 minutes while they found a new bottom seat cushion because one was wet.)
If I knew I was going to piss off hundreds of people as a result of not checking things early enough to get them fixed if they're minor issues, or getting alternate arrangements in place if they're major, then I'd seriously think about changing the way I do business. I think that's Christian's point. When there's an issue and a flight is canceled or delayed for hours, the airlines find a way to solve the problem. I'm simply asking that they take a few hours out of the process. At the moment, they seem to have little interest in doing so.
I agree that little can be done about weather or ATC overruns (though changes in procedures and alternate routes can often help). I'm not asking for them to control extreme events; simply do a better job at what seem to be routine checks.
Either:
1) Have a few hot spares in the region (remember that the DC/NY and Boston/NY [link|http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/10/12/low_cost_ny_hub_air_fares_reappear/?page=1|Shuttles] used to be able to roll another plane out when one was full).
2) Create a regional "overflow" subsidiary that can supply a plane to member airlines with minimal notice. The planes could be used for charters, etc., when demand was low.
3) Reward competence. Get everyone in the airline to buy into the idea that anything that makes flying unpleasant drives away business.
4) Supply relevant information to customers. Don't keep them in the dark about how long repairs will take. If people don't have information that's useful in helping them decide to make other arrangements, they'll bail at the earliest opportunity even if it's not necessary. That means their bags will have to be removed, further delaying the departure.
5) Hire more maintenance crews and impress upon them the importance of doing the job right while doing it efficiently. [link|http://www.ergoweb.com/news/detail.cfm?id=1036|Quit overworking them] in the hope of squeezing another hundredth of a cent out of the per-mile cost.
And so on. Things like these don't have to cost billions of dollars. There's little reason why they can't do several of them.
The airlines need to change.
BMW didn't get to be one of the most profitable car makes by being the cheapest and squeezing every cent out of the business....
My $0.02. I think I'm about done.
[edit:] Homonym typo...
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who appreciates your comments about the various carriers.)
|
Post #287,229
6/18/07 2:27:50 PM
|
Re: There are ways around these problems.
Well, the shuttles used to roll out 50 seaters to oversell the 150 seaters. Not like for like.
And they don't do that anymore.
To create a regional "overflow" carrier would 1) violate antitrust...and 2) not be a really good business model to invest in..since the goal would be to NEVER use it.
On rewarding competence, at least one airline does this (CO) that I'm aware of. Bonuses are awarded for on time performance and other key stats. Exceptional customer service gives the employee a shot at a ford explorer. They give away a couple dozen cars a year iirc.
I have no issue at all with #4. Its dead accurate and something I have been in a position to share with airline leadership and have to at least 3 majors.
Hiring more maintenance crews does cost billions of dollars. And to do so on the "pssobilities" of overwork being blamed by an ergonomics journal may be a bit...rash.
How many people get (read "can afford) to buy a BMW?
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #287,233
6/18/07 3:00:47 PM
|
On the last one...
How many people get (read "can afford) to buy a BMW? Enough for BMW to make a lot of money. The point I was trying to make was, not everyone should have a low-cost-at-the-expense-of-everything-else business model. The airlines don't have to be run as badly as they are (from a customer-service perspective). (Yes, I know about [link|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braniff_Airways|Braniff] and others who tried a full-service model and failed.) Flying used to be fun - there's no reason why it can't be again. I know you know more about this industry than I ever will. I'm relating my experiences and what seems to make sense based on what I've read. Maybe deregulated airlines are a lost cause; maybe national flag carriers are a lost cause too. I don't know. All I do know is that I and many other people I know refuse to fly unless we have to. Anything less than ~ 600 miles, I'll drive unless it's a one day trip. It's much cheaper, and it's often a wash in the amount of time required (security, delays, changing planes, etc., etc.). They're going backwards on lots of [link|http://www.transtats.bts.gov/HomeDrillChart.asp|statistics] that matter to people flying, and even if part/most/all of it is the FAA's fault, they need to change the way they do business because what they're doing is pissing off a lot of people. FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #287,235
6/18/07 3:15:06 PM
|
in agreement sort of
I just extended my driving range to 800 miles. There is a two fold problem. One is customer service. When you have had your pay sliced continously you either leave or dont give a rats ass about being nice to customers. You are serving a lot more and getting paid a lot less. The parts and serviceability is a separate issue. You outsource the mechanic work to people who are paid considerably less than in house mechanics and are often the same folks you laid off during the bankrupcy. They have a vested interest in work to rule. Also they will attempt to meet FAA guidelines to the nth degree and having the manager of the airline screaming at them doesnt work like it used to.
On the other hand one can fly to most destinations in the US very cheaply. If you are going from NY to Seattle check out amtrack prices. Even the hound will have a hard time to match the fares the airlines offer. So speed and low price is what makes people want to fly. Lousy CS and delays are part of that price.
thanx,
bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|
Post #287,239
6/18/07 4:25:58 PM
|
Well said.
Maybe BP can chime in on what it "really" costs, but I doubt that people would change their plans if it cost 10-30% more on a flight if it got them higher on-time percentages and better service. People are still buying first-class tickets and they're still putting up with delays and cancellations like the rest of us, and the planes are full, so it's not just the low ticket price that's causing the problems.
People don't fly as much if the price doubles, but small percentage changes usually are in the noise. E.g. gasoline has gone up a lot but people aren't changing their driving habits much.
Hypothetical e.g. DCA to ATL on July 9, returning July 13: Round trip, nonstop, coach $275 to $464 per person, with most of them in the $275 - $295 per person range. Why can't they make money at that fare? Business/First Class is $658 to $768 for the same conditions. (All on Travelocity.) (No, I'm not going to be taking such a trip, it's just an example. :-) United's fares are nuts - the flights go through Chicago and they're $439 to $1064 for Coach!
I'm in whole-hearted agreement that management (or more often the corporation) usually eventually reaps what they sow when it comes to employee compensation and so forth.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #287,237
6/18/07 3:36:22 PM
|
Unfortunately
there is a large discrepancy between what people want and what can be provided at anything approaching affordable.
There is no doubt that the majors could do better...but one of the key reasons people seem happier with southwest is because they EXPECT crappy service from them...but seem to expect more from the others without actually expecting to pay for it.
Security. Sucks yes...but at this point I'm back to arriving 1 hr before flight time and making my flights without much of an issue. Thats roughly the same as pre-9/11.
My fly/drive is 5 hours...roughly 300 miles.
Personally, I think the airlines should charge a min fare based on per seat variable cost. This will mean that the price is at least loosely based on what it costs them to operate. Unfortunately, that would also mean that I would not be able to afford to see my parents on a regular basis, as I wouldn't be able to afford the flights.
ATC needs to be overhauled and the airlines need to assist in this by volunteering to reduce frequency, which is essentially what they agreed to do at O'Hare to limit congestion and delays.
Summer weather is summer weather, though...and delays from April to October WILL happen, no matter what. [link|http://weather.unisys.com/images/sat_sfc_map_loop.html|Somewhere there is a thunderstorm screwing up somebody's flight.]
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #287,240
6/18/07 4:27:19 PM
|
Re: roughly the same as pre-9/11.
Security. Sucks yes...but at this point I'm back to arriving 1 hr before flight time and making my flights without much of an issue. Thats roughly the same as pre-9/11.
B.S. You need really broad definitions of "roughly" to make that comment work. I've personally gotten my dad and his bags on an airplane after having arrived at the airport 10 minutes prior to departure. *That* was pre-9/11. Also, pre-9/11, I could pull 22T up to the gate with a passenger and bags and put them directly on a commercial carrier. *That* was also pre-9/11. Commercial air travel will never again be "roughly pre-9/11"-esque.
bcnu,
Mikem
It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
|
Post #287,243
6/18/07 4:33:15 PM
|
True enough
if you have to check bags you aren't going to be able to do that 10 minute sprint anymore.
But I arrived with check-on luggage only last week 25 minutes prior to flight and wasn't breathing heavy when I sat down on the plane. I had checked in prior to leaving for the airport and midday there was little in the way of lines at security.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #287,314
6/19/07 12:46:58 PM
|
I think that varies with location.
If you're standing in line for security screening at FWA or LAX 20 minutes before the flight departs, you don't get on the airplane period.
bcnu,
Mikem
It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
|
Post #287,317
6/19/07 1:04:39 PM
|
or ATL, the other day the had the queue going outside the
terminal with a 2-3 hour wait for screening.
thanx,
bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|
Post #287,371
6/19/07 11:40:43 PM
|
I got out pretty quick last time
and I was running VERY late for the flight.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #287,242
6/18/07 4:31:01 PM
6/18/07 4:31:20 PM
|
Re: There are ways around these problems.
How many people get (read "can afford") to buy a BMW? Lots. In the UK last year, the 3 series outsold the Ford Mondeo. (A Taurus-like vehicle; FF, 2L-ish, 4 doors, saloon)
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]
Edited by pwhysall
June 18, 2007, 04:31:20 PM EDT
|
Post #287,244
6/18/07 4:51:13 PM
|
What,you got "3000+" airports? "Big" ones? No? QED: Strawman
From "3000+" flights to 26 airports, that's a diff of two orders of magnitude. So your attempt at implying they'd need 3000+ "hot spare" aircraft per airline *was* bullshit.
And could you go easy on the "one per country Mr Euro" crapola too, mr Everything-is-so-fucking-much-bigger-and-therefore-better-in-America? Thank you.
(Otherwise, if you're going to persist in trying to earn that nickname... It's just too frigging long for everyday use, so we'd have to come up with some shorter one. How'd'ya like the ring of "Ugly American"?)
[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]
|
Post #287,251
6/18/07 6:19:00 PM
6/18/07 6:20:18 PM
|
You were the one saying they should have spares
and then counter with the "only one or 2 at the big airports"...which now calculates out to 50 jets per airline times the (for limited arguments sake) the top 8 airlines...so your now have 400 jets sitting idle at a cost of some 65 million per unit.
Roughly, you assume that the airlines could park 26 billion in assets. Thats about 5 million a day (if you assume no compounding) or about 650k per day per airline. (also 7% cost of capital is assumed)
227 million is about 3/4 what the most profitable US airline made last year and thats what you want them to absorb JUST IN CARRYING COST. No maintenance. No crew training. No hangar costs.
I didn't say anything was bigger or better here. Simply that you assume that "only the big airports" seemed to be some magical limitation on what it would take to accomplish your "simple" solution.
So, you bring up the idea "these billion dollar us airline companies" should just run out and buy all sorts of extra jets..then limit it to "only the big airports" and assume that makes it "realistic".
I can take "ugly American" if it means I'm telling you a truth that you don't want to hear or acknowledge.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
Edited by bepatient
June 18, 2007, 06:20:18 PM EDT
|
Post #287,279
6/19/07 3:29:18 AM
|
Next fix...
...that sometimes even genuinely capitalistic for-profit companies come up with all on their own:
Let them pool their resources. It doesn't even really have to be "one or two hot spares *per airline* per airport", which apparently would make it 8-16 spare aeroplanes per airport; if we assume (can we?) that not *every* bloody airline will have a plane break *every* day at *every* airport (do they?), then two or three planes, *total*, per airport, should do the trick. Have the airlines found some SparePlane Co that they each own equal shares in (or in relation to the number of planes they operate, or whatever), let that run the spare plane operation, and then they all can draw spares from its common pool. What are we down to now; 75 planes, total?
Then about the maintenance, crew training, and hangar costs... The only one of those that they'd *actually* incur would be the hangar cost, wouldn't it? They have crews already; they'd actually be using them *less*, if in stead of having them hang around and wait for a broken plane to be repaired and then fly it, as they do now, they could just switch them to another plane and fly away without the wait. Same goes for maintenance: The same number of miles (or trips or hours) would be flown (only spread over a few more planes), so the same amount of maintenance work would be needed (only spread over a few more planes). These last two arguments go for either number of spare aircraft, BTW; 75 or 400 or any number above, below, or in between.
Funny how a smart guy like you doesn't SEE those things on his own, innit..? Or could that possibly, *possibly*, be because you don't WANT TO see?
And no, honey, you're only really ugly when you throw snide little bullshit barbs like "One airport per country like you Euros are used to" around you. Which I thought I'd made quite clear in my previous post. No use trying to pretend it is your "telling [me] a truth" that pisses me off, when I explicitly *said* it was your behaving like the stereotypical Ugly American that makes me contemplate whether the moniker "Ugly American" would fit.
[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]
|
Post #287,282
6/19/07 5:20:00 AM
|
But.. but...
such a scheme would require that a bunch of COMPETING biznessmen, CIEIOs making tens of millions/year + perks (several hundred X the rate of each fired mechanic) -- these would have to imagine something beyond ^all they have ever known^ -- a concept so alien to the Spirit of John Galt as to be unutterable above whisper -
They would have to cooperate! -- small enough to prevent apoplexy?
And to what end?
Merely to improve the experience of the already-captive audience of their commodity service, reduce their overall costs, thus ticket prices.
Who could predict what moral perversions might follow from such a scary idea as, "viewing the Whole Picture from the POV of the powerless buyer" of transportation; then to ponder: passengers flying, for the first time, in an Unbranded Logo-free generic airplane!
Merely to expedite passengers to their destinations, without artificial delay. Is that not surreal?
Of course this is unthinkable, except in backwards countries whose carriers possess no sense of Corporate Destiny, no spirit of Winner-take-All (save for the odd foot games where the ball is.. 'round'?)
HTH
SAP Individual Travel Services-the-Murican-Way, LLC
|
Post #287,288
6/19/07 9:01:36 AM
|
dont forget shareholders who would squat sqare bricks
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|
Post #287,292
6/19/07 9:33:49 AM
|
Ignore them, they're just filthy capitalists
and once we're done fixing their problems here, the shareholders will be RICH...RICH I tell you...RICH!
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #287,309
6/19/07 11:16:15 AM
|
if it takes longer than the next quarter forget it
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|
Post #287,291
6/19/07 9:32:49 AM
|
It must be simple
forget that there are just a few different jets in use (MD80, 727,737,747,757,A319,320,330,340) each requiring a crew certified to operate that plane, each with different seating configurations (is it better to inconvenience a select few or all passengers equally on an affected flight...how do you choose the lucky few).
Ok, so only get one that holds more than the max of any.
You're back to having to have crews sitting...you can't recycle because crews are specific to aircraft type.
And on the maintenance, airlines are required to carry a certain amount of spares for every aircraft of every type in their fleet. This is why most airlines pick a Boeing OR Airbus and stick. For some US carriers that have grown by glue this is a very large part of their embedded expense (like United for example). Too many different aircraft types make their maintenance operation very expensive.
I find it more amusing that you feel compelled to tell someone how simple it would be to "fix" their business without having the first clue about how it works.
I guess we'll keep each other laughing...
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #287,313
6/19/07 11:21:09 AM
|
he's a conslutant of course he doesnt need to understand the
bidness to fix it, its what he does for a living :-)
thanx,
bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|
Post #287,333
6/19/07 5:49:04 PM
|
Not that kind of conslutant-I'm a code slave w/ weird title.
|
