Next fix...

Post #287,279 by CRConrad 6/19/07 3:29:18 AM Reply	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 by Ashton 6/19/07 5:20:00 AM Reply	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 by boxley 6/19/07 9:01:36 AM Reply	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 by bepatient 6/19/07 9:33:49 AM Reply	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 by boxley 6/19/07 11:16:15 AM Reply	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 by bepatient 6/19/07 9:32:49 AM Reply	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 by boxley 6/19/07 11:21:09 AM Reply	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 by CRConrad 6/19/07 5:49:04 PM Reply	Not that kind of conslutant-I'm a code slave w/ weird title.

Welcome to IWETHEY!