XPost: rec.travel.air, alt.travel   
   From: F.Raccoon@wilderness.org   
      
   None wrote:   
   > Southwest has considered adding 50- and 70-seat regional jets to its fleet   
   > but always balked because they couldn't carry enough customers to bring the   
   > cost per passenger low enough.   
      
   Which is most interesting reality that the larger airlines haven't quite   
   grasped yet. The only reason regional jets have caught on is because the big   
   airlines were able to pin off a low cost "regional airlines" that was allowed   
   to fly those, and even though the operating cost per pax is higher, they were   
   able to hire el-cheapo pilots instead of their very expensive mainline pilots.   
      
      
   > "We are very happy operating a single aircraft type with the 737," Parker   
   > said, but the larger regional jet is "a new technological feature or aspect   
   > of our industry that I think we need to take a look at."   
      
   Bull shit. The real reason is that with a single plane type, Southwest has   
   pretty well reached its limit on viable destinations. They will need other   
   plane types to reach new destinations. And this is the exact same argument   
   used by Jetblue when it ordered its jungle jets.   
      
   > The workers' familiarity with the Boeing 737 helps Southwest turn around   
   > incoming planes and get started on the next flight in an average of 25   
   > minutes, the best record among major U.S. carriers.   
      
   I don't buy that argument at all. Plane turn around is a question of schedule,   
   planning and staff flexibility. Since both the 737 and jungle jets have loose   
   baggage compartments, it doesn't really make much of a difference. If some of   
   its jets were containerized and some were loose luggage, then it would make a   
   difference.   
      
   The big advantage of having single fleet is that the pilot pay structure,   
   scheduling and eniority issues make it a much more efficient system. When you   
   fire the pilot with least seniority, you don't need to retrain all pilots with   
   more seniority who get displaced ontothe next lower plane type.   
      
   In terms of maintenance, I am not so sure that Southwest really has that big   
   of an edge. Are the 737 of various flavours really so compatible with each   
   other ? I find it hard to believe that a 737-200 would be the same as a   
   737-700 in terms of maintenance and spare parts.   
      
   > Betsy Snyder, an analyst with Standard & Poor's, said JetBlue's costs for   
   > operating the Embraer is similar to its Airbus A320s, indicating that the   
   > Embraer could be a "very plausible" addition to Southwest's fleet.   
      
   The Jetblue president, shortly after announcing that order was interviewed on   
   the USA PBS program "Charlie Rose". He was very specific in that the smaller   
   jets are in no way as cost effective as their A320s, but that they would still   
   be profitable and allow JetBlue to continue to grow.   
      
   Now, for jetblue, there is a bigger difference between the A320 and jungle jet   
   than there would be for Southwest and the same jungle jet since A320s are   
   bigger.   
      
   But for Southwest, they may be forced into it since if they don't start to   
   open up the thinner routes to smaller towns, Jetblue and others will and   
   Southwest may no longer be seen as the leading airline because it will have   
   stopped growing.   
      
   The big question will be how both these airlines treat Jungle jet pilots   
   versus the bigger plane pilots. They may end up over time with problems   
   similar to the bigger airlines (but perhaps not to the same extent) in terms   
   of pilot seniority, and who gets bumped first when layoffs are necessary.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)