ASA 700 Staffing

[wmuflyguy]

When an airbus burns 2600 a side at .78 it makes you wonder how anyone makes money with an RJ. Not a knock, just amazing that for only 500# more then a 170 you can carry 75+ more folks.

Oh I agree...it is definitely a head scratcher. We usually fly .76 which is more around 1700ish a side, but when you compare a 737 or A320 the burns are not that much more for twice the seats. There are plenty of routes where the 170's compete directly with mainline equipment from other carriers such as DTW or MSP to PHL, EWR, IAH, DFW, ORD etc... so it isn't like these aircraft are just going to smaller markets.

 

[enuffalready]

Oh I agree...it is definitely a head scratcher. We usually fly .76 which is more around 1700ish a side, but when you compare a 737 or A320 the burns are not that much more for twice the seats. There are plenty of routes where the 170's compete directly with mainline equipment from other carriers such as DTW or MSP to PHL, EWR, IAH, DFW, ORD etc... so it isn't like these aircraft are just going to smaller markets.

seriously.... do you think that if they could sell 165 seats they wouldn't just to send a 190 with 86? or you could send a A380 with 500 all economy seats...that would make sense..

 

[777forever]

Departments.network/planning.current schedules.

I checked the weekly schedule update and the pattern of service summary, No EV code on any LGA departures for July

 

[Jags1]

It's in the schedule july12-august12 or 13th or something like that.

 

[Flyguy1226]

ExpressJet cities from LGA starting July:

ATL, BGR, BHM, BNA, BUF, CMH, CLT, CHS, CVG, DTW, OMA, PWM, PIT, RDU, ROC, SAV, SYR, STL

 

[wmuflyguy]

seriously.... do you think that if they could sell 165 seats they wouldn't just to send a 190 with 86? or you could send a A380 with 500 all economy seats...that would make sense..

On routes where the Aircraft directly competes with A320 and B737...Yes I think they could use said aircraft.

Sure there are routes that won't fill an A320 and a CRJ-50 is not enough, but in my opinion the routes I described are not those. Then again as long as the paycheck keeps clearing, then I'll just go wherever they tell me to.

 

[ohplease!]

When an airbus burns 2600 a side at .78 it makes you wonder how anyone makes money with an RJ. Not a knock, just amazing that for only 500# more then a 170 you can carry 75+ more folks.

Higher paid fa's, plus a third fa + hugely higher paid pilots + more pilots to staff three 320 due to the better contact + higher paid Mtc personnel + more ramp personnel (also higher paid + higher landing fees....probably not as great a profit marine as you might think...

 

[amcnd]

Higher paid fa's, plus a third fa + hugely higher paid pilots + more pilots to staff three 320 due to the better contact + higher paid Mtc personnel + more ramp personnel (also higher paid + higher landing fees....probably not as great a profit marine as you might think...

Not to mention 3x the cost to buy the airplane... 22mill vs 60mill....

 

[DYLIN]

Higher paid fa's, plus a third fa + hugely higher paid pilots + more pilots to staff three 320 due to the better contact + higher paid Mtc personnel + more ramp personnel (also higher paid + higher landing fees....probably not as great a profit marine as you might think...

None of that changes the fact that the plane holds DOUBLE what the CRJ does.

 

[enuffalready]

None of that changes the fact that the plane holds DOUBLE what the CRJ does.

and a 74 has double the capacity of the 320

 

[777forever]

and a 74 has double the capacity of the 320

Exactly, going by their theory lets staff mainline with 500 pilots, Capts paid 500k and FOs paid 250k and fly an A380 from the outstation at 8am and fly another A380 for the RON at 2100. Perfect way to run an airline!

 

[ohplease!]

None of that changes the fact that the plane holds DOUBLE what the CRJ does.

You're right. However, 3 rj flights uses about the same fuel (a little more maybe...negligible...), 1/3 the fa cost, 1/2 the ramp personnel cost, 1/3 purchase cost, 1/2 the Mtc cost & undoubtedly 1/2-1/4 the pilot cost...same # of people (actually more on 3rj's vs. a320) with 3 times the options

$40/barrel or $100/barrel, fuel costs the same for an rj and a 747.... the Larger planes didn't magically become more fuel efficient and the rj's less

 

[Clutch]

Rj's are neat!

This world needs more

 

[Speedtape]

What the world needs now is LOVE! The ATL world is about to get plenty of it and rj's should be the last thing on your mind!

 

[n757st]

You're right. However, 3 rj flights uses about the same fuel (a little more maybe...negligible...), 1/3 the fa cost, 1/2 the ramp personnel cost, 1/3 purchase cost, 1/2 the Mtc cost & undoubtedly 1/2-1/4 the pilot cost...same # of people (actually more on 3rj's vs. a320) with 3 times the options

$40/barrel or $100/barrel, fuel costs the same for an rj and a 747.... the Larger planes didn't magically become more fuel efficient and the rj's less

Actually, considering a 150 seat airbus burns ~2600/ side at .78, and the RJ if I remember was 1600/ a side... At .74... CRj burns about 9600lbs/ hr to carry 150 folks and the bus burns 5200. That's a little more then negligible.

 

[enuffalready]

Actually, considering a 150 seat airbus burns ~2600/ side at .78, and the RJ if I remember was 1600/ a side... At .74... CRj burns about 9600lbs/ hr to carry 150 folks and the bus burns 5200. That's a little more then negligible.

displaying those math skills and the sound logic demonstrated in your logic above, it's no wonder you were snatched up by a major. Sheer Brilliance.

 

[CaribPilot]

Lolololol

 

[n757st]

displaying those math skills and the sound logic demonstrated in your logic above, it's no wonder you were snatched up by a major. Sheer Brilliance.

Maybe it's early and I'm missing something but where am I wrong...

CRj = 50 seats 1600/side = 3200/hr. to carry 150 seats 1 hr (3 ac) = 9600lbs/hr

A320 = 150 seats 2600/side = 5200/ hr to carry 150 seats 1 hr.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you get the ability to flex your schedule, but to get the same amount of folks from point a to b on a crj200 you burn almost twice the fuel. I have no experience with the 70 or 90, maybe it has a better burn.

 

[BOX OFFICE]

Maybe it's early and I'm missing something but where am I wrong...

CRj = 50 seats 1600/side = 3200/hr. to carry 150 seats 1 hr (3 ac) = 9600lbs/hr

A320 = 150 seats 2600/side = 5200/ hr to carry 150 seats 1 hr.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you get the ability to flex your schedule, but to get the same amount of folks from point a to b on a crj200 you burn almost twice the fuel. I have no experience with the 70 or 90, maybe it has a better burn.

Unless you fly said 320 to a place that routinely only books 75 people... that's the only places RJs should be used. It's the only way they're worth the high fuel burn... places where you can't fill a larger airplane. Flying big airplanes with open seats increases seat mile costs. Small planes flown full justifies fuel burn. Get it?

 

[n757st]

Unless you fly said 320 to a place that routinely only books 75 people... that's the only places RJs should be used. It's the only way they're worth the high fuel burn... places where you can't fill a larger airplane. Flying big airplanes with open seats increases seat mile costs. Small planes flown full justifies fuel burn. Get it?

I get that, completely. I just think there are few markets that are worth serving that only board 75 folks. Hell, Ithaca ny has 3-5 flights a day to Philly with no competition, why not send 1-2 larger planes. I'm not trying to argue against the pilots, heck I flew an RJ for a while, i guess I can't rationalize the buisness case.