Delta 'playing hardball' with regional affiliates (Article - June 11)

[meyers9163]

Why is the E170 'far more comfortable' than any CRJ?

Comfort is nice and all, but does it really affect the bottom line? Doubtful in these times.

At the days end its all ones oppinions. Honestly I dont mind a CRJ7/9 or an EMB170/175. To me the ride is the same and comfort is about the same. Honestly I'll take an RJ or EMB over a damn tight fitting 737 any day of the week.

Bottom line is that the 170 is less fuel efficient then the CRJs. However its not by much. The 700/900 and E170/175 are the way of the future. With any luck mainline will start getting CRJ1000s and EMB190/195s to help keep flying at mainline and offset fuel.

Again with any luck we'll never see those planes at any regional.

 

[johnsonrod]

I am thinking those two types would be very popular given the high fuel prices and the need to spread costs over more seats (and the E170 is far more comfortable for passengers than any CRJ).

Why is the E170 'far more comfortable' than any CRJ?

Comfort is nice and all, but does it really affect the bottom line? Doubtful in these times.[/quote]

Give me a break. Have you EVER flown in an E170? Have you? It is far more comfortable than any CRJ I have ever flown in. What's up with the low windows in the CRJ? Every time I sit on the window I end up hurting my neck as I attempt to look outside. You basically have to sit on the aisle to not hurt your neck while looking out the window. Most business passengers (seem like the only people who can afford flying these days) hate the lack of bin space and often the inability to use their computers inflight (tight seating space) in the CRJs - just ask them... I am sure most business pax would prefer to fly Southwest or AirTran when given the option vs. a CRJ-200/700/900 on a competing route. A 717 is far more comfortable.

The E170 is like a mini-Airbus. Very comfortable with great bins and huge windows in comparison. I'd venture to say that E170s are more comfortable than coach in most big airliners. The CRJ is not comfortable at all. The ERJs suck too in the back. An E170 is as comfortable as a 717 for pax if not a little better.

As far as economics are concerned, sure, the CR9 is probably slightly more economical. But it still has the feel of an RJ vs. the feel of a mini-Airbus in the E170. Regardless, the E170/175 has better economics than anything but the CR9 and it clearly beats other slightly bigger airliners like DC9s and 737-500s from an operational cost standpoint (even though NWA's DC9s are paid off - yada yada yada). The E190 is even better from a cost standpoint.

Simply put, ask passengers who have flown both the CR9 and the E170 and the vast majority will select an E170 any time. I would in a heartbeat. CRJs are just not comfortable for medium to long distance flights.

CRJs/ERJs can be used effectively on non-competing routes when passengers have NO other choice but to fly on it. CRJ-200s/ERJs should not be used on routes where they compete with LCCs like SWA or AirTran or Jet Blue because you cannot spread the operational costs over 50 seats and still charge competitive LCC fares. Not every passenger is an international feed passenger...

 

[EMB170Pilot]

everyone knows the 170/175 is a superior product than the crj. Duhhhhh

now all we have to do is work on the pay rates and other stuff in Republic's contract.

Ball is in our court to raise the bar. I hope this happens

 

[flyboyike]

The 50 seaters are NOT making any money whatsoever during high fuel.

Not by themselves, perhaps not. But paired with that 76 they're feeding they are. Or were you planning on flying that 76 yourself to places like, I dunno, Portland, ME, for instance? Let's see how much money that wide-body makes then.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

everyone knows the 170/175 is a superior product than the crj. Duhhhhh

now all we have to do is work on the pay rates and other stuff in Republic's contract.

Ball is in our court to raise the bar. I hope this happens

Ummm, am I the only one that thinks this sentence is crazy? Many of the regionals are in a fight for their lives, and you are trying to get more pay and work rules for yours? Go ahead, run Republic out of business. The more expensive you are to operate, the more flying you will lose to those that are cheaper.

 

[General Lee]

Do you think you might, just might, be a little too cavalier about another pilot's livelihood here?

Just askin'...

RJs hurt EVERYONE during high gas. When they can't make money and still fly, they are potentially hurting everyone's livelihood. None of you guys said anything after 9-11 when mainline planes were being parked and RJs expanded everywhere. Remember?


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

This message is hidden because Jmoney is on your ignore list.


Still the best thing I have ever done on this board. This guy has "Valdosta trash" written all over him.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

I'll say it. So tomorrow, if Delta parked every 50 seater, what happens to Delta? I think you're simplifying the argument just a bit. 50 seaters serve a function, ideally to feed international flights, in that case they're a loss leader (not the exact definition but close enough). With Delta's emphasis on international, it would seem they serve a vital role. So, wishing them away isn't going to save Delta. As a replacement for domestic flying, well, they don't serve that role in a profitable manner, but that solution is much more complex, ie related to scope, frequency, consumer needs, etc.

Thanks to being desperate during our BK, we signed a lot of deals that were not good for us. (like one in Utah) They are holding us back now. I can understand that we need feed for our INTL feed, that is good. But, we have too much point to point with them, and spoke flights to cities that do not come back with INTL feed---like 4 daily RJs to SYR from JFK. Why do we do that? We are competing with Jetblue E190s, and we really only need one or possibly two a day to feed the mid afternoon and late night Europe banks of departures. The other two flights are a waste. Yes, we need RJs, but we have too many of them. Even Boyd agrees. Obviously RA does too, since he is trying to park a bunch of Freedom Air 50 seaters. Some are good, a lot are NOT. You need to be wishing for Dash-8-400s right now. Those are fuel efficient and can carry a bunch of people.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

How many more E170s and CR9s can Delta allow with their scope clause?

I am thinking those two types would be very popular given the high fuel prices and the need to spread costs over more seats (and the E170 is far more comfortable for passengers than any CRJ).

Right now we give them 3 76 seaters for every new airplane we get on the property. Hopefully that will change with our new JOINT CONTRACT we are negotiating with the company right now. NWA's scope clause is better than our current one, but everything else in their contract stinks. Hopefully we will take the best of both, and we know it could happen because management is desperate to get a joint contract done prior to the companies merging. Fingers crossed!


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[No.W.]

And this is why I'm seeking employment OUTSIDE of the airlines.

There is not much good news for ANY RJ operator right now.

I believe Delta bringing the RJ flying in house(Comair) makes sense...and it would work from a logistical standpoint as well...get rid of all the contracts...then give Comair the flying(shrank to about 20% of what it used to be). Keeps all the money in house.

When oil goes to more than $100/bbl lots of things change, including the way you address your regional feed...it's very possible that with high oil prices it is no longer profitable for Delta to have so many contracted carriers. As much as I hate to admit it, I think ALL DCI contract carriers better look out.