Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

who will be awarded the AWAC flying?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
numbers

Seriously, you would think you're a bunch of armchair cpa's. My guess is everybody's number's are significantly off. Even if they were close it's a small piece of the picture during negotiations such as this. It's really irrelevant when you can't effectivly do anything about it anyway.
 
bvt1151 said:
Really, I'm not making them up. Find them at http://www.bts.gov

You can also find them at http://www.flyi.com/com-investor.htm.
Indy shows total fuel costs in Q3 of $44,192,000.
Block hours in Q3 of 92,716.*

Simple math results in a fuel cost of $476.64 per block hour, and this is from their own 10-Q. Far shy of your calculated $824/hr.

*These numbers are Q3, while previous posts showed Q1 numbers
Sorry you are getting the wrong info but anybody who flys the CRJ knows the thing burns more than $476 per hour in gas. The fuel flow indicators are not wrong when in cruise they say about 2800lbs per hour, on TKO around 4500 lb.hr.


Any MD 80 pilot knows she burns WAY more than what you have said. Your numbers are either wrong or you are interpeting them wrong.

Just so you know we were still operating J41's in Q3 and FRJ's. They all burn different amounts so using your method is not going to work.

J/S on a CRj one day and look at the fuel flow, then multiply by the average cost per gallon then get back to me.
 
LawReview said:
Seriously, you would think you're a bunch of armchair cpa's. My guess is everybody's number's are significantly off. Even if they were close it's a small piece of the picture during negotiations such as this. It's really irrelevant when you can't effectivly do anything about it anyway.
LOL, though how did you know what I do part time???
 
At MESA and please don't throw stones on me.
J.O. said our ops costs is about 350/hr on RJ's but we still have the Dash and the Beech (that will be out as their contract finishes).
He also said the Dash is about 800 to 1200/hr and Beech with 1800/hr would be worthy only for essencial services. So Rj's are indeed very cheap to operate.
GOD Bless you
 
I also personally think all this thing about AWAC it's nothing about the price itself or the cost and indeed about stocks.
As AWAC stock are a kind of stable they will try to bring the price down to in a future buy it or bring someone elses stock up to make some profit out of it.
Just my $0.02

GOD Bless you
 
Ligeirinho said:
I also personally think all this thing about AWAC it's nothing about the price itself or the cost and indeed about stocks.
As AWAC stock are a kind of stable they will try to bring the price down to in a future buy it or bring someone elses stock up to make some profit out of it.
Just my $0.02

GOD Bless you
AWAC is a private company and has no publically traded stock, just 6 owners.
 
Makes the stock thing kinda a wasted space........ Just kidding. Anyone know for certain who is bidding and who isnt?
 
Rottweiller said:
AWAC is a private company and has no publically traded stock, just 6 owners.
What's the latest rumor on the number of owners anyway......last I heard there was talk of at least 1 of them moving on.
 
WhiteCloud said:
What's the latest rumor on the number of owners anyway......last I heard there was talk of at least 1 of them moving on.
That may be 6 of them moving on plus 2000+ other people if management don't get thier $hit together!!
 
SpocksBeard said:
Maybe this will put sufficient pressure on our management to actually enter the larger aircraft market. Sometimes I'm afraid they're a bit too conservative.
Ironically, staying with 50-seaters instead of getting 70's seems to be more risky these days, not more conservative.
 
I also personally think all this thing about AWAC it's nothing about the price itself or the cost and indeed about stocks.
As AWAC stock are a kind of stable they will try to bring the price down to in a future buy it or bring someone elses stock up to make some profit out of it.
Just my $0.02


What the hell???
 
Last edited:
AWAC does not have stock!!!!


Oh wait, I just realized you were quoting someone. Sorry Skybound.
 
waterskiin'

I know Trans States is bidding for it. At least that's what our management told us about a week ago. Our CP said they expect to get another 10-15 planes out of the deal to fly for United. We are already flying about 15 or so for U. I don't know if they know something or are just hoping.
 
210FR8DOG said:
I know Trans States is bidding for it. At least that's what our management told us about a week ago. Our CP said they expect to get another 10-15 planes out of the deal to fly for United. We are already flying about 15 or so for U. I don't know if they know something or are just hoping.
I wouldn't hold my breath then for those aircraft. This is where UAL is being crafty the bid is to take over 70 aircraft in total and not to give 20 here, 10 there etc. They are hedging their bets that FlyI will say stuff it we can give them 70 right now, downsize FlyI and thus UAL all but eliminates competition at IAD.

That is what makes this whole thing bad at AWAC as we have been told (from Management and the union) that it is an all or nothing deal, we cut costs and bid for 70 aircraft not a part of that number.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom