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

Why the RJDC is sooo nervous

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

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Posted on Sun, Sep. 26, 2004

By Trebor Banstetter

Star-Telegram Staff Writer


About two years ago, many North Texas travelers loyal to Delta Air Lines began to feel a little squeezed.

More and more, fliers found themselves taking off from Dallas/Fort Worth Airport on narrow, small regional jets carrying the Delta Connection label instead of full-size airplanes. And it wasn't just on short hops to cities like Tulsa, Okla., or Lubbock. It was on longer flights to big cities like New York, Minneapolis and Phoenix.

The downsizing was Delta's last-ditch attempt to turn around its D/FW hub, which had lost money for years. Executives hoped using the smaller aircraft would save money and push Delta's operations into the black.

They were wrong. Delta made it official this month when it announced plans to pull the plug on its D/FW operations as part of an extensive restructuring. It will eliminate 92 percent of its D/FW flights by Jan. 31 -- including its regional jet flights.

One lesson from Delta's exodus: Regional jets -- once hailed as saviors of the airline industry -- aren't necessarily the solutions for every problem, aviation experts say.

"Twelve years ago, this was a revolution," said aviation consultant Stuart Klaskin of Klaskin, Kushner & Co. in Coral Gables, Fla. "Six years ago, it was a panacea. Three years ago, it was a sort of Band-Aid.

"Now, there's some rethinking going on."

Mike Boyd, an airline consultant with the Boyd Group of Evergreen, Colo., said Delta's experience at D/FW demonstrated that the small jets have difficulty on routes where they compete against full-size airplanes.

Given a choice, he said, travelers fervently avoid the cramped cabins and narrow confines of the regional jets.

"There has been a real consumer backlash against these airplanes," he said. "People hate them for any flight longer than an hour or so."

That's been the case for Tom Chick, a vice president of national accounts at Southlake-based Technical Transportation.

A frequent business traveler, Chick, who lives in Plano, has found himself on regional jets more and more in recent years when flying out of D/FW. And not just on Delta -- he said he often must travel on the narrow airplanes when flying American Airlines or other carriers.

"I will do just about anything to avoid those planes," he said. "I'll even connect if I have to, and I detest connecting."

Hope for the airlines

Regional jets were developed to replace turboprop airplanes, which were typically used to ferry passengers from towns and small cities to nearby hub airports, where they would connect to full-size jets.

The regional jets, with fewer than 100 seats and often 50 or less, can fly at higher altitudes and thus more smoothly than turboprops.

They can also fly farther, connecting more distant cities to the biggest hubs. And, because they are typically operated by affiliate airlines -- such as American Eagle or Delta Connection -- they usually have lower labor costs.

"Compared to the old turboprops, the regional jets are great," said Alan Bender, a professor of aeronautical science at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Fla.

But when the travel industry began to slow down after 2000, some airlines began to use the small jets on routes that had been served with full-size planes.

While more expensive to operate in terms of the cost per seat, the regional jets were seen as a cost-effective alternative because the big airplanes often had many empty seats. The same number of passengers would fill a regional jet, increasing the chances that the flight would be profitable overall.

While Delta was the most aggressive major airline when it came to adding regional jets, other carriers also ramped up their use of the small planes, including Fort Worth-based American Airlines.

Last year, when it negotiated concessions with pilots, executives asked for and received the ability to expand American Eagle, the carrier's regional affiliate. Previously, the labor contract with pilots had greatly restricted Eagle's growth.

According to financial documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, a majority of the new airplanes American has on order for the next few years are regional jets.

Of nearly 140 new planes that American is scheduled to receive by 2010, 80 -- or nearly 60 percent, will be regional jets manufactured by Embraer and Bombardier.

In the past year alone, the number of passengers transported on regional airlines has increased 15 percent, according to the Regional Airline Association. Mary Dulle, who works in corporate communications for Fort Worth-based Alcon Labs, said she has noticed greater use of regional jets on flights to Cleveland, where she travels regularly, usually on American.

"They used to be nice, comfortable large jets, and now they are regionals," she said.

Dulle doesn't like the change. "Flying time is longer, the seats are smaller, there's less carry-on space and it seems noisier than larger jets," she said.

Crushing competition

Regional jets are effective in serving small communities, but their advantage vanishes when they compete with full-size airplanes, said consultant Klaskin.

"You saw the majors throw 50-seat regional jets against the [discount airlines] and against mainline jets," he said. "That's a classic mistake because the customer feels like he's getting a subpar product."

That's why Delta had little success at D/FW, where many of its small-jet routes faced full-size competition from American, he said.

That doesn't mean a hub dominated by regional jets cannot work.

In Cincinnati, for example, nearly two-thirds of Delta passengers flew on regional affiliates rather than the main airline during the first five months of the year, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Unlike its exodus from D/FW, Delta plans to boost its presence at Cincinnati, and it recently unveiled a new pricing scheme designed to attract more local passengers.

But Delta also lacks a major competitor in Cincinnati, so on most of those routes, it's a regional jet or nothing.

"When you're the only game in town, a regional jet will work, particularly at a small hub like Cincinnati," said professor Bender.

That's generally how American has deployed regional jets in markets from D/FW.

For example, while Dulle of Alcon doesn't like flying on small jets to Cleveland, she doesn't have any choice. The only airlines serving that market directly are American Eagle and Continental Express, both of which use 50-seat jets.

Lisa Bailey, a spokeswoman for American Airlines, acknowledged that the carrier has replaced mainline jets with regional jets in some markets.

"Those are typically mainline markets where the big jets couldn't be profitable," she said. "We made a decision that those assets could be better deployed elsewhere."

But she stresses that American's regional jet strategy is different from Delta's. The airline typically doesn't offer the small airplanes against full-size jets at its hubs, and it believes that American Eagle's primary mission is to feed passengers to connections at big airports.

In coming years, the line between the regional jets and their larger counterparts is likely to blur. A new generation of regional jets are much larger, with 100 to 110 seats, and feature roomier cabins.

Fast-growing discount carrier JetBlue Airways has ordered 100 of the new planes manufactured by Embraer, a Brazilian aerospace company. Many analysts believe that they will allow that airline to expand into smaller cities that cannot be served profitably with full-size airplanes.

"The thing is, these aren't really even regional jets, even though everyone calls them that," said consultant Boyd. "They make a lot more sense right now than the little 50-seaters."

The newer aircraft make more sense on longer flights because they are more comfortable for passengers and can compete better with large airplanes, he said.

"They're not going to vanish overnight," Boyd said, "but the day of the regional jet is drawing to a close."

It wouldn't come a moment too soon for business traveler Chick.

"I hate those little things," he said.

IN THE KNOW

Regional jet growth

The number of regional jets registered with the Federal Aviation Administration has grown exponentially since 1994.


Year Airplanes
1994 20
1995 30
1996 40
1997 60
1998 120
1999 210
2000 370
2001 570
2002 760
2003 970
2004 1,350




Bye Bye--General Lee
 
I find it funny how aweful these airplanes supposedly are, how the passengers hate them, how high there CASM is, blah blah blah, yet the number of registered RJ's keeps climbing year after year.

Perhaps the General (who obviously despises the RJ) could educate me as to why the number of RJ's continue to skyrocket when everyone seems to hate them so much. As much as you and I wish they would go away, face it: They're not going away anytime soon.

Deal with it!
 
shamrock said:
Why do people soooo want to blame the DFW closure on the RJ?
Because they don't want to accept the fact that mainline failed in DFW which is the real reason DFW is closing.
 
JI Gone OH said:
I find it funny how aweful these airplanes supposedly are, how the passengers hate them, how high there CASM is, blah blah blah, yet the number of registered RJ's keeps climbing year after year.

Perhaps the General (who obviously despises the RJ) could educate me as to why the number of RJ's continue to skyrocket when everyone seems to hate them so much. As much as you and I wish they would go away, face it: They're not going away anytime soon.

Deal with it!
Dude, you and most Regional pilots are in denial... Passengers don't like smaller airplanes, and, when given a choice they will avoid them at all costs. I have heard these words from passengers myself - and they are adament about it...

The number of RJs have increased considerably over the past few years because airline managers got it wrong - they focused on the flawed assumption that passengers would pay more to fly direct on the smaller jets (that the passengers' main concern was direct flights vs. comfort). Well, many passengers are backlashing right now and trying to avoid the smaller aircraft. Former President/COO of Delta, Fred Reid, loved RJs and he ordered hundreds of them. Again, did Delta and others fail to conduct focus groups with passengers? Every time I board an RJ I watch the faces of the boarding passengers - many are frightened by the small cabin...

Having flown the E170 as a pax, I know that passengers will appreciate these and the E190 aircraft. The E170 retains the "big airplane" feel and it has plenty of room. In fact, it is much, much nicer than the CRJ700 and CRJ900 which retain the tube feel and limited seat and bin space. I think Jet Blue will do very well with the E190 because it has world class economics and that "big airplane" feel that the passengers NEED...

Yes, there will always be a need for 50-seat RJs on non-competitive thin routes, but they should not be used on LCC-competitive routes when passengers have a choice....

JI Gone OH,

Did you ever see passengers whince when they got on your FK100? Doubt it. Airline managers need to focus on what the passengers want in this ultra-competitive industry too (not just on the economic/CASM/RPM side)...
 
Last edited:
MedFlyer said:
Because they don't want to accept the fact that mainline failed in DFW which is the real reason DFW is closing.
100% correct (Delta failed in DFW, thus the closure of the hub) . Delta failed inpart to a flawed strategy on the deployment of the RJ. Delta wanted to see how far they could go with the RJ and used DFW as a test bed, it failed.
 
TWA Dude, I didn't know ALPA even represented it's small-jet airlines.

Give it a few years. When the EMB-170 and 190's and the extended-range variants (that are no-doubt in the works) are flying coast to coast, the people will bitch about that too.
 
NYRANGERS said:
100% correct (Delta failed in DFW, thus the closure of the hub) . Delta failed inpart to a flawed strategy on the deployment of the RJ. Delta wanted to see how far they could go with the RJ and used DFW as a test bed, it failed.
No, Delta failed because DL mainline could NOT compete with AA mainline. DL tried for many years (pre RJ era) to compete with AA. They added more and more mainline flights and the losses piled up. So DL began pulling the mainline flights down and shifting them elsewhere (mostly ATL). RJ's were brought in as a band-aid to try to fill in for mainline. However, it's not the RJ's that killed DL in DFW, it was mainline.

The "RJ issue" will fade away when mainline is fixed. Thus far, both DL management and DALPA are unwilling to fix mainline, so DL continues to die.
 
MedFlyer said:
No, Delta failed because DL mainline could NOT compete with AA mainline. DL tried for many years (pre RJ era) to compete with AA. They added more and more mainline flights and the losses piled up. So DL began pulling the mainline flights down and shifting them elsewhere (mostly ATL). RJ's were brought in as a band-aid to try to fill in for mainline. However, it's not the RJ's that killed DL in DFW, it was mainline.

The "RJ issue" will fade away when mainline is fixed. Thus far, both DL management and DALPA are unwilling to fix mainline, so DL continues to die.
Thats a fair assesment. However I do think that we had a better chance at competing with AA with our mainline product than with the RJ. When I hired on I was initially based in DFW on the 727, we had a fair ammount of flying. Three years later has seen mainline almost dissapear from DFW and now the closure. I think competing with AA 757 "more room throughout coach" in RJ's was a big mistake. Delta managment is "stellar".
 
It's the passengers own fault. I agree that they are uncomfortable, but hey ... if you don't want to pay the proper fare, we'll stick you in a **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**ty seat in a cramped airplane. I say serves them right. The traveling public is at least in part to blame for the current mess we are in!
 
First of all, I do NOT hate RJs. I continually say that I think RJs are good aircraft on certain routes. I don't think they are great on very long flights (the DFW examples--OAK, ONT, SNA, JFK, DCA, DTW, RDU, PBI, FLL), and I don't think they win out over LCC direct service on larger, roomier aircraft. They can't compete like that. I think the RJ role should be to support certain mainline flights during off peak hours, and to be route finders. I also think they are a better alternative to props.


Instead of slamming me (even though I did NOT slam the RJ in my first post on this thread, merely saying that the RJDC would be nervous), why don't you read the article and understand what the passengers are saying. I am NOT saying that---the paying customer is. Sure, guys like afellowaviator have neighbors that LOVE RJs---and some people do love them---but not many on LONG flights, and that is where ASA was using them out of DFW.


As far as the DFW collapse, I think a lot of the blame should be on aircraft planning. Certain routes should never had be considered. Also, there was a draw down in DFW because of the Song start up. Just think about it, we had to pull 36 mainline 757s out of mainline and put them on Express routes. That had a cascading effect----routes that had 757s now had to have 738s, which were then replaced by MD-88s, and the MD-88 routes were replaced by 737s, which were replaced by CR7s. The emphasis was placed on growing Song, which needed to be done to combat a Jetblue threat, and the loser was mainline at DFW---and the RJs then could NOT compete with AA and their MD-80s.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Last edited:
MedFlyer said:
The "RJ issue" will fade away when mainline is fixed. Thus far, both DL management and DALPA are unwilling to fix mainline, so DL continues to die.
Let's hope DL doesn't DIE!!

Good luck DL,
Jet
 
Dude, you and most Regional pilots are in denial... Passengers don't like smaller airplanes, and, when given a choice they will avoid them at all costs. I have heard these words from passengers myself - and they are adament about it...
I love hearing comments like this..

Passengers don't like smaller planes because they see safety in size. Ask the average passenger if they would rather fly a 777 from ATL-CVG over a 737-200 or MD80 and they will all say yes.

As a long time commuter, I get the chance to talk with all sorts of passengers. I've been lucky this past year and have flown in first class a good majority of the time, so I've been able to speak with the upper level frequent fliers.

The overall majority of those passengers that I speak with have no problems with being on an RJ at all. They like the fact that they can ring their FA call button and get a drink in a matter or seconds, not minutes or longer on a larger airplane.

In today's day in age, the cheap coach traveler is who you have to make happy. They are the ones who are buying the majority of tickets now. If the 158 other folks in the back of the 757 I rode in last night was any indication, they weren't very happy with the "comfort" level of that airplane.

I've never heard one passenger complain leaving my little RJ, but I sure hear passengers complain all the time leaving mainline equipment.
 
Medflyer,


Dalpa and Delta management have been talking all along--with Malone and Grinstein talking twice a week on the phone (I read that in an article). Both of them are trying to SQUEEZE the creditors to contribute, and I think Dalpa has known all along that we will give back HUGE. Dalpa just stated today that we will again be going back to the table, probably starting next week, and it looks like the TA has a great chance of passing tomorrow---which would help Delta out again. I think both Dalpa and Delta know the eventual plan.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
I think you will always find some pax complain about the airplane, comfort, and space... whether they're in a 1900 or 777.
 
In an ideal world my job is to feed passengers to mainline aircraft. Also, intiate service to new cities that hopefully will later support a mainline aircraft. Our RJ's were never the long term answer and obviously not the short term with regard to DFW.
But, I don't want to read people complaining when they do not want to pay a fair price to travel. More people are traveling but they are not paying fares that support the system.
If mainline doesn't grow we are all in a world of hurt! It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out!! Cheers, Wil
 
MedFlyer said:
No, Delta failed because DL mainline could NOT compete with AA mainline.
I guess that's why all the mainline airplanes got pullled out of DFW and there will only be RJs flying out of there now. OOPPs, I got that wrong.

JMO, but it would seem that with over 200 RJ departures out of DFW those self financing, super profitable RJs should have beat up on AA. Unless of course, those RJs are not the cash cows some people think they are. The RJ is a nice aircraft for connecting small towns to a hub, if the yields are high, but it is a poor competitor against any mainline aircraft, and too costly in this low yield market. Delta mortgaged its future on RJs these last 5 years, $3B purchasing ASA/CMR and billions more on acquiring the largest RJ fleet in the industry. We'll see if GG is as fond of the RJ as our recently departed executive team of Mullin, Reid, Bell and Mascarra were.
 
Last edited:
I do not believe that passengers will not pay a higher price for a ticket. I believe they will shop for the best deal for them to get from point A to Point B. Often a difference in fare of ten bucks will be the determining factor, if all other things are fairly equal. LCC transport has brought this situation to be where it is. If ten bucks was the determining factor, these people would not be flying in the first place.

If I decide I need to fly from MSP to ORD, a relatively short one hour flight, and I had a choice between AA and NWA, what other than price would be involved with my decision, if frequency and a/c size were identical.

I believe there is to some degree, excess capacity in the system, and that is why any attempt to raise ticket prices, will drive the customer to the competitor who does not raise fares.
 
jarhead,


Please, please re-read the article. Not all passengers are just looking for low fares. It looks like the passengers we WANT, the last minute high fare ones, continually look for ways to AVOID RJs. Don't take it from me, read the article again. Now sometimes they don't have a choice--like the DFW-CLE routing (in the article). But, if they do---they will avoid RJs on long flights and happily go AA on their MD80s.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
General Lee said:
jarhead,


Please, please re-read the article. Not all passengers are just looking for low fares. It looks like the passengers we WANT, the last minute high fare ones, continually look for ways to AVOID RJs. Don't take it from me, read the article again. Now sometimes they don't have a choice--like the DFW-CLE routing (in the article). But, if they do---they will avoid RJs on long flights and happily go AA on their MD80s.


Bye Bye--General Lee

On that I will agree. I always fly mainline a/c given a choice. When I used to Non Rev from MSP to CVG I ALWAYS picked the larger mainline aircraft over the RJ when available seats were to be had. I'd always try for first class as well, and was often successful with that. It was only when the only choice was a 50 RJ that I'd list myself on that one. Frequently it meant showing up at MSP at 4:45 a.m., so I was a happier camper in the larger a/c for the 1 hour 40 minute flight to CVG.

However, if I lived in a town small enough that it could not support a mainline connection, I'd gladly take an RJ point to point, if it meant avoiding the hassle of a hub connection.

BTW, Delta has stopped all mainline travel now between MSP and CVG, so the only non-rev game in town for me is DCI. It still beats driving 720 miles.
 
Do you think there would be such animosity towards RJs on this board if there were DAL pilots up front?

Just a thought.
 
Having flown the E170 as a pax, I know that passengers will appreciate these and the E190 aircraft. The E170 retains the "big airplane" feel and it has plenty of room. In fact, it is much, much nicer than the CRJ700 and CRJ900 which retain the tube feel and limited seat and bin space. I think Jet Blue will do very well with the E190 because it has world class economics and that "big airplane" feel that the passengers NEED...

I agree with most of what you said, but these bigger "regional" jets are still no better for the industry (employees) because while bigger, they are still in the hands of cheap a$$ regional airlines.
 
Shamrock,


I don't think it would change. Remember, I am not against the RJ or RJ pilots in general, just the fact that RJs have been taking (via fleet planning) many ex mainline routes that we all know should not have happened. We all know that an RJ on a 3-4 hour flight is NOT comfortable for any passenger. Is it better than losing the route? Maybe. But, we will not get any last minute high paying passengers, and we will fill it with money losing fare sale passengers that have no teeth.


I think there are some routes that do warrent RJs, and I think they should be used for some point to point that makes sense. I also think some of our furloughs should have had the chance to fly those new RJs IF more of the mainline planes were to be parked and replaced with new, larger RJs. I would not have advocated kicking anyone out of their current RJs---and certainly NOT furloughing ANY DCI person. A lot of my concern was with NEW RJ orders and possible parking of future mainline aircraft. It doesn't seem like that will be the case now, since the 50 seat RJ and possibly the 70 seat RJ will soon lose steam and 100 seaters will probably start being the new "in" aircraft in the near future......But, there will always be a need for 50 and 70 seaters--in certain markets.....JMO.



Bye Bye--General Lee
 
shamrock said:
Do you think there would be such animosity towards RJs on this board if there were DAL pilots up front?

Just a thought.
What?? The fact that the rj's are losing their luster has nothing to do with you or me. The animosity is comming from pax who can either fly on an rj or a A320, B717, B777 etc, etc. The fact that they are choosing to fly on bigger aircraft and on the competition is the reason the rj's will slowly reduce in numbers.....not because a mainline or DCI pilot is flying them.

Lose the chip, most of us were flying for regionals and such before getting "the last job we will ever have". I know it makes many feel better to play the victim, but we are not all out to "get you rj guys". People don't like the rj's anymore, period (unless it serves as their only flight out of their little towns, in wich case they are fortunate to have air service). We either change or die. Simple.
 
FDJ2 said:
I guess that's why all the mainline airplanes got pullled out of DFW and there will only be RJs flying out of there now. OOPPs, I got that wrong.

JMO, but it would seem that with over 200 RJ departures out of DFW those self financing, super profitable RJs should have beat up on AA.
You Delta guys all forget that Delta launched a full-on attack of AA in DFW (with mainline of course) in the early 90s. That didn't work either, and doomed Delta to be a sorry shell of a third-class player in the D/FW market.

If Delta really saw the writing on the wall, they would have pulled out of DFW back then and either deployed their assets in a more profitable area, or found a different hub to try. But there's something to be said about hindsight being 20/20 and Monday-morning quarterbacking and all.

It has been said before, but it doesn't hurt to repeat it again: DCI was a last-ditch effort in Dallas after mainline had already failed. Guess what, DCI failed too. It's funny how guys I fly with daily (well, 20-21 days monthly) that are affected by this seem to accept it better than these few Delta guys that like to stir up trouble on this board, yet are affected very little by it.
 
wil said:
In an ideal world my job is to feed passengers to mainline aircraft. Also, intiate service to new cities that hopefully will later support a mainline aircraft. Our RJ's were never the long term answer and obviously not the short term with regard to DFW.
But, I don't want to read people complaining when they do not want to pay a fair price to travel. More people are traveling but they are not paying fares that support the system.
If mainline doesn't grow we are all in a world of hurt! It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out!! Cheers, Wil
Good post. Look, 50-seat RJs should be used on routes that don't compete with larger, low-cost carrier aircraft. That should be a rule because many passengers would prefer the larger aircraft and the economics don't work as well for the 50-seater (can't spread the costs very well over 50 seats and make a profit with low fares for each seat). I am talking about LCC competitive routes - not thinner routes with no competition.

The introduction of more 70-100 seaters should be a priority. Clearly, from a passenger comfort standpoint, the CRJ-700 is not much of an improvement over the CRJ-200 and the ultra-narrow ERJ. I am hopeful that more airlines order the EMB-170/190 or whatever new aircraft Bombardier develops to compete with it. Passenger comfort means wider cabins, more seat room and better bin space. I agree that JetBlue will probably do very well with the EMB-190 (of course they will - pilot costs will be very low...). Let's hope Delta orders the EMB-190 as well very soon.
 
Whould all this be going on if we all still flew turbo props? People HATED the Brasilia, but it was a connecting airplane. It never tried to be anything but that. Just because the RJ can go 3-4 hrs doesn't mean it should. I fly it and I wouldn't want to sit in the back of that thing that long. I flew the Brasilia before that and watched people's faces when they got on. Longing to be on one of those "jets". Now I'm on the RJ and have seen people look at the RJ the same way.
Its all about the preception that people have. They would rather be on a 30 year old 737 than a 2 year old RJ. They don't know the difference. They see small and think its bad.
That e170/190 will kick some ass. Doesn't look small to the pax.
 
Delta's problem out of DFW seemed to be a scheduling problem, especially on west coast flights. Several times a day out of DFW, including late evening yet the last flight leaving some west coast cities was at noon time! So if you have to conduct business in the morning you got to leave the meeting at ten to make your departure, or have to stay another night and waste half a day flying back to DFW. No wonder everybody was coming back on AA and DL was flying half empty.

What is DL costing dearly now are their cheaper-than-SWA fares on Song. Oh yeah, the planes are probably full, but if SWA is barely making a profit with their fares how can DL do that with a lot lower utilization of the (more expensive) 757?
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom