America West FlightFund (Pre-2005 US Airways merger) - How would you change a new HP/US airline?

Assuming the merger goes through, combining these airlines will provide an opportunity to make changes in both strategy and the frequent flyer program.

What would you change?

Add HP to the *A. Keep the name America West! But, if they're gonna us US's name, change it back to USAir, and change the livery of those ugly black planes! Yes I know its suppose to be blue but come on, they look black. And can ya imagine all those a/c at PHX in that dark color? LORDY! ;)

Add HP to the *A.

While I would treasure a HP partnership with LX, I would want HP out of *A. Once the merger goes through, HP will have a relationship with BA & QF. All they would need to add is CX, LA, and maybe AY. This would be in addition to their existing partnership with VS and RJ.


Keep the name America West!

You know I agree. ^


But, if they're gonna us US's name, change it back to USAir


I have to disagree there. Even though I hate the name, US Airways sounds more upscale than USAir . Can you imagine if British Airways changed their name to British Air. yuk.


...and change the livery of those ugly black planes! Yes I know its suppose to be blue but come on, they look black.


Yes the mortuary livery has to go.


And can ya imagine all those a/c at PHX in that dark color? LORDY! ;)

It's supposed to be 110 by the end of the week. I wouldn't even try imagine PHX-T4 full of black aircraft in July. Just looking at it would make you hot. The US people don't seem to understand our aversion to dark things during the summer.

Having planes one shade lighter than asphalt in PHX/LAS is just plain stupid, and we here in PHX know that.

Well sorry. I think their colors scheme falls more into line with other international carriers. And if Royal Jordanian can pull off having their planes painted black and they are in the middle of a desert than I think you guys can survive as well.

Well sorry. I think their colors scheme falls more into line with other international carriers. And if Royal Jordanian can pull off having their planes painted black and they are in the middle of a desert than I think you guys can survive as well.

Does Royal Jordanian have a hub and spoke operation where 5 dozen planes have to be cooled simultaneously? That's extremely expensive and fuel INEFFICIENT!! With all due respect, it would patently stupid to paint the planes dark blue or black in the desert! Who cares whether they "fall in-line" with other international carriers?

They better be thinking about how they'll survive another year. Hopefully, Doug Parker will start this as a codeshare so that HP can bail if US's financial situation worsens.

Well sorry. I think their colors scheme falls more into line with other international carriers.

Where is it written that intl carriers have to have a dark livery? BA,AF,SQ,CX,JL,QF,SA,etc don't seem to follow this standard.

Does Royal Jordanian have a hub and spoke operation where 5 dozen planes have to be cooled simultaneously? That's extremely expensive and fuel INEFFICIENT!!


Exactly. RJ has a fleet of about 16 planes. Four of which are A340's which would spend most of their time outside of the deserts of the middle east. Another six of their planes are A310's which fly pax and cargo, and also spend a great deal of time out of the desert.

The remaining six planes are A320's which I'm sure RJ can afford to paint every year.

As a US3 (almost US2) I have to say that I like our livery...the planes are crisp, sleek looking, and I like the navy blue. That said, I have to agree that if PHX is to be a hub having a bunch of dark colored planes is a bad idea. Perhaps a white background with the US colors and the AW fonts? US should change its 757 back to F12 and indeed the whole fleet should be a minimum of F12. The Dividend miles program is great...looks like Silver & Gold translate to similar levels on AW, but AW top tier is at 75K and US at 100K - Maybe split that and give top tier at 85K? Uniforms definitely need to change...I like the US plane colors but their uniforms are tired & old looking...need a more modern uniform.

There's my 2 cents...I think this will be a great partnership and definitely make it easier to go West! :cool:

Assuming the merger goes through, combining these airlines will provide an opportunity to make changes in both strategy and the frequent flyer program.

What would you change?


Upgrade First Class amenities immediately. Short flights should offer snack baskets a-la-US Airways. Transcontinental flights should offer meals similar to what America West offers already.

Envoy Class needs a serious uplift. Better meals, an actual Business Class style amenity kit, perhaps more Pursers/Inflight Supervisors looking after Envoy passengers, etc.

Envoy Class needs a serious uplift. Better meals, an actual Business Class style amenity kit, perhaps more Pursers/Inflight Supervisors looking after Envoy passengers, etc.

While that would certainly be nice, given Parker's history, I'd be surprised if they go that way. I would anticipate that they'll extend most aspects of the LCC model to the international service. In that scenario, Envoy Class will still be around but it will be a far cry from international full service carrier standards. :(

Hopefully there will still be Star Alliance, BA & QF options on many of the same routes. Though, I have to say, that sounds too good to be true.

Upgrade First Class amenities immediately. Short flights should offer snack baskets a-la-US Airways. Transcontinental flights should offer meals similar to what America West offers already.

Envoy Class needs a serious uplift. Better meals, an actual Business Class style amenity kit, perhaps more Pursers/Inflight Supervisors looking after Envoy passengers, etc.

given the immediate systemwide adoption of HP's fare scheme, it would be unreasonable to assume anything other than imposition of HP's F meal plan-- i.e., slim going on none... and for the US side of the system, increasingly it will be none as their mainline fleet shrinks by 71 aircraft over the next 18 months...

assuming the model's extension to overseas service would point to something more like an Economy Plus service as the new mode for Envoy. only slightly better servicewise than coach but tons cheaper than traditional Business.

given the immediate systemwide adoption of HP's fare scheme, it would be unreasonable to assume anything other than imposition of HP's F meal plan-- i.e., slim going on none... and for the US side of the system, increasingly it will be none as their mainline fleet shrinks by 71 aircraft over the next 18 months...

assuming the model's extension to overseas service would point to something more like an Economy Plus service as the new mode for Envoy. only slightly better servicewise than coach but tons cheaper than traditional Business.


Maybe I missed something, but where are you getting this information from? I highly doubt US mainline fleet will shrink by 71 aircraft.

Maybe I missed something, but where are you getting this information from? I highly doubt US mainline fleet will shrink by 71 aircraft.

US Airways projects returning 25 additional aircraft by the end of 2006, in addition to the 46 aircraft that US Airways already has announced it plans to return. Nearly all of the aircraft are being returned to General Electric Capital Aviation Services (GECAS).

71 planes.

HP Press Release (https://www.americawest.com/aboutawa/companyprofile/usair/us_pressrelease.htm)


Hopefully there will still be ... BA & QF options on many of the same routes. Though, I have to say, that sounds too good to be true.

Did you notice how they said nothing in the FAQ about whether the BA, NW,VS, or HA partnerships would be affected?

Did you notice how they said nothing in the FAQ about whether the BA, NW,VS, or HA partnerships would be affected?

Yes, it was not addressed on the conference call, either. It's one of the reasons I'm afraid the prospects of their continuation is unlikely.

As I said over in the UA forum, it would seem to make much more sense for the alliance for HP/US to sever the BA relationship and replace that extensive European/South American coverage with another alliance carrier, like LH out of their hubs, PHX in particular. HP currently feeds a ton of passengers to BA in PHX. The lack of such code-share passengers is no doubt what caused LH to fail in its brief attempt in PHX.

As sad as it makes me, I'd look for the BA relationship to end, for BA to pull out of PHX (it's reportedly low yield, anyway), and for LH to come back. :(

Did you notice how they said nothing in the FAQ about whether the BA, NW,VS, or HA partnerships would be affected?

Its way too early to even speculate. They are barely done meeting with each other, finance people, and creditors. Have some patience.

Speculation is that HP wanted service to Hawaii. HA should either secure a long term deal or pull its planes immediately, since there is no point continuing in the market without the HP option. Isn't NW really to Asia, and neither has ops there, so its likely that could continue.

Maybe I missed something, but where are you getting this information from? I highly doubt US mainline fleet will shrink by 71 aircraft.

just adding up the numbers in the PR--- it's a principal source of "synergy"! yes, 71 US mainline aircraft (out of 279 as of 3/31/05) will be gone in 18 months... 25 plus 46 on the US side to exit, while 13 on the HP side to enter, a net reduction of 58 systemwide.

they've managed to stay real quiet on the impact of this-- probably because you just can't do that kind of fleet chop without massive further layoffs at the US side of the operation.. 25% of the mainline fleet is going, after all. can 25% of the labor force be far behind?

Speculation is that HP wanted service to Hawaii.

If HP isn't going to keep the 767's for Hawaii service, I'd rather fly HA's 763s.

Isn't NW really to Asia, and neither has ops there, so its likely that could continue.

If HP stays in Star then I could see the NW partnership going, as both UA and NW have rights within asia.

71 US mainline aircraft (out of 279 as of 3/31/05) will be gone in 18 months... 25 plus 46 on the US side to exit, while 13 on the HP side to enter, a net reduction of 58 systemwide.

Well on the plus side we know that HP won't be giving up the 757's. Since they're going primarily airbus, I think it's safe to say that no A319/A320's are going. The A321's will probably stay(mostly in the east). So that really leaves the 733's and 767's.

HP has the option of returning five 733's, but that can only happen if certain market conditions are met. The next date for HP 733 retirement is in 2008.

So it looks as though all of the planes will be coming from US' fleet, and they'll be 733's and 767's.

In that scenario, Envoy Class will still be around but it will be a far cry from international full service carrier standards. :(





Um, I really don't want to sound too negative here, but Envoy already is a far cry from the C class products offered by any other * carrier, or actually any other US carrier, too.

Envoy USED to be excellent, and although it's still great, the plastic often emerges. Preflight drinks are in plastic cups (even wine) and bags of cashews are given out (compare to UA's or AA's warm nuts in dishes with glassware). The second meal service is all plastic cups, plastic utensils, and served on the same cheap trays used in Y.

Envoy used to feature some pretty innovative things. There used to be a salad cart that would be used to allow pax to create their own salads. The FA's would walk through the cabins with the cart. Also, their used to be an ice cream sundae cart, where you would make your own sundae (similiar to the salad cart) from a huge variety of toppings. Now the ice cream that is served in Envoy comes in the same small plastic tubs that Swiss and BA serve to their Y pax.

Although it's tons better than the domestic F product, it still trails behind the other US carrier's C class, and is left in the dust by Int'l carrier's products. Envoy is maybe a very, very small step down from one of the legacy's transcon services. It's like US is offering JUST enough to get by, and call it "Business Class," but offer nothing more along the lines of originality or special touches, the way it used to.

The only thing Envoy still has going for it is the P@ssport Entertainment system, which is top-notch.

[QUOTE=ByrdluvsAWACO]The A321's will probably stay(mostly in the east).
QUOTE]

Don't think so.....US's A321's are the best narrow body aircraft they have (well the E70 is more comfortable in some ways but that's a whole other story). US shifted 757's to F8 and they serve largely MCO, FLL, Carribean markets and some PHL-CLT and other really short haul (i.e. BDL/PVD) markets in the northeast. The only transcons they serve are LAS. SAN, SFO, LAX and SEA are largely 321 service and FF's love it. PHX and DEN also see a 321 or two mixed in. Others are sprinkled on shorter east coast routes.

Envoy USED to be excellent, and although it's still great, the plastic often emerges. Preflight drinks are in plastic cups (even wine) and bags of cashews are given out (compare to UA's or AA's warm nuts in dishes with glassware). The second meal service is all plastic cups, plastic utensils, and served on the same cheap trays used in Y.

FYI: plastic before take off is on all carriers--it's a post 9/11 federal regulation for reasons unknown.

Correction: been in Envoy four times in the last two months and all drinks in the air are served in glassware.

Add HP to the *A. Keep the name America West! But, if they're gonna us US's name, change it back to USAir, and change the livery of those ugly black planes! Yes I know its suppose to be blue but come on, they look black. And can ya imagine all those a/c at PHX in that dark color? LORDY! ;)

They could always dedicate the white *A livery to PHX. I like the darkblue look--it goes with their previous personality as the business person's carrier.

They could always dedicate the white *A livery to PHX. I like the darkblue look--it goes with their previous personality as the business person's carrier.

I agree - it's one of the better liveries in my opinion. Far better than NW, DL or UA's new colors.

They could always dedicate the white *A livery to PHX. I like the darkblue look--it goes with their previous personality as the business person's carrier.


That was then, this is now. Welcome to the wonderful world of the "full service" LCC!!!!! :p

I think this will be a great partnership and definitely make it easier to go West!

Unless you fly out of US hub, such as PHL, CLT, or PIT, I do not see how simply combining the two route systems will help, unless you like to make double connections. For example, suppose you want to go from ALB to SJC. First you have to take US to a US hub, then fly to PHX or LAS, then fly to SJC.

I fly out of SJC primarily and I cannot find a single destination other than CLT that will allow a new single connection itinerary with the combined route system than I could already have done. I have relatives in PHL, but I could already go there on HP alone. If I fly out of SFO, US already has nonstops to PHL, and if I fly out of MRY, its HP via PHX all the way again.

And if I should want to go to a strictly US city on the east coast, it's the double connection again. Again, from a western perspective, you gain almost nothing, since US already flies to their east coast hubs from both PHX and LAS.

Unless you fly out of US hub, such as PHL, CLT, or PIT, I do not see how simply combining the two route systems will help, unless you like to make double connections. For example, suppose you want to go from ALB to SJC. First you have to take US to a US hub, then fly to PHX or LAS, then fly to SJC.

I fly out of SJC primarily and I cannot find a single destination other than CLT that will allow a new single connection itinerary with the combined route system than I could already have done. I have relatives in PHL, but I could already go there on HP alone. If I fly out of SFO, US already has nonstops to PHL, and if I fly out of MRY, its HP via PHX all the way again.

And if I should want to go to a strictly US city on the east coast, it's the double connection again. Again, from a western perspective, you gain almost nothing, since US already flies to their east coast hubs from both PHX and LAS.

I think you will begin to see mid-sized west coast cities (SJC, PDX, SMF, etc.) connected to PHL and CLt and mid-sized east coast cities (RDU, BDL, BNA, etc) connected to PHX.

FYI: plastic before take off is on all carriers--it's a post 9/11 federal regulation for reasons unknown.

Correction: been in Envoy four times in the last two months and all drinks in the air are served in glassware.


I have been flying Envoy every other month for 18 months now and they are brining things back little by little. Glass has always been after take off. And the last time I was on Envoy (May) we has silverware for the main meal and 2nd meal. Now as far as the hot nuts. That is hit and miss. It depends who is running the galley. Some of the FA's actually do heat up the nuts.

I think you will begin to see mid-sized west coast cities (SJC, PDX, SMF, etc.) connected to PHL and CLt and mid-sized east coast cities (RDU, BDL, BNA, etc) connected to PHX.

But that's exactly my point. Mid-size west coast cities are already connected to PHL on HP alone. And mid-size east coast cities such as RDU, BDL, BNA are already connected to PHX on US alone. The only addition is west coast cities connecting to CLT, since HP does not currently fly to CLT. That alone, at least for me, hardly seems worth getting excited about.

I guess it's more the idea that you will now be able to combine miles in the same program for flights to both midsize west coast cities and midsize east coast cities.

But that's exactly my point. Mid-size west coast cities are already connected to PHL on HP alone. And mid-size east coast cities such as RDU, BDL, BNA are already connected to PHX on US alone. The only addition is west coast cities connecting to CLT, since HP does not currently fly to CLT. That alone, at least for me, hardly seems worth getting excited about.

I guess it's more the idea that you will now be able to combine miles in the same program for flights to both midsize west coast cities and midsize east coast cities.

But I thought the point was PDX-ABE for example would still be a double connection. But if you connect PDX to CLT, then you have a single connection PDX-CLT-ABE that just plain didn't exsist before on either HP or US. Or BNA-PHX-SJC vs. BNA-CLT-PHX-SJC.

Get rid of the black paint job. I know it is supposed to be blue, but it is not!

Fire all US management that was not part of Piedmont. Then merge the old Piedmont and America West to form a great airlines.

Oh yeah, change the name to something that shows it is a new airlines and not the old US.

Unless you fly out of US hub, such as PHL, CLT, or PIT, I do not see how simply combining the two route systems will help, unless you like to make double connections. For example, suppose you want to go from ALB to SJC. First you have to take US to a US hub, then fly to PHX or LAS, then fly to SJC.


Your example is a bit slanted. I can find the same example of double connections between two obscure airports in other airline networks as well. Flying ALB to SFO yields a different result.

Your example is a bit slanted. I can find the same example of double connections between two obscure airports in other airline networks as well. Flying ALB to SFO yields a different result.

SJC isn't "obscure" - your definition of "obscure" is EXTREMELY slanted. ;)

You just don't like it cuz WN owns O/D there. :D

To the thread, if this new airline is going to compete it needs good mid-con and transcon alternatives from CA, OR, WA. It just doesn't have anywhere near that capability in its current state.

CO, NW, UA, and AA (and even B6 and lately WN) have gotten this aspect in their network.

Your example is a bit slanted. I can find the same example of double connections between two obscure airports in other airline networks as well. Flying ALB to SFO yields a different result.

But ALB to SFO can already be done with a single connection at PHL or CLT.

The only thing that would improve links between mid-sized cities on the west coast and mid-sized cities on the east coast would be, as another poster suggested, more nonstops from the west to CLT/PHL and more nonstops from the east to PHX.

FYI: plastic before take off is on all carriers--it's a post 9/11 federal regulation for reasons unknown.

Correction: been in Envoy four times in the last two months and all drinks in the air are served in glassware.


Thank you FAN and Envoy for the well-informed input. My information has been from other personal accounts and photos from airlinemeals.net. Apparently, then, I should assume that US has made some service improvements lately in Envoy? I have seen pictures of the second meal service on flights that have been all-plastic meals. Good to know that Envoy is on the rebound. Now if only we could see the same on domestic flights :rolleyes:

I agree in upgrading the FC product. Better meals, glassware and hot nuts would be nice. In the back, I'd offer the pre-packaged snack packs (vs. stale sandwitches) a la United Ted. Perhaps really get bold and if a flight leaves the gate 30 minutes or more late a free round of drinks on the house.

I would also give every 1K some drink certs and snack pack certs (esp. since they're upping the number of flights without FC or few FC seats).

Bring back the club network (or spin it off). Perhaps someone would try to buy US clubs and UA clubs and combine them into a single club system. In a combined club system, the service reps would likely have to be replaced by kiosks - but that would provide the cost savings to make a club system viable.

Route structure - I'd try to make it so we didn't have to connect more than two times. I'd hate to go GSO to CLT to PHX to SJC. That really sucks.

I agree in upgrading the FC product. Better meals, glassware and hot nuts would be nice. In the back, I'd offer the pre-packaged snack packs (vs. stale sandwitches) a la United Ted. Perhaps really get bold and if a flight leaves the gate 30 minutes or more late a free round of drinks on the house.
.

Love the drinks idea. As for the replacement of the IFC with Snack Packs - disagree a lot. The benefit of US IFC (which I have had only a couple times but found of reasonable quality) is that it's an actual meal. A snack pack is too many high-calorie, high-fat snacks which will just make you feel lousy. IFC is not only healthier but represents a larger group of food groups. Best IFC I had though was UA (May 2004) SFO-ORD. Half sandwich - relatively fresh - half sald - damn fresh with non-iceberg and a excellent Eli Chessecake bar. It was steep at $10 but I was happy to pay for it and not have to lug stuff in from the terminal. I already had broken my back with bottles of wine coming back from Napa.

But I thought the point was PDX-ABE for example would still be a double connection. But if you connect PDX to CLT, then you have a single connection PDX-CLT-ABE that just plain didn't exsist before on either HP or US. Or BNA-PHX-SJC vs. BNA-CLT-PHX-SJC.

US has had years to institute PDX-CLT-ABE and has not done so. Why would it become profitable just from the sudden presence of those hubs out there at LAS and PHX?? it wouldn't. Installing unprofitable spokes at each hub is not going to make sense for long.

trying to glue together a system with hubs 1800 miles apart is not a gimmee.

US has had years to institute PDX-CLT-ABE and has not done so. Why would it become profitable just from the sudden presence of those hubs out there at LAS and PHX?? it wouldn't. Installing unprofitable spokes at each hub is not going to make sense for long.

trying to glue together a system with hubs 1800 miles apart is not a gimmee.

It's called economies of scale: it costs US a lot to open a PDX station.....HP has a presence there, they can add a couple transcons with no more employees or gates. Not to mention, there are likely HP elites in PDX which would not have flown an old US transcon due to loyalty. This now changes too.

It's called economies of scale: it costs US a lot to open a PDX station.....HP has a presence there, they can add a couple transcons with no more employees or gates. Not to mention, there are likely HP elites in PDX which would not have flown an old US transcon due to loyalty. This now changes too.

Economies of scale are highly overrated in these situations, and anyway couldn't be realized until the operations merge, 2 or 3 years down the line. And why wouldn't the PDX elites have ridden US transcon before-- who would they have ridden? not HP...

HP is risking everything it has achieved on a $600m set of dubious and overstated "synergies," and a tossing of its own employees to the wolves...

Economies of scale are highly overrated in these situations, and anyway couldn't be realized until the operations merge, 2 or 3 years down the line. And why wouldn't the PDX elites have ridden US transcon before-- who would they have ridden? not HP...

HP is risking everything it has achieved on a $600m set of dubious and overstated "synergies," and a tossing of its own employees to the wolves...

There would not be any US elites in PDX. HP likely has some (likely not many) but some elites which would give the route some support....plus, of course non-status pax looking for the best route/price.

Why are economies of scale so overrated? Look at PHL or CLT vs. a small station such as DEN or SAN. My guess is the revenue pax to employee ratio is much higher in the hubs than in small stations. At some times of day there are as many ticket agents at BNA as there are when I check-in at my home, PHL. Daily departures 19 vs. 500.

You've got to keep it 1K. The route structure will be too big (with star alliance) to have it any less. I would vote 25K, 50K, 1K. That mimics the *A status levels.

Also, I would upgrade the F product, and downgrade the price. I would (and have) paid $1K to fly from coast to coast on a C ticket (JFK-LAX on UA - and that's a pretty nice ride). Why can't US/HP do the same? As a FF I'd prefer to get mine free, but the airline needs to make money and the best way to do it is to charge a reasonable amount for F (esp. since the F product is sub-standard).

What would you pay for F? $1K seems reasonable trans-con. Perhaps $500 otherwise.

Any comments?

Also, I would upgrade the F product, and downgrade the price. I would (and have) paid $1K to fly from coast to coast on a C ticket (JFK-LAX on UA - and that's a pretty nice ride). Why can't US/HP do the same?


HP already does. There are plenty of sub-$1000 fares on transcon flights.


What would you pay for F? $1K seems reasonable trans-con. Perhaps $500 otherwise. Any comments?

I would pay $500-600 for a transcon restriced F fare. Not much more. If they're trying to be a low cost carrier then their prices need to reflect it. HP has often mentioned it's low-fares, but prices F like a legacy carrier.