In the 737-900 seat map MKEflyer95 posted there are 3 bathrooms. The Delta configuration shows four. It's not worth my time to research who has the most/least bathrooms.

As already pointed out, I was stating a fact, not an opinion. However, I will present an opinion here, you haven't taken even an entry level economics class. Everything exists for a reason. Just because it doesn't fit your picture of "perfection" doesn't mean that is true for everyone. You might find that trying to take other peoples views and needs into mind will be a very rewarding experience.

Or you can go on thinking you are always right and the center of the universe and continue trolling everyone. I for one enjoy the entertainment.

There are flights where all the profit is made from these big comfy seats in front of the curtain. They exist for a reason (and it's not to give out as free upgrades).

No that was from somebody else. I was just replying to that post :rolleyes:

FACT: First class seats take up more space on a plane, hence you can't put as much as normal seats.

Logical conclusion: Therefore, since the goal of an airplane is to transport as many people as safely possible, seats that take up more space equal waste.

You have to come to this logical conclusion looking at the available resource (space in the aircraft) and the goal of the aircraft. WN has just taken the initiative to actually eliminate this type of waste and become more lean, along with others (inefficiency due to assigned seats, airplanes sitting too long at the gate, serving cities that can't support enough planes to spread the overhead).

I suspect that the "free" checked bag thing, while not only great marketing, is also aimed at reducing turnaround time, since rampers can load baggage into the cargo bays a lot faster than passengers can cram it into the overhead bins, keeping planes moving and making money.

Except most of them seem to just be given out as upgrades. WN makes a profit, and they have eliminated this type of waste from their system. Not only have other airlines not eliminated this type of waste from their system, DL has actually introduced the idiotic Economy Plus seating, which introduces another source of waste and inefficiency into the process. Instead of doing 31/34, if they just gave everyone 32 like WN and went from there, things would be a LOT more efficient. DL is basically running a racket with Economy Plus, but that's another story.

Wifi isn't as bad, since the take rate of suckers who pay absurd amounts for internet doesn't have to be high at all to make back the tiny amount of extra fuel used for the weight of the electronics, and the relatively negligible cost of buying, installing, and maintaining said electronics. Plus, it provides a utility to everyone, since the little flight tracker thing is cool, and available to non-suckers like me.

Cannot reach a logical conclusion is you start with a wrong assumption:

The goal of a flight is to make as much $ as possible to the airline, not to transport as many people as possible.

Some airlines (budget airlines, like WN) accomplish this by a. flying as many people as possible, b. paying their staff as little as possible, c. flying their planes as much as possible, d. servicing their planes as little as possible etc.

Some other airlines accomplish this by premium seating and services that equates to premium fares.

To each their own, that's why there are lots of choices for lots of people. That's why you enjoy WN and I would never even consider flying them, no matter what. Simple. Choices.

Your "logical conclusion" is invalid, as it is based on the incorrect assumption that the primary purpose of an airplane is to transport as many pax as possible.

You have actually disproven yourself when you said you will not fly NK due to 28" pitch. They fit more people on to their planes than WN, and arguably do so in a way that is safe enough to satisfy the FAA, so why do you not consider them the pinnacle of all that a domestic airline can be? It seems that, perhaps, meeting varying standards of onboard comfort and attracting a variety of customers willing to pay to transport themselves or their cargo might have something to do with it...

More tickets = more $$$. When you have a big inventory of first class seating, and many of the people in those seats are getting free or very low-cost upgrades just to fill up the seats, that's not a very good money maker.

WN is paying their people the same as the equivalent on any other airline.

Part of cutting waste is utilizing their fleet better. They turn and burn each plane 4 or 5 or more times each day. Every minute longer that a plane spends on the ground is a minute that plane isn't making flying, and isn't making money. DL meanwhile, lets their fleet sit around on the ground a lot, not making money. Often their planes are parked at the gate an hour ahead of a flight time. WN shows up 35 minutes ahead of the flight time, dumps a load, picks up another one, and gets out as quickly as they can. That cuts waste to a bare minimum.

Why would you not consider flying WN? Sure, they have limited international service, and they don't service Montana and much of the Dakotas, but other than that, if they go where you want to go, i.e. the rest of the CONUS, they offer a good flying experience and are often by far the cheapest option.

That is the objective. To move as many as possible in a safe manner. Otherwise, why would commercial airplanes exist?

You can take any logical conclusion to an extreme which will make it start to fall apart, which is what NK has done. WN's pitch at 31-32" fits around the 95th percentile of adult men, while NK only fits a much smaller proportion of the population. They seem to be doing well, so good for them, but they have taken things to an extreme. WN has found what is value (a seat that 95% of people can actually fit in), and separated it from waste (first class). NK is cutting into the value, although they are technically being more efficient in the process. There might actually be some logic that shorter people will migrate towards NK because to someone who is 5'2", more than 28" of seat pitch provides no value, and thus creates efficiency. Of course there is a lot more to it than that, but what NK is doing is rather interesting, but I'll stick with normal sized seats on WN.

What might almost make sense is for the opposite of Economy comfort, which, unless someone is more than 6'4", is waste, but rather have a regular (31-32) section, and then a "super economy" section that's at 28", so shorter people don't have to waste money on a 32" seat pitch that fits taller people like me. The problem is, creating different types of inventory is in itself waste, so just to cram another half dozen or dozen people on a flight, it might not be worth that waste.

It's an interesting discussion, but to say that my logical conclusion is invalid is just completely ignoring the nuances of what is waste and what is value. Anything above 32" is just waste for anyone who is 6'4" or under.

Just because WN flies to a city doesn't mean you can actually get there from here on a single ticket. WN flies out of ECP and PNS here. I want to visit my parents in GRR this September when Art Prize is going on.

Except that WN's booking software sucks donkey genitalia and will not let me do that. PNS-GRR is never a valid routing for WN; ECP-GRR is discontinued on August 9. I could in theory book ECP to BWI and then another ticket from there to GRR somehow But those 35 minute turnarounds? Result in some of the worst in category delays and I don't trust the airline to get me there in time to make it to the second ticket.

The legacies, even the much maligned Delta.dumb, will gladly sell me what should be a very simple routing. I mean if a city is on your route map, you should be able to get there on a single ticket somehow even if it involves spending the night in Newark or something equally distasteful.

Actually, it sounds like their software is smarter than Delta's idiotic system that will let you do 30 minute layovers at DTW where you might end up literally a mile away from your next flight. It just sounds like they don't have the right timed flights for that particular combination.

WN doesn't do overnight stuff. Since they aren't really an international airline (although technically they do Mexico and the Caribbean now), they pretty much shut down at the end of the day.

I prefer to live dangerously in that regard, and have actually never had problems with Delta at ATL, MSP or DTW when I've booked minimum legal connections or a handful of minutes above through there. (For some reason, I'm most likely to hit a delay when there had been a scheduled 75-90 minute connection. Go figure.) And hey, if I've got to make it from T to C at ATL at a nice brisk pace with carry on on + personal item, then I figure I'm getting in a workout when I wouldn't otherwise on a travel day.

Even if it means that I wouldn't have time to ...sob... hit the Pinkberry in ATL.

BWI also has Pinkberry, so there's that.

But seriously, on WN you have to be there about 35 minutes ahead if you have a good boarding position, or unless you don't care if you get a middle seat and have no room for your bags I guess. With DL's archaic assigned seat system, your seat will still be there a few minutes later, but on any airline, the overhead bin space is at a premium...

Eh. I have freahishly long femurs for all that I'm not that tall compared to some of y'all. (NK is anatomically impossible for me.) So Delta gets me every time with the economy whatevertheheckitisthisweek for the extra leg room and that generally gets me early enough boarding for bin space.

The times WN has actually been able to get me somewhere I want to go, they get me for Early Bird check-in in hopes of a fighting chance for an exit row seat, so it's kind of a wash in some ways. At least with Delta, I know my knees aren't going to grind into someone else's seat back because I have a seat assignment.

Delta's FCM has been able to get people to buy up to F more often these days. So, they do make more money with F.

Additionally, DL is adding seats to C+. I was on an MD88 last week that had 5 rows of C+, not 3 as shown on the seat map. It's obviously working, or they would't be adding seats to this section.

So have I, but so what? I'm pointing out that it's possible.

Reality doesn't care how it sounds to you. It just is.

They started out from a hotel in midtown Manhattan. The article mentioned that there were weather delays for the flight, else it would have been much faster.

Except for minor issues like time. Some people's time is valuable to them. Nobody else cares what their time is worth to you, unless you're offering to pay for it.

Nobody else cares about your opinion as to how much benefit something provides them. The only person whose opinion matters about the amount of benefit something (like regional service) provides to me is me.

I also see more benefit in the availability of a flight on a small plane every 2 hours rather than only 2 flights a day on a big plane. But again, that's my opinion of the benefit to me, which is definitive.

The public interest is not defined as whatever you want. There are a lot more people in the public than you.

I see no reason to care about what "the world is talking about", especially when the vast majority of the people in the world never heard of whatever it is you claim they're all talking about.

The fact that you have no use for something doesn't make it useless.

But they should run fewer bigger trains, right? And only the express stops should be served, just like airplanes.

Somehow, the "greater common interest" seems to be defined as what you want. You don't get that many votes.

Your opinion is noted, and accorded all due consideration. How profitable is the airline you run?

Having two flights a day is not more efficient for me than having ten, no matter what you claim.

Perhaps it hasn't occurred to you that not everybody can get "the best boarding position possible on WN" nor would necessarily be stuck in the back on a carrier using the more efficient assigned seats system.

You're completely missing the fact that flying is much faster, and some people's time has value.

Tell us again how a 9 hour train ride within NY is better than a 90 minute flight.