Delta Turns Focus to Regaining Respect

 
Old Oct 8, 03, 2:21 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: ATL
Programs: DL SkyMiles, MR, HH, ICH/PC, Avis Pref., Hertz Gold
Posts: 2,897
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by jjglaze77:
Look at the last two sentences:

"Delta has also been using smaller regional jets to reduce capacity and increase the number of flights at its four largest hubs, including Atlanta. Mullin said Delta will extend the strategy to its secondary hubs."

</font>
This increased reliance on RJ's is what bothers me the most.

One can do the usual rant about the cramped seats, no carryon luggage, no premium cabin and no jetways but the main issue is that these RJ's are NOT DELTA. They are operated by subsidiaries and, in some cases, totally unrelated companies. The standards for service (or lack of it) are totally different. Flying ASA is an experience usually reserved for third-world countries.

If Mullin wants to improve customer service, he will have to institute a minimum level for ALL flights.
keeton is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 4:56 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: TUL
Programs: AA Plat, DL FO/1MM, UA Silver, Marriott Titanium, National Exec Elite
Posts: 2,086
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BearX220:
RJs are fine if they replace a J31. They're resented if they replace a 757. SLC-MSO might be OK, but CO operates IAH-YYZ with an RJ now, a three-hour sector, and it's got to be a total nightmare.

Also, if the main reason you are loyal to an airline is to have a crack at F upgrades and RJs have no F, you no longer have a main reason for staying loyal.
</font>

Perhaps this is off topic, but I was just looking through seatguru.com, and noticed that the NW ARJs have an FC. Is this new or am I just getting up to date? Are they the normal FC, or a smaller version? Anyone tried them out? Good, bad, ugly?
jjglaze77 is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 4:59 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Lost in Translation
Programs: DL
Posts: 370
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
Mullin said in a seven-page memo that was to be issued to employees today.

</font>
Has anybody got access to the memo to see what he actually had to say?
elektrik is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 5:14 pm
  #19  
JS
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by jjglaze77:

Perhaps this is off topic, but I was just looking through seatguru.com, and noticed that the NW ARJs have an FC. Is this new or am I just getting up to date? Are they the normal FC, or a smaller version? Anyone tried them out? Good, bad, ugly?
</font>
Coach is 2x3 and First is 2x2 seating, so it's similar to an MD-80.

There is no bulkhead or curtain or anything between First and Coach. The seats are the same color, so you have to look at the row numbers carefully to make sure you sit in the correct "cabin"!

You do get to board first, a pre-departure drink, coffee in a mug, the big armrest, etc. It is the same as mainline but without the cabin divider.

------------------
"Yippie-kay-yay, Mr. Falcon!" -- John McClane, Die Hard II As Seen on TV
JS is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 5:30 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah, DL DM since inception, 3+ MM, HH Gold, SPG-Gold
Programs: DL, UA, AA, HH, SPG, HH, Hertz, Avis
Posts: 1,794
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by sxf24:


I typically fly Delta from via SLC to FCA, MSO and GTF. I think the move to all Skywest CRJs is great as it doubles the number of flights I can take.

</font>
While there may be a FEW examples of this, I think by-and-large that is an incorrect statement.

From SLC, the CRJ's first replaced EM2's and smaller prop planes to smaller metropolitan airports in Nevada, Colorado, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana, subsequently became a scorge by replacing mainline metal, initially in a mixed mainline/CRJ fashion and sometimes, but far from always adding one or two CRJ flights per day. Now this will expand to major metropolitan cities in those States as well as to California, Portland, Southwest including Texas, Midwest States including ( ) the Eastern part of the Midwest. Best I can tell, this will be done on a close to "one 737 for one CRJ" basis, some undoubtedly the 70 seaters CRJ's, with the decreased capacity likely being the calculated loss of people who any day would chose to jump to other mainline metal through connections, take the train, drive bikes or walk for the shorter distances, then being tortured in the tin can.

But to claim that for every mainline metal departure being replaced with CRJ's there will be two of those departures is IMHO absurd.


[This message has been edited by Flying_Duck (edited 10-08-2003).]
Flying_Duck is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 5:41 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,040
two things...
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Among them, he said, Delta will start refurbishing aircraft interiors</font>
Does this mean BizE will finally be revamped for the sake of competing with CO/VS/AF/BA/LH/etc's new biz classes? ( )

Does it mean DL's coach might get something equivalent to E+ or MRTC? ( )

...or does it mean all shuttle aircraft, all the time? ( )


<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Mullin said the SkyTeam alliance founded by Delta and Air France will become the largest in the world with the planned addition of Continental, Northwest and KLM Royal Dutch</font>
Inaccurate.

Star will still command some 2% more (21 vs 23%) of worldwide ASMs than SkyTeam, even with NW/CO/KL added

------------------
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
~ConcordeBoy

Try the Unofficial Continental Airlines Dictionary
ConcordeBoy is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 5:51 pm
  #22  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Flying_Duck:
But to claim that for every mainline metal departure being replaced with CRJ's there will be two of those departures is IMHO absurd.</font>
You're right. There will be a loss of capacity out of SLC, which is something to be concerned about. Still, the use of RJs can benefit smaller markets by providing increased frequencies. I believe the preference of several FlyerTalk members for fewer main line frequencies instead of more RJ frequencies is not held by the majority of people flying short routes.

Obviously, DL and other network carriers, have placed too many RJs on too many routes. Everyone, except DL Yield Management, agrees they’d rather fly a ‘mainline’ aircraft on a flight over 90 minutes.


[This message has been edited by sxf24 (edited 10-08-2003).]
sxf24 is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 7:01 pm
  #23  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 14,309
Concordeboy, that assumes that Star doesn't lose share (which is very possible in the timeframe stated) or that one of its large carriers doesn't go bust (a very likely scenario).

At the moment, the biggest bust risk at Skyteam is Alitalia, at Star you can choose one of several (as UA IS in Ch. 11, Air NZ did go bust and was bailed out, etc.)
hfly is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 8:51 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: dfw
Programs: AA EXP/MM, HGP ♦; former elite in Hilton, Marriott & DL (just under MM thanks to Leo)
Posts: 414
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by sxf24:
I must be missing something with the whole RJ issue...

Using smaller jets increases frequency and opens up new routes. Isn't this what customers want?

I typically fly Delta from via SLC to FCA, MSO and GTF.
</font>
Yes sxf24, you definately are missing something.

This is a "use the right tool for the right job" situation. Lets see, SLC-FCA is 532 miles, SLC-MSO is 436 miles & SLC-GTF is 464 miles. All reasonable lengths for a RJ and all but SLC probably qualify as regional airports (I have only hit FCA, and SLC ofcourse). Plus- you are flying on the highly ranked SkyWest.

Want to see what you are missing? Try taking ASA from DFW-OAK. And you say somebody out there prefers this, and for what, increased frequency? No, my feeling is that playing the ASA departing at ??:?? game, followed by four hours of forced sitting in a unneccessarily compact cabin is pure pain and torture. DFW to OAK in a RJ is like using a butter knife to drive sheetrock screws.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by billhar:
"smaller jets to reduce capacity and increase the number of flights"

This guy is a idiot.

On time now will be sacrificed due to getting back to the skies getting crowded with RJs...
</font>
Right, but its not just the skies. Anybody notice how bad the morning taxi out of LGA has become? Last couple months my best case was 30 minutes (sunny day) and worse case was 1:45 minutes (low cloud cover). It is deja vu to 1999, with one big exception. As we begin the long crawl to the runway, I often count as many as 2/3 of the aircraft parade to be RJs (various "connection" carriers for all the legacy airlines).

[This message has been edited by traveling_again (edited 10-08-2003).]
traveling_again is offline  
Old Oct 8, 03, 9:07 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: dfw
Programs: AA EXP/MM, HGP ♦; former elite in Hilton, Marriott & DL (just under MM thanks to Leo)
Posts: 414
dup

[This message has been edited by traveling_again (edited 10-08-2003).]
traveling_again is offline  
Old Oct 9, 03, 1:58 pm
  #26  
JS
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by traveling_again:

Right, but its not just the skies. Anybody notice how bad the morning taxi out of LGA has become? Last couple months my best case was 30 minutes (sunny day) and worse case was 1:45 minutes (low cloud cover). It is deja vu to 1999, with one big exception. As we begin the long crawl to the runway, I often count as many as 2/3 of the aircraft parade to be RJs (various "connection" carriers for all the legacy airlines).

[This message has been edited by traveling_again (edited 10-08-2003).]</font>
It's not as bad in the afternoon or really, really early in the morning.

You can thank Bill Clinton for trashing the LGA slots!

------------------
"Yippie-kay-yay, Mr. Falcon!" -- John McClane, Die Hard II As Seen on TV
JS is offline  
Old Oct 9, 03, 2:14 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 381
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by traveling_again:
Right, but its not just the skies. Anybody notice how bad the morning taxi out of LGA has become? Last couple months my best case was 30 minutes (sunny day) and worse case was 1:45 minutes (low cloud cover). It is deja vu to 1999, with one big exception. As we begin the long crawl to the runway, I often count as many as 2/3 of the aircraft parade to be RJs (various "connection" carriers for all the legacy airlines).

[This message has been edited by traveling_again (edited 10-08-2003).]
</font>
LGA is definitely becoming a disaster again. This is really a collective action problem. All of the airlines want to gain customers by offering the most frequencies out of LGA and do so by using RJ's. Instead all of the airline customers end up steamed because they are always late.

IMO, the Port Authority and the FAA need to crack down and force the airlines to reduce frequencies (thereby producing the happy consequence that there would be more mainline flights). As you may notice from my handle, I'm in Brooklyn and LGA is closest airport mile-wise but I only fly from there in the direst of circumstances (or a really, really cheap fare ).
brooklynflyer is offline  
Old Oct 9, 03, 4:21 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PIT/DFW/MEL; AA Exec. Platinum & 4MM, QF WP
Posts: 7,689
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by brooklynflyer:
down and force the airlines to reduce frequencies (thereby producing the happy consequence that there would be more mainline flights). </font>
that doesn't follow at all. no more than California's quackpot plan to constrict flights at SFO to "force" airlines to only fly widebodies there to "reduce delays"...

martin33 is offline  
Old Oct 9, 03, 5:15 pm
  #29  
JS
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
Do you remember September of 2000 (or was it 1999?) Per Bill Clinton, the LGA regulations were relaxed, and airlines could fly as many RJ flights as they wanted.

Delays were reaching FOUR hours on a daily basis! It was truly unbelievable. I guess the delays didn't get any longer because four hours' worth of airplanes pretty much fills up the taxiways at LGA.

There are a few airports that have terrible congestion problems at certain times of the day -- LGA, JFK, EWR and SFO. Limiting flights at crowded airports is not much different from those metered ramps on Loop 110 in Phoenix.

If there's only a certain amount of space, there is no point in having massive amounts of congestion. You end up wasting enormous amounts of time and money (and fuel).

------------------
"Yippie-kay-yay, Mr. Falcon!" -- John McClane, Die Hard II As Seen on TV
JS is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: