Hasta la Vista, Lynx

Old Feb 5, 10, 11:47 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somehere in the Midwest
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,891
Hasta la Vista, Lynx

http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver...html?ana=yfcpc
hazelrah is offline  
Old Feb 5, 10, 12:57 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The views I express here are not necessarily supported by any airline or codeshare partners, nor do I represent their views and/or opinions. They are my own OPINIONS dont like them dont read them.....
Posts: 1,462
This was announced several days ago. The reason is there are 6 Q400 and over 200 Embraers. The Q maybe more efficient on fuel but because of the Colgan crash many people have been booking away from the Dash. Also it is cheaper for RAH to buy parts in bulk for the Embraers that have many common parts and the Q has none in common...
cwe84 is offline  
Old Feb 5, 10, 2:25 pm
  #3  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somehere in the Midwest
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,891
Originally Posted by cwe84 View Post
This was announced several days ago....
Are you confusing the fleet change announcement with the Lynx closure announcement?

All the newswires I saw stated that Republic made the Lynx closure announcement yesterday.
hazelrah is offline  
Old Feb 5, 10, 2:47 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sussex, WI
Programs: Marriott Platinum, Delta Silver Medallion, Fmr Midwest Miles Executive
Posts: 151
When will the schedule changes be populated through the travel registration system?

If I go to Orbitz and put in an itinerary for travel from MKE to ABQ leaving May 3 and returning May 10 it still shows as the DEN to ABQ leg being operated by Lynx with a Q400.

I get the same result if I try to book on Midwestairlines.com as well.

Am I missing something here? Will there still be Q400's being flown on these dates, or does the scheduling system need to be updated?
blucys is offline  
Old Feb 5, 10, 3:00 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,800
Originally Posted by blucys View Post
When will the schedule changes be populated through the travel registration system?

If I go to Orbitz and put in an itinerary for travel from MKE to ABQ leaving May 3 and returning May 10 it still shows as the DEN to ABQ leg being operated by Lynx with a Q400.

I get the same result if I try to book on Midwestairlines.com as well.

Am I missing something here? Will there still be Q400's being flown on these dates, or does the scheduling system need to be updated?
I believe the last of the Q400s are scheduled to leave the fleet in September so it's certainly possible DEN-ABQ will be flown with one of those planes.

As for Lynx in general, no one should be surprised by yesterday's announcement. When Republic announced its plans to acquire Frontier last summer, Bryan Bedford stated that he wasn't to keen on having a turbo prop operation. Then all of the remaining options Frontier had for Q400s were cancelled, leaving a very small fleet of aircraft. As cwe84 mentioned, it was probably very costly and inefficient for Republic to keep these planes and associated infastructure around when there are plenty of E-jets to handle these missions.
BlueHorseShoe2000 is offline  
Old Feb 5, 10, 3:05 pm
  #6  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Denver, Colorado
Programs: AA, UA, WN, Amtrak, VIA
Posts: 1,457
Originally Posted by BlueHorseShoe2000 View Post
As for Lynx in general, no one should be surprised by yesterday's announcement. When Republic announced its plans to acquire Frontier last summer, Bryan Bedford stated that he wasn't to keen on having a turbo prop operation. Then all of the remaining options Frontier had for Q400s were cancelled, leaving a very small fleet of aircraft. As cwe84 mentioned, it was probably very costly and inefficient for Republic to keep these planes and associated infastructure around when there are plenty of E-jets to handle these missions.
Lynx is a subsidiary of Frontier, not Midwest--I know it's all one company now, but until the Frontier forum is combined/abolished, would that not be a more appropriate place for this discussion?
Daze is offline  
Old Feb 5, 10, 3:32 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,800
Originally Posted by Daze View Post
Lynx is a subsidiary of Frontier, not Midwest--I know it's all one company now, but until the Frontier forum is combined/abolished, would that not be a more appropriate place for this discussion?
Perhaps.

Both Frontier and Midwest are subsidiaries of Republic. Frontier and Midwest are sister airlines with a comprehensive frequent flier agreement and code-share in place. What happens at Frontier does have an impact on Midwest and its customers.
BlueHorseShoe2000 is offline  
Old Feb 8, 10, 7:31 am
  #8  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somehere in the Midwest
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,891
Originally Posted by BlueHorseShoe2000 View Post
As cwe84 mentioned, it was probably very costly and inefficient for Republic to keep these planes and associated infastructure around when there are plenty of E-jets to handle these missions.
I'm not so sure. Doesn't the Q400 have one of the lowest cost to operate in the industry, whereas the E135/145 and even the 170 are a little dicey with oil $70-80 dollars?
hazelrah is offline  
Old Feb 8, 10, 8:30 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The views I express here are not necessarily supported by any airline or codeshare partners, nor do I represent their views and/or opinions. They are my own OPINIONS dont like them dont read them.....
Posts: 1,462
Originally Posted by hazelrah View Post
I'm not so sure. Doesn't the Q400 have one of the lowest cost to operate in the industry, whereas the E135/145 and even the 170 are a little dicey with oil $70-80 dollars?
Thats from a fuel standpoint. You need to look at the whole picture. Having an all Embraer fleet (for less than 100 seats) means more bulk savings. Besides the markets that the Q is competing in mainline UA and WN are servicing and that puts us at a disadvantage because of passengers fear of prop planes...
cwe84 is offline  
Old Feb 8, 10, 11:02 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mountain West USA
Posts: 436
Originally Posted by cwe84 View Post
Thats from a fuel standpoint. You need to look at the whole picture. Having an all Embraer fleet (for less than 100 seats) means more bulk savings. Besides the markets that the Q is competing in mainline UA and WN are servicing and that puts us at a disadvantage because of passengers fear of prop planes...
The Embraer has less than 100 seats and is so cheap to operate because RAH is using a loophole in the contract. The pilot contract only goes up to 99 seats and for some reason the E190 can only be booked to 99 seats. Hmmm...

I question the "bulk savings" because twice the fuel burn for the same amount of passengers on an E170 doesn't add up to me. F9 dumped them due to fuel costs before and unless RAH can figure out how to make them burn less fuel, I don't know how that situation is going to change. If you are talking about back office and support staff, it's a straw man argument because that would have been integrated into RAH no matter if the planes were kept or not.

As for the prop avoidance factor, numerous cities did just fine with the Q and saw no avoidance. The only places were avoidance occurred was where the Q was subbed in for the Airbus, like SLC. However, when the flight is booked to 40, running it on a Q makes a whole lot more sense than just burning any chance of a profit out the back end of a jet engine. At the end of the day, the great majority of customers only want one thing, a cheap ticket.

What really happened was that Bedford made it so that Lynx was too expensive to keep. By canceling the orders, he took a company that was designed to grow and stagnated it, setting it up to fail from day one.

IMO, Lynx was a great hedge against fuel and was the best aircraft to run in and out of the mountains. We shall see if the E190 is as successful in and out of ASE. I'll check in this summer to find out.

Checko
GreatChecko is offline  
Old Feb 8, 10, 12:42 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,800
Originally Posted by GreatChecko View Post
What really happened was that Bedford made it so that Lynx was too expensive to keep. By canceling the orders, he took a company that was designed to grow and stagnated it, setting it up to fail from day one.

Checko
FWIW, Republic stated last week that serious consideration was given to keeping Lynx around via contracted flying with another carrier. Apparently there were no takers.

While the Q400s had a great fuel burn rate, the entire operation was rather inefficient and costly. The Q400s were an orphaned fleet once the remaining options were cancelled. There were a lot of costs to support the operating certificate, flight crews, maintenance, and other various operations. While some of these functions would have been rolled into the growing Republic operations, many of the costs associated with the Lynx operations would still be there.

Personally, I would have loved to see some of the Q400s moved to MKE to take over some of the larger regional routes and open new markets. Sadly, that won't be happening (at least with Republic).
BlueHorseShoe2000 is offline  
Old Feb 8, 10, 2:08 pm
  #12  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somehere in the Midwest
Programs: Delta Dirt Medallion,AA,USairways, WN Rapid Rewards, National Emerald Club
Posts: 3,891
Originally Posted by BlueHorseShoe2000 View Post
Personally, I would have loved to see some of the Q400s moved to MKE to take over some of the larger regional routes and open new markets. Sadly, that won't be happening (at least with Republic).
I would have too. I think it came down to too much capacity at Republic (too many jets looking for homes), and gettting rid of Lynx was just expediant.

While I do think that prop avoidance is a factor in some markets, I don't think its the case in all markets.
hazelrah is offline  
Old Feb 9, 10, 4:29 am
  #13  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 88,702
So is this the end of DEN-ASE service?
GUWonder is online now  
Old Feb 9, 10, 10:33 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MKE
Programs: Delta Skymiles, Frontier EarlyReturns Summit
Posts: 766
Originally Posted by GUWonder View Post
So is this the end of DEN-ASE service?
No. Not yet anyway. They are currently evaluating getting one of their embraer models certified for the ASE airport.
MikeFromMKE is offline  
Old Feb 9, 10, 12:43 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: DEN/BDL/LGA/HPN
Programs: Marriott Ambassador; AA EXP 2MM; AS MVP, Hilton Gold, CH-47/UH-60/C-23/C-130 VET
Posts: 5,236
Sure hate the loss of Lynx. IMHO, they are much more comfortable than the smaller Embraer's. Not to mention less fuel burn.

Then again, if they're replaced by the E 190, that's a nice plane.

Wish AA would by them and upgrade their short-distance regional service.
C17PSGR is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread