OMA-MKE Flight Delayed Due To Drunk Pilot
#1
Original Poster
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: May 2006
Location: SEA or BGR, Lower Earth Orbit
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 17,295
OMA-MKE Flight Delayed Due To Drunk Pilot
http://www.ketv.com/news/30472967/detail.html
Wasn't arrested, "in the hands of Frontier Now"
I'm going to guess a term, and loss of FAA whatever the FAA can take away from them.
Wasn't arrested, "in the hands of Frontier Now"
I'm going to guess a term, and loss of FAA whatever the FAA can take away from them.
#2


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 264
The plane with 29 passengers and three crew members on board left just before 8 a.m.
Read more: http://www.ketv.com/news/30472967/de...#ixzz1mZA7tT8C
Read more: http://www.ketv.com/news/30472967/de...#ixzz1mZA7tT8C
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Denver DEN-APA
Programs: AF Platinum, EK Gold Royal Air Maroc OW Emerald Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 22,540
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Denver DEN-APA
Programs: AF Platinum, EK Gold Royal Air Maroc OW Emerald Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 22,540
#7
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
29 actually isn't too bad for that 6:00am OMA-MKE flight. Here's why:
(1) It is mostly local traffic and very few connections.
It is scheduled to arrive too late to connect to anything except Columbus, Newark and Nashville. (DC too, but there's OMA-DCA nonstop.)
(2) Today's total of 29 likely was only local traffic.
This flight arrived a few hours later than scheduled, so all connections were broken. What connections there were in markets like OMA-EWR were probably rebooked on other airlines in Omaha.
I know this flight had more than 29 people originally booked, but I don't know how many may have been no-shows versus how many were booked on other carriers (like OMA-ORD-CMH) to their final destination.
These point-to-point RJ markets generally don't run load factors nearly as high as mainline. What makes them sink or swim is high enough fare levels coupled with decent local traffic. Connecting traffic fills seats but doesn't bring in the revenue local traffic does.
Here's an illustration to this point.
Six months ago, Skywest shared the local OMA-MKE market with Frontier, and they kept average fares low. There were a lot more connections via MKE, but those connecting fares in markets like OMA-MKE-LGA had to be split between both segments.
Six months ago, a flight booked to 90% (45 pax) might have looked like this:
15 local passengers @ $105 = $1575
30 conx passengers @ $56 = $1680
total revenue........................$3255
I got to $56 for connecting passengers by using an average fare of $140 in markets like OMA-LGA and allocating 40% to the shorter OMA-MKE and 60% to the longer MKE-LGA.
Today there were 29 people onboard this flight, and they were likely locals. Skywest is gone, and fares are somewhat higher. Currently the lowest advance purcase fares are $119-$130 depending on day, with last-minute fares at $231. I'll pick an average of $135 for this illustration.
29 local passengers @ $135 = $3915
total revenue........................$3915
In this illustration, today's flight with only 29 passengers onboard would have brought in 20% more revenue than the same plane with 45 passengers onboard six months ago.
(1) It is mostly local traffic and very few connections.
It is scheduled to arrive too late to connect to anything except Columbus, Newark and Nashville. (DC too, but there's OMA-DCA nonstop.)
(2) Today's total of 29 likely was only local traffic.
This flight arrived a few hours later than scheduled, so all connections were broken. What connections there were in markets like OMA-EWR were probably rebooked on other airlines in Omaha.
I know this flight had more than 29 people originally booked, but I don't know how many may have been no-shows versus how many were booked on other carriers (like OMA-ORD-CMH) to their final destination.
These point-to-point RJ markets generally don't run load factors nearly as high as mainline. What makes them sink or swim is high enough fare levels coupled with decent local traffic. Connecting traffic fills seats but doesn't bring in the revenue local traffic does.
Here's an illustration to this point.
Six months ago, Skywest shared the local OMA-MKE market with Frontier, and they kept average fares low. There were a lot more connections via MKE, but those connecting fares in markets like OMA-MKE-LGA had to be split between both segments.
Six months ago, a flight booked to 90% (45 pax) might have looked like this:
15 local passengers @ $105 = $1575
30 conx passengers @ $56 = $1680
total revenue........................$3255
I got to $56 for connecting passengers by using an average fare of $140 in markets like OMA-LGA and allocating 40% to the shorter OMA-MKE and 60% to the longer MKE-LGA.
Today there were 29 people onboard this flight, and they were likely locals. Skywest is gone, and fares are somewhat higher. Currently the lowest advance purcase fares are $119-$130 depending on day, with last-minute fares at $231. I'll pick an average of $135 for this illustration.
29 local passengers @ $135 = $3915
total revenue........................$3915
In this illustration, today's flight with only 29 passengers onboard would have brought in 20% more revenue than the same plane with 45 passengers onboard six months ago.
#8




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: TPA-MKE-PHX
Programs: Ex DL-DM. MM. TWA-Aviator Plat. HHonors-DVIP, MR-Gold. Nat-Emerald. Avis Chairmn.
Posts: 1,929
Latest from TMJ. Usual rush to the airport get the passengers to comment story...
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/139439853.html
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/139439853.html
#9
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
Latest from TMJ. Usual rush to the airport get the passengers to comment story...
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/139439853.html
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/139439853.html
:-)
#10


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 264
Thanks for the illustration Knope. Hadn't really thought it alway through and I blindly assumed it was a E-90. I didn't realize it was a E-45. All of a sudden a load factor of 56 seems much more reasonable plus anyone that was rescheduled.
#11
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
No probl on the E190 vs E145. CNN doesn't have the right picture either:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/16/travel...html?hpt=hp_t3
http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/16/travel...html?hpt=hp_t3
#12
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend




Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Rapids Reward
Posts: 40,121
#13
Original Poster
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: May 2006
Location: SEA or BGR, Lower Earth Orbit
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 17,295
Latest from TMJ. Usual rush to the airport get the passengers to comment story...
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/139439853.html
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/139439853.html
#14
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NE & SE Asia, N America
Programs: TG ROP Gold, Lifetime OZ Diamond Plus, BA Gold
Posts: 3,105
http://www.coloradoconnection.com/ne...7#.Tz48r7Qaveo
http://www.koaa.com/news/fired-drunk...es-settlement/
The pilot's union wanted that drunk pilot to be reinstated. Can you believe it? Their pilots actually think it's ok to drink and fly, and if you get caught just a slap on the wrist and you should be let back in to fly again! Every Frontier pilot who remains a member of that union supports this kind of thinking.
Something seriously wrong with this airline and their pilots.
#15
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
The two links you posted both refer to the same alcohol use incident in September of 2008 by a Frontier pilot.
(a) Yesterday's incident was not a Frontier pilot but a Chautauqua pilot, an airline contracted to fly a handful of small aircraft which are operated under the Frontier Express banner. Sold as the same brand, but completely different pilots groups.
(b) Currently the same holding company (Republic Holdings) owns both Frontier and Chautauqua, though they are fully separate certificates and workgroups. But back in 2008 when the other incidient took place, there was no relationship or ownership link between Chautauqua and Frontier.
(c) Even if both had been within the same airline and pilot group, an episode in September 2008 and a second episode in February 2012 do not exactly constitue a "habit".
I'm not saying incidents like this are not serious, but it's way out of line to paint this as proof of "something seriously wrong with this airline and their pilots".
(a) Yesterday's incident was not a Frontier pilot but a Chautauqua pilot, an airline contracted to fly a handful of small aircraft which are operated under the Frontier Express banner. Sold as the same brand, but completely different pilots groups.
(b) Currently the same holding company (Republic Holdings) owns both Frontier and Chautauqua, though they are fully separate certificates and workgroups. But back in 2008 when the other incidient took place, there was no relationship or ownership link between Chautauqua and Frontier.
(c) Even if both had been within the same airline and pilot group, an episode in September 2008 and a second episode in February 2012 do not exactly constitue a "habit".
I'm not saying incidents like this are not serious, but it's way out of line to paint this as proof of "something seriously wrong with this airline and their pilots".

