Re: AA & the Airbus A340

From:         tim@me.rochester.edu (Tim Takahashi)
Organization: University of Rochester, School of Engineering
Date:         19 Apr 96 02:04:05 
References:   1 2 3 4
View raw article
  or MIME structure

Allan Elkowitz <elkowitz@gramercy.ios.com> wrote:
>gt1086c@prism.gatech.edu (Gregory Glockner) wrote:
>> I have often found it interesting
>>that most of the major airlines have moved to greater frequency with
>>smaller aircraft, yet Delta uses widebodies for a bunch of 90 minute
>>flights out of Atlanta (c.f. ORD, MCO, FLL, PBI).

>I inquired about this recently while on a short flight on an L1011 -?
>from Cincinnati to Boston one evening when the plane was
>nearly empty.  I was told that the only reason such a large and empty
>plane was used for such a short flight was to position the aircraft in
>Boston for an 8:00 a.m. run to Florida when it would be expected
>to be full.


First of all, some airlines - United and American - have
moved to a very centralized hub system. For any given
United city you are likely to find a flight to one or
more hubs - Denver, Chicago, San Francisco, Washington-Dulles.
For American, it seems that Dallas/Ft.Worth and Chicago
are the primary hubs. Northwest and Minneapolis. TWA and
St. Louis.

Some other airlines, say Southwest, specialize in point-to-point
service : the west coast corridor, cross-Texas, etc.

Now, US-Air and Delta seem to be two airlines that have
nationwide service *AND* a heavily point-to-point schedule.
It would seem that certain stage lengths would prove difficult
to schedule with a fixed number of aircraft. And if traffic
demands a wide-body, then the schedule would have to provide
for a wide-body showing up at the appropriate time.

For even odder staging, consider the SkyWest flights out west.
I'm flying from San Jose to Newark and am routed San Jose to
LAX on SkyWest (which stops at Santa Barbara on both outbound
and inbound legs).

-tim