The city of brotherly love is now the city of airport love:
Survey: Love is in the air at Philly Airport - USA Today
The fantasy of every single man flying around the United States: Finding a woman at an airport.
Not my fantasy of course, but that was a pretty fun scenario when I was single and flying around the United States. I never found that perfect airport bound woman, but if you're game - I spose you can try out PHL.
Or maybe you don't - the "Airport Love Experts" made their ratings based partly on the amount of time people spend at an individual airport ... meaning what airports are the most delay prone. Philly is definitely near the top of that list. So unlike most airport ratings, this one deemed Philly's delays a positive factor, because you can spend that much more time wooing your newly beloved airport maiden to share a taxi with you when you finally reach your destination, whenever that might be.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Monday, December 10, 2007
too tired to post
But I'm doing it anyway!
To give you a quick insight into the life an airline pilot, here goes.
I had dinner with my buddy Andy tonight - he flies the Embraer 135/140/145 for American Eagle. He's based out of Chicago but lives in Des Moines, so he's a commuter. He commuted into work today on the 6:00 am flight and then went to work, flying to White Plains, NY and back in the late morning and early afternoon. He was scheduled to fly into Bloomington, Ill. tonight and overnight there (OVN), but because of scheduling and operations issues, Eagle "canceled" his overnight.
What does this mean? Well, Andy was on his own until his call in time at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. Too much time to just hang out at the airport, and not enough time to fly home and get back - especially with the impending ice storm.
So Andy had to pay $50 to rent a hotel room. That's tough on Andy, who has to report at 9:00 tomorrow to deadhead to Bloomington and fly the airplane back to O'Hare. From there, he's taking an airplane out to Rochester, then to LaGuarida, then to Syracuse, where he'll spend the overnight before trucking it all back to ORD on Wednesday morning.
The impending Midwest ice storm is really wreaking havoc with airline flight schedules, and I'm betting that Andy will be spending lots of time at ORD tomorrow waiting around for dispatch and ATC to give him a time to start go. It'll be a busy day...we'll see what happens.
To give you a quick insight into the life an airline pilot, here goes.
I had dinner with my buddy Andy tonight - he flies the Embraer 135/140/145 for American Eagle. He's based out of Chicago but lives in Des Moines, so he's a commuter. He commuted into work today on the 6:00 am flight and then went to work, flying to White Plains, NY and back in the late morning and early afternoon. He was scheduled to fly into Bloomington, Ill. tonight and overnight there (OVN), but because of scheduling and operations issues, Eagle "canceled" his overnight.
What does this mean? Well, Andy was on his own until his call in time at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. Too much time to just hang out at the airport, and not enough time to fly home and get back - especially with the impending ice storm.
So Andy had to pay $50 to rent a hotel room. That's tough on Andy, who has to report at 9:00 tomorrow to deadhead to Bloomington and fly the airplane back to O'Hare. From there, he's taking an airplane out to Rochester, then to LaGuarida, then to Syracuse, where he'll spend the overnight before trucking it all back to ORD on Wednesday morning.
The impending Midwest ice storm is really wreaking havoc with airline flight schedules, and I'm betting that Andy will be spending lots of time at ORD tomorrow waiting around for dispatch and ATC to give him a time to start go. It'll be a busy day...we'll see what happens.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Meet Lynx
There's a new regional airline on the block - Lynx.
Lynx to begin flying Friday - Denver Post
Lynx is owned by Frontier Airlines, but it's your typical subsidiary owned regional arm - using Frontier Airlines money to buy and fly smaller airplanes and pay non-union pilots less money than their mainline union counterparts.
But that's an old story. Personally I'm not a huge non-union or union guy - but my pilot buds all join the unions and feel pretty strongly about them. If I was an airline pilot, I'd probably be the same way. Anywho, that's not relevant to this blog entry, exactly.
The point is, Lynx is doing something most regional airlines don't do - fly turboprops. The majority of all the regional airlines in the United States have been flying CRJs and ERJs , mainly because most passengers don't like airplanes with big spinning meateaters out there on the wing. It's been like this ever since the 1950s when the turbofan was introduced.
But there are many advantages to flying turboprops - mainly in fuel efficiency, which is pretty much paramount for airlines nowadays. Frontier is flying 74 seat Bombardier Q400s from Denver to four destinations: Wichita, Kansas; Rapid City, SD; Sioux City, Iowa, and Albuquerque, NM.
The flights are all between 300 and 466 miles, which means passengers will have to spend about one to two hours each flight, which are a bit easier to deal with on the Q400 than the CRJ or the ERJ. In fact, other than the slight comfort gain, there won't be much noticeable difference between a jet and a turboprop for passengers sitting on the Q400 (Btw, the "Q" stands for "quiet").
Lynx has had some issues getting certified (just random DOT delays from what I've heard), and they've been flying the routes since October using RJ metal leased from other regional airlines. The loads have apparently been good so far, considering most of these airports (save ABQ) see little in the way of competition from the mainstay airlines (NW at SUX and RAP, for instance). Lynx has already upgraded SUX from two flights a day to three flights, so that's a definite plus.
Not everyone flying from these communities will be using Lynx (except for ABQ, there are virtually no convenient ways to get to any east coast or Midwest city using the airline), but there are a myriad of west coast, mountain and even Caribbean destinations that would be useful using the turboprop to get to Frontier's main operation at DEN. Lynx is good for Frontier and good for passengers (but pilots will say it's bad for them - which it is - further dragging down pilot base pay for new hires).
But we can't have everything.
Lynx to begin flying Friday - Denver Post
Lynx is owned by Frontier Airlines, but it's your typical subsidiary owned regional arm - using Frontier Airlines money to buy and fly smaller airplanes and pay non-union pilots less money than their mainline union counterparts.
But that's an old story. Personally I'm not a huge non-union or union guy - but my pilot buds all join the unions and feel pretty strongly about them. If I was an airline pilot, I'd probably be the same way. Anywho, that's not relevant to this blog entry, exactly.
The point is, Lynx is doing something most regional airlines don't do - fly turboprops. The majority of all the regional airlines in the United States have been flying CRJs and ERJs , mainly because most passengers don't like airplanes with big spinning meateaters out there on the wing. It's been like this ever since the 1950s when the turbofan was introduced.
But there are many advantages to flying turboprops - mainly in fuel efficiency, which is pretty much paramount for airlines nowadays. Frontier is flying 74 seat Bombardier Q400s from Denver to four destinations: Wichita, Kansas; Rapid City, SD; Sioux City, Iowa, and Albuquerque, NM.
The flights are all between 300 and 466 miles, which means passengers will have to spend about one to two hours each flight, which are a bit easier to deal with on the Q400 than the CRJ or the ERJ. In fact, other than the slight comfort gain, there won't be much noticeable difference between a jet and a turboprop for passengers sitting on the Q400 (Btw, the "Q" stands for "quiet").
Lynx has had some issues getting certified (just random DOT delays from what I've heard), and they've been flying the routes since October using RJ metal leased from other regional airlines. The loads have apparently been good so far, considering most of these airports (save ABQ) see little in the way of competition from the mainstay airlines (NW at SUX and RAP, for instance). Lynx has already upgraded SUX from two flights a day to three flights, so that's a definite plus.
Not everyone flying from these communities will be using Lynx (except for ABQ, there are virtually no convenient ways to get to any east coast or Midwest city using the airline), but there are a myriad of west coast, mountain and even Caribbean destinations that would be useful using the turboprop to get to Frontier's main operation at DEN. Lynx is good for Frontier and good for passengers (but pilots will say it's bad for them - which it is - further dragging down pilot base pay for new hires).
But we can't have everything.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
What does the falling dollar mean for aircraft manufacturers?
A few things.
It depends on whom you ask though.
For airplane builders, like Airbus, it means that their planes cost more than Boeing's, because Airbus deals in Euros but sells in dollars. So as their costs pile up from suppliers, workers wages and other expenses in Es, their profit margin goes down more and more because they sell in $.
For example (purely theoretical)
Labor: 50 E
Parts: 50 E
Other: 50 E
Total: 150 E
150 E = $219.90 (E 1 = $ 1.466)
But Boeing might have:
Labor: $ 60
Parts: $60
Other: $60
Total: $180
For the unmathed - that's $39.90 more for an Airbus aircraft even with cheaper base prices.
With a lower exchange rate, profit margins go down because they have to price down. Boeing could feasibly sell their airplane for $200 and still make a $20 profit. If Airbus sells at $210, they still lose $9.90. See why Boeing has an advantage?
So what can Airbus do?
For starters, they can start building airplanes paying US $ - and that's just what they're fixin' to do:
Airbus Seeks a Welcome in Alabama - New York Times
Yeehaww. I liked their lede:
"Louis Gallois, the co-chief executive of EADS, the parent company of Airbus, could have his pick of invitations among dozens of parties during the Paris air show, the giant industry gathering this week.
But on Saturday night, Mr. Gallois went to pay his respects at a gathering held by members of the Mobile City Council of Alabama and the Mobile Airport Authority."
Only a $9 trillion debt, vanishing currency value, towering oil prices and a huge military contract for refueling tankers could cause the CEO of EADS to hobnob with the who's who of the Mobile, Ala. jetset. But he sure is doing it.
You see, EADS is pinning it's hopes of overcoming the American Congress' silly "Buy-American" tendencies on the folks of Mobile, who hope to attract an Airbus plant in the near future. Operating in the United States would give Airbus the ability to buy American parts at literally bottom-dollar American prices, and pay non-union American workers respectable union wages and give them lots of benefits for far cheaper than they would be paying in a similar factory in France or Germany.
Also, an American plant would give Airbus the credibility it needs to get that big fat American government contract to build it's European airplanes in the United States for the American military to operate.
Got me?
With the dollar being so low - this contract becomes even more important for EADS. We'll see what happens - but it really is unlikely that they'll get a contract. It might have the backing of Mobile, along with Alabama's senators and reps - but Alabama doesn't exactly have the Congressional clout it needs to bring other members (and it would need lots) on board to make an Airbus bid successful over an American product.
But that's no knock to the state of Alabama. They do have that awesome song...
It depends on whom you ask though.
For airplane builders, like Airbus, it means that their planes cost more than Boeing's, because Airbus deals in Euros but sells in dollars. So as their costs pile up from suppliers, workers wages and other expenses in Es, their profit margin goes down more and more because they sell in $.
For example (purely theoretical)
Labor: 50 E
Parts: 50 E
Other: 50 E
Total: 150 E
150 E = $219.90 (E 1 = $ 1.466)
But Boeing might have:
Labor: $ 60
Parts: $60
Other: $60
Total: $180
For the unmathed - that's $39.90 more for an Airbus aircraft even with cheaper base prices.
With a lower exchange rate, profit margins go down because they have to price down. Boeing could feasibly sell their airplane for $200 and still make a $20 profit. If Airbus sells at $210, they still lose $9.90. See why Boeing has an advantage?
So what can Airbus do?
For starters, they can start building airplanes paying US $ - and that's just what they're fixin' to do:
Airbus Seeks a Welcome in Alabama - New York Times
Yeehaww. I liked their lede:
"Louis Gallois, the co-chief executive of EADS, the parent company of Airbus, could have his pick of invitations among dozens of parties during the Paris air show, the giant industry gathering this week.
But on Saturday night, Mr. Gallois went to pay his respects at a gathering held by members of the Mobile City Council of Alabama and the Mobile Airport Authority."
Only a $9 trillion debt, vanishing currency value, towering oil prices and a huge military contract for refueling tankers could cause the CEO of EADS to hobnob with the who's who of the Mobile, Ala. jetset. But he sure is doing it.
You see, EADS is pinning it's hopes of overcoming the American Congress' silly "Buy-American" tendencies on the folks of Mobile, who hope to attract an Airbus plant in the near future. Operating in the United States would give Airbus the ability to buy American parts at literally bottom-dollar American prices, and pay non-union American workers respectable union wages and give them lots of benefits for far cheaper than they would be paying in a similar factory in France or Germany.
Also, an American plant would give Airbus the credibility it needs to get that big fat American government contract to build it's European airplanes in the United States for the American military to operate.
Got me?
With the dollar being so low - this contract becomes even more important for EADS. We'll see what happens - but it really is unlikely that they'll get a contract. It might have the backing of Mobile, along with Alabama's senators and reps - but Alabama doesn't exactly have the Congressional clout it needs to bring other members (and it would need lots) on board to make an Airbus bid successful over an American product.
But that's no knock to the state of Alabama. They do have that awesome song...
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
"Save the Small Airports"
Good headline, great article:
Save the Small Airports - New York Times
Save the small airports indeed. Such is the battle cry for general aviation in the United States these days. As I previously posted, there are many reasons why people around the country don't like smaller airports - whether it be noise, perceived safety issues, financial reasons or whatever - small airports are really a dying breed.
The article states that 57 general aviation airports have closed in the state of New Jersey since the end of World War II. While some of those were likely small grass airfields and unused Army Air Corps training fields, some of them were viable landing airstrips. With all the congestion in and around the New York/New Jersey area, it sounds like New Jersey needs all the airports it can get.
One of the driving debates in the article is the prospect of "very light jets," or VLJs.
For the uninformed, VLJs are often considered to be the future of general aviation. They're small, 4-6 seat jets (including the pilot) built by companies like Eclipse, Adam and Diamond (along with reputable, historic aviation names like Cessna and Piper) that people say will transform aviation. The key to light jets is that they will not only be safe but also cheap as hell to operate (low fuel consumption, one pilot and low operating costs). That is the main question in whether or not they will "transform" aviation like some people say.
But I am skeptical. VLJs will certainly be a viable option at some point in the near future - how near (or far) that is is still in question.
Save the Small Airports - New York Times
Save the small airports indeed. Such is the battle cry for general aviation in the United States these days. As I previously posted, there are many reasons why people around the country don't like smaller airports - whether it be noise, perceived safety issues, financial reasons or whatever - small airports are really a dying breed.
The article states that 57 general aviation airports have closed in the state of New Jersey since the end of World War II. While some of those were likely small grass airfields and unused Army Air Corps training fields, some of them were viable landing airstrips. With all the congestion in and around the New York/New Jersey area, it sounds like New Jersey needs all the airports it can get.
One of the driving debates in the article is the prospect of "very light jets," or VLJs.
For the uninformed, VLJs are often considered to be the future of general aviation. They're small, 4-6 seat jets (including the pilot) built by companies like Eclipse, Adam and Diamond (along with reputable, historic aviation names like Cessna and Piper) that people say will transform aviation. The key to light jets is that they will not only be safe but also cheap as hell to operate (low fuel consumption, one pilot and low operating costs). That is the main question in whether or not they will "transform" aviation like some people say.
But I am skeptical. VLJs will certainly be a viable option at some point in the near future - how near (or far) that is is still in question.
Monday, December 3, 2007
Re: Winter Storm 1
So,
It turns out my friend Ryan Stuart was on that Mesa Airlines/United Express aircraft that got stuck in Des Moines.
On top of that, he was in the exact picture that the Des Moines Register used for its web-front to illustrate said stuck aircraft:
That's him, in the left corner, the only dude who was not, as he put it, an "astronaut." Talking on his cell phone.
Hollywood.
Anywho, I talked to Ryan - who was jumpseating to ORD to commute to his base in Columbus, Ohio (CMH), where he flies the E-135/40/45 for Republic Airlines . He obviously had no luck getting through ORD, but was able to get there through the back door (St. Louis).
He did say, however, that because he is obviously dressed up in his pilot garb, most people logically thought he was the pilot of the plane. Apparently the picture is all over the pilot message boards and many regional pilots across the country are making fun of little Ryan Stuart for jumpseating on an inopportune flight.
In other news - the New England Patriots are trying to score to go up on the Baltimore Ravens and stay undefeated, and I need to watch it.
It turns out my friend Ryan Stuart was on that Mesa Airlines/United Express aircraft that got stuck in Des Moines.
On top of that, he was in the exact picture that the Des Moines Register used for its web-front to illustrate said stuck aircraft:
That's him, in the left corner, the only dude who was not, as he put it, an "astronaut." Talking on his cell phone.
Hollywood.
Anywho, I talked to Ryan - who was jumpseating to ORD to commute to his base in Columbus, Ohio (CMH), where he flies the E-135/40/45 for Republic Airlines . He obviously had no luck getting through ORD, but was able to get there through the back door (St. Louis).
He did say, however, that because he is obviously dressed up in his pilot garb, most people logically thought he was the pilot of the plane. Apparently the picture is all over the pilot message boards and many regional pilots across the country are making fun of little Ryan Stuart for jumpseating on an inopportune flight.
In other news - the New England Patriots are trying to score to go up on the Baltimore Ravens and stay undefeated, and I need to watch it.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Winter storm 1
It's been precipitating in Chicagoland for about 8 hours now, but at the moment there are no big delays or problems at any of the airports around here. So far, it seems like the only casualties were about 400 flights at O'Hare and a poor Mesa CRJ that slid off a taxiway in Des Moines:
Airplane slides off Des Moines airport runway (Des Moines Register)
I feel bad for those pilots and passengers, because it's unlikely any of them were able to get to their final destination today. With 400 flights canceled and quite a few afternoon delays in and out of ORD, they're all probably still stuck in Des Moines. And while that wouldn't be so bad for me, for other people it's probably a drag (no offense Des Moines).
In other news, California NIMBYs are at it again:
California City votes to ban fastest jets (NY Times)
The issue, apparently, is "fast jets" - an incredibly vague descriptor. The airport has been around since 1924 - a whole hell of a long time before anyone was retarded enough to build houses 250 feet away from the runways. You can pretty much see this anywhere across the country where upscale neighborhoods are built closer and closer to general aviation airports.
Cheap land is inherently easy to find if it exists close to airports. Because we don't have infinite land anywhere, urban and suburban sprawl will continually press city councils and county boards to rezone land around airports and other areas for residential purposes instead of the industrial space it is more suitable for. That's why airport land is so cheap - to attract business instead of home buyers. The fact that most buyers probably don't want to live next to airports escapes those homebuyers until they have been on the land for 5-10 years and realize they hate the airport that's next to them. It happens mostly anywhere land is more scarce than others - like California.
Airplane slides off Des Moines airport runway (Des Moines Register)
I feel bad for those pilots and passengers, because it's unlikely any of them were able to get to their final destination today. With 400 flights canceled and quite a few afternoon delays in and out of ORD, they're all probably still stuck in Des Moines. And while that wouldn't be so bad for me, for other people it's probably a drag (no offense Des Moines).
In other news, California NIMBYs are at it again:
California City votes to ban fastest jets (NY Times)
The issue, apparently, is "fast jets" - an incredibly vague descriptor. The airport has been around since 1924 - a whole hell of a long time before anyone was retarded enough to build houses 250 feet away from the runways. You can pretty much see this anywhere across the country where upscale neighborhoods are built closer and closer to general aviation airports.
Cheap land is inherently easy to find if it exists close to airports. Because we don't have infinite land anywhere, urban and suburban sprawl will continually press city councils and county boards to rezone land around airports and other areas for residential purposes instead of the industrial space it is more suitable for. That's why airport land is so cheap - to attract business instead of home buyers. The fact that most buyers probably don't want to live next to airports escapes those homebuyers until they have been on the land for 5-10 years and realize they hate the airport that's next to them. It happens mostly anywhere land is more scarce than others - like California.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)