ExpressJet Announces September Traffic

[meritflyer]

STORY

Load factor hung in at 51%. An improving number overall but not what the market was looking for. Over all I believe Q3 load factors should come in around 60% which is a dramatic improvement from Q2 at 39%. However, the true test will be Q4 with the winter months, new routes, new cities, and less aircraft.

[Velocipede]

Even at 60%, that's pretty dismal in a day when everyone else is running 80-82%. XJT better get on the stick quick or it could be Adios.

[tprops4me]

Keeping my fingers crossed for you guys.

[SmitteyB]

Something I haven't seen is how the corportate stuff is going. Can you move airplanes to that operation?

As a stockholder I would say...FORGET THE BRANDED FLYING. FIND HOMES FOR THOSE AIRPLANES.

[Velocipede]

Originally Posted by SmitteyB

Something I haven't seen is how the corportate stuff is going. Can you move airplanes to that operation?

As a stockholder I would say...FORGET THE BRANDED FLYING. FIND HOMES FOR THOSE AIRPLANES.

Unfortunately, Mike Boyd over at Aviation Planning is forcasting a DROP of 55% in the number of RJs by 2017.

http://www.aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm

Homes are getting tougher and tougher to find for RJs.

[meritflyer]

Originally Posted by Velocipede

Unfortunately, Mike Boyd over at Aviation Planning is forcasting a DROP of 55% in the number of RJs by 2017.

http://www.aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm

Homes are getting tougher and tougher to find for RJs.

This is assuming the airlines dont slump back into a rut. Remember, RJ's kept a majority of the industry thriving post 9/11.

[BobDDuck]

Sure, RJs kept the industry going, but that was before mainline costs had been slashed. It is much more expensive to send 2 RJs somewhere then one Airbus. Only when you start getting in the >80 seat realm on the RJ do the costs make sense. And last I checked, XJet did have any of those.

[Velocipede]

And that's where the RJ is going. 50 seaters will be replaced by Ejets. That's where the 55% number comes from.

[Maximillian_Jenius]

Originally Posted by Velocipede

And that's where the RJ is going. 50 seaters will be replaced by Ejets. That's where the 55% number comes from.

And CJets. Apparently even according to the Boyd article (if I read it right) CRJ900's are not part of the perscribed future of regional traffic, because they're built off an older platform.

Hope that Bombardier gets their stuff in order and get the CJets approved, or they're dead in the water, so to speak.

[BobDDuck]

Originally Posted by Maximillian_Jenius

Hope that Bombardier gets their stuff in order and get the CJets approved, or they're dead in the water, so to speak.

I very much doubt we will see the C series ever. The NextGen 900 and 1000 (and 700 although I doubt there will be many of these) is the future for Bombardier. They certainly are an improvement over the straight 900, but they aren't as nice as the big Jungle Jets. Also, they are cheaper to operate so they have that going for them as well.

[meritflyer]

I personally believe the 50 seat market will return in full strength as majors/legacies return to the playing field and fill the CRJ900 routes with 737s.

Ah... this is another thread and another debate. Look for it.

[Soul Brotha']

The 50 seat market is slowly dying. Too many RJ's in many regions,(ORD,LGA,etc.) It looks like Majors who are going to be fishing out their flying to contract carriers will look at the E170/190 & CRJ-700/900 aircraft now. There will still be a market for the Q400 and Saabs.

[jtrain609]

There will always be a need for...

19/34/50/70/90/120/150/200/250/300/350/400/450/500/800 seat lift. Now whether you need a 50 RJ flying from Houston to Toronto is a completely different discussion, but the need will ALWAYS be there for small and large capicity lift. To say that if the plane smaller than size X can't make money isn't a valid argument, or we might as well dump all the 1900's of the world, which last I heard, were making money.

[kellwolf]

The need for the lift is gonna be there, but I don't think it's gonna be 50 seat RJs doing it. Airlines are already losing revenue from oversold 50 seaters on some routes, which means they could run a bigger aircraft on that route and NOT lose the revenue. That's why I think Pinnacle is gonna lose a LOT of NWA routes to Mesaba/Compass. So, the need will still be there for smaller communities, just not in great demand. I think that's what's meant by the 50 seat need dying, and I agree. The number of communities where a 50 seater is a good option has greatly decreased. It's either too big for some and too small for others. It might be "just right" for a fraction of the cities serviced by them right now. MEM-MOB is a good one since it's almost always right in the 40-50 seats on the loads (at least that's been the case when I've flown the route). But something like MEM-CHA or MEM-JAN could go with something smaller (aka cheaper). I'm amazed we fly a 50 seater from DTW-LAN, personally. The fuel burn alone makes a TP a better choice for that route, IMO. DTW is the only base I've flown 6 legs in one day and blocked less than 6 hours.

I'd go out on a limb and say most B1900s make their money off EAS contracts, NOT ticket sales. I've been on a B1900 from Farmington, NM to ABQ, and there were TWO of us on it. I doubt it made much money on tickets (esp since I was non-revving), but it's subsidised by the government through EAS.

[CFIse]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

The need for the lift is gonna be there, but I don't think it's gonna be 50 seat RJs doing it. Airlines are already losing revenue from oversold 50 seaters on some routes, which means they could run a bigger aircraft on that route and NOT lose the revenue.

Well there's a couple of factors to take into account:

- First of all while the flight may be over-sold, is the incremental traffic going to be paying good money for the seats, or will the extra seats have to be sold at below cost to fill the plane. Right now you have a 50 seater on the route and the ticket software is maximising the revenue for that size aircraft - on the same route can maximised revenue for a 70-seater justify the extra cost.

- All it takes is a recession or an aviation melt-down and we're back down the hole and all these passengers who are filling the 70-seaters will drift away and the routes will revert to 50-seaters. If you don't believe the aviation world is cyclical then you haven't been paying any attention. Right now 50-seater bad, 70-seater good - but see how long that lasts when passengers stop flying.

[JBUCREW]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

The need for the lift is gonna be there, but I don't think it's gonna be 50 seat RJs doing it. Airlines are already losing revenue from oversold 50 seaters on some routes, which means they could run a bigger aircraft on that route and NOT lose the revenue. That's why I think Pinnacle is gonna lose a LOT of NWA routes to Mesaba/Compass. So, the need will still be there for smaller communities, just not in great demand. I think that's what's meant by the 50 seat need dying, and I agree. The number of communities where a 50 seater is a good option has greatly decreased. It's either too big for some and too small for others. It might be "just right" for a fraction of the cities serviced by them right now. MEM-MOB is a good one since it's almost always right in the 40-50 seats on the loads (at least that's been the case when I've flown the route). But something like MEM-CHA or MEM-JAN could go with something smaller (aka cheaper). I'm amazed we fly a 50 seater from DTW-LAN, personally. The fuel burn alone makes a TP a better choice for that route, IMO. DTW is the only base I've flown 6 legs in one day and blocked less than 6 hours.

I'd go out on a limb and say most B1900s make their money off EAS contracts, NOT ticket sales. I've been on a B1900 from Farmington, NM to ABQ, and there were TWO of us on it. I doubt it made much money on tickets (esp since I was non-revving), but it's subsidised by the government through EAS.

In DTW XJ is already replacing 9E with the 900 on many of our routes... ie DTW-TUL/OKC/MDT to name a few. The 50 seat is "starting" to be phased out... NY Tracon is in the process of limiting the number of 50 seat jets that will be allowed to operate out of JFK... It sounds like ORD will follow shortly.

[CFIse]

Originally Posted by JBUCREW

In NY Tracon is in the process of limiting the number of 50 seat jets that will be allowed to operate out of JFK... It sounds like ORD will follow shortly.

The FAA isTALKING about limiting traffic to JFK - but there's no mention of how it will be done, when it will be done, or how it will be implemented. However it's done I sincerely doubt the NY Tracon will have anything to do with it.

In LGA they make each carrier run "an average number of seats per plane" which tends to reduce the number of low seat count planes (although one 757 can make up for a lot of Saabs). That's not going to work at JFK, where there are a LOT of different carriers running just a couple of flights, most of them in 747s.

Regardless - while the 50 seat jet may be considered evil with respect to air space, runway space etc., it's not half as evil as a 1900, a Saab, an E135 etc. etc., they've got to be eradicated first before we get to the 50 seaters (and 70 seaters ain't much better).

[Seggy]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

I'd go out on a limb and say most B1900s make their money off EAS contracts, NOT ticket sales. I've been on a B1900 from Farmington, NM to ABQ, and there were TWO of us on it. I doubt it made much money on tickets (esp since I was non-revving), but it's subsidised by the government through EAS.

Regardless of the EAS contracts a B1900 only needs three people to make money.

Some of our stand alone 19hondo flying makes a killing like...

BOS-ALB
BOS-ISP
BOS-HPN
LGA-ACK-HYA
ALB-LGA
LGA-PVD
LGA-MHT

In the summer EAS is icing on the cake. We run hourly shuttles from BOS-BHB and it always goes out with 19 folks.

[JBUCREW]

[quote=CFIse;709395]The FAA isTALKING about limiting traffic to JFK - but there's no mention of how it will be done, when it will be done, or how it will be implemented. However it's done I sincerely doubt the NY Tracon will have anything to do with it.

I have a friend who works in the TMU at NY TRACON and he says they have a big say in whats going on with the operations at JFK. They are considering when they issue a ground delay program that the scope of some will only involve 50 seaters. They make no public mention of how it will work, but the process has already started.

[CFIse]

I have a friend who works in the TMU at NY TRACON and he says they have a big say in whats going on with the operations at JFK. They are considering when they issue a ground delay program that the scope of some will only involve 50 seaters. They make no public mention of how it will work, but the process has already started.

I'm afraid I'll believe that when I see it. Individual airlines have programs in effect to use the slots the TMU assigns them for specific aircraft types based on a number of factors. If the FAA starts picking on individual aircraft sizes they're going to run into something of a brick wall as it relates to their mandate with respect to air traffic.

[BobDDuck]

Who do you think the airline is going to ground? The 737 with 110 people on it or the CRJ with 34 people on it? International connections aside, the RJ is grounded and the 737 released. The TMUs don't have to specify.

[Soul Brotha']

Originally Posted by BobDDuck

Who do you think the airline is going to ground? The 737 with 110 people on it or the CRJ with 34 people on it? International connections aside, the RJ is grounded and the 737 released. The TMUs don't have to specify.

I'm sure it happens but I've sat in the holding area at PIT,RDU and others with US, B6, and more and we got released b4 them to the same cities. I think it has to do with your proposed time of departure.

[BobDDuck]

Actually, I have too... I've just been wanting to use this graphic for a few days now.

[Soul Brotha']

Originally Posted by BobDDuck

Actually, I have too... I've just been wanting to use this graphic for a few days now.

You made me laugh.

[CFIse]

Originally Posted by Soul Brotha'

I'm sure it happens but I've sat in the holding area at PIT,RDU and others with US, B6, and more and we got released b4 them to the same cities. I think it has to do with your proposed time of departure.

I think the only airline that overtly uses a priority scheme is UAL. The others may, but they are much more circumspect about it. Of course it only applies to an airline and the slots they are assigned. There is no priorty system between airlines, it's first come first served.