What's it gonna take?

John T wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message


The Hub and Spoke system relies somewhat on the fact that a pretty
good number of the passengers want to go to the hub cities.

No, it doesn't. FedEx uses the H&S, for example, with a *very* limited
number of passengers. The model is merely a means of moving large
numbers of objects (passengers, freight, etc.) efficiently.

FedEx uses the 'Mother of All H&S" systems but overnight envelopes don't
mind sitting in a box on the ramp for a couple of hours.

Name me one passenger airline that's main hub isn't co-located with a high
passenger target location.

If this wasn't the case the airlines would have all built airports out in
the middle of nowhere for next to nothing and Hub'd out them.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message


"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message


The Hub and Spoke system relies somewhat on the fact that a pretty
good number of the passengers want to go to the hub cities.

No, it doesn't. FedEx uses the H&S, for example, with a *very*
limited number of passengers. The model is merely a means of moving
large numbers of objects (passengers, freight, etc.) efficiently.

FedEx uses the 'Mother of All H&S" systems but overnight envelopes
don't mind sitting in a box on the ramp for a couple of hours.

Name me one passenger airline that's main hub isn't co-located with a
high passenger target location.

If this wasn't the case the airlines would have all built airports
out in the middle of nowhere for next to nothing and Hub'd out them.

The H&S model itself does not require a passenger magnet location. I'm not
suggesting the airlines have implemented the model to the contrary, but
there's nothing preventing a hub from being at any airport with the size to
handle the planes required and accommodations for the transient population.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
The principle revolves around the enormous extra time required to
take the plane. Trains go from city center to city center, and so
about the only time you spend on a train trip is time actually
riding on the train. Airplanes, on the other hand, have a built-in
delay of two hours or so at both ends of the trip, irrespective of
time in the air.

Agree. (This is the same problem, BTW, that is addressed by private
aircraft. It's the reason we can easily beat the airlines to Florida
from Iowa, even though I'm only flying at 160 mph.)

This is also the main idea behind the "new" "Air Taxi Service", which
is really nothing more than providing the same service our parents and
grand-parents enjoyed for decades, using smaller, more efficient
aircraft.

When I was a boy, people in Iowa City routinely flew United and Ozark
Air Lines to anywhere in the country. This was possible because the
US Air Mail paid the airlines to fly mail to hundreds of smaller
airports, like Iowa City -- and the passengers were literally just
gravy. (They broke even whether they carried passengers or not.)

When the postal service was forced by Congress to get more efficient
in 1972 (by then, we'd ****ed all of our wealth away on Viet Nam and
the Great Society), the airlines could no long justify flying their
big, fuel-inefficient, union-operated Martin 404s into places like
Iowa City -- and most of the country was left without decent airline
service.

Vern Raburn's EclipseJet was supposed to be the answer to this
problem. So far, I've seen little progress along those lines -- but
the confluence of "hub" airport overcrowding along with an FAA in
"crisis" seems to be shoving the system in a direction away from the
status quo.

Iowa city needs to get its act together and get on the Essential Air
Service gravy boat.

My question about the new air-taxi service using the VLJs is how is it any
different than charter flights have been for years?

I've been asking myself this, and there are a couple of things that
could help.

1. The airport security crap has gotten so bad and so slow, that there
are a lot more people out there willing to spend some extra bucks on
Charters or Fractional ownership. While small, these aircraft are much nicer
than a business class seat 64F.

2. As someone mentioned earlier, airlines have a built in delay at both
ends, and a hub in the middle. Point to Point, using all of those unused, no
slot, under 7000' airports can give you one hell of an advantage.

3. The aircraft are smaller, more efficient, and burn way less fuel than
the old Lear.

4. They will, however, have almost the same block time as the Lear, and
quicker than an airline.

5. With enough of them, left around the country from their last trip,
response time to smalltown, anywhere could still be fairly good. If crews
are left at the last destination until called, the only deadhead is the last
trip of your 2 week shift.

6. There are a lot of very experienced 60+ year old airline captains in
excellent health running around out there.

Does all of this add up to a workable economic model? I hope so.

Al G

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:20:19 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:

John T wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message


The Hub and Spoke system relies somewhat on the fact that a pretty
good number of the passengers want to go to the hub cities.

No, it doesn't. FedEx uses the H&S, for example, with a *very* limited
number of passengers. The model is merely a means of moving large
numbers of objects (passengers, freight, etc.) efficiently.

FedEx uses the 'Mother of All H&S" systems but overnight envelopes don't
mind sitting in a box on the ramp for a couple of hours.

Name me one passenger airline that's main hub isn't co-located with a high
passenger target location.

If this wasn't the case the airlines would have all built airports out in
the middle of nowhere for next to nothing and Hub'd out them.

Great idea. Scrap ORD and put it's replacement Geographically centered
in the US. *Relatively* cheap land, few neighbors to complain, no
ground traffic problems as there's no place to go, less air congestion
as there is little local traffic and the bizjets are going to real
airports at their destinations. So now we can be more comfortable
gazing at Denny's NUBILE stewardesses in short skirts.

BTW with security, traveling by road into Canada is now as bad as
flying with the long waits.

Roger (K8RI)

"Al G" wrote in message
...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
My question about the new air-taxi service using the VLJs is how is it
any different than charter flights have been for years?

I've been asking myself this, and there are a couple of things that
could help.

1. The airport security crap has gotten so bad and so slow, that there
are a lot more people out there willing to spend some extra bucks on
Charters or Fractional ownership. While small, these aircraft are much
nicer than a business class seat 64F.

2. As someone mentioned earlier, airlines have a built in delay at both
ends, and a hub in the middle. Point to Point, using all of those unused,
no slot, under 7000' airports can give you one hell of an advantage.

3. The aircraft are smaller, more efficient, and burn way less fuel
than the old Lear.

4. They will, however, have almost the same block time as the Lear, and
quicker than an airline.

5. With enough of them, left around the country from their last trip,
response time to smalltown, anywhere could still be fairly good. If crews
are left at the last destination until called, the only deadhead is the
last trip of your 2 week shift.

6. There are a lot of very experienced 60+ year old airline captains in
excellent health running around out there.

Does all of this add up to a workable economic model? I hope so.

Question: Doesn't a charter require something like five or more passengers?
Like Chartering a Greyhound bus as compared to hiring a taxicab?

Matt Barrow wrote:

Question: Doesn't a charter require something like five or more
passengers? Like Chartering a Greyhound bus as compared to hiring a
taxicab?

They don't require all the seats be filled but you are going to pay for the
empty seats any way.

That is where I'm concerned about the VLJ model. Let's say I need to fly
from Little Rock AR to Nashville TN. If they are only charging me for one
seat I either wait for the plane to fill or they loose money. It seems like
the routes where it might work for VLJ are already served by airlines.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote

That is where I'm concerned about the VLJ model. Let's say I need to fly
from Little Rock AR to Nashville TN. If they are only charging me for one
seat I either wait for the plane to fill or they (___loose___?) money. It
seems like the routes where it might work for VLJ are already served by
airlines.

If there is any of that "loose" money floating around in the VLJ's, I'll
take some! VBG

Sorry Gig, but I had to do that! I can't believe you let "that one" slip by
your proof reading! ;-))

That is a concern for me, too. I believe it may be rough for a while, to
keep (or get) the seats full.

I think they are counting on the first someone needing to go, and enough
others wanting to go (in the same time frame) that are willing to pay the
premium price for the ride and filling some more of the seats.

I would think that there would be some premium included in the seat price
structure, if the first person needs to go right away, and not be willing to
be flexible in the departure time and destinations. (to help with filling
some more of the seats) If not, there may be tough times ahead, indeed.
--
Jim in NC

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:

Question: Doesn't a charter require something like five or more
passengers? Like Chartering a Greyhound bus as compared to hiring a
taxicab?

They don't require all the seats be filled but you are going to pay for
the empty seats any way.

That is where I'm concerned about the VLJ model. Let's say I need to fly
from Little Rock AR to Nashville TN. If they are only charging me for one
seat I either wait for the plane to fill or they loose money. It seems
like the routes where it might work for VLJ are already served by
airlines.

And that may be just the ticket. Riding an airline isn't as much fun as
it was when I was a kid. VLJ's convenience could be just short of owning
your own, at a cost of only 2-3 times an airline fare. Like you said, it
depends alot on whether you are traveling alone. I had to fly my family from
Roseburg, Or to Grand Junction, Co, on short notice, for my Dad's funeral.
It was not quick, not easy, and not cheap,( 2-3amu's). A VLJ would have been
my choice.

Al G

Al G wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:

Question: Doesn't a charter require something like five or more
passengers? Like Chartering a Greyhound bus as compared to hiring a
taxicab?

They don't require all the seats be filled but you are going to pay
for the empty seats any way.

That is where I'm concerned about the VLJ model. Let's say I need to
fly from Little Rock AR to Nashville TN. If they are only charging
me for one seat I either wait for the plane to fill or they loose
money. It seems like the routes where it might work for VLJ are
already served by airlines.

And that may be just the ticket. Riding an airline isn't as much
fun as it was when I was a kid. VLJ's convenience could be just short
of owning your own, at a cost of only 2-3 times an airline fare. Like
you said, it depends alot on whether you are traveling alone. I had
to fly my family from Roseburg, Or to Grand Junction, Co, on short
notice, for my Dad's funeral. It was not quick, not easy, and not
cheap,( 2-3amu's). A VLJ would have been my choice.

Al G

So, did you consider using a charter flight for the trip? There's no reason
a VLJ should be any cheaper than than a Cessna 414 charter. And while it
isn't going to be as fast it would have been faster on that trip than the
airlines.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Al G wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:

Question: Doesn't a charter require something like five or more
passengers? Like Chartering a Greyhound bus as compared to hiring a
taxicab?

They don't require all the seats be filled but you are going to pay
for the empty seats any way.

That is where I'm concerned about the VLJ model. Let's say I need to
fly from Little Rock AR to Nashville TN. If they are only charging
me for one seat I either wait for the plane to fill or they loose
money. It seems like the routes where it might work for VLJ are
already served by airlines.

And that may be just the ticket. Riding an airline isn't as much
fun as it was when I was a kid. VLJ's convenience could be just short
of owning your own, at a cost of only 2-3 times an airline fare. Like
you said, it depends alot on whether you are traveling alone. I had
to fly my family from Roseburg, Or to Grand Junction, Co, on short
notice, for my Dad's funeral. It was not quick, not easy, and not
cheap,( 2-3amu's). A VLJ would have been my choice.

Al G

So, did you consider using a charter flight for the trip? There's no
reason a VLJ should be any cheaper than than a Cessna 414 charter. And
while it isn't going to be as fast it would have been faster on that trip
than the airlines.

I did consider it. I called 2 outfits, 1 in Medford, and 1 in Eugene.
Neither returned my call. I checked with FlightCraft in PDX, but their quote
was a King Air, and with the repositioning from PDX, and the pilot standby,
it got impractical. We drove to Eug, united to Den, some commuter to GJT. On
the way back it was GJT- DEN- SLC -EUG drive to RBG. I was searched twice
down to the shoes. GJT - DEN wasn't even westbound. We spent most of our
time waiting in airports. I do some flying for a guy now, and our last trip
to GJT was IFR direct @ 210 in a P210. 4:17, no searches, no waiting. It is
a long flight, and a little cramped, but compared with the airlines it was
Wonderful. We could drive from the house, park at the FBO, and simply walk
over to our aircraft and go. At the other end we parked the aircraft got in
the car and left.

I think one of the strongest arguments for VLJ is the incredible
inconvenience of the airlines, particularly for businesses where more than 1
are going.

If a VLJ was flying the "Average" passengers itinerary, how much shorter
on the average, would the trip be? This trip GJT,DEN,SLC,EUG,RBG was 183 +
338 + 535 + 53 = 1109. Direct is 712nm, so the VLJ can cut 36% of the
distance by flying only what needs to be flown. I know it will be more
expensive for the aircraft. But when you start to consider ALL the costs
from parking to time, convenience may win out.

Al G