Flyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2510 times:
Since deregulation in the US, airlines have become more and more efficient. By no means are LCCs today operating at the absolute most efficient way possible. When will we see the next level of efficiency and low cost....ultra low cost carriers?
XFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3958 posts, RR: 36 Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2491 times:
The names are gonna get even simpler. Instead of Ted, or Song.. youll have "Airline" and they wont even bother painting the titles on the plane. In addition, youll have "the airline formerly known as" and theyll just have a symbol. Then the still bankrupt United will try to copy the others and come up with "_"
PiedmontGirl From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1124 posts, RR: 14 Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2460 times:
.....and no peanuts, no pretzels, no cokes, certainly no PTVs. The seats will be old style military (as from the 1940s) metal and webbing seats that face backward and have a seat belt.
Possibly no heat, no air, and maybe no pressurization -- you don't have to have it if you stay below 10,000 ft.
Hmmmmmmm........maybe curtains over the bathrooms instead of doors (saves weight), maybe some toilet paper, and perhaps a drinking fountain every so often.
I'm only kidding......I think.....wellllllllllll..................
Aa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3338 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2434 times:
I don't think the US wil see them for a long time. Even WN, the model of almost all LCCs, may "tweak" their product, adding IFE, small aircraft, assigned seats and so forth. I think Americans are happy with F9, B6, TZ, and FL, all of which have some form of IFE.
Usnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 55 Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2416 times:
I'm all for the general public trying their luck at humping a ride on the good old C-130 with those very same webbed seats mentioned before! I'm sure Ford and Chevrolet will see a boost in their profits!
BCAInfoSys From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2403 times:
Better yet, instead of a C-130.. a C-141! I got a 2-hour flight on one of those out of McChord AFB in Washington. I arranged it for my JROTC company when I was in high school. They spilt the company among a flight of 3 Starlifters that were doing practice low altitude drops over the Snoqualamie Pass area. It was pretty freakin' cool, especially for a plane nut like me, I was goin' apeshit!
(And if any of you don't believe me, I still have the shirt to prove it! 7th Airlift Squadron: "Voens et Potens", "Willing and Able")
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5488 posts, RR: 34 Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2361 times:
Flyf15:
"By no means are LCCs today operating at the absolute most efficient way possible. When will we see the next level of efficiency and low cost....ultra low cost carriers?"
By no means can your question be taken seriously, and that is why you are getting the humorous responses.
On what do you base your belief that the LCC's are not operating as efficiently as possible? Just how do you propose that current LCC's move to the "next level of efficiency"?
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
F86sabre From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 92 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2303 times:
Remove the wings, tail, jet engines, all but one lav, the entertainment systems, a pilot and all the flight attendants and you have the ultimate ULLC. It’s called Greyhound.
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3375 posts, RR: 18 Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2231 times:
These flights already exist. The airplanes that are used are C-2s, C-130s, C-17s, and C-5s.
Bistro1200 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 337 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2165 times:
Measure to the millimeter, mark with a crayon, cut with an axe.
Ikarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2070 times:
Well, Ryanair is a great example of a great low cost carrier, but I don't think it's necessarily got a lower cost base than Southwest or Jetblue or any of the Americans.
The main differences are the price structure (Ryanair has about 5-7 different fares per plane, from virtually nothing to prices above flexible economy tickets on full frills airlines), and the fact that Ryanair chooses its destinations by airport subsidies.
From what I saw while looking at the Southwest web page, I had the impression they have 2 or 3 different prices on each flight - their yield management is less radical. And their destinations are much larger airports, in many cases.
To be honest, I think modern LCCs are squeezing every bit of efficiency out of the system already, and I suspect that a lower cost base than currently enjoyed would be virtually impossible.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5488 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Apr 2000, 2751 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
