DL Launches Delta Shuttle SEA-LAX/SFO

Travelmanager · Mon May 09, 2016 8:13 pm

Anything that enhances the customer experience and makes the market more competitive is a win in my book. As a DL Diamond and Alaska 75K, I am happy to see this development.

However, after reading the announcement, I think that 2 things stand out as notable with the Delta product:

1, SFO is still E75. As a passenger who gets upgraded 99% of the time on the west coast, I much prefer the 739s Alaska flies on this route (and I think that frequent flyers will agree with me on that)

2, change fees don't seem to be going away with this announcement. Alaska still maintains a strong advantage when it comes to frequent flyers on this route when it comes to the waived change fees.

Freshside3 · Mon May 09, 2016 8:15 pm

As for SEA-LAX, UA brought this problem on upon themselves......low frequency would work with "Standard"(A320/737) planes, or if using the "Barbie" planes, at least have some frequency. But low frequency on small planes is NOT the way to make it viable.

ScottB · Mon May 09, 2016 8:16 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 38):
IIRC the yield commanded on LAX-SFO is comparable to AA/UA while the slight yield premium on ORD-LGA can be somewhat attributed to the conscious choice of placing the shuttle out of LGA Marine Air Terminal which depresses connections and boosts the contribution from local O&D.

I'd say it's quite impressive that DL even achieves yield comparable to UA & AA in both LAX-SFO and LGA-ORD considering that DL didn't even serve these airport pairs until several years ago.

Quoting a380787 (Reply 23):
The funnier part is that DL had to label it as "Shuttle" to trick unsuspecting travelers into believing that they offer shuttle-like frequency when in fact they're the frequency leader in NEITHER market.

In the SEA-LAX/SFO markets, I think the branding is intended to be more about the expedited airport experience (dedicated check-in, close-in gates) and enhanced onboard product. The frequent travelers they need to make the product successful aren't going to be "unsuspecting travelers" they can "trick" into thinking the schedule is hourly.

RWA380 · Mon May 09, 2016 8:19 pm

Quoting mysterzip (Reply 43):
Wasn't Seattle NWA's focus city at some point?

Much more than a focus city, SEA was THE NW hub to the Pacific for decades. It wasn't until the 747-200's came along that could do routes like ORD-NRT. SEA had flights to JFK, IAD, BOS, ORD, LAX, MSP, PDX & GEG with all the MT cities from GEG

Quoting n7371f (Reply 47):
It's the AS Homers.

My friends at AS like DL in SEA it gives them someone to ride non-rev on, when their flights are full, which is most of the time.

a380787 · Mon May 09, 2016 8:31 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 53):

I'd say it's quite impressive that DL even achieves yield comparable to UA & AA in both LAX-SFO and LGA-ORD considering that DL didn't even serve these airport pairs until several years ago.

DL flies 76-seaters on LGA-ORD with limited connections at LGA (due to terminal choice) and basically none at ORD. AA/UA flies up to 180-seaters, with many seats flooded by lower-yielding connections at the ORD end. It's not really *that* hard to achieve similar seg-yields given those circumstances.

Similarly, VX also yields higher than UA on many SFO routes primarily because UA transits many of them to long-haul TPAC that really depresses the domestic segment contribution. We can't use that and conclude VX is better performing.

a380787 · Mon May 09, 2016 8:51 pm

Quoting FSDan (Reply 49):

I just checked the LAX-SEA schedule for 7/28/2016 and found that there are two "Canadair Regional Jet 700"-operated flights, according to united.com. Looks like UA flies CRJs between L.A. and Seattle to me...

Using this definition, looking at today's schedule, 50% of DL's SEA-SFO are operated by "CRJ".

DTWPurserBoy · Mon May 09, 2016 9:01 pm

Eastern used to get very proprietary when another airline used the term "shuttle." I wonder if they had a copyright on it. Perhaps after all these years it would have expired.

hiflyeras · Mon May 09, 2016 9:05 pm

Quoting Travelmanager (Reply 51):
2, change fees don't seem to be going away with this announcement. Alaska still maintains a strong advantage when it comes to frequent flyers on this route when it comes to the waived change fees.

If I recall, the main customer-focused point of the old 'shuttles' between DC-NYC-BOS was that there was no change fee. It was for business travelers that needed flexibility. To call this new service a 'shuttle' while still gouging customers with change fees is disingenuous.

alfa164 · Mon May 09, 2016 9:24 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 56):

Quoting FSDan (Reply 49):
I just checked the LAX-SEA schedule for 7/28/2016 and found that there are two "Canadair Regional Jet 700"-operated flights, according to united.com. Looks like UA flies CRJs between L.A. and Seattle to me...

Using this definition, looking at today's schedule, 50% of DL's SEA-SFO are operated by "CRJ".

But comparing apples-to-apples, DL's flights from LAX to SEA are all B717 or B737.

a380787 · Mon May 09, 2016 9:26 pm

Quoting ALFA164 (Reply 59):

But comparing apples-to-apples, DL's flights from LAX to SEA are all B717 or B737.

Sure, if you want apples-to-apples, on SEA-SFO :

UA 100% mainline
DL 100% regional, including 50% "CRJ"

alfa164 · Mon May 09, 2016 9:30 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 60):
Sure, if you want apples-to-apples, on SEA-SFO :

Okay... but the discussion was about LAX-SEA, not SFO-SEA. At least, the poster you quoted was discussing LAX-SEA.

And, personally, I would prefer the ERJ's (but not the CRJ's) to mainline - whether it is DO or UA.

[Edited 2016-05-09 14:36:18]

a380787 · Mon May 09, 2016 9:33 pm

Quoting ALFA164 (Reply 61):

Okay... but the discussion was about LAX-SEA, not SFO-SEA.

The discussion of this thread is both routes.

SEA-SFO
UA 100% mainline
DL 100% regional, 50% CRJ

SEA-LAX
UA 100% regional, 100% CRJ
DL 100% mainline (hub-to-hub)

dc10lover · Mon May 09, 2016 10:13 pm

This is a marketing tool commonly used by airlines. Sometimes it does pay off like in the early years of Horizon Air's "I - 5 Super Shuttle" between SEA & PDX.

avi8 · Mon May 09, 2016 10:58 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 55):
DL flies 76-seaters on LGA-ORD with limited connections at LGA (due to terminal choice)

So passengers cannot change terminals? Wow.

Freshside3 · Mon May 09, 2016 10:58 pm

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 50):
Might as well call anything a Shuttle these days.

Yes, when UA had the so-called "Shuttle", SFO-GEG was part of it......yet they only had it twice, maybe three times a day, at the most. Not exactly a "Shuttle" in most people's books.

N717TW · Tue May 10, 2016 1:46 am

Quoting avi8 (Reply 64):
DL flies 76-seaters on LGA-ORD with limited connections at LGA (due to terminal choice)

So passengers cannot change terminals? Wow.

Not easily nor not practically; therefore DL doesn't sell connections on the DC/ORD legs of the Shuttle. The old Marine Air Terminal (MAT) is physically on the other side of LGA from the main terminals and separated by one of the busiest runways in American aviation. While saying the Port Authority won't allow a secure-side bus between the MAT and Delta's main terminals might be wrong, it certainly isn't/wasn't encouraged. Therefore the customer-experience in making a DL Shuttle to DL connection is so bad that DL doesn't bother. I've done it in IRPOS situations in the past and you really need at least 90 minutes (from arr. to push back) to be safe.

wjcandee · Tue May 10, 2016 2:40 am

Quoting N717TW (Reply 65):
The old Marine Air Terminal (MAT) is physically on the other side of LGA from the main terminals

Which to me is a HUGE plus! (And you get in line for takeoff from the other side of the runway, avoiding the big line. Whoo-hoo!)

PS This is a very smart use of the 717. The 738 was originally bought for the NY-DCA Shuttle, and it was horrible on it. So DL went to the MD88s. The longer stage length here probably doesn't make the 738 so bad economics-wise.

[Edited 2016-05-09 19:42:19]

grbauc · Tue May 10, 2016 3:30 am

Hi,

I've been flying the LAX-SFO delta shuttle and I like it. I've taken few flights on Delta to SLC and was thinking id get the same offering has the LAX/SFO shuttle and to my surprise i didn't. Well more like I missed the small little touches that they give on the shuttle.

Now I get that the shuttle might not be like the Old east coast shuttle but I think that the shuttle name is more then a marketing ploy its a better service. maybe not the exact same but it does lend into my decision when buying airfare has i enjoyed to little differences. IF they want to run a shuttle service to SEA a hub of there's yea it might make me choose them. And any airline that will break the SW domination of the West Coast flying I applaud. SW dominates out here and is constantly changing there schedule and cutting flights and charging OLD legacy prices. Its cheaper to fly out of LAX then out of ONT for West coast runs.

psa1011 · Tue May 10, 2016 3:37 am

Quoting AirFiero (Reply 47):

Yes, although strangely they haven't started SEA-OAK, which makes me wonder about DL's interest in capturing the Bay Area market.

MaxxFlyer · Tue May 10, 2016 3:48 am

Quoting a380787 (Reply 61):
The discussion of this thread is both routes.

SEA-SFO
UA 100% mainline
DL 100% regional, 50% CRJ

SEA-LAX
UA 100% regional, 100% CRJ
DL 100% mainline (hub-to-hub)

Most of us who read these threads see CRJ = 50 seater. All of the regional flying for Delta out of SEA is on CR7, CR9, or E75. All of which are quite comfortable.

wjcandee · Tue May 10, 2016 3:57 am

Quoting a380787 (Reply 54):
DL flies 76-seaters on LGA-ORD with limited connections at LGA

Which is fine, because NY-Chicago is the numero uno local o/d pair in the US. UA and AA had dominated. DL had to do something a little special/different to get in the game. And if they are trying to be a solid choice for NYC FFs, then they need to be solid on that o/d pair. Doing a business-traveler-oriented service made a lot of sense.

That way, when I'm going to Chicago, I don't have to wait while a bunch of leisure travellers stash ten tons of vacation crap in the overhead and some kid is kicking my seat, because they are all connecting to somewhere at ORD. I'll sit back with my WSJ, fire up my wi-fi, and chill.

[Edited 2016-05-09 20:58:45]

a380787 · Tue May 10, 2016 4:01 am

Quoting MaxxFlyer (Reply 71):

I'm just using their definition of "CRJ". They use that term to describe UA's CR7 services, so I'm using the same definition to describe DL's services. Fair apples to apples.

TW870 · Tue May 10, 2016 4:32 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 12):
Dedicate check in desks??? Who checks in at the desk any more??

People who check bags, which is still a good number of people.

Quoting HiflyerAS (Reply 15):
Fliers with status already get a free drink, dedicated check-in, assigned seats, free bag check, etc.

Right but that is not who this is for. SEA is a battleground market, and they want to put on a good show for people who do not yet have status. This is not an MSP-LGA shuttle or an ATL-DCA shuttle. It is a product designed to compete for business travelers who they are trying to win away from competitors in SEA and LAX.

MesaFlyGuy · Tue May 10, 2016 4:49 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 12):

I work for a US Airline and you would be very surprised how many people check in at the desks nowadays. Keep in mind also that people who check their bags do so at the desks, so they will appreciate having dedicated desks as well.

FSDan · Tue May 10, 2016 1:54 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 55):
Using this definition, looking at today's schedule, 50% of DL's SEA-SFO are operated by "CRJ".

Yep, I'd agree with you - that's a fair comparison. And it doesn't bother me. The route will be 0% CRJ for DL by summer (with the exception of a potential last-minute equipment sub).

And while some might complain that an E-175 is still a regional jet, I find them to be extremely comfortable, especially if I get upgraded. Generally speaking, E-Jets have been very successful on shuttle routes. Both AA and DL use them on the majority of their shuttle markets.

Quoting Freshside3 (Reply 64):
Yes, when UA had the so-called "Shuttle", SFO-GEG was part of it

I forgot about United Shuttle. Were there similar complaints on this site about that product when it was in existence? It seemed like that was a brand that was applied to both high and low frequency markets out of LAX and SFO...

a380787 · Tue May 10, 2016 2:10 pm

Quoting FSDan (Reply 76):

I forgot about United Shuttle. Were there similar complaints on this site about that product when it was in existence? It seemed like that was a brand that was applied to both high and low frequency markets out of LAX and SFO...

United Shuttle (first called Shuttle-by-United) was *drastically* different from the old northeast shuttles. It was actually branded as a low-end product, in the same space as "Continental Lite". Think of it as a predecessor to TED, which also failed.

There was no attempt to brand it as a premium offering whatsoever, and included lower-yielding airports such as ONT and SMF, mostly as a counter measure against Southwest's build up on the west coast. The rest is history - WN now dominates up and down the west coast, while UA is mostly a scissor hub at SFO.

Quoting FSDan (Reply 76):

And while some might complain that an E-175 is still a regional jet, I find them to be extremely comfortable, especially if I get upgraded. Generally speaking, E-Jets have been very successful on shuttle routes. Both AA and DL use them on the majority of their shuttle markets.

I agree the E-jets have good levels of comfort, with the minor exception that they're still operated by the regionals, which we all know have poorer on-time/completion metrics than their mainline counterparts.

The E90s were a good compromise - E-jet comfort with mainline crew, but unfortunately due to the GE engine the airlines despises them.

DiamondFlyer · Tue May 10, 2016 2:29 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 77):
I agree the E-jets have good levels of comfort, with the minor exception that they're still operated by the regionals, which we all know have poorer on-time/completion metrics than their mainline counterparts.

Not all of them do, but you're right, the ones that are failing to attract crews are getting themselves into a situation that will get out of hand quickly.

-DiamondFlyer

AirFiero · Tue May 10, 2016 3:59 pm

Quoting psa1011 (Reply 69):
Yes, although strangely they haven't started SEA-OAK, which makes me wonder about DL's interest in capturing the Bay Area market.

Some airlines seem to like to serve all three airports, some might see Oakland as the same as San Francisco, some only serve one airport. Maybe they all see the Bay area market differently.

I just wonder why there was no mention of the San Jose flights in the press release.

Freshside3 · Tue May 10, 2016 4:08 pm

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 74):
I work for a US Airline and you would be very surprised how many people check in at the desks nowadays. Keep in mind also that people who check their bags do so at the desks, so they will appreciate having dedicated desks as well.

Keep in mind, some airlines, at some airports, also don't have skycaps, either....so they have to go inside....

Quoting a380787 (Reply 76):
United Shuttle (first called Shuttle-by-United) was *drastically* different from the old northeast shuttles. It was actually branded as a low-end product, in the same space as "Continental Lite". Think of it as a predecessor to TED, which also failed.

And airlines are repeatedly making the same mistakes in this area.....Tango failed for Air Canada.....yet they, in the past couple years, revived their low cost carrier, and call it Rouge.

B747forever · Tue May 10, 2016 4:28 pm

I dont know why some members get all worked up that I wrote CRJ and not CR7. You can try to distinguish between the different CRJ series a/c but it doesn't change the fact that they are all CRJs. I find it almost embarrassing that UA can only offer 2 CRJs on LAX-SEA.

a380787 · Tue May 10, 2016 4:57 pm

Quoting B747forever (Reply 82):

I dont know why some members get all worked up that I wrote CRJ and not CR7. You can try to distinguish between the different CRJ series a/c but it doesn't change the fact that they are all CRJs. I find it almost embarrassing that UA can only offer 2 CRJs on LAX-SEA.

Because we all know what you meant by writing "CRJ" which has a negative connotation of a single-class 50-seater. FYI, AA Eagle had upwards of 299 "CRJ" of all variants as of Oct'15, far in excess of both DL and UA, so I wouldn't throw stones if I were you.

But then again, you're the same poster who whined consistently about UA's 757s to Scandinavia when your employer AA offered zero services on their own. I guess "embarrassment" really is relative.

PlanesNTrains · Tue May 10, 2016 5:34 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 33):
1. The "myth" referred to was implication that 1-class 50-seat CRJ-200 runs UA SEA-LAX, which is false since it's a CR7.

Since my previous reply was deleted due to another member's issues, let me just reiterate that I just flew LAX-SEA with UA on a CRJ-200 a few weeks ago. It looks to be a regular occurrence.

-Dave

B747forever · Tue May 10, 2016 5:34 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 82):
Because we all know what you meant by writing "CRJ" which has a negative connotation of a single-class 50-seater. FYI, AA Eagle had upwards of 299 "CRJ" of all variants as of Oct'15, far in excess of both DL and UA, so I wouldn't throw stones if I were you.

You seem to make it like a competition between UA, DL and AA. I dont care if AA have 300 CRJs and UA only 1. What matters is the type of routes they put them on. On a highly competitive route such as LAX-SEA, there is no place for CRJs, let alone at 2 daily.

Quoting a380787 (Reply 82):
But then again, you're the same poster who whined consistently about UA's 757s to Scandinavia when your employer AA offered zero services on their own. I guess "embarrassment" really is relative.

Ha, let us not go there again. But there is no doubt that UA were dishonest to market flights between ARN/TXL/BCN/LIS-EWR during winter as nonstop when upwards of 50% of the flights had to divert in DEC/JAN/FEB. Name me any other professional airline with such a high frequency of diversion on so many routes. I am sure you will have a hard time to come up with such a list. Anyway it seems UA came to its senses by either upgauging to 767 or operating seasonally.

BTW, would love to be working for AA. Every bit of extra cash would go a long way during my medical studies.

PlanesNTrains · Tue May 10, 2016 5:42 pm

Quoting B747forever (Reply 81):
I dont know why some members get all worked up that I wrote CRJ and not CR7. You can try to distinguish between the different CRJ series a/c but it doesn't change the fact that they are all CRJs.

A CRJ-700/900/1000 seems different in product and comfort from a CRJ-200, even if not hugely. To me, a CR7 would at least say "Making an effort". A CR2 says "Cheapest way to keep a line on a map".

Quoting B747forever (Reply 81):
I find it almost embarrassing that UA can only offer 2 CRJs on LAX-SEA.

Let alone CRJ-200's with no real premium option. Actually, I think it's the first time I've been on an flight where instead of the pilot saying "Flight attendants please prepare for departure", they said "Christy, time to take your seat". lol

To be fair, it was an incredibly smooth flight and all three employees on the plane seemed to be doing a good job.

-Dave

a380787 · Tue May 10, 2016 5:47 pm

Quoting B747forever (Reply 84):

You seem to make it like a competition between UA, DL and AA. I dont care if AA have 300 CRJs and UA only 1. What matters is the type of routes they put them on. On a highly competitive route such as LAX-SEA, there is no place for CRJs, let alone at 2 daily.

DL places "CRJ" on SFO-SEA. By your definition, either that route is not "highly competitive", or DL has "no place" for it. Your own words.

MesaFlyGuy · Tue May 10, 2016 5:51 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 82):

Don't lump us all in with your anger. I knew exactly what was meant when he wrote CRJ.

a380787 · Tue May 10, 2016 5:59 pm

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 87):
I knew exactly what was meant when he wrote CRJ.

Got it. Next time whenever there's any AA service on a key market by CR7/CR9 on PSA / Envoy / Skywest etc, I'll lump it all under "CRJ" for your convenience.

PlanesNTrains · Tue May 10, 2016 6:01 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 88):
Got it. Next time whenever there's any AA service on a key market by CR7/CR9 on PSA / Envoy / Skywest etc, I'll lump it all under "CRJ" for your convenience.

Or, when they fly CRJ-200 equipment on the route, at least acknowledge it. I agree.

-Dave

MSPNWA · Tue May 10, 2016 6:11 pm

And to be fair, most of UA's SEA-LAX flights are on E170s. And only Saturday does the CR2 show up.

B747forever · Tue May 10, 2016 6:16 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 86):
DL places "CRJ" on SFO-SEA. By your definition, either that route is not "highly competitive", or DL has "no place" for it. Your own words.

Sure they use the CRJ on SEA-SFO, but they also use the E75 + look at their frequency on the route. A far cry from 2x UA CRJs on SEA-LAX.

BTW, still waiting for that list of other airlines having such a high frequency of diversions as UA had with the 757.

PlanesNTrains · Tue May 10, 2016 6:17 pm

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 90):
And to be fair, most of UA's SEA-LAX flights are on E170s. And only Saturday does the CR2 show up.

That is fair. However, it's not a myth (as was stated) that the CRJ-200 flies the route. What's more, when I booked it I took "CRJ" to be CRJ-700 because I never imagined a CRJ-200 would be put on the route.

I would have MUCH PREFERRED the E170 though.

Oddly, living in SEA I've only flown UA once RNO-SEA, once SEA-SMF-LAX, and I think this LAX-SEA flight - in 50 years. I was actually glad to have an excuse to fly them (I won't fly DL so usually am on AS or WN).

-Dave

FSDan · Tue May 10, 2016 6:32 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 86):
DL places "CRJ" on SFO-SEA. By your definition, either that route is not "highly competitive", or DL has "no place" for it.

It seems accurate to say that DL doesn't like having the CRJs on SEA-SFO. As of the summer they'll be gone, even on weekends.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 90):
And to be fair, most of UA's SEA-LAX flights are on E170s. And only Saturday does the CR2 show up.

As of the summer schedules, I see mostly CRJ-700s. There's an E-175 in June, but it appears to go away in July.

a380787 · Tue May 10, 2016 6:34 pm

Quoting B747forever (Reply 91):

BTW, still waiting for that list of other airlines having such a high frequency of diversions as UA had with the 757.

No need to respond, since many of those routes are completely un-flown by rival carriers. It's pure sour grapes that your preferred carrier doesn't fly it so you have to chastise the competition for giving it a try.

Freshside3 · Tue May 10, 2016 6:38 pm

Quoting B747forever (Reply 84):

What matters is the type of routes they put them on. On a highly competitive route such as LAX-SEA, there is no place for CRJs, let alone at 2 daily.

Indeed, it's WHERE equipment is appropriately placed. This route, of course, warrants something like a A319/737.......and for transatlantic, 757s would be fine for US hub-to-secondary EU, but not NYC-LON(unless they are all-premium cabin).

Quoting B747forever (Reply 91):
BTW, still waiting for that list of other airlines having such a high frequency of diversions as UA had with the 757.

That hasn't really said much, in fact I've never heard of any talk about it. Does AA/DL have less seats on the overwater 757s??

OA412 · Tue May 10, 2016 6:40 pm

A reminder that this thread is about DL announcing they will fly LAX-SEA/SFO-SEA flights under the Delta Shuttle brand and NOT a discussion of what the true definition of a CRJ is. Please keep this thread on topic.

B747forever · Tue May 10, 2016 6:43 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 94):
It's pure sour grapes that your preferred carrier doesn't fly it so you have to chastise the competition for giving it a try.

A try that miserably failed for a large part of winter season.

Quoting Freshside3 (Reply 95):
Indeed, it's WHERE equipment is appropriately placed.

Well some members cant grasp that. A CRJ on a regional route with no other competition is something different than putting it on a highly competitive route between major cities.

n7371f · Wed May 11, 2016 8:21 am

Quoting HiflyerAS (Reply 57):
If I recall, the main customer-focused point of the old 'shuttles' between DC-NYC-BOS was that there was no change fee. It was for business travelers that needed flexibility. To call this new service a 'shuttle' while still gouging customers with change fees is disingenuous.

Yay AS!

airzona11 · Wed May 11, 2016 5:49 pm

SF to LA Airports, I have found the Delta Shuttle flights to be a great experience. Delta isn't my frequented carrier, however I have had great experiences with them on the Shuttle.

What makes this interesting is with AS / VX - they now have a play on the SF - LA market. There is so much competition up and down the west coast, great for us flyers (frequent and casual).

That being said, hard and soft product wise, Delta Shuttle is the best SFO - LAX, and dont see how it wont be the same SEA-SFO/LAX.

PlanesNTrains · Wed May 11, 2016 6:11 pm

Quoting airzona11 (Reply 98):
That being said, hard and soft product wise, Delta Shuttle is the best SFO - LAX, and dont see how it wont be the same SEA-SFO/LAX.

No doubt about it. What ultimately matters is what AS chooses to do post-VX.

-Dave

wjcandee · Wed May 11, 2016 9:00 pm

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 83):
I think it's the first time I've been on an flight where instead of the pilot saying "Flight attendants please prepare for departure", they said "Christy, time to take your seat"

These 1-flight-attendant flights almost always end up with a superior level of service than if you had 2 folks serving. For some reason, the bad habits and bad attitude seems to come out when they get together, and never when they aren't. It has always struck me as odd that the folks who do it on their own do an extraordinary job, while when you have two, it's hit or miss as to whether they will slide to the bottom of the barrel.

Maybe because if something doesn't get done, and there's a ghost rider on board, it's the fault of only one person, and they know it. I.e. accountability. Or maybe it's the kind of personality that expects to do something his/her self -- industrious. I don't know.

Or maybe that's just my data points. But that has been my experience.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net