One of the new interesting business model concepts listed in this article is LaCompagnie. I think that they have a very promising business model of pricing themselves lower than any other first or business class offered by the airlines. By offering a cut-rate business class fare, they are able to entice fliers who can afford to pay for a bit more but are not in the ballpark of paying for first or business class on the airlines. Like Southwest, by only having one type of aircraft, the 757, they are able to control and predict fuel and maintenance costs on a much more consistent basis. The Other company, WOW Air, is also an interesting business model. They are doing trans-atlantic flights but stopping in iceland and are using A320's which are much more efficient to operate than long haul aircrafts. Their business model would not exist if it were not for the geographic advantage Iceland has. The fares they offer are well worth the inconvenience of stopping in Iceland before continuing on to your destination in Europe.
One company I came across is WizzAir. This is the largest airline based in Hungary and currently flies to 35 countries. They are a European low cost carrier and are in competition with Ryanair, Easyjet, and FlyBe. They have many bases including Belgrade, Budapest, Bucharest, and many others. As is typical of low cost carriers, they have a fleet comprised entirely of A320's. They have 54 currently and 66 on order. Another low-cost airline is Tigerair. They are a based in Singapore and fly to all the country's an A320 can reach including China, Australia, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Cambodia, India, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and the Philippines and a few more. As is standard, they offer no meals unless you pay for them, and have an a-la-carte pricing system.
Wizzair is more of a point to point airline. By having so many bases (19) they fly from those to almost any other city they serve. By having this extremely high number of bases but only 54 aircraft, they are able to pack their planes full and generate a lot of revenue. Tigerair, on the other hand, does all of their flights out of Singapore. They were the first non-Chinese airline to operate flights to Guagzhou, Haikou and Shenzen. These were 3 highly profitable routes and gave them a major leg up on their competition. It is hard to say, but I think Tigerair will ultimately be more successful than Wizzair. They both have plenty of competition but Wizzair is number 3 behind Ryanair and Easyjet in Europe and has too many other airlines on its routes. Tigerair will be hampered by the pilot shortage as Southeast Asia is going to be hit pretty hard, but they fly routes with less competition and the growth for airline travel in Southeast Asia and China, their primary markets, is expected to surge in the coming years.
The economic impact these carriers will have on a global scale is very significant. They are essentially re-writing the way airlines market themselves. They are reaching out and creating markets by enticing customers who would otherwise be unable to travel. One of the dirty secrets of this whole low-cost operation at least overseas is the way they employ and pay pilots. Carriers like Ryanair set up third parties who contract out their pilots. They are not direct employees of Ryanair, but they are contractors. This means the pilots have to pay for their training and uniforms and have no union protection. The pay for pilots of low cost airlines around the world is an issue that will have to be addressed if they wish to continue to attract and retain the talent they need to have a safe and efficient operation.
http://www.theleader.info/article/45652/easyjet-and-ryanair-lead-the-way/
http://skift.com/2013/10/30/jetblue-worries-about-losing-pilots-to-better-paying-airlines/
http://skift.com/2013/10/23/european-pilots-with-lufthansa-dreams-must-face-ryanair-realities/
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Monday, November 10, 2014
Virgin Galactic
The Virgin Galactic crash happened due to the shuttles air braking system deploying too early. Just after the rocket detached from the mothership, for some reason the air brakes deployed while the aircraft was traveling mach 1.2. This caused it to violently break apart 50,000 feet above the ground. The pilot who survived was thrown from the wreckage but did not have an ejection system and could not explain how he was able to get away from the aircraft.
Virgin Galactic was the idea of Richard Branson. He started the company Virgin. Virgin Galactic was one of the first attempts to market and commercialize space travel. It was originally launched in 2008 with the hope of being ready by 2010 but was delayed several times. Space travel in general is a completely new and untouched way of transport. Several companies are looking into it but so far no one has been able to implement it.
The FAA has rules and regulations regarding space travel all the way from commercial operation to amateur rocket launching. They fall under 14 CFR and consist of licensing, procedures and general rules. In light of the recent crash, you can almost be sure that there will be a new set of rules coming to address what happened in order to prevent this from happening again.
I believe that commercial flights will eventually happen one day but it will take much longer than any of us anticipate, and especially since this crash happened. At first the tickets will be outrageously expensive but as more operators are permitted, competition will increase and prices will come down. As far as being accessible to the flying public, I'm not convinced this will be priced to where the average traveler can afford a ticket. If anything, I believe the major airlines will end up buying these space operations or starting their own and will offer them as the new first class tickets to high paying customers.
To qualify to be NASA astronaut pilot, you need a bachelors degree in engineering, bio science, physical science, or mathematics. You also need 1000 hours jet PIC time. You need to pass a NASA physical which is similar to the military's. On top of this you need to have vision correctable to 20/20. I could not find any information on pilots in the space tourism industry but whatever they would have been, they will be changed due to this crash. It will take some time to finalize the rules on pilot qualifications for space commercial operations.
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/postsecondary/features/F_Astronaut_Requirements.html
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/regulations/
Virgin Galactic was the idea of Richard Branson. He started the company Virgin. Virgin Galactic was one of the first attempts to market and commercialize space travel. It was originally launched in 2008 with the hope of being ready by 2010 but was delayed several times. Space travel in general is a completely new and untouched way of transport. Several companies are looking into it but so far no one has been able to implement it.
The FAA has rules and regulations regarding space travel all the way from commercial operation to amateur rocket launching. They fall under 14 CFR and consist of licensing, procedures and general rules. In light of the recent crash, you can almost be sure that there will be a new set of rules coming to address what happened in order to prevent this from happening again.
I believe that commercial flights will eventually happen one day but it will take much longer than any of us anticipate, and especially since this crash happened. At first the tickets will be outrageously expensive but as more operators are permitted, competition will increase and prices will come down. As far as being accessible to the flying public, I'm not convinced this will be priced to where the average traveler can afford a ticket. If anything, I believe the major airlines will end up buying these space operations or starting their own and will offer them as the new first class tickets to high paying customers.
To qualify to be NASA astronaut pilot, you need a bachelors degree in engineering, bio science, physical science, or mathematics. You also need 1000 hours jet PIC time. You need to pass a NASA physical which is similar to the military's. On top of this you need to have vision correctable to 20/20. I could not find any information on pilots in the space tourism industry but whatever they would have been, they will be changed due to this crash. It will take some time to finalize the rules on pilot qualifications for space commercial operations.
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/postsecondary/features/F_Astronaut_Requirements.html
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/regulations/
Saturday, November 1, 2014
Cargo Carrier Regulations
In the wake of the Colgan Air accident, the FAA implemented new rest and duty regulations for all scheduled passenger air carrier operations under 14 CFR part 121. There are several key differences between the new rules and the old ones. Perhaps the most important are the minimum rest requirements. Under the old system, the crew was allowed 8 hours off in between duty periods but this does not include the opportunity for sleep. So if there was a long drive to the hotel, the bus was late, it did not matter you were only allowed 8 hours in between periods. The new rules change this up. There is now a 10 hour period in between ending shifts and starting another with the opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted rest. The crews are also required to call the company to extend their duty period if they do not have the opportunity to get 8 hours of sleep. There are now also limits on how much flying a pilot can do in a week, month, and year including: 100 block hours in any 672 consecutive hours (28 days) 1,000 block hours in any 365-day period and duty hours: 60 flight duty period hours in any 168 consecutive hours 190 flight duty period hours in any 672 consecutive hours. There now is also more responsibility on the pilot to declare himself "fit for duty" before every flight and if they declare they are fatigued, they must be removed from the flight. Under the current FAR's there is no definition for reserve status. Now there are short call and long call reserve. Airport or standby time is now considered part of the pilots' flight duty period.
Since cargo carriers are exempt from these new set of rules and regulations, the pilots are subject to more stringent and longer duty hours. They are only required to have 8 hours in between shifts unlike the 10 hours with a guarantee of 8 hours of sleep like the airlines do. They do not have the protections and regulations that reduce fatigue in their pilots like the airlines now have.
There really is only one reason that cargo carriers have been omitted from these new sets of rules and regulations: The almighty dollar. It all comes down to money, unfortunately and even the FAA has admitted it. "The FAA, meanwhile, has revised its economic rationale behind exempting cargo pilots, saying it would cost the industry $550 million to comply, outweighing safety benefits. Originally, it said the rules would cost an additional $214 million. 'As a result, the FAA has determined that no revisions to the final rule on either cargo or passenger operations is warranted,' the agency said in a regulatory filing expected to be finalized by July." There is also the fact that a lot of the cargo flights are at night and this is the time when the rules affect flight-duty and rest periods the most so it would be a major burden on the cargo operators to change up their schedule to accommodate for the new rules.
I absolutely believe cargo operators need to be included in the new rest and duty rules. To omit them from this is an unbelievable and outrageous act by the FAA. Regardless of what the airplane is carrying, whether it is cargo or 300 passengers, a tired pilot is a tired pilot. By excluding cargo pilots from its new rules, the FAA is failing to adhere to its mission of making safety the first priority in aviation. If the FAA believes even one life lost in an accident is too many, shouldn't that principle also apply to cargo pilots?
From a pilots' perspective, if the FAA were to include cargo carriers in these new rules and regulations, I don't believe much would change in terms of them being able to attract and retain pilots. It is widely known throughout the aviation industry that top cargo carriers such as UPS or Fedex are among the highest paying and are usually the most sought after career destinations even though they are still under the old regulations. If given the choice between Delta or Fedex, most pilots I know would go with the latter. If the FAA were to include them, it would only further entice pilots to join the cargo ranks and make the career at a cargo carrier that much more attractive.
http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/fastread/2011/FastReadNewsflash_20111223.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/13/ups-pilots-urge-more-rest-for-cargo-crews/6402615/
Since cargo carriers are exempt from these new set of rules and regulations, the pilots are subject to more stringent and longer duty hours. They are only required to have 8 hours in between shifts unlike the 10 hours with a guarantee of 8 hours of sleep like the airlines do. They do not have the protections and regulations that reduce fatigue in their pilots like the airlines now have.
There really is only one reason that cargo carriers have been omitted from these new sets of rules and regulations: The almighty dollar. It all comes down to money, unfortunately and even the FAA has admitted it. "The FAA, meanwhile, has revised its economic rationale behind exempting cargo pilots, saying it would cost the industry $550 million to comply, outweighing safety benefits. Originally, it said the rules would cost an additional $214 million. 'As a result, the FAA has determined that no revisions to the final rule on either cargo or passenger operations is warranted,' the agency said in a regulatory filing expected to be finalized by July." There is also the fact that a lot of the cargo flights are at night and this is the time when the rules affect flight-duty and rest periods the most so it would be a major burden on the cargo operators to change up their schedule to accommodate for the new rules.
I absolutely believe cargo operators need to be included in the new rest and duty rules. To omit them from this is an unbelievable and outrageous act by the FAA. Regardless of what the airplane is carrying, whether it is cargo or 300 passengers, a tired pilot is a tired pilot. By excluding cargo pilots from its new rules, the FAA is failing to adhere to its mission of making safety the first priority in aviation. If the FAA believes even one life lost in an accident is too many, shouldn't that principle also apply to cargo pilots?
From a pilots' perspective, if the FAA were to include cargo carriers in these new rules and regulations, I don't believe much would change in terms of them being able to attract and retain pilots. It is widely known throughout the aviation industry that top cargo carriers such as UPS or Fedex are among the highest paying and are usually the most sought after career destinations even though they are still under the old regulations. If given the choice between Delta or Fedex, most pilots I know would go with the latter. If the FAA were to include them, it would only further entice pilots to join the cargo ranks and make the career at a cargo carrier that much more attractive.
http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/fastread/2011/FastReadNewsflash_20111223.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/13/ups-pilots-urge-more-rest-for-cargo-crews/6402615/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)