Talk:Low-cost carrier
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Origin of Business Model
What is the source of the information that the business model was first exploited by Pacific Southwest not Southwest?
- How about "The Chronicle of Aviation," JPL Publishing 1990? I don't have an exact cite, but I own the book (it's in storage). Or Wiki's own article on them? Elwood64151 04:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Let's do a switch to "Low cost airline"
The term "carrier" for "airline" is industry speak, and should thus be avoided in Wikipedia. "Carrier" can in itself mean almost anything, as it just means someone who carries something, while "airline" is unambiguous. In Wikipedia we have the article "Airline", as well as the article "Cargo airline", so why should this article suddenly use the much less well known term "carrier"? When ordinary people (i.e. not those working in the aviation industry) come to Wikipedia to find out more about this subject, which search words are they most likely to use: Low-cost/low cost/low fare/low-fare/low-frills/ "airline" or "carrier"? There is currently a redirect from "Low cost airline" to "Low-cost carrier". I propose that we simply switch them with a simple move, and then add a few more redirects for all the different "low" variants. Anyone opposed? Thomas Blomberg 17:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Me, for one. Low-cost carrier and its abbreviation "LCC" are the industry standard term and widely used outside it (try eg. punching it into Google News), and it also beats low-cost airline in the Google test by 1,680,000 [1] to 1,100,000 [2]. Jpatokal 04:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- At the moment "Low-cost airline" and "Low cost airline" redirects here so that is good enough for me and we do use both terms in the start of the article. I'm neutral though. Strawberry Island 15:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Yield management
I removed the reference to "typically fares increase as the plane fills up, which rewards early reservations (yield management)" as the LCCs' the-earlier-the-cheaper pricing policy is just one example of a yield management approach - the term yield management refers to a broader revenue maximisation activity. I updated a few of the references elsewhere in the article too. Ecozeppelin 12:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Outdated fleet
The part about outdated fleets contains a lot of spelling errors.
Agreed, and it's also not relevant to low-cost carriers in particular. I have created a new page, Future aircraft developments, which is perhaps more appropriate, and have included some of the references from this section there. I am therefore removing this section from this article. Ecozeppelin 13:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
(Further to the above: There were some odd and factually incorrect statements in the added section ("turbofans can't use alternative fuels since they are based on combustion, so propellors would be better...") which also led me to remove it. I wanted to contact the user who added this to encourage her/him to expand on the subject but perhaps with some fact-checking and in a more relevant article, but it was an anon user...) Ecozeppelin 13:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Apparently the same anon user (81.244...) has now inserted a comment about boundary-layer suction again. I have deleted it again: it is a technical development not any more relevant to low-cost carriers than to other types of airline. I created the Future aircraft developments page for this and other such technical issues. A polite request to this user: feel free to expand on topics such as boundary-layer suction there or to create a dedicated page for the topic - but it doesn't belong here. Ecozeppelin 11:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Business structure
Some of the things on the business structure simply do not make sense having them there.
For example, reserved seating, and one aircraft type. This really only applies to Southwest...
I'd respectfully disagree - I think the list is a reasonable one. Ryanair and easyjet don't provide reserved seating. Ryanair have one aircraft type; easyjet when they decided on two felt the need to explain their decision because of the conventional wisdom that LCCs should only have one type. Not every low-cost carrier is going to tick all those boxes, but most of the points will be true. However I've added a sentence to try to make this clear. Ecozeppelin 07:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Add external link
Recently I added an external link to my own (non-commercial) site I’m currently working on. It’s a site which is part of my graduation research and all about European low-cost carriers. By posting a link I was hoping to share the knowledge, any suggestions or ideas why link is removed? Jvdz 07:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- I probably removed it, along with a number of other links that were getting added. I certainly remember looking at your site and seeing quite a lot of "under construction" sections. The Wikipedia:External links guideline suggests avoiding adding A website that you own or maintain (unless it is the official site of the subject of the article). If it is relevant and informative, mention it as a possible link on the talk page and wait for someone else to include it, or include the information directly in the article. Thanks/wangi 08:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your answer. I plan to have another update at the end of June, and will post a request at this place. Sorry I didn't follow the guidelines correctly. Jvdz 08:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
My research has finished and would like to suggest my related site for inclusion into the external link section. The site is non-commercial and by posting the link I hope to share the results of the research. If someone agrees I hope he/she could add the link according to the Wikipedia guidelines. Thanks. The link: European low-cost carriers. Jvdz
[edit] Pictures
I've updated the pictures: they were both of Ryanair aircraft which seems a bit skewed. It seemed reasonable to remove the 737-200 as it's no longer in service with Ryanair, so I have used the new 737-800 picture that user Marc Almond added, and also the earlier Easyjet 737-700 picture. Ecozeppelin 09:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Accidents and Incidents
Not sure that the "accidents and incidents" section contributes much to the article. What does a PSA in-flight collision in 1978 have to do with modern LCC operation? And wasn't the Helios flight that went down in 2005 a charter flight? A JetBlue emergency landing with no injuries is listed - should we be listing all emergency landings? I don't think so. I'd respectfully suggest that perhaps this section could be deleted, but I'm interested to hear other opinions. Ecozeppelin 09:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that the section is irrelevant. Since there has been no activity on the topic for some time, I will remove the section now. --KPWM_Spotter 23:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- People are concerned that low-cost carriers spend less maintaining there planes than full service airlines. Some refuse to travel on them for safety reasons. I was trying to collect all of the accidents and incidents in one place. The JetBlue landing is clearly an incident. Edward 07:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
True, the jetBlue landing is an incident. But; each airline's page should have a section like what you have put together, the information is redundant It doesn't make any clear conclusions about safety, nor does it show all of the accidents and incidents that have taken place. This list of occurances could easily be replaced by a few lines of text explaining the airlines' safety procedures relative to the legacies, and how they are no more or less safe. As this article is now, it is more focusing on the buisness aspect of the airlines. The crashes are simply out of place. --KPWM_Spotter 15:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Environmental impact
It should be noted too that flying at night is better vor the environment than flying during the day. It has something to do with the oxidization-process of the fuels.
Lastly, it should also be noted that non-polluting engines exist too (such as hydrogen-engines/compressed air engines in cars), and that these can be used on plains too (when they switch to normal propellors instead of turbofan's, such as those found in Hercules C-130 plains).
KVDP 10:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure this section should even be included. It seems utterly irrelevant to include a statement about the environment when we're talking about airlines and airplanes. Perhaps a separate article, or an article on the environment, but not this one. I especially object since no one can honestly claim to know one way or the other if man is the cause of global warming. Elwood64151 04:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
