5 Responses

  1. Joey
    Joey at |

    At the end of the day, the main revenue of JetBlue comes from its passengers. I’d say give it 2-3 years before these changes will make a negative impact on JetBlue’s financial statements. I hope I’m wrong but it’s just unfortunate to see part of what made JetBlue unique gone.

  2. D.
    D. at |

    Did the announcement make any mention of their E-190 fleet. I imagine adding seats to those planes is not worthwhile since they would only be able to add 6-8 seats and that would then force them to have another flight attendant onboard (their E-190s currently have 100 seats). Is it possible until the end of those planes service life they will continue to have extra leg room. The other option would be to standarize leg room across the board by adding a couple extra rows of even more space seats on the E-190s and then adding an extra row of coach while reducing the legroom to A-320/321 level.

    On a flight attendant level, this seems like a interesting choice. The prevailing trend seems to be either stay at just below 150 or get up close to 200. I wonder about the cost calculations of adding these extra 15 seats in exchange for another flight attendant.

  3. Oliver
    Oliver at |

    Has anyone attempted to change the FAA’s required FA/pax ratio? Is the extra FA going to make a measurable difference in the safety of the passengers as the number increases from 150 to 165?