Airlines have spent a lot of time and effort trying to figure out a way to squeeze a seat and a bed into a very small space on an airplane, and they’ve done an admirable job. But any time you try to create multiple uses in one place, it’s not perfect. Lufthansa has decided to go a different way. Back to 1950. First Class fliers on some 747s will now get a seat and a bed. And as far as I’m concerned, this might be the best First Class product in the air. (Not that I’ve tried them all . . .)

Tell me that doesn’t look sweet. It’s made even more awesome by the fact that it’s on the upper deck of the 747. Eight of these babies upstairs and that’s it. Amazing.

As I’ve said, airlines have put some serious research and development into creating the perfect experience in a very small space. The problem, however, is that no seat can also be a perfect bed. Except for the Craftmatic adjustable, beds are not meant to fold up. Sure, they can be very comfortable, but most airlines get to that point by putting an increasingly thick mini-mattress over the bed to hide the bumps and dips.

What you get is a pretty comfortable bed with a mostly comfortable seat. It works well considering the space constraints, but Lufthansa looked it in a different way. They applied typical German efficiency.

Lufthansa’s First Class on the 747 is dated. It does go fully flat, but you sit right next to someone. In a world of insanely-private suites and opulent amenities, it’s just not that competitive. So Lufthansa looked at the space and said, “Huh, instead of selling 16 First Class seats, why not sell only 8 of them so it’s more private?” And that’s exactly what they’re doing on the 747s starting April 22. So First Class customers will have two seats all to themselves.

But on 10 of the 747s, Lufthansa is pulling out eight of those seats and installing real beds instead. So there will still be eight First Class seats sold, but instead of two seats, you’ll have a seat and a bed. Works for me.

My only problem with this whole plan is that it’s only on 10 of the 747s. I’m told that these airplanes will not be dedicated to any specific routes, so it will really be luck of the draw. And that’s a bummer. It’s also kind of a waste since people won’t be willing to pay extra if they don’t know that they’ll actually get it. But it was emphasized to me that there will be only be 10 done “for now” because that’s how many they can get done this year. My guess is that we’ll either see more retrofitted later or we’ll just see more of the 747s retired.

Beginning next year, Lufthansa starts taking delivery of the bigger 747-8, and those will have this new First Class as well as a new business class. So it seems this year is something of a transition year.

I do like where the airline is going with this. You can now have a true bed and a comfortable seat for reclining and eating. Sounds like a nice way to pass the time to me. Combine that with the private First Class Terminal in Frankfurt and you’ve got an incredible experience from the time you arrive.

Anyone who thinks that the days of airline schedule retaliation are over clearly hasn’t been watching Delta. The airline is royally pissed that Frontier had the gall to enter the Minneapolis to Kansas City market and now it’s unleashing its own response to try to change the airline’s mind. What a waste of a good airplane.

On March 2, Frontier said it would begin two daily flights between its mini-hub in Kansas City and Minneapolis on June 6. Before these flights, Delta was the only one operating that route. It was big enough that there were even some mainline Delta flights out there. So you would expect hard price competition between the two and maybe a little beefing up/tweaking of Delta’s schedule to best position itself against Frontier. But the reaction was far stronger than that.

Delta has quietly added new flights that sit right on top of Frontier coincidentally (yeah right), also beginning on June 6. You will now get two daily flights from Kansas City to Boston, two to Columbus, one to New Orleans, and one from Omaha to Washington/National. Why do I say this is retaliation? Because there’s no other way to look at this.

The only nonstop from Kansas City to Boston, Columbus, and New Orleans right now is on Frontier. Apparently Delta forgot to look at the tapes, however, because the Columbus flight will end on June 3. But these are also the only nonstops from Kansas City on Frontier that have no direct competition except for Austin, Seattle, and the newly-announced San Antonio flight. There’s no way Delta is going to want to waste that much aircraft time to bother with Seattle if it’s just retaliation. And Austin and San Antonio really aren’t Delta’s domain. They can leave that to the Texan airlines.

But possibly the biggest smack is that Omaha to Washington route. That’s one of the legacy Midwest Express (now part of Frontier) routes that has been operated for years. Right now, Frontier flies it twice daily but Delta is coming in to spoil the party.

Though I doubt this is the main catalyst, this move might also be a little kick in the pants for Frontier’s decision to fly to Provo, an alternate for Delta’s big Salt Lake City hub. Never a dull moment in this business.

So what’s the bottom line here? This is an attempt by Delta to convince Frontier not to bother starting Minneapolis. The hope is that if the collateral damage is too much, Frontier will walk away with its tail between its legs (sticking with the Frontier animal theme). But Frontier isn’t likely to budge on this, I wouldn’t think. Instead, both airlines may just suffer losses for awhile as they compete hard against each other. At some point, someone at Delta will realize that it’s a waste of time and pull out.

It always amazes me that airlines continue to try these types of tactics that so rarely seem to succeed. And since it’s nearly impossible to prove anti-competitive behavior, there’s nothing really stopping Delta from doing this other than someone on the inside looking at the balance sheet and saying that it’s a huge waste of money. At a time when fuel is spiking, decisions based on spite instead of actual commercial viability really are a waste.

But hey, there is a silver lining. Cheap fares for Kansas City-folk for awhile! Enjoy it while you can.

Last week, American and its joint venture partners British Airways and Iberia were here in Southern California to pitch the benefits of the joint venture to the region. The airlines are launching a lot of new service here in the next month, and they say the joint venture is a big reason why. I, however, was more interested in how the airlines were going to deal with their sometimes large product differences. The result? There doesn’t seem to be much concern about that.

As you probably know, BA and Iberia are now co-owned by the same umbrella company so they are slowly beginning to act more like one airline these days. All of these airlines have been in the oneworld alliance together for a long time, but it’s only in the last year that they’ve been granted antitrust immunity to effectively operate as one airline over the Atlantic. This is something that Delta/Air France (including Northwest/KLM) and United/Lufthansa have had for a long time so these guys are playing catch up. And they were in LA to spread the gospel about how great this is going to be.

Some of the point here is to promote new service. Iberia starts its nonstop from LA to Madrid soon, BA is adding San Diego to London again, and American is adding a bunch of regional jet flying around the Western US. Oh, and LA to Shanghai too. With the increasingly tightened cooperation, it had me wondering about the onboard experience. Did they think that it was an issue that the experiences could be so different on the airplane? The answer was no.

We need to look no further than the offerings in LA to see that there is a stark difference, even in coach. Iberia, for example, has no powerports and only overhead video screens on its flight to Madrid. American’s London flight has looping movies in each seat with scattered cigarette-lighter style powerports. BA has full audio/video on demand and no powerports. Meanwhile, BA has a premium economy section that the others do not have. And the business class experiences are very different as well. BA has a full flat bed while Iberia and American have different angled lie flat seats. And Iberia doesn’t have a First Class while the others do. And yet, you wouldn’t know a difference existed if you book online at the airline website. Here’s a shot from BA’s:

As you can see, you know the name of the airline that’s operating the flight but that’s about it. If you click on the class of service, it just gives a vague description of what you get on BA in those classes and not the other airlines. You can go to the more robust descriptions on the BA website and there are links to American and Iberia from there, but this assumes that people think in advance to ask if there’s a difference. One solution would be to work toward a combined product standard, but they don’t like that idea.

Jose Maria Alvarado, General Manager of the US and Canada for Iberia said, “I don’t think the passenger wants the same cookie cutter service.”

I think there’s a big difference between having similar product offerings and offering “cookie cutter” service. But let’s assume he’s right and that everyone loves each of these airlines for the differences they offer. Shouldn’t they at least be making a greater effort to describe product differences in the booking process?

Kevin Burns, Regional Director of Western USA and Canada for BA said that “to bias the decision process isn’t to our benefit.” Again, there’s a wide gap between informing the customer of the options and biasing the decision process. My hopes aren’t high that we’ll see this change anytime soon.

This isn’t a problem that only these airlines face. Every airline entering into a joint venture or any close business cooperation has to learn to either eliminate the differences or do a better job of explaining them. I wish more airlines would focus on this, especially as they get tighter and tighter with their partners.

Weather, tarmac rule irk airlines – Arizona Republic
Another article talking about long tarmac delays, and I was asked to comment.

The scoop on business class seats – CNN Out of the Office
This week, I looked at the different types of business class seats out there and which ones would be best depending upon the type of traveler you are.

Attention Airlines: A New Paint Job Is Not Rebranding -BNET Headwinds
Too many airlines seem to think that a new paint job is rebranding. It’s not. JAL’s recent repainting drew my wrath on this one.

Allegiant asks if a low fare is worth a gamble – AP
I commented on the possibility of Allegiant having fares that require you to pay extra for fuel.

In the Trenches: The Upmarket Temptation – Intuit Small Business Blog
There’s always a temptation to go upmarket in businesses like CC, but I’m holding firm against it.

It’s Spirit week here at Cranky, and not in the “ra ra, go team” kind of way. I’m talking about Spirit Airlines. I actually hadn’t planned on talking about them twice this week, but soon after the Cardinal’s guest post went live, I saw Spirit announce one of the strangest route additions I’ve seen in a long time. For some reason, the airline is going to fly five times a day from LA to Vegas. I don’t get it.

There are a few reasons you might decide to go into a market, but the best is that it’s commercially viable. I don’t see that as being the case here. Here is a table showing the number of flights from the LA Basin to Vegas.

Yes, Vegas to LA is a big market, but as you can see, there is plenty of service including a lot from low cost carriers, not to mention carloads full of people who would rather drive anyway. So can Spirit come in and scrape a bunch of low dollar people out of the cars and put them on an airplane? Maybe. But I can’t see that being a profitable move, especially since a fare war is already in full effect. Even if the airline finds a way to make this profitable, is it really the best use for an airplane? I mean, these are brand new birds, and there has to be a better way to use them than this.

But there are other reasons airlines fly routes, like utilization. For example, Continental has an airplane sitting overnight at LAX, so it decided to send it to Hawai’i. It was either that, or sit on the ground. Heck, the entire America West Vegas Nite Flight hub was based on utilizing airplanes at night when they would otherwise just be parked. So is that what Spirit is doing here? It’s unclear, actually.

This isn’t one plane going back and forth all day. Three of the airplanes continue to Detroit, one to Dallas, and the other to Ft Lauderdale. So I suppose it’s possible that these airplanes had some extra ground time in Vegas before heading east again and this is how the airline decided to spend that time. But that doesn’t make a ton of sense either. There have to be less crowded markets that could be served from Vegas with similar distances. But why would that even need to be the case? There aren’t any slots in Vegas, and as an ultra low cost carrier, Spirit’s goal is to fly these airplanes whenever they’re ready to go, not necessarily at the best commercial times. For the people Spirit is courting, they’ll fly anytime.

I do, however, wonder if this is part of a larger assault on LA. These airplanes consistently sit on the ground in Vegas for 30 to 40 minutes. The times fit well. But in LA, it’s all over the map. I actually tried to connect the dots between airplanes the come to LA and I can’t. Some airplanes are sitting for almost two hours before there’s a flight going back. And one would actually require a 26 minute turnaround. It just doesn’t seem right the way these are scheduled. So I do wonder if more might be coming in LA to make this schedule fill out better. But then, why do you need 5 airplanes coming from Vegas every day? You don’t.

This could also be an old-fashioned ego fight. Maybe Spirit wants to send Southwest a message that it’s going to fight the airline on its turf, and this is a very good way to get noticed. These ego fights are just so stupid that I won’t even address it. If that’s the point, then Spirit is in trouble. I don’t believe it.

The last theory comes from Airliners.net. According to one poster, Vegas has two tiers of airport charges and part of the criteria to qualify for the lower rate is a certain number of flights per day. So Spirit is adding five more flights as quickly as possible to get to that point.

This one just doesn’t seem right either. I mean, Spirit has 9 daily flights this summer from Vegas before LA. Would it really make sense to fly 5 marginal-at-best flights to LA just to bring down costs on 9 other flights? The math just won’t add up on that unless we’re talking about an insanely big discount that I can’t imagine.

In the end, LA to Vegas is going to end up in an ugly fare war for the foreseeable future. It’s great for us Angelenos but not for anyone in the industry.

You guys have any theories on this?

[Original Vegas photo via Flickr user Bukowsky18/CC 2.0]

[Updated at 741a to reflect Delta's flights from LAX]