Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
Chautauqua to be merged into Shuttle America >

Chautauqua to be merged into Shuttle America

Search
Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

Chautauqua to be merged into Shuttle America

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-26-2014, 09:26 AM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 926
Default

Originally Posted by MrMustache View Post
Quote:





Originally Posted by sqwkvfr


Haha!! Yes, yes it does!




Wait I was talking only shuttles airplanes. Now you're saying Compass airplanes too? Doubtful
Yes, I'm having a little fun..I assumed I was responding to a joke...that's what it means when folks laugh and put smilies on a post.
sqwkvfr is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 09:59 AM
  #22  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
Default

Originally Posted by sqwkvfr View Post
I'm betting that Shuttle will be an all Delta certificate, as well.
Doubtful unless the CPAs with Airways/American and United have changed. When I worked at Republic I remember Bedford saying many times that we could not get Delta or United flying because their scope applies to all aircraft on that certificate, not just the flying you do for them. Airways scope only applies for the aircraft flying for Airways, not anybody else. IE you could theoretically put a 747 on the Republic certificate as long as it wasn't flown for Airways. That is why the 190s went on the RP certificate. Also the 86 seat 175s for Airways violated Delta and United scope. Used to be 76 seats, not sure what it is now.

Now that was about 5 years ago and things change, particularly since the mergers. Heard those 175s are no longer at 86 seats, not sure what they are now.
FlyingKat is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 10:47 AM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 511
Default

Originally Posted by FlyingKat View Post
Doubtful unless the CPAs with Airways/American and United have changed. When I worked at Republic I remember Bedford saying many times that we could not get Delta or United flying because their scope applies to all aircraft on that certificate, not just the flying you do for them. Airways scope only applies for the aircraft flying for Airways, not anybody else. IE you could theoretically put a 747 on the Republic certificate as long as it wasn't flown for Airways. That is why the 190s went on the RP certificate. Also the 86 seat 175s for Airways violated Delta and United scope. Used to be 76 seats, not sure what it is now.

Now that was about 5 years ago and things change, particularly since the mergers. Heard those 175s are no longer at 86 seats, not sure what they are now.
The Airways 175s are at 80 seats but I believe the United flying going to YX is a solid rumor based at what BB has hinted at. We already know United's scope isn't the problem as the Q's are on the YX cert.
flyingreasemnky is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 10:52 AM
  #24  
Moderator
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Default

Originally Posted by flyingreasemnky View Post
The Airways 175s are at 80 seats but I believe the United flying going to YX is a solid rumor based at what BB has hinted at. We already know United's scope isn't the problem as the Q's are on the YX cert.
Are you certain about that? I believe UAL pilot's scope for jets is more restrictive than for t-props. If the seat count on the jets go down then maybe it could work. I think AA, UAL, & DAL are all at 76 seats jet max now.
johnso29 is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 10:53 AM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 926
Default

Originally Posted by FlyingKat View Post
Quote:





Originally Posted by sqwkvfr


I'm betting that Shuttle will be an all Delta certificate, as well.




Doubtful unless the CPAs with Airways/American and United have changed. When I worked at Republic I remember Bedford saying many times that we could not get Delta or United flying because their scope applies to all aircraft on that certificate, not just the flying you do for them. Airways scope only applies for the aircraft flying for Airways, not anybody else. IE you could theoretically put a 747 on the Republic certificate as long as it wasn't flown for Airways. That is why the 190s went on the RP certificate. Also the 86 seat 175s for Airways violated Delta and United scope. Used to be 76 seats, not sure what it is now.

Now that was about 5 years ago and things change, particularly since the mergers. Heard those 175s are no longer at 86 seats, not sure what they are now.
So since the Airways birds aren't going to be 80-seaters much longer what I say could very well be true then? You just kinda made my case.

Anyway, we'll see here in the next few weeks/months.
sqwkvfr is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 10:59 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2011
Posts: 133
Default

Whole thing smells fishy. There is NO way this saves them any $$ unless there is something they are hiding. Here is why:

Cost MORE to add a new AC Type to a cert, manuals and training and FFA approval. Think about it, NEW manuals cost more than updating older ones. If the 145s are truly to be parked in 24 months then this does NOT save money. You still need to move 'most' of the admin costs to the larger cert because you have more resources to manage.

And for those wondering about an All Delta cert: Remember that S5 and RP 145s do NOT count toward Delta scope. If they could staff 500 planes they would still not breach any scope. And take a look at basing now, not much to consolidate when you consider places like IND and CMH already had 3 certs based there with shared crew rooms and M/X facilities.

Something doesn't add up.....
CptGSXR is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 11:12 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
seafeye's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Hot tub for now
Posts: 1,203
Default

They are worried about the pilot shortage. Consolidate and then remove the smaller airframes. It will save money and they will remove airplanes.
seafeye is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 11:15 AM
  #28  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Feb 2014
Posts: 285
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by sqwkvfr View Post
Actually, I think that first blood was drawn when you fell out of a tree and landed on your head when you were a child.
I don't care who ya are, that's funny right there.
A320ULCC is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 11:15 AM
  #29  
Moderator
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Default

Originally Posted by CptGSXR View Post
Whole thing smells fishy. There is NO way this saves them any $$ unless there is something they are hiding. Here is why:

Cost MORE to add a new AC Type to a cert, manuals and training and FFA approval. Think about it, NEW manuals cost more than updating older ones. If the 145s are truly to be parked in 24 months then this does NOT save money. You still need to move 'most' of the admin costs to the larger cert because you have more resources to manage.

And for those wondering about an All Delta cert: Remember that S5 and RP 145s do NOT count toward Delta scope. If they could staff 500 planes they would still not breach any scope. And take a look at basing now, not much to consolidate when you consider places like IND and CMH already had 3 certs based there with shared crew rooms and M/X facilities.

Something doesn't add up.....

I believe some go the 145s are on a pro rate agreement. Every jet over 50 seats does count against scope though. No 51+ seaters on pro rate agreements.
johnso29 is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 11:34 AM
  #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 511
Default

Originally Posted by johnso29 View Post
Are you certain about that? I believe UAL pilot's scope for jets is more restrictive than for t-props. If the seat count on the jets go down then maybe it could work. I think AA, UAL, & DAL are all at 76 seats jet max now.
They are restricted for seat count as far as the a/c flying for them but not the seat limit for other a/c on the same cert flying for someone else. That is the problem with DAL's scope as it limits the size of all a/c on the same cert regardless of who they fly for.

Originally Posted by CptGSXR View Post
Whole thing smells fishy. There is NO way this saves them any $$ unless there is something they are hiding. Here is why:

Cost MORE to add a new AC Type to a cert, manuals and training and FFA approval. Think about it, NEW manuals cost more than updating older ones. If the 145s are truly to be parked in 24 months then this does NOT save money. You still need to move 'most' of the admin costs to the larger cert because you have more resources to manage.
It does save a lot of money initially as they no longer have to pay double for a bunch of VPs, middle management, SOC and other support staff. Also, believe it or not, we are also having a problem staffing FAs. Its no longer worth it to be an FA with our crappy outstations, low pay, horrible benefits, and abysmal travel benefits (the main reason most become FAs). So they are then able to have all the FAs dual qualified and use them on both the 145s and 170s which means fewer FAs will be required. They already have closed quite a few of the RP bases and will likely only be in LGA by the time the merger occurs. I believe the FAs already have a provision in their new contract for co-basing too.

All the pilots have just been issued company Ipads so by the time the merger happens, they won't have to print off new manuals. They will just update a couple PDFs and issue some new badges.

According to BBs roadshow, Delta wants all the DCI carriers to all wear the same uniform so that adds up to another small cost as they won't have to supply two sets of uniforms for the rest of the people on the cert.

This cert merger is all about removing redundant costs which will same a ton of money in the end. BB has already stated that we will be going down to just the 170's and the Q's. Once the Airways birds are at 76 seats or less with the 190's gone, I have no doubt Shuttle will be gone as well. He can probably sell of the RP cert for a decent profit as well because it already has Saabs, 145's, CRJ's, and 170's on it.
flyingreasemnky is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TonyWilliams
Regional
62
02-27-2011 10:49 AM
cloudkicker1981
Regional
0
01-19-2006 08:17 AM
Sir James
Major
1
01-05-2006 07:59 PM
Gordon C
Regional
0
06-10-2005 12:38 AM
Gordon C
Regional
0
04-21-2005 06:14 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices