Originally Posted by
Wingtips
Your not seeing each market served. Many markets served by RJ are old turbo prop markets, such as ALB-EWR. This will not go to a 70 seat jet. Same with IAD-ABE, or SFO-SAC.
I dont think they will. If it's not dropped altogther, they will likely go to a turboprop, like the Q400 which can carry more revenue then a 37-50 seat RJ, for half the expense and do so as fast and comfortable considering the stage length altitudes flown.
Originally Posted by
Wingtips
Also a vast majority of the 70+ seat RJs are flying routes previously served by 737-500/300 (90-120 seats), or 727, or DC-9. We have also seen an increase in frequency in these places, while cutting capacity. IE 2 727 (250 total seats) is now 3 CRJ 700. (200 seats). That is just odd ball numbers but I think you get my point.
They're flying a mix of routes like that, stand-alone new markets and also mixing in with larger aircraft. Larger RJ's DO have a place and as the global increase in flying accelerates and the airspace limits, it's one reason why larger capacity is necessary as long as a route is "right-sized" in both capacity and frequency.
Originally Posted by
Wingtips
I do not see routes like MIA-TLH going to a 70 seat jet, or getting dropped. Same with GNV/NAS/GGT/PNS/BHM etc. They will remain 50 seat RJs, till something makes more sense. The frequency they have now works for the hub/spoke system they run.
Same with LGA-RDU, LGA-CLT, LGA-YYZ, JFK-CLE, JFK-CVG. No other airlines really fit this route, but they feed the INTL travel.
Again, look for those routes to have a mix of aircraft size, either all regional of various sizes and propulsion or a mix of regional/mainline. If they cannot support at least three flights a day of at least Q400 size (or perhaps ATR in the south), then I'd expect them to be dropped. If dropped, another start-up code share with some refurbished SAAB's or something might be an answer for that market as a code-share, but many analysts expect many smaller towns and markets to lose air service in the future due to economics.
Originally Posted by
Wingtips
If your predictions came true, it would mean your out on the street, since you feel more flying will be farmed out. However lucky for you, your wrong. With retirements, and lack of incoming pilots, the upward movement will be fairly steady for 15 years to come. The regional business will shrink off, as they see their staffing costs skyrocket. A319s on a B scale will more likely be the case at mainline. I think the airline owned regionals will grow starting in 2 years, as they can offer stability. The Pinnacle situation is just step 1 of a long road. Look what that did to United. Republic maybe next, which could really shake things up since CHQ flys for EVERYONE.
Any number of scenarios in the future could put me "out on the street". Considering the term sheet, if that becomes reality for an extended period of time, it may be ME putting MYSELF on the street to seek new adventures. The older you get, the more you realize how short life is. Retirements in any great numbers are 5 years off. Considering the pilot forcast, I wouldn't be surprised to see age 65 increased to age 67 or 70 if one can pass a stringent physical (probably including a cognitive test). When big businesses profits are threatened corporate power has proven to easily control governmental roadblocks (auto industry, banks and airlines, etc.)
By your own admission, you're now saying the regional airline business will shrink off, yet every indication says it has no intention of doing that (AMR certainly isn't) and instead simply morphing to larger RJ's. Since these are more economically viable and can even do MORE of the domestic operations, it only makes sense that contracting mainlines with their higher costs will not provide the escape rope for most regional pilots and thus the majority should expect to spend many years there, if not their ENTIRE careers. The regional industry WILL indeed go through its own "shake-up" via consolidation and elimination. U and UAL for example have a rediculous amount of feed providers and both will almost certainly condense that down to just enough to provide a competitive whipsaw model to ensure labor costs don't spiral higher one dime more then necessary.