Originally Posted by
eaglefly
I think many don't necessarily want BIGGER planes to fly, but with any RJ less then 70 seats become economically obsolete, they just want SOME viable aircraft to replace them. Naturally that means more 70-seaters.
Virtually every significant regional feeding a mainline carrier has 70-seaters...........and lots of them. Eagle only has 25 and would like to exchage most for 70-seaters. The APA will have to at the very least allow AMR the ability to match others regionals with cost effective aircraft. That means they will HAVE to allow a substantial number of 70-seaters. As far as larger then that, it's understandable (and likely) those aircraft will not show up at AA feeders.
70 seat RJ's have (and always will be) RJ's. They will always be flown by regional carriers. This crap about moving those over to mainline carriers with their cost structure is an unworkable fantasy. It's a good goal in principle, but completely unrealistic.
I'm pretty sure APA hates Eagle, but I could be wrong. They will do whatever it takes to protect AA, even if it means doing their best to see AE goes away.
Yeah, we could use some bigger aircraft in regards to economics. It makes sense. Either that or more props. But mainline sees bigger aircraft as a way to take away their jobs. I don't think mainline guys would want to fly our aircraft. I'd love to see the expression on the face of some 757 pilot when you offered him an ATR with the full seat configuration in it...the ones we can't have because of scope. "Alright Captain, here's your new plane!".
I don't pretend to understand this industry. I'm pretty certain I never will figure it out...but I'm also pretty certain I'm not alone. I think even management can join me on the ignorance train!