DarkSideMoon

Or fly on a brand new, quiet, fuel efficient turboprop.

tonsterboy5

but can you? You can do a lot of the short routes but anything over 1.5 hours and you are weight restricted. I also know no one wants to be on a 50 seater with no Wi-Fi or movies for over 1.5 hours, but I guess if it’s that or nothing, 50 seater it is.

Hedley

There isn’t one currently available and the American people don’t like them. If you can see the blades, it’s outdated and dangerous, if they put the blades inside a cowling, it’s modern and safe.

DarkSideMoon

Americans don’t look at blades when they buy their Expedia tickets, and if they’re already willing to fly a -200 rather than drive, it means they really hate driving.

Besides, the 700 is not much shorter in the tooth than the -200. There has to be a clean sheet 50 seat design in the next decade or so if any majors want to use their unlimited scope machines.

Hedley

To develop a new plane, especially for the US market, there has to be demand. Embraer made major improvements with the E2, but they can’t sell it here. The risk of developing a new turboprop without firm orders won’t be worth the risk.

Any clean sheet 50 seat design (jet or turboprop) will most likely be too far off to save the current 50 seat jobs. On another note, at United, the 50 seaters aren’t unlimited. They are not hull restricted like the 50+ seaters, but they are subject to the same block hour restrictions. I’d also expect future limits to be as restrictive as the current LOA, or possibly even more so. Delta doesn’t seem to think that there is a need for a 50 seat aircraft, and I’d expect United and American to follow. Time will tell, but my money is on demand coming back to pre-pandemic levels and growing, thus making larger aircraft the better option.

mixture lean

What about the ATR 42? It's still in production and Silver is replacing their Saabs with them. FedEx is also investing heavily in the type, so there's no need for a clean sheet design. And with sales toppling for the manufacturer in 2020, they could probably get them for a good deal if they were interested. Just my .02

Hedley

It would be a possibility, but no US legacy has publicly entertained the idea. Kirby is sold on upgauging. He wants to get rid of the 50 seaters and replace them with more 175’s, but he can’t. The only way that the regionals get more is if United gets another SNB fleet type, or if scope is relaxed. Both options are extremely unlikely.

LAXtoDEN

Honest question, why are UA pilots so hell bent on that? Why not just reduce the 50 seat scope to nothing in exchange to open more 76 seat flying?

Hedley

UA would probably love to make that deal, but U-ALPA is opposed. They know that the 50 seaters are nearing the end of the line and will be phased out soon enough. There just isn’t a reason to allow more 175’s in exchange for a fleet that is going to be retired anyway. The union position is that the company has all of the 70/76 seaters that they are going to get unless the company buys another new SNB, or if United pilots fly them.

TegridyFarms

Newsflash: scope tightening is good for regional pilots. It creates jobs at the next level.

Part 2: mainline pilots are not going to be relieving scope to accommodate your large RJ dreams. As more and more A220 type airplanes come online, that serves their thinner markets along with the current level of RJs serving their medium to small markets.

Customers don’t like the 50 seat RJ. Companies don’t like the 50 seat RJ. The 50 seat RJ is on its 9th life and about to be put to pasture.