Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Air Wisconsin (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/air-wisconsin/)
-   -   50 Seat Viability (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/air-wisconsin/128834-50-seat-viability.html)

dremaldent 04-06-2020 09:45 AM

50 Seat Viability
 
Just want to create this thread to talk about a few things we know so far. Kirby did imply that 50-seaters may be going away, but we shouldn't be super worried about that right now. Here's my take on everything going on right now.

1. We have no idea what he actually meant when he said that, nor the timeframe. He could be implying that he wants scope relief from UALPA, which he likely won't get, which makes this entire fear of him taking our planes away kind of moot.

2. Switching exclusively to a 70 seat market won't work without scope relief. There are simply too many routes to cover.

3. AWAC has passed an LOA that makes us (Hopefully) furlough proof until the end of May, on the basis of reducing our guarantee of course.. They have also passed an LOU which pay protects us in case we get COVID-19. That doesn't sound like a dying company to me. If they take money from the Federal government, this is extended to the end of September.

4. Even if Kirby gets his scope relief, there will still be a (Slightly smaller) regional market that needs to be covered. Sure it will be taken up by larger companies, but having CRJs rather than ERJs will give us a small edge in retraining since I'm expecting United will prefer CRJs over ERJs. It's very likely AWAC will still retain a contract.

5. The economy will bounce back after this. UND has posted a video made by economists in their university about how they expect airlines to fully recover by the end of the year. Hiring will slow down until summer next year, but will not stop. UND is 96% accurate when it comes to industry prediction.

6. Contrary to the fear I've been seeing from many, this will not end the airline industry (Yes, I've actually seen people say that no one will want to do air travel ever again after this). People will forget about this rather quickly, and return to their old habits as soon as the risk of contracting COVID-19 is reduced.

GA2Jets 04-06-2020 10:23 AM

I think you make some good points, but there should be a #0 that appears before all others: no one knows how this public health crisis, therefore this economic crisis will unfold.

This is the message underneath the town hall and the emails from RB. We could see anything from complete devastation to comtolete return of demand and the only way to know is wait, unfortunately...

I really doubt 50 seat flying will disappear from UA. Get cut, sure I mean everything will be trimmed. But disappear? Makes no sense to me. If pax comfort was such a big deal, they wouldn't pack economy seats into mainline planes. If they don't get scope relief, there is no way it will all disappear, but even if they do get relief, they'd need a heck of a lot of 175s flying to replace the seats in smaller markets.

Perhaps another good question is, if 50 seat flying gets cut by (let's say) 50%, whose flying is going away?

Itsajob 04-06-2020 10:27 AM


Originally Posted by dremaldent (Post 3025261)
Just want to create this thread to talk about a few things we know so far. Kirby did imply that 50-seaters may be going away, but we shouldn't be super worried about that right now. Here's my take on everything going on right now.

1. We have no idea what he actually meant when he said that, nor the timeframe. He could be implying that he wants scope relief from UALPA, which he likely won't get, which makes this entire fear of him taking our planes away kind of moot.

2. Switching exclusively to a 70 seat market won't work without scope relief. There are simply too many routes to cover.

3. AWAC has passed an LOA that makes us (Hopefully) furlough proof until the end of May, on the basis of reducing our guarantee of course.. They have also passed an LOU which pay protects us in case we get COVID-19. That doesn't sound like a dying company to me. If they take money from the Federal government, this is extended to the end of September.

4. Even if Kirby gets his scope relief, there will still be a (Slightly smaller) regional market that needs to be covered. Sure it will be taken up by larger companies, but having CRJs rather than ERJs will give us a small edge in retraining since I'm expecting United will prefer CRJs over ERJs. It's very likely AWAC will still retain a contract.

5. The economy will bounce back after this. UND has posted a video made by economists in their university about how they expect airlines to fully recover by the end of the year. Hiring will slow down until summer next year, but will not stop. UND is 96% accurate when it comes to industry prediction.

6. Contrary to the fear I've been seeing from many, this will not end the airline industry (Yes, I've actually seen people say that no one will want to do air travel ever again after this). People will forget about this rather quickly, and return to their old habits as soon as the risk of contracting COVID-19 is reduced.

I don’t think that anyone knows how this is going to play out. This is Kirby’s quote about the 50 seat jets:
“my guess is that the 50 seaters will be mostly gone by the end of this. Under almost any of these scenarios 50 seat flying will be a thing of the past”.

Do they think that in a market where demand is reduced that many of the small markets that have been served by the 50 seat jets will no longer be worth it? Do they want to take advantage of this depressed market to eliminate a fleet type that generates negative customer feedback? Will they decide to add 100 seat jets to the mix and unlock more 175’s for the regionals? They have wanted to greatly reduce the 50 seat fleet in the past, but couldn’t due to scope. With reduced demand and a several year recovery anticipated, it sounds like they have decided that now is the time. Depending on what this recovery looks like, there could be fleet retirements at both UAL and UAX.

TheFly 04-06-2020 10:33 AM

Fifty seaters burn less fuel and only takes 3 people to staff. With 10 people on an RJ versus 10 pax on a 737 or Airbus...from an economic standpoint, the RJ is probably less of an economic hit.

piloto2 04-06-2020 10:46 AM


Originally Posted by dremaldent (Post 3025261)
I'm expecting United will prefer CRJs over ERJs. It's very likely AWAC will still retain a contract.

What makes you think that? The only plane the flying public hates more than the ERJ 145 is a CRJ 200. The 200 is getting harder and harder to support. The 145XRs flying for UAL were going to get upgrades. Nothing similar has been mentioned for the 200, has it? But the real issue may be the small size of AWAC's pilot group. Very much in the same category as Trans States, but without any aircraft that UAL has expressed any interest in upgrading.

RAHkid94 04-06-2020 10:52 AM

Regarding point 4- United was going to dump a bunch of money into upgrades (including wifi) for the 145’s so they must like them more than the CRJ’s.

If there’s a reduction, why would they give the remaining flying to us instead of Commutair or XJT, since they’re heavily invested in those two?

GA2Jets 04-06-2020 10:58 AM


Originally Posted by RAHkid94 (Post 3025332)
Regarding point 4- United was going to dump a bunch of money into upgrades (including wifi) for the 145’s so they must like them more than the CRJ’s.

If there’s a reduction, why would they give the remaining flying to us instead of Commutair or XJT, since they’re heavily invested in those two?

Technically they said the whole 145 fleet and "many" of the 200 fleet would be upgraded. That read to me like, we don't own them so we can't make anyone (like SKW) do anything.

GA2Jets 04-06-2020 11:05 AM


Originally Posted by GA2Jets (Post 3025341)
Technically they said the whole 145 fleet and "many" of the 200 fleet would be upgraded. That read to me like, we don't own them so we can't make anyone (like SKW) do anything.

"– a full interior refresh across our E-145 fleet and many of the CRJ-200 aircraft our partners operate." In the article on Flying Together, Feb 24 (a lifetime ago).

Firefighterpilo 04-06-2020 11:11 AM

dremaldent

I appreciate the optimistic post and know you are trying to buffer the doom and gloom. That being said it is more important that all pilots right now stay grounded in reality so they can best position themselves for the future.

All of your points are optimistically subjective at best and misleading at worst. University of North Dakota is not a world renowned financial college and have not predicted anything close to 96% accuracy. In fact they released the same info after 911 saying it was going to only be a couple month slump. We know how that turned out. Being a large aviation school they are trying to paint a rosy picture not grounded in reality. They survive on students paying hundreds of thousands of dollars buying into the pilot shortage myth. They and embry riddle have been peddling this fantasy for two decades.

If pilots learned anything from the lost decade, and this is shaping up to be much worse, things are going to be bad for a really long time.

I am not trying to attack you but after 911 I spent more time listening to pilot recruiters and not enough time focus on reality and it hurt my family. Right now all pilots would be best served planning on the worse case scenarios instead of banking on the best. Some airlines are better positioned then others but all are being hurt. If you are at AWAC and heard Kirbys words you should be planning accordingly.

I wish nothing but the best for all pilots but don’t want to see people with their heads in the sand ignoring the huge red flags. Like they say sh*t in one hand and wish in the other and see what fills up first.

dremaldent 04-06-2020 11:29 AM


Originally Posted by Firefighterpilo (Post 3025353)
dremaldent

I appreciate the optimistic post and know you are trying to buffer the doom and gloom. That being said it is more important that all pilots right now stay grounded in reality so they can best position themselves for the future.

All of your points are optimistically subjective at best and misleading at worst. University of North Dakota is not a world renowned financial college and have not predicted anything close to 96% accuracy. In fact they released the same info after 911 saying it was going to only be a couple month slump. We know how that turned out. Being a large aviation school they are trying to paint a rosy picture not grounded in reality. They survive on students paying hundreds of thousands of dollars buying into the pilot shortage myth. They and embry riddle have been peddling this fantasy for two decades.

If pilots learned anything from the lost decade, and this is shaping up to be much worse, things are going to be bad for a really long time.

I am not trying to attack you but after 911 I spent more time listening to pilot recruiters and not enough time focus on reality and it hurt my family. Right now all pilots would be best served planning on the worse case scenarios instead of banking on the best. Some airlines are better positioned then others but all are being hurt. If you are at AWAC and heard Kirbys words you should be planning accordingly.

I wish nothing but the best for all pilots but don’t want to see people with their heads in the sand ignoring the huge red flags. Like they say sh*t in one hand and wish in the other and see what fills up first.

Obviously everyone should plan for a worst-case scenario. But, the worst-case scenario that I am seeing from other pilots on this forum is far worse than will actually happen. Some are saying that all air travel will be shut down for years. Not just a reduction, completely shut down.

UND's projection was completely based in evidence. I watched it and analyzed the data myself.

The industry will recover from this. There might be furloughs, but it won't be terrible once the economy opens back up.

Besides, with the entire economy shut down for a few months, most don't have any options other than to collect unemployment if furloughs happen anyway. Personally, I have a second job lined up, about 9 months of living expenses, and unemployment which will all buffer me through if things go really wrong. Leaving any company right now is a terrible idea. Having backup plans is a good idea. Basically I'm telling everyone that the right decision right now is to ride it out and hope we come out ahead (or at least as far ahead as we can be) once this is all over. Not like you're getting another job flying anyway.

RJ4LIFE 04-06-2020 11:42 AM


Originally Posted by Firefighterpilo (Post 3025353)
dremaldent

I appreciate the optimistic post and know you are trying to buffer the doom and gloom. That being said it is more important that all pilots right now stay grounded in reality so they can best position themselves for the future.

All of your points are optimistically subjective at best and misleading at worst. University of North Dakota is not a world renowned financial college and have not predicted anything close to 96% accuracy. In fact they released the same info after 911 saying it was going to only be a couple month slump. We know how that turned out. Being a large aviation school they are trying to paint a rosy picture not grounded in reality. They survive on students paying hundreds of thousands of dollars buying into the pilot shortage myth. They and embry riddle have been peddling this fantasy for two decades.

If pilots learned anything from the lost decade, and this is shaping up to be much worse, things are going to be bad for a really long time.

I am not trying to attack you but after 911 I spent more time listening to pilot recruiters and not enough time focus on reality and it hurt my family. Right now all pilots would be best served planning on the worse case scenarios instead of banking on the best. Some airlines are better positioned then others but all are being hurt. If you are at AWAC and heard Kirbys words you should be planning accordingly.

I wish nothing but the best for all pilots but don’t want to see people with their heads in the sand ignoring the huge red flags. Like they say sh*t in one hand and wish in the other and see what fills up first.

Economically it may be worse, but consider also that part of the reason it was a "lost decade" for pilots was the lack of retirements. That is a major difference that should make the current situation less painful for us this time around, especially after a year or two.

Itsajob 04-06-2020 11:55 AM


Originally Posted by GA2Jets (Post 3025348)
"– a full interior refresh across our E-145 fleet and many of the CRJ-200 aircraft our partners operate." In the article on Flying Together, Feb 24 (a lifetime ago).

United was going to do a bunch of things a few months ago. That playbook is in the trash. They are now talking about the possibility of retiring 767’s that they spent millions on recently upgrading to the Polaris configuration. Any plans for an interior improvement on the 50 seat fleet are probably long gone. It’s hard to believe how fast and dramatically things have changed.

GA2Jets 04-06-2020 12:03 PM


Originally Posted by Itsajob (Post 3025392)
United was going to do a bunch of things a few months ago. That playbook is in the trash. They are now talking about the possibility of retiring 767’s that they spent millions on recently upgrading to the Polaris configuration. Any plans for an interior improvement on the 50 seat fleet are probably long gone. It’s hard to believe how fast and dramatically things have changed.

Yes I know. This was to make the point that the cabin refresh did not by itself show favor to 145s over 200s. It does not support the idea the United likes 145s more than 200s. It certainly is true that all capital expenditures like that are gone for now.

Itsajob 04-06-2020 12:23 PM


Originally Posted by GA2Jets (Post 3025397)
Yes I know. This was to make the point that the cabin refresh did not by itself show favor to 145s over 200s. It does not support the idea the United likes 145s more than 200s. It certainly is true that all capital expenditures like that are gone for now.

I don’t know what they favor, but when Kirby talked about United fleet retirements he went back and forth from best case to worse case. When he threw in the comment on the 50 seat flying, it sounded like they have made a decision that regardless, it will be “a thing of the past”. I would think that when the big boss says something like that, it shouldn’t be considered spoken out of context, that’s only worst case, etc. I think that he meant it. The question is when. Will it come early or late in the recovery, somewhere in the middle, or will they change their mind? It’s a guessing game at this point.

GA2Jets 04-06-2020 12:24 PM


Originally Posted by Itsajob (Post 3025412)
I don’t know what they favor, but when Kirby talked about United fleet retirements he went back and forth from best case to worse case. When he threw in the comment on the 50 seat flying, it sounded like they have made a decision that regardless, it will be “a thing of the past”. I would think that when the big boss says something like that, it shouldn’t be considered spoken out of context, that’s only worst case, etc. I think that he meant it. The question is when. Will it come early or late in the recovery, somewhere in the middle, or will they change their mind? It’s a guessing game at this point.

But isn't guessing fun?? 😎

IDriveJets 04-06-2020 12:30 PM

We have no bloody clue when this virus will be curbed or cured if that. We have no clue when the economy will start to recover.

Call me a simpleton but would I rather focus on saving money after a pandemic or blowing it on air travel? This virus caught America and Americans with our pants down and butts bare. People are definitely thinking what’s important to them now or should have taken importance.

Even when the economy opens up, recovery won’t be overnight or even 6 months. The damage this thing has done will take a long time to recover from. China just started reopening stuff and had to shut it down again because the virus started coming back. Factor that in as well, it won’t go away completely.

Everything is being dictated by the virus and some dork sitting on his computer sipping Earl Grey tea at UND or Riddle can’t be right. When the hell did a virus REALLY impact the airline world like this? Even bird flu or swine flu didn’t do this kind of damage. A company like Emirates is bleeding through its rear end and looking for money even with their subsidies.

People will be afraid to travel unless everyone is like woohoo let’s get on a plane because everything is dandy. It isn’t the invisible enemy for nothing. Would you feel safe right after a pandemic getting on a wide body or CRJ with someone right next to you?

Of course we want to be positive, plan for the worst and hope for the best but this is unchartered territory for EVERYONE not just airline pilots and nobody has a real answer on how we’ll overcome this.

If the 50 seaters go then they go and it’s better we adopt a mindset of accepting that now than be given a rude awakening later and thinking of a backup plan of employment. If they stay then perfect for us and it’s happy days...

just my two cents.

IDriveJets 04-06-2020 12:36 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-nowhere...190704591.html



read this

IFLYACRJ 04-06-2020 01:06 PM

Install WiFi on the CRJ 200’s and people will be happy they’ll be able to stay connected even for a 1:45 flight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RabidW0mbat 04-06-2020 01:56 PM


Originally Posted by IFLYACRJ (Post 3025448)
Install WiFi on the CRJ 200’s and people will be happy they’ll be able to stay connected even for a 1:45 flight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bingo. I’ve been saying this for months. WiFi and BYOD entertainment will immediately placate a good chunk of the CRJ’s naysayers.

Itsajob 04-06-2020 02:38 PM


Originally Posted by RabidW0mbat (Post 3025489)
Bingo. I’ve been saying this for months. WiFi and BYOD entertainment will immediately placate a good chunk of the CRJ’s naysayers.

Exactly, then all they need to fix is the tiny, cramped cabin with no ability to bring carry on luggage, plus the issue of having to walk outside on a noisy ramp to get to the plane. I really don’t know why Kirby said what he did.

idlethrust 04-06-2020 02:44 PM


Originally Posted by RabidW0mbat (Post 3025489)
Bingo. I’ve been saying this for months. WiFi and BYOD entertainment will immediately placate a good chunk of the CRJ’s naysayers.

WiFi or not , people will still cringe at the 145 or 200. Just face the facts, they are old,outdated products that served well during their prime , but its time for them to go away and restructure all of this “ regional flying “” like Ord-Hpn back in house . In the end it will create more mainline jobs for us all shortly down the road.

Escargot 04-06-2020 02:46 PM

Kirby knows that after six months of panic eating non-stop and using up the world's supply of toilet paper, no proper 800 lb American will fit in that tube of sardines anymore.

GA2Jets 04-06-2020 03:04 PM


Originally Posted by Escargot (Post 3025533)
Kirby knows that after six months of panic eating non-stop and using up the world's supply of toilet paper, no proper 800 lb American will fit in that tube of sardines anymore.

They didn't go from "50 seats are so cool we are going to do an expensive cabin refresh" to "oh we need to get rid of these because of customer experience" in month. It's all about money, capacity and demand.

dremaldent 04-06-2020 03:11 PM


Originally Posted by Itsajob (Post 3025524)
Exactly, then all they need to fix is the tiny, cramped cabin with no ability to bring carry on luggage, plus the issue of having to walk outside on a noisy ramp to get to the plane. I really don’t know why Kirby said what he did.

Having to walk on the ramp won't go away. Dulles doesn't have the capacity to handle that many RJs at jet bridges. Maybe if they built a new terminal, but that will take awhile. Plus we fly into a lot of airport that don't have them to begin with and would easily bankrupt them if they were to build them.

Itsajob 04-06-2020 03:30 PM


Originally Posted by dremaldent (Post 3025552)
Having to walk on the ramp won't go away. Dulles doesn't have the capacity to handle that many RJs at jet bridges. Maybe if they built a new terminal, but that will take awhile. Plus we fly into a lot of airport that don't have them to begin with and would easily bankrupt them if they were to build them.

I think some that what Kirby was trying to say is that there isn’t going to be as many rj’s. I think they anticipate fewer flights on bigger planes to be the new normal coming out of this.

amcnd 04-06-2020 07:13 PM


Originally Posted by RAHkid94 (Post 3025332)
Regarding point 4- United was going to dump a bunch of money into upgrades (including wifi) for the 145’s so they must like them more than the CRJ’s.

If there’s a reduction, why would they give the remaining flying to us instead of Commutair or XJT, since they’re heavily invested in those two?

OO was working on a satellite based wifi for the 200’s. So it wasn’t just for the E145’s.. But its all a moot point now...

piloto2 04-06-2020 08:10 PM


Originally Posted by Itsajob (Post 3025524)
Exactly, then all they need to fix is the tiny, cramped cabin with no ability to bring carry on luggage, plus the issue of having to walk outside on a noisy ramp to get to the plane. I really don’t know why Kirby said what he did.

The “walking outside on a noisy ramp” isn’t the airplane’s fault, it’s that way because United went the cheapo route on the south side of the B terminal. You make that same walk whether you’re on a 145, 175, or CRJ if that’s where your gate it. And if you’re anywhere else, you use a jetbridge like every other airplane!

trip 04-06-2020 09:33 PM

Point 5, UND is in the business of selling pilot certificates and diplomas, of course they’re predicting full recovery by fall.

IDriveJets 04-06-2020 10:01 PM

Lol @ United forking out money on WiFi on our lovely old planes and those griping about walking on the ramp.

#priorities

vortacmeatsac 04-07-2020 03:53 AM


Originally Posted by piloto2 (Post 3025324)
What makes you think that? The only plane the flying public hates more than the ERJ 145 is a CRJ 200. The 200 is getting harder and harder to support. The 145XRs flying for UAL were going to get upgrades. Nothing similar has been mentioned for the 200, has it? But the real issue may be the small size of AWAC's pilot group. Very much in the same category as Trans States, but without any aircraft that UAL has expressed any interest in upgrading.

What do you think people would hate more? A 50 seat RJ, or no service?

IFLYACRJ 04-07-2020 04:10 AM


Originally Posted by RabidW0mbat (Post 3025489)
Bingo. I’ve been saying this for months. WiFi and BYOD entertainment will immediately placate a good chunk of the CRJ’s naysayers.


It’s a high tech babysitter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RabidW0mbat 04-07-2020 04:51 AM


Originally Posted by IFLYACRJ (Post 3025842)
It’s a high tech babysitter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I mean yeah, the CRJ sucks donkey balls, but I bet you give the average American WiFi, and they won’t really care what kind of airplane they’re on. The whole 145 vs 200 discussion only happens between us and seasoned travelers. End of the day no one here knows how this will shake out. Enjoy it while it lasts, this is my second career, so I can appreciate how easy the job is vs sitting at a desk.

IDriveJets 04-07-2020 06:15 AM


Originally Posted by RabidW0mbat (Post 3025852)
I mean yeah, the CRJ sucks donkey balls, but I bet you give the average American WiFi, and they won’t really care what kind of airplane they’re on. The whole 145 vs 200 discussion only happens between us and seasoned travelers. End of the day no one here knows how this will shake out. Enjoy it while it lasts, this is my second career, so I can appreciate how easy the job is vs sitting at a desk.


what ☝️said (second part not the WiFi part)

Beechnut 04-07-2020 07:54 AM

The soon to be CEO of the one company AirWis has a contract with just stated he doesn’t want your product.

You guys are arguing about WiFi.

DontLookDown 04-07-2020 08:15 AM


Originally Posted by Beechnut (Post 3026065)
The soon to be CEO of the one company AirWis has a contract with just stated he doesn’t want your product.

You guys are arguing about WiFi.

mic drop

filler

GA2Jets 04-07-2020 08:16 AM


Originally Posted by Beechnut (Post 3026065)
The soon to be CEO of the one company AirWis has a contract with just stated he doesn’t want your product.

You guys are arguing about WiFi.

Actually he didn't say that. He said it was his "guess" that "almost all". Bad, to be fair, but he didn't say "I don't want 50 seat aircraft anymore" or anything to that effect.

Itsajob 04-07-2020 08:32 AM


Originally Posted by GA2Jets (Post 3026086)
Actually he didn't say that. He said it was his "guess" that "almost all". Bad, to be fair, but he didn't say "I don't want 50 seat aircraft anymore" or anything to that effect.

Here is his exact quote:

“my guess is that the 50 seaters will be mostly gone by the end of this. Under almost any of these scenarios 50 seat flying will be a thing of the past”.

The scenarios he talked about prior to that statement were best case and worst case. A person hanging their hope on on the words “guess”, or “almost” is setting themselves up for disappointment. After Scott made the statement Oscar didn’t walk it back. He said, “there are probably some smiles around virtual land right now with that statement.”



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

dremaldent 04-07-2020 08:51 AM


Originally Posted by Itsajob (Post 3026100)
Here is his exact quote:

“my guess is that the 50 seaters will be mostly gone by the end of this. Under almost any of these scenarios 50 seat flying will be a thing of the past”.

The scenarios he talked about prior to that statement were best case and worst case. A person hanging their hope on on the words “guess”, or “almost” is setting themselves up for disappointment. After Scott made the statement Oscar didn’t walk it back. He said, “there are probably some smiles around virtual land right now with that statement.”



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

Okay, but how are they gonna get rid of 50 seaters without scope relief? Even if they do get scope relief they'll still need additional 70 seaters. No way can they operate more profitably without additional aircraft if they get rid of all 50 seaters. We're gonna still have some kind of job at the end of this flying. There's too many retirements for them to continue operating without hiring new pilots.

Itsajob 04-07-2020 09:25 AM


Originally Posted by dremaldent (Post 3026125)
Okay, but how are they gonna get rid of 50 seaters without scope relief? Even if they do get scope relief they'll still need additional 70 seaters. No way can they operate more profitably without additional aircraft if they get rid of all 50 seaters. We're gonna still have some kind of job at the end of this flying. There's too many retirements for them to continue operating without hiring new pilots.

My guess is that they picture reduced frequency with bigger planes. Some small markets could be determined to be no longer viable. I really don’t know what their post-virus plan is, just that it sounds like it will not involve 50 seaters. They could be considering a new NB fleet to unlock additional rj’s, bringing owned 175’s in-house, picking up cheap used 737/320 aircraft and using a Southwest style domestic model, cheap Max7’s from Boeing...... I think that people will get hurt as the change happens. United pilots will most likely be furloughed, regionals airlines operating 50 seaters could easily be let go. Considering the attrition, most will still have some kind of a job, but it may be starting over at the bottom of another regional after a furlough or liquidation. There may be options out there, but they stink.

GA2Jets 04-07-2020 10:05 AM


Originally Posted by Itsajob (Post 3026100)
Here is his exact quote:

“my guess is that the 50 seaters will be mostly gone by the end of this. Under almost any of these scenarios 50 seat flying will be a thing of the past”.

The scenarios he talked about prior to that statement were best case and worst case. A person hanging their hope on on the words “guess”, or “almost” is setting themselves up for disappointment. After Scott made the statement Oscar didn’t walk it back. He said, “there are probably some smiles around virtual land right now with that statement.”



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

It's like you aren't even reading what I'm saying. I have said over and over again that no one knows what will happen and that it's a possibility that 50 seat flying will go away. Don't come at me like I'm an idiot.

I understand what he said and what dark reality it poses. You can be as dark as you want, **however**, the words guess and mostly are important because the point is: Anything. Might. Happen.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:08 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands