Rumor Mill
 

Hi,

Compass planes?

Bahama flying?

Pay raise?

LA base?

What else have you guys "HEARD" ?

We’re getting absorbed by mainline and all getting seniority numbers.

Endeavor pay plus $10.

Industry leading reserve rules.

Opening MIA E75 base.

Lol at the first 3. The last point isn't far fetched, at least at some point way down the line. Not anytime soon though.

They are going to honor the flow with 50% going over.

E190's from AA are coming to us.

More than one of these should be announced in the near future. Just saying.

Pay raise for captains only.. my guess

Don't we already fly to the Bahamas? Freeport, exuma?

Yep, except for ELH and some Cuba charters they completely stopped island flying when they closed MIA last time. Most of them are back in turn form now

This is the only thing that makes sense right now

About time, FOs have been reaping all the benefits the past two years, time for the CAs to get their money.

Unfortunately it only makes sense in our minds, and the people holding the strings

For the Bahamas flying, looking in the NRTP It actually looks like we are taking away the MIA - EXUMA (Georgetown, GGT) route from Republic E175's in early April.

MIA also got a lot more lines in April.

So maybe there is the truth in the rumor mill, growth and island flying in MIA.

More island flying isn’t an announcement and nothing that would be kept “secret” while they negotiate. Island flying would just simply appear on schedules. If they don’t announce pay increases, then envoy is in trouble. Maybe not now, but for the future. Especially if they are trying to attract CAs and get FOs to upgrade voluntarily. Money talks, along with better schedules.

See I keep hearing Money in March and compass 175s announced later this summer.

I would say money for captains and increased flow by 5 each month for certain amount of time.

Well it’s time to start jerking off in one hand and hoping in the other. Listen people nothing has ever or will ever happen until Rick Wilson recognizes that there is a severe problem on the horizon and that he’s going to be blamed if it happens. Does anyone think he has his binoculars pointed in the right direction? Back to work people

It would make sense. However, it's not on the table right now.

Lots more LGA flying soon.

Are the Envoy E-175s EOW? Or if anyone knows if the Compass ones are?

I heard from our program manager back when i was on recurrent that Envoy E-175s are ready for EOW when ever AA needs us to be. All the EOW planning has already been worked by the company.

Currently being worked on. I'm sure it will be finalized by the time we start DFW-EYW.

^^^^this^^^^

Otherwise that’s a long ass flight along the coast....

Rumors? Sorry but what waste of time but I get it. It’s fun. If you want to have a guess at the future follow the trend. The LA base opening for Envoy is not going to happen. This is a terrible rumor started by an FA. This will be retained by another regional. Envoy pilots are here to fly the bases and lines knowone else will take or wants. We are the cleanup crew. I hope to GOD I am wrong.

Well solid facts from someone(Not me) that was in a recent Q&A with RW stated that

1)Vacancy Bid displacement at months end.

2) There's not going to be any matching of Endeavours contract in regards to pay raises in the near future

3) No fighting to union about lack of PBS because it will put a negative light on hiring prospects. When we want PBS(never) call and let him know.

4) Confirmed slowdown on hiring of Fo's.

Don't forget to fill out your Envoy Pulse surveys, gents. Conveniently there's a comments block to the effect of what would make your job better...

And don't forget to drop in your complaints and comments in the first textual comment box of the survey. They lie and lead you to believe there'll be room for general comments later in the survey; there are not....

RE: 175 to EYW Has anyone looked at the performance numbers for the 175 in EYW? If you end up having to use icing speeds there's a decent chance you'll have to divert. I guess we'll be getting some MIA flying on the 175 after all.

You can land ice speeds in EYW no problem unless they’re reporting less than 555

When exactly do you plan on using icing speeds in Key West?

Leave Dallas encounter ice there or enroute. Have to use ice speeds even if it's 90 in key West.

In the 175 if you encounter icing in the climb or cruise you have to use icing speeds even if you've clearly shed all the ice. It posts an EICAS message that doesn't go away and increases shaker activation point until landing.

So if you pick a tiny bit of ice on the climb, you still have to land with ice speeds even if it's been 2 hours and there's clearly no ice.

Edit: was looking at wrong numbers, should be no problem.
Second edit: was looking at correct numbers:

Lowest distance requirement flaps full with ice speeds and 5/5/5/ is 4830. EYW runway is 4801. That's at 50,000lbs. With anything resembling a normal load you're not landing.

With a dry runway things are tight, but not as bad. ISA, calm wind, flaps full, and ice accumulation you are good up to 67,500lbs (with interpolation). So light pax load, dry runway, and no alternate fuel you'll probably be ok but anything else is going to be a diversion.

I haven't looked at takeoff numbers but my guess is they're pretty tight as well. Although flaps 4 may alleviate a lot of that.

Maybe I was off on the 555 but RPA does or has done EYW from MIA (I’ve gotten ice speeds from MIA-EYW because...Embraer), CLT, DCA, EWR, and ORD without much of an issue. Makes it entertaining though.

The actual landing distance is significantly less than what the book shows. I'm not sure why the numbers are as inflated as they are, but they're the ones in the book so that's what we use.

The hilarious part is that we have a table for mechanical failures where you take a default distance and then apply a penalty based on what's broken. According to that table a 70,000lbs ice speed landing with a single break failure takes 4179'. According to our regular landing distance table a 70,000lbs ice speed landing requires 4930' under the same conditions.

In this situation the EYW runway wouldn't be long enough for a regular landing, but would apparently be long enough for a landing with a failed brake. :rolleyes:

I once promised a filly I would give her a ride home in my Mercedes in exchange for some bathroom stall shenanigans. In reality I drove a white Geo Prizm with a dent in the fender.

What I'm trying to say here.. Is that you can pick up icing in the climb or decent into Key West.

Didn’t know the message latches on in the 175

It's one of the 175's many....quirks.

The inflight landing tables is the minimum distance required on a runway to accept a landing. It takes into account the land and stop distance, plus 40% (FAR requirement to land and stop within 60% of available runway). The unfactored landing distance tables are the actual land and stop distance..... unfactored for inop equipment, ect. So yes, you may be able to land and stop in less than 4930 feet, but the runway length required to ACCEPT a landing is the land and stop distance, plus 40%.

I just realized that I've never heard of the 40% factor. May I have a quote please for my reference?