U.S sees more than 70000 new virus cases for the second day in row, I think its safe to say there will be regionals joining TSA and Compass in the grave yard sooner or later. Plan accordingly!

k


filler

9:30 am EST on a sunday: Acey has 3 flights operating right now, all out of IAH.

for comparison:
commutair has 1; Wisconsin has 5, republic has 55, skywest has 80, mesa has 15

Also for comparison:

UAL has 95 flights airborne. AAL has 225. What's going on United?

AAL is done with boring bankruptcies. They want this next one to be absolutely fabulous.

UAL is in 'shrink to profitability mode.' AAL is in 'damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead mode.'

It's pretty hard to guess which strategy is better. Without significant improvement in bookings or more taxpayer assistance both roads lead to restructuring.

The early plans were all based on a V shaped recovery which clearly isn't happening (cue sophomoric reasoning that a vaccine will cause demand to roar back; the economic damage is already baked into the cake and will take years to recover).

The network carriers are not particularly well positioned to pivot to domestic leisure flying as the primary source of revenue. International and high margin business travel will be the last markets to return. Those markets are critical to both widebody and regional jet profitablity.

L shaped recovery is more like it. Tell we see what summer 2021 looks like..

So for us new guys who are still under the bonus agreement, it does state that we are not required to repay anything if we are terminated without cause. So if the airline shutters we are off the hook.

If it survives and we spend a year on furlough, I don’t believe that will count toward the 24 months because it requires “active service as a pilot.”

I also don’t think some asset shift to combine us with C5 could keep us on the hook, but who knows. They could try to TSA us and change the rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A defunct company won’t come after you for a little bonus. This will be a question of solvency and cash flow. Minimal revenue coupled massive fiscal liabilities will be the nail in the coffin. Once the furlough happens everyone that will be left will be maxed out on pay scale, 401k match and 4 weeks vacation given the group is so senior. And that’s across the board in all labor groups, lots of senior people. This is no bueno.

This is true although if the group is prepared to take concessions then it could be viable in the short term. Although, not sure any pilot group is prepared to do that right now.

Qualitatively that is true. Nothing is going to make bookings roar back to 2019 ... 4 times higher than they are now. But a vaccine could certainly make them double in December rather than June, which might make the difference

only if that includes a bay tour in 452 or 696!

If there is any constant in the universe it's the short memory of Americans. The second we have a vaccine that works, assuming that ever happens, people are going to take it and not look back. Six months after that everyone will be saying "hey, remember that big virus scare we had?" as they go back to wiping their ass and then touching their toothbrush without bothering to wash up first.

.
Yep, and travel will eventually return to 2019 levels. However by then XJT will be long gone and the 50 seat jet will be retired next to the ATR and the 120.

Needed this laugh, thanks. It's funny because it's true!

And...



Disgusting!


:eek:


:D

Skywest is trying to (ruin)* you giys? They offer a better product and have the staffing to cover the routes. I’m sorry but you guys (*did this) yourself, take some responsibility

You don't work here and, as such, really don't know what you're talking about. SKYW created a Frankenstein with the hatchet job they did of merging us with ASA. They never shepherded that process or were even present. Then they got ****ed and started bleeding us dry when, surprise, surprise, the merged company didn't perform to expectations. None of this, by the way, was the fault of front-line XJT employees. We're all probably going to lose our jobs now. So why don't you pound sand.

You are clueless.
You are either uneducated regarding our history with Skywest or willfully ignorant. Our downfall began when CALs Smisek began trying to diversify their feed and cut costs by gutting our cpa. Prior to that we had impeccable stats as an airline and were universally praised.
Skywest gets a lot of positive press because they keep Wall Street happy. As an airline, they are simply average.
Try the search function. You might be surprised by what you find.

You are either a Skywest shill or ****ing clueless as to history.

everyone has the staffing now to cover their flying. Second thing is better product. Skywest has a different product, not better. Up until very recently United was using 50 seat jets like no tomorrow. In a few months they will want more 50 seaters when they have to park most of your large RJs due to scope.

Picking on Skypest is fun but not particularly helpful. The fact is (as you mentioned) United was planning almost 200 50 seaters based East of the Mississippi River at the beginning of the year. The only question was finding enough crews to fly them. Now Kirby says no 50 seaters will survive COVID-19. Logic seems to dictate the truth will be somewhere in the middle. But until we know it is hard to guess at the future of EV, C5 or ZW.

He’ll need scope concessions to get his wish granted. That genie is firmly bottled at the bottom of the sea.

I agree, there is a lot of unknown. If United gets their way in scope relief through court or the pilots expect Skywest to grow, if not expect them to get hit the hardest once the look back period forces significantly less large RJs. No one can predict the future but either way it will be interesting.

Does the look back period set a limit to large RJs? I can't find any sources for that other than RJ can be a max of 90% of NB flying (but no data on what the mix of large RJ to 50 seater has to be).

It doesn’t. The look back is UAX vs mainline NB flying. The large RJs are scopes out in terms of number of hulls but there is no provision for mix.

I assume that whatever departures UAX will do come fall is mostly large RJs and 50 seaters going away.

Yeah that's the crux of it. If they're going to be capped on total RJ flying due to reduced NB flying, will they want the 50's or the 70's?

If they won't have enough RJ's overall and something has to give, they'll want to cut service to smaller regional destinations, not larger regional destinations. Simple revenue math.

BK is the only help for that, no major pilot group that I can see has any appetite to grant relief on scope or much of anything else right now. I suspect UA (and the others) will try hard to stay out of BK for about one year if they can, to try to catch a possible economic rebound wave.

it’s going to be a total of 153 76 seaters and 50 seaters are limited at 90% of NB planes. Right now they have roughly 230 76/70 seaters and who knows how many 50 seaters. They will have to cut roughly 75 70/76 seater out which are currently flying. They have parked a whole bunch of 50 seaters but will still have scope room to pull thwm
back into service while being forced to park the larger ones. There is also a percentage cap of uax to Mainline NB which will be 120%. They may be able to cover that with just 70/76 seaters at the 153 cap but I doubt it. It’s all still fuzzy how it will play out

there is NO requirement to pull any 70/76 seaters. The only requirement affecting that fleet is to pull 6 seats from the 76 seaters if furloughs are going deeper at UA.

The only cap relative to mainline flying is on total UAX hulls. So they can pull either 50 seater or 70/76 seater.

my money is on UA keeping the large RJs

So how come before the pandemic 70-seaters were maxed out and 50-seaters weren’t? I don’t know the details of UA’s scope limits, but from my understanding there is a different limit for 76-seaters, 70-seaters, and 50-seaters, isn’t there?

after 153 76/70 seaters the number is tied to to NB planes. That is why they will have to pull.

All i heard is the problem is solved by pulling 6 seats out of the 76 seat Jets, and parking 50 seaters...( except prorate 50 seaters)....

No - google United pilot agreement, read

1-C-1-a-(2) and report back

Did you read 1-C-1-f and g?

That is mostly in relation to a NEW small NB aircraft, ie E195 or A220

the limitation in 1-C-1-f is likely not gonna matter as 76 seat block hours can be 120% of NB block hours.

You seem to know a lot more about scope than me, so I’ll take your word for it. I still don’t see all 50-seaters going away, question is who will fly them.

i see most “CPA” 50 seaters going away.... Prorate 50 seaters will grow..

Could be.

Not under scope, but it expands the mainline brand, service fotprint, and some revenue. Kind of a win-win.

all UAX flying falls under scope - EAS/pro-rate or not doesn’t matter. As long as it is marketed under UAX it is subject to scope.

thats the point. Its not. Prorate they do there own marketing... the city's provide marketing capital, adds billboards ect...and “x” amount of funds to guarantee service...