piloto2

Yes, he said that in an earlier town hall. But just a couple of days ago he walked that back a little in another town hall. I'm not going to post the video of that or transcribe it, but here is a good synopsis from another poster: "He answered a fleet question and he said that if the demand is down 30% at the end of the year and expected to stay, that the 757 is most likely gone. He then said that if the 757 goes, then the 767 probably will too. If the demand worsens or stays depressed for an extended period of time the Airbus fleet would follow. He then said that he really doesn’t want to get rid of the 757 or 767 and that they would have to look at it then. He then said that the 50 seat flying will see a “significant reduction” under any scenario. He didn’t define what he meant by significant, what model of 50 seaters would be targeted first, or when this will begin."

I'd call eliminating 1/2-2/3 a significant reduction and that could easily be done by getting rid of all the CRJ200s, maybe the LRs, and just keeping the XRs around. Who knows on the 550s....maybe just keep the ones that are already converted. The question is, who will be operating this reduced fleet. Would they all go to a single regional, or maybe two?

HighWingingIt

Merge us with C5 and retire all LRs. IAH/ORD/DEN/IAD??? GoJet ORD/EWR? ZW? Will they be around? Them closing IAD doesn’t look good imo. One thing I would say is Skywest probably isn’t won’t be going anywhere other than some small reduction of the -200’s.

itsmytime

agreed. Doesn’t look good for ZW, as they are the only airline closing bases. Don’t know how the rest shakes out, but xjt survives under any scenario. Don’t know what they will be flying, but they will be there.

TT15

We don’t know what we don’t know! ZW has money and owns all of their jets... they may be left in the dust but they may find a way to survive. They have done that before. My point is this...none of us knows what will happen... we can guess and speculate all day long but none of us are privy to the details that are being discussed in Willis Tower or the regional airlines’ C Suites...my only advice..plan for the worst, hope for the best. That said, I believe SK’s statement that 50 seaters are going away. SK didn’t state a timeline; I doubt the 50 seaters will disappear on Oct 1st...but in 3 years...UA may not have any 50 seaters.

Itsajob

The only thing that XJT has are 50 seaters, and we all know the apparent plan for them. Why do they survive under any scenario? The money that United spent investing in any regional is water under the bridge at this point. If preserving cash and controlling cost is king going forward, wouldn’t it be less costly to keep the 76 seaters where they are and just let XJT and Air Wisconsin go away? All bets are off at this point, and I really don’t think that United has a preferred regional, they just want the job done at a competitive price. The companies currently operating the planes that United actually want to keep are already doing that. If United decided that there were to be 75 (just making up a number for an example) 50 seat rj’s left in the system, XJT would be in the running for those I guess. Serious question, not trying to anger or stir the pot.

GregD

As has been pointed out numerous times, nobody knows the apparent plan right now, Kirby included! He discussed a range of options. Who knows, he may be setting up something to do with scope. Why do they survive? As Kirby restated in his last town hall, there will likely be a significant reduction in 50 seat flying after this is over. That's not the same as altogether gone, at least for the foreseeable future. There is still a market, albiet small, for the 50 seat jets. You also fail to mention that there are three other regionals besides XJT and AWAC that fly 50 seat jets in the UAL system. What makes you think that they are somehow immune to all of this?

itsmytime

i just think United’s investment in them carries more weight than you do. Not angry at all, just my opinion. I might be wrong, wouldn’t be the first time.

Itsajob

I was replying to a previous post where it was said, “but xjt survives under any scenario. Don’t know what they will be flying, but they will be there”. My question was about why they thought that XJT is any different than any other regional. They are staring down the same barrel that everyone else is. What puts them in greater risk than a company like SkyWest is that they only operate a fleet that has been slated for a significant drawdown. United could decide that the 50 seaters that SkyWest currently operates are to be the survivors, or they could decide that the ones that XJT operates are. The 50 seat fleet isn’t getting any younger, there still isn’t a replacement, and people still hate them. I think that the bulk of them will be gone within a couple of years, with the rest to be phased out after that. Small markets used to be served by 19 seat turboprops, those are gone now, and in time, the 50 seat jets will also.

TFAYD

UA invested in C5 because they wanted to save their 145 flying as SKYW was winding down XJT. Once it became clear that C5 couldn’t pull it off they had to buy XJT to rescue the 50 seat feed and to have some BATNA in future negotiations with other regionals.

That is all a non issue. I would assume they will keep whatever 50 seat flying they end up keeping with XJT but there is no need to consolidate anything.

TFAYD

In all fairness, EMB120 flying wasn’t phased out at SKYW until 2015. Allegedly because MX became an issue - getting a reliable supply of parts - not because PAX hated them.