So you judge all of us based on about 10 guys who have 1000 posts on a forum? How many have you talked to in person? I don't judge you by what Captain Tony and JoeMerchant spout daily. Annoying, ignorant, and yes, definitely immature.

This battle between the two sides, while mostly just blowhards on an online message board, needs to end. It benefits no one.

 

Nothing like ad hominem followed by wishing ill on an entire pilot group, eh folks?

 

The amount of 50 seaters needs to go. But sadly, just like the turboprops, the 50 seat frame will always have it's place. Just not nearly on the scale it has now, the scale that legacy management was able to exploit in the wake of 9/11 and the BK's. After all, you can't run a 737/Airbus, or even a 70 seat airframe into all markets all the time. Or, use it as a supplement to markets that have a 70-90 seat type.

But just so we're clear, you ACTUALLY want bigger airframes at the regional level? You think that's "sick"?

SJS anyone?

 

Are you really serious? If you know it is immature then grow up a little. Obviously you are looking to flame bait the L-Xjt guys. This was your second post saying the same nonsense. You do realize that United also uses the E-170's right? Why wouldn't they trade the 145 for those? Either way this is not good for industry.

 

Agreed.

Besides, remember that joke (based on truth) about what Embraer would say when the old XJT management would ask if they'd re-spool up the XR production line?

EMB Rep: "no, but we can get you some great deals on EMB170's or 190's"

 

He is a bit confused!

 

Remains to be seen whether it is a step in the right direction for the industry (a la DAL TA reducing total RJ airframes and block hours) because we haven't seen the text of the UAL TA.

However, there are a few points on which Bombardier has the upper hand over Embraer:

• Delivery schedules. Bombardier can get new airframes online much quicker than Embraer right now because of the E190 backlog.
• Training costs. ASA would have to set up a whole new training department for a new aircraft type, eliminating any fleet synergies.
• SKYW relationship with Bombardier and resultant unit cost efficiencies by increasing its CRJ fleet size.

Word at the GO is the ERJs will be exiting as soon as mid-2013 and replaced with the largest CRJ UAL scope will allow. The biggest hurdle right now they said is that Bombardier has reduced production to 2.5 units/month, but can flex that back up to 3.5 to 4 units/month if a large order comes in, allowing for a steady replacement schedule.

They've also tossed around the idea of getting an additional CR7 sim at the ATL training center and trimming down to two CR2 sims, as well as getting a CR7 initial training program (as opposed to CR2 initial + differences) approved due to the volume of CR7/9 training that will be occurring. It all kind of fits into what we've been seeing lately...

 

Who are they?

 

Linda

Pete

Art

 

As a stagnant CRJ guy, I'd like to see some growth, but not at the expense of the ERJ guys. So ERJs get parked and we get new, big CRJs because we're cheaper and we're getting excited about that? The regional whipsaw game is exactly what's wrong with our segment of the industry, so we take offense when GoJet gets some of "our" flying, but we're more than happy to grow while L-Xjet parks planes?