REAL timeline & quantities of E-175’s??
#21
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 205
Likes: 9
AG is in a real bind right now. They are still very dependent on the Q400 rout structure to feed AS. It was a great niche in the market. Now it is 2018 and the the ol’ battle ax Q’s life span is coming to an end. What’s more, the flying public wants Jets. Unfortunately for AG, E175s were never designed to be flown in 28 min to 1 hr cycles. Though not their fault, this is going to end up as a big loss for QX.
#22
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Is there any reason that AAG would HAVE TO assign all 30 of these E-jets to QX? Couldn’t some of them still go to OO (in addition to the 35 + 8 already planned to go to OO)? In other words, those 30 E-Jets aren’t QX’s - they’re AAG’s and the original plan was to send them to QX, but there’s no hard & fast reason that AAG couldn’t devise a new plan to reallocate them to OO, right?
The latest public documents show through 2019: 30 E jets with Horizon, 35 E jets plus 8 options with Skywest.
As far as cost goes there is no indication Horizon is more expensive than Skywest. What is different, Skywest very likely has an industry standard CPA that protects their investment in those jets in the form of daily utilization and stage length. In the end it is very expensive for AS to NOT use Skywest on the long routes. I really don't think Skywest cares one way or another if they do short or long legs. Long legs pay well and the financial downside of short legs is mitigated in the CPA.
As far as cost goes there is no indication Horizon is more expensive than Skywest. What is different, Skywest very likely has an industry standard CPA that protects their investment in those jets in the form of daily utilization and stage length. In the end it is very expensive for AS to NOT use Skywest on the long routes. I really don't think Skywest cares one way or another if they do short or long legs. Long legs pay well and the financial downside of short legs is mitigated in the CPA.
#23
Is there any reason that AAG would HAVE TO assign all 30 of these E-jets to QX? Couldn’t some of them still go to OO (in addition to the 35 + 8 already planned to go to OO)? In other words, those 30 E-Jets aren’t QX’s - they’re AAG’s and the original plan was to send them to QX, but there’s no hard & fast reason that AAG couldn’t devise a new plan to reallocate them to OO, right?
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,302
Likes: 2
#29
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Why no HUD/autoland for QX 175’s?
In reading comments here & in seeing announcements about no more service to Mamooth, I can’t help but ask whether 175’s are a good thing for QX or not... Will the shiny new toy fundamentally change who QX is and reduce QX’s ability to feed mainline AS from just about anywhere in any weather? In other words, is QX going to lose its identity through the 175’s and their poor fit for the 28 min jumps?
I want QX to take on 175’s as much as anyone - my biggest & perhaps only reservation about aspiring to work for QX is adverse career progression due to flying the turboprop - but I’m wondering if the overall impact of the 175’s will be negative on QX’s business. Here’s to hoping I’m not seeing the whole picture or looking at this through the right lens??
In reading comments here & in seeing announcements about no more service to Mamooth, I can’t help but ask whether 175’s are a good thing for QX or not... Will the shiny new toy fundamentally change who QX is and reduce QX’s ability to feed mainline AS from just about anywhere in any weather? In other words, is QX going to lose its identity through the 175’s and their poor fit for the 28 min jumps?
I want QX to take on 175’s as much as anyone - my biggest & perhaps only reservation about aspiring to work for QX is adverse career progression due to flying the turboprop - but I’m wondering if the overall impact of the 175’s will be negative on QX’s business. Here’s to hoping I’m not seeing the whole picture or looking at this through the right lens??
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Why no HUD/autoland for QX 175’s?
In reading comments here & in seeing announcements about no more service to Mamooth, I can’t help but ask whether 175’s are a good thing for QX or not... Will the shiny new toy fundamentally change who QX is and reduce QX’s ability to feed mainline AS from just about anywhere in any weather? In other words, is QX going to lose its identity through the 175’s and their poor fit for the 28 min jumps?
I want QX to take on 175’s as much as anyone - my biggest & perhaps only reservation about aspiring to work for QX is adverse career progression due to flying the turboprop - but I’m wondering if the overall impact of the 175’s will be negative on QX’s business. Here’s to hoping I’m not seeing the whole picture or looking at this through the right lens??
In reading comments here & in seeing announcements about no more service to Mamooth, I can’t help but ask whether 175’s are a good thing for QX or not... Will the shiny new toy fundamentally change who QX is and reduce QX’s ability to feed mainline AS from just about anywhere in any weather? In other words, is QX going to lose its identity through the 175’s and their poor fit for the 28 min jumps?
I want QX to take on 175’s as much as anyone - my biggest & perhaps only reservation about aspiring to work for QX is adverse career progression due to flying the turboprop - but I’m wondering if the overall impact of the 175’s will be negative on QX’s business. Here’s to hoping I’m not seeing the whole picture or looking at this through the right lens??
But seriously, being on the Q will not keep you at the regionals because it isn’t keeping people here now is it? Nope they’re off to the green pastures
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



