Originally Posted by BeatNavy

Also from a pilot’s perspective, the 190 is a good plane for short stuff. The 220 is most efficient on routes 2 hours or greater and can’t currently do EYW and MVY. Scott L said a higher thrust variant -300 is coming and will likely be able to do EYW-JFK, but the pavement in MVY is (or was) restricted and won’t allow the -300 apparently. So, where does that leave jetblue from a network perspective. Let RJs fly that stuff with the NEA? Seems like a potential solution…one that I don’t particularly like. -100s are a solution, but it appears even now with the final nail in the 190 coffin, they don’t want -100s.

Originally Posted by avi8orco

Yeah, great for the company. Pilot group, not so much.

I find it funny how many people I've been randomly running into celebrating the 190 going away, especially the MCO base. Notably, a new bus captain upgrade that can just barely hold it that was sitting at the table next to me in the schoolhouse break room recently. He was so thrilled there will be less 190s...clearly he has never considered the sheer mayhem that a displacement in Orlando will produce including getting kicked out of his seat. Not all the 190 pilots both CAs and FOs are going to be able to get on the MCO bus list and many current MCO FOs, on both planes, will get displaced as a result booting others out of the left seat.

Originally Posted by Roy Biggins

BeatNavy, don’t you think we’ll potentially keep a handful of 190’s (up to 30) for some of the reasons you just stated? I kinda always figured that would be the case. I do see some of the analytics you’re taking about with pilot seniority, and yea, some will be affected. Overall though, I can’t see this being anything other than good for us as a whole…especially looking ahead the next 4-5 years.

Originally Posted by BeatNavy

Not necessarily. A 5-7 year guy is senior enough to be left seat with good QOL on the 190. A 3 month guy can have good QOL on the 190 in the right seat. There’s additional bodies required the more fleets there are, because there are more guys in training at any given time, more reserves needed, more management staff needed, more instructors needed, etc. Having a much lower paying fleet is also good because of the wider distribution in seniority and more options for relative seniority. Also, those options were going to get exercised anyway. It was just a matter of time. And keep in mind, they are also replacing 320s as those exit the fleet (as are 321 variants). All in all, it’s good for the company, but there are some advantages to having multiple fleets from the pilot perspective. Having 2 similar paying planes will make upgrades longer, training events fewer, and resultant staffing needs a little lower. Having a 3rd much lower paying plane helped the pilot group.

If there was actual profit sharing given out, I’d use that as an argument for streamlining fleets, as it would have a positive impact to that. But the only argument you could make for pilot benefit is that the company will do better financially this way and better be able to afford more growth and higher pay rates. But, that’s a stretch imo.

Also from a pilot’s perspective, the 190 is a good plane for short stuff. The 220 is most efficient on routes 2 hours or greater and can’t currently do EYW and MVY. Scott L said a higher thrust variant -300 is coming and will likely be able to do EYW-JFK, but the pavement in MVY is (or was) restricted and won’t allow the -300 apparently. So, where does that leave jetblue from a network perspective. Let RJs fly that stuff with the NEA? Seems like a potential solution…one that I don’t particularly like. -100s are a solution, but it appears even now with the final nail in the 190 coffin, they don’t want -100s.

Originally Posted by nuball5

JFK-EYW is bookable during the Christmas season as of now on the A220.

Originally Posted by BeatNavy

I heard the only way it can do it is with a massive weight restriction. Curious what the numbers look like, or if a thrust bump is imminent.

Originally Posted by avi8orco

EYWs pavement limitation for a dual tire landing gear is 125K and Martha's is 108K. I looked up a random BOS to FLL 220 flight release and they were about 85% full, No alternate, took off at almost 142K and landed at 128K with 8K lbs FOB at landing. EYW to BOS or anywhere but MCO/FLL isn't going to work without serious caps, nevermind adding alternate/hold fuel...at least for a -300, high thrust variant if it exists is meaningless for this case.