I Love PSA
#1941
900s would make more sense. It is more fuel efficient than the 170/175 and the training cost is pretty much non existent. Not only for pilots but also the maintenance and flight attendants. Passengers do prefer the Embraers but we don't have enough gates in E concourse to accommodate them. But the ultimate decision may lie with bombardier and embraer. The management is whipsawing them as they are whipsawing AE and PSA and probably PDT next.
I personally agree with skyx, 900s are a no brainer cost wise. Even more 700s to replace the aging 200s. Maybe replace all 200s with 700s then add 900s over and above the 49 a/c PSA has? Unless Parker has a big banana in the pants for the 170s since passengers like them so much. Regardless of where the A/C go I wonder if they will be wifi equipped and have features like the new RAH 170s.
#1945
Guest
Posts: n/a
And train eagle pilots on a new type (145 pilots now 700) which costs $$$ and train PSA guys on a new type? (170) Way too much $$$. If we get 170s or 900s they are either in addition to what we have or replacing the 200s. Keeping them at PSA reduces training costs, when we hire they'll be typed in whatever, leftover from seniority bids to the new aircraft.
#1946
And train eagle pilots on a new type (145 pilots now 700) which costs $$$ and train PSA guys on a new type? (170) Way too much $$$. If we get 170s or 900s they are either in addition to what we have or replacing the 200s. Keeping them at PSA reduces training costs, when we hire they'll be typed in whatever, leftover from seniority bids to the new aircraft.
Any way they do it will cost too much $$$$. The best way is give them to PDT and eliminate the Dash8.
#1948
Line Holder
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
From: The Parlor
#1950
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



