Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

Mrj 70/90

Old 04-25-2019, 07:30 PM
  #21  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,275
Default

Mainline pilots will never relax on scope ever again. The MRJ is a failure.
No Land 3 is offline  
Old 04-25-2019, 09:05 PM
  #22  
On Reserve
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 12
Default

If that is the case, and 50 seat aircraft are here to stay, what is going to replace the high cycle CRJ200's and E145's?

Is it full cycle and back to props with ATR's or will it be derated larger aircraft like to CRJ700 and MRJ70.

I don't think there are any expectations that aircraft the size of the A220 would ever be considered within the scope at mainline, but if the next generation of RJ's are heavier because of engine technology while remaining 50/76 seats what is actually being given up?
Budgiesmuggler is offline  
Old 04-25-2019, 09:05 PM
  #23  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,409
Default

Originally Posted by No Land 3 View Post
Mainline pilots will never relax on scope ever again. The MRJ is a failure.
Regional airlines have flown large aircraft in the past. DC-9 size anyway. And neither Alaska nor Horizon have scope restrictions.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?i...dq=horizon-air

But regardless, there is nothing in the scope agreements that would preclude someone from starting up a new airline with either MRJs, E2s, A220s, or 777s as long as it wasn’t a codeshare for a 121 with scope.
Excargodog is offline  
Old 04-26-2019, 06:59 AM
  #24  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,100
Default

Originally Posted by Budgiesmuggler View Post
If that is the case, and 50 seat aircraft are here to stay, what is going to replace the high cycle CRJ200's and E145's?

Is it full cycle and back to props with ATR's or will it be derated larger aircraft like to CRJ700 and MRJ70.

I don't think there are any expectations that aircraft the size of the A220 would ever be considered within the scope at mainline, but if the next generation of RJ's are heavier because of engine technology while remaining 50/76 seats what is actually being given up?
RJ's don't *have* to be heavier, in fact both technical advances and the need/desire to be lighter and more efficient should drive the airframe weight down for a given number of seats. Over (scope) weight 70 seat RJ's are due to design challenges, which instead of being addressed holistically were patched with band-aid fixes which added weight. The managers shined it off as a non-issue on the assumption that scope could be readily fixed in their favor.

The 50 seat market is a dilemma... the older designs are not coming back to production, and a new clean-sheet design might be too expensive since the majority of the RJ market has shifted to 70 seaters... might not be enough sales opportunities to pay for a new design. Solution might CRJ550 or an EMB equivalent, or possibly back to props. Props are very fuel efficient, but mainline is convinced that pax still hate "crop dusters" even though the new ones are pretty quiet. IMO Horizon has a good thing going... a significant part of their feed customer base is still used to props... they shouldn't spoil them with RJ's.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 04-26-2019, 07:13 AM
  #25  
Custom User Title
 
AZFlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,268
Default

The rest of the world happily flies on Q400s and ATRs. If US Airlines choose to operate them, then Americans would happily fly on them too.

It's so silly. I'm now flying a 50 seat jet on the same routes that I was previously flying a 50 seat turboprop, only now I'm burning almost twice as much gas to do it!
AZFlyer is offline  
Old 04-26-2019, 07:21 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
pangolin's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Position: CRJ9 CA
Posts: 4,083
Default

Originally Posted by Budgiesmuggler View Post
If that is the case, and 50 seat aircraft are here to stay, what is going to replace the high cycle CRJ200's and E145's?

Is it full cycle and back to props with ATR's or will it be derated larger aircraft like to CRJ700 and MRJ70.

I don't think there are any expectations that aircraft the size of the A220 would ever be considered within the scope at mainline, but if the next generation of RJ's are heavier because of engine technology while remaining 50/76 seats what is actually being given up?
If it would fly mainline would use 100 seaters on regional routes, if it would make and save them a ton of money. They are going to be forced to look at the expense numbers. With higher regional salaries and expenses it’s making more and more sense for the model to end. If fuel ticks up a bit more the 50 seaters will start losing a lot of money. The efficiency of the CS series and the new E2 Embraers will have these planes flying at mainline. I wouldn’t count the Mitsubishi’s as a failure if they are efficient enough. You won’t see regionals flying them but you might see mainline transition to them and kill off the regionals.
pangolin is offline  
Old 04-26-2019, 09:02 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 2,370
Default

Originally Posted by Budgiesmuggler View Post

I don't think there are any expectations that aircraft the size of the A220 would ever be considered within the scope at mainline, but if the next generation of RJ's are heavier because of engine technology while remaining 50/76 seats what is actually being given up?
Aircraft like the EMB-175 were actually already designed to be outside the scope limits. When there was trouble getting a relaxation in scope, the MTOW was artificially adjusted downward to bypass the scope limits, taking advantage of scope requirements that didn't foresee that possibility. What has happened now is the manufacturers have gotten to a point in design where the artificially low weights are no longer feasible.

Anything that increases RJ efficiency is a give by mainline pilots because it reduces regional costs vs mainline costs and further encourages additional outsourcing. If regionals had never been allowed to exist as a pure feeder form the industry and profession world be much different today. Changes are finally happening that put pressure towards higher paid jobs and reducing the ability of airlines to keep wages low for regional pilots by threatening careers if they become "too expensive" and the overwhelming majority of mainline pilots are not willing to give up a single pound or seat in scope to change that.

As it is, the regionals are a very different place than they were 10 years ago, and that is a good thing, but at mainline the focus is still to move as many jobs in house as possible. As retirements continue, this is even more important for everyone.
Baradium is offline  
Old 04-26-2019, 04:58 PM
  #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Position: Upright
Posts: 396
Default

Originally Posted by No Land 3 View Post
Mainline pilots will never relax on scope ever again..
I hope you’re right. Mainline pilots need to grow some brass ones and absolutely not budge on scope. Too bad they ever did to begin with.
CrowneVic is offline  
Old 04-26-2019, 05:14 PM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
pangolin's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Position: CRJ9 CA
Posts: 4,083
Default

Originally Posted by CrowneVic View Post
I hope you’re right. Mainline pilots need to grow some brass ones and absolutely not budge on scope. Too bad they ever did to begin with.
I think your implication is misleading. There was B scale - and that was rejected by the pilot groups so the airlines invented the regional model. There was no scope initially because there was no union involvement. Scope came later and has been gradually and continually tightened. The only gives on Scope have been to receive something - and they have been minimal.

The regionals are evolving to become a feeder of a limited resource - pilots - and that too is becoming unnecessary.
pangolin is offline  
Old 04-26-2019, 05:22 PM
  #30  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,275
Default

I think the mainline pilots should reject flow programs all together, everyone should be off the street. Forcing people to basically work at a B scale until they flow is ridiculous, disgusting, and for all intents and purposes, a true B scale workaround, to have a true B scale.
No Land 3 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Metering
Trans States Airlines
120
02-26-2018 09:37 PM
Skittles9E
Regional
70
07-27-2016 05:50 AM
tom11011
Trans States Airlines
105
02-26-2015 08:53 AM
mtsupilot376
Regional
0
07-15-2014 08:09 AM
trip
Regional
19
12-20-2012 05:38 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices