Mrj 70/90
04-27-2019, 06:33 AM
#41
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,275
Originally Posted by dera
Really?
How does PSA fit in your scenario? They are in the top third in pay right now, and have SAP for lineholders.
How does PSA fit in your scenario? They are in the top third in pay right now, and have SAP for lineholders.
04-27-2019, 09:54 AM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2017
Position: 175 CA
Posts: 1,285
Originally Posted by No Land 3
PSA may have really good QOL, but if I want a job at AA, why should I basically take a huge pay cut to go to PSA for the chance of getting an AA flow? That's B scale. I should be able to continue flying the 747 if I wanted to apply to AA(I don't) without having to go to a regional! You don't see the problem because of where you sit, but you are basically doing the same exact job as mainline for a fraction of the pay, benefits, QOL. And don't say they do off the street hires, we all know the percentages.
I personally do not know of a single non-mil person hired at AA OTS and wouldn't like my chances at it. If you can't take the time at a WO regional I would write off AA for better chances at DL or UA.
04-27-2019, 10:00 AM
#43
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,289
Originally Posted by Varsity
AA hired 2, yes 2. OTS hires without .mil background in January.
I personally do not know of a single non-mil person hired at AA OTS and wouldn't like my chances at it. If you can't take the time at a WO regional I would write off AA for better chances at DL or UA.
I personally do not know of a single non-mil person hired at AA OTS and wouldn't like my chances at it. If you can't take the time at a WO regional I would write off AA for better chances at DL or UA.
04-27-2019, 10:02 AM
#44
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,289
Originally Posted by dera
Your argument makes no sense.
You're saying a regional providing feed for a mainline is fine, but if there's a flow between them, suddenly it becomes disgusting?
You're saying a regional providing feed for a mainline is fine, but if there's a flow between them, suddenly it becomes disgusting?
04-27-2019, 11:28 AM
#45
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2019
Position: 175 CA
Posts: 101
Originally Posted by dera
Really?
How does PSA fit in your scenario? They are in the top third in pay right now, and have SAP for lineholders.
How does PSA fit in your scenario? They are in the top third in pay right now, and have SAP for lineholders.
04-27-2019, 11:32 AM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Position: FO
Posts: 793
Mrj 70/90
Originally Posted by MuPpET
Lmfao. You'll always be known for voting in concessions and as a scum airline, not for getting lucky and having management throw money at you out of their own necessity. Just saying.
is not at PSA buddy.
I hope this thread does not deviate from title
04-27-2019, 04:47 PM
#48
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 79
The MRJ brochure lists the MRJ90STD as having a MTOW of 87,303 lbs, giving a range of 1,150 NM with 88 pax.
If we take out 12 pax and their seats, shave 1,303 lbs off the MTOW, we now have a scope compliant RJ with geared fans and a larger cabin than the E175.
A loss of 1,300 lbs from the MTOW is more than made up for by the lower pax count. It won't have huge range (good!), but it will have enough.
This plane could become THE next regional jet with current scope intact.
If we take out 12 pax and their seats, shave 1,303 lbs off the MTOW, we now have a scope compliant RJ with geared fans and a larger cabin than the E175.
A loss of 1,300 lbs from the MTOW is more than made up for by the lower pax count. It won't have huge range (good!), but it will have enough.
This plane could become THE next regional jet with current scope intact.
04-27-2019, 05:46 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Position: sideways
Posts: 294
Originally Posted by Bloggs
The MRJ brochure lists the MRJ90STD as having a MTOW of 87,303 lbs, giving a range of 1,150 NM with 88 pax.
If we take out 12 pax and their seats, shave 1,303 lbs off the MTOW, we now have a scope compliant RJ with geared fans and a larger cabin than the E175.
A loss of 1,300 lbs from the MTOW is more than made up for by the lower pax count. It won't have huge range (good!), but it will have enough.
This plane could become THE next regional jet with current scope intact.
If we take out 12 pax and their seats, shave 1,303 lbs off the MTOW, we now have a scope compliant RJ with geared fans and a larger cabin than the E175.
A loss of 1,300 lbs from the MTOW is more than made up for by the lower pax count. It won't have huge range (good!), but it will have enough.
This plane could become THE next regional jet with current scope intact.
04-27-2019, 06:10 PM
#50
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,275
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Yeah, I don't get it either?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
