SonicFlyer

The unions wouldn't let them do that to us

ninerdriver

Shouldn't you be plotting to kidnap a governor somewhere?

Hedley

Prior to COVID regional block ran 85-90% of mainline block. UAX was scoped out on the big rj’s, and the company really didn’t want that many 50 seaters, but scope left them the choice of more mainline, or more 50 seaters. In the last 4-5 months express has been flying way over 120% because of the history of being under 100%. With mainline greatly reduced, express will have to stay below mainline NB block until the LOA terminates. United will maximize the use of the bigger rj’s, and this could alter the timeline for the reduction of the 50 seaters. Until United is running a full schedule, UAX will be given less flying. If they have to make a decision to reduce 70 seat hours (all 76 seat jets have to be converted to 70 while mainline is on reduced work) or 50 seat flying, my money says that it is the 50 seat fleet that takes the biggest hit. If this LOA is short lived, UAX could go back to what it was, if this drags on, the company will likely permanently alter the fleet mix and retire the 756 and all but a few 50 seaters. Grab a beer and pop some popcorn, it should be an interesting show. The carnage isn’t over yet.

JediCheese

I agree up to a point.

The only variable that I don't know about is when the slot program at several major airports resumes. With reduced traffic, it's cheaper to run a 50 seat flight on a route that you have no interest in flying than a 70 seater. Especially if you're using the 70 seaters on profitable routes.

Hedley

I don’t know what the route structure will look like and how much it will change. We may stop flying 6 flights a day from a hub to LHR in a 767 and run 4 in a 777. We could stop running 6 flights a day on a 175 and run 4 in a 319 or 737-700. We may stop serving very small towns like CLL or HYS. We could end up back to where we were, or with reduced frequency on bigger planes and give up unneeded slots. There will probably be a difference in the near term, and post recovery as well. This could easily accelerate the phase out of different fleets. Just like 9/11 got rid of 727’s, DC-10’s, and most turboprops, this could be the gas on the fire that accelerates how both the legacy and regional fleets change. I really don’t see any older fleet at the legacies or regionals as something that stands a good chance of being here in several years. My money is on an airline industry that looks different than what it did a year ago.

JediCheese

Fuel costs post 9/11 got rid of many older airframes. When oil is 100+ a barrel, it's hard to justify flying an inefficient airplane vs buying a nice new A320/737 that's efficient. Might as well wonder why there's no 737 classics in anyone's fleet.

Airframes get cheaper to operate and larger over time, but the same hub and spoke ideas continue on. Ask United how giving up slots and space at JFK and LGA are working out for them. Unless the airlines absolutely need to save cash to survive, they'll need those slots long term and filling them with cheap packing peanut flights allows the airlines to hold onto those valuable slots.

Excargodog

SWA, F9, and NK are FIGHTING for those gates and slots, in the case of NK quite literally. They have a longstanding court case going over some slots in EWR.

https://www.courthousenews.com/spiri...k-airport/amp/

All three of the Big Three are going to be downsized. They’ve said that. All three have reduced the number of types of aircraft in their fleets. While this pandemic has been a disaster for everyone it is certainly less damaging to the LCC/ULCC crowd, h€||, Allegiant is planning on BUYING aircraft while they are so cheap.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...argains-abound


So yeah, very different indeed.

Hedley

You are right about the fuel cost being a huge driving force that isn’t there right now. The market is also going to be full of deals on used mainline sized planes for a while and both the used and new markets will have some deals. I still see big changes in the next few years. The 756 is getting old. The Max and 321 orders will take care of the 757 fleet, but there really isn’t a 767 replacement that they like. The 787 is a great machine, but expensive. On the regional side, both 50 seat fleets are aging as well, there isn’t a replacement, and there are only so many 700’s to convert into 550’s. Since scope is maxed out and a good sized chunk of the regional fleet is getting really old with no real replacement option, coupled with how unpopular they are with our customers, the regional side of the house will probably be seeing changes in the next few years as well. Kirby has said that he will be looking for opportunities and weaknesses in our competition as we come out of this. U-ALPA has dug in its heels on enhancing scope protections, not eroding them. United could get more 175’s and improve the regional product by adding a new NB mainline fleet, but so far they aren’t interested in that option. It should be an interesting show.

da42pilot

AA’s deal with Jetblue and Alaska essentially bypasses scope altogether. This leaves United and Delta without a date, but makes
you wonder if they could bring back TED and Song...

Excargodog

Hub and spoke works until it doesn’t. Until business and international flying rebounds, flying in the hubs is going to be way down. And while yes, the Big Three have long used their regionals to occupy gates so they could lock competitors out of a hub but unlike Alaska, they all do have scope clauses and for most of these cutbacks in NB aircraft flying will cause a cutback in allowed Regional flying as well. And the Big Three right now are sort of in survival mode - they really can’t afford it. Both Delta and United have recently released financial reports and they are still bleeding money. American has debt of over $40 BILLION and it is increasing every day. Sure, if the pax are there they could and would do it - right up to the scope limits - but right now the pax aren’t there and they don’t have the money to defend many gates or slots they can’t economically utilize.