![]() |
Originally Posted by pangolin
(Post 3527259)
You guys are missing the point. The hiring at the majors is going to slow. This is a temporary surge to replace the covid losses. It’s already changing.
|
Originally Posted by Throwitaway
(Post 3528876)
Pangolin is right, a major has 1000 (max) retiring per year and they are able to train 2000. The airlines are absolutely replacing the covid early outs and catching up with retirements. The hiring will not be this crazy 2 years from now. Legacy Airline jobs will be harder to come by. Let's hope we get these contracts hammered out before that happens and we lose any shred of leverage currently held.
https://i.ibb.co/NNgmXx1/E504-F7-FA-...AB285-F4-D.jpg Most current hiring at legacies only covers their incentivized early retirements for COVID. The majors will need to replace their FUTURE retirees and staff those new aircraft while the ULCCs (including all the new kids on the block) and LCCs continue their own expansions. And the regionals have already nearly exhausted the DEC supply. |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3529011)
i disagree. Look at the order books for new narrow bodies at the majors. Then look at those at the regionals.
https://i.ibb.co/NNgmXx1/E504-F7-FA-...AB285-F4-D.jpg |
Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1
(Post 3529017)
All those orders are not all growth. A lot are to replace aging fleets. Think about all the 757 and 767 delta and United are going to retire in the next 5ish years. They also have older 320 and 737 they are probably looking to replace by the time these narrow bodies roll in.
For the ULCCs and new majors like Breeze, it’s entirely expansion. Do some research. |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3529023)
Read their information for investors. Yeah, they have some old aircraft, but not nearly as many as they did before they trimmed their fleets during COVID. BUT MUCH IS FOR EXPANSION.
For the ULCCs and new majors like Breeze, it’s entirely expansion. Do some research. |
Originally Posted by Reader
(Post 3527707)
The problem there is that you’re going up against math with wishful thinking.
There is, by regulation, a hard cap on how much flying can be done. The number of captains is dictating where the cap is set. You talk about keeping the ball rolling, but what you describe is an airline forced to continually shrink. That is, by definition, not sustainable. A few more obviously doesn’t equate to expansion, it equates to reducing the rate of the shrinkage. You need some more to get back to even. Expansion? That takes even MORE |
Originally Posted by pangolin
(Post 3529095)
Every fo you upgrade to ca IS more fo flying allowing more FOs to upgrade.
Every fo isn’t starting at zero. It’s going to take some time to recover but it’s not a negative death spiral. |
Another FO that upgrades is now just a Captain with his apps out…. Its a never ending cycle. The question is where do you get on and off the “lazy river” at the water park…
|
An interesting thought experiment is "Imagine the regional industry is stable then transitions to unsustainable pilot losses. What would that look like?"
Another thought experiment "If the regional model of February 2019 is not sustainable, is there a smaller model that is?" IE, how many ASM/year can be sold sustainably paying current labor rates and how many airframes does that translate to." If you assume the US can support, say two hundred 76-seat jets, what does that look like? |
Originally Posted by WHACKMASTER
(Post 3525598)
I’ve flown both of those jets and the 737 is certainly a less friendly place for a 1500 new to 121 pilot.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:11 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands