Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

90 Seat Regional Jets

Old 01-11-2006, 12:18 PM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
ryane946's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: FO, looking left
Posts: 1,057
Default 90 Seat Regional Jets

I believe that regionals should be limited to 70 seat aircraft.
I am trying to find out what regional airlines fly aircraft with more than 70 seats but less than say 110 seats.
I know Air Wisconsin flies the BAE-146
I know Mesa flies the CRJ-900
I know JetBlue flies the EMB-190
I saw Republic has a pay scale for the EMB-190, but do they actually own any, or are they on order?
Any other regionals that fly aircraft with 70-110 seats and give regional airline pay?
Thanks a lot
ryane946 is offline  
Old 01-11-2006, 02:00 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Eric Stratton's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Default

What's a regional jet?

Was Indy Air's airbus a regional? It was flown by a regional.

Was northwest's old DC-9-10 a regional. It held less than an 190 and had less range. It even had less range then some 50 seaters.

The regionals will fly any airplane that the majors give up in scope.
Eric Stratton is offline  
Old 01-11-2006, 03:18 PM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 137
Default

Jetblue isn't a regional...I think I know what you mean, but today a regional is alot different than it used to be.....instead of saab's, DH8, BE1900, its CRJ900 E170, etc.
supercell86 is offline  
Old 01-11-2006, 03:27 PM
  #4  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 40
Default

Employees should stay away from telling employers what type of equipment it should operate. Can you name a successful company, or even an industry, that has been successful when the employees dictate to the management and even the companies' founders what kind of equipment they can operate (i.e. scope clauses), what they will pay the employees to operate it, and when and how they will work (work rules)?? Can you name any?

If that is your desire, start your own business. Never outside of the airline industry have I heard employees who felt it was their right to run the company. If you are capable of running a business then do it. But when you seek employment at the door of another man, then let that man decide how and where to make the profits.
sarcasticspasti is offline  
Old 01-13-2006, 08:00 AM
  #5  
flier2005
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

i think i am missing your point. please explain why you feel they should be limited to 70 seats?
 
Old 01-13-2006, 08:24 AM
  #6  
done, gone skiing
 
dckozak's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Rocking chair
Posts: 1,601
Lightbulb wouldn't it be nice..........

Originally Posted by sarcasticspasti
............the employees dictate to the management and even the companies' founders what kind of equipment they can operate (i.e. scope clauses), what they will pay the employees to operate it, and when and how they will work (work rules)?? Can you name any?
Like to hear your feelings on scope when JB starts flying to Barcelona with Spanish pilots!!

Last edited by dckozak; 01-14-2006 at 07:33 AM.
dckozak is offline  
Old 01-13-2006, 09:25 AM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Laxrox43's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: A320/321 FO
Posts: 1,114
Default

Flier2005,
No kidding...Why should there be limited on how many seats they fill?! And I concur, regionals use to be T-props only. The definition has changed somewhat over the years. (T-props to RJ's)

On a side note, the reason why they are operating a/c with more seats is because of money. Let me give you an example: My dad told me that in a 50-seat RJ, typically the first 20 seats pay for operating cost, fuel, the 'whole nine' and the last 30 seats are basically profit. RJ's operating cost/maint expenses/etc. cost just a little more then the equivelant sized T-prop commutor, BUT they have longer range, and get you there faster. Anyways, I could go on and on, but here's the bottom line...The more seats there are to fill, the more money. Companies like dollar signs!!!

Thats how I understand the whole gambit. If I am wrong, somebody please correct me.

D
Laxrox43 is offline  
Old 01-13-2006, 09:26 AM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Eric Stratton's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Default

Originally Posted by sarcasticspasti
Employees should stay away from telling employers what type of equipment it should operate. Can you name a successful company, or even an industry, that has been successful when the employees dictate to the management and even the companies' founders what kind of equipment they can operate (i.e. scope clauses), what they will pay the employees to operate it, and when and how they will work (work rules)?? Can you name any?

If that is your desire, start your own business. Never outside of the airline industry have I heard employees who felt it was their right to run the company. If you are capable of running a business then do it. But when you seek employment at the door of another man, then let that man decide how and where to make the profits.
When has scope ever not allowed the airline to operate any type of airplane that they want?

Name me any airline that can't fly whatever they want. If a regional wants to fly bigger equipement then go ahead and try. They might lose some agreement with a major that they do business with but they can do it if they want. (ie when delta pulled away from ACA because they got airbuses)

Northwest believes that 76-100 seat airplanes are going to save their company. If this is true they why don't they go out and get some. Nothing is stopping them. There is nothing in Northwest scope clause that says they can't buy even a 2 seat jet.
Eric Stratton is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 12:32 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
dash8driver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 101
Default

i checked the specs on the new DHC-8-400Q, on a 300nm route it only needs to fill 35 seats to break even...
I'd like to know how a 50 seat RJ can fill 20 seats and break even when they use twice the gas ? Sorry but thats not making too much sense to me.....
They may get you there faster but with fuel prices the way they are, my money is on the turbo props....
dash8driver is offline  
Old 01-16-2006, 06:19 PM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 7ER B...whatever that means.
Posts: 3,964
Default

Originally Posted by dash8driver
They may get you there faster but with fuel prices the way they are, my money is on the turbo props....
Sounds like the airlines are starting to feel that way too. Horizon converted all of their remiaing CRJ-700 deliveries to Q400s didn't they? I have a feeling Expressjet and Skywest are about to see a turn in their fortunes. I'm also curious how fast Eagle is going to continue to pull T-props from their fleet.
freezingflyboy is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Gordon C
Major
5
11-20-2018 11:58 PM
Future Furlough
Regional
2
01-06-2006 07:26 PM
Delta102
Hangar Talk
1
11-18-2005 08:30 AM
Lennon
JetBlue
0
07-01-2005 07:27 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