skywest not hiring?
02-17-2008, 04:28 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by fatmike69
Tough to call....but I would say it probably won't just be limited to Skywest. I think all carriers of the 50 seat RJ are probably going to start feeling the pinch on cutbacks. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Comair is getting cutbacks on their 200's, as well as Skywest. With age 65, the large pool at Southwest, etc, I would say that hiring at the major levels will affect attrition at the regionals. Combine that with less growth and aircraft cuts at the regional level, I think it will be felt industry wide. However, that said, I think that RAH is in a much better strategic position than most just due to their fleet makeup (E170's, E190's...). While Skywest, ASA, Comair have much more 200's than any other plane, RAH is pretty evenly distributed between the smaller RJ's and the larger ones. Just my opinion though.
02-17-2008, 04:41 PM
#13
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,277
Originally Posted by flyboyzz1
Agree with this except I think the E-jet, when the stuff hits the fan, will not be viewed as such a great plane due to higher fuel burn...what do I know though.
02-17-2008, 07:05 PM
#14
*********
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,068
Originally Posted by Koolaidman
I heard RAH has 190's and is looking for someone to fly them for. Is that true?
Someone from RAH would know more than me, but I think they could come as early as the end of this year/beginning of next.
02-17-2008, 07:25 PM
#15
Che Guevara
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ght=boyd+group
As far as staffing goes we are getting better but I'm still thinking we're far from where they'd like to be. So long as I keep seeing two CA's flying the same aircraft we aren't there yet. We very rarely have reservist available by any means.
As far as staffing goes we are getting better but I'm still thinking we're far from where they'd like to be. So long as I keep seeing two CA's flying the same aircraft we aren't there yet. We very rarely have reservist available by any means.
02-17-2008, 07:26 PM
#16
Che Guevara
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
Originally Posted by paxhauler85
As I understand it, some of their 170 options can be converted to 190's if they so choose.
Someone from RAH would know more than me, but I think they could come as early as the end of this year/beginning of next.
Someone from RAH would know more than me, but I think they could come as early as the end of this year/beginning of next.
02-17-2008, 08:07 PM
#17
Gets Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: On Top
Posts: 742
In my humble opinion the cards are laid out for an industry slow down in hiring....
Age 65
Oil Prices
Mergers and consolidations
Fleet retirements and replacements
Here at XJT we've been hiring into a pool for a while with classes not resuming 'til April (subject to change ofcourse), and the same thing with upgrades...all based on attrition at this point.
Age 65
Oil Prices
Mergers and consolidations
Fleet retirements and replacements
Here at XJT we've been hiring into a pool for a while with classes not resuming 'til April (subject to change ofcourse), and the same thing with upgrades...all based on attrition at this point.
Last edited by Bond; 02-17-2008 at 08:13 PM.
02-17-2008, 08:53 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,425
Originally Posted by flyboyzz1
the E170/90 burn way more fuel the the CRJ700/900 too bad everyone has a woody for em
If fuel burn was their primary concern we'd see a lot more RFP's for TP's on the table IMO like the Colgan Q400 one instead of the numerous -900 RFP's.
The 170's really spanked the CRJ. While my company operates only CRJ's, thankfully they don't have the size of fleet like the "major" regionals do. Personally I see the 170's doing most of the domestic RJ flying in the future.
02-17-2008, 10:21 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: left seat regional
Posts: 146
Originally Posted by fosters
And the RJ's burn way more fuel (and I mean WAY MORE) than the comparable turboprops yet the majors haven't given serious thought to go back to them. CAL is the only one, with the majority of the majors issuing RFP's for large RJ's.
If fuel burn was their primary concern we'd see a lot more RFP's for TP's on the table IMO like the Colgan Q400 one instead of the numerous -900 RFP's.
If fuel burn was their primary concern we'd see a lot more RFP's for TP's on the table IMO like the Colgan Q400 one instead of the numerous -900 RFP's.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
