copied this out of a thread on the Major forum.....unless im reading this wrong...their capacity reductions do NOT include the express side... and actually show an increase? or am I just not awake yet?

Capacity Fourth Quarter Full-year Full-year
(Available Seat Miles) 2008 2008 2009
(Versus FY 2007)

North America -14.5% to -13.5% -8.0% to -7.0% -18.0% to -17.0%
International -4.5% to -3.5% +1.5% to +2.5% -5.0% to -4.0%
Mainline -10.5% to -9.5% -4.0% to -3.0% -12.5% to -11.5%
Express +3.0% to +4.0% Flat to +1.0% +10.0% to +11.0%
Consolidated Domestic -11.5% to -10.5% -6.5% to -5.5% -13.5% to -12.5%
Consolidated -9.0% to -8.0% -3.5% to -2.5% -10.0% to -9.0%

 

Is UAL's scope a 70-seat max? If I were United (not that I condone these moves), I would make use of Air Whiskey and their scope exemption and throw some 86 seaters in place of those 737-500s where the market doesn't fit them.

 

Now that would be interesting but that goes back to the days when AWAC actually flew for UAX. Could be once that contract was gone, so was the exemption.... dunno.

 

Are the percentages increases in flying or increases compared to total fleet utilization? If Mainline capacity was reduced, but Express flying remained to same (or slight increases with previously annouced expansion) would that effectively show as a larger percentage of Expresss flying as a whole?

 

well thats a damn good question that I dont have the answer to.

 

I cannot see UAL growing express much if any since this is geared to reduce costs not add them. 70 seaters are not cost savings compared to a 20 yr old 737 with concessionary wages flying them.

United, AA they are all just trying to stay afloat. My guess is others will follow soon. The whole industry is aiming for 15-20% reduction. Just my opinion.

 

just posting what came out of the article..... see above.....

if I read that chart correctly it shows a 10% or so increase in available seatmiles for 2009 ...... for express

i dont get it either.

 

I have heard conflicting reports as to the scope exemption that AWAC had. Most people think it is still in effect, though I had heard that it was only good for those 18 airframes. Others have said they could be replaced 1-for-1. Not that I advocate it either. I would rather see mainline jobs for all of us in the future, not large RJs.

With that said, AWAC and United have always had a different kind of relationship and even though AWAC is not currently flying as United Express there is still a solid business relationship between UAL and AWAC regarding ground handling. And when the contract ended a couple years ago for flying the company was very clear that they intended to keep a good business relationship with United should the opportunity arise to fly for them again.

Personally, I would love to fly as United Express again. I liked it much more than what we currently do on the East Coast.

Not that I want RJs to replace 737s......

 

I certainly hope UA Express flying does not increase. That would be a shame, seeing 73s replaced in full by E-jets and RJs.

Who wants more crappy paying jobs and benefits at the regionals? Not me. I want there to be more jobs at the majors, for everyone.

 

Bad sign...domestic mainline is being outsourced to the E-jets. Good news for career regional pilots but dismal for those of us with asparations of something better. This is just a band-aid for a very broken industry. The majors will decide that E-jets and C-series at the regionals are a good source of lift until that becomes unprofitable, then something else will come along to replace the replacments. Someone needs to draw a line in the sand. I sure hope ALPA has the means to stand at the line