Go Jet
11-19-2011 | 08:09 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
From: 747 FO
Go Jet
From another thread;
In spite of what was said in another prematurely closed thread by whatever overzealous and biased moderator, this is a good point. GoJet DOES INDEED deserve a place on this forum like ANY other regional. Regionals are regionals.
Yeah I said it, the G word. Go ahead, lock it, send me on vacation...I don't give a $hit. G7 deserves a place on this forum like every other "job stealing regional". Why is everyone so sensitive? Cripes almighty. If anything this company serves to illuminate whats happening in this industry.
11-19-2011 | 08:32 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
From: EMB145 FO
Ha! I do not work for Go Jet and am not hating, But........ oh I will stop typing b4 I get in trouble.
Am in....
Am in....
11-19-2011 | 08:37 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
From: Chris's Closet
Too many people drinking cervezas and logging on here tonight I guess
In before the lock!
In before the lock!
11-19-2011 | 09:03 PM
#4
Day puke
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 0
From: Out.
There are some regionals which provide connection to a mainline in aircraft the mainline could not afford to support: light twin and turbo prop operators.
Then there are some regoionals which have both augmented and eroded mainline operations: the RJ operators.
Then there is a third group of regionals which circumvent all mainlines, regionals, and unions......
11-19-2011 | 10:00 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
From: Seat 0B
Actually, not all regionals are the same.
There are some regionals which provide connection to a mainline in aircraft the mainline could not afford to support: light twin and turbo prop operators.
Then there are some regoionals which have both augmented and eroded mainline operations: the RJ operators.
Then there is a third group of regionals which circumvent all mainlines, regionals, and unions......
There are some regionals which provide connection to a mainline in aircraft the mainline could not afford to support: light twin and turbo prop operators.
Then there are some regoionals which have both augmented and eroded mainline operations: the RJ operators.
Then there is a third group of regionals which circumvent all mainlines, regionals, and unions......
11-19-2011 | 10:19 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 996
Likes: 0
Making blanket statements like all regionals are the same is pure idiocy. Just like saying all majors are the same.
11-19-2011 | 10:41 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
From: EMB145 FO
All regional are the same.
Simple And More Exacting.
Or if you are bold
Simpler And More Efficient
Simple And More Exacting.
Or if you are bold
Simpler And More Efficient
11-19-2011 | 10:48 PM
#8
Line Holder
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 27
From: 737 CA
The grey is the in between...is a 37 seat ERJ a problem? How about a 74 seat turboprop?
Though I'll make no argument about being biased, I don't see any problem with sub-50 seat turboprops at regional/commuter carriers. Mainline can't profitably run things Dash/ATR sized with the current economy and market conditions. The simple fact that the turboprop lacks in speed will keep it from being used on routes where the CRJ/ERJ are jumping dangerously into mainline territory.
It's sad that AA is trying to go to a B-scale on pilot wages...because a 50-seats-and-up mainline contract is exactly what this industry needs more of.
11-19-2011 | 11:16 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,450
Likes: 0
From: Airbus button pusher
Beers for you sir.
The grey is the in between...is a 37 seat ERJ a problem? How about a 74 seat turboprop?
Though I'll make no argument about being biased, I don't see any problem with sub-50 seat turboprops at regional/commuter carriers. Mainline can't profitably run things Dash/ATR sized with the current economy and market conditions. The simple fact that the turboprop lacks in speed will keep it from being used on routes where the CRJ/ERJ are jumping dangerously into mainline territory.
It's sad that AA is trying to go to a B-scale on pilot wages...because a 50-seats-and-up mainline contract is exactly what this industry needs more of.
The grey is the in between...is a 37 seat ERJ a problem? How about a 74 seat turboprop?
Though I'll make no argument about being biased, I don't see any problem with sub-50 seat turboprops at regional/commuter carriers. Mainline can't profitably run things Dash/ATR sized with the current economy and market conditions. The simple fact that the turboprop lacks in speed will keep it from being used on routes where the CRJ/ERJ are jumping dangerously into mainline territory.
It's sad that AA is trying to go to a B-scale on pilot wages...because a 50-seats-and-up mainline contract is exactly what this industry needs more of.
Q 400's should be scoped as well. I hope we don't get another one over at pinnacolaba
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GliderCFI
Regional
20
01-23-2006 07:20 AM
