actually you have it back wards , in my opinion.
mainlines are tied to the hub and spoke system, to much money invested in it.
mainlines wont have problem hiring pilots to replace those retiring, and they are many without any growth. the mainline hiring process at most has for lack of better term, a psychological test. This weeds out those who wont play ball with management, but mainline will still fill the cockpits. So mainline wont have any problems.
The problem is on the other side of there hub and spoke operation, the feeder side. Why not ask why they are so big on 12/4 pay caps, pay freezes, and 10 year term of contracts at the owned regionals. The non owned regionals since they wont have flow agreements to mainline will have to fight it out for what pilots are left, how are they going to do that, by offering pay cuts and reduction in benefits, i dont think so. Which one of the non owned feeders is even talking to there pilots about concession, none, just mainline owned regionals.
Thats because they want to get the owned regionals tied to a ten+ year contract with 1% raises and pay more for health insurance before the non owned regionals start negotiating. RAH management has stopped, EJT management has stopped and the rest have not started.

So it is not they dont need us, they want you to think that. for all i care they can bring all flying to mainline, but management will seek concessions from the mainline pilots there too.

As a foot note if my source is correct, to help out SKW, Delta has told management at SKW not to worry about the reset in there contract, why? Because that requires SKW to go out and seek concessions from it pilots and delta does not want any interruptions with there feed.

again that is my take.

 

I think this discussion is missing something that's very important to mainline: customer demand for frequent flights each day.

When Joe Q. Public (or, more accurately, Ernie the Executive) goes on Expedia or Kayak to look for flights from Rapid City, SD to Frankfurt, Germany, and he sees the following options:

Airline 1: Major airline departure (one per day, using B737/A320 type of equipment) at 0600 hrs to ORD, with a 10-hour layover to connect to the ORD-Frankfurt overnight. Ernie's got to get up at 0300 to make that flight, and sit for 10 hours twiddling his thumbs in ORD.

Airline 2: Regional airline departure (5 per day, using EMB-145s/CRJ-200s/Q400s/ etc), allowing Ernie to work nearly a full day, then hop a late-afternoon flight and spend just a 90-minute layover in ORD before catching that UA 747 to Frankfurt.

Which option do you think Ernie is going to take? Sure, people like to grouse about flying on 'small airplanes' such as a -200 or a -145, but they'll choose the airline with the lowest cost and the most convenient flight times. And the only way to offer that is by offering multiple RJ/turboprop departures per day vs. one 737/A320 departure per day.

The majors have outsourced a huge amount of flying for a reason. Cost is one reason, but frequency of departures is a huge influence on customer demand. I've spent many years working in a (non-aviation) career field that demands frequent travel, and let me tell you, none of my colleagues give a rat's patootie what equipment is serving the route. All they want to know is, "What's the quickest way I can get from City A to City B?" The airline that offers the fastest connection nearly always gets the business (assuming that the price differential is not too extreme.)

 

Hence my response about one 747 a week between Detroit and some out station. The big 3 will do whatever it takes to keep their regional feed. There will still be 50 seaters flying around 20 years from now.

 

Actually Delta will own the airframes at the end of the lease period.

 

kfahmi, i have personally witnessed passengers complain that the aircraft was so small numerous time. One was a B727, the other S80, but they go on it and the airline got its money. Frequency is what hub and spokes are all about and to fill the the feeder and mainline aircraft with ****ed, rude, obnoxious passengers who the airline has there money up front.

it is not as it has been mentioned cost only, frequecy is a big factor.

 

We're not talking about one 747 a week to DTW. We're talking about replacing 6 50-seat RJ's a day (300 seats) and/or 4 76-seat RJ's a day (304 seats) with 3 717's a day (300 seats) on routes that used to be serviced by mainline 737's and DC-9's. As UAL AA and DL reduce frequency but keep seat counts stabile, pax will move back to mainline.

And I agree, business travelers do care about frequency. But they care more about reliability, and the last thing they want is to be sitting on the ramp in LGA or JFK waiting for a crew until their flight cancels.

Pilot availability is becoming more important than fuel costs. $130/BBL oil made 50 and even 76 seaters unprofitable. In addition, now that the big 3 are profitable, they look to reliability to ensure that business travelers can make their flight and get to their destination as planned. As DCI carriers lose pilots, they cancel flights, get penalized by mainline, lose future CPA's and shrink. Displacements and downgrades motivate more pilots to bail, which lowers their reliability even further. That's why DL is putting mainline 717's back on the shuttle. DL is rumored to be looking for even more 717's and RA was quoted in AW&S that he was interested in the C-series, which means that the E-190/175E2's may be in play. If that happens, it will spell the end of the DCI model as it currently stands. Like you said, mainline has too much invested in the hub-spoke system to let DCI problems affect it's reliability.

The only 50 seaters that will be flying 20 years from now will be in China.

Again, just my opinion. The goal is to bring all flying and RJ pilots who successfully interview to mainline, isn't it?

 

DC-9's had 72 seats and the short 73 was 90. Slap a RJ sticker on the side and you were more than happy to sell them for fire water and beads. What do you think will happen to the C-series? E-jets are already know as RJ's. How much of a raise do you think it will take? 5%-10%....

 

actually he never said for who the aircraft were for. yes scope for now stops anything like that at DAL but they got another contract coming. RA says, you want that flying delta mainline pilots, what you willing to give up for that to happen. If mainline pilots dont want too play then the next step for mainline management (whom all want to change) is Qantas confirms plans to split international, domestic operations - ch-aviation.com.

We have been playing the Lorenzo play book for 20 years, management is not going to change.

 

Semantics.... That size aircraft hasn't been at mainline for years. Mainline is taking back block hours every month.

 

Maybe, but almost a 99% chance they won't. The whole reason to structure that agreement is the option to dump the aircraft. The capex control excuse makes no sense when they drop billions on new RJ's.