If we granted more RJ relief, that would exacerbate the stuff flying off the fan. Lessons have been learned, and applied to multiple contracts at multiple airlines. The ACMI low bidders have peaked. Other than fighting amongst themselves for what we choose to allow, their only options are to go it alone or comply. Almost all will comply, and those that go it alone, well, good luck I guess. But there won't be super jumbo RJ's coming your way. That ship has sailed, and with every month that goes by hundreds of anti-RJ pilots further stack the demographics and those few senior pilots who live up to the stereotype of not caring as long as they get a couple percent more for a few years sail off into the sunset (most aren't like that though).

Obviously you have no clue how long a change like that would would be implemented by the FAA. We will have 2 pilot airliners for at least another 50 years. Also, what happens when systems malfunction? Who or what is going to fix the problem? What about hackers? While the technology is right around the corner, the infrastructure and implementation is decades away.

LOL! Yeah ok.

So the machines are taking over, etc. Whatever. That tech has been around for generations and practically viable for decades. But no where near realistic on a cost basis. Humans are simply way cheaper. Especially for flying. Worst case we'll see a reduction on long haul crews. Although it would be pretty funny to see them sign off on a 2 pilot ultra long haul knowing that if something happens the pilot in deep REM sleep will have to spring to life and come help save the day bwahahahah!

Not worried about it in the slightest.

How does that effect utilization in the slightest?

Turn times have nothing to do with pilots. If anything, we'll see more and more back side of the clock flying and perhaps more stringent regulations on sleep etc. Sucks for the hero who bid back side stuff so they can run businesses and paint their houses during the day but oh well.

And yet you think the trend vector for regional airlines will always continue towards larger AC. Yes things change, and this is one of them. That trend is rapidly slowing and coming to a stop, and you're far from alone in not being able to accept it.

Now, if your broader point is to always be vigilant and not take things for granted, then of course I agree.

I disagree completely. I know just as many millennials who are uncomfortable with self-driving cars as I do baby-boomers. It is going to take quite a bit of testing and certification to get the first fully pilotless aircraft. I estimate it to be in the next 40-50 years. Airlines aren't going to park brand new 787s in 15 years and completely repurchase an incredibly more expensive airplane just because it would save them a few dollars per ticket.

Exactly this. Pilots aren't salary. If you get more utilization, you don't save money. Increasing utilization allows you to get more revenue. Labor is a fixed cost (for the most part) in that equation.

Plus, many mainline aircraft already fly 24/7. The reason they don't isn't because of the pilots. It's because they can't sell enough tickets to fill up an airplane.

What could go wrong with a self driving car!

. An entry level pilot will incur a 24-month category freeze. 24 Exception two: A pilot who is in the last 12 months of such category freeze may be 25 awarded an AE or VD to another base for which qualification training is required if he is 26 unable to be awarded an AE or VD to such base in his current position in a given posting. 27 In such event, the balance of his existing category freeze will be added to the category 28 freeze resultin

Oh really now?

My entire point is that the 76 seat limit (along with current weights) is far more likely to hold than to be relieved. You pointed to the metro-CR9 trend as "historical" proof that regionals will continue to be granted ever increasing sized RJ's.

I've said its possible that there could be additional 76's granted for a larger corresponding reduction in seats and block hours in the 50-70 range. But even that was smacked down recently. Could it happen in the future? Maybe. But even that is a far cry from 77+ sized ones, and would require the regional sector to shrink even more, even if it did happen.

No, not at all, these systems would be added on to current aircraft.

Machine learning does not require Cat III ILS systems, it uses synthetic machine vision to shoot visual approaches in all weather conditions. All that expensive equipment you talk about is actually eliminated, and replaced with much less expensive equipment.

The entire machine learning team at Boeing thinks this can be done within 5 years. Elon Musk thinks it's sooner.

Probably not as log as you've been working for SKYW.

Not even remotely close to that. They are off by many decades.

Like I said, you can fully automate planes right now...if you are OK with drone like safety levels. RC, Robot, internal or external, whatever, can already be used to fly a CAT III approach. Big deal. Its the complex management of all systems during an emergency as well as decision making and redundancy that it can't even come remotely close to doing at anywhere near the same universe of costs. Humans are simply WAY cheaper. I can't blame Musk for trying to break off some more of that sweet Uncle Sugar gravy train money though.

What jobs will be left then? Sounds good, we can all just sit at home and watch TV. Except no one will have money to buy a TV.

Is that going to happen on the same timeline as the EFB at Mesaba? If so we are all safe for at least a half a century.

All of these problems are addressable, you can add human operators if systems are deferred. However, this is really not an issue, since if redundancy is lost, the aircraft would land at the nearest suitable airport. This is like saying we can't go below having 4 engines, because if one fails we can't make it to the destination. Is a two engine jet more costly, than a four engine jet, according to you it is. On top of that, a self driving car is ridiculously more complicated, than an autonomous aircraft. No matter how much you are in denial, this will happen, and soon.

No no no. You won't be able to watch TV cause a machine will replace you to watch TV! Networks need ratings. Machines don't get tired and can watch TV 24/7 thereby increasing the networks ratings and revenue!

Look at the drone loss rate, I agree this will happen but not soon. How long did it take the FAA to approve replacing one book in an aircraft with an iPad? Yeah, multiple that by 50, no one reading this thread will be alive when passenger airliners fly without pilots in the cockpit.

The economics of the future is likely a resource based economy, not what we have today.

I think most people would have to agree that as time goes on and technology increases, at some point computers/robots/whatever will be doing ALL jobs everywhere.

You may say "not this job" or "not that job", but the truth is, as long as advancements are made, even at the slowest possible speed, that means the future will eventually be all computers and robots doing the work. Maybe that means 100 years or maybe that means a million years from now. Whatever the scale, so long as advancements continue to be made, the end result cannot be denied.

On a side note, other socialist countries are now talking about having a guaranteed monthly income to all people of their country, whether they participate in the work force or not.

There is already a test group in California living off a basic monthly income for this very reason.

They are not drones, they still require a human on board, however, it is no longer a profession that requires more than two weeks of training. There is still a pilot up front, you would have to have one to prevent hacking. The aircraft would still require manual flight path programming, just the autopilot takes the aircraft from gate to gate, there is no longer any instrument procedures, or ATC, every plane goes direct to destination. Since machine vision can see and avoid wake turbulence, there is no longer separation requirements. The aircraft automatically time, and space each other.

If pilots go, whose job is safe? I've read articles about doctors and surgeons being replaced by robots. I would think by that logic computers should have already taken over law, math, engineering, sailing ships, etc. Instead we use the human element along with technology. Just my observation.

New jobs will have to be created, it's the same as the horse and buggy manufacturers from many years ago. Most future professions will be in art, sports, media, and human services. Manufacturing, and transportation are dead careers.

Not worried about it in the slightest, especially for pax ops.

Ask an irrelevant question get an irrelevant answer.

It doesn't matter if I started yesterday or am C.E. Woodman posting from beyond. SkyWest will not get ever increasing sized airplanes to fly for other airlines. Either bet the farm on IndyAir or be happy within the confines of what unionized pilot groups allow your airline to fly.

And speaking of how one handles oneself, cue your insults, ad hominem attacks and zimmerman GIF's in 3...2...

Despite your implied stereotype, there just aren't many "senior" pilots chomping at the bit to sell bottom end scope. If anything, the top end is more of a carrot for the bottom of the list than it is for those already at the top. There are plenty of very senior "scope hawks" as well as junior pilots who just aren't watching it very closely ATM. The resistance to further scope sales is coming from all across the seniority spectrum. That's why I just don't see it happening for you.

The industry is now several post BK contracts into this, and the line is being held quite strongly.

While you attempt to act better than others, you constantly resort to immature personal and ad hominem attacks and even thinly veiled threats. That's really classy of you, and it shows your character, as well as highlights the hypocrisy of the high and mighty tone you try to exude on one hand while resorting to that on the other.

Its clear that you either work for or have a strong vested interest in SKYW. That's fine, and I've said numerous times that they run a good operation and I give them credit for that. But IMO you're just not going to get larger flying for DL or UAL because the unions won't allow it, and they'd have to for you to be able to. That flying is 100% owned and controlled by the union pilot PWA's so relief would be needed for your airline to get the permission to fly bigger planes.

Of course, we can (and do) disagree on the likelihood of that permission being granted. You think its a 100% given, and I don't think it will happen. But even if it does, it will be the choice of the mainline pilot groups to decide to permit it for you. That it simply out of your hands.

I really don't see why that would upset you so much. I get that you're a SKYW fan, and that's fine. They've always been one of the better run regionals out there and I've said as much repeatedly. You're just not going to get larger planes to fly for DL or UAL in my opinion. Sorry if that offends you.

Holy Jeebus!! You two need to get a room and bro-slap each other a bit!

I don't disagree with you. All I'm saying is that the new generation is much more equipped to be "OK," with that sort of tech. I saw a child try to "swipe," the page on a book last week. Change happens. For the sake of our jobs and our livelihood, I hope you're right.

Flag of convenience airlines will kill off any good jobs much quicker than pilotless airplanes. 10 years or less and you won't have many options. the good paying legacy jobs, the regionals that serve them and many other airlines will be history. Terrible time to be getting into aviation.

Great story, thanks. :rolleyes:

Delayed again, mid 2020 now reported. Better get comfy flying crj's and emb's.

Did I miss something? The article says E2 in 2020 and MRJ 2018.

Formal announcement coming Monday from Mitsubishi. So says Reuters.
Delayed till mid 2020.

"Is it possible you could put the 175-E2 in a deep freeze until things change, or would you just say ‘Let’s not go with that?’

It is just a matter of one or two years of shifting, but we will do it because we are in an advanced stage already. It has a dedicated wing, but everything else—the components, the avionics, the interior—are basically the same as the 190. And let’s not forget there will be a market outside the U.S., and a new entrant [the Mitsubishi Regional Jet] will offer an aircraft of the same size. So we will do it anyway, because we will be competing with a new manufacturer."

Embraer CEO Lays Out Commercial Aviation Battle Plan

More info in the article.

Things could always change, but sounds like there are no plans of canceling the 175E2.

Sounds like United may once again be in the market for a small narrow body, and already has pay scales for them.

Those -E2s or more CSeries may very well end up at mainline.