Beware
 

From page 271 in the new rest rules document.

For the high case the FAA backed away from a benefit outcome based on mean
fleet, flight hours, and occupant numbers because ultimately we were persuaded there
was information which could not be ignored by the three regional passenger accidents
occurring without a mainline passenger accident. For this reason, we selected an 88 seat
regional jet (like an ERJ-175) to be the representative airplane for the high case. This
size airplane is also consistent with the fact that regional operators are expected to fly
somewhat larger airplanes in the future.

Regional carriers will inherit all Domestic flying. Legacies will be left with mostly international and LCCs will merge or compete against 'regionals.' Then cabotage will happen and the legacies will be wiped out while the LCC/regionals are bought up by Emirates. You heard it here first!

Another Jack n Coke please!

Industry View on Scope
 

From page 271 in the new rest rules document.

For the high case the FAA backed away from a benefit outcome based on mean
fleet, flight hours, and occupant numbers because ultimately we were persuaded there
was information which could not be ignored by the three regional passenger accidents
occurring without a mainline passenger accident. For this reason, we selected an 88 seat
regional jet (like an ERJ-175) to be the representative airplane for the high case. This
size airplane is also consistent with the fact that regional operators are expected to fly
somewhat larger airplanes in the future.

I guess that is a true statement. They currently fly 50 seaters and 70/76 seaters... the 50s are going away, so I guess on average they WILL be flying larger airplanes. Since the 76 seaters are really 80s configured for 76, I don't think that is out of the question having them reconfigured for the 80 seats depending on the quid.. but anything larger just... ain't... happening.

I don't know why anyone at a regional would want them to grow with bigger aircraft. I always had my eye on the ball of moving on at a major and was very fortunate to make that jump in 2007 before Age 65.

I couldn't be happier.

While our contracts need improvement from the post-9/11 era, my worst day at a major beats my best day at a regional.

I think once Age 65 comes to pass you'll see a lot of the cheer leaders for 90-110 seats at the regionals move on....and they'll be saying the same thing in 5 years!

And that attitude is why we are so deep in the mess we are in right now.


-"No turbojet aircraft... ...except for 50 seaters. We don't want to fly those anyway." DAL pilots 1991/CAL pilots 1993/AA pilots 1994


-"Nothing over 50 seats... ...unless it is the BAE-146." UAL pilots mid 1990s/NWA pilots 1997


-"70 Seaters will be ok because it means we get to protect our payrates and workrules." UAL pilots mid 2000s right before all that was lost anyway in Ch 11.


-"Nothing over 50 seats... ...unless they are flown by a startup company that employs some of our furloughed pilots using the former Independence Air certificate but not more than 76 seats and no more than 36 aircraft." NWA pilots late 2005


-"Nothing over 70 seats... ...unless we add one 757 to mainline for every three 76 seaters that are added to the regional side." DAL pilots late 2007 (before 36 aircraft mentioned in the previous bullet were added during the DAL/NWA merger exceeding the 1 for 3 agreement)


-"I don't think that is out of the question having them reconfigured for the 80 seats depending on the quid.. but anything larger just... ain't... happening." Unknown 767 Captain December 2011


When will it stop??? PLEASE DON'T CONTINUE DOWN THIS ROAD!


None of the above quotes are meant to be disrespectful. They are only meant to look back and remember history. Please learn from it and don't repeat it.:(