I wasn't implying as such, I was simply pointing out that a poster claiming there were no ATR's in the US was factually wrong.

You are missing the point, once again. Why, by the way, are you so determined to see the continuance of a massive fleet of RJ's operated by sub-contractors?

Again, out of touch. Good luck with your turbo prop fantasies.

The market will eventually be all large RJs. Why? Because that's what people want, remember the people? Yes, the folks that are tired of crappy 50 seaters. Do you honestly think that the company is going to deny great brand new efficient AC because of the Union? The company will do whatever they like in the end, there's always a way. If you think you're going to be able to fly RJs in house, tell us how you plan on doing that. Good luck, I'm actually rooting for you.

Mercyful, you sure seem an awful lot like a certain "General" stink stirrer from that other pilot message board that basically killed that place.

What's to keep Mitsubishi from certifying the aircraft at reduced MGTOW that is under the scope limitation? If you go with a dual class configuration, isn't it right around 76 seats and close to the MGTOW limitation of mainline carriers?

I guess that depends how much useful load will be left over.

This has been done in be past, for example the CRJ440 which was a CRJ200 certified with only 44 seats for scope, and the CRJ705 which was a CRJ900 certified with only 75 seats for Air Canada scope.

Weight may be trickier than seats though.

I read an article somewhere from Mitsubishi. They didn't want to limit the weight because it would have to come from fuel and wouldn't have the advertised max distance. Now, under pressure of losing all their orders, I can see them dropping the max weight or fuel load and allowing a mod in the event scope gets lifted.

Yeah I'm sure there are difficulties beyond just adjusting the paperwork for certification. However, it could be a possibility if scope did end up being a significant problem for them.

I didn't think the majors were going to be able to hire enough going
forward to keep up with retirements. If the RJ's reduce in number where
will the next group of qualified pilots come from?

Though im sure that's not your problem nor do you probably even care.
Its just every person for themselves and whats best for them. To pretend otherwise is a lie.

Mainline pilots say they want scope back but as long as they don't have to fly 6 legs a day to Podunk. It seems like they would rather lose customers
to the competition than have their own regionals fly (their) customers.

They are doing exactly that. Check the spec sheet. The problem is that the airframe was designed from the start for 90 plus seats. The 70 version is not that efficient and limited range for the scope compliant version.