Notices
SkyWest Regional Airline

Future of ATL

Old 03-21-2020, 07:37 AM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
trip's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,221
Default

The CRJ200's are either owned outright or leased with zero tail risk, meaning they can be parked or given back to the lessor with a 30 day notice and SKYW owes them nothing. The easiest aircraft to idle at the moment.
trip is offline  
Old 03-21-2020, 04:37 PM
  #22  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Subieguy14's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: Right Seat
Posts: 300
Default

Originally Posted by GearUpHeadDown View Post
don’t think you have the ability to pick your regional anymore..
yep, im going to sit tight at my 135 while I can. maybe stuff will fix itself in the coming months.
Subieguy14 is offline  
Old 03-21-2020, 05:45 PM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,202
Default

Originally Posted by trip View Post
The CRJ200's are either owned outright or leased with zero tail risk, meaning they can be parked or given back to the lessor with a 30 day notice and SKYW owes them nothing. The easiest aircraft to idle at the moment.

and the easiest to spin back up if/when the demand is back...
amcnd is offline  
Old 03-21-2020, 05:53 PM
  #24  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 873
Default

Originally Posted by amcnd View Post
and the easiest to spin back up if/when the demand is back...
Why wouldn’t the 700/900 or the 175’s be easy to spin back up?
Melit is offline  
Old 03-21-2020, 06:02 PM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,202
Default

Originally Posted by Melit View Post
Why wouldn’t the 700/900 or the 175’s be easy to spin back up?
OO has the 200’s down to a fine science... see how fast they went from one partner to another...
amcnd is offline  
Old 03-21-2020, 06:12 PM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,090
Default

Originally Posted by Melit View Post
Why wouldn’t the 700/900 or the 175’s be easy to spin back up?
The hardest part is finding a carrier to place them in service for. UA/DL/AA/AS are not going to park much of their 65/70/76 seat fleets as those will be critical to them during the recovery when load factors will support a large regional jet but not a narrow-body.

The 50 seat fleets will also see large cuts initially, which is a problem for the 145 which has no common type with a larger jet, but for the 200, any 700/900 pilot can fly them with basic differences training, if not already qualified.

The 200s also have a very low acquisition cost, some parts and maintenance commonality with the 700/900, and can be brought on-line for cheap, and then put back into storage for not much loss if that need arises as well (possibly when fuel spikes in a year or two)
threeighteen is offline  
Old 03-22-2020, 11:46 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2019
Posts: 247
Default

Originally Posted by threeighteen View Post
The hardest part is finding a carrier to place them in service for. UA/DL/AA/AS are not going to park much of their 65/70/76 seat fleets as those will be critical to them during the recovery when load factors will support a large regional jet but not a narrow-body.

The 50 seat fleets will also see large cuts initially, which is a problem for the 145 which has no common type with a larger jet, but for the 200, any 700/900 pilot can fly them with basic differences training, if not already qualified.

The 200s also have a very low acquisition cost, some parts and maintenance commonality with the 700/900, and can be brought on-line for cheap, and then put back into storage for not much loss if that need arises as well (possibly when fuel spikes in a year or two)
United is giving plenty of flying to XJT and the 145 (comparatively). So that assertion doesn’t match up.

At present time there’s no ability to even fill a 700/900 or 175 with pax. Before this whole virus thing United wanted to get rid of the 200’s at any cost.

Don’t forget that a 145 has an a row of 2 and 1 pax. Bet passengers would really want a single seat to themselves at this point
Cessna182TypeR is offline  
Old 03-22-2020, 05:45 PM
  #28  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 873
Default

Originally Posted by Cessna182TypeR View Post
United is giving plenty of flying to XJT and the 145 (comparatively). So that assertion doesn’t match up.

At present time there’s no ability to even fill a 700/900 or 175 with pax. Before this whole virus thing United wanted to get rid of the 200’s at any cost.

Don’t forget that a 145 has an a row of 2 and 1 pax. Bet passengers would really want a single seat to themselves at this point
I’m not sure where you came from or your background but you are misinformed. You’re still on probation
Melit is offline  
Old 03-22-2020, 09:48 PM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Turbosina's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: CRJ CA
Posts: 1,801
Default

Originally Posted by Cessna182TypeR View Post
United is giving plenty of flying to XJT and the 145 (comparatively). So that assertion doesn’t match up.

At present time there’s no ability to even fill a 700/900 or 175 with pax. Before this whole virus thing United wanted to get rid of the 200’s at any cost.

Don’t forget that a 145 has an a row of 2 and 1 pax. Bet passengers would really want a single seat to themselves at this point
No. Just no. You literally have no idea what you're talking about.
Turbosina is offline  
Old 03-22-2020, 10:47 PM
  #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 880
Default

Originally Posted by threeighteen View Post
The hardest part is finding a carrier to place them in service for. UA/DL/AA/AS are not going to park much of their 65/70/76 seat fleets as those will be critical to them during the recovery when load factors will support a large regional jet but not a narrow-body.

The 50 seat fleets will also see large cuts initially, which is a problem for the 145 which has no common type with a larger jet, but for the 200, any 700/900 pilot can fly them with basic differences training, if not already qualified.

The 200s also have a very low acquisition cost, some parts and maintenance commonality with the 700/900, and can be brought on-line for cheap, and then put back into storage for not much loss if that need arises as well (possibly when fuel spikes in a year or two)
funniest statement of the evening. Bet you didn’t know AS is about to kick Skywest to the curb completely because of this recession and they aren’t happy with costs. Yeah. Didn’t think so.
domino is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
xNavyTR
SkyWest
10
08-30-2018 07:20 AM
FAPA
Career Questions
0
01-22-2018 04:35 PM
FAPA
Career Questions
0
01-05-2018 08:12 AM
JetJock16
Regional
278
03-10-2017 02:03 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices