Will the MRJ fly at Skywest and TSA?
 

I'm sorry, but sexy don't pay the bills.......... It's your pay that matters - not how the airplane looks on the ramp. That said, this is a nice looking airplane. Will we see the MRJ at SkyWest and Transstates flying for the legacies some day? What are the latest thoughts/predictions? :confused::D

http://www.airplane-pictures.net/pho...subishi-mrj90/


http://cdn.airplane-pictures.net/ima.../27/770581.jpg

I hope this airplane comes with a search function.

So you essentially opened this thread just to fap off to an airplane that has been fapped off by many other threads in APC? Niceeee

I doubt it. Doesn't this violate every legacies scope?

The MRJ90 that they both have on order does. The smaller MRJ70 doesn't

I think even the MRJ70 violates at least some scope on MGTOW, even if the seat count is low enough.

Never underestimate mainline pilots willingness so sell their souls or the souls of their JR brethren for a few sheckels.

The non-ER MRJ70 is only at 81k lbs MTOW. I think even the ER version is at 86K. Above that is where the trouble is, no?

I think the problem is the MRJ70 seats less than 70 in a typical dual class configuration. There's no chance that mainline pilots allow an increase in allowable weight for the MRJ90.

Oh I totally agree, just pointing out, that, in theory, part of the MRJ series would be legal to be operated at a regional under current scope clauses. And I too hope that mainline doesn't give one more inch of scope up.

My question is will the MRJ fly ever? They can't even get it over here for testing. How many years behind schedule is it?

Not all scopes are the same. They typically limit some combination of seats, MGTOW, and cargo capacity. Also scope allows fewer RJ's at the larger end of the spectrum.

CRJ's for example have essentially zero cargo capacity after pax bags are loaded, but revenue cargo is a significant money-maker for mainline planes. An RJ which could carry cargo would be a scope problem for mainline pilots.

Mitsubishi really screwed up when they designed the MRJ...they just glossed over the scope limits and explained it away as an artificial limitation which could be easily forced over on labor. Not realizing that the pilot groups in the US (the largest regional market by a long shot) are in no mood whatsoever to give up any more scope, and are in a good bargaining position for the foreseeable future. Unless the major managements offer them a REALLY sweat deal. But at some point management will lose interest in heavily incentivizing scope relaxations for regionals which can't even staff the planes they already have.

Not that I want to see more RJs but they can easily fly them if they put a cap on the amount of passengers that it can carry 76 to 80, that's how many it will be if they want first class in there anyways. There's already RJs that have that many seats now. As far as being like 6000 pounds overweight, what's the difference if it's 92 vs 86k if it can only take 76? Maybe an agreement just for the MRJ? If not then I doubt you'll see the MRJ here, there no way mainline will take them in house.

I guess you failed to read the above post regarding cargo capacity.

Or did he post it while he was typing? Mind blown eh?

The MRJ looks really cool :D

Maybe in the past. But I think mainline pilots have seen how management will exploit language and outsource as much flying as possible. It seems they also realize the career stagnation that took place at mainline while the regional airlines exploded. As regional airline pilots are hired at Legacy airlines, they will have a broader understanding of how much that initial raise will cost them over their careers.

Yep. With the level of retirements over the next couple years, it appears that a majority of groups are wanting to get a piece of the record breaking profits the airlines are producing. And they don't seem to want to give up QOL for extra money that can be taken away when their is a market hiccup.

No. Next question?

If it makes you feel any better our private Delta forum specifically talks about this aircraft and the orders SkyWest and Trans States have. We are fully aware that changing MGTOW would allow this airplane to fly for you guys and my reps assure me that is not going to happen.

As Rick pointed out, this aircraft is prohibited because the MGTOW violates most scope clauses. When Mitsubishi designed this airplane I believe they were counting on scope clauses being modified to allow it at the regionals but considering most majors have contracts that aren't amendable in the near future (except for Delta which we are currently working on) it seems very unlikely.

Unfortunately, it sounds like more 76 seaters is being talked about but only if the company parks all 50 seaters sooner than planned. We all know 50 sweaters are going away anyway so I don't see the point of making that trade...

So, there may be a few more 76 seaters allowed in any TA we get (which I am totally against BTW) but increasing MGTOW to allow the MRJ is not happening.

Why would Mitsubishi be worried about scope. The reality is manufactures are not worried about what goes on in the US alone. Do you really think the E2 is made for scope, or why dear old Canada is making the CS and no more CRJ orders? Get over yourselves, this is a global market. Stop thinking the US market is it. We are saturated with pilots and equipment. Other markets are hurting more for pilots and could care less about scope. So tell me again why the MRJ is screwed because of weight...

Just for the sake of argument, if you already have 76 seaters flying, why does it matter how much that 76 seater weighs? I mean the MRJ is still an RJ, a few thousand pounds over.

Might want to check the title of this thread again....

So if you were to pour billions and billions of dollars into an airplane (like Japan and Mitsubishi) you would totally ignore the US? Ridiculous - pull up some stats on how many airplanes fly in the US verses whole other continents. If they don't sell this plane in the US the project will be a failure. There is no getting over ourselves - the US market is huge and will make or break this plane.

It matters because we have two limits. Size and weight. We are not budging on either one.

To give a more complete answer, the weight limit prevents them from buying large airplanes and configuring them with fewer seats. It prevents them from buying a 110 seat airplane and putting 76 seats in it and somehow complying with the agreement. Before you respond with why does that matter if there are still only 76 seats, my reply is that it does and again we aren't talking about changing it. There is talk of allowing more 76 RJs at the expense of eliminating 50 seaters. If I had to guess how that'll work, Delta will offer the 76 seaters to whomever will park and cancel the 50 seat portions of their contracts.

Just to be clear, these limits don't prohibit Delta from operating these aircraft. They do prohibit them from outsourcing them. Delta can have thousands of MRJs. Delta pilots would have to fly them...

Because if you bump the weight up at all, planes that were operated by mainline could then be flown by a regional.

Fair enough but I don't know any 90k pound 737 or Airbus.

Who's going to buy a 110 seat plane, wich the MRJ is not anyways, and put 76 seats?? It's really apples to oranges when it comes to the MRJ specifically, it's a RJ that competes with the CRJ9 and 175 that happens to be slightly overweight. The MRJ will have no chance of being flown by mainline, might as well bring the CRJ9 and 175s on board at that point.

The point I was trying to make is that there are two limits. Weight is one. Regardless of how illogical you think it is to have a weight limit there is one and it will prevent anyone that is a DCI carrier from flying the MRJ. Maybe another mainline pilot group will give up the weight limit but Delta pilots will not.

I completely agree we should fly CRJ700 and CRJ900s here at mainline. Maybe someday, a guy can hope right?

Just an afterthought but it seems fairly obvious you have no desire to move on to a mainline legacy carrier. Is that correct? It's not an insult, just a question. Allowing SkyWest MRJs helps no one except SkyWest and people planning making a career at SkyWest.

For the sake of discussion it really seems like the weight limit is a random number. The next biggest plane that is a threat to mainline jobs, the 190 or Cseries is no where near that limit and is over it by like 30k pounds. The MRJ is in the same class as the crj9 and 175 wich you already have, no jobs will be lost that would have been lost by CRJ9s and 175s to begin with.

I can't tell you how it came about but I'm sure it's not random. But let's say it was, we aren't changing it to allow a more capable aircraft to be flown by outsourced labor. Delta wants it that is fine but they can fly it at mainline. That can't work then I guess they won't get it.

Btw, I edited my previous post and added some info.

No in all honesty I just don't understand that weight limit. If you're concerned with "jobs", it doesn't make a difference in the MRJs case as it's the equivalent of a CRJ9 or 175 in seats and pretty much weight but slightly over.

The original DC-9 was right around 86K lbs, for what it's worth. Damn fine airplane at that weight too

Haha that's how they came up with that number then! The DC9.

I don't think we are going to agree on this. Good luck.

It's a better RJ than the CRJ ever can be, for what it's worth...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^Brightest thing I've seen anyone say on here!

If you want to argue that the MTOW limit makes no sense wouldn't it follow that you think the 76 seat scope limit is arbitrary too? Why not put CRJ 1000s and E195s at regionals?

Well for that to happen, mainline pilots would have to change their minds and elect to fly those aircraft. And mainline management would have to be willing to pay mainline wages to fly those aircraft. Neither of these two conditions has been true for a very long time.

Did Alaska get scope? Hopefully. Probably needed that yesterday if they didn't.