Airline Pilot Central Forums - Trans States acknowledges MRJ scope issues

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Trans States Airlines (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/trans-states-airlines/)

- - Trans States acknowledges MRJ scope issues (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/trans-states-airlines/86631-trans-states-acknowledges-mrj-scope-issues.html)

Remember when regionals were commuters, and "large small jets" were DC9-10s?

Quote:

Originally Posted by minimwage4 (Post 1831134)

The mrj hasn't even had it's first flight yet. It is scheduled to be delivered in 2017. That's at least two years from now. That might as well be a decade in aviation time. Skybus might have returned by then who knows what things will look like.

Only thing I've heard is they might take some seats out and certify it for weight that fits scope.

i agree except it has....about a few months ago...but i agree

Quote:

Originally Posted by IlliniPilot99 (Post 1831154)

i agree except it has....about a few months ago...but i agree

No not yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercyful Fate (Post 1831163)

Hey, i think it would be great to have 737's flying into BTM and CPR again...Delta is leaving so much money on the table by not doing so.

Psssst, don't ever go into making any business decisions for anyone.

I think you're having a problem differentiating the term "mainline route" from current mainline aircraft.

Your straw-man argument came charging into battle when you mentioned 737's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercyful Fate (Post 1831163)

Who says DAL would have to fly it with a 737? Why not a 717? Why not a 190, provided DAL were to add it to it's fleet? The fact that it is a DL coded flight means it's mainline, right now it just so happens to be outsourced.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercyful Fate (Post 1831344)

Straw man? Are you some sort of liberal? Liberals loooove that word.

Negative!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercyful Fate (Post 1831344)

So, go ahead and edumacate me on the difference between a mainline route and a mainline aircraft. You know, in your terms.

I'd consider a mainline route to be a city pairing that is or once was served by mainline crews. Also, any route that is served by a CPA carrier at the request of a mainline carrier. SkyWest, Republic, Horizon, PSA... none of these companies did the market research and decided operating into BTM or CPR was a good idea. That was done by UAL/DAL/AAG/Alaska.

A mainline aircraft is just that. An aircraft operated by mainline. At present, the smallest of which seems to be the 737/319/E190/MD80 types. The moment a mainline carrier buys a new type, it's a mainline aircraft. What we have at present is a bunch of mainline routes being flown by regional pilots in aircraft operated by regionals. There's nothing preventing a mainline carrier from purchasing some E175's or CRJ's and operating them with mainline pilots.

The whole thing is just semantics, used by management to excuse the sub-standard pay and quality of life that is experienced by those working at contract carriers. The point of my earlier post was to illustrate the fact that "regionals" are nothing of the sort. Contract carriers are flying long domestic routes that are on par with their mainline counterparts. This is problematic from a compensation and career advancement point of view.