Percentage of flying done by regionals.
 

I am one in support of facts, and I find the ability of people on the internet to make posts that are fallacious and then have that information gain a life of it's own to be the single biggest failing of the internet. With that in mind here is last month's posting by UCH of RPMS. The point here is that regionals do not carry anything close to what mainline carries in any measure be it passengers or miles, and if you are a subset of regionals you are even a smaller fraction which over the last two decades has changed radically every 5 years or less.

It's all about keeping a healthy perspective . . . on ALL sides.

Awesome.....17.3% for the regionals. No where near half or more.

Now do one by departures.

First of all they don't post that statistic. Second of all it would still be a minor fraction especially when considered on a company by company basis. Your post has no factual basis, but yet you post and people who sympathize with your sentiment shake their head in agreement and the myth continues. Regionals represent a small piece of the pie and to think otherwise is simply not factual.

I am not trying to say mainline pilots are better than regional pilots. What I am trying to show with a simple factual chart is that regional flying is a small piece of the total flying especially when considered on a company by company basis, and what is worse is that the mainline companies have simply ravaged the regionals every few years to get the lowest cost possible for this feed.

When I was 23 I vowed I would never fly a jet for a non-mainline carrier. I got hired off a Beech 1900. If every pilot had the same opinion as mine regionals would never have had a place in history. I don't expect my Utopian view to be popular, but I just hope regional pilots of today can empathize a little better with mainline pilots. No one foresaw 9/11 or age 65 or the financial collapse of 2008 and THAT is really what enabled the 50 seaters and then the 70 seaters to proverbially Take Off. Today we should all be focused on reversing that trend regardless of where we work.

I got to go with Sunvox on this you have smaller passenger loads flying in smaller aircraft on shorter legs, and that woukd definitely increase the percentage of the total departures and arrivals attributable to a regional. And I'm sure they do keep statistics on that, because fitting an a RJ departure or arrival into a busy airport (SEA comes to mind) takes about as much ATC, runway, and taxiway tome as a 737.

I'm not saying the world would come to an end if mainline picked up all the regional passenger miles, and that woukd likely be a good thing for ALL of us if it happened, but based on a per passenger mile basis, RJs represent a disproportionately LARGE PORTION OF THE ATC and facilities burden.

Are you serious?

The only people to blame for RJ's existing is the mainline pilots who sold out scope to keep a few more dollars in their paycheck.

There is no shortage of people wanting to fly for a living. Regionals have classes full until next year. It you create it, it will get staffed.

The only people creating this mess of a system are the greedy mainline pilots saying "eff the scum below me, I got mine." Now there are a few realizing the heavy intl flying is getting farmed out to JV's at the top and the regional jet flying is getting bigger at the bottom saying "oh no guys! let's band together now that my future wb job might be at risk!":rolleyes:

https://i.imgur.com/f7FdEdG.jpg

Are mainline pilots responsible for bankruptcy, lost wages and loss of pensions too?

The only problem I have with this post is the idea that greedy heavy pilots have ruined it for all.

Let me ask this, did you want to be stuck in low paying jobs away from home or did you get take that job with the hope of moving into the big jets? We all know the answer is...

I love to fly and can’t believe I get paid to do it! :eek:

Right!!! :rolleyes:

I have not seen this big bad wolf you describe since arriving here 5 years ago. A very small percentage of any group will be the greedy, get mine, screw everyone else type. Everyone I talk to is pulling in the right direction trying to make the pilot profession better for all. The widebody guys from the 2003 time frame are all gone so it’s like you guys are yelling at someone not even here. I understand you guys are nervous that more scope slip will stagnate your career further but that ain’t happening as long as UA pilots have anything to do with it. It was and is the same concern that 99% of UA pilots share. Mainline pilots understand better than regional pilots do about career stagnation caused by scope slip. It would cause stagnation for 95% of pilots at mainline too. I fly mostly with guys in their last 5 years here and none of them would vote to give away scope further. What regional guys can do to help is to teach the new hires about scope and why any slip causes stagnation to their careers.

did CRJs exist when you were hired at mainline?

What is completely neglected when you just factor seat miles is the *number* of people who have the United experience at our regional affiliates. Many of our miles are wrapped up in ultra long flights to places like Singapore.

For each passenger buying that ticket, more than a dozen would fly express from, say EWR-BUF to equal seat miles.

So per seat miles, sure we, uh, rock. But as a ratio, how many unique passenger travel experiences go to express? It’s a lot closer and that is a tangible and significant issue.

Would have been nice to have grabbed those 65 737-700s to take control of that ratio and I hope we find ourselves with a NSNB for this same reason.

Oh yes, Varsity. That’s EXACTLY how it went down *eyeroll*. Yes in 2003 we all got SUPER greedy and decided to vote in a contract that, for me personally, resulted in a 60% paycut.

You’re wrong about another thing too. If you look at UAL over the past year and look ahead to the next 2 years, you’ll see substantial growth both in domestic and international capacity.... at mainline. What “farming out” are you talking about? I’m doing layovers in cities I haven’t seen in almost 20 years. EUG, MFR, BNA, SBA, PSP, etc etc.

And, shockingly, wrong again about all the regionals being able to fill classes. At least according to management. *Cough* Great Lakes *Cough*

Tell us more about how United pilots sold scope out and what their pay rates were after selling out? Speaking of scope sell out, aren’t you flying for the carrier with the absolute weakest scope language that came with new increased pay rates? :confused:

I don't think the regional pilots could cohesively hold that line.... Can you imagine an ALPA regional carrier restricting their next contract to turboprops ....?

Yeah, so, the thing about math....

What those statistics also tell me are, mainline held 84.3% of the flying in 2017, now it's only 82.7%. I don't necessarily disagree with Sunvox's point, but as a % it's trending the other way! And this is an environment where everyone is pounding to take flying back, yet the math doesn't lie. Mainline is growing, but again, the math don't lie here and I would have expected the statistics to show otherwise.

I bet however, if the regional stats were further dissected it would show much of that growth is new service, so one could argue previously served destinations are stagnant on the regional side.

Yes a slight year on year growth 2017 vs 2018. This is not currently sustainable due to the “scope choke” affecting any further regional growth here at United. I don’t see that situation altering anytime soon. United Pilots are motivated to insource as much of our flying as possible.

If you're just trying to compare total flying between both sides, a better metric is Available Seat Miles, not RPMs. RPMs tell you how many passengers were flying; ASMs tell you how much total flying took place regardless of how many butts actually occupied seats.

Comparing ASM's in UAL's 2nd quarter results between 2017 and 2018 show (in millions):

Mainline 2Q 2017: 60,473
Regional 2Q 2017: 6,994
Regional percentage of flying: 11.6%

Mainline 2Q 2018: 63,061
Regional 2Q 2018: 7,641
Regional percentage of flying: 12.1%

Mainline growth 2Q year-over-year: 4.3%
Regional growth 2Q year-over-year: 9.3%

I wasn't able to find anything that broke down new destination growth vs. capacity growth via upgauging equipment between either of the two sides. Certainly growing regional capacity at over double the rate of mainline growth isn't sustainable over the long term because of scope limitations.

It will be interesting to see how the YOY numbers compare when 3Q results get released next month. IIRC, the company has already hit the "scope choke" hard limit on the number of 76 seat airplanes UAX can operate. Increasing efficiency for further capacity growth can only take them so far: there are only so many hours in the day.

No but Southwest, Kiwi, Vanguard, Spirit, Frontier, and others were around, and I did not and would never have applied to any. In fact I was called at home and offered a job at Vanguard while I was flying a 1900 and turned it down. I would have gotten to United a year earlier had I taken the job, but I'm a bit of a utopian and altruist at heart, and I believed then as I do now that pilots should not fly jets for non-mainline companies. I actually had applications in for investment jobs in '96 when I finally got hired at UAL because I promised myself if I didn't make it to the mainlines by 30 I'd look for work elsewhere rather than go to work for a non-mainline jet company. Lucky for me, United called 3 months before I turned 30.

Those numbers include Commutair parking a bunch of 37 seat turboprops and replacing them with E-145’s.

How did Vanguard get your home phone number is you never applied there?

So your concern for mainline pilots almost drove you into banking because in a perfect world all flying would be done by mainline?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What about selling out your own union brothers and sisters? 2172 UAL pilots were put on the street in 03. Roughly 1400 furloughed in 08-09. Had scope not originally be relaxed in 1997 then again in 2003, wouldn’t the large RJs have been flown my pilots on the mainline list? Couldn’t United have been saved in 2003 without caving on scope?

A student from my CFI days at Danbury actually ended up in the Vanguard training department. He called me at home. He's now more than a thousand numbers senior to me at United.

No. My concern for mainline pilots did not almost drive me to Wall St. My concern for mainline pilots kept me from applying to any airline other than American, Delta, Northwest, and United. I applied to Wall St. out of concern for my own future. If I couldn't make it to a mainline by 30 then clearly my plan wasn't working out so it was time to re-evaluate my career choice and start to go for money instead of satisfaction.

Gosh,

If only there was a way to find information on the internet. . . :rolleyes:

https://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements.aspx?Data=2

Sorry, but I don't see where that link provides data on actual passengers carried rather than RPMS and ASMS. If you found the information why not take the time to post it rather than taking the easy way out of posting a link and hinting that somehow you have the answer. You insinuate that you found the fact, but then don't actually post one. That is exactly what is wrong with the internet.

I do not doubt the information is available somewhere somehow, but it won't alter the basic fact that regional flying is a relatively small piece of the "whole pie".

Preach on my BROTHER!

Teach it and Preach it.

Each and every time there has been "scope relief" it caused two things to happen:

1. Provided only temporary financial relief to the airline. Why? Because the competion figures out a way to adapt.

2. Provided a permanent Screw Job to the pilots at the airline and to the profession at large.


The LOST DECADE in aviation was caused by "scope relief." If Joe Pilot wants to know why he had to fly an RJ around for garbage wages for 15 years, there's his answer....

Today's Jeopardy challenge Topic "scope relief." Shall we come up with some clever answers and provide the questions for today's Jeopardy Challenge?

I'll take Airline Flying for 200 Alex

1. The upcoming pilot shortage in America as well as stagnant wages, and poor career progression and reduced career expectations was the result of. What is "Scope Relief?"

Can you post some specific times and contracts when scope was sold? Will you please post the scope protections from prior to the RJ boom? In every contract I have been involved with scope was the last thing settled long after pay.

CRJ1988,

I will ask you again do you want to work at UAL?

Biff

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/united-airlines-pilots-resist-contract-changes-over-regional-213053056--finance.html

The lost decade was caused by 9/11, a tanking economy, and age 65.

The scope relief that put CRJ1998’s Dad on the street was thanks to the 1113c process. He acts like it was some big money grab by the “greedy” United Pilots. This is the way the 1113c works. The company says “you’re going to bend over and take a monster paycut, relax scope, and destroy your retirement. And you’re going to LIKE it”. The pilots than have 2 choices: hold your nose and accept it, or let a judge decide. The same judge that had rubber stamped EVERY SINGLE request UAL had brought to the court. UAL’s finances were such that they had about 3 days of operating capital at one point. What they asked for, they got. Simply for survival thanks to the denial of the ATSB loan (twice). UAL couldn’t raise any capital at that point.

So was it a smart move by the pilots to accept the contract? I don’t know, but I’m pretty confident the scope we would have ended up with would have been what was on management’s emergency 1113c term sheet had we taken our chances with the judge: NO scope. CRJ1998’s Dad might not have liked it, and I don’t blame him. But we lived on to fight another day and he now has a pretty strong airline with a decent contract to come back to.

THAT’s the fact.

Well I was in college and had no skin in the game then and from the sounds of it you were maybe in middle school when it was all hitting the fan? So I think it’s safe to say that your dad has already molded your perspective on the scope relief history at UAL with his side of the story (which I can only imagine how awful it was for him and your family).

So with that said, why bother even engaging in the topic when you dont seem to care to hear the other side of the story from the guys like photoflier that are offering their narrative? Something tells me scope relief wasn’t a real savory option that was leading the pilot group to fortune and glory at the expense of their furloughed brothers and sisters.

awe He!!. Don't start trying to pull out facts. We we're just a bunch of greedy bastards that sold out scope for sliver like Judas!! We shat on our fellow pilots and caused the lost decade. :rolleyes: That's the narrative!! Got it?? ;)

Judge Wedoff couldn't wait to rubber stamp that POS 1113c Term Sheet. Glad we didn't give him the chance.

I am too. If these kids think Scope is bad now, can you imagine trying to get the genie back in the bottle if we had been left with a blank Section 1??????

I resent the implication that we as a group simply didn’t care about the 2172. Nothing could be further from the truth. I didn’t pick up ONE trip while we had pilots on involuntary furlough. As soon as we got PBS my number one criteria was minimum time. Those as*h*les who Jr manned had their names posted on the wall in ops, despite the threats from management. I don’t know of ONE pilot who’s primary goal was anything other than getting our brothers and sisters back to their rightful seats at United. It was a horrible time for them and their families: doubly bad for the 2x furloughees that got sacrificed for the merger “right sizing”.

YAAAAAAAAAWWWWWN!!! Of course miles are going to be heavily skewed towards mainline pilots. lol

Number of passengers per pilot per month is a different story. Sure, mainline carries more passengers per trip, but the RJ pilot does many more trips many more days per month.

Wow. Just wow. You are the reason I started this thread. You again espouse a statistic that doesn't exist, and that you fail to show and expect people to believe. Your statement has no basis in fact. Please post real numbers and real facts.

....and you tried to refute it with a meaningless statistic.

Let's do some back of the envelope math . . .

seats x legs x days worked = passengers potentially carried

50 x 4 x 16 = 3200

76 x 3 x 16 = 3648 passengers per month

150 x 3 x 16 = 7200 (EWR 320 flying)

166 x 2.5 x 16 = 6640 passengers per month (737 EWR flying)

265 x 2 x 12 = 6360 passengers (me on 777 doing Tel Aviv)

But, then the mainline fleet is bigger than the regional fleet so again regionals are a small piece of the pie especially when considered on a by company basis. Each vendor is a tiny fraction of mainline and this is why they are whipsawed incessantly. I do not want to diminish the job RJ pilots do, but what I want to make clear is that it is a small part of the whole, and we need to work together to make it smaller. We need to bring it all back to mainline.

Give me a sec . . .

Oh wait there are 250 something 76 seaters so that means

3648 x 250 = 912,000

versus using numbers from my head . . .

7200 x 150 = 1, 080,000
6640 x 300 = 1,992,000

ok I'll stop there 'cuz you have the 756, 777, and 787 to go . . . this is not precise because it's not complete and is only counting one pilot per plane, but the math would remain relative if you expand the concept.

Do you get the picture? 12,000 pilots each carrying almost twice what UAX RJ pilots carry per month.

I seriously doubt you’re doing 12 round trip TLV trips a month. 😜 Math in public, don’t do it. Your haul is more like 265 x 1 x 12 = 3250 pax per month.

But you’re right, this is a completely meaningless statistic in every sense. We might as well try to tally up how many crew meals we consume per month and try to say that has some kind of metric on who does more work for the company, or measure the number of steps the FO has to take on the walk around per month or some other nonsense like that. The metrics that matter are the ones Wall Street pays attention to.