Mesabah

It's possible, they were able to start getting Skywest's 900SCs out the door in a few months. The 550 is just an STC 700.

RJDio

I think the heartburn from this is the company’s willingness to invest in an outsourced product, while having a viable (according to the union) alternative in-house.

While we may be far removed from the toxic environment of the Tilton era, this announcement is a sobering one, remind us we are far from strategic harmony with management. They are/will continue to treat this relationship like Hyman Roth. And so should we.

Knotcher

One pack on the APU and one on an engine cools fine.

awax

I hear ya, I'm the last fan of the RJ product but I never expected mainline pilots holding firm on scope in this contract would equal the death of outsourced RJ flying entirely. The company has had the option to invest small narrow body aircraft since 2012 with mainline pilot flying them and for whatever reason they've decided not to.

Pulling 20 seats out of a jet doesn't make sense on the surface, but if the payoff is higher yield across the network, at a lower cost, and in compliance with the CBA I'm OK with it. I'd rather see new aircraft pay at wide body rates, not RJ rates.

Fr8Thrust

If only they gave the flying to a reputable operator.

IAHB756

Exactly. On the 737 on hot days, single engine taxi actual cools the cabin better than running both (if you are running both packs off of the engines). Why? We use #2 (the right) engine for single engine movement. It is normally operating at a slightly higher RPM (read, more pneumatic pressure feeding the pack) and the left pack is getting constant high pressure from the APU. EWR 4R departure last Summer. I’m DH in row 21. Captain taxis out on number 2. Cool cabin and nice smooth taxi. Starts number 1 while still number 8 or something. Cabin begins to warm up by the time we are next for departure as both engines at idle (lower pneumatic output). Wish he had waited a tad longer (for comfort reasons). Max taxis easy on 1 engine. In fact, easiest way to operate from our busy hubs is crank 2 ASAP. Run after start and get taxi clearance. Start moving and clear the alley for others then have the option to start the left immediately upon taxi or, if conditions permit; hold off until you see fit

da42pilot

The point of E175s is the higher yielding passengers from smaller destinations. If anyone doubted this before, here’s your proof.

The CRJ550 takes care of the premium pax while leaving a few low yielding passengers behind. Not ideal, but it is a workaround scope.

If this is successful it’ll render scope nearly useless. Given the higher costs I’d expect limited use/success of these aircraft. However it is a threat and it will reduce bargaining power re:scope clause. Relief still won’t happen, but it’s gonna make bringing 175s in-house more difficult for ALPA.

NFLUALNFL

Swing and a miss

NFLUALNFL

True enough. I haven't flown the Guppy since 2006, but WHY ???

trip

Replacing the god-awful CRJ200 and ERJ145 with these makes good sense, 10FC, 20+ and 20 economy.

Seat map
https://hub.united.com/united-more-p...628095340.html