Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
UAL to remove seats from RJs >

UAL to remove seats from RJs

Search
Notices

UAL to remove seats from RJs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-16-2020, 11:08 AM
  #111  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,067
Default

Originally Posted by Excargodog View Post
Yeah, the block hours YTD already suck, for everybody (excepting maybe QX, because one “legacy” doesn’t have any scope restriction), and they are likely to get worse before they get better. Scope built with a restriction on previous domestic Block hour flying ought to be awful tight next year systemwide.
correct - but expect to see all the permissible block hours to be flown by 70 seaters.
TFAYD is offline  
Old 08-16-2020, 11:21 AM
  #112  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2011
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 847
Default

Originally Posted by TFAYD View Post
almost correct.

there are a couple of limits:

total hulls being operated by UAX as percentage of single aisle mainline aircraft. That limit applies to the total of small and larger RJ and has never been reached.

total number of 70/76 seaters. That is an absolute limit and not a function of NB count. That limit has been reached a long time ago.

total UAX block hours as a percentage of single aisle mainline block hours. That will be interesting to see as covid schedule reductions creep into the 12 month look back. I don’t think that limit was ever reached Pre-covid. That limit also doesnt differentiate between small and large RJ. You can expect 70/76 seaters to fly according to the absolute limit and 50 seater to go away.

and then there is a the furlough provision. No 76 seater at UAX are allowed if furloughed deeper than x. This is not subject to block hour or hull limitations or ratios.
Thank you!
tallpilot is offline  
Old 08-16-2020, 11:45 AM
  #113  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Viperstick's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 280
Default

Originally Posted by tallpilot View Post
Several different interconnected constraints. It is hard to keep them all straight without a spreadsheet. Perhaps some kind soul will scour the data and make one.

The number of 70/76 seat airframes was already at the limit based on total narrowbody airframes.

The 'poison pill' clause requires elimination of all 76 seat airframes in the event of a furlough but the total limit of over 50 seat airframes remains the same.

The real fireworks should be the block hour restrictions from the lookback period. It is hard to envision how that gets dealt with.

Please correct me if I am inaccurate. I don't have the contract in front of me.
Viperstick is offline  
Old 08-16-2020, 01:19 PM
  #114  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,503
Default

Originally Posted by Viperstick View Post
Seriously doubt they are going to make new mainline routes SOLELY for the purpose of generating more scope availability for affiliated regionals. Those routes are either economically feasible or they are not.


However, if they did I’m sure both pilot groups would take it.
Excargodog is offline  
Old 08-16-2020, 07:34 PM
  #115  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: 320 Captain
Posts: 634
Default

Express pre Covid did not reach the block hour restriction of 120%. How that plays out next spring with the 12 month lookback will be interesting.
Attached Images
C11DCA is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EZBW
United
131
05-04-2017 08:19 PM
Lbell911
SkyWest
16
04-19-2015 08:19 AM
LAfrequentflyer
Hangar Talk
2
02-01-2006 05:39 AM
HSLD
Major
14
01-30-2006 01:08 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



Your Privacy Choices