Scope-CRJ550
 

I started watching the P2P brief the NC put out. Within about 5 minutes, they tell us that they raised the weight limit on the CRJ550 so allow the company to carry more revenue and ensure pilots would be able to commute on them.

i don’t want this plane to have more capability. This scope give alone is reason to vote NO.

You know how you get pilots on them to commute…positive space.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Anything that incentivizes the company to retire/replace that TURD the CRJ200 is a huge GO item with me. Not that I'm for the TA...just sayin'...

the CRJ200 will retire itself. This scope give revitalizes the 50 seat segment.

^^THIS^^
If this was what the NC did (I too saw the Video), and the MEC/LEC members approved it, once this is shot down a RECALL of all those members needs to be initiated.

Disgusting and everyone should now realize that SCOPE has been changed, and NOT for the better.

His quote- "Currently there's no range restriction on that aircraft"
BS
Look at 1-C-1-b At least eighty percent (80%) of all United Express Flights each month shall be under 900 statute miles.
Then they are adding 4750 lbs. For revenue passengers? How many is that? Even if you go with 300lb per pax (with bags)- that's 15.8 passengers. How many passengers are getting left behind on this abortion of an aircraft?! Are they saying that a 70 seat aircraft now configured for 50 seats can only hold 35 revenue passengers?!
Also, for all the RJ experts out there- what other RJ's does UAX use and are the jumpseaters not part of the BOW or are there others that are leaving behind JS'ers?

Many people posted the absurdity of this 70 seater being turned into a 50 seater. But now this? This is a change of 1-L-29. Management knew the limit when they tried this experiment and now it's up to us to give up a Scope Limit to allow then to fix their mistake?

FS, FP & FtC
Motch

When using the winter weights, the CRJ-200 is seldom able take a jumpseater, when using summer weights they can make it work about half the time providing they don’t need an alternate. The ERJ-145 can’t even take 50 pax sometimes, never mind a jumpseater.

The 65,000lb wt limit very effectively limited the range of the 550 to 600 nm. adding 4750 of fuel and range limited to 900 nm would be a major scope give. Please reject it for this reason if nothing else.

Time to wind down this whole regional debacle and bring it in house. Alaska are you listening?

Should they also congratulate us for getting the week off when they give our job away?

A UAL jumpseater could still be bumped by another pilot, low cockpit oxygen, training, etc. There's nothing special here for the jumpseater. I'd be surprised if adding 4750 lbs alone doesn't completely secure the jumpseat for weight. This is purely spin.

If the company wants pilots to get to work, they can make it so jumpseaters don't count against the weight. If they insist on changing the MTOGW in order to lift jumpseat weight restrictions, they can deal with pilots exercising the prudent pilot policy when denied the jumpseat for weight.

I'm a commuter and I know this will hurt commuters. But that's not reason enough to raise the MTOGW.