Airline Pilot Central Forums

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

- United (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/)

- - C Series?? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/united/84831-c-series.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by svergin (Post 1759366)

We had unlimited 78 seaters at CAL with the Q-400 so at least those got included in the new SCOPE as part of the limit, closing that loophole I never liked. But 76 seat jets were not allowed under our CAL scope, so I guess thats a trade off.

My thoughts exactly. The UAX side of the house is getting smaller and the block hour restrictions are getting tighter. The gauge increase sucked but it put UAX in a tighter bottle and capped it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 24/48 (Post 1759370)

My thoughts exactly. The UAX side of the house is getting smaller and the block hour restrictions are getting tighter. The gauge increase sucked but it put UAX in a tighter bottle and capped it.

Now just keep it there or shrink the number of airframes each contract and all new domestic needs to go to mainline.

Quote:

Originally Posted by awax (Post 1758868)

Scope highlights from the UPA roadshows in 2012:

80% of Feeder flying must be less than 900 miles.

900 sm not nm.... 900sm = 783nm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by morerightrudder (Post 1759345)

What is an "Aer Lingus type operation" ?

That was a real gem. Due to our POS bankruptcy contract, UAL was able to sell UAL seats on a bastardized Aer Lingus flight from IAD to MAD. I say bastardized because the pilots were Aer Lingus (although originally they were going to be off the street new hires), and the F/As WERE off the street new hires based in IAD. All ramp and above the wing personnel were UAL, I believe. So "our" only flights to MAD were operated by this outsourced scheme much like the United Express FFD model...only instead of an RJ, it was an A-330. Good times. A perfect example of what management is capable of.

Quote:

Originally Posted by El10 (Post 1759170)

The only reason they are going away is because they can replace them. If they did not have the option to get the 76 seaters they would have no choice but to keep the 50 seaters longer.

Also the 70 seater is not going any where. The ability to have three class cabin in the 70 and 76 seaters allows them to do all the up sells. The ancillary income on these makes for far better economic terms then the 50 seaters.

The only reason they are going away is that they are unprofitable. We will see some flying returned to us but it could have been a whole lot more had we held the line and not given away the E2 jets. There are NO orders for 70's anymore. MGT will get rid of them as they come off leases because they are not profitable. They can't get rid of the 50's fast enough. This would have happen just the same had we held the line on the 76 seaters. Below is a quote from the article.
Assessing the 70-90 seat regional jet sector | Leeham News and Comment

The 70-seat market is transitioning into the past; there are few remaining orders for the CRJ-700 and E-170 and none at all for the MRJ-70. The ARJ-21-70 is actually a 90-passenger aircraft in one class configuration. The paucity of orders for the CRJ-700 and the E-170 demonstrate this declining market.

I don't get this. Did they have a change of heart?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/trans-...160000262.html

TSA sucks this will not help the completion factor, probably the worst airline that we have under the UAX banner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Guapo (Post 1761722)

I don't get this. Did they have a change of heart?

Not really.

It's simply UCH moving existing aircraft from XJT to Trans States (the ones not being retired, presumably).

At the end of the day there will still be far fewer 50 seaters at UAX.