82spukram

Jet Pilot Mike,

Anything is possible when all parties involved are motivated. The question in my mind is not can it be done (in as little as 9months) but what would the product look like? What would the impact on things like the stock price be if we spent 2 years worth of product development cost in 6 months (I don't personally care but the people the board does)? Getting pilots typed and bringing on a new fleet can be done but it would not be an AQP program. The aircraft would be limited to one or two bases and almost all out and back flying. All of things you mentioned are valid points but if the Company thinks it makes sense then make no mistake it will be done. (While I like the C-Series more and have ~3000 hours in the 190 and didn't enjoy it I think a 190 program would be much quicker to get up and running largely because we could just buy one of our regional partners program and contract out the maintence program while our technitions receive training.)

David Puddy

All good points. I get it about ramp-up time. No doubt SWISS has had to do the same with a new platform. Fortunately, Bombardier has the support infrastructure throughout the US already established for the CRJ/Q400, but training and parts will need to be addressed. Bombardier no doubt needs to step-up and show it can successfully address ramp-up timing - especially for potential legacy customers.

CLazarus

Anyone have any idea how many aircraft we have coming off of lease in the next couple of years? I looked at the 2014 annual report (2015 not posted yet) and saw we have quite a few 800s and a number of 900s/700s that we've leased along with A319/320s. None of our 900ERs are leased and the -9 Maxes will be purchased. The purchase of the 700s seems like growth, but it might not be all that much depending on how many aircraft we are planning to give back. I understand we can extend leases or even purchase aircraft coming off of lease. I imagine part of the appeal to the CO of grabbing the 700s is the bargain price, but another part may be to reduce leasing expenses.

As for CS vs E2, it would still be a while before we could get any CS on property... but it would certainly be a few years faster than we could get an E2 on property. I'd say the key advantage of the E2 (190/195) is that it better covers the "100 seat" segment than the CS, which on the largest end overlaps capacity we now seem to have well covered with the 700s.