Originally Posted by gojo

I can't offer anything on lines out of Ney York. But Shuttle does hourly flights from DCA to LGA. Or at least they used to. Most of our flying is east of the Mississippi. As far as upgrade, currently there is a company requirement of 1000 hours. That is reducible all the way down to street captain to meet company needs. There has been some upgrading with lower on the last two vacancies. I'm sure others will have more specifics. Good luck

Originally Posted by prex8390

Typically any better or worse flying from New York than say like Detroit or Msp. From the Midwest and wanna get it of the northeast cooridor once and a while

Originally Posted by prex8390

Typically any better or worse flying from New York than say like Detroit or Msp. From the Midwest and wanna get it of the northeast cooridor once and a while

Originally Posted by gloopy

I guess it would be a "loss" of 100-150 or so frames (not sure exactly how many 50's are flying around ATM, and the number is always in flux anyway) but they definitely want Fifty more 76 seaters (really 90 seaters with a desirable first class, etc).

Obviously the exact number in question would effect the total seats portion of the equation, but in pretty much any case doing so would be a reaction, and in general a reduction would be a good thing in and of itself.

However the very reason they (the company) wants to do this in the first place is because they know going forward they are going to have a VERY hard time staffing the regional model, and eventually parking 50's to take on more 76's allows for 50%+ more pax to be flown by whatever number of pilots they can manage to keep at any given time.

So basically doing this would breathe more life into the program and make it more viable than it otherwise would be. Clearly that is the only reason they would even attempt to do something like that.

I don't trust them with this iteration of RJ's anymore than the days of "hey all we want are twenty 70 seaters, total pinky promise!" etc.

Originally Posted by Mesabah

The 76 seat jets actually cost less to operate than the 50 seaters. We have 200's that are market specific, and may sit for several hours, even up to 24 hours without flying. Since the 76 seater can be flown on way more routes, it makes sense to replace all the 50 seaters with 76 seat jets, and cover the displaced 76 seat flying with the C-series. So, this is exactly what Delta is doing, DALPA will allow it.

Originally Posted by Mesabah

The 76 seat jets actually cost less to operate than the 50 seaters. We have 200's that are market specific, and may sit for several hours, even up to 24 hours without flying. Since the 76 seater can be flown on way more routes, it makes sense to replace all the 50 seaters with 76 seat jets, and cover the displaced 76 seat flying with the C-series. So, this is exactly what Delta is doing, DALPA will allow it.

Originally Posted by stringandrudder

Makes sense. But what's the deal with the -200 expansion then? Temporary?

Originally Posted by Mesabah

The 76 seat jets actually cost less to operate than the 50 seaters. We have 200's that are market specific, and may sit for several hours, even up to 24 hours without flying. Since the 76 seater can be flown on way more routes, it makes sense to replace all the 50 seaters with 76 seat jets, and cover the displaced 76 seat flying with the C-series. So, this is exactly what Delta is doing, DALPA will allow it.