Envoy or PDT
12-03-2016, 07:12 AM
#31
Custom User Title
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,271
PDT will never get 175s. Why would AAG waste millions of dollars a month on training, maintenance, management, and other costs? AAG is wisely moving flying around based on fleet type to reduce costs and be more efficient. In the end, PSA will fly the CRJs, Envoy will fly the EJets, and PDT will fly the 145's.
Once the fuel prices rise again and the market tanks, the 50 seaters will find themselves parked in the desert somewhere.
Once the fuel prices rise again and the market tanks, the 50 seaters will find themselves parked in the desert somewhere.
12-03-2016, 08:51 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2016
Position: E175
Posts: 686
PDT will never get 175s. Why would AAG waste millions of dollars a month on training, maintenance, management, and other costs? AAG is wisely moving flying around based on fleet type to reduce costs and be more efficient. In the end, PSA will fly the CRJs, Envoy will fly the EJets, and PDT will fly the 145's.
Once the fuel prices rise again and the market tanks, the 50 seaters will find themselves parked in the desert somewhere.
Once the fuel prices rise again and the market tanks, the 50 seaters will find themselves parked in the desert somewhere.
12-03-2016, 12:30 PM
#33
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,291
PDT will never get 175s. Why would AAG waste millions of dollars a month on training, maintenance, management, and other costs? AAG is wisely moving flying around based on fleet type to reduce costs and be more efficient. In the end, PSA will fly the CRJs, Envoy will fly the EJets, and PDT will fly the 145's.
Once the fuel prices rise again and the market tanks, the 50 seaters will find themselves parked in the desert somewhere.
Once the fuel prices rise again and the market tanks, the 50 seaters will find themselves parked in the desert somewhere.
They will eventually get 175s as the 145s time out I'm sure
12-03-2016, 03:05 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2015
Posts: 687
Right now it is 6 years at Envoy but with 60 to 70 NH a month and 30 Capt leaving a month that number should drop drastically. We are at the beginning of going from stagnation to steady movement. In 6 months to a year, if it is still 6 years upgrade we are in trouble. Common sense says that's not possible for it to stay 6 years as long as we keep hiring pilots and pilots keep flowing to AA.
12-03-2016, 06:03 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 147
2012 NH= 6
2013 NH= 70
2014 NH= 59
2015 NH= 93
2016 NH= 300 +
2017 NH = 600 + at same hire rate now
2017 AA FLOW 360 to 400
You are correct that is good news. Esp if we get more 175's and open more bases. Also not including any attrition to other legacy or LLC's
12-04-2016, 07:29 AM
#38
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Posts: 83
A friend interviewed at PDT recently.They told him the original plan for PDT was 175 s but the faa wouldn't sign off on it .They wanted to see them successfully operate a smaller jet first rather than jumping from the dash to a 76 Seat jet.
They will eventually get 175s as the 145s time out I'm sure
They will eventually get 175s as the 145s time out I'm sure
12-04-2016, 07:58 AM
#39
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 761
Yeah, the 175 is the future for Envoy. Clearly, the only logical conclusion to draw is that no other WO regional will get 76 seat jets
12-04-2016, 08:02 AM
#40
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 761
Makes total sense to grow a company in a huge way and then shut the doors. blah blah blah
What world do you live in man??
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
