What's the Latest at ASA/Expressjet?
09-02-2014, 11:25 PM
#7131
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 2,035
It has been the hot talk in the crew room...but any of us with sense know this is not going to happen for a huge number of reasons, but the primary reasons being:
1. There are enough applicants for DL, UA and AA for the next 3-5 years in Captains alone from all the regionals...not to mention the FOs...the overwhelming majority of major new hire classes have been filled with military guys/gals to date. Regional attrition to the majors hasn't even scratched the surface yet of it's full potential.
2. What makes one regional different or "better" than the other? Why would a major choose one regional for it's "flow" over another? What if United went to GoJet and proposed a flow, or chose the L-ASA group over L-XJT's pilot group etc etc? The only "flows" that will be set up will be at the wholly owned level and they'll be nothing but a bait and switch written in "iron clad" language that can be undone with the simple pull of a string, or "per the company's discretion."
Now, will a "flow" be set up within 5-10 years after this proposed "shortage" takes full affect as so many claim? Perhaps, but the only way to get to a major right now is to earn it.
1. There are enough applicants for DL, UA and AA for the next 3-5 years in Captains alone from all the regionals...not to mention the FOs...the overwhelming majority of major new hire classes have been filled with military guys/gals to date. Regional attrition to the majors hasn't even scratched the surface yet of it's full potential.
2. What makes one regional different or "better" than the other? Why would a major choose one regional for it's "flow" over another? What if United went to GoJet and proposed a flow, or chose the L-ASA group over L-XJT's pilot group etc etc? The only "flows" that will be set up will be at the wholly owned level and they'll be nothing but a bait and switch written in "iron clad" language that can be undone with the simple pull of a string, or "per the company's discretion."
Now, will a "flow" be set up within 5-10 years after this proposed "shortage" takes full affect as so many claim? Perhaps, but the only way to get to a major right now is to earn it.
There are plenty that didn't "earn it".
09-03-2014, 03:44 AM
#7133
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,951
09-03-2014, 04:20 AM
#7134
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: 737 Left
Posts: 1,827
What he's talking about is that the industry has shown three flights a day are the minimum in most markets. People don't want to fly from MLI to ATL, they want to fly from MLI to CDG, LHR, or AMS (John Deere). They don't want to get on the 7am flight out and sit in ATL all day waiting for their international flight. One flight a day would destry any reasonable chance of connections. This is partially why large RJs will never go away completely. They simply can'ty fill a 717/319/737 three times a day every day.
09-03-2014, 04:42 AM
#7135
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B777 Capt
Posts: 844
On the subject of service levels. 3 flights a day in mainline jets is exactly what many markets had prior to the RJ introduction. The mainline jets were full. They were not pulled due to load factor. They were pulled due to RJ carriers doing the flying for less costs. Pure and simple it was introductory wages by guys liking up to fly RJ's. Now wih a workforce that is long in the tooth the cost difference is not as large. Mainline has the merger seat discipline and high fuel prices have slowed the number of startups. The legacy carriers have gotten their houses in order and will be doing more and more of their own flying going forward.
Get well soon
09-03-2014, 04:42 AM
#7136
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2013
Position: The Parlor
Posts: 1,247
I know they can't fill a 717/737/a319 3 times a day. Never said they could/would. They topic began about cutting or eliminating capacity on less profitable or non-profitable routes. The other poster threw in MLI and 200+ seats. All I did was give an example of an RJ replacement with adequate seating capable for the city he/she used as an example. Lastly, what customers 'want' doesn't always matter. If mainline decides one flight a day in a specific market on a narrow body, the flying public will adjust.
09-03-2014, 04:48 AM
#7137
Stuck Mic
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,059
The bottom line is small RJs are going away in massive numbers.
Schedules are being adjusted to fit smaller mainline aircraft into those cities and reduce the number of flights but maintain capacity (most cities). Look at vps, fay, cae, and even AGS. Flying an airbus, 717 or md80 and cut 2-3 50 seaters. Its been happening and it will continue to happen. Delta still has another 30+ 717s to take delivery of from southwest.
United is a few years behind delta so expect to see the same thing. American is jumping on the bandwagon as well.
There will always be a spot for smaller jets, it just won't be the major part of domestic flying any more.
Schedules are being adjusted to fit smaller mainline aircraft into those cities and reduce the number of flights but maintain capacity (most cities). Look at vps, fay, cae, and even AGS. Flying an airbus, 717 or md80 and cut 2-3 50 seaters. Its been happening and it will continue to happen. Delta still has another 30+ 717s to take delivery of from southwest.
United is a few years behind delta so expect to see the same thing. American is jumping on the bandwagon as well.
There will always be a spot for smaller jets, it just won't be the major part of domestic flying any more.
09-03-2014, 05:44 AM
#7138
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,951
On the subject of service levels. 3 flights a day in mainline jets is exactly what many markets had prior to the RJ introduction. The mainline jets were full. They were not pulled due to load factor. They were pulled due to RJ carriers doing the flying for less costs. Pure and simple it was introductory wages by guys liking up to fly RJ's. Now wih a workforce that is long in the tooth the cost difference is not as large. Mainline has the merger seat discipline and high fuel prices have slowed the number of startups. The legacy carriers have gotten their houses in order and will be doing more and more of their own flying going forward.
I hear DAL's 717 program isn't going too well... turns out they CAN'T fill 3 mainline planes a day in 3rd tier markets after all, and the operating costs are going through the roof. The pilot positions went senior, maintenance is way more than expected, and fuel burns are much higher than they thought on those short legs.
Small RJs are history. Large RJs are here to stay.
09-03-2014, 06:53 AM
#7139
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B777 Capt
Posts: 844
What actually caused mainline flying to go to RJs was greedy senior mainline pilots selling off scope for short term gains. So look in the mirror, Pops.
I hear DAL's 717 program isn't going too well... turns out they CAN'T fill 3 mainline planes a day in 3rd tier markets after all, and the operating costs are going through the roof. The pilot positions went senior, maintenance is way more than expected, and fuel burns are much higher than they thought on those short legs.
Small RJs are history. Large RJs are here to stay.
I hear DAL's 717 program isn't going too well... turns out they CAN'T fill 3 mainline planes a day in 3rd tier markets after all, and the operating costs are going through the roof. The pilot positions went senior, maintenance is way more than expected, and fuel burns are much higher than they thought on those short legs.
Small RJs are history. Large RJs are here to stay.
It doesn't matter where the positions went for seniority. Did you or DL think that no mainline pilot would bid an airplane to get better seniority or perhaps an upgrade? That would show you and DL mgmnt are out of touch.As for scope, tell yourself whatever you need to make yourself feel good. RJ's were sold as additional lift versus wholesale replacement in markets.
If the RJ flying was known to be undesirable why did you take the job? If guys like you had said no or asked for better wages to fly those RJ's we would not be having this debate. You had the chance to say NO yourself, yet you took those jobs with the intent of getting one of the mainline jobs you were helping eliminate. I suspect if we went back to 2002-2008 there would not be too many guys like you complaining about your jobs as you saw massive growth. You weren't blaming the mainline pilots for your upgrades back then.
09-03-2014, 07:09 AM
#7140
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,951
I am sure you have all the inside scoop on the DL 717 operations It doesn't matter where the positions went for seniority. Did you or DL think that no mainline pilot would bid an airplane to get better seniority or perhaps an upgrade? That would show you and DL mgmnt are out of touch.
As for scope, tell yourself whatever you need to make yourself feel good. RJ's were sold as additional lift versus wholesale replacement in markets.
If the RJ flying was known to be undesirable why did you take the job? If guys like you had said no or asked for better wages to fly those RJ's we would not be having this debate. You had the chance to say NO yourself, yet you took those jobs with the intent of getting one of the mainline jobs you were helping eliminate. I suspect if we went back to 2002-2008 there would not be too many guys like you complaining about your jobs as you saw massive growth. You weren't blaming the mainline pilots for your upgrades back then.
It doesn't matter where the positions went for seniority. Did you or DL think that no mainline pilot would bid an airplane to get better seniority or perhaps an upgrade? That would show you and DL mgmnt are out of touch.As for scope, tell yourself whatever you need to make yourself feel good. RJ's were sold as additional lift versus wholesale replacement in markets.
If the RJ flying was known to be undesirable why did you take the job? If guys like you had said no or asked for better wages to fly those RJ's we would not be having this debate. You had the chance to say NO yourself, yet you took those jobs with the intent of getting one of the mainline jobs you were helping eliminate. I suspect if we went back to 2002-2008 there would not be too many guys like you complaining about your jobs as you saw massive growth. You weren't blaming the mainline pilots for your upgrades back then.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
