Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
Latest on Midwest Airlines >

Latest on Midwest Airlines

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Latest on Midwest Airlines

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-05-2009, 05:18 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
UCLAbruins's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: F/O- G-V/550
Posts: 1,163
Default

They put the 25 B717s up for sale, only a couple of airlines showed any interest. Mexicana needed to replace their aging Fokker-100 fleet, I think they agreed to take the B717s.

Sad what happened to Midwest, flew them a couple of times, best service, nicest F/As. truly a shame
UCLAbruins is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 05:40 AM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
DAL4EVER's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: 88B - Loud Pipes Save Lives
Posts: 1,597
Default

I rather hope Republic gets it. If memory serves correctly, this is what Independence tried to do and got the royal shaft. If Republic got the 717, they could no longer fly for DAL, that would be a great way to downsize a significant number of RJs in the system.

The airline graveyard is littered with companies that leave their core product and try and become something they're not.
DAL4EVER is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 05:47 AM
  #13  
Line Holder
 
UND_Sioux's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 32
Default

Originally Posted by DAL4EVER
I rather hope Republic gets it. If memory serves correctly, this is what Independence tried to do and got the royal shaft. If Republic got the 717, they could no longer fly for DAL, that would be a great way to downsize a significant number of RJs in the system.

The airline graveyard is littered with companies that leave their core product and try and become something they're not.
That is not actually correct. If the Midwest certificate is purchased by Republic Airways Holdings, it would be operated as a seperate company. Any aircraft size operating on that certificate would be completely unrelated to the Delta scope that limits Shuttle America and Chautauqua aircraft seats flying under Delta paint. On the Republic Airlines certificate, they already operate E175s with 86 seats which is more than Delta's scope allows.
UND_Sioux is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 05:56 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
upndsky's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Bebe Bus De L'Air Assistant Aerial Conveyance Facilitator
Posts: 351
Default

Originally Posted by DAL4EVER
I rather hope Republic gets it. If memory serves correctly, this is what Independence tried to do and got the royal shaft. If Republic got the 717, they could no longer fly for DAL, that would be a great way to downsize a significant number of RJs in the system.

The airline graveyard is littered with companies that leave their core product and try and become something they're not.
I don't know about that. Republic Holdings, nee Chautauqua, has a good track record for getting around scope. They did this with AA, which has a restriction that an AA regional can't fly anything larger than 50 seats, even if it's in another airline's colors (Eagle being the exception with their CRJ700s).

They got around that by starting Republic Airways and creating Republic Airways Holdings (RAH), which then "owned" Chautauqua and Republic (they have since add Shuttle America). Chautauqua continued to do all 50-seat and less flying under their certificate while Republic and SA did all the 50+ flying under their certificates. In essence, RAH operates three separate airlines, although their pilots can bid across certificates.

The point is that it got around the AA scope issue because Chautauqua does not operate anything above 50 seats. I'm not familiar enough about our scope clause to know if they can do a similar runaround, especially if they add another certificate (Midwest) to their portfolio.

As much as I hate what RAH is doing to our profession, I have to give them kudos for being pretty savvy when it comes to stuff like this.
upndsky is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 05:57 AM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
UCLAbruins's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: F/O- G-V/550
Posts: 1,163
Default

Originally Posted by DAL4EVER
I rather hope Republic gets it. If memory serves correctly, this is what Independence tried to do and got the royal shaft. If Republic got the 717, they could no longer fly for DAL, that would be a great way to downsize a significant number of RJs in the system.

The airline graveyard is littered with companies that leave their core product and try and become something they're not.
Correct, that's why I don't see any regional venturing into any 120 seat experiment. It didn't work for Air Indi back in 06, why woudl it work now? Not to mention their pilots would probably deman major wages...

Airtran and Hawaiian showed no interest in those B717s, either a foreign airline takes them, or its straight to the desert.
UCLAbruins is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 06:37 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
DAL4EVER's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: 88B - Loud Pipes Save Lives
Posts: 1,597
Default

Originally Posted by upndsky
I don't know about that. Republic Holdings, nee Chautauqua, has a good track record for getting around scope. They did this with AA, which has a restriction that an AA regional can't fly anything larger than 50 seats, even if it's in another airline's colors (Eagle being the exception with their CRJ700s).

They got around that by starting Republic Airways and creating Republic Airways Holdings (RAH), which then "owned" Chautauqua and Republic (they have since add Shuttle America). Chautauqua continued to do all 50-seat and less flying under their certificate while Republic and SA did all the 50+ flying under their certificates. In essence, RAH operates three separate airlines, although their pilots can bid across certificates.

The point is that it got around the AA scope issue because Chautauqua does not operate anything above 50 seats. I'm not familiar enough about our scope clause to know if they can do a similar runaround, especially if they add another certificate (Midwest) to their portfolio.

As much as I hate what RAH is doing to our profession, I have to give them kudos for being pretty savvy when it comes to stuff like this.
It's been a few years so I truly forget the specifics but as I recall, ACA was doing our DO-Jet flying. When they fought UAL during the bankruptcy I believe they saw an opening at Dulles. With the LCCs being all the rage and no one could do anything wrong, ACA management made their fatal error and thought that as a low cost regional unit they could take the same infrastructure, get some Airbus aircraft and compete like JBLU.

They had to get a new certificate to operate those aircraft around scope, but because it was seen as a direct threat to DAL mainline flying we dropped them. Again, I don't remember the exact specifics so I'm talking from a shady memory. But I do recall that we dropped them over this as they were now competing against mainline not flying for them. If Republic does the same thing in MKE with Midwest, don't you think DAL may have some serious heartburn with this. They are already trying to find a way to get rid of significant numbers of 50 seaters and this could accomplish that.

The reason no one challenged them with AA is that AA was supportive of their lift and wanted them for the regional feed. The game changes when you go head to head with the hand that feeds you.
DAL4EVER is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 06:50 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 119
Default

Originally Posted by DAL4EVER
It's been a few years so I truly forget the specifics but as I recall, ACA was doing our DO-Jet flying. When they fought UAL during the bankruptcy I believe they saw an opening at Dulles. With the LCCs being all the rage and no one could do anything wrong, ACA management made their fatal error and thought that as a low cost regional unit they could take the same infrastructure, get some Airbus aircraft and compete like JBLU.

They had to get a new certificate to operate those aircraft around scope, but because it was seen as a direct threat to DAL mainline flying we dropped them. Again, I don't remember the exact specifics so I'm talking from a shady memory. But I do recall that we dropped them over this as they were now competing against mainline not flying for them. If Republic does the same thing in MKE with Midwest, don't you think DAL may have some serious heartburn with this. They are already trying to find a way to get rid of significant numbers of 50 seaters and this could accomplish that.

The reason no one challenged them with AA is that AA was supportive of their lift and wanted them for the regional feed. The game changes when you go head to head with the hand that feeds you.
The difference is ACA or ExpressJet was trying go it alone on a new brand. RAH would have the infrastructure in place to use the MidEx brand, and I doubt they would keep the 9 717s around. It would be an Embraer product, presumably 190/195s. Not saying its guaranteed success, but they would be acquiring a well established airline that has been marginally successful in the past in spite of all the efforts of Hokesema et al to hinder it. Also, DAL might even love to have RAH operating 170/190s as Midwest...bring them on as a codeshare and have a pseudo-regional that easily gets around DAL scope with their DCI partners.

Also, RAH was challenged by AA (actually, I believe APA brought the legal action), and was forced to acquire a new certificate to operate the >50 seat aircraft separate from CHQ, who does the AA 145 flying.
OlyRob is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 07:07 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
upndsky's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Bebe Bus De L'Air Assistant Aerial Conveyance Facilitator
Posts: 351
Default

Originally Posted by DAL4EVER
It's been a few years so I truly forget the specifics but as I recall, ACA was doing our DO-Jet flying. When they fought UAL during the bankruptcy I believe they saw an opening at Dulles. With the LCCs being all the rage and no one could do anything wrong, ACA management made their fatal error and thought that as a low cost regional unit they could take the same infrastructure, get some Airbus aircraft and compete like JBLU.

They had to get a new certificate to operate those aircraft around scope, but because it was seen as a direct threat to DAL mainline flying we dropped them. Again, I don't remember the exact specifics so I'm talking from a shady memory. But I do recall that we dropped them over this as they were now competing against mainline not flying for them. If Republic does the same thing in MKE with Midwest, don't you think DAL may have some serious heartburn with this. They are already trying to find a way to get rid of significant numbers of 50 seaters and this could accomplish that.

The reason no one challenged them with AA is that AA was supportive of their lift and wanted them for the regional feed. The game changes when you go head to head with the hand that feeds you.
True, but that's very different than a scope violation. DL dropped ACA because they were ****ing in our cornflakes and we were easily able to end the agreement.

Again, RAH could possibly start up Midwest without triggering the scope clause. Whether that will trigger a similar ACA-type response from DL remains to be seen. It all depends on the details of the agreements we have with RAH. There may not be anything in there that would allow us to end the contract without encurring significant penalties. Look at the trouble we're having trying to get rid of Freedom. Knowing RAH's track record, they probably have a pretty ironclad deal that prevents DL from just ending the contract.
upndsky is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 07:15 AM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Avroman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: FIRE ALPA
Posts: 3,097
Default

Perhaps that's why there is such the holdup on the 90+ seat pay at RAH???? This time it would matter since a 90+ seat plane is actually on the verge of reality and the company has planned a certain pay below what is being asked for to make all this work...
Avroman is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 07:19 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: e190
Posts: 929
Default

Originally Posted by OlyRob
The difference is ACA or ExpressJet was trying go it alone on a new brand. RAH would have the infrastructure in place to use the MidEx brand, and I doubt they would keep the 9 717s around. It would be an Embraer product, presumably 190/195s. Not saying its guaranteed success, but they would be acquiring a well established airline that has been marginally successful in the past in spite of all the efforts of Hokesema et al to hinder it. Also, DAL might even love to have RAH operating 170/190s as Midwest...bring them on as a codeshare and have a pseudo-regional that easily gets around DAL scope with their DCI partners.

Also, RAH was challenged by AA (actually, I believe APA brought the legal action), and was forced to acquire a new certificate to operate the >50 seat aircraft separate from CHQ, who does the AA 145 flying.
SOOO what again is preventing the new Delta, United, etc from absolutely crushing you? I think the only reason this charade that is Midwest Airlines is still flying is because Northwest has allowed it too. What could an E-190 product offer to a passenger other than a different paint job on the outside of the airplane? There are very few under utilized aiports and even though you are excited to get more airplanes and fly a 190 the chances of you filling an e-190 with the competition that will be there....

I work at xjt and even though branded failed a lot of our guys had a lot of pride in what we were doing and it gave a lot of people a glimmer of hope through a difficult time. It was definitly a cool experience but as far as operationally it is going to suck. Management will be pre-ocuppied with the new flying, all monetary resources will be going towards it, and there wil be hiccups in the operation.... its a PIA
newarkblows is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EWRflyr
Major
2
01-09-2009 03:12 PM
vagabond
Major
15
10-12-2008 12:07 PM
Flyboydan
Major
91
09-25-2008 04:50 AM
BoilerUP
Regional
110
09-06-2008 08:11 PM
DLax85
Cargo
3
08-30-2008 07:00 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices