50 seat RJ gones by 2013. Whats to come of this?
05-24-2008, 09:56 PM
#51
Banned
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 698
I wonder what fuel prices embraer used when they came up with this: http://www.embraercommercialjets.com...tela=economics
I think it's a bit flawed. Im flying mostly E135's out of CVG, which I know will be gone by the end of the year. And at least for our company, we're supposed to be getting rid of all the 50 seaters in 5 or 6 years, as per mainline's wishes. The lower frequency of flights accompanying the use of the 70+seaters will mean less pilots will be needed, so the belt tightening will continue...
I think it's a bit flawed. Im flying mostly E135's out of CVG, which I know will be gone by the end of the year. And at least for our company, we're supposed to be getting rid of all the 50 seaters in 5 or 6 years, as per mainline's wishes. The lower frequency of flights accompanying the use of the 70+seaters will mean less pilots will be needed, so the belt tightening will continue...
I want to know what idiot thinks there is even a break even mark for an airplane. I know at ExpressJet our break even for charter is 1 seat sold!! And we are making a good profit on that!
In all reality the break even point for an airplane depends on the market it is flying in. As well as if there is another airplane of the same size that burns less gas or a larger one that burns the same. Otherwise, until you invent a more efficient 50-seater, there is no price a gas that will prevent it from making money.
05-25-2008, 05:53 AM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: retired
Posts: 645
Maybe the Boyd Aviation consulting business will be gone by 2013.
Airplanes don't grow on trees, Mr. Boyd,
The RJs are here to stay until the industry can sustain a changeover.
That changeover requires surplus cash.
Who has any today????
Airplanes don't grow on trees, Mr. Boyd,
The RJs are here to stay until the industry can sustain a changeover.
That changeover requires surplus cash.
Who has any today????
05-25-2008, 07:35 AM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 1,105
I wonder why we never hear from the major / legacy pilot groups clamoring to do ALL their company flying ?
If company XXX has a need for a 19 / 30 / 50 / 70 / 76 seat aircraft on any route, why doesn't that pilot group demand that it be done by company pilots in company planes ?
Why is there a floating (and arbitrary) line of how many seats to be flown by company pilots ?
If company XXX has a need for a 19 / 30 / 50 / 70 / 76 seat aircraft on any route, why doesn't that pilot group demand that it be done by company pilots in company planes ?
Why is there a floating (and arbitrary) line of how many seats to be flown by company pilots ?
The major guys often look down on the guys flying smaller aircraft. Back in the day you didn't always fly the little plane to get to the big one and for some reason the pilots that got to the big one first thought less of the small plane pilot. They would not want to bruise thier egos by having to fly a little airplane.
05-25-2008, 07:39 AM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 1,105
This is only because there are more former RJ pilots at the majors now. And one of them has shown a carrier pilot how to land an airplane full of paying passengers with out dislodging thier teeth.
05-25-2008, 03:00 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: King Air (both)
Posts: 124
05-25-2008, 03:14 PM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: King Air (both)
Posts: 124
In "The Airline Pilots" by Hopkins, the early days, 1930's or so, are discussed about the lack of mil guys. Mil avaition was small for many years. Have the majors changed because of the mil guys? WWII and Viet Nam pushed huge numbers of mil to the airlines but what is the affect?
I understand the part about some of the mil egos. A few times I was amazed the plane could fly with with the huge ego "load" of my copilot.
Should the 121 world be all civilain? Not looking for flame but trying to see where this is going.
No, I will not be upset to be FO to my much younger CA. I am lucky to find a job.
05-25-2008, 03:22 PM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: G550 Captain
Posts: 1,206
At the NWA/DAL joint merger presentation, the NWA rep stated that they are looking for 100 seat jets that are fuel efficient to replace DC9s and MD80s, but that they are not available at a reasonable price at the moment. Until then, I think the RJs will be flying but it looks like 50 seat RJs will be phased out in numbers over the next few years. 76 seat RJs will continue on until they are replaced with 100 seat jets. The 100 seat jets will be flown by mainline pilots unless mainline pilots give up on the current scope clause. NWA alone has 8 regionals flying their routes and that's way too many. Looks like the new DAL will try to consolidate and narrow down regionals flying for them.
05-25-2008, 08:43 PM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,750
05-26-2008, 01:55 PM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: G550 Captain
Posts: 1,206
You mean at the majors or at the regionals? I believe there will be jobs at the majors. Whether they will be quality jobs with decent pay, I don't know. I hope so. At regionals, I believe there will continue to be needs for experienced pilots.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
