United's death to the 50 seaters

Reply Subscribe

Page 3 of 6

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

01-22-2016, 06:14 AM

#21

schmohawk

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2015

Position: CRJ 0B

Posts: 215

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisreedrules

Thats a lot of caveats. Gas won't be cheap forever. Pilot supply is already showing signs of drying up. It isn't about cheap gas and pilots. 50 seaters aren't as profitable.

Today, the oil futures for DEC 2024 are still at $47.5/barrel. Those 50 seaters will fly as long as the airframes have cycles and pilots.

I was pretty excited when I saw the CI's creep up to 30, and now a few months later, I'm seeing CI's in the 40+

01-22-2016, 06:56 AM

#22

Washout

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jan 2007

Posts: 122

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisreedrules

I think what will happen over the next few years will be good for the industry and the profession long term. Although I think it will be a tough transition and a difficult pill to swallow for many. Regionals will shrink. 50 seaters will go away. Many cities will experience less frequency of flights as those three 50 seat RJs are replaced either by one mainline flight or maybe even one or two 80ish seat RJ flights. Other cities will lose air service altogether. Commuting will become more and more difficult.

I had a feeling that Boeing was going to make it tough on United to want to start flying 175s, 190s, or even the C-series. I'm sure they made them a sweet deal for those 73's.

United is still in the market for 100 seat aircraft. What else does your crystal ball say..?

01-22-2016, 07:35 AM

#23

Systemized

patience

Joined APC: Mar 2011

Posts: 1,068

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisreedrules

Any ideas where the losses in flying will come from? Also, 40 175s to be operated by who?

The 40 additional E175s in 2016 are from Skywest, Republic and Mesa. More coming online in 2017 also.

The two companies that operate E145s for United are Expressjet and TSA. The losses are probably Expressjet's. And more E145 losses in 2017 probably.

The three companies that operate 700s for United are Skywest, Mesa and Gojet. Skywest, most likely will lose 700s.

01-22-2016, 07:46 AM

#24

chrisreedrules

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2012

Position: CRJ FO

Posts: 4,601

Quote:

Originally Posted by Washout

United is still in the market for 100 seat aircraft. What else does your crystal ball say..?

I didn't say the 737s were the nail in the coffin for UAL buying the C-Series. I just figured Boeing would sweeten that pot to entice United into buying them.

And I'm selling the winning numbers to the next powerball, just DM me your email and I'll send you wiring instructions to my account in Switzerland.

01-22-2016, 07:47 AM

#25

chrisreedrules

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2012

Position: CRJ FO

Posts: 4,601

Quote:

Originally Posted by Systemized

I'm admittedly not very familiar with the UAL regional ops... Why would SkyWest lose the 700s over Mesa or GoJet?

01-22-2016, 08:07 AM

#26

buddies8

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Aug 2005

Posts: 3,707

Question, with the addition of the 737-700 to the United fleet, how many large regional jets does that increase that united can have on property per scope and how many can they add to the regionals if they park fifty seaters?

01-22-2016, 08:11 AM

#27

BeatNavy

Covfefe

Joined APC: Jun 2015

Posts: 3,001

Quote:

Originally Posted by buddies8

None. It was determined IIRC that the language in UALs contract that says "new narrow bodies" had to be a new type of airframe, not more of the same, i.e. E190/C series.

01-22-2016, 08:22 AM

#28

Systemized

patience

Joined APC: Mar 2011

Posts: 1,068

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisreedrules

I'm admittedly not very familiar with the UAL regional ops... Why would SkyWest lose the 700s over Mesa or GoJet?

The info I posted took no more than a couple minutes to dig up on United's website. If I had to guess, maybe Skywest traded 700s for E175s? Gojet and Mesa probably operate the 700s cheaper than Skywest.