Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Do Airlines Dictate To RJ Operators What To Fly?  
User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2885 posts, RR: 10
Posted (4 years 4 months 3 hours ago) and read 7060 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Do the major airlines tell the feeder airlines (who they contract with) which planes / fleets they use? Like; can UA tell their feeder airlines to fly E195 or CRJ 1000's? Or does the feeder airline design there own fleets in hopes the big guys will be attracted to their fleet diverstity?


The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 3 hours ago) and read 7027 times:

That is a good question, and I don't really have the answer. I can say though that sometimes the major airlines (or more specifically the contracts with their pilots) dictate what planes their contractors cannot have. This is why Republic Air Holdings has to have Republic, Chautauqua, and Shuttle America to get around this.


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2178 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 2 hours ago) and read 6955 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I believe that pilot scope clauses at mainline dictates what RJ operators end up flying. For instance, at CO, jets with max 50 seats are allowed for regional flying (E145/CR2), while at US, jets with 90 seats are allowed - thus the CRJ900 was born.


Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25143 posts, RR: 46
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 6833 times:

Well the majors contract for specific aircraft to be operated over a specific route and times, at a established rate.
So yes the majors are very much in the driving seat as to what they contract for.

Now as far as your specific United EMB195/CRJ1000 example, both types would not be allowed by the UA mainline pilot contract so UA obviously would not go out and contract for such equipment.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2885 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months ago) and read 6675 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):

Thanks! And thank you for answering my "example" question too. Why would the UA pilots contact forbid the op of an EMB195 or CRJ1000? Is it because they are each close in size to UA's smallest? Gosh the EMB 170 from a pax pov are a 1000 times more comfortable than it older, smaller, 145. ( which by the way- at first an awesome ride)



The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
User currently offlinesaab2000 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2001, 1610 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months ago) and read 6675 times:

Most CPA (Capacity Purchase Agreements) specify aircraft type. In fact, they generally specify almost everything.


smrtrthnu
User currently offlinelegacytravel From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1067 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months ago) and read 6614 times:

Quoting saab2000 (Reply 5):
Most CPA (Capacity Purchase Agreements) specify aircraft type. In fact, they generally specify almost everything.

UA's contract with OO on the ORD-MKE route should be an E-70 instead of a CR2, always oversold on the evening routes.

Mark in MKE



I love the smell of Jet fuel in the Morning
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25143 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months ago) and read 6603 times:

The E195/CRJ1000 would not be allowed at United currently as the pilot contract has a seat count restriction, or what is commenly refered to as "scope clause" which specifies the scope of operations and that flying above a certain size (seat count/aircraft weight) must be performed by mainline employees.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9343 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6563 times:

Quoting VC10er (Reply 4):
Thanks! And thank you for answering my "example" question too. Why would the UA pilots contact forbid the op of an EMB195 or CRJ1000? Is it because they are each close in size to UA's smallest? Gosh the EMB 170 from a pax pov are a 1000 times more comfortable than it older, smaller, 145. ( which by the way- at first an awesome ride)

Because it cost mainline jobs. The point of Scope is to protect jobs.
like looking at Delta
they parked the 732s and DALPA signd 120 76 seat jets away during BK which replaced them. DALPA jobs went away and jobs at DCI grew. Thats bad for mainline. What ends up happening is, well look at YX. The airline becomes a virtual airline pretty much.

Quoting legacytravel (Reply 6):
UA's contract with OO on the ORD-MKE route should be an E-70 instead of a CR2, always oversold on the evening routes.

OO doesn't fly the the E70, they do fly the CR7 though.


Here is part of DALPA's section 1(aka SCOPE)


40. “Permitted aircraft type” means:
a. a propeller-driven aircraft configured with 70 or fewer passenger seats and with a
maximum certificated gross takeoff weight in the United States of 70,000 or fewer
pounds, and
b. a jet aircraft certificated for operation in the United States for 50 or fewer passenger
seats and with a maximum certificated gross takeoff weight in the United States of
65,000 or fewer pounds, and
c. one of up to 255 jet aircraft configured with 51-70 passenger seats and certificated in
the United States with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 86,000 pounds or less
(“70-seat jets”), and
d. one of up to 120 jet aircraft configured with 71-76 passenger seats and certificated in
the United States with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 86,000 pounds or less
(“76-seat jets”). The number of 76-seat jets may be increased above 120 by three
76-seat jets for each aircraft above the number of aircraft in the baseline fleet
operated by the Company (in service, undergoing maintenance and operational
spares) as of October 30, 2008. The baseline fleet number will be 440+N, in which
N is the number of aircraft (in service, undergoing maintenance and operational
spares but not including permitted aircraft types) added to the Company’s baseline
fleet from NWA. The number and type of all aircraft in the Company’s fleet on
October 30, 2008 will be provided to the Association. The number of 70-seat jets
plus 76-seat jets permitted by Section 1 B. 40. may not exceed 255.
Exception: Up to the 36 EMB-175s that were operated and/or ordered by Northwest
prior to October 30, 2008 may continue to be operated with up to a maximum gross
takeoff weight of 89,000 pounds



yep.
User currently offlinesaab2000 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2001, 1610 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6423 times:

Quoting legacytravel (Reply 6):
UA's contract with OO on the ORD-MKE route should be an E-70 instead of a CR2, always oversold on the evening routes.

What United should operate and what OO is obligated to operate are two different things. United feels that the CRJ-200 is appropriate. The fact that it is frequently oversold does not mean that OO is obligated to operate something else. That decision really lies with United and not with the contracted carrier.

If United specified to OO or another carrier what to operate on the ORD-MKE route for certain flights then that is what they would operate. I doubt that the equipment specified for that route is anything other than the CRJ-200.



smrtrthnu
User currently offlineilovepabst From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 102 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6360 times:

Quoting saab2000 (Reply 9):
United feels that the CRJ-200 is appropriate. The fact that it is frequently oversold does not mean that OO is obligated to operate something else. That decision really lies with United and not with the contracted carrier.

However, for your example, the ORD-MKE route is at-risk for OO and ultimately they are the ones who decide the equipment choice and whether to even fly the route.


User currently offlinejolau1701 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 232 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6271 times:

Unfortunately, I don't think OO puts CRJ-700's on it's pro-rate routes. Therefore, the only choices they have for the pro-rate routes would be either EMB-120s or CRJ-200s.

User currently offlineFRNT787 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1321 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5919 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 8):
Thats bad for mainline. What ends up happening is, well look at YX. The airline becomes a virtual airline pretty much.

YX is a different beast though. YX didn't give away all of their mainline because of scope, it was because of a shrinking airline and, eventually, Boeing. 16 of the 717s were returned early, thus Boeing went shopping to find an airline who needed 16-25 717s, and Mexicana Connect was found, and they wanted 25. The 717s were then gone at YX. The 190 was chosen by Republic to replace them. YX pilots could not come to a contract agreement with Republic Airways Holdings, and the E190s are now operated by Republic crews.



"We have a right to fail, because failure makes us grow" --Glenn Beck
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22915 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5787 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
Well the majors contract for specific aircraft to be operated over a specific route and times, at a established rate.
So yes the majors are very much in the driving seat as to what they contract for.

I don't know, though, that CPAs generally prohibit aircraft subs. RP puts 135s on AA Connection routes all the time presumably when that will not cause an oversale). If OO winds up in a situation where they have 4 contracted CR2 flights departing from a hub but have 3 CR2s and a CR7 available, they are going to send the CR7 on the flight booked to 60, not the one booked to 42.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineTranspac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3205 posts, RR: 13
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5658 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
If OO winds up in a situation where they have 4 contracted CR2 flights departing from a hub but have 3 CR2s and a CR7 available, they are going to send the CR7 on the flight booked to 60, not the one booked to 42.

It's actually remarkably rare for us to do a CR2>CR7 swap. In four years I've only seen it done 3 times.


User currently offlineshamrock604 From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4167 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5587 times:

It depends where in the world you are talking about.

Some European Regionals have a freer hand in this regard. The major may well have a hand in the decision, but might not have the casting vote!



Flown EI,FR,RE,EIR,VE,SI,TLA,BA,BE,BD,VX,MON,AF,YS,WX,KL,SK,LH,OK,OS,LX,IB,LTU,HLX,4U,SU,CO,DL,UA,AC,PR,MH,SQ,QF, EY, EK
User currently offlineKingFriday013 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1297 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4478 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 2):
For instance, at CO, jets with max 50 seats are allowed for regional flying (E145/CR2)

Don't forget that Colgan Air flies 74-seat Q400s for Continental Connection.

CO's smallest mainline jet is the 737-500, right? They have 114 seats.

I think that the airlines do have some power over telling regional carriers which aircraft should fly which routes. For instance, US Airways flies BUF-ROC-BDL with a Colgan SF340. However, we know Colgan also has Q400s which they fly for CO -- and not for US at all. So I guess mainline carriers can limit the type of aircraft their regionals fly for them.

-J.



Tho' I've belted you an' flayed you, By the livin' Gawd that made you, You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4381 times:

Quoting KingFriday013 (Reply 16):

It isn't just planes for them, but the others on the regional's certificate, which is why RAH has multiple subsidiaries.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2885 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2456 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From a customer standpoint United is United and CO is CO and Delta is Delta. Most go by what ticket they buy, what's painted on a plane and when the FA says "welome aboard United 1234 to Manalapan New Jersey"
that said a new clean E170 is a lot better a flying experience than an old E145 or an unheard of prop.
If I could make the numbers work, and I wanted to be the best North American airline, I'd want my pax on a nice plane always.



The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
American Airlines To HNL In 1981, Did I Fly A 747? posted Sun Jan 27 2008 10:20:11 by NotPs76
How Do Airlines Commit To The 350 This Early? posted Thu Jan 18 2007 00:25:07 by SSTsomeday
How Far Do Airlines Go Out Of Their Way To Help... posted Sat Jul 8 2006 00:30:56 by AirCanada014
Do Airlines Jig Their Schedules To Please? posted Mon Feb 6 2006 23:25:26 by ETStar
When Do Airlines Decide To Increase Frequencies? posted Mon Jan 9 2006 08:17:00 by ETStar
Why Do Airlines Want To Have All A/B Fleets? posted Tue Sep 20 2005 00:04:58 by Lazyshaun
US Airlines May Be Soon Allowed To Fly In Canada posted Wed Mar 2 2005 04:57:15 by STARAC17
Nepal Airlines Offers Stake To Indian Operators posted Fri Nov 12 2004 00:32:14 by Sunnyb
Northwest Airlines; Why Did They Have To Do This? posted Thu Oct 30 2003 02:18:20 by Superfly
Why Do Airlines Want You To Book Online? posted Fri Aug 8 2003 22:14:27 by Funflyer