ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:16 am

With the recent anouncement of DJ ordering E170/E190s, and in the US we have B6 and NW all building up a fleet of E-Jets. UA and DL both have regional services on E-Jets as well. US Airways has a nice E170 fleet as well.
Will CO look into the E-Jets as well? I know they will have to change their contracts to allow regionals to use the E-170, but what about mainline E-190s? I guess to answer my own question, CO does have an all Boeing mainline fleet, and the E-190 is still pretty young.
Mainline E-190s are a long shot, but some have said on here that the E-170 is nearly a sure thing.
Not only will the E-Jets look great in CO colors, I finally will have an oppurtunity to fly on one of them, as I fly CO frequently.
 
B6WNQX
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:38 pm

Quoting KSUpilot (Thread starter):

Don't forget that US will be receiving some E190's for mainline soon too.
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 1:42 pm

Did not know that. I knew they had a very nice sized E170 fleet. I'm assuming these will be delivered in the new livery? Those are going to look great!
 
CRGsFuture
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:04 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 2:01 pm

I wish AE would pick them up, but alas no.
Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 2:42 pm

CO will eventually work out the pilot contracts for E175s and who will fly them and for what amount, and you'll see them lickety split. Until then, the answer is a firm no. I think they also want to know how low the 797 goes, to see if the E170/E190 family is best, or if they will do a 797 replacement for the 735. Otherwise, it might make sense for CRJ series.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
masseybrown
Posts: 4448
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 3:04 pm

It would be nice to see some hard operating numbers for the 170/190 types.

Does anybody have them? I wonder on a CASM basis if either type beats the 735 or A318.

EWR can fill a 735 to almost anywhere and CLE can fill the ERJ's on routes with enough of a fare premium to make them modestly profitable. I'm guessing it's IAH that could use the 75-90 passenger capacity best.
 
FCYTravis
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:21 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 3:20 pm

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 5):
I wonder on a CASM basis if either type beats the 735 or A318.

The E-jets soundly beat those aircraft - which are overweight shrink-jobs by comparison. Nobody's buying the A318 and nobody's buying the 736.
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 3:28 pm

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 6):
The E-jets soundly beat those aircraft - which are overweight shrink-jobs by comparison. Nobody's buying the A318 and nobody's buying the 736.

But the 735 is not the 736. The 736 may be an overweight shrink, but the 735 was not. It was the "optimal" 737 Classic length, same as the 732, and the wings are smaller, the airframe lighter.

I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
coiah756ca
Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:31 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 3:37 pm

While it is true that our(CO) contracts will not allow it, CO will persuade the union that it's in their best interest to use the E170 and 190. There are some routes in the COEX system that are suitable for that airplane and no other. e.i. IAH-BOI.

BTW.  Smile

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/bmtair/1110345_copy-1.jpg
Long live Denver-STAPLETON. RIP the old and best KDEN
 
User avatar
BreninTW
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 5:31 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:36 pm

Quoting CRGsFuture (Reply 3):
I wish AE would pick them up, but alas no

AE has eight on order -- due for delivery from April 07; news release at http://www.mandarin-airlines.com/en/enews_608.htm
 
FutureFO
Posts: 2811
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2001 10:58 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:46 pm

American Eagle, not Mandarin Airlines. Eagle has the ERJ's and the CR7's.
I Don't know where I am anymore
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 12:41 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

I would like to see this as well. The E170 is perfect for Continetnal Express, however, if we are talking a replacement for the 735, the E195 and not the E190 may be the answer.

For the E195 vs Y1, I think it all comes down to whether the smaller Y1 is a simple 735 like shrink or if it is an entirely different aircraft, similar to the 717 (in terms of size, not configuration)
 
masseybrown
Posts: 4448
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:50 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

The Embraer corporate site offers a slide presentation that suggests the 195 with either 32" or 31" seat pitch will be cheaper to operate per seat on a 500nm trip than the 717, 737-600, and A318. The E170/175/190 will be more expensive to operate. The comparison is in percentages, not actual costs.

The 737-500 is not shown in the comparison.
 
konrad
Posts: 463
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2002 3:54 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:27 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

LOT is replacing 10-15 years old 735s with E175 (82pax) and E195 (not yet in fleet). Supposedly because of the better CASM. No numbers from them though.
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:44 am

Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 8):
BTW.

Nice render. Had a little fun with a Copa E190:

http://onfinite.com/libraries/1032498/9fe.jpg

Is Copa still owned by CO? If so, then Copa probably is serving as a ncie test of the E-Jets for CO.
 
FCYTravis
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:21 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:39 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
But the 735 is not the 736. The 736 may be an overweight shrink, but the 735 was not. It was the "optimal" 737 Classic length, same as the 732, and the wings are smaller, the airframe lighter.

I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

You're comparing a 20-year-old steam-gauge used aircraft dragged out of the desert somewhere to a brand-new, high-efficiency, glass-cockpit modern medium jetliner. There's no comparison at all.

Is CO going to immediately ashcan their 735 fleet? I doubt it. But by the same token, you don't see them rushing to buy up used ones, either.

[Edited 2006-11-03 22:41:28]
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:47 am

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 15):
Is CO going to immediately ashcan their 735 fleet? I doubt it. But by the same token, you don't see them rushing to buy up used ones, either.

I doubt they will as well...not until more is known about Y1. If Boeing does not offer a smaller "LRJ" version of Y1, CO will go with the E190/195.
 
coiah756ca
Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:31 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:11 am

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 14):
Is Copa still owned by CO? If so, then Copa probably is serving as a ncie test of the E-Jets for CO.

Yes they are. A good part of CO's 3Q profit was brought in by Copa.
Long live Denver-STAPLETON. RIP the old and best KDEN
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:25 am

Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 17):
Yes they are. A good part of CO's 3Q profit was brought in by Copa.

So CO technically is operating E190s, just "indirectly". Well I'm sure CO will make a good decision, but you have to think that the E190 does have some advantages already over a Y1LRJ, as CO will know how the E190s worked for Copa, whereas Y1 will be unknown.

Either one is good for me, but I really want to fly on a CO E190!!!  Smile
 
masseybrown
Posts: 4448
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 1:46 pm

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 14):
Is Copa still owned by CO? If so, then Copa probably is serving as a ncie test of the E-Jets for CO.

On July 5th CO sold 7.5 million shares of Copa for $156 million, a $92 million profit. They retain ownership of 4.4 million shares, about 10% of Copa.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 1:49 pm

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 12):
The Embraer corporate site offers a slide presentation that suggests the 195 with either 32" or 31" seat pitch will be cheaper to operate per seat on a 500nm trip than the 717, 737-600, and A318.

I don't doubt that (though I would imagine the 717 is pretty competitive). I wonder how it changes for a 1200nm trip, since an airline like CO is not going to limit 110 seat aircraft to 500nm trips.

CO would be doing a complete breakdown based on their various stage lengths for planes of that size and prorating the contribution each makes to reach the baseline CASM for each aircraft.

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 11):
For the E195 vs Y1, I think it all comes down to whether the smaller Y1 is a simple 735 like shrink or if it is an entirely different aircraft, similar to the 717 (in terms of size, not configuration)

That's part of it. but it's also a question of whether it makes more sense to do Y1 all the way down to 735 size (in which case it allows for the CRJ700/900 into the picture, flown by express), or only take Y1 from 149 seats and up and intro the E-Jet family at 80-130 seats is a new intermediate CO airline, with a pay scale between express and mainline. Continental+ or something. It might be a way to work it out with the pilots, offer F class (possibly just same width seats at 38" pitch and real food) but still keep the planes out of the mainline fleet.

A lot depends on how the pilots work with the airline toward a manageable solution. Right now, the situation is not manageable, as it leaves a huge hole in their business and hurts the bottom line.

Every time I fly on a completely full ERJ on a 750nm stage I know that they are losing out on more revenue. Just tonight my flight had 50 pax in 50 seats, and that's pretty standard for the SRQ run, but they don't have the demand for 110 seats on that route, nor is flying the 735 under 1000nm the best use of the aircraft.

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 15):
You're comparing a 20-year-old steam-gauge used aircraft dragged out of the desert somewhere to a brand-new, high-efficiency, glass-cockpit modern medium jetliner. There's no comparison at all.

What a silly statement.

735s are not 20 years old (max 16.5 years), they aren't being dragged out of the desert and they are not inherently inefficient. If they were inefficient, WN would have dumped them.

CO has a relatively young fleet, with 30 being delivered in between July 1997 and October 1998, and the others only a few years older. To a certain extent, Boeing was stupid for offering the 736 in the first place and might have continued to offer the 735 to customers who liked it, possibly with the upgraded engines of the 737NG family to improve it.

I have no doubt that as the longest stretch, the E195 is very economical. All I asked for was a comparison of HOW much more. Gaining efficiency in the small jet market is not as easy as you make it out to be. Just because the E170 is new, doesn't make it more efficient than a 735 for example, due to the size of the 735 (assuming you can fill it most of the way). But the E170 blows away the ERJ and CRJ100/200 business case, which is why they are selling well.

Just because something is nearly as old as you are doesn't make it a hunk of junk.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:16 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 4):
CO will eventually work out the pilot contracts for E175s and who will fly them and for what amount, and you'll see them lickety split.



Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 8):
While it is true that our(CO) contracts will not allow it, CO will persuade the union that it's in their best interest to use the E170 and 190.

Nope.

1. CAL is as risk averse as any airline out there; no one wants another type on the property with the associated costs.

2. As soon as a cost structure is developed for the a/c at CAL, a 737 immediately is more cost effective.

3. CAL pilots WILL NOT allow another regional work list (regional) to fly those a/c, and if CAL pilots fly them, they are very equal to -500, -300 and -700 pay, so better to get 737s

4. CAL is putting winglets on -500s and -300s; range flex is the new key and an "E Jet" is not enough a/c to be flexible enough for the route structure.
 
optionscle
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:08 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:37 pm

Quoting EssentialPowr (Reply 21):
3. CAL pilots WILL NOT allow another regional work list (regional) to fly those a/c, and if CAL pilots fly them, they are very equal to -500, -300 and -700 pay, so better to get 737s

I think you're overestimating the cost of labor and underestimating the cost of fuel. Admittedly, I don't have either of those figures in front of me, but I would think that the inefficiencies from overpriced pilots and F/A's would be offset by the aircraft's lower operating costs. Furthermore, (and again this might be against CO's labor contracts,) CO employees need not perform the maintenance on the aircraft. It could instead be outsourced to ExpressJet or another carrier which minimizes the costs associated with adding a fourth aircraft type.
 
FCYTravis
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:21 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:19 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20):
Just because something is nearly as old as you are doesn't make it a hunk of junk.

I didn't say they were "hunks of junk" - but you can hardly grow an airline into the future with a discontinued airframe which is less efficient and heavier for its carrying capacity compared to modern aircraft.
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:33 am

Quoting OptionsCLE (Reply 22):
but I would think that the inefficiencies from overpriced pilots and F/A's would be offset by the aircraft's lower operating costs.

Operating costs on the 170 series are as yet highly variable; as a new a/c the DOCs are above projected, and any time a new type is added to a fleet, costs go up due to training and acclimation. On a 737 NG, for ex, if the FMS won't take the OAT, the problem is typically that the pitot heat is on. That fix is told to the crew over the radio, and fixed in moments.

On a new type, troubleshooting has to occur to sort out the smaller issues, and that increases docs.

CAL is very proud, as is Wall Street, that it has 3 fleet types, and the 787 certainly warrants another. I don't see it happening at CAL to buy or finance another small a/c, and the pilots will prevent the scope issue from being overturned.
 
B737900ER
Posts: 589
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:58 am

Quoting OptionsCLE (Reply 22):
CO employees need not perform the maintenance on the aircraft. It could instead be outsourced to ExpressJet or another carrier which minimizes the costs associated with adding a fourth aircraft type.

The cost of day to day maintenance would be too high, and complicated to outsource. If you have to train people to perform line maintenance then you might as well keep it all in house, if you have the facilities, which is CO's philosophy already

Quoting EssentialPowr (Reply 24):
That fix is told to the crew over the radio, and fixed in moments.On a new type, troubleshooting has to occur to sort out the smaller issues, and that increases docs.

 checkmark  Perfect example. When outsourced this would take longer and would lead to allot more complications
 
coiah756ca
Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:31 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:10 am

Quoting EssentialPowr (Reply 21):
Nope.

Think what you like, but anything can happen at CO. Any type of resolution for ERJ inefficiency is being explored. Out of personal opinion, I would like to see the E-170 at COEX.

I am nearing the last 6 years of my career at CO, but my son will hopefully be at COEX in the next few years. IMO, The E-170 is a great airplane and would be a good starting or 2nd aircraft in an airline career.
Long live Denver-STAPLETON. RIP the old and best KDEN
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:55 pm

Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 26):
Think what you like, but anything can happen at CO. Any type of resolution for ERJ inefficiency is being explored. Out of personal opinion, I would like to see the E-170 at COEX.

Whoa!

What about the CAL pilots junior to you??? You aren't worried about those jobs, but where is your son going to start at CAL? XJT gets 170s, and he still shouldn't stay there b/c XJT isn't an airline, just a labor group.

COEX and the regionals will still be there for your son and there will always be opportunities for everyone to start their careers. XJT is going to have to return to turboprops to remain solvent; if CAL pilots let them do it (let COEX get 170s) that eliminates a lot of CAL pilots and kills the career, unless of course you see no fuure for CAL.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:29 pm

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 23):
I didn't say they were "hunks of junk" - but you can hardly grow an airline into the future with a discontinued airframe which is less efficient and heavier for its carrying capacity compared to modern aircraft.

But you've provided nothing to back this up.

You made claims about them being 20 years old, and that they were dragged out of the desert. Those were false claims. But then we are supposed to just trust that the E-195 is so much more efficient than the 735 for the routes CO uses them on that it's worth scrapping 8-10 year old jets and buy new equipment because you say it's true? And yet Boeing itself is not in any hurry to introduce the 797 because it isn't efficient enough compared to the 737NG and 737Classic to inspire a rush of orders, but we are to believe that Embraer has solved this dilemma? And if that's true (that the E-Jet is a revolution in efficiency), why are orders only slowly coming in? Why isn't E selling 1000s a year?

I pointed out that the 735 was selling pretty well, but the 736 not at all, and Boeing might have made a mistake not continuing to sell the 735, just with engine (and maybe cockpit) upgrades rather than the whole NG treatment, considering how heavy it made the plane...

All I did was ask for some data comparing the 735 (not 736) to the E-Jets. I didn't say it's true one way or the other which is superior, or by how much the E-Jet wins. Embraer is noticeably absent in their comparisons, but if they want people to REPLACE 735s with E-195s (as opposed to ordering E-195s instead of new A318s and 736s), then they need to present that case, don't you think?

Since you have declared it a fact, please show us some proof?

Quoting EssentialPowr (Reply 21):
Nope.

You were so busy being right you didn't bother to read what I wrote.

I suggested that there might even be a new tier created, between xpress and mainline, that covers the new 70-120 seat jets. If CO were to decide that the E-Jet made sense, they might take this path because it would mean in the future that the 797 replacement would not extend down to the 735 size for CO. They'd have fleet commonality for these jets, and while it introduces a new "type" it also helps replace two older jets.

If you don't think it could happen, look around the industry at the various new subcarriers being created to fly specific new types for airlines. Look at the lost leverage unions have compared to even a few years ago, and then ask if CO were to offer 80% for flying these planes (vs. the lower XJT rates) and a place in the seniority list, whether they would be considered so evil, or rather a place for younger pilots to vest...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
FCYTravis
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:21 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:39 pm

US Airways MEC pilots did exactly that, offering a cheap rate for the E190, which secured the E190 as a mainline aircraft... hoping that in the future they'll be able to negotiate upward.
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:42 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 28):
I suggested that there might even be a new tier created, between xpress and mainline, that covers the new 70-120 seat jets.

I thnk this is the way things are going to go. When you had two groups, your small RJs and then you larger airliners, it was wasy to split the two. Now that a third party is entering between the two, there will be a need to open up a middle front between the two.
This is really the only way to avoid the conflicts that will arrise from smaller RJ pilots flying large semi-mainline RJs or pilots flying largeer aircraft flying the same semi-mainline RJs.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 28):
If you don't think it could happen, look around the industry at the various new subcarriers being created to fly specific new types for airlines. Look at the lost leverage unions have compared to even a few years ago, and then ask if CO were to offer 80% for flying these planes (vs. the lower XJT rates) and a place in the seniority list, whether they would be considered so evil, or rather a place for younger pilots to vest...

I like the sound of this, and is probably one of the better ways to introduce the E-Jets to the CO fleet. I just don't see them addind the E-Jets to the "mainline" as CO has an all Boeing fleet, and I am assuming Boeing and CO want to keep it that way.
 
coiah756ca
Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:31 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:11 pm

Quoting EssentialPowr (Reply 27):
COEX and the regionals will still be there for your son and there will always be opportunities for everyone to start their careers. XJT is going to have to return to turboprops to remain solvent; if CAL pilots let them do it (let COEX get 170s) that eliminates a lot of CAL pilots and kills the career, unless of course you see no fuure for CAL.

Your missing one thing. XJT is starting to move out at the end of the year. Chautauqua is moving in. The deal with them has good terms:
-They lease the airplanes
-They maintain the airplanes
-They crew the airplanes

Your resolution to the ideas stated are in many ways false. You must elaborate further if you want to get a true point across.

Yes, COEX will need Q400's in the near future.

Young pilot's careers are not at risk here. COEX needs to loosen up the ERJ-145/135's and get a system of large turboprops, ERJ-170's, and a smaller fleet of ERJ-145/135's. The spaces can be filled. Chautauqua is the answer.

The future of CO is a mystery at this point. All we can do is wait and watch.
Long live Denver-STAPLETON. RIP the old and best KDEN
 
KAUSpilot
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:15 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:30 pm

With all due resepect, I sincerely hope the majority of Continental pilots do not share your line of thinking....decent scope is the one thing Continental pilots still have in their contract. Hopefully your pilot group won't be shortsighted enough to give that up. You do realize that you're sentencing your son to several more years at the regionals by outsourcing more of that domestic narrowbody flying? Maybe you're fine with that. Then again I guess he won't have to worry with nepotism working in his favor....forget about the rest of us that have to earn things the normal way.

Speaking of simplified fleet types, we now get to see the CRJ flying for Continental. I'm sure that will be efficient for Chautauqua (sarcasm). Hopefully the customers make their feelings known to Larry when the inevitable cancellations roll in. After all, can you really drag a fleet of planes that you've never operated before out of the desert and expect things to go smoothly? Continental is becoming more and more like UAL, DAL, and USair all the time.....back to their old habits, cost over quality.
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Mon Nov 06, 2006 4:02 am

Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 31):

Your missing one thing. XJT is starting to move out at the end of the year. Chautauqua is moving in. The deal with them has good terms:
-They lease the airplanes
-They maintain the airplanes
-They crew the airplanes

Your resolution to the ideas stated are in many ways false. You must elaborate further if you want to get a true point across.

False? How? Regional feed is just subcontract labor, to be awarded at lowest cost. XJT has leased, maintained and crewed their a/c, just as Chautauqua will. What if CAL wanted to sublease to XJT (and let XJT maintain and crew) all the 757s?
 
FlyHoss
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: CO E-Jets?

Mon Nov 06, 2006 6:27 am

Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 31):
Young pilot's careers are not at risk here. COEX needs to loosen up the ERJ-145/135's and get a system of large turboprops, ERJ-170's, and a smaller fleet of ERJ-145/135's. The spaces can be filled. Chautauqua is the answer.

Why are you in such a hurry to give up the junior pilots? The company approached the M.E.C. about Scope relief for 100 80+ seat jets (just the beginning, I'd guess, but that's for another time). At 5 1/2 crews per airplane, that's 1100 pilot jobs lost. Flight Attendant jobs (1000+) will be lost. Mechanic positions will be lost.

I'm not against the company acquiring the aircraft, I sure a compelling business case can be made. The Scope clause of the pilot contract requires that pilots from the CO pilot seniority list fly them. I'll not vote to allow the Scope relief that the company has requested. Furthermore, I believe in the recent (union sponsored) polling of the CO pilot group, 81% voted against Scope relief or change.

I want the opportunity to bid them, as the contract requires. Why do you want to deny me this chance?

[Edited 2006-11-05 22:41:23]
A little bit louder now, a lil bit louder now...
 
usair320
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2003 9:53 am

RE: CO E-Jets?

Mon Nov 06, 2006 6:43 am

Quoting KSUpilot (Thread starter):
but what about mainline E-190s

well only if they decide to replace the 735 as the seating capasitys are not too far from either plane.