Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
PSA727 wrote:Does anyone know how many airplanes American Eagle can operate as a whole amongst its affilates? Because it seems that a lot of aircraft are coming online (CR7s/E170s/E175s) while not as many (E140s/E145s) are leaving. Moreover, a lot of mainline aircraft have been removed from the fleet at AA (A333s/A332s/B763s/B752s/E190s).
sagechan wrote:Someone probably has a more precise answer, but the Eagle fleet is based on a % of the AA narrowbody fleet. I think it has an 18 month lookout normally, but I believe there was a minor scope consession to allow the 2019 #s a little longer. I also believe AA was under the small RJ number anyway (65 seats or less) based on that 2019 number.
alasizon wrote:PSA727 wrote:Does anyone know how many airplanes American Eagle can operate as a whole amongst its affilates? Because it seems that a lot of aircraft are coming online (CR7s/E170s/E175s) while not as many (E140s/E145s) are leaving. Moreover, a lot of mainline aircraft have been removed from the fleet at AA (A333s/A332s/B763s/B752s/E190s).
Total RJ fleet is capped at 70% of the overall AA Mainline fleet. Large RJs are capped at 45% of the narrowbody fleet so losing the widebodies did not hurt as much as losing more narrowbodies would have. The delivered NEOs and MAXes help bump the count back up.sagechan wrote:Someone probably has a more precise answer, but the Eagle fleet is based on a % of the AA narrowbody fleet. I think it has an 18 month lookout normally, but I believe there was a minor scope consession to allow the 2019 #s a little longer. I also believe AA was under the small RJ number anyway (65 seats or less) based on that 2019 number.
There is an 18 month compliance allowance for acts beyond the company's control, one of those was the grounding of the MAX. Retirements are under AA control so no allowance was needed. The most recent vote with APA only reduced the amount of INTL widebody hours that AA had to fly, hence the deployment of 777s to PHX-OGG/HNL and 787s on ORD-ANC for the summer.
Currently, AA has a total of 810 operational aircraft (not counting any MAXes or NEOs delivered in the past couple weeks), of which 698 are narrowbodies. That puts their allowed total RJs at 567.5 with the large fleet capped at 314. Currently there are 548 total RJs in the fleet with 289 of them being considered large RJs (66 seats or more). AA's scope clause is a god-send on the large vs small front as the CR7 and E170 can be the backbone of the small fleet minus about 65 E145s down the road for the smaller cities in the East and Midwest.
Pending deliveries of the E170s will put them at total scope for the summer (assuming AA only takes delivery of 2-3 more MAXes before the summer) and then the SkyWest E175s starting in October will get them up to the large RJ count followed by the retirement of some more E145s to make room in the overall scope (assuming there are no further drawdown on the Mesa side for poor performance).
PSA727 wrote:Does anyone know how many airplanes American Eagle can operate as a whole amongst its affilates? Because it seems that a lot of aircraft are coming online (CR7s/E170s/E175s) while not as many (E140s/E145s) are leaving. Moreover, a lot of mainline aircraft have been removed from the fleet at AA (A333s/A332s/B763s/B752s/E190s).
GSOtoIND wrote:I caught N821MD this evening here at IND. Is this the first of Republic's 65-seat E170s to enter service? It looks like she was at AMA for a little over a week, and spent about three weeks on the ground at SDF before that. She flew AMA-CLT-BGR on Thursday, and has bounced around between ORD, LGA, and various outstations since.
A little history, since this bird's lived an interesting life: she started at MidAtlantic, then moved to Republic in 2005 when US wound down the in-house operation. In 2007 she shed the blue over coal for the RW (since this predates Brickyard stealing the MidEx code) house livery to do work as a spare. In 2012 she went to AeroMexico Connect, came back stateside in 2019 to fly in Delta colors (presumably as a replacement for the 170 that caught fire in CMH, since her sisters 806 and 826 got the new house livery after returning from Mexico), and was doing charter work, sans titles and widget, following the outbreak of the Beer Situation.
My terrible picture (I had to go to the next gate over to get a clean shot of the registration, and it being just after sunset it's rather grainy): https://imgur.com/a/Qur43cC
EMBSPBR wrote:E175 N450YX, msn 17000875 delivered on April 12th., 2021 to Republic Airways.
Source:
https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... gle/ek7myn
flightsimer wrote:EMBSPBR wrote:E175 N450YX, msn 17000875 delivered on April 12th., 2021 to Republic Airways.
Source:
https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... gle/ek7myn
451YX, 450 was delivered in March.
AMP44 wrote:Why did Piedmont retire the Dash 8 fleet? Could turbo props have a place again in the American Eagle operations in the future?
AVLAirlineFreq wrote:AMP44 wrote:Why did Piedmont retire the Dash 8 fleet? Could turbo props have a place again in the American Eagle operations in the future?
Most if not all of the Dash 8 fleet were approaching their cycle limits. Plus, AA was the last of the big three legacy brands to operate turboprop equipment, and American travelers have made their preferences known. I think it's unlikely we will ever see turboprops in legacy liveries again.
n797mx wrote:N842AE is to be ferried to MZJ tomorrow from ABI. Quite significant as it is the last active aircraft in the old AA livery (not including the heritage livery).
Oddly enough, it went to ABI as a live flight. Normally they ferry it to ABI then to MZJ or just ferry it direct from DFW.
Scheduling did the DFW spotters a dirty as it was originally going to fly to MZJ direct tomorrow, but then there was a schedule change. I was able to fly her a few weeks ago. The paint was pretty rough, but the interior actually wasn't so bad for it's age.
mhkansan wrote:n797mx wrote:N842AE is to be ferried to MZJ tomorrow from ABI. Quite significant as it is the last active aircraft in the old AA livery (not including the heritage livery).
Oddly enough, it went to ABI as a live flight. Normally they ferry it to ABI then to MZJ or just ferry it direct from DFW.
Scheduling did the DFW spotters a dirty as it was originally going to fly to MZJ direct tomorrow, but then there was a schedule change. I was able to fly her a few weeks ago. The paint was pretty rough, but the interior actually wasn't so bad for it's age.
MHK had the March schedule with 3x daily E140s. We got to see a lot of 842. Yeah, she was very rough on the outside but the interior was in great shape, since they all got new interiors after the fleet was parked in 2016.
Sad to see 842 get parked. That should leave about 4-5 E140s active at Envoy, right?
n797mx wrote:mhkansan wrote:n797mx wrote:N842AE is to be ferried to MZJ tomorrow from ABI. Quite significant as it is the last active aircraft in the old AA livery (not including the heritage livery).
Oddly enough, it went to ABI as a live flight. Normally they ferry it to ABI then to MZJ or just ferry it direct from DFW.
Scheduling did the DFW spotters a dirty as it was originally going to fly to MZJ direct tomorrow, but then there was a schedule change. I was able to fly her a few weeks ago. The paint was pretty rough, but the interior actually wasn't so bad for it's age.
MHK had the March schedule with 3x daily E140s. We got to see a lot of 842. Yeah, she was very rough on the outside but the interior was in great shape, since they all got new interiors after the fleet was parked in 2016.
Sad to see 842 get parked. That should leave about 4-5 E140s active at Envoy, right?
Four:
831
852
857
858
MLIAA wrote:“Envoy Air Careers” Facebook page is hinting at a possible American Eagle retro livery making an appearance in the future, possibly on one of the 6 EMB-170s that Envoy will be bringing on this summer.
If so, I would love to see a white 170 with the scissor eagle on the tail!
rsgolfpunk wrote:AA is resuming 145 transfers from Envoy to Piedmont in September? Didn’t know they were doing that in the first place.
rsgolfpunk wrote:AA is resuming 145 transfers from Envoy to Piedmont in September? Didn’t know they were doing that in the first place.
sagechan wrote:Cranky suggesting that the new Connect Airlines Q400s may opporate as American Eagle. Most announced routes touch AA hubs/"focus" cities. Personally, I'd definitely take a Q into Toronto City.
https://crankyflier.com/2021/05/06/who- ... -airlines/
alasizon wrote:sagechan wrote:Cranky suggesting that the new Connect Airlines Q400s may opporate as American Eagle. Most announced routes touch AA hubs/"focus" cities. Personally, I'd definitely take a Q into Toronto City.
https://crankyflier.com/2021/05/06/who- ... -airlines/
Pretty slim chance there, adding a Q would cut a 175/900.
n797mx wrote:rsgolfpunk wrote:AA is resuming 145 transfers from Envoy to Piedmont in September? Didn’t know they were doing that in the first place.
Have a source on that? I haven't heard anything yet.
sagechan wrote:alasizon wrote:sagechan wrote:Cranky suggesting that the new Connect Airlines Q400s may opporate as American Eagle. Most announced routes touch AA hubs/"focus" cities. Personally, I'd definitely take a Q into Toronto City.
https://crankyflier.com/2021/05/06/who- ... -airlines/
Pretty slim chance there, adding a Q would cut a 175/900.
At one time it was said props don't fall under the same rules in scope, at least that was said a while back when Piedmont still had the Dash.
sagechan wrote:alasizon wrote:sagechan wrote:Cranky suggesting that the new Connect Airlines Q400s may opporate as American Eagle. Most announced routes touch AA hubs/"focus" cities. Personally, I'd definitely take a Q into Toronto City.
https://crankyflier.com/2021/05/06/who- ... -airlines/
Pretty slim chance there, adding a Q would cut a 175/900.
At one time it was said props don't fall under the same rules in scope, at least that was said a while back when Piedmont still had the Dash.
bigb wrote:sagechan wrote:alasizon wrote:
Pretty slim chance there, adding a Q would cut a 175/900.
At one time it was said props don't fall under the same rules in scope, at least that was said a while back when Piedmont still had the Dash.
Big difference between the 30 seat Dash and 70 seater Q-400
sagechan wrote:bigb wrote:sagechan wrote:
At one time it was said props don't fall under the same rules in scope, at least that was said a while back when Piedmont still had the Dash.
Big difference between the 30 seat Dash and 70 seater Q-400
I've never seen the actual scope clause, so I'm unaware of how exactly it treats large turboprops, but do recall a time when Piedmont was considering q400s and commentary was, at that time, they were outside of scope. Cranky didnt address any scope questions in his article, but seemed to imply there was a CPA in place or in the works. Even if scope applies to props as large RJs, they could do the 65 seats and only count as a small RJ.
bigb wrote:sagechan wrote:bigb wrote:
Big difference between the 30 seat Dash and 70 seater Q-400
I've never seen the actual scope clause, so I'm unaware of how exactly it treats large turboprops, but do recall a time when Piedmont was considering q400s and commentary was, at that time, they were outside of scope. Cranky didnt address any scope questions in his article, but seemed to imply there was a CPA in place or in the works. Even if scope applies to props as large RJs, they could do the 65 seats and only count as a small RJ.
AA mainline scope clause doesn’t differentiate between prop and jets. Just seats with anything being above 65 being counted against the large RJ cap.
KCaviator wrote:Just recently flew a “new” 65-seat 170. I was going to take and post pictures, but honestly, besides for the new airplane smell, not much looks different.
The staggered seats aren’t nearly as noticeable as I was expecting. And as previously mentioned, there are 66 physical seats, with only 65 usable (nothing was “blocking” the 66th seat, although the placard depicting seat lettering only has “D” on the last right-side row with the window seat being blank). I thought that was unique.
Should be a very successful product for AA.
GSOtoIND wrote:KCaviator wrote:Just recently flew a “new” 65-seat 170. I was going to take and post pictures, but honestly, besides for the new airplane smell, not much looks different.
The staggered seats aren’t nearly as noticeable as I was expecting. And as previously mentioned, there are 66 physical seats, with only 65 usable (nothing was “blocking” the 66th seat, although the placard depicting seat lettering only has “D” on the last right-side row with the window seat being blank). I thought that was unique.
Should be a very successful product for AA.
Interesting that they're not physically blocking off 22F. I wonder if there were a situation where another seat was broken (tray table, recline, etc) if they could move a customer from the affected seat to 22F.
alasizon wrote:GSOtoIND wrote:KCaviator wrote:Just recently flew a “new” 65-seat 170. I was going to take and post pictures, but honestly, besides for the new airplane smell, not much looks different.
The staggered seats aren’t nearly as noticeable as I was expecting. And as previously mentioned, there are 66 physical seats, with only 65 usable (nothing was “blocking” the 66th seat, although the placard depicting seat lettering only has “D” on the last right-side row with the window seat being blank). I thought that was unique.
Should be a very successful product for AA.
Interesting that they're not physically blocking off 22F. I wonder if there were a situation where another seat was broken (tray table, recline, etc) if they could move a customer from the affected seat to 22F.
Possibly in-flight but not in advance, only one seat exists on the seat map in Sabre.
GSOtoIND wrote:Republic's N869RW left AMA today after being there for a week, presumably for paint. I would expect this to be the fourth E170 for Eagle.
GVZZZ wrote:G-LCYD/E/F are at Macon, GA
G-LCYG/H/I are at Norwich.