Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
wave46
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:02 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 6:33 pm

lightsaber wrote:
DL717 wrote:
It is also those scary spinny thingies on the wings my sister doesn't like. Most of my medical doctor relatives, who are also Uber double platinum frequent flyers just won't get on Turboprops. Heck, I have maybe 20 relatives who won't unless I am on board (as if my aerospace engineering matters as a passenger). Icannot explain as I love to fly, but they all spend 8X to 20x what I do per year

Lightsaber


Is this just a familiarity thing? Coming from a country that has extensive use of turboprops (Canada), market resistance is less here. The regional airlines of Canada has no compunction about using turboprops on short hops. Admittedly, one regional airline (Porter Airlines) is mandated to use them due to restrictions at their hub (YTZ - Billy Bishop Airport).

However, Air Canada Express (Jazz) and Westjet Encore do not seem to have much market resistance. They make sense for connecting their smaller spokes to their hubs. Or is it just lack of better options? I'm not sure most would pay for the extra cost of a CRJ900 on a short hop.

Difference in culture?
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5362
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 6:56 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
From my standpoint they could use more 50-seaters. There's so many markets out of DTW and MSP that have either lost service or have very limited frequency since the Saab 340/50-seater drawdown. A further reduction of 50-seaters to levels DL describes would further eliminate more routes and frequencies. Fewer 50-seaters is largely not passenger-friendly now.

yes because we don't live in Soviet Russia.

If a market can't support a flight it can't support a flight. Its not the job of the airlines to fly to BF USA just because of your feels. If the market ponies up the cash they will have flights. Hell if the market was there, EMB and BBD would be coming up with a solution to replace the 50 seaters. Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.


but I also know you are doing your normal "make everything Delta does a negative" thing because no normal person would want more CRJs.

wave46 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
DL717 wrote:
It is also those scary spinny thingies on the wings my sister doesn't like. Most of my medical doctor relatives, who are also Uber double platinum frequent flyers just won't get on Turboprops. Heck, I have maybe 20 relatives who won't unless I am on board (as if my aerospace engineering matters as a passenger). Icannot explain as I love to fly, but they all spend 8X to 20x what I do per year

Lightsaber


Is this just a familiarity thing? Coming from a country that has extensive use of turboprops (Canada), market resistance is less here. The regional airlines of Canada has no compunction about using turboprops on short hops. Admittedly, one regional airline (Porter Airlines) is mandated to use them due to restrictions at their hub (YTZ - Billy Bishop Airport).

However, Air Canada Express (Jazz) and Westjet Encore do not seem to have much market resistance. They make sense for connecting their smaller spokes to their hubs. Or is it just lack of better options? I'm not sure most would pay for the extra cost of a CRJ900 on a short hop.

Difference in culture?


the biggest issue is scope. Airplanes like the ATR72 and Q400 count against scope. In other words the US3 get to pick between a E75 or a Q40.

In most other markets they don't have the outsourcing restrictions the US does which is why props like the Q400/ATR72 work.

but also, yes it is a culture thing. Props are loud, vibrate and after a good bit of crashes in the 80s, 90s and even 00s people don't want to fly them.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 7:14 pm

deltal1011man wrote:
yes because we don't live in Soviet Russia.

If a market can't support a flight it can't support a flight. Its not the job of the airlines to fly to BF USA just because of your feels. If the market ponies up the cash they will have flights. Hell if the market was there, EMB and BBD would be coming up with a solution to replace the 50 seaters. Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.


Your best responses are straw mans and ad hominems?

Losing cities and frequencies isn't passenger-friendly no matter how its spun. And frequency in this context isn't waiting a half hour for another flight. Even fewer 50-seaters is going to mean more losses of service in many markets. Hard reality.
 
User avatar
deltadawg
Posts: 1014
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 2:56 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 7:17 pm

deltal1011man wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.

wave46 wrote:


While I would say that you are correct there are still quite a few Q's in service with Horizon, somewhere in the neighborhood of 45-50 if I recall correctly but yes, overall you are correct. Why? I really don't get it either as DL had a fairly extensive fleet of ATR's ten years ago +. I would relish DL bringing back some 50-70 seat Q's or ATR's to better serve outlying cities especially in the Midwest and Plains where NW Saab's used to fly into.
GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
 
HVNandrew
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:05 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 7:48 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
The 2017 Investor Day presentation (yeh, a year ago) pointed to about 50 CR2s in the fleet in 2023. See slide page 25.

Delta has already dropped about 50 destinations from the 2008 peak, even while growing the LAX and SEA hubs. What's the incremental trip cost of a CR7 vs. a CR2 on a 600-mile segment?

50 destinations have been cut since 2008? Wow. I am shocked the number is that high. From where primarily? I know there were a few destinations cut from BOS in 2008 when Big Sky stopped flying as a DL Connection carrier up there.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 8:25 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
yes because we don't live in Soviet Russia.

If a market can't support a flight it can't support a flight. Its not the job of the airlines to fly to BF USA just because of your feels. If the market ponies up the cash they will have flights. Hell if the market was there, EMB and BBD would be coming up with a solution to replace the 50 seaters. Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.


Your best responses are straw mans and ad hominems?

Losing cities and frequencies isn't passenger-friendly no matter how its spun. And frequency in this context isn't waiting a half hour for another flight. Even fewer 50-seaters is going to mean more losses of service in many markets. Hard reality.


If a city cannot provide enough passengers to allow an airline to turn a profit, its market does not deserve any service. Passenger-friendly does not apply to small airports with 5-15 passengers per flight. Look how many train and bus stops have been dropped over the decades. I know people who live in very rural areas and they don't seem to care about having nearby airline service, its comes with the territory with living in a rural out of the way community and most people accept that. Even some larger areas that had airline service now don't, GON and BDR, both lost service when the B-1900's were parked and even then they rarely sold out. GON has PVD, 50 miles as the closest airport and BDR has HVN, 20 miles and HPN, 31 miles.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 9:07 pm

cheapgreek wrote:
If a city cannot provide enough passengers to allow an airline to turn a profit, its market does not deserve any service. Passenger-friendly does not apply to small airports with 5-15 passengers per flight. Look how many train and bus stops have been dropped over the decades. I know people who live in very rural areas and they don't seem to care about having nearby airline service, its comes with the territory with living in a rural out of the way community and most people accept that. Even some larger areas that had airline service now don't, GON and BDR, both lost service when the B-1900's were parked and even then they rarely sold out. GON has PVD, 50 miles as the closest airport and BDR has HVN, 20 miles and HPN, 31 miles.


You don't understand either. We're not talking about routes that don't have the demand for "profitable" service. That's the straw man argument. We're talking routes that have sufficient demand that lose service due to lack of suitable aircraft. That has played out all over the U.S. in the past decade. Further reduction of 50-seaters will bring more losses.

For example, currently DL, UA, and AA fly an untold number of flights with 50-seat jets. Many of these are to airports with low demand. According to your own logic, there's "profit" there because the airline currently operates these flights and has not cut them. However, many of these routes do not have sufficient demand for large RJ service. That has played out in the past, and it will continue if DL reduces their 50-seat fleet down to 50 aircraft.
 
PennPal
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 12:35 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Fri Dec 14, 2018 9:42 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
B757Forever wrote:

Speaking of ATL, I saw an A220 in the flesh for the first time there yesterday. What an ugly airplane.


Oh my Lord! Is a statement like THAT even allowed on a.net?!?!
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 12:38 am

MSPNWA wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
If a city cannot provide enough passengers to allow an airline to turn a profit, its market does not deserve any service. Passenger-friendly does not apply to small airports with 5-15 passengers per flight. Look how many train and bus stops have been dropped over the decades. I know people who live in very rural areas and they don't seem to care about having nearby airline service, its comes with the territory with living in a rural out of the way community and most people accept that. Even some larger areas that had airline service now don't, GON and BDR, both lost service when the B-1900's were parked and even then they rarely sold out. GON has PVD, 50 miles as the closest airport and BDR has HVN, 20 miles and HPN, 31 miles.


You don't understand either. We're not talking about routes that don't have the demand for "profitable" service. That's the straw man argument. We're talking routes that have sufficient demand that lose service due to lack of suitable aircraft. That has played out all over the U.S. in the past decade. Further reduction of 50-seaters will bring more losses.

For example, currently DL, UA, and AA fly an untold number of flights with 50-seat jets. Many of these are to airports with low demand. According to your own logic, there's "profit" there because the airline currently operates these flights and has not cut them. However, many of these routes do not have sufficient demand for large RJ service. That has played out in the past, and it will continue if DL reduces their 50-seat fleet down to 50 aircraft.


The demand at some small airports is not equal currently to the size of newer regional aircraft in service. Gone are the b-1900's, Saab A340's, Dash-8's, Twin otters, etc, the old days are gone forever. With the new hour requirement for pilots, airlines need to place crews on routes that can support larger RJ's. Even mainline fleets are growing in size, the 737-700 and A319 have very short order lists. If OEM's came out with a new 50 seater, who would buy it, what would the cost be of developing a new 50 seater? As far as the airlines making a profit on 50 seat aircraft, its due primarily to fuel cost being low, AA pulled out of storage many E145's and E140's due to this very fact. Where will fuel prices go, who knows, but as history has shown, oil is very volatile and at some time oil will go up and when it does,it will kill the economics of the 50 seaters.
 
User avatar
AVLAirlineFreq
Posts: 1407
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:31 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:02 pm

I think the days of turboprops in legacy airline liveries are gone.

What's going to be interesting is whether there will be a cry for expansion of EAS once DL and others drop markets as a result of the 50-seat RJ retirements, leaving them without any air service. I'm not trying to start another endless a.net discussion about the pros and cons of EAS, but I predict there will be quite a few House representatives clamoring for restoration of service to the largest cities in their districts.
 
jb1087xna
Posts: 493
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:11 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 5:16 pm

capitalflyer wrote:
Is DL flying anywhere 1x with CR1/2? IMT for example is 3x. Thats 150 seats. Why not just cut frequency to 2x and use E70? That would give 138 seats, and unless those 3 flights are running at 100%, should be good. Ideally I would imagine they would like to axe CR2 all together so that they can be earning premium income on all flights. Obviously reality is different, but I bet they wish they could.


I'll be interested to see what DL does with FSM. I imagine it'll be one of the last stations when (assuming it happens at some point) the CR2s are gone. They fly 2x Sunday-Friday to ATL with only 1 flight on Saturdays. They've tried CR7s in the past but they haven't seemed to stick beyond a few months at a time. AA manages 4x to DFW with generally 2 of the 4 being on CR7s/CR9s.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5362
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:11 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
yes because we don't live in Soviet Russia.

If a market can't support a flight it can't support a flight. Its not the job of the airlines to fly to BF USA just because of your feels. If the market ponies up the cash they will have flights. Hell if the market was there, EMB and BBD would be coming up with a solution to replace the 50 seaters. Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.


Your best responses are straw mans and ad hominems?

Losing cities and frequencies isn't passenger-friendly no matter how its spun. And frequency in this context isn't waiting a half hour for another flight. Even fewer 50-seaters is going to mean more losses of service in many markets. Hard reality
.

and again, welcome to the free market. Not a hard concept.

MSPNWA wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
If a city cannot provide enough passengers to allow an airline to turn a profit, its market does not deserve any service. Passenger-friendly does not apply to small airports with 5-15 passengers per flight. Look how many train and bus stops have been dropped over the decades. I know people who live in very rural areas and they don't seem to care about having nearby airline service, its comes with the territory with living in a rural out of the way community and most people accept that. Even some larger areas that had airline service now don't, GON and BDR, both lost service when the B-1900's were parked and even then they rarely sold out. GON has PVD, 50 miles as the closest airport and BDR has HVN, 20 miles and HPN, 31 miles.


You don't understand either. We're not talking about routes that don't have the demand for "profitable" service. That's the straw man argument. We're talking routes that have sufficient demand that lose service due to lack of suitable aircraft. That has played out all over the U.S. in the past decade. Further reduction of 50-seaters will bring more losses.

For example, currently DL, UA, and AA fly an untold number of flights with 50-seat jets. Many of these are to airports with low demand. According to your own logic, there's "profit" there because the airline currently operates these flights and has not cut them. However, many of these routes do not have sufficient demand for large RJ service. That has played out in the past, and it will continue if DL reduces their 50-seat fleet down to 50 aircraft.

what you don't seem to understand is that those markets aren't profitable on such small aircraft with fuel so high.

Again, If money was to be made, Delta/American/United would be pushing for a new 50 seater with new engines. Instead they are dropping that flying all together.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20032
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:27 pm

deltal1011man wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
yes because we don't live in Soviet Russia.

If a market can't support a flight it can't support a flight. Its not the job of the airlines to fly to BF USA just because of your feels. If the market ponies up the cash they will have flights. Hell if the market was there, EMB and BBD would be coming up with a solution to replace the 50 seaters. Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.


Your best responses are straw mans and ad hominems?

Losing cities and frequencies isn't passenger-friendly no matter how its spun. And frequency in this context isn't waiting a half hour for another flight. Even fewer 50-seaters is going to mean more losses of service in many markets. Hard reality
.

and again, welcome to the free market. Not a hard concept.

MSPNWA wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
If a city cannot provide enough passengers to allow an airline to turn a profit, its market does not deserve any service. Passenger-friendly does not apply to small airports with 5-15 passengers per flight. Look how many train and bus stops have been dropped over the decades. I know people who live in very rural areas and they don't seem to care about having nearby airline service, its comes with the territory with living in a rural out of the way community and most people accept that. Even some larger areas that had airline service now don't, GON and BDR, both lost service when the B-1900's were parked and even then they rarely sold out. GON has PVD, 50 miles as the closest airport and BDR has HVN, 20 miles and HPN, 31 miles.


You don't understand either. We're not talking about routes that don't have the demand for "profitable" service. That's the straw man argument. We're talking routes that have sufficient demand that lose service due to lack of suitable aircraft. That has played out all over the U.S. in the past decade. Further reduction of 50-seaters will bring more losses.

For example, currently DL, UA, and AA fly an untold number of flights with 50-seat jets. Many of these are to airports with low demand. According to your own logic, there's "profit" there because the airline currently operates these flights and has not cut them. However, many of these routes do not have sufficient demand for large RJ service. That has played out in the past, and it will continue if DL reduces their 50-seat fleet down to 50 aircraft.

what you don't seem to understand is that those markets aren't profitable on such small aircraft with fuel so high.

Again, If money was to be made, Delta/American/United would be pushing for a new 50 seater with new engines. Instead they are dropping that flying all together.

Those markets need the MRJ-7 (if it makes promised economics). But as you note, this is the free market.

The higher yielding markets will attract competition anyway. With the pilot shortage, high oil (anything over $35/bbl impacts airlines), and many hubs not expanding, it is time to upgauge.

Markets will loose service. Meh... You have to spend to receive.

Lightsaber
Flu+Covid19 is bad. Consider a flu vaccine, if not for yourself, to protect someone you care about.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:52 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
yes because we don't live in Soviet Russia.

If a market can't support a flight it can't support a flight. Its not the job of the airlines to fly to BF USA just because of your feels. If the market ponies up the cash they will have flights. Hell if the market was there, EMB and BBD would be coming up with a solution to replace the 50 seaters. Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.


Your best responses are straw mans and ad hominems?

Losing cities and frequencies isn't passenger-friendly no matter how its spun. And frequency in this context isn't waiting a half hour for another flight. Even fewer 50-seaters is going to mean more losses of service in many markets. Hard reality.


Especially when you consider that it was congress that raised pilot minimum hours. So it isnt much of a free market when the barrier to entry for pilots has gone up
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:56 pm

Is the ATR-42-600 covered under SCOPE or can the US3 order those without being counted in the SCOPE clause? The last CRJ was built in 2006 I understand. These planes will all be gone by the mid 2020s. Either something needs to replace them and pilot mins have to lowered or a lot of cities are going to lose air service. And no they arent losing service due to the "free market" but due to union and government barriers to entry.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20032
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:41 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
yes because we don't live in Soviet Russia.

If a market can't support a flight it can't support a flight. Its not the job of the airlines to fly to BF USA just because of your feels. If the market ponies up the cash they will have flights. Hell if the market was there, EMB and BBD would be coming up with a solution to replace the 50 seaters. Even the OEMs know that 50 jets don't work and the US market just doesn't do props.


Your best responses are straw mans and ad hominems?

Losing cities and frequencies isn't passenger-friendly no matter how its spun. And frequency in this context isn't waiting a half hour for another flight. Even fewer 50-seaters is going to mean more losses of service in many markets. Hard reality.


Especially when you consider that it was congress that raised pilot minimum hours. So it isnt much of a free market when the barrier to entry for pilots has gone up

If small cities keep losing service, political will shall change.
Flu+Covid19 is bad. Consider a flu vaccine, if not for yourself, to protect someone you care about.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 2388
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:53 pm

Has DL considered using CRJ700 as 50-seaters when the CR2 reach max limits? Bigger and heavier aircraft, yes, but room for two lavs, 9-12 F seats, several rows of Y+, room for freight in the cargo hold maybe... it will be a good product for smaller destinations, especially as new CR9 are coming as 70-seaters...
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Cactusjuba
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:06 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:11 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
Is the ATR-42-600 covered under SCOPE or can the US3 order those without being counted in the SCOPE clause? The last CRJ was built in 2006 I understand. These planes will all be gone by the mid 2020s. Either something needs to replace them and pilot mins have to lowered or a lot of cities are going to lose air service. And no they arent losing service due to the "free market" but due to union and government barriers to entry.


The regional airline model of the 1990s-2000s was predicated on cheap labor and oil. If you dropped the hiring minimum from 1500 (1000 for college programs) to 250 hours, you'd be able to scoop up some pilots earlier today. But in 2 years you'd be back to square one. You'd exacerbate the shortage of instructors to train more pilots.
It's always been a cost-wage-progression problem in attracting new pilots. RJs are just getting older, detested by passengers, and the pilot oversupply
that supported $20k/yr minimal benefit salaries is gone.
 
Cactusjuba
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:06 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:25 pm

CRJ900 wrote:
Has DL considered using CRJ700 as 50-seaters when the CR2 reach max limits? Bigger and heavier aircraft, yes, but room for two lavs, 9-12 F seats, several rows of Y+, room for freight in the cargo hold maybe... it will be a good product for smaller destinations, especially as new CR9 are coming as 70-seaters...


DL is limited to 102 70 seat aircraft. They cannot grow this fleet. They can upguage a 70 seater to something bigger, then have that 70 seater takeover the CR2. But nothing is taking over the CR2 outside of other less used CR2s from the desert.. Hence this discussion.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:29 pm

Cactusjuba wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
Is the ATR-42-600 covered under SCOPE or can the US3 order those without being counted in the SCOPE clause? The last CRJ was built in 2006 I understand. These planes will all be gone by the mid 2020s. Either something needs to replace them and pilot mins have to lowered or a lot of cities are going to lose air service. And no they arent losing service due to the "free market" but due to union and government barriers to entry.


The regional airline model of the 1990s-2000s was predicated on cheap labor and oil. If you dropped the hiring minimum from 1500 (1000 for college programs) to 250 hours, you'd be able to scoop up some pilots earlier today. But in 2 years you'd be back to square one. You'd exacerbate the shortage of instructors to train more pilots.
It's always been a cost-wage-progression problem in attracting new pilots. RJs are just getting older, detested by passengers, and the pilot oversupply
that supported $20k/yr minimal benefit salaries is gone.


ATR-600s are not based on cheap fuel, quite the opposite. I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers. You must be a mainline pilot.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:31 pm

CRJ900 wrote:
Has DL considered using CRJ700 as 50-seaters when the CR2 reach max limits? Bigger and heavier aircraft, yes, but room for two lavs, 9-12 F seats, several rows of Y+, room for freight in the cargo hold maybe... it will be a good product for smaller destinations, especially as new CR9 are coming as 70-seaters...


The CASM would be awful.
 
Cactusjuba
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:06 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:10 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
Cactusjuba wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
Is the ATR-42-600 covered under SCOPE or can the US3 order those without being counted in the SCOPE clause? The last CRJ was built in 2006 I understand. These planes will all be gone by the mid 2020s. Either something needs to replace them and pilot mins have to lowered or a lot of cities are going to lose air service. And no they arent losing service due to the "free market" but due to union and government barriers to entry.


The regional airline model of the 1990s-2000s was predicated on cheap labor and oil. If you dropped the hiring minimum from 1500 (1000 for college programs) to 250 hours, you'd be able to scoop up some pilots earlier today. But in 2 years you'd be back to square one. You'd exacerbate the shortage of instructors to train more pilots.
It's always been a cost-wage-progression problem in attracting new pilots. RJs are just getting older, detested by passengers, and the pilot oversupply
that supported $20k/yr minimal benefit salaries is gone.


ATR-600s are not based on cheap fuel, quite the opposite. I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers. You must be a mainline pilot.


Turboprops have great fuel economics and airfield performance suited for many truly regional routes. Why then, do you think they've been parked with no new orders? :scratchchin:

I ride on CRJ200s probably 8 times a month. I didn't name it Satan's chariot. "I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers".. I'm glad you don't mind. But premium passengers, large passengers, tall passengers, passengers with standard carry-ons, and any passenger on a hot day disagree with you. So do net promoter scores.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:33 pm

Cactusjuba wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
Cactusjuba wrote:

The regional airline model of the 1990s-2000s was predicated on cheap labor and oil. If you dropped the hiring minimum from 1500 (1000 for college programs) to 250 hours, you'd be able to scoop up some pilots earlier today. But in 2 years you'd be back to square one. You'd exacerbate the shortage of instructors to train more pilots.
It's always been a cost-wage-progression problem in attracting new pilots. RJs are just getting older, detested by passengers, and the pilot oversupply
that supported $20k/yr minimal benefit salaries is gone.


ATR-600s are not based on cheap fuel, quite the opposite. I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers. You must be a mainline pilot.


Turboprops have great fuel economics and airfield performance suited for many truly regional routes. Why then, do you think they've been parked with no new orders? :scratchchin:

I ride on CRJ200s probably 8 times a month. I didn't name it Satan's chariot. "I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers".. I'm glad you don't mind. But premium passengers, large passengers, tall passengers, passengers with standard carry-ons, and any passenger on a hot day disagree with you. So do net promoter scores.

Ok. When you said Rjs I think of CR9s and E75s. But I’ll agree CRJ-200
Ian pretty bad.

Actually outside the USA turbo props have done well in sales. In the USA if theyRe counted under SCOPE, I can see why they aren’t purchased. That’s why I asked if the ATR-42 was exempt from SCOPE.
 
Cactusjuba
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:06 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:57 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
Cactusjuba wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:

ATR-600s are not based on cheap fuel, quite the opposite. I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers. You must be a mainline pilot.


Turboprops have great fuel economics and airfield performance suited for many truly regional routes. Why then, do you think they've been parked with no new orders? :scratchchin:

I ride on CRJ200s probably 8 times a month. I didn't name it Satan's chariot. "I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers".. I'm glad you don't mind. But premium passengers, large passengers, tall passengers, passengers with standard carry-ons, and any passenger on a hot day disagree with you. So do net promoter scores.

Ok. When you said Rjs I think of CR9s and E75s. But I’ll agree CRJ-200
Ian pretty bad.

Actually outside the USA turbo props have done well in sales. In the USA if theyRe counted under SCOPE, I can see why they aren’t purchased. That’s why I asked if the ATR-42 was exempt from SCOPE.


There is nothing stopping DL from buying hundreds of ATR42s if they wanted to.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 12:59 am

Cactusjuba wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
Cactusjuba wrote:

Turboprops have great fuel economics and airfield performance suited for many truly regional routes. Why then, do you think they've been parked with no new orders? :scratchchin:

I ride on CRJ200s probably 8 times a month. I didn't name it Satan's chariot. "I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers".. I'm glad you don't mind. But premium passengers, large passengers, tall passengers, passengers with standard carry-ons, and any passenger on a hot day disagree with you. So do net promoter scores.

Ok. When you said Rjs I think of CR9s and E75s. But I’ll agree CRJ-200
Ian pretty bad.

Actually outside the USA turbo props have done well in sales. In the USA if theyRe counted under SCOPE, I can see why they aren’t purchased. That’s why I asked if the ATR-42 was exempt from SCOPE.


There is nothing stopping DL from buying hundreds of ATR42s if they wanted to.


Oh yes there is, passenger resistance. Props are viewed in a very dim light by many flyers. A study done some years ago found when an RJ replaced a prop, ridership went up 20%. Its been years since I flew on an ATR so I don't recall the experience but I have flown many dozens of flights on Dash-8-100's and 300's. They were the most uncomfortable, noisiest, constant vibration and slowest planes I can recall apart from the Twin Otter or B-1900. I took a flight from PHL to ROA on a Dash and later on a CRJ-200, a world of difference between the two.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6080
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:00 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
what you don't seem to understand is that those markets aren't profitable on such small aircraft with fuel so high.

Again, If money was to be made, Delta/American/United would be pushing for a new 50 seater with new engines. Instead they are dropping that flying all together.


Still beating on that straw man? You can stop. It's dead already.

If these routes aren't profitable, I'd suggest you tell the airlines right now before they waste more money on them. Strange how they would wait to save money until their 50-seat fleets voluntarily dwindle....


They might be profitable with a paid off 50-seater, they may or may not be more profitable than OTHER routes with a 76-seat RJ. They won’t be profitable with a new 100-seat plane. It’s a matter of MOST profitable use of the assets. No route is profitable if you have to pay for a new design 50-seat plane that might cost as much as a new A220.

GF
 
amcnd
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 4:19 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:14 pm

Also a all prop regional in the USA would have serious staffing issues. All the new pilots have tons of choices, of Dual class regionals and higher pay right now..
 
DaveFly
Posts: 386
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 9:35 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:38 pm

I am completely ignorant of the stats you guys know about CRJ economics and union contracts. I’m not in the industry.

But I fly on Delta Connection (Skywest) every month from SWF. And I’m guaranteed a bad experience. The incoming flights are often canceled or late. So there goes my connection.

Or if I’m lucky enough that the flight actually shows up, I can’t see out of the window, I can’t hear a single word from the flight deck, and I’m nearly paralyzed at 6’2” after being tortured in the seat for an hour or two.

I fly occasionally on 10-12 flights, but nothing is as miserable as a CR2.
717,727,737,747,757,767,777,787
L1011,DC8,DC9,DC10,MD80/90
A300,A319,320,321,330,340,
CRJ,E135/45/190,
DH8,Avro85,DHBeaver,AstarHelo,F100,ATR42
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4297
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:18 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
They might be profitable with a paid off 50-seater, they may or may not be more profitable than OTHER routes with a 76-seat RJ. They won’t be profitable with a new 100-seat plane. It’s a matter of MOST profitable use of the assets. No route is profitable if you have to pay for a new design 50-seat plane that might cost as much as a new A220.


I'm not going to stop your fun beating of that straw man. The debate has nothing to do with 50-seat economics or a new design. All the evidence points to the fact that complete routes and important frequencies are being lost due to voluntary reductions of 50-seaters. It's quite ironic that I'm advocating for an increase to the DL network that would be beneficial for customers, and the DL defenders are foaming by their mouth as they advocate against their own airline's size and reach to customers. Defense of an airline has come to this?


This is interesting as United and SkyWest are adding a lot of CRJ markets to underserved or EAS cities. The CRJ is not glamorous at all, but compared to a 3-5 hour drive it’s pretty darn attractive as an option. United can get you to many places that Delta or American won’t. We’ll see how it plays out.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:41 pm

It all comes down to that some routes are not worth the time, staff and equipment needed to run the operation. Having airline service is not a right but for profit airlines will place their equipment where it can earn the greatest profit and serve the greatest number of passengers. Times have changed, props are out, larger RJ's are in. To lament about props and small RJ's being gone has no place in the airline business. Years back a two man cockpit crew flew EMB-110's, and B-1900, now that same crew can transport 65-76 passengers instead of 19 passengers, from a business point of view, what makes more financial sense?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6080
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 9:35 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
They might be profitable with a paid off 50-seater, they may or may not be more profitable than OTHER routes with a 76-seat RJ. They won’t be profitable with a new 100-seat plane. It’s a matter of MOST profitable use of the assets. No route is profitable if you have to pay for a new design 50-seat plane that might cost as much as a new A220.


I'm not going to stop your fun beating of that straw man. The debate has nothing to do with 50-seat economics or a new design. All the evidence points to the fact that complete routes and important frequencies are being lost due to voluntary reductions of 50-seaters. It's quite ironic that I'm advocating for an increase to the DL network that would be beneficial for customers, and the DL defenders are foaming by their mouth as they advocate against their own airline's size and reach to customers. Defense of an airline has come to this?


I’m not bearing a dead horse or erecting strawmen. If the route doesn’t make a profit, either as a route or connecting enough passengers to profitable routes in the mainline, it deserves to be voluntarily dropped. It’s pretty simple. DL has only so many CRJ to fly, it will use them where THEY feel it makes the returns the best revenue. Yes, they are VOLUTARILY leaving markets where they either don’t make financial sense or the assets can better used elsewhere. Why do you think you know better than their marketing people?

I just flew a turboprop back home from the office, but timing worked perfectly. If I have to wait an hour hanging about, drive over to the terminal 1+30 prior to departure, go thru security, march to the gate, fly to the destination, then go thru the rental car deal; I’ll drive. Any destination/airport under three hours drive time, it’s far easier to drive. Five hours is probably the break even point.

GF
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 630
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Sun Dec 16, 2018 10:50 pm

Here in Canada, the breaking point is at least five hours too, but probably closer to six hours - due to higher fares...
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 12:11 am

DaveFly wrote:
But I fly on Delta Connection (Skywest) every month from SWF. And I’m guaranteed a bad experience. The incoming flights are often canceled or late. So there goes my connection.


That's not a CRJ issue, that's a Delta Connection issue. I fly many domestic business trips every year to smaller airports -- never been to SWF, but many similar size airports that primarily see regional and little to no mainline service. I gave up on Delta Connection several years ago. The number of late and cancelled flights and missed connections made them non-usable for business travel.
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 881
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:18 am

kcrwflyer wrote:
ThomasMTroxell wrote:
I've always felt that Delta is missing out on a revenue premium by not having F on CRJs. One or two rows of F at 3 across, maybe one or two rows of Comfort + and the remaining as Main Cabin. It would present a much more consistent product for Medallions and they would be the only Big 3 carrier with three or more cabins on every flight. I know that the one row of DC+ at the front of the plane kind of helps but it's really just lipstick on a pig. I support a draw down of CRJs and upgauging but for the markets that cant support that I think DL would benefit themselves if they added F, even if just 3 seats.

Will be interesting to see the DC network in 2 or 3 years once all A220s are on property.


If comfort + on the CR2 is lipstick on a pig then F on a CR2 is a wig on a warthog.

Sadly, the CR2 is more comfortable and spacious than the new "Max seating" on Frontier. Or United...
 
freakyrat
Posts: 2021
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:04 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:27 am

jmscsc wrote:
My home airport is SBN and I fly DL exclusively. They're still using the CRJ, which is a miserable experience, with a CRJ-900 swapped in on the afternoon ATL leg every once in a while.


What is really going on in SBN is a real circus. The airport want's Delta to bring in larger aircraft and therfe is demand for them especially to Atlanta. Once this year something happened and Delta either overbooked the last flight in from Atlanta or something else but it wasn't connected to ND or football. Delta flew a B717 into SBN with 89 passengers in bioard. They flew it to MSP the following morning with 87 or so on board. Demad is there. Here is the real deal Delta wants the following out of the airport to bring in the 717 or Airbus A319 regulary. They want the aircraft parking ramp rebuilt with concrete and also take out the slope. They also want new jetbridges for their gates similar to the one Allegiant's on Gate 9. The city says bring the planes first and we'll do all that. Delta says no fix the problems first. This back and forth has been going on for about a year now.

My observations. The ramp does need a rebuild. It just bafely meets minimum standards and should have been rebuilt when they built the new concourse. Ameribridge can install two used jetbridges similar to the one they installed on Gate 9 with modifications to be in ADA compliance for slope. In fact if they take the slope out of the ramp the jetbridges would be in compliance for Airbus aircraft.

Anyway according to the local DGS folks the plan is to have the CRJ200's just flying to DTW and CRJ9's or 717's for the ATL flights and CRJ9's for the MSP flights.
 
freakyrat
Posts: 2021
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:04 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:45 am

evank516 wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
N766UA wrote:

Detroit to Iron Mountain, Pellston, Alpena, Marquette, Sault St Marie, Wasau, et al...

Atlanta to New Bern, Columbus, Albany, Brunswick, etc.

There are a large number of routes that will never support a bigger jet. The CRJ2 is also just much better on runway space than a 900, especially in contaminated conditions.


If you are talking runway length, the CR2 is the least efficient off short runways compared to the 700 and 900. 700's are best according to a PSA pilot I was seated next to some months ago. A more advanced wing gives the 700-900 better numbers.


Hence DL sending the CR7 into EYW.


CR2's have no leading edge slats making them runway hogs.
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 12:34 pm

freakyrat wrote:
evank516 wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:

If you are talking runway length, the CR2 is the least efficient off short runways compared to the 700 and 900. 700's are best according to a PSA pilot I was seated next to some months ago. A more advanced wing gives the 700-900 better numbers.


Hence DL sending the CR7 into EYW.


CR2's have no leading edge slats making them runway hogs.


Still not as bad as the E-145's. The 145 could not do HVN, the CR2 could.
 
freakyrat
Posts: 2021
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:04 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 12:35 pm

jmscsc wrote:
My home airport is SBN and I fly DL exclusively. They're still using the CRJ, which is a miserable experience, with a CRJ-900 swapped in on the afternoon ATL leg every once in a while.


The DGS folks at SBN said that the passengers prefer the CRJ900 hands down and they would like to offer more of them on the ATL and MSP routes.
 
jmscsc
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 1:09 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:39 pm

freakyrat wrote:
jmscsc wrote:
My home airport is SBN and I fly DL exclusively. They're still using the CRJ, which is a miserable experience, with a CRJ-900 swapped in on the afternoon ATL leg every once in a while.


The DGS folks at SBN said that the passengers prefer the CRJ900 hands down and they would like to offer more of them on the ATL and MSP routes.



Of course we do! It has a first class and is much more comfortable. The CRJ200 is just miserable. I'll book the CRJ900 whenever it appears, even if it means making an odd connection and my trip longer.
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3381
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:52 pm

freakyrat wrote:
jmscsc wrote:
My home airport is SBN and I fly DL exclusively. They're still using the CRJ, which is a miserable experience, with a CRJ-900 swapped in on the afternoon ATL leg every once in a while.


The DGS folks at SBN said that the passengers prefer the CRJ900 hands down and they would like to offer more of them on the ATL and MSP routes.


At the end of the day, it comes down to Delta having cities they can make more money on elsewhere with the larger regional jets than they can with SBN.
From my cold, dead hands
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:18 pm

Cactusjuba wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
Cactusjuba wrote:

RJs are just getting older, detested by passengers, and the pilot oversupply
that supported $20k/yr minimal benefit salaries is gone.


ATR-600s are not based on cheap fuel, quite the opposite. I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers. You must be a mainline pilot.


I ride on CRJ200s probably 8 times a month. I didn't name it Satan's chariot. "I dont think that RJs are destested by passengers".. I'm glad you don't mind. But premium passengers, large passengers, tall passengers, passengers with standard carry-ons, and any passenger on a hot day disagree with you. So do net promoter scores.


+1 to this. CR100/200s are indeed Satan's chariot, and E35/45s, despite the 1-2 setup, are just as bad. You might get to sit with no neighbor, but you ain't got no footroom and are jammed against the window anyway.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6080
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:37 pm

Remember the CRJ 200 was a revelation after the SAAB 340s and EMB 120s that had been serving those routes.

GF
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8063
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:46 pm

IPFreely wrote:
DaveFly wrote:
But I fly on Delta Connection (Skywest) every month from SWF. And I’m guaranteed a bad experience. The incoming flights are often canceled or late. So there goes my connection.


That's not a CRJ issue, that's a Delta Connection issue. I fly many domestic business trips every year to smaller airports -- never been to SWF, but many similar size airports that primarily see regional and little to no mainline service. I gave up on Delta Connection several years ago. The number of late and cancelled flights and missed connections made them non-usable for business travel.

Well that may be your experience with DCI, but that sounds like a bit of hyperpole. DL has also made it a priority over the past few years to improve the reliability of DCI.
How much of that is a function of weather and/or congested NYC area airports where naturally DCI carriers are the first to get cut.

I've flown 44 segments in 2017 & 2018 on DCI carriers in/out of DTW, MSP, ATL, SLC"
Out of 44 flights:
30 on-time or early
10 0-14 minutes late
4 15+ minutes late (the longest was 40 minutes)
0 cancellations
 
evank516
Posts: 2138
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:52 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
IPFreely wrote:
DaveFly wrote:
But I fly on Delta Connection (Skywest) every month from SWF. And I’m guaranteed a bad experience. The incoming flights are often canceled or late. So there goes my connection.


That's not a CRJ issue, that's a Delta Connection issue. I fly many domestic business trips every year to smaller airports -- never been to SWF, but many similar size airports that primarily see regional and little to no mainline service. I gave up on Delta Connection several years ago. The number of late and cancelled flights and missed connections made them non-usable for business travel.

Well that may be your experience with DCI, but that sounds like a bit of hyperpole. DL has also made it a priority over the past few years to improve the reliability of DCI.
How much of that is a function of weather and/or congested NYC area airports where naturally DCI carriers are the first to get cut.

I've flown 44 segments in 2017 & 2018 on DCI carriers in/out of DTW, MSP, ATL, SLC"
Out of 44 flights:
30 on-time or early
10 0-14 minutes late
4 15+ minutes late (the longest was 40 minutes)
0 cancellations


Maybe make a longer drive to HPN and route through ATL over DTW if feasible. They have mainline on that route now. Cancellations are less likely on mainline.
 
User avatar
AVLAirlineFreq
Posts: 1407
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:31 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:58 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Remember the CRJ 200 was a revelation after the SAAB 340s and EMB 120s that had been serving those routes.



What's funny is that after many years of flying the CRJ200, I ended up in a Saab on a short route (IAH-CLL) a few years ago and found it almost luxuriously roomy by comparison!.
 
oosnowrat
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:55 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:00 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
IPFreely wrote:
DaveFly wrote:
But I fly on Delta Connection (Skywest) every month from SWF. And I’m guaranteed a bad experience. The incoming flights are often canceled or late. So there goes my connection.


That's not a CRJ issue, that's a Delta Connection issue. I fly many domestic business trips every year to smaller airports -- never been to SWF, but many similar size airports that primarily see regional and little to no mainline service. I gave up on Delta Connection several years ago. The number of late and cancelled flights and missed connections made them non-usable for business travel.

Well that may be your experience with DCI, but that sounds like a bit of hyperpole. DL has also made it a priority over the past few years to improve the reliability of DCI.
How much of that is a function of weather and/or congested NYC area airports where naturally DCI carriers are the first to get cut.

I've flown 44 segments in 2017 & 2018 on DCI carriers in/out of DTW, MSP, ATL, SLC"
Out of 44 flights:
30 on-time or early
10 0-14 minutes late
4 15+ minutes late (the longest was 40 minutes)
0 cancellations


Agree. DCI is operating as well or better than UAX, and this guy never complains about UAX.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8063
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:08 pm

https://news.delta.com/delta-connection ... cellations

This was posted last week.
DCI has 150 cancel-free days so far in 2018, exceeding the 117 cancel-free days in 2017.
Mainline has had 233 cancel free days so far in 2018

135 brand (mainline+DCI) cancel free days in 2018, exceeding the 90 recorded in 2017.
 
gsg013
Posts: 560
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:03 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 5:15 pm

cheapgreek wrote:
freakyrat wrote:
evank516 wrote:

Hence DL sending the CR7 into EYW.


CR2's have no leading edge slats making them runway hogs.


Still not as bad as the E-145's. The 145 could not do HVN, the CR2 could.


The E-145's are just uncomfortable I once flew EWR-NAS (1095 miles) on the E-145 about 2 hrs 40 minutes IIRC that was not comfortable one bit
 
DaveFly
Posts: 386
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 9:35 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:12 pm

Is it possible that the delays/cancellations affect Skywest more than the other Delta Connection carriers? I’m just using my own experience, and it’s always a problem.

As for HPN, my house in the Hudson Valley is 1-1/4 hours from HPN. So if I can’t use SWF, I’d rather bite the bullet and drive to EWR.
717,727,737,747,757,767,777,787
L1011,DC8,DC9,DC10,MD80/90
A300,A319,320,321,330,340,
CRJ,E135/45/190,
DH8,Avro85,DHBeaver,AstarHelo,F100,ATR42
 
beerbus
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 2:41 pm

Re: Will DL get rid of 50 seat RJ's entirely?

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:46 pm

IPFreely wrote:
That's not a CRJ issue, that's a Delta Connection issue. I fly many domestic business trips every year to smaller airports -- never been to SWF, but many similar size airports that primarily see regional and little to no mainline service. I gave up on Delta Connection several years ago. The number of late and cancelled flights and missed connections made them non-usable for business travel.


Like a few others on this Forum- I too, have a completely different experience in the last few years on Delta Connection.

They terminated the contractors who didn't perform. The Contractors left are performing well. The statistics PROVE that.

I have been on Delta Connection flights monthly for the last two years-

And I have not had a single mechanical Delta Connection delay. I had WX delays on Delta Connection- but so did every other carrier in these instances.

My last American Eagle connection in 2017 from DFW to SPS was delayed. 2 hrs late. A nice clear day at Dallas and Shepard AFB too.....the inbound plane arrived late into DFW.
.
And my friend's DFW OKC American Eagle connection was also delayed in May, arriving in OKC six hours late at 0400.

Maybe you should give DL another chance?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos