Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9
 
airlineworker
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:32 am

SonomaFlyer wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/embraer-hopes-e175-e2-jet-efficiency-helps-modify-scope-clauses/134837.article

What are the chances that the old scope clauses are modified for this beautiful and efiicient jet ?
Will it take another 2 years?


Boeing has its stakes in Embraer E2 program.
Does this make the chances bigger for a modification?


Airlines could buy it and start training their pilots to fly it on the mainline tomorrow.

COVID hurts but the pilots have been down the scope road too many times. The youngins are now about to experience their first furloughs and adversity. They won't cave on scope. Yes they'd burn the airline down first. When the economy comes back, the shortage of airline pilots will be worse due to mandatory retirements. Pilots know this and no they don't trust the airlines to "do the right thing." They will dig in.


"Yes they'd burn the airline down first." And how do they benefit from that? My way or the highway mentality does no one any good.We are talking about the same plane, 76 seats, but the newer version is slightly heavier. The trend among airlines is upgauging, 737-700's to 737-800 and 900's. A-319's to A320 and A321's. I don't see any winners in this situation. No more 37 to 50 seat regionals are being made, its a waste of crews to fly so few people. I guess we will never see eye to eye, but I have many times seen jobs lost due to being rigid and unyielding.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 19723
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:35 am

txkf2010 wrote:
I'd expect AC to E2 to replace their 175s that they have KV operating for them. Only carrier in North America whose scope clause is on seats and not seat AND weight.

Nitpick, Alaska has a high enough scope weight for the E2-175.

I believe AeroMexico also could, but I am not certain.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:41 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
airlineworker wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

So the company doesn’t put 76 first class seats in a 757 and have SkyWest fly it.


I can't imagine any airline flying a 757 with 76 seats, fuel and maintenance costs would wipe out any profit. The E-2 175 is basically the same as the E-175. If both sides would offer some give and take this issue could be resolved. Unions at Eastern held firm and in the end, Eastern was gone. I'm not promoting one side over the other, but both mainline and regionals need to work together.


How many seats are on those air France and BA 319s that fly across the Atlantic in all business config?

A line has to be drawn or it will be exploited.


Bad comparison, those flights account for less than one percent of commercial flights. Those flights also are high yielding flights unlike the majority of most flights. Here in the states many small cities cannot fill a mainline plane but 65-76 seats work for them. The E-175-2 is one plane that is being discussed here is a direct replacement for the E-175, going beyond that plane say with the E-190-2 would be entering the the realm of mainline and and scope should prevent that. Again, seats not weight should be the determining factor.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5589
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:08 am

alasizon wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:
Regional crews want nothing to do with flying a 175-E2. It should be at mainline.


That is not at all true. Regional pilots want something to fly; if that happens to be the E2, so be it. Sure, they would prefer to be making Mainline wages but to say they want nothing to do with flying the E2 is not correct at all.

FLALEFTY wrote:
I wonder why Alaska, which supposedly does not have the 86K lb. scope limit restriction for their Horizon operations, has been ordering E175E1's, rather than E2's? Perhaps the efficiency gain does not offset the capital costs?


A) The E2 isn't in service yet and won't be for a while
B) Just because the clause isn't there doesn't mean AS wants to piss off its pilot group


I don’t who you’re talking with among my acquaintances, none want to see non-scope compliant planes flown by regional partners—mainline or nothing. They’ve been whipsawed enough, they’ve been stuck for the Lost Decade and now going backwards again.

GF
 
jagraham
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:12 am

lightsaber wrote:
FlyMKG wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
It needs to be remembered that Delta negotiated more large (76 seat, 86,000 lb) regional jets as part of the agreement to bring in the 717 (and not reduce other flying).

It was a deal, bring in 88 717s and you can fly 50 more 76 RJs (but the total quantity of alliwed RJs stopped going up).

The CS100 expands that. I agree cheap purchase/lease enabled Delta to bring in the 717/CS100, but improving the RJ economics was part of the business case.



With Compass Airlines shutting down, there is no more flow down protection offered to Delta pilots. The amount of 76 seat aircraft actually needs to be decreased by 35 frames per the contract unless another DCI carrier agrees to a flow down. Delta is required to remove 76 seat jets. They are in no position to add more.

My comments were on to why the economics of the 717 and A221 are more than the economics of individual types of aircraft.

We all now know the majors must reduce RJ count, in particular 76 RJs today. But there will be a time new 76 RJs are bought.

That is what this thread is about. Could the E2-175 sell to US regional airlines. I am of the opinion scope will not change. As someone in aerospace R&D, I see the advantage of the latest generation aircraft.

Lightsaber


With regards to scope, your (Lightsaber) previous observation that the MRJ will be in compliance means that as airlines choose to replace or expand their 76 seat fleets, they will get the MRJ and avoid scope negotiations. Most unfortunate for Embraer.

But the most important thing is that this issue has been overtaken by events. 2019-like times will not return for years. Every airline is now at risk. Even with (and perhaps especially with, considering the conditions) bailouts. Airlines that do not adapt will not survive. How much can the bargaining units hold on to is now the issue.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1036
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:13 am

airlineworker wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
airlineworker wrote:

I can't imagine any airline flying a 757 with 76 seats, fuel and maintenance costs would wipe out any profit. The E-2 175 is basically the same as the E-175. If both sides would offer some give and take this issue could be resolved. Unions at Eastern held firm and in the end, Eastern was gone. I'm not promoting one side over the other, but both mainline and regionals need to work together.


How many seats are on those air France and BA 319s that fly across the Atlantic in all business config?

A line has to be drawn or it will be exploited.


Bad comparison, those flights account for less than one percent of commercial flights. Those flights also are high yielding flights unlike the majority of most flights. Here in the states many small cities cannot fill a mainline plane but 65-76 seats work for them. The E-175-2 is one plane that is being discussed here is a direct replacement for the E-175, going beyond that plane say with the E-190-2 would be entering the the realm of mainline and and scope should prevent that. Again, seats not weight should be the determining factor.


You give the company an inch and they will take a mile. We gave away our souls just prior to bankruptcy at United with a promise that our pensions would be saved. Then United filled bankruptcy and the first thing they did was destroy our pension.....then they kept the concession we gave them anyway.

Unions exist to protect jobs. You believe what you want but it’s a pipe dream. The only way scope gets changed from here on out is through bankruptcy because us pilots have been kicked around enough the last 20 years.
Last edited by CriticalPoint on Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3531
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:21 am

Eventually the E175s will need to be replaced. What will be available to replace them? Also, in a bankruptcy, can the weight scope clause be discharged in a bankruptcy and be subject to renegotiation? (That said, the E275 is really too heavy compared to its capacity.)
Last edited by aemoreira1981 on Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1036
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:22 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Eventually the E175s will need to be replaced. What will be available to replace them?


How about the E2 flown by mainline?
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3531
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:27 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
Eventually the E175s will need to be replaced. What will be available to replace them?


How about the E2 flown by mainline?


Would not be profitable at mainline wages. I later edited my post to suggest that as per the Bildisco & Bildisco SCOTUS decision, a company could force a renegotiation on this. Most likely for this is American Airlines. (That said, the problem remains that the E275 is basically a "fat pig" and would cost way more to operate and emplane than an E175.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1036
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:29 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
Eventually the E175s will need to be replaced. What will be available to replace them?


How about the E2 flown by mainline?


Would not be profitable at mainline wages. I later edited my post to suggest that as per the Bildisco & Bildisco SCOTUS decision, a company could force a renegotiation on this. Most likely for this is American Airlines. (That said, the problem remains that the E275 is basically a "fat pig" and would cost way more to operate and emplane than an E175.


What exactly are mainline wages?

And yes in bankruptcy anything and everything can be changed and shoved down the employees throats.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5589
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:47 am

I don’t get the assumption the RJs “have to be replaced”. Networks can eliminate service to low profit destinations, they can up gauge-reduce frequency, they can keep operating old types for a long time. No one has a right to air service in Podunk, USA.
 
N353SK
Posts: 1021
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:08 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:48 am

airlineworker wrote:
The E-175-2 is one plane that is being discussed here is a direct replacement for the E-175, going beyond that plane say with the E-190-2 would be entering the the realm of mainline and and scope should prevent that. Again, seats not weight should be the determining factor.


If the Legacies were to take scope in bankruptcy filings and be allowed to outsource the 175-E2, people like you will be here howling in a few years how airlines should be allowed to outsource the 190 because it's the same plane, just stretched.

Organized labor exists to protect jobs. Allowing the employer to give those jobs to other companies does not protect jobs.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:56 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
airlineworker wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

How many seats are on those air France and BA 319s that fly across the Atlantic in all business config?

A line has to be drawn or it will be exploited.


Bad comparison, those flights account for less than one percent of commercial flights. Those flights also are high yielding flights unlike the majority of most flights. Here in the states many small cities cannot fill a mainline plane but 65-76 seats work or them. The E-175-2 is one plane that is being discussed here is a direct replacement for the E-175, going beyond that plane say with the E-190-2 would be entering the the realm of mainline and and scope should prevent that. Again, seats not weight should be the determining factor.


You give the company an inch and they will take a mile. We gave away our souls just prior to bankruptcy at United with a promise that our pensions would be saved. Then United filled bankruptcy and the first thing they did was destroy our pension.....then they kept the concession we gave them anyway.

Unions exist to protect jobs. You believe what you want but it’s a pipe dream. The only way scope gets changed from here on out is through bankruptcy because us pilots have been kicked around enough the last 20 years.


I went through chapter 22 with US years ago, that's chapter 11 twice in two years. We had a union back then and it was useless. As soon as the bankruptcy order was signed by the judge, company stock was rendered worthless and many older employes had company stock in their investment portfolios. Again, I am only talking about the E-175-2, not the larger models. Many pilots are being given layoff notices and it may take a long time if ever to return to the what was the golden era of the past few years. Hurting the company hurts everyone, mainline and regionals. I don't buy this "give an inch, they will take a mile" issue.
The whole country is going through convulsions that are much worse than 9-11. In this economy having a job is a precious commodity and we will all have to get used to the new normal.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1036
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:58 am

airlineworker wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
airlineworker wrote:

Bad comparison, those flights account for less than one percent of commercial flights. Those flights also are high yielding flights unlike the majority of most flights. Here in the states many small cities cannot fill a mainline plane but 65-76 seats work or them. The E-175-2 is one plane that is being discussed here is a direct replacement for the E-175, going beyond that plane say with the E-190-2 would be entering the the realm of mainline and and scope should prevent that. Again, seats not weight should be the determining factor.


You give the company an inch and they will take a mile. We gave away our souls just prior to bankruptcy at United with a promise that our pensions would be saved. Then United filled bankruptcy and the first thing they did was destroy our pension.....then they kept the concession we gave them anyway.

Unions exist to protect jobs. You believe what you want but it’s a pipe dream. The only way scope gets changed from here on out is through bankruptcy because us pilots have been kicked around enough the last 20 years.


I went through chapter 22 with US years ago, that's chapter 11 twice in two years. We had a union back then and it was useless. As soon as the bankruptcy order was signed by the judge, company stock was rendered worthless and many older employes had company stock in their investment portfolios. Again, I am only talking about the E-175-2, not the larger models. Many pilots are being given layoff notices and it may take a long time if ever to return to the what was the golden era of the past few years. Hurting the company hurts everyone, mainline and regionals. I don't buy this "give an inch, they will take a mile" issue.
The whole country is going through convulsions that are much worse than 9-11. In this economy having a job is a precious commodity and we will all have to get used to the new normal.


Yep which is why we are not giving on scope. Why should I give away my job? As you put it my precious commodity?
 
TObound
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:18 am

txkf2010 wrote:
I'd expect AC to E2 to replace their 175s that they have KV operating for them. Only carrier in North America whose scope clause is on seats and not seat AND weight.


I can't see it. They'll be replaced with Q400s eventually.
 
TObound
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:25 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
Eventually the E175s will need to be replaced. What will be available to replace them?


How about the E2 flown by mainline?


Or a Q400. I suspect that the aversion to prop flying would change very quickly if some of these smaller towns weren't given a choice.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2568
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:47 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I don’t get the assumption the RJs “have to be replaced”. Networks can eliminate service to low profit destinations, they can up gauge-reduce frequency, they can keep operating old types for a long time. No one has a right to air service in Podunk, USA.


85-90% of RJ flying isn't to "low profit destinations"; in fact the majority of it is more profitable than Mainline flying at a system level. All the legacies get better yield on the RJ flying than they do on the Mainline flying. At every hub (except SEA, ANC and HNL), I'd wager that at least 70% of their top 10 domestic, Mexican, and Canadian markets by yield are flown by RJs and that if they were to serve it with a 319/CS1/717 there just isn't the demand for it or the yield would fall flat to fill the seats.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
alasizon wrote:
DiamondFlyer wrote:
Regional crews want nothing to do with flying a 175-E2. It should be at mainline.


That is not at all true. Regional pilots want something to fly; if that happens to be the E2, so be it. Sure, they would prefer to be making Mainline wages but to say they want nothing to do with flying the E2 is not correct at all.


I don’t who you’re talking with among my acquaintances, none want to see non-scope compliant planes flown by regional partners—mainline or nothing. They’ve been whipsawed enough, they’ve been stuck for the Lost Decade and now going backwards again.

GF


Plenty of RJ pilots want planes to fly; period. They would love for it to be at Mainline wages but many are content to work their way up (remember, most of the pilots that have been whipsawed in the early to mid 2010s aren't even at the regionals anymore unless it is by choice) and eventually go to Mainline. I have friends at three different carriers who would be more than happy to fly the E1 or E2 at their current rate if it means they don't have to step foot into a CR2 or E145 again. If you are out there pretending that there aren't pilots who would fly the E2 at current Regional rates, you are not aware of how the pilot group at large feels. Plenty always want more money and better labor rules and to be at the Mainline carrier but that doesn't mean they aren't willing to improve their life as it currently stands.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
User avatar
FLALEFTY
Posts: 725
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:48 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
I don’t get the assumption the RJs “have to be replaced”. Networks can eliminate service to low profit destinations, they can up gauge-reduce frequency, they can keep operating old types for a long time. No one has a right to air service in Podunk, USA.


That's a good point. When Delta took over NW and shut down the Memphis hub, several cities served by NW-branded regionals were dropped. This included Tupelo, Meridian, Hattiesburg, Muscle Shoals and Greenville (MS). But after this virus crisis is settled, look for Delta to end branded regional service to stations like Dothan, Valdosta, Brunswick (GA), Albany (GA), Golden Triangle (MS), et. al. Similar reductions will probably also play out for the other airlines' hub feeds, too.

What is not talked about yet is that the E170/175's are not just used to connect small/medium-sized cities to major airline hubs. They are also increasingly being used to invade competitor's hubs. Examples of some interesting E170/175 "hub raiding" flights include IAH to SLC, MSP to IAH, DAL to SEA, SLC to DEN and this doesn't even start to address the numerous E170/175 flights running in and out of slot-restricted airports like LGA and DCA on behalf of Delta (LGA) and American (DCA). These are flights that normally should be served by mainline jets, but are given to the regionals for cost savings.
 
oosnowrat
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:01 am

JoseSalazar wrote:
Mainline pilots would welcome the E175-E2 (and E1 for that matter) at the already negotiated and mutually agreed upon pay scales, which are less than other narrow-bodies. With the efficiencies of this plane, added seats to the scope-limited/slightly shorter 76 seat E1, it can hold what around 80-82 seats? The higher pay rates/improved work rules at major airlines would be more than offset by the reduced fuel burn and increased number of seats (as well as the associated in-sourced efficiencies).


If this was true it would have happened years ago.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 856
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:33 am

alasizon wrote:
FLALEFTY wrote:
I wonder why Alaska, which supposedly does not have the 86K lb. scope limit restriction for their Horizon operations, has been ordering E175E1's, rather than E2's? Perhaps the efficiency gain does not offset the capital costs?


A) The E2 isn't in service yet and won't be for a while
B) Just because the clause isn't there doesn't mean AS wants to piss off its pilot group

Additionally, Alaska likes young aircraft, which means they have resale in mind. I don't know if this is as true with QX as it is with AS, but IIRC, AS decided to not opt for mid-aircraft lavatories on their longer mainline aircraft partially because the non-standard plumbing would reduce resale.

QX getting scope non-compliant aircraft would all but eliminate resale. It would make for an interesting poison-pill against a takeover, but that's not such a concern right now.
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:34 am

oosnowrat wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
Mainline pilots would welcome the E175-E2 (and E1 for that matter) at the already negotiated and mutually agreed upon pay scales, which are less than other narrow-bodies. With the efficiencies of this plane, added seats to the scope-limited/slightly shorter 76 seat E1, it can hold what around 80-82 seats? The higher pay rates/improved work rules at major airlines would be more than offset by the reduced fuel burn and increased number of seats (as well as the associated in-sourced efficiencies).


If this was true it would have happened years ago.

Negative. It can be flown profitably at mainline. It can be flown more profitably outsourced to underpaid regionals. Management clings to the “more profitable” course of action.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2367
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:44 am

CriticalPoint wrote:
airlineworker wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

How many seats are on those air France and BA 319s that fly across the Atlantic in all business config?

A line has to be drawn or it will be exploited.


Bad comparison, those flights account for less than one percent of commercial flights. Those flights also are high yielding flights unlike the majority of most flights. Here in the states many small cities cannot fill a mainline plane but 65-76 seats work for them. The E-175-2 is one plane that is being discussed here is a direct replacement for the E-175, going beyond that plane say with the E-190-2 would be entering the the realm of mainline and and scope should prevent that. Again, seats not weight should be the determining factor.


You give the company an inch and they will take a mile. We gave away our souls just prior to bankruptcy at United with a promise that our pensions would be saved. Then United filled bankruptcy and the first thing they did was destroy our pension.....then they kept the concession we gave them anyway.

Unions exist to protect jobs. You believe what you want but it’s a pipe dream. The only way scope gets changed from here on out is through bankruptcy because us pilots have been kicked around enough the last 20 years.


The E2 holds the same amount of seats as the E175 it would be replacing. It's not taking any aircraft away from mainline.

Imagine this, Boeing or Airbus somehow manages to make a 100 seat jet under the 86,000 lb scope limit. Revenue management then figures out they can still make a profit off of just 76 seats and fly it at the regionals. Technically they are honoring the scope agreement. But certainly not in the spirit of the agreement. It would be a dirty thing to do. But you're doing the same thing to the airline right now. The E175 gained a little weight and you're pulling a "gotcha!" On them. You are certainly not honoring the spirit of the agreement.
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri Apr 10, 2020 7:54 am

"No one has a right to air service in Podunk, USA."

At a time when the airlines and their employees are surviving on the US taxpayers (some of whom might live in Podunk) under the basis that they are essential to the US economy. That approach won't win many friends in Congress who represent Podunk
    300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
     
    User avatar
    Aesma
    Posts: 13022
    Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 9:56 am

    DenverTed wrote:
    Theoretically if you have a pilot fly a 75 seat, 150 seat, and 300 seat aircraft, how much should they be paid?
    The same at 200K each? Or per seat,100K, 200K, and 400K? Or some average of the two methods, 150K, 200K, and 300K?


    I think you are onto something.

    Salaries at the top are too high, making salaries at the bottom too low, for what is basically the same job.

    Flame away.
    New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
     
    User avatar
    aemoreira1981
    Posts: 3531
    Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:08 pm

    TObound wrote:
    CriticalPoint wrote:
    aemoreira1981 wrote:
    Eventually the E175s will need to be replaced. What will be available to replace them?


    How about the E2 flown by mainline?


    Or a Q400. I suspect that the aversion to prop flying would change very quickly if some of these smaller towns weren't given a choice.


    The Q400 doesn’t allow hub bypassing, while the E-Jet does. That could pose an issue, especially in middle America.
     
    EssentialBusDC
    Posts: 104
    Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:29 pm

    TTailedTiger wrote:
    CriticalPoint wrote:
    airlineworker wrote:

    Bad comparison, those flights account for less than one percent of commercial flights. Those flights also are high yielding flights unlike the majority of most flights. Here in the states many small cities cannot fill a mainline plane but 65-76 seats work for them. The E-175-2 is one plane that is being discussed here is a direct replacement for the E-175, going beyond that plane say with the E-190-2 would be entering the the realm of mainline and and scope should prevent that. Again, seats not weight should be the determining factor.


    You give the company an inch and they will take a mile. We gave away our souls just prior to bankruptcy at United with a promise that our pensions would be saved. Then United filled bankruptcy and the first thing they did was destroy our pension.....then they kept the concession we gave them anyway.

    Unions exist to protect jobs. You believe what you want but it’s a pipe dream. The only way scope gets changed from here on out is through bankruptcy because us pilots have been kicked around enough the last 20 years.


    The E2 holds the same amount of seats as the E175 it would be replacing. It's not taking any aircraft away from mainline.

    Imagine this, Boeing or Airbus somehow manages to make a 100 seat jet under the 86,000 lb scope limit. Revenue management then figures out they can still make a profit off of just 76 seats and fly it at the regionals. Technically they are honoring the scope agreement. But certainly not in the spirit of the agreement. It would be a dirty thing to do. But you're doing the same thing to the airline right now. The E175 gained a little weight and you're pulling a "gotcha!" On them. You are certainly not honoring the spirit of the agreement.


    The E2 is larger then the E1, and carries more passengers when not scope limited. Even the E1 would be more then 76 seat normally with no scope limits.

    The pilots aren’t pulling a gotcha. The scope seat and weight limits are a known issue. It’s Embraer who bet those limits wouldn’t exist, so they designed a non scope compliant aircraft. They bet wrong.
     
    User avatar
    lightsaber
    Moderator
    Posts: 19723
    Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:00 pm

    CriticalPoint wrote:
    aemoreira1981 wrote:
    CriticalPoint wrote:

    How about the E2 flown by mainline?


    Would not be profitable at mainline wages. I later edited my post to suggest that as per the Bildisco & Bildisco SCOTUS decision, a company could force a renegotiation on this. Most likely for this is American Airlines. (That said, the problem remains that the E275 is basically a "fat pig" and would cost way more to operate and emplane than an E175.


    What exactly are mainline wages?

    And yes in bankruptcy anything and everything can be changed and shoved down the employees throats.

    Careful, see Eastern Airlines where the feud resulted in liquidation if the company.

    I would like to see E275 vs. E175 costs. I did back of the envelope calculations and I am only getting a few percent in fuel savings (for a larger aircraft).

    Lightsaber
    IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
     
    CFRPwingALbody
    Posts: 372
    Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:05 pm

    Sorry if this post upseads, I'm just writing down my oppinion.
    I don't see any future for the E175-E2, the reason is that the PW1700 are inferior to the GE CF-34-8E. The PW1x00 engine core is to large, thus heavy. The geared fan only adds weight thus increases the problem. Bombardier saw this and didn't reengine the CRJ's. Both Embraer and Mitsubisi didn't see this and tried to develop the E175-E2 jets and M90/M100.
    The E190/E195-E2 will be succesfull because they are larger, requiring higher thrust. The PW1900 is supperior to the CF34-10E.
    The 50-100 seat regionaljet market requires another engine. Most regional airlines were happy converting their E175-E2 orders into E175 orders.
     
    User avatar
    lightsaber
    Moderator
    Posts: 19723
    Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:27 pm

    CFRPwingALbody wrote:
    Sorry if this post upseads, I'm just writing down my oppinion.
    I don't see any future for the E175-E2, the reason is that the PW1700 are inferior to the GE CF-34-8E. The PW1x00 engine core is to large, thus heavy. The geared fan only adds weight thus increases the problem. Bombardier saw this and didn't reengine the CRJ's. Both Embraer and Mitsubisi didn't see this and tried to develop the E175-E2 jets and M90/M100.
    The E190/E195-E2 will be succesfull because they are larger, requiring higher thrust. The PW1900 is supperior to the CF34-10E.
    The 50-100 seat regionaljet market requires another engine. Most regional airlines were happy converting their E175-E2 orders into E175 orders.

    The PW1200G burns 12% to 16% less fuel than the CF-34-8, including the penalty of engine weight and nacelle drag. The PW1700G is the same basic engine, so numbers will be similar.

    Neither Mitsubishi nor Embraer would have picked the engine if that poor.

    https://www.mtu.de/fileadmin/EN/7_News_ ... W1000G.pdf

    New engines will always be heavier. The CF-34-8 had a low pressure ratio and low bypass ratio. A low pressure ratio means the casing holding in the pressure could be thinner. A higher bypass ratio means a larger fan an thus a much heavier fan and fan casing.

    The CRJ isn't as competitive.

    Lightsaber
    IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
     
    User avatar
    hOMSaR
    Moderator
    Posts: 2337
    Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:42 pm

    I also, sadly, don't see the immediate appeal of the E175-E2 in the US.

    First of all, the US majors just received a bunch of brand new 175s over the past few years. These planes will not need replacing until 2030 or later. In fact, they still have more on order (delivery may be "up in the air" so to speak, owing to COVID, but nonetheless new ones are/were being built this year).

    Second, the situation that airlines face at the moment is one of needing to shrink their operations significantly. This is not the time to buy new planes. Even if the oldest of the 175s need retiring in the near future, there are plenty of newer ones out there that will more than pick up the slack. So, again, what's the rush to buy the E2?

    Third, the argument about pilots needing to give up scope to save their jobs in this environment is a bit disingenuous, for a combination of the above reasons: airlines are not struggling for lack of new equipment, they are struggling for lack of demand for their service. Fuel prices are down right now, which reduces one of the main benefits of the E2. If fuel prices were to rise significantly, one would assume that would occur in tandem with a rise in the economy, which would imply that the state of the airline industry would be improving, therefore countering any argument that the airlines "need" scope relief to survive.

    Just because a plane is more fuel efficient than another type doesn't automatically make it a must-have for airline fleets, and it doesn't automatically render existing fleets worthless junk. Airlines didn't immediately throw away paid-for A340s just because the 777 and A330 got better. Airlines found profitable uses for their 767 fleets after the 787 was introduced, etc. Likewise, even the existence of the E2 doesn't mean the E1s have to all be thrown away. If the economy recovers, the existing 175 fleets will be able to be flown profitably for a bunch more years, and if it doesn't, then the E2 doesn't really have much chance anyway.
    I was raised by a cup of coffee.
     
    GalaxyFlyer
    Posts: 5589
    Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:51 pm

    Plenty of RJ pilots want planes to fly; period. They would love for it to be at Mainline wages but many are content to work their way up (remember, most of the pilots that have been whipsawed in the early to mid 2010s aren't even at the regionals anymore unless it is by choice) and eventually go to Mainline. I have friends at three different carriers who would be more than happy to fly the E1 or E2 at their current rate if it means they don't have to step foot into a CR2 or E145 again. If you are out there pretending that there aren't pilots who would fly the E2 at current Regional rates, you are not aware of how the pilot group at large feels. Plenty always want more money and better labor rules and to be at the Mainline carrier but that doesn't mean they aren't willing to improve their life as it currently stands.


    Plenty of regional pilots would fly 777s at current wages, which is exactly why the scope clause exists.

    No, there are no RJs at unprofitable locations and lots of locations are going to lose service soon.
     
    User avatar
    aemoreira1981
    Posts: 3531
    Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:23 pm

    hOMSaR wrote:
    I also, sadly, don't see the immediate appeal of the E175-E2 in the US.

    First of all, the US majors just received a bunch of brand new 175s over the past few years. These planes will not need replacing until 2030 or later. In fact, they still have more on order (delivery may be "up in the air" so to speak, owing to COVID, but nonetheless new ones are/were being built this year).

    Second, the situation that airlines face at the moment is one of needing to shrink their operations significantly. This is not the time to buy new planes. Even if the oldest of the 175s need retiring in the near future, there are plenty of newer ones out there that will more than pick up the slack. So, again, what's the rush to buy the E2?

    Third, the argument about pilots needing to give up scope to save their jobs in this environment is a bit disingenuous, for a combination of the above reasons: airlines are not struggling for lack of new equipment, they are struggling for lack of demand for their service. Fuel prices are down right now, which reduces one of the main benefits of the E2. If fuel prices were to rise significantly, one would assume that would occur in tandem with a rise in the economy, which would imply that the state of the airline industry would be improving, therefore countering any argument that the airlines "need" scope relief to survive.

    Just because a plane is more fuel efficient than another type doesn't automatically make it a must-have for airline fleets, and it doesn't automatically render existing fleets worthless junk. Airlines didn't immediately throw away paid-for A340s just because the 777 and A330 got better. Airlines found profitable uses for their 767 fleets after the 787 was introduced, etc. Likewise, even the existence of the E2 doesn't mean the E1s have to all be thrown away. If the economy recovers, the existing 175 fleets will be able to be flown profitably for a bunch more years, and if it doesn't, then the E2 doesn't really have much chance anyway.


    Especially with OO still receiving a lot of E175s that it ordered directly (and will then offer to the US3 and others in a capacity purchase). The real aim is to get the aging 50-seat planes out the door.

    Now, on this, a wild card could be B6. They have no scope clause, and will need a plane smaller than the A220-300 or even the A220-100 for intra-New York and New England operations. However, at the same time, if one is thinking about resale, the E275 will not be liquid at all, and if B6 were to acquire them, they would need to plan for a 23-24 year service life (about the same service life expected for the Airbus aircraft at B6). I could see the B6 pilots union at least pushing for some restrictions on where they can fly (i.e., similar to Hawaiian, where mainline and regional planes cannot operate the same routes).

    BTW, are orders still being taken on the CRJ9?
     
    DCA-ROCguy
    Posts: 4207
    Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:40 pm

    A usual airliners.net brawl over scope clauses raises the question: Why would Embraer knowingly design an aircraft that does not comply with a contractual limitation in a huge market? Didn't they design the ERJ-140 many moons ago specifically to comply with an AA scope clause? Embraer is presumably well aware of scope. And the last decade until now hasn't been a time of economic hardship for USA legacies, so why would E. expect contractual changes for a heavier engine and efficiency (granted, effiicency is a very good thing)? Just keep making the regular EMB-175.

    BTW, as a matter of fact, "Podunk USA" (love the slur, certain derogatories are apparently still acceptable) *is* entitled to air service if it can be economically provided. Air travel is a social good, all the more in an economy that is going to remain global, if maybe with more adjustment to home. If airlines stray too far from providing service everywhere it can be economically provided, Congress has means to make their lives miserable. Seat-pitch, seat-width, and fee restrictions, anyone?

    Jim
    Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
     
    GalaxyFlyer
    Posts: 5589
    Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:51 pm

    It’s not a slur, Podunk is an actual location. I live near it. Air travel is not a right, a social value, it’s a scarce service that responds to economics. Someone has to pay for it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podunk
     
    MohawkWeekend
    Posts: 243
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

    Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

    Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:56 pm

    But we've just tossed economics out the window with the bailout, no?

    Not sure if this is the right forum for this. I wonder if this would be the time to look at raising the number of seats a single pilot airliner could carry. Currently at 9, I think their safety record is pretty good (Look at how many single pilot FEX Cessna's are droning around). Would 12 or 14 make it more likely to increase service to cover this "Podunk" gap? It could increase the number of flying jobs as this market is really untapped in the US.
      300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
       
      DCA-ROCguy
      Posts: 4207
      Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

      Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

      Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:01 pm

      The word Podunk, whatever its origins, was most definitely being used as a slur in the context it was used in this discussion.

      Air travel is a social good. Yes, it has to be paid for. It does need to be offered where it can be paid for.

      Were I an Embraer investor, I'd be wanting answers from management over the EMB-175 E2. Unless there's some significant factor I've missed, there seems to be no reason for a hugely successful manufacturer of regional aircraft to deliberately design an aircraft that does not comply with an economic restriction in a huge market that had little to no chance of being changed, in the period in which the plane was brought to market, and the near future.

      Jim
      Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
       
      frmrCapCadet
      Posts: 4094
      Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

      Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

      Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:33 pm

      Something puzzles me, grew up in the 40s, 50s in a union family. Unions for blue collar people have collapsed in the US, and conservatives rejoiced and exploited. Now two really strong unions remain, pilots at mainlines and police in blue states (look at their pay in red states, way lower). And conservatives rejoice. Pilots have huge control over business decisions, the hell with market economics. And most conservatives on this site are really fine with it. In an odd sort of way I am glad pilots have some power, but most of them happily ignore workers who do not have power and seem to rejoice in that too.
      Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
       
      User avatar
      Revelation
      Posts: 23916
      Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

      Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

      Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:47 pm

      DCA-ROCguy wrote:
      A usual airliners.net brawl over scope clauses raises the question: Why would Embraer knowingly design an aircraft that does not comply with a contractual limitation in a huge market? Didn't they design the ERJ-140 many moons ago specifically to comply with an AA scope clause? Embraer is presumably well aware of scope. And the last decade until now hasn't been a time of economic hardship for USA legacies, so why would E. expect contractual changes for a heavier engine and efficiency (granted, effiicency is a very good thing)? Just keep making the regular EMB-175.

      They made an ill-informed gamble, one that is not paying off nor seems to have any chance of paying off.

      It seems to me this thread exists because EMB is desperate to use the COVID crisis to rescue them from their mistake.

      DCA-ROCguy wrote:
      BTW, as a matter of fact, "Podunk USA" (love the slur, certain derogatories are apparently still acceptable) *is* entitled to air service if it can be economically provided. Air travel is a social good, all the more in an economy that is going to remain global, if maybe with more adjustment to home. If airlines stray too far from providing service everywhere it can be economically provided, Congress has means to make their lives miserable. Seat-pitch, seat-width, and fee restrictions, anyone?

      Entitled subject to economic provisions is IMO a strange, almost nonsensical construct.

      GalaxyFlyer wrote:
      It’s not a slur, Podunk is an actual location. I live near it. Air travel is not a right, a social value, it’s a scarce service that responds to economics. Someone has to pay for it.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podunk

      I agree. A given location is no more entitled to airline service than it is to, let's say, a Chinese food restaurant.

      Your link says:

      The word podunk is of Algonquian origin. It denoted both the Podunk people and marshy locations, particularly the people's winter village site on the border of present-day East Hartford and South Windsor, Connecticut.

      Chances are high that I've been to the original Podunk since I worked in South Windsor CT for a year or so.

      Also,

      Podunk was first defined in an American national dictionary in 1934, as an imaginary small town considered typical of placid dullness and lack of contact with the progress of the world.

      So, yeah, it's a slur. When I want to refer to some obscure location I just go with East Bumf&ck, at least it's clear I'm exaggerating for effect.
      Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
      The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
      Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
      The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
       
      MohawkWeekend
      Posts: 243
      Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

      Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

      Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:54 pm

      The three most powerful Unions are probably the ALPA, Major League Baseball Players Association, and the NBA Players union. It will be interesting to see how all 3 fair if the country slips into a Depression and several airlines and sports teams file for bankruptcy. Can you imagine ball players asking for a bailout?
      Last edited by MohawkWeekend on Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
        300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
         
        User avatar
        Revelation
        Posts: 23916
        Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:00 pm

        frmrCapCadet wrote:
        Something puzzles me, grew up in the 40s, 50s in a union family. Unions for blue collar people have collapsed in the US, and conservatives rejoiced and exploited. Now two really strong unions remain, pilots at mainlines and police in blue states (look at their pay in red states, way lower). And conservatives rejoice. Pilots have huge control over business decisions, the hell with market economics. And most conservatives on this site are really fine with it. In an odd sort of way I am glad pilots have some power, but most of them happily ignore workers who do not have power and seem to rejoice in that too.

        I was following you pretty well up to the last sentence. Yes, pilots exercise their bargaining power, but why does that make you feel they should do something for other workers without such power, and even rejoice in their lack of power?

        I think if we look at the US airline business it features the same kind of excesses found in executive salaries and bonuses as most large US corporations, and these people are the ones making the decisions on what the workers without bargaining power get, so I think your remarks are aimed at the wrong target.

        The core reality is what you say, workers in general do not have collective negotiating power. US society as a whole has decided corporate health and welfare is our priority, and workers have convinced themselves that they are better off relying on corporate benevolence rather than on collective bargaining power.
        Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
        The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
        Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
        The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
         
        DCA-ROCguy
        Posts: 4207
        Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:14 pm

        I should note that while Embraer appears to have been successful at sales, I don't know their financial history other than the Brazil / Canada subsidy-accusations controversy, so whether they've been 'hugely successful' financially I don't know.

        Unions were too powerful in the mid 20th century to early 80's, and correction was needed (see the US car industry). But now, it appears things have swung too far the other direction. Unfortuantely this is how things can happen. Regarding 'strong unions' today, teachers unions and public-employee unions are probably some of the more powerful.

        Jim
        Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
         
        GalaxyFlyer
        Posts: 5589
        Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:24 pm

        I’m not rejoicing, so much as stating the facts of law and labor relations in the industry. I’ve been an MEC member, I have an acquaintance with the situation. The airline labor pool is very much a “winner take all” enterprise. The chance at becoming a 400k legacy captain leads people to work for nothing to gain the required credentials that might get them that position. The question is it worth it?
         
        JoseSalazar
        Posts: 187
        Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:38 pm

        aemoreira1981 wrote:
        hOMSaR wrote:
        I also, sadly, don't see the immediate appeal of the E175-E2 in the US.

        First of all, the US majors just received a bunch of brand new 175s over the past few years. These planes will not need replacing until 2030 or later. In fact, they still have more on order (delivery may be "up in the air" so to speak, owing to COVID, but nonetheless new ones are/were being built this year).

        Second, the situation that airlines face at the moment is one of needing to shrink their operations significantly. This is not the time to buy new planes. Even if the oldest of the 175s need retiring in the near future, there are plenty of newer ones out there that will more than pick up the slack. So, again, what's the rush to buy the E2?

        Third, the argument about pilots needing to give up scope to save their jobs in this environment is a bit disingenuous, for a combination of the above reasons: airlines are not struggling for lack of new equipment, they are struggling for lack of demand for their service. Fuel prices are down right now, which reduces one of the main benefits of the E2. If fuel prices were to rise significantly, one would assume that would occur in tandem with a rise in the economy, which would imply that the state of the airline industry would be improving, therefore countering any argument that the airlines "need" scope relief to survive.

        Just because a plane is more fuel efficient than another type doesn't automatically make it a must-have for airline fleets, and it doesn't automatically render existing fleets worthless junk. Airlines didn't immediately throw away paid-for A340s just because the 777 and A330 got better. Airlines found profitable uses for their 767 fleets after the 787 was introduced, etc. Likewise, even the existence of the E2 doesn't mean the E1s have to all be thrown away. If the economy recovers, the existing 175 fleets will be able to be flown profitably for a bunch more years, and if it doesn't, then the E2 doesn't really have much chance anyway.


        Especially with OO still receiving a lot of E175s that it ordered directly (and will then offer to the US3 and others in a capacity purchase). The real aim is to get the aging 50-seat planes out the door.

        Now, on this, a wild card could be B6. They have no scope clause, and will need a plane smaller than the A220-300 or even the A220-100 for intra-New York and New England operations. However, at the same time, if one is thinking about resale, the E275 will not be liquid at all, and if B6 were to acquire them, they would need to plan for a 23-24 year service life (about the same service life expected for the Airbus aircraft at B6). I could see the B6 pilots union at least pushing for some restrictions on where they can fly (i.e., similar to Hawaiian, where mainline and regional planes cannot operate the same routes).

        BTW, are orders still being taken on the CRJ9?

        B6 absolutely has scope clauses...tightest scope in the US besides WN. The pilot contract scope clauses completely prohibit any contracted regional flying. That said, B6 could buy E175-E2s with NO restrictions on where they fly, and B6 pilots would be happy to fly them, just as they are happy to fly the 190. In fact, prior to the A220 winning out, I had a theory that B6 might get some 80-84 seat configured E175-E2s as well as E195-E2s as the E190 replacement. At this point though, I don’t see B6 taking anything smaller than an A223, maybe a small batch of A221s. And certainly there will be outsourced RJs.
         
        frmrCapCadet
        Posts: 4094
        Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:41 pm

        Revelation wrote:
        frmrCapCadet wrote:
        Something puzzles me, grew up in the 40s, 50s in a union family. Unions for blue collar people have collapsed in the US, and conservatives rejoiced and exploited. Now two really strong unions remain, pilots at mainlines and police in blue states (look at their pay in red states, way lower). And conservatives rejoice. Pilots have huge control over business decisions, the hell with market economics. And most conservatives on this site are really fine with it. In an odd sort of way I am glad pilots have some power, but most of them happily ignore workers who do not have power and seem to rejoice in that too.

        I was following you pretty well up to the last sentence. Yes, pilots exercise their bargaining power, but why does that make you feel they should do something for other workers without such power, and even rejoice in their lack of power?

        I think if we look at the US airline business it features the same kind of excesses found in executive salaries and bonuses as most large US corporations, and these people are the ones making the decisions on what the workers without bargaining power get, so I think your remarks are aimed at the wrong target.

        The core reality is what you say, workers in general do not have collective negotiating power. US society as a whole has decided corporate health and welfare is our priority, and workers have convinced themselves that they are better off relying on corporate benevolence rather than on collective bargaining power.


        I think in part unions failed because the princes among them (my operating engineers probably qualify), acted to protect themselves. Who really need more power were retail clerks, nursing home and restaurant workers etc. Highly paid union workers would have done better by using some of their power to protect lower paid workers. Most heavy equipment operators are no longer in my union. (I worked high school through college and grad school). Even walked picket lines from time to time. If people earning well over $100K a year don't help stick up for lower paid workers, social security, medical care for all, they will eventually find themselves alone and threatened. I am appalled at how many civil service workers enjoying pensions, medical care, sick leave, job protection from firing are so often against anyone in the private world enjoying some of the same benefits and protection. Bonhoeffer's story all over, 'first the came for .... and I did nothing ... '
        Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
         
        User avatar
        Aesma
        Posts: 13022
        Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:42 pm

        DCA-ROCguy wrote:
        A usual airliners.net brawl over scope clauses raises the question: Why would Embraer knowingly design an aircraft that does not comply with a contractual limitation in a huge market? Didn't they design the ERJ-140 many moons ago specifically to comply with an AA scope clause? Embraer is presumably well aware of scope. And the last decade until now hasn't been a time of economic hardship for USA legacies, so why would E. expect contractual changes for a heavier engine and efficiency (granted, effiicency is a very good thing)? Just keep making the regular EMB-175.


        A bet on 150$ oil ?

        Isn't the E170-175 an almost only US plane already ?
        New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
         
        GalaxyFlyer
        Posts: 5589
        Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:30 pm

        Actually, they’re worth more than the president and, at US legacies, captains do beat 400k. When airline pilots get a personal 747, the White House and Camp David and all the catering they can eat, I’ll listen to your silly argument. People get paid for what their product is worth.
         
        User avatar
        lightsaber
        Moderator
        Posts: 19723
        Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 6:11 pm

        Revelation wrote:
        DCA-ROCguy wrote:
        A usual airliners.net brawl over scope clauses raises the question: Why would Embraer knowingly design an aircraft that does not comply with a contractual limitation in a huge market? Didn't they design the ERJ-140 many moons ago specifically to comply with an AA scope clause? Embraer is presumably well aware of scope. And the last decade until now hasn't been a time of economic hardship for USA legacies, so why would E. expect contractual changes for a heavier engine and efficiency (granted, effiicency is a very good thing)? Just keep making the regular EMB-175.

        They made an ill-informed gamble, one that is not paying off nor seems to have any chance of paying off.

        It seems to me this thread exists because EMB is desperate to use the COVID crisis to rescue them from their mistake.

        Embraer needs to redesign a new E2-170 that seats 76 and is scope compliant. Both Mitsubishi bluffed trying to expand scope. They started this effort in 2013 IIRC, and it didn't happen.

        The idea pilots would sign away their jobs is unlikely. Nor will other mainline unions.

        Lightsaber
        IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
         
        txkf2010
        Posts: 205
        Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:10 am

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 7:50 pm

        TObound wrote:
        txkf2010 wrote:
        I'd expect AC to E2 to replace their 175s that they have KV operating for them. Only carrier in North America whose scope clause is on seats and not seat AND weight.


        I can't see it. They'll be replaced with Q400s eventually.


        Can you really see a Q doing YYZ-ORD/ATL/MSY/DFW/AUS/IAH?
         
        embraer175e2
        Topic Author
        Posts: 291
        Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Fri Apr 10, 2020 9:01 pm

        lightsaber wrote:
        Revelation wrote:
        DCA-ROCguy wrote:
        A usual airliners.net brawl over scope clauses raises the question: Why would Embraer knowingly design an aircraft that does not comply with a contractual limitation in a huge market? Didn't they design the ERJ-140 many moons ago specifically to comply with an AA scope clause? Embraer is presumably well aware of scope. And the last decade until now hasn't been a time of economic hardship for USA legacies, so why would E. expect contractual changes for a heavier engine and efficiency (granted, effiicency is a very good thing)? Just keep making the regular EMB-175.

        They made an ill-informed gamble, one that is not paying off nor seems to have any chance of paying off.

        It seems to me this thread exists because EMB is desperate to use the COVID crisis to rescue them from their mistake.

        Embraer needs to redesign a new E2-170 that seats 76 and is scope compliant. Both Mitsubishi bluffed trying to expand scope. They started this effort in 2013 IIRC, and it didn't happen.

        The idea pilots would sign away their jobs is unlikely. Nor will other mainline unions.

        Lightsaber


        I doubt that embraer will redesign any airplane again. The chances are small. Remember the e175e2 is already a resigned model from the the former e175.
         
        TObound
        Posts: 776
        Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

        Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

        Sat Apr 11, 2020 6:40 am

        txkf2010 wrote:
        TObound wrote:
        txkf2010 wrote:
        I'd expect AC to E2 to replace their 175s that they have KV operating for them. Only carrier in North America whose scope clause is on seats and not seat AND weight.


        I can't see it. They'll be replaced with Q400s eventually.


        Can you really see a Q doing YYZ-ORD/ATL/MSY/DFW/AUS/IAH?


        No. I can see those being consolidated and upgraded to a 223.
        • 1
        • 2
        • 3
        • 4
        • 5
        • 9

        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