Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting syncmaster (Reply 2): I believe they are still owned by Alaska and only operated by SkyWest... |
Quoting syncmaster (Reply 4): Yes I believe so, but my original post was incorrect, they are owned by SkyWest. It'll be interesting to see what they do with them. |
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 5): With the EMB-120 gone, CR2s are flying what viable routes remained, I'd imagine that OO won't have to look to far for another partner carrier that would likely enjoy the up-gauge from a CR2 to a CR7 on more than a couple routes. UAX? |
Quoting Tan Flyr (Reply 7): Quoting RWA380 (Reply 5): With the EMB-120 gone, CR2s are flying what viable routes remained, I'd imagine that OO won't have to look to far for another partner carrier that would likely enjoy the up-gauge from a CR2 to a CR7 on more than a couple routes. UAX? Perhaps with AA ? any info if any Skywest flights for FAT will get upgauged ? |
Quoting WhatUsaid (Reply 8): There has been talk that OO wanted to reconfigure their FAT hanger so that they could do maintenance on the 175s. On the FAT FB page it was reported that the City of Fresno said "No" to their request. A dumb move if true given the EMB120 base is now closed (there remains 8 or 9 CRJs, 700s, and 900s that go through the base each night). That said, as of this fall, QX is gone from FAT and OO has a lll AS FAT flying - SAN, PDX, and SEA. The WIP November schedule suggests that there's a change that's beyond just the flip from Qs to 700s given the new SAN-FAT departure lands at FAT way too early to RON. Will be interesting to see how soon AS moves the 175s into FAT or whether we see the Q's return in 2016. |
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 10): Why would FAT say no to keeping jobs at the airport? That is FATheaded move. Where will the mx base for the 175s be? |
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 9): That is interesting & it made me wonder as the CR7's leave, is there any current route that may not be able to support the 175 in the AS network? Routes like PDX-SBA or SEA-SBA that are too far for the Q400's. |
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 9): Quoting WhatUsaid (Reply 8): That is interesting & it made me wonder as the CR7's leave, is there any current route that may not be able to support the 175 in the AS network? Routes like PDX-SBA or SEA-SBA that are too far for the Q400's. |
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 9): That is interesting & it made me wonder as the CR7's leave, is there any current route that may not be able to support the 175 in the AS network? Routes like PDX-SBA or SEA-SBA that are too far for the Q400's. |
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 5): |
Quoting threeifbyair (Reply 14): As far as pasengers, if the 175 is configured in a 76-seat layout that's only 6 seats more than a CR7 and the same capacity as the Q400. |
Quoting b777900 (Reply 24): Is the E 190 too big for AS.? to replace the crj700? |
Quoting bahadir (Reply 26): considering Delta cannot use them (scope clause) |
Quoting bahadir (Reply 26): 190s would work wonders for the Alaska system |
Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 27): Can AS fly the E90 at QX? I thought they had similar scope as the other majors. |
Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 27): Sure they can. It has to be flown with mainline. for now though the 717 fills that roll just fine. |
Photo © Raúl Sepúlveda - SJU Aviation Photography | Photo © Juan C. Aponte |
Quoting cactus739 (Reply 34): Nice!!! Anyone know if that's really a lighter blue font and Chester or is it just the light? |
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 9): Where will the mx base for the 175s be? |
Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 11): I think BOI offered a great tax incentive to OO to build an all new maintenance facility there. I think its the one for the EMB's. They have built quite an impressive facility in Boise. |
Quoting tomcbaker (Reply 17): Very good question, and one I've been thinking of too with regards to SBA's future with AS. SBA has seen a lot of its service disappear in the last decade alone; it lost SBA-DFW and then lost all American/Eagle service (although not US) even though LAX-SBA used to be a staple on Saab 340's, it lost Frontier's DEN service, lost all Delta/DL Connection service (SBA-SLC), it lost QX to Sacramento and all QX service (replaced by OO to PDX/SEA), it lost UAx/OO to SJC. All of this in the last ten years. As someone else has pointed out, the 175 only has half a dozen more seats than the CR7, so the extra capacity isn't that much of an issue in my opinion. With that being said, I think that AS will have better uses for the 175's (i.e., more profitable routes), so I sincerely doubt SBA-PDX on an E175 will last for very long. SBA-SEA maybe, or they could always bring back SBA-SMF-PDX on QX Q400's or perhaps route it elsewhere (such as SBA-SFO-PDX/SEA). |
Quoting Cosyr (Reply 45): So is this the first plane that has the revised livery? Is it not on any 737's yet? |
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 38): As part of the ongoing brand refresh, Chester was done in navy blue instead of the dark blue that has been in place since 1991. And of course the streamlined "Alaska" wordmark added as well. |
Quoting N1120A (Reply 39): Since United lost its Tulip, Chester is the best airline logo out there. |
Quoting F9Animal (Reply 41): I agree with others on the 190. I think the 190 would be a perfect fit for AS. It will certainly help fill the void for the loss of the 737-400 and 700. |
Quoting ericm2031 (Reply 44): Also, the timings currently don't allow for maximum connecting potential that morning flights will allow starting next week |
Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 47): or the c-series |