Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
qcpilotxf wrote:I wonder who are these planes going to go to? PSA is having a hard time putting pilots in seats right now, and Envoy has been trying to get rid of their CRJs for years.
American 767 wrote:Could these replace the ERJ-190s that are scheduled to leave end of next year? I see American putting them on the hourly Shuttle flights LGA to BOS and DCA, and maybe YYZ.
redwingspilot wrote:American 767 wrote:Could these replace the ERJ-190s that are scheduled to leave end of next year? I see American putting them on the hourly Shuttle flights LGA to BOS and DCA, and maybe YYZ.
Word internally is there's a chance they may be sticking around longer. When the bean counters we're trying to come up with a better alternative for the Shuttle the E190 kept being the best option.
bigb wrote:I think the only place they are going to come is PSA, we are getting Envoys CRJs and AA gotta back fill all of Air Wisconsin flying that it lost. And have a big group of RTP guys that are entering into the training pipeline. PSA problem isn't gettain't into seats but more so we just weak on maintenance personnels and flight attendant attrition is high.
alasizon wrote:bigb wrote:I think the only place they are going to come is PSA, we are getting Envoys CRJs and AA gotta back fill all of Air Wisconsin flying that it lost. And have a big group of RTP guys that are entering into the training pipeline. PSA problem isn't gettain't into seats but more so we just weak on maintenance personnels and flight attendant attrition is high.
I actually think they would be more likely to go to OO over PSA (although OO typically orders their own aircraft). PSA still needs to fly the 200s and will continue getting 700s from Envoy. OO on the other hand could help backfill for YV (who can't staff their flying) as well as their own retiring 200s.
Lpbri wrote:I hate CRJs. E170s are far more comfortable. Doesn't AA management know this?
Lpbri wrote:I hate CRJs. E170s are far more comfortable. Doesn't AA management know this?
kevintarmac wrote:Before we speculate on who is going to operate them, I'm trying to figure out how they're going to operate them under current scope. It was my understanding AA was tapped out on 71 seat and over aircraft. That's why the OO and EV 700s were coming in. CRJ9SC?
airtran737 wrote:Congrats to the scabs of PSA. Once again your industry leading concessionary contract has provided you with gains. Perhaps you will take more concessions in the future and gain some 175's?
airtran737 wrote:Congrats to the scabs of PSA. Once again your industry leading concessionary contract has provided you with gains. Perhaps you will take more concessions in the future and gain some 175's?
Lpbri wrote:I hate CRJs. E170s are far more comfortable. Doesn't AA management know this?
LPSHobby wrote:what is the reason to split the order to 2 comparable models, instead of only buy 30 of just 1 type? What is the logic?
LPSHobby wrote:what is the reason to split the order to 2 comparable models, instead of only buy 30 of just 1 type? What is the logic?
peterj324 wrote:LPSHobby wrote:what is the reason to split the order to 2 comparable models, instead of only buy 30 of just 1 type? What is the logic?
Their regional affiliates already operate both types of aircraft in large numbers and ordering 15 of each will allow them to receive the aircraft much quicker than if they ordered 30 of one type.
My guess is the CRJ-900s will go to PSA while the E-175s will go to Envoy?
DiamondFlyer wrote:LPSHobby wrote:what is the reason to split the order to 2 comparable models, instead of only buy 30 of just 1 type? What is the logic?
Different missions.
MIflyer12 wrote:DiamondFlyer wrote:LPSHobby wrote:what is the reason to split the order to 2 comparable models, instead of only buy 30 of just 1 type? What is the logic?
Different missions.
Different missions? How are capabilities - within the boundaries of AA's uses - meaningfully different?
bigb wrote:MIflyer12 wrote:DiamondFlyer wrote:
Different missions.
Different missions? How are capabilities - within the boundaries of AA's uses - meaningfully different?
Considering PSA runs majority of the regional feed on the east coat for AA, CRJ 900 is lighter than the E175 and burns less fuel.
Flighty wrote:AA has a strategy to bid regional providers (including airframes, engines and maintenance) against each other. EMB has to give a sharp price because they know if it is 10% higher, AA will shift more orders to BBD. They also need multiple labor providers for each type of aircraft. If any labor or equipment provider starts making demands, no problem, AA can simply allocate the business to the labor / equipment providers that actively want the work.
DiamondFlyer wrote:bigb wrote:MIflyer12 wrote:
Different missions? How are capabilities - within the boundaries of AA's uses - meaningfully different?
Considering PSA runs majority of the regional feed on the east coat for AA, CRJ 900 is lighter than the E175 and burns less fuel.
Exactly. People pretend like all that extra cabin volume on a 175 is free, when compared to a 900. Yes, they may use the same engines, but the 900 is a significantly lighter airframe at the end of the day.
soflaflyer wrote:Been a while since I have been on a CRJ-900, but I don't remember the inside feeling as spacious as an E-175. Remind me, is that the case?
DiamondFlyer wrote:Flighty wrote:AA has a strategy to bid regional providers (including airframes, engines and maintenance) against each other. EMB has to give a sharp price because they know if it is 10% higher, AA will shift more orders to BBD. They also need multiple labor providers for each type of aircraft. If any labor or equipment provider starts making demands, no problem, AA can simply allocate the business to the labor / equipment providers that actively want the work.
That only works if you've got a surplus of labor, which isn't likely to be the case anytime soon, in terms of pilots. Barring another economic disaster and age 65 being increased again, you're unlikely to see what happened in the last 8 years ever again.