Just announced at Farnborough

Republic Airways orders up to 200 E175's, 100 firm plus 100 options

https://twitter.com/AvGeekJames/status/ ... 8119824384

The big question is, what will these planes replace? Scope isn't just about size/weight of the plane, it's also about how many, and from what I can tell both UA and DL are at the limit for 70+ seat RJs, to the point where they're now going to start configuring E175s with 70 seats and replace CRJ700s just to stay within scope limits.

Maybe AA has some room left (I don't really follow their fleet developments), but is it 200 planes worth?

I wonder how much of a role the potential joint venture with Boeing is having in these order placements? Would these orders have happened in the same manner? Somewhat influenced (Surely that is at least the case as any customer would surely want to weigh all the variables in play)? Are some of these embraer orders solely due to Boeing influence when the customer would have otherwise gone with a CRJ or MRJ?

hOMSaR wrote:

The big question is, what will these planes replace? Scope isn't just about size/weight of the plane, it's also about how many, and from what I can tell both UA and DL are at the limit for 70+ seat RJs, to the point where they're now going to start configuring E175s with 70 seats and replace CRJ700s just to stay within scope limits.

Maybe AA has some room left (I don't really follow their fleet developments), but is it 200 planes worth?

Republic is probably hoping to replace older E170/E175/CRJ700/CRJ900s. Many of them have spent the past 10+ years (longer when these planes actually get delivered) operating short hops so they get beat up fairly quickly.

This order makes no sense. They can’t place a majority of these frames at any US major, unless.... United is set to announce a new narrowbody order that will unlock their ability to add additional 175.

This is not a good thing for Embraer actually. It means the E2 is a failure, at least for the regional carriers, which is supposed to be a big chunk of the projected market for the E2. They now rather get more of the old plane than going to the new one. They are getting the E-Jet because there is no better replacement. Embraer is able to sell these 100 jets only because the others have failed even more spectacularly.

Arguably, the only other one on the market is MRJ, which is also exactly on the 70-100 seat range, same as the E2. SSJ cannot cover the lower size of the range, CSeries/A220 is not a competitor as it is going for 100-130 seat. It's more of a A318/736 replacement.

The airlines are probably hoping and praying someone will be able to do better with a new and more efficient plane at the 70-90 seat range, especially soon the 50-seat RJs will need to be replaced too, and there is no new product there.

Polot wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

The big question is, what will these planes replace? Scope isn't just about size/weight of the plane, it's also about how many, and from what I can tell both UA and DL are at the limit for 70+ seat RJs, to the point where they're now going to start configuring E175s with 70 seats and replace CRJ700s just to stay within scope limits.

Maybe AA has some room left (I don't really follow their fleet developments), but is it 200 planes worth?

Republic is probably hoping to replace older E170/E175/CRJ700/CRJ900s. Many of them have spent the past 10+ years (longer when these planes actually get delivered) operating short hops so they get beat up fairly quickly.

Agree. The fact that AA, DL and UA own almost the entire company means the airlines would have had to approve (the Board definitely would have to approve this action) and that we can expect Republic to get additional aircraft and/or replace existing aircraft. I expect Republic's older E170s to be replaced and to get additional aircraft replacing other carriers.

raylee67 wrote:

This is not a good thing for Embraer actually. It means the E2 is a failure, at least for the regional carriers, which is supposed to be a big chunk of the projected market for the E2. They now rather get more of the old plane than going to the new one. They are getting the E-Jet because there is no better replacement. Embraer is able to sell these 100 jets only because the others have failed even more spectacularly.

Arguably, the only other one on the market is MRJ, which is also exactly on the 70-100 seat range, same as the E2. SSJ cannot cover the lower size of the range, CSeries/A220 is not a competitor as it is going for 100-130 seat. It's more of a A318/736 replacement.

The airlines are probably hoping and praying someone will be able to do better with a new and more efficient plane at the 70-90 seat range, especially soon the 50-seat RJs will need to be replaced too, and there is no new product there.

The E175E2 is too heavy for US3 scope clauses, as is the MRJ. Embraer has indicated that they will continue to build the E175E1 until US scope changes allowing for E2 operations. The only risk is if BBD is able to reengine the CRJ900 and keep it under the max MTOW allowed by scope.

not to go off topic but I have always thought CM could use a bunch of E175 in potential smaller volume markets from PTY....places like RTB/FRS/BON/MID and to smaller Caribbean destinations like UVF, GCM and PTP.

hOMSaR wrote:

Maybe AA has some room left (I don't really follow their fleet developments), but is it 200 planes worth?

It doesn't need to be 200 planes' worth - just 100, across aging CR7 and E70s, some growth at AA, and maybe Alaska.

While I think this will mainly be used to replace older E170's, I've got a feeling the US3 are planning for some hard line scope clause negotiations when the next round of contract talks comes up. The biggest thing I can think of off the top of my head is AA pilots are wanting profit sharing similar to what DL pilots have. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the main bargaining chip AA uses against the scope clause to get more regional flying...

Doesn't this thread belong into the Farnborough thread of orders from other manufacturers?

LewisNEO wrote:

Doesn't this thread belong into the Farnborough thread of orders from other manufacturers?

It is, but it also can be discussed separately.

Yes, the original Mesa CR-9's is what I see a lot of these replacing. These are configured for over 70 seats, are getting up there in age and cycles, and were not next-gen so they have small bins and low/small windows.

No E2?

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

Republic operates some of the oldest E170/175's left flying, as we were one of the original operators for the type. In total, We operate 60 E170's currently between United and Delta.

AA scope is based off of a percentage, so as aircraft are added to mainline AA, their total regional aircraft numbers go up. Then, the regional fleet is broken down by percentages between small, medium and large RJ's.

UA is currently at its max for 76 seaters. The 25 175's announced by UA and likely our order will be used to replace older CRJ700's with 70 seats. Our order does not specifically state if they will be 175's or 175SC's.

Delta is in the same boat as UA. Currently using 175SC's and CRJ900 with 70 seats to replace older 70 seaters.

Congrats to Embraer for the large order!

stburke wrote:

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

Or reins, even.

Two observations, Republic presently has contracts with multiple airlines, so the numbers may not be too much of an issue if you factor in replacements and some growth.
On the E2 side, until scope is adjusted the a/c is limited in the USA, but the rest of the world is available. Hopefully with Boeing involvement, they can start pushing sales to other areas of the world. B6 for example uses their E190 into the Caribbean, local carriers could use them as well if the price and operating cost are manageable. UP only has used 737's going up against AA RJ's on Miami, as a result AA is winning on frequency, if the price is right and cost manageable, maybe E2 could be the first new jet that UP operates, who knows.

Yes, this is a little crazy, but with JetBlue ordering the A220, some of these frames could be used to replace the E190.

stburke wrote:

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

I do not see how more E 175's would affect this since E 175's are mainly used on routes that used to be mainline back in the day (PHX-LAX)(IAH-ATL)(PDX-STL) for example. These small communities just do not make sense from a business perspective rather than some evil pilot union saying that people in Macon Georgia should not have air service. The big 3 could run Saab 340's to Greenville Mississippi from Atlanta or Houston if they truly wanted tomorrow without talking to ALPA but management would rather use E 175's to fly routes that were historically mainline 15 years ago (SFO-AUS is a good example of this strategy). If ALPA would allow regional scope relaxation the big 3 wouldn't be airlines anymore rather just a place to book tickets on regional carriers that still do not serve little towns across America.

stburke wrote:

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

So you're in favor of farming out your own job to another vendor? In other words, ALPA is doing what they're paid to do.

Or are you just trolling?

FlyHossD wrote:

So you're in favor of farming out your own job to another vendor? In other words, ALPA is doing what they're paid to do.

Or are you just trolling?

Help him out by asking what routes the US3 would fly if they could outsource any route for cheaper labor cost.

stburke wrote:

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

Scope protect the consumer as well as the employees. How many times have we seen issues arise on outsourced carriers and the consumer complain about the fact it’s not mainline operated.

If you prefer some of the antics from the regional carriers there will still be plenty of them to travel on in the future.

stburke wrote:

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

Pilots wanting to keep SOME of their jobs..... THE HORROR!!! Look at the tens of thousands of jobs and thousands of jets already lost to scope erosion... and you think keeping whats left is absurd?

Whats really absurd here is that there is an entire business model based on outsourcing to the lowest bidder, employees making food stamp wages, airlines getting played against each other, and slapping X Airline's name on whatever contractor they've signed up with for today but still telling passengers that they're flying on X Airlines. There is nothing stopping these planes from being flown at mainline, except for the fact that management doesn't want to spend the money to do it.

mikejepp wrote:

stburke wrote:

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

Pilots wanting to keep SOME of their jobs..... THE HORROR!!! Look at the tens of thousands of jobs and thousands of jets already lost to scope erosion... and you think keeping whats left is absurd?

Whats really absurd here is that there is an entire business model based on outsourcing to the lowest bidder, employees making food stamp wages, airlines getting played against each other, and slapping X Airline's name on whatever contractor they've signed up with for today but still telling passengers that they're flying on X Airlines. There is nothing stopping these planes from being flown at mainline, except for the fact that management doesn't want to spend the money to do it.

Thousands of jobs lost to scope...umm....

Can you please post the number of employed mainline pilots every decade or so for the past 50 years? Let’s say 78, 88, 98, 08, 18. Curious to see...

raylee67 wrote:

This is not a good thing for Embraer actually. It means the E2 is a failure, at least for the regional carriers, which is supposed to be a big chunk of the projected market for the E2. They now rather get more of the old plane than going to the new one. They are getting the E-Jet because there is no better replacement. Embraer is able to sell these 100 jets only because the others have failed even more spectacularly.

Arguably, the only other one on the market is MRJ, which is also exactly on the 70-100 seat range, same as the E2. SSJ cannot cover the lower size of the range, CSeries/A220 is not a competitor as it is going for 100-130 seat. It's more of a A318/736 replacement.

The airlines are probably hoping and praying someone will be able to do better with a new and more efficient plane at the 70-90 seat range, especially soon the 50-seat RJs will need to be replaced too, and there is no new product there.

Issue is the current scope weight. When that is fixed in the next two years (pilot agreements are expiring then), the E2 will have more orders. I bet that they may have the option to move this to the 175E2 in the agreement.

Polot wrote:

The E175E2 is too heavy for US3 scope clauses, as is the MRJ. Embraer has indicated that they will continue to build the E175E1 until US scope changes allowing for E2 operations. The only risk is if BBD is able to reengine the CRJ900 and keep it under the max MTOW allowed by scope.

You beat me, but see above.

flyaa757 wrote:

mikejepp wrote:

stburke wrote:

Once again, absurd scope clauses keeping the reigns tightened on small aircraft and small communities.

Thanks ALPA.

Pilots wanting to keep SOME of their jobs..... THE HORROR!!! Look at the tens of thousands of jobs and thousands of jets already lost to scope erosion... and you think keeping whats left is absurd?

Whats really absurd here is that there is an entire business model based on outsourcing to the lowest bidder, employees making food stamp wages, airlines getting played against each other, and slapping X Airline's name on whatever contractor they've signed up with for today but still telling passengers that they're flying on X Airlines. There is nothing stopping these planes from being flown at mainline, except for the fact that management doesn't want to spend the money to do it.[/

Thousands of jobs lost to scope...umm....

Can you please post the number of employed mainline pilots every decade or so for the past 50 years? Let’s say 78, 88, 98, 08, 18. Curious to see...

FFS, scope erosion is a myth. The 175 a perfect route opener aircraft in my eyes. It's legs (along with the E2's), allow it to fly routes that are too big for mainline, too large and far for a 50 seater or CRJ-700/900.

Its one of my favorite aircraft for this reason. The aircraft in the 100-seater arena are too. Which is why I am SO excited that DL has the A220/CS on order.

nmdrdh787 wrote:

Issue is the current scope weight. When that is fixed in the next two years (pilot agreements are expiring then), the E2 will have more orders. I bet that they may have the option to move this to the 175E2 in the agreement.

I would love to see the contracts for this exact reason if nothing else it would give us a better window into Embraer's thinking on the E175E2 whether it can be salvaged or if it's headed for a redesign or shelf.

Really amazing order for Embraer, pretty awesome when you can land a full year of backlog in one go!

Regional Airlines would not even exist if not for the mainline Pilots unions. They would fly them in house and have multi teared wages that make the economics work.

BTW there is no loosing of Pilots jobs, every increasing flying has created more jobs. They estimate as many as a half million more will be created in the next 20 years.

Such a shame, if only EMB made the E2 within scope that thing would be racking in orders from the US airlines.

200 order and its good for Embraer? Lol

The production line is adaptable between e1 and e2.

If the scope changes, its easy to convert those order.

What’s really odd is the mainline pilots are blamed by the RJ pilots for allowing RJ’s. And mainline pilots are blamed by anet armchair experts for not allowing more RJ’s. Perhaps those two groups could get together and figure who really is the bad guy. What’s next? Blame mainline pilots because you didn’t get a pony for Christmas?

Scope ain’t changing and, as pilots become scarcer, mainline will be taking back more flying—RJs will either be upgauged or routes cancelled; NB flying will more to larger narrow bodies (A321/ B739) or wide bodies at peak hours. Off hours services will be rolled into larger mainline service, RJ off-hours—gone. Shed loads of RJ flying will just away—RDU-GSO, BDL-EWR, routes like that—gone.

GF

nmdrdh787 wrote:

Issue is the current scope weight. When that is fixed in the next two years (pilot agreements are expiring then), the E2 will have more orders. I bet that they may have the option to move this to the 175E2 in the agreement.

Flawed thinking. Pilot agreements do not expire under the RLA (Railway Labor Act), they become amendable. Therefore unless both sides agree to a new contract, the current language remains. What makes you think any of the legacy pilot groups are going to have any interest in giving up more scope with the airlines raking in cash they are. If anything I could see tightening of the scope as the pilots groups have had quite a bit of leverage in the last few cycles.

Scope isn’t changing unless there is another dramatic slowdown in economy and airline industry. Why should pilots give up more to the airlines?

mcdu wrote:

What’s really odd is the mainline pilots are blamed by the RJ pilots for allowing RJ’s. And mainline pilots are blamed by anet armchair experts for not allowing more RJ’s. Perhaps those two groups could get together and figure who really is the bad guy. What’s next? Blame mainline pilots because you didn’t get a pony for Christmas?

Incorrect. Mainline pilots blame the RLA and Chapter 11 process for allowing management to make RJs happen. The vast majority of mainline pilots wish their fellow RJ pilots were on the same seniority list with them.

As far as A.net experts go.... well, I suppose it is hard for a teenager to weigh someone's job as more important than getting a shiny jet at their airport.

mikejepp wrote:

mcdu wrote:

What’s really odd is the mainline pilots are blamed by the RJ pilots for allowing RJ’s. And mainline pilots are blamed by anet armchair experts for not allowing more RJ’s. Perhaps those two groups could get together and figure who really is the bad guy. What’s next? Blame mainline pilots because you didn’t get a pony for Christmas?

Incorrect. Mainline pilots blame the RLA and Chapter 11 process for allowing management to make RJs happen. The vast majority of mainline pilots wish their fellow RJ pilots were on the same seniority list with them.

As far as A.net experts go.... well, I suppose it is hard for a teenager to weigh someone's job as more important than getting a shiny jet at their airport.

RJ pilots not being on the same seniority list as mainline has just as much to do with the pilot unions as management does.

Right now with the pilot shortage and improving conditions the pilot unions are holding a hard line in terms of scope. But they have been perfectly willing in the past to screw over RJ pilots to protect mainline if need be.

raylee67 wrote:

This is not a good thing for Embraer actually. It means the E2 is a failure, at least for the regional carriers, which is supposed to be a big chunk of the projected market for the E2. They now rather get more of the old plane than going to the new one. They are getting the E-Jet because there is no better replacement. Embraer is able to sell these 100 jets only because the others have failed even more spectacularly.

Arguably, the only other one on the market is MRJ, which is also exactly on the 70-100 seat range, same as the E2. SSJ cannot cover the lower size of the range, CSeries/A220 is not a competitor as it is going for 100-130 seat. It's more of a A318/736 replacement.

The airlines are probably hoping and praying someone will be able to do better with a new and more efficient plane at the 70-90 seat range, especially soon the 50-seat RJs will need to be replaced too, and there is no new product there.

For the American market, maybe. And getting these orders also mean that MRJ won't get any of those because there're no way any of them would be replaced by MRJ in like only 5 years

tphuang wrote:

Scope isn’t changing unless there is another dramatic slowdown in economy and airline industry. Why should pilots give up more to the airlines?

There's just as much hubris in this statement as there was in Parker's "we'll never lose money again" statement. While it appears to me that ALPA tends to be better negotiators than the unions I've dealt with, at the end of the day, people are only human and if the financial incentives are right, it would be tough for current members to vote no if they see the chance for a better living for them and their family. A quick look back through time shows numerous instances of unions giving in on major points for minor pay concessions.

mcdu wrote:

What’s really odd is the mainline pilots are blamed by the RJ pilots for allowing RJ’s. And mainline pilots are blamed by anet armchair experts for not allowing more RJ’s. Perhaps those two groups could get together and figure who really is the bad guy. What’s next? Blame mainline pilots because you didn’t get a pony for Christmas?

The two opinion are not contradictive.

MIflyer12 wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

Maybe AA has some room left (I don't really follow their fleet developments), but is it 200 planes worth?

It doesn't need to be 200 planes' worth - just 100, across aging CR7 and E70s, some growth at AA, and maybe Alaska.

Republic does not fly for AS, that would be Skywest and Horizon (and PenAir)

I’m a bit confused about scope; if it didn’t exist, does that mean we’d have a /lot/ more routes flown on regionals (I.e., instead of 50 main 50 reg it’d be 40 main 60 reg) and much less mainline? Why would this be preferred since costs on regional aircraft tend to be relatively higher in the end?

UpNAWAy wrote:

Regional Airlines would not even exist if not for the mainline Pilots unions.

Regional airlines existed long before mainline tried carrier within a carrier to reduce cost and failed - Ted Song - they were just that, flying mostly turbo prop a/c within limited regions / states. Mainline started buying them up to shift flying and reduce cost...

I think that the first 60 of these airframes are for replacing the old E-170's. The rest are for when Republic decides to buy GoJet and park and replace their CR9's with E175's.

As a regional pilot, I can say that I wish that every one of these aircraft was flown by a mainline pilot. Mainline gave up scope and created this mess, which now they need to dig in and never give it up. Not for a B scale, not for future considerations, not for anything. Scott Kirby at UA is the devil and he is going to try to get ALPA to sell out and give away the farm. I truly hope that ALPA and the APA fight tooth and nail to keep scope where it is.

mikejepp wrote:

Whats really absurd here is that there is an entire business model based on outsourcing to the lowest bidder, employees making food stamp wages, airlines getting played against each other, and slapping X Airline's name on whatever contractor they've signed up with for today but still telling passengers that they're flying on X Airlines.

I've said the same thing here many times. The "majors" are pretty much engaged in fraud. The argument goes, "Well it says 'Operated by X Airlines' painted in small letters on the plane and printed on the boarding pass, shown on the website booking page" but that's "fine print" and most people have no idea they are flying on an airline they never heard of when they fly one of the regional's flights operated "on behalf of" the majors.

N62NA wrote:

mikejepp wrote:

Whats really absurd here is that there is an entire business model based on outsourcing to the lowest bidder, employees making food stamp wages, airlines getting played against each other, and slapping X Airline's name on whatever contractor they've signed up with for today but still telling passengers that they're flying on X Airlines.

I've said the same thing here many times. The "majors" are pretty much engaged in fraud. The argument goes, "Well it says 'Operated by X Airlines' painted in small letters on the plane and printed on the boarding pass, shown on the website booking page" but that's "fine print" and most people have no idea they are flying on an airline they never heard of when they fly one of the regional's flights operated "on behalf of" the majors.

Except that it clearly says who is operating the flight on the booking page...

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Scope ain’t changing and, as pilots become scarcer, mainline will be taking back more flying—RJs will either be upgauged or routes cancelled; NB flying will more to larger narrow bodies (A321/ B739) or wide bodies at peak hours. Off hours services will be rolled into larger mainline service, RJ off-hours—gone. Shed loads of RJ flying will just away—RDU-GSO, BDL-EWR, routes like that—gone.

GF

Those routes are highly profitable and won’t be gone. If hub and spoke carriers drop them because their pilots are pricing themselves out of the market, they will be picked up by LCCs.

“Gone” doesn’t happen. LOSE happens, the question is only who loses and who wins.

Don’t kid yourselves, you CAN bargain yourselves out of your jobs.

N62NA wrote:

mikejepp wrote:

Whats really absurd here is that there is an entire business model based on outsourcing to the lowest bidder, employees making food stamp wages, airlines getting played against each other, and slapping X Airline's name on whatever contractor they've signed up with for today but still telling passengers that they're flying on X Airlines.

I've said the same thing here many times. The "majors" are pretty much engaged in fraud. The argument goes, "Well it says 'Operated by X Airlines' painted in small letters on the plane and printed on the boarding pass, shown on the website booking page" but that's "fine print" and most people have no idea they are flying on an airline they never heard of when they fly one of the regional's flights operated "on behalf of" the majors.

Lol. Fraud. Come on man. Fraud is "the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right." The passenger (1) KNOWS they are booking a Delta Connection carrier, as the booking process clearly indicates when the service is on a regional carrier, therefore there is no deceit, trick or dishonest means and (2) the passenger is still getting transported to their destination.

The E2 is not going to happen at the U.S. regionals in my opinion.

One reason I think this is that the 2019 DL pilot negotiations are going to be all about balancing block hours in the joint ventures, and especially the KE joint venture, because the pilots feel they are losing jobs to the partner hub model. I think the two sides will work it out, but I doubt the company is going to want to open the RJ can of worms - because it will make things even more difficult on the top end if they are trying to outsource more jobs off the bottom.

Therefore, I think Delta will come out of contract 2019 with zero RJ scope changes. AA and UA activists will pattern bargain with that same benchmark, and thus no one will open the door to the E2 or MRJ for oursourcing.

Now I absolutely think that there is room to bring a small jet like the E2 into the mainline in the right circumstance. There is a lot of revenue to be had out there in smaller U.S. markets, and after consolidation there are many ways to chase that revenue. I paid $650 round trip to ride a CRJ round trip MSP-DAY this week and didn't even get a free drink. People are flying LAX-HKG for cheaper than that. Right now, the US3 would rather be flying to MSP-DAY than most long hauls, and so I think we might see them continue to innovate on how they do it. But playing games with outsourcing is not the place to start.