Before RJs...

I don't get the Regional bitching. If it wasnt for the regional boom alot of these guys would be flying rubber dog crap out of Hong Kong so I don't get it.

Travelers want more point to point service and flying 72's into small markets isnt going to cut it, hence why they where all retired after 9/11. So who else is supposed to fly these RJ? Mainline???? Yeah that will go over well.
 
Champcar said:
I don't get the Regional bitching. If it wasnt for the regional boom alot of these guys would be flying rubber dog crap out of Hong Kong so I don't get it.
Click to expand...

And the problem with that is...???? Rubber dog crap doesn't moan and groan, and you're not Maverick!!!:p

The 72's were all "retired" because airlines wanted newer aircraft, and cheaper labor, along with better fuel economy.

Steve, it's just the age old JC argument of RJ's vs. mainline that's rearing its ugly head.
 
Stone Cold said:
And the problem with that is...???? Rubber dog crap doesn't moan and groan, and you're not Maverick!!!:p

The 72's were all "retired" because airlines wanted newer aircraft, and cheaper labor, along with better fuel economy.

Steve, it's just the age old JC argument of RJ's vs. mainline that's rearing its ugly head.
Click to expand...
Ok as long as I get to be Goose

The point I tried making is that with the retirement of 727s went some of the hub and spoke system. When I lived in ROC one day we had 727s and the next it was a CRJ infestation. Along with that though came more flights and more destinations.

Its a heck lot better than being put on a cattle car to ORD.
 
Champcar said:
So who else is supposed to fly these RJ? Mainline???? Yeah that will go over well.
Click to expand...


Yes, mainline should be flying these things.

We can advocate this change with involvement in collective bargaining pilot groups. Seriously, we can.
 
Seggy said:
Yes, mainline should be flying these things.

We can advocate this change with involvement in collective bargaining pilot groups. Seriously, we can.
Click to expand...

So how many routes and jobs are you going to push for Colgan to give up for mainline to start flying more routes?
 
Seggy said:
Yes, mainline should be flying these things.

We can advocate this change with involvement in collective bargaining pilot groups. Seriously, we can.
Click to expand...

Or you can invent a time machine, go back to the early '90s, and tell the mainline pilots that they should have accepted and kept the regional jets at their mainline level. But no, those folks decided to protect other things, and let the regional jet slide...
 
Seggy said:
Yes, mainline should be flying these things.

We can advocate this change with involvement in collective bargaining pilot groups. Seriously, we can.
Click to expand...
I don't think too many mainline guys would be happy about flying a CRJ.

RJ's are right where they belong.
 
Champcar said:
I don't think too many mainline guys would be happy about flying a CRJ.

RJ's are right where they belong.
Click to expand...

The Mainline guys that are there now would not be flying those 'RJs'. They would still be flown by the same guys that are flying them now, just at the mainlines benefit level. I would MUCH rather fly a CRJ fr Delta or Continental than "contract lift provider of the week"
 
Not wanting to continue this whole argument deal (but I guess I am), I don't see a problem with RJs being at the level they are now; the only problem I see is with the increasingly large classification of what is considered an 'RJ'

When you are going at around 90-110 people and are flying half way across the country, I just don't know...
 
Dugie8 said:
So how many routes and jobs are you going to push for Colgan to give up for mainline to start flying more routes?
Click to expand...

In my ideal world anything over 10 seats flying commercially should be on a mainline seniority list. It is not going to happen overnight, but maybe in two, three, five, ten years it could be changed.

Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Or you can invent a time machine, go back to the early '90s, and tell the mainline pilots that they should have accepted and kept the regional jets at their mainline level. But no, those folks decided to protect other things, and let the regional jet slide...
Click to expand...

Agreed, back in the day the mainline pilots had an opportunity to have these RJs flown by them. They didn't and are paying the price. It is time to change that through involvement and action.

Champcar said:
I don't think too many mainline guys would be happy about flying a CRJ.

RJ's are right where they belong.
Click to expand...

Pay and QOL are important to! Pay proper wages for these 'RJs' and then who wouldn't want to fly them?
 
I scoured the picture for a Beech 1900 or Saab, but couldn't find them. Oh yeah, they weren't even in production when the picture was taken.

Thanks for the sermon, though.
 
I know of at least 1600 furloughees from a particular legacy airline that really WISH we could go back in time and secure the scope language to prevent the outsourcing of the "RJ".

Even before 09/11 the DC9, F28, F100, 737-200 (not to mention the Bac 111, BAe146, etc.) were being retired in favor of the CRJ.

As a result, those narrowbody jobs were sacrificed to the lowest bidder. If I could go back to 1995 and negotiate mainline pay and workrules to keep that airplane on the property... you can be DARNED sure that I would do so.

The so-called "regional" jet most definately is NOT "right where it belongs". Unfortunately, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. You can, however, put the cap back on. That cap -- at least for me -- should exist at about 70 passenger seats.

If I were king, for that matter, I'd make FAR minimums for any part 121 carrier at LEAST as restrictive as IFR 135 minimums. It is rediculous to me that flying freight, single pilot, in a Piper Cherokee requires significantly more experience than being a first officer in a high performance turbojet.

Ok. Rant over. :bandit:
 
EDUC8-or said:
I scoured the picture for a Beech 1900 or Saab, but couldn't find them. Oh yeah, they weren't even in production when the picture was taken.

Thanks for the sermon, though.
Click to expand...

No sermon man and NOTHING at all personal against those who fly them.

We are all pilots and have a goal in our careers. It is ashame though that guys are responsible for a 50 to 76 seat jet and are on foodstamps. We need to raise the bar!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top