Chautauqua Selected as a Continental Express Carrier

Doug Taylor said:
I really think if you buy a ticket on United, you should be flying on a UAL aircraft with UAL pilots.

The entry level position could be the CRJ (or whatever the smallest aircraft there is in the whole dumbasssed 'porfolio' concept)

If you treat and compensate your employees well, you're still going to attract the best pilots even if the entry level position is a 50 seat jet. Lower turnover, lower costs, a legion of employees that are all pulling on the same side of the rope.

But the whole idea of competing subcontractors beating their brains out to provide lift under an "Express/Connection/Whatever" banner is another facet of what's destroyed the piloting profession.

One airline, one carrier, one pilot group, one seniority list.
Click to expand...

Strongly Agree.

A year or so ago there was a consumer advocacy group that was bringing a lawsuit forward against the airlines claiming false advertising.

I'm not sure what ever came of it....probably didn't have enough teeth to win against all of the fine print.

I'd have to say our profession won't be respectable again until all of the subcontractors stop underbidding everyone else.

I ate lunch with a 46 year old United 757 Captain today. Without me saying anything...he said, "These RJs have ruined our profession. I'm quitting to become a general contractor."

Wow. That's a pretty strong action to back up his statement. That's a 757 Captain!
 
I have always wondered why it wasn't like that anyway.

Think of all the training costs that comes with replacing one airline with another and how often it is happening in the past few years. No wonder all these airlines are bankrupt.
 
Doug Taylor said:
But the whole idea of competing subcontractors beating their brains out to provide lift under an "Express/Connection/Whatever" banner is another facet of what's destroyed the piloting profession.
Click to expand...
B767Driver said:
Strongly Agree....I'd have to say our profession won't be respectable again until all of the subcontractors stop underbidding everyone else.... I ate lunch with a 46 year old United 757 Captain today.... he said, "These RJs have ruined our profession. I'm quitting to become a general contractor."
Click to expand...
Makes me wonder... is that 757 Captain going to hire Plumber's, Electricians, hole diggers, and Carpenters, to work directly for him? Or do you think it's more likely he will "sub" out the work to save himself some costs like tools, trucks, fuel, workman's comp, unemployement insurance, federal taxes, benefits, 401k matching, etc... ?

I guess that's as close to borderline flaimbait as I've ever come on here... but... I don't think it's neccessarily cheaper for any business... or I guess more specifically any Airline to do all of it's own flying when you consider the cost of different fleet types, different MX inventory and issues, different training issues, etc...

I think I'm more of the mindset that if CAL or any of the legacies, don't want to do the short haul flying (IAH-CLL for example) or the 50 seat flying... then they should just not do it, and let companies like Colgan, XJT, CHQ, PSA, TSA, etc... be themselves and compete and offer service as themselves in those hubs. "Thank you for flying Trans-States, Chatauqua, Skywest, or ExpressJet Airlines today." Let them battle it out themselves, and see who comes out on top...

If I'm way off base here and this is going to start a PFT/PFJ type issue, then please school me...

Bob
 
I don't think anybody is going to school you Bob... you are pretty much right on. It *is* cheaper to farm stuff out but by doing that the airline loses direct control of it's product and that may end up costing them in the end. Xjet guys know, just as every other wholly owned knows (even though they aren't truly WO anymore) that your future is tied very closely to that of your Daddy carrier. The companies providing contract service, while relying on keeping the contract for growth won't cease to exsist if they lose some service agreements. Does this lead to these companies caring less? I don't know, but it is certainly posible. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone, but I have overheard on three different occasions crews from contract feeders state something like "well, if they don't like us they will axe our service and we'll just go back to flying for only X and Y brand." That's certainly not an option for the WOs and remains to be seen how well it works for companies who only have agreements with one carrier (XJet, ASA etc). At least for these single carrier companies there is the option of going off the reservation and finding other work. On the flip side, the WOs are more protected in the sense that if the Daddy carrier was to liquidate for some reason they would likely be sold off whole as opposed to being liquidated themselves. Moral of the story? From a business security point of view it makes sense for the independant regionals to diversify. From a economic point of view it makes some sense for mainline carriers to farm out their feed (although there are certain exceptions, the company I fly for being one of them, where the WO is providing much more of an income stream then the contract feeds). However (and this is the BIG issue as far as I can tell) is that by keeping the feed inhouse the parent carrier is able to control the quality.
 
"If I'm way off base here and this is going to start a PFT/PFJ type issue, then please school me..."

I think the issue here is what is better from an overall pilot career standpoint and what is better from an airline stockholder/management standpoint. Who's side you're on pretty much answers the question.

I think it would be better for pilots and their careers to have one list and keep the flying in house, at as competitive of wages as possible. Then again, I look at it from a pro-pilot/pro-union angle. From a stockholder/management standpoint, Walmarting it puts the most money in your pocket, so you'd go with that.
 
Hey there DE... well, I'm obviously on the pro-pilot side... but with a little bit of a management (not airline) background... Kinda hard to break from that I guess...

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this statement?

Captain_Bob said:
I think I'm more of the mindset that if CAL or any of the legacies, don't want to do the short haul flying (IAH-CLL for example) or the 50 seat flying... then they should just not do it, and let companies like Colgan, XJT, CHQ, PSA, TSA, etc... be themselves and compete and offer service as themselves in those hubs. "Thank you for flying Trans-States, Chatauqua, Skywest, or ExpressJet Airlines today." Let them battle it out themselves, and see who comes out on top...
Click to expand...
It would allow the whole "buy a ticket on UAL and you'd be flying UAL" issue. I'm also thinking that a few of the Regionals/Commuters would die out due to an inability to compete directly with each other... versus competeing based on subsidized flying from the legacies...

Bob
 
Hey there Capt Bob. Glad to hear your more pro-pilot than pro-management.

Once upon a time. America West had Dash 8's. They said America West on the side of them and the pilots that flew them were on the America West seniority list. That's the way it should have been for all the airlines. They also had free booze and free Wall Street Journals. What a great concept. I mean, in the overall scheme of things, what could free booze, free Wall Street Journals, and pilots making the same flying Dash 8's as Horizon Dash 8 pilots really cost?

I guess what I'm saying is it's been proven that a large airline could operate turboprops. Those pilots could be on the same list and work for wages comparable to industry standards.

Of course, that's my perfect world. Ego's and the perception, or reality, that another dime could be made, messed it all up.
 
DE727UPS said:
Of course, that's my perfect world. Ego's and the perception, or reality, that another dime could be made, messed it all up.
Click to expand...
LOL! Yeah... I think we've all been there before. I'm sure that half of all my ideas would work if someone just did them... cost be damned! ;)

Thanks for the response... and right now I'm wishing I was flying on a Dash 8... WSJ in one hand... and a jack and coke in the other... :)

Bob
 
GaTechKid said:
IMO, the CRJ is a better looking jet. The ERJ, especially the 145, looks like it could snap in half at any time. Hell, even the slaab is a wee bit wider than an ERJ. :)
Click to expand...

True, but the ERJ definitely outperforms the CRJ in climb, range, and speed. I personally like them both (well, the CRJ 700 and ERJ 145).

Neil
 
I'm not sure if you can put the words "performance", "climb" and "CRJ100/200" into the same sentence!
 
Captain_Bob said:
Makes me wonder... is that 757 Captain going to hire Plumber's, Electricians, hole diggers, and Carpenters, to work directly for him? Or do you think it's more likely he will "sub" out the work to save himself some costs like tools, trucks, fuel, workman's comp, unemployement insurance, federal taxes, benefits, 401k matching, etc... ?
Click to expand...

And the other funny thing is: he's not going to quit. I've been hearing guys say that for 30 years. Never seen one quit, unless it was to salvage a pension payout.

Another funny thing: it was ALPA (at least at my airline) that wanted scope so they wouldn't have mainline salaries diluted by low paying equipment. As far as I know they still don't want to fly the stuff.

The only time I've ever had ALPA reps get really worked up (at me) was when I would suggest bringing all the flying under one contract. Let's just say it would take a lot of bleeping to repeat their responses. And that was whether it was 1985 or 2001.
 
Doug Taylor said:
I'm not sure if you can put the words "performance", "climb" and "CRJ100/200" into the same sentence!
Click to expand...

C'mon, we we're able to do 500 FPM up to FL280 the other day and we were indicating a whopping 270 in the climb. What a dog...
 
flyover said:
And the other funny thing is: he's not going to quit. I've been hearing guys say that for 30 years. Never seen one quit, unless it was to salvage a pension payout.

Another funny thing: it was ALPA (at least at my airline) that wanted scope so they wouldn't have mainline salaries diluted by low paying equipment. As far as I know they still don't want to fly the stuff.

The only time I've ever had ALPA reps get really worked up (at me) was when I would suggest bringing all the flying under one contract. Let's just say it would take a lot of bleeping to repeat their responses. And that was whether it was 1985 or 2001.
Click to expand...

Yep. They (ALPA) obviously don't want anything to do with RJs over here. I guess we're too good for them.
 
One benefit to the CRJ is that it's not quite so weight limited as earlier model ERJ's.....expecially on longer legs. I consistantly get booted off the ERJ commuting home on Chataqua but never used to have a problem when the flights were done by our CRJ's.....(roughly 2-2.5 hour flight). This becomes an even bigger problem when alternate fuel is required.

That being said, the ERJ will kick the 200's butt in climb performance. It is simply designed to fly higher (despite the published service ceilings).
 
Blah blah, what matters is block-to-block times. The CRJ will beat the ERJ (maybe not the XR) to the gate every time. Is it by much? Nope, maybe 30 seconds, maybe 3 minutes. If Bomba had made the CRJ-500, it would have outperformed the XR's numbers.

From an airline's viewpoint, it's better to get all 50 pax there, not leave a few behind. A few weeks ago, I had to deadhead on one of our ERJs from IAD to BNA. They couldn't take the full 50 people and passengers. There was no need for an alternate. I've flown that route many many times in the -200, and have never been weight-restricted, even with an alternate.

What really matters is how much money goes into your pocket. Who cares what's faster or has taller winglets.
 
As far as weight restrictions go, I have to agree the CRJ is much better than the non XR ERJs. The CRJ gets restricted when an alternate is required to CVG, and all the time to MSP. I have only been landing weight restricted once, that was when BOS had an alternate of MDT. The ERJ-ER is always restricted (ZFW), it is pretty much a 45 seat airplane. The LR is pretty good for 400-600 mile segments, beyond that it gets restrictions. I have never had an XR restricted, granted that was nly going to EWR. Of course the CRJ-700 is better than all of them performance wise.

[Anet] As far as a passegers go, I like the ERJ over the CRJ-100/200. The DL CRJs have old saging seats (way non-ergonomic), the lav is WAY too small, and the windows are WAY too low. The CRJ-700 and the ERJ are pretty much a wash.[/Anet]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top