Yeah, I've heard a great deal of how unreliable the F100 has been. Pardon my going off topic here, but does anyone know why it is that none of the US manufacturers were building replacements for the DC-9s in the 80s? It wasn't until MacDac's last gasp in the mid-90s that their replacement showed up.
Midatlantic Of To A Rocky Start
- Thread starter wings396
- Start date
Light Years
Veteran
- Aug 27, 2002
- 2,878
- 0
Yes, someone please show me the Boeing 70 seater. Or any American made aircraft in the 30-50 or 70-100 seat range.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
i believe that Air Tran operates the B-717 aircraft which i think may hold 90 or 100 people.Light Years said:
Light Years
Veteran
- Aug 27, 2002
- 2,878
- 0
Again, where is the 70 seat version?robbedagain said:
Boeings smallest offering are the 717, really the DC9 updated or the 737-600, a poor seller that has commonality but is still too heavy. They offer nothing smaller than the 100 seat range.
Airbus offers the A318, another poor seller with the same problems as the 736. Nothing smaller. They shelved thier plans for the smaller AE316 and AE317.
Bombardier offers the CRJ family, with different stretches from 44-100 or so seats. The larger versions, while offering a nice commonality with the 50 seater, still feel like an RJ with the cramped cabin. They chose to strech the CRJ instead of going ahead with the BRJ-X project.
Fairchild Dornier was set to begin the 528/728/928 project but that may never see the light of day.
Rekkof (Fokker backwards) would like to reopen the F70/F100 line, but again, it may never see the light of day. If it did, it would be years from now.
Embraer's product is a completely different design from thier ERJ135/140/145 line. Its a mainline size/comfort plane, offering flexibility/commonality of 70-110 seats (E170/175/190/195) with 2000 mile range. This can cover everything from smaller regional markets with higher demand than an RJ as well as longer midcon routes all at "mainline", and even superior passenger comfort levels.
US Airways is the 'regional' carrier for one of the busiest air traffic areas in the world. Its fleet problems in the past have consisted of too many similar sized types serving the same mission, full size, high-cost aircraft serving short haul regional routes, larger aircraft tied up on short routes decreasing the stage length and raising costs, a lack of a competitive jet product in traditional small markets, and a big capacity gap between a 50 seat RJ and 120 seat A319.
I think a suitably sized, competitive product operated at competitive costs is exactly what US Airways needs to defend and cement its core route network, and allow it to grow a better long haul network to feed.
I do not think that people really understand what the EMB-170 is all about. It is NOT state of the art, nor is it meant to be, Like the 7E7 it is meant to exploit current market needs with the cheapest seat cost possible.
The Emb-170 is meant to fufill the promise that stretched versions of the Challenger Business jet were never meant nor really able to do.
They built it to offer a large cabin, decent range, low seat-mile costs, and commonality with larger versions.
It is first meant to provide seamless jet service. Ask any passenger to look at a A319, a E-170/190, and a CRJ (from either the inside or outside). Almost to a person they will group the 170 with the 319, and describe the CRJ as a "small" plane. The 170 provides the image of a airliner vs a "RJ" or puddle jumper jet like I overheard one passenger call an CRJ once.
This comes into playu in a variety of ways, one of which is ride legth tolerance. Do you know u can fly a 737 from OAK to Hawaii... Do yourealy want to though? Same thing applies to being in the back of a Emb-145 or CRJ (50 or 70). they are not comfortable for a long trip. It will be a competitive advantage to be able to fly from PHL to MCI with no complaints while our competition cannot go from EWR to MCI without making passengers suffer.
70 seats has shown itself to be profitable in this time of high fueal costs while 35, 40, 44, and even 50 seaters have not. The Emb-170 can best match out system's capacity needs without too little or too many seats. It fits well on a PIT-ROC flight where a CRJ or B737 did not.
Another HUGE issue is that THE COMPANY CAN GET THEM. Thank the Brazillians for "co-signing" on our planes that allows US to still get and make use of them NOW to help cut costs. With a CCC+ credit rating we are lucky to be able to reequip our fleet.
So, it is obvious that the 170 actually has the potential to allow real restucturing of the US route structure. It can assume the needed role that the CRJ could not(which was better as a turboprop replacement, not for a B-737). That is why I sense such a higher degree of distaste towards the aircraft and MDA from many mainline workers. Who knew this sort of thing would come along someday, yet had the reprieve of working mainline flights a good while longer since the RJ's were not up to the task.
"Aint nothing but a B-Scale" is true, but like I have said before, if you are senior enough to stay mainline, then good for you. If not, then that is the way senority goes. Working weekends sucks too, but you do not look down upon those who work the crappy shifts instead of you, do you...? This is no different.
Let's support MDA so it can support US, then there will still be a mainline to move up into.
The Emb-170 is meant to fufill the promise that stretched versions of the Challenger Business jet were never meant nor really able to do.
They built it to offer a large cabin, decent range, low seat-mile costs, and commonality with larger versions.
It is first meant to provide seamless jet service. Ask any passenger to look at a A319, a E-170/190, and a CRJ (from either the inside or outside). Almost to a person they will group the 170 with the 319, and describe the CRJ as a "small" plane. The 170 provides the image of a airliner vs a "RJ" or puddle jumper jet like I overheard one passenger call an CRJ once.
This comes into playu in a variety of ways, one of which is ride legth tolerance. Do you know u can fly a 737 from OAK to Hawaii... Do yourealy want to though? Same thing applies to being in the back of a Emb-145 or CRJ (50 or 70). they are not comfortable for a long trip. It will be a competitive advantage to be able to fly from PHL to MCI with no complaints while our competition cannot go from EWR to MCI without making passengers suffer.
70 seats has shown itself to be profitable in this time of high fueal costs while 35, 40, 44, and even 50 seaters have not. The Emb-170 can best match out system's capacity needs without too little or too many seats. It fits well on a PIT-ROC flight where a CRJ or B737 did not.
Another HUGE issue is that THE COMPANY CAN GET THEM. Thank the Brazillians for "co-signing" on our planes that allows US to still get and make use of them NOW to help cut costs. With a CCC+ credit rating we are lucky to be able to reequip our fleet.
So, it is obvious that the 170 actually has the potential to allow real restucturing of the US route structure. It can assume the needed role that the CRJ could not(which was better as a turboprop replacement, not for a B-737). That is why I sense such a higher degree of distaste towards the aircraft and MDA from many mainline workers. Who knew this sort of thing would come along someday, yet had the reprieve of working mainline flights a good while longer since the RJ's were not up to the task.
"Aint nothing but a B-Scale" is true, but like I have said before, if you are senior enough to stay mainline, then good for you. If not, then that is the way senority goes. Working weekends sucks too, but you do not look down upon those who work the crappy shifts instead of you, do you...? This is no different.
Let's support MDA so it can support US, then there will still be a mainline to move up into.
RedOne
Senior
Do you think this could be part of the "new plan?" Think about it. If we have lots of turnover, our employees will always be "junior employees!"WSurf said:
Junior employees make less, cost the company less in benefits....as one of the B737 a/c says IT'S A NO BRAINER!
Haven't they been saying we are too senior? Turnover could be part of the plan! 
Light Years
Veteran
- Aug 27, 2002
- 2,878
- 0
Thats my point. Both the Fokker 70/100 and the Fairchild 528/728/928 programs are in preliminary stages of being "revived" , by D'long and Rekkof respectively. However, even if they ever did come to fruition, which is a long shot, the new versions wouldnt be available for years, and besides, you could pretty up an F100 but its still the same basic crap plane, who'd want it?700UW said:
Rico, great post... I hate to sound like management, but I think alot of people are missing the big picture on this one.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
we had one broken since friday night and then it finally left this afternoon at around 1250pm. it was aircraft 807 and it was a problem that turned into a series of problems including the apu going down. this morning's flt to phl at 8a was also cancelled due to no plane! so we'll se if we can get one tonight to make up tomorrow's 8a plane to phl. if they would work, it be the perfect plane to go from abe to pit because we wouldnt have to worry about the weight restrictionsHope777 said:
Our MEC with Duane Woerth's signature have sent us on a race to the bottom. The "be glad you have shi--y jobs" philosophy sucks. At last winter's MEC meeting, a guy from Mexicana told our leadership about South American pilots who fly left seat in a 757 for $1500.00 a month.... and they were worried. Yet on our property, we agree to take care of our furloughees at MDA at crappy wages with lousy work rules. The haves have not one care for the have nots. But the poor bastards with our top jobs are concerned with their own livlihoods.
Our hipocritical leadership doesn't give one damn for the guys on the street. They have theirs, don't they?
This is just another manifestation of the systemic greed of our profession. No one, I mean NO ONE cares about anyone but themselves... We have no one to blame but ourselves.
That's a damn shame. We are just as stupid as our management thinks we are.
Our hipocritical leadership doesn't give one damn for the guys on the street. They have theirs, don't they?
This is just another manifestation of the systemic greed of our profession. No one, I mean NO ONE cares about anyone but themselves... We have no one to blame but ourselves.
That's a damn shame. We are just as stupid as our management thinks we are.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
RedOne,RedOne said:Do you think this could be part of the "new plan?" Think about it. If we have lots of turnover, our employees will always be "junior employees!"
Junior employees make less, cost the company less in benefits....as one of the B737 a/c says IT'S A NO BRAINER!
That is why the sick policies are so fierce along with the harsh disciplines. Mangement looks to terminiate the "top-out" senior f/as... that's the plan, and will continue to be the plan for U and all the legacy carriers.
This way, you will always have a turnover and no one will top out. :down:
Reality Check time
Nothing to like about Low MDA wages/rules, but...
It is not like they pulled these wages out of thin air, they are the ones OUR COMPETITION has had in place for years now over at American. Reality, if our we do not match our competition, then everyone here is taking a 100% paycut.
The other Reality check is that up till recently, Our so called "partners" have been becoming rich while US still struggles to avoid bankruptcy. Undercut by Mesa and Chataquua, all of that flying left the property , as well as THE PROFIT. Mesa now brags about having 250Million in cash, where do you think it came from... Bake sales? The fact is, that now those low salaries match or exceed the savings that outsourcing supposedly gave. I do not like low MDA wages and/rules, but I dislike seeing outsiders pick up all that flying and profit rather than US even moreso
Cry me a river about how "unjust" these low wages are, and blah race t5o the bottom blah blah. The fact of the matter is that for too long we have been uncompetitive to external and internal threats to our flying. Unless you have some huge desire to raise the pay rates at MDA by dropping your own pay rates to make it happen, then stop knoocking it and thank those who have to "deal with reality" for you.
Yes, MDA will probably replace some mainline flying, BUT THANK GOD, as for so long everyone has agreed that the US systems needs to restruccture it's flying. MDA can fly full and make a profit rather than the half full mainline (or full with too many discount seats) aircraft on too many routes to list. MDA can help transform the many mainline stations that should have been transformed to mainline-express long ago) so the company can see real savings from the givebacks given in the past.
Yeah, no one likes a sweet deal to change or come to an end, but Reality is that it willl cahnge no matter what. US has no choice. I for one would prefer a sacrifice now for a future later, than to watch the place fold.
So enough griping about MDA, which is just resentment (over necessary change occuring here at US) hidden as expressing a poor opinion of MDA, the EMB-170, or the people that have sacrificed to work there (and help keep us all working here at US)
Nothing to like about Low MDA wages/rules, but...
It is not like they pulled these wages out of thin air, they are the ones OUR COMPETITION has had in place for years now over at American. Reality, if our we do not match our competition, then everyone here is taking a 100% paycut.
The other Reality check is that up till recently, Our so called "partners" have been becoming rich while US still struggles to avoid bankruptcy. Undercut by Mesa and Chataquua, all of that flying left the property , as well as THE PROFIT. Mesa now brags about having 250Million in cash, where do you think it came from... Bake sales? The fact is, that now those low salaries match or exceed the savings that outsourcing supposedly gave. I do not like low MDA wages and/rules, but I dislike seeing outsiders pick up all that flying and profit rather than US even moreso
Cry me a river about how "unjust" these low wages are, and blah race t5o the bottom blah blah. The fact of the matter is that for too long we have been uncompetitive to external and internal threats to our flying. Unless you have some huge desire to raise the pay rates at MDA by dropping your own pay rates to make it happen, then stop knoocking it and thank those who have to "deal with reality" for you.
Yes, MDA will probably replace some mainline flying, BUT THANK GOD, as for so long everyone has agreed that the US systems needs to restruccture it's flying. MDA can fly full and make a profit rather than the half full mainline (or full with too many discount seats) aircraft on too many routes to list. MDA can help transform the many mainline stations that should have been transformed to mainline-express long ago) so the company can see real savings from the givebacks given in the past.
Yeah, no one likes a sweet deal to change or come to an end, but Reality is that it willl cahnge no matter what. US has no choice. I for one would prefer a sacrifice now for a future later, than to watch the place fold.
So enough griping about MDA, which is just resentment (over necessary change occuring here at US) hidden as expressing a poor opinion of MDA, the EMB-170, or the people that have sacrificed to work there (and help keep us all working here at US)
