Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Are they in violation of Scope yet?

  1. #1
    Registered User NoOtPilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,935
    Level
    100
    Points: 68,267, Level: 100
    Overall activity: 99.8%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    DownloadsPosting Award
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 137/37
    Given: 0/0

    Ignore User

    Are they in violation of Scope yet?


    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    With envoy bringing the total number of E175 aircraft to 56. With at least 28 more E175 aircraft to come by the end of 2020. Have we exceeded the amount of small and large RJs that we are allowed by the Scope clause?
    I always tell the truth. Even when I lie.

  2. #2
    Registered User ardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    4,796
    Level
    99
    Points: 28,799, Level: 99
    Overall activity: 89.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 570/36
    Given: 589/14

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I believe that anything 65 seats or less is small RJ. 66 seats to 76 seats is large rj.
    Total rj's 75% of aa narrowbody, 2017 is 799 narowbody equals 599 rj's, of this 320 large rj's which are 66-76 seats. All crj 700 will be reduced to 65 seats max to keep adding e175 and crj900 aircraft.
    Scope is no longer aircraft certified max seating it is aircraft configuration. So management can and are reconfiguring to max the crj700 and crj900/e175 aircraft on property.

  3. #3
    Registered User NoOtPilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,935
    Level
    100
    Points: 68,267, Level: 100
    Overall activity: 99.8%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    DownloadsPosting Award
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 137/37
    Given: 0/0

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    As of January 24, 2019
    AA NB Fleet Count is 835 planes.
    Last edited by NoOtPilot; 04-03-2019 at 02:24 PM.

  4. #4
    Registered User ardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    4,796
    Level
    99
    Points: 28,799, Level: 99
    Overall activity: 89.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 570/36
    Given: 589/14

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Then that's 334 large rj's that's 14 more for aag.

  5. #5
    Registered User NoOtPilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,935
    Level
    100
    Points: 68,267, Level: 100
    Overall activity: 99.8%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    DownloadsPosting Award
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 137/37
    Given: 0/0

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Actual 2018
    CRJ 700 119
    CRJ 900 118
    E175 154

    Estimate 2019
    CRJ 700 119
    CRJ 900 129
    E175 174

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,670
    Level
    68
    Points: 10,724, Level: 68
    Overall activity: 69.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranOverdrive10000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 209/18
    Given: 66/145

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    AA narrow body fleet is supposed to drop by about 5. They can convert the-700's to 65 seats, but they still have a problem. The EMB-145's (and -140's) won't last forever and sooner or later (likely sooner) they'll have to be replaced. With what ?

    They'll be maxed out on large RJ's and barring a mainline replacement, either will have to buy more -700's or some other 65-seat jet or contract and lose market share. Will lenders find that a good investment and give AAG the capital, especially considering their balance sheet ? A TALL order. The economics of the CRJ-700 aren't optimal with 65 seats. AAG will have to watch the large RJ and NextGen small jet market from the sidelines unless they get relief from APA and AA pilots which would require one heck of a contract and agreement. That's so unlikely, it's not even in the one percentile. The other options is...……..well, let's just say that is Code Red for those junior at AA and those expecting the flow to pay off the way they want it too.

  7. #7
    Registered User ardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    4,796
    Level
    99
    Points: 28,799, Level: 99
    Overall activity: 89.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 570/36
    Given: 589/14

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Ah, they will just but more wire and speed tape and keep them from falling apart and keep them flying to squeeze every penny out of the birds, it's the us air way.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,670
    Level
    68
    Points: 10,724, Level: 68
    Overall activity: 69.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranOverdrive10000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 209/18
    Given: 66/145

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by ardvark View Post
    Ah, they will just but more wire and speed tape and keep them from falling apart and keep them flying to squeeze every penny out of the birds, it's the us air way.
    Certainly within the realm of possibilities. Of course, this is a VERY expensive way to bring lift to AA. When you add to what they have to pay pilots to come to the Eagle system, the marginal revenue abilities of clapped out Embraer’s going forward only exacerbates AAG’s woes. Plus, they’ll have to trim revenue expectations as they remove seats from CRJ-700’s. I don’t even need to mention the product quality compared to the industry leaders driving future revenue away, but on that front apparently management doesn’t care....at least enough to make it a priority.

    This issue is simply yet another gust in the multiple turbulent headwinds likely to face AA and the Eagle system going forward. Astonishingly (actually disturbingly), the front is that all is well. In fact, if you take that to the hallucinogenic level Dacuj does, things are more then well, they are spectacular. If that was really true though considering the present economy, AA would have banked closer to 7 billion last year instead of 1.5 billion or there abouts.

  9. #9
    Registered User ardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    4,796
    Level
    99
    Points: 28,799, Level: 99
    Overall activity: 89.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 570/36
    Given: 589/14

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Wait. Dacuj has to explain the psa pay rate increase, bonus for all, premium for all flying above 75 hrs, etc, etc. I thought the flow would take care of everything, wait, it did not, we started new hire bonuses and appears that not working too. All fo's under a year here should bail for psa, more money and you might flow faster than envoy.
    Just more to pay out here at the happy aag farm team to crew the mainline planes.
    Debt to continue.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    28
    Level
    40
    Points: 3,989, Level: 40
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran1000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1/0
    Given: 2/0

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by ardvark View Post
    Wait. Dacuj has to explain the psa pay rate increase, bonus for all, premium for all flying above 75 hrs, etc, etc. I thought the flow would take care of everything, wait, it did not, we started new hire bonuses and appears that not working too. All fo's under a year here should bail for psa, more money and you might flow faster than envoy.
    Just more to pay out here at the happy aag farm team to crew the mainline planes.
    Debt to continue.
    That timeline under a year doesnt apply to me but I am curious, do we have a copy of the PSA flow agreement anywhere? And if so, Id lik to put pen to paper and figure out if someone quit and went there really would flow faster.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    114
    Level
    46
    Points: 5,199, Level: 46
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 4/6
    Given: 15/18

    Ignore User

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dvtpilot View Post
    That timeline under a year doesn’t apply to me but I am curious, do we have a copy of the PSA flow agreement anywhere? And if so, I’d lik to put pen to paper and figure out if someone quit and went there really would flow faster.
    They flow 10/month and their seniority list has 1800 pilots.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •