Air Wisconsin will add CRJ900 regional jets to the fleet of aircraft

[john john]

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/...g+the+line.html
Scope to expand

Air Wisconsin, which flies 50-seat regional jets for US Airways, may also benefit from scope relief. The air service accord between the two part of a $125 million investment by the regional in the America West/US Airways merger stipulates that the two firms may agree that Air Wisconsin will add CRJ900 regional jets to the fleet of aircraft used by it in the provision of service and that this could occur either in addition to or as replacements for certain CRJ200s flown by the carrier as US Airways Express.

a clause in the US Airways pilot contract then allowed for up to 25 E-190s to be flown by affiliates under certain provisions.
Delta and Northwest. Brokered in mid-April just days before a threatened pilot strike, Delta’s tentative pilot agreement which still requires member ratification sets an E-190 pay rate competitive to that agreed at JetBlue. The Delta agreement relaxes scope limits to 76 seats from the current 70-seat restriction and imposes strict caps on 76-seat flying to encourage mainline growth.

From 1 January, Delta Connection can operate 15 aircraft with 71-76 seats with a maximum gross take-off weight of 39,044kg (86,000lb), and increase that figure to 30 aircraft one year later. More 76-seaters can be introduced, but only on a ratio of three for every one mainline growth aircraft added. And the number of 70- and 76-seat jets may not exceed 200.

Northwest had hoped Compass would be able to fly 105 aircraft in the 77- to 100-seat range. But after pilots refused to accept this, management reconciled that the subsidiary will be capped at the 76-seat level.

 

[a320av8r]

"a clause in the US Airways pilot contract then allowed for up to 25 E-190s to be flown by affiliates under certain provisions."

Then, not now- all E190's must be flown by mainline pilots as part of the transition agreement.

"...stipulates that the two firms may agree that Air Wisconsin will add CRJ900 regional jets..."

You sure do twist the title of this article from may to will.

 

[john john]

Will the company do it maybe, maybe not? The point is the language exist.The company will use it to there advantage not ALPA
"may agree that Air Wisconsin will add CRJ900"

 

[FM2436]

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/chan...s/BOMB05246.xml

In terms of Bombardier's current order backlog, the airframer is still having discussions with US Airways concerning the 37 CRJ-701s the carrier has on order. When questioned about the possibility of the carrier switching those orders to a larger Bombardier plane, Ngo said the airframer hasn't stopped airlines from switching to different aircraft models, but nothing definitive has been decided about the US Airways deal. Ngo pointed out, however, that the order is "still very much" in Bombardier's backlog.

 

[BoeingBoy]

In terms of Bombardier's current order backlog, the airframer is still having discussions with US Airways concerning the 37 CRJ-701s the carrier has on order.

They're still talking alright - about whether that order will be assumed or rejected....

From the latest BK filing on the subject:

WHEREAS, the Reorganized Debtors and Bombardier, Inc. and Bombardier Aerospace (collectively, “Bombardierâ€￾) are parties to certain agreements set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto that were included on the Post-Effective Date Determination Schedule (collectively, the Agreements);

WHEREAS, on March 24, 2006, the Court entered a Stipulation and Order Regarding Certain Agreements with Bombardier, Inc. and Its Affiliated Entities on the Post-Effective Date Determination Schedule (Docket No. 3902), which extended the deadline for the Reorganized Debtors to assume or reject the Agreements to April 6, 2006;

WHEREAS, on April 5, 2006, the Court entered a Supplemental Stipulation and Order Regarding Certain Agreements with Bombardier, Inc. and Its Affiliated Entities on the Post-Effective Date Determination Schedule (Docket No. 3916), which extended the deadline for the Reorganized Debtors to assume or reject the Agreements to April 25, 2006;

WHEREAS, on April 24, 2006, the Court entered a Second Supplemental Stipulation and Order Regarding Certain Agreements with Bombardier, Inc. and Its Affiliated Entities on the Post-Effective Date Determination Schedule (Docket No. 3936), which extended the deadline for the Reorganized Debtors to assume or reject the Agreements to May 2, 2006;

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2006, the Court entered a Third Supplemental Stipulation and Order Regarding Certain Agreements with Bombardier, Inc. and Its Affiliated Entities on the Post-Effective Date Determination Schedule (Docket No. 3944), which extended the deadline for the Reorganized Debtors to assume or reject the Agreements to May 9, 2006;

WHEREAS, on May 9, 2006, the Court entered a Fourth Supplemental Stipulation and Order Regarding Certain Agreements with Bombardier, Inc. and Its Affiliated Entities on the Post-Effective Date Determination Schedule (Docket No. 3954), which extended the deadline for the Reorganized Debtors to assume or reject the Agreements to May 23, 2006; and

WHEREAS, the Reorganized Debtors and Bombardier are continuing their discussions regarding the Agreements and consensual modifications with respect thereto and assumption thereof as modified.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the Reorganized Debtors and Bombardier, as follows:

1. The deadline for the Reorganized Debtors to assume or reject the Agreements is extended through and including June 23, 2006, and may be further extended by agreement of the parties.

Jim

 

[SegmentKing]

"MAY" add.

Air Wisky better cancel all those CRJ 900 orders!

Oh wait, Mesa is the only one with undelivered CRJ 900s... huh. I thought there were talks of streamlining the USX fleet, which is why you've seen TSA and Mesa pull back on some of their ERJ flying (mesa all together)... so you've got one CRJ 900 operator right now (under the HPX contract, as US doesn't allow it under USX), and now AWAC is salivating to want MORE flying when they can't even fly what they have.

I think we just need to merge AWAC and PSA to simplify things... let Mesa keep the west & some limited East flying, and Chautauqua out of BOS/LGA.

Reminds me of another airline, but this one stole the planes and kicked everyone to the street, now US has had to cancel a handful of routes or downgrade them.

 

[john john]

so you've got one CRJ 900 operator right now (under the HPX contract, as US doesn't allow it under USX

Why doest US Airways allow CRJ900’s under US Airways Express?

 

[BoeingBoy]

as US doesn't allow it [CRJ-900-Jim] under USX

Thanks to the transition agreement, it's allowed. A total of 93 CRJ-900's (or other aircraft meeting.....) are allowed for the combined operation.

I think we just need to merge AWAC and PSA to simplify things

US would have to buy AWAC, or AWAC would have to buy PSA (and that would open up the "MDA"-like can of worms with J4J's).

Jim

 

[john john]

I think we just need to merge AWAC and PSA to simplify things... let Mesa keep the west & some limited East flying, and Chautauqua out of BOS/LGA.

PSA is wholly owned by US and Air Wisconsin is Independently owned. Who would merge with whom and who would own whom. Air Wisconsin stands to make a large sum of money off US Airways stock. I think ZW would be in the driver seat on this one.

 

[john john]

I thought there were talks of streamlining the USX fleet, .

US Airways is adding Express Flights as fast as they can.
A lot of new planes and routes
going to our express friends all mainline can do is give planes back to there leasers and get 3 757

 

[pilot]

It's cheaper to contract out the flying than to do it in house. No one should believe DP is any different than any of the others. We are not expanding our route network with our own jets. We are using RJ's to replace mainline flying and buying 190's to replace 737's because it costs less to fly them. That is how he will get around the "scope" issue of using too many RJ's.

ALPA allowed it. And when I say ALPA, I'm talking about the 57% who voted yes the last time. This fight isn't over. DP is being told there is more the pilots will give. Glass is telling him so. And I, for one, believe he is correct.

He will whipsaw the AWA pilot group against the U pilot group and operate the fleets independently. The "synergies" he speaks of do not include both pilot groups together.

This is going to get interesting. I only hope the AWA guys have more balls than our 57% yes men.

pilot

 

[SegmentKing]

first off, I have a lot of respect for AWAC. But the UA to US transition has been aweful on them and killing their operation... so don't think I'm a ZW hater.

With ZW, well Eastshore, owning a chunk of the new USAirways, they are in the drivers seat in terms of Expressland, which is why they just need to take over PSA or the wholly owneds, as ZW will do what they can to get the next batch of new USX planes that come online, even if there is an operator of the type already.

 

[nethan]

Keep in mind, AWAC isn't as big a player as they were a few months ago. Eastshore sold off most of their stock last month (or was it the month before?) They still have a seat on the board but with only $25mil in stock they aren't what they were.

 

[aquagreen73s]

"He will whipsaw the AWA pilot group against the U pilot group and operate the fleets independently. The "synergies" he speaks of do not include both pilot groups together.

This is going to get interesting. I only hope the AWA guys have more balls than our 57% yes men.

pilot"
[/quote]


Looks like 49% of we Cactus heads will get along great with about 43% of you Easters. But unfortunately the ALPO-DP is great-koolaid drinkers will still be a majority. My wife and I just had a long talk about the future because I know what's in store for the combined group: capitulation, stagnation and paycuts.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Keep in mind, AWAC isn't as big a player as they were a few months ago. Eastshore sold off most of their stock last month (or was it the month before?) They still have a seat on the board but with only $25mil in stock they aren't what they were.

Maybe I missed something, but are you sure you aren't thinking of ACE? They sold a chunk of their stock to PAR a while back.

As far as I know, Eastshore still has the stock they received for their $125 million investment. They did sell their option to acquire more stock (also to PAR), but that was shortly after we emerged from BK.

Jim