CAL RFP's 70 Seaters (turboprops)

[catIIIc]

[FONT=ARIAL,]Source:http://www.flightglobal.com

There were the strongest signs yet of a revival of the turboprop in the USA at the Regional Airline Association’s (RAA) annual conference in Dallas, Texas last week, when it emerged that Continental Airlines has issued a request for proposals (RFP) for 24 new 70-seat turboprops.

According to industry sources, the airline’s RFP specifies that 12 turboprops will operate from Continental’s New York Newark hub and an equal number from the carrier’s Houston hub. Both airports will lose capacity under a new feeder deal with its regional associate ExpressJet, which has to take 69 Embraer ERJ-145s out of its current 274-strong regional jet fleet.

Continental, which phased out its turboprops, now wants 24 70-seaters

The turboprop RFP, which the airline says is just one of several options “for our future regional flying needs”, marks the first serious interest in new-build large turboprops since the 1990s from a US legacy carrier.

Continental was among the pioneers in the USA of an effort to move to an all-jet regional fleet, phasing out its ATR and Embraer turboprops in favour of ERJ-145s. However, more recently the airline has begun to re-introduce some turboprop feeder services through contracts with Colgan Air, Gulfstream International and Regions Air.

ATR and Bombardier – the two producers of 70-seat turboprops in the form of the ATR 72-500 and Dash 8 Q400, respectively – are said to be excited about the potential prospects of the RFP. Both have been waiting and hoping for a revival of the turboprop market in the USA.

[/FONT]

 

[Master Shake]

I'll be interested to see how they try to circumvent the CAL pilots scope clause on that one. Now if mainline were to operate the Q400, that would be a boon for all of us.

Stay strong CAL pilots!

 

[wmuflyguy]

I'll be interested to see how they try to circumvent the CAL pilots scope clause on that one. Now if mainline were to operate the Q400, that would be a boon for all of us.

Stay strong CAL pilots!

Does the fact that they are Turboprops and not jets having anything to do with going around the scope language? I'm unfamiliar witht he scope language of CAL.

Example CAL flies any JET over 50 seats or is it any aircraft over 50 seats is flown by CAL

 

[Master Shake]

My understanding is that the scope is seat specific, ie. 51 + seats is mainline. I'm sure Neal will be reading this today and post the real scope language.

 

[catIIIc]

As long as the turbo props have less then 79 seats then the company can contract it out.

 

[Crash Pad]

Sweet let me be first... I heard ASA got the flying. They beat out horizon because the pilot pay at horizon is too high.

 

[arthompson]

If it would be a scope violation then COEX never would have been able to operate the ATR-72, we still had a few when I was there though they were on the way out as the jets come on board. 70 seat turboprops pose no threat to 737 flying.

 

[DashTrash400]

Ugh

I *hope* somebody beats QX to it, living in HOU or EWR isn't worth the growth! :bawling:

 

[TEXAN AVIATOR]

Considering Horizon and ASA are the only companies currently operating 70 seat props... I hope we at least put in a bid.

 

[Jbitzer]

No I'm sure Trans States will make a couple Frankenstien ATRs out of old spare parts hanging around the hanger....

 

[Kaman]

Hello,
I am not an expert, but I think it was only a matter of time before the airlines realized that they could no longer econically operate 50-seat RJs on routes of less than 300 miles. It is going to be interesting to see who bids on these proposals. I can't see Horizon or ASA bidding on the contracts for two distinctly different reasons. Horizon is wholly-owned by Alaska Air Group and their operations are primarily in the west coast and I think that they want to keep it that way. ASA on the other hand has unanswered labor questions, and my understanding is that the ATR was on it's way out, but I think it's been "on-it's-way-out" for 3 years now...Again, I merely speculating why these two companies will probably not bid.
The only airlines that will bid are airlines that are financially leveraged to come up with the capital required to purchase/lease the aircraft. Although, Bombardier/ATR may make the terms on a par with Airbus to get the orders. There are two airlines that come to mind simply because they already have operations in both areas in the RFP; Colgan and Commutair. Both already operate as CAL Connection, and have low-cost operations. It would be in the strategic interest of both of these companies to bid on the contract. If not,
someone else will and may very well run them both out of business in the long-term by expanding into their markets/codeshares offering newer aircraft and a better product.
Airlines and the airline customer will be facing a very different world as we enter the second half of the decade. Airlines will continue to reduce capacity and increase fares as a result of supply and demand. This is the only way that the yields off ticket sales will keep up with $70.00/barrel of oil. This reinforces the theory of modern technology turboprops. The flying public typically doesn't care what they fly on as long as it departs/arrives on time with their luggage. Airline managers need to drop the "seemless service" philosophy of having 100% jet service that typically isn't either seemless or good service.

Regards,

ex-Navy Rotorhead

 

[Alchemy]

JUst FYI, the CAL scope clause covers 51 seats and greater for jets and 79 seats and greater for turboprops.

1-4​

A. The Agreement covers all revenue, non-revenue, scheduled, nonscheduled and​

miscellaneous flying performed by or for the Company or a Company Affiliate, or for

Continental Micronesia, Inc. or any of its Affiliates, so long as the Company Controls Continental Micronesia, Inc. or any of its Affiliates, in either case other than:​

1. Flying by other air carriers authorized by Part 4 or Part 5;

2. Flying by a Company Affiliate that is separately incorporated as a Domestic
Air Carrier operating solely Small Jets or Small Turboprops, or both; and
3. Flying by another air carrier while participating in a Complete Transaction in
accordance with Part 7 below.​

Y. "Small Jet" means jet aircraft with an FAA certification of fifty (50) or fewer seats.

Z. "Small Turboprop" means turboprop aircraft with an FAA certification of seventynine
(79) or fewer seats.​

​

​

 

[Ready2Fly]

I'll be interested to see how they try to circumvent the CAL pilots scope clause on that one. Now if mainline were to operate the Q400, that would be a boon for all of us.

Stay strong CAL pilots!

Yeah! Just like the Delta pilots did!

 

[LearLove]

why do I find myself rooting for Colgan?!?

I think we should get a pool going. The winner(s) get to display any avaitar they want for 30 days.

 

[Southbound]

Hello,
I am not an expert, but I think it was only a matter of time before the airlines realized that they could no longer econically operate 50-seat RJs on routes of less than 300 miles. It is going to be interesting to see who bids on these proposals. I can't see Horizon or ASA bidding on the contracts for two distinctly different reasons. Horizon is wholly-owned by Alaska Air Group and their operations are primarily in the west coast and I think that they want to keep it that way. ASA on the other hand has unanswered labor questions, and my understanding is that the ATR was on it's way out, but I think it's been "on-it's-way-out" for 3 years now...Again, I merely speculating why these two companies will probably not bid.
The only airlines that will bid are airlines that are financially leveraged to come up with the capital required to purchase/lease the aircraft. Although, Bombardier/ATR may make the terms on a par with Airbus to get the orders. There are two airlines that come to mind simply because they already have operations in both areas in the RFP; Colgan and Commutair. Both already operate as CAL Connection, and have low-cost operations. It would be in the strategic interest of both of these companies to bid on the contract. If not,
someone else will and may very well run them both out of business in the long-term by expanding into their markets/codeshares offering newer aircraft and a better product.
Airlines and the airline customer will be facing a very different world as we enter the second half of the decade. Airlines will continue to reduce capacity and increase fares as a result of supply and demand. This is the only way that the yields off ticket sales will keep up with $70.00/barrel of oil. This reinforces the theory of modern technology turboprops. The flying public typically doesn't care what they fly on as long as it departs/arrives on time with their luggage. Airline managers need to drop the "seemless service" philosophy of having 100% jet service that typically isn't either seemless or good service.

Regards,

ex-Navy Rotorhead

I could be wrong but it was said by the QX VP of Finance that these RFP's come across regional airline's desk's all the time. It is common for majors to put different types of flying out for bid. QX, for example did bid on the last RFP CAL put out which was awarded to Colgan. The QX CEO and VP Finance made it sound like they pretty much sport bid most RFP's they see. Delta, United, CAL, NWA, just in case something good like our F9 contract pops up. I don't think the RFP necessarily means the 70 seat turboprop flying will even happen. Just a thought by Continental.
As much as I personally dislike groan and droan of a Dash8 for more than 400 nautical miles I think management has realized the cost benefits of the turboprop are just too great and at the end of the day. The noise and slow speed are worth the extra coin as long as 80-90% of passengers buy tickets on price alone.

 

[BluDevAv8r]

Considering Horizon and ASA are the only companies currently operating 70 seat props... I hope we at least put in a bid.

You left out Island Air in Hawaii. They fly Q400's.

-Neal

 

[beechcowboy]

Hello,
I am not an expert, but I think it was only a matter of time before the airlines realized that they could no longer econically operate 50-seat RJs on routes of less than 300 miles. It is going to be interesting to see who bids on these proposals. I can't see Horizon or ASA bidding on the contracts for two distinctly different reasons. Horizon is wholly-owned by Alaska Air Group and their operations are primarily in the west coast and I think that they want to keep it that way. ASA on the other hand has unanswered labor questions, and my understanding is that the ATR was on it's way out, but I think it's been "on-it's-way-out" for 3 years now...Again, I merely speculating why these two companies will probably not bid.
The only airlines that will bid are airlines that are financially leveraged to come up with the capital required to purchase/lease the aircraft. Although, Bombardier/ATR may make the terms on a par with Airbus to get the orders. There are two airlines that come to mind simply because they already have operations in both areas in the RFP; Colgan and Commutair. Both already operate as CAL Connection, and have low-cost operations. It would be in the strategic interest of both of these companies to bid on the contract. If not,
someone else will and may very well run them both out of business in the long-term by expanding into their markets/codeshares offering newer aircraft and a better product.
Airlines and the airline customer will be facing a very different world as we enter the second half of the decade. Airlines will continue to reduce capacity and increase fares as a result of supply and demand. This is the only way that the yields off ticket sales will keep up with $70.00/barrel of oil. This reinforces the theory of modern technology turboprops. The flying public typically doesn't care what they fly on as long as it departs/arrives on time with their luggage. Airline managers need to drop the "seemless service" philosophy of having 100% jet service that typically isn't either seemless or good service.

Regards,

ex-Navy Rotorhead

Colgan needs to worry about more than bidding on new flying. They can hardly keep their a/c properly maintained as it is. The chickens will come home to roost for this organization b/c they simply are average in all areas. Rumors of Colgan going larger have been around since I came and went. Bottom line, they provide a below average service that would actually be worse if they weren't lucky enough to hire some good people. I just hope everyone safely makes it home at the end of the day. BTW, if you are such a turboprop / Colgan advocate, as most of your post indicate, why did you leave Colgan for PSA, only to return after an unsuccessful attempt at the jet? Is it b/c you truly believe the turboprop is best, or b/c that is where you have ended up? I only say this b/c I am sick and tired of everyone's perceived immortality when it comes to bashing the 50 seat operators. I think my company does a fantastic job, and as far as I am concerned, we are setting the bar pretty high on how to run an operationally efficient airline. And yes, polls have shown that the flying public hates flying on most t-props b/c they are so noisy. If they do, it is often out of necessity. All this being said, whatever will happen, will happen. I just fly the plane!

 

[FutureHeavyAC]

Dont forget......

What about Cape Air.....has the CAL code share and new cretificate for ATR flying.

 

[arthompson]

The Q400 is quiter than most jets. It's one of the reasons why QX has done so well

 

[DashTrash400]

The Q400 is quiter than most jets. It's one of the reasons why QX has done so well

At least for the three airplanes that still have a working ANVS... :laugh:

 

[Kaman]

Hey Cowboy,
Not sure if I know exactly who you are, but you obviously know me from CJC past. I am neither bashing nor cheering RJ carriers or turboprop carriers respectively. I am simply stating what current market forces and costs are driving the industry to.
On a personal level I do resent your making this personal by discussing my own career woes in a public forum. I have no idea why you would have done that unless you have an axde to grind with Colgan. I suggest that you take that somewhere else, because I certainly made no personal attacks or hurled any insults at a particular pilot group or airline.

Regards,

ex-Navy Rotorhead

 

[Prop2Jet]

I am an advocate of Colgan! I think it would be great to c them get new or bigger airplanes. The market demands such a turboprop operation. It just makes sense. Ahhh the rise of turboprop again! Funny how this whole thing worked out....

 

[ScumBum]

Cape Air

I would think Cape Air is especially well suited to bid and receive the Newark flying. I think there was always the intent to start flying the ATRs in Guam for CO and then add service back here.

A while back I had heard they were approached by CO for Newark TP flying but hadn't heard anything in the past year.

They provide great service and although I don't work for them have heard lots of good stuff from those that do. Good company.

 

[Dave Benjamin]

I think it will be tough for any airline with the exception of possibly QX to field a fleet of 24 70 seat turboprops. I doubt Candair can get them out the door quickly enough without adversely impacting CRJ deliveries. ATR's could be a different story but they are more expensive to operate.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Dave - What you talkin' about?

The ATR goes slower, but burns 1/3 less gas than the zoomin Q400's. The Dash is built on a completely separate line than the RJ's. It's the Brit. / Irish side of Canadair - the De Havilland folks. I would bid either one if the schedules were decent. (No, not after your flying, I'm just saying if one showed up on the ramp it would be more fun than an RJ)

If the ATR's were built anywhere but France and had any product support - those plastic winged yellow, red and white bugged beasts would be ubiquitous.

At ASA we have to tell the French how the electrical system works. Turns out that Avions Transport de Regional is to Aerospatial as ASA is to a decent airline. As soon as the engineers can, the go get the better jobs - leaving no one that knows anything about the product.

 

[Dave Benjamin]

Dave - What you talkin' about?

The ATR goes slower, but burns 1/3 less gas than the zoomin Q400's. The Dash is built on a completely separate line than the RJ's. It's the Brit. / Irish side of Canadair - the De Havilland folks. I would bid either one if the schedules were decent. (No, not after your flying, I'm just saying if one showed up on the ramp it would be more fun than an RJ)

Isn't the CASM for the Q-400 much lower due to the difference in speed? The breakeven load factor for QX is somewhere around 27 pax for those aircraft. I'd guess MX costs might be much higher on the ATR but I could be wrong. Frankly I don't care who gets that flying. If I wanted to live in EWR or HOU I'd apply with CO. You won't see me volunteering for anything more than 2 hours away from a west coast beach. Hope you guys get a shot at the flying.

 

[Dave Benjamin]

If the ATR's were built anywhere but France and had any product support - those plastic winged yellow, red and white bugged beasts would be ubiquitous.

At ASA we have to tell the French how the electrical system works. Turns out that Avions Transport de Regional is to Aerospatial as ASA is to a decent airline. As soon as the engineers can, the go get the better jobs - leaving no one that knows anything about the product.

Perhaps they should stick to what they know best? Wines and cheeses?

 

[~~~^~~~]

Flip, I dunno. Had lunch at the Sweetwater Brewery. That 420 is some supremely excellent stuff.

The maintenance on the ATR is nothing (if you don't have to order a part from France) - ASA was getting 15,500 hours between hot sections. The airplane is very simple to operate, it just does not fly like an airplane. Think of a dump truck with no power steering and a severely AFT CG and you will be close. Same engines as an E120 - twice the airplane - makes for cheap operations.

I hope we all, each and every one of us, gets to keep our flying and stops this cross bidding race for the bottom crap. I'm beating the drum to wrap up some decent scope language at ASA and tie up Skywest so at least we have a home in this family.

 

[beechcowboy]

Hey Cowboy,
Not sure if I know exactly who you are, but you obviously know me from CJC past. I am neither bashing nor cheering RJ carriers or turboprop carriers respectively. I am simply stating what current market forces and costs are driving the industry to.
On a personal level I do resent your making this personal by discussing my own career woes in a public forum. I have no idea why you would have done that unless you have an axde to grind with Colgan. I suggest that you take that somewhere else, because I certainly made no personal attacks or hurled any insults at a particular pilot group or airline.

Regards,

ex-Navy Rotorhead

I know 2 pilots who have an axe to grind with Colgan; unfortunately they are not with us any longer. Here's to you Colgan mx, with your outdated, unrevised mx manuals and your malfunctioning elevator trim! Drink one for our departed friends who paid the price for your mistakes. Colgan with 70 seats = more mx problems and more NTSB paperwork. Based on how they run their biz, treat their employees, and the quality of their training, I hope they never see more a/c. Low cost does not equal better in their case.

Southwest runs a low cost airline b/c they run efficiently w/ timely hedges, Colgan runs a low cost airline b/c they cut corners and pay low wages. As to your personal background, I just find it hippocritical that you can be such an advocate for Colgan "the super t-prop" operator, when you were once so negative on them and bailed.... only to come back. Nuff said. You could never convince me that Colgan deserves to win any more flying, much less for CAL.

 

[Icelandair]

The Q400 is quiter than most jets. It's one of the reasons why QX has done so well

Depends where you sit. If you sit right next to the engines they are quite loud, but if you sit in the back row they are surprisingly quiet.