Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

First Mesaba then Pinnacle

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Monster Buck said:
Ok I'll bite. I know you have some work rules to better but how are you cheaper than Mesa? I haven't put the two contracts up against each other but I was under the impression you guys were already way ahead of Mesa.


An airlines expenses go far beyond the cost of a pilot working agreement (less than 10% of block hour costs). I wish pilots could understand that everything doesn't revolve around them. I have no doubt that Mesa's pilot working agreement does realize some substantial savings over even our agreement at PCL. That being said, Mesa's operation is NOT the model of efficiency. They operate a wide variety of aircraft types in domiciles all over the country. According to ALPA's economic research department PCL's block hour costs are approximately $1750/block hour. Mesa is right around $2000/block hour (for regional jet operations) and the rest of the industry is between $2200 and $2600 per block hour.

This may be hard for some to believe but until you have worked at PCL you will never understand the kind of ghost ship they are running. Our G & A is less than half of what it probably should be.
 
DoinTime said:
This may be hard for some to believe but until you have worked at PCL you will never understand the kind of ghost ship they are running. Our G & A is less than half of what it probably should be.
What the hell is G & A?

Yeah, much to some people's disbelief, I CAN admit when I don't know something. ;)
 
Server's down and Kelly and John don't know why.

They webhost the main site and the message board on that one server. Another server just does emails that end in airlinkpilots.com (which is why you can still email Kelly and others with those email addresses).

The DNS people have been paid up and are redirecting properly - I have one of my websites through them and it works just fine, so forwarding isn't an issue.

There doesn't seem to be much other info coming out. It's going to really suck this bidding period, as there is no legality report, no immediate result to your bids (the company website doesn't have that function), although Sollinger's product pilot tool suite is also on a separate server, seems to be working properly, and if you're a paying subscriber you can still use the tool suite function.

Unfortunately, I don't feel like subscribing to a 6 month service just to save a couple hours each month, plus it doesn't do exactly what I want it to do since I usually deliberately create my own legality conflicts to get more days off. :D
 
dondk said:
We are NOT cheaper than MESA, but we are close. We have a few work rules they don't have and a better completion factor.

Yes, we are indeed cheaper than Mesa. I know it's hard to believe, but talk to Wake. It's not even close when you look at both airlines' total costs per block hour. Our performance/efficiency is also much better.

It is well known that the kool aid in nonconnah is filled with 70/90 dreams and our and the FA's CBA are the road blocks from making it happen. Regardless, we are in no postion (staff and company wise) to deal with anything more than what we currently regardless of how "Cheap" we are.

Since when has our management refused additional flying based on what sort of "position" we were in to accept it? Management will take whatever flying they can get their hands on, even if it means junior manning every management pilot in the company to fly it.
 
Lear70 said:
What the hell is G & A?

Yeah, much to some people's disbelief, I CAN admit when I don't know something. ;)


General & Administrative

Basically, it is a measure of overhead being carried by the company. Everybody and everything that doesn't produce revenue is part of G & A.
 
Dear DoinTime,

Well thanks for the ed. When pcl 128 said "We" I thought, as in his post, he was speaking of the pilot contracts. As in my reply, "comparing the contracts" remember? I'm sure you could be helful expaining to me further the breakdown of a full corporate cost structure. I'm sure after eight years at Mesaba and running two companies I have alot to learn. Maybe soon with some hard work I will not "understand" things so narrow as you have quoted and be nearer your wisdom of bus. and fin.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Hey PCL128,

(This is not a dig) If your efficiency is much better than Mesa's, they must be pretty bad! You guys cancel flights all the time, especially TOL. I know some of you guys at DTW and don't buy into the "9E pilots suck" thing, but I do think that you must have serious issues with your SOC, or MX or something, because that airline is hardly the epitomy of efficiency.

Like I said, not a dig, but you have to admit that your operation has issues!
 
Rossa said:
Like I said, not a dig, but you have to admit that your operation has issues!

Man, is that an understatement. :) Seriously though, you're absolutely right. However, as pathetic as our performance is, it's still better than most other regionals. Our on-time and completion factors are almost always higher than Mesaba's and mainline's. The Christmas debacle last year is the big exception. Just imagine, as bad as you think our performance is, most other regionals are worse.
 
hold on there a cotton pickin minute.

Sitting here in the SOC a lot of our cancels are not necessarily our doing. sure we seem to have a lot of MX issues but Big NW make us cancel several times a day to protect their slots for example. We also have problems in that when we have a ship down for any reason the outstations try to rebook as soon as possible to be able to move the passengers along. Occasionally as happened on Sat AM they rebooked before we even cancelled the flight....

sure we have issues in the SOC (and now limited OT to cover shifts to save money) but its not all our doing.. We have issues with Crews in the wrong place. Missing deadheads, issues with Junior Manning and dare I say other crew related tasks but lets be fair when we throw the blame out there.

We are just as frustrated as you guys and gals..

midnight Brit
Live on Acars 4 nights a week to a CRJ near you..
 
Last edited:
PCL_128 said:
We are currently the lowest cost RJ provider in the country. (Yes, even cheaper than Mesa) Even with a new pilot CBA, the rest of our costs are so far below the rest of the industry that I think it's possible for us to bid for other flying successfully. We'll just have to wait and see.


Perhaps this statement is true when you only take into account crew payrates and crew W-2 earnings. Now lets factor in MULTIPLE lost hulls, horsecrap performance, clueless pilots, wasted de-ice fluid, sky high insurance premiums, ect. ect. The result is a VERY costly RJ privider for NWA.
 
DetoXJ said:
Perhaps this statement is true when you only take into account crew payrates and crew W-2 earnings. Now lets factor in MULTIPLE lost hulls, horsecrap performance, clueless pilots, wasted de-ice fluid, sky high insurance premiums, ect. ect. The result is a VERY costly RJ privider for NWA.

Wow, you really are ignorant. We've lost just one hull, thank you very much. If memory serves, that's the same number that Mesaba has lost in the last few years. Something about a couple of idiot mechanics that didn't understand that brakes are hydraulic on an Avro. Must be some top-notch maintenance you've got over there. :rolleyes:

As for your other moronic ramblings, they have no basis in reality. I'll just leave it at that.
 
DetoXJ said:
Perhaps this statement is true when you only take into account crew payrates and crew W-2 earnings. Now lets factor in MULTIPLE lost hulls, horsecrap performance, clueless pilots, wasted de-ice fluid, sky high insurance premiums, ect. ect. The result is a VERY costly RJ privider for NWA.
You forgot about hot fueling...
 
"We are currently the lowest cost RJ provider in the country. (Yes, even cheaper than Mesa) Even with a new pilot CBA, the rest of our costs are so far below the rest of the industry that I think it's possible for us to bid for other flying successfully. We'll just have to wait and see."

You have to be kidding me...why are so proud of the fact that you are the lowest cost RJ provider in the industry. Another victim to SJS!
 
Quack said:
"We are currently the lowest cost RJ provider in the country. (Yes, even cheaper than Mesa) Even with a new pilot CBA, the rest of our costs are so far below the rest of the industry that I think it's possible for us to bid for other flying successfully. We'll just have to wait and see."

You have to be kidding me...why are so proud of the fact that you are the lowest cost RJ provider in the industry. Another victim to SJS!

Not proud, just stating a fact. Again, when talking about low cost I'm not just referring to the pilot costs. I'm referring to the entire operation. Rampers, SOC, corporate, everything. As for SJS, I think not. I'll fly a Cessna 172 if you'll pay me $100k for it. I could care less whether my plane is a jet or not, or how shiny it is.
 
DetoXJ said:
Perhaps this statement is true when you only take into account crew payrates and crew W-2 earnings. Now lets factor in MULTIPLE lost hulls, horsecrap performance, clueless pilots, wasted de-ice fluid, sky high insurance premiums, ect. ect. The result is a VERY costly RJ privider for NWA.
Well, at least we're not a bunch of drunks...There's nothing I hate more than that liquor-breath and booze smell coming from the cockpit when boarding a Mesaba aircraft. I feel like I'm inside a bar instead of an airplane.
Also...I know about the hull loss with 3701, I know of no other CRJ losses. Please tell us about the other hull losses. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I guess that Jetstream that the pilots flew into the ground with passengers onboard isn't considered a hull loss.

Is that airplane that crashed in MKE up and flying?
 
Will you girls quit your bickering? For crying out loud. Go pre-flight and shut up.

Sincerely,

MM
 
Dodge said:
I guess that Jetstream that the pilots flew into the ground with passengers onboard isn't considered a hull loss.

Is that airplane that crashed in MKE up and flying?

Jetstream? Good grief man, how far back are you gonna go to dig up dirt on Pinnacle? Could we at least stick with dealing in the current century please? I'm sure we could find plenty of dirt on Mesaba if we looked back long enough too.

The MKE plane is back flying. It has been for quite some time now.
 
Dodge said:
Is that airplane that crashed in MKE up and flying?
Yeah, they fixed it, just like when Mesaba fixed that F-27 back in 1990 when the captain went 100 FEET off the side of the runway into snow and ruined the landing gear. I think the NTSB said something about the "pilot-in-command's failure to maintain directional control of the aircraft", or something like that.

Was that Mesaba CRASH considered a HULL LOSS? Maybe the captain was drunk after a night of throwing pool chairs in Brainerd.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top