General Lee
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Posts
- 20,442
You ignore the statements of others and continue to post your babble. The debate had nothing to do with the 737's you were just in your own la la land there. The original question was about why you continue to ignore the NWA scope clause and produce your own imaginary ideas.
Your scope clause is better, but our current one is being thrown aside thanks to high fuel. We don't need the RJs now, too expensive. Even the 76 seaters can't pay their own bills. If fuel stays high, RJs will be seen less, even the larger ones. At JFK, some routes cannot take a mainline connection, and the 50 seaters are being replaced with 76 seaters. That may be the only larger expansion of the 76 seat market, because those thinner routes connecting the INTL pax at JFK can use a slightly bigger plane to pay for the gas and the added seats for the influx of INTL pax in general.
How's that? Care to rebutt any of that?
Bye Bye--General Lee