So Now What For Mesaba?

[Butters]

Hold on Monster! I'm not fanning here, just restating what I've read. No judgement. It is very possible for NW to get renegotiated leases. But I'm not going to hold my breath till I read it in writing...

Anyone who thinks the Avros aren't going away sometime sooner than later is fooling themselves. The NWA info says they want to look at the leases but may still dump the aircraft.

I also don't know where the 31 number came from because all 35 Avros are on the official list. 501XJ to 536XJ is on the list for "renegotiation." (No 528XJ, though. Thank you Memphis mechanics!)

NWA already said publically today that they want to get smaller planes on some routes and shift more flying to Pinnacle and Mesaba.

 

[CubanSmoker]

I sure hope the don't park that Avro too soon. All of us Avro drivers are going to have to re-learn how to land an airplane and set our thrust manually.

Seriously, the engines are efficient, but you can't get past the point that it has 4 of them and they are thirsty flying low. I rode in the A319 jumpseat from DTW - MSP last month; 1:20 minute flight and the exact fuel burn as the Avro on a typical 1:20 flight.

I'll miss it....

 

[BoDEAN]

What airlines in the US use the Avro besides Mesaba / Pinn?

 

[CWASaab]

What airlines in the US use the Avro besides Mesaba / Pinn?

Mesaba is the only airline operating the Avro RJ in the U.S.

Air Wisconsin operates an older version of the aircraft, the BAe 146 (I believe most of the type at Air Wisconsin are -300s). From what I read here it is not entirely clear if the 146s will make the switch to USAir with the rest of Air Wisconsin.

There have been several other North American carriers that opearted the 146, most recently Jazz (Air Canada feeder).

Shifting gears, and not that I have a horse in the race any longer, but I do think it is likely the Avro will disappear. In my mind there are two 'barriers' keeping the Avro in place: Scope and Aspen.

Scope language in the NWAlpa contract would have made replacing the Avro with another 70-seater impossible. Having any 70-seater is better than having none, and so the Avro, one of the first of the 'big' regional jets, stuck around. With the help of a willing Bankruptcy Judge, NWA well likely seek, and get, scope relief from its pilots (through negotiations, with the threat of an 1113 motion for motivation). Thus opening the door for the Avro to be replaced by a more economical aircraft (i.e. one with only two engines).

Second factor in keeping the Avro is Aspen. The Avro/146 is one of the few commercial jets that can make it in and out, and with the only other jet operator at Aspen being United/Air Wisconsin. Aspen flights are likely priced at a premium, and giving that market to a competitor would be foolish. Not that logic plays a role in airline planning.

If Air Wisconsin and United split completely then NWA may have the only jet service into Aspen (and first class at that).

My hunch is that when the Avro gets replaced it will be with an airplane that can manage Aspen.

 

[Monster Buck]

As the Avro sits right now it is a sore thumb on economy. But... BK does help you do a few different things. They could put all 85 seats in with scope release and compete on the 90 seat routes. Which is cheaper than scrapping the entire program(mx,training,books), for a entirely new ac. Second is to get awesome lease deals since no one else will propably want to start up a whole new operation to fly them. Also any AVRO instructors can correct me if I am wrong but there was talk by the dept. to pull back to .72 giving a much better time/fuel cost structure. Although I don't fly the Avro so I don't know any more about that than hearsay.

Will the AVRO go? Time will tell. I am just offering some alt. endings to this mess. Sixteen months ago they told us that all the Avros were being parked in the desert, now we signed a new ten year deal to fly them just last week, when NWA knew that they were going BK. So I quess we will see. No official word yet, so we will have take it as it comes.

 

[4fanman]

Also any AVRO instructors can correct me if I am wrong but there was talk by the dept. to pull back to .72 giving a much better time/fuel cost structure.

Well, considering that Mmo is .73 ('cept for Sparky) it would have to be more than that. More likely around .67, as if it isn't already a pita for atc. Not to mention having to listen to that flap-lock-out-thingy clacking away at 227 kias.

I left XJ almost 2 years ago and at the time the service agreement had NWA paying the fuel bill for the AVRO. If they managed to negotiate their way out of this due to the bk I would think that would put a sizeable burden on XJ's finances.

I wish the best for my former-fellow XJers.

 

[Crizz]

Well, considering that Mmo is .73 ('cept for Sparky) it would have to be more than that. More likely around .67, as if it isn't already a pita for atc. Not to mention having to listen to that flap-lock-out-thingy clacking away at 227 kias.

I left XJ almost 2 years ago and at the time the service agreement had NWA paying the fuel bill for the AVRO. If they managed to negotiate their way out of this due to the bk I would think that would put a sizeable burden on XJ's finances.

I wish the best for my former-fellow XJers.

Normal cruise is .72 The proposal pulls it back to .66 I have already flown one trip from HPN to MSP flight planned at .66 - Blocked 3.8 hours. We saved some gas though.

Strait from SK, this is NWA forcing a fuel savings program on us. IMO, its a good step. Somethings gotta give - This dang bird burns as much as a baby bus and only carries half the people at way lower speeds. At FL300 going .66 we were burning 600-800 Lbs/hr less than at .72

The avro is comfortable for pilots and passengers, but it really doesnt do anything particularly well. (Except go into Aspen)