ssullivan

Looks like the Q-400s will be on their way out, starting in January, and gone by September, 2016. And, at the same time, Republic will be taking on 50 new EMB-175s for UA, as well as extending the agreement to operate the 38 existing EMB-170s.

Republic Aways to Expand Large Regional Jet Operations for United Airlines

Micp3208

I guess most people will find this to be a good thing, especially when considering the delays always plaguing The Qs out of EWR. However, I would much rather be in a Q400 than an ERJ-145 anytime! I just don't believe we will see the EMB-175s placed on the EWR routes.

As much as I dislike the ERJ, I might prefer that over the Q-200 and 300 that CommutAir operates. Those have definitely seen better days (200s).

TWA Guy

Love flying the Q400s, especially on DEN-EGE, but thrilled to see more E175s. Hope they will send some our way to IAD, which has become CR7 hell.

EWR764

50 more E75s is great news. This is a net gain of 19 frames, taking into account the 31 Qs they replace. Keep chopping those 50-seaters!

Now, if UA makes up its mind and adds wifi...

Bonehead

Even in the winter in the Great Lakes region? You might want to rethink your position.

Micp3208

Fair enough, I don't ever fly through there, but I've never had an on time flight operated by a United Express carrier flying a Q series aircraft.

fly18725

This looks like a deal where everyone should be happy: Republic gets a common fleet with more airplanes, UAL gets the cost benefit of Republic having a common fleet, customers get a better airplane, and the Q400s will move to an operator that wants them. With all of the parties involved, I imagine this was extremely complex to negotiate.

hagan73

Definitely excited to see more E175s, but I'd much rather see them replace the E145s on stuck on half the time out of YYZ. Never minded the Q400 when up front. Though 12 F seats makes it an almost guaranteed upgrade.

qukslvr619

Not sure what the aversion is to Q400s in winter. Those were ATRs that had icing issues in that region and last I checked the Q400 became a lawn dart in BUF due to pilot error.

Don't get me wrong, I welcome more 175s, but what this probably means though is a trickle down effect whereby 175s will upgauge 50-seat RJs and then 50 seat RJs will probably be used to backfill the 31 Q400s so to me it may not be a huge win. My guess, and I could be completely wrong, is that 50 seaters will initially go back on former Q400 routes not 175s.

sinoflyer

I've never minded the Q400s, but I've loved the E170s and now the E175s more, so this is a ^. I'll withhold my complaints about the lack of wifi and inflight service in a different thread.

COSPILOT

This might explain why the upgrades to the Q400's seemed to have stopped in the last few months.

Micp3208

I think you are right. I think I have been on one 170 and it was to EWR from STL. It is always the Qs or ERJ to the places I am flying (PVD, SAV). I hope the former Q routes will see at least one 170/175 per day, going back to an ERJ will obviously cut capacity.

It will be a waiting game to see how United restructures their regional network. I've seen discussions on various boards about UA wanting one or two Express carriers per hub, but never saw anything definitive from them.

trk1

Look at the november schedule. You will ses the shifting of regionals at the hubs to the new configuration.

EWR764

I expect to see more OO CR7 service at DEN to replace the Qs, as the E70 does not have the same hot-and-high performance necessary for operations in the UAX network there. This would mostly affect service to places like GUC, MTJ, HDN, etc. which previously saw more CR7 service before the Q400s came to town.

Taking into account removing 31 Q400s, the 19 additional E75s provide the capacity of about 28 50-seaters. The company appears to be keeping overall regional capacity flat to slightly up, but reducing fleet count in accordance with the ALPA contract, which puts a 450-frame cap on the UAX fleet and a max of 255 70/76-seaters without a new small narrowbody in the mainline fleet by January 1, 2016.

At present, there are 153 70-seaters, not counting the Qs, which will be leaving the fleet. So, by 1/1/16, for every E175 coming on property over frame #102 (of which there are orders presently for 18, compare to about 20 E75s on property as of today) but not to exceed the max of 153 76-seaters, it will replace a 70-seater, probably a CR7. At the same time, the number of <51-seaters (including Q200/300s, EM2s, ERJs and CRJs, depending on their disposition schedule) will be no greater than 195, down from the current ~345.

I do not foresee UA acquiring and inducting a new mainline fleet type in just over 15 months, so as it stands presently, the YE 2016 UAX fleet is probably going to be composed of 120 E75s, 97 CR7s, 38 E70s and 195 <51 seats, which I suspect will be almost all ERJ-145s.

Going forward, if UA introduces a new small narrowbody aircraft (above 86k MGTOW, basically, anything bigger than an E-175), the 153-frame max of 76-seaters goes up to 223, provided UA mainline takes at least 88 new small narrowbodies. The ratio of growth is pegged at 1 new 76-seater for every 1.25 mainline frames. The <51-seaters must also be reduced at a predetermined rate, and ultimately there may be no more than 125 frames if all 223 76-seaters are operated.

Just a bit of perspective on what the regional fleet may look like in the next few years.

qukslvr619

I'm not sure what strategy UA uses with respect to regional flying; operating a route with everything from a 764 to an ERJ all at the same time (I'm talking to you IAD). Seems like for consistency, or at least the effort of reducing the number of operaters, they should put a X mile radius or some sort of threshold around each hub and determine which markets will stay 50 seat RJs, which ones should have 70 seaters with F, and which ones should stay mainline. In theory this sounds more simple than in reality but it would reduce the frustration of not having a consistent product.