telloh

Does this only apply to new aircraft? What is the MTOW of an ERJ170-200(AR)?

Down3Green

Your memory isn't failing you ....there are also seat limitations. The max number of seats is 76. However, you could take a plane that is built for 90 or more seats and remove some to comply with the restrictions. The same is not true with weight.....an airline could not take a plane that is certificated greater than 86,000lbs and pull pieces of metal off it in order to get it under weight. The restriction comes from the certificated weight.

There are also restrictions on the number of 50/70/76 seaters allowed in operation as well as limits on what routes they can fly. As of the last contract, there are also restrictions on the ratio of block hours that mainline vs. connection must fly.

The strange thing is that both the recent contract approved by American Pilots and the one being voted on at United have followed Delta's weight/seat limits very closely and these planes could not be operated there either. Pilots, in general have been scratching their heads about what Skywest's plan is here. They have recently begun taking over some Alaska flying, and for all intents and purposes, Alaska really has no Scope restrictions.

Of course, I wrote in my original post the phrase "unless things change" and since this an an airplane that hasn't actually flown, my guess is they could work on making it lighter. Subsequent pilot contracts could also relax Scope, though they'd do it without my help.

motytrah

The plot thickens. There's some threads over on APF that indicate that in the past Bombardier re-certified some 700's MGTOW for SkyWest specifically to get around DL's union scope. The general thought is the FAA doesn't have a rule about having extra conservative ratings nor do they care about union scope. The standard MRJ90 is just a hair over the scope weight as is.

My experience with Japanese companies tells me they'll have no issue doing extra paperwork. That's not to say these are heading to DL, but I think it's going to end up with one or more of the large legacies.

DXjr

The agreement is for MRJ90s, but they will be able to change certain line numbers to MRJ70s with X number of days prior notice to Mitsu. However, by ordering the larger airplane, it allows for flexibility. Plus, we ARE talking about an airplane that won't have its first flight until late next year.

That said, the MRJ-70ER currently resides in DL/UA/AA scope.

Right. Making the airplane lighter won't do anything to the MGTOW. It'll just help the payload.

Irrelevant to the discussion.
Or making a lighter subtype, which would make its range pitiful.

Not just incorrect, but blatantly incorrect. The only aircraft that was certified to get around scope was the CRJ-705s, which is a rebadged CRJ-900, and which no one in the US uses.

Everyone is puzzled by what's going on, but of course, no one batted an eye when TranStates ordered 50 of them. That said, as an ALPA pilot, you should know better than anyone that management always has an ace up their sleeve.

Dawgfan6291

It is based on seats but also MTOW.

76 seats, 86K MTOW


Also DALPA has a block hour ratio limit. ie, can't cut a bunch of mainline flying without cutting DCI flights.