Facility Downgrades / Upgrades

Move78 said:

Defined by seating capacity. I think it’s 70 like someone said. RJ2s definitely air taxi.

that’s super dumb. They’re large aircraft just like 737s and they are clearly commercial air carriers lol

32andBelow said:

that’s super dumb. They’re large aircraft just like 737s and they are clearly commercial air carriers lol

They are lower large aircraft.

redsphanatic said:

They are lower large aircraft.

I know I’m a dumb idiot but if the plane says something like delta on the side it’s an air carrier

32andBelow said:

I know I’m a dumb idiot

Finally something we can agree on!

32andBelow said:

I know I’m a dumb idiot but if the plane says something like delta on the side it’s an air carrier

Literally from OPSNET:

• Air Taxi. (AT) Aircraft designed to have a maximum seating capacity of 60 seats or less or a maximum payload capacity of 18,000 pounds or less, carrying passengers or cargo for hire or compensation.

redsphanatic said:

Literally from OPSNET:

• Air Taxi. (AT) Aircraft designed to have a maximum seating capacity of 60 seats or less or a maximum payload capacity of 18,000 pounds or less, carrying passengers or cargo for hire or compensation.

That literally makes 0 sense. Faa is playing tower controllers for counting crjs different

32andBelow said:

That literally makes 0 sense. Faa is playing tower controllers for counting crjs different

Not true. CRJ2 and the CRJ-550s are 50 seaters but the CRJ7’s and up are air carriers.

redsphanatic said:

Not true. CRJ2 and the CRJ-550s are 50 seaters but the CRJ7’s and up are air carriers.

To put it very basically, if it’s a regional jet that offers a first class cabin (exception for CRJ-550), in general, it’s an air carrier.

redsphanatic said:

Not true. CRJ2 and the CRJ-550s are 50 seaters but the CRJ7’s and up are air carriers.

And that makes any sense to you? Crj550 only exists cus of United scope Clause

32andBelow said:

And that makes any sense to you? Crj550 only exists cus of United scope Clause

I work for the federal government. I haven’t had anything make sense in some time, sir.

redsphanatic said:

I work for the federal government. I haven’t had anything make sense in some time, sir.

Sorry this is the number one dumbest thing I’ve heard ever since being an atc. And I’m really having trouble coping with it

32andBelow said:

Sorry this is the number one dumbest thing I’ve heard ever since being an atc. And I’m really having trouble coping with it

I’m not the lawyer that wrote it, but my take…

Lots of regional airports around the country have only CRJ2/ERJ service to a handful of hubs and they wanted the formula to reflect that level of service and not allow the smaller facilities the benefit of adding points to their complexity.

redsphanatic said:

I’m not the lawyer that wrote it, but my take…

Lots of regional airports around the country have only CRJ2/ERJ service to a handful of hubs and they wanted the formula to reflect that level of service and not allow the smaller facilities the benefit of adding points to their complexity.

That’s all well and fine, but it makes absolutely no sense. A CRJ200 isn’t some Cessna Caravan shuttling people between PIT and JST, it’s a scheduled airliner carrying 50 people in and out of the busiest cities in the country. It’s a little disheartening that NATCA let’s this type of stuff effect the pay of their dues paying members.

redsphanatic said:

Literally from OPSNET:

• Air Taxi. (AT) Aircraft designed to have a maximum seating capacity of 60 seats or less or a maximum payload capacity of 18,000 pounds or less, carrying passengers or cargo for hire or compensation.

This is why every point out is a crj7

32andBelow said:

That literally makes 0 sense. Faa is playing tower controllers for counting crjs different

caprisun said:

That’s all well and fine, but it makes absolutely no sense. A CRJ200 isn’t some Cessna Caravan shuttling people between PIT and JST, it’s a scheduled airliner carrying 50 people in and out of the busiest cities in the country. It’s a little disheartening that NATCA let’s this type of stuff effect the pay of their dues paying members.

redsphanatic said:

I’m not the lawyer that wrote it, but my take…

Lots of regional airports around the country have only CRJ2/ERJ service to a handful of hubs and they wanted the formula to reflect that level of service and not allow the smaller facilities the benefit of adding points to their complexity.

False.
So there’s a misunderstanding in this thread of how the mix add on works.
You don’t get paid more for working air carriers. Read the words in the appendix.
If your air carrier plus military is less than GA then the air taxis get added to air carrier anyway. The best mix for add on is 50/50. Air taxi count gets moved to wherever it helps you. So no this isn’t something NATCA dropped the ball on.
Read the words.
Read the words.
Reastgewords
Rrdhewrrrds

Just as an FYI: You can change the type in a stars data block and it’ll stick in count ops when it drops off or exits your airspace.

Move78 said:

False.
So there’s a misunderstanding in this thread of how the mix add on works.
You don’t get paid more for working air carriers. Read the words in the appendix.
If your air carrier plus military is less than GA then the air taxis get added to air carrier anyway. The best mix for add on is 50/50. Air taxi count gets moved to wherever it helps you. So no this isn’t something NATCA dropped the ball on.
Read the words.
Read the words.
Reastgewords
Rrdhewrrrds

Just as an FYI: You can change the type in a stars data block and it’ll stick in count ops when it drops off or exits your airspace.

Too late, already left the union over this. Thanks Santa

redsphanatic said:

Not true. CRJ2 and the CRJ-550s are 50 seaters but the CRJ7’s and up are air carriers.

Funny thing about that is the only difference between a CRJ-700 and a CRJ-550 is on the inside, so they both have the type code CRJ7.

Termine said:

Funny thing about that is the only difference between a CRJ-700 and a CRJ-550 is on the inside, so they both have the type code CRJ7.

it was created cus the United scope clause only allows for so many 70 seat jets and they were all flown. But they had more spots left in the 50 seat part of the contract

32andBelow said:

it was created cus the United scope clause only allows for so many 70 seat jets and they were all flown. But they had more spots left in the 50 seat part of the contract

Nice airplanes.... still air taxis.

redsphanatic said:

Nice airplanes.... still air taxis.

Nah. A caravan is an air taxi

32andBelow said:

Nah. A caravan is an air taxi

We can play the “not all rectangles are squares” game all you want, but the definition has been provided.

and like someone else said, in almost all circumstances, it literally doesn’t even matter.