Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5435580/

Topic: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: olddominion727
Posted 2012-04-10 18:28:54 and read 9660 times.

On a flight last night BURSEA and a pilot was dead-heading back to SEA for his next flight. We jabbered for most of the flight. He was saying his partner was on a team of staff from AS/QX researching the CR9. They've already put on the drawing board potential markets: FAT, RNO, BUR, LGB, TUS, PHX, SMF to PDX and FAT, RNO, STS, MRY, SBA, SMF, BUR, LGB to SEA as well as RNO to FAT, SJC & LGB... as well as beginning SBP to LAX and SEA with Q400's.

Doesn't this seem like a lot of smoke and no fire? He said they'd been looking for equipment between the 73G and CR7 and that didn't pan out, now they're looking for equipment between the Q400 and 73G. It's also still viewed as a commuter aircraft so some of the slot restricted stations (ie LGB) wouldn't be an issue and that it would help SJC & SNA with their curfews too. He wasn't sure of any variations but that they thought of seating w/F class around 82-86 pax... If this equipment was such a marvelous piece of machinery for QX why wasn't it ordered sooner?

How does the CR9 operate in the hot markets like TUS & PHX? Also if the CR7 didn't work how would the CR9? Some of the runways don't seem long enough to be taking the CR9 like STS?

Then he said something very interesting... AS/QX was also looking into CCR-LAX, CCR-SEA on the Q400. They had been in talks for months with Contra Costa County, Alameda County and Buchanan Field managers.

My question is if PSA ran a 146 CCR-LAX, Eagle ran a J31 CCR-SJC, and I think Air21 CCR-FAT ran an F28, and none of them could make it work, how has the market been primed? None of the smallest equipment from the J31 to the largest 146 could make it work. Can there be anything to this? Maybe some sort of it is a subsidy? Can the Bay Area support 4 commercial airports? I know SJC has lost a lot of business since the down-turn of the Silly-con Valley

Of course my final question to him was how he knew all of this aside from his partner's word? Apparently AS would like the CR9 to be their aircraft if they order it and not QX. But if AS has the CR9 (instead of QX) would the AS pilots be at the same level on a CR9 as the 737 pilots? Not sure what the last part means if he was speaking of salary, hours required to fly, seniority, etc

Does this sound possible plausible or more like someone's fantasy?

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: AS739BSI
Posted 2012-04-10 18:57:45 and read 9530 times.

Pilot rumors are typically the ones that are the least likely to happen. I doubt QX would want another fleet type after ditching the CR7s.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: cargolex
Posted 2012-04-10 19:08:51 and read 9452 times.

I have no insider knowledge of this, but it would seem very odd to dump the CR7s and outsource that flying to Skywest only to purchase CR9's a year or two later. Why get rid of a small subfleet to streamline and then add another small subfleet?

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: toltommy
Posted 2012-04-10 19:39:57 and read 9296 times.

Quoting cargolex (Reply 2):

I have no insider knowledge of this, but it would seem very odd to dump the CR7s and outsource that flying to Skywest only to purchase CR9's a year or two later. Why get rid of a small subfleet to streamline and then add another small subfleet?

Because the market has changed perhaps? To look at a business decision once and never revisit it could be foolish.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
On a flight last night BURSEA and a pilot was dead-heading back to SEA for his next flight

Rumors from crew tend to be what that crewmember wants (i.e. new service to the city they commute from, or a new airplane so they'll be able to upgrade). Rarely is it based on actual business knowledge.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: HiFlyerAS
Posted 2012-04-10 19:43:04 and read 9272 times.

Quoting cargolex (Reply 2):
would seem very odd to dump the CR7s and outsource that flying to Skywest only to purchase CR9's a year or two later

Exactly. This makes no sense....QX was hell-bent on getting to a single fleet-type as quickly as possible.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: FATFlyer
Posted 2012-04-10 19:49:14 and read 9239 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
It's also still viewed as a commuter aircraft so some of the slot restricted stations (ie LGB)

LGB's restrictions are that commuter slots can only be used by aircraft under 75,000 lbs MTOW. The base CR9 is 80,500 lbs MTOW so it would not be able to use commuter slots.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: cargolex
Posted 2012-04-10 20:02:35 and read 9172 times.

Quoting toltommy (Reply 3):
Because the market has changed perhaps? To look at a business decision once and never revisit it could be foolish.

I don't disagree, but it's been less than a full year since Skywest has been operating those CR7's. It would have to be an awfully fast and dramatic change to justify the expense of a subfleet of new RJs.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: as739x
Posted 2012-04-10 20:04:10 and read 9153 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
Then he said something very interesting... AS/QX was also looking into CCR-LAX, CCR-SEA on the Q400. They had been in talks for months with Contra Costa County, Alameda County and Buchanan Field managers.

This guy is blowing smoke to you buddy. CCR will not have airline service anytime soon. The NIMBY's would cream the idea first off. Second, why would AS/QX serve OAK/SMF and CCR?

He said he was on a team evaluating the plane for AS/QX service. Did he mention that they are looking to own CR9? It still takes a team to evaluate the service even if they will have OO operate them. This is always a possibility.

And I third the above opinions on crew rumors!

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 5):
LGB's restrictions are that commuter slots can only be used by aircraft under 75,000 lbs MTOW. The base CR9 is 80,500 lbs MTOW so it would not be able to use commuter slots.

Has AS given up their mainline slots?

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: FATFlyer
Posted 2012-04-10 20:11:12 and read 9109 times.

Quoting as739x (Reply 7):

Has AS given up their mainline slots?

Yes. The current allocation of mainline slots at LGB is JetBlue (32), US Airways (5), Delta (2), FedEx (1), UPS (1), that covers all 41 mainline.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: olddominion727
Posted 2012-04-10 20:27:50 and read 9031 times.

I knew it was too good to be true. It just makes you wonder I guess, 'could' there be small amount of truth to needing to fill a gap from a Q400 to a 737. That's a pretty big gap. The Q400 to a CR7 is relatively the same pax wise. But is buying a new sub fleet of say 20% more seating worth it? Probably not... who knows. The only thing I can say is QX has been known to go outside of the box. like their new service from SAN? I flew a QX Q400 from PRC-LAX a few years ago. And carriers who flew into SMF, SFO, OAK, SJC, SCK & FAT added CCR, like PSA. Of course maybe that's why it didn't last  The upper East Bay doesn't seem like it has the passenger flow it would need to sustain the flow they would need to open a station.

Anyway, thanks for all of the input...

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: jrfspa320
Posted 2012-04-10 21:00:16 and read 8909 times.

They may as well go for the CRJ1000...

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: wedgetail737
Posted 2012-04-10 21:28:11 and read 8818 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
My question is if PSA ran a 146 CCR-LAX, Eagle ran a J31 CCR-SJC, and I think Air21 CCR-FAT ran an F28, and none of them could make it work, how has the market been primed? None of the smallest equipment from the J31 to the largest 146 could make it work. Can there be anything to this? Maybe some sort of it is a subsidy? Can the Bay Area support 4 commercial airports? I know SJC has lost a lot of business since the down-turn of the Silly-con Valley

I completely disagree that CCR could not support PSA's 146 service to LAX. The CCR-LAX route continued through the US/PS merger. Flights were always full. The ONLY reason why CCR-LAX was dropped is because USAir removed the 146's from service, which doomed a lot of intra-CA service.

I don't think AA Eagle (Wings West) ever served CCR. I do know that Westair served CCR-SFO with both twin-otter and Cessna 402 equipment.

Could QX successfully serve CCR-LAX or CCR-SEA with a Q400 today? Definitely! By the way, that would be 5 Bay Area airports with STS.

Quoting as739x (Reply 7):
This guy is blowing smoke to you buddy. CCR will not have airline service anytime soon. The NIMBY's would cream the idea first off. Second, why would AS/QX serve OAK/SMF and CCR?

There's enough catchment area under the watchful eye of Mt. Diablo and across and along the Straits that could definitely support QX service to either SEA or LAX.

However, you are right that the public would have more than a cow. The public wants Buchanan Field closed...let alone new passenger service. TVL is in the same boat.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: RWA380
Posted 2012-04-11 04:03:41 and read 8387 times.

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 11):
The ONLY reason why CCR-LAX was dropped is because USAir removed the 146's from service, which doomed a lot of intra-CA service

Same exact concept in Oregon, when QX pulled the Q200's....sigh. BTW, I liked flying the 146, kinda loud but fun and good for looking out the window, no pesky wings to obstruct your view.  

It surprised me when QX got rid of the CR7's, but they did it at a time the planes were still worth something. Since then I've been thinking that AS does need a plane type for routes like SBA, LGB, ONT, BUR. Whether that is OO or QX remains to be seen. But if AS does it, they thought it out fully. Is AS and their customers experiencing the same AS/QX spirit when flying on OO? If there are enough unhappy elites, maybe AS/QX is looking at bringing those routes back in house.

[Edited 2012-04-11 04:22:44]

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: yenne09
Posted 2012-04-11 06:05:51 and read 8232 times.

I don't know the exact situation regarding CCR-LAX. But I flew on Air Canada JAZZ CRJ 705 that in fact is a CRJ-900
fuselage with some business class seats. Can it be because of having business class over the CRJ-700?

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: msp747
Posted 2012-04-11 06:40:05 and read 8147 times.

I know they are loyal to Bombardier, but maybe AS or QX would consider adding some 190's to the fleet. That is a roomier plane, so I'm sure the elites would be happier. They could probably even make it work with the mainline pilots flying it. Plus, it would give them more seats (including first class) than the CRJ900. I think AS needs to expand their fleet beyond two planes. While they have several sizes of 737's, the Q400 does limit them, especially on the longer, thinner routes

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: whatusaid
Posted 2012-04-11 06:57:33 and read 8087 times.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 12):
Is AS and their customers experiencing the same AS/QX spirit when flying on OO? If there are enough unhappy elites, maybe AS/QX is looking at bringing those routes back in house.

[Edited 2012-04-11 04:22:44]

OO has nailed the service model for AS. Yes, the first month or so was more Skywest or "lost identity" than AS, but that's changed at least in my opinion. I'm doing SEA-FAT on OO often and it's as good as any Horizon Air flight. The Skywest ground crew at FAT has finally learned to hustle the bags on to the jetway.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: RWA380
Posted 2012-04-11 07:10:18 and read 8054 times.

Quoting whatusaid (Reply 15):

OO has nailed the service model for AS. Yes, the first month or so was more Skywest or "lost identity" than AS, but that's changed at least in my opinion. I'm doing SEA-FAT on OO often and it's as good as any Horizon Air flight. The Skywest ground crew at FAT has finally learned to hustle the bags on to the jetway

Good to hear, I hope farming these routes out to OO will keep flyers happy. I'd love to think AS/QX would farm out the smaller cities they abandoned when the Q200 left the fleet. Having QQ use EMB-120's to fly LMT, RDD, ACV, OTH as AS, would take care of not having small enough aircraft to service these places. I doubt this rumor is true if AS is happy with OO.   

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2012-04-11 08:04:01 and read 7965 times.

Quoting whatusaid (Reply 15):
I'm doing SEA-FAT on OO often and it's as good as any Horizon Air flight.

I agree with that. I did the SEA-FAT evening OO/AS flight last 8/31 and the service was outstanding. It was one of the best coach flights I've ever had. One of the flight attendants was especially good. The free beer never stopped flowing on that flight (once I told her truthfully that we only had to walk across the street to the hotel, and weren't driving).

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: iceberg210
Posted 2012-04-11 08:17:55 and read 7920 times.

I think you'd see AS push BBD into stretching the Q400, into the Q500 or whatever you'd want to call it, before you see them picking up CRJ900's. Sounds like Skywest is working out well for them, so why not let OO continue running all the jet stuff, and QX can run the prop stuff.

Great idea on the EMB120's, I'm still curious what Skywest is going to do down the road, they continue to wind that fleet down, but nothing really to replace them... If I were EMB I would be VERY much chatting with Skywest about the possibility of a EMB120NG, given that it's not like the EMB120/ERJ145 line is exactly busy these days, nothing might happen, but it'd certainly be a conversation I'd want to have (not to say it hasn't happened already). Course that's another topic for another thread...

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: Goldenshield
Posted 2012-04-11 09:15:32 and read 7459 times.

Quoting iceberg210 (Reply 18):
If I were EMB I would be VERY much chatting with Skywest about the possibility of a EMB120NG,

Embraer will need to do something here soon about the E-120. While you can still "buy" one, the design is out-dated, and uses old weight standards. Plus, from what I hear, certain spare parts are getting harder to come by, which will eventually lead to cannibalization of any stored aircraft, and possibly scrapping.

[Edited 2012-04-11 09:18:18]

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: chrisair
Posted 2012-04-11 10:45:40 and read 6744 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
How does the CR9 operate in the hot markets like TUS & PHX?

They operate just fine. Both TUS and PHX have ~11,000 foot runways, you know...

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: penguins
Posted 2012-04-11 11:53:07 and read 6300 times.

The CRJ-900 flies 2500 km at 850 km/h while the 2522 km at 667 km/h. The range is the same for both aircraft and the Q400 does not fly to much slower than the CRJ. Because QX is west coast only the speed will only increase flight time for a little bit. Therefore, for the sake of fleet comonality, they should keep the Q400s as their only plane in my opinion.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: CRJ900
Posted 2012-04-13 04:02:54 and read 4431 times.

Did QX buy the CRJ700 because of scope clause limitations or because it was the only aircraft available at the time? The CRJ900 and E-Jets didn't appear until 2004 or so.

70-seat one-class CRJ700s probably became too small and uneconomical, but an 80-84-seat two-class CRJ900 or 94-seat two-class CRJ1000 might be a good complement to the Q400. If scope clause agreements allow it, though.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: hatbutton
Posted 2012-04-13 06:54:51 and read 4325 times.

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 22):
Did QX buy the CRJ700 because of scope clause limitations or because it was the only aircraft available at the time?

There isn't really a scope clause at Alaska that would prohibit a regional from operating something with more than 70 seats. I think it's partly due to the CRJ700 being the best regional jet available at the time. The first order was placed in 1998 for 25 aircraft. So yes, before the larger regional jets hit the scene. This was also a time when fuel was cheap, so having a fleet of half jets and half props wasn't the craziest idea especially when the regional jet boom took off in the US.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: flyPBA
Posted 2012-04-13 07:12:29 and read 4289 times.

I wish AS/QX flew to SBP

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: msp747
Posted 2012-04-13 08:09:09 and read 4295 times.

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 23):
I think it's partly due to the CRJ700 being the best regional jet available at the time. The first order was placed in 1998 for 25 aircraft. So yes, before the larger regional jets hit the scene. This was also a time when fuel was cheap, so having a fleet of half jets and half props wasn't the craziest idea especially when the regional jet boom took off in the US.

I think part of the decision was based on the fact that these jets were replacing QX's fleet of F-28's, which had 69 seats. The CRJ-700 was basically a more modern plane with the same capacity. If I remember right, they ordered the Q400's about the same time, kind of as an experiment, and they weren't sure what to expect. When they were very successful, they decided to ditch their fleet of Q200's. I'm not sure if they decided to get rid of the CRJ's at the same time.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: SuperDash
Posted 2012-04-13 19:29:29 and read 4012 times.

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 22):
Did QX buy the CRJ700 because of scope clause limitations or because it was the only aircraft available at the time? The CRJ900 and E-Jets didn't appear until 2004 or so.

It was the only jet available and the F-28 were already aged and fuel was going up. Horizon was a launch customer for the CRJ-700 but deliveries were actually a few years out. In fact American and Eagle had contract disputes and we actually swapped slots with AA (hence why some planes had blue carpeting). About a year later we ordered the Q400 and actually took delivery of those before the CRJ-700s. Ironically, the Qs were only suppose to replace Dash 8 flights. We took them all the way to Spokane and replaced some F-28s which we thought was "risky". Then we got real bold and sent the Q to Kalispell. At that point we realized the Q400 could easily replace the F-28s. The Q's went into service in December of 2000. The first scheduled CRJ-700 was on September 16, 2001. The airplanes were on the operations spec by late summer of that year and were doing substitution service but were not bookable in the CRS until September. Fresno got the first airplane and Portland service was launched that day.

Given the timing of the calendar, the CRJ-700s were pushed into new routes like Tucson. But yields were very depressed and "long haul" didn't work. Today, its the fuel price that stings the plane.

As for the topic....Alaska would be the one buying the planes, not QX. And truthfully, SkyWest has the CRJ-900 in fleet so it would be easy for AS to buy the planes and OO to operate them-virtually turn key. QX would't likely operate them. The 190 would be a fine plane, but AS would need a new partner to fly them and that's not turn key.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: toltommy
Posted 2012-04-13 19:34:48 and read 4014 times.

Quoting cargolex (Reply 6):
I don't disagree, but it's been less than a full year since Skywest has been operating those CR7's. It would have to be an awfully fast and dramatic change to justify the expense of a subfleet of new RJs.

Have you noticed the price of fuel lately? The -900 moves a lot more ASMs for not a lot more fuel than the -700. A year can be a long time in this business.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: cschleic
Posted 2012-04-14 12:17:36 and read 3672 times.

Quoting flyPBA (Reply 24):
I wish AS/QX flew to SBP

   Especially now that Eagle's long gone.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: RWA380
Posted 2012-04-15 02:57:38 and read 3368 times.

Quoting flyPBA (Reply 24):
I wish AS/QX flew to SBP

Not much would surprise me with QX flying into several California cities. We already know they are big at LAX, they wish to expand from SAN with the SAN experiment, there are several Q400 routes that go from SEA/PDX to Northern and central California, then onwards south to SAN, LAX, LAS, RNO. If this rumor of new CRJ's ever comes true, there could be several Q400's freed up to fly to other cities. The other option is AS takes QX north to Alaska, and has QX flying internal flights for AS up in the 49th.

Topic: RE: QX To Order The CRJ-900 For New Routes?
Username: ANM604
Posted 2012-04-15 13:12:39 and read 3139 times.

Quoting toltommy (Reply 27):
Have you noticed the price of fuel lately? The -900 moves a lot more ASMs for not a lot more fuel than the -700. A year can be a long time in this business.

On that note, I wonder if AS/QX would ever consider ordering the C-Series? I could see it fitting in nice between the Q's and the 737's, at least instead of the CRJ.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/