Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Didn't NW Order More RJ-85's?  
User currently offlineNWAA330 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 213 posts, RR: 1
Posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3799 times:

Why weren't more of these ordered. Their relatively new (this one delivered in 99) I personally think their an awesome aircraft and since NW is downsizing its MEM opporations these days, but im sure would like to keep F class on some of the routes being changed to regional a/c wouldnt this be the perfect option? (They are the only airlink opp. with F/C I beleive. and ive flown it and found it equal to if not better than NW mainline) Messaba opporates 36 at present.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bruce Leibowitz



NWAA330


To Fly is to Live.
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIndustrialPate From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3764 times:

By contract NW cannot operate more than 36 69-seat regional aircraft.

User currently offlineNWAA330 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 213 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3717 times:

Could anyone explain that contract to me?

NWAA330



To Fly is to Live.
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3690 times:

It must be a scope limitation with the mainline pilot agreement.

Anyway, 36 aircraft is a sizeable fleet....NW must be happy with the aircraft performance.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineNoBoeingNoGoin From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3651 times:

If they can't operate more that 36 69-seaters why don't they just take out one of the seats?
Alex


User currently offlineTimf From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 970 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3625 times:

The 69 seat specification is a limit. I believe it really means they can't operate more than 36 regional jets with more than 50 seats, with a maximum of 69 seats. Without this restriction, the RJ85s would likely have 85 coach seats, rather than the comfortable 16/53 configuration they currently have.

User currently offlineAcidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1874 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3611 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Actually the contract calls for no more than 36 aircraft that are less than 70 seats. The Avro is supposed to do 85 pax with an all coach configuration, so this was kind of a workaround to use this aircraft and in the process we gained a first class product that doesn't really exist anywhere else in the regional airlines. There are actually 35 active in the fleet right now, as N528XJ was heavily damaged in a collision with a jetbridge in MEM earlier this year.


Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
User currently offlineNWAA330 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 213 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3577 times:

So why is this contract in place? Basically even if they wanted to NW could not order more of the a/c? It just seems to be such a perfect fit for their downsizing opporations.


To Fly is to Live.
User currently offlineBAGSMASHER From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3563 times:

Its all about the CRJs now, with NW having more than 100 on order and options for many more.

User currently offlineBrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3557 times:

So why is this contract in place? Basically even if they wanted to NW could not order more of the a/c? It just seems to be such a perfect fit for their downsizing opporations.

They couldn't order any more even if they wanted to, because they're not being made anymore. Plus, it's really been made obsolete by the latest generation of regional jets such as the EMB-170.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineNWAA330 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 213 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3552 times:

Right but it would seem that the CRJ's are geared more towards replacing the SAAB's becuase the travelling public prefers jets over prop a/c. But their have to be many downsizd routes that they would like to have an F/C on? At least routes that the DC9's are too large to handle. I think if given the chance NW would snatch more up in a minute.


To Fly is to Live.
User currently offlineNWAA330 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 213 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3548 times:

Not being produced anymore? In that case.....hey how about those CRJ's? Laugh out loud

NWAA330



To Fly is to Live.
User currently offlineIndustrialPate From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3529 times:

Basically even if they wanted to NW could not order more of the a/c?
(this is highly generalized for easy understanding)
Under the current contracts in place with the pilots' unions, NW’s regional partners are allowed to operate (on behalf on NW) 36 jet aircraft with 51-69 seats, 54 jet aircraft with 46-50 seats and an unlimited number of jet aircraft with less than 46 seats. Thus, until that clause is changed, NW could not add any more ARJ to their fleet.

The bulk of the ARJ's leases expire in less than 4 years... I wouldn't be surprised if NW replaced them with CRJ-700 (which will likely be ordered if NW could change the clause, anyway) ... idealistically, NW could work out something like US that would enable them to purchase the EMB-175 or EMB-195 and fly them as mainline-express.

So why is this contract in place?
To protect mainline jobs -- regional jet pilots are payed very, very low wages.

CRJ's are geared more towards replacing the SAAB's
NW's used their most recent CRJ deliveries for expansion & to replace quite a bit of DC-9 flying ex-MEM. SF3 flying hasn't decreased within the last 12 months.



User currently offlineAviatortj From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1838 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3495 times:

Is anyone else kind of disappointed that the CRJ is becoming more prevalent than mainline. I mean, it is a very nice plane and my four CRJ flights are some of the smoothest flights I have ever had in a commercial airliner. I understand that it costs less for the airlines to operate these than DC-9's, but from a passenger standpoint I would much rather fly on a DC-9 or A319. Being 6'1", CRJ flights get LONG. My carry-on doesn't make it on board half of the time and the windows are too low for me to look out of without cramping up my neck. Don't get me wrong about the CRJ, I like it a lot! But I just do not see it as a good candidate for mainline flights. Does the EMB-170/190 resemble more of an Airbus or Canadair? Could NWA possibly place an order for the EMB at the end of the ARJ lease? I wish I knew more about all of these planes to understand the complete situation, but from a consumer/passenger standpoint, you would think comfort would be more of a consideration.

I am sorry if this is the wrong place for this 'rant' as I am still learning my way around here  Smile/happy/getting dizzy Thanks.

~TJ


User currently offlineTonyctnyc From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3365 times:

The RJ-85 (a fancy name for a BAe 146-200) ... whats so great ? One of the ugliest, most ungainly looking airplanes ever built (like almost every other British built plane) ... is also one of the loudest jets inside the cabin too-- has anyone ever had the misfortune to sit near the back ?

Glad theyre gone.


User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3355 times:

I thought it was called the "whisper jet" ?!?!??!
4 engines must not be very efficient..unless they are really weak.
Hey! Nobody must not fill up those F seats like to burlington other than 1 or 2 upgraders. I bet someone could ask for an upgrade?
And you probably don't get meals/snacks that nw mainline gives on longer Avro Routes.
-UN



What now?
User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3942 posts, RR: 28
Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3234 times:

Actually, the scope clause that NW pilots have in their current contract calls for unlimited number of jets with less than 50 seats (hence the 44 seaters). The amount of 50 seat jets will be a function of the current mainline narrowbody fleet (increase = more 50 seaters, decrease = less 50 seateres and more 44 seaters). The 69 seat avros we're grandfathered into the current contract after the NW pilot strike and the clause says only 36 jets with no more than 69 seats can be operated and will only be operated by Mesaba Aviation. BAE Aerospace no longer manufactures the a/c so no new ones can be bought. However used ones can be brought online should they become available and the scop is relaxed over at NW.

The avro is the second generation Bac146 - with FADEC engines, more powerful engines, almost entirely glass cockpit, higher service ceiling, digital pressurization controls, faster cruise speed and other enhancements. So Tonyctnyc - it's not just a pretty name for the 146 - it's the same airframe but very very different. The loud fan you hear in the back is only the recirculating air fan - not an engine. This a/c is one of the quietest in the sky, that's why it's called the whisperjet. The fan usually gets turn to "fresh" once airborne, so the sound decreases. Who cares what it looks like? Airlines don't buy planes to satisfy the eye, but to satisfy the bottom line.

The avro, being twice the size and weight and having twice as many systems and engines is only 25% more fuel INEFFICIENT than the CRJ. This straight from the engineers in Woodford at the factory. It is the most profitable in the NW fleet right now - making NW TONS of money.

Meals are indeed served on many routes! No ovens onboard, so the same cold meals are served that NW serves on alot of their flights. Some meal segments are (in FC only): MSP-HPN/ASE/OKC/ORF/GSO/PIT, DTW-OKC/YHZ, MEM-ASE (probably MEM-PHL/EWR when we start in Sept). There were many more meal flights, but they were cut back post 9/11. Some meal flights were DTW-BHM and prior to 9/11 MSP-CVG! The avro is jjust a small mainline a/c operated by a Airlink partner. The planes are catered as if it were NW, look like NW on the inside and are serviced at jetways by mostly NW employees (depending on station). So there is VERY VERY little difference between NW and the avro service - ecept maybe being a little better.

I'm sure NW would in a heartbeat expand the 70 seat fleet if they could - but the NW pilots have a say in that. As IP said - the reason for these restrictions is for job protection. Even though currently, the majority of mainline pilot jobs have been lost to the widebody fleet adjustments, not because of airlink services. This came straight from NW ALPA. It's unfortunate though, that when times were good for NW they had no interest in befriending their "regional" brothers and sisters. Now that things are awful at mainline, they want to dance with us.


AZJ


User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3121 times:

So if I ever become NW elite.........you can dream. You get a meal on BTV-DTW??? If so, this would be the only flight out of BTV with a meal service, unless US F to PIT or PHL. or UA F/Y to ORD.
-UN



What now?
User currently offlineRjx From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 38 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3106 times:

The bulk of the ARJ's leases expire in less than 4 years...


Why did Northwest leases these planes with such short leases. Do they plan to get rid of them starting 2007. I hope they keep them as they are the best plane in their fleet.


User currently offlineATA L1011 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1384 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Actually if you wanted to go 6 abreast like Air Wisconsin (UA Express) you could get over 100 in the Avro 85/146-200 something like 112 at Max.


Treat others as you expect to be treated!
User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3942 posts, RR: 28
Reply 20, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3019 times:

I haven't flown BTV yet - so I don't know for sure, but I doubt there is a meal. Oh yea - PWM-DTW is a brekky flight. THe RJ85 is on'y certified for 85 in the US - the 100 seat bac jets that Air Will yhas are the Bae146-300s or if it were an avro the Rj100.

The first 12 were bought and the last 24 were leased under 10 year terms. I'm sure they can be negotiated to be longer... no plans to get rid of them. I'll believe it when I see it too...



AZJ


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Didn't DL Order More T7's In The Good Old Days posted Tue Mar 28 2006 10:27:20 by Gokmengs
Why Didn't NW Take The 764? posted Wed Jan 21 2004 00:57:27 by ORBITJFK
Why Didn't UAL Order A Few MD 11s? posted Mon Feb 19 2001 06:50:03 by United Airline
Skywest Bombadier Order: More RJ's In California? posted Mon Jan 15 2001 19:54:29 by Trvlr
NW RJ-85: Why Not Mainline? posted Wed Oct 8 2003 19:49:49 by Aviatortj
NW (Mesaba) RJ 85's posted Fri Sep 8 2006 12:55:11 by Nwafflyer
Why Don't Mexican Airlines Use More RJ's? posted Sat Dec 24 2005 16:44:56 by Danild
Why Didn't Avro/BAerospace Make A Two Engined RJ? posted Wed Apr 28 2004 14:53:33 by Motorhussy
Why Didn't AA Or UA Order 767-400? posted Wed Aug 20 2003 21:38:38 by 727LOVER
Why Didn't NWA Buy RJ-70's? posted Tue Jun 12 2001 21:12:56 by Tupolev154B2