Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CASM: CRJ Vs. ERJ  
User currently offlineJmc1975 From Israel, joined Sep 2000, 3270 posts, RR: 15
Posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6894 times:

Does anybody have comparative CASM figure between the CRJ-200 and the ERJ-145? Both seat 50 pax, however, does one have the competitive edge over the other? Is one better suited for shorter flights <250 vs. longer flights >500 miles?


.......
32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9619 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6841 times:

Well I have no specific information about CASM, but here are claims from the very biased source of Bombardier.

Bombardier claims on the CRJ-200:
The operating economics of the Bombardier CRJ200 are remarkable. It can fly further, faster, more often and more economically than any aircraft in its class. Its fuel burn is 10% less than its nearest competitor. With its long range and high cruise speed, the Bombardier CRJ200, which can seat 50 passengers in a true European high service configuration, allows airlines to serve more cities and open new markets.

What's more, the Bombardier CRJ200 delivers the lowest trip and seat mile cost of any 50-seat jet airline, giving airlines the potential for higher profits flight after flight.

And because the aircraft is designed to share a high degree of commonality with other members of the Bombardier CRJ family, fleet operators can enjoy substantial savings in spares, ground support equipment, maintenance programs and aircrew training costs.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6754 times:

And because the aircraft is designed to share a high degree of commonality with other members of the Bombardier CRJ family, fleet operators can enjoy substantial savings in spares, ground support equipment, maintenance programs and aircrew training costs.

Not as much as you would think where it counts... Different engines, different gear...and as far as the maintenance training classes..both the 200 and 700/900 are different and not honored. The 700/900 are the same class.



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineKevOC3 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 45 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 6676 times:

Wrong. The CRJ-200 and the 700 are the same type. All there is us differences training.

User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5227 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 6666 times:

You raise an interesting question. I'm an AMR shareholder, and in reading the 2004 annual report, I noted that mainline's CASM was listed, but not Eagle's.

This leads me to believe that the CASM for the Saabs, ATRs, Embrears, and CRJs is higher than AA's mainline operations, even though Eagle has a much lower pay scale.


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 6658 times:

Wrong. The CRJ-200 and the 700 are the same type

You saying that to someone that has been to 'BOTH' 4 week classes..!! Two certificates, two classes, two ratings. Keep in mind, we are talking maintenance training,,!!

The EMB class covers the EMB-135, EMB-140, EMB-145 and EMB-145XR. There is an add on Legacy class that is a differances class...almost all of it fuel system related.

[Edited 2005-06-02 06:21:25]


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9619 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 6643 times:

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 4):
CASM for the Saabs, ATRs, Embrears, and CRJs is higher than AA's mainline operations, even though Eagle has a much lower pay scale.

Smaller planes are always less efficient on a per passenger basis. The economies of scale work in the 747/A380s favor. Yes Eagle does have a lower pay scale and that reduces costs in one dimension, but ERJs are less efficient when compared to MD80s. Express flying usually only works well when demand is low on a specific routes, or when people want lots of frequencies. Flying two or three ERJs is less efficient than one MD80 by far. You will never meet the CASM, also it requires more crew members for three ERJ flights since you have three times the three crew members per plane for the ERJs. Also you have to get ground crew to stay at the airport for three times the time. The one benefit that express flights have is the lower pay and seniority scale. Sometimes this can outweigh the costs of the less efficient planes, but express flying is at a disadvantage to start with. Unless you have a furious cost efficient carrier with little seniority like Mesa or Chautauqua or have a disastrously expensive and archaic mainline setup, then you are most likely not saving money by outsourcing to regional jets, which is probably why AA is not keen to show off the costs of Eagle.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6535 times:

RJ Direct Operating Cost Average per block hour:

Do328J $1200

ERJ-135 $980
ERJ-140 $989
ERJ-145 $1150
ERJ-170 $1764

CRJ-200 $1259
CRJ-700 $1478
CRJ-900 $1942


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11563 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6447 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 7):
ERJ-135 $980
ERJ-140 $989
ERJ-145 $1150
ERJ-170 $1764

CRJ-200 $1259
CRJ-700 $1478
CRJ-900 $1942

From these #s, it looks like Eagle made the right choice with the ERJ-145 for its 50-seat RJs but the CRJ-700 for its 70-seaters. Interesting. Thanks Boeing7E7.


User currently offlineSHUPirate1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 17
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6429 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 7):
Do328J $1200

ERJ-135 $980
ERJ-140 $989
ERJ-145 $1150
ERJ-170 $1764

CRJ-200 $1259
CRJ-700 $1478
CRJ-900 $1942

Let me get this straight...the E70 is more expensive to operate than the CR7, but the ER4 is less expensive to operate than the CR2? I would have thought for sure it was the other way around.



Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
User currently offlineLoggat From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6421 times:

If you want to know what the cheap planes to operate and acquire are just look at Trans States Airlines. ERj-145 and Crj-700.


There are 3 types of people in this world, those that can count, and those that can't.
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8961 posts, RR: 40
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6408 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 7):
RJ Direct Operating Cost Average per block hour:

Does that also include leasing costs?

Thanks,
PPVRA



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offline1MillionFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 6381 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 11):
Does that also include leasing costs?

NO those are only the costs of directly operating the aricraft. Lease costs are fixed costs and are not included


User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6312 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SHUPirate1 (Reply 9):
Let me get this straight...the E70 is more expensive to operate than the CR7

Just a guess on my part, but the E170 is bigger and heavier than the CRJ700. It probably is more comfortable, too. But when you're calculating efficiency, bigger and heavier is bound to be more expensive. Don't they use the same engines?



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineJmc1975 From Israel, joined Sep 2000, 3270 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6214 times:

Boeing 7E7,
Thanks for the numbers! Where did you find those? I'm durprised that the CR9 has a higher CASM than the CR7, assuming 86 pax and 70 pax, respectively. I would imagine the E90 has a lower CASM than the E70, right?



.......
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 6185 times:

Does that also include leasing costs?

It includes national average Hull Cost (Lease or Depreciation or both), Crew Cost, Maintenance Cost, Fuel Cost, Maintenance Labor and Insurance. Indirect costs can range from an additional 30% to 45% depending on the carrier. It's all in the types of benefits to the work groups, airport rentals and landing fees, staff per aircraft etc...


User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 6167 times:

CRJs cost more than comparable ERJs. Interesting. Delta, United, and US are hemorraging red ink, being rather heavily (especially DL) vested in the CRJ's (US is a split) while CO and AA are less in the hole, running an ERJ fleet. Makes a little sense. But if this is the case with expenses... why does ANYONE buy a CRJ-200? They definitely aren't anymore comfortable than an ERJ. I typically fly by myself and LOVE the A-seats in the ERJ all by themselves.. to the extent that I try to fly CO when possible despite having my miles through NWA.



Also, would anyone mind posting stats for other mainline jets... like the 737-500 and so forth, to see how much the RJ's are actually killing the airlines? Likewise... a Q300, and Q400.

Thanks for the Stats Boeing7E7!


User currently offlineTinPusher007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 977 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6108 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 7):
RJ Direct Operating Cost Average per block hour:

Do328J $1200

ERJ-135 $980
ERJ-140 $989
ERJ-145 $1150
ERJ-170 $1764

CRJ-200 $1259
CRJ-700 $1478
CRJ-900 $1942

Just curious...what is your source for these numbers?



"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
User currently offlineMQrampBOS From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 107 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6062 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 6):
Also you have to get ground crew to stay at the airport for three times the time.

Not quite. You may only need half the crew for an RJ as opposed to a mainline. All we use on the ground is 3 per plane(one runner and 2 servicing the plane). Anyone who works on, say, a DC9/MD80/717 help me out on this? I've seen some MD80s serviced with as many as 6 at one time.

However, you would probably hold gate personnel 3 times as long.



Don't put me on A7! I got out of the airport, so why send me back?
User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26450 posts, RR: 75
Reply 19, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6044 times:

Quoting Arrow (Reply 13):
Just a guess on my part, but the E170 is bigger and heavier than the CRJ700. It probably is more comfortable, too

The 170 has far more range



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8961 posts, RR: 40
Reply 20, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6029 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 19):

The 170 has far more range

So it's like the E90 Vs. A318/B736 deal? E90 is better for shorter hops (same for the CRJ7) and the A318/B736 is better for longer routes (same for E70, the only ones that have the range for it anyway).

Each one in it's own class, of course.

Cheers,
PPVRA



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineCVG777 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1251 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6011 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 7):
ERJ-135 $980
ERJ-140 $989

Am I to understand that it only costs $9 more to operate a 44 seat ER4 than a 37 seat ER3. Also then, why the larger increase betwee the -140 and the -145?

Other than purchasing/acquisition costs for the larger aircraft, wouldn't it make sense for an airline to invest in the 44 seat version and use those aircraft rather than the -135, as the possibility of selling an additional 7 seats would seem to offset the $9 additional dollars it costs to operate the aircraft each hour? Or are the prices of the larger aircraft great enough to where that wouldn't be economically sound?

By airline I am talking about the ones with the larger fleets, such as American Eagle and Continental. It looks like Eagle did a smart thing when investing in the ER4s.

Thanks,

-Mike


User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26450 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6011 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 20):
E90 is better for shorter hops (same for the CRJ7) and the A318/B736 is better for longer routes

Actually, given the normal flight profile of an A318/736 and adding that to the fact that the E190 has rather good range, particularly in AR trim, it is generally the better choice anyway.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4263 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6006 times:

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 16):
They definitely aren't anymore comfortable than an ERJ. I typically fly by myself and LOVE the A-seats in the ERJ all by themselves

I totally disagree. The A seats are awful on the ERJ. For one thing, its right where the fuselage curves under, which elimates room on the left side, and leaves less room to store the personal item underneath in front, not to mention causing circulation problems on the left leg because you have no room on the left side. Plus, because its a bit elevated, that takes away a little more room, and the legs often block the aisle. And one time I flew one on CHQ years ago, was sitting in the A seat, and found it so narrow and uncomfortable (and I am a skinny person), that I ended up moving to a C seat instead.

The CRJ's aren't a lot better, but the seat is a bit more comfortable, and there is more overhead storage room, though obviously the bigger items still have to be gate checked.

Truthfully, I think the 146 family has the most comfortable seats of the Regional Jets (Bae does advertise them as Regional Jets, though in my opinion anything less than a 100 seats is an RJ, the 170 and 190 included). Mesaba will be the only ones left operating this type in the future since we at ZW are in the process of retiring our 146's. Though with OO getting E+ and first class in the CRJ7 series as well as CHQ having them in the 170, those would be right up there.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21516 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6008 times:

it would make sense as the wings, engines, gear, toilet, galley, door, tail, etc. are the same on the 135/140. The added fuselage length, seats, pax and bags of two rows can't add much cost. And any efficiencies learned from the original designs have been incorporated into the 140.

The 140 was late to the game. First the 145 in 1996, then the 135 in 1999, then the 140 based on the other two. And not many were ordered, since 145XR makes more sense in the "let's use a cramped plane for 3 hour flights" world of modern US aviation.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 1MillionFlyer : the ERJ is very noisy compared to the CRJ, thankfully I have the Bose ANC headsets or I would be hearing impaired by now. The ERJ also has issues wit
26 Legacy135 : The soundproofing on the 135 BJ, the so called Legacy is quite good. It gets more wind noise, most of it from the doorsection than other business jet
27 EMBQA : The 140 was late too the game. First the 145 in 1996, then the 135 in 1999, then the 140 based on the other two. And not many were ordered Not really.
28 1MillionFlyer : is it just me or does the 135 fly like a light piston twin? the 145 is very solid but the 135 is very squirrly and feels like a Piper Seneca on landin
29 Legacy135 : I can only talk for the 145 and the 135BJ, the Legacy. I didn't fly the airline 135. The Legacy is very solid as well and a joy to land, even with str
30 Post contains images Ikramerica : Uhm, the 140 was late to the game, as I said. I am quite familiar with the AA pilot union agreement, but just because AA ordered it as a "one-off" do
31 Legacy135 : In São Jose dos Campos I got told that the XR was designed for CoEX as they asked for More range So they got an extra fuel cell in the fuselage High
32 EMBQA : OK, let me try and re-phrase. Not many EMB-140's were ordered because it was designed for a specific airline to fill a specific need and from the star
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...
CRJ -vs- ERJ posted Tue Oct 26 1999 03:03:26 by Fly US Airways
Problems! CRJ's Vs. Extreme Weather Conditions! posted Mon Feb 20 2006 08:43:53 by CYEGsTankers
A318 Vs ERJ 195 posted Tue May 10 2005 18:52:44 by Dsa
Air Canada CRJ Vs AC Jazz CRJ... posted Mon Nov 29 2004 03:58:41 by ERJ170
Your Favorites With CRJ/EMB/ERJ? posted Sun Mar 7 2004 20:57:57 by ScottysAir
Dislike For CRJ Or ERJ? posted Sat Oct 25 2003 21:51:48 by Qantasguy
ERJ-145ER Vs. ERJ-145LR posted Wed Jul 25 2001 20:27:03 by Modesto2
Galleys On CRJ And ERJ posted Fri May 4 2001 21:30:23 by ANA767
CRJ Or Erj? posted Sun Feb 18 2001 15:53:42 by Sushka
What're The CRJ And ERJ Like For Ramp Rats? posted Fri Nov 24 2000 00:24:08 by MD-90