Greasemonkey From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 67 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6661 times:
About time. We operate both -200 and -700 and regret ever buying the -200 after seeing the profits produced by the -700. Shorter field operation, more pax, more powerful and efficient engines, etc. Plus on a sidenote, the -200 never did perform very well for us, it was always a biz jet that just got too big, and never quite meant for the abuse airlines put it through.
It's usually a good idea to know what all the buttons do...before you push them.
Okie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2715 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6590 times:
Quoting Bjg231 (Reply 3): Good riddance. From a passenger's perspective, the CRJ-200 is probably the most uncomfortable plane in the sky.
Agreed, but soon there will be about a 50 year supply mothballed 50 seaters in the desert so I do not see them disappearing for a long time. When it comes time for that heavy check, instead just go get one out of the desert.
Good to see from the article that the "415 Water Bomber" is gearing back up.
I am just not sure if the economics of a seasonal use new aircraft are there. Still a lot of old (cheap) airframes out there competing for the same application.
Tornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6367 times:
Quoting HAJFlyer (Reply 4): and by early next year the smallest plane in its regional operation will be the RJ85.
Seeing as the ERJ's CASM is better than the CRJ's... and those 4-engined Avros are maintenance hogs... is it really cheaper to run a 4-engine Avro than a relatively newer ERJ?? Especially on the thin routes, and considering the ERJ can go higher and faster.
Quoting Okie (Reply 5): Agreed, but soon there will be about a 50 year supply mothballed 50 seaters in the desert so I do not see them disappearing for a long time. When it comes time for that heavy check
I expect to see some ERJ/CRJ conversions back to biz jets... and just maybe a *few* freighters... kinda like the roles some of these Learjet freighters run now and so forth.
As for the CRJ-200's being gone. Good riddance. I never did like them, uncomfortable, impossible to look out the windows, and they just never feel "right" in flight, between the take off rolls, the slow climbs, low cruises, and everything else. Give me an ERJ anyday on a route like that (and living in ABE most routes are like that) and a classic example of why I chose CO for my main airline.
-CRJ200 production haults in mid January 2006
-Bombardier has 18 CRJ2000s due for delivery in 2006.
-Major layoffs in Montreal and Belfast.
-12 projected CRJ200 deliveries in 2007.
I hope the this closure of the CRJ200 production line is permanent. Really, does Bombardier want to build airframes that won't be delivered to customers like DL or NW? I'm expecting DL and NW to also terminate some of their leases on their 40/44/50-seat CRJ100s/200s/400s/440s. Plus I expect DH to dump its remaining 50-seat CRJs extremely soon. I'm expecting that by St-Patrick's Day we will see close to 100 40/44/50-seat CRJs parked in the desert.
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11921 posts, RR: 100 Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5884 times:
Quoting Cslusarc (Reply 10): I hope the this closure of the CRJ200 production line is permanent. Really, does Bombardier want to build airframes that won't be delivered to customers like DL or NW? I'm expecting DL and NW to also terminate some of their leases on their 40/44/50-seat CRJ100s/200s/400s/440s. Plus I expect DH to dump its remaining 50-seat CRJs extremely soon. I'm expecting that by St-Patrick's Day we will see close to 100 40/44/50-seat CRJs parked in the desert.
100% agree with you. I would add that I expect to see close to 200 CRJ's parked in the desert by this time next year. There is a niche for 50 seaters, but not a 2,000 airframe niche...
BA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11150 posts, RR: 60 Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5877 times:
I've flown on the CRJ200 only once and that was 3 years ago from Denver (DEN) to Santa Barbara (SBA) on United Express (operated byAir Wisconsin). It was a CRJ200ER and I didn't like much at all. It was a full flight and we used up nearly the entire 12,000 feet of the runway! I was shocked. I had heard that CRJ requires a relatively long take-off roll since it lacks slats, but my gosh, we used almost as much runway as we did when I flew on an LH A340 to FRA.
I've never flown on the CRJ700/900, but they do look quite slick. I'd love to try them one day, especially since their windows are mounted higher! My gosh it was such a pain on the CRJ200, and I'm not particularly tall...
The slats on the CRJ700/900 is also a clear plus.
Either way, my favorite regional jet is the Avro RJ and probably will always be my favorite regional jet.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
ORDagent From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 823 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5585 times:
I DESPISE the crj200! I fly ORD-ORF regularly and go to AA ERJs when price is similar because the ERJs are downright luxurious in comparison! The tiny low windows always give me a sore neck! Next week I fly the CRJ200 to ORF and retrurn on the EJ170... Should make for an interesting comparison....like night and day!
Web From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 425 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5407 times:
I don't find CRJ-200s to be so bad, but I agree, they don't hold a candle to the ERJs. And there is a market for 50-seat jets, but no airline taps that market (long (>400 miles), thin routes), and the only plane anyone would want to fly on that type of route is the ERJ. So idealy, in the forseeable future, ERJs have a bit of a monopoly; no one likes the competiton, and they have longer range.
9252fly From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 1367 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5269 times:
Love or hate them,they have changed how we see aviation today. I think the production line for the CRJ 100/200 50 seat series has served it's purpose with a run of about 1000 units,that's quite successful? The industry is always in a constant state of evolution,whether it be aircraft,services,routes or fares. Times change and we can be thankful for the CRJ,in that it gave many of us the chance to fly fast and avoid many of the connections that were the norm not so long ago. So it's an end of an era and a beginning of another(E70-95)and I'm excited about the things to come. I wouldn't be so cocky to assume that so many of these CRJ aircraft will be parked in the desert,but rather,they will find new homes and their future owners will find missions for them that can still be profitable.
EnviroTO From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 821 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5259 times:
I didn't find the CRJs any less comfortable than the smaller ERJs other than the windows on the 100s and 200s which you need to be the Hunchback of Notre Dame to look through. I suppose comfort also has to do with the seats the airlines choose to fit them with and the seat pitch they choose. The larger ERJs are definitely more spacious. I really hope to see the C-Series program launched.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21313 posts, RR: 60 Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5228 times:
Quoting Web (Reply 15): And there is a market for 50-seat jets, but no airline taps that market (long (>400 miles), thin routes), and the only plane anyone would want to fly on that type of route is the ERJ.
COex flies them routinely on those kind of routes, to the dismay of those of us who prefer a larger jet for 2+ hour flights...
Quoting NLINK (Reply 17): CRJ is much more comfortable than the ERJ.
CRJ is not all the same. The 700/900 has a lower floor and higher windows to provide a larger cabin and better views, etc.
CRJ200 is cramped for anyone tall.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11921 posts, RR: 100 Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5075 times:
Quoting 9252fly (Reply 19): Love or hate them,they have changed how we see aviation today. I think the production line for the CRJ 100/200 50 seat series has served it's purpose with a run of about 1000 units,that's quite successful?
Good point. The benchmark for a "runaway success" airframe is 1000 units. The CR2 passed that point and has thus earned the accolades.
The CRJ (and later the ERJ) changed the market dramatically.
That said, expect hundreds to become beer cans soon.
I've posted how many times?!?
25 Web: I know, I have flown such a route with them (DEN-CLE), what I meant was that not many airlines fly those kind of routes, not no airlines.
26 Ikramerica: well, with that correction, you are right. And it's not to say CO doesn't have a mess of too short flights, but that was their idea to go to an all E
27 Tornado82: Flex Takeoff. Why run it full steam ahead and bring up maintenance on the engines quicker and only use half the runway? Save the engines, use more ru
28 Arrow: No -- I have no problem with it and I've flown on several, sitting in aisle and window. I think it is an excellent airplane and I've always had comfo
29 Mikefly562: Thank God the CRJ-200 will cease production. The CRJ-700 is much better and more comfortable. I personally have found the CRJ-200 to be by far the wor
30 Planemaker: Not so... unless you call having a mere 1-inch of additional aisle height "much better and more comfortable." And who spends their flight standing in
31 BCAInfoSys: I've flown the CRJ-700 with QX (Horizon), and the CRJ-200 more times then I can count with OO (Skywest). And while I agree, the CRJ-200 sucks somethi
32 Tornado82: Yeah the CRJ-700 is barely noticably different. The main difference in it is just the takeoff performance, but Joe Q. Public doesn't notice stuff like
33 Pyrex: Well, you know what happened last time someone tried...
34 Aloha717200: I flew on the CRJ last year SLC-PDX, and wasn't expecting it to be a good flight because of the poor reviews of the CRJ I've read on this site. But ho
35 Tornado82: Yes, unfortunately, that's why I worded it the way I did.
36 Caribb: I like both the ERJ and CRJ. Yeah the ERJ's are narrow and the CRJ windows are low but overall they are very similar and the ride is quite comfortable
37 ATCT: Yea I nonreved on CRJ's all the time. A coach seat is a coach seat. I personally love the aircraft. Great from a ramp rats point of view, and flying o
38 Frugalqxnwa: Both types of Bombardier aircraft I have flown (CRJ100/200 and Q400) were uncomfortable (but then again I am a little chubby). If I have a choice betw