Soaringadi From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 472 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5918 times:
Okay I cannot really give an exact proof, but I know I read this somewhere (and maybe some of you guys did too) that a couple of airlines were getting id of the small Rj's (Crj 200's especially). Maybe even Erj's but haven't heard about that yet. Anyone know why is this, since it seems like a great airplane to me.
BBJII From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 850 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5484 times:
Not wanting to start any wars .... but
Most carriers removing CRJ200's from there fleets are US regionals.
The Seat per Mile costs on these flights are getting higher and higher in the competitive US market place. (not that othe rmarkets are not competitive).
Newer RJ's offer the same performance with more seats, so it lower the Seat per Mile costs and beoming more viable.
In Europe CJR200's are operated mainly on routes where there is no competion on the carrier is so dominant they are the public first choice and can charge as they wish...therefore the Seat per Mile costs are lower as the fares are higher.
Although some Euro-regionals are fading them out too
Ohh yeah...I hate the CRJ200. It's a blow dart with wings
Remember: The Bird Hit You, You Didn't Hit The Bird.....
ATWZW170 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 904 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5225 times:
At one time people paid to fly on the RJ's to avoid turbo's but now days, the fares aren't high enough to keep them flying. I think airlines like Skywest who are bringing on the CRJ-700 are making a smart move. I only hope that Air Wisconsin will order something larger and soon! I don't want us to start lagging behind!
Success is getting what you want...happiness is liking what you get
You've been lagging behind since the day our folks bought CRJ's instead of ERJ's IMHO. Otherwise, you're a top-notch regional as far as service goes.
Quoting ATWZW170 (Reply 9): I think airlines like Skywest who are bringing on the CRJ-700 are making a smart move. I only hope that Air Wisconsin will order something larger and soon!
Unless you're going the FlyI route, you need to find an airline who will allow you to bring on the larger aircraft... like US. And for God's sake, don't buy anything with the first letter C in its name.
Iowaman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 5021 times:
Quoting BBJII (Reply 5): In Europe CJR200's are operated mainly on routes where there is no competion on the carrier is so dominant they are the public first choice and can charge as they wish...therefore the Seat per Mile costs are lower as the fares are higher.
How does someone charging what they wish lower the seat per mile costs?
Skywatcher From Canada, joined Sep 2002, 534 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4828 times:
The CRJ-100/200 was innovative in it's time. It spawned numerous competitors (Dornier/Embraer/Russians etc.). That alone is proof enough of its success.
Like many humans (self included), it's getting long in the tooth but still deserves the respect that it should have.
If it's so bad, how could it have sold in excess of 1,000 airframes?
DAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4811 times:
The CJ-200 is now out of production due to weak demand. Canadiar just announced this last week. The smallest one you can get is the 700 now. The 200 is being discontinued because of the high CASM airlines have experienced with it. Too few seats.
All of these jets will eventually be parked/replaced by the 700 or the EMB 170, except where they are needed in the very smallest communities, where the ticket price/revenue will support them.
Comair, ASA and others will have to go to the larger jets with less frequesncy to survive. Canadair has admitted that the C-series is a program that is also in trouble since thye have not yet found launch customer.
Bomber996 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 462 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4127 times:
Quoting BeechNut (Reply 15): However, the CRJ does NOT have leading edge slats and this gives it a longer takeoff run. I don't know if the ERJ has leading edge slats or not.
The ERJ's do not have leading edge slots. That explains their nose down approach. However, with fuel prices the way they are it is cheaper to make the takeoff roll longer to use less fuel. Hell, even the A340 can be a good performer if pushed to its limits.
I feel like I just opened a whole new can of worms with that one.
Two biggest lies in aviation... "I'm from the FAA and I'm here to help you." & "Traffic in sight."
Tornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3989 times:
Quoting BeechNut (Reply 15): I don't know if the ERJ has leading edge slats or not.
The ERJ's can regularly cruise at FL370, loaded or not. When was the last time you saw a CRJ at FL370 with any type of meaningful load? In all the RJ flying I've done I've never been over FL 320 in one, and typically we're in the mid 20's.
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 7210 posts, RR: 37
Reply 18, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3869 times:
Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 14): The 200 is being discontinued because of the high CASM airlines have experienced with it. Too few seats.
That it not so! The CRJ200 is being discontinued because there is a surplus of them on the market... it is as simple as that and not because of the "high" CASM. You don't see the 737-700 being discontinued even though it has higher CASM (and fewer seats, too) than the 737-800!
The only reason why there is a glut of small RJ's is entirely due to pilot union scope clauses that first prevented, then restricted, the number of plus 50-seat jets that airlines could fly. It is a simple as that.
For example, do you think that COEX doesn't want to fly +50-seat jets... or have the requirement for them. Likewise, AE, do you think that that they are happy being restricted to only 25 CRJ-700's?
Now with many Scope Clauses being relaxed, or almost eliminated by Chap. 11, airlines are now buying the larger RJ's that they always needed... and wanted.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein