Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CO E-Jets?  
User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3780 times:

With the recent anouncement of DJ ordering E170/E190s, and in the US we have B6 and NW all building up a fleet of E-Jets. UA and DL both have regional services on E-Jets as well. US Airways has a nice E170 fleet as well.
Will CO look into the E-Jets as well? I know they will have to change their contracts to allow regionals to use the E-170, but what about mainline E-190s? I guess to answer my own question, CO does have an all Boeing mainline fleet, and the E-190 is still pretty young.
Mainline E-190s are a long shot, but some have said on here that the E-170 is nearly a sure thing.
Not only will the E-Jets look great in CO colors, I finally will have an oppurtunity to fly on one of them, as I fly CO frequently.

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineB6WNQX From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3638 times:

Quoting KSUpilot (Thread starter):

Don't forget that US will be receiving some E190's for mainline soon too.


User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3540 times:

Did not know that. I knew they had a very nice sized E170 fleet. I'm assuming these will be delivered in the new livery? Those are going to look great!

User currently offlineCRGsFuture From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3526 times:

I wish AE would pick them up, but alas no.


Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21503 posts, RR: 60
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3492 times:

CO will eventually work out the pilot contracts for E175s and who will fly them and for what amount, and you'll see them lickety split. Until then, the answer is a firm no. I think they also want to know how low the 797 goes, to see if the E170/E190 family is best, or if they will do a 797 replacement for the 735. Otherwise, it might make sense for CRJ series.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5402 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3467 times:

It would be nice to see some hard operating numbers for the 170/190 types.

Does anybody have them? I wonder on a CASM basis if either type beats the 735 or A318.

EWR can fill a 735 to almost anywhere and CLE can fill the ERJ's on routes with enough of a fare premium to make them modestly profitable. I'm guessing it's IAH that could use the 75-90 passenger capacity best.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineFCYTravis From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3454 times:

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 5):
I wonder on a CASM basis if either type beats the 735 or A318.

The E-jets soundly beat those aircraft - which are overweight shrink-jobs by comparison. Nobody's buying the A318 and nobody's buying the 736.



USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21503 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3443 times:

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 6):
The E-jets soundly beat those aircraft - which are overweight shrink-jobs by comparison. Nobody's buying the A318 and nobody's buying the 736.

But the 735 is not the 736. The 736 may be an overweight shrink, but the 735 was not. It was the "optimal" 737 Classic length, same as the 732, and the wings are smaller, the airframe lighter.

I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineCOIAH756CA From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 506 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3438 times:

While it is true that our(CO) contracts will not allow it, CO will persuade the union that it's in their best interest to use the E170 and 190. There are some routes in the COEX system that are suitable for that airplane and no other. e.i. IAH-BOI.

BTW.  Smile

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/bmtair/1110345_copy-1.jpg



Long live Denver-STAPLETON. RIP the old and best KDEN
User currently offlineBrenintw From Taiwan, joined Jul 2006, 1629 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3387 times:

Quoting CRGsFuture (Reply 3):
I wish AE would pick them up, but alas no

AE has eight on order -- due for delivery from April 07; news release at http://www.mandarin-airlines.com/en/enews_608.htm



I'm tired of the A vs. B sniping. Neither make planes that shed wings randomly!
User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3350 times:

American Eagle, not Mandarin Airlines. Eagle has the ERJ's and the CR7's.


I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3229 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

I would like to see this as well. The E170 is perfect for Continetnal Express, however, if we are talking a replacement for the 735, the E195 and not the E190 may be the answer.

For the E195 vs Y1, I think it all comes down to whether the smaller Y1 is a simple 735 like shrink or if it is an entirely different aircraft, similar to the 717 (in terms of size, not configuration)


User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5402 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3096 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

The Embraer corporate site offers a slide presentation that suggests the 195 with either 32" or 31" seat pitch will be cheaper to operate per seat on a 500nm trip than the 717, 737-600, and A318. The E170/175/190 will be more expensive to operate. The comparison is in percentages, not actual costs.

The 737-500 is not shown in the comparison.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineKonrad From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 524 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3064 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

LOT is replacing 10-15 years old 735s with E175 (82pax) and E195 (not yet in fleet). Supposedly because of the better CASM. No numbers from them though.


User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3022 times:

Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 8):
BTW.

Nice render. Had a little fun with a Copa E190:

http://onfinite.com/libraries/1032498/9fe.jpg

Is Copa still owned by CO? If so, then Copa probably is serving as a ncie test of the E-Jets for CO.


User currently offlineFCYTravis From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2959 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
But the 735 is not the 736. The 736 may be an overweight shrink, but the 735 was not. It was the "optimal" 737 Classic length, same as the 732, and the wings are smaller, the airframe lighter.

I'd like to see a comparison of the E195 vs. the 735 in economics. Anyone have access to something like that?

You're comparing a 20-year-old steam-gauge used aircraft dragged out of the desert somewhere to a brand-new, high-efficiency, glass-cockpit modern medium jetliner. There's no comparison at all.

Is CO going to immediately ashcan their 735 fleet? I doubt it. But by the same token, you don't see them rushing to buy up used ones, either.

[Edited 2006-11-03 22:41:28]


USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2893 times:

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 15):
Is CO going to immediately ashcan their 735 fleet? I doubt it. But by the same token, you don't see them rushing to buy up used ones, either.

I doubt they will as well...not until more is known about Y1. If Boeing does not offer a smaller "LRJ" version of Y1, CO will go with the E190/195.


User currently offlineCOIAH756CA From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 506 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2780 times:

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 14):
Is Copa still owned by CO? If so, then Copa probably is serving as a ncie test of the E-Jets for CO.

Yes they are. A good part of CO's 3Q profit was brought in by Copa.



Long live Denver-STAPLETON. RIP the old and best KDEN
User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2759 times:

Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 17):
Yes they are. A good part of CO's 3Q profit was brought in by Copa.

So CO technically is operating E190s, just "indirectly". Well I'm sure CO will make a good decision, but you have to think that the E190 does have some advantages already over a Y1LRJ, as CO will know how the E190s worked for Copa, whereas Y1 will be unknown.

Either one is good for me, but I really want to fly on a CO E190!!!  Smile


User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5402 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2682 times:

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 14):
Is Copa still owned by CO? If so, then Copa probably is serving as a ncie test of the E-Jets for CO.

On July 5th CO sold 7.5 million shares of Copa for $156 million, a $92 million profit. They retain ownership of 4.4 million shares, about 10% of Copa.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21503 posts, RR: 60
Reply 20, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2677 times:

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 12):
The Embraer corporate site offers a slide presentation that suggests the 195 with either 32" or 31" seat pitch will be cheaper to operate per seat on a 500nm trip than the 717, 737-600, and A318.

I don't doubt that (though I would imagine the 717 is pretty competitive). I wonder how it changes for a 1200nm trip, since an airline like CO is not going to limit 110 seat aircraft to 500nm trips.

CO would be doing a complete breakdown based on their various stage lengths for planes of that size and prorating the contribution each makes to reach the baseline CASM for each aircraft.

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 11):
For the E195 vs Y1, I think it all comes down to whether the smaller Y1 is a simple 735 like shrink or if it is an entirely different aircraft, similar to the 717 (in terms of size, not configuration)

That's part of it. but it's also a question of whether it makes more sense to do Y1 all the way down to 735 size (in which case it allows for the CRJ700/900 into the picture, flown by express), or only take Y1 from 149 seats and up and intro the E-Jet family at 80-130 seats is a new intermediate CO airline, with a pay scale between express and mainline. Continental+ or something. It might be a way to work it out with the pilots, offer F class (possibly just same width seats at 38" pitch and real food) but still keep the planes out of the mainline fleet.

A lot depends on how the pilots work with the airline toward a manageable solution. Right now, the situation is not manageable, as it leaves a huge hole in their business and hurts the bottom line.

Every time I fly on a completely full ERJ on a 750nm stage I know that they are losing out on more revenue. Just tonight my flight had 50 pax in 50 seats, and that's pretty standard for the SRQ run, but they don't have the demand for 110 seats on that route, nor is flying the 735 under 1000nm the best use of the aircraft.

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 15):
You're comparing a 20-year-old steam-gauge used aircraft dragged out of the desert somewhere to a brand-new, high-efficiency, glass-cockpit modern medium jetliner. There's no comparison at all.

What a silly statement.

735s are not 20 years old (max 16.5 years), they aren't being dragged out of the desert and they are not inherently inefficient. If they were inefficient, WN would have dumped them.

CO has a relatively young fleet, with 30 being delivered in between July 1997 and October 1998, and the others only a few years older. To a certain extent, Boeing was stupid for offering the 736 in the first place and might have continued to offer the 735 to customers who liked it, possibly with the upgraded engines of the 737NG family to improve it.

I have no doubt that as the longest stretch, the E195 is very economical. All I asked for was a comparison of HOW much more. Gaining efficiency in the small jet market is not as easy as you make it out to be. Just because the E170 is new, doesn't make it more efficient than a 735 for example, due to the size of the 735 (assuming you can fill it most of the way). But the E170 blows away the ERJ and CRJ100/200 business case, which is why they are selling well.

Just because something is nearly as old as you are doesn't make it a hunk of junk.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineEssentialPowr From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1820 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2665 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 4):
CO will eventually work out the pilot contracts for E175s and who will fly them and for what amount, and you'll see them lickety split.



Quoting COIAH756CA (Reply 8):
While it is true that our(CO) contracts will not allow it, CO will persuade the union that it's in their best interest to use the E170 and 190.

Nope.

1. CAL is as risk averse as any airline out there; no one wants another type on the property with the associated costs.

2. As soon as a cost structure is developed for the a/c at CAL, a 737 immediately is more cost effective.

3. CAL pilots WILL NOT allow another regional work list (regional) to fly those a/c, and if CAL pilots fly them, they are very equal to -500, -300 and -700 pay, so better to get 737s

4. CAL is putting winglets on -500s and -300s; range flex is the new key and an "E Jet" is not enough a/c to be flexible enough for the route structure.


User currently offlineOptionsCLE From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2619 times:

Quoting EssentialPowr (Reply 21):
3. CAL pilots WILL NOT allow another regional work list (regional) to fly those a/c, and if CAL pilots fly them, they are very equal to -500, -300 and -700 pay, so better to get 737s

I think you're overestimating the cost of labor and underestimating the cost of fuel. Admittedly, I don't have either of those figures in front of me, but I would think that the inefficiencies from overpriced pilots and F/A's would be offset by the aircraft's lower operating costs. Furthermore, (and again this might be against CO's labor contracts,) CO employees need not perform the maintenance on the aircraft. It could instead be outsourced to ExpressJet or another carrier which minimizes the costs associated with adding a fourth aircraft type.


User currently offlineFCYTravis From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2581 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20):
Just because something is nearly as old as you are doesn't make it a hunk of junk.

I didn't say they were "hunks of junk" - but you can hardly grow an airline into the future with a discontinued airframe which is less efficient and heavier for its carrying capacity compared to modern aircraft.



USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
User currently offlineEssentialPowr From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1820 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2500 times:

Quoting OptionsCLE (Reply 22):
but I would think that the inefficiencies from overpriced pilots and F/A's would be offset by the aircraft's lower operating costs.

Operating costs on the 170 series are as yet highly variable; as a new a/c the DOCs are above projected, and any time a new type is added to a fleet, costs go up due to training and acclimation. On a 737 NG, for ex, if the FMS won't take the OAT, the problem is typically that the pitot heat is on. That fix is told to the crew over the radio, and fixed in moments.

On a new type, troubleshooting has to occur to sort out the smaller issues, and that increases docs.

CAL is very proud, as is Wall Street, that it has 3 fleet types, and the 787 certainly warrants another. I don't see it happening at CAL to buy or finance another small a/c, and the pilots will prevent the scope issue from being overturned.


25 Post contains images B737900er : The cost of day to day maintenance would be too high, and complicated to outsource. If you have to train people to perform line maintenance then you
26 COIAH756CA : Think what you like, but anything can happen at CO. Any type of resolution for ERJ inefficiency is being explored. Out of personal opinion, I would l
27 EssentialPowr : Whoa! What about the CAL pilots junior to you??? You aren't worried about those jobs, but where is your son going to start at CAL? XJT gets 170s, and
28 Ikramerica : But you've provided nothing to back this up. You made claims about them being 20 years old, and that they were dragged out of the desert. Those were
29 FCYTravis : US Airways MEC pilots did exactly that, offering a cheap rate for the E190, which secured the E190 as a mainline aircraft... hoping that in the future
30 KSUpilot : I thnk this is the way things are going to go. When you had two groups, your small RJs and then you larger airliners, it was wasy to split the two. N
31 COIAH756CA : Your missing one thing. XJT is starting to move out at the end of the year. Chautauqua is moving in. The deal with them has good terms: -They lease t
32 KAUSpilot : With all due resepect, I sincerely hope the majority of Continental pilots do not share your line of thinking....decent scope is the one thing Contine
33 EssentialPowr : False? How? Regional feed is just subcontract labor, to be awarded at lowest cost. XJT has leased, maintained and crewed their a/c, just as Chautauqu
34 FlyHoss : Why are you in such a hurry to give up the junior pilots? The company approached the M.E.C. about Scope relief for 100 80+ seat jets (just the beginn
35 Usair320 : well only if they decide to replace the 735 as the seating capasitys are not too far from either plane.
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...
ExpressJet "versus" CO, Employing 69 Jets posted Mon Jun 12 2006 06:31:46 by Lt-AWACS
Delivery Dates For CO's New Jets. posted Sun Apr 3 2005 03:02:37 by IAHTowTeam
CO Cutting IAH-PSP posted Wed Nov 22 2006 16:10:05 by CALMSP
Why No EWR Or IAH To BUR On CO? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 03:28:19 by COEWRNJ
Skywest Gets 12 Comair Jets posted Tue Nov 21 2006 21:29:35 by DeltaFFinDFW
CO Ending IAH-FRS; IAH-PUJ posted Tue Nov 21 2006 19:55:54 by MAH4546
CO: Fare Class When Changing A Nonref Res posted Mon Nov 20 2006 23:48:44 by Lincoln
CO "Order Of The Golden Dragon" Card? posted Mon Nov 20 2006 16:19:12 by Chase
It's Time For UA And CO posted Sat Nov 18 2006 07:24:56 by Lufthansa
DL/AA Or DL/CO Merger posted Sat Nov 18 2006 02:42:12 by 1337Delta764