lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 15198 posts, RR: 100
Reply 6, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 13838 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
It won't change the conclusion, but the OP link example has the CR2 buring more fuel than I believe it will for a 500 mile journey (19gal/pax*50pax)=950 gallons. While the MD-90 is at 1200 gallons for the same flight. If my memory serves, the CR2 is more like 13gal/pax for a 500 mile journey. Using 2900 lbm/hr which is ~426 gal/hr. Both end up at approximately 650 to 700 gallons for a 500nm flight (vs 950 if it is 19 gal per pax for 500 miles).
I'm personally surprised 50 seat RJs have survived this long. The economics haven't been there for years. This is from someone who *loved* CO's ERJ-135s.
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 4): The next gen jets coming out will be significantly more efficient than todays models but I reckon we've seen our last new under 70 seat jet.
I agree. While I'm excited for the GTF, I wonder what today's fuel prices are doing to the business case of the MRJ.
Quoting starrion (Reply 5):
and there is no market to refurb the CRJ and ERJ for private jets?
At what price? I'm sure CO and AA would love to sell their parked E135s. But at this point, it could be cheaper to pay the lease and return them to the financing company. Until a few years ago, I'm sure they were worth more as parts for the E145 fleet.
How many could be converted to executive jets? We're talking 1900 RJs of which perhaps 500 are not in condition to become executive jets (e.g., older RJs with lower MTOW/range and thus not suitable for conversion).
It will be interesting when AA or DL does their next round of RJ 'consolidation.'
HA! My drone is lighter than required for registration.
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7397 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 13600 times:
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 6): It will be interesting when AA or DL does their next round of RJ 'consolidation.'
DL will be about done next year. From 2010, they had said they will park and return to lessors, CR2s that they do not need through 2012. The shuttering of Comair will continue until they are only flying a handful of 50 seaters and a few CR7s/9s. As a matter of fact they are loosing 3 additional CR7s to GoJet in conjunction with the 12 that are transferring from OO/EV to bring the contract count to 15.
CRJ 900 From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 613 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 12107 times:
They're retiring ours (jazz), aside from their speed I'm not sad to see them go. I agree that big propjets are the way to go for the shorter routes and then 75 +seat jets for the rest. Our new Q4s are very nice, there's only a couple problems with them. If AC wants Jazz to fly those from YQM-YYZ(which starts next month) then they should have coughed up the money to have tvs put on them(even tho Jazz owns those airplanes). That route is blocked at 3h10 (Q4)compare to 2h10 on the jet(winter). I think the airplane is best suited for 1h or 1h30 max from YYZ and would be perfect for ops out of YVR. They also made a huge mistake installing "poor man's coffee machines". They've actually had to remove them due to issues. They should have installed either the jugs or potable h2o system. People need to get over this perception that props are antiquated technology. Those are jet engines driving those big props afterall.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8288 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 11994 times:
With new and improved turboprop engines, we could see a LOT of ATR's sold to replace older smaller jets, on the proviso that ATR redesign the wing to better accommodate the type of icing conditions we see in the upper Midwest and US Northeast in winter--in short, the wings may have to be electrically de-iced.
aamd11 From UK - Wales, joined Nov 2001, 1067 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 11333 times:
Quoting CRJ 900 (Reply 9): If AC wants Jazz to fly those from YQM-YYZ(which starts next month) then they should have coughed up the money to have tvs put on them(even tho Jazz owns those airplanes). That route is blocked at 3h10 (Q4)compare to 2h10 on the jet(winter).
3:10 is one hell of a block for YQM-YYZ... Porter's YQM-YOW-YTZ services on their Q400s are blocked at around 3:15 including the 30 minute stop in YOW. The direct YQM-YTZ flights operated by PD over the Christmas period are only 2:40.
I think PTVs on a Q400 make little sense economically... conventional wisdom has it that Q400s, and turboprops in general, are more efficient on the shorter hops. To operate a Q400 on a longer route where the efficiency advantages taper off and then lumber the aircraft with heavy IFE equipment seems counterproductive.
In-flight Wifi might be a thought for Q400 fleets (particularly for Porter) but PTVs I can't see making their way onto Q400s, really.
Acey559 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1613 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 10142 times:
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12): AA uses the ERJ out of DFW and CO does out of IAH on tons of profitable routes that are too far for a turboprop.
I cant see them going away completely.
Back in September when I was going through indoc, Dan Garton came to talk to us and basically said the same thing. He said that because there are so many routes that AA/MQ controls pricing on, especially the longer intra-Texas flights, even the -135s can be profitable. He said he doesn't see the end of them at MQ in the near term, and for my sake and many of my fellow employees I hope he's right.
cyeg66 From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 228 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9865 times:
Quoting CRJ 900 (Reply 9): That route is blocked at 3h10 (Q4)compare to 2h10 on the jet(winter).
Quoting aamd11 (Reply 13): 3:10 is one hell of a block for YQM-YYZ... Porter's YQM-YOW-YTZ services on their Q400s are blocked at around 3:15 including the 30 minute stop in YOW. The direct YQM-YTZ flights operated by PD over the Christmas period are only 2:40.
Sorta what I was thinking, it would *probably* only take about 20 mins more than CRJ100/200.
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 15): As it is, expectations of IFE are getting a bit over the top, I reckon. Passengers should be able to find some way to amuse themselves for 3 hours, without it being the responsibility of the airline.
Couldn't agree with you more.
slow to 160, contact tower, slow to 160, contact tower, slow to....ZZZZZZZ......
ABQopsHP From United States of America, joined May 2006, 883 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9846 times:
Quoting Acey559 (Reply 14): the longer intra-Texas flights, even the -135s can be profitable.
When I first started with XE the 135's were still in the system. Now I only get to see MQ bring theirs into CRP. I always liked the sporty little jet, and find it interesting that AA/MQ can make it profitable, but CO could not. The Q400's are on some of the longer markets out of IAH, such as IAH-TUL and OKC. They operate on IAH-MAF / MFE and DFW/DAL in state. The longest route I saw out of IAH was to MTJ last spring . If UA post merger gets rid of all the 50 seaters I am curious to see what will replace them on midsize markets such as AMA CRP and MAF. And what about cities such as VCT, who has Colgan Saabs? My guess is it will not have service to IAH at all, only MQ to DFW.
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2918 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9025 times:
Quoting queb (Reply 11): There's a lot of companies specialized in CR2 conversion
There may be, but as lightsabre said:
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 6): How many could be converted to executive jets? We're talking 1900 RJs of which perhaps 500 are not in condition to become executive jets
The market for large business jets isn't at 1400 aircraft. It's true you can convert a CR2 for about half the cost of a new Challenger 850. There is a market, but I wouldn't say you could take a significant percentage of the under 50 seat RJ market and continue flying them as bizjets.
MD80Nut From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1050 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 8524 times:
From what the linked article says, they are discontinuing service to many small cities alltogether, so nothing is going to replace many of them. Already many are sitting somewhere awaiting their fate. I suppose they will keep using the remaining 50 seat or less jets until the more efficent 70+ pax models become available. Some routes which are served by multiple RJ will probably be consolidated into a one or two MD80/A320X/737.
I don't have a problem with turboprops at all, I like the ATRs and Dash 8s. I hope they are a solution to help maintain service to the remaining small cities that have it.
Given the state of the economy, at least here in the US, I believe few of the parked RJs will be conversted to private / executive use.
United727 From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7590 times:
Quoting VC10er (Reply 22): Would Embraer be able to sell Legacy "kit's" to change the E135's into private jets or refurbish them for smaller regionals around the world or charter service? What is an E 135's range?
And with that said, what is the current "book" value of the E35's/CR2's, etc?
JoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 6281 posts, RR: 32
Reply 24, posted (4 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 7178 times:
I wonder if there's a market for military/coast guard/border patrol/air ambulance/SAR type usage for these aircraft. I would guess that the majority of these craft are being mothballed due to operating cost, as opposed to mx costs.
They'd certainly lead a more docile life doing government work of some sort than the slam/bam grind they currently go through.
: In choosing between the E-Jets and the CRJ700/900 being the two big players in this field (especially in the US), what qualities are there for an airl
: The sad conclusion is that a whole bunch of airports that currently have CRJ/ERJ 37-50 pax service will be loosing service alltogether, unless: a) The
27 CRJ 900
: OOOOPS my bad I dunno what I was looking at yyz-yqm 2h12 and yqm-yyz 2H47 blk...just checked in in the bid package. Maybe it was the rumored YYG -YYZ
: To a fully Legacy..? The cost would be astronomical. To a Corporate Shuttle Legacy, it has already been done. But why...? The secondary market on Leg
: Published range is 1,750nm for an LR. About a 1/4 of them are in the desert right now.
: My two cents - this is a screaming call for regional high speed rail in the United States. Fat chance it happens given the political climate, but rail
: It's not just political climate...it's billions of dollars that just aren't available, and most of it would be picked up by the public purse. Most ai
: Majors didn't want it that way. AC flew the CRJ100 under an agreement that got furloughed pilots back to work. But once all those pilots were back, i
: You bring up a good point. I also wonder what will happen at an airport like AZO. We used to have (gulp!) at least 1-2 mainline flights a day on DC-9
: I'm thinking corporate shuttle and charter could take a few of them. Tough part is the economy right now. Book value isn't going to tell you anything
: At least those got built and flew revenue service.....this never did... http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/d/dynab52.jpg
: I predict a number of the 50 seaters will be in service for quite a few years to come. The fact is that like the ancient DC-9s at NWA, once the acquis
: Rail will never break even, high speed rail even less so. The infrastructure for regional air service is already in place. I don't advocate subsidizi
: Your airline might but the the overall domestic airline industry future is very uncertain. The more people I talk with the more I realize that few pe
: GOOD! I can not stand those CRJ 100/200, now I do like the EMB ERJs, but a MD80/90 flying in its place, is fine with me. What I would like to see, is
: At least in the US, while I do think that some communities will lose all air service, I don’t think that’s the biggest story here. The bulk of 50-
: From that article, it looks like MCI is going to get some orders from Air Bus of Oxnard CA, for their Oxnard-LAX shuttle. Hey this may be an opportuni
: I saw on here that the airline i think you work for was actually adding 2-3 more CRJ-200s, how is that going? Hopefully better than Piedmont's attemp
: Two things I am not getting: 1. Would airlines really bring back turboprops when passengers are used to jets. 2. If they don't bring them back can the
: Yes. CO does it with 9L on former mainline 735 routes (OKC-IAH, from personal experience). People seem to get on just fine. Of course in Europe, we a
: Indeed, European carriers never really ditched turboprops on the same scale as the US. Cityjet (AF) is even still flying refurbished Fokker 50s. Most
: I have not heard that one, but you never know. We just added the 71st airplane which is operating as an 'operational spare' just to try to improve ou
: I don't get it... Agreed. And as someone who has done a lot of CRJ2 flying out of ATL, having had occasion recently to fly on both Porter's Q400s and
: It was just a pun on the misspelled "dinasaur" and the old project.....Dyna-Soar.
: Honestly, I feel that it really doesn't matter what the passengers are used to. The majority of people will book with the airline with the fare that'
: It's the same thing with 10 abreast 777's. Passengers might grumble about SQ being more comfortable but EK doesn't have any trouble filling its planes
: I've had the unfortunate chance to ride on several Dash 8 models (200, 300 and 400) and can say for certian that all three were noisy, vibrated quite
: Different strokes, I guess. Not everybody is going to agree on everything.
: Has the reliability improved on the Q400
: The ATR-72 is the only aircraft on which I've become airsick and vomited. I hate it. It is louder and rougher than a jet, and cannot fly as high or as
: 950 CRJ 100 and 200 from 1992 on and about 1000 ERJ135-145 (from 1995 on) have been built - so in the end which is before 2025 2000 have to be scrapp
: I don't know if that's a ATR72-200 or -500, but my experience with countless 72-500 and 42-500 flights has been totally opposite. Somehow the turbopr
: Many small communities will have to face the choice of prop service or no air service at all. A Q400 or ATR can do the same trip for similar or lower