Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Future Of JetBlue's E-190 Fleet  
User currently offlinedoulasc From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 485 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 14543 times:

What do you think the future has in store for the Embrarer E-190 fleet at JetBlue.I hear the fleet will top at 75 aircraft down from a 100. At the time I haven't heard of any plans for any new short haul aircraft at JetBlue.I can't wait to see their Airbus A-321.

36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2848 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 14529 times:

The E190 will continue to play an important roll in starting up new cities with light demand, serving shorter-haul routes that you don't want to flood with extra seats/capacity, and even handling the longer/mid-length thinner routes. I also see it playing a role in "connecting the dots" when/if the airline starts doing so. You will probably see B6 try to get rid of some of the older birds while new deliveries come in to reduce the fleets age while increase reliability. I don't see the plane going anywhere for quite some time as it does serve an important role in what the airline is trying to do (IMHO).


"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8090 posts, RR: 24
Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 14469 times:

I'm hoping they keep them around; I prefer flying them to the more crowded feeling 320.


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24312 posts, RR: 47
Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 14206 times:

I think it will comes down to economics and network strategy.

In one of the earnings calls from last year when they announced the reduction of the eventual E190 fleet, they basically said that while the E190 was a decent plane, they saw better case for growth of the A320 family and NEO at the airline.

Also 11 E190s were sold for 2013-2014 delivery. That was announced last summer.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3094 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 13887 times:

Still no 190s at lgb but since it's slot restricted i guess no real shocker so we might not see any out west for a while

User currently offlineflyby519 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1080 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 13149 times:

What is the advantage of the E190 vs A319? I've heard the heavy checks on the 190 are almost as much as a 320. It is a bit discouraging to see the original 100+100 order turn into a max of 75 airframes.


These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24312 posts, RR: 47
Reply 6, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 13136 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 4):
Still no 190s at lgb but since it's slot restricted i guess no real shocker so we might not see any out west for a while

E190s came and went. JetBlue opted to pull E190s off West Coast operations.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlinemoose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2240 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 13000 times:

Quoting N766UA (Reply 2):
I'm hoping they keep them around; I prefer flying them to the more crowded feeling 320.

I flew one for the first time a couple of weeks ago between JFK-CLT and back, and I agree, it's a nice ride!



KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
User currently offlinebos2laf From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 371 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 12158 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 4):
Still no 190s at lgb but since it's slot restricted i guess no real shocker so we might not see any out west for a while

They nixed the E190s on the West Coast for 2 reasons:

-No maintenance base out west. If the lone MCO-AUS-LGB flight had a mechanical in LGB, they were screwed.

-LGB wouldn't allow the E190 to be considered for the commuter slots. B6 figured it'd be a waste of a regular slot when they could use it for a 320.

I really think that LGB is boxing themselves in with these tough restrictions, and they could've been much more of a hub for B6 if they were even just a little more flexible. I would not be surprised to see more LGB ops slowly transition to LAX.


User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1972 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 11426 times:

Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 1):
The E190 will continue to play an important roll in starting up new cities with light demand, serving shorter-haul routes that you don't want to flood with extra seats/capacity, and even handling the longer/mid-length thinner routes.

The E190 seems perfect for expanding BOS. If they want business traffic to medium-sized cities with less demand like BOS-CMH/IND/CVG, or higher frequencies on shorter routes like BOS-JFK/Washington, the E190 would be good for those.



2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3094 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 11272 times:

Lgb has restrictions but it's a very busy airport its slot restricted for a reason. with Boeing leaving though and a new terminal I think they might find some more flex in the future and be able to arm twist a little more

User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18679 posts, RR: 58
Reply 11, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 10720 times:

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 5):
What is the advantage of the E190 vs A319? I've heard the heavy checks on the 190 are almost as much as a 320. It is a bit discouraging to see the original 100+100 order turn into a max of 75 airframes.

E190 carries fewer passengers and is more efficient than the direct Airbus competitor, which is the A318.

The E190 is basically the DC-9 replacement. Similar size, similar range.


User currently offlineN757ST From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 335 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9098 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 10):

LGB isn't busy, trust me. This is all people near the airport not wanting the noise... Nothing more, nothing less.


User currently offlinedivemaster08 From Cayman Islands, joined Jul 2008, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9018 times:

Send some down to GCM!

Would love to see them fly from either FLL,MCO or JFK down here! As AC seem to be showing, the E190 is great for these longer, thinner routes to the Caribbean!



My dream, is to fly, over the rainbow, so high!
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3171 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9018 times:

The E190 is 2/3 the size of the 320 (in terms of B6 seat configuration) but does not burn 2/3 the fuel or have 2/3 the mx xosts or have 2/3 the flight crew operating cost.


So. . . The plane has higher seat costs than the 320. This is a problem on B6s leiure routes which tend to generate lower yields


User currently offlineICEBIRD757 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 656 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8273 times:

Quoting bos2laf (Reply 8):
No maintenance base out west. If the lone MCO-AUS-LGB flight had a mechanical in LGB, they were screwed.

Actually we have a MX base here at LGB, the problem with the E-190 out here was that we did not have the space to keep all parts necessary for the 190.



LGB....where you can watch the grass grow because the traffic is so slow.
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3171 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8160 times:

"Actually we have a MX base here at LGB, the problem with the E-190 out here was that we did not have the space to keep all parts necessary for the 190."

Well that was a smart business plan, wasn't it?


User currently offlineUnited_fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7383 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 7887 times:

B6 sends the -190's to ROC off and on from JFK.


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineJHCRJ700 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 7757 times:

Quoting moose135 (Reply 7):

Quoting N766UA (Reply 2):
I'm hoping they keep them around; I prefer flying them to the more crowded feeling 320.

I flew one for the first time a couple of weeks ago between JFK-CLT and back, and I agree, it's a nice ride!

I look forward to my flights up to Boston because I know I'll be flying on an E190. I've heard some people complain about it being a rough ride but I haven't noticed I think they are great.



RUSH
User currently offlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 788 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 7551 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 5):

Why would you expect the heavy checks to cost less for virtually the same size airplane?? The Engine overhaul might be less but I doubt it.


User currently offlinebos2laf From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 371 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 7249 times:

Quoting ICEBIRD757 (Reply 15):
Actually we have a MX base here at LGB, the problem with the E-190 out here was that we did not have the space to keep all parts necessary for the 190.

I should've clarified... No 190 maintenance base.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24312 posts, RR: 47
Reply 21, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 7215 times:

Quoting N757ST (Reply 12):
LGB isn't busy, trust me.

I dont know what airport you are looking at, but in 2011 LGB had 311,577 movements.

That's almost 900 per day on average !



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineICEBIRD757 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 656 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6421 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 16):
Well that was a smart business plan, wasn't it?

Well when this space was acquired 10 years ago, there was no plan for a second a/c type so they had no idea at that time they would need more space. Overall, as a station here, we need more space for MX, parts, and crewmembers as a whole.



LGB....where you can watch the grass grow because the traffic is so slow.
User currently offlineSuperCaravelle From Netherlands, joined Jan 2012, 224 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5763 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 14):
The E190 is 2/3 the size of the 320 (in terms of B6 seat configuration) but does not burn 2/3 the fuel or have 2/3 the mx xosts or have 2/3 the flight crew operating cost.


So. . . The plane has higher seat costs than the 320. This is a problem on B6s leiure routes which tend to generate lower yields

Depends. They can charge a higher price for an E190 service, as they have less supply, at least in the short run (until another airline offers the same destinations from the same origin (city)).

Also, if you cannot fill up an A320, an E190 is still more efficient, despite the lower efficiency per seat. The A380 has the lowest cost per seat but isn't the most efficient on many routes.

[Edited 2012-05-13 10:44:30]

User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2848 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5386 times:

Quoting bos2laf (Reply 20):
I should've clarified... No 190 maintenance base.

B6 has its own MX in both LGB and SFO (it was OAK instead of SFO when the E190 was flying on the west coast). MX techs were trained for the E190 and there were A LOT of E190 parts in LGB...I would know, I'm the person that shipped them all back. Skids and skids worth:


Quoting ICEBIRD757 (Reply 15):
Actually we have a MX base here at LGB, the problem with the E-190 out here was that we did not have the space to keep all parts necessary for the 190.

Everything was fitting just fine with the exception of some of the largest items like spare engines/APUs/Cowls, but the vast majority of support items there was plenty of space for.

Quoting bos2laf (Reply 8):

-LGB wouldn't allow the E190 to be considered for the commuter slots. B6 figured it'd be a waste of a regular slot when they could use it for a 320.

I really think that LGB is boxing themselves in with these tough restrictions, and they could've been much more of a hub for B6 if they were even just a little more flexible. I would not be surprised to see more LGB ops slowly transition to LAX.

That's a big one right there, not being granted the capability to use the E190 in the "commuter slots". B6 already opened LAX and moved a lot of the TRANSCON activity to LAX. If the E190 was allowed to use the commuter slots, I think you would see A LOT of "connecting the dots" with B6 and the E190....and maybe we would have needed the extra planes that were on order.



"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
25 Viscount724 : Landing fees in the U.S. are based on maximum landing weight (maximum takeoff weight in most of the rest of the world), so those fees should be signi
26 N757ST : A vast vast majority of LGB ops are general aviation operations on 25L/R. 30/12 is not even close to busy.. I fly the airbus I there almost weekly. I
27 jfklganyc : "A vast vast majority of LGB ops are general aviation operations on 25L/R. 30/12 is not even close to busy.. I fly the airbus I there almost weekly. I
28 richierich : That's not a given - B6 has been courting the business market more and more, and while LGB works as a great alternative to LAX (I happen to prefer th
29 bos2laf : We have a winner. My gut says that once the growth in BOS levels off and after SJU does the same, we will see B6 make a bigger push out west, and in
30 jfklganyc : Agreed. I could see a full push at LAX and LGB being drawn down to a few transcons to BOS and JFK. Then all the NIMBYs can sleep quietly
31 AADC10 : Most of that number must be GA or something since the slot restrictions do not add up to anywhere near that number. If there is a capacity problem an
32 Av8tor : The people of LGB are shooting themselves in the foot. The E190 is quieter than most "commuter" jets. They want the service, but they won't change the
33 LAXintl : Yes bulk was GA, with about 30,000 being air-carrier. The point is, LGB is hardly some sleepy little airport. Its a quite busy facility, (one of the
34 jmacias34 : Does jetBlue have any financial investment into the modernization of the Long Beach Airport?
35 LAXintl : Outside of long term leases, and ongoing operating fees, no JetBlue does not have direct investment in the facilities at LGB. They did however push ha
36 nycdave : I'd imagine they've got to be more efficient than the A319/320/321 on the short-haul routes in the northeast out of JFK and BOS, which are more likely
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...
UA/CO Future Of The 777 Fleet: posted Mon Nov 28 2011 04:53:35 by Flying Belgian
Future Of JetBlue posted Mon Jul 5 2010 17:59:39 by DeltaMD90
The Future Of LH Regional Fleet posted Wed Mar 18 2009 04:02:56 by Columba
Future Of JetBlue's East Coast Shuttle posted Sat Oct 15 2005 23:48:28 by Jmc1975
The Future Of The Airline Fleet posted Thu Oct 26 2000 05:38:12 by Boeing747-400
Future Of BA's Fleet posted Fri Oct 13 2000 06:36:19 by Mr.BA
The Future Of OS Long Haul Fleet posted Sat Aug 14 2010 14:00:15 by miaintl
Future Of AZ Fleet? posted Fri Jul 23 2010 23:41:29 by TrijetsRMissed
Future Of Air Comet's Long-haul Fleet posted Tue Jan 26 2010 17:53:16 by Irobertson
The Future Of AC's Fleet. posted Wed Sep 19 2007 09:16:22 by Boeingluvr