Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SkyWest Airlines To Order More CRJ's?  
User currently offlineCRJ900X From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 197 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3672 times:

At the end of the article, it states that Skywest Airlines is speaking to Bombardier and Embraer about an order for additional regional jets.

Link: http://atwonline.com/airline-finance...rts-209-million-3q-net-income-1107

Based on the current fleet of CRJ700/900's in the fleet (and the additional ex-Comair machines), would it be a safe assumption that Bombardier would be able to win this order? Any idea on how many numbers of aircraft that Skywest is looking to order?

It also appears that the large order for the MRJ will be firmed up in the next little while.

Cheers,
CRJ900X

40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3768 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3686 times:

Quoting CRJ900X (Thread starter):
Based on the current fleet of CRJ700/900's in the fleet (and the additional ex-Comair machines), would it be a safe assumption that Bombardier would be able to win this order? Any idea on how many numbers of aircraft that Skywest is looking to order?

I'm willing to bet that it has a lot to do with large near-term increases of 70/76-seat RJs at both DL and AA.

Since it's OO we're talking about, it's likely that Bombardier will win this order... but with EV's extensive use of ERJs, I wouldn't rule out E-Jets for OO or EV.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1567 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3680 times:

I think a lot of it has to do with what the mothership airlines are looking for in regards to a new order. While on the surface, it would seem Bombardier would be a shoe in. However, if OO can have better placement with say E-175s and have a long time commitment for them, then it could be feasible for them to look at and even open a new training program for the 175s. They might even split the order as FWAERJ was getting at, and take on Bombardier for OO and EV could get bigger ERJs. Question is, who would these fly for (err..paint scheme wise)?


ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6070 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3678 times:

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 2):
They might even split the order as FWAERJ was getting at, and take on Bombardier for OO and EV could get bigger ERJs.

If anything, a Bombardier order is going to be C-Series. I don't see Q's in the short-medium term either. The CRJ series is pretty much dead now. Partially because there's a glut of them, and partially because technology and efficiency has marched on.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineJayDub From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3676 times:

If OO were to make an order with Bombardier in the near-term, I think it would be for a Q.

User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5873 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Quoting JayDub (Reply 4):
If OO were to make an order with Bombardier in the near-term, I think it would be for a Q.

Maybe. But the reliability of the Q has been iffy, supposedly, so I'm not sure they're willing to go that route.

And, regarding a C-series order, while I would LOVE to see one, I think that's too big. The carriers don't need a 130 seat aircraft flown by SkyWest.

[Edited 2012-11-10 02:53:50]

User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3364 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3679 times:

Quoting JayDub (Reply 4):
If OO were to make an order with Bombardier in the near-term, I think it would be for a Q

I would love to see OO taking steps towards the replacement of the EMB-120's, a Q200 would easily fill the gap that will be left when the 120's leave the fleet. I expect several communities will loose service all together if OO does not order something along those lines. OO must have quite a hodge podge of CRJ's in their fleet by now, didn't they take over the AS/QX planes, then turned around and started flying them for AS?



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineSLCPilot From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 589 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 3):
If anything, a Bombardier order is going to be C-Series. I don't see Q's in the short-medium term either. The CRJ series is pretty much dead now. Partially because there's a glut of them, and partially because technology and efficiency has marched on.

G-Shield,

Granted your perspective is different than most, I doubt a C-series order would ever happen due to scope, unless OO starts a branded and code-share operation. It isn't hard for me to imagine a CRJ900 or 1000 order with a double sized cargo area for Alaska operations. It could serve Alaska on routes up north that don't merit a 737. There is also speculation about additional Airways and American flying with two class planes.

Cheers!



I don't like to be fueled by anger, I don't like to be fooled by lust...
User currently offlineBD500 From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 3):
The CRJ series is pretty much dead now. Partially because there's a glut of them, and partially because technology and efficiency has marched on.

To better understand your comment, when you say the CRJ are behind in term of technology and efficiency, you are referring to things such as fly by wire? For efficiency, I'm not sure your right; the weight of the CRJ is lower than the one of E series which should advantage the CRJ in terms of efficiency and might help Bombardier winning this order.

Otherwise, Embrear would not be developing an E175+ as it was stated last month.


User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6070 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 5):
The carriers don't need a 130 seat aircraft flown by SkyWest.
Quoting SLCPilot (Reply 7):
I doubt a C-series order would ever happen due to scope, unless OO starts a branded and code-share operation.

Who said anything about a CS300?

The CS100 can be fitted with more first class seats, and even a Real Galley with Ovens™, and still fall within the 85 seat restriction for Airways and (lack of restriction with) AS.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 6):
I would love to see OO taking steps towards the replacement of the EMB-120's

I'd love to see a manufacturer take that step first. The Q3/400 is too big for most markets. The DH8-200 is no longer manufactured. The closest alternative we have right now is the ATR42. EMB hasn't shown any interest in pursuing a replacement for the E120.

And then you have to deal with the majors, of which, a certain major out there has already offered new turbopropr flying, but wants to pay rates below what a decent regional would need in order to break even on that flying...

Kind of a conundrum, don't you think?



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13250 posts, RR: 100
Reply 10, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3678 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 1):
I'm willing to bet that it has a lot to do with large near-term increases of 70/76-seat RJs at both DL and AA.

Ditto. That is a big demand known to be coming. I doubt this is for larger aircraft (as some have speculated and I would hope for).

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 1):
Since it's OO we're talking about, it's likely that Bombardier will win this order... but with EV's extensive use of ERJs, I wouldn't rule out E-Jets for OO or EV.

My sense is (but this is without anything other than compiling in my head what I've read for the past couple of years), that in a CRJ-900 versus E-Jet decision in North America, the more advantageous operating economics of the CR9 will always win.

Besides, when's the last time an airline in North America ordered E-Jets? (And I wouldn't count California Pacific.) Perhaps a better question--when is the last time a North American airline already operating E-Jets add to that order?

In any case, I doubt the fact that EV already operates ERJ-145s will be a major factor. For the CR9 it's more relevant, as the cockpit and a lot of the parts are similar.


User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

RAH...a couple of years ago. So?


My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlinefutureualpilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2605 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3684 times:

Quoting JayDub (Reply 4):
If OO were to make an order with Bombardier in the near-term, I think it would be for a Q.

Word is SkyWest was offered the Colgan Q400s before RAH was and turned them down because of estimated maintenance costs, and the cost of adding a new type to the certificate and the fleet to include training, staffing, etc.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 6):
I would love to see OO taking steps towards the replacement of the EMB-120's, a Q200 would easily fill the gap that will be left when the 120's leave the fleet.

It wouldn't make sense to get rid of turboprops that are paid for, make money hand over fist less than half full and already have the infrastructure necessary to support them, only to replace them with airplanes to make payments on, retrain and re-staff, and build a whole new inventory of parts and support for. To my knowledge -200s aren't made any longer so you would also be getting second hand airplanes. The Bro at OO has a long history of "being on the way out" but it is still going strong. It has a limited life, to be sure, but it seems the draw-down plan for the airplane is revised to keep it in service longer and longer.

[Edited 2012-11-10 10:15:06]


Life is better when you surf.
User currently offlinejporterfi From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 446 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Quoting JayDub (Reply 4):

If OO were to make an order with Bombardier in the near-term, I think it would be for a Q.

I'm not so sure that OO would go with the Q series if the aircraft were to be operated for AA and/or DL. UA I can see, because they already operate props, but aren't props generally unpopular with many members of the traveling public (myself and some other a.netters excluded!)? I'd love to see props back in the DL and AA regional fleets, but I just don't know if it is feasible, as it hasn't been that many years since DL and AA ditched their Saab 340Bs.


User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4520 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3676 times:

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 14):
I'd love to see props back in the DL and AA regional fleets, but I just don't know if it is feasible, as it hasn't been that many years since DL and AA ditched their Saab 340Bs.

Up until November 15th of this year, American Eagle is still flying quite a few ATR props, and they've been doing it for years, so to have another prop pop up in the American Eagle fleet wouldn't be an unusual step at all.


User currently offlinefutureualpilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2605 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3678 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 15):
Up until November 15th of this year, American Eagle is still flying quite a few ATR props, and they've been doing it for years, so to have another prop pop up in the American Eagle fleet wouldn't be an unusual step at all.

I know before 9E/9L ran into trouble, they took a Q400 to DFW for AA to look at, evidently they loved the airplane as well as the performance but the company was having too many staffing issues so nothing ever happened with it. I'd agree that it isn't outside the realm of possibility.



Life is better when you surf.
User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3676 times:

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 16):
I know before 9E/9L ran into trouble, they took a Q400 to DFW for AA to look at, evidently they loved the airplane as well as the performance but the company was having too many staffing issues so nothing ever happened with it.

"We really like the plane, but due to 'staffing issues,' we can't fly it."

Doesn't make much sense to me.

AA didn't have to contract with 9L after all.


User currently offlineJBo From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2359 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Quoting neveragain (Reply 17):
"We really like the plane, but due to 'staffing issues,' we can't fly it."

Doesn't make much sense to me.

AA didn't have to contract with 9L after all.

It makes perfect sense ... AA probably was interested in the aircraft type but wasn't interested in contracting with Pinnacle/Colgan due to the staffing/operational issues. Contracting with 9L would've been cheaper than AA ordering and taking on the aircraft type themselves. There really isn't another Q400 operator to contract with aside from Horizon Air unless RAH were to step up.



I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Quoting JBo (Reply 18):
There really isn't another Q400 operator to contract with aside from Horizon Air unless RAH were to step up.

Or the aircraft was added to MQ's certificate, which would have been the most logical thing to do.

If AA really "wanted" the aircraft, it would have issued an RFP. And it would've gotten responses, including some perhaps from airlines not operating the Q400 today.


User currently offlinerlwynn From Germany, joined Dec 2000, 1093 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Do they still sell CRJ200's


I can drive faster than you
User currently offlinegcb5196 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

They make what looks a CRJ200, but do not offer it to airlines, it is only offered as a business jet. Don't know if that is cuurently the case, that's what it was a few years ago.

User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3674 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting neveragain (Reply 11):
more advantageous operating economics of the CR9 will always win.

A new video has appeared on YouTube, made by Bombardier, showing off the new slimline seats for the CRJ900 - and they claim that in a typical CR9 layout the new seats shave off around 400 lbs of weight. Is that enough to make a significant contribution in lowering costs and fuel consumption even more?

I think Lufthansa is installing these seats in their CR9s and they have added 4 more seats (the LH website seat map now shows 90 seats with the same galley config they had with 86 seats) and LH usually know what they're doing.

Is the E175 available with these seats?



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3674 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 22):
Is that enough to make a significant contribution in lowering costs and fuel consumption even more?

It certainly won't hurt!

I still can't get over the difference between the CR9 and the CR2--night and day, even though they have the same fuselage!


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25626 posts, RR: 22
Reply 24, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3673 times:

Quoting rlwynn (Reply 20):
Do they still sell CRJ200's
Quoting gcb5196 (Reply 21):
They make what looks a CRJ200, but do not offer it to airlines, it is only offered as a business jet. Don't know if that is cuurently the case, that's what it was a few years ago.

I believe airline production ended in 2005. The CRJ100/200 had a good run with 1,021 delivered.


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3768 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3857 times:

Quoting JayDub (Reply 4):

If OO were to make an order with Bombardier in the near-term, I think it would be for a Q.
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 24):
I believe airline production ended in 2005. The CRJ100/200 had a good run with 1,021 delivered.

IIRC, it was none other than OO that got the last CR2 delivered.

It's safe to say that SkyWest and Bombardier have a very strong relationship that just might win them this order.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4520 posts, RR: 7
Reply 26, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3853 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 22):
in a typical CR9 layout the new seats shave off around 400 lbs of weight. Is that enough to make a significant contribution in lowering costs and fuel consumption even more?

At the rate at which Americans are gaining weight, it probably doesn't matter (though perhaps in other countries it would).


User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 27, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3970 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 26):
At the rate at which Americans are gaining weight, it probably doesn't matter (though perhaps in other countries it would).

Carrying fat people around in lighter seats versus regular seats generates the same 400-lb savings.


User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6070 posts, RR: 14
Reply 28, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3973 times:

Quoting neveragain (Reply 27):
Quoting N62NA (Reply 26):
At the rate at which Americans are gaining weight, it probably doesn't matter (though perhaps in other countries it would).

Carrying fat people around in lighter seats versus regular seats generates the same 400-lb savings.

Exactly. The fuel burn different is pretty marginal, and on paper, it's the same. Though, I would suspect that the feds will be wanting to do another average here within the next decade.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlinecrj900lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 356 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3982 times:

Quoting JBo (Reply 18):
AA probably was interested in the aircraft type but wasn't interested in contracting with Pinnacle/Colgan

Smart on their part, a good choice to stay as far away from Pinnicle/Colgan as possible. I know we couldnt wait until we could eliminate their name (Colgan) from our "family" of express carriers.


User currently offlineKingAir200 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1622 posts, RR: 2
Reply 30, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4005 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 25):
IIRC, it was none other than OO that got the last CR2 delivered.

The last CRJ-200 delivered to an airline from the US was N602XJ, delivered to Mesaba in September of 2005.

[Edited 2012-11-12 18:06:46]


Hey Swifty
User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3960 times:

Quoting neveragain (Reply 23):
I still can't get over the difference between the CR9 and the CR2--night and day, even though they have the same fuselage!

But now, instead of 50 people waiting for "pink tag" bags, you get nearly 80. THAT'S customer service for ya!



My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlinegcb5196 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3919 times:

The next gen's have a larger overhead bin and will fit a little less than the "dead yak" people are packing these days. The sad thing is as far as my experience just about no one, including the people working the flight, knows that. I would tell the flight attendant that the plane is a next gen and I'm going to let the passengers keep their carry on's and then she nicely collected the carry on's inside the door, because they were to big, for me to put underneath. The bins will fit a 22 inch roller no problem granted it isn't exceeding it's design limits or one of the ones that doubles in size when it's expanded.

User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 33, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3903 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting gcb5196 (Reply 32):
The next gen's have a larger overhead bin and will fit a little less than the "dead yak" people are packing these days.
Quoting gcb5196 (Reply 32):
The bins will fit a 22 inch roller no problem granted it isn't exceeding it's design limits or one of the ones that doubles in size when it's expanded.

What about the "old gen" bins, can they carry small rollers in real life? BBD had pictures of the old bins with roller bags in them before revamping the website. There are quite a few old-gen CR9s flying in the US.



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineOB1504 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 3391 posts, RR: 6
Reply 34, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3873 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 15):
Up until November 15th of this year, American Eagle is still flying quite a few ATR props, and they've been doing it for years, so to have another prop pop up in the American Eagle fleet wouldn't be an unusual step at all.

November 15th is when the ATR 72 will leave MIA, but the type will remain in American Eagle service from SJU until April 1st.


User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3872 times:

OO and PSA crews put their 22" bags in the overhead. It's not that they WON'T fit, it's that they CAN'T fit all of them for everyone.


My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlineAntoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1579 posts, RR: 4
Reply 36, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3854 times:

Quoting gcb5196 (Reply 32):
The bins will fit a 22 inch roller no problem granted it isn't exceeding it's design limits or one of the ones that doubles in size when it's expanded.

Many regionals are going to a "no carry on" policy, which means it doesn't matter if it fits, it's not going in the cabin. This gains available weight for the aircraft because they don't have to assume that every passenger has a 35lb carryon with them, just a personal item at whatever weight for that has been averaged out. So they're not getting hit twice for the 25 gate claim bags that won't fit on every flight.



Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
User currently offlinegcb5196 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3832 times:

Good point, I know ASA had that policy when I used to work their flights. Not sure if that is how it is today with their merger.

User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 38, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3595 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Any chance of SkyWest (or Delta) asking BBD for a "CRJ905" or "CRJ900XR" (my bright idea) - a CRJ900 with one additional 31-inch fuselage frame ahead of the wings allowing four more seats and a larger centre fuel tank plus incorporating CRJ1000 wings, engines, and fly-by-wire rudder?

It might be easier to expand scope clauses to 79-80 seats from today's 76 than 90-100 seats. Then they can offer 15F+64Y=79 or 12F+68Y=80 seats. And 300-400kg more fuel will give a little extra range, allowing it to compete even more with Embraers upgraded E175.

Is this realistic or am I talking completely out of my ass?   An order for 50-60 such aircraft might make it worthwhile?



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3266 times:

PSA is a "no-carryon" airline. And they don't need to stretch the CRJ-900, DL already did, it's the RJ-2000 (aka) MD-8R/9K!


My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlineflightsimer From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 568 posts, RR: 1
Reply 40, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3229 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 38):

Why not just take a -1000 and outfit it in a better cabin with the lower seat density? After all, the 705 was not a stretch of the -700, but a -900 with a -700 sized cabin installed.

[Edited 2012-11-29 19:05:39]


Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
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...
CSA Czech Airlines To Axe More Routes posted Fri Mar 2 2012 20:37:52 by Checo77
Saudi Arabian Airlines To Order 12 B777-300 ER posted Mon Jul 19 2010 04:54:13 by ManuCH
Turkish Airlines To Order 20+15 737NG posted Thu Feb 4 2010 02:26:11 by TKfan
Turkish Airlines To Order 2 A330-200F posted Sat Oct 31 2009 06:01:16 by TKfan
American Airlines To Cut More Jobs posted Fri Jun 12 2009 20:08:19 by Co757
WSJ: LH Currently Sees No Need To Order More A380s posted Mon Jun 16 2008 10:16:47 by N328KF
Pinnacle To Get More CRJ-900s For Delta? posted Thu Jan 24 2008 14:54:23 by Flyf15
SAS To Order More 737s posted Thu Dec 27 2007 01:06:14 by PanAm_DC10
Vietnam Airlines To Order A359 By December 21! posted Fri Nov 16 2007 09:12:56 by KL808
VS Aims To Order More 787s, Eyes 747 Replacement posted Sun Jul 8 2007 21:46:22 by SFORunner