My Airline (Crossair) has ordered quite a few of the Embraer 170 and 190s. Some people here think that the Dornier 728 will be a superior aircraft. Other than the oft quoted thing of the slightly wider fuesalage allowing for 3x2 seating (and subsequently 2x2 1st class) what real advantages does the Dornier offer? I ask this not to start a war but rather to find out.
I have looked at both manufacturer's web sites and cannot see that one really stands above the other.
But what I think is REALLY cool is that these planes have the potential to make many of the A vs B arguments superfluous. Here in Europe at least, very many flights are flown by Airbus or Boeings at far below their capacity. For example, I used to work for a handling company in ZRH. We did the handling for Air France. Their flights to CDG are mostly flown by 735s with capacity in their configuration for about 100 pax. It was common for this to be half full or even less. And even when it was full, it had a lot of excess fuel and baggage capacity.
To me this is excess waste. This is a plane which is fully capable of flying 3-4 hour sectors nearly fully loaded. Of course, they often fly longer segments than CDG-ZRH but to my eyes at least, using larger planes like this on relatively short routes is wasteful. I think that the new jets from these companies (Embraer and Dornier) have the potential to really put the hurt on Airbus and Boeing if the issues like scope clauses can be dealt with. Of course, there will always be a need for the larger jets but it seems as though the smaller ones are coming and not going away.
Can anybody comment?
By the way, I fly for Crossair (Soon to be Swiss) but I like the discussions here and I am something of a spotter myself, though I do not go to extremes. I am hoping to fly the Embraer when it arrives here at Crossair!! But the Embraer 145 does not interest me in the least!