Oykie
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:38 pm

Since the ongoing debate is about Bombardier dropping the C-Series for now Bombardier says it is working on a stretch CRJ codenamed CRJ-900X and a Q400 stretch

i thought it might be interesting to start a new thread about these two airplanes, since the other thread about the Bombardier to jilt the C-series is about the C-series, and not these to planes.

Now for some reason my first thread about the two new airplanes Studies were removed. Don't know why.

My question about these two new airplanes is if anyone have any information at all regarding what the modifications would be to the 900X and Q400 Stretch? I remember reading about a wing redesign and a stretch. Any comments thoughts would be appreciated.

This is the article and information I have about the 2 planes for now.


Http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=3883
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
legacy135
Posts: 966
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 11:06 pm

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:46 pm

I am pretty sure, that those "streches" will not really face a bright future. It will probably have an outcome as the MD90, which was a nice aircraft but never really able to compete with it's competitors.

So comparing an E195 and a A318 with a CRJ900X? I don't even like the imagination.

Cheers
Legacy135 Wink
 
Oykie
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:48 pm

Quoting Legacy135 (Reply 1):
am pretty sure, that those "streches" will not really face a bright future. It will probably have an outcome as the MD90, which was a nice aircraft but never really able to compete with it's competitors.

In my opinion the MD-90 could have been a success if MDD had developed a larger wing giving the plane a better range.

Quoting Legacy135 (Reply 1):
So comparing an E195 and a A318 with a CRJ900X? I don't even like the imagination.

I do agree with that. Especially if they don't upgrade the plane more than just stretching it.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 01, 2006 9:00 pm

The MD-90 really did need a new wing, for better range and efficiency. You could easily argue that Douglas lost their way after McDonnell bought them out.

And I don't see how you could stretch the Q400 to seat 100 like the article says without extensive design work that would basically constitute a new plane anyway.
 
Oykie
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 01, 2006 9:05 pm

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 3):
And I don't see how you could stretch the Q400 to seat 100 like the article says without extensive design work that would basically constitute a new plane anyway.

Does the CRJ and the Q400 share some fuselage parts? They have the same fuselage diameter IIRC.

One should believe that it would require a massive rework on the both planes to stretch it even further.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 3):
The MD-90 really did need a new wing, for better range and efficiency. You could easily argue that Douglas lost their way after McDonnell bought them out.

It seems that when Donald Douglas left there was not to much left originality in the company left.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 01, 2006 9:25 pm

Interesting, I thought I was the only one here who asks questions about that long and lanky bird (the CR9) from Canada...  Smile

Anyhoo, the CRJ and Dash8 have different fuselages, the D8 is a little wider - according to the Q400.com info page - due to the high wing, I assume...

If and when pilot scope clauses are renegotiated to allow 90 seats instead of the current 70, the CRJ900X (CRJ905???) may have some success. The 9X stretch is 1 row (4 seats) with a wing-root insert. I guess that means a little more wing material too to increase performance and fuel capacity...? Engines will be uprated, according to FI.

If the -9X can perform as sprightly as the CRJ701 it will be a great airplane, I'm sure.

Stretching the Q400 will not be easy - it's pretty long already... but what do I know...  Smile
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:05 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 5):
Interesting, I thought I was the only one here who asks questions about that long and lanky bird (the CR9) from Canada...

PS: I meant that in a positive and encouraging way, y'all... keep askin'  Smile
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Oykie
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Thu Feb 02, 2006 3:35 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 5):
Interesting, I thought I was the only one here who asks questions about that long and lanky bird (the CR9) from Canada...

I find that very interesting as there is no CRJ900 in Norway  Smile I like Bombardier and would like them to stand a chance, but it seems like they are falling behind right now.

Thanks for info on the CRJ-900X I get the feeling, that this extension is not so huge as I first thought. Still it will be interesting to see how it performs.

Does anybody have Cargo capacity in the CRJ jets compared to the EJets from Embraer?
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:03 am

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 4):
Does the CRJ and the Q400 share some fuselage parts? They have the same fuselage diameter IIRC.



Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 5):
Anyhoo, the CRJ and Dash8 have different fuselages, the D8 is a little wider - according to the Q400.com info page - due to the high wing, I assume...

The two aircraft do not share any fusleage parts. As well, the shape of the fuselages are different - the CRJ is circular while the Q400 is ovoid which leads to only an arc of the fuselage being slightly wider (the wing has nothing to do with fusleage shape/diameter.) You might find it interesting that the CRJ700/900 fusleage is built by Shorts in N. Ireland and the Q400 by MHI in Japan.

BTW, cargo space comparison between the CRJ900 and the E-Jets is relative due to the rear cabin/cargo bulkhead placement on the CRJ that depends upon customer pax/lav/door configurations. BTW, the Q400 also has a moveable rear cabin/cargo bulkhead.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
aeronut
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:41 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:10 pm

Quoting Legacy135 (Reply 1):
I am pretty sure, that those "streches" will not really face a bright future. It will probably have an outcome as the MD90, which was a nice aircraft but never really able to compete with it's competitors

With respect to the Stretch RJ900X I agree although it will gather some sales.

I am not sure what the competitor would be for a 100 seat Dash 8, is there one out there? I don't think so, and I am not sure ATR is willing to develop one to compete. I have to wonder though if the great economics of the Dash Q400 apply when adding another 20 PAX.
 
Oykie
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:53 pm

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 8):
BTW, cargo space comparison between the CRJ900 and the E-Jets is relative due to the rear cabin/cargo bulkhead placement on the CRJ that depends upon customer pax/lav/door configurations. BTW, the Q400 also has a moveable rear cabin/cargo bulkhead.

I see. I would assume that the E-Jets have more capacity due to a wider fuselage.

Quoting Aeronut (Reply 9):
With respect to the Stretch RJ900X I agree although it will gather some sales.

I hope so. I hope it will offer airlines close to E190 economics.

Quoting Aeronut (Reply 9):
I am not sure what the competitor would be for a 100 seat Dash 8, is there one out there? I don't think so, and I am not sure ATR is willing to develop one to compete. I have to wonder though if the great economics of the Dash Q400 apply when adding another 20 PAX.

It does require higher thrust engines. It will be interesting to see if airlines are more interested with the high fuel price.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3226
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:20 pm

Stretch the CR9/Q400?

OK, I dare them. Wienerprop anyone?

[Edited 2006-02-02 09:20:52]
 
Oykie
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:50 am


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andy Jung




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter Unmuth-VAP



The cockpit windows seems to look very much the same. How is that?
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Fri Feb 03, 2006 7:13 am

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
My question about these two new airplanes is if anyone have any information at all regarding what the modifications would be to the 900X and Q400 Stretch?

This is another (somewhat quirky, perhaps  Smile) observation and following suggestion that I hope some BBD person reads and find useful:

I have noticed that the CRJ seem to be designed so that the window frames and seat rows match up at 31" seat pitch, so that the 7 windows on the CR2 between the main exit and o/w exit has room for 7 rows of seats, and the CR7 has 13 windows between the main exit and o/w exit allowing 13 rows of seats. So far so good...

The CR9 has room for 16 windows between the main exit and aft pair of o/w exits, but because windows number 15 and 16 are replaced with the forward pair of o/w exits, the total rows of seating becomes 15 instead of 16 (the 15th row - exit row - needs 5-8 (?) inches extra legroom) + a small closet up front. Source: seat map in RU March or April 2000, BBD.com

So my suggestion is that on the CR9X, when adding that extra row mentioned in Flight International the other day, the new extra fuselage frame (31" long) should be extended the extra inches lost on the current CR9 (5-8") so the total stretch is 35-40", giving 16 full seat rows + the new 1 row. The "previously lost" row will then offer 2 extra seats on the LH side (and 2 more on the RH side if the lav is removed), giving the CR9X potentially 6-8 more seats instead of 4 compared to the current CR9... That's 2-4 extra paying bums on seats from an 8" extension.

Possible or am I off my rocker (again  Wink)?
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Fri Feb 03, 2006 7:24 am

Quoting Aeronut (Reply 9):


I am not sure what the competitor would be for a 100 seat Dash 8, is there one out there? I don't think so, and I am not sure ATR is willing to develop one to compete. I have to wonder though if the great economics of the Dash Q400 apply when adding another 20 PAX.

The competition would be jets of airlines who are forced into using jets on very short hops due to capacity needs. Northeast Shuttles would be one (though the biz pax would likely stick their nose up), stuff like GSO-CLT on US is one, DTW-Chicago, ALOT of NW's DC9 routes, etc.

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 12):


The cockpit windows seems to look very much the same. How is that?

Trust me, they're two different fuselages. More than once I've flown a CRJ then gotten on a Dash with US. The Dash has a more vertically-stretched fuse than the CRJ does.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Fri Feb 03, 2006 9:49 am

I'm think about rotation. The landing gear for a -500 90-100 seat Dash-8 would be pretty long, requiring big nacelles. Plus it would look strange.
 
aeronut
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:41 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Fri Feb 03, 2006 10:03 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 13):
So my suggestion is that on the CR9X, when adding that extra row mentioned in Flight International the other day, the new extra fuselage frame (31" long) should be extended the extra inches lost on the current CR9 (5-8") so the total stretch is 35-40", giving 16 full seat rows + the new 1 row. The "previously lost" row will then offer 2 extra seats on the LH side (and 2 more on the RH side if the lav is removed), giving the CR9X potentially 6-8 more seats instead of 4 compared to the current CR9... That's 2-4 extra paying bums on seats from an 8" extension.

Just guessing, but if they could add more PAX they would for sure rather than leave it to the next project. This platform has got to be stretched to the max and I don't think they can afford the weight of more PAX and structure or else they'll be trading PAX for fuel. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the performance on the 900X.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Tue Feb 07, 2006 5:11 am

Next week's issue of Flight International has another article about the CR9X and Q4X, sounds like there really is something happening... I wonder if NWA's Newco is one of the companies asking for the 100-seat CR9X...?
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Oykie
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Tue Feb 07, 2006 5:26 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 17):
Next week's issue of Flight International has another article about the CR9X and Q4X, sounds like there really is something happening... I wonder if NWA's Newco is one of the companies asking for the 100-seat CR9X...?

Do you have a link to thihs article?
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Tue Feb 07, 2006 5:34 am

Man, these aircraft would be 20ft longer than they already are! It might look something like this monstrosity!!  laughing 


Modified Airliner Photos:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Johan Adolfsson
Template © Johan Adolfsson

I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Tue Feb 07, 2006 6:13 am

Hahaha, good one, BoeingNut  laughing 

But, seriously, the current CR9 can pack in 92 seats at 31" pitch plus two lavs when pushing the rear cabin wall as far back as you can into the rear cargo hold (source: BBD.com). Hold space is reduced obviously, but if most pax only pack light anyway, then it is enough. So the -9X only needs about 90-100 inches more in length to get 100 seats. I assume the underfloor baggage hold will be extended accordingly... (these are my conclusions, mind you).

I'm unsure about copyright rules as it is "future" news, but check out the magazine's website.
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 08, 2006 1:51 am

CRJ900,

Hey thanks for that. I was unaware of the capability to move the rear cabin walls. Do you know if the same be done for the Q400? Also, sorry for the dumb question but is BBD.com the Bombardier site?

Regards

[Edited 2006-02-07 17:53:36]
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Questions About The CRJ 900X And The Q400 Stretch

Wed Feb 08, 2006 2:10 am

BoeingNut: BBD.com is www.bombardier.com  Smile Read through their Regional Updates, lots of aircraft info there.

Yes, LH CityLine has pushed the cabin wall to the max on their CRJ701, as they have 70 seats, 2 lavs and 3 galleys vs most US regionals having only 1 lav and 1 galley in their 70-seat CRJ701s... I read this in a magazine some years ago, don't remember which, though.

The image of the Q4X look like the cabin is simply stretched...
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos