tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:47 pm

I was just curious what poeple think about the likelyhood of Comair and/or ASA flying the E170 for DL. It is no secret that this aircraft is far superior to the CRJ and Comair made no bones about their desire to fly it. I know it would take Comair and DL coming out of BK for this to materialise, but I pose the question since these two are DL's primary connection carriers. All thougts on the subject are welcome.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
bucky707
Posts: 954
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 2:01 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:44 pm

now that Delta has CHQ flying the E-170 for them, I think the chance of seeing that aircraft at ASA or CMR is about zero.
 
767-332ER
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 1:20 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:17 pm

With ASA's current expansion strategies following the leadership of a very well organized (and managed) SkyWest, you'll see more and more CR7's coming to the fleet. That isn't to say that later on you could see some other fleet types coming in to the fleet, but for the near future, only CR7's.

Regards
Twinjets...if one fails, work the other one twice as hard!!!
 
avconsultant
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:44 pm

Fred Buttrell (OH - president) arrived in January '05. In his first meeting eith the employees, he mentioned he wanted an additional 70 seater platform. As he met with employee groups through out the company, he said he wanted to look at the EMB-170 which Embraer brought the EMB-175 demo aircraft to CVG.

Fred dangled a carrot before ALPA and Teamster for paycuts inexchange for 10 CRJ's (former DH) and 25 EMB-170's.

Those 10 CRJ's were returned shortly after bankruptcy and the EMB flying, as mentioned, was RP quick to jump on that flying by purchasing the leases and operating certificate from Mid-Atlantica wholey owned subsidary of US. Some reason S5 keeps popping in my head.

Off topic, look for RP to pick up some of the CO express flying.
 
FlightShadow
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:43 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:13 pm

Quoting TinPusher007 (Thread starter):
It is no secret that this aircraft is far superior to the CRJ

Don't forget, if they have nice seats (like UA Express(GoJet) does), the CRJ7 is a great airplane to fly for 2-3 hours.

Shuttle America currently operates DL Connection's fleet of E170s on routes like SLC - BNA and SLC - IND and those of similar loads and length. The E170 is an excellent aircraft, but the CRJ7 is also right up there. I don't expect any for Comair or ASA anytime soon, although it certainly would be nice  Smile
"When the tide goes out, you can tell who was skinnydipping."
 
quickmover
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 4:28 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:23 pm

What exactly is better about the E170 over the crj7s? I've never been on a E170 before, but I truly love those UA crj7s. I never thought I would say this, but I'd rather fly a crj7 than a main line jet. At least if it is configured the way United has theirs. Very comfortable and stable jet.
 
avconsultant
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:27 pm

Quoting FlightShadow (Reply 4):
The E170 is an excellent aircraft, but the CRJ7 is also right up there.

Maybe on economics its comparable, but not for pax comfort unless you're a 5'2" woman. I rode a OO CRJ-70 for 3 hrs two weeks ago. It was miserable!! The plane was hald to 3/4 full. Cramped cabin, overhead bins are too low, narrow aisles.

The return flight was a EMB........WOW, no comparison!!

That's the biggest cabin for a regional which I noticed it's an EMB and not an ERJ. Unlike it's competitor (CRJ) and sister (ERJ), it's a real airplane. Any plane that does not require me to walk across the ramp is a real airplane. I know Europe uses stairs, but still!!
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:36 pm

I think an easy way, for SkyWest and ASA, of silencing those who complain about the CRJ is to install the now-available(?) drop-down LCD screens and show air map and movies... then pax will be completely lost in the magic world of television and won't notice the rest of the interior...  Wink

Will be a lot cheaper than buying a whole new aircraft type too  Smile
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
ord
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 1999 10:34 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:43 pm

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 5):
I never thought I would say this, but I'd rather fly a crj7 than a main line jet.

While United's CR7s aren't bad, and better than other airlines' CR7s, the overhead space is far smaller than a mainline jet. You can't fit a standard roller bag in a CR7 and must check it. You also don't get Channel 9. I'd still take a mainline jet any day.
 
quickmover
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 4:28 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:49 pm

Quoting ORD (Reply 8):
While United's CR7s aren't bad, and better than other airlines' CR7s, the overhead space is far smaller than a mainline jet. You can't fit a standard roller bag in a CR7 and must check it. You also don't get Channel 9. I'd still take a mainline jet any day

That's true about the overheads and ch. 9, but the seats and leg room are awsome. The CR7 is also about the most quiet jet I've ever been on. It also seems to handle turbulance better than under wing engined jets.

Are the overheads on E170s larger? I thought they were 2x2 seating as well.
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:00 am

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 5):
What exactly is better about the E170 over the crj7s? I've never been on a E170 before, but I truly love those UA crj7s.

Width and cabin cross section is very noticably larger in the E70. None of that cramped CRJ feeling.

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 9):

Are the overheads on E170s larger? I thought they were 2x2 seating as well.

They're full size like a 737 basically. But, since only 4 people are using the space allotted to each seating row, it's essentially "bigger" than the 737's overhead. You can fit roll-aboard carry-ons into the E70 overheads, no more gate checking required. And yes, they are 2x2.
 
quickmover
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 4:28 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:20 am

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 10):
They're full size like a 737 basically. But, since only 4 people are using the space allotted to each seating row, it's essentially "bigger" than the 737's overhead. You can fit roll-aboard carry-ons into the E70 overheads, no more gate checking required. And yes, they are 2x2.

That is a plus. I'd like to try one out, unfortunately, they haven't put them on DEN-MCI yet (where I do most of my flying).
 
ord
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 1999 10:34 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 1:18 am

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 9):
That's true about the overheads and ch. 9, but the seats and leg room are awsome.

It sounds like you're comparing Economy Plus on the CR7 to regular Economy on mainline, which is really an unfair comparison. Looking at a United CR7 vs. a United A320, the mainline jet is still roomier across the board:

United CR7 Economy Plus: 34"
United A320 Economy Plus: 36"

United CR7 Economy: 31"
United A320 Economy: 31"

United CR7 seat width: 17"
United A320 seat width: 18"

Like I said, the CR7 is nice for an RJ. But I'd take a mainline jet over it any time.
 
767-332ER
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 1:20 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 1:29 am

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 6):
That's the biggest cabin for a regional which I noticed it's an EMB and not an ERJ. Unlike it's competitor (CRJ) and sister (ERJ), it's a real airplane. Any plane that does not require me to walk across the ramp is a real airplane. I know Europe uses stairs, but still!!

Wow, I don't know what type of aviation consulting you would do or who on God's green earth would hire you, but any guy that says that two aircraft types (ERJ/CRJ) that have made tons of money for a number of regionals, aren't real airplanes, then you clearly should not be doing any consulting for anyone!!! Also if you have a problem on flying onboard a plane that requires you to walk across the ramp (a mere 20 yds at the most), then the laziness of our country has been taken a new level.


BTW-I've never seen an aircraft not boarded using stairs when jetways were not available. So your last statement that "Europe uses stairs.." well, I don't know what heck you were talking about there. Do you have to jump from the apron to the cabin when you enplane or deplane a CRJ/ERJ/DC-9/MD-80?

[Edited 2006-03-10 17:34:54]
Twinjets...if one fails, work the other one twice as hard!!!
 
FlyDeltaJets
Posts: 1635
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:24 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 7):
I think an easy way, for SkyWest and ASA, of silencing those who complain about the CRJ is to install the now-available(?) drop-down LCD screens and show air map and movies... then pax will be completely lost in the magic world of television and won't notice the rest of the interior...

Will be a lot cheaper than buying a whole new aircraft type too

I feel the same way.
The only valid opinions are those based in facts
 
avconsultant
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:24 am

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 9):
Are the overheads on E170s larger? I thought they were 2x2 seating as well.

Same size as a mainline aircraft

Quoting 767-332ER (Reply 13):
Wow, I don't know what type of aviation consulting you would do or who on God's green earth would hire you, but any guy that says that two aircraft types (ERJ/CRJ) that have made tons of money for a number of regionals, aren't real airplanes, then you clearly should not be doing any consulting for anyone!!! Also if you have a problem on flying onboard a plane that requires you to walk across the ramp (a mere 20 yds at the most), then the laziness of our country has been taken a new level.

Regional Jet's have cost airlines (Legacy Carriers) more money than they have made on them with the exception of American and Continental. Legacy carriers are losing their asses on RJ operations. The operator's are making money, but the legacy carriers are failing with their dependence of these machines. RJ's were meant to connect smaller communities (low O&D markets) to hubs. In an indsutry where multiple fare buckets are in place it is not efficient to operate an aircraft with extremely limited revenue capabilities. One critical mistake made by legacy carriers is its dependence of RJ's. FL and DH proved RJ's are not profitable. DL is proving RJ's are not profitable. The are small, cramped, uncomfortable and encapable of flights greater than 2 hrs with full loads should there be weather a long the route. I've never seen a 717, 737 or MD-80 with this problem for this stage length. This my friend is not a real airplane, it's merely a want to be.

Quoting 767-332ER (Reply 14):
BTW-I've never seen an aircraft not boarded using stairs when jetways were not available. So your last statement that "Europe uses stairs.." well, I don't know what heck you were talking about there. Do you have to jump from the apron to the cabin when you enplane or deplane a CRJ/ERJ/DC-9/MD-80?

I don't know where you live nor care; however, you might want to get out occassionally. There are several airports with boarding bridges that RJ's cannot use, I flew into CVG on OH and out on RP - neither carrier connects boarding bridges to aircraft. Although, you take stairs from the ramp to the boarding bridge. IF you visit ATL, you will find the same thing with the EV.

I flew all over Europe for the month of September, after I left AMS, I did not see a baording bridge until I departed FCO back to the United States. The 737, MD-80's and Airbus' I flew on all used stairs in place of boarding bridges. The reason I made the European comment was to ward off the European aviation junkies and some how you found me.

You have the right to like the barbie/toy jets, but the EMB is a real airplane. It reminds me of the DC-9-10.
 
S5FA170
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:04 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 6:44 am

Just for the record, Republic Airways Holdings has been operating the Embraer 170 long before Comair had it "dangled in front of them like a carrot." We started revenue service with the E-170 at Chautauqua Airlines in October of 2004.

Those aircraft were all transferred over to the Shuttle America certificate beginning in June/July of '05 and that finished last fall.

The aircraft purchased from MidAtlantic / USAirways are operated by our Republic Airlines subsidiary.

-Tony
Prepare doors for departure and cross-check.
 
avconsultant
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:41 am

Quoting S5FA170 (Reply 16):
Those aircraft were all transferred over to the Shuttle America certificate beginning in June/July of '05 and that finished last fall.

The aircraft purchased from MidAtlantic / USAirways are operated by our Republic Airlines subsidiary.

-Tony

Does RP have separate operating certificates. Was Mid Atlantic not the "Jet For Jobs" for US Airways? Did all that change in the bankruptcy on recall rights?
 
S5FA170
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:04 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:48 am

Republic Airways Holdings operates three regional airlines on three seperate certificates.

Chautauqua Airlines was the original, and now flies the ERJ-135/140/145 for UA, AA, DL and US.

Shuttle America was purchased in June of '05 and now flies the E-170 for DL and UA. (Some of these aircraft are the aforementioned 170s that CHQ began service with in '04)

Republic Airlines was certified in September of last year and flies the E-170 for USAirways, including the aircraft that came over from MidAtlantic. And yes, MD was the "jets for jobs" solution at Airways as far as I know. And yes, that all changed in bankruptcy when RAH purchased the aircraft, along with landing slots in LGA.

-Tony
Prepare doors for departure and cross-check.
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:55 am

Quoting S5FA170 (Reply 18):
Shuttle America was purchased in June of '05

Well.... they actually owned them for several years through Wexford Mgt.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
FlightShadow
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:43 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:03 am

Quoting ORD (Reply 8):
You also don't get Channel 9

Yeah! What kind of crap is that? Surely there must be an IFE option on them? Channel 9 is what, in my opinion, makes UA (mainline) better than DL and CO.
"When the tide goes out, you can tell who was skinnydipping."
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5015
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:16 am

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 15):
Regional Jet's have cost airlines (Legacy Carriers) more money than they have made on them with the exception of American and Continental. Legacy carriers are losing their asses on RJ operations.

If that was the case, then why are United and Delta ADDING service, hmm?

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 15):
The are small, cramped, uncomfortable and encapable of flights greater than 2 hrs with full loads should there be weather a long the route.

Small? Okay, I'll give you that. Cramped? Only if you are a football player, obese, or extremely claustrophobic. Encapable? If you meant UNcapable, then, no, you would still be incorrect. The CRJ can fly comfortably up to 3 hours with full payload. It's the weather at the destination that causes the problems—and not just for RJ's.

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 15):
I've never seen a 717, 737 or MD-80 with this problem for this stage length. This my friend is not a real airplane, it's merely a want to be.

I guess all of those payload restrictions that American has when they have to reroute, have planned holding, or add an alternate to their west coast MD-80 flights don't count?

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 6):
Unlike it's competitor (CRJ) and sister (ERJ), it's a real airplane.

Airplane: N.-
Any of various winged vehicles capable of flight, generally heavier than air and driven by jet engines or propellers.

The CRJ and ERJ, the many turboprop and piston powered aircraft, and even ultralights sure fit that description, hence are all indeed real airplanes, or do need more clarification?
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
avconsultant
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 10:47 am

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 21):
If that was the case, then why are United and Delta ADDING service, hmm?

The 2 carriers referencedrnhave lost several mainline aircraft to bankruptcy. Neither airline havernthe same number of CRJ flight prior to their bankruptcy. The same couldrnbe said with all of the markets DL cut on Dec 1st. DL is adding servicernby reallocatingrnaircraft from service cut backs. They have no choice, but to outsourcernflying because they do not have the funds nor credit to acquire newrnaircraft.

Not sure if you've realized the CRJ-200 lines willrnbe closing shortly. Due to no demand; by the way CRJ-700/705/900 arernfacing the same problem. OH had 164 aircraft prior to bankruptcy thatrnnumber should be dropping to 140 (I think someone will clear this up).

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 21):
Small?rnOkay, I'll give you that. Cramped? Only if you are a football player,rnobese, or extremely claustrophobic. Encapable? If you meant UNcapable,rnthen, no, you would still be incorrect. The CRJ can fly comfortably uprnto 3 hours with full payload. It's the weather at the destination thatrncauses the problems---and not just for RJ's

The RJrnare comfortable for petite people. I'm 5'11" 190 lbs, so I'm neitherrnpetite, obese or a football player. Trust me, the CRJ is notrncomfortable. ERJ has the single seat row. Start a post asking if the CRJ and ERJ are comfortable for 2 + hrs. You're nuts thinking it's a 3 hrs comfortable. And you're misinformed thinking the CRJ -200 is a 3 hr airplane with a full payload.

Askrnany CRJ pilot, they will correct you. I asked the pilot of my flightrnfrom CVG - SAT. why he could not carry 46 people. He said, he hadrnspecial permission to waive the alternate requirement and only carry 45rnminute reservernso he would not bump 11 people. Obviously, no weather issue in SAT ifrnthe alternate was waived. To counter your point, this captains responsernwas - "these little airplanes are pushed to their limits at 2.5 hrs."
As your FF what they think!

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 21):
Irnguess all of those payload restrictions that American has when theyrnhave to reroute, have planned holding, or add an alternate to theirrnwest coast MD-80 flights don't count?

I flyrnDFW-LAX/SAN twice a month and never diverted. I'm not saying it doesrnnot happen, I've never experienced and I've heard AA ask for volunteersrnb/c of over sales. Time will tell.

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 21):
The CRJ and ERJ,rnthe many turboprop and piston powered aircraft, and even ultralightsrnsure fit that description, hence are all indeed real airplanes, or dornneed more clarification?

Oh geez, stay on point. I hate bursting your petite bubble; however, the RJ'srnhave replaced the turbo-props as puddle jumpers. This is a commonrnreference used in Concourse C in ATL & CVG and Terminals A&B inrnDFW.


I appreciate the Bombardier fans/employees defending their product. Face it this aircraft is done. The maintenancernprogram for the CRJ aircraft will not carry it much longer. Bombardierrnhas not committed to a program beyond 15 yrs. Operators of this productrnline know this and will start to ramp plans to replace this platform ofrnaircraft. An airline needs 36 -24 months shop and acquire a new fleetrntype. OH launched this aircraft in 1994.

Name one industry leader operating CRJ's. The industries leaders have been replaced with LCC. One attempted and went out of business - DH.
 
avconsultant
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 10:50 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 19):

Well.... they actually owned them for several years through Wexford Mgt.

RP owned them?

IMO, Brian Bedford one of the most brilliant leaders in this industry.
 
S5FA170
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:04 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:39 am

Brian Bedford is a fine manager. Regardless of everyone's opinion, at the end of the day, we make money, and he seems to know what he's doing!

Wexford Capital owned both Chautauqua Airlines and Shuttle America. CHQ didn't own S5 through Wexford, we just bought them from the same company that owns us. Its all kind of confusing, but saying we owned S5 already is not correct.

-Tony
Prepare doors for departure and cross-check.
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5015
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:39 am

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 22):
And you're misinformed thinking the CRJ -200 is a 3 hr airplane with a full payload.

How am I misinformed when I know what the aircraft can, and cannot do by sheer experience alone?

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 22):
ERJ has the single seat row.

And so does it's sister, the Brasilia—oi which I am perfectly comfortable flying on the A side for 3 hours (The Brasilia was not meant for that that kind of flying in the first place, but I have no qualms with it. It's much better than the jumpseat.)

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 22):
Name one industry leader operating CRJ's.

Since you are mentioning Independence Air, formerly Atlantic Coast, a regional airline who was a top-notch carrier, I'll go ahead and list some for you.

1) SkyWest. They have an exceptional product, low costs (compared to other regionals,) and several happy contractees.

2) Mesa. They may not be the top choice for a regional operation, but they operate both the CRJ and ERJ fleets effectively, and make the bean counters fairly happy.

3) Air Wisconsin. They may be smaller than SkyWest and Mesa, but they've got a long, successful history, and an exceptional product as well.

4) Horizon. Alaska and Frontier are perfectly happy with them, and their balance sheet is good. Plus, they still give out free alcohol.

I could list more, then you would say that these aren't the airlines that you were hoping I would list, as they "don't count" since they aren't "real airlines."

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 22):
He said, he hadrnspecial permission to waive the alternate requirement and only carry 45rnminute reservernso he would not bump 11 people. Obviously, no weather issue in SAT ifrnthe alternate was waived.

You either need the alternate, or you don't—per the regulations; there is no waiver.

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 22):
he would not bump 11 people.

From San Antonio, the best place I can think of to bump 11 people for an alternate, is Memphis—which is a LONG ways away from San Antonio, and simply not needed. You were either lied to, or you are making this crap up.

[Edited 2006-03-11 03:41:40]
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
767-332ER
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 1:20 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:37 pm

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 15):
I don't know where you live nor care; however, you might want to get out occassionally. There are several airports with boarding bridges that RJ's cannot use, I flew into CVG on OH and out on RP - neither carrier connects boarding bridges to aircraft. Although, you take stairs from the ramp to the boarding bridge. IF you visit ATL, you will find the same thing with the EV.

I flew all over Europe for the month of September, after I left AMS, I did not see a baording bridge until I departed FCO back to the United States. The 737, MD-80's and Airbus' I flew on all used stairs in place of boarding bridges. The reason I made the European comment was to ward off the European aviation junkies and some how you found me.

You have the right to like the barbie/toy jets, but the EMB is a real airplane. It reminds me of the DC-9-10.

I do not need to respond to your comment regarding the "inefficiency" and how the "legacies" are losing money with regard to their regional partners and their operation of the CRJ's. This point is being undertaken by others before me...There will be one point I will stress, is that out of the carriers that you say are facing "reduction" of the RJ fleets and losing money, you mentioned OH, which is actually the one in the worst shape.

If the legacies realise that they are losing money with these contracted operations then answer this: Why are ASA, Skywest, Chautauqua and others making money and also INCREASING operations, which the addition of NEW aircraft...NOT reallocation of existing aircraft. Skywest is due to receive 27 new CR7's and so is ASA.

Now...the comment I will undertake is this. You mentioned that bit about "using stairs," which you did not ellaborate on and still do not make sense. Actually, I do get out, and quite a bit. I fly to Europe about 6 times a year, specifically to Spain and with that, Madrid Barajas Airport which is one of the most overly congested airfield (used to be prior to T4) opening up. We deplaned and enplaned from almost every single domestic flight using the aircraft stairs. I am not talking about the "air stairs" that are brought out to the aircraft, but I am talking about the stairs that are stowed within the aircraft (MD80 series include this feature). That was the reason why I questioned your whole comment on "walking out to the plane and using stairs."

In all reality, a plane is a plane. The RJ's have proven to be moneymakers and your comment on the reason being that the legacies are losing money due to the contracts they have with regional carriers is absurd. Otherwise, you would not see Delta pushing ASA to fly their CRJ's to such stretches as ATL-STX or ATL-PLS or ATL-Ponce.

If you were to take a poll, actually most people (that aren't stupid airliners.net armchair CEO's, that whine about PTV's) prefer CRJ's due to the quiet and cozy cabin that these aircraft provide. I do get out and fly on CRJ's all the time...and many of my conversations with fellow passengers have been about their view on the CRJ's or ERJ's. Most of them are very positive views and that's all that matters. Passengers are comfortable, then they keep coming back. Now try to get someone on an EMB-120...that's a different story.

The CRJ200 line will come to an end, and not because it "wasn't a real airplane," because indeed this aircraft was the one that pioneered it all and that changed the way that we view 'regional' aircraft. The line will be closing because airlines are finding out that the CASM for the 50-40 seater RJ's is much higher than in the CR7's and CR9's. You will see that these aircraft are selling very well and are actually becoming popular overseas, with carriers such as Air Nostrum in Spain taking deliveries of the CR9's.

My final point is that for someone to be such a "know-it-all" about aviation, would not refer to a very successful family of pioneering aircraft in the industry, as a "fake plane or not real plane." To base it on the idea that the aircraft are smaller than the average 737, MD-80, A320, then your ideas about the industry are rather simplistic and for a 23 year old to be telling you this, well, you might want to consider a change of occupation, for this one that you are currently involved in will not benefit anyone you are doing consulting for.

Regards
Twinjets...if one fails, work the other one twice as hard!!!
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5288
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:05 pm

Quoting 767-332ER (Reply 26):
The RJ's have proven to be moneymakers and your comment on the reason being that the legacies are losing money due to the contracts they have with regional carriers is absurd.

Wheres the proof that RJ's are moneymakers? The regionals certainly make money on them because they have fixed fee contracts that almost GUARANTEE a profit. However, there is little evidence that the majors make money on the RJ's.

The only reason the majors have kept RJ operations is that they desperately need the incremental revenue provided by the hub feed. Delta, for example, has two hubs with relatively low O+D traffic. They need a ton of feed to keep the hubs alive. So DL has invested heavily in RJ's. RJ's have become a necessary evil to keep hubs alive, but in reality they have little chance of making a profit for the majors.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:26 pm

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 22):
Name one industry leader operating CRJ's. The industries leaders have been replaced with LCC.

In Europe industry leaders Lufthansa (LH Cityline + Eurowings) fly 77 x CRJs and have 12 x CRJ900 on order, Air France regional Brit Air fly 32 x CRJs, Iberia regional Air Nostrum fly around 30 x CRJs and have orders/intentions for 15-20 more CRJs, Austrian Airlines (Arrows + Lauda) fly 21 x CRJs. British Airways had (or still have?) Maersk Air UK flying up to 16 x CRJs.

Not to forget Air Canada which fly 56 x CRJs (in AC Jazz livery).

Source: BBD.com, order/delivery chart ending January 31, 2006

I have myself flown Austrian's CRJ200 on a 2,5 hour flight with 49 other pax, and it was great. I think a nice inflight product will compensate for any shortcomings the cabin has. A tasty breakfast with a choice of fresh warm breads beats half a can of cola, that's for sure...

LH is one of the most profitable carriers in the world, and yet they fly a big fleet of CRJs and A340s = the two aircraft types that are slagged off the most here on A.net... they must be off their rocker!  Yeah sure
Oh, and they don't have PTVs either...  yell 
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:18 am

Quoting 767-332ER (Reply 26):
The line will be closing because airlines are finding out that the CASM for the 50-40 seater RJ's is much higher than in the CR7's and CR9's.

That argument does not hold water... it is like saying that Boeing would close down the 736 because the CASM is much higher than the 73G and 738.

No, the real reason that the CRJ200 line is closed is because there is a glut of 50-seat RJs on the market due to pilot union Scope Clauses. For example, do you think that AE really only wants 25 CRJ700s? Of course not, but Scope limits them to that number. Now that Scopes are getting a bit less restrictive, airlines are starting to get the larger equipment that they always wanted but were denied.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 6:09 am

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 29):
The line will be closing because airlines are finding out that the CASM for the 50-40 seater RJ's is much higher than in the CR7's and CR9's.

That argument does not hold water... it is like saying that Boeing would close down the 736 because the CASM is much higher than the 73G and 738.

That's not a fair argument because the 736/G/8/9 are all produced from the same line...each aircraft are essentially identical, save for the fuselage length. The same cannot be said for the CRJ100/200 and 700/900.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 29):
No, the real reason that the CRJ200 line is closed is because there is a glut of 50-seat RJs on the market due to pilot union Scope Clauses. For example, do you think that AE really only wants 25 CRJ700s? Of course not, but Scope limits them to that number. Now that Scopes are getting a bit less restrictive, airlines are starting to get the larger equipment that they always wanted but were denied.

You are partially correct with respect to scope having an effect on orders, but you kind of contradict your argument about why the CRJ100/200 line was shut down. You first say that the line is shut down due to a glut of 50 seat aircraft because of pilot scope clauses. Pilot scope clauses by and large don't heavily restrict aircraft with 50 seats or less, they cap the number of 70+ seat aircraft that can be contracted out. Your example of AE is right on the money; of course they want more CR7's, but APA won't have it. The reason the company wants bigger airplanes is not to inflate the egos of their respective pilots, but because these larger aircraft do in fact have better economics (CASM) than the 50 seaters.

When RJ's first came on the scene many moons ago, they were a step up from turboprops and the airlines were much more profitable. The economic advantage to the airlines was that they got a higher RASM with RJ's by charging alot to fly from say SAV to LGA on DL Connection. Now, things have changed and even the business traveler has become a bargain shopper, so the economics for the 50 seat RJ's don't work very well. Moreover, with the advent of the E170 which is superior to the CR7, both manufacturers and airlines realize that along with being too expensive, the CRJ 100/200 along with the ERJ135/145 are small and cramped: an inferior product offering. Dare I say they are the 'new' turboprops that pax love to hate.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
767-332ER
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 1:20 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 7:57 am

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 27):
Quoting 767-332ER (Reply 26):
The RJ's have proven to be moneymakers and your comment on the reason being that the legacies are losing money due to the contracts they have with regional carriers is absurd.

Wheres the proof that RJ's are moneymakers? The regionals certainly make money on them because they have fixed fee contracts that almost GUARANTEE a profit. However, there is little evidence that the majors make money on the RJ's.

The only reason the majors have kept RJ operations is that they desperately need the incremental revenue provided by the hub feed. Delta, for example, has two hubs with relatively low O+D traffic. They need a ton of feed to keep the hubs alive. So DL has invested heavily in RJ's. RJ's have become a necessary evil to keep hubs alive, but in reality they have little chance of making a profit for the majors.

Okay, first of all, the fact that the regionals have contracts with the major carriers is not a guarantee profit. The regionals have to meet the expected goals, such as arrivals within 15 mins, completion factors, load factors, etc. If a regional carrier does not meet the great number of specified goals in the contract, then they do not get paid. The majors buy the seats, just as travel agents buy seats, though the majors buy all the seats as opposed to just a block of seats, but in order for these companies to make profits then they must ensure that they have an efficient and smooth running operation with lowered costs. They cannot do this with aircraft that are not money makers and are not efficient to operate.

The reason as to why Delta Connection (among other majors) are using Connection/Express carriers to operate longer haul routes, knocks your last statement out. Yes, the RJ's will be used in routes such as ATL-SHV or ATL-BTR, where demand is lower and smaller aircraft must be utilized. However, you are also seeing an increase in RJ's being used on longer routes, such as ATL-STX or ATL-PLS, routes that would guarantee higher loads but thus the lower operating costs of the CRJ/CR7's prove these aircraft to be ideal for these routes.

I am assuming the two hubs with relative low O&D that you are referring to are SLC and CVG (as ATL is one of the largest O&D areas out there, do a search if you question me). Please explain why are we also seeing a simultaneous increase in routes operated by RJ's along with mainline from SLC & CVG? New York, being one of the greatest O&D markets out there is also seeing an increase in RJ (both CRJ's & ERJ's) traffic with ASA, Comair and Chautaqua.

The fact of the matter is that RJ's in general (CRJ/CR7/CR9, ERJ) are increasing due to their economics. With regards to the scope clauses, I understand them very well, but hey, the E170 is complying with most scope clauses, why don't some of these airlines switch directly to the E170 if the economics and efficiency of the CRJ/CR7 was so low? In the long run it would be cheaper, correct? If it were so inefficient, then we would see Delta force this change to be imposed considering that Delta has a 15 year contract with EV & OO.
Twinjets...if one fails, work the other one twice as hard!!!
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 8:30 am

Quoting 767-332ER (Reply 31):
With regards to the scope clauses, I understand them very well, but hey, the E170 is complying with most scope clauses, why don't some of these airlines switch directly to the E170 if the economics and efficiency of the CRJ/CR7 was so low? In the long run it would be cheaper, correct? If it were so inefficient, then we would see Delta force this change to be imposed considering that Delta has a 15 year contract with EV & OO.

The cost of doing such would be obscene to say the least. Since DL has the largest fleet of RJ's operated under Delta Connection, I think they do have the desire to have a fleet comprised mostly of the E170 and probably the E190 as well, but they cannot afford to make that change right now; perhaps a few years down the line though.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
FutureFO
Posts: 2811
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2001 10:58 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:23 am

The EMB family from the 135 all the way up to the 190 are far superior to the CRJ family. The 135 may be small but it is a pocket rocket a/c and is more comfortable than the CRJ100. The 170/190 family of a/c are designed to increase pax comfort and that is wha they do. The 170 is a far greater airplane the CR7 and you can take that to the bank. AE starting service from ORD-NAS, I believe on the CR7, 4 hours on a tiny airplane. Where as the 170 from JFK-AUS same flight time is a more comfortable ride and far more spacious.



The situation with DLC at both ATL and CVG with jetways, is an easy explanation. The biggest problem is C concourse at CVG. Way to many parking spaces. A concourse at CVG is pretty bad as you have 2 parking spaces covering one jetway door. ATL is just a mess at C and D concourses.



Sean from MCO and SDF
I Don't know where I am anymore
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:55 am

Quoting FutureFO (Reply 33):
ORD-NAS, I believe on the CR7, 4 hours on a tiny airplane. Where as the 170 from JFK-AUS same flight time is a more comfortable ride and far more spacious.

Im having a hard time with JFK-AUS being 4 hours.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 10:20 am

Av Consultant,
you obviously consult in your dreams and not reality. Your lack of knowledge about the subject is woefully obvious. Many of your statements are patently obvious and you know you pulled them out of thin air with no backing.

Back to the original question.... yes, I do believe Comair could see the E170 because DL would certainly like to sell Comair as DL comes out of BK. Not only does DL need the cash but they no longer need Comair to be an owned subsidiary. Once Comair's costs are brought down to competitive levels, they will become not only a quality carrier (which they have long been - and the pioneer of the RJ) but also a competitively priced one as well. The best way for Comair's value to be enhanced in preparation for a divestiture is for DL to place the highest value regional aircraft with Comair.

As for ASA and Skywest, unless they can guarantee to operate the E170 cheaper than any other operator (and Republic is a pretty low cost operator), DL has no strategic reason to place any E170s with ASA/Skywest.
 
S5FA170
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:04 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:33 pm

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 34):
Im having a hard time with JFK-AUS being 4 hours.

What do you mean by this? Are you having a hard time believing that JFK-AUS could take 4 hours? I work this route almost once every week, and I can guarentee you it is a long flight. It is blocked at 4:20 and routinely takes anywhere from 3:30 to 5:40 non-stop, depending on the headwinds.

-Tony
Prepare doors for departure and cross-check.
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Sun Mar 12, 2006 5:13 pm

Quoting S5FA170 (Reply 36):
What do you mean by this? Are you having a hard time believing that JFK-AUS could take 4 hours? I work this route almost once every week, and I can guarentee you it is a long flight. It is blocked at 4:20 and routinely takes anywhere from 3:30 to 5:40 non-stop, depending on the headwinds

I never said it was incorrect, I just didn't think it was that long of a flight. I have flown MCO-LAS, CVG-SEA and HNL-LAX all in four hours, I just didn't know JFK-SAT took that long, but I learn something new every day.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
S5FA170
Posts: 528
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:04 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 12:46 am

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 37):
I never said it was incorrect, I just didn't think it was that long of a flight

I just wasn't sure if you meant you didn't think it was 4 hours long or if you meant you were having a hard time with it being 4 hours from an "I've flown it and its an uncomfortable flight" standpoint. If that had been the case I was going to launch into my "our economy seats are an inch wider than Delta mainline..." and other reasons why you couldn't possibly be uncomfortable on my airplane  Wink

-Tony
Prepare doors for departure and cross-check.
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:14 am

Quoting S5FA170 (Reply 38):
just wasn't sure if you meant you didn't think it was 4 hours long or if you meant you were having a hard time with it being 4 hours from an "I've flown it and its an uncomfortable flight" standpoint. If that had been the case I was going to launch into my "our economy seats are an inch wider than Delta mainline..." and other reasons why you couldn't possibly be uncomfortable on my airplane

Oh no, I'd love to fly on one...actually I'd love to pilot one more than anything. Do you have any interior pics of DL Connection E170's?
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 39):
Do you have any interior pics of DL Connection E170's?

Just look at any EMB-170 interior... they're all the same. The only differance is the color of the leather. I think the Shuttle America-Delta Connection are dark blue....
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 4:13 am

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 30):
That's not a fair argument because the 736/G/8/9 are all produced from the same line...each aircraft are essentially identical, save for the fuselage length. The same cannot be said for the CRJ100/200 and 700/900.

It is absolutley a fair argument. And the production line has nothing to do with it. I could have just as easily substituted with the A318 (Hamburg) and A320 (Tolouse).

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 30):
You are partially correct with respect to scope having an effect on orders, but you kind of contradict your argument about why the CRJ100/200 line was shut down.

No I don't contradict my argument at all!

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 30):
You first say that the line is shut down due to a glut of 50 seat aircraft because of pilot scope clauses. Pilot scope clauses by and large don't heavily restrict aircraft with 50 seats or less, they cap the number of 70+ seat aircraft that can be contracted out.

Precisely! Because under most Scopes there are no sub-50 seat RJ restrictions, airlines ordered 40- and 44-seat RJs because they had no other option when what they really wanted was a larger aircraft.

Obviously it makes absolutely no economic sense for BBD (or the purchaser) to pull 4 seats out of the CRJ-200 and call it a CRJ-440 EXCEPT just to get around a Scope Clause.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 5:29 am

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 41):
It is absolutley a fair argument. And the production line has nothing to do with it. I could have just as easily substituted with the A318 (Hamburg) and A320 (Tolouse).

Again, you are comparing apples and oranges here and the production line has everything to do with the 737. BOEING does not maufacture the 736 in Renton and the rest in Everett; the 736/G/8/9 are not separate aircarft for the purpose of manufacture...there really is no 736 line to shut down. The line is run that way on purpose to make it more efficient. Its the same story with the 762, that line is not shut down because its all the same as the 763(ER), Boeing just hasn't built any because they haven't had orders.

God only knows why the French build the A318 in one location and the rest of the A32X family at another. And as for BBD, the CRJ200 is a different aircraft and manufactured on a different line from the CR7/9. The fact that there is even a line to shut down is proof.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 41):
Precisely! Because under most Scopes there are no sub-50 seat RJ restrictions, airlines ordered 40- and 44-seat RJs because they had no other option when what they really wanted was a larger aircraft.

This makes absolutely no sense! If they wanted larger aircarft because of better CASM, why in the world would they have made the already high CASM 50 seater into a 40 and 44 seater? Why cosmetically alter an aircraft into a 'smaller' one when they really wanted a larger one? Why not just take more 50 seaters? Im speaking mostly of DL here because their scople clause does not limit 50 seat jets at all or at least it didn't at the time ASA and Comair were taking them in large numbers. The reason they made them into 40 and 44 seaters is because both carriers got rid of their E120's and needed some smaller aircraft and it made more sense to standardize around the CRJ which they both had large numbers of.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 41):
Obviously it makes absolutely no economic sense for BBD (or the purchaser) to pull 4 seats out of the CRJ-200 and call it a CRJ-440 EXCEPT just to get around a Scope Clause

This is true of airlines such as Pinnacle because NWALPA was not as liberal with 50 seat jets as DALPA.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 5:36 am

Quoting S5FA170 (Reply 24):
Wexford Capital owned both Chautauqua Airlines and Shuttle America. CHQ didn't own S5 through Wexford, we just bought them from the same company that owns us. Its all kind of confusing, but saying we owned S5 already is not correct.

You'll need to better explain the chain of events that lead to today for me then. I knew Wexford owned both CHQ and S5 for several years. My understanding was CHQ flew the Saab 340. CHQ wanted to start flying the E145 and Wexford bought S5 certificate (2000-01 window) and transfered the Saab's to them. So then CHQ flew the E145 and S5 flew the Saabs. CHQ then wanted to add the E170 (2004-05), but because of Scope Clause issues transfers those to the S5 certificate which has no Scope Clause. USAirways decides to sell off Mid Atlantic and CHQ forms Republic Airlines to fly the USAirways Express flying...at that point Repubic Holdings is created and here we are today. So at what point did, or has Wexford sold off they stake in all this and how do you say S5 was 'bought' when they have been part of this all along...? It's like taking money from your right pocket and moving it to your left pocket and saying you just got paid..

[Edited 2006-03-12 21:38:07]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 5:56 am

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 42):
And as for BBD, the CRJ200 is a different aircraft and manufactured on a different line from the CR7/9. The fact that there is even a line to shut down is proof.

No. You are not knowledgeable about this subject.

FYI, the CRJ-700 was initially built in Dorval. The only reason why production was was moved to Mirabel was because there was not enough space at Dorval to accomodate full rate production of the CRJ-200 AND both the CRJ-700 and -900. Its that simple!

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 42):
This makes absolutely no sense!

It makes total sense given the irrational restrictions imposed on airlines by Scope Clauses.

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 42):
If they wanted larger aircarft because of better CASM, why in the world would they have made the already high CASM 50 seater into a 40 and 44 seater?

Because under scope they were not permitted larger aircraft.

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 42):
Why not just take more 50 seaters?

Because under scope they were not permitted larger aircraft.

It is really quite simple and I don't understand what you don't understand about the rational for the glut of CRJ-200s.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 6:11 am

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 44):
No. You are not knowledgeable about this subject.

FYI, the CRJ-700 was initially built in Dorval. The only reason why production was was moved to Mirabel was because there was not enough space at Dorval to accomodate full rate production of the CRJ-200 AND both the CRJ-700 and -900. Its that simple!

The city where the aircraft is manufactured doesn't necessarily mean they are manufactured on the same LINE. One line builds CRJ200's and the other builds the CR7/CR9.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 44):
Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 42):
If they wanted larger aircarft because of better CASM, why in the world would they have made the already high CASM 50 seater into a 40 and 44 seater?

Because under scope they were not permitted larger aircraft.

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 42):
Why not just take more 50 seaters?

Because under scope they were not permitted larger aircraft.

Ok, If I have a 50 seat airplane and I want a bigger one, but can't because of scope, but I am not restircted on 50 seaters, you're saying it makes perfect sense for me to go to BBD and ask them to remove seats from the 50 seater and give me some with 40 and 44 seats? Thus giving me an even smaller product when I want a bigger one. Im telling you, this moe was about right-sizing the aircraft in the markets where they replaced the smaller Brazilias...again, Im speaking about DL here as I said before. I agree that the NWA/Pinnalce siutation was about scope as you state it.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 44):
It is really quite simple and I don't understand what you don't understand about the rational for the glut of CRJ-200s.

I understand it perfectly...there is a glut because they were ordered in large numbers and now the industry has changed, the economics of 50 seaters suck and the airlines want bigger jets now but are stuck with what they have.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:41 am

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 45):
The city where the aircraft is manufactured doesn't necessarily mean they are manufactured on the same LINE. One line builds CRJ200's and the other builds the CR7/CR9.

You are showing again why you do not understand this topic... there are in fact multiple LINES for both the -200 and the -700/900 models! It is pointless for you to continue on this red herring.

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 45):
but I am not restircted on 50 seaters, you're saying it makes perfect sense for me to go to BBD and ask them to remove seats from the 50 seater and give me some with 40 and 44 seats?

But that is what you do not understand... the Scope restriction applies to 50-seaters... not just to 70-seaters. There are only so many 50-seaters that are allowed.

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 45):
Im telling you, this moe was about right-sizing the aircraft in the markets where they replaced the smaller Brazilias...again, Im speaking about DL here as I said before.

No, it was about Scope... not "right-sizing."

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 45):
...the economics of 50 seaters suck and the airlines want bigger jets now but are stuck with what they have.

The economics of 50-seaters obviously do not "suck" on routes where they are appropriate. And the airlines always wanted jets larger than the 50-seaters... it is not just "now" as you say.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:46 am

OK Planemaker, Im calling it a day on this one...we just have to agree to disagree on certain things. Good debate though.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5288
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:16 am

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 35):
The best way for Comair's value to be enhanced in preparation for a divestiture is for DL to place the highest value regional aircraft with Comair.

As for ASA and Skywest, unless they can guarantee to operate the E170 cheaper than any other operator (and Republic is a pretty low cost operator), DL has no strategic reason to place any E170s with ASA/Skywest.

It's scary but I actually agree with WorldTraveler on this one. Assuming DL is able to negotiate with the DL pilots to allow DCI to take on flying up to 78 seaters, I see DL doing the following:

ASA/SkyWest: DL will allocate more CRJ700 flying and possibly add CRJ705/900 with F class.

Republic/Shuttle America: Additional EMB170/175.

Comair: If DL can get Comair cleaned up for a sale, they will promise whoever buys Comair a nice order for either EMB170 family or CRJ700 family aircraft.
 
worldtraveler
Posts: 3417
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Chances Of E170's For Comair/ASA

Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:33 am

it's rational so it's ok to agree. DL's bankruptcy exit will depend on getting the value out of its subsidiaries and DL needs to recoup its investment in Comair and not lose money like they did on ASA. DL wants bigger aircraft, the industry seems to be pushing the cutoff from 70 to /7879 seats, and DL wants to enhance the onboard service on RJs (which require two FAs anyway) so the CR9 in a 78 seat config makes alot of sense. Also, Bombardier has no choice but to aggressively price its planes because they have no real competitor to the EMB 170/190 (from a cabin perspective). DL could well order CR7/9s while waiting for Boeing to develop a 100 seat replacement to the lower end of the 737 family. The only alternative is to order the EMB 170/90 and that could happen but probably only with some 190s. You will see some in DL colors but it doesn't make sense for DL to order a bunch of them from a sole supplier, esp. if that supplier cannot supply DL's other needs - like ultra long haul aircraft and new generation widebodies. In reality, DL could probably use 150-200 aircraft with 80ish to 110ish seats.

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