zkojq wrote:I absolutely understand where you are coming from, but IMO because the E190 is such a liquid asset, which such a wide variety of operators, the lessors really don't have too much to worry about. The wide base of E1 operators will make it much easier for lessors to place new E2 aircraft.
Actually... No. We have a situation similar to the A330NEO where leasing companies are competing with the airframer. Until enough operators select to lease the type (and dry up already purchased slots), we have a case of too many salespeople calling on the same customers.
However, once enough new orders are placed (I happen to agree about 130+45 unknown? are the sales basis), that situation will end abruptly.
As a Pratt fan I fear that airlines are waiting until Pratt truly proves reliable operation. Sadly, they have missed far to many "and this will fix it" promises.
But many E1 operators were not happy with reliability/durability and the number of backup aircraft they had to keep available. The Gold standard is a far lower fraction of the fleet as backup.
"From my perspective the introduction of the Embraer 190-E2 seems like a success. It seems that Widerøe have taken a conservative approach to utilizing the new aircraft. With an average of around 5-6 hrs of production every day spread across 2-3 round trips, the risks of delays and cancellations is minimized. Minor delays are easily caught up because of the generous timetable for these new aircraft. Widerøe is also working very closely with Embraer and Pratt & Whitney to ensure that everything runs smoothly."
The introduction has been an outstanding success. Now the issue is production where the same weak link (Pratt) must step up their game.
Okcflyer wrote:The reality is that in this size segment, reliability and maintenance costs matter more than 1-3% of fuel burn relative to peers. If the E2 can meet or exceed Neo and MAX (gold standard) performance for overall reliability and maintenance costs (frame, systems, engines) then I fully expect additional orders.
Maturity in this market range is massively important ... it seems EMB understood this and invested time/resources accordingly to achieve.
Cheers to future campaign wins!
This I can agree with all points.
Fuel in this segment is < 30% of total costs. However, the Pratt are much more than a 3% drop.
But it will be exceeding performance standards (something the E-190/195-E1s had an issue with when they were competitive).
The E2-175 is a non-starter without US scope clause, so Embraer needs to sell E2-190s/195s (I think the later will be 70% of E2s).
So far the E2s are looking good for reliability.
Does anyone have a link to the LOV for cycles and hours planned? What is the corrosion interval? The fact these aren't easy to find concerns me. Seriously, when I Bing or Google, I just find my own speculative posts here on a.net!