Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
 
TObound
Posts: 783
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:55 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
Which comes to one of my initial questions for this topic. Could a Boeing Embraer joint venture influence embraer jet sales on the u.s. market?


No. I'm guessing you're not American. There seems to be this weird projection from non-Americans that American carriers are automatically biased towards Boeing because Boeing is US based. They are businesses. They go with what fits the business plan. Simple as that.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6301
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:57 pm

dxBrian wrote:
In my opinion, pay rates should be the same for all aircraft flown. There are many benefits from this, one of them being training costs are significantly reduced because you don't have to change airplanes to get a pay increase. UPS pays the same across their fleet. The only reason to bid a different aircraft is to change bases. But the current pay system is pretty well entrenched, so it probably won't change.


Been brought up many times in US. Unions won’t hear of it for the simple reason the senior (high dues paying) pilots will take a huge pay cut. The union would want B787/A350 pay for everyone and the company would want B737/A320 pay. Now, you could argue something in between, say 767/A330; but that would add a lot of money to the narrow body pay while hitting the senior pilots. No surprise, there’s more narrow body pilots than wide body.

IOW, not happening.
 
User avatar
FLALEFTY
Posts: 803
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 12:58 am

lightsaber wrote:
FLALEFTY wrote:
Here are my closing comments on the E175E2:

6) The plane is overweight due to airframe & wing changes needed to accomodate its state-of-the-art P&W engines.
7) The likelihood of major US airlines to change their scope clauses just to buy the E175E2 seems remote.

For 6, the airframe didn't have to be stretched as much as it was. That added far more weight. The wing need nacelle and fuel system changes to accommodate the engine were required. Much of the weight increase was to add range. The plane grew from 31.68m to 32.4m long. That added weight. Most of the weight increase was the wingspan increase from 26m to 31m.

That huge wingspan increase improves efficiency on the 90 minute+ missions. Wingspan increases stress at the wing root and thus a heavier wing box and wing (plus the added metal for the added wing area).

To meet scope the M90 was shrunk from the M90's 35.8 to M100's 34.5m.
The wingspan was reduced from 29.2m to 27.8m.

Now, the M100 will need to be longer due to cargo being behind instead of below.
The M90 was too heavy with a 26,000kg empty weight


The E2-175's empty weight is unknown, but the E1 was 21,680 kg.
The E2-190 grew from 27,837kg to 33,000 kg with 33.72m wingspan increased from 28.72m and length unchanged.
Some was the engines. But a 5m increase in wingspan is heavy. I suspect the E2-175 has an empty weight on the order of 4,500kg or 26,180kg or so (my back of the envelope estimate, assuming engines grew less in weight as the CF-34-10 had only one turbine row while the CF-34-8 had two).

I keep seeing overweight blamed exclusively on the engines. But in no way is a 5m wingspan increase required. Now was stretching the body (the E2-190 kept the same body length).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26 ... ifications

Wikipedia has the PW1200G weight at 1724 kg. The CF-34-8 engine weight is 2704lb (or 1226kg). So 1 ton of the weight increase is the engines (2x the per engine weight increase). There will be another say 500kg for the larger nacelle (larger fan diameter) for two nacelles. So 1500 kg due to the engine. The pylon weight also probably increased, let us say 150 kg more. Or 1650 kg total per aircraft.

There remains quite a few tons of weight of growth. I expect about 1,000kg for the advanced subsystems. They are more efficient, but heavier. Perhaps as much as 1200kg on this size of aircraft.

There is still about 1650 kg of weight increase that is on Embraer (by my estimate). Probably a bit more.
Engine weight:
https://www.flyradius.com/bombardier-cr ... cf34-8c5b1

A question on cargo:
First numbers:
E2-175 cargo: 9.92 m^3 (forward) + 7.2m^3 aft or 604 ft^3.

https://www.airplaneupdate.com/2019/02/ ... 75-e2.html

M100 reduces cargo to 480ft^3 from M90 640 ft^3:
https://leehamnews.com/2019/06/13/how-m ... -spacejet/

I couldn't find the E1-175 cargo volume. I did fine the E170 had 508ft^3:
http://www.team.aero/images/aviation_da ... e_jets.pdf

Do the E175 bins fill up? I wondered if this was any competitive advantage for the E2 being stretched.

I agree with the Leeham link, thanks to large bins in the SpaceJet, the aft cargo will fly mostly empty. It is supposed to have room for 76 wheeled bags in the overhead compartment per the leeham link. This is substantially higher than the current E-175 bins.

Lightsaber


You are correct, not all of the empty weight increase was due solely to the engines. The additional fuselage length to push capacity from 76 to 80 in a typical 2-class layout certainly contributed. The increased wingspan also factored into to the weight increase. Had they gone with the CFRP wing as proposed early in the design cycle, maybe they could have gotten their larger wingspan without the weight increase?
 
airlineworker
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:43 am

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
The embraer 135 trough 145 didn't receive an engine and wing avionics upgrade in decades. Why doesn't embraer seem to see à market anymore for this 50 seat regional aircraft?????? Does it have something to do with fuel? Still many are flying globally though.

Because there is no more market for any new 50-seater jets.
The only competitor was the CRJ100/200/440, and it's gone off the production line as well.


Why are they still flying if there isn't any market on them?


Because fuel is low and there still some hours left before C checks are due. Airlines have dropping small cities for many years now, GON, BDR, DAN, EEN and many others since the B-1900, Saab A340 and Dash-8 have been scrapped. I flew some time ago PHL-GON and there were about 4 people on board, sounds like the loads today with Covid-19.
There is no market for small, 50 seat and lower planes. Airlines don't want them and neither do pasengers.
 
argentinevol98
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:40 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:30 am

TObound wrote:

No. I'm guessing you're not American. There seems to be this weird projection from non-Americans that American carriers are automatically biased towards Boeing because Boeing is US based. They are businesses. They go with what fits the business plan. Simple as that.


I didn't understand the question as relating to an American bias towards Boeing but if Boeing could help Embraer compete better. There are a lot of way the partnership could ease sales on the US market for E2s that aren't related to a Boeing bias. Boeing has far deeper pockets that Embraer, for example, to push sales (including helping with discounts)-especially true when Embraer is facing a much much larger competitor in Airbus. Boeing gives Embraer more mass to compete with Airbus. That's got nothing to do with bias in American carriers.
"He sospechado alguna vez que la única cosa sin misterio es la felicidad, porque se justifica por sí sola"-Jorge Luis Borges
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5045
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:40 am

dxBrian wrote:
In my opinion, pay rates should be the same for all aircraft flown. There are many benefits from this, one of them being training costs are significantly reduced because you don't have to change airplanes to get a pay increase. UPS pays the same across their fleet. The only reason to bid a different aircraft is to change bases. But the current pay system is pretty well entrenched, so it probably won't change.

again? you make an anomaly like the rule. What other airline in the USA does that? I'll tell you. Nobody!
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5045
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:54 am

embraer175e2 wrote:
EssentialBusDC wrote:
There is no need to modify scope clauses. If mainline managment really wants the 175-E2, they can buy them now, with mainline pilots flying them.

You are more likely to see pay and quality of life contractual changes, should it become necessary, then you will see any scope changes.

The biggest benefit for the company to having it as a mainline flown aircraft is the elimination of any restrictions (seat counts, number of aircraft in fleet, range etc. ). Scope wouldn’t apply.

But given the current economic situation, no one will be buying for a while.


And just move up the pilots and engineers from the smaller regional carriers up to the mainline carriers ?

Yes. and that would hurt Whom? The Worst that can happen? Is the regional mechanics would have fewer Bases more than likely and maybe have to face seniority from the mainline mechanics who might bid into regional Maintenance. I for One? Enjoyed my time as a regional mechanic. Were the Pay and benefits equal to what I made at United? I would have stayed. I was lucky in that my 33 years at United? Were all consecutive. I was never laid off nor even faced a layoff. I took a job and a shift not many wanted though I don't know why. Working Swing shift was the "Berries".
 
FlyinRabbit88
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:56 am

Airline crews in the US have very long memories. Those who were at the regionals after 9/11 through the “lost decade” and the huge growth of the regionals know how management wants to play this. With many of the seniority lists at the legacies being from regionals they know how much scope is worth to their jobs and selling out to reduce scope won’t happen this time. If United or whoever wants the E175/E195 E2 there is nothing stopping them to bringing the aircraft on property for mainline crews to fly them. Delta figured out in many ways it can improve the bottom line bringing back flying to mainline vs outsourcing.

Many mainline contracts have pay rates for the CR9 and E190, just like they have A380 rates.

There is a reason why jetblue pilots felt scope was a major part to their first contract. Alaska pilots are trying to reign in scope on their next contract. Pilots have learned more pay on a wide body isn’t worth the losses by relaxing scope.
It’s just my opinion but even during these very rough times, pilots still won’t release any scope that hurts pilots best interests at that mainline. Seniority lists are younger than what they used to and have had great history lessons of what could happen in various furlough situations. Hence why you hear a majority of pilots say “Full pay till the last day!” Why make concessions when they really don’t help and will probably get them anyway in bankruptcy. Any concession will take years, decades or never to get back, so why open the box.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:58 am

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
The embraer 135 trough 145 didn't receive an engine and wing avionics upgrade in decades. Why doesn't embraer seem to see à market anymore for this 50 seat regional aircraft?????? Does it have something to do with fuel? Still many are flying globally though.

Because there is no more market for any new 50-seater jets.
The only competitor was the CRJ100/200/440, and it's gone off the production line as well.


Why are they still flying if there isn't any market on them?

There is no market for new ones.
The ones flying are either fully paid for, or on cheap leases.
There is a market for new cars; why do you think there's still plenty of 10+ year old cars on the road?
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:20 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Because there is no more market for any new 50-seater jets.
The only competitor was the CRJ100/200/440, and it's gone off the production line as well.


Why are they still flying if there isn't any market on them?

There is no market for new ones.
The ones flying are either fully paid for, or on cheap leases.
There is a market for new cars; why do you think there's still plenty of 10+ year old cars on the road?

So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6301
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:39 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:

Why are they still flying if there isn't any market on them?

There is no market for new ones.
The ones flying are either fully paid for, or on cheap leases.
There is a market for new cars; why do you think there's still plenty of 10+ year old cars on the road?

So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?


Perhaps or,

Cancellation of service to some locations

Fewer frequencies with upgauged planes

Depends on how much revenue can be earned, cost structures, subsidies.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20343
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:49 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:

Why are they still flying if there isn't any market on them?

There is no market for new ones.
The ones flying are either fully paid for, or on cheap leases.
There is a market for new cars; why do you think there's still plenty of 10+ year old cars on the road?

So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?

UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
Nean1
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:49 pm

1) The oil market throughout its history has exhibited high and low price cycles lasting 15 years. The current Covit-19 shock has precipitated a drop in fuel prices that will certainly last for long time.
2) The reduction in demand for air travel, especially long-distance travel, will probably take many years (4 or 5?) to be reversed due the global impoverishment.
3) On the development side, the great technical difficulties of the new engines and the problem with the 737-Max certification, in my opinion, will be a powerful conservative force in terms of technology. Mitsubishi has not yet certified any aircraft and certainly further delays will occur.
4) Embraer will not redesign the 175E2, since in the new scenario the 175E1 is still very competitive.
5) Finally, I believe that soon we will see jets with 30-35 seats designed with fully automatic flight capability, compatible with single pilot cabin.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:01 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:

Why are they still flying if there isn't any market on them?

There is no market for new ones.
The ones flying are either fully paid for, or on cheap leases.
There is a market for new cars; why do you think there's still plenty of 10+ year old cars on the road?

So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?

Or bigger aircraft. Or nothing altogether and they'll lose service.

3 50-seater a day could be replaced by 1 100-seater (like the A220-100) a day (the 3rd rotation customers will most likely be lost).

Airlines constantly re-evaluates their operations; and, lately, replacement has rarely been on a 1-to-1 basis, but involves bigger aircraft. And, if there's not enough pax to maintain the number of rotations, they will cut frequency, down to 0 if necessary.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:04 pm

lightsaber wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
There is no market for new ones.
The ones flying are either fully paid for, or on cheap leases.
There is a market for new cars; why do you think there's still plenty of 10+ year old cars on the road?

So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?

UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.
 
Jetport
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:23 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 4:50 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
Or bigger aircraft. Or nothing altogether and they'll lose service.

3 50-seater a day could be replaced by 1 100-seater (like the A220-100) a day (the 3rd rotation customers will most likely be lost).

Airlines constantly re-evaluates their operations; and, lately, replacement has rarely been on a 1-to-1 basis, but involves bigger aircraft. And, if there's not enough pax to maintain the number of rotations, they will cut frequency, down to 0 if necessary.


Losing service entirely or even going from 1 to 3 a day is a political non-starter in the USA. With the way the US Senate is set up, there is no way most Senators are going to let scope clauses and high mainline pilot compensation packages decimate service to smaller airports. There may be more subsidies for smaller airports or some legislation that alters scope clauses so that service levels at smaller airports can be maintained. I know I will be writing my 2 Senators regularly if the airlines try to cut frequency to PWM just because mainline flight crews cost too much.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 6:50 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?

UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

The crj550 looks more then a business class capacity increase possibility for airlines. Rather than a 50seat jet replacer.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6301
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 7:14 pm

Jetport wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Or bigger aircraft. Or nothing altogether and they'll lose service.

3 50-seater a day could be replaced by 1 100-seater (like the A220-100) a day (the 3rd rotation customers will most likely be lost).

Airlines constantly re-evaluates their operations; and, lately, replacement has rarely been on a 1-to-1 basis, but involves bigger aircraft. And, if there's not enough pax to maintain the number of rotations, they will cut frequency, down to 0 if necessary.


Losing service entirely or even going from 1 to 3 a day is a political non-starter in the USA. With the way the US Senate is set up, there is no way most Senators are going to let scope clauses and high mainline pilot compensation packages decimate service to smaller airports. There may be more subsidies for smaller airports or some legislation that alters scope clauses so that service levels at smaller airports can be maintained. I know I will be writing my 2 Senators regularly if the airlines try to cut frequency to PWM just because mainline flight crews cost too much.


You’re dreaming, any idea how many cities have lost service since deregulation? Lots and senstors aren’t going to subsidize losing services. We’re too far done the trail on that one. Besides scope clauses are negotiated contracts, not government gifts.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 7:52 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

The crj550 looks more then a business class capacity increase possibility for airlines. Rather than a 50seat jet replacer.

OK, but it still seats only 50 (give or take) and falls within scope clause.
You're trying to spin the issue in any imaginable way until you make us dizzy. But the reality is here: there were 2 aircraft manufacturers recently that made 50-seater jets (Bombardier with the CRJ200 and Embraer with the ERJs), one of them decided to stop manufacturing of this frame 10+ years ago (Bombardier in 2006) and the other one seems to be delivering only bizjets variants of it (Embraer seems to have delivered the last passenger ERJ in 2016).

So, again, I'll ask: who is ordering new 50-seaters? No one is, that's why the production lines are either closed or trickling down bizjets only. And also why they haven't been NEO'd/MAX'd.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 8:02 pm

Jetport wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Or bigger aircraft. Or nothing altogether and they'll lose service.

3 50-seater a day could be replaced by 1 100-seater (like the A220-100) a day (the 3rd rotation customers will most likely be lost).

Airlines constantly re-evaluates their operations; and, lately, replacement has rarely been on a 1-to-1 basis, but involves bigger aircraft. And, if there's not enough pax to maintain the number of rotations, they will cut frequency, down to 0 if necessary.


Losing service entirely or even going from 1 to 3 a day is a political non-starter in the USA. With the way the US Senate is set up, there is no way most Senators are going to let scope clauses and high mainline pilot compensation packages decimate service to smaller airports. There may be more subsidies for smaller airports or some legislation that alters scope clauses so that service levels at smaller airports can be maintained. I know I will be writing my 2 Senators regularly if the airlines try to cut frequency to PWM just because mainline flight crews cost too much.

Political non-starter? Well, I guess then all those cities that have lately lost commercial service never started then.

PWM you says? Right now, every "major" (except Alaska) flies in and out of PWM; so, chances that all of them drops it are very slim.
But, push come to shove, BOS is less then 2-hour drive away and BGR shy over 2 hours. Not insurmountably.

If you feel you are entitled air service from PWM, then feel free to write the airlines and tell them you're ready to pay the real cost of the ticket; I'm sure they'll be happy to send a plane your way, not sure you'll be happy to pay the bill though...
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 8:43 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

The crj550 looks more then a business class capacity increase possibility for airlines. Rather than a 50seat jet replacer.

OK, but it still seats only 50 (give or take) and falls within scope clause.
You're trying to spin the issue in any imaginable way until you make us dizzy. But the reality is here: there were 2 aircraft manufacturers recently that made 50-seater jets (Bombardier with the CRJ200 and Embraer with the ERJs), one of them decided to stop manufacturing of this frame 10+ years ago (Bombardier in 2006) and the other one seems to be delivering only bizjets variants of it (Embraer seems to have delivered the last passenger ERJ in 2016).

So, again, I'll ask: who is ordering new 50-seaters? No one is, that's why the production lines are either closed or trickling down bizjets only. And also why they haven't been NEO'd/MAX'd.

Can you believe it in 15years from now only 76 seat jets flying the routes of all 50 seat jets. Means pax amounts Haasss to grow for the aircrafts to be productive.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 8:53 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

The crj550 looks more then a business class capacity increase possibility for airlines. Rather than a 50seat jet replacer.

OK, but it still seats only 50 (give or take) and falls within scope clause.
You're trying to spin the issue in any imaginable way until you make us dizzy. But the reality is here: there were 2 aircraft manufacturers recently that made 50-seater jets (Bombardier with the CRJ200 and Embraer with the ERJs), one of them decided to stop manufacturing of this frame 10+ years ago (Bombardier in 2006) and the other one seems to be delivering only bizjets variants of it (Embraer seems to have delivered the last passenger ERJ in 2016).

So, again, I'll ask: who is ordering new 50-seaters? No one is, that's why the production lines are either closed or trickling down bizjets only. And also why they haven't been NEO'd/MAX'd.

Maybe nobody has ordered because there hasn't been any upgrades. Officially the erj is still in production.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2352
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:07 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
OK, but it still seats only 50 (give or take) and falls within scope clause.
You're trying to spin the issue in any imaginable way until you make us dizzy. But the reality is here: there were 2 aircraft manufacturers recently that made 50-seater jets (Bombardier with the CRJ200 and Embraer with the ERJs), one of them decided to stop manufacturing of this frame 10+ years ago (Bombardier in 2006) and the other one seems to be delivering only bizjets variants of it (Embraer seems to have delivered the last passenger ERJ in 2016).

So, again, I'll ask: who is ordering new 50-seaters? No one is, that's why the production lines are either closed or trickling down bizjets only. And also why they haven't been NEO'd/MAX'd.

Can you believe it in 15years from now only 76 seat jets flying the routes of all 50 seat jets. Means pax amounts Haasss to grow for the aircrafts to be productive.


I could believe it. Just like how 15-20 years ago, the US majors still had branded regional carriers flying 19-30 seat turboprops and those are all gone, and nobody needed a new 30 seat turboprop to replace them. The routes that survived got upgauged to 50 seats (there were some 37 and 44-seaters, but really not that many; the cost of flying one of those is essentially the same as the cost of flying a 50-seater).

So...yes, eliminating an entire capacity segment and upgauging, reducing frequency or ending service is definitely a believable set of options.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:27 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
Can you believe it in 15years from now only 76 seat jets flying the routes of all 50 seat jets. Means pax amounts Haasss to grow for the aircrafts to be productive.


Before the regional jets were introduced to passenger service, many of the US cities that are now served only by RJs had true mainline service with comparable frequency to the bigger hubs. If 50-seaters go away, a 76 or 100-seater would be a more natural upgauge but a 126-seat 737/319 wouldn't be the end of the world. With the exception of the current economic situation, people will fly more when there are seats available.

If the people that are hired to run and manage the airlines by the owners (stockholders) have determined that having mainline-compensated crews flying smaller aircraft isn't in their best financial interest, then that's pretty much it. They'll go to Plan B.
 
Jungleneer
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:56 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:07 pm

Nean1 wrote:
1) The oil market throughout its history has exhibited high and low price cycles lasting 15 years. The current Covit-19 shock has precipitated a drop in fuel prices that will certainly last for long time.
2) The reduction in demand for air travel, especially long-distance travel, will probably take many years (4 or 5?) to be reversed due the global impoverishment.
3) On the development side, the great technical difficulties of the new engines and the problem with the 737-Max certification, in my opinion, will be a powerful conservative force in terms of technology. Mitsubishi has not yet certified any aircraft and certainly further delays will occur.
4) Embraer will not redesign the 175E2, since in the new scenario the 175E1 is still very competitive.
5) Finally, I believe that soon we will see jets with 30-35 seats designed with fully automatic flight capability, compatible with single pilot cabin.


I second this. I believe that a redesign of the 175 Plus overhead bins for more space is necessary.
Another thing: the 175E2 without the extra length and wingspan, to accommodate more passengers would barely match the current 175 Plus performance, and would have lower range. This is mainly because of extra weight in engines. Also, due to the higher diameter of the engines, and the extra weight, the wings cannot be the same as E1, neither the landing gears.

For those who can read Portuguese, the 175 Plus model has 6.4% fuel burn advantage over original 175E1.
http://www.defesanet.com.br/embraer/not ... mbustivel/
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5045
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:44 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?

UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

The CRJ 550'sUnited ordered were all new built. they were built and configured from the Factory in the 50 seat Business class config. and actually? United can't add more seats to the airplane. None of their routes are mainline duplications as they all go to either ORD or IAD. from their stations. the E-jets could do the same out of IAH,DEN SFO and LAX if this is really successful. I'm retired now so I can't actually tell you how successful this might be or IS. But it looks good on Paper.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5045
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:46 pm

Jungleneer wrote:
Nean1 wrote:
1) The oil market throughout its history has exhibited high and low price cycles lasting 15 years. The current Covit-19 shock has precipitated a drop in fuel prices that will certainly last for long time.
2) The reduction in demand for air travel, especially long-distance travel, will probably take many years (4 or 5?) to be reversed due the global impoverishment.
3) On the development side, the great technical difficulties of the new engines and the problem with the 737-Max certification, in my opinion, will be a powerful conservative force in terms of technology. Mitsubishi has not yet certified any aircraft and certainly further delays will occur.
4) Embraer will not redesign the 175E2, since in the new scenario the 175E1 is still very competitive.
5) Finally, I believe that soon we will see jets with 30-35 seats designed with fully automatic flight capability, compatible with single pilot cabin.


I second this. I believe that a redesign of the 175 Plus overhead bins for more space is necessary.
Another thing: the 175E2 without the extra length and wingspan, to accommodate more passengers would barely match the current 175 Plus performance, and would have lower range. This is mainly because of extra weight in engines. Also, due to the higher diameter of the engines, and the extra weight, the wings cannot be the same as E1, neither the landing gears.

For those who can read Portuguese, the 175 Plus model has 6.4% fuel burn advantage over original 175E1.
http://www.defesanet.com.br/embraer/not ... mbustivel/

the fuel Burn is impressive, However? What good are the statistics if ALPA is the main obstacle in the USA??
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5045
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:49 pm

jetblastdubai wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
Can you believe it in 15years from now only 76 seat jets flying the routes of all 50 seat jets. Means pax amounts Haasss to grow for the aircrafts to be productive.


Before the regional jets were introduced to passenger service, many of the US cities that are now served only by RJs had true mainline service with comparable frequency to the bigger hubs. If 50-seaters go away, a 76 or 100-seater would be a more natural upgauge but a 126-seat 737/319 wouldn't be the end of the world. With the exception of the current economic situation, people will fly more when there are seats available.

If the people that are hired to run and manage the airlines by the owners (stockholders) have determined that having mainline-compensated crews flying smaller aircraft isn't in their best financial interest, then that's pretty much it. They'll go to Plan B.

AND? What exactly might Plan "B" entail?
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:52 pm

hOMSaR wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
OK, but it still seats only 50 (give or take) and falls within scope clause.
You're trying to spin the issue in any imaginable way until you make us dizzy. But the reality is here: there were 2 aircraft manufacturers recently that made 50-seater jets (Bombardier with the CRJ200 and Embraer with the ERJs), one of them decided to stop manufacturing of this frame 10+ years ago (Bombardier in 2006) and the other one seems to be delivering only bizjets variants of it (Embraer seems to have delivered the last passenger ERJ in 2016).

So, again, I'll ask: who is ordering new 50-seaters? No one is, that's why the production lines are either closed or trickling down bizjets only. And also why they haven't been NEO'd/MAX'd.

Can you believe it in 15years from now only 76 seat jets flying the routes of all 50 seat jets. Means pax amounts Haasss to grow for the aircrafts to be productive.


I could believe it. Just like how 15-20 years ago, the US majors still had branded regional carriers flying 19-30 seat turboprops and those are all gone, and nobody needed a new 30 seat turboprop to replace them. The routes that survived got upgauged to 50 seats (there were some 37 and 44-seaters, but really not that many; the cost of flying one of those is essentially the same as the cost of flying a 50-seater).

So...yes, eliminating an entire capacity segment and upgauging, reducing frequency or ending service is definitely a believable set of options.

But seventy is a much bigger number then 42 or 50. Imagine atr stops making the 42 series just with the same philosophy. Bombardier lost many customers by doing the above. Now we are talking about jet aircraft her so let's stick to the point.
If you think the seats will be filled ok ( with less frequency) but 70 remains a big number ;Thin routes like the erj135 flights of US Contour airlines routes won't be able to exist anymore.

There are still plenty of beach crafts 1900 and twin otters flying worldwide. Also Canada has a few handfulls of 37 - 30 seat props flying around.
Depending of the country. Maybe USA is a big country and upgauging in the US is an easier task. But smaller countries...
 
oosnowrat
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:10 am

WayexTDI wrote:

3 50-seater a day could be replaced by 1 100-seater (like the A220-100) a day (the 3rd rotation customers will most likely be lost).


Do you really see mainline carriers opening up a slug of stations in flyover country for one flight a day?
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1977
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:21 am

strfyr51 wrote:
AND? What exactly might Plan "B" entail?


CR550, and more used 73G/319s for starters.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5045
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:30 am

jetblastdubai wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
AND? What exactly might Plan "B" entail?


CR550, and more used 73G/319s for starters.

United is already campaigning used A319-132's they bought from China, they fly 73G's and the CRJ-550. But that's their model. what the other Majors do?
who can say? I haven't heard of anybody else doing this, Have you?0
 
Jungleneer
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:56 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 1:29 am

strfyr51 wrote:
Jungleneer wrote:
Nean1 wrote:
1) The oil market throughout its history has exhibited high and low price cycles lasting 15 years. The current Covit-19 shock has precipitated a drop in fuel prices that will certainly last for long time.
2) The reduction in demand for air travel, especially long-distance travel, will probably take many years (4 or 5?) to be reversed due the global impoverishment.
3) On the development side, the great technical difficulties of the new engines and the problem with the 737-Max certification, in my opinion, will be a powerful conservative force in terms of technology. Mitsubishi has not yet certified any aircraft and certainly further delays will occur.
4) Embraer will not redesign the 175E2, since in the new scenario the 175E1 is still very competitive.
5) Finally, I believe that soon we will see jets with 30-35 seats designed with fully automatic flight capability, compatible with single pilot cabin.


I second this. I believe that a redesign of the 175 Plus overhead bins for more space is necessary.
Another thing: the 175E2 without the extra length and wingspan, to accommodate more passengers would barely match the current 175 Plus performance, and would have lower range. This is mainly because of extra weight in engines. Also, due to the higher diameter of the engines, and the extra weight, the wings cannot be the same as E1, neither the landing gears.

For those who can read Portuguese, the 175 Plus model has 6.4% fuel burn advantage over original 175E1.
http://www.defesanet.com.br/embraer/not ... mbustivel/

the fuel Burn is impressive, However? What good are the statistics if ALPA is the main obstacle in the USA??


You are right, but my point is that the 175 Plus is competitive for current scope. With M100, Embraer will lose it’s 80% marketshare, but will be able to compete against M100 on current scope, since they could offer their product at very attractive prices...
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 1:43 am

strfyr51 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

The CRJ 550'sUnited ordered were all new built. they were built and configured from the Factory in the 50 seat Business class config. and actually? United can't add more seats to the airplane. None of their routes are mainline duplications as they all go to either ORD or IAD. from their stations. the E-jets could do the same out of IAH,DEN SFO and LAX if this is really successful. I'm retired now so I can't actually tell you how successful this might be or IS. But it looks good on Paper.

I’m not sure where you got that they are new-builds from. They are all converted CRJ700s.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 1:54 am

strfyr51 wrote:
Jungleneer wrote:
Nean1 wrote:
1) The oil market throughout its history has exhibited high and low price cycles lasting 15 years. The current Covit-19 shock has precipitated a drop in fuel prices that will certainly last for long time.
2) The reduction in demand for air travel, especially long-distance travel, will probably take many years (4 or 5?) to be reversed due the global impoverishment.
3) On the development side, the great technical difficulties of the new engines and the problem with the 737-Max certification, in my opinion, will be a powerful conservative force in terms of technology. Mitsubishi has not yet certified any aircraft and certainly further delays will occur.
4) Embraer will not redesign the 175E2, since in the new scenario the 175E1 is still very competitive.
5) Finally, I believe that soon we will see jets with 30-35 seats designed with fully automatic flight capability, compatible with single pilot cabin.


I second this. I believe that a redesign of the 175 Plus overhead bins for more space is necessary.
Another thing: the 175E2 without the extra length and wingspan, to accommodate more passengers would barely match the current 175 Plus performance, and would have lower range. This is mainly because of extra weight in engines. Also, due to the higher diameter of the engines, and the extra weight, the wings cannot be the same as E1, neither the landing gears.

For those who can read Portuguese, the 175 Plus model has 6.4% fuel burn advantage over original 175E1.
http://www.defesanet.com.br/embraer/not ... mbustivel/

the fuel Burn is impressive, However? What good are the statistics if ALPA is the main obstacle in the USA??


ALPA is most definitely not an obstacle. ALPA has not prevented any purchases for the E175-E2, or any other airplane for that matter, as buying airplanes isn’t ALPA’s business. They just prevent underpaid and outsourced pilots from flying them. The obstacle lies within the airlines’ C suites, where airplane purchases ARE decided. And that obstacle is the c suite not wanting to pay pilots fair wages to fly this plane. Again, US3 airline management and ALPA/APA have already negotiated pay rates for similar planes (CRJ-900) and each airline’s ALPA would gladly agree to those rates and apply them to any of the E-175 family and welcome the aircraft into the fleet. I can guarantee you DALPA, UAL ALPA, and APA at AA would be ecstatic to get some E175s (E1 or E2) on property.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20343
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 2:32 am

WayexTDI wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
So what is going to replace them ? 70 seaters?

UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

Agreed that these are not new build. However, with a limit of Validity of 80,000 cycles and 120,000 hours, the CRJ-550s will fly for a long time.

As an aerospace R&D engineer, of course I want new development. But as I noted, this is a while away before demand is sufficient.

The market for 50 seaters was saturated after an early surge due to the ULCC model. 50 seat service declined. The RJ model needs premium traffic and I have trouble coming up with a 50 seat RJ concept business case today.

Please recall the original 50 seat jets utilized existing, but certainly not efficient, available engines. To make the market viable would require a low cost modern engine in the 7500lbf to 9500lbf range (wing tech and final size dependent. To work, it must be an engine more optimized than a business jet engine (more cycles between overhauls, higher bypass ratio) with efficiency at least 15% better than prior generation engines. I am unable to create a business case to develop such an engine.

Now a turboprop engine, I can see the business case...

For lightening the E2-175, there is a business case too (smaller wing, shorter body).

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
Jetport
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:23 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 3:34 am

WayexTDI wrote:
Jetport wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Or bigger aircraft. Or nothing altogether and they'll lose service.

3 50-seater a day could be replaced by 1 100-seater (like the A220-100) a day (the 3rd rotation customers will most likely be lost).

Airlines constantly re-evaluates their operations; and, lately, replacement has rarely been on a 1-to-1 basis, but involves bigger aircraft. And, if there's not enough pax to maintain the number of rotations, they will cut frequency, down to 0 if necessary.


Losing service entirely or even going from 1 to 3 a day is a political non-starter in the USA. With the way the US Senate is set up, there is no way most Senators are going to let scope clauses and high mainline pilot compensation packages decimate service to smaller airports. There may be more subsidies for smaller airports or some legislation that alters scope clauses so that service levels at smaller airports can be maintained. I know I will be writing my 2 Senators regularly if the airlines try to cut frequency to PWM just because mainline flight crews cost too much.

Political non-starter? Well, I guess then all those cities that have lately lost commercial service never started then.

PWM you says? Right now, every "major" (except Alaska) flies in and out of PWM; so, chances that all of them drops it are very slim.
But, push come to shove, BOS is less then 2-hour drive away and BGR shy over 2 hours. Not insurmountably.

If you feel you are entitled air service from PWM, then feel free to write the airlines and tell them you're ready to pay the real cost of the ticket; I'm sure they'll be happy to send a plane your way, not sure you'll be happy to pay the bill though...


I don't think I am getting through. My concern is that as the 50 seaters age out, airlines cannot add additional 76 seaters because they are already capped on 70-76 seat aircraft due to silly scope clauses. All US airlines are well under their 50 seat aircraft limits and still declining. The only scope relief that is needed is more 76 seaters, and why not allow a more modern and efficient 76 seater like the E2-175 in too?

PWM will maintain decent service even if we have to have more mainline flights with higher costs and more seats to fill. I am mainly concerned about frequency, especially in the winter. BOS is my least favorite airport in the US, terrible drive, terrible parking and terrible layout. I still fly from BOS sometimes to save money or connections, but it is not pleasant. NY Yankee fans are correct, BOS Sucks.
 
SkyLife
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2020 1:45 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:16 pm

I would disagree that the scope is ‘silly’. By exchanging a 50 seater to a 76 seater your basically giving up to 50% more seats to a regional. A lot of 121 pilots in the US don’t agree even current scope clauses are good enough. The reason is it reduces mainline opportunities for all of us at the regional level. Regional airplanes are flying halfway across the country and those that are are primarily the 76 seaters. I’ve done it. The 76 seaters do some flying that isn’t exactly outstation - hub. Republic flies a 175 DCA-CLT. PSA flies CRJs on CLT-PIT. Say what you will but CRJs reduce mainline opportunities for us at the regional level. We know it, we’ve seen it. These are legitimate routes that should be mainline flying. The ‘regional’ is just that in name and that’s upsetting because it does take mainline jobs away. As so many have said, if the non scope compliant airplanes are so wonderful, fly them at mainline. The pay is still far less than piloting a 777 or the like. The whole ‘non economical’ mumbo jumbo is because you’re comparing what cost should be at mainline to a severely under priced regional model...no reason regionals should be doing >50% departures at a hub...
 
SkyLife
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2020 1:45 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:48 pm

The question I have is why is a CR9 or 175 now borderline the size of a DC-9-10/14? My guess is cheap outsourcing...
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20343
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 1:21 pm

Jetport wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Jetport wrote:

Losing service entirely or even going from 1 to 3 a day is a political non-starter in the USA. With the way the US Senate is set up, there is no way most Senators are going to let scope clauses and high mainline pilot compensation packages decimate service to smaller airports. There may be more subsidies for smaller airports or some legislation that alters scope clauses so that service levels at smaller airports can be maintained. I know I will be writing my 2 Senators regularly if the airlines try to cut frequency to PWM just because mainline flight crews cost too much.

Political non-starter? Well, I guess then all those cities that have lately lost commercial service never started then.

PWM you says? Right now, every "major" (except Alaska) flies in and out of PWM; so, chances that all of them drops it are very slim.
But, push come to shove, BOS is less then 2-hour drive away and BGR shy over 2 hours. Not insurmountably.

If you feel you are entitled air service from PWM, then feel free to write the airlines and tell them you're ready to pay the real cost of the ticket; I'm sure they'll be happy to send a plane your way, not sure you'll be happy to pay the bill though...


I don't think I am getting through. My concern is that as the 50 seaters age out, airlines cannot add additional 76 seaters because they are already capped on 70-76 seat aircraft due to silly scope clauses. All US airlines are well under their 50 seat aircraft limits and still declining. The only scope relief that is needed is more 76 seaters, and why not allow a more modern and efficient 76 seater like the E2-175 in too?

The pilots of mainline are unlikely to grant relief on 76 seaters. The rule was the more mainline aircraft, the more 76 seaters. There is another 76 seater with more overhead space and high efficiency, the M100. Any scope relief means extended range and fewer mainline jobs.

I see the 76 seaters thriving.

Why cannot Embraer design a scope compliant E2 as Mitsubishi has done?

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 2:34 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
The crj550 looks more then a business class capacity increase possibility for airlines. Rather than a 50seat jet replacer.

OK, but it still seats only 50 (give or take) and falls within scope clause.
You're trying to spin the issue in any imaginable way until you make us dizzy. But the reality is here: there were 2 aircraft manufacturers recently that made 50-seater jets (Bombardier with the CRJ200 and Embraer with the ERJs), one of them decided to stop manufacturing of this frame 10+ years ago (Bombardier in 2006) and the other one seems to be delivering only bizjets variants of it (Embraer seems to have delivered the last passenger ERJ in 2016).

So, again, I'll ask: who is ordering new 50-seaters? No one is, that's why the production lines are either closed or trickling down bizjets only. And also why they haven't been NEO'd/MAX'd.

Can you believe it in 15years from now only 76 seat jets flying the routes of all 50 seat jets. Means pax amounts Haasss to grow for the aircrafts to be productive.

Pax quantity does not have to grow: 3 50-seaters a day is 150 seats a day, same pax capacity as 2 76-seaters. Consequence will be to upgauge capacity and reduce frequency.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 2:37 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
The crj550 looks more then a business class capacity increase possibility for airlines. Rather than a 50seat jet replacer.

OK, but it still seats only 50 (give or take) and falls within scope clause.
You're trying to spin the issue in any imaginable way until you make us dizzy. But the reality is here: there were 2 aircraft manufacturers recently that made 50-seater jets (Bombardier with the CRJ200 and Embraer with the ERJs), one of them decided to stop manufacturing of this frame 10+ years ago (Bombardier in 2006) and the other one seems to be delivering only bizjets variants of it (Embraer seems to have delivered the last passenger ERJ in 2016).

So, again, I'll ask: who is ordering new 50-seaters? No one is, that's why the production lines are either closed or trickling down bizjets only. And also why they haven't been NEO'd/MAX'd.

Maybe nobody has ordered because there hasn't been any upgrades. Officially the erj is still in production.

Well, that's the old "the chicken or the egg" riddle: had there been interest in upgraded 50-seaters, OEMs would have made a proposal and airlines would have bought them. Point in case: A320neoFamily, 737MAX, A330neo.
Just like with the 757, airlines stopped ordering 50-seaters and OEMs shut down production (or switched to bizjets).

Bottom line: as of right now, no airline is ordering 50-seaters.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 2:44 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

The CRJ 550'sUnited ordered were all new built. they were built and configured from the Factory in the 50 seat Business class config. and actually? United can't add more seats to the airplane. None of their routes are mainline duplications as they all go to either ORD or IAD. from their stations. the E-jets could do the same out of IAH,DEN SFO and LAX if this is really successful. I'm retired now so I can't actually tell you how successful this might be or IS. But it looks good on Paper.

As been pointed out, the CRJ-550s are actually converted used CRJ-700s.

And, very interestingly, the aircraft in the United link (N163GJ) is wearing a registration that, according to the FAA, is not assigned nor was ever applied...
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 2:47 pm

oosnowrat wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:

3 50-seater a day could be replaced by 1 100-seater (like the A220-100) a day (the 3rd rotation customers will most likely be lost).


Do you really see mainline carriers opening up a slug of stations in flyover country for one flight a day?

Never said "opening stations", I said "converting cities from 3 50-seaters a day to 1 100-seater a day". Subcontract every aspect of ground ops and you can sustain a single daily operation; I'm sure it's already happening.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1820
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 2:50 pm

Jetport wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Jetport wrote:

Losing service entirely or even going from 1 to 3 a day is a political non-starter in the USA. With the way the US Senate is set up, there is no way most Senators are going to let scope clauses and high mainline pilot compensation packages decimate service to smaller airports. There may be more subsidies for smaller airports or some legislation that alters scope clauses so that service levels at smaller airports can be maintained. I know I will be writing my 2 Senators regularly if the airlines try to cut frequency to PWM just because mainline flight crews cost too much.

Political non-starter? Well, I guess then all those cities that have lately lost commercial service never started then.

PWM you says? Right now, every "major" (except Alaska) flies in and out of PWM; so, chances that all of them drops it are very slim.
But, push come to shove, BOS is less then 2-hour drive away and BGR shy over 2 hours. Not insurmountably.

If you feel you are entitled air service from PWM, then feel free to write the airlines and tell them you're ready to pay the real cost of the ticket; I'm sure they'll be happy to send a plane your way, not sure you'll be happy to pay the bill though...


I don't think I am getting through. My concern is that as the 50 seaters age out, airlines cannot add additional 76 seaters because they are already capped on 70-76 seat aircraft due to silly scope clauses. All US airlines are well under their 50 seat aircraft limits and still declining. The only scope relief that is needed is more 76 seaters, and why not allow a more modern and efficient 76 seater like the E2-175 in too?

PWM will maintain decent service even if we have to have more mainline flights with higher costs and more seats to fill. I am mainly concerned about frequency, especially in the winter. BOS is my least favorite airport in the US, terrible drive, terrible parking and terrible layout. I still fly from BOS sometimes to save money or connections, but it is not pleasant. NY Yankee fans are correct, BOS Sucks.

If airlines cannot add 76-seaters, then they'll fly 100-seaters (well, at least those who were smart enough to order them, I'm thinking DL) and reduce frequency accordingly: taxpayers will not pour money in places like PWM just to maintain several flights a day when there are suitable alternatives.
 
Jetport
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:23 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 3:40 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Jetport wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Political non-starter? Well, I guess then all those cities that have lately lost commercial service never started then.

PWM you says? Right now, every "major" (except Alaska) flies in and out of PWM; so, chances that all of them drops it are very slim.
But, push come to shove, BOS is less then 2-hour drive away and BGR shy over 2 hours. Not insurmountably.

If you feel you are entitled air service from PWM, then feel free to write the airlines and tell them you're ready to pay the real cost of the ticket; I'm sure they'll be happy to send a plane your way, not sure you'll be happy to pay the bill though...


I don't think I am getting through. My concern is that as the 50 seaters age out, airlines cannot add additional 76 seaters because they are already capped on 70-76 seat aircraft due to silly scope clauses. All US airlines are well under their 50 seat aircraft limits and still declining. The only scope relief that is needed is more 76 seaters, and why not allow a more modern and efficient 76 seater like the E2-175 in too?

The pilots of mainline are unlikely to grant relief on 76 seaters. The rule was the more mainline aircraft, the more 76 seaters. There is another 76 seater with more overhead space and high efficiency, the M100. Any scope relief means extended range and fewer mainline jobs.

I see the 76 seaters thriving.

Why cannot Embraer design a scope compliant E2 as Mitsubishi has done?

Lightsaber


Alright Lightsaber, I'll bite, you keep pumping the M100 for some unknown reason. The Mitsubishi M100 is many years from entering service and will likely will be a hanger queen if ever enters service at all. The odds of the M100 being a viable commercial aircraft appear to be very low, based on the program and company history. Do you have some insight or reason for your inexplicable confidence in the M100?
 
Nean1
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 3:44 pm

lightsaber wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
UA is repurposing CRJ-700 as premium 50 seaters.
Recertified as CRJ-550:
https://hub.united.com/united-regional- ... 53393.html

Eventually there will need to be a replacement. But DL negotiated for replacing 50 seaters partially with 76 seaters:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

The addition of the 717s actually allowed Delta to acquire 70 more large regional jets, while only reducing the number of 50-seat regional jets.

If you read the charts, Delta has significantly cut 50-seat RJ flying.

I do not think 37 to 50 seat flying is gone, I just think the market must shrink for another 7 to 10 years before airlines will buy new again.

The stable RJ market is the 76 seat market. I would like to see an Embraer product, but that stretch and 5m wingspan addition added too much weight.

Lightsaber

The problem with the CRJ-550 is that, I believe, none of them are new-built and all are conversions from CRJ-700s.
Reconfiguring aircraft for more or less seats is common occurence; but that doesn't help the aircraft manufacturers with selling more new planes.

Agreed that these are not new build. However, with a limit of Validity of 80,000 cycles and 120,000 hours, the CRJ-550s will fly for a long time.

As an aerospace R&D engineer, of course I want new development. But as I noted, this is a while away before demand is sufficient.

The market for 50 seaters was saturated after an early surge due to the ULCC model. 50 seat service declined. The RJ model needs premium traffic and I have trouble coming up with a 50 seat RJ concept business case today.

Please recall the original 50 seat jets utilized existing, but certainly not efficient, available engines. To make the market viable would require a low cost modern engine in the 7500lbf to 9500lbf range (wing tech and final size dependent. To work, it must be an engine more optimized than a business jet engine (more cycles between overhauls, higher bypass ratio) with efficiency at least 15% better than prior generation engines. I am unable to create a business case to develop such an engine.

Now a turboprop engine, I can see the business case...

For lightening the E2-175, there is a business case too (smaller wing, shorter body).

Lightsaber

There will be no business case for advanced turboprops in 35-45 usd/bbp crude price scenario. This window now is closed.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20343
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 4:04 pm

Jetport wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Jetport wrote:

I don't think I am getting through. My concern is that as the 50 seaters age out, airlines cannot add additional 76 seaters because they are already capped on 70-76 seat aircraft due to silly scope clauses. All US airlines are well under their 50 seat aircraft limits and still declining. The only scope relief that is needed is more 76 seaters, and why not allow a more modern and efficient 76 seater like the E2-175 in too?

The pilots of mainline are unlikely to grant relief on 76 seaters. The rule was the more mainline aircraft, the more 76 seaters. There is another 76 seater with more overhead space and high efficiency, the M100. Any scope relief means extended range and fewer mainline jobs.

I see the 76 seaters thriving.

Why cannot Embraer design a scope compliant E2 as Mitsubishi has done?

Lightsaber


Alright Lightsaber, I'll bite, you keep pumping the M100 for some unknown reason. The Mitsubishi M100 is many years from entering service and will likely will be a hanger queen if ever enters service at all. The odds of the M100 being a viable commercial aircraft appear to be very low, based on the program and company history. Do you have some insight or reason for your inexplicable confidence in the M100?

The program had issues. I look at this from the big picture, there is a competitor.

As to insight, I have contacts in the industry. There have been numerous issues. My first exposure was their initial bid for an engine that... was a joke. They fixed that.

Technically, I really like the aircraft. As a passenger, it fixes the issues I wanted fixed. From a predictive maintenance/avionics standpoint, it sets the standard for RJs.

The M90 is amazingly delayed. That is obvious. But Mitsubishi keeps fixing the issues. The Hondajet was even more delayed. Yet it happened. Hondajet first flight in 2003, delivery in 2015, now a top product in the category.

The Japanese aircraft design culture seems to not seek experienced help until they hit a major delay. However, they eventually produce reliable aircraft.

This thread is on expanding scope to allow the E2-175. With two alternatives (E175, M100), why would scope be reduced?

Now, the MRJ program will never make a profit.

I am of the opinion it will sell, enter service, and be supported by the purchased CRJ maintenance network. I am of the opinion Mitsubishi selected good vendors. I am not of the opinion the competitiveness should be dismissed.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
Jungleneer
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:56 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 4:28 pm

I believe the M100 has the ability to take half of the market, and that is good for the industry. And if scope is not relief, E175 will live for many years sharing the same production line as E2.
 
Jetport
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:23 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Tue Apr 21, 2020 5:13 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Jetport wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
The pilots of mainline are unlikely to grant relief on 76 seaters. The rule was the more mainline aircraft, the more 76 seaters. There is another 76 seater with more overhead space and high efficiency, the M100. Any scope relief means extended range and fewer mainline jobs.

I see the 76 seaters thriving.

Why cannot Embraer design a scope compliant E2 as Mitsubishi has done?

Lightsaber


Alright Lightsaber, I'll bite, you keep pumping the M100 for some unknown reason. The Mitsubishi M100 is many years from entering service and will likely will be a hanger queen if ever enters service at all. The odds of the M100 being a viable commercial aircraft appear to be very low, based on the program and company history. Do you have some insight or reason for your inexplicable confidence in the M100?

The program had issues. I look at this from the big picture, there is a competitor.

As to insight, I have contacts in the industry. There have been numerous issues. My first exposure was their initial bid for an engine that... was a joke. They fixed that.

Technically, I really like the aircraft. As a passenger, it fixes the issues I wanted fixed. From a predictive maintenance/avionics standpoint, it sets the standard for RJs.

The M90 is amazingly delayed. That is obvious. But Mitsubishi keeps fixing the issues. The Hondajet was even more delayed. Yet it happened. Hondajet first flight in 2003, delivery in 2015, now a top product in the category.

The Japanese aircraft design culture seems to not seek experienced help until they hit a major delay. However, they eventually produce reliable aircraft.

This thread is on expanding scope to allow the E2-175. With two alternatives (E175, M100), why would scope be reduced?

Now, the MRJ program will never make a profit.

I am of the opinion it will sell, enter service, and be supported by the purchased CRJ maintenance network. I am of the opinion Mitsubishi selected good vendors. I am not of the opinion the competitiveness should be dismissed.

Lightsaber


Thank you for the answers and insights. As to your question why scope would be reduced, I think you answered it. The current E175 qualifies and M100 will qualify, why lock out a more modern and efficient aircraft with the same number of seats just because of weight? It is an irrational position, considering the two aircraft that meet scope perform the same function, just less efficiently. Of course unions have never been known for rational behavior, just maximizing pay and benefits and protecting the poorest performing employees.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

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