Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 557
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:27 am

acecrackshot wrote:
FiscAutTecGarte wrote:
acecrackshot wrote:
A Hawker Beechcraft salesman told me a long while he could sell 300 1900s "tomorrow."

I agree there is a significant market for what was the best 19 seater ever built.


Sure he could.... It took 20 years to sell less than 700 of all available versions... I'm sure he could sell 300 in a day... :duck:

Looks like the SkyCourier is Textron's (cessna/beechcraft) future 19pax plane.


I would agree on the SkyCourier being the only viable replacement, but there were lots more 19 seaters than the just the 1900. You have to include the Metro and Jball as direct competitors.

Then, you've got the 9-39 seat market for Do-228s/Twotters/D-328s/Dash 8s/etc. that never really got replaced.


You are absolutely right! There were allot of aircraft in the 9 to 30 seat category marketed in those days... Lots of competition. Really need to take my 700 number and add all of the other prop craft in the 9-30pax category to see the true potential of the niche.... I think it's allot.... I concur with many and see 9 & 19 and 30 & 50 seat turbo prop familes as sorely needed....
 
Pentaprism
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:18 pm

NCAD95 wrote:
I think a better design for a regional jet would have been a DC-9-10 type aircraft with a little roomier cabin. The thing with the current RJs is they are all 2-2 seating very cramped.


Not quite all. The Sukhoi Superjet is 3-2 seating and the trip reports I have read suggest it is very comfortable. Of course there are issues with after Sales Support and Spares, as well as Political challenges but I haven't read much criticism of the design.
 
acecrackshot
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:22 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:26 pm

Pentaprism wrote:
NCAD95 wrote:
I think a better design for a regional jet would have been a DC-9-10 type aircraft with a little roomier cabin. The thing with the current RJs is they are all 2-2 seating very cramped.


Not quite all. The Sukhoi Superjet is 3-2 seating and the trip reports I have read suggest it is very comfortable. Of course there are issues with after Sales Support and Spares, as well as Political challenges but I haven't read much criticism of the design.


Somewhere floating around were close up pictures of the SSJ Demo bird.

If that was any indication of the production model, the quality was pretty rough.

The real crime of the CRJ was that it helped to kill lots of very good airliner companies like SAAB, DeHavilland, Fokker, etc.

I get that its more complicated than that, and certainly EMBRAER found a way to survive with its own 50 seater.
 
acecrackshot
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:22 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:31 pm

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:

You are absolutely right! There were allot of aircraft in the 9 to 30 seat category marketed in those days... Lots of competition. Really need to take my 700 number and add all of the other prop craft in the 9-30pax category to see the true potential of the niche.... I think it's allot.... I concur with many and see 9 & 19 and 30 & 50 seat turbo prop familes as sorely needed....


Lots of the market isn't in North America, either. The B350 is a really fantastically capable airplane, but its not a 1900 replacement.
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 1226
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:32 pm

Further to our discussions, I copied the following from the Wikipedia page on the Islander series of aircraft -

"In 1977, a single standard BN-2 was re-engined with Dowty Rotol ducted fans. The ducted fan produced less noise than conventional propeller propulsion. Some structural strengthening of the main wing spar at the root was required due to the extra weight.[14] This aircraft was subject to 18 months of flying trials to test the suitability of the ducted fan as a means of reducing aircraft noise; these tests reportedly demonstrated a 20 decibel noise reduction as well as increased thrust and reduced pollution.[3][15]"

If they were able to achieve those reductions (in sound and fuel consumption) back before the technology we have today, why aren't any manufactures or engine makers looking at this for new under 50 seat aircraft. It might also help reduce the propeller phobia travelers have towards turbo props.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 454
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Sat Apr 10, 2021 12:00 am

A 19 seater would hold no appeal for the airlines. Wasting a flight crew to move 15-19 passengers is unprofitable. The trend is going larger, 37, 44 and 50 seat RJ's on the way out, 70 and higher seats on the way up. 19 seat B-1900's were used to serve GON and BDR, GON close to PVD and BDR close to HVN and HPN. GON and BDR are no longer served by the airlines. The Beech's, Dash's, Saab's, etc are all gone as passengers prefer RJ's as shown by increased passenger numbers on the same routes previously flown by small props.
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Sat Apr 10, 2021 12:10 am

airlineworker wrote:
A 19 seater would hold no appeal for the airlines. Wasting a flight crew to move 15-19 passengers is unprofitable. The trend is going larger, 37, 44 and 50 seat RJ's on the way out, 70 and higher seats on the way up. 19 seat B-1900's were used to serve GON and BDR, GON close to PVD and BDR close to HVN and HPN. GON and BDR are no longer served by the airlines. The Beech's, Dash's, Saab's, etc are all gone as passengers prefer RJ's as shown by increased passenger numbers on the same routes previously flown by small props.

The only problem with this statement is that most of the US3 are tapped out and are maxxed for the number of those 70/76 seaters allowed by pilot contracts. There are provisions that allow more (e.g. at UAL, a new small narrowbody (190/195/221) unlocks more 76 seaters at something like a 1.25:1 ratio iirc). I think at AA it’s based on mainline fleet count ratios, so increased mainline NB frames would increase the allowable # of RJs. But, as a whole, I don’t think we will see a lot of 70/76 seaters replacing outgoing 50 seaters, as there are a lot more 50 seaters than there are 70/76 seaters that are allowed to be added. Unless of course, scope gets renegotiated.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 8969
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Sat Apr 10, 2021 2:08 am

Or, they just drop service at smaller stations—1-2 daily services of 76-seaters instead of frequency-dominated 4-6 daily services of small RJs.
 
User avatar
atimp
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 2:19 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Sat Apr 10, 2021 2:36 am

Boeing did build regional jets. Originally the 727 was designed to be a short/medium range jet and the 737 a short range jet. That's why they had built in air-stairs and APU's, to serve small under-developed airports. But like the CRJ-200 the airlines put them on long routes.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 454
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Sat Apr 10, 2021 4:17 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Or, they just drop service at smaller stations—1-2 daily services of 76-seaters instead of frequency-dominated 4-6 daily services of small RJs.


That's the trend, small cities that cannot support multiple daily flights are down to one flight. Many small cities have been dropped altogether as the props were parked. I remember US flights from PHL to GON on 19 seat B-1900's would have 5-8 people onboard. Not worth the time and money for those types of loads.
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Why doesn't Boeing build regional jet?

Sat Apr 10, 2021 5:01 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Any trip less than 350 miles is easier and quicker by car, even by your own plane sometimes based on total door-to-door travel time. And that’s in the NE corridor. Not sure what augmented interstates are, but I’m certain I don’t need driving aids that merely enable distracted driving. Sit down, put two hands on the wheel, one for the pedals and drive. I haven’t used cruise control in 30 years in four M-B cars, driving isn’t a spectator sport.


The augmented interstate highway system for me means all of the newer and proposed interstates - every year I am surprised by a new I-number. Here in Alabama, 22. 14 and 2 in Texas. 11 in Nevada. 7 or 9 proposed for California. 41 in Wisconsin. 87, 73, and 74 in North Carolina. 69 extended to Mexico. 57 to Little Rock. 49 from KC to Nola. Not many gaps left.

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