Delta/Northwest merger may lead to reduction of 50-seat RJs

[WSurf]

Ooooooorrrrrrr I flew corporate and freight for the last 5 years before flying for Republic.

But what do I know...

Corporate and Freight for 5 years, now he is an expert on the Airline Industry. Easy on him!

 

[rogerwilcoout]

Corporate and Freight for 5 years, now he is an expert on the Airline Industry. Easy on him!

And you are a book of knowledge because you fly the dash ! Too funny ! You would be the lesson in what NOT to do ! lol

 

[WSurf]

And you are a book of knowledge because you fly the dash ! Too funny ! You would be the lesson in what NOT to do ! lol

Since I am flying a plane that burns less fuel. Hmmm, With pref. Hiring at US Airways, well..... Probably better then what your doing.

 

[dwhsunday]

Wsurf

Truly an idiot who wishes flight attendants respected him.

 

[WSurf]

Truly an idiot who wishes flight attendants respected him.

Your mom respects me however.. and thats what matters. LOL

 

[WSurf]

Truly an idiot who wishes flight attendants respected him.

Respect! And this from a person that makes 23.00 in the rightseat of a EMB-175. Lovely, just Lovely!

 

[deadstick]

You guys do know that Bombardier makes a Q300, right?

There was in AIN article awhile back what mentioned that BB was looking at replacing the current Q300 with a 46-56 (I can't recall the exact numbers) seats and extending the Q400 to a 90-ish pax version. Also in the article was a bit from ATR and that it was looking at scrapping the 42/72 designs and starting over with a new single base airframe with 40-50/70/90 pax configurations. I was just thinking Saab might be looking a getting a piece of this action.

 

[DoinTime]

There was in AIN article awhile back what mentioned that BB was looking at replacing the current Q300 with a 46-56 (I can't recall the exact numbers) seats and extending the Q400 to a 90-ish pax version. Also in the article was a bit from ATR and that it was looking at scrapping the 42/72 designs and starting over with a new single base airframe with 40-50/70/90 pax configurations. I was just thinking Saab might be looking a getting a piece of this action.

The current Q300 is certified for 56 seats (50 seats is the most common config). The Q200 is the same size as current Dash 8-200. I have heard about ATR getting back into the game. It will be interesting to see what they make.

I doubt you will see Saab getting back into the civilian business. Turboprops have always been cheaper than RJs but the operators with RJs were able to charge a premium when they were competing in a prop market. Now that everyone has RJs there is no competitive advantage unless props start getting widespread again.

Turboprops are great but its still unknown if the marketplace will accept them back into widespread usage. Even the cream of the turboprop crop, Q-series, has the same crappy cabin as the CRJ.

 

[deadstick]

Now that everyone has RJs there is no competitive advantage unless props start getting widespread again.

Turboprops are great but its still unknown if the marketplace will accept them back into widespread usage. Even the cream of the turboprop crop, Q-series, has the same crappy cabin as the CRJ.

To once again see black on the balance sheet, airlines have to find a way of reducing cost unless deregulation goes away. The comfort of the pax is secondary to how many of them the airline can cram in a plane and how much it costs the airline to run the flight. People might rethink the curse of the turboprop if the everthing is the same, but the RJ flight costs $200 more.

It's all about the Benjamins...imp:

 

[WSurf]

MONTREAL — Bombardier Inc. is phasing out production of its Q200 and Q300 Dash 8 turboprop aircraft, made at the company's facility in Downsview, Ont.

The company said this morning that job losses will be minimal because most of the work will be transferred to the expanding Q400 program.

The Q200 and Q300 seat 37 and 50 people, respectively.

Montreal-based Bombardier has been focused on expanding its Q400 program. The aircraft seats 78 passengers.


A total of 950 people work on the Q200, Q300 and Q400 programs at Downsview, said Bombardier Aerospace spokesman Marc Duchesne.

The Q200 and Q300 backlog now stands at 17 planes and the assembly line will come to a stop in May of 2009 when the final delivery is made, said Mr. Duchesne.

 

[FSIGRAD]

I think that SAABs civilian aviation program went out of business years ago. Mostly due to the SAAB 2000's lack of sales.

 

[WSurf]

Turboprops are great but its still unknown if the marketplace will accept them back into widespread usage. Even the cream of the turboprop crop, Q-series, has the same crappy cabin as the CRJ.

I think they are addressing the issue. The Q400/NextGeneration has a new interior.


Check it out. Not bad.

http://www.q400.com/q400/en/interior.jsp

 

[DashTrash400]

Turboprops are great but its still unknown if the marketplace will accept them back into widespread usage. Even the cream of the turboprop crop, Q-series, has the same crappy cabin as the CRJ.

Incorrect. It has a lot more room inside than the CRJ-200, and I'd actually rather sit in a Q400 cabin for 2 hours than a CRJ-700/900 cabin. The cross section is about the same but the seats are a lot more comfortable despite being unable to recline, and to me it feels like there's more headroom.

QX has found that although they get a few complaints when they switch routes from CR7s to Q400s, there is no dropoff in demand. That could have something to do with lack of competition on those routes, though.

 

[Papa Woody]

I think that SAABs civilian aviation program went out of business years ago. Mostly due to the SAAB 2000's lack of sales.

Oil was $20 a barrel when the Saab 2000 went head-to-head with the CRJ and lost.

At $115 a barrel, the Saab would've emerged the winner.

 

[deadstick]

I really have too much time on my hands...

Anybody with Saab 2K experience, what kind of numbers did you get on climb, cruise, burn, ceiling, etc? Any shortcomings on useful load, CG, etc?

Just curious.

 

[DoinTime]

To once again see black on the balance sheet, airlines have to find a way of reducing cost unless deregulation goes away. The comfort of the pax is secondary to how many of them the airline can cram in a plane and how much it costs the airline to run the flight. People might rethink the curse of the turboprop if the everthing is the same, but the RJ flight costs $200 more.

It's all about the Benjamins...imp:

I would agree that airlines are scrambling for a cost advantage but ultimately the consumer will decide if they are willing to pay a premium for jet service. Consumers willingness to pay this premium is what lead to the first death of the turboprop. We shall see what they choose in the future.

Incorrect. It has a lot more room inside than the CRJ-200, and I'd actually rather sit in a Q400 cabin for 2 hours than a CRJ-700/900 cabin. The cross section is about the same but the seats are a lot more comfortable despite being unable to recline, and to me it feels like there's more headroom.

All CRJs and all Qs have a 8' 10" cross section tube with comparably sized overhead bins and the same seating configuration. It is not physically possible to create more room when no room is available.

Seat accommodations are specified by the operator so comfort varies. The NextGen CRJs also have a mesh bottom seat pan instead of sheet metal so they are claimed to considerably more comfortable.

The most miserable part about riding in a CRJ/Q is being crammed up against the person next door to you. You can't fix that problem unless you make the fuselage wider (like the EMBs) or put fewer seats across (like first class in the CRJ). You can paint the cabin any color you like and put in fancy lights to make it "feel" bigger but you are still going to be crushed by the 300 lbs guy sitting next to you.

 

[79%N1]

Holy ********************. Another flightinfo winner, huh?

I don't know if my airplane makes money, but I know it has a better CASM than a 145. How do I know this? You can read all about it on numerous internet sites, or you can just look at what's happening in the industry. People are getting away from 50 seat a/c. They are very difficult to make money with.

BTW, are you jealous of what I fly? If so, you can have it. I could care less what I'm sitting in. My original post had nothing to do with "My airplane is bigger than yours, therefore it's better." How childish are you?

You wanna start smart guy, or tough guy? Which is it! You start a post saying...hey, the whole world knows those darn 50 seaters are not profitable, which is crap. 50 seat RJ's are no less profitable than the EMB you fly, if they are used on the proper routes. What facts do you have? Your casm is higher! Whoopdedoo! Who says a crj is not profitable. Do you know what fare each passenger paid? What the segment cost for every crj/erj leg is? No, you do not. So, don't spout your infinite (lack of) knowledge here. Nobody cares what you think, Boyd Jr.

Now, you wanna trash me in public, be a man and pm me. We can discuss it there. I'm a "winner" because I completely disagree with your post, and do think you believe you are a hot shot because you fly something other than a 50 seater. I don't believe for a second you don't.

 

[CRJ puppy]

I really have too much time on my hands...

Anybody with Saab 2K experience, what kind of numbers did you get on climb, cruise, burn, ceiling, etc? Any shortcomings on useful load, CG, etc?

Just curious.

Only have about 10 hrs in a 2000. Recollection is its performance numbers (wts, loads, climbs, etc) were very similar to a CRJ. Engines were FADEC controlled...

It's been 8 yrs since i was in one though...

 

[spitfire1940]

Saab 2000

Aside from the racing team, the government uses a Saab 2000 for con air. I think it's the Marshall's service, but I'm not sure.

Last I heard, the Saab 2000 still hasn't been certified in the U.S., at least not for 121 service.

 

[spitfire1940]

from airliners.net

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva][FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]"Lack of sales and profitability forced Saab to cease 340 and 2000 production, with the lines winding up in 1998. The last 2000 was delivered to Crossair in April 1999. [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva][FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]In 2000, 54 were in airline service with three used as corporate transports."[/FONT][/FONT]