ERJ-195, B717, B737-600, Airbus 318?

[120% Torque]

SkyWest ERJ-195, B717, B737-600, A318?

I posted this above in "Majors" to get their opinion and wanted to post here too, it being relevent to "Regionals":

This is just a theoretical question. IF and I emphasise IF SkyWest were to branch out on it's own independant operation in the 130 seat and less aircraft catagorie size which airplane would be the best choice of those listed above and why? I was perusing some facts and figures and was surprized to see that the Airbus 318 will take off (standard conditions) in 2000 feet less runway than a CRJ-200. Thats pretty amazing. Both Boeing and Airbus make claims and counter claims that each of their aircraft operate at lower costs than their other manufacturers conterpart.

 

[justApilot]

Why not buy Alaska? 737' and MD80's. Anyone heard this rumor yet?

 

[120% Torque]

Hmmm, sounds good!

Alaska is a very fine operation! I asked the above question because of a recent "snippet" released by SkyWest management about flying bigger airplanes. Speculating about things like this is a hobby of mine and possibly nothing will ever become of it but as long as we are speculating.... I have heard the Alaska aquisition rumour. Not sure how SkyWest would fit in with Horizon and combining forces. The Alaska/Horizon match seems to work pretty well as it is. I suppose more RJ's could be a more aggressive feed to Alaska if SkyWest were to get fed up with United's lame treatment and no loyalty to a regional (SkyWest) that has done an extremely good job for them. Also, Alaska mentioned looking at Airbuses recently...I thought that was kind of strange but could be nothing more than getting Boeing to come down on price on future 737 orders. OK, next we have a Frontier Aquisition. Dump Mesa/Great Lakes and let SkyWest and Frontier combine forces and market share. Under that scenario SkyWest would have to dump United because as it stands one of Uniteds current rules says you cant feed another airline at the same Domicile (if I'm not mistaken) and SkyWest currently feeds United in Denver. America West, once again, dump Mesa and I dont know how the rest would work out. Other than those I dont know of any other Airline that SkyWest would be interested in purchasing other than JetBlue and I seriously doubt Dave Neelaman wants to part with his baby right now. The SkyWest CEO did mention a possible code share with NorthWest or Continental but dont they already have plenty of feed? Anybody else care to chime in?

 

[justApilot]

I'm thinking Frontier and Jetblue, myself.

 

[120% Torque]

OK, maybe none of the bigger airplanes above will happen. I just heard from a fairly reliable souce the extended flying opertunities will include all night E-120 flying in and out of Vegas. Also, Continental feed in So Cal and Northwest feed in Memphis. All with the little Bra. Dont see too much opertunity for 130 pax airplanes with these code shares but who knows.

 

[corky]

Though I'm partial to the 717, it's performance, efficiency, dispatch reliablility and proven durability make it a hands down winner in the regional arena. That's what it was designed for. The 737-6 and 318 don't compare. They're heavier, longer range airplanes and the 318 isn't meeting it's performance guarantees not to mention the typical airbus electrical gremlins. The 717 is a hoot to fly. Tons of thrust and lots of modern automation yet still simple fly by cable and a great cabin comforts. It's the only transport that doesn't recycle the cabin air. I should be in sales.

 

[120% Torque]

Yea, I agree that the 717 seems to fit the regional role a bit better. I dont know what SkyWest Managers have/had in mind when talking about bigger aircraft, truley "regional" flights or transcontinental? Just out of curiousity, would a 6'4" tall guy be able to stand up all the way in the cabin of the 717? I know the EMB195 has 6'7" of standing room but not sure about the others.

Here is some "FAA Takeoff Field Length" for different aircraft:

CRJ-200LR 6,290 ft
CRJ-700 5,130 ft
CRJ-700ER 5,500 ft
CRJ-900 6,160 ft
CRJ-900ER 6,462 ft
Boeing 737-600 (110 pax) 5,900 ft
Boeing 717-200 (106 pax) 5,750 ft
Airbus A318 (107 pax) 4,200 ft

 

[120% Torque]

OK, based on the economics and operating efficiency of the 736 I think we can rule that one out. Here is a comment I found on airliners dot net about its economics:

"As SAS was finalizing their criteria when acquiring replacement aircraft for the DC-9 Classic and FK-28,McD-Douglas' financial situation was such that the MD-95 project could flounder,and that left only the 736 as a viable option.In addition,Boeing needed a launch customer for the -600 and gave SAS a price that was extremely favourable.That's how we got the -600.
Experience,however,has shown the operating economics to be very poor for this plane in SAS service,specific fuel consumption being 0.049 KG/Kilometer (compared to the DC-9-41's 0.051,MD-80's 0.045,MD-90's 0.041.737-700 have the same figures as the MD-80 while the rest of the SAS fleet lies around 0.034-38).Latest figures state that SAS needs some 105-107% loadfactor to break even with the -600,and that is for the version with the lowest weight options.
Then there are the flight characteristics of the -600,especially in turbulence;POOR!

And from another person:

I am sorry to be blunt, but the B737-600 is a lousy aircraft and Boeing knows this .. very well. Anyone familiar with B737-600 Direct Operating Cost will know that the aircraft is much too heavy to be competitive against dedicated 100-seat designs. So called 'Shrinks' are never very good economically and certainly not when they are derived from the upgraded B737NG, which is much heavier than the original B737.

The B737-600 is at least 25% heavier than other dedicated 100-seaters. SAS has regretted its purchase from day one and changed to -700 & -800 as quickly as they could. Sales are a disaster, as only political sales have been achieved. No credible airline will fly the -600.


Corky, do you are does anybody else have any info on the proposed downsize and stretch of the basic 717 airframe? Also, does anybody know when the EMB-195 will be available in quantity?

 

[corky]

Yeah, I've been involved with the 717 program for 6 years. We designed both a shrink (-100) and a stretch (-300)and have shelved them both until someone shows interest. McD's criteria was an order of 50 to launch a program. I don't know how many it would take for Boeing to launch it. Most of the tunnel testing is complete. The stretch was a no brainer, the shrink was a bit tricky. We've had recent interest in the stretch so who knows.

The standing height of the cabin is 6'8" floor to ceiling.

 

[120% Torque]

Corky, what is the maximum pax a "stretch" 717 could accomidate? Any chance of a blended wingtip down the road?