In another thread (now overrun with the usual backbiting comments) someone asked:
********
I met a jetBlue higher up today who told me that jetBlue is going to be getting 50 seat RJs. I thought he might be confusing terms with the Embraer 190, but he said no, jetBlue is getting 50 seat jets to enable them to use LGB's commuter slots. He said one seat would be removed to bring it under the restriction.
True story or bogus?
********
Here's a very good reason it's bogus (apart from all the other very good reasons). If you want to run RJs into LGB, you'd do it with 70-seat RJs, not 50s. LGB defines a commuter operation as one done by an airplane of under 75,000 lbs MGTOW. A CRJ700 fits under that limit (but an EMB-170 does not, is my understanding). In fact, in 2003 I believe Horizon ran CRJ700 flights into LGB using commuter slots. So if you were going to fly flights into LGB using "commuter" slots, you'd use CRJ700s because they have better economics than the RJ50s.
********
I met a jetBlue higher up today who told me that jetBlue is going to be getting 50 seat RJs. I thought he might be confusing terms with the Embraer 190, but he said no, jetBlue is getting 50 seat jets to enable them to use LGB's commuter slots. He said one seat would be removed to bring it under the restriction.
True story or bogus?
********
Here's a very good reason it's bogus (apart from all the other very good reasons). If you want to run RJs into LGB, you'd do it with 70-seat RJs, not 50s. LGB defines a commuter operation as one done by an airplane of under 75,000 lbs MGTOW. A CRJ700 fits under that limit (but an EMB-170 does not, is my understanding). In fact, in 2003 I believe Horizon ran CRJ700 flights into LGB using commuter slots. So if you were going to fly flights into LGB using "commuter" slots, you'd use CRJ700s because they have better economics than the RJ50s.