Markets hot for 50 seaters.

[B727FA]

IMO, you can't go wrong by adding more power.

Is that anything like getting more cowbell?

 

[CopilotDoug]

Is that anything like getting more cowbell?

One and the same, my friend:laugh:

 

[BLing]

I recently read about one of these conversion companies whose program offered engine "upgrades"

It didn't get into specifics about what the upgrades were, but based off the performance stories that have been told about the CRJ's climb performance, one would take it to mean bigger engines.

IMO, you can't go wrong by adding more power.

What Ive been told from guys who have flown these 850s is that its a computer mod. Basically they bump up the N1 a few percent for takeoff and climb. The justification is that these things wont be flying 10 legs a day like a typical CRJ. So they will be able to handle the abuse over a long period of time due to fewer cylces.

 

[time builder]

The corporate thing I can see. The cargo thing, you're either joking or out of touch with reality (at least in the US markets).

 

[Salukipilot4590]

The corporate thing I can see. The cargo thing, you're either joking or out of touch with reality (at least in the US markets).

There's a cargo outfit flying a modified -200....in Europe of course though...

http://www.airliners.net/photo/West-Air-Europe/Canadair-CL-600-2B19-Regional/1231507/L/

It's always a possibility!!

 

[time builder]

There's a cargo outfit flying a modified -200....in Europe of course though...

http://www.airliners.net/photo/West-Air-Europe/Canadair-CL-600-2B19-Regional/1231507/L/

It's always a possibility!!

Just very slim in the US.

Seriously, you've got cargo "gateways" scattered all over the place in the US, even in places such as Casper, WY and Sioux Falls, SD. Outstations are rarely over an hour and a half away in a turboprop, and even a Cessna Caravan is competitive with it's low speed. The fact is that turboprops get the job done at less cost (less fuel, mx under part 135 etc.)

With the heavies flying into the gateways, and everything getting to the outstations in time to make the early a.m. deliveries with turboprops the job is getting done at a lower cost than if you tried entering RJ's into the equation. It's not like your customers are going to "sneer" at the fact that their package had to fly on an old beat up turboprop (like passengers do).

Additionally, everything is being consolidated in the cargo world, further supporting the heavy jet gateway network. ABX used to do well with their DC9's, for example. Now after being consolidated with DHL, and then having DHL decide to ship things on UPS instead, the DC9's are on the chopping block, and the DC8's are being pulled out of the desert for UPS. You'd think "whoa, DC8's are gas guzzlers if there ever were any," but the bottom line is that through consolidation, it's more cost efficient to send one DC8 than two 727's and a DC9.

If even a DC9 can't survive, what makes you think there's a market for a CRJ?

Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, well, those are entirely different networks, who knows what a CRJ could do there.

 

[ex j-41]

Do you people actually do the math yourselves or just pass words? Most flights i do in a CRJ say for an hour block i burn 3500 pounds. Or 522 gallons. Even at $4/gallon that is only say around $2000 in gas.
Share that between 50 pax and you got each person paying $40 for gas. And that is at $4/gallon and i donm't think the airlines are paying that.
Now look at a DC-9. You will find the same flight will cost around $52/pax.
The CRJ is not as inefficient as you may think.

And look at the ERJ 170 (Regional Jet). It burns 30% more fuel than the CRJ 700. Same engines. Just a lot more drag. Air Canada is very dissapointed with the efficiencies of this jet. The 190 burns the same fuel but carries 20% more. (Depending on first class set up).
Anyway the airplanes that need to go away are the ERJ 170/175's.

 

[time builder]

Sorry for the late response, but I gotta respond anyway.

First off, when did we start talking about 70 seat RJ's? We're talking about 50 seaters and cargo. The only reason the 50 seaters are even in consideration for cargo is because the demand for them just drastically dropped.

In the cargo world, low cost of aquistion can compensate for higher operating costs because aircraft fly less legs/hours. How do you think the 727 has lasted so long?

Second, who said that DC9's were being chopped for inefficiency? The fact of the matter is that through consolidation FedEx and UPS can stick with larger aircraft (727 and larger).

Third, I gotta call BS on the "30%" figure.

 

[wahoo250]

whats the range on one of these things...

 

[BoilerUP]

whats the range on one of these things...

FTFA:

Peterborough, Ontario-based Flying Colours is a preferred completions provider for Bombardier and has developed an “ExecLiner” CRJ modification package that includes an STC for additional fuel tanks that can give the aircraft 3,000 nm range.