Regional jets appear on endangered species list

[Heavy Set]

I disagree.

There will ALWAYS be a need for a 50-seat jet on some short- to medium-length routes into small capacity cities such as Pellston, MI and Coeur de Lane, ID during peak seasons, just as there will always be a need for 19 seat turboprops operating into short hops (less than 30 minutes in a jet) into small cities.

If you give up these aircraft, you give up these passengers (what airline will send a 70- or 90- seat jet into a market where only 20-30 people will board with ticket prices where they are?). Someone else will come in to pick up the slack, they always do.

Sometimes carriers will operate these flights at a loss in order to connect them to long-haul domestic or international routes where they make the profit back.

I don't see them buying NEW aircraft and I do see production decreasing, but even with reduced scope and companies like Mesa and "Newco" flying 70 and 90 seaters, some 50 seaters and 19-30 seat turboprops will remain...

I agree with that. 50-seat jets will only be profitable on non-LCC competitive routes like SLC-Pasco or ATL-HPN that can support higher nonstop fares. Too bad business travelers will have to suffer on these more convenient, non-competitive routes. After 2 hours on a CRJ/ERJ my back starts to ache...

 

[Jurassic Jet]

Didn't somebody once write the same thing about the 19 passenger planes?

Hey, maybe they will fire up the production lines again and we will she shiny new Metro's, Jetstreams, and Bandit's again!:laugh:

 

[theo]

I don't think anyone disagrees that the cost of the RJ's is too high for the revenue they can produce. Obviously that means somebody is gonna take a bath as RJ's get parked. But follow on a little longer and what will you see? RJ's making a comeback at half or less of their previous lease payments. All of a sudden airlines get interested again as they save 60 or 70 thousand per month per aircraft. The original leaseholders take it in the shorts...some Regional airlines take some huge losses but the aircraft will ultimatly be flying again, seems pretty likely to me.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

I don't think anyone disagrees that the cost of the RJ's is too high for the revenue they can produce. Obviously that means somebody is gonna take a bath as RJ's get parked. But follow on a little longer and what will you see? RJ's making a comeback at half or less of their previous lease payments. All of a sudden airlines get interested again as they save 60 or 70 thousand per month per aircraft. The original leaseholders take it in the shorts...some Regional airlines take some huge losses but the aircraft will ultimatly be flying again, seems pretty likely to me.

How much of the CASM is lease cost? I'm thinking mx and fuel aren't spread out on enough seats.

Look at JetBlues forecast costs on the 100 seaters. Even with 50 seat pay rates they will be at least one cent more on the CASM than the A320's.

 

[Jetjockey]

Good news. I'd love to see the 50 seat "replacement jet" go extinct.

To make room on the ramp for all those 70-100 seat "RJs".

Stop the insanity.

 

[VVJM265]

Hey, maybe they will fire up the production lines again and we will she shiny new Metro's, Jetstreams, and Bandit's again!:laugh:

There ya go!