Republic's certificate

[ERfly]

My apoligies I was dislexic. I meant CMH-SLT (Salt Lake City) and then SLT to Mazatlan. Other destinations are SLT to Seattle, DWI-SLT, and I think SLT to LA. The airline will look at the # of people who go from one city to the next through their hub (ATL), say cmh to salt lake, if that number gets over, for example, 500, they start a direct flight with a regional carrier. I believe we will start to see more of this.... thankyou.

How long do you think it will take for him to give up after the FMS keeps kicking back SLT as the identifier for Salt Lake City?

I mean, it'll take, but if you're going from CMH to Salt Lake, you'll probably get a violation.

 

[FlyingDawg]

This is a pretty good question so I will inform you on this. The EMB 170 is a whole different ball game when compared to the crj-700. The cabin in the 170 is actually bigger and more comfortable than the crj 700. The seating configuration in the 170 could almost be a 3 and 2 but its a 2 and 2 so you could see that its much roomier than a 700. Additionally, the cabin height in the 170 is tall enough so a 6 foot 5 man, give or take, could stand up with ease. Furthermore the performance of the 170/190 is comparable to the 737-700 (max ceiling 410, max speed mach .82). In a nut shell the EMB170/190 is a mainline aircraft with 70 to 90 seats vs 130 seats. The operating costs on the 170 are comparabe to the crj 700. To sum it all up, this aircraft are going to be much more popular with passengers and that is very good thing. Nobody wants to fly in a tube from FLL to CMH for example. As a result of this the emb-170 is going to be more popular for code share's vs the crj-700/900's.

Give me a break. I could make the same arguement about the CRJ vs the ERJ 145 series. The CRJ is certified to FL 410 (ERJ is FL370), max speed is higher than the ERJ .78M, seating is 2x2 (vs 2x1), and the cabin is both taller and wider than the ERJ. Sounds like someone is jealous that Embraer just came out with something better than Bombardier. I bet you fly a CRJ right?

 

[FlyingDawg]

My apoligies I was dislexic. I meant CMH-SLT (Salt Lake City) and then SLT to Mazatlan. Other destinations are SLT to Seattle, DWI-SLT, and I think SLT to LA. The airline will look at the # of people who go from one city to the next through their hub (ATL), say cmh to salt lake, if that number gets over, for example, 500, they start a direct flight with a regional carrier. I believe we will start to see more of this.... thankyou.

First of all, Salt Lake is SLC.

Second, its not 500 people, its more like 70 (or 68 in this case). If they had 500 it would be a mainline 757 aircraft several times a day. See link below.

Third, I would argue that the larger the aircraft the cheaper it is to operate on a seat mile basis. The problem is they can't fill a mainline size aircraft, yet they can a 170. If the larger aircraft is half full than the 170 is the right aircraft for the mission.

Take a look at Deltas schedules. 9 flights a day from ATL-BHM. All but one is mainline. Total distance is 133 miles. Because the demand is there they fill larger aircraft because it cheaper to operate per seat mile.

However, looking at CVG-BHM it all CRJ's. To keep enough frequency for the paying passenger and fill the aircraft to acceptable levels, the aircraft is right-sized to the market. A mainline aircraft on this route wouldn't be full and would be less profitable. It's all economics.

I copied this post from the CHQ Lounge website:

http://www.port-columbus.com/flight/stats/quarterly/2005_1q.pdf

Check out page 6, "10 largest markets without non-stop service". SLC is #6. You automatically have 68 people a day who O&D between CMH-SLC. Just right for a 70 seat aircraft. Now add 2 additional flights per day for a total of 3 RT per day from CMH and how many of those other passengers on that list will now go through SLC to connect to LAX (12 flights/day from SLC), SAN (7 flights), SEA (10 flights), SFO (7 flights) and PDX (6 flights)?

You now have a possible 567 connecting passengers to those destinations without going through more indirect or congested hubs or ORD, DFW, CVG, DTW, ATL, etc.. Not to mention the relief you are giving the ATL and CVG Delta hubs where those flights that are very often full or oversold.

 

[FlyingDawg]

I sure am glad the Mid Atlantic guys proudly raised their middle finger in the direction of Republic. What a great group of guys...I'm glad none of them will be subjected to this little scope busting party.

You guys need to realize that the threat to your new airline isn't coming from Mesa anymore, it's coming from these SJS sufferers that love their little E170s that truly ARE stealing your flying. The CRJ200/700/900 will forever be an express aircraft, travelling to express destinations. I'd like to see an E170 in San Luis Obispbo, or Santa Barbara, or Monterey, or any of the other small size destinations we serve on the 200/900 for Mesa. Remember guys, without us flying to those places, you wouldn't have those passengers feeding your mainline airplanes, and your competitors would have them. I don't need to remind you that you need us...good luck doing it on your own and making it work because financially its not possible. For those of you that disagree I reference the success of FlyI.

So maybe we worked a deal with Delta to fly 50 seaters for them...great, to express destinations. And maybe we fly the biggest regional jet in history, thats fine too but just remember we are serving in an Express capacity. It may seem like we aren't, and it may seem like you're jacking our flying, and we may be...but if you want it back, do something and take it back you little kitty cats. Quit your whining, strengthen your scope and take it back...

But I know my job is secure, because I know you're all hiding behind a screen name and none of you would ever do anything to make waves at your current employer.

But please...be concerned about the E170/E190 project. These guys are ripping you off.

Pot meet Kettle.

Any 70 seat aircraft is just that a 70 seat aircraft. It doesn't matter if its a CRJ or a ERJ.

You sir are also hidding behind a screen name, Mr. bitememesa!

Mainline management decides where the express carriers fly and what mission their express carriers serve in the airline.

 

[low-key]

I guess this where lie in my confusion. Everyone is all up in arms and constipated over the ERJ 170. Somebody tell me why? The CRJ700 and Avro 85 are also in the same category yet you never hear any of you flamers discuss it. Its always those asshoes in the 170..... gimme a break. dont forget Freedumb out in LAS in those shiny 90 seat CRJ's.


another ISA +17 day at FL320...... do you know where your performance charts are???

 

[BlackPilot628]

The CRJ7 is not flying to all "Express" Cities. Let's see here.

Mesa flys the CRJ7 from DEN-RDU and DEN-BNA. Should I name more. Those aren't short flights at all. If i'm not Mistaking the CRJ9 does PHX-MSY and PHX-LIT. Don't kid yourself, those aren't express cities.

 

[mr_kilo]

Give me a break. I could make the same arguement about the CRJ vs the ERJ 145 series. The CRJ is certified to FL 410 (ERJ is FL370), max speed is higher than the ERJ .78M, seating is 2x2 (vs 2x1), and the cabin is both taller and wider than the ERJ. Sounds like someone is jealous that Embraer just came out with something better than Bombardier. I bet you fly a CRJ right?

You don't make any sense, why would I be jealous about the emb 145 when I fly the Emb-145. I was trying to explain how much bigger the 170 is than both the crj and the erj 145, and also explain that the market is going to the 170 because passengers feel like its a mainline aircraft. The crj 700's may be a little faster than the 145, however I am trying to explain to you guys that the crj-700 does not even compare to the 170. Have you ever sat in the 170, I have. Also, the 2-2 seating config in the crj is a much tighter fit than the 2-1 config in the emb-145, not that it really matters. I don't know how you could say they are similar, (170 vs. crj-700) you probably have never sat in the 170. Guys, this isn't even a matter of opinion anymore, it is fact.



Sorry guys, it was slc not slt, you guys are quick to correct any mistakes.

 

[mr_kilo]

The CRJ7 is not flying to all "Express" Cities. Let's see here.

Mesa flys the CRJ7 from DEN-RDU and DEN-BNA. Should I name more. Those aren't short flights at all. If i'm not Mistaking the CRJ9 does PHX-MSY and PHX-LIT. Don't kid yourself, those aren't express cities.

Good point, however, in the near future don't be surprised to see those flights being done by the 170/190. Nobody wants to sit in a can for a 3 hour plus flight. Now I know passenger preference doesn't mean much, but the airline execs begin to prefer the 170 over the crj-700 because the operating price is similar to the crj-700 but it is just as big as a mainliners cabin. That is the bottom line.

 

[mr_kilo]

Pot meet Kettle.

Any 70 seat aircraft is just that a 70 seat aircraft. It doesn't matter if its a CRJ or a ERJ.

You sir are also hidding behind a screen name, Mr. bitememesa!

Mainline management decides where the express carriers fly and what mission their express carriers serve in the airline.

Again, you are missing my point. Management will be more impressed with the 170 vs the crj-700.... Have you sat in the emb-170? Any 70 seat aircraft IS NOT any other 70 seat aircraft. Management is trying to give passengers a mainline aircrfat at a regional operating price (ie, SLC-CMH in the 170). This is a win/win situation. You are completely mistaken, the 170 is a different ballgame from any other 70 seater.

 

[BlackPilot628]

Good point, however, in the near future don't be surprised to see those flights being done by the 170/190. Nobody wants to sit in a can for a 3 hour plus flight. Now I know passenger preference doesn't mean much, but the airline execs begin to prefer the 170 over the crj-700 because the operating price is similar to the crj-700 but it is just as big as a mainliners cabin. That is the bottom line.

I think they do like the E170 for the comfort of the passengers and the bigger feel of the airplane. But, people need not make the argument based on the amount of seats and the cities that the airplane fly's to. I'm sure that if Canadair had build a little wider cabin airplane (as they're doing now. C-Series) people would have purchased that. It's all about passenger comfort. For people to make the seat argument is foolish, Considering Mesa has been flying CRJ9's for 2+ years now and the BAe146 has been around for 15 years. If Canadair produces a CRJ that holds 130 people, (in the same cabin config as the CRJ7/9) would it be ok with people because it has a "smaller cabin feel"?
Of course not.

 

[sleddriver77]

How long do you think it will take for him to give up after the FMS keeps kicking back SLT as the identifier for Salt Lake City?

Delta Air Lines proudly announces Non-Stop service to Slate Run VOR!! (Or wherever)

 

[91100 100 set]

Delta Air Lines proudly announces Non-Stop service to Slate Run VOR!! (Or wherever)

Slate Run VOR! North-central Pennsylvania is actually a gorgeous place. I have many fond memories of camping trips and mountain bike races up in those woods.

This thread needs to be hijacked. Yes, I agree that that E-170, from a passenger point of view, is a superior airplane to the CRJ-700. But I really doubt that when John and Sally Customer are planning their trip and go on Expedia to find tickets, they look and say, "oh honey look, we'll get to fly on a _____" or "oh geez, I don't like those little _____, so lets connect through XYZ instead".