Pontifications writing had been on the wall for years for q400 sale; crj is next – leeham news and comment electricity icon

###########

The entire reason for the continued existence of the CRJ in recent years has been the US Scope Clause. The original E-175 complies with Scope, which is the clause in US pilot labor contracts with American, Delta, United and Alaska airlines that limits the size, weight, number of passengers and number of airplanes regional airline partners can operate for their major partner.

In this context, the weight is the key metric. 7 cases movie The Scope limits airplane weight to 86,000 lbs. The E175-E2 and Mitsubishi MRJ90, conditionally ordered by the USA’s Skywest and Trans States airlines for operation on behalf of their partners, weigh too much. It’s only a few thousand pounds. Embraer and Mitsubishi counted on contract relief in the 2019 and 2020 negotiations, but the unions signaled they have no intention of granting this small concession.

This sounds like a page out of the Boeing strategy to kill the CSeries when it filed a complaint with the US Department of Commerce over alleged unfair trade practices. Boeing prevailed at Commerce, which proposed a 292% tariff. The International Trade Commission, which had to determine in Boeing suffered harm, unanimously ruled it didn’t, thus killing the case.

Ironically, it was the trade complaint that forced Bombardier to sell 50.01% of the CSeries program to Airbus. This gave Airbus an advantage in the single-aisle sector. youtube gas station karaoke Boeing and Embraer proposed a joint venture to combine Embraer Commercial with Boeing in a new company, giving Boeing (and Embraer) a new way to compete with Airbus and the CSeries. Limited future

The E1 economics are pretty close to the CRJ’s in our analysis and the E2 is better, as is the MRJ70. The CRJ can’t be re-engined. The Pratt & Whitney and GE Passport engines weigh more than the CRJ’s GE34 engines and the airplane already has weight-and-balance challenges under some flying conditions. (A recent flight I was on had to play musical chairs before we could leave the gate to get weight-and-balance right.)

All aircraft have to be loaded properly; however, on airliners with forward and aft cargo compartments under the cabin floor, such as all mainline airliners and the E-Jet series, one moves baggage between the forward and aft cargo compartments to resolve weight and balance issues, instead of having to resort to moving passengers around the cabin, as will sometimes be necessary in an aircraft, like the CRJ 200 and most small private planes, that have only one baggage compartment.

Continuing to spend much more time than I should reading about CRJ weight and balance on the internet, I discovered that the CRJ 700/900/1000 have a small baggage compartment under the forward cabin floor, big enough only for carry on bags, in addition to the behind the cabin baggage compartment. This must help immensely in achieving proper weight and balance by moving baggage instead of passengers, but does not seem to be well loved by baggage handlers.

“There are also caged in wire bundle protectors…those get damaged and bags get hung up on those very often. It’s a really tight space, and it’s hard on the back standing inside the doorway and loading bags in it. electricity trading I am 5 foot 9 tall, and the top of the doorway space is about 5 foot 5 off the ground. So you have to stand under the doorway and crouch, and load the bags in. Have bumped my head many times on the metal studs that hold the door in place when it is shut.

Like any asset manager, Alain Bellemare calculated that the return on investment on the Q400 was no longer worth the risk. It was becoming unprofitable to try to renew this turbo-prop range. electricity cost in california Especially since the new technologies being developed in regional aviation will undoubtedly have overtaken the current fuel advantages of turbo. As I mentioned recently, the CRJ’s adventure can still continue if Bombardier finds a business partner. Let us not forget that Mitsubishi is an important partner for Bombardier in Global projects. A joint venture is always possible. electricity lessons 4th grade CRJ/MRJ, a winning combination? Bombardier has a worldwide network of parts and maintenance. Mitsubishi will probably have to find another network similar to the one proposed by Boeing after the Embraer integration. Finally, such a future would imply a relocation of the manufacturing workshop to a low-cost country. Or Japan. Airbus would thus obtain more space at Mirabel to produce more A220s.

Bombardier will undoubtedly develop the successor to the Challenger 650 very soon. This is probably the starting point for thinking, if necessary, about the post-CRJ. 9gag wiki As long as you believe in it, indeed. Therefore, will the diameter of the future Challenger 750 lead to a CRJ 950 as narrow as the 900? In that case, why not bet on the Global’s cabin? Other issues remain unresolved. So why would GE have invested so much money in the Passport engine? For a single customer, a single range of aircraft? If Bombardier loses money in the manufacture of CRJs, isn’t that the lot of all manufacturers: sell at cost and make money on parts and maintenance? This chapter is far from over.

As I noted last week for a similar post here in LNC, I flew a Bombardier CRJ-900 last month RDU-EWR for a DL Connection flight, and even in seat 5D (bulkhead/1st row in Comfort+), I found the narrow 17” width of the seat (I always bring a tape measure!) too narrow, confining and unpleasant for the 90-mins flight when compared against the wider, 18” seat (6D also in Comfort+) taken on the outbound flight LGA-RDU two days earlier which was aboard an Embraer 175.

So, just as I strive to AVOID the 17” (or thereabouts) wide seats on Boeing’s 737s, or its truly atrocious ten abreast “densified” 777s and nine abreast 787s, that recent flight aboard the Delta Connection CR9 was a potent reminder of why it’s best for most adults to avoid any aircraft with 17” wide economy class seats – and especially those for mid- to long-haul flights – as I simply found myself pining to get off that plane ASAP I hated it that much being pinned between the person next to me, whom in this case was someone I know very well, and the sidewall of the cabin.

Anyhow, I’ll sure do my best to avoid Bombardier’s CRJs of all sizes whenever possible if there’s other flights aboard Embraer 175s, 195s, or better yet, Airbus’s (nee Bombardier’s) brand new A220s what with their 18.6” wide economy seats… just as I go out of my way to avoid Boeing’s nasty (for economy flyers) densified 777/787 widebodies and book Airbus’s much nicer A330s/340s whenever booking long-haul international flights for myself – and others who ask for my assistance booking their flights!

(Fortunately, with Airbus’s far more comfy for economy pax A350s becoming more widely available on many routes, especially to/from Asia, perhaps this will force a rethinking of those atrocious, densified 777s now that Airbus has a viable competitor in the long-haul widebody space that it lacked until now, and which allowed for Boeing to call all the shots, including the unacceptably narrow, 17” wide seating that has become commonplace on many airlines’ 777s in recent years since 17” wide seats really is too narrow and confining for most adults…)

So, for sure, buh-bye CRJs – you did well introducing the speed and “comfort” of jets to small markets that used to be dominated by propeller planes back when Comair introduced them nearly 30 years ago. But your time has come, and gone, now that better options with wider economy seats are available as 17” wide seats, even for 90-mins is unpleasant, undesirable, and even unacceptable!