Originally Posted by
fullflank
Why would they want less seat? To save money on the extra fa? How does the fuel burn stack up in comparison? Less seats on aircraft is exact opposite of anything ive ever heard Parker say. And arent you at eagle? Youre familiar with the working of pdts operations?
You are correct about less seats making it harder to spread cost but you also need to think about communities who can't support a 70+ seat aircraft, some of these communities help fill up the NB and WB aircraft. That's the knock on the Q300, that it has a much higher cost per seat compared to the -400. If Bombardier would do what ATR did with the -600 and allow the company to derate the engines per the operation then it could be beneficial but it costs a big penny to push a 50 seater 320 Knts.