Originally Posted by
gloopy
I still think the net effect is highly exagerated on the forums. It plays an incredibly small role; barely enough to move the needle.
As for CPZ, I think that they think that CPZ thinks that the pilots think that they are so married to their airline/flow/advancement that they will be able to staff even a radical transcon shift in basing/allocation. They see CPZ as somewhat operational for the foreseeable future (12-ish months, maybe 24) in tact and picked them to do it. They had to pick someone. Who else was it going to be? PCL is teetering on the fulcrum of their own viability as it is, and SKYW is gearing up for a potential C-Series war plus an upcoming rate reset battle so I doubt DL wants to give them leverage in the most crucial growth market in the network right now. Who else could do it? Mesa? Air Wisky? Eagle?
TBH the CRJ9 product isn't that bad. The 700 is awful because they removed the forward lav. The 700 and 900 is way better than the 50 because the floor is lower and the windows are higher, the AC actually works on the ground (plus recircs) and its not nearly as weight/balance limited. The magical E jet is a better tube, but who cares. Seriously. No one cares. The A320 is a better tube than the 737 but I doubt SWA loses any sleep (or customers) over it.
No one is switching airlines over the possibility of getting an C jet over an E jet. Its just not a factor in the real world.
I think your argument is invalid for several reasons. Alaska is getting Embraers for SkyWest, why didn't they buy CRJ's...guessing it has to do with range. The Embraer also is more flexible in short field conditions, take for example Chicago Midway, I've piloted both a 900 and a 175 in there, and Ide take a 175 in there 24/7/365, due to its flexibility in lowering ref speeds with a full flap configuration rather than Flaps 5, range wise the Ejet is a better product, it allows greater range and the ability to be less restrictive on weight, again I've flown both over a route like LGA-DFW, in the 900 you'de be stopping for gas with a strong headwind or having an alternate, the Embraer wouldn't be as restrictive. The 900 only has a forward galley, if your catering during boarding then you have to stop, not so in the Embraer. VNAV in the Embraer allows for lower approach minimums on certain GPS approaches. I could go on and on simply put, having 1500+ hours in both airplanes Ide take the Embraer over the CRJ every day...