Originally Posted by
David Puddy
Yawn. Did you notice the phrase “based on Embraer estimates” for those stats? Clearly an article sponsored by Embraer (marketing).
Bottom line: the E2 is no doubt better than the E190 in terms of FBW updates and overall CASM reduction - it is an improvement and it will be more efficient. Better cockpit too. That said, the interior is somewhat underwhelming beyond slightly bigger bins. Still an improvement though...
A key question remains: what will be the “mission profile” of the E190 replacement? Same profile as the E190? If so, maybe the E2 is a better fit as more of a regional (primarily East Coast) airplane. Or, is Robin thinking about longer, thinner legs that could be accommodated by the CS300 (in addition to shorter, shuttle-type flights like BOS-DCA and JFK-SYR)? Nobody knows! Air Canada seems excited about their impending CS300 deliveries, but it also plans to use them all over their network including longer, thinner routes to Mexico and the Caribbean from various Canadian cities. Sounds like AC is planning to use the CS300 on both shorter and longer routes.
Perhaps a mix of CS100s and CS300s at JB could be useful given their different seating options (flexibility to match seat supply to market demand). Who knows????
David, I wouldn't say those performance numbers are anything to yawn about. I understand it comes from a biased source, but Embraer's past performance estimates were conservative compared to what they actually accomplished. While this is not an apples to apples comparison, I'm willing to give this data some consideration, especially because it is the first time I've seen a direct comparison between the E2 and its competitors. I would love to get my hands on more independent analysis of the true operational costs of each aircraft, but I'm guessing I would need to have some more clout within the industry to get access that kind of data. Until then, this is all I've got, so I temper it with some healthy skepticism.
I would like to know how they calculated those cost comparison numbers. What was the stage length? Seating configuration?
The article was written after the author visited the Embraer facility for the delivery of the first E2 and it was made pretty clear who provided the data. Most of that article was factual and has been reported in other publications similarly as well, so I don't see where this is coming across as a marketing puff piece.
I would have appreciated a comparison of maintenance intervals for the different aircraft as well. Any variable that affects aircraft utilization will have an impact on the fleet decision.
As we've agreed upon this in the past, the big unknown is what the mission profile for the replacement fleet will be. Does the CSeries encroach too much into what the 320 can do? If the CSeries is meant to replace part of the 320 fleet, how willing is Airbus to make a deal and buy back older 320s, for instance, to sell some new CSeries? How much farther can the E2 fly before its CASM starts creeping up to match the CSeries or the 320ceo and 320neo?
The versatility of both aircraft and the overlap in capabilities between the two exacerbates the uncertainty of this fleet review, which is occurring during a time of very little communication from management about the future strategy of the company, all while negotiating a first contract, making for a murky environment where making any predictions about what direction this decision will go is a WAG at best. We can't afford to dismiss any information regarding either aircraft right now.
The best we can do right now is to educate ourselves as pilots the best we can, to understand the capabilities of each aircraft, their comparative strengths and weaknesses, and the business environment in which they're being sold. Once a decision is made and the waters become a little less murky, the pilot group can apply that knowledge to better understand the business plan for JetBlue going forward, making for a more informed decision regarding the strategy of negotiating a contract, and ultimately making an informed decision once a TA is presented.