Originally Posted by
flightlessbirds
In a limited sense that’s a false comparison: the 175 can’t be optimized for seat count because of scope, so it is artificially First heavy and spacious because of mainline scope considerations.
However, I also agree with your conclusion that it is a ‘mainline’ airplane ... that it qualifies as an RJ is beyond my comprehension ... what we’ve been willing to accept is bewildering. I’ve always said it’s be a great airplane if it was being flown at main line like what DL is doing with the 717.
Generally speaking if you optimize for a niche an aircraft will perform better in that niche than an aircraft optimized to do something else. For that reason alone it probably makes sense to come up with a clean sheet 50 seater. Currently there are 1500 of those registered in the US alone. That’s a sizable market and they are wearing out. A replacement aircraft with 20% more fuel efficiency could quite possibly be a market success.
The larger challenge, IMHO, is the next generation of larger not-exactly regional jets like the E-2 series and the A220. What Neeleman is hoping to do with Moxy could well put a serious dent in the traditional hub and spoke model. Any trip involving a transfer is inherently slower and less efficient, and more fraught with uncertainty than a nonstop. Just how many commuters even look at flights requiring a connecting flight when they are jumpseating?
With a nonstop aircraft of transcontinental, and even transatlantic range, how many people are going to want to go from a medium sized airport to a hub - most likely not in their intended final direction of travel, to PERHAPS make a connecting flight, assuming the first flight gets off on time and the second flight isn’t scheduled too close on the heels of the first flight’s scheduled arrival.
Sure, with enough of a price break people will still use hub and spoke, but it won’t be as lucrative as it once was if the A220 winds up being as economical to operate as it is being touted.