View Single Post
Old 03-13-2008 | 07:37 AM
  #9  
rickair7777's Avatar
rickair7777
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,864
Likes: 663
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by JetJock16
I agree, when comparing the statistics from a friend of mine on the E-170, the CR7 & 9 have better fuel efficiency. Yes, according to him even the CR9 burns less than the E-170 and it carries more Pax.

No flaming so let’s leave it at that.
The E-jets essentially corrected all of the pax-comfort issues associated with RJ's, and this is HUGE.

I think Embraer was on the verge of putting Bomardier out of the RJ business, and the industry order statistics show this: A very large drop off in CRJ orders over the last several years, followed by a massive resurgence in 2007.

The E-jet was designed when oil was $25. A 15% fuel economy penalty was deemed acceptable to enhance pax comfort...made sense in 2004. But 15% of $110 is WAY more significant than 15% of $25. Oil saved the CRJ.
Reply