Tell me about Compass..
05-10-2008 | 08:40 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,105
Likes: 0
From: Left Seat
Regarding fuel numbers for E175 vs CR9....
I don't think the fuel burn numbers are all that different for the same altitude, I think the biggest difference is that E175s are consistently flying at lower altitudes than CR9s. For a takeoff at max gross we can only go up to FL300 or so initially! It's fairly seldom that I have the numbers to get above FL360. From what CR9 drivers tell me, they operate routinely in the mid to high 30s. There's a big difference in fuel burn between 300 and 370.
It's not that the E175 doesn't have the power to get up to a decent cruise altitude, I'm usually still doing 700-800 fpm when I reach the book's max altitude number. The wing may be more of a limiting factor...at max cruise alt you're definitely seeing a good bit of the yellow speed tape. Still, I think the numbers in the book are pretty conservative and higher altitudes could be used safely in smooth air. If there's really a 20-30% disparity in fuel burn between the E175 and CR9 I suspect our management will be pressing Embraer to rework those numbers.
I don't think the fuel burn numbers are all that different for the same altitude, I think the biggest difference is that E175s are consistently flying at lower altitudes than CR9s. For a takeoff at max gross we can only go up to FL300 or so initially! It's fairly seldom that I have the numbers to get above FL360. From what CR9 drivers tell me, they operate routinely in the mid to high 30s. There's a big difference in fuel burn between 300 and 370.
It's not that the E175 doesn't have the power to get up to a decent cruise altitude, I'm usually still doing 700-800 fpm when I reach the book's max altitude number. The wing may be more of a limiting factor...at max cruise alt you're definitely seeing a good bit of the yellow speed tape. Still, I think the numbers in the book are pretty conservative and higher altitudes could be used safely in smooth air. If there's really a 20-30% disparity in fuel burn between the E175 and CR9 I suspect our management will be pressing Embraer to rework those numbers.
05-10-2008 | 08:48 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,847
Likes: 10
Hot, high, and heavy in the -200 usually won't get us much about 30K...but level off before she dies on you, get a few mach numbers under your belt and you can get another easy few thousand feet between you and terra firma if you play your cards right...
05-10-2008 | 09:00 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 0
From: B737 CA
I'm sure you could get the E175 several thousand feet above the published numbers fairly easily, to say nothing of using your technique ExAB. However, I'm not much for operating an aircraft outside of what its manufacturer says its capable of. I know Embraer's max altitude capability tables are conservative and I could safely go higher...but how much higher? At some point you enter test pilot territory a la PCL3901. I'll gladly burn the extra fuel to stay within established limits until Embraer puts out other numbers.
05-10-2008 | 09:11 PM
#24
Underboob King
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 4,412
Likes: 0
From: Guppy Commander
Don't get me wrong... I like Compass. But, everything I've been hearing indicates that NWA isn't as happy with the EMB-170 fuel cost as they are about the CRJ-900 at Mesaba. Every flight, we ACARS all our fuel information to Northwest. That data is compiled and compared to Compass, since both carriers are operating 76-seat RJs. We're hearing that the CRJ-900 is about 20% more efficient on fuel across the board in those comparisons. Of course, the 900 is about 100% less comfortable for passengers and crew, but that doesn't matter much to management. I think with the DC-9 being retired, there will be enough flying to justify expanding both XJ and CP. But, with fuel prices the way they are, it will be interesting to see which of the two expands more. Of course, there are plenty of factors that could really screw things up. The whole merger thing could really complicate what everyone was previously expecting. Who knows...
I'm also curious if NWA/Delta will keep their order for Bombardier C-Series jets when they hit the market. Supposedly NWA has a big order in for those as well as the 787. Depending on whether they get C110s or C130s, that's a 99-125 seat airplane (mixed class), meaning that could have some affect on the 76-seat RJ flying at both Compass and Mesaba. 2013 isn't as far away as you may think, and the C-Series is supposed to be more efficient than anything we're flying now.
I'm also curious if NWA/Delta will keep their order for Bombardier C-Series jets when they hit the market. Supposedly NWA has a big order in for those as well as the 787. Depending on whether they get C110s or C130s, that's a 99-125 seat airplane (mixed class), meaning that could have some affect on the 76-seat RJ flying at both Compass and Mesaba. 2013 isn't as far away as you may think, and the C-Series is supposed to be more efficient than anything we're flying now.
The above wont happen either. The C-Series has already been looked at by NWA. I personally spoke with the DC9 fleet manager and he said they have already flown the mock up sim of the c-series and in his opinion that would be the DC9 replacement at Mainline. fwiw
05-11-2008 | 05:48 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
From: 757/767
He is probably basing it on what the Director of Ops has said and also based on his flying experience. CRJ9 at mid 30s burn averages around 2700 at mach .77 near max capacity.
Maintenance tech has informed us that CRJ9 Next Gen Enhanced version that XJ flies is about 30% more fuel efficient overall when compared to ERJ175 and these are based on the same destinations CP and XJ flies to.
Maintenance tech has informed us that CRJ9 Next Gen Enhanced version that XJ flies is about 30% more fuel efficient overall when compared to ERJ175 and these are based on the same destinations CP and XJ flies to.
05-11-2008 | 06:11 AM
#26
Thread Starter
Indian Takeout Driver
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: FAR part 347 (91+121+135)
I just came back from the first orientation day of training at Compass. For our class the seniority numbers were 235-242. We were told that the delivery schedule had been accelerated and all planes should be here by September. I don't know if it is 100% true, but we were also told that 18 more planes were confirmed for 2009 and that Delta agreed to allow the flow through to continue after the merger.
05-11-2008 | 06:22 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 0
From: B737 CA
I've also heard talk that maybe RAH might be interested in buying Compass as the DAL/NWA merger may require the shedding of non-core assets.. It would make sense with them suddenly announcing more airplanes.. the whole thing is a mystery and none of it will be known until it's all said and done!
05-11-2008 | 06:29 AM
#28
Gets ALL Days Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
From: Sit down comedian.
I cant believe you guys are arguing over fuel burns between the 900 and 175. If you want to know the truth, the 900 gets a tiny bit better fuel burn but not by much. NWA favors the 175 for several other various reasons, and the slight fuel advantage the 900 has is not enough to make it the favorite to NWA over the 175.
Back to the Compass thread. In my opinion, Compass is a great place to be. I have enjoyed every second of it, given that it is still an airline and has its typical airline problems that you would find anywhere. Management has been firmly saying for the last two weeks that Compass is in a great position with the Delta/NWA merger and in a good position even with the high rising fuel costs. Everyone always doubts the things that management says (since many pilots have heard the "we are doing fine" followed by bankruptcy) but in my own opinion they have not lied to us yet so my trust is still there.
In my opinion, here is the important part. I know many people have considered coming to Compass, but they want to wait until the merger dust settles to ensure their job security. Right now many people are worried what is going to happen, and rightfully so. If you are on the fence about it, I would suggest you get your interview in quick as possible and get into class as quick as possible if you want to upgrade in less than 18 months. If you wait until the merger dust settles, once there is more guarentee that Compass is one of the great places to be, you will be putting yourself at the bottom of a longer senority list and looking at a 2+ year upgrade. Just my 2 cents.
Back to the Compass thread. In my opinion, Compass is a great place to be. I have enjoyed every second of it, given that it is still an airline and has its typical airline problems that you would find anywhere. Management has been firmly saying for the last two weeks that Compass is in a great position with the Delta/NWA merger and in a good position even with the high rising fuel costs. Everyone always doubts the things that management says (since many pilots have heard the "we are doing fine" followed by bankruptcy) but in my own opinion they have not lied to us yet so my trust is still there.
In my opinion, here is the important part. I know many people have considered coming to Compass, but they want to wait until the merger dust settles to ensure their job security. Right now many people are worried what is going to happen, and rightfully so. If you are on the fence about it, I would suggest you get your interview in quick as possible and get into class as quick as possible if you want to upgrade in less than 18 months. If you wait until the merger dust settles, once there is more guarentee that Compass is one of the great places to be, you will be putting yourself at the bottom of a longer senority list and looking at a 2+ year upgrade. Just my 2 cents.
Last edited by UnlimitedAkro; 05-11-2008 at 07:23 AM.
05-11-2008 | 06:30 AM
#29
Thread Starter
Indian Takeout Driver
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
From: FAR part 347 (91+121+135)
Hope you're right. On that note, is there any wording in the pilot working agreement (Since they pilots are represented by ALPA and the NWA MEC) to protect them should something like this happen? Surely there is wording on such a possibility?
05-11-2008 | 09:41 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 0
From: B737 CA
Yeah, the NW pilots' CBA prohibits the company from selling CPS until they add 10 new narrowbody airframes to mainline above the floor that was set when we got our 18th E175 (a few weeks ago). With no narrowbodies on order and the C-series not out for 5 yrs or so, I think it'll be some time before they can sell Compass.
Unless, of course, that language goes away when they negotiate a joint DL/NW contract.
Personally I think we'll be inundated by NW flowdowns long before we're sold.
Unless, of course, that language goes away when they negotiate a joint DL/NW contract.
Personally I think we'll be inundated by NW flowdowns long before we're sold.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
