Narrowing the carriers down?
11-30-2018, 11:35 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 2,370
Originally Posted by Mesabah
It won't be there for long probably, the A220 is best on routes like FNT-LAS or CLT-PDX, etc. Flights that would be served by an RJ, if they had that kind of range. Both the 717 and the RJs, are cheaper on the current routes they fly, than the A220.
11-30-2018, 12:17 PM
#32
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: 6 Train - Panhandler
Posts: 2,001
Originally Posted by Baradium
Citation definitely needed as I understand the A220 has the lowest cost per seat mile of any aircraft in the fleet throughout its range. If that's the case the only way an RJ would be cheaper would be if the route doesn't support the number of seats.
11-30-2018, 08:19 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: FIRE ALPA
Posts: 3,082
Originally Posted by SlamClicker
Long live crazy 8s!
12-01-2018, 04:58 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,203
Originally Posted by Avroman
Except in most cases a 900 is cheaper than a 200 because of the much better climb and minimal cruise burn difference plus you know that 50% seating increase. The 200 really only makes sense on short routes that can't fill more than 60 seats (yes I know seating capacities)
12-01-2018, 03:05 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 2,370
Originally Posted by amcnd
200’s are mostly paid for at most airlines now... so they are super cheap. That 900 payment negates any savings over a 200 right now...
12-01-2018, 03:20 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 2,370
Originally Posted by msprj2
Its about dual class cabin, not fuel burn.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
