Mrj 70/90
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,237
Shrinking a airframe almost always results in less efficiency and ultimently a market failure. Embraer and Mitsubishi went all in on scope caves by the major airlines. It did not happen and now they are trying to salvage something from the wreckage. That’s not likely to succeed either.
Composite. Will save a lot of weight
#112
That is much more harder than it sounds.
Weight savings matters to the customer, but a big part of the cost/benefit equation from the airframer's perspective is saved labor. The design/testing costs for a composite wing are about the same regardless of wing size. If you're going to build widebody wings, that's a lot of labor-work saved over the life of the project... not as much for an RJ. To get an ROI on saved labor you need to either build large wings (lots of spars, rivets, panels, holes drilled, etc) or build a whole lot of smaller wings... a niche RJ isn't going to provide that opportunity although you can bet your arse the next generation NB's (on both sides of the Atlantic) will have composite wings.
Also spending money to save weight is easier to justify for longer-range aircraft... once they get up to cruise the saved weight and smoother surface, and cruise-optimized wing shape amplifies into fuel savings over the duration of the flight. Widebodies (not coincidentally) are the primary market for composite wings now. Smaller planes which are up and down a lot don't get the same advantage, since they spend a lot of time in transition and on the ground. That costly, light, smooth composite wing is a liability at the gate and in the departure lineup at the hub.
You could do composite just to get to a specific weight goal, but that would likely be an economic fail. Better to just design your plane to be at the correct weight from day one. MHI was almost arrogant over the years in their disregard for US scope, and I for one am enjoying watching them squirm a bit (OK a lot). Message sent loud and clear.
Weight savings matters to the customer, but a big part of the cost/benefit equation from the airframer's perspective is saved labor. The design/testing costs for a composite wing are about the same regardless of wing size. If you're going to build widebody wings, that's a lot of labor-work saved over the life of the project... not as much for an RJ. To get an ROI on saved labor you need to either build large wings (lots of spars, rivets, panels, holes drilled, etc) or build a whole lot of smaller wings... a niche RJ isn't going to provide that opportunity although you can bet your arse the next generation NB's (on both sides of the Atlantic) will have composite wings.
Also spending money to save weight is easier to justify for longer-range aircraft... once they get up to cruise the saved weight and smoother surface, and cruise-optimized wing shape amplifies into fuel savings over the duration of the flight. Widebodies (not coincidentally) are the primary market for composite wings now. Smaller planes which are up and down a lot don't get the same advantage, since they spend a lot of time in transition and on the ground. That costly, light, smooth composite wing is a liability at the gate and in the departure lineup at the hub.
You could do composite just to get to a specific weight goal, but that would likely be an economic fail. Better to just design your plane to be at the correct weight from day one. MHI was almost arrogant over the years in their disregard for US scope, and I for one am enjoying watching them squirm a bit (OK a lot). Message sent loud and clear.
#114
Huh. It's almost like Mitsubishi is making news for the sake of making news.
"We're buying the CRJ program! We're revamping our program! Holy bejesus, someone in the US wants to order our plane!"
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/06/19/airline-in-talks-to-buy-mitsubishi-spacejet-to-serve-us-regional-market.html
"We're buying the CRJ program! We're revamping our program! Holy bejesus, someone in the US wants to order our plane!"
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/06/19/airline-in-talks-to-buy-mitsubishi-spacejet-to-serve-us-regional-market.html
#115
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,237
Huh. It's almost like Mitsubishi is making news for the sake of making news.
"We're buying the CRJ program! We're revamping our program! Holy bejesus, someone in the US wants to order our plane!"
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/06/19/airline-in-talks-to-buy-mitsubishi-spacejet-to-serve-us-regional-market.html
"We're buying the CRJ program! We're revamping our program! Holy bejesus, someone in the US wants to order our plane!"
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/06/19/airline-in-talks-to-buy-mitsubishi-spacejet-to-serve-us-regional-market.html
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
#118
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Posts: 54
How will this effect the future of the CRJ? Will it be phased out in favor of the SpaceJet? The article says they will build the backlog but will they build any more past the 43 remaining? Interesting times we live in.
#119
If there is demand and they can make money, they will continue. What benefit not to?
#120
The SpaceJet will get renamed to the ScopeJet. It will look a heck of a lot like a 900.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post