Future of the 50-seater? Cargo?
11-15-2007 | 12:54 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,047
Likes: 20
From: 7ER B...whatever that means.
I think ETOPS restrictions and, as you said, the inability to climb into the 400s will limits its conversion to a medium-long haul biz jet. The wing is just not suited for it. The Gulfstreams and Global Express have better wings for those altitudes. The fact that it is a low-mid 300s jet is a problem. And the fact that it can't fly the speeds required in the NAT Track system on a regular basis.
Anyway, I think that for Euro continental or North American routes it would do pretty well, especially in the -200 series we have with higher gross weights and fuel capacity. East coast to West coast in winter winds non-stop would be out of range now, but if they put in more fuel capacity it would be possible.
We'll see.
Anyway, I think that for Euro continental or North American routes it would do pretty well, especially in the -200 series we have with higher gross weights and fuel capacity. East coast to West coast in winter winds non-stop would be out of range now, but if they put in more fuel capacity it would be possible.
We'll see.
11-15-2007 | 01:15 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,732
Likes: 0
From: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
For some corp flight departments, probably not a concern. For others, it just wouldn't work.
11-15-2007 | 08:08 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Just where did this rumor get started? I used to walk around saying things like that based on what I had read here and other places, and most people I've talked to who have flown the Metro say it was easy, or at least not that bad. So which is it?
11-16-2007 | 03:54 AM
#16
La Familia Delta
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,467
Likes: 0
From: B-717 FO / C-17 AC
I heard the autothrottle mod is hugely expensive and probably not feasible on a CRJ.
they might also not be a bad deal in Europe. TNT currently uses a bunch of BAE-146's for short range cargo, but those airplanes have side cargo doors and i doubt its cost effective to modify CRJ's to have a cargo door and get certification
they might also not be a bad deal in Europe. TNT currently uses a bunch of BAE-146's for short range cargo, but those airplanes have side cargo doors and i doubt its cost effective to modify CRJ's to have a cargo door and get certification
11-16-2007 | 03:58 AM
#17
Thread Starter
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,755
Likes: 6
They have the same CASM issues in Europe that exist in the US. RJs are not nearly as prevelant there as they are in the US. Anyway, the autothrottle thing won't be happening. It is expensive and hardly worth it on airframes that will not be worth much soon. Did Bombardier offer this on the CRJ-200? For that matter, was it offered on any CRJ model?
11-16-2007 | 04:26 AM
#18
Doing One Pilot's Job
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,889
Likes: 129
Safe Flight which is located on HPN offers an "AutoPower" autothrottle conversion for the Challenger 604 and 850...which is the CRJ.
Combine that with a Rockwell Collins HGS 2100 (providing Cat IIIa approaches), the large aux fuel tank and a refurbished executive interior and you have a highly capable, customized large-cabin bizjet with transatlantic range for a fraction of the acquisition cost of a comparable airframe. Even without the autothrottles and/or HGS it would be cheaper and nearly as capable.
DOC will be higher that comparable large cabin bizjets as the aircraft can't really take advantage of lower full burns above FL400 and doesn't carry the fuel for true international range...but you could easily get into the upper 30s on a long segment and there is a plentiful supply of parts and labor supporting the airframe.
Combine that with a Rockwell Collins HGS 2100 (providing Cat IIIa approaches), the large aux fuel tank and a refurbished executive interior and you have a highly capable, customized large-cabin bizjet with transatlantic range for a fraction of the acquisition cost of a comparable airframe. Even without the autothrottles and/or HGS it would be cheaper and nearly as capable.
DOC will be higher that comparable large cabin bizjets as the aircraft can't really take advantage of lower full burns above FL400 and doesn't carry the fuel for true international range...but you could easily get into the upper 30s on a long segment and there is a plentiful supply of parts and labor supporting the airframe.
11-16-2007 | 04:30 AM
#19
La Familia Delta
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,467
Likes: 0
From: B-717 FO / C-17 AC
but who cares if the pilots get autothrottles or not? sure the pilots care, but nobody is really asking them. as for CatIII approaches in a CRJ, that sounds scary. with a x-wind the autopilot will land in a crab on a true zero zero coupled approach. thats nuts with as low as the wings are to the ground and how weak that gear is.
11-16-2007 | 04:40 AM
#20
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 55
From: 765A
but who cares if the pilots get autothrottles or not? sure the pilots care, but nobody is really asking them. as for CatIII approaches in a CRJ, that sounds scary. with a x-wind the autopilot will land in a crab on a true zero zero coupled approach. thats nuts with as low as the wings are to the ground and how weak that gear is.
I've flown three aircraft that can autoland (88,757,767) and none of them land in a crab during an autoland.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
1800 RVR
Cargo
26
10-21-2007 04:46 AM
