Future of the 50-seater? Cargo?
 

Thoughts? I wonder if eventually they will be taken out of pax service and put into freight ops. They might not even be bad for some types of ops. They're not being made anymore and I would imagine the oldest ones are being removed from service slowly.

What's the future of this airplane?

i thought i have heard that was what this plane was originally designed to do? hence why the windows are so low, it wasn't supposed to have windows in the first place.

watch out UPS/Fedex, here's where the whipsawing begins for you guys!! ;)

Miller High Life.

Single pilot freight ops in a CRJ.... I can see it now.

Well, it would probably be easier than flying a Metro, from what I've heard!

The windows are low because it is a business jet. They did not put 2+2 seating in the Challenger and were forced to raise the floor. That's what I have heard at least.

Ive always wondered the same thing. If Cherry air and a few others can make money flying freight in those old DA-20s I'm sure theres money to be made with a larger, more efficient RJ.

The Challenger was designed per the request of Fed Ex as a replacement for their DA-20s. A couple design parameters were a cabin wide enough for a pallet and the ability to stretch it into larger sizes for impending deregulation. I guess you could say they'd be coming full circle.

Cargo deregulation happened earlier than they thought it would and Fred started buying up 727s.

The ATRs have found a second wind as cargo haulers. Maybe we'll see CRJs doing the same, I highly doubt it happening any time in the near future.

That's probably because they bought those Falcons for next to nothing :D! A used CRJ probably still fetches a pretty penny.

I don't believe UPS and FedEx can get them for their feeders as the scope clause limits all off line flying to be done by props. No jets allowed.

Incidentally I saw a photo of a converted cargo 146 being used over in Europe...

I'd bet that in the next 5-10 years you're going to start seeing MANY, MANY CRJ-100/200s used for corporate shuttles and converted to full-blown business jets.

You could probably buy a used 200, C-check it, install the big aux fuel tank, hang new engines on the pylons, add HGS and autothrottles up front and totally refurbish the interior to a luxurious 8-12 pax cabin with full-sized lav and galley for well under $20 million.

Of course it won't have the range of a dedicated large-cabin bizjet, and the DOC will likely be higher than average due to the airplane's practical climb limitation to the upper 30s...but it'll provide large cabin comfort and the range for NY Metro to Europe or the US west coast in even the worst winter headwinds, with plenty of AOG support and an ample supply of experienced crews & mechanics.

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.

Are biz-jets covered by ETOPS regulations? I was under the impression that only applied to 121 operators. I think if the airplane is operated under part 91 you can do whatever you want. I thought you could hop the pond in a 182 if you felt like it.

I would believe you are correct. Besides, do you know how prohibitively expensive it would be if Globals/GIV/GV's etc, as well as their crews and MX programs had to comply with ETOPS requirments.

For some corp flight departments, probably not a concern. For others, it just wouldn't work.

I think many of them will go to China and India...

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?

The future of the 50's is in China!

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 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?

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.

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.

Cat IIIa is not zero/zero.

UPS 727-QFs with the HGS could shoot hand-flown Cat IIIb down to 600 RVR, and you can bet they didn't have autothrottles! The HGS provided a flare and thrust idle cue for the PF, though I'm not sure how that'd work while coupled. With a coupled approach and ATs I'm sure the system would automatically retard the thrust at the appropriate time to land mains first.

The CRJ2 has weak landing gear???? Compared to what, a carrier-borne aircraft?

oh ok i was thinking catIII autoland my mistake. and side loading on most airplanes makes any gear weak with the exception of airplanes that have more than 2 main gear trucks

We had CatIIIa approach capabilities on the SAAB2000 with a HUD when I was in Europe. Hand-flown. Any real business jet going to Europe needs at the very least Cat II approach capability, which is not hard to get with the CRJ. Cat IIIa is also pretty nice to have and I can think of at least one time when Cat II would not have been adequate. Landing at CDG and called the RWY in sight very near the 50 foot DH.

Anyway, there might be some conversions to biz jet status, but probably not too many.

Also, yes, the system we had gave aural "Idle" and "Flare" cues.

One more thing... The SAAB2000 was vastly more stable and speed control was easier than on the CRJ. It is hard for me to imagine a Cat III approach in the CRJ hand flown. And another thing! They were serious about keeping planes and vehicles out of the ILS sensitive area there. The CatII/III line was much further back than the ILS sensitive line in the US. I once almost had to go around here in ORD because something cross the ILS and we lost the GS. Had we been lower I would have had to go missed. Anyway....

Umm, guys to put an end on this, the CRJ into the business jet idea is already taking affect. I have a friend who's company is already buying one and making it into an unreal transcon business bird that is really, really sweet. 20 something seats, aux tanks, new engines and I'm not sure about the autothrottles things, but I'll ask about it. What he said was the company likes it because of the size vs cost. As far as not being able to go up higher then FL410, they get around that by adding huge aux tanks. I'll be you'll start seeing alot, ALOT of birds like this soon, as it just makes sense.

Well, you might be right. After all, the cabin would be pretty spacious for 20 folks or so and the weight issues would be much less. Certainly for some types of ops, including domestic sports charters for smaller teams like basketball teams it might be a good option. East-to-West coast capabilities would help. As would a larger lav! :rolleyes:

Yeah what he said was the lav would be the cross section of the cabin. The galley is behind the lav (I"m guessing accessed through some door, I don't know how it'd work out) but the front was 20 or so pretty plush seats. I"m going to try to find some pictures for something.

I agree with the earlier poster about corp. shuttles. Some companies are already doing this. The Limited (Columbus, OH) I think has two CRJ-200's that run all over the east cost (CMH-TEB-CMH for sure). Take out the overhead bins.... and it'd be a nice corp. a/c...somewhere in the middle of the Challenger and Global.

These things won't ever haul freight.... I would guess it's cheaper to send 5 Caravans on a route than it would be 1 CRJ-100/200. This is probably the same conversation they were having about the B-1900/Dash-8 when the CL-65 came onto the market.

Cherry air and companies of the like don't make they money off volume they make their money off "on demand". Mostly car parts. When I worked in Del Rio several companies including Cherry air would come in almost daily. Several times a few of us would go across the river into Acuna, grab some lunch on them, then bring parts back to put on the planes. It cost the factories millions to go down for a day so when they need a specific part they need speed not size. I've seen them fly all the way out there, pick up a small bag of about 15 o-rings, then jump back into the jet and smoke it up to Detroit. No telling what those o-rings ran a piece.

The windows are so low because they were designed for little kids and midgets -- duh.

[quote=BoilerUP;263870]
You could probably buy a used 200, C-check it, install the big aux fuel tank, hang new engines on the pylons, add HGS and autothrottles up front and totally refurbish the interior to a luxurious 8-12 pax cabin with full-sized lav and galley for well under $20 million.

quote]

And call it a poor mans Global Express!:D

Yeah...half (or less) the price tag, though possessing half (or less) the range and 2/3 the performance.:eek:

I'm told Embrear is building a new factory in China to produce ERJs. I was told this and haven't looked it up so take it with a grain of salt.

As far as what will happen goes I don't see RJs being that good of a deal for people to actually want them. Pretty much all the side markets have been filled. There are aircraft that go higher, faster, further, and do so more efficiently than the RJs. True they don't fit as many people but if that's your market then they'd have BBJs. Has any fractional, which caters to the markets some of you are talking about, ever tried to place orders for CRJs? If the CRJ had that much of a future they would have been marketed already. Netjets would have a few at least. I could see a few places like USA JET or someone like them grabbing a couple but not in the personal market.

First Hainan ERJ is Embraer's 1000th

Aviation International News offers FREE subscriptions to industry insiders...that includes regional airline pilots.

I just heard it in passing. I never really cared enough to find out if they were actually making more RJs or not. I just fly the things I don't have to like them. The link that you posted doesn't want to work. I don't like subscriptions they lead to too much junk mail.

A Challenger 850 doesn't really compete with the Gulfstream 450/550, Falcon 2000EX/900EX, or even the Global Express; it simply doesn't have the range. In fact, the Challenger 850 holds less fuel than a Challenger 604 does! They are all different airplanes, largely for different missions...not to mention those aircraft would cost at least double the price of a nicely equipped converted CRJ. Look no farther than the success of the Embraer Legacy...

Do you have any earthly idea what the acquisition and direct operating cost of a BBJ would be, especially compared to an 850 or Legacy?

You can buy a Challenger 850 directly from Bombardier, or from any number of companies doing conversions of these aircraft. The Limited has a couple CRJ-200s they use as a corporate shuttle, Penske Racing has a 200 (or was it a 700?) they use as a shuttle, Indy Racing League has 700 they use as well.

There is a market for a corporate CRJ, and it is just now starting to blossom.

Keep in mind Ghilis flies 747s that land in a fat crab. As I was saying there might be a couple out there but overall I don't see a market for them unless they are basically giving them away. Time will tell.

I"m with boiler on this one, I think there is a HUGE market for the CRJ/ERJ converstions in the furture. It just makes sense. You can have a plane with about, what, double the size, with aux tanks, almost the same range for half the price of a new G550 or Global Express. Umm, sounds pretty decent to me. I will bet you will see a large number of these birds converted in the near future. As far as cargo, who knows what those guys will want. And if some one could explain how fedex used gas hogs Faclons for that long, maybe the CRJ makes sense. I'm being serious on that last one.

Even with the large aux tank a Challenger 850/CRJ2 won't be anywhere close to touching the range of a Global Express or G450/550. Those planes have 12+ hours of endurance in the mid to upper-40s.

Doing BED-VNY or LGW-TEB in the winter, however, should be within the 850s range and ability...especially if you climb it above 370 (which should be no problem on a 4+ hour segment).

Right that's what I mean, it's not going to be doing tokyo to nyc, but transcon, sure why not? That'd work out great.