I personally find CRJs more comfortable than ERJs; the single-seat aisle of the ERJ is nice but the fuselage rolls too much for my comfort and I'm only 5'11"-180lb.

I'd rather be in any RJ for a couple hours than a center seat on any "mainline" narrowbody...

If the 50 seater is the new b1900 then we are in trouble. But I just don't see that happening. Average price for fuel for a one hour leg per pax on the crj is $18. Fuel can double and it will still be affordable.

No, it doesn't...and it doesn't take a financial whiz kid to simply look at fuel burns alone (not even considering capital costs or depreciation) to know that.

Not exactly apples-to-apples for airliners, but the 2010 Business & Commercial Aviation Operations Planning Guide shows the Challenger 850 (nee CRJ-200) with an operating cost of $2216.28/hr and the BBJ (nee 737-700) @ $4065.52/hr given a fuel price of $4.90/gal...which is probably double or more what airlines pay.

Now, if you're talking about the cost involved moving a total number of pax seats...then yeah, 3 RJs for a single 733/737 doesn't make any financial sense at all unless an airline can enhance revenue due to more frequency options, which most can't.

I did one of those kinda trips when I was at AWAC from PHL-MSP for the NCAA Basketball tournament; 3 CRJ2s left PHL within 15 minutes of each other heading to MSP because Airways didn't have a narrowbody available.

If this was directed at me, I do mean riding an a purchased ticket that my employer(s) pay for.
I am an elite member in all 3 airline alliances. I made Platinum on Delta, Gold on AA and Gold on UA last year.

You can't look at fuel cost alone. We could just talk about acquisition cost to begin with and with all the other operating expenses is where the RJ looses its shine. Some number cruncher did a cost analysis and found to run 1 RJ cost almost the same as to run 1 737-300. I wished I had those numbers to really digest them.

Does an RJ have its place? Yes, of course. But not flying 2+hr legs or hub to hub flying as they are doing now.

So with fuel and direct operating costs almost triple that of emerging technology you think they'll still be affordable? Add MX costs on top and you have the same thing as 727 trying to compete with a 737NG.

http://www.mba.aero/presentations/04...ket_update.pdf

Fast forward to page 17.

Hang in there until you make it to page 25.

I didn't look at fuel cost alone.

I provided you objective total per-hour direct operating cost figures for a CRJ-200 and a 737-700 (CL850 & BBJ) from Business & Commercial Aviation...fuel is but portion of that expense.

Over a 1000nm segment, B&CA says a CRJ-200 has $5503.75 in total direct operating costs (fuel $3892.94 @ $4.90/gal) where the 737 has $9960.53 in direct operating costs (fuel $7636.69 @ $4.90/gal).

Acquisition cost? A 50-seat RJ costs somewhere around 33-40% of what a 737-700 costs based on list prices...and we both know airlines don't pay sticker on any aircraft purchase. With a higher acquisition price comes higher total capital costs (more interest expense, etc).

I think the "number cruncher" figures you are referring to is probably looking at cost per available seat mile (CASM), which is where any 50-seater looses the economic battle to larger aircraft every day and twice on Sunday.

While not exactly the same metric, consider the CRJ2's hourly cost of $2216.28/hr; with 50 filled seats it gives you a per-seat hourly cost of $44.33...compared to the 737's DOCs of $4065.52 and 147 filled seats giving you a per-seat hourly cost of $27.66.

Of course, you've got to fill a certain number of seats to make the larger aircraft truly less expensive than the smaller one; in this case, 92 passengers or more passengers in the 737 is less costly than a full CRJ2.

Bottom line? RJs will start to go away and be replaced with larger aircraft, and frequency will suffer...but for well into the future there will be markets that need and demand 50-seat jets because they simply cannot support the break-even factor on larger aircraft.

Finally! Someone thinking right. I Jumpseat on CAL twice a week and trust me they will fight to the death it seems like to keep scope. If they "relax" then all our futures will be regional carriers or flying 100+ seat Jets for 30 an hour. Wait... That's already happened.

It's called long term job security, and the possibility of a job at the majors for the regional guys. So by all means, take the 50 seaters, take them all!