So where are the 150 EMBs going then?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Take any class date you get with a grain of salt. At first I was assigned the Bro, but asked for the RJ. Given the RJ, then told one of the very first 175 classes was mine. Took that, but was then told the 175 class was full and I'd need to take the RJ if I wanted a class date in the near future. By the time I got to the training center I was half-expecting them to give me a Metro II...

 

Pure conjecture here, but as stated plenty of times the company views them as replacement aircraft for the larger RJs down the road. OO operates 134 CRJ7-9s, EV operates 69. 150 E-175s as replacements isn't a stretch. Besides, the E2 doesn't start delivery until 2020. That's a good four years away.

The MRJ? Who knows. From what I've read, there was a specific, unnamed carrier who was very interested in them. Maybe they plan to lease them out. Maybe not. Maybe it's all subterfuge to lower prices on the E-175s from Embraer. You're guess is as good as mine. Deliveries on those start in early 2018, so we have awhile before any of us will find out, and TSA gets to make the first move.

As for the 50-seaters, there is a place for them, now and in the future. On the correct routes they do make money, even when fuel is expensive. Will there be less of them going forward? Certainly. Go back 15 years and make the prediction that there would be less turbo-props today and no one would have argued otherwise. But the current landscape just doesn't allow for 2-for-1 deals, or even 1-for-1 deals on the 50-seaters. Outside of Alaska, the rest of the majors are basically scoped out on large RJs now. If you know of a major that still has a sizable amount of large RJs to utilize, let me know. I'm not saying I have all the facts. However, could that landscape change in the next few years? Sure, but it remains to be seen at this point.

 

You do realize that currently the E2 doesn't fit under any partners scope limitations, with the exception of Alaska?

 

And neither does a variant of the MRJ. Fully aware. But they do have 100 options on E1 as well.

 

You don't understand what a narcissist really is.

 

I know that the big three are scoped out, which is why I was asking the question. But the orders for the EMBs only came up because it supposed to be proof of the 2 year upgrades someone was predicting. And if the EMBs are just to replace the CRJ700/900s, then that doesn't support the lowering of upgrades. That's the main reason why I was asking the question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You will get some airplane replacment with the E175's. But all of them. Upgrades are a combo of growth, and attrition. Even with a even swap the E175 requires more crews per plane then the CRJ. Doubt SkyWest ever get the E2. (But concert them to regurlar 175's) All these "E/Max" planes are a marketing scam. Engines weigh more, landing gear have to weigh more, and the extra MX intervals and just the markup on the sticker cost alone done make up what unproven fuel efficiency they promise...

 

I would really like to know why you think the 175 requires more crews per plane than the CRJ? That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

 

This particular post that amc just wrote isn't dumb. The 175 is infact requiring more crews per airplane than the CRJs.

Not sure how that's hard to understand. You fly one particular airframe more hours per day, the more pilots you need. Great attempt at using your brain though.