Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
iceberg210 wrote:I'd be incredibly curious what the early results are for the 195E2. My hunch is it might see similar amounts of exceeding targets.
texl1649 wrote:I’m sure there are reasons, but what are they, as to why they couldn’t stretch it by three or four rows? E200?
avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
dbo861 wrote:Does this have transcon range?
Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
Thenoflyzone wrote:dbo861 wrote:Does this have transcon range?
2600 NM.
It's tight in winter on the westbound legs.
The CSeries is a better option for B6.
Nean1 wrote:Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
Abeam79,
Rest assured, with the help of Canadian taxpayers the the CS-100's price will be unbeatable.
Thenoflyzone wrote:dbo861 wrote:Does this have transcon range?
2600 NM.
It's tight in winter on the westbound legs.
Flighty wrote:Is there really demand (high enough yield) for transcon flights in 100 seaters?
EMBSPBR wrote:Flighty wrote:Is there really demand (high enough yield) for transcon flights in 100 seaters?
According to FlightGlobal, 95% of flights between city pairs are under 1.500nm.
Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
Flighty wrote:Is there really demand (high enough yield) for transcon flights in 100 seaters?
EMBSPBR wrote:Flighty wrote:Is there really demand (high enough yield) for transcon flights in 100 seaters?
According to FlightGlobal, 95% of flights between city pairs are under 1.500nm.
Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
Thenoflyzone wrote:dbo861 wrote:Does this have transcon range?
2600 NM.
It's tight in winter on the westbound legs.
The CSeries is a better option for B6.
avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
VV wrote:"Embraer E190-E2 performs better than expected"
Either the expectation (target) was too low or there has been some design changes during development (relative to the initial expectation) or they have lost the opportunity to sell more aircraft at higher value.
The good thing is that the backlog is quite small today, thus from now on they can sell the E190-E2 at its right value.
As for the range, it is about right for an aircraft in its category. This is one of those "Regional jets that are getting a little bigger".
fastmover wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
If I was a betting man, I think they will order 195s
Nean1 wrote:VV,
I have no way of knowing how familiar you are with complex projects such as aircraft. At the time of the launch of the E2 generation in 2013 there were many proposed changes. Learning through the process allowed a rebalancing between the various conflicting objectives (production cost, fuel efficiency, performance, maintenance, confort ...).
Success in design is always relative. Considering the serious problems that affected the Sukhoi SSJ-100, Mitsubishi MRJ-90, Boeing 787, Airbus A350 and A380, Bombardier CRJ-1000 / CS Series / Global 7000 / Learjet 85 projects, I can say without hesitation that Embraer achieved a very good outcome.
VV wrote:Nean1 wrote:VV,
I have no way of knowing how familiar you are with complex projects such as aircraft. At the time of the launch of the E2 generation in 2013 there were many proposed changes. Learning through the process allowed a rebalancing between the various conflicting objectives (production cost, fuel efficiency, performance, maintenance, confort ...).
Success in design is always relative. Considering the serious problems that affected the Sukhoi SSJ-100, Mitsubishi MRJ-90, Boeing 787, Airbus A350 and A380, Bombardier CRJ-1000 / CS Series / Global 7000 / Learjet 85 projects, I can say without hesitation that Embraer achieved a very good outcome.
It does not matter much whether I am familiar or not with aircraft development process.
The term "better than expected" can indeed be very ambiguous. Is it against the initial target that was set at launch? Is it "better" against the status each time the design has been adjusted?
In any case, there is a mechanism, that I do not want to discuss here, to protect the company from uncertainties during the development. If someone tells me an aircraft if finally "better than expected" and if I were the boss then I would be seriously upset.
In my opinion, it means the initial target was not ambitious enough or the engineers were hiding design margins without telling the bosses. Either way, it is not good.
As I said previously, it is very fortunate Embraer didn't sell too many E2 as yet because now they can sell them at the right value.
Nean1 wrote:VV,
You seem to have written things without thinking before. Anyway, I think your advice will be valuable so that Embraer project management can be further improved.
texl1649 wrote:I’m sure there are reasons, but what are they, as to why they couldn’t stretch it by three or four rows? E200?
Nean1 wrote:Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
Abeam79,
Rest assured, with the help of Canadian taxpayers the the CS-100's price will be unbeatable.
airzona11 wrote:Abeam79 wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
The cseries still beats it and delivers a better transcon performances than the E2. Jfk-abq/rno/oak/Pdx/psp/slc or bos-slc/Dfw/msy/Pdx on the cseries offers better range and better cost per seat vs the E2. I still think the cseries will offer better overall cost savings and better network opportunities with its performance over the E2. It would be incumbent upon JetBlue to look at the long term cost benefits of the cseries over the E2 and not just sticker price.
What airline is wanting to fly these regional jets/ small mainline jets on those routes?
Airlines want the lower casm/higher RSM potential of the 738/A320/A321/739 on those routes.
Both the EMB and BBD are niche in that above 100 passenger space. They are awesome regional jet upgauges. If they are chasing Transcon, they arent going to be landing any orders.
avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
richierich wrote:fastmover wrote:avi8 wrote:Hopefully B6 will jump in now. It would be sad if they did not.
If I was a betting man, I think they will order 195s
I tend to think that Embraer is going to do EVERYTHING it can to keep B6 as a customer, so I agree with your bet. The C-series is an interesting plane and would fill the niche, but I think the E2s will be the way to go presuming the price is right. My guess is that B6 turns over some of its current E190s back to Embraer as part of a deal.
If the E190-E2s have a 2600nm range, that's probably more than enough for JetBlue. They are not looking for transcon range, but the flexibility of a plane with this range is huge. My longest JetBlue E190 flight was from BOS-DFW, and as a passenger it was very comfortable over that kind of distance. I'd be OK flying JFK-ABQ or even further on such a plane.
rbavfan wrote:texl1649 wrote:I’m sure there are reasons, but what are they, as to why they couldn’t stretch it by three or four rows? E200?
Do you realize how long it would take to load a plane that long. Also that much of a stretch of a narrow fuselage would cost a loy of additional weight. Neggating thw improvements. You can only go so long before issues pop up.