Page 1 of 2

What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:34 am
by NZ321
I see that the last 145 rolled off the production line in June 2018 for Air Hamburg. CRJ 200s a similar story.

So with an aging fleet (AA's and Expressjet's E145's are 15+ years old on average) and AA's CRJs 17 years old. Skywest's & Air Wisconsin's CRJs are of similar vintage. Is there a replacement for these aircraft or is the 50-seat sector back to props?

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 8:01 am
by Someone83
In the US, I see 70 and 76 seaters replace this, combined with a reduction in frequencies

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 8:16 am
by USAirKid
I agree with Someone83 that there are going to be lots of routes upgaged to 70 and 76 seaters.

I also remember reading about this earlier, and there was a thought that the E145s and CRJ200s would be replaced with more E145s. AFAIK, AA has some stored in the desert with lower hours that they'll cycle in as needed. Plus Embraer still has that line open for business jets, so it might be possible to order new E145s. The ERJ145 is still on Embraer's website.

I'm not sure if CRJ200s are still available, they're not on Bombardier's website, so I'm guessing that that they aren't available anymore.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 8:34 am
by VSMUT
Bigger planes operating less frequently. The 70-76 seaters are a good bet. For the very shortest routes, turboprops, or the airline will pull out and leave it to trains and cars.

USAirKid wrote:
I'm not sure if CRJ200s are still available, they're not on Bombardier's website, so I'm guessing that that they aren't available anymore.


The CRJ-200 is completely out of production.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 11:46 pm
by cheapgreek
Just as airlines are ordering larger single aisle narrowbodies, the trend is for larger RJ's. No demand for 50 seat RJ's and when the next jump in fuel prices happens, many of the 50 seaters will be parked. Props are just about dead in the USA. Airlines don't want them and neither do passengers.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:15 am
by airtran737
cheapgreek wrote:
Just as airlines are ordering larger single aisle narrowbodies, the trend is for larger RJ's. No demand for 50 seat RJ's and when the next jump in fuel prices happens, many of the 50 seaters will be parked. Props are just about dead in the USA. Airlines don't want them and neither do passengers.


Hopefully it mean large RJ’s operated by mainline pilots. Right now AA is scoped out, as I believe UA is as well. Pilots are not going to sell out on scope, so management will need to pony up the money for mainline pilots to fly them.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:27 am
by MO11
airtran737 wrote:

Hopefully it mean large RJ’s operated by mainline pilots. Right now AA is scoped out, as I believe UA is as well. Pilots are not going to sell out on scope, so management will need to pony up the money for mainline pilots to fly them.


You mean customers will need to pony up the money to pay for them.....

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:56 am
by Delta757MD88
Following boeing's new leadership we will have the EMB145MAX

:)

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 1:31 am
by KICT
Nothing.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 1:43 am
by MIflyer12
airtran737 wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
Just as airlines are ordering larger single aisle narrowbodies, the trend is for larger RJ's. No demand for 50 seat RJ's and when the next jump in fuel prices happens, many of the 50 seaters will be parked. Props are just about dead in the USA. Airlines don't want them and neither do passengers.


Hopefully it mean large RJ’s operated by mainline pilots.


I doubt that, frankly. Mainline rules and benefits, as much as hourly wages, will kill it. Mainline will be 717/CS100/A319/Max 7s at the bottom end of size. Weak destination airports that can't succeed among their peers for CR7/CR9/E75 flights will be dropped entirely.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 1:58 am
by lightsaber
It depends on scope clauses. If DALPA allows the MRJ and/or E2-175, expect that upgauge. Otherwise, more CRJ-900/E-175s.


Delta757MD88 wrote:
Following boeing's new leadership we will have the EMB145MAX

:)

:rotfl:

I would like to see a re-engine of the EMB145, but I'm not aware of any engine family that is appropriate to discuss.

I'm a huge fan of two stage high turbines, but this isn't the market for them (too much weight).
I do think a GTF would work, but it would have to be a new gearbox.

Even the Pearl is too heavy (and too much thrust when given a fan for the slower cruise).

Lightsaber

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:01 am
by JBo
Thinking long term, I think what we'll see happen is that, as 50-seaters are withdrawn from service and the 70-seaters fill their role with fewer frequencies, you'll end up seeing some other smaller cities losing service entirely because the 70-seaters will end up being too much airplane for the route.

Which, in turn, will rekindle a demand for a smaller aircraft to serve these routes, and with enough such demand, perhaps we'll see a new generation of 50-seat and smaller turboprops (or jets) to fill that gap back in, whether through the major carriers or a new network of independent regionals (the latter being super unlikely, but weirder things have happened).

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:03 am
by adamblang
EAS is really going to balloon when 50 seat RJs age out.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 2:08 pm
by AVLAirlineFreq
adamblang wrote:
EAS is really going to balloon when 50 seat RJs age out.


I've thought about this, too--that EAS may morph into including subsidies for legacy airlines to continue serving destinations now served by 50-seaters without subsidy, or that some of the current primarily EAS carriers may grow their operations substantially to cover new destinations with aging 50-seaters or even props. (I don't see legacy regional carrier partners ever adding props again.)

This is not intended to open an argument about the merits or faults of EAS. It's only to note that EAS lives on because politicians allow it to survive. What happens when more places like Florence, SC or Dothan, AL are threatened with the loss of their air service entirely because AA or DL decide they can't support 70- or 76-seat service twice a day to CLT or ATL? I realize those places and many others can be accessed via other regional airports. That's not the point, because if that were simply the case airports like Hot Springs, AR wouldn't continue to have commercial air service.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 2:10 pm
by Dutchy
Interesting question indeed. I think for longer routes the 70-75 seater jet type: EMB170/175 and the likes, with less frequencies. For shorter routes probably the ATR-42/72 type.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 2:18 pm
by oosnowrat
adamblang wrote:
EAS is really going to balloon when 50 seat RJs age out.


Unless the program is changed, no new cities can be added to EAS.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:20 pm
by jeffrey0032j
NZ321 wrote:
I see that the last 145 rolled off the production line in June 2018 for Air Hamburg. CRJ 200s a similar story.

So with an aging fleet (AA's and Expressjet's E145's are 15+ years old on average) and AA's CRJs 17 years old. Skywest's & Air Wisconsin's CRJs are of similar vintage. Is there a replacement for these aircraft or is the 50-seat sector back to props?

I doubt props will make a comeback in the US. Other countries, yes.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 4:33 pm
by aemoreira1981
Embraer still offers the model for sale. The E45X should be marketed for use in India for the regional connectivity scheme, and elsewhere in South Asia and Australasia.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:11 pm
by yzfElite
Here in Canada it has been a combination of E175, Q400 and CRJ900 for the most part. WS has gotten into regional flying as well with an all Q400 fleet. Unfortunately for me, it means some long Q400 routes I have to suffer from time to time or seek alternatives (e.g. YYC-YZF which is now painfully long).

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:20 pm
by trexel94
I know most airlines are upgaging to 76 seaters but what about Air Canada and their CRJs that fly routes like MCI/STL/MKE/OMA etc - YYZ? Are they going to be replaced with CRJ705s or discontinued? How hard can it be to fill a 705 considering AC flies MCI double daily half the year.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 pm
by yzfElite
trexel94 wrote:
I know most airlines are upgaging to 76 seaters but what about Air Canada and their CRJs that fly routes like MCI/STL/MKE/OMA etc - YYZ? Are they going to be replaced with CRJ705s or discontinued? How hard can it be to fill a 705 considering AC flies MCI double daily half the year.


Given that their likely only competition on those routes may come from WS Q400, I suspect they might end up either canceled or going to a Q400. One-stops via ORD/IAD may be the reality for thinner routes. Not sure if any arenoutside the Q400 range, but not a short hop to OMA for ex.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 6:08 pm
by TripleA
So what's going to replace the older CRJ700s eventually? The E175? Is the CRJ700 in production still?

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 6:11 pm
by BAINY3
trexel94 wrote:
I know most airlines are upgaging to 76 seaters but what about Air Canada and their CRJs that fly routes like MCI/STL/MKE/OMA etc - YYZ? Are they going to be replaced with CRJ705s or discontinued? How hard can it be to fill a 705 considering AC flies MCI double daily half the year.

Some already have been upgauged. YYZ-MSP was only CRJ2s for the longest time but now they are E175s.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 6:36 pm
by TWA772LR
Delta757MD88 wrote:
Following boeing's new leadership we will have the EMB145MAX

:)

Ive been advocating that for sometime now. New engines, avionics, lighter materials and a new wing is exactly what it needs. If they can find a way to integrate pivot bins, a EMB145MAX would be a slam dunk, especially if they make it competitive to turboprop cost-wise.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 6:40 pm
by oosnowrat
TripleA wrote:
So what's going to replace the older CRJ700s eventually? The E175? Is the CRJ700 in production still?


A quick trip to the Bombardier website will show that, yes, the CR7 is still on offer.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 11:10 pm
by KD5MDK
What's the largest city with only 50 seat service? Are any of them more that 3 hours drive time from a mainline airport?

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 11:32 pm
by cheapgreek
JBo wrote:
Thinking long term, I think what we'll see happen is that, as 50-seaters are withdrawn from service and the 70-seaters fill their role with fewer frequencies, you'll end up seeing some other smaller cities losing service entirely because the 70-seaters will end up being too much airplane for the route.

Which, in turn, will rekindle a demand for a smaller aircraft to serve these routes, and with enough such demand, perhaps we'll see a new generation of 50-seat and smaller turboprops (or jets) to fill that gap back in, whether through the major carriers or a new network of independent regionals (the latter being super unlikely, but weirder things have happened).


Its mot worth it for the airlines, using crews for small planes is counter productive. The cost of the new aircraft to capture a very small market won't work. With the small jets in low numbers and props virtually gone, small cities will disappear from airline route maps. The EIS program is a waste as it moves so few passengers and again wasting crews flying 6-10 or so passengers as opposed to as least 50 passengers, having commercial airline service is not a right, but as long as politicians want to get reelected, the EIS program will go on but hopefully will be eliminated as wasteful spending.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 11:35 pm
by cheapgreek
TWA772LR wrote:
Delta757MD88 wrote:
Following boeing's new leadership we will have the EMB145MAX

:)

Ive been advocating that for sometime now. New engines, avionics, lighter materials and a new wing is exactly what it needs. If they can find a way to integrate pivot bins, a EMB145MAX would be a slam dunk, especially if they make it competitive to turboprop cost-wise.


The current E145 is a runway hog, Piedmont could not fly them on the HVN-PHL route but the CRJ-200 does it.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 12:03 am
by Boeing727
I got 2.500 hrs in ERJ135/140/145 equipment, but had no idea that it could fly that long...

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N799MS

Boeing727

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:37 am
by GoHokies
A few people have commented that 70/76 seaters will replace the 50 seaters, but unless the scope clauses at the US3 change during the next round of negotiation in 2019/2020, then it is unlikely that the 50 seaters will be replaced at all. The US3 are maxed out on 70/76 seaters right now.

The real question is what will happen first: Will the 50 seaters time out or will the regionals run out of pilots to fly them?

Between the 50 seaters timing out and the pilot shortage, it is highly likely that there will reductions in frequencies between cities and some cities will lose service altogether.

Below is a link that outlines the current scope clauses at the US3.

https://www.mba.aero/wp-content/uploads ... 11-AAC.pdf

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:00 am
by N292UX
Well with the Boeing-Embraer partnership, my money is on the 717-100, an ERJ-145 with new engines and upgraded systems...

In all honesty, I don't know if anything will really ever replace them. The 70/76 seaters may be the closest we get to a replacement.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:18 am
by TWA772LR
cheapgreek wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Delta757MD88 wrote:
Following boeing's new leadership we will have the EMB145MAX

:)

Ive been advocating that for sometime now. New engines, avionics, lighter materials and a new wing is exactly what it needs. If they can find a way to integrate pivot bins, a EMB145MAX would be a slam dunk, especially if they make it competitive to turboprop cost-wise.


The current E145 is a runway hog, Piedmont could not fly them on the HVN-PHL route but the CRJ-200 does it.

Give it slats and it's good.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:06 am
by Alias1024
I wonder if we might see some of the 70-76 seat RJs do some triangle routes to cover 50 seat markets.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:20 am
by oosnowrat
KD5MDK wrote:
What's the largest city with only 50 seat service? Are any of them more that 3 hours drive time from a mainline airport?


SGU (pop 82k) comes to mind. It has CR2 service to 4 cities. PIH (pop 55k) has CR2 to 1 city. Both less than 3 hours from mainline airports.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:22 am
by iceberg210
My guess is that nothing will and that much like small props they will fade away over time.

However what I'd like to see which would preserve the flying, but be very unlikely is to change some regulations to make it more economical and also encourage the development of aircraft that could serve that niche. For example if you had a EMB`120 stretch (which was originally what the 145 was supposed to be) (or Do328/428 combo)with new generation turboprop engines and updated in terms of avionics etc, the efficiency gains might make it worth the while of airlines for feeders. The reality is that I don't think new planes of the current generation have any chance because the capital cost of a new frame makes them uneconomical. It will likely require a step change in economics via efficiency or crew cost or regulation that would make it feasible for new 50 seaters to be built, and so far I just don't see any of those coming down the pipe, except unless GE has something up their sleeve in terms of a bigger Catalyst prop. Something that is 20%+ more efficient than props along with a cleaned up frame might just be the ticket, especially if you could get some regulatory relaxation (ie one pilot one copilot who has training but not an ATP who doubles as the FA).

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:45 am
by DarthLobster
Delta757MD88 wrote:
Following boeing's new leadership we will have the EMB145MAX

:)

You forgot to add an -8 to it...

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:55 am
by strfyr51
Should the Mainline Carriers (at least United) fly the E195 (which Boeing will now support) Then they can add 2 E170/E175's for every E190/E195 flown by the Mainline. Amd this has already been agreed to by ALPA. It's just a matter of whether they would fly the E190/E195 at the mainline.
That remains to be seen..

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:04 am
by ADent
Either scope clauses need to change or United will be flying 50 seaters for a long time. They have about 250 50 seaters and 250 70/76 seaters. They can not add any more 70/76 seaters. So if the 50s wear out and are parked they will just need to stop flying them and shrink the RJ fleet.

Or negotiate a new deal.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:00 am
by UAinAUS
strfyr51 wrote:
Should the Mainline Carriers (at least United) fly the E195 (which Boeing will now support) Then they can add 2 E170/E175's for every E190/E195 flown by the Mainline. Amd this has already been agreed to by ALPA. It's just a matter of whether they would fly the E190/E195 at the mainline.
That remains to be seen..


For United that is incorrect. For every 1.25 E190/E195 flown by mainline they can add 1 E170/E175. Up to 70 extra E170/E175 for 88 E190/E195.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 12:32 pm
by steeler83
I don't necessarily forsee a CR2/E145 replacement either. I say the pax will either be absorbed into the service provided by larger aircraft (if there's a mix of CR2/E45, E70/75, and/or mainline, then the E75s or mainline equipment would pick up the slack left behind from the 50-seaters - as some have already stated) or give way to smaller turbo-prop fleets or the smaller aircraft operators (Southern Air, OneJet, etc), also as some have already stated or insinuated. Frankly, I do not see any benefit of re-engining a CR2 or E45. Typically a re-engine option is used to boost efficiency and/or range. Efficiency, perhaps, but who wants to spend more than 2 hours on a cramped E45? Been there, done that!

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:22 pm
by MIflyer12
GoHokies wrote:
A few people have commented that 70/76 seaters will replace the 50 seaters, but unless the scope clauses at the US3 change during the next round of negotiation in 2019/2020, then it is unlikely that the 50 seaters will be replaced at all. The US3 are maxed out on 70/76 seaters right now.


Are you sure? Delta just ordered 20 more CR9s with a plan to config them at 70 seats. Do all US3 truly have identical scope and equal 70/76-seater counts?

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/new ... 0-new.html

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:28 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
Scope limits vary by airline and also replacement cycle has an effect on orders.

GF

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:00 pm
by ExMilitaryEng
GoHokies wrote:
A few people have commented that 70/76 seaters will replace the 50 seaters, but unless the scope clauses at the US3 change during the next round of negotiation in 2019/2020, then it is unlikely that the 50 seaters will be replaced at all. The US3 are maxed out on 70/76 seaters right now.

Exactly.

Despite the newer / more efficient (but heavier) engines available, no airlines would pay the additional costs for re-engined CRJs/ERJ145s. Most probably those would exceed the scope clause weight anyways.

As we all know, the current scope clauses authorises a much greater number of 50 seaters than 70/76 seaters. The unions will certainly not trade some 50 seaters for more 70/76 seaters as they know darn well most current 50 seaters will just die anyways.

I'm wondering if some new CRJ700s / EMB170s fitted with 50 seats (dual class) could be operated profitably on some higher yield routes? Would they be too heavy for the 50 seats scope clause? That could be a good way of replacing some of those CRJs/ERJ145s.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:06 pm
by GoHokies
MIflyer12 wrote:
GoHokies wrote:
A few people have commented that 70/76 seaters will replace the 50 seaters, but unless the scope clauses at the US3 change during the next round of negotiation in 2019/2020, then it is unlikely that the 50 seaters will be replaced at all. The US3 are maxed out on 70/76 seaters right now.


Are you sure? Delta just ordered 20 more CR9s with a plan to config them at 70 seats. Do all US3 truly have identical scope and equal 70/76-seater counts?

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/new ... 0-new.html


I’m pretty sure that the most recent Delta order will be used to replace 65-70 seat planes not 50 seaters.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 0s-449595/

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:32 pm
by alasizon
MIflyer12 wrote:
Do all US3 truly have identical scope and equal 70/76-seater counts?


No, all three scope clauses are decently different. UA has a X for X ratio based on the Mainline aircraft being added to ML. AA has a fixed percentage where the overall regional fleet can be 65% of the total ML fleet while the number of allowed 66-76 seaters is 40% of the narrow body total. DL has a fixed number of each size except 50 seaters which is billed as a fixed number of lines of flying (125 if I recall correctly) which is how OO pro-rate doesn't count and how they can maintain more planes than they actually fly which allows them to have operational spares but still have 125 planes worth of flying.

Or at least that is how I understand/recall it.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:45 pm
by MartijnNL
yzfElite wrote:
Here in Canada it has been a combination of E175, Q400 and CRJ900 for the most part. WS has gotten into regional flying as well with an all Q400 fleet. Unfortunately for me, it means some long Q400 routes I have to suffer from time to time or seek alternatives (e.g. YYC-YZF which is now painfully long).

Here in Europe I have travelled longer routes on the Q400, up to almost three hours in the air.

No suffering at all. Only the limited view outside from seats next to the very large engine bothers me.

What is your problem with the Q400? I thought this was an aviation enthusiast website. Flying is always better than not flying.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:55 pm
by VV
Do they need to be replaced?

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:32 pm
by oosnowrat
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
I'm wondering if some new CRJ700s / EMB170s fitted with 50 seats (dual class) could be operated profitably on some higher yield routes? Would they be too heavy for the 50 seats scope clause? That could be a good way of replacing some of those CRJs/ERJ145s.


That's interesting. Some CR7s only have 63 seats, so it wouldn't be a huge leap down.

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:35 pm
by MartijnNL
cheapgreek wrote:
The EIS program is a waste as it moves so few passengers and again wasting crews flying 6-10 or so passengers as opposed to as least 50 passengers, having commercial airline service is not a right, but as long as politicians want to get reelected, the EIS program will go on but hopefully will be eliminated as wasteful spending.

As a European I am not very familiar with the Essential Air Service program. To me it looks very valuable for the people who live in isolated areas. Not everything that costs government money is a waste. Better spend it on travel for the public than on bailing out banks.

In Norway Widerøe operates a lot of Public Service Obligation routes. This airline sees a future for aircraft with less than fifty seats. I found this article about it:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/martinrive ... akthrough/

Re: What will replace the EMB145 / CRJ200 ?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:44 pm
by NWADTWE16
i agree that up-gauging is what will happen, and the C series stands to really benefit here. I have to cast a vote for the Q400 though, just to state that at least the way Porter has it configured, it is a very comfortable plane and their service is great. I could go 3 hours max on that.