If a new airline company were to operate only EMB 195 E2’s, what would be the pro’s and con’s? Most airline companies (such as Southwest and Ryanair operate solely Boeing 737’s).
What if an airline were to only operate Embraer 195 E-2’s?
THIS FORUM INQUIRES ON SHORT TO MEDIUM ROUTES LIKE (BOS - LAS) (DTW - LAX) (PHL - DEN)
I want to know everyone’s opinion, here are mine:
* Pros
- $60 million list price ($30 million less than Airbus & Boeing list price)
- 146 single class seats (B7377 149 single class seats)
- As low as 15 minute turn around time (Airbus & Boeing average 35-45 min)
- Maintenance cost
- Being a lighter aircraft and nearly same amount of seats as B7377, the profits would be nearly be identical (assuming airfare are the same).
* Cons
- 2,450 nautical miles (B7377, 3,300nm)
- Made in South America (slightly a joke).
Please people, stay on topic. This is for shorter to medium routes. Not international routes, US domestic ONLY. Not inquiring about 777’s or international routes, please stick to pro’s and con’s of EMB 195 E2.
Thank you.
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: What are pros and cons for having a fleet of Embraer 195 E2’s?
- How deep can Embraer go with discounts? Airbus and Boeing have both shown that under the right circumstances they can discount very heavily due to economies of scale.
- Hardly anyone is buying 700 series 737s today, the same as 319s.
- There is no way you will get 15 minute turn arounds with a 146 seat single class, single aisle aircraft.
- Maintenance costs maybe, but how does the GTF factor into this?
- OK, but as before the 737-700/319 aren't really selling. How does it compare to the 737-8MAX and 320NEO?
- That range limit doesn't factor into to your discussion on short/medium routes, but it does have an impact where a carrier wants something with more legs, even if that will only be used sparingly. By limiting your comparison to short/medium range you remove a valid parameter from the reasoning of potential customers.
- I doubt that the folks at SJC would get the joke, they take things rather seriously. However there is a negative public perception to overcome so it remains a valid point. The term "Jungle Jets" for earlier Embraer models didn't do them any favours.
I think the 195 E-2 is a superb aircraft, and certainly a good looker. However I don't think it will make much of an impact on the US domestic scene, and unless scope gets changed neither will the 175 E-2. I do think, and this is purely my personal opinion, that it will do better in Europe than the US, and it will probably be the best seller of the E-2 family.
- Hardly anyone is buying 700 series 737s today, the same as 319s.
- There is no way you will get 15 minute turn arounds with a 146 seat single class, single aisle aircraft.
- Maintenance costs maybe, but how does the GTF factor into this?
- OK, but as before the 737-700/319 aren't really selling. How does it compare to the 737-8MAX and 320NEO?
- That range limit doesn't factor into to your discussion on short/medium routes, but it does have an impact where a carrier wants something with more legs, even if that will only be used sparingly. By limiting your comparison to short/medium range you remove a valid parameter from the reasoning of potential customers.
- I doubt that the folks at SJC would get the joke, they take things rather seriously. However there is a negative public perception to overcome so it remains a valid point. The term "Jungle Jets" for earlier Embraer models didn't do them any favours.
I think the 195 E-2 is a superb aircraft, and certainly a good looker. However I don't think it will make much of an impact on the US domestic scene, and unless scope gets changed neither will the 175 E-2. I do think, and this is purely my personal opinion, that it will do better in Europe than the US, and it will probably be the best seller of the E-2 family.
-
- ExMilitaryEng
- Posts: 759
- Joined:
Re: What are pros and cons for having a fleet of Embraer 195 E2’s?
I also believe that the 195 E2 is a superb aircraft. (EMBRAER's ingeniousity coupled with lower costs manufacturing is definitely a killer combination).
Also, it seems that the 195 E2 has better CASM than the CS100, or anything else in the same seating category.
But if a growth potential exists, then the CSeries "family" might offer a better value proposition - with the better CASM CS300. You would also have some additional range as a bonus, for more operational flexibility.
Also, it seems that the 195 E2 has better CASM than the CS100, or anything else in the same seating category.
But if a growth potential exists, then the CSeries "family" might offer a better value proposition - with the better CASM CS300. You would also have some additional range as a bonus, for more operational flexibility.
-
- caverunner17
- Posts: 298
- Joined:
Re: What are pros and cons for having a fleet of Embraer 195 E2’s?
ExMilitaryEng wrote:I also believe that the 195 E2 is a superb aircraft. (EMBRAER's ingeniousity coupled with lower costs manufacturing is definitely a killer combination).
Also, it seems that the 195 E2 has better CASM than the CS100, or anything else in the same seating category.
But if a growth potential exists, then the CSeries "family" might offer a better value proposition - with the better CASM CS300. You would also have some additional range as a bonus, for more operational flexibility.
They're very different families that happen to overlap with one size - the E2 in dual class format seats 66-100. The CSeries seats 108-130. The E2 is a regional jet with the 195 is for those who need a little larger capacity but want to maintain commonality. The CSeries is a small mainline jet.
You're not going to be flying a CSeries plane into places that only sell 50-60 seats a day, just like you wouldn't fly an E2 into a place that needs over 100 seats a day.
-
- ExMilitaryEng
- Posts: 759
- Joined:
Re: What are pros and cons for having a fleet of Embraer 195 E2’s?
caverunner17 wrote:They're very different families that happen to overlap with one size - the E2 in dual class format seats 66-100. The CSeries seats 108-130. The E2 is a regional jet with the 195 is for those who need a little larger capacity but want to maintain commonality. The CSeries is a small mainline jet.
You're not going to be flying a CSeries plane into places that only sell 50-60 seats a day, just like you wouldn't fly an E2 into a place that needs over 100 seats a day.
I was referring to the OP example of only using E195 E2.
Would you include the (delayed) E175 E2 as part of the same E190/195 E2 family? Around here, one would be regional, the other two mainline. So different pilot groups.
Where do you get your 66 seat dual class E175 E2? All I see is like 80 seats.
-
- caverunner17
- Posts: 298
- Joined:
Re: What are pros and cons for having a fleet of Embraer 195 E2’s?
ExMilitaryEng wrote:caverunner17 wrote:They're very different families that happen to overlap with one size - the E2 in dual class format seats 66-100. The CSeries seats 108-130. The E2 is a regional jet with the 195 is for those who need a little larger capacity but want to maintain commonality. The CSeries is a small mainline jet.
You're not going to be flying a CSeries plane into places that only sell 50-60 seats a day, just like you wouldn't fly an E2 into a place that needs over 100 seats a day.
I was referring to the OP example of only using E195 E2.
Would you include the (delayed) E175 E2 as part of the same E190/195 E2 family? Around here, one would be regional, the other two mainline. So different pilot groups.
Where do you get your 66 seat dual class E175 E2? All I see is like 80 seats.
You know what, shit. I was looking at the original E series. I didn't realize the E2 all got stretched out.
Re: What are pros and cons for having a fleet of Embraer 195 E2’s?
Azul Airlines used exclusively first generation e-jets in their first 3 or 4 years of operation. The economics of using E2 must be similar.
I don't know why they choose to use the e-jets, but no Brazilian airline operated e-jets before 2008, and Azul is still the only one. If anyone knows why they went such a different path from the other main airlines, I would like to hear. Probably Neeleman involvement in the company and his previous experience in JetBlue has more to do with the decision than the raw economic factors.
I don't know why they choose to use the e-jets, but no Brazilian airline operated e-jets before 2008, and Azul is still the only one. If anyone knows why they went such a different path from the other main airlines, I would like to hear. Probably Neeleman involvement in the company and his previous experience in JetBlue has more to do with the decision than the raw economic factors.