E175 (enhanced) profitability?

Hello all,

I understand that AirlineSim isn’t 100% accurate or perfect, but I’m struggling to understand why the economics of the Embraer E175 Enhanced are so inferior to its in-class competitor, the Bombardier CRJ 900 NextGen.

As of March 31st, 2017, the Embraer E175 has a significantly larger order backlog than the CRJ 900. Also, (I don’t know if this means anything) there have been more E175 aircraft produced than CRJ 900 aircraft. It seems like in every category of flight that these planes can fly, short haul and medium haul, the CRJ NextGen beats the E175 Enhanced by a healthy margin.

The E175 looks to be more popular with airlines across the world in comparison to the CRJ 900. I’m confused on why that isn’t reflected in AirlineSim.

Thanks in advance for your help,

JustPlaneBad

Yes E70 and E75 economics are easy worse than CRJ and I have been trying to change that situation for a long time… So far virtually no one replied to that suggestion.

Orders in real life don't reflect too well in AS because we don't run aircraft the same way the airline did in real life. If you look into the orders between ATR and Dash8, it doesn't reflect too well in AS either.

I think CRJ1000, which is a competitor for E195, came into the market too late, so quite a lot of airlines chose E jets because simply it offered more seat variations. I never looked over the technical data between two, so i can't say anything on performance and operations, but comparing orders in real life can't really be a good support on operations

Agreed. Something needs to be done. 

I've run numerous airlines where I've been crying out for the E175 to compliment my E195's for smaller routes, but because of the poor profitability I've needed to add another maintenance category and opt for a Bombardier or something.

Plus, the E175 is a cracking little plane - it should have a passenger comfort advantage over the CRJ's in my opinion!  

Agreed. Something needs to be done. 

I've run numerous airlines where I've been crying out for the E175 to compliment my E195's for smaller routes, but because of the poor profitability I've needed to add another maintenance category and opt for a Bombardier or something.

Plus, the E175 is a cracking little plane - it should have a passenger comfort advantage over the CRJ's in my opinion!  

As someone who flies often business and leisure, I can easily say that the economy class seat width of the Embraer E175 is far wider and more comfortable than that of any CRJ. I'm quite tall, and I find that the cabin height of the Embraer is taller - I don't have to crouch down to walk through the cabin.

At least for AirlineSim, it'll be unpopular with players if the CRJ "popularity with passengers" rating is dropped from 5 bars to something lower. To be honest, I'm not even sure why the CRJ passenger comfort rating is ranked on par with the Embraer. The Embraer is clearly more comfortable in almost every aspect.

Opinions?

I for one love the Ejets, and think they are fantastic from a passenger point of view, but does anyone have performance figures to back this conversation up, as otherwise your just going on aircraft sales....

The main AS-performance problem of E70/75 is the disproportionate maintenance cost vs CR7/CR9.

I for one love the Ejets, and think they are fantastic from a passenger point of view, but does anyone have performance figures to back this conversation up, as otherwise your just going on aircraft sales....

Page 12 of the Embraer E-Jet brochure provides fuel burn statistics: http://www.team.aero/images/aviation_data_insert/owners_n_operators_guide_e_jets.pdf

I haven't found anything for the Bombardier CRJ 900 and CRJ 1000. However, there are fuel burn figures available for the CRJ 200 and CRJ 700:

http://www2.bombardier.com/CRJ/en/specifications.jsp?langId=en&crjId=200

http://www2.bombardier.com/CRJ/en/specifications.jsp?langId=en&crjId=700

However, I think, as rubiohiguey2000 mentioned, the most important factor seems to be the high maintenance cost of the Embraers in comparison to the CRJs. I'm pretty sure maintenance costs are slightly different for every carrier, so I haven't been able to find any decent stats.

Thoughts?

From your doc, E jets need C checked every 6000 FH, while CRJ needed every 8000 FH, per Bombardier (http://commercialaircraft.bombardier.com/en/crj/Economics.html), this will lower CRJ maintenance already

From your doc, E jets need C checked every 6000 FH, while CRJ needed every 8000 FH, per Bombardier (http://commercialaircraft.bombardier.com/en/crj/Economics.html), this will lower CRJ maintenance already

Hmm, that makes sense. In that case, I'm pretty sure that the only advantages the E-Jet has over the CRJ are manufacturer discounts and cabin comfort.

From your doc, E jets need C checked every 6000 FH, while CRJ needed every 8000 FH, per Bombardier (http://commercialaircraft.bombardier.com/en/crj/Economics.html), this will lower CRJ maintenance already

You would need to precisely know what percentage of total maintenance costs do C check costs account for out of full maintenance cost structure for each model in real life, then damage per takeoff can be calculated in proportion between the two models. In other words, just a data that C check is every so and so hours is only a small piece of big picture both in real life and Airlinesim.

Airlines consider a total coat of ownership which includes frame and nine cost, maintenance and fuel. The total cost of ownership / operation must be substantially lower for CRJ than they are for Ejets, otherwise the real life CRJ order book would look much, but much different. And this reality does not translate into Airlinesim total cost of ownership /Operation. It’s much higher in AS for Ejets than for CRJ.

And believe me, passenger comfort has nothing to do with real life many orders for EJETS and virtually none for CRJ, because airlines since long don’t give a damn about passenger comfort, ever since bean counters have been running the airlines as CEOs instead of people from operational or marketing background.

You would need to precisely know what percentage of total maintenance costs do C check costs account for out of full maintenance cost structure for each model in real life, then damage per takeoff can be calculated in proportion between the two models. In other words, just a data that C check is every so and so hours is only a small piece of big picture both in real life and Airlinesim.

Airlines consider a total coat of ownership which includes frame and nine cost, maintenance and fuel. The total cost of ownership / operation must be substantially lower for CRJ than they are for Ejets, otherwise the real life CRJ order book would look much, but much different. And this reality does not translate into Airlinesim total cost of ownership /Operation. It’s much higher in AS for Ejets than for CRJ.

And believe me, passenger comfort has nothing to do with real life many orders for EJETS and virtually none for CRJ, because airlines since long don’t give a damn about passenger comfort, ever since bean counters have been running the airlines as CEOs instead of people from operational or marketing background.

Well, precise cost of will be harder to find, AMS personal might know maybe even not, might need to ask airline management people. 

My understanding for lack of new CRJ order in real life is that Bombardier introduced CRJ1000 way too late. When they introduced the jet, a lot of airlines already ordered E190/195, which would also help Embraer got 170/175 orders. Airlines are more likely to choose one or another, not both. Most of the airline didn't even consider CRJ1000 when they ordered they E jets. Addition consideration is that if there are fewer airlines ordered the aircraft, more airlines will reconsider the model because they also need to consider the availability of parts in the future: fewer aircraft ordered, harder to find the parts in the future 

Well, precise cost of will be harder to find, AMS personal might know maybe even not, might need to ask airline management people.

My understanding for lack of new CRJ order in real life is that Bombardier introduced CRJ1000 way too late. When they introduced the jet, a lot of airlines already ordered E190/195, which would also help Embraer got 170/175 orders. Airlines are more likely to choose one or another, not both. Most of the airline didn’t even consider CRJ1000 when they ordered they E jets. Addition consideration is that if there are fewer airlines ordered the aircraft, more airlines will reconsider the model because they also need to consider the availability of parts in the future: fewer aircraft ordered, harder to find the parts in the future

Not true, or at least not true in USA. E70 and E75 are operated by regionals who cannot operate E90 or E95 because of a scope clause. And for majors the E90 and E95 have way too few seats. Only exception is Delta but she has its own small seat model, the 717.

So at least on USA the reason is not the late availability of CRK. And I think USA is where majority of E70 and E75 production goes to. The regionals, operating on a fee per departure departure model, are really cost constrained, so it is definitely in their best interest to get aircraft with lowest cost of ownership and operation into their fleets. So far E70 and E75 leads by a huge headstart vs CR7 and CR9.

http://www.planestats.com/bhsr_2016dec

Cost Per Block Hour (US$)

 
Aircraft   Carrier      Crew  Fuel AC Cost     Mx     Insur.     Other  Total

CRJ 900 SkyWest  $353   $3     $286        $323    $2         $28     $996

ERJ-175 SkyWest  $439 $119  $726          $283    $3         $27 $1,596

CRJ 700 SkyWest  $348 $75    $388         $428     $1         $25 $1,265

ERJ-175 Mesa        $259 $1     $89             $125     --           $3   $478

CRJ 900 Mesa        $305 $2       $421         $613     --           $5 $1,345

                        I think there might be an error in the Mesa's 175 AC cost.

Indicies and Monthly Ownership Cost

Aircraft   Carrier    Fleet   Stange Length  Seats   GPH  Monthly Rentals  Montly Dep.  Monthy AC Ownership

CRJ 700 SkyWest 97              642              69       451          $71,564         $36,264              $107,827

CRJ 900 SkyWest 36              656              76       475           $47,359        $38,732                $86,091

ERJ-175 SkyWest 39               772             76        373          $258,057      $16,024               $274,081

ERJ-175 Mesa      32               739             76        484          $12,646        $12,735                $25,382

CRJ 900 Mesa      55               529             78        499          $74,809         $48,743               $123,552

Historically I operated the E175 & 195 for lower density routes, however I found it impossible to make a profit on the E175 when any type of competition existed.

 

I replaced all Link Airways (Nicosia) E175’s with E195 with a lower seating density and found it much easier to make a profit.  I always found this weird as I often fly on British Airways E170 from London City and they must make a profit!