AirwaySim
Online Airline Management Simulation
Login
Username
Password
 
or login using:
 
My Account
Username:
E-mail:
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
Buy credits
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

Author Topic: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?  (Read 3899 times)

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« on: August 11, 2009, 07:23:54 PM »
These are among the most popular regional jets today.

There are only 49 total CRJs on order right now...  16 of those are mine.  I already have 18 new ones in my fleet.   They all make more than 100k per week in profit. 

Is there a reason?

Offline Southsky

  • Members
  • Posts: 194
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2009, 07:44:05 PM »
Fuel price (in the future) is my reason

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #2 on: August 11, 2009, 08:05:11 PM »
#1.  Fuel prices are set to Custom and not Real World

#2.  People are buying Fokker 70s and 100s...  A F70 uses 23.54 kg/hr per passenger A F100 uses 19.81 kg/hr per passenger.  The CRJ200ER uses 25.4.  Sure that is a bit more, but.....  How many more cities can you fly into carrying 50 pax instead of needing to find an airport that has over 100 demand?  Plus, The CRJ will use 1 less cabin crew to carry 100 people (2 vs 3).  That alone is a ton of savings. 


Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14535
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #3 on: August 11, 2009, 08:39:14 PM »
Fokker is cheaper to buy? or CRJ too small...

stefan.aj@hotmail.com

  • Former member
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #4 on: August 11, 2009, 09:03:12 PM »
For my part the ATR 42-300 is taking care of my short haul - low demand routes up to 600NM. The main reason for choosing this aircraft is Caticlan airport, a short hop from my base MAnila. Caticlan has a pax demand of 1000-1200 daily, but the runway is only 950 meters, wich rules out all jets. And then, again, I fly DC9's seating 100-115 pax on high demand shorthaul. Theyr'e cheap, available and efficient.

I'm also flying DC10's, MD11's and B737 classics. Adding more aircraft types would raise fixed costs dramatically, and in the short run I just think my money is better spent elsewhere:P

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #5 on: August 11, 2009, 09:10:17 PM »
Fokker is cheaper to buy? or CRJ too small...

I was saying that the fuel expense is justified because you will be able to fly to more destinations than if you went with a 100 pax plane to be the backbone of your short-medium range fleet.   The F70s and F100s all use 3 cabin crew meaning the 1 used in the 50 pax CRJ is cheaper.  In the end, the fuel price difference is almost a wash and I can fly to tiny airports over a long distance that usually make no sense to fly.

luke3

  • Former member
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #6 on: August 11, 2009, 09:33:16 PM »
For the type of routes where the CRJ is competitive on the chart, i would go for a turboprop 100 times. They can very well cover the same segments but use up much less fuel. An ATR 72 can do the job much more economically, and if speed is the problem, so can a Saab 2000  ;)

mukk

  • Former member
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #7 on: August 11, 2009, 09:53:55 PM »
i used crj's in the last ATB game, though mostly crj900, but in the end i did not really like their profit margin.
it's range and speed vs. much lower fuel consumption, and personally i will use props in the future if possible.

Offline Gwaneum

  • Members
  • Posts: 837
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #8 on: August 11, 2009, 10:23:56 PM »
CRJ 100/200 series are not very efficient. For shorter hauls, props are more efficient (and in many cases, fast enough to keep up), and for longer hauls (1000 NM or longer), they barely break even, and it's better to deploy larger aircraft.

My first Mercy Airlines went under, primarily from the 747-400 fleet, but also from my inability to turn any real profit from the CRJ fleet.

This time around, I won't even bother with CRJs. Maybe the 900 series, but even the 700 is not good for me. And by the time the 900s come out, Embraer will have the E170/E190 as well, but again, not sure if I'll ever use either aircraft, at the expense of fleet commonality with my 737s.

Honestly I want a game that stretches into about 2015 or so, which would allow me to play with the Bombardier C-series as well.

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #9 on: August 11, 2009, 10:36:38 PM »
The one assumption you are all making is that gas is going to follow history... It does say CUSTOM when you enter the game.

In regards to profit, I am making a ton on these CRJs...   About 100k each. 

The other side is that you need 2x as many props in order to cover the entire territory because they are about 1/2 to 2/3rds as fast. 

Then again, this entire game is an experiment for me.   If I make enough money early enough along, I could afford to buy the next batch when they are released. 

Offline Gwaneum

  • Members
  • Posts: 837
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #10 on: August 11, 2009, 10:55:58 PM »
It can depend on the market.

Both renditions of my Mercy are based in Seoul. For South Korean domestic routes, the extra speed of the CRJ is negligible, and not worth the additional costs incurred. And for Chinese and Japanese routes, on most major markets, it makes far more sense to send in a larger plane (F100, MD80, 737, or A320) due to higher demands. As for long, lean markets (say, southern China, or outlying Japanese places like Okinawa or Sendai), the basic CRJs struggle to break even. And that was with the lower 1998 fuel prices (it was the old game where fuel prices were historical).

There is a reason why in real life, no South Korean airline flies regional jets. Though I do find it stupid that both Korean Air and Asiana run all-jet domestic services - it IS well known that they are sustained only via artificially high fares. All South Korean domestic runs are short enough that a 737 or an A320 will barely hit 26,000 feet cruising altitude, and only for a few minutes tops. A jet is simply not designed for short hops like that. The low-cost competitors do fly props, which work a lot better.

There are some markets (probably western US) where the basic CRJ will make good sense. Not for me, though, as long as I'm in Seoul. It's either the CRJ-900, the E170/190, or the smallest variants of larger planes (737-600 or A318).

mukk

  • Former member
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #11 on: August 11, 2009, 11:13:46 PM »
The one assumption you are all making is that gas is going to follow history... It does say CUSTOM when you enter the game.

The one assumption you seem to make is that 'custom' means somewhow that the fuel price will stay low all the time...
how do you know?  :)

In regards to profit, I am making a ton on these CRJs...   About 100k each.

i remember i had 3 crj200 (LR?) and they where making about 100-150k per week in around 2005, but when the fuel price skyrocketed it went down to +-0. later on i switched them with crj700 and they where doing a bit better, but still nothing to write home about...

Offline ekaneti

  • Members
  • Posts: 843
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #12 on: August 11, 2009, 11:26:48 PM »
I had 2 CRJ 200LRs and they almost bankrupted me.

The are expensive to lease about 300,000 monthly
They use 2000 kg fuel per hour
Sami has set the defaulting seating at 44 seats, not 50

Offline swiftus27

  • Members
  • Posts: 4395
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #13 on: August 12, 2009, 01:20:19 AM »
The one assumption you seem to make is that 'custom' means somewhow that the fuel price will stay low all the time...
how do you know?  :)

i remember i had 3 crj200 (LR?) and they where making about 100-150k per week in around 2005, but when the fuel price skyrocketed it went down to +-0. later on i switched them with crj700 and they where doing a bit better, but still nothing to write home about...

I am not assuming that it will stay low.  I am just waiting for enough time to pass for me to buy my next generation of aircraft.  At that point, I dont have to worry about paying leasing costs.

CX717

  • Former member
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #14 on: August 12, 2009, 04:33:47 AM »
same thing at 777-200 vs A330-300...
I don't mind to lease 777 at a higher price,because it fly faster,and I love 777.
It could save 30 mins -45 mins trip time on long haul route,BUT the turn around time simply neutralize the time it save.
I mean they have roughly same pax,same MTOW,same crew,both have 8 pax door,WHY did 777-200 require 2 hrs 45 mins to turnaround,30mins more than A330?is that because 772 fleet commonality with 773?

Offline Unbornio

  • Members
  • Posts: 662
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #15 on: August 12, 2009, 07:38:51 AM »
The CRJs aren't really profitable if you bring in the maintenance and leasing costs. I remember operating 50 of them in beta.  ;D

But again, there wasn't a business class which could have been a key profit maker.
Beta Tester

Talentz

  • Former member
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #16 on: August 12, 2009, 08:42:28 AM »
Leasing costs are a major factor as to why they become unprofitable over the long term.

Sure, making 100k stated profit right now is fine. Labor is cheap. Fleet Common is not as harsh and maint is low. But as time goes by and costs rise, profit margin thins and suddenly, a spike in variable costs (IE: fuel, fleet common) make them unprofitable.

However, if owned out right, just about any aircraft has a decent profit margin. Which is why its suggested to add regional aircraft later, after you've built a solid airline and have the cash to buy smaller aircraft.

Its not like running a regional airline w/ leased aircraft is impossible. It can be done, with hard work.  8)


Talentz

Offline maxishrek

  • Members
  • Posts: 140
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #17 on: August 13, 2009, 12:55:39 PM »
Guys...Don't know why are you such CRJ haters.

In previous game I ran an extremely profitable Airline out of Cologne that used solely CRJ700 and CRJ900.
100 of them!

All of those featured 3 standard business class seats and HD economy class.

Some CRJ900 made almost 600 000 a week...

I guess a lot depends on the strategy and routes. Embraers 170 and 190 ate more fuel and also they had commonality issues. E170 and E190 were not common somehow...



Offline Unbornio

  • Members
  • Posts: 662
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #18 on: August 13, 2009, 01:21:08 PM »
Guys...Don't know why are you such CRJ haters.

In previous game I ran an extremely profitable Airline out of Cologne that used solely CRJ700 and CRJ900.
100 of them!

All of those featured 3 standard business class seats and HD economy class.

Some CRJ900 made almost 600 000 a week...

I guess a lot depends on the strategy and routes. Embraers 170 and 190 ate more fuel and also they had commonality issues. E170 and E190 were not common somehow...




I actually love CRJs.. But you operate the -900 which ruins the point of CRJs. It's like cheaper to operate a Fokker for that many seats....
Beta Tester

Filippo

  • Former member
Re: Why aren't people getting Bombardier CRJs?
« Reply #19 on: August 13, 2009, 01:31:14 PM »
so, wait a second,

If you have to fly a 2000 nautical mile route that has like 70 pax, what should you use?

Are CRJ 200/700/900 good for 1 hour flights?

The last question - should you sacrifice commonality and have 3 fleet groups instead of 2 because CRJs are so bad on short flights?


I never operated CRJs, My only regional aircrafts was fleet of Embreaer 135LR (owned) which hardly reached 50 000 when petrol was low and went in the red as soon as petrol reached $500.
So I am a bit confused if, after all, CRJs are good aircrafts or not so good aircrafts. 
« Last Edit: August 13, 2009, 01:35:28 PM by Filippo »

 

WARNING! This website is not compatible with the old version of Internet Explorer you are using.

If you are using the latest version please turn OFF the compatibility mode.