On Sep 15, 12:28*pm, John Doe wrote:
Jeff Hacker wrote:
OK, what would be the threshold size of a cost effective new airliner
with $100 per barrel fuel prices? 70 seats? 90 seats?

There is another issue to consider. During the .com bubble (when
airlines also had their bubble), Bombardier spawned CRJ200s like
mosquitos in a swamp. *Production stopped for 2 reasons: after 9-11,
airlines stopped growing their fleets before bombardier stopped making
the puppy, and secondly, a few bankrupcies left enough CRJ200s in the
used market to remove the need for new ones.

The CRJ200 is a relatively young aircraft and it will be a while before
airlines start to need a replacement for their CRJ200s.

Meanwhile, to survive, Bombardier upscaled the CRJ to the -700 -900 and
now-1000 models to try to get new markets (where Embraer has done better)..

The Dash-8 which had been on the verge of being shutdown got a sudden
and unexpected boost due to rise in price of oil and all of a sudden,
the -400 has had a renaissance. This is in part because of the acticve
noise reduction system and new props that makes the plane far more
comnfortable and feel less like a propellor airplane (aka: more
acceptable to general public), as well as the significant economic
advantage over jet powered planes in that size. *Also, mpw that there
are jetways capable of handling a Q400, it also makes the aircraft more
palatable to the general public.

While the renaissance of the Dash-8 is remarkable, it still isn't a
widespread phenomena and the numbers are still relatively small.

Note that there are developments in smaller aircraft. For insance, the
venerable Twin Otter (Dash-6) was relaunched by a Victoria Canada firm
(Viking air) who got the designs/rights from Bombardier and new new ones
in about 2 years. *This is a 19 passenger aircraft. It is used a lot in
the caribean for inter island hops for instance (it can be fitted with
floats, skis etc). However, this aircraft won't have huge performance
gains over the original twin otter.

And I guess this is one big reason you'd not seeing much activity in
smaller aircraft: lack of new engines for aircarft that removes
incentive to design a new aircraft since it would have about equal
performance as the previous one.

Also, below a certain size, you need to factor in the cost of having 2
pilots up front while smaller aircraft only need 1. *Perhaps the 30-40
pax aircraft ends up costing more because it needs to be operated like a
bike aircraft, but doesn'T carry enough passengers to warrant all the
extra staff and operating costs.

Here's an interesting interview about P&W Canada's PW810 engine.

http://www.ainonline.com/news/single...rys-back-door/

It says the PW810 was originally planned for a new 50-seater regional
jet but since there was no new development, the PW810 eventually found
itself on a business jet. And the interviewee commented that "It could
take forever [for a new 50-seat jet to reach the market]."

"Q: There really isn’t an application in regional jets for this size
engine anymore, is there?

A: Not today. It’s interesting, because when we launched the PW800 it
was for a regional jet. We kept on developing the technology because
we wanted to be ready for the next generation of regional jets, and
now the business aircraft are coming first.
It’s not obvious to us if there will be a replacement 50-seat regional
jet…a 70-seater, a 90-seater…if you have the right technology, maybe.
But we believe when you get into that size of aircraft, you go to the
geared turbofan because then the benefit is there - the mission, the
altitude they fly, the speed, the range. So I’m not sure where a
conventional PW800 advanced turbofan would go in a regional
application going forward. It’s not obvious to me. It could take
forever [for a new 50-seat jet to reach the market]. And even then,
there could be benefit in a geared fan for a 50-seater because the
technology has evolved."