Skywest Questions

175 guys...I heard last week that the company was pretty disappointed with the overall performance the 175 was giving them over a 900. Someone said to get the same fuel efficiency you guys had to fly even slower than what a 900 could achieve at a faster speed. Is it true? Any insight into this? Supposedly that's why the rumor of buying 900's popped up.

I'm genuinely curious or if that's just a pay scale above that nobody really cares.
 
tcco94 said:
175 guys...I heard last week that the company was pretty disappointed with the overall performance the 175 was giving them over a 900. Someone said to get the same fuel efficiency you guys had to fly even slower than what a 900 could achieve at a faster speed. Is it true? Any insight into this? Supposedly that's why the rumor of buying 900's popped up.

I'm genuinely curious or if that's just a pay scale above that nobody really cares.
Click to expand...

I know nothing about CRJs


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
tcco94 said:
175 guys...I heard last week that the company was pretty disappointed with the overall performance the 175 was giving them over a 900. Someone said to get the same fuel efficiency you guys had to fly even slower than what a 900 could achieve at a faster speed. Is it true? Any insight into this? Supposedly that's why the rumor of buying 900's popped up.

I'm genuinely curious or if that's just a pay scale above that nobody really cares.
Click to expand...

That's not a widely held secret, it's known everywhere. I had always heard a 900 running around at Mach .80 burns less fuel than a 175 at Mach .70, or even slower. It makes sense too. The CRJ is a lighter airframe, with a much smaller tube to push through the air. All that cabin space isn't free on a 175, you know.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
That's not a widely held secret, it's known everywhere. I had always heard a 900 running around at Mach .80 burns less fuel than a 175 at Mach .70, or even slower. It makes sense too. The CRJ is a lighter airframe, with a much smaller tube to push through the air. All that cabin space isn't free on a 175, you know.
Click to expand...
Well. You don't save any gas going much slower than about .73 in the ERJ.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
That's not a widely held secret, it's known everywhere. I had always heard a 900 running around at Mach .80 burns less fuel than a 175 at Mach .70, or even slower. It makes sense too. The CRJ is a lighter airframe, with a much smaller tube to push through the air. All that cabin space isn't free on a 175, you know.
Click to expand...
I guess I just never used my common sense or cared to think of it! Good to know though.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
That's not a widely held secret, it's known everywhere. I had always heard a 900 running around at Mach .80 burns less fuel than a 175 at Mach .70, or even slower. It makes sense too. The CRJ is a lighter airframe, with a much smaller tube to push through the air. All that cabin space isn't free on a 175, you know.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the fuel burn on my legs is comparable but that's because I'm (1) on reserve, (2) frequently late because (1) and (3) dial it up to .82.
 
tcco94 said:
175 guys...I heard last week that the company was pretty disappointed with the overall performance the 175 was giving them over a 900. Someone said to get the same fuel efficiency you guys had to fly even slower than what a 900 could achieve at a faster speed. Is it true? Any insight into this? Supposedly that's why the rumor of buying 900's popped up.

I'm genuinely curious or if that's just a pay scale above that nobody really cares.
Click to expand...
The CRJ is happy going fast.
 
tcco94 said:
Few months ago it looked like SFO was dramatically shrinking on the CRJ side. Not sure if people getting in are replacements or small growth. UA side got some more 200's from AA last month and I heard they were mostly going to DEN.

SEA on the other hand is seeing some growth because our 700's are coming back online. News just popped we will fly more routes for Alaska this fall but nothing officially announced by the company. Someone looked up the tail numbers on the flow board to the AS 700's and said 7 will be online on the next month or 2.

Right now it's about 6-7 months from training date to both bases. Who knows what's going on then. Just put your bid in and be patient! That's all I know some others might know some more.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info man. I checked out the seniority numbers on their web page but it doesn't seem to be the most up to date.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top