I have always wondered why AC/Jazz went with both the E75 and CRA jets for their fleets, considering they are so similar? I mean, they are within 2 seats of each other, with the following major differences:

CRA
-operated by Jazz
-Longer range
-No ovens
-Smaller overheads
-Cramped space in the back of the plane (near the lav, good luck getting by if anyone is waiting!)

In terms of the range/ovens, I don't understand the appeal- it's not as though AC will put a CRA on a flight to it's full 2200 mile range anyways! The longest CRA flight I know of is YYC-IAH, which is the only one I can think of that needs more than the E75's range. The CRAs primarily fly legs such as YYZ-DFW, YVR-YYC, and YYZ-LGA/ORD, all of which would be fine with the E75.

E75
-Shorter Range
-Interior is similar to mainline, takes away from the "Regional jet" look/feel
-Bigger bins

Does anyone know why they operate both? Is it simply that AC wanted one and Jazz wanted the other? Did they plan to launch other longer/thin routes that required the CRA's range (Even if they did, I can't see a 4 hour+ CRA flight sounding popular to PAX)? I appreciate everyone's ideas!

Would the CRJ 1000 work for AC?

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...rofits-354596/

AC Express / Jazz has 16 CRA, I've been on the 4 hour 15 min YYC-IAH flight way too many times. Last week, no hot water so no coffee. Food in J is cold as it does not have a real galley.

The CRA should be limited by law to 3 hours, cramped uncomfortable ride even in J

I believe if they had the money those 16 planes would be replaced, no sane FF likes them.

Oh... perhaps politcking?

yes
It was to throw a bone to Quebec/Bombardier very poor product compared to anything built by Embraer. AC proper does not have a single CRA/CRJ, all them are "regional" ' no surprise it's not a good enough product

WOW

Really?
They why do TONS of airlines all around the world use the canadair jet?

Talk about complet balony!

Take a look at current order book, it's a piece of crap and the market has moved on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_CRJ700_series
602 delivered, 52 left on order and 32 are for the "new" CRJ1000

No airline has any options to buy any as well, nobody wants the current CRJ product

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_family. 802 delivered and 249 on order, as well another 695 with options to buy

I dont see Chorus getting rid of these NEW AC

The Oldest one

C-GJAZ Bombardier CL-600-2D15 CRJ9 15036 L2J C05C86 JZA 2005 2005-06-09

The Newest one

C-GPJZ Bombardier Inc CL-600-2D15 CRJ-705ER CRJ9 15055 L2J C06D48 JZA [QK] Jazz Air 2005 2007-11-16

And on another note, with all the AC Ejets going mechanical in the last 6 months, I would much rather fly on the CRA then the E9 or E7!

I fly on an E every month, never had an issue,

The simple fact is the CRJ is dead product, no new orders, they managed to sell 600 of the pieces of crap, on price. Passengers for the most part hate them.

in 5 -10 years as the leases end, all of them will be flying in 3rd countries, if at all.

oh it's 2012, 2007 is 5 years old, not "new"

Another Quebec hater from Alberta who just can't accept that we can build a product the world wanted to buy. CRAs are perfectly good aircraft for their function and an improvement on the CRJs. The reason the order book is thin is because Bombardier has been pushing its new jet which is a generation ahead of both the CRA and Embraer. The CRA suits Chorus' purposes, fleet compatibility and route system just fine.

As for being old, if you call these old what do you call AC's A320s and B763s, many of which date back to the 80s?

What part of the facts can't you understand, no new orders for CRJ family in "years" barely 600 built, there is no product the world wants from Bombardier, they don't have a product, just promises of developing something new.

As far as your silly defensive " everyone in Alberta hates Quebec" grow up, Bombardier hide behind subsidies and handouts and built a inferior product sold on price

IIRC the reason for the various planes has to do with the collective agreement with ACPA. Something about any planes with more than 75 seats have to be flown by mainline pilots. Most airlines assign E75's to their regional fleets.

I believe the CRA is a specially configured CRJ-900, reconfigured to have 75 seats; the maximum number of seats "express" is allowed to operate. AC can operate aircraft with fewer than 75 seats if they so choose, and do so with the E75's (E75's interior isn't "similar" to mainline, it is mainline).

The E75 is likely the smallest plane that AC can fly in a cost effective manner with its higher labour costs. The CRA is the largest that can be flown by Express. Depending on the route, AC can assign the flying to either group. Having a mixed fleet for both groups probably wouldn't make sense. I assume that CRA pilots can also fly CRJ 100/200 and that the E75 pilots can also fly E90's.

I have only flown a CRA once, YOW-YWG, in Y and it was not a very nice ride. It was very cramped, both the seats and the lav.

I love those Embraers. Very nice J cabin feel.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Embraers, but they feel semi-mainline to me:

1- In J, the cabin feels tight. Lets be fair, having a 1x2 feels a bit regional jet-like.
2- Overhead space is tight- most planes fit all carry ons, no problem. The E75 and E90 fit my bags, but barely, and they have all passed the Lufthansa carry on police (for size that is...not weight)....

they are 100x better than the CRAs, and in my opinion, far better than what UA and DL offer in comparison. That being said, they always feel a little "regional" to me, and I'd always prefer to be on an airbus, even though they are both mainline.

What seems strange to me is that express would operate a larger jet than mainline....Surely pax would prefer to hear "Air Canada flight XXX" versus "Air Canada Express flight XXX" Over the PA before boarding? When I hear express I imagine walking onto a DH3 or CRJ, skychecking my bag, having the FA do the automated safety demo, flying on a loud prop/rear-mounted jet, sitting in a tiny seat, and being thankful to get off! When I hear mainline, I think comfortable, spacious, relaxing, and nice!

In LGA or ORD, for example, don't you think business travelers would prefer mainline vs. express, in which case the E75 would be beneficial? Is this why most E75's are flown out east (YYZ-BOS/LGA/DCA/ORD) while the CRAs are used more in YYC/YWG/YVR?

That doesn't make know sense and you know it. The CSeries is a 100-145 seat airplane and isn't designed to compete with the CRA/J or the E-Jets. The RJ competition isn't E-Jet vs CRA vs CSeries. It's E-Jet vs CRA, and the CRA is getting crushed (and with good reason IMHO).

Bombardier was a huge player in the RJ market, mainly because they offered the best product until the E70/90 showed up, but it now appears they've given up on it entirely in favour of the mid-sized narrow body market. I'm not saying its a bad decision, but painting the dismal CRA numbers as 'they're focusing on its replacement', when the CSeries isn't a replacement, is disingenuous.