Re: The Regional Jet order update. OCT 1995.

From:         spagiola <spagiolaworldbank.org@minerva.worldbank.org>
Organization: World Bank
Date:         21 Nov 95 01:20:31 
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Followups:    1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

bernies@ice.net.au (Bernie Samms) wrote:
>Manuel.DeKlerck@ping.be says...
>>>>I was wondering if you know why the Avro RJ rejional jets are
>>>>so popular.  I like the planes myself, but I thought that the
>>>>four engines would dramaticially increase the cost of the planes.
>
>>>Probably because the four engines make passengers feel more secure.
>
>>Four (lighter) engines allow a lighter construction of the wings, so
>>although the engines may cost more, overall cost is not increased.
>
>The secret is quiet (cheap?) operation from low power engines.

As in many things, the reason the 146 has 4 engines is basically
accidental.  When it was first designed in the mid-1970s (as the HS.146),
there were no two engines that would provide the required performance.
So they used 4.  Since these engines were in fact exceptionally quiet,
they then stressed this marketing point.

>Personally,
>I hate the things. They are slower (in BAE146 format) in my Aussie travels
>and despatch rate with Ansett Australia, as far as my experience goes, is
>very poor. I feel more secure in a good old Boeing 737, 727 or even a DC9.
>Maybe the newer Avro RJ is improved?

The BAe 146 is not a fast airplane, as jets go.  It was designed for
short-haul routes, where speed is secondary.  Ansett is using them on some
pretty long segments out there in western Oz.  (BTW, the 737 is also pretty
slow; one reason United went with the A320).  As for despatch reliability,
early models did fare poorly (and AN has some pretty early examples).

In any case, the Avro RJ is very much improved.  Do you think airlines
like Lufthansa and Crossair would buy them in large numbers in preference
to the Fokker jetline series if they were poor aircraft?

Stefano