PHL-PUJ 9/23

[NoMoreKoolAid]

So whats the deal on this E190 flight # 867? Got word that there was smoke in the cockpit/cabin 30 minutes out of Punta Cana. One person says PBE's were used. Crew landed ok but the outbound was cxl #1860. Why did they start taking this tiny plane all the way over water to Punta Cana? Not meant for that type of flying. Anyone with any info?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Why did they start taking this tiny plane all the way over water to Punta Cana? Not meant for that type of flying. Anyone with any info?

First I've heard of it. I assume that US is using the E190 because it matches the capacity needs better than a bigger plane. Since it's not ETOPS certified, it looks like it wouldn't be able to take a direct route between PLH and PUJ if it's EOW certified- it probably was over land till just north of ILM and then the AR routes toward the Bahamas and along the islands after that, never getting over 150 miles or so from land. If it's not EOW certified it would have to go over land to SAV, just off the Florida coast to S Florida, then along the islands to PUJ. The E190 has plenty of range for that route.

Jim

 

[skinvalve]

"One person say's PBE's were used." ( PBE=Personal Breathing Equipment ) If a PBE was infact used, this would be the first time in the 20 plus years that these things have been installed on acft, that I have ever heard of one being used. Not my intention to hi jack (sic) this thread! But does anyone have a PBE in use story?

 

[PullUp]

E190 not ETOPS, not EOW. Must stay within 50 miles of land at all times.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

OK, my question here is, wouldn't it be cheaper to put an A319 on the route and fly it direct instead of the E190 hugging the coast down to PBI? Wouldn't the fuel savings justify it?

 

[BoeingBoy]

OK, my question here is, wouldn't it be cheaper to put an A319 on the route and fly it direct instead of the E190 hugging the coast down to PBI? Wouldn't the fuel savings justify it?

Not necessarily, given that the 190 isn't ETOPS (and may not even be able to be ETOPS certified) at best you're talking 150 mi or so difference in distance. You have to realize that the 190 is burning less fuel every minute of the flight and that the portion of the flight with the highest rate of fuel burn is from T/O to cruise. So total fuel burn could favor the 190 over the 319.

Plus there's the load factor drop from having a larger plane than the market will support - if the 190 has an 80% load factor the 319 would have a 65% load factor. Which do you think has the better chance of being profitable?

Jim

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Not necessarily, given that the 190 isn't ETOPS (and may not even be able to be ETOPS certified) at best you're talking 150 mi or so difference in distance. You have to realize that the 190 is burning less fuel every minute of the flight and that the portion of the flight with the highest rate of fuel burn is from T/O to cruise. So total fuel burn could favor the 190 over the 319.

Plus there's the load factor drop from having a larger plane than the market will support - if the 190 has an 80% load factor the 319 would have a 65% load factor. Which do you think has the better chance of being profitable?

Jim

OK, thanks , I am more understanding about that now.

 

[algflyr]

Not necessarily, given that the 190 isn't ETOPS (and may not even be able to be ETOPS certified) at best you're talking 150 mi or so difference in distance.

US's 190's are not ETOPS, but the plane is capable of being so. Jetblue flys their 190's to Bermuda...

 

[Dog Wonder]

People tell tired jokes about commuters flying transatlantic.