Second Baltia Air 747-200 Undergoing FAA Required Maintenance

Posted on March 28, 2011 by | 1 Comment

A colleague and former JetCheck writer, Andrew Young, recommended that I take a close look at Baltia Air Lines, a 21 year start-up airline based in New York City. According to a recent press release, the airline’s second airplane, a Boeing 747-200 (N706BL) formerly operated by Northwest Airlines and Kalitta Air, entered the Kalitta maintenance facility in Oscoda, Michigan on March 15, for required FAA maintenance. It appears as though both airplanes are just about ready, but how long will it be until the carrier begins operations?

For those unfamiliar with Baltia Air Lines, the carrier has a base of operations in Terminal 4 at New York’s JFK International Airport. According to the airline, they are, after JetBlue and Virgin America, the only new start-up United States Part 121 (heavy jet operator) airline in existence with Department of Transportation approval. Baltia aspires to become the leading airline on trans-Atlantic flights between major U.S. cities and capital cities of Eastern Europe. The airline “intends to provide high quality three-class passenger service, and reliable cargo and mail transportation. Baltia plans to begin their scheduled air transportation as the only U.S. airline, connecting directly, to two of the world’s most prominent cities – New York and St. Petersburg.”

It’s safe to say that Baltia has a well-defined target market. Their operations start-up date is unknown, but the airline still has yet to jump a major hurdle: FAA air carrier certification. Yet in the mean time, Baltia is prepping their 747. They’ve even launched a website and have made some progress in social media, but I cannot pull up their Twitter page anymore – what happened? However, Baltia posted a YouTube video, highlighting plane #1′s arrival at a maintenance facility in Malaysia:

There’s been a lot of debate on the air carrier’s choice of the Boeing 747-200, as it is far from new and probably not seen as congruent with the “high quality” brand they’re selling. However, one thing is for certain, the airplane sports attractive capital costs.

It’s always fun and interesting to watch and observe start-up airlines. While Baltia isn’t selling tickets yet, this recent press release suggests that the airline is nearing its first day of operations.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Airlines

Tagged , , ,

JetCheck Out of the Office

Posted on March 14, 2011 by | Leave a comment

Unfortunately I will be unable to post this week as I have a number of midterm exams and projects that will be taking up most of my time. The following week, I will be on vacation.

Blue skies!

JetCheck

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Misc.

JetChecking Embraer’s Upper E-Jet Series (E-190, E-195, E-195X)

Posted on March 11, 2011 by | Leave a comment

Call me an Embraer E-Jet novice, but before today I was unsure of the differences between the E-190 and the E-195. Looking at pictures of these sister airplanes side-by-side, they look nearly identical, but as typical aircraft naming and numbering would suggest, the E-195 is a slightly longer airplane. Yet, what the E-190 lacks in length it makes up for in range. How exactly do these aircraft compare in terms of origins, specifications and orders / deliveries?

Both the E-190 and E-195 are stretched versions of the the smaller E-170 and E-175 aircraft. The two families of airplanes have an estimated 89% commonality, but differ in engines, wing area, horizontal stabilizer and in the landing gear. The cockpit, including Embraer’s famous yoke and avionics (Honeywell Primus EFIS), allow cross-certification for pilots throughout the entire series. Both families feature a single-aisle cabin consisting of a two-by-two seat arrangement and share the same outer width, inside width, outer height and inside height measurements. Like the E-170/175, the E-190/195 share a 95% commonality, differing only in length. On a technicality note, the E-195′s official designation is the E-190-200 and the “E-190″ is designated the E-190-100. For the purposes of this post, I will continue to refer to the aircraft as E-190 / E-195 for the sake of simplicity.

Looking at the E-190 and E-195 only, here are some key differences in the specifications:

  • Length
    • E-190: 118′ 11″
    • E-195: 126′ 10″
  • Passengers
    • E-190: 94 two-class, 114 one-class (29″/30″)
    • E-195: 106 two-class, 122 one-class (30″/31″)
  • Range (note that both aircraft have the same max. fuel load)
    • E-190 STD: 1,800 nm
    • E-190 LR: 2,300 nm
    • E-190 AR: 2,402 nm
    • E-195 STD: 1,400 nm
    • E-195 LR: 1,800 nm
    • E-195 AR: 2,201 nm

Looking at these key specifications, the E-195 has the seat advantage of about 5-15 percent, depending on the configuration and seat pitch. As both airplanes share the same maximum fuel capacity, the extra length of the E-195 adds to the aircraft’s empty weight (63,900 Ib versus the E-190′s 61,900 Ib), thus increasing the fuel burn and reducing the range of the airplane by approximately 200 nautical miles per variant compared to the E-190. Both aircraft feature two GE CF34-10E turbofan engines, powering both aircraft to a maximum cruise speed of Mach 0.82 and to a service ceiling of 41,000 feet. With all of these specifications in mind, Embraer has stretched their way into the mainline jet sector of commercial aircraft manufacturing.

A Mandarin Airlines Embraer E-190 in new colou...

Embraer E-190 - Image via Wikipedia

You can consider the E-190/195 as Embraer’s breakthrough into the mainline airliner market as both models flirt with the lower end of the 100-seat spectrum of the commercial airliner market. I would have guessed that the E-195′s few extra seats would be an attractive option for airlines. Yet, the order-books tell a different story (for details on E-190/195 operators, check out CH-Aviation). Most airlines have chosen the E-190 over the E-195. The question is, why? To the best of my knowledge, most E-190 operators are not taking advantage of the aircraft’s superior range (thinking of US Airways, JetBlue and Virgin Blue), which leads me to believe that either the E-195s price-tag does not justify the extra seats, or the E-195′s extra seats are unlikely to be filled on the routes used. Nonetheless, the E-195 is still generating decent sales (Lufthansa CityLine, Azul, etc), but it has not been embraced by carriers as well as the E-190.

An Embraer E-195 of Augsburg Airways with regi...

Embraer E-195 - Image via Wikipedia

What about the E-195X – it’s in the title, isn’t it? According a FlightGlobal / ATI article, Embraer considered stretching the E-195 a bit more to get it in the 130 seat range. The article cites a source with knowledge of the situation that this aircraft is a response to a request for a Boeing MD-80 series replacement for American Airlines. Yet, American’s plan is to replace the MD-80s exclusively with the Boeing 737-800. About five months after publication of the aforementioned article, FlightGlobal reported that the program was scrapped due to the aircraft’s range. According to Embraer’s chief executive Frederico Curado, the 195X would have utilized the same GE CF34 engines. Thus, Embraer learned from customer feedback the range would degrade the aircraft to an unacceptable level.

Looking at the future of the Embraer E-Jet program, it will be interesting to watch and see if the Brazilian manufacturer follows the path of Airbus and decides to re-engine the series in an attempt to develop a longer E-Jet. The company has a lot of options for the future, but I am interested to see what happens with their competitor Bombardier, now that the engine that powers the C-Series will be used on the A320neo (which could justify selecting the C-Series for some airlines).

–

Happy Friday. I hope everyone has a great weekend! Be sure to follow JetCheck on Twitter :)

Related Articles

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Aircraft

Tagged , ,

A Good Move? Delta Buys 9 MD-90s

Posted on March 7, 2011 by | 1 Comment

This past Thursday, Delta Air Lines confirmed their plans to purchase 9 used Boeing MD-90 aircraft from Japan Air Lines (JAL) to replace the airline’s aging DC-9. Deliveries are expected to begin in January 2012 following an interior refurbishment.

Japan Airlines International McDonnell Douglas...

JAL MD-90 - Image by contri via Flickr

According to Bloomberg, Delta’s vice president of fleet strategy, Nat Pieper, wrote employees in an internal website, Delta will “continue to look for opportunities to acquire used MD-90s.” As of December, according to the airline’s annual report, Delta operated 19 MD-90s.

If you have followed Delta’s fleet acquisitions over the past few years, you’ll note that the carrier has developed a liking for the MD-90. In early 2010, Delta reached a deal with China Eastern Airlines for 9 MD-90s. The aircraft went into service during the months of February through July. There is also speculation (maybe confirmation?) that Delta has a lease agreement with SAS for a few MD-90 aircraft.

Is this a smart move? You bet! Delta’s CEO, Richard Anderson, cites the aircraft’s economics and lowly capital costs (compared to a Boeing 737-800) that make it a great option. Let’s compare, shall we?

Delta currently operates 34 DC-9-50s, which were inherited from Northwest Airlines, and has quite a few of the smaller DC-9 variants in storage. The DC-9-50s seat 125 people (16 in first, 109 in economy) and are powered by two Pratt & Whitney JT8D turbofans. Meanwhile, the 160 seat MD-90-30s sport two much more efficient IAE V2525-D5 engines.

JAL’s MD-90s were built throughout 1996-1998, while the aged DC-9-50s Delta currently operates were built between the mid-1970′s through the early 1980′s. That’s roughly a two decade gap in technology.

Aero Engines V2500 on the MD-90-30 flight test...

IAE V2500 Engines on a MD-90 - Image via Wikipedia

Yet let’s go back to the engines. Although the IAE V2500 series engines are available for the A320 series (Delta operates 319s and 320s), the carrier uses CFM56s on their A320 fleet and the IAE V2500 is only on Delta’s acquired MD-90s. Therefore, from a maintenance perspective (and A/Ps, please correct me if I’m wrong), it’s surprising that Delta would adopt this aircraft when no other airplane in their fleet utilizes IAE engines. While I’m not an expert on engines, I’m confident the benefits of this airplane still outweigh the cons to keeping the older DC-9s, as those 1960′s JT8Ds are fuel burners.

How about pricing? The Bloomberg article cites Douglas Runte, managing director at Piper Jaffray & Co. in New York, who follows aircraft transactions, for a price estimate. “MD-90s have appraised values of $5 million to $9 million, depending on vintage, and it is highly unlikely that Delta would be paying more than that range for the Japan Airlines aircraft.” As JAL is restructuring its fleet, there is a strong desire to improve efficiency (hence all the recent route cuts / aircraft retirements). I would agree with Mr. Runte that Delta got a good deal for JAL’s MD-90-30s.

If Delta is buying these used MD-90-30s for the aforementioned $5 million to $9 million, their getting quite a bargain for their buck considering what they’re paying Boeing for the 737-800. The 737-800 also seats 160 people, but costs 8 to 16 times more, depending on what Delta’s paying for the 737 and what they paid for the MD-90.

Overall, as I mentioned earlier, picking up MD-90s right and left is a great move for Delta. Sure, the Boeing 737-800 is newer and more efficient than the MD-90, yet the economics of the MD-90 can’t be too far off from the 737, given its equal seating and efficient IAE engines. It will be interesting to watch and see if Delta can happily take more MD-90s off other carriers hands in the future to continue growing their MD-90 fleet.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Airlines

Tagged , , , , , , , ,