Austrian Arrows CRJ100 at Kemble
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: Wiltshire, UK
Austrian Arrows CRJ100 at Kemble
I've just come back from Kemble and to my surprise, there's an Austrian Arrows CRJ100LR sat in the scrapping compound along with the engine-less 747, G-BDXE and a very broken Jetstar.
The registration, OE-LRE was painted out and indeed it was only because of the aircraft name, Turin that I was able to suss out which one it was. It was fully complete so it must have only flown into Kemble in the last few days. And I must say that it looked immaculate (unlike the 747 or Jetstar)
Now I know there's a debate going on in another thread about the rights and wrongs of scrapping an ex-BA 777 but my angle on this subject is that as long as places like Victorville and Mojave are stuffed full of surplus airliners because of over capacity in the market, then it will be inevitable that a lot of fairly new aircraft will be scrapped for their parts because that is where the money is.
Incidently, the CRJ in question was completed in February 1995.
Your thoughts please?
Cheers
MDLB
The registration, OE-LRE was painted out and indeed it was only because of the aircraft name, Turin that I was able to suss out which one it was. It was fully complete so it must have only flown into Kemble in the last few days. And I must say that it looked immaculate (unlike the 747 or Jetstar)
Now I know there's a debate going on in another thread about the rights and wrongs of scrapping an ex-BA 777 but my angle on this subject is that as long as places like Victorville and Mojave are stuffed full of surplus airliners because of over capacity in the market, then it will be inevitable that a lot of fairly new aircraft will be scrapped for their parts because that is where the money is.
Incidently, the CRJ in question was completed in February 1995.
Your thoughts please?
Cheers
MDLB
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 899
Likes: 0
From: Middle Earth
I think the CRJ (& probably ERJ) were built with very short lifespans in mind due to the fact they were designed for short routes & quick turn arounds (especially some of the very short routes in the USA). Due to it making lots of short hops, it would reach its maximum airframe life very quickly.
I'm sure there are some CRJ's which are used on the short Commuter hops in the US with the same amount of airframe hours as some of the older B747's!!
Fried Chicken
I'm sure there are some CRJ's which are used on the short Commuter hops in the US with the same amount of airframe hours as some of the older B747's!!
Fried Chicken
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 226
Likes: 1
From: Devon
The ASI website states it arrived on 17 Oct for parting out........more money in parting out than whole for some airliners at present......
The circle of supply and demand - makes the business world go round....
The circle of supply and demand - makes the business world go round....
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 899
Likes: 0
From: Middle Earth
One other point, on short routes, I believe Turboprops are more econimcal to operate than a jet. Not good for these small Jets with the current price of oil.
There will probably be a lot more CRJ's being broken up/stored in the next 12months
FC
There will probably be a lot more CRJ's being broken up/stored in the next 12months
FC
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
From: UK
Over a certain distance, a prop is deffo more economical than a jet - until the difference is flight times evens out the operating cost.
And with various US operators of CRJs having financial issues (such as Spirit Airlines), there is definitely the chance of further CRJs being broken up.
And with various US operators of CRJs having financial issues (such as Spirit Airlines), there is definitely the chance of further CRJs being broken up.
