Talk:Bombardier CRJ200

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Aircraft WikiProject

Contents 1 CRJ200 2 End of production? 3 Cold weather operations 4 CRJ 100 vs 200

[edit] CRJ200

Looking at the FAA and Canadian type certificates under the official name of CL-600-2B19 only the two marketing names are listed, the Regional Jet Series 100 and Regional Jet Series 440. The article states that the 200 is a 100 with 3B1 variant engines. Both type certificates state that the 100 series can be fitted with either CF-34-3A1 or 3B1 engines. Just for information. MilborneOne 18:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] End of production?

I've seen some commentary in other articles (Bombardier's page, I think, and maybe Dash 8) that the CRJ200 is (going) out of production, with commetns on why, and that the Dash 8/Q Series is now preferred over the 200. Does anyone have any sources that back this up? If true, some of it needs to be here, especially the parts of the smaller CRJs going out of production. - BillCJ 18:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I think the CRJ100/200 compete internally with the Dash8-Q400. In the 90's, people were afraid of turboprops because of safety, plus they were loud. RJ's took over the 40-50 seat market because they were faster and more comfortable. Lately, with fuel prices on the rise, turboprops are coming back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgw89 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cold weather operations

For the past few days Air Canada Jazz has cancelled flights to and from Yellowknife because "their CRJs are not certified for operations below -40". It seems strange that a Canadian-designed airplane wouldn't be certified for cold-weather operations, while their competitors (in the north) who operate Boeings haven't missed a flight because of the cold. Does anyone know anything about the CRJ cold-weather certification?

Charles Dent 216.108.187.98 (talk) 03:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC) 216.108.187.98 (talk) 03:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CRJ 100 vs 200

Reading this entry, it is clear they marketed two different models. However, the entry is not clear on the differentiation between the models and the timeline for each of them. IE: the CRJ200 was sold from x year onwards and improved on the CRJ100 in this manner. Yes it says that the engines differ later on in the piece, but to the lay person the engine specs read the same, and everything else reads the same. Surely there are more differences between the two than just a letter in the engine model? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.201.219 (talk) 14:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)