best regional aircraft?

Jacko-Smitha · **on:** July 27, 2008, 10:13:26 am

What do u think is the best regional aircraft for the 1980's to 1990's? i believe that the saab340 but that doesn't come out for 4 years in W8

zkvac · **Reply #1 on:** July 27, 2008, 10:17:40 am

Fokker F-27 or ATR 72-200. Or maybe Convair 640s for Australasia.

SkinnyRabbit · **Reply #2 on:** July 27, 2008, 11:08:50 am

HS-748E for Australia.

Obmit · **Reply #3 on:** July 27, 2008, 11:35:31 am

F27-200 for Regional Australia

Cheung Airlines · **Reply #4 on:** July 27, 2008, 12:10:36 pm

At first: Hurel Dubois HD321 (44-seater,~ 4.4m) :wink:
Planes within 60 seats: F-27 (Short-haul)(~6.8m ~ 8.6m) and CV-240 ~ 440, 640(Medium ~ Long-haul) (~7.4m ~ 10.2m)
and Let L-610 and its varient
After that: ATR-72-210, Q-400 and BAe Jetstream J-61 /ATP

The reason why I choose -72-210 is its cheaper than 200 (2m cheaper) and less fuel. Speed is not really important in regoinal planes.
Thats why airlines are usin Beech 1900D (or something like that) as a regional airliner. :wink: :wink: :wink:

MarkP1969 · **Reply #5 on:** July 28, 2008, 04:50:38 am

Gulfstream 1 or 2 low seats high profit

zenmen5 · **Reply #6 on:** July 30, 2008, 10:52:30 pm

saab 2000s are a litle pricy but worth it

XeniaAirways · **Reply #7 on:** August 02, 2008, 09:46:41 pm

I'm in world 9 so I don't know exactly how its like in world 8, but I think Fokker F27-400 is great for regional routes to airports with >1M (i've been using them for service to cities with around 300-500k passengers, going as low as 9k for one of my shortest hops)

they're good for short flights because they aren't very fast, but are rather economical with fuel.

fokker f27-200 is also good.

yourefired · **Reply #8 on:** August 02, 2008, 10:27:46 pm

EMB-120.

Japanair · **Reply #9 on:** August 04, 2008, 02:20:44 am

Dornier Do-328-100/110...

zkvac · **Reply #10 on:** August 04, 2008, 06:10:09 am

Yeah I have some 328s and they work well. Also for W10s I'm trying CRJs.

yourefired · **Reply #11 on:** August 04, 2008, 07:58:30 am

In W10 I'm going against the tide and going with ERJs. I'm only operating one type of CRJ and that is the 700.

zkvac · **Reply #12 on:** August 04, 2008, 08:14:49 am

I might consider that once they come out, I'll go for the better one surprisingly enough

yourefired · **Reply #13 on:** August 04, 2008, 08:17:57 am

I have a thing against doing something just because everyone's doing it. Just for the record. :wink:

But 1996 definitely going with ERJs. I saw pictures of the CRJ-100/200 and they're butt ugly. Too short in comparison to the wings.

ERJs on the other hand are nice and slick (and more balanced).

zkvac · **Reply #14 on:** August 04, 2008, 08:23:44 am

Yep CRJ's look like little fat things. SO we have ERJ's in 1996? The ERJ-145 I'm guessing?