Talk:Bombardier CRJ700 series

Alleged name change of Mitsubishi

The assumption change the name Mitsubishi jets:

• Source 1:https://www.aerotelegraph.com/en/lufthansa-uses-mitsubishi-jets

Appears the name:Mitsubishi CRJ

• Source 2:http://www.endeavorair.com/content/endeavor-air/en_us/about-us/our-fleet.html

Appears the name:MHI RJ CRJ

They are the ones who are involved in the name change of the Mitsubishi jets Galizz (talk) 21:11, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

But the Flightradar24 incorrected change the name Mitsubishi CRJ Galizz (talk) 21:14, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Please proof read before saving your changes, and try to make some sense, thanks. Aerotelegraph is quoted stating "An official change of name has not yet been made, however", so it's quite the opposite of a name change. One operator using an alternate, non official, naming scheme is not sufficient. You can read Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide/Naming for more insight.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

But the program CRJ series was acquired by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI RJ Aviation Group) and the type of certification,marketing,etc. Galizz (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, Mitsubishi acquired the programme, but Mitsubishi isn't interested in continuing to market the aircraft. Bombardier is in the process of assembling the final aircraft on the order backlog, and once that is complete, marketing and manufacturing will cease. This is why the aircraft has not been rebranded as "Mitsubishi CRJ"; even on the MHI RJ website it is simply referred to as the "CRJ Series". As various analysts pointed out at the time of the takeover, the main thing that Mitsubishi gets out of this deal is a competent customer service business that it can subsequently repurpose for its own regional jet, the Mitsubishi SpaceJet. Rosbif73 (talk) 10:06, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

But if the Bombardier CRJ production assembly ends, will the name be changed to Mitsubishi CRJ? Galizz (talk) 11:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Mitsubishi isn't going to continue production. Once Bombardier finishes the current backlog, production will cease definitively. Mitsubishi will service existing aircraft, and that's it. Rosbif73 (talk) 11:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Bone without change of name of the Mitsubishi CRJ? Galizz (talk) 11:16, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Can you please proof read before saving? You don't make sense.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 11:18, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

But the production ended of the CRJ Series without change the name? Galizz (talk) 11:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Mitsubishi bought the programme but will not continue manufacturing the aircraft. It has no reason to change the name of an aircraft that will shortly be out of production. Rosbif73 (talk) 11:23, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

But you have to wait until the authorities (MHI RJ Aviation Group) decide on the name change? Galizz (talk) 11:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The aircraft name has not changed and is not expected to change. In the unlikely event that Mitsubishi were to change its mind, then yes, we would wait for an official announcement before changing the page. Rosbif73 (talk) 11:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The source:https://mhirj.com/en/trademarks [Copyrighted text removed.] Galizz (talk) 12:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Appear the logotype of the company (MHI and MHI RJ Aviation Group) Galizz (talk) 12:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

"Mitsubishi CRJ" does not appear on that list of trademarks. The aircraft is trademarked as the "CRJ", "CRJ series" or "CRJnnn". The company logos are separate items on the list. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:22, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, the source www.endeavorair.com appears the name: MHI RJ CRJ? Galizz (talk) 13:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Example:In istagram appears the name in:#mitsubishicrj Galizz (talk) 17:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

An instagram account name means nothing. One airline website doesn't count for much in the absence of corroboration, and in any case it indicates a different name to the one you are claiming. The most reliable of your sources, aerotelegraph, has a quote from Mitsubishi clearly saying that the name has NOT changed and that Flightradar were wrong to use the name the way they did. Aerotelegraph even points out another airline (Lufthansa) still referring to their aircraft as "Canadair RJ 900", yet the Canadair name only ever applied to the CRJ100/200 series! And MHI RJ's own website confirms that it doesn't use the purported name. Enough said! Rosbif73 (talk) 20:12, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks and sorry for the inconvenience Galizz (talk) 20:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

BTW folks, the name on the Type Certificate Data Sheets (TCCA A21EA-1, for example) shows "MHI RJ Aviation ULC" HyeProfile (talk) 11:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

"Orders and deliveries" section

Now that production has ended, the "Orders and deliveries" section (near the end of the article) needs to be updated with the final production numbers. Can someone provide those? —SaxTeacher (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I added "(and CRJ550)" after the "CRJ700" in the table, to make it clear that all existing CRJ550 were originally delivered as CRJ700. HyeProfile (talk) 10:55, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

CL-600-2C11 (Regional Jet Series 550) - aka CRJ550

A few people have been undoing my edits adding the CRJ550 variant, arguing it's a "paper variant". Let's just say that I'm pretty connected in these things, and it's not a paper variant. It's listed as it's own aircraft model on the TCCA Type Certificate and TCDS A-276, as well as the FAA Type Certificate A21EA-1. Therefore, the aircraft bears a seperate model on its aircraft identification plate (located at the bottom of the aft fuse on the aircraft, if you're curious). In fact, MHIRJ is marketing it as a separate variant, so if MHIRJ were to restart production, it could produce a CRJ550 new out of the factory. HyeProfile (talk) 10:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this in talk. The 550 is the same aircraft as the 700, only marketed with fewer seats to comply with an aritrary scope clause. There may be some minute details and it can have its own TC subsection, but it's still a CRJ700. Giving it a column is an editorial decision between editors, there is no right or wrong way to include it, only editorial consensus. As we are only 2, we need inputs from other editors. Thanks.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 19:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC) Also, see WP:EXPERT

Marc, the 550 is NOT the same aircraft as the 700.

It might look the same physically to a CRJ700, but legally speaking it's a new aircraft model on the Type Certificate and Type Certificate Data Sheet, with different limitations. Your argument is like saying the Boeing 737-400 (Classic) and Boeing 737-800 (NextGen) are the same aircraft.

The CL-600-2C10 (CRJ700/701/702) has an MTOW of ~75,000lbs, whereas the CL-600-2C11 (CRJ550) has an MTOW of 65,000lbs. That's more than a 15% higher MTOW for the CRJ700 vs the CRJ550.

The CL-600-2C10 (CRJ700/701/702) has a max pax capacity of 75 pax, whereas the CL-600-2C11 (CRJ550) can only carry a max of 50 pax. More than 50% difference...

In fact, when you walk to the aircraft identification plate, the model # is different. So it's a different aircraft.

Per wp:brd, my edits are BOLD and fact-based, and there's a consensus with everyone but you, so please stop reverting them. You should refine the edits if you don't like the way I present the facts. HyeProfile (talk) 11:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

• The CRJ550 is essentially a derated CRJ700 with limited seating. I'm OK with the current specs table now that shows their common specs values. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:58, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Some people have been reverting some of my CRJ550 info, like the info on supplemental aircraft identification data plate, and other benefits of the CRJ500 as a 50-seater compared to the CRJ100/200. I will slowly add the info back, since I have solid sources for this info. For the data plate, I'll cite the recent rev 5 of the TCCA Ops Eval Report, but for some of the other info, let's just say they're easily verifiable on seatguru and other public sources, not to mention via a simple inspection of any CRJ550, so I'd appreciate that people post on here so we can talk about it before removing the info again; it's useful summary info for pilots and maintenance personnel that are new to the CRJ550. HyeProfile (talk) 14:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• The id plate detail really belongs in a footnote instead of the main text. Wikipedia is NOT a how to manual, etc. per WP:NOTHOWTO. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Just because the information is true and verifiable doesn't necessarily mean we should include it, per WP:VNOT. And I dearly hope that pilots and maintenance personnel are using something other than Wikipedia to learn about aircraft they are flying or working on! Certainly they are not our target audience, and we should only be including information if it is encyclopedic. At most, this should be in a footnote, per Fnlayson. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

References