Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Austin-San Francisco: Longest RJ Flight In N.A.?  
User currently offlineAs739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6142 posts, RR: 23
Posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5122 times:

We have seen from these other thread that there are some long ass RJ flights. Then I see UAX will launch Austin to San Francisco. Looking through Sabre its the longest I can find.This beats PHX-YYC,this beats EWR-MSP by over an hour,this beats IAH-PSP by 40 min. The only flight close to it is EWR-OKC which is 20 min shorter.These are the only one's I can think of. So AUS-SFO, Will it be the longest?

Please only respond if you have milage and /or time!!!

Austin(AUS)-San Francisco(SFO)
UAX (Skywest) Flight #7103 1,498 miles and 4 hours 10 min.

ASSFO


"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25260 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5065 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm guessing here, but perhaps the new AUS/IAD service is longer?

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineN670UW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1605 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5066 times:

CO's new IAH-BFL (begins Apr. 3, ERJ-145XR, 4hr5mn) will be pretty close.

BFL=Bakersfield, CA




670


User currently offlineAs739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6142 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4996 times:

Mariner...close 3.45 and 1303 miles
N670UW...I forgot that one 4.05 and 1438 miles..good call
I'm sorry but this is to damn long for me and I fly myself, when I fly regionals I will avoid these at all cost!
ASSFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineFlairport From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4964 times:

i was going to say XNA-LAX! but I'm wrong

HLN-CVG is 1474...close


User currently offlineScottysAir From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4960 times:

Yes, this is very longer flight any kind of those hub. So what are you guys think about ERJ or CRJ on their way with the final destination city. Is that will give them with the snacks? I was flew on the CRJ out of MHT-ATL nonstop from 4 years ago and during for my vacation time at the work in FLL. This is really longer flight for me.

User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4927 times:

Yes it does appear that AUS-SFO is the longest at 1307nm. The second longest I could find was DEN-RDU at 1248nm.

User currently onlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32783 posts, RR: 72
Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4900 times:

Yes it does appear that AUS-SFO is the longest at 1307nm. The second longest I could find was DEN-RDU at 1248nm.


DL's DFW-OAK is currently the longest. Will be 2nd when SFO-AUS starts.



a.
User currently offlineTommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4863 times:

I wonder on these REALLY long RJ flights if people get impatient with no IFE or short isles or anything. I don't know if I could take a 4 hour 10 minute flight on an RJ. Do you think there will be sucess?


"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineFlyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1738 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4850 times:

ASA will soon be operating JFK-DFW with the CRJ-700, also very long.


727, L1011, MD80, A300, 777-200, 737-300, 737-700, 747-400, 757-200, 737-800, A320. E190, E135, 767-200, CRJ9
User currently offlineN670UW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1605 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4845 times:

DL's DFW-OAK is currently the longest. Will be 2nd when SFO-AUS starts.

IAH-BFL will be second (at 4:05).

DFW-OAK is 3:55.


670

[Edited 2004-01-19 00:21:25]

User currently offlineSebwhite From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4782 times:

DFW-OAK is really 29 miles longer than IAH-BFL!

User currently onlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32783 posts, RR: 72
Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4773 times:

IAH-BFL will be second (at 4:05).

DFW-OAK is 3:55.


DFW-OAK is still longer. It is shorter in time because it operates with faster CRJ-700s.



a.
User currently offlineOuboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4599 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4612 times:

I think US Airways ALPA had it right...these are just "small jets" not "regional jets." Granted they are being operation in United States region.  Smile

User currently offlineFlyboyaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4576 times:

RJ's suck...LOL

They are so easy to board, but to me they are more of a hassel than they're worth.

One of my agents the other day got blasted by a VP from Air Midwest because he announced that the pax would be travelling on a small regional jet (CR9). Came over to the door and started yelling at him...right in front of all the passengers...then he had the balls to say "It's just like an MD80!" Yeah...what have you been smoking? Unfortunately I wasn't there, but believe me he would have gotten a lesson or 2 about the difference between the 2 planes. I was a bit upset when I heard about it.

I understand their cost effectiveness...but they have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to flying them on 4 hour flights. I can understand why people freak out when they find out they're on a little plane.


User currently offlineVectorVictor From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4529 times:

The CR9 is hardly a little plane in my humble estimation.

The only people that seem to be freakin out are the posters on these boards who worry about in flight entertainment. Perhaps you as gate agent can attest differently to passenger reactions, but having a nonstop in a market versus a connection is hands down the winner with about 90% of today's traveling public.

If some are so worried about in-flight entertainment, I suggest you visit http://www.apple.com and buy yourself an iPod.


User currently offlineTjwgrr From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2444 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4512 times:

"I understand their cost effectiveness...but they have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to flying them on 4 hour flights. I can understand why people freak out when they find out they're on a little plane."
------------------------

Maybe United will put a 735 on the AUS-SFO route and CO a 735 on the IAH-BFL route just because people don't like little jets....  Smile/happy/getting dizzy Wonder how long that would last with loads of 35-45 passengers.....?

Folks- don't whine! Consider the alternatives. UAL would be AUS-DEN-SFO or AUS-ORD-SFO. CO wouldn't probably even fly to BFL if it weren't for the RJ's.

Here in GRR we're thrilled about the RJ. We would never have routes like GRR-EWR, GRR-IAH, GRR-DFW, GRR-ATL without the RJ. (Although we now do have a DL 732 on one of the GRR-ATL flights.)



Direct KNOBS, maintain 2700' until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 26 left approach.
User currently offlineCitationX From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4484 times:

Legacy airlines are using their regional partners to develop new routes at high yields. Being a long-time business frequent flier - if I can avoid a hub connection (especially at the chaotic, DFW), shave an hour or more of travel time, and still get my mileage - I would be willing to put up with a 4-hour ride on a cramped mini-jet like the CRJ.

When the Embraer 170~190 series enters service, I think these new jets will push the CRJs and ERJs back to the (sub-1K-mi.) routes they were meant to serve. The 170~190 jets are being designed to address the comfort issues of first-generation RJs and will probably blur the categories of mainline and regional jets.


User currently offlineFlyboyaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4441 times:

All valid points, however I still stand by my statements.

I deal with RJ's on a daily basis and get numerous complaints on a daily basis, particularily from Continental passengers. They are not popular with the general flying public (those not interested in aviation). Since Expressjet has been flying to TUS, I have personally had a dozen or so passengers, outright refuse to fly on them.....I had to rebook them on the mainline flights.

Had CO not added mainline service and a EWR nonstop this past holiday....we would have had riots at the airport from people being denied boarding due to oversells. As it was we had the most denied boardings ever, even with the extra capacity.

While the changes necessary may not come for a while, if ever to make mainline operations on obscure routes profitable, RJ's ARE being overutilized. As convienent as it is to fly out of my own station (when seats are available!), I will make the 2 hour drive to PHX to avoid flying RJ's, especially one's operated by Mesa.  Smile


User currently offlineVenuscat2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 478 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (10 years 8 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4321 times:

Here in GRR we're thrilled about the RJ.

We are?  Wink/being sarcastic True, we're thrilled to have those routes. But I'm sure some people aren't thrilled about the type of aircraft (given the length of the flight).


User currently offlineTjwgrr From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2444 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (10 years 8 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4233 times:

"We are? True, we're thrilled to have those routes. But I'm sure some people aren't thrilled about the type of aircraft (given the length of the flight)."
--------------------------------

Without the RJ, GRR would have main line flights to DTW, MSP, ORD, and perhaps one each to CVG and ATL- that's about it.



Direct KNOBS, maintain 2700' until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 26 left approach.
User currently offlineTcfc424 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 517 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (10 years 8 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4187 times:

I live in Austin, and while I am thrilled there is new non-stop service coming to the airport, I don't agree with the choice of equipment. That said, I understand that UA may not be able to justify a mainline aircraft, especially as AA has the "nerd bird" which is served with an MD80.

Correction: AA does not fly AUS-SFO, that is AUS-SJC, my apologies. I find it interesting that this "new" service has not been announced on the ABIA website...hmmm

I like regional jets for shorter segments, i.e. <2 hours, but my wife gets claustrophobic aboard them...yee haa. I could care less about the IFE, isn't that what the window and the in-flight magazine are for? The comfort however is questionable given the small dimensions of the RJ's.

As for airline service here in AUS, yeah we have to fly through IAH, DFW, ATL, or DEN to get any distance, but frequencies are good and connecting is fairly easy. Flying out of AUS, you really have to want to make multiple connections, as you can get to most anywhere in the lower 48 with 1 connection.

Mike S in AUS

[Edited 2004-01-20 16:39:53]

User currently offlineBobs89irocz From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (10 years 8 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4139 times:

TcFc424- UAX serves ORD-AUS. I fuel this flight almost every day.....takes alot too. I sure as heck wouldnt want to be cramped on a CRJ-200/ERJ-145. The CRJ-700/900 wouldnt be so bad but thats about it. Otherwise i would wait for a mailine flight. It is shocking to find how far some of these RJ's travel, but as mentioned above alot of places that are served with these RJ's wouldnt get service at all if we where without them.

User currently offlineJcs17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 38
Reply 23, posted (10 years 8 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4112 times:

AUS-SFO...lol.

An appropriate name could be "The Weirdo Shuttle" or "The Purple Hair Shuttle."



America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13602 posts, RR: 61
Reply 24, posted (10 years 8 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4084 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

IMHO, the biggest reason people complain about the ERJ/CRJ aircraft is due to the lack of storage space aboard.

People have become accustomed to lugging their rolling carryons aboard, most of which do not fit comfortably on a small jet and need to be gate-checked.

This angers many people, who are uncomfortable with the idea of being separated from their bag, even for a short hop.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
25 As739x : Bob, what would make getting on the CR7 better then the CR2? They are the same other then length. Still the same width and damn cramped. Jcs17...Weird
26 Bhmal : I agree with Tjwgrr's comments about the service being less if RJ's weren't around. Here in BHM, we just got BHM-DEN service on UAX and BHM-MSP servic
27 Post contains images OH-LGA : Austin(AUS)-San Francisco(SFO) UAX (Skywest) Flight #7103 1,498 miles and 4 hours 10 min. Dude... it's not SkyWest operating the flight (yet - but we
28 Njintern : United States RJ flying over 1,000 miles: Al Org Dst Miles Flight Equip Block Mins DOW UA AUS SFO 1,496 7103 CR7 250 1234567 UA SFO AUS 1,496 7104 CR7
29 Dsuairptman : Just pure evedience that the RJ concept is abused to death! Who in their right mind would want to fly for 3+ hrs. in the cramped confines of a plane n
30 Ssides : Dsuairptman -- If you don't like the RJs, then don't fly them. Connect on a larger jet if you want, but let us that prefer non-stops to keep flying on
31 Jcs17 : Jcs17...Weirdo Shuttle or Purple Hair Shuttle...I don't follow? WHat do you mean? Both Austin and San Francisco have their share of "interesting" peop
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Longest 747 Flight In The World? posted Thu Apr 14 2005 17:14:58 by BoeingForEver
The Longest Direct Flight In The U.S posted Wed Apr 13 2005 06:01:55 by MSYtristar
EWR-HNL: Longest Domestic Flight In The World? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 06:02:21 by Lrgt
Longest Commercial Flight In The World posted Sun Mar 6 2005 04:29:10 by BG777300ER
Longest CRJ Flight In The US? posted Sat Apr 3 2004 11:01:32 by Aguilo
Longest RJ Route In North America posted Fri Jun 6 2003 06:40:54 by Planenutz
Longest RJ Flight posted Sun Jan 16 2000 07:06:39 by TWA902fly
Longest CRJ-200 Flight In The United States? posted Tue Dec 5 2006 20:37:33 by B737-112
A New Non-stop SQ Flight To San Francisco? posted Sat May 20 2006 11:33:41 by Ctang
Emirates Non-stop Flight Dubai - San Francisco posted Wed Mar 29 2006 03:08:24 by Amax1977