Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
RJ's Clogging Up Airports  
User currently offlineThelowfarehero From Cayman Islands, joined Aug 2005, 144 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7857 times:

It seems to me all these Regional Jets are congesting just about every airport I go to. If the airlines have to run such high frequencies with them, why not reduce flights and use larger planes. I took off from LAX the other day and waited about 35 minutes to take off, there were a ton of United Express, and American Eagle RJ's and Props, at least 13 before our position. Just a bit frustrating.


I HAATE AA!
82 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 11157 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7839 times:

That's what the flying public wants, so that's what the flying public gets.

User currently offlineThelowfarehero From Cayman Islands, joined Aug 2005, 144 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7806 times:

Thats B.S. I dont know of anyone who actually WANTS to fly one one of those, or have heard anone make a request to fly on one. Maybe you do, but my consensus from the general public is a bit different, they prefer larger roomier aircraft.


I HAATE AA!
User currently offlineUAL Bagsmasher From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2143 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7776 times:

The flying public bitches about not wanting to fly on "an old noisy unsafe propeller plane." So now they get their wish with RJs.

User currently offlineErikwilliam From Brazil, joined Mar 2004, 2152 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7740 times:

Quoting Thelowfarehero (Reply 2):
but my consensus from the general public is a bit different, they prefer larger roomier aircraft.

sorry man, the average flier knows close to nothing about the plane.
They are not like us, that know even the type of brake discs the plane has.
Off course everybody likes the larger ways of transport, do you prefer drive a Mini or a BMW 7 series?But sometime you can´t drive a 7 because you can´t afford the gas, simple as that.



Dida, Cafu, Lucio, Roque Junior, Roberto Carlo, Emerson, Ze Roberto, Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano, Robinho, Ronaldo
User currently offlineDAL767400ER From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, RR: 46
Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7732 times:

The travelling public demands as much frequency as possible, hence the airlines give it to them to attract their business. Never mind the fact that there are many communities especially in Cali with service to LAX that can only be sustained thanks to such rather small planes. IIRC, United Express has actually reduced a lot of frequencies out of LAX, not sure about American Eagle though.

User currently offlineClearedDirect From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 271 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7719 times:

I think it is more like "Why don't they fly to MY HOMETOWN? Why do I have to drive all the way to (insert big airport here)? We have an airport - why don't they use it?

Thus the great flexibility of the RJ. I mean seriously - if you put yourself in Joe Public's shoes and you have a choice of flying in a 19-30 seat turboprop or a 50 seat RJ - which are you (they) going to choose?

CD


User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7714 times:

Quoting Thelowfarehero (Reply 2):
dont know of anyone who actually WANTS to fly one one of those, or have heard anone make a request to fly on one.

In Europe and Asia it's a bit different, but I guarantee you that the US business traveler would much rather have 8 daily departures on RJs rather than 3 or 4 on MD-80s.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineLowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7697 times:

High frequency service (read as "more flexibility in the customers' flight choices") generally necessitates smaller aircraft. Most customers want a flight schedule that works around thier life. Different types of passengers prefer different times. In an attempt to keep as many customers satisfied (with the service schedule) as possible, you have to have a wide variety of choices to offer people. I am willing to bet that most, if not all, of your 35 min taxi was built into the flight flight's block time.


Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7694 times:

Quoting Thelowfarehero (Reply 2):
Thats B.S. I dont know of anyone who actually WANTS to fly one one of those,

I do. The ERJ-145 is my favorite type. No middle seats, the A seat is great, and sure beats any props that we'd get here otherwise... or a NW DC-9.

Quoting ClearedDirect (Reply 6):
I think it is more like "Why don't they fly to MY HOMETOWN? Why do I have to drive all the way to (insert big airport here)? We have an airport - why don't they use it?

Thus the great flexibility of the RJ. I mean seriously - if you put yourself in Joe Public's shoes and you have a choice of flying in a 19-30 seat turboprop or a 50 seat RJ - which are you (they) going to choose?

Precisely. If I want to fly I want to fly from my town, which is now ABE. I don't want to drive the 2+ hours (w/ traffic) it'll take to get to EWR/PHL. The fact of the reality is there wouldn't be enough traffic here to support 737's everywhere, and would you rather have half empty 737's everywhere or full RJ's?

Maybe when you big-city people get your heads out of your... nacelles... you'll realize that not everybody is flying between million-population markets, therefore RJ's need to exist to serve the mid-sized markets... the ABE's, DSM's, and DAY's of the world. If we only want to fly between the top 50ish sized cities in the US, we'll fly that all-737 airline everywhere. Sorry, the point of flying for me is to spend as little time as possible in my own car, and as much time letting the airplane haul me around. Driving to the big city would defeat that. I'm sorry that we're "clogging up your airports." Maybe if your residents would wake up you could add on to/build new airports and they wouldn't be "clogged up" because of those of us in the smaller cities.


User currently offlineJMV From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 241 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7675 times:

Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 5):
The travelling (sic) public demands as much frequency as possible,

There's the key, along with wanting more direct flights between city pairs. Certainly they would prefer a larger aircraft, but are willing to compromise in order to get schedule flexibility and direct flights.

Alas, they, the traveling public, are a fickle lot. Even though they want frequency, direct flights, and cheap fares, they also whine a great deal about small regionals, cramped full size aircraft, and the loss or lack of service. Funny how quickly they forget they get what they pay for.



Google begins where my brain ends! ©
User currently offlineVfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 3914 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7675 times:

The former CEO of DUS airport was famous for unnerving Lufthansa by repeatedly complaining in public about Lufthansa clogging the airports limited runway capacity with "Challengers" - he meant Lufthansa's CRJ.....

User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24655 posts, RR: 86
Reply 12, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7670 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ssides (Reply 7):
I guarantee you that the US business traveler would much rather have 8 daily departures on RJs rather than 3 or 4 on MD-80s.

But hang on. I would much prefer Virgin Atlantic to charge $1000 r/t Upper Class LAX/LHR but it ain't going to happen.

Since most RJ flights within the US feeder system lose money, why should the business traveler expect that all his dreams can come true?

There are very few "business travelers" for whom an hour wait at an airport is the end of a deal - or, if it is, what would happen in the case of an mx or wx delay?

If providing those additonal frequencies to the business traveler is clogging airports and helping to send the airline bust, I don't see the point.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 13, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7672 times:

The number of RJs and "customer flexibility" is also due to the hub-and-spoke operation (altough the advent of RJs has allowed some markets to circumvent hubs).

For example, my hometown airport of ABI has 6 daily RJs and 2 daily Saabs to DFW. Given those numbers, it could probably support one or two MD-80s per day to DFW (for the moment, forget that use of such an aircraft on such a short route would be wildly inefficient).

However, 90% of ABI passengers connect at DFW to a further destination. Having 8 daily flights instead of 2 allows AA to funnel connecting passengers in a much more efficient manner.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 11157 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7650 times:

Quoting Thelowfarehero (Reply 2):
Thats B.S.

Sorry, but that's reality.

In today's competitive environment, consumers have made their preference loud and clear: they care about two things, and one more than anything else. Consumers care only about fares, and to a slightly lesser extent, schedule frequency. RJs help on both fronts, as they usually have lower operating costs than mainline jets (thanks largely to the lower wages associated with regional operators) and they obviously help with frequency, as you can fill 6-8 RJs in place of 3-4 737s.

Quoting Thelowfarehero (Reply 2):
I dont know of anyone who actually WANTS to fly one one of those, or have heard anone make a request to fly on one.

Well, as long as they "request" to have dirt-cheap fares and high frequency schedules to get exactly where they want when they want to get there, they are -- in effect -- choosing RJs. As long as this is how consumers behave, RJs upon RJs is what they are going to get.

Quoting Thelowfarehero (Reply 2):
Maybe you do, but my consensus from the general public is a bit different, they prefer larger roomier aircraft.

Again, with all due respect, that's B.S. Not only do most people, as others have said, not really have a clue about what plane they are on, but most will not wait for a "larger roomier aircraft."

If a business traveler's meeting gets done early, they get out to the airport, and see that there's a flight in 30 minutes on an RJ, or a flight in two hours on a 737, they must wait in order to get their "larger roomier aircraft." But, the reality is, they won't. They will get on the RJ, suck up any potential loss of room or comfort, because they want to get home!.

And, by the way, as for those who say RJs are so uncomfortable -- I have never flown on the CRJ line of aircraft, but have been on many Embraer ERJs, and have never really found them uncomfortable. The leather seats are great, I find the legroom to be more than adequate, and the bathroom is huge. The only real drawback is that the ceiling is a bit low, and there aren't huge overhead bins, but you can gatecheck bags and pick them up right after you deplane.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 12):
Since most RJ flights within the US feeder system lose money, why should the business traveler expect that all his dreams can come true?

Most lose money? American Eagle is profitable. So is Continental Express. Both are primarily RJ operators. Many RJs make money.

[Edited 2005-08-17 23:06:40]

User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7603 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 14):
Many RJs make money.

Yes. If they weren't, you wouldn't have Chautauqua, Mesa, AWAC, etc. fighting over business.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24655 posts, RR: 86
Reply 16, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7587 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Commavia (Reply 14):
Most lose money? American Eagle is profitable. So is Continental Express.

United has said that their Express operation costs them between $45 million and $50 million a year.

Frontier has said that their Express operation, using the larger CR7's, is stand alone profitable for maybe a couple of months of the year.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 14):
RJs help on both fronts, as they usually have lower operating costs than mainline jets

Um - I cannot speak for AA or CO - but most airlines that I know of report a CASM of between 14 and 16 cents for their RJ's.

This compares with a mainline CASM of around 8 cents.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineIRelayer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1073 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7573 times:

Out of LAX there are plenty of places that are served that will NEVER deserve mainline service, but for whom an air link is essential b/c there is such a huge gap between SoCal and NorCal. Places like Fresno, SLO, Santa Barbara, Yuma, Bakersfield, Lodi, Monterrey are served with RJ's and props because there is a market for it. People are willing to pay 100R/T, for instance, to get from LA to Monterrey, b/c the other option would be LAX-SJC, and then a 1.5 hour drive to Monterrey. Also traffic is so bad in LA that a short hop like LAX-SAN (a 15 minute flight) becomes more and more appealing as the traffic gets worse. There are a large number of people that commute between these two places on a regular basis, and on a weekday, getting into and out of the LA area can be a nightmare at pretty much anytime during the day.

Same thing with ORD. A lot of the traffic at ORD is regional. A huge amount. And the frequencies are insane. But UAX and Eagle fly to places that are pretty isolated but that can support RJ service. Like Sioux City, Lincoln, Carbondale, almost everywhere in Iowa, etc etc...

Face it, the airlines will run routes that feed their hub operations, and they will respond to market demand, however small, to do that. And to do that they need to be connected to almost every center of population, so that they can ensure that if someone from Sioux City wants to go to Europe, they can. UAX might lose money on the first domestic sector, but it will most certainly make money on the long-haul sector.

-IR


User currently offlineCORULEZ05 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7518 times:

Quoting Erikwilliam (Reply 4):
sorry man, the average flier knows close to nothing about the plane.

The average flier doesn't need to know much about planes to prefer the larger jets over smaller ones. More of a psychological thing than a true mechanical point. Obviously the RJ's and other small planes are safe but some people don't see it that way. Purely psychological really.....

Quoting Erikwilliam (Reply 4):
Off course everybody likes the larger ways of transport, do you prefer drive a Mini or a BMW 7 series?But sometime you can´t drive a 7 because you can´t afford the gas, simple as that.

RIGHT......so the $70+k price tag has nothing to do with their decision/ability to purchase the car? Seriously, based on your statement, who would say no to getting a 7 series for a dirt cheap price based on higher fuel consumption???? Give me a break..... Yeah sure

[Edited 2005-08-17 23:46:41]

User currently offlinePtcflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 101 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7496 times:

Stats show that the average CASM is 14 - 16 cents per mile... making the RJs not as economical. I wonder if anyone has really calculated the CASM of the RJs once all of the additional costs that are shifted to the mainline due to delays on the ground and in the air are added to the equation.

The net-net is that there is often a lot of subsidization for that "regional" feed into a particular airlines' hub. Given the state of the airline industry... I wonder how long they will afford to subsidize the "frequencies" and feeder flights to less than economical destinations?

When you add the total CASM of the RJs plus the incremental costs on the rest of the mainline fleets due to too many aircraft... and not enough runways.... At some point, it would seem like that huge number of RJs would be scaled back, or consolidated onto larger aircraft where possible.

Like Meals, Pillows, Magazines.... perhaps granular flight frequencies is a perk that airlines should look at reducing.... to maximize operating profitability


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24655 posts, RR: 86
Reply 20, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7484 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 15):
Yes. If they weren't, you wouldn't have Chautauqua, Mesa, AWAC, etc. fighting over business.

The reason that they are fighting for business is that their profit is (usually) built in.

The major they fly for pays them on a "cost-plus" basis - that is, whatever it costs the regional to provide the service, plus a defined profit margin.

This is how ACA got to have all that money in the bank that they have burned through with FlyI.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineLegacy135 From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 1052 posts, RR: 27
Reply 21, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7445 times:

Demand creates market and market also creates a demand. So it is just one of the rules of selling, offering 8 times 50 seats is easier to sell than 4 times 100. People want flexibility and airlines are responding to this demand by offering a lot of flights by RJ's. Then travelers also don't want to wait around a long time id they have connecting flights. So if an airline wants to stay in the market they need to come up with frequencies. If they can sell it they will do it, otherwise somebody else will do it and take them the customers away.

User currently offlineSHUPirate1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 17
Reply 22, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7439 times:

Gentlemen, look at the wholly-owned regionals' numbers. The fact is, as of the latest DOT releases (Q1 2005), both ASA and Comair made slight profits, and American Eagle had a profit margin that would make the Southwest's and jetBlue's of the world jealous. These numbers are available to the public...take a look...

http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/X-5...e_files/airlinefinancialreview.htm



Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7390 times:

Quoting Thelowfarehero (Reply 2):
Thats B.S. I dont know of anyone who actually WANTS to fly one one of those, or have heard anone make a request to fly on one. Maybe you do, but my consensus from the general public is a bit different, they prefer larger roomier aircraft.

Tell that to the city that went from 2-3 737's a day to 8-10 RJ's a day allowing them more flexibility in their tavel plans.

Oh yeah.. and what SHU said.

[Edited 2005-08-18 00:16:37]

User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24655 posts, RR: 86
Reply 24, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 7338 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SHUPirate1 (Reply 22):
and American Eagle had a profit margin that would make the Southwest's and jetBlue's of the world jealous.

But that is not stand alone. Much of that traffic - and thus the profit - is feed into mainline.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
25 GRRTVC : I would have to agree that the RJ are filling up the airports but I don't completely agree that they are "clogging" airports. An airfield only has so
26 Ssides : Well, when UA's mainline operation is losing around $1 billion a year, $45-$50 million doesn't sound so bad. That's because, despite the expansion of
27 Post contains images Mariner : That's funny. And true - I can't argue with that. cheers mariner
28 Dutchjet : Regional jets are flown by affiliate airlines staffed with cockpit and cabin crews working for less money.....that is part of the reason as to why so
29 SHUPirate1 : I don't have the RASM, but I do have the yields handy: Executive: 49.02 cents per RPM (60% loadfactor) American Eagle: 25.79 cents per RPM (65.8% loa
30 Post contains images Birdbrainz : Some people will complain about how tiny or loud an ERJ135 or CRJ is. At least until they ride on a Jetstream 31 or Beech 1900. I've even heard people
31 FlyPNS1 : If this was true, why hasn't DL blown Airtran out of the water in Atlanta? DL matches Airtran fares and DL offers much higher frequency than Airtran.
32 Boeing7E7 : Delta isn't struggling in Atlanta. Other hubs, yes.
33 Post contains images Thelowfarehero : Couldn't have been said any better!
34 Commavia : Because FL is competitive on frequency. Sure, DL may offer 8-10 flights a day in a market, or up to 30 or 40 in some key markets, but FL still is abl
35 Boeing7E7 : RJ's aren't the problem. High densiity market cherry picking by a handful of LCC's is. They bleed pax from the mainline routes which used to be full.
36 Thelowfarehero : heres an example.....HP flies many CRJ flights to it's LAS and PHX hubs from larger markets like LAX...are you telling me they cant fill a 733 or A320
37 SHUPirate1 : Define "many"...looking at next Wednesday's schedule, Mesa doing business as America West Express flies one CRJ-900 between LAS and LAX, and one CRJ-
38 Boeing7E7 : Enough said. Thanks for playing.
39 CORULEZ05 : Smaller aircraft are definetly clogging up airports. I mean, they don't seat that many people so they need to operate more flights to accomodate all t
40 Tornado82 : Let's try these theories for size. How about instead of 7x DH-8/RJ on PHL-ABE we change it to 1x A330. Instead of 3x SF-340 on ABE-PIT we change it t
41 Commavia : No, what I am telling you is that HP obviously feels that for its current schedule PHX-LAX, at that particular time of day, an RJ is better suited to
42 Sllevin : The only thing people care about is if the plane is jet powered. CO stated at the FT meet in April that their numbers show that people will standby in
43 Mariner : That assertion may be right - but in a negative sense. HP CEO Parker is on record as saying that they have too many aircraft in their Express fleet,
44 Tornado82 : Look at Continental Express... CLE has ERJ's as far as the eye can see, it's kind of hard to find a mainline jet at quick glance there. But who was p
45 SHUPirate1 : Even more ironic is that when the DOT reports the separate American Airlines and American Eagle numbers, they will likely bear out, as the Q1 numbers
46 Commavia : True enough, CO and AA are both profitable, and both have RJ operations either through wholly owned carriers (Eagle) or contract carriers (ExpressJet
47 Post contains links Mariner : Okay - if, as some would have it, RJ's are, in themselves and with decent loads, profitable, what's with Independence Air? http://www.economicexpert.c
48 SHUPirate1 : I'm not saying that the RJ is, in and of itself, profitable, particularly in and of itself. However, it is an integral part of the mainline network,
49 EmiratesA345 : You can't possibly be a pilot and spew such non-sense. Surely you would have some knowledge about the purpose of regional jets, markets, frequencies
50 SHUPirate1 : Certain American Eagle stats since they became a major carrier in 2000: Profit (Loss) margin, loadfactor, BELF Q1 2000: (-0.4%), 59%, 59.3% Q2 2000: 8
51 Flyinryan99 : I know I'm chiming in a little late with this, but if the mainline planes were put on the routes the RJs are on wouldn't the CASM of the mainline pla
52 RIPCORDD : I think RJ'S suck for anything longer than 2hrs. When I make my flights I first check to see what equip is on the route and if AA is flying a RJ and U
53 Mrniji : I am sure he has, as opposed to you. Get real and grow up first, kid!
54 Post contains images Mariner : Certainly, it has become an integral part of that network, and some others. I would need to know how AA costs it, though. It can't be "stand alone" -
55 SHUPirate1 : Mariner-Let me rephrase...for the legacy carrier, the fee-per-departure model does not work. For the regional carrier, they couldn't be happier with t
56 Post contains images Mariner : I think I got that. The question you might be able to answer for me is this: United, for example, contracts all its Express providers. But what to AA
57 Post contains links SHUPirate1 : Continental Express is no longer owned by Continental, and they now have a fee-per-departure agreement. With respect to American Eagle, however, from
58 AirWillie6475 : With way the industry is going, I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot more of regional aircraft before we see less of them. There will be greater d
59 Zoheb : I'd choose whichever was cheapest.
60 Erikwilliam : I was only trying to compare why sometimes some airlines use the RJ´s instead of the 747 on a route, that´s all. So, now, chill buddy, don´t need
61 FlyPNS1 : Sounds like fee-for-departure to me, since the industry standard proration agreement is a fee-for-departure schedule. Most of the regionals are suppo
62 Commavia : It is. AA switched a fee-per-departure method of payment to Eagle back in 2002 or 2003, IIRC.
63 Boeing7E7 : A turboprop is a jet. 50 Seat RJ's don't work as a stand alone product. For a stand alone product to work, you need at least 64 seats, preferably 96.
64 DAYflyer : The only place you ever get non-stop flights to are the hubs. Hell, if they could do some non-stops that were not through the hubs, the mess could st
65 CWAFlyer : Was this your first visit to LAX? LAX is one of the busiest airports in the world and was experiencing taxi times of this length or more prior to the
66 CWAFlyer : Jet engine with a prop attached. Most passengers associate anything with a prop as a dangerous, loud "puddle jumper" and think a Saab or Brasilia in
67 AirWillie6475 : Why is it insane? If your talking about the product then flying with Southwest, Airtran, Spirit or any other LCC is insane. There is no difference be
68 Thelowfarehero : Are you kidding me? You mean to tell us that the cabin heighth and width for a CRJ or ERJ is comparable to that of a 737 or A319? You can barely stan
69 Erikwilliam : actually the seat pitch of the E-series is larger than a 737, and the aisle pitch also, but it´s a different aircraft
70 Post contains images EmiratesA345 : Thanks for that excellent contribution which had nothing to do with anything. Maybe when you wash that grease out of your hair, I just might grow up.
71 Post contains links Pensacolaguy : From... "AVIATION INDUSTRY PERFORMANCE Trends in Demand and Capacity, Aviation System Performance,Airline Finances, and Service to Small Airports Numb
72 FATFlyer : Not really. For example, according to seatguru.com, UA's aircraft look like this in economy: 737-500 Pitch = 31" Width = 17" A319 Pitch = 31" Width =
73 Post contains images Goldenshield : And for some reason, turboprops DON'T require access to the same runways? Last I checked, turboprops were fitting in nicely in places like SFO, LAX,
74 Arrow : I'm glad you posted that. I'm fed up with all the people who look down their noses at RJs and write them off as an inferior product. I've flown on al
75 TimRees : Seems like a great deal has been said of RJ's in North America. It's puzzled me in recent years why there is an increase in the use of RJ's at slot li
76 CWAFlyer : It is insane because of the size of the cabin. Unless you happen to get on a UAX product that has 1st class or E-plus, then are getting zero cabin se
77 Post contains images SRT75 : A fact that CO exploited when it became an "all jet" airliner, even though it was running several turboprops. RE: LAX There has been talk about conve
78 Tornado82 : Should be the same speeds as a mainline jet within the normal variations for different Vee's amongst jet types.
79 Boeing7E7 : When frequencies are the same, passengers don't care. Horizon will attest to this.
80 Tornado82 : Since when do airlines give you good service on any domestic flights, unless its BOB? RJ or not, it's still crappy service unless maybe you fly CO it
81 PPVRA : Yes, but they don't get the higher yielding pax. Down here GOL has been growing like crazy, but JJ and RG's pax base have also been growing. If eithe
82 BoeingPride800 : I personally think RJ's are taking over so many routes. But I don't know if it's cheaper to fly RJ's or regular mainline. I would like it better if th
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...
Flyi RJ Lease Up? posted Mon Jan 3 2005 21:07:37 by Hiflyer
American Eagle RJ Build-up At MIA posted Fri Apr 23 2004 21:57:53 by MAH4546
Airports Line Up To Join In Frontier's Expansion posted Mon Oct 9 2006 21:30:47 by KarlB737
Do Airports Pay Up For ATC Errors? posted Sun Apr 23 2006 22:37:55 by Boysteve
What's Up With Florida Airports Today? posted Fri Mar 25 2005 18:23:04 by JetBlueAtJFK
Goof Up On A RJ? posted Sun Apr 25 2004 08:10:57 by PilotNtrng
EUG To Put Up $1m For SLC-EUG RJ Flights posted Tue Nov 18 2003 22:35:18 by Flashmeister
Airports Built For Jets, Now Used By RJ's posted Thu Jul 31 2003 19:12:18 by Jrlander
"Swampy Brigade" Lines Up Against Airports! posted Sun Jul 21 2002 12:24:14 by Kaitak
Scanner Wont Pick Up Local Airports, Just Planes.. posted Sun Jan 20 2002 03:31:13 by FSPilot747