Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
1 Vs 2 Lavs On DL And US CRJ700s  
User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2234 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5541 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I was browsing through seatguru.com and noticed that DL and US have put 2 lavs on their CRJ700s, which is great for pax, I'm sure, but how does that extra lav up front impact on operating economics and baggage?

They still have 70 seats, which means that the cabin is extended one row back and taking up space from the rear cargo hold, so do these aircraft have more baggage issues than 1-lav CRJ700s?

Are these aircraft flown on longer routes only? Do they have extra galley features as well next to the forward lav?


Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8690 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5498 times:

I would guess that they have problems. But I dont know the exact specs of the CR7 baggage compartment. Maybe HPramper could help us out. Can someone whos familiar with the CR7 help give us info on whether it would be restricted or not restrcted with bags?

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5476 times:

One lav per 35 pax, that's crazy.
-Mr. X



What now?
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8690 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5469 times:

Quoting UN_B732 (Reply 2):
One lav per 35 pax, that's crazy.

Agreed. Its totaly insane.

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5469 times:

And the forward Lav is probably no bigger than your hall closet.



Sean



I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlineBohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2748 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5469 times:

Quoting UN_B732 (Reply 2):
One lav per 35 pax, that's crazy.

Better than 1 lav for 70 pax.


User currently offlineKDCA From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5455 times:

Quoting Bohica (Reply 5):
Better than 1 lav for 70 pax.

I think the earlier posters meant that 1 lave for every 35 passengers is a lot of lav capacity.

Think about an A320, 2 lavs in the back for over 100 pax.


User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2234 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5406 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KDCA (Reply 6):
I think the earlier posters meant that 1 lave for every 35 passengers is a lot of lav capacity.

It is. In the 737-800, 63 pax must share one lav when flying FR in their 189-seat config.

Does DL and US have two lavs on the CRJ700 in case one goes tech halfway through a 3-hour flight so they don't have to land ASAP?



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineTinPusher007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 983 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5342 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 7):
Does DL and US have two lavs on the CRJ700 in case one goes tech halfway through a 3-hour flight so they don't have to land ASAP?

I worked the ramp for DL and saw the very first CR7 that ASA aquired, even before Comair. To my knowledge, I thought they were all made with two lavs. Things can and do get pretty tight in the back sometimes. However if we ever ran out of room, we could put some smaller bags in the forward cargo hold used for the gate-checked carry-ons. Overall, I think 2 lavs is good for these aircraft, especially as they are used on increasingly longer legs. Plus it gives the CR7 a more 'mainline' feel; it is a vast improvement over the CRJ-200, however inferior to the E170.



"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5337 times:

Everything is inferior to the Embraer family of airplanes. But yes the CR7 is majorly inferior to the 170 family.


Sean



I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlineTinPusher007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 983 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5332 times:

Quoting FutureFO (Reply 9):
Everything is inferior to the Embraer family of airplanes. But yes the CR7 is majorly inferior to the 170 family.

Not the whole family, the E135/140/145 is just as much junk as the CRJ200. IMHO, the only thing that the E135/145 has going is a higher window line. Other than that, it's just as (un)comfortable as a CRJ. And I find the CR7 to be comfortable, however the E170 is obviously more comfortable.



"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
User currently offlineB4real From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2661 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5318 times:

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 8):
. Plus it gives the CR7 a more 'mainline' feel;

Errrrr How? Not feeling you at all here.

Quoting FutureFO (Reply 9):
But yes the CR7 is majorly inferior to the 170 family.

 checkmark 



B4REAL, spelled like it sounds
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6413 posts, RR: 34
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5313 times:

Quoting FutureFO (Reply 4):
And the forward Lav is probably no bigger than your hall closet.

Good one... however, MY hall closet IS bigger than the 700's lav!!  Smile

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 10):
IMHO, the only thing that the E135/145 has going is a higher window line.

Oh, and the single row of seats and larger lav!



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineTinPusher007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 983 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5260 times:

Quoting B4real (Reply 11):
Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 8):
. Plus it gives the CR7 a more 'mainline' feel;

Errrrr How? Not feeling you at all here.

Generally speaking, mainline aircraft tend to have a forward and an aft lav. Im not speaking to size of the aircraft here, but more than one lav is something that pax would identify with bigger aircraft.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 12):
Oh, and the single row of seats and larger lav!

I'll give you the single row of seats, but I almost never go to the lav on airplanes, especially not RJ's. BTW 'IMHO' mean In My Humble Opinion.



"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
User currently offlineSupa7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5229 times:

The CR7 is the most efficient way to carry 70 humans on 500-1000 mile segments. It is much lighter than an E-170. It is a good performing airplane that rarely weight restricts. It's not as comfortable as the E-170, but financially I believe it performs better.

User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6413 posts, RR: 34
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5210 times:

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 14):
The CR7 is the most efficient way to carry 70 humans on 500-1000 mile segments.

Nope. The Q400!

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 14):
It's not as comfortable as the E-170, but financially I believe it performs better.

Nope. The 700 has lower trip costs (around 4%) but the E170 has lower CASM since it seats up to 10 pax more (or turn it around and look at the 170's extra revenue capability from the additional 10 seats).



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5190 times:

If I remember correctly from peeking over my pilots' shoulders, our 1-lav CR7's have a maximum bag capacity of 91 bags. That seems like an arbitrary number, so maybe someone else can explain better. But that's for 66 passengers. If they have made the aft cargo hold smaller for 70 passengers, one would think there could be some issues.


Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineSupa7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5124 times:

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 15):
Nope. The 700 has lower trip costs (around 4%) but the E170 has lower CASM since it seats up to 10 pax more (or turn it around and look at the 170's extra revenue capability from the additional 10 seats).

Hmm, "10 seats" is really stretching it. More like 2 to 4 seats according to seatguru.com.

Likewise, you say the CR7 has a 4% cost advantage, but the BBD website says 10% cheaper per trip. I really think its fuel savings are important... that's why I personally dig the CR7.


User currently offlineFCYTravis From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5100 times:

Yes, but on longer legs the comfort advantage of the E-Jets series over the CR7 is extremely compelling. One provides mainline-or-better ergonomics and no gatecheck hassles, the other is a CR2 shoved into a taffy puller.

Ask 100 pax which they prefer, an E-170 or a CR7. You'd get 100 people voting for the E-Jet.



USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6413 posts, RR: 34
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5067 times:

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 17):
Hmm, "10 seats" is really stretching it. More like 2 to 4 seats according to seatguru.com.

At the same 31" pitch of the CR7, the E170 does indeed have 10 more seats. In fact, EMB announced this configuration at Farnborough. That an airline choses to provide greater pitch and reduce the number of seats to increase pax comfort is always their choice.

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 17):
Likewise, you say the CR7 has a 4% cost advantage, but the BBD website says 10% cheaper per trip.

And on an EMB site it is the opposite... what do you expect manufacturers to state?

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 18):
One provides mainline-or-better ergonomics

Indeed, the E-jets have better ergonomics than mainline single aisle jets.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5061 times:

Quoting FutureFO (Reply 4):
And the forward Lav is probably no bigger than your hall closet.

Neither is very big. I do agree, two lavs are better than one on a CR7. I've actually only worked a CR7 one time in my experience, and it was a Frontier (operated by Horizon) at ABQ during training. There is a world more difference between a CR2 and a CR7 than there is between the CR7 and the CR9.


User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2234 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4979 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 8):
I worked the ramp for DL and saw the very first CR7 that ASA aquired, even before Comair. To my knowledge, I thought they were all made with two lavs. Things can and do get pretty tight in the back sometimes. However if we ever ran out of room, we could put some smaller bags in the forward cargo hold used for the gate-checked carry-ons.

How forward-thinking of them... or had they heard people complaining about long lav queues on other CR7s and decided to stop complaints before they got started? Was longer-haul flying in DL's plans from the beginning? What are baggage limitations on domestic routes in the US? In Europe, 15-20kgs (32-45lbs??) checked-in per person seem to be the norm and I seldom hear about overstuffed cargo holds here...



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26785 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4897 times:

Quoting KDCA (Reply 6):
Think about an A320, 2 lavs in the back for over 100 pax.

You seem to have left out the forward lav.

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 10):
Not the whole family, the E135/140/145 is just as much junk as the CRJ200. IMHO, the only thing that the E135/145 has going is a higher window line.

Not to mention 1x2 seating from the Brasilia.

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 17):
Hmm, "10 seats" is really stretching it. More like 2 to 4 seats according to seatguru.com.

You see that because most E170s are configured with a F cabin of ~6 seats. In a similar, all Y configuration, the E170 holds 10 more.

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 21):
What are baggage limitations on domestic routes in the US?

50 pounds which is ~24kg



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4894 times:

The DL 170's are configured as 6/60.



Sean



I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlineCOERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4858 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 22):
Quoting KDCA (Reply 6):
Think about an A320, 2 lavs in the back for over 100 pax.

You seem to have left out the forward lav.

Usually, the forward lav's are reserved for the first class pax, while the rear lav's are for cattle class pax.


25 AV8AJET : Also I love it because the CR7 can fly at .80 mach and carry 70-pax, while the E70 has to fly at .72 mach or less for the same or more fuel burn carr
26 MCOflyer : Agreed. HPRamper, I have seen your postings and think they are quite good. Welcome to my RU list. HPRamper is right, there is a whole lot of diffrenc
27 AV8AJET : Nope 6 F & 64 Y Doubt it, the E70 is so "slow" the CR7 can do the same flights much quicker and use less fuel. I would rather get there on the CR7, t
28 TinPusher007 : Most pax have absolutely no idea how fast an airplane is going inflight. Pax will however, readily notice how big and comfortable the cabin is, or la
29 Post contains images HPRamper : You're exaggerating a bit. Far from being noticeable, on even longer flights the time difference may end up 15 minutes at most. Time is money, but ho
30 Goldenshield : And in that case, they will still demand a 747, and the tempurature cranked up to 95 degrees. :P
31 AV8AJET : I am not talking about Mesa. I'm talking about the split FY combination with Skywest's 10 F & 60Y. The seat pitch and comfort will be considerably be
32 Post contains links Planemaker : Huh? 10F and 60Y on Skywest? Embraer 170 yields improved fuel burn, higher payload Dateline: Monday December 13, 2004 Embraer announced increased eff
33 HPRamper : The point in my using Mesa as an example was to show that what favors the passenger is often good for the bottom line, as those customers will want t
34 CRJ900 : Okay, thanx... so if 70 pax have 4kgs more per suitcase in the US than in Europe, then 70 x 4 = 280kgs extra weight (560lbs??). Will that impact rang
35 AV8AJET : Yes this the configuration of Skywest's CR9's for DL starting in Sept. After Jan '07 they are able to add six more seats per DL's pilot contract.
36 Planemaker : No, why would there "be loads of complaints" if the E170 had 80 seats. At 80- seats the E170 is still quite a more comfortable aircraft than the CRJ7
37 Supa7E7 : No, the limit is 2x 50 lbs or 100 lbs total, plus a carryon which can weigh 20 lbs easily. Although it never happens, each passenger is allowed 120+
38 Post contains images CRJ900 : Ah, I was unclear on that... I meant loads of complaints from our fellow A.netters. Good Lord, can you really bring that much baggage on a domestic f
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...
35 Most Delayed Flights On DL And Affiliates posted Thu Oct 5 2006 14:59:00 by SeeTheWorld
Update On DL And LAX posted Sat Oct 15 2005 05:09:17 by Planefreak
First Class On DL And Crown Room posted Tue Nov 9 2004 05:05:54 by Jcxp15
DL And US Swapping RJs? posted Thu Jul 10 2003 00:32:25 by Bigphilnyc
Opinions On DL BusinessElite? (US To Japan/Europe) posted Sat Jul 27 2002 23:39:57 by Bobcat
NYT Story On DL Pensions And DL Response posted Fri Nov 17 2006 21:35:54 by Positiverate
EU And US Reach Deal On Passenger Data posted Fri Oct 6 2006 08:37:28 by Leskova
Comair 5191 And Its After Affects On DL posted Mon Aug 28 2006 17:54:47 by Jumbojet
Woman Dies On DL Flight And Goes Unoticed! posted Tue May 23 2006 19:24:37 by Luv2fly
US Changes Policy On Pets And Minors posted Wed Aug 17 2005 21:33:16 by Kearnet