Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Long Range, Comfortable RJ  
User currently offlineBoston92 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 7
Posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4448 times:

I would like to know why there is not a comfortable RJ out there that has the range and capability of a 737. I live in an area where the largest craft is a CR9, but they are just really uncomfortable. There needs to be one with a standup cabin for people over 6 feet, and one that can go from the small airports in CA to Ohare or IAD. What do you guys think?


"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCOERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4437 times:

The E190 would fit the bill.

User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4411 times:

Quoting Boston92 (Thread starter):
I would like to know why there is not a comfortable RJ out there that has the range and capability of a 737. I live in an area where the largest craft is a CR9, but they are just really uncomfortable. There needs to be one with a standup cabin for people over 6 feet, and one that can go from the small airports in CA to Ohare or IAD. What do you guys think?

C-Series would be rather nice. No demand for it yet. Until then (or a Boeing/Airbus bird) there's the EMB's.


User currently offlineAirportPlan From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 469 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4393 times:

Quoting Boston92 (Thread starter):
I would like to know why there is not a comfortable RJ out there that has the range and capability of a 737. I live in an area where the largest craft is a CR9, but they are just really uncomfortable. There needs to be one with a standup cabin for people over 6 feet, and one that can go from the small airports in CA to Ohare or IAD. What do you guys think?

You evidently have not flown on a E170/175 or E190/195. I prefer them over 737s and 320s. No middle seats.


User currently offlineFL370 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4370 times:

the i really want to fly on the E170, UA express 170's look really nice. and they offer 2class seating. but for mainline, i prefer the 737 over the A320. more comfy!!

just a question. are there any private CRJs out there. i've seen very little private CRJs.

fl370


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4359 times:

The E-jets don't have the range of the 737NG or 320, and need longer runways than the true RJs, correct? I can't tell about the runways as Embraer won't make the performance data of the planning manual available to the public on their website.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4359 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

UA's exPlus Embraer 170 series are quite nice as they have First Class (though the seats are a bit narrow at 19" width) and Economy Plus (with 18" wide seats) in a 2+2 config. The ceiling and window height in these are pretty good, as well.

UA's exPlus CRJ-700s are acceptable with First Class and Economy Plus, but the narrower Economy seats (17") and lower ceiling and window height make the experience not as nice as the Embraer 17x/19x series.


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4359 times:

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 3):
You evidently have not flown on a E170/175 or E190/195. I prefer them over 737s and 320s. No middle seats.

Absolutely!  checkmark 

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineEasternSon From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 668 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4287 times:

Quoting FL370 (Reply 4):
are there any private CRJs out there. i've seen very little private CRJs

I might be wrong, but I think the private version of the CRJ is the Challenger CL-600, and from the same family, the Global Express.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, which I'm sure somebody will.



"The only people for me are the mad ones...." Jack Kerouac
User currently offlineCOERJ From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4266 times:

Although the EMB-170 and EMB-190 currently do not have 737 range, but something is telling me that Embraer will come out with an XR edition, similar to what they did with the ERJ-145, that will have a much more extensive range.

The E-Jets are extremely comfortable, and I'd prefer them any day over a cramped 737, and find it comparable to any Airbus narrowbody.

I don't understand why people think the ERJs are so uncomfortable. For about 95% of the flight most people are sitting, and ceiling height does not matter. They fly just as smooth and fast as a mainline jet, the seats are the same, and so is the pitch. When making a connection I prefer an RJ because they have faster boarding and alighting times.


User currently offlinePavlovsDog From Norway, joined Sep 2005, 657 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4266 times:

The new Russian RRJ or Super 100 series as it is now known will have 60,75 and 95 seat variants with up to 2500 nm range and a five abreast interior in economy class. That is very close to a 737's range and in the right conditions might manage transcontintal operations.

User currently offlineAirTranTUS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4259 times:

Quoting EasternSon (Reply 8):
I might be wrong, but I think the private version of the CRJ is the Challenger CL-600, and from the same family, the Global Express.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, which I'm sure somebody will.

I have a this book about Executive Jets, and it talks about a Biz Jet conversion for the CRJ. It has less range than the CL-600, but it carries more people, like a corporate shuttle. Didn't ACA operate a service like this?
Big version: Width: 234 Height: 254 File size: 12kb


Here is a pic I found of the Suncor Energy Corporate Shuttle CRJ.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter Nickerson



User currently offlineEmiratesA345 From Canada, joined Jun 2003, 2123 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4238 times:

Quoting FL370 (Reply 4):
the i really want to fly on the E170, UA express 170's look really nice. and they offer 2class seating. but for mainline, i prefer the 737 over the A320. more comfy!!

I don't know how you came up with that conclusion seeing as how the seats are totally dependant on the choice of the airline.

Mark



You and I were meant to fly, Air Canada!
User currently offlineFL370 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4050 times:

""I don't know how you came up with that conclusion seeing as how the seats are totally dependant on the choice of the airline.

Mark"""


i was refering to united express's E170s


User currently offlineBoston92 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 3966 times:

Quoting FL370 (Reply 13):
i was refering to united express's E170s

That was quite appearent. I think EmiratesA345 just read it wrong,



"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
User currently offlineFlyabunch From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 517 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3931 times:

I know it is a small point but I think that the E-jets are not even being referred to as regionals. But, since they seem to be flying the same kinds of routes I think it will be impossible to keep them separate in general discussion. I will say my one flight on a 170 was much better than any flight on an RJ. Comfortable RJ is an oxymoron as far as I am concerned.

I go out of my way to avoid them...even if it means an additional connection or less favorable flight time.

Mike


User currently offlineBoston92 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3926 times:

Quoting Flyabunch (Reply 15):
Comfortable RJ is an oxymoron

Just widen the cabin, give a little more pitch, make the pax want to fly them like UA did with explus.



"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3926 times:

Quoting COERJ (Reply 9):
I don't understand why people think the ERJs are so uncomfortable.

To save weight they use thinner, harder seats than mainline jets, and the shoulder room is less as well. I find the ERJ okay for 1:30 or shorter flights, but flying nearly 3 hours is very hard on my body on the ERJ.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineBoston92 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3913 times:

I tend to dislike the SBA-DFW flight on American Eagle aboard a CR7. 3 hour flight there and 3 and a half coming back.


"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
User currently offlineKanebear From United States of America, joined May 2002, 953 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3866 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
To save weight they use thinner, harder seats than mainline jets, and the shoulder room is less as well. I find the ERJ okay for 1:30 or shorter flights, but flying nearly 3 hours is very hard on my body on the ERJ.

Yep... did CRP-IAH-ORD on ERJs and my ass fell asleep at about 45 minutes in on the IAH-ORD leg. I've NEVER been so happy to get off a flight. A mainline coach seat is much much more comfortable. Pitch and width are definitely not all there is to a seat. Somehow until now I'd been able to avoid longer legs on ERJs. Done CRP-ATL on DL's CRJ and for some reason it didn't feel quite as bad.


User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3859 times:

Quoting Boston92 (Thread starter):
I would like to know why there is not a comfortable RJ out there that has the range and capability of a 737.

Wait, wait...

Range, capablility and comfort of a 737. Isn't that what you described... actually... a 737?

Regional jets are regional. Thats the key word. If you want something longer range and more comfortable, your best bets are an A318/319 or B737-600/700. You're not going to be able to get smaller than that and keep the comfort level up without dropping the amount of seats down drastically to make up for the small cabin height/width. This just isn't economical. To have comfort and economics, you have to have a fairly large cabin (at least DC-9 size)... and with that, you're not going to have an RJ.. you're going to have a mainline bird.

Regional jets are just too small to be used for long range flights. These are mainline flights that should be flown by mainline aircraft.


User currently offlineCorey07850 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2525 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3828 times:

Quoting FL370 (Reply 4):
are there any private CRJs out there. i've seen very little private CRJs

Absolutely... 601LS, 501LS, 500PR, 846PR, 529DB, 711WM are just a few off the top of my head that I've had experience with/have come across


User currently offlineEmiratesA345 From Canada, joined Jun 2003, 2123 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 3696 times:

Quoting FL370 (Reply 4):
but for mainline, i prefer the 737 over the A320.



Quoting Boston92 (Reply 14):
That was quite appearent. I think EmiratesA345 just read it wrong,

Nope. I don't believe I did. It quite clearly says that for mainline he prefers the 737 over the A320.



You and I were meant to fly, Air Canada!
User currently offlineAirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 3673 times:

I don't understand, the CRJ700/900 has the same seat space as any other aircraft out there. Look at seatguru. Not to mention it's faster than other planes and the windows are eyelevel compared to the 200. I don't get what a taller cabin has to do with long range comforts. The cabin is 6 foot 1. 90% of the population is shorter or as tall as that. I'm tired of people bashing RJs.

[Edited 2006-08-29 09:47:51]

User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 3621 times:

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 3):
You evidently have not flown on a E170/175 or E190/195.

 checkmark 

Quoting FL370 (Reply 4):
i really want to fly on the E170, UA express 170's look really nice

See this report:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/trip_reports/read.main/70848

The UA Express E170 is absolutely top notch . . . wonderful aircraft. US Express CRJ7 is nice as well . . .

As a rule, I'll avoid the Bombardier's if I have to fly Y. And I'll take the Embraers if I'm in Y but can get a A (Single) Seat.


25 MotorHussy : What airlines are you talking about? From my experience, somewhat limited of the Airbus, but extensive of the Boeing, the A320 is far more comfortabl
26 Post contains images CRJ900 : The windows are actually placed slightly HIGHER UP on the CRJ700/705/900 than on the B737NG... ...yet nobody complains about craning their necks on a
27 Boston92 : Yeah, but the 737 doesn not fly to smaller airports that the RJ are capable of.
28 Post contains images Boston92 :
29 Stitch : I do agree I prefer the wider seats and better overhead HVAC/lighting controls on the A320 family, but I will note the 737NG seats are more comfortab
30 Ikramerica : I do! The 737 windows are very low, and I have to lean away to look out. When I flew with my GF the other day, I took the middle and she the window,
31 Boston92 : It says that he likes the United Express E170's, and that he prefers the mainline 737 over A320. He was just taliking about UNITED express, than he s
32 1011 : My big problem with RJs is (at least the CRJ) that the windows seem more spread apart and they are way too low down. I big time mess up my neck tryin
33 FlyMIA : Well I have only flew two RJ's Bae-146 which I dont remember much about it and recently I flew an American Eagle ERJ-135 from IAD-MIA. I must say I am
34 Boston92 : CRJ's dont have that. They are 2 (small seats) X 2(small seats). Its also weird on how the east has the ERJ and the West has the CRJ (for the most pa
35 FlyMIA : I was not aware of that, (note to self dont fly CRJ on long routes) True there are alot of CRJ's on the west than ERJ's but there are still alot of C
36 Boston92 : American Eagle has a 1500 mile DFW-SBA flight aboard the CR7. I take that about 2 times every three months.
37 FutureFO : Still prefer the EMB fmaily of products over the Bombardier family anyday, anytime. Sean
38 ChinaClipper40 : I suppose that this question revolves, to some degree, around the definition of an "RJ." If the definition is based upon whether or not the aircraft i
39 Ikramerica : How is that as a pax? If I were going to that area, I'd take that over going to LAX and connecting or driving, sore butt and all. AA had an ORD fligh
40 N1120A : The E-jets do, however, have similar, if not better, range to 737Classics and don't need an unreasonable amount of runway in any case Actually, it is
41 Post contains images Ikramerica : Again, correcting me for no reason. The question posed was about RJs running transcons or other routes that they can't actually do. And I pointed out
42 FutureFO : Rnage, hmmm. The E170 is good on the JFK-AUS runs at 4hrs. They are also operating a Sat only service for DL on the ATL-STX route. Blocked at 3h 45 mi
43 Boston92 : Yeah, but the airports don't need a craft that big. 50-70 seat range is perfect, but current ones cant get a 1500+ mile range.
44 WJA73G : 737NG's have taller seats than previous 737s. They are more comfortable. The LVAC controls above the seats are very comparable to the 737Classic as we
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...
UA 757s Long Range International Flights? posted Tue Sep 5 2006 05:59:40 by MIAUA777
Small Planes Equal Long Range? posted Thu May 18 2006 22:03:01 by ContinentalGuy
Bwia Long-range posted Sat Apr 8 2006 21:02:55 by BA747YYZ
B737 / A19 Flying Long Range - Special Version? posted Wed Mar 15 2006 04:16:03 by GBan
Big LH Long Range Order To Be Announced In March posted Tue Feb 28 2006 00:44:04 by Bolu340
Long Range Out Of GVA, Your Wishes? posted Fri Jan 20 2006 11:23:09 by HBJZA
Long-Range Jets Threaten Singapore Airport's Hub posted Fri Jan 6 2006 08:00:37 by MidnightMike
How Long Is Long Range? posted Sun Dec 11 2005 10:33:39 by Seatofyerpants
Why No Long Range A/c For Tunisair? posted Tue Dec 6 2005 17:12:24 by LY777
Airbus Pitches Long-range A340 To Qantas posted Thu Oct 27 2005 06:43:09 by Sq212