B727fan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 292 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7008 times:
Hi,
Although the CRJ's are nice jets, as a window seat lover, I find them very uncomfortable! I think the windows are a bit too low and don't provide a comfortable viewing angle to the outside. (I am barely above 5'-10")
The other day I flew DL and next to our plane was a CRJ900. Judging by passengers seated by the windows on that plane, it seemed to me that the windows are higher than those on CRJ200.
Was this an illusion or did CRJ improve their window design?
Thank You in advance.
Evan767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2957 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7003 times:
The CRJ100's and CRJ200's both have windows in your lap. The CRJ700's and CRJ900's have them at shoulder height.
The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
PiedmontINT From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 376 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6991 times:
Yes, the CR9 has a lowered floor and therefore the windows are at a proper and more comfortable height so you wont have to put your head between your knees to look out. Also, the next-gen CRJ-900s and 1000s will have larger windows that will be staggered better so that the rows line up better with each window.
ERAUgrad02 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6986 times:
Quoting Evan767 (Reply 1): The CRJ100's and CRJ200's both have windows in your lap. The CRJ700's and CRJ900's have them at shoulder height.
And CRJ-700/900/1000NG are even further improved which DL has the -900NG. The 700's are the original not NG edition even though as Evan767 stated were improved over the -100/200's. The windows are even larger than the 1st gen CRJ's.
PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9 Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6963 times:
I think a LOT of things have been improved from the -100/-200 to the -700/-900 models:
In a comparison of these two pictures, you can also see that although the curve of the fuselage still intrudes into the cabin for the window-seat passengers, it is less extreme in the case of the -700 and -900. Also, note the difference in the size of the overhead bins - still not 777 size, but an improvement over the sardine can of a -200.
I too have had the opportunity to compare the original versus the "new and improved", and to me, there IS no comparison. I have found the -700/-900 to be as comfortable as a mainline jet - the only difference being that there is no middle seat!!
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62 Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6962 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting B727fan (Thread starter): The other day I flew DL and next to our plane was a CRJ900. Judging by passengers seated by the windows on that plane, it seemed to me that the windows are higher than those on CRJ200.
The windows are higher, but there are fewer of them. It's difficult to see in photos, but rather than one window per seat, virtually every seat is given a blank wall and half a window.
You'll probably end up in one of two situations. To see out the window, you'll either have to lean all the way back and turn your head 90 degrees, or you'll have to lean forward and hope the person in front of you doesn't recline.
A318 From Bahamas, joined Jan 2008, 226 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6822 times:
How do you think I, being 6'6" tall, felt tonight in the CRJ-200! It was horrifying. And on top of the cramped seats and low windows, we were in a huge take-off queue that took over a half hour long at PHL.
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6540 posts, RR: 11 Reply 7, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6581 times:
In all honesty, I still much rather fly on a CRJ200 than an ERJ135/145. Those things are too small for me. And the argument about the one seat on the left doesn't cut it for me.
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62 Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6555 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 7): And the argument about the one seat on the left doesn't cut it for me.
It sure does for me. I love having the shoulder room, and I especially love not being in such close proximity to other passengers.
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7421 posts, RR: 9 Reply 9, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6497 times:
The CR9 NG has pretty big windows, I flew the CR9NG on the first day ever for revenue flights on the NG, MSP-FAR on XJ and thought that was great, then I flew the CP 175 and that thing has huge windows and more room, a much better ride. But the CR9 has windows at your height like a normal mainline plane.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
KaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12043 posts, RR: 42 Reply 10, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6466 times:
Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 9): The CR9 NG has pretty big windows, I flew the CR9NG on the first day ever for revenue flights on the NG, MSP-FAR on XJ and thought that was great, then I flew the CP 175 and that thing has huge windows and more room, a much better ride. But the CR9 has windows at your height like a normal mainline plane.
I still need to do my CR9 and E75 trip to try them out. Fly the CR9 one way and E75 the other.
A318 From Bahamas, joined Jan 2008, 226 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 6325 times:
Quoting 2H4 (Reply 8):
It sure does for me. I love having the shoulder room, and I especially love not being in such close proximity to other passengers.
It sure does for me too. I love not being literally 1cm away from the person next to me. I am not a claustrophobic person by any means, but was most definitely feeling so on the CR2.
FlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 6267 times:
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 7): In all honesty, I still much rather fly on a CRJ200 than an ERJ135/145. Those things are too small for me. And the argument about the one seat on the left doesn't cut it for me.
Hehe. I'm the exact opposite. But to each their own I guess. I'm 6'4 but love the window seat. So on every jet EXCEPT the ERJ, it means I have to cram myself in so I can enjoy the view (or get the exit row, which on the CRJ, isn't even worth it). On the ERJ, I can have and enjoy both at the same time. Walking down the aisle to my seat is a bit of a pain, but at my height, I have to duck whether its a CRJ or an ERJ. Heck, I'll even choose an ERJ over some mainline jets if that options available.
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5546 posts, RR: 34 Reply 13, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 6197 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 4): In a comparison of these two pictures, you can also see that although the curve of the fuselage still intrudes into the cabin for the window-seat passengers, it is less extreme in the case of the -700 and -900.
But the on the other hand the "curve still intrudes" in an even more case at floor level on the -700 and -900 vs the -200.
Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 9): The CR9 NG has pretty big windows, I flew the CR9NG on the first day ever for revenue flights on the NG
Sorry but you are mistaken. The first XJ CR9s do not have the larger windows since BBD had not switched over fuselage production yet when the built the XJ CR9s . And, BTW, the NG windows are not in fact "pretty big windows"... they are only 2" taller than the "old" -900 windows (which were already small) and they are not any wider.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
SeaBosDca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4290 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 6119 times:
Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 12): Heck, I'll even choose an ERJ over some mainline jets if that options available.
I feel cramped standing up in an ERJ, but how often are you standing up? And seated, it's great. A seat to myself, huge windows (aligned with the seats), and a feeling that you're actually flying, not in a moving barn.
I fly BOS <-> DCA quite regularly and choose MQ rather than US when the fares are remotely close because I prefer the ERJ to the A319.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
AirTranTUS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 6054 times:
Quoting Planemaker (Reply 13): But the on the other hand the "curve still intrudes" in an even more case at floor level on the -700 and -900 vs the -200.
Would the intrusion be comparable to the intrusion on the small ERJ's then?
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5546 posts, RR: 34 Reply 16, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 6000 times:
Quoting AirTranTUS (Reply 15): Would the intrusion be comparable to the intrusion on the small ERJ's then?
Yes, the intrusion is comparable because the ERJ partially resolves the smaller diameter fuse by the tunnel aisle. The CRJ-200 and the -700 & -900 have the same diameter fuse but the -700 & -900 floor width is narrower because BBD lowered the floor on the -700 & -900 to gain marginal aisle height that benifit fewer pax than the lost floor space for window pax.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
SeaBosDca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4290 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 5955 times:
Quoting Planemaker (Reply 16): BBD lowered the floor on the -700 & -900 to gain marginal aisle height that benifit fewer pax than the lost floor space for window pax.
I've flown in window seats on numerous CRJ-200s and CRJ-700s. I'd much rather have the window at a useful height, and usable overhead bins, than an inch or two of extra width for my left foot.
The CRJ-700/900 is vastly superior to the CRJ-200 from a passenger perspective.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7421 posts, RR: 9 Reply 19, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 5687 times:
Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 10): I still need to do my CR9 and E75 trip to try them out. Fly the CR9 one way and E75 the other.
Make sure you do the CR9 first, I did the 175 first then the CR9 back and it was like going from a A320 to a CR2.
Quoting Planemaker (Reply 18): How exactly is the -700/900 "vastly superior" to the -200 and not just an improvement?
Well, bigger cabin, bigger windows, more fuel efficient, a lot of them also have a First Class section, wider seats, bigger overhead bins etc.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
BR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 5663 times:
I prefer the ERJ-135/145 over the CRJ-100/200
I prefer the CRJ-700/900 over the ERJ-135/145 or CRJ-100/200
Believe it or not, I hate the CRJ-100/200 series airplanes because of the fact of the window problem.
I mean, seriously, look at this picture... I'm NOT a Giraffe, and it seems Bombardier designed it so a Giraffe would be comfortable..
However, anytime I fly on the CRJ-700 series, I don't have any problems, and I think the way DL puts their seats has to do with the blank wall/half window deal. I'd have to try it for myself to see.
NwAflyer07 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 5642 times:
I flew on both the CR2 and the CR9 for Mesaba, and i definitely agree that the CR9's are way more comfortable. I probably will do my best to avoid flying on the CR2 unless i absolutly have to. It's just uncomfortable.
KaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12043 posts, RR: 42 Reply 22, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 5630 times:
Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 19): Make sure you do the CR9 first, I did the 175 first then the CR9 back and it was like going from a A320 to a CR2.
Ok, I'll try to do that. I also need to fly the Saab
Quoting NwAflyer07 (Reply 21): I probably will do my best to avoid flying on the CR2 unless i absolutly have to. It's just uncomfortable.
I flew MSP-PIT-MEM-MSP one day, all on the CR2. Man I was glad to land in MSP. I don't mind the CRJ, but three flights of over two hours each in one day was pushing it.
BR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 5517 times:
Does anybody even order the CR2 anymore? With the advent of the CR7 and CR9, not to mention the CRX, you'd think there wouldn't be anymore CR2s anymore... However, on my first CR2 flight this past thurs, N8928A, I noticed that it had the NEW PSU units Which indicated that it was relatively new (delivered in 04) as opposed to the older style PSU Units which this one was delivered in 2000 or 2001... N8432A
[Edited 2008-01-15 12:35:08]
25 Bond007: Oh, tell me about those CRJ200s! I fly 'em every week between DCA/PHL and BTV. Can't seem to get my schedules to match the E170 flights I'm only 5'10"
26 KaiGywer: Oh yes.... A lot of the newer ones have those now. Some also have the electronic safety demo and predeparture speech.
27 Burnsie28: Since its not being made anymore...no it was discontinued about a year ago now by bombardier All of NW's CR2's have those.
28 KaiGywer: Nope, on my three CRJ day, two had the old style, one had the new style.
29 Planemaker: Uh? The seats are not wider! And just how exactly are the windows and overhead bins VASTLY SUPERIOR??? Those are marginal increases... (and they are
30 2H4: Regarding windows, well, it seems pretty obvious to me: - If looking out the window requires you to do nothing more than comfortably rotate your head
31 Planemaker: But it does not make the CRJ700/900 "vastly superior" as is claimed.
32 2H4: I disagree. Provided there's a window positioned immediately adjacent to the seat, I do indeed consider the -700 and -900 to be "vastly superior" in
33 Planemaker: The "measurable data", which has been presented in this thread, shows that the -700/900 are not "vastly superior." Wow, a window raised 4.8" makes a
34 Seabosdca: That, combined with an overhead bin my backpack fits into (so that I don't have to jam it under my seat and lose any room for my feet), does indeed r
35 Planemaker: What's more... the -200 is actually quieter than the -700 by a few dB! I am not, and have not, disputed that the CRJ-700/900 is better than the -200!
36 BR715-A1-30: Um, please note the second picture of the PSU units... The second picture with the old style comes from N8432A. The first picture with the NEW "Bug E
37 2H4: Yes, very good! Comfort! That was my point all along, in case you missed it. Why are you getting your feathers so ruffled over this? When I'm seated
38 Planemaker: Oh, where are my feathers ruffled... it is always interesting to see people get personal when they can't rationalize a statement. I am 6' 1" and *gas
39 BR715-A1-30: I don't know how you do it Planemaker, but I am 5' 8" and I hurt my neck everytime. Even the past CRJ-200 flights, I got an aisle seat because I knew
40 Planemaker: I guess I have good neck muscles. It really isn't a problem... for me. Of course I don't keep my eyes glued on the horizon... but I have no real issu
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 292 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Jan 2008, 226 posts, 
From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5546 posts, 
Assuming you mean the CRJ-200
Which indicated that it was relatively new (delivered in 04) as opposed to the older style PSU Units 
which this one was delivered in 2000 or 2001... N8432A
Printer friendly format 
