I'm sure there are lots of people here that can identify what carrier and configuration this is
Looks like a widebody to me, but I've never seen a 1-x-x configuration on any of the widebodies I've ever flown with (330, 767, DC-10, MD-11, L-1011).
Anyone familiar with this?
We have clearance, Clarence. Roger, Roger. What's our vector, Victor?
Baw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7187 times:
This photo looks like the interior of an EMB145...and the configuration is 1-2. The key is the overhead bin...there is none on the left side and one that reaches nearly the top of the ceiling in the middle of the cabin.
Additionally, the windows look quite large, which is also one of the key features of the EMB145.
Hope this help you.
David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
Skyone From Mexico, joined Feb 2001, 438 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7166 times:
it definitely looks like the interior of an EMB-35, 40 or 45. Been up on Continental Express and AEagle EMBs and I am positive it is one of those airplanes. If they use it for a widebody article, they really do not know the difference. Only wide body with 1-X-X that I have been on is AM 767 in J. 1-2-2. CO J class is 2-1-2, so the 1 seat doesnt have a window.
Pnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2313 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 6896 times:
The key is the lack of overhead on the left side. A wide body has room for an overhead over the left row of seats due to the curvature of the aircraft. The EMB family has such a narrow diameter there isn't enough room for a AC had two configerations prior to the763 being Xm'd with single row of seats being on either the left or right side of the J Class cabin. The difference being whether the aircraft was one of the ones inherited in the takeover of Canadian or the normal config.
Glom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2821 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 6896 times:
My regular bird these days making the LHR-ABZ run. That and the BAe-145 and S-92.
I like it for the config and the quick boarding and deboarding (though it annoys me how we have to wait for oversized hand baggage to be offloaded first before we can get off). But for some reason, I always have a hankering for an A319. Don't know why. Only advantage I can see is that the flight would be shorter, not an insignificant advantage I grant you.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26240 posts, RR: 22
Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6305 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 10): I've flown a QF 767 in Business where the port side was a single seat. Great if you're traveling by yourself.
Canadian Airlines 763s were 1-2-2. After the merger with AC that was the easiest way to tell an ex-CP 763 from an original AC 763 (prior to their recent conversion to flat-bed seats in a 1-1-1 layout). CP's had the single seat on the left side and AC's on the right side. In any case,they were both much more spacious than than 767 operators with 6-abreast business class configurations like DL.
A few other 767 operators with 5-abreast in J class, including CO and AZ, are 2-1-2 with the single seat in the middle..
CastropRauxel From Germany, joined Sep 2008, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6307 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 14): Canadian Airlines 763s were 1-2-2. After the merger with AC that was the easiest way to tell an ex-CP 763 from an original AC 763
Hmmm... interesting. I didn't know that. so I guess the 763 I flew a few years back MUC-YYZ was originally CP? I actually liked those C seats and configuration. and btw, it's much more pleasant to be on the single seat in a 1-2-2 config, rather than in the 2-1-2, which feels like you're on a deserted island