Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:29 am

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?"
 
COERJ145
Posts: 1140
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:22 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:34 am

The E190 would fit the bill.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:39 am

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.
 
airportplan
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 12:36 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:46 am

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.
 
FL370
Posts: 239
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 2:25 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:53 am

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
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:54 am

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 avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:56 am

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.
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:56 am

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.
 
EasternSon
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 10:07 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:16 am

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
 
coerj
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:49 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:23 am

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.
 
PavlovsDog
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 3:28 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:24 am

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.
 
AirTranTUS
Posts: 3313
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:12 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:24 am

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

I love ASO!
 
emiratesa345
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 10:11 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:28 am

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!
 
FL370
Posts: 239
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 2:25 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:21 am

""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
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:28 am

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?"
 
flyabunch
Posts: 443
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 1:42 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:47 am

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
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:49 am

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?"
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:49 am

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.
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:53 am

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?"
 
kanebear
Posts: 852
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 12:06 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:09 pm

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.
 
flyf15
Posts: 6633
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:10 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:12 pm

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.
 
corey07850
Posts: 2335
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:21 pm

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
 
emiratesa345
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 10:11 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:23 pm

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!
 
AirWillie6475
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:44 pm

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]
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:53 pm

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.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3218
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:43 pm

Quoting FL370 (Reply 4):
737 over the A320. more comfy!!

What airlines are you talking about? From my experience, somewhat limited of the Airbus, but extensive of the Boeing, the A320 is far more comfortable.

Regards
MH
come visit the south pacific
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1936
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:53 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
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.

The windows are actually placed slightly HIGHER UP on the CRJ700/705/900 than on the B737NG...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eric Fortin - AirImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dario Crusafon - Iberian Spotters




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eric Fortin - AirImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter Unmuth-VAP



...yet nobody complains about craning their necks on a 737.  Wink
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:02 am

Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 20):
Range, capablility and comfort of a 737. Isn't that what you described... actually... a 737

Yeah, but the 737 doesn not fly to smaller airports that the RJ are capable of.
"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:03 am

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 25):
the A320 is far more comfortable

 checkmark 
"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:00 am

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 25):
...the A320 is far more comfortable.

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 comfortable then those found on the 737Classic, which helps narrow the gap.

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 26):
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 737.

Perhaps the 737's spacing is better, for I do indeed need to crane my neck on her (and the A320, for that matter), but it doesn't seem to be as much as on the CRJs...
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:11 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 26):
...yet nobody complains about craning their necks on a 737.

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, and when she asked if that was okay on both legs, I said sure, and it's easier for me to look out from the middle seat anyway. So in that case, it worked out...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:15 am

Quoting EmiratesA345 (Reply 22):
Nope. I don't believe I did. It quite clearly says that for mainline he prefers the 737 over the A320.

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 says mainline. Quite clear if you read it correctly.
"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
 
1011
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2001 11:30 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:25 am

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 23):
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.

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 trying to look out. I am 6ft2. The worse part for me is, for all you UA fans, the RJs have no Channel 9.

If I had fly on a commuter I'd rather fly a prop for flights under 400nm. At least they've got nice big windows. Well, the EMB120 does. WIth a bit more vibration though. Well, that is how flying should be.
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:26 am

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 6'1 around 195lbs but the flight was great, ofcourse I was on the single seat row which is great. I much rather fly an ERJ from MIA-IAD than a 757,737,A300 as long as I am on the row with only one seat, plenty of room. Now I cant say the same for Eagles ATR-72s I hate flying them even on MIA-NAS.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:32 am

Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 33):
as I am on the row with only one seat

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 part). Sucks, I live in the west.
"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:38 am

Quoting Boston92 (Reply 34):
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 part). Sucks, I live in the west.

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 CRJ's on the east coast. The East Coast just has alot more RJ's overall.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:49 am

Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 35):
note to self dont fly CRJ on long routes

American Eagle has a 1500 mile DFW-SBA flight aboard the CR7. I take that about 2 times every three months.
"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
 
FutureFO
Posts: 2811
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2001 10:58 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:36 am

Still prefer the EMB fmaily of products over the Bombardier family anyday, anytime.



Sean
I Don't know where I am anymore
 
ChinaClipper40
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:23 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:46 am

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 is operated by mainline crews, one may get a different subset of passenger jetliners meeting the definition of "RJ" than if the definition is based upon the intent of the manufacturer when designing and building the aircraft. After all, the Boeing 717 is described right here on A-net (Aircraft Data & History section) as "...designed for high cycle, short range regional airline operations." Well, for my money, the 717 (as configured by most operators) is at least as comfortable (and arguably more comfortable) than the 737 (as configured by most operators). Of course, the 717 doesn't have the range of the 737, but it certainly is a roomy and comfortable passenger airliner. And what about the Avro RJ-70, RJ-85, RJ-100 family (and the predecessor airliner from which they derive, the BAE-146)? I've had hundreds of flights in those aircraft, and have always found them delightfully roomy and comfortable with 18" wide seats, 33-34 pitch, and 2x3 seating (as configured by the airlines that I have flown most often). Again, they lack the range of a 737, but their range of 1100-1400 nm with max load is not shabby. One can fly 2 or 3 hour segments in them with excellent comfort. And how about the Fokker F-70 and F-100? NICE comfortable aircraft. 17.3" seat width, 33 pitch, and 2x3 seating (as configured by the airlines that I have flown most often). And with ranges running from 1000 to 1800 nm, one can fly 2-3 hour segments in real comfort. I spent a lot of years flying AA F-100s from HPN to ORD and back. Often with onward connections out of ORD on F-100s as well. Those were truly comfortable flights. Of today's RJs, my money - comfort wise - is with the EMB-170 and EMB-190. NICE comfortable passenger aircraft. And with standard ranges with max passengers at long range cruising speed (A-Net Aircraft Data & History section) of 1800-2000 nm, and with LR ranges in excess of 2000 nm under same operating conditions, I submit that one is getting well into the range over which most 737 segments are flown. Personally, I dislike the CRJs intensely. I fly them a lot, because they're used a lot. But I sure don't like them.

ChinaClipper40
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:52 am

Quoting Boston92 (Reply 36):
American Eagle has a 1500 mile DFW-SBA flight aboard the CR7. I take that about 2 times every three months.

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 flight for a time, too, IIRC.

I've always thought CO should look into an IAH-SBA flight on the ERJXR, but now losing so many from the fleet, I would assume this is a non-starter.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:13 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
The E-jets don't have the range of the 737NG or 320, and need longer runways than the true RJs, correct?

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

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.

Actually, it is the other way around. The CRJ was developed from the Challenger CL-600

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 25):
Quoting FL370 (Reply 4):
737 over the A320. more comfy!!

What airlines are you talking about? From my experience, somewhat limited of the Airbus, but extensive of the Boeing, the A320 is far more comfortable.

There is no statistically significant difference

Quoting Boston92 (Reply 27):
Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 20):
Range, capablility and comfort of a 737. Isn't that what you described... actually... a 737

Yeah, but the 737 doesn not fly to smaller airports that the RJ are capable of.

737s can fly into and out of pretty much any airport that an RJ can.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:17 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 40):
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

Again, correcting me for no reason.  Wink The question posed was about RJs running transcons or other routes that they can't actually do. And I pointed out, CORRECTLY, that the e-jets don't have the range to do what the poster was asking, and they also might need more runway than the small airports can offer them.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
FutureFO
Posts: 2811
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2001 10:58 pm

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:28 am

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 mins. But actually longer than that.


Sean
I Don't know where I am anymore
 
Boston92
Topic Author
Posts: 2553
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:37 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 40):
737s can fly into and out of pretty much any airport that an RJ can

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.
"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
 
WJA73G
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:03 am

RE: Long Range, Comfortable RJ

Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:52 am

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 well as the A320. Both are very similar.

I have flown A320s and I do find that the extra width is more comfortable, But- It is not necessary on short-hops which the 737s are famous for and most commonly utilized on-especially when speaking of "Regional Jets".

WJA73G

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, Aesma, AirlineCritic, aljrooney, BlueF9A320, DOHspotter, FrenchieDC, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], keesje, Miami, pasu129, qfatwa, Someone83, TWA772LR, VirginFlyer, wedgetail737 and 358 guests