|Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 123):|
This makes the E175/190 even more attractive: more range, and more cargo hold, with wider seats, nice seat pitch, and generous overhead bins.
Well, there has to be a big BUT, otherwise Bombardier wouldn´t have been able to sign three customers for the CRJ1000 and several new customers for the CRJ900 in the past 12 months. The Embraer 170 series is (have flown it) an attractive bird, but it is quite heavy from my understanding. Pax comfort is very nice for the passenger, but as an airline you are basicaly only flying a lot of empty air around i.e. you are dragging bigger holes into the air than necessary.
Have in the past two years used the Embraer 170/175 and the CRJs and Embraer ERJ-145 quite a bit in Europe, and cargo & luggage have never been heavily loaded from my observation. The manufacturers might promote the cargo revenue potential, but in many cases you won´t really fly much cargo in Europe but rather have it trucked at a fraction of the airfreight cost. Only few items are in such time-critical demand that you will have them loaded on a CRJ/Embraer - and if this is the case you will manage it somehow into the hold.
Means: if you are just flying pax around on comparably short segments (up to 2-3 hours or so) there is little incentive for the airline(s) to chose the most comfy bird but rather the most economical one. Not nice from a pax perspective, but when you are flying your main criteria is not to feel absolutely comfy over the clouds, but to safely and cheaply travel from point A to point B. And here the CRJ1000 seems to be a viable solution for at least three airlines.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A343/346, A359, A380,AT4,AT7,B712, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9,B742/4,B752/3, B762/763,B772/77W,CR2/7/9/K,ER3/4,E70/75/90/95, F50/70/100,M11,L15,SF3,S20, AR8/1, 142/143,... 330.860 miles and counting.