MilesBuzz! - News of the odd, a new contender in longest CRJ route

NW made an announcement today that they will begin 2x daily non-stop service with CRJ's between MSP and JAX. The route is 1175 miles and will take up to 3 & 1/4 hours, making it right up there with PHX-DSM and CVG-NAS as the longest service in a RJ.

Does JAX enjoy non-stop service to BOS? Not anymore.
Does JAX enjoy non-stop service to DEN? No.
Do we have any non-stop serivce west of DFW? No.

But we can fly to MSP twice a day starting in February. Go figure.

My guess is this will last as long as AC's struggling service once a day in a CRJ to Toronto.

But any news of new service is a good thing in my mind.

From the press release:

Northwest Airlines and its Northwest Airlink partner, Express Airlines I, today announced that they will begin offering new nonstop Canadair Regional Jet (CRJ) service between the airline's Minneapolis/St. Paul hub and Jacksonville, Fla. beginning February 13, 2002.

The new route will make service to 37 additional destinations possible with just a single connection at Northwest's convenient Minneapolis/St. Paul hub. Previously, travel to and from Jacksonville to these cities required two connections.

Northwest and Northwest Airlink's new twice daily Minneapolis/St. Paul-Jacksonville service will be operated with the airline's 50-passenger CRJ. The CRJ features a spacious cabin with comfortable two-by-two leather seating and other cabin amenities similar to much larger jets, such as overhead bins, a service galley, lavatory, and an efficient climate control system to ensure passenger comfort. The CRJ has a cruising speed in excess of 500 miles per hour, enabling a smooth and quick journey.

The new flights will increase Northwest's number of daily departures out of Jacksonville from the five it will operate in its January schedule to seven, and the number of nonstop markets it serves out of Jacksonville from two to three. The airline currently offers daily nonstops from Jacksonville to its hubs in Detroit, Mich. and Memphis, Tenn.

Members of Northwest's WorldPerks frequent flier program will receive 1,175 miles each way for flying its new Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota - Jacksonville service.

The flights are currently open for sale through http://www.nwa.com , Northwest Airlines Reservations at 1-800-225-2525 or through travel agencies.

New Minneapolis/St. Paul -Jacksonville Service

Flight number: Departs: Arrives: Aircraft:

NW 5652 1:10 p.m. 5:15 p.m. CRJ

NW 5671 6:50 p.m. 10:55 p.m. CRJ

New Jacksonville-Minneapolis/St. Paul Service

Flight number: Departs: Arrives: Aircraft:

NW 5638 7:50 a.m. 10:05 a.m. CRJ

NW 5657 5:45 p.m. 8:00 p.m. CRJ



[This message has been edited by Jax Tom (edited 11-27-2001).]

The plane may be able to travel the distance but will the passangers enjoy the flight? The CRJ is a great airplane to increase jet service between 2 cities an hour or so away, any flight longer than that is............really cramped!

i made the mistake of flying a comair CRJ from cinci-tucky to orlando ONCE! RJ's in general are very good at what they are designed to do, short hops in comfort.

but anything over 90 minutes, and the airlines oughta be held accountable for cruel and unusual punishment...

------------------
All Hail Mighty Oregon!

GO DUCKS GO!

Strange. I assume MSP-JAX is a bit too far to be served by a DC-9, which is what NW would normally use for this type of service. Hopefully the CRJ is just a test until some more A319's arrive?

I admit that a long flight in a CRJ isn't the most comfortable. The longest I have ever personally flown in one was SLC-DSM (about 950 miles) but I'm not as down on them as y'all seem to be.

Mesa/America West fly PHX-DSM (about 1150 miles each way) and I looked at some random dates and found that a morning flight is on a CRJ and an afternoon flight is on a 733. Would I rather fly on the 733? Of course. Would I rather see both flights serviced by a 733? Of course.

That said, two flights are better than one, and I am willing to sacrifice some comfort for some additional scheduling flexibility.

(Living in ANC I have to fly forever just to get to the lower 48. Maybe that's why I don't think a 90 minute or 2 hour flight is really all that long.) http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by eastwest (edited 11-27-2001).]

For those persons making a choice between a nonstop on the CRJ and a connection on a bigger jet I don't think they will mind. Are the seats smaller? Is there less legroom? I have been on several and haven't noticed there to be much of a difference. The only difference, in fact, that I noticed was that the cabin was smaller. And since I'm not doing laps in the cabin I don't see the problem. It is true that you won't be getting a first class upgrade and to that I don't know what to say. I guess I just don't see the big deal. If you are traveling between, say, Seattle and JAX and have a choice between NW or DL via ATL on a big jet then take DL. For those in small communities in the midwest not served by other airlines this is a nice option if you are going to JAX. Just my take on it.

I was on Comair's CRJ from CVG-CLT. It was an hour flight...the seats were killing me...can't imagine flying 3 and half hours!

One side note...at least these CRJs are much better than the ASA's EMBs!

You think this is bad. AA serves (or at least they did unless it's been discontinued) LGA-XNA on an RJ-135. That's a 37 pax CRJ.

And I thought CVG-PVD was bad http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Sheryl:
You think this is bad. AA serves (or at least they did unless it's been discontinued) LGA-XNA on an RJ-135. That's a 37 pax CRJ.</font>

CRJ = Canadair Regional Jet
ERJ = Embraer Regional Jet

AA's plane is an ERJ.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Just to be perfectly correct.

What is better... an aisle seat in a CRJ or ERJ, or a middle/window coach seat in a 737?
Personally, I think I'd prefer the little jet.

With the ERJ's 1+2 seating, I wouldn't think it would be too bad, if you're by yourself, you can get a single seat, and if you're with someone, you can get two together. Never been on one though, so can't say for sure ...

MSP being the NW hub that it is, I'm surprised that NW can't fill up a larger plane for a destination as populous as JAX.

For me, the heart of the issue is twofold:

"RJ" stands for REGIONAL JET

At what point does one cross the line between regional service and cross country (not Trans-Con) service?

I'd personally say at about 600 miles or 90 minutes, whichever comes first...

AT THE SAME TIME...

There's alot to be said for convenience.

I'm surprised NW doesn't just filter most of its JAX connecting business through MEM. Presently only two DC-9s per day...

Unless you're doing business predominantly in the upper Midwest, why not try AA, DL or US through their hubs?

In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if the JAX pax can connect in MSP to a 757-300 http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif going to HNL. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

[This message has been edited by the-ca-goat (edited 11-28-2001).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Seat 2A:
MSP being the NW hub that it is, I'm surprised that NW can't fill up a larger plane for a destination as populous as JAX.</font>I'm not. JAX is a DL stronghold as are most Fla. cities. I really can't see JAX-MSP as a profitable route, so in order to keep costs down, NW is using the CRJ. Even UA now serves JAX with CRJs.

Earlier discussion on RJ's:

Why are they still flying those EMB turboprops? (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum21/HTML/004110.html)

I read something a while back that mentioned one of the routes AA will use its new CRJ-700's on is XNA-LAX, aka the Wal-Mart express, 1371 miles! No thank you.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by JJeffrey:
I read something a while back that mentioned one of the routes AA will use its new CRJ-700's on is XNA-LAX, aka the Wal-Mart express, 1371 miles! No thank you. </font>


Easy to say but if you happened to be traveling to XNA from LAX you most likely would take these flights out of convenience. It beats a connection that would take almost 2 hours longer not to mention saving the headaches. You won't find any large jets serving XNA anytime soon. AA had one flight a day on their F100 but I think that's gone now. People complain about those RJ's alot but they are making travel more convenient and comfortable for alot more people than not. The days of flying 1/2 full DC-10's on a route just for passenger comfort are long, long gone. But then again, so are the days of outrageous fares for the leisure traveler.


[This message has been edited by AS Flyer (edited 11-28-2001).]

AA flies two F100 on ORD-XNA. Personally, I would be happy to fly LAX-ORD-XNA. I hate RJ's.

I'm just curious....

What is it that people hate about the RJ's? Other than the fact that they can't upgrade?

Most airlines RJ seats are 17.5" - 18.5" wide.
Most airlines mainline seats are 17" wide.

Seat pitch on most RJ's is 31"
Seat pitch on most mainline jets is 32"

The pitch is not that noticeably different between the two planes - the seats are just a little, albeit not noticeably, wider on the RJ's. The only real difference is that the cabin is smaller. Inflight amenities are fewer on the RJ's but inflight amenities on most mainline jets has been pared down to next to nothing anyway. The washroom situation is definetely different but the ERJ's have a larger washroom than most mainline jets. So, I don't get it. It seems like purely a psychological thing to me. Is that the case?

Living in MKE, I get the "pleasure" of flying on ERJ's a lot....145's and 135's. Although far from spacious. the 1-2 seating does help. I always sit on the one side, and it is not too terrible. The seat padding is a little light, however, and there is obviously no inflight entertainment. It does get a little tight on the 2:34 MKE-IAH run, I have to admit!

------------------
Hell hath no fury like that of an elite frequent flyer in coach.

Stupid People Shouldn't Breed

ASflyer -

It's not so much about the seat width or pitch. A coach seat is a coach seat is a coach seat.

It has to do more with the lack of features. Most of the airline world cannot grasp the concept of Horizon's "Ala Carte". And east coast commuter pax are not as savvy as northwesterners (puffs chest out).

The cabin is claustrophobic to me for a long haul flight. There. I've said it. My name is Duxfan, and I hate small airplanes. 737, fine. A320, better. Commuter, fine if they are flying what the plane was designed for. Short hops. Heck I'm from the northwest, props don't faze me. But as soon as AS decide to convert a couple of those marginal ANC-SEA flight to RJ's, trust me you'll know what I mean.

There are a few things in life that I just prefer.

1. Hondas over anything, even lawnmowers

2. Henry's over Rainier

3. Libertarians over Republicans

4. Connections over long haul RJ's

------------------
All Hail Mighty Oregon!

GO DUCKS GO!

[This message has been edited by duxfan (edited 11-28-2001).]

Duxfan -

Thanks for your reply. I can see that on a long flight one might start to feel a little claustrophobic in a small cabin. There certainly isn't much to look at on a big plane and even less on a RJ. Wbile I get your point, the SEA-ANC flight is a 3 hour flight on a good day in a bigger, faster jet. An RJ would never make it, so fortunately for me I don't think I'll ever have that worry about.

I guess I do take for granted Horizons Ala Carte service. I didn't realize that other carriers didn't offer the same thing. It's a pretty nice bonus and prior to 9/11 you could drag everything AND the kitchen sink with you and not have to check anything in. Anyway - thanks for the perspective.

AS Flyer-

As a counterpoint, I used to fly DEN to JAN on a UA CRJ (966 miles over 2-1/4 hours), but since that service has been discontinued I have to change planes in DFW, IAH, STL, of MEM. I MUCH, MUCH prefer the nonstop CRJ to any of the other metal when considering the hassles of connecting.

Not only is the check-in more convenient, someone takes my carryon when I board and gives it back when I get off. And, no, I never felt closed in or pressed for space in the cabin.

I have flown several CRJ's on DL as well and was very pleased, although these flights were not as long. Bottom line for me, I will choose a CRJ over most 737's any time, and especially if I have to connect.

Actually, it's just the TIME that ticks me off about RJs. My perception is they're slower than 737, F100, MD80 and when you get to the type of length MSP-JAX, well, that's just too far. 3 1/2 hrs flying time, instead of maybe 2 1/2, is significant. It's just too slow.

I don't mind them on 1 hour flights, at all.

After years of flying mainline US 757, 737, MD-80 (and occasional F100), I flew an AA ERJ-135 BOS-PIT over the Thanksgiving holiday. For the 496 mile flight, I found the ERJ to be _more_ comfortable than almost everything I have flown previously on the route except the 757. I appreciated the valet carry-on service, and boarding/disembarking was far more relaxed than the usual crush on US. I actually found the service quality to be superior, as the one FA actually monitored and attended to the passengers, instead of serving beverages and being able to disappear into a spacious galley (admittedly, this could be correlated with AA vs US). The single seat was sufficiently comfortable for the length. Sure, I would prefer a half-empty mainline jet (even an F100), but for a full flight of this distance I'll gladly take the regional--and at least in the northeast, any non-stop is far preferable to a connection.

Thanks for all the replies.

My experiences with the CRJ have all been on Comair and ASA. Generally I've enjoyed the flights (yes, even the ASA ones, even though others here have had much worse times with them). Fairly often I've been on the ASA route between OMA and ATL which clocks in at a bit over 2 hours and it didn't seem bad to me.

What I like about the CRJ:
More non-stop options
Keeping your bag with you (planeside bag check)
When the flight is less crowded, its like being on a biz jet (which the CRJ is derived from)

What I don't like as well about the CRJ:
Window placement has to be further down the side fuselage
When the plane is packed it seems worse than in a bigger jetliner
No first class option
No entertainment system

And these are a toss up for me:
On board service, as has been said above, its all about the same now in coach, RJ or not
Many airports still not equipped with connectors to the jetways--reminds me of the old days in good weather, nice to see the plane up close; not fun in rainy, snowy weather.

3 & 1/4 hours seems to be stretching the limits of comfort though on a RJ in my mind, especially if its full.

I'm still surprised at the 2x daily service to MSP, there are larger markets from JAX that have no non-stop service.

Thanks again to all who replied.

------------------
Tom

[This message has been edited by Jax Tom (edited 11-29-2001).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by AS Flyer:
For those persons making a choice between a nonstop on the CRJ and a connection on a bigger jet I don't think they will mind. Are the seats smaller? Is there less legroom? I have been on several and haven't noticed there to be much of a difference. The only difference, in fact, that I noticed was that the cabin was smaller. And since I'm not doing laps in the cabin I don't see the problem. It is true that you won't be getting a first class upgrade and to that I don't know what to say. I guess I just don't see the big deal. If you are traveling between, say, Seattle and JAX and have a choice between NW or DL via ATL on a big jet then take DL. For those in small communities in the midwest not served by other airlines this is a nice option if you are going to JAX. Just my take on it.</font>

Also realize that for those pax travelling on UA and AA, both have some sort of extra legroom product that is not available in any of the RJ's. Yes, that means when I fly a 737, I can ride UA's Economy Plus, yet if I have to ride the BAE 146 or CRJ there is no additional legroom.

While DHAST is right about the Am. Eagle ERJs not being configured as MRTC, the single seat still feels (to me) more spacious than any single seat in an ordinary (non-MRTC/Econ Plus) narrow-body in which the entire row is occupied. All else being equal I'd rather have MRTC, but I'll take a even a cramped non-stop over a connection on any reasonably short route (2 hours or less?). Over course, different body-types and physiques miught lead to differing opinions on this....

Having flown Continental's version of this plane a number of times last year between CLT and Cincinnati, I can tell you that the ONLY advantage I see is - wait, I'm thinking.

OK - if you're trying to avoid any stops and you can get there non-stop on a regional jet.. maybe.

Top 5 Disadvantages:

Forget the window seat - the side of the plane curves in and there's no comfortable place for your wall-side foot.

The padding resembles nothing so much as a wooden church pew. I was literally numb when I arrived.

There are no upgrades

There are no upgrades

There are no upgrades

[This message has been edited by svpii (edited 11-30-2001).]

I booked a flight CLE-DFW-CLE which were both on 737's originally (booked in late Sept for early Nov flights) and about a week prior to the flight I called to check on status and found out they switched me to RJ's

Yikes 1021 miles on an RJ each way. Funny thing was I took 735's BWI-CLE-BWI for all of 200 plus miles

If you want to go mainline via IAH, call CO and see if they'll switch you.

I flew on CO-EX IAH-GSO on an ERJ a few months ago. the legroom was fine in the exit row and I had the 2-seat side to myself, so it wasn't the lack of room that made me insane by the time the anorexic little jet landed, nor the skinny cabin, nor the pleasant and cute FA, but the fact that the seats are leatherette-covered granite.

at least that's what they felt like. my back and butt were practically numb by the time we got off.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Jax Tom:
What I don't like as well about the CRJ:
Window placement has to be further down the side fuselage</font>

Canadair is apparently fixing this short coming on its newer CRJ variants ... not sure what caused it in the first place (are Candians short or something http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif ).

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Beckles:
Canadair is apparently fixing this short coming on its newer CRJ variants ... not sure what caused it in the first place (are Candians short or something http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif ).</font>


I have heard somewhere that this has more to do with the smaller circumference of the CRJ and the lower window placement allows for greater structural strength of the fuselage somehow. I've never flown the ERJ, so I don't know what the window placement is like on that jet.


------------------
Tom

This is an easy question. I have 50+ ERJ (CO and AA fly it, its the brazilian one) flights this year. ITS THE SEAT AND LACK OF PADDING. Legroom and width are great. But the numb butt thing is unreal.

I haven't flown a CRJ, but I've flown a couple of ERJs on AA out of Chicago (to PIT and to MKE a couple of times if my memory serves)

On my own on the single side, they're at least as comfortable as most coach seat, and there's nobody crammed next to me. Travelling with the wife on the 2x side gets a little tight, although for the short hops I've flown it's fine.

I just wish AA would replace some more of their S340s with RJs -- especially for LAX-SBA (my wife wishes they'd just get a direct SFO-SBA or SJC-SBA flight. Personally, for the same $ I'll give up the extra 2 hours and take the extra miles)