Originally Posted by
minnyfly
They're still needed in some areas of the network. Without them smaller cities lack viable service. It becomes painfully obvious when you don't live in or near a large city. I for one am glad to see some 50-seaters remain
Undoubtedly. But this...
Originally Posted by
lincolnjkc
I actually rather like the 145 -- I'll always go for a 2-cabin option (mainline, E175, or CR7/E170 in that order) if its viable, but the 145 is comfortable enough especially in 18 or the A-side seats; I haven't found a seat I don't hate on the CR2 -- the exit rows are awful, the bulkhead is habitable but not comfortable, and the windows are oddly placed and too small.
My gripe, whatever the reason, is that they're retiring the wrong 50-seater. Lincoln is right, there is no good seat on the CRJ...Bulkhead, exitrow or otherwise, even on a less-than-full flight when one can have an empty seat next to them, the seat construction, the width, the window positioning, the arm rest--are all horrible. Not only is the 1+2 arrangement far superior on the 145, the windows are better placed, the seats themselves are much more comfortable.