New quest... [To avoid RJ segments]
 

..to minimize RJ segs for upcoming travel. I would like to fly fewer than 5 during the forthcoming qualifying year.

I can't believe that some of you are tough enough to qualify for GE or even PE through mainly - or solely - RJ flying...aaargh! So, do tell... tube warriors, how many RJ segs have you flown this year? I've managed to keep it to seven but it seems like more.

And COInsider, you guys should award the winner a prize...how about free systemwide redemption for 2......on COEX only :rolleyes:

RTS

LOL :)

Funny thing, to me, as bad as the RJ's are, I think CO's 737's in coach on a transcon are worse.

Think about:

On an ERJ you have 31" seat pitch, no middle seats, much more comfortable leather seats and 1 lavatory for 50 pax.

On the CO 737-800's (mainly what is flown transcon out of EWR on CO) you have the same brutal 31" seat pitch, one third of the seats are middle seats, and there are only two lavatories for 141 pax.

That is my dfefinition of dreadful...

At leasst the ERJ's aren't capable of flying 6 and a half hours they way the 738's do.

You sparked my curiosity about what exactly I've flown on CO Domestically this year...so far according to One Pass Stmnts...


CO RJ's=39
CO 737=50

It sure felt like more RJs than that though..;)

I think I've only ever flown two segements on CO RJs (EWR-MHT and CLE-PHL). I didn't find them to be cramped or uncomfortable.


[mod hat on]
I've edited the title of this thread to clarify what the topic at hand is.

Xyzzy
CO forum moderator

The last time I flew a CO RJ was early 2003. In several markets where CO went all-RJ, CO lost my business. If more of us voted with our pocketbooks this way, maybe CO would find other ways to serve lower capacity markets without sacrificing their mainline product in favor of RJs.

Bravo! Keep it up. ^

I've had 32 flights on ERJ's this year. Generally good except for the 3 roller coaster rides. A few weeks ago when I stepped into a 735 I said to myself that it looked so big.

1A and 12A make RJ's tolerable for up to two hours.

It's actually two lavs for 127 passengers - F has its own lav. Thus, only 63.5 passengers must share a lav in Y on the 738.

RJ Warrior
 

91 RJ segments (all but 4 since March 06) RJ Plat!
4 737 segments

And it doesn't get any easier with experience :(

44 CO segments YTD, 11 on RJs (25%).

Fortunately, all but one of those were sub-500 miles. In fact, all but the one were actually under 200 miles, so that's bearable.

A couple years ago, I had longer ones (e.g., IAH-CLT-IAH), but I was not going to do that again!

I looked at my other flying, and noticed that CO is right in the middle in terms of number of RJs:

Flights YTD
AA 4 segments, 0 RJs (0%)
CO 44 segments, 11 RJs (25%)
DL 2 segments, 1 RJ (50%)
NW 19 segments, 4 RJs (79%)
AS 11 segments, 2 RJs (18%) -- and free beer!
UA 14 segments, 2 RJs (14%) and 2 props (14%)

I'm almost exclusivly RJs
 

Covering the NE for my company I am usually only in RJs. IAD, PIT, ROC, BVM, BUF and Portland ME to name a few. Being almost 6 ft tall I'm not crazy about the height of the cabin but I really don't mind the seats. I usually score the A seat for the exit row so I'm fine. I liked the gate check feature, too. Other then that, they are quite noisy IMHO. Ihave only had 6 RTs in them so far but 3 more RTs planned by the end of the year.

CHeers

I agree the height is pain but the seats are fine, particularly if you get 12A or 1A. I am not a huge fan of the RJ's, but I have come to like them.

CO does not fly any 737 configured for 127 passebgers in Y.

Its 737-800 without the midcabin lavatory (the workhorse of transcon out of EWR) is configured for 141 passengers in Y, Thus, this works out to 70.5 passengers per lav, almost 50% more pax per lav than on the ERJ.

The 737-800 without midcabin lav was fine for its original purpose, which was medium-haul routes. But when you have so many people sharing so few lavs for over 6 hours, it gets pretty brutal.

Here are the layouts in coach and the number of lavs for CO's planes:

ERJ 135 -- 37 pax -- 1 lav -- 37 pax/lav
ERJ 145 -- 50 pax -- 1 lav -- 50 pax/lav

737-300 -- 112 coach pax -- 2 coach lavs -- 56 pax/lav
737-500 -- 106 coach pax -- 2 coach lavs -- 53 pax/lav
737-700 -- 112 coach pax -- 2 coach lavs -- 56 pax/lav
737-800 w/out Midcabin lav -- 141 coach pax -- 2 coach lavs -- 70.5 pax/lav
737-800 with Midcabin lav -- 132 coach pax -- 3 coach lavs -- 44 pax/lav
737-900 -- 149 coach pax -- 3 coach lavs -- 49.6 pax/lav

757-200 -- 159 coach pax -- 3 coach lavs -- 53 pax/lav
757-300 -- 192 coach pax -- 4 coach lavs -- 48 pax/lav
767-200 -- 149 coach pax -- 3 coach lavs -- 49.6 pax/lav
767-400 -- 200 coach pax -- 6 coach lavs -- 33.3 pax/lav
777-200 -- 235 coach pax -- 6 coach lavs -- 39.1 pax/lav

If you want to see for yourself, here's the link: http://www.continental.com/web/en-US...t/default.aspx

So what's instructive here is that CO doesn't fly any plane with much more than 50 coach pax per lav, except the 737-800 without midcabin lavatory.

Also, as the distances the plane flies increase, the number of lavs per passenger also increases.

The only--glaring--exception is the 737-800 without midcabin lavatory. Although this ship is the workshorse of CO's transcon out of EWR it has by far and away the highest ratio ofpax to lavs which makes it supremely unsuited for flights of these lengths.

Interestingly, CO operates most of its 737-800 with Midcabin lavatory on shorter flights where there is less demand. And so, because of the greater demand of the EWR transcon routes, they can pack in an extra 9 coach passengers by using the model without the midcabin lav on the transcon routes.

That may be good for CO's revenue stream, but it comes at the expense of passenger comfort and convenience.


Edited for typos

ERJ: 39
Boeing Mainline: 51