Anyone Hate the E-Jets?
Dec 11, 2009 | 11:41 am
#16
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Programs: UA Premier 1K: PlAAtinum; DL SM, MM; Marriott Gold; CO Plat Emeritus; NW Plat Emeritus
Posts: 4,777
Dec 11, 2009 | 2:42 pm
#17
Join Date: May 2004
Programs: co, aa, ua, hilton, hyatt
Posts: 37
Dec 11, 2009 | 4:51 pm
#18
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Programs: Airline Free Agent, Bonvoy Platinum, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 3,862
One thing for sure... It's better than the Turboprop.... Worst plane experience ever from PVD to IND when I had to ride it from PVD to LGA. Pretty sure I was going to puke if I was on the plane a bit more since it was shaking like crazy on turbulence.
Dec 11, 2009 | 5:36 pm
#20
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: DL Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,314
The CRJs are another matter entirely.....
Dec 12, 2009 | 2:55 pm
#22
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Programs: FOTSG
Posts: 413
I am a huge fan of the E75s and E90s in ACs fleet. They are great aircraft to fly on, even transcon. If I have a choice between flying on a full A319 or a full E90, I'll take the E90 any time.
Dec 13, 2009 | 12:52 am
#23
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,716
The E-190 is a good little aircraft. I'm not sure what the Canadair is doing in not having a product to compete with it. AC uses these and I found it comfortable on a reasonably long flight.
Dec 13, 2009 | 7:02 am
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,809
I like the E170 / E190 a lot. It's wrong to lump them in with the narrowest, tightest Barbie jets -- the pax experience is entirely different. Can easily do two or three hours in one of those, while a Canadair or EM145 with 2-1 seating, etc. is a trial.
Dec 13, 2009 | 8:54 am
#25
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2
I flew Embraer 175/190s with RJ while I was living in the Middle East. They were configured with business class and economy and I always found the seats to be comfortable and spacious. I'm not sure, but it seems RJ gives more leg room than US carriers.
Dec 13, 2009 | 10:11 am
#26
In memoriam
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: IAD, BOS, PVD
Programs: UA, US, AS, Marriott, Radisson, Hilton
Posts: 7,203
Originally Posted by lizinatizzy
Too bad only you and one other person on this thread seems to agree with YOU. Everyone one hates them or likes them but only in very proscribed circumstances.
of cluelessness. On the other hand, it would seem to me that most of the
posters here agree that the E75 and E90 (this latter being the aircraft
in question) are reasonably nice to ride in. Sorry to feed the troll, but
sometimes cluelessness should be stood up to.
Dec 13, 2009 | 11:59 am
#27
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,452
How does the comfort of CS100 compare against Superjet 100-95?
Dec 13, 2009 | 1:21 pm
#28
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Louisville, KY, US
Programs: QF Plat - OW EMD | DL Gold / Starwood Gold
Posts: 6,106
From the NYT US Shuttle article:
US Airways also plans to switch the planes... to smaller regional jets known as Embraer 190s
“Business travelers hate regional jets,” said Joe Brancatelli, editor of JoeSentMe, a Web site dedicated to air travel. “The more you downsize the equipment, the more people feel it’s not worth it to fly.”
Personally, I prefer E-jet to any other narrowbody. Aaaah, Joe...
US Airways also plans to switch the planes... to smaller regional jets known as Embraer 190s
“Business travelers hate regional jets,” said Joe Brancatelli, editor of JoeSentMe, a Web site dedicated to air travel. “The more you downsize the equipment, the more people feel it’s not worth it to fly.”
Personally, I prefer E-jet to any other narrowbody. Aaaah, Joe...
I have no problems flying in an E-175 for 3 hours, even in coach. FWIW, I had a 4+ hr ride in economy on an E-175 just this year. I was flying JFK to MEM, about a 2 hr flight but we circled for an hour, and then diverted for a gas N' go because of a t-storm cell sitting over MEM. Once we did reach MEM I had been on the plane for just over 4 hours and I found the ride quite comfortable, even with the diversion.
Most of my E-175 flights are about an hour to 90 minutes in length, but I honestly don't mind longer flights on this particular bird. It's no different than a mainline bird in many respects and if I'm not upgraded, the 2x2 seating in economy is quite nice.
Only drawback is overhead space when you have a roll-a-board and are the last passenger to board, but this can be a problem on a mainline jet as well.
As usual, Joe doesn't have a bloody idea what he's talking about.
Last edited by SDF_Traveler; Dec 13, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Dec 13, 2009 | 1:26 pm
#29
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Louisville, KY, US
Programs: QF Plat - OW EMD | DL Gold / Starwood Gold
Posts: 6,106
I don't mind them if they are not put into mid-range routes. I had to fly one not too long ago PHX to IAH.
I tend to encounter more seat poachers on the ERJ's...I always end up with the "single" seat. If I board last, someone from the "doulbe" side is usually in it. Never had someone refuse to move though.
I tend to encounter more seat poachers on the ERJ's...I always end up with the "single" seat. If I board last, someone from the "doulbe" side is usually in it. Never had someone refuse to move though.
When it comes to the ERJ's (E135/E140/E145), which is what I think you're talking about, anything more than an hour is too long!
Last edited by SDF_Traveler; Dec 13, 2009 at 1:32 pm