halls120

This. I detest the CR2 and avoid it all costs.

Kmxu

In my experience, only seat 1B is bearable on CR2. I have three schedule changes, which will put me on CR2 (from E145) in January and April 2018. It is still too early to call United to avoid these flights. But the alternative flights create big detour or long stopover at IAD, for example, changing from SFO-ORD-YOW (ORD-YOW on CR2) to SFO-EWR-IAD-YOW or SFO-IAD-YOW. The original booking was SFO-IAD-YOW, but UA cancelled the early morning IAD-YOW flight.

eng3

Same here, I thought they were finally getting rid of the devil's chariot

goodeats21

They backtracked on that with the Air Wisconsin deal.

I have started my own personal book-away. I was looking at a weekend trip for next month, and the only options on United were the craptastic CR2 Torture Tubes.

They aren't getting my money for that garbage.

lincolnjkc

Since I haven't seen any commentary on the ZW frames... I caught a ride on N423AW Tuesday and it was every bit as uncomfortable [and the windows were scratched to the point where they were more translucent than transparent, another CR2 trend I've noticed getting worse] as you've come to hope for from the CR2, but I noticed the bulkhead walls had the "inverted globe-silver wedge"-type design like the MP luggage tags \.

Otherwise, cabin interior and what I could see of the exterior was indistinguishable from the suffering on recent SkyWest-operated CR2 flights.

goodeats21

16 too many.

They are infesting the upcoming schedules and are getting tougher and tougher to avoid.

So much for the strategy of limiting these pieces of excrement.

goodeats21

yes, thank you. Corrected now.

The CR2 is the only RJ that I will not fly. All the others have decent seats to choose if careful, but the CR2 is a plane full of pain.

UAL250

Yep. CR2's are HORRIBLE planes. 18A is actually not too bad a seat at all on the 145. CR7 and E75 both have good seats. CR2? Nothing. At all.

lincolnjkc

Unfortunately for some of the places I wind up going -- especially of late -- it's impossible to avoid those miserable excuses for transportation, but I agree that I will go out of my way to avoid them where there is an out of the way available.

^

Absolutely. For a window-dweller:

E145 -- 18A is a great seat, 18D isn't really any worse except for having someone next to you, 1A is about the same as 18A save for the lack of under-seat space (consolation: you can have some very entertaining conversations with the FA). 3D is also serviceable, but I'd happily take any A seat if those were unavailable.

CR7 - 2A, 2D, 1A, 1D are all comfortable in F, 7A/7D works and OMG the leg room in 18A or D! (Can't say I've ever been in any of the other seats on the CR7)

E170 - Basically ditto the CR7 but strike row 18 from consideration. Other Y seats aren't great but they don't force me to find the nearest chiropractor on landing.

E175 - I don't think I've ever been in Y on the 175 but if F is any indication it may be better than some of the mainline aircraft.

CR2 - Pure torture. If I can get 1A or 1D I'll at least entertain the thought but anything else I'll find another airport and drive if I have to. The exit rows certainly don't have any more leg room -- and quite possibly have less -- than the rest of the cabin.

findark

Yup. Honestly, any A seat forward of the exit row is pretty nice. I'm happier there than any non exit row, non-bulkhead Y seat on a mainline plane.

goodeats21

Well crap. How many more of these torture tubes are they adding to the fleet?

EWR764

goodeats21

Amen. Though the reality is far from their spin.

They have decimated the DAY schedule to both ORD and IAD with these craptastic, vile tubes.
I thought United learned their lesson, but apparently not.

Brilliant to throw CR2s into their All United Express competition with Delta and American main-line operations...

EWR764

Exactly... there aren't enough Springfields, Wilmingtons and Elmiras (or the like) to fill 50 frames of CRJ flying.

minnyfly

I don't want to take this too far off-topic of the fleet status, but they are being used for small-market growth and replacement of E-jets. Quantum leap? I agree it's worse than the 1-side of the E-jets, but it's certainly not a large difference otherwise, and it's certainly better than no service at all. Plus UA has brought on board a good regional partner with access to pilots, leading to more reliable regional operations. It's a good long-term play.

IAD is the second smallest hub to have legacy service from DAY (I'm assuming AA at LGA is still smaller and DL at LGA slightly larger, and IAD is no LGA for O&D). DAY mainline service is predictably limited to ATL and DFW, with currently only 6 combined mainline flights. UA's 5 flights to ORD is the second highest frequency for any carrier to one city out of DAY. DL and AA use CR2s heavily to MSP, DTW, LGA, PHL, and ORD, with some also to CLT and DCA. Their alternatives are mostly large CRJs, which are only marginally better for most passengers.

UA's new CR2s are being used almost exclusively in markets where 50-seat service would be expected and tolerated. Most flights are under an hour, and those that are longer are generally thin markets that won't support large airplanes. I don't like CR2s, but I can't complain with how they're being used. I'm happy to see some increased service.

There's more than enough to cover 50 frames. 50 planes doesn't come close to covering the small-market service UA needs.