Embraer RJs
Oct 27, 1999, 7:36 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 1,439
Embraer RJs
I need to go home (NYC to CAE) in December and I was just checking flights. I just checked flights/fares and noticed that none of my preferred carriers has a decent fare for the trip. US Airways , on the other hand, has a direct flight LGA-CAE on an Embraer 145 jet.
The question: Have any of you ever flown over two hours on one of these pups? Is it miserably small/uncomfortable, or o.k. for a trip that length. If I'd be better off connecting in CLT, then I'll gladly do it, but I seek advice.
(I am a total brasilophile, and I've been dying to ride one of these...I just hoped my first trip would be 60-90 minutes!)
The question: Have any of you ever flown over two hours on one of these pups? Is it miserably small/uncomfortable, or o.k. for a trip that length. If I'd be better off connecting in CLT, then I'll gladly do it, but I seek advice.
(I am a total brasilophile, and I've been dying to ride one of these...I just hoped my first trip would be 60-90 minutes!)
Oct 27, 1999, 10:23 am
#3
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: New York, NY, AA 4MM PLT, BA Gold, VS Gold, Hilton Gold, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold, Hyatt Platinum, IHG Platinum, CC Gold
Posts: 1,098
I've done the ERJ (on AA) from ORD to both MGM (route now discontinued) and MEM. They were fine, normal coach class legroom and, luckily, not heavily booked so I was able to take 2 seats. They're configured (1 - 2).
Take off is the best - super quiet and up like a rocket.
I'll take one of these any day offer a prop-job.
Take off is the best - super quiet and up like a rocket.
I'll take one of these any day offer a prop-job.
Oct 27, 1999, 5:39 pm
#4
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold, ex-BD Gold, SPG Gold, HH Gold
Posts: 2,040
I've flown the EMB-145 several times EWR-PIT on CO. They're far mroen comfortable than a prop, though not spacious. Insufficient carry-on luggage space (necessitating gate-check for anything even medium-sized) is my major complaint. A major plus is that 2/3 of seats are aisle, AND 2/3 window (3 across)--get the single and you get the best of both worlds. Legroom is average.
Oct 27, 1999, 6:06 pm
#5
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 301
The interior of the EMB-145 jet is about the same as a EMB-120 prop--I think they may be the same. In fact, at first, the Brazilians were just going to take off the props and put a jet engine but found the aerodynamics off. Eventually, on the 3rd try, they put the engines on back and redisgned the wing. By that time, the CRJ had a 2 (?) year head start in bring their plane to airline service. That lady former inspector general (Schiovo?) cites safety reasons for not wanting to fly the EMB-120's and ATR 42's. (I think she's the one, don't sue me if it was some other bigwig). I wonder what she has to say about the EMB-120 with jet engines. They're not my favorite, Gordon Bethune or Don Carty!
Oct 28, 1999, 8:17 am
#6
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 300
The only difference in the cabin width and height between the EMB-120 prop and the RJs is the cabin height on the RJ is 6'0" (1.82 M) against the 5'9" (1.76 M) on the 120. The widths are the same on both aircraft 6'11" (2.10 M). One factor, other than the speed, that leads to a more comfortable flight on the RJ is the lack of the turboprop engine vibration noticed when sitting near the wings on the 120.