*sigh* getting off topic...but I'll address some points here:
Originally Posted by
Zoomie
I don't know what RJ you're flying, maybe the 70 seater or 74 seater, but the RJs that I commute on are weight restricted the VAST majority of the time when I was commuting from RDU-EWR.
50 seaters almost always restricted to 46-48 seats, which is 4-8% of its passengers. This is a daily occurrence year round.
I can believe those numbers on a CRJ-200. Those things are an unqualified piece of junk. There is no better example than the CRJ-100/200 of how your product doesn't need to be good or capable to sell, it just needs to be the first one to the market place. But I fly the E145. That's the Embraer 50-seater. And I have flown that route numerous times at all times of year. Never with a weight restriction. Even when the alternate is BUF or some nonsense. The VAST majority of the time on that route it seems we are taking 50 folks, all their bags, the ones the E170 or the Q400 left behind and two jumpseaters. So hop aboard next time I'm driving.
Now, I don't know old your data is, but the ExpressJet 145 LRs were all weight-modded many years (6 or more?) ago and basically made weight restrictions a very very rare occurrence.
Originally Posted by
Zoomie
As a matter of fact, UAL is flying all RJs from IAH-CLT and this summer, I trying to non-rev my parents and oldest 2 children on 50-seater.
There were 10 seats open, so good to go, right?
Got to 5 mins prior to boarding when I couldn't take it anymore since they were number 2 on the standby list. I ask the agent if there was a problem, and they informed me that the 50 seater was weight restricted to 29 seats out of 50. So that was a loss of 42% of it's seating capacity.
So either you're flying a super RJ or maybe a Q400, or I will call BS on this one.
I'll call BS on this one. That is an insane number. And if it were the norm, we wouldn't be flying that route. Ever. Unless there was some one-off maintenance issue like having to fly at 10,000' with the gear down all the way there, then there is no way I can see any flight being that restricted. So either it's BS and you were misinformed or there were some other extenuating circumstances.
Originally Posted by
Zoomie
I've flown the 737 for seven years now, and I have only flown one route that I've been weight restricted, and that was Guam to Fiji a long ETOPS route, which ended up getting canceled because not enough demand, and probably not the right aircraft for the route.
That route from ORD-DEN, I'm taking a guess, but I would bet that flight might get a weight restriction 1 or 2 days a year.
When I was commuting, those ****ty ass RJs were always weight restricted, almost every day of the year and it drove me crazy.
I know this comment was meant at an attempt at humor, so I apologize if the humor is lost on me.
I'm sure some other commuters will agree.
It was humor. And my apologies if it fell on deaf ears.
Here's the facts guys, especially you commuters: I can't speak for other airlines and other airplanes. But if you come over to an ExpressJet Embraer 145 for a ride, you will find 2 jumpseats (double the number on the 737 btw), almost nary a weight restriction and a crew happy to get you where you want to go, even if that place is work. Period.