Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
New Delta Service to Mexico (from LAX) >

New Delta Service to Mexico (from LAX)


Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

New Delta Service to Mexico (from LAX)

Old 11-04-2007 | 06:17 PM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: DHC-6-300 EMB 120 CRJ
Default

Originally Posted by johnso29
Oh, because its so much better than a 50 seater. NEWS FLASH!!! A 700/900 is still an RJ. You can put a bow on a terd, but its still a terd.
As far as PAX go, it is much better.
Reply
Old 11-04-2007 | 06:19 PM
  #32  
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 0
From: A-320
Default

Originally Posted by otter
As far as PAX go, it is much better.
no its not, the seats are so uncomfortable, and the windows are down by their knees
Reply
Old 11-04-2007 | 06:22 PM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: DHC-6-300 EMB 120 CRJ
Default

Originally Posted by freezingflyboy
But pretty darn accurate!

I know you guys are in love with the 700/900s and probably feel like you got a couple brass ones swinging between your legs but that doesn't change the fact that THEY ARE STILL RJS!!!
It has nothing to do "our" love of the 700/900. They just make more sense to fly.
Reply
Old 11-04-2007 | 06:25 PM
  #34  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: DHC-6-300 EMB 120 CRJ
Default

Originally Posted by SAABaroowski
no its not, the seats are so uncomfortable, and the windows are down by their knees
They lowered the floor so it's not as bad. I do agree, on the 50 you have to be adout 8 years old to look out the window. And yes I voted for ALPA
Reply
Old 11-04-2007 | 06:34 PM
  #35  
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 0
From: A-320
Talking

Originally Posted by otter
And yes I voted for ALPA
Good man!!!
Reply
Old 11-05-2007 | 09:54 AM
  #36  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

Originally Posted by otter
It has nothing to do "our" love of the 700/900. They just make more sense to fly.
No, they don't because the loads don't call for it. It makes sense to keep those RJ's on routes that have higher loads. Thats why they don't put the 700/900 on the same routes as the 120. Think about it.
Reply
Old 11-05-2007 | 09:56 AM
  #37  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

Originally Posted by otter
As far as PAX go, it is much better.
And I've ridden on a CRJ900, its no better than a CRJ100 or CRJ200. The seats feel the same, and theres really not any more room.
Reply
Old 11-05-2007 | 10:57 AM
  #38  
JetJock16's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 0
From: SkyWest Capt.
Default

Originally Posted by SAABaroowski
no its not, the seats are so uncomfortable, and the windows are down by their knees
By your comment I can tell you've never been on a CR7 or CR9. The floors been lowered for more head room and better visibility out the windows as well as a dramatic improvement in the A/C systems that provides for a very comfortable environment for the Pax. Add another Lav and the fact they we are ALMOST NEVER WEIGHT RESTRICTED and you have an excellent airplane.
Reply
Old 11-05-2007 | 11:28 AM
  #39  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: DHC-6-300 EMB 120 CRJ
Default

Originally Posted by johnso29
No, they don't because the loads don't call for it. It makes sense to keep those RJ's on routes that have higher loads. Thats why they don't put the 700/900 on the same routes as the 120. Think about it.
I think you've been in FAT city to long. Look at delta net and see where we fly 700/900. Dude, lose the anger towards the RJ. I once flew the 120 and loved it. The RJ is no where nere as fun to fly as the 120, however, 6+ legs a day for the same pay as 2 legs on the jet is what it's all about. Come over to the dark side, I know there's room for you!
Reply
Old 11-05-2007 | 11:37 AM
  #40  
JetJock16's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 0
From: SkyWest Capt.
Default

Originally Posted by johnso29
No, they don't because the loads don't call for it. It makes sense to keep those RJ's on routes that have higher loads. Thats why they don't put the 700/900 on the same routes as the 120. Think about it.
No, we fly them where UAL & DAL want us to fly them. I understand that they do the analysis to determine the demand, but when it's time to change they do what's necessary. An example is the fact that we are parking 18 EMB’s and replacing them with CR7's & 9's; we closed our EMB base in DEN and some of those routes are now covered my RJ's. Don’t forget that a lot of our SoCal/NoCal routes on the EMB are also flown by the RJ. LAX-SBA, LAX-FAT; SFO-FAT, SFO-SBA, SFO-RNO, SFO-MFD. There are more but I just wanted to name a few. BTW I was KFAT EMB based for almost a year. I’m very familiar with the bird and I’ve never had more fun flying than when I was flying the EMB out of PDX.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sir James
Major
1
01-05-2006 07:59 PM
Sir James
Major
0
10-16-2005 09:14 AM
RockBottom
Major
0
09-22-2005 08:09 AM
geshields
Major
2
08-16-2005 03:00 PM
Sir James
Major
0
04-13-2005 10:13 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices