Ugly DAL/ASA rumor

[FL000]

Re: Re: Wiggly-Pig

You know, back when folks would have thought it inappropriate for a big, fat, nasty, trailer trash broad to wear flip-flops, terry cloth short-shorts, and a loose fitting tank top with her saggy mud flaps hanging out the side on to an airplane.

Don't worry Metro...the FAs are supposed to get new uniforms soon.

 

[wms]

The CRJ has a 2-speed mach trim and with the autopilot on and the flaps in motion, the trim moves at fast speed and gives that fast pitch change.

732 any day!

 

[Vortilon]

At least I could wear a normal headset on the MD88 and not go deaf.

Also: CAT III Autoland, Autobrakes, Autothrottles, etc. It might be an older generation airplane, but I'll take it and its performance over an RJ any day. Plus a radar dish thats twice the size of the CRJs is nice to have. Not to mention having a jetway, no weight and balance problems, you don't have to reboot the Mad Dog, you don't have to rebuild the jumpseat, it has a cool door in the floor. All that and you always flying in manual reversion....talk about safe!

Thats the only thing I didn't like about the Embraer 145, when you had a bad radome you were blind out there! Radar really sucked sometimes....wonder if they've improved it.

And lets face it, what type of pilot REALLY wants to fly a smaller airplane? C'mon....we all love the big stuff.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

WMS

That's interesting. If that is the case, it sounds like nothing more than a software glitch. I am surprised that the Canadians haven't come up with a "patch" that dampens the pitch during configuration changes and while on a coupled ILS.

As for the Boeing's rudder -- touche'. I probably wouldn't mention that in the SWA interview though

Personally I'm a Douglas guy. I loved the DC9. Give me a direct cable to the control surfaces (or at least to a servo tab) any day of the week over this hydraulic, aritificial feel, voo-doo, bad-ju ju.

They had to drag me off the Douglas Racer kicking and screaming when I went to Boeing school.

The RJ's a neat little airplane -- no question there, but despite all of the nifty technology it just doesn't fly particularly well in my opinion.

For what it's worth I hear that the 70 seater is an entirely different animal and has much more traditional flying qualities. (I'm guessing that the slats prevent the center of pressure from moving so much during configuration changes but thats just a wag.)

 

[bvt1151]

WMS

For what it's worth I hear that the 70 seater is an entirely different animal and has much more traditional flying qualities. (I'm guessing that the slats prevent the center of pressure from moving so much during configuration changes but thats just a wag.)

This is true. The 70 flies much like the 727 did (or does). Much heavier feel than the 50 and the slats significantly slow down the aircraft during approach, allowing for shorter field ops.

I would like to share with you some numbers I discovered in a recent survey conducted by Boeing. They interviewd both business and Leisure passengers on what was most important to them when choosing an airline. The results:

Business:
Flights under 2 Hrs: Schedule: 42% | Fare: 31% | Airline: 22% | Airplane: 5%
2-5 Hrs: Fare: 36% | Schedule: 35% | Airline: 24% | Airplane: 5%
Over 5 Hr: Schedule: 30% | Fare: 29% | Airline: 27% | Airplane: 14%

Leisure:
Under 2 Hrs: Fare: 63% | Schedule: 19% | Airline: 16% | Airplane: 2%
2-5 Hrs: Fare: 51% | Schedule: 24% | Airline: 17% | Airplane: 8%
Over 5 Hrs: Fare: 52% | Schedule: 19% | Airline: 18% | Airplane: 11%

Notice that in each one of these results, schedule is always higher than airplane. This goes to show that, especially in the high-yield business market, there are significantly more passengers who will prefer the high-frequency RJ over the more roomy, and less often mainline aircraft. They may complain, but when push comes to shove, they prefer the schedule over the aircraft. Of course there will always be that small percentage (5-14%) who will choose their airline based on aircraft, but bare in mind that there are no RJ's that go over 5 hours. In fact, most RJ flights fit into the "Under 2 Hr" category, in which business and leisure pax chose aircraft at only 5 and 2% respectively.

I'm not refuting the fact that some people will pay extra to fly on a larger aircraft. What I am saying is that most passengers would choose an RJ over a mainline aircraft if it meant getting there sooner.

* This survey was conducted to demonstrate the pheasibility of continueing the 717 program and deals specifically with RJ's. "Airplane" is repeatedly referred to as "comfort" within the article.

 

[MetroSheriff]

Re: Re: Re: Wiggly-Pig

Don't worry Metro...the FAs are supposed to get new uniforms soon.

ROFLMAO!!!

 

[General Lee]

BVT1151,

But you left out these numbers about how many businessmen want to fly on RJs for long hours and want to be productive at the same time:

RJs: 0% | mainline aircraft with a first class seat 100%

How about asking businessmen which aircraft they would rather fly on with a severely obese person next to them:

RJs: 0% | Mainline aircraft with a chance of going to first 100%

How about asking businessmen who have bladder problems which aircraft they prefer:

RJs: 0% | Mainline aircraft with 3 or more lavs 100%


But, I do like your effort. And, I think the CRJs are a nice ride and are advanced---but most businessmen DO NOT.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[GogglesPisano]

You guys want to talk about pitch excursions during flap extension, or poor handling (especially in a crosswind landing), don't talk to me until you've flown the DarnNearajet.

It lands like a 172!

 

[bvt1151]

These aren't my numbers, General.
You'll have to argue with the marketing team at Boeing.

The numbers don't lie. There are people who will complain about flying in an RJ, and I think the press has found every one of them. Fact is, the business man will choose to chance it that they'll sit next to a fatty on an RJ and make his meeting on time,than to chance sitting next to a fatty on mainline (with the small chance of upgrading), and either showing up to his meeting late, or having to leave hours earlier.

They may be complaining about the RJ, but they are lining up to fly on it.

Frequencies or comfort? The US Domestic passenger chooses frequencies.

 

[N2264J]

But you left out these numbers about how many businessmen want to fly on RJs for long hours and want to be productive at the same time:

RJs: 0% | mainline aircraft with a first class seat 100%

It seems to me that a business man who can over fly Atlanta or Dallas without having to stop and make a connection or has many choices in the timetable so he can schedule as he pleases will excersize that option regardless of the airframe. Comair passed the threshold of DOT's definition of major airline in 1999, in large part, because it catered to the bidnessman.

It has already been pointed out that the seat pitch and width on a CL-65 is similar to coach at mainline. And why shouldn't it be? The CL-65 is an airliner. Complaints are part of any service based industry but it's what the market will bare.

Your "statistics" are quite remarkable though. Can we assume you made them up?