E170

[fatherabraham]

Two comments only...

Hope they're not going to take off with the two bar still attached.

That's the first time I've seen the initial version of any airplane have a dorsal fin. Wonder what the longer versions will have?

Jim

could you reference the position of " dorsal fin" on pic?

 

[Colby]

Okay so does the Fact that the side says UsAirways Express REALLY matter...
Fact is ... Whether it says that or not would be more important when someone is Booking the travel.... Will it say Operated by Us AirExpress on the Website?

I Mean Really.... How many Passengers pay attention to what the Side of the A/C looks like when they're sitting in the boarding area...or Going down the Jet way Boarding the Air Craft.......???


This would be like when I told a Client that they were on a 70 Pax Jet On NorthWest to go from MSP to FNT.... Yep..Operated by Mesaba...But as soon as I said JET it was ALL OKAY !!!!!

 

[BoeingBoy]

fatherabraham,

The dorsal fin is an extension at the front of the vertical stabilizer (tail) on an airplane where it meets the fuselage. If you look at the picture closely, you'll see that the front of the vertical tail comes downward from the upper tip then angles forward join the fuselage. If you can picture the difference between the Airbus 320 series and the 737-300/400, you'll see what I mean. The 737 has a dorsal fin while the Airbus doesn't.

A dorsal fin is added as necessary to meet the directional stability requirements for certification (think of a arrow with not enough feathers or a kite with too short a tail).
Normally it is not needed in the initial version of an aircraft - the verticle tail is made large enough to meet certification requirements. Likewise, if an aircraft is designed to be built in different capacities (like the Airbus 320 series) the verticle tail is designed to meet the requirements for all the versions. Only when the decision is made to "stretch" an aircraft sometime after the initial version is built is a dorsal fin normally added.

I'm not saying Embraer screwed up their initial designs and had to use a workaround to meet certification. Using the dorsal fin allows the tail to be shorter - maybe that was their goal. I'm just saying that it's the first airplane I've seen designed that way.

Jim

ps - if you want to see what happens when the designers have to go to extremes to meet certification requirements as an airplane gets bigger, look at all the aerodynamic "add-ons" around the tail of a Beachcraft 1900. The original design goes back to the '50's QueenAire - a piston-powered corporate-type plane.

 

[AKA_trvlr64]

Okay so does the Fact that the side says UsAirways Express REALLY matter...
Fact is ... Whether it says that or not would be more important when someone is Booking the travel.... Will it say Operated by Us AirExpress on the Website?

I Mean Really.... How many Passengers pay attention to what the Side of the A/C looks like when they're sitting in the boarding area...or Going down the Jet way Boarding the Air Craft.......???


This would be like when I told a Client that they were on a 70 Pax Jet On NorthWest to go from MSP to FNT.... Yep..Operated by Mesaba...But as soon as I said JET it was ALL OKAY !!!!!

Well to this US1 it does matter. I am sick and tired of flying on a DASH, BEECHCRAFT, SAAB and even the EMB and CRJ that squeeze me into them. I am sick of the oversold statements and leaving luggage behind because the plane is overweight.

I purposely will review the flight schedule to see what type of aircraft I am flying on. And if it involves an express flight on a plane I don't care for I will reroute myself, sometimes at an inconvinence, just to avoid certain airfact types.

The EXPRESS signage should be removed from the new EMB 190. Your customers that fly as much as I do notice these things. There is no logical reason for the word EXPRESS to be on this plane.

 

[WSurf]

Don't worry dude, you'll get over it!

 

[BoeingBoy]

Has anyone here actually been on the E-170 yet? If so, I'm interested in your impressions. All I have to go by are the specs on the Embraer website. According to that, it is only slightly bigger than the CRJ-700 - less difference than there is between the 737 and the little Airbus.

Jim

 

[TransatlanticFlyGuy]

Don't worry dude, you'll get over it!

My words exactly! Good lord.....there are so many awful things going on in this world and certain people have nothing to do but whine about flying on a RJ. What is this world coming to?

 

[46Driver]

Okay so does the Fact that the side says UsAirways Express REALLY matter...
Fact is ... Whether it says that or not would be more important when someone is Booking the travel.... Will it say Operated by Us AirExpress on the Website?

I Mean Really.... How many Passengers pay attention to what the Side of the A/C looks like when they're sitting in the boarding area...or Going down the Jet way Boarding the Air Craft.......???


This would be like when I told a Client that they were on a 70 Pax Jet On NorthWest to go from MSP to FNT.... Yep..Operated by Mesaba...But as soon as I said JET it was ALL OKAY !!!!!

Well to this US1 it does matter. I am sick and tired of flying on a DASH, BEECHCRAFT, SAAB and even the EMB and CRJ that squeeze me into them. I am sick of the oversold statements and leaving luggage behind because the plane is overweight.

I purposely will review the flight schedule to see what type of aircraft I am flying on. And if it involves an express flight on a plane I don't care for I will reroute myself, sometimes at an inconvinence, just to avoid certain airfact types.

The EXPRESS signage should be removed from the new EMB 190. Your customers that fly as much as I do notice these things. There is no logical reason for the word EXPRESS to be on this plane.

Jumpseating today on an MD-88. Sure enough, the customer was complaining about the aircraft being too small and not enough overhead space. The customer is not going to be happy unless they are flying on a widebody 767/777/747 - and business class to boot.

That being said, the dividing line is whether the airplane is jet or prop. Passengers for some reason are scared to death of "primitive" props. Whether or not the airplane says "Express" on the side is irrelevant to most.

 

[mwereplanes]

Has anyone here actually been on the E-170 yet? If so, I'm interested in your impressions. All I have to go by are the specs on the Embraer website. According to that, it is only slightly bigger than the CRJ-700 - less difference than there is between the 737 and the little Airbus.

Jim

I spoke to a simulator engineer who was in Brazil and got to see the jet. He was very impressed with the interior. He said it was roomy and unlike the other RJ's he'd been on. More like a 737. And there are 2 or 4 1st class seats in there.

It is amusing to me however that Southwest and JetBlue and Airtran (the LCC's Dave wants us to compete with with a lower cost structure) doe not fly any RJ's at all. JetBlue ordered the 190 which is the equivalent of the Airbus 318 but cheaper to buy. It is not an RJ.

Mesa will operate the majority of these jets for U. Mark my words. And we better find a management who can define whether we are a LCC or a "Legacy" airline with a low cost structure. So far, there has not been any success trying to emulate both models within one airline. I doubt Siegel can make that work at U either.

mr

 

[AtlanticBeach]

That being said, the dividing line is whether the airplane is jet or prop. Passengers for some reason are scared to death of "primitive" props. Whether or not the airplane says "Express" on the side is irrelevant to most.

Driver, I agree with your assessment that the prop/jet difference is significant to many travelers. However, there is still a substantial part of the population that has some fear of flying, no matter what aircraft they are on. Psychologically, if the plane "seems" larger there is often less anxiety.

An interesting study would be to show two almost identical photos of this aircraft to a series of people. One picture would have Express, the other saying USAirways on the fuselage. I believe that many people would presume that the non-Express aircraft is larger and may further erroneously concluse that it is safer.

Again, this is not a matter concerning quality of service, but public perception.

 

[Fleazle]

Now that I am on "the outside" and have to travel for a living I will add my 2 cents as far as the Regional Jets/ Express flights go. I try to avoid them like the plague...especially the CRJs...to darn small, can't see out the windows without contorting myself into an uncomfortable shape.
The ERJ is ok as long as I am in an "A" seat and not on it for more than 40 minutes. Leaving my luggage behind is getting to be a real pain though.
I was on a Continental/Express Jet ERJ from IAH to PSP last week....2 hours plus....way too long to be cooped up on something that small.
I will not get on a Beech 1900 for any reason, and will do a Saab 340 if no other choice.
Dash-8s are a little slow but at least they are comfortable, and my luggage always makes it with me.
Bottom line for me is that I would rather be on a big, comfy Boeing, MD, or Airbus any day of the week....especially in bad weather. Most of my coworkers share my thoughts on this.
I hope these new Embraers are everything they are supposed to be, but I hate to see U bet the future on them.

 

[ClueByFour]

I spoke to a simulator engineer who was in Brazil and got to see the jet. He was very impressed with the interior. He said it was roomy and unlike the other RJ's he'd been on. More like a 737. And there are 2 or 4 1st class seats in there.

Word has it the marketing geniuses at CCY reneged on the F class promise in the 170 and CRJ700s. It would be nice to see.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

I think this whole 'express' thing always had to do with U's concern with losing the financing. I'd think they'd admit that if the prospect of having to spin the 'craft off weren't on the horizon because of the financing, it would be best to have it mainline. This way, it can't be perceived as U selling off its 'own' mainline aircraft. My second thought is that jetBlue's entry with the 190 reduced their projected yield on the 170 ops, so they needed more seats to sell, so they had to ditch the first class and they didn't want to sell a 'mainline' product without a first class. But, geez how much differences is 2 seats?

 

[BoeingBoy]

mwereplanes,

Thanks, I've heard the same thing - "spacious" and "large overhead bins" come to mind.

Like I said, the specs say the width difference between the E170 & CRJ700 is almost exactly the same as between the 737 and 320, except that the 170 has the extra width between the aisle seats and sidewall - more shoulder room in the window seat. And what Embraer calls their "double-bubble" design makes the ceiling higher so it seems more spacious.

The overhead bins are supposed to hold a standard 16" wide rollaboard with the handle toward the front or back - where the 737/320 hold a 24" tall one with the handle toward the aisle.

Jim

 

[Weasil]

Anybody here got pics of the CRJ700?