Why Are So Many Bags Not Able To Fly On Erjs

[WSurf]

They did it at Piedmont with the Dash 8/300's.. MTW went from 41,100 to 43,000 which makes it pretty awesome for the the ramp guys. You can put 50 pax, 2500 lbs of bags (around 85 bags or so).. Fill it full of gas and go!!!!!!!!!!!! It's not a RJ but I don't think they can get close to carrying that load.
But wait!!! It's a PROP.. !!! Sorry dont want it..

 

[wwtraveler99]

Here's a question though, if the airplane took off just fine with the old weights, why did we change them? I'll let someone else answer that because I really don't have a good answer.

I do work in the airline industry but I am not sure if this is the correct answer, someone will correct me if I am wrong.

The reason for the change is due to the Air Midwest crash. If was believed that the "averages" used by the carriers were causing some weight issues. I think the Air Midwest plane was in proper weight and balance limits using the numbers at that time. It is believed that the averages were really higher than what was used. Becasue of this the FAA made changes to the "average" weights that are now used.

What I can't believe is that Boeing, Airbus, or someother manufacture has not come up with a way to instantly weight the aircraft as it is being loaded.

Maybe someone out there can tell me/us why some sort of scale cannot be incororated into the struts. I mean they can get brake tempertures why not weights>

 

[rvolkcpa]

Robbedadgain said: I know that some of the pax that fly on us outta my station have bitterly complained about seeing their bags stay behind only to arrive either late on us or early on another airline! I just wonder how many folks we are losing at this rate?
this happens most of the time on our only rj service to clt daily!

It will be nice to see the Mesa ABE-CLT flight restored to 319 service in February to correct this situation.

 

[Singleflyer]

This problem is not just on US RJ's. I was on a NW flight from SBN to DTW (short flight) and after all PAX boarded the decided that the plane was overweight. They asked for Five PAX to give up their seats. I guess that was quicker than taking the bags off.

Are these planes flying close to their weight limits often? If so this will be a big problem in the future. Comair has some CRJs with only 40 seats, they removed some seats. I don't know if it is for weight reasons to carry more fuel or a scope clause. But as RJs increase on ALL airlines, this will be more and more of a problem.

 

[Kev3188]

This can be a problem on main line A/C as well, not just RJ's (think hot and high airfields.). This whole thread reminds me of working at West Air several years ago. The weight restrictions on the J31's were ridiculous. I can remember several times being told our "numbers" would be,like, 13 pax and 1 bag, and having to work the math from there (1 pax=7 bags). Not fun. At the end of the day we would have a courier bring a box truck, and drive all the left over luggage to Redmond (RDM).

 

[AOG-N-IT]

This can be a problem on main line A/C as well, not just RJ's (think hot and high airfields.). This whole thread reminds me of working at West Air several years ago. The weight restrictions on the J31's were ridiculous. I can remember several times being told our "numbers" would be,like, 13 pax and 1 bag, and having to work the math from there (1 pax=7 bags). Not fun. At the end of the day we would have a courier bring a box truck, and drive all the left over luggage to Redmond (RDM).

Deja Vu with my days at CCAir regarding the JS-31's..and later the Super 31's we got via AE.

The worst of the worst was a JS-31 going to SOP (Pinehurst /Southern Pines N.C.) with all the Golfers and their gear. A thirty minute flight maximum from CLT...and then load up the vans for all the bags that could not make it on the flight.

The next worse was for CCAir was the DHC-8-100's going to OAJ...the duffle bags for the US Marines going to Camp Lejune had the same impact..but I'm told it held true when mainline service was offered there with the F-28 as well.

Many ask why was the RJ orders split between the ERJ's and the CRJ's....and the answer is simple. It all boils down to financing and the quickness of delivery dates.

Bombardier whom builds the CRJ could not meet U's timeline needs by themselves...U is afterall not thier only customer or concern. Had the ERJ's been the only logical choice? The situation would have been the same.

U has reaped a major benefit of being the launch customer of the ERJ-170/175's...yet time will tell how this will play out when parts needs creep into the picture. If Embraer operates like Airbus or Fokker? We will see a number of these planes parked while awaiting logistical support from San Paulo....transportation and customs will have thier delaying aspects as well. U's willingness to keep parts on hand at MAA will also be a defining factor...history plays against us on that issue.

Without lumping the 170/175 series into the mix , cuz Bombardier doesn't have an alike product to draw a comparison with ...my vote between the current RJ's in service goes to the Bombardier CRJ series hands down !!!

The CRJ is a really built machine and Canada is a great deal easier to contend with in a transport and customs situation as opposed to Germany, France , England or Brazil.

Knowing many former U Tech's whom now work for Expresss affiliates...the word is this. The ERJ breaks more frequently...but it's an easy aircraft to work. The CRJ is reliable as heck...but when it does break , it breaks hard. I find this to be most consistant with my past dealings with another Bombardier product...the Dash-8. I'm a big Dash fan....IMHO it's the best Turbo-Prop Commuter plane ever made...and its heritage bleeds over to the Canadair series of RJ's known as the CRJ's

 

[robbedagain]

at my station, my friends at Comair have two 70 seat CRJ-700s and they each to ATL and CVG leave full and they have yet to even pull a bag off. We're the ones usually giving up bags to Comair or UA or another airline just to deliver them quicker if their flt gets to teh destination faster otherwise most of our pax usually
have to wait until late evening or the next day for GROUND DELIVERY!!!

 

[wheels]

At RDU we take paxs off...all bags go...per manager. we had a dornier to pit that holds 32, only could take 25! ended up giving 4 rtfc's..as only 29 showed.

Its soo stupid...but the pax LOVE the free tkts!.....BIG SMILES.....

 

[tadjr]

Getting volunteers usually isnt a problem, unless its the last flight of the night, but with Spring Break coming up and ALL flights (to EYW) sold out some weekends from Thur-Sun, its going to be tough getting volunteers. We cant even send them thru MIA many days, so we'll leave off the bags, send them to MIA on AA (big jet) and then set up a couple hundred dollar van ride to EYW for the bags. We've done this before and it only cost about $300 and 24 hours from the time they left TPA to get them their bags.