On Thursday, April 10, 2003, at 04:02 AM, Nick Laflamme wrote: > At 02:21 PM 4/9/2003 -0700, John Kurtzke wrote: >> BTW, is 4 hours on anyone's 757 any better than 2.5 hours on an RJ? > > Seriously? Absolutely! At least on the 757 you can get up and walk > around, > and there's usually decent in-flight entertainment. On an RJ, I have to > fold, spindle, and mutilate my 6' 220+ lb body to fit into the seats, > and > once wedged it, there isn't anything to do but sit there. I dunno. I think the 2-2 seating on the RJ is more desirable than the 3-3 on the 757. (I am, however, only 5'7". ) There's also a lot of variation among RJ operators. On Air Wisconsin (United Express) out of DEN, I felt like I was on a miniature airliner or maybe a big bizjet. It was nice. On Comair (Delta Connection) out of Cincinnati, though, I felt like I was on a Greyhound bus. The seats were dinky and on a raised platform, with linoleum. On AWAC they were real airliner seats mounted right on the carpeted floor with more underseat space. My first choice for that "midrange" flight, though, would be an A320/A319/A321, which seem more spacious and comfortable than any 757 or 737. Boeing owns the wide-body market, if you ask me, with 747, 767, and 777, but I give top marks to Airbus for the narrow-bodies. Best option for a domestic flight (in economy) in my opinion has to be the 767, with the 2-3-2 seating. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx