CRJ vs. Dash 8

I'll be traveling out of my small local airport soon and my preferred
airline serves it with three different types of aircraft: Bombardier
CRJ-700ER, Dash 8 100 or Dash 8 300. Now I've been on a CRJ before and I
thought it might be interesting to try a turboprop, as I understand the seat
size is about the same. So how do the Dashes stack up against the jet? Do
they fly lower in more turbulence? (I'm something of nervous air passenger
and my traveling companion definitely is) Is there a big difference between
the 100 and 300?

Nobody <nobody@nobody.org> writes:

> If you must sit at or behind the props, aisle seat provides
> less vibration.

"At?"


The one and only time I ever flew on a Dash 7 (Rio Airlines,
1985, DFW to someplace I don't remember), I was surprised to
see a row of seats in line with the propellers...not least
because there were no windows there.

In the recip and early turboprop days it was conventional
wisdom that this area should be occupied by lavatories, in
order to minimize deaths or injuries in the (unlikely but
possible) event that one of the propellers threw a blade.
When and why did that stop being the case?

Obviously a plane of the size of the Dash 7 or -8 is too
small to have a pair of lavatories in that area, but something
else could be placed there -- lockers or coat closets, perhaps.



Geoff

--
"As Tim would never say about your kind, you
need to be put to death." -- Steve Thompson

caribino caddy wrote:
> a ride on a US Airways Dash-8 not too long ago where I was "at" the
> prop (couldn't avoid it, flight was full) and you really do feel it in
> a not-very-pleasant sort of way. The vibrations were incredible. And
> loud as hell. I will not be repeating that experience if I can at all

The newer generation of Dash-8s (Q series), have new quieter propellors
and the active noise/vibration reduction system and it makes a huge
difference.

If you have an opportunity to ride on a Dash-8 Q400 or Q300, give it a
second chance. Unfortunatly, it is hard to know from airline schedules
what sort of aircraft is used.

> avoid it. And the Dash-8 cabins have that "commuter" look and feel
> whereas the ATR-42/72 cabin feels much more like a jetliner.

The Q series aircraft have new seats and bigger overhead bins.
Unfortunatly, this results in a narrower "high ceiling" area over the
aisle. But once you are seated, it is quite comfortable.

Porter Airlines that operates the Q-400 has 34" seat pitch and that is
very noticeable. (The operate out of toronto's island airport).

> So how do the Dashes stack up against the jet?

For me, the Dash-8 always wins, hands down. There's nothing better than
being in a window seat on a Flying Skidoo, watching the landing gear go up
and down and watching the earth come 'up' to meet the wheels.

And don't get me started on the windows on the early CRJs. Feels like they
come up to about my elbow!

However, the CRJs do fly higher and likely encounter less turbulence. So
yes, more boring, but less bumpy.

Cheers,
Geoff Glave
Vancouver, Canada

Geoff Glave wrote:
> and down and watching the earth come 'up' to meet the wheels.

This isn't a newsgroup to discuss your orgasmic experiences :-) But
yeah, I agree with you. This is really neat to watch.

> However, the CRJs do fly higher and likely encounter less turbulence. So
> yes, more boring, but less bumpy.


If a city pair is served by both Dash-8 and a CRJ, chances are that the
distance isn't great enough to warrant the CRJ climbing much higher than
the Dash-8.

On the other hand, the Dash-8 needs far less runway and can land or
takeoff from places that the CRJ can't.