I flew on it about 2 months ago in first class. I was very diappointed with the under seat storage. A backpack doesn't even fit inder the seat. The gallys are so small the crew has no room to work and prep food. Back to the drawing board with this plane.
The reason people hate the 200 is because a harsh label makes for an attractive review video. Nobody would watch a review that was titled "The CRJ200 is an ok commuter jet but not as spacious as a bigger plane". They really aren't that bad, and it beats driving 5 hours from nowhere Wyoming to an international hub.
The CRJ-200 having the reputation as being the worst airplane comes from several different perspectives. As a passenger.. yes the seating room.. but also the lack of overhead bin space (this is all CRJs) lack of a true stand up cabin for those of us over 6 feet, and if the air conditioning isn’t working related to age because of a broken APU or the power and other bleed air demands in the aircraft. From a pilots perspective they are awful because they are aging so a lot of things are broken on them, they don’t have auto throttle like most other jets, they don’t have leading edge devices which makes approach into high altitude airports like Denver on a hot day very challenging since true airspeed is much higher, they are very underpowered requiring a “step climb” to higher altitudes. They have a very narrow gear for the same reason 737s have poor engine clearance-they were designed to use onboard air stairs at small airports but with the CRJ there’s no room for the wheels in the wings to make a wider short gear. From ATCs perspective they are a giant roadblock in the sky. Taking an entire state to get up to altitude and being in the way of much faster jets. From a maintenance/engineering perspective they are a business jet that was turned into an airliner. It was made to fly 200 hours a year.. not 2000 hours a year or more in airline service. Thus it was not up to the rigours it encountered. Like the 737 using a fuselage from a transcontinental airliner and then being beaten to death doing short hop high cycle service. But….. from the perspective of someone in 2000… it was a dream. Instead of flying on a noisy, cramped, slow, and old Brazilia or Metro or 1900 with no in flight service (no flight attendant), and even no bathroom in many of them.. getting smashed by turbulence and thunderstorms. Between this plane and the Dash 8.. it put nearly every regional airframer out of business by the 2000s. Hawker Siddeley, SAAB, Dornier, Fokker, Swearingen, Beechcraft-and even Boeing (the 717).. and the only reason Embraer survived was it did the same thing.. turning a business jet into an airliner. It was the right combination of size, capabilities, and cost for regional airlines who’d previously operated 19-30 passenger turboprops to go into jets without invoking the ire of mainline scope clauses.
They are fine for what they are. A inexpensive jet to get provide low volume areas service with jet speeds. No they are not spacious but you are not typically going to be sitting in one for four hours either. You really don't have a choice to fly on something else from low volume airports.
It's small, it's a bizjet confusing itself as a high-density passenger jet, but it gave small aerodromes jet service when they would have turboprops. It had its place.
I have said it before and I will say it again, BOEING MADE A HUGE MISTAKE WHEN TEH SHUT DOWN 757 PRODUCTION, A 757 PLUS/MAX SHOULD HAVE BEEN FLYING 10 YEARS AGO
@@brightaviation Not long enough? How long do you need? Just shy of two hours is unquestionably long enough to serve business class passengers a light meal at the least.
