Avro RJ85 planes - should nervous traveller avoid?

Hmm_Messiah

HI

I am just wondering, based on any one's experience, are Avro RJ85s a little small and claustrophobic for a nervous flyer ?

Eponymous

They're very comfortable. If you can get the seats at the back, where the plane narrows, the seats are only two wide on one side rather than three... Try get seats in row 15, 16 or 17 A or C (no B on that side).

Hmm_Messiah

I heard the seats are comfortable etc but even just looking at the seat plan it just looks very enclosed, and I also wonder about the noise of the engines

I have a 12 hour flight after that one so just don't want my mild-ish fear of flying becoming bigger

Elirlandes

I would say that the aircraft are absolutely fine to fly on. Sometimes there is a slight smell of fuel in the cabin before takeoff - this appears to be fairly normal on this aircraft type.
The other thing that might seem a little scary for some fliers is that the AVRO's angle of approach for landing is more nose down than on other aircraft, so it can feel a little off putting for nervous fliers who are already used to flying on B737s or A320s (Ryanair/Aer Lingus). Again, this is perfectly normal for this aircraft type given the different positioning and aerodynamics of its wings.

tkd93

Traveled in this aircraft a few weeks ago. Completely fine never noticed any issues. Had no issues with the seats and I am 6ft.

faoiarvok

Hmm_Messiah wrote: »

...I also wonder about the noise of the engines

Honestly the engines are quite noisy and have a slightly strained-seeming sound under completely normal operation.

Really you have nothing to be worried about, though I understand that logical reasoning doesn't necessarily help to combat anxiety/phobia.

I assume it's Cityjet you're flying with – the last (and I think only) time I flew with them there was a complimentary croissant and coffee, so that's something to look forward to at least 😛 (unless that's been retired since 2011)

dogmatix

Great aircraft to fly on - British airways used to use them on their Dublin to Gatwick route in the late 1990's/early 2000's. Although they where branded BAe 146 at the time. I found them quite comfortable and the shoulder placing of the wings meant every window had a great view. I much preferred them over the 737's and Airbuses in use on the heathrow routes.

PukkaStukka

Other than being a little fumey when starting up, they are a fine aircraft. Their rate of climb, turning, and overall general performance is good. I don't recall any issues with refinement; engine noise in flight seemed no worse than a 737.

LXFlyer

The only aspect that would strike me as different is the rather loud noise that the flaps being retracted makes after take off.

It is pretty unique to the RJ85 and much more obvious than on an Airbus for example, and might just strike a nervous flyer as an odd noise. But if they are prepared for it then it won't be an issue.

An example is in the video below at about 2:15:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maOjFuE8Qkk

LeChienMefiant

Apart from stinky jacks, I've never had any issue.

The ATRs that Aer Lingus Regional use can be a bit bumpy for my liking. The Avro that Cityjet use is fine.

martinsvi

Airline and their seat layout matter.. Originally airlines used avro's with 3-2 seating layout, which is sensible. I have flown CityJet's Avro between Zurich - Paris - Dublin - with 3-3 layout - it's fine for first 40 minutes or so, but at certain point my legs started falling asleep, it just wasn't good, the aisle was very little as well, hard to squeeze by if you need to go to the loo and have to pass another pax or staff

the plane itself din't feel small from a claustrophobic sense, the ride is neat, I don't find it noisy or anything. CityJet staff are superb as well, overall service is good - it's just that layout.. not suitable for longer legs imho. If you're running just up to London, you'll be fine

Chris_5339762

They're fun to fly on because they're different. If you sit close to the back and get a window seat you get a better view below you because the wings are on the top.

If you're flying INTO London City, be aware that the approach is steeper than other airports (5.5º vs 3º). It feels a little different as you're descending quicker but is nothing to worry about at all and is completely normal.

Noxegon

The 3-3 layout is pretty miserable if you're big. Otherwise they're fine.

Hmm_Messiah

martinsvi wrote: »

the plane itself din't feel small from a claustrophobic sense, the ride is neat, I don't find it noisy or anything. CityJet staff are superb as well, overall service is good - it's just that layout.. not suitable for longer legs imho. If you're running just up to London, you'll be fine

Unfortunately flying to / from Paris on way to /back from Shanghai .

I think I might try avoid this aircraft - I've a feeling I am too big to be comfortable, and while I have flown happily to China a few times at start of year I had a truly awful short flight from Stockholm to Brussels- I don't think I relaxed for a moment it was just bumpy and noisy, and since then even short flights not a great experience. I just don't want any nervousness or whatever made worse on the short flight with then a 12 hour flight ahead


Thanks for all the replies

martinsvi

Noxegon wrote: »

The 3-3 layout is pretty miserable if you're big. Otherwise they're fine.

For what it's worth I'm not big, just a tad bit over 6ft, but I'm no fatty.. those seats where too cramped for me

dogmatix

Interesting: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/jet-returns-to-dublin-after-pilots-discover-cracked-windshield-over-irish-sea-760607.html.

I still think it's a great aircraft to fly on!

Locker10a

dogmatix wrote: »

Interesting: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/jet-returns-to-dublin-after-pilots-discover-cracked-windshield-over-irish-sea-760607.html.

I still think it's a great aircraft to fly on!

Sure that happens on any aircraft

The King of Dalriada

5 oil leaks connected by an electrical fault.

Growler!!!

The King of Dalriada wrote: »

5 oil leaks connected by an electrical fault.

Like a classic car engine, if there's oil leaking it means there's some left in it!!!

robyntmorton

Growler!!! wrote: »

Like a classic car engine, if there's oil leaking it means there's some left in it!!!

Sure for a while BAe meant Bring Another Engine.

I've always thought the 146/RJ85 was a very capable aircraft though. The first time you dive into London City in one is an... adventure. (1996 - CityJet, when they would have the flight deck door open during the descent)

Oscar Bravo

Speaking of which

Hmm_Messiah

so recent posts would suggest the answer to the thread title is - maybe yes
:D:eek:

robyntmorton

Hmm_Messiah wrote: »

so recent posts would suggest the answer to the thread title is - maybe yes
:D:eek:

Sure, there's no more reason to be nervous on an RJ85 than any other aircraft. They're perfectly capable and any you would be flying on are well maintained. The recent cracked windshield could happen to any plane, and you only hear about it because of it being a CityJet.

On the other hand, you mention possible discomfort during the journey. This is purely subjective. I can't say I was ever uncomfortable on one, but I can say don't pee on a CRJ200 unless you like being squashed into the tail. YMMV of course.

Henry Ford III

Flew in one only once when on a trip to the US. Lovely aircraft.

cameramonkey

lxflyer wrote: »

The only aspect that would strike me as different is the rather loud noise that the flaps being retracted makes after take off.

It is pretty unique to the RJ85 and much more obvious than on an Airbus for example, and might just strike a nervous flyer as an odd noise. But if they are prepared for it then it won't be an issue.

An example is in the video below at about 2:15:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maOjFuE8Qkk

First time I heard it I got a bit of a fright, it sounded like the engines winding up to full power. Now when I fly on them I try watch other passengers reaction to the noise. lots dont even notice it but I see a few who begin to look worried.

Jack1985

Isn't this the aircraft powered by 4 hairdryers... similar enough to the A340 for any ATCOs.

Locker10a

Jack1985 wrote: »

Isn't this the aircraft powered by 4 hairdryers... similar enough to the A340 for any ATCOs.

Indeed

dogmatix

Jack1985 wrote: »

Isn't this the aircraft powered by 4 hairdryers... similar enough to the A340 for any ATCOs.

BAE tried to market a twin engined version back in the 1990's but it never sold. I suppose having to service only two engines as opposed to four would have made it cheaper to maintain and operate. The similarities between the twin engined BAE-146 and the current Antonov 148/158 are very striking.