Does AA still have extra room in coach?
 

It's been a few years since I was on AA but I remember a few years back that AA was boasting the "most leg room in coach". I am traveling from DCA to PDX with a connection through ORD. On three legs of the flight the equipment is MD80 (Super) and one leg is ERJ. When I called the 800# to inquire if they still have extra leg room they said yes.

Is that true? Have anyone else traveled that route and found that there is indeed extra leg room in coach?

<i>When I called the 800# to inquire if they still have extra leg room they said yes.</i>

I truly wish you had obtained the name of the CSR that said that on the phone.

&quot;MRTC&quot; - More Room Throughout Coach - is long gone. AA has the same seat pitch as everyone else now, worse than some actually.

The only US carrier offering extra legroom in coach nowadays is United, provided you qualify for (through elite FF status) or have purchased the right to sit in their &quot;economy plus&quot; seating section on many - but not all - aircraft.

I would definitely try to avoid the RJ sector (I presume DCA-ORD or v.v.)

How odd that you would get that information when the &quot;more leg room&quot; has been gone for so long, especially for domestic flights.

Well, they probably have more leg room then some sirline in some plane:-)

Keith

LOL Keith!!! Don't we all just love the &quot;customer service&quot; reps that companies have. No we do not!!

Thanks so much for the info, when the CSR told me that they did have more leg room, I thought that this was wrong information. Sometimes, I think the CSR's are generally mis-informed or they just tell you anything to get you off the phone.

They do not have free food, either for domestic.

Gardyloo, you are correct that E+ seating is on most but not all UA flights. I'll be a bit nitpicky and suggest that &quot;most, but not quite all&quot; UA flights have E+ seating and E+ is availaible on Ted and on United Express flights (where it is call ExPlus).

Aren't the majority of UA's CRJs still in the old configuration? Not the ERJs but the older ones?

According to seatguru.com, the CRJ-200s don't have E+. The larger CRJ-700s depends. Some even have FC.

I'm not sure what percentage of the United Express fleet has explus (first class plus E+). There's a press release from last year that says 1/3 of the UX fleet by the end of 2005 and another from earlier this year that says that says there is explus service to 70 markets. All of the CR-700s I've been on recently have had it, including the one we flew from Jacksonville to Chicago just a few hours ago. Mr. Easy Chicken Online offered me the chance to upgrade to first class for $130, but I declined.

You have to pay for United Economy plus or get bumped up to it, but Jet Blue does have extended legroom, if they are going where you want to go.

More leg room in coach went the way of most airline service.

Americans talk a good game, but we VOTE with out pocketbooks. AA wanted to charge more since they had fewer seats... we wanted to pay less. They adapted to meet our wants.

Not exactly how it happened. AA wasn't charging perceptibly more on &quot;More Room in Coach&quot; flights. They just re-discovered that they could get more income from more passengers; and with the reduction in numbers of flights (esp. since 9/11) overall, they could get away with taking out the extra room, because on a great many routes, their passengers really don't have a huge choice among carriers. Sure wish I could vote against AA with my feet, but that would mean walking to many of my destinations.

Folks,

Go back to www.seatguru.com and check out the pitch for the various airlines, this will tell you if there's more or less leg room.

AA said they couldn't afford to give the more room through coach. I read an interview with an AA excecutive. Basically they had &quot;hoped&quot; that this would allow them to raise prices when that didn't happen they had to look at revenue per flight. Fewer seats equals less revenue so.....

I have to agree with Carol on this one. They're going to have to put more seats back to stay competitive. They couldn't have fewer seats compared to other airlines &amp; charge the same as the other airline does especially with fuller flights.

Originally, Carol implied that AA charged more and &quot;we voted&quot; by declining to pay the difference. It's a little different to say AA <i>wanted,/i&gt; to charge more but didn't.</i>

Sorry about the font-change glitch. The point is exactly that they couldn't have fewer seats and charge the same, not that they charged more and lost passengers.

AA didn't charge more, but once the loads were getting back to &quot;normal&quot;, ~2005/06, AA could not sustain their business plan. If they were to match all the other legacy airlines in fares, they needed more seats to fill. Let's not forget that 4 of the 6 legacy airlines were under bankrupcy protection, shedding their retirement plans and not paying many bills. AA kept on paying into the retirement plan, kept on paying bills and it's the only US based legacy airline that has never been in the bankrupcy court.