Ah, gotta love the UA Express "fright crews." Yes, they really did thank us "on behalf of this IND based fright crew--I mean, flight crew."

I haven't flown UA in a while, but ended up on them this week due to a last minute ticket where UA was 1/3 the price of my preferred carriers.

A few notes:

• The EMB170 is great. Overhead space is a little skimpy, but otherwise I was very impressed with the plane. I wish NW would consider them as DC9 zreplacements.
• What's up with the "nothing may be placed in the seat back pockets" policy? I've flown a lot in the last couple years on a ton of non-UA carriers and have never heard that, but it was announced and enforced on 3 of 4 flights this trip (two mainline 733 and one Chataqua EMB170--the AWAC CRJ flight didn't have that announcement).
• The EMB170 "fright crew" also made an announcement on landing that cellphones could not be used until the aircraft was parked and the door open. The other three flights (like the vast majority of domestic flights I've taken in the last few years) allowed cellphone use as soon as the wheels hit the ground.

Just wondering. Hopefully these haven't been asked-and-answered a million times (I don't follow the UA board too closely and search is down).

I don't know about Express, but on mainline you can use the seatback pocket, just not for laptops.

Laptops seemed to be the main concern. But on one of the flights (I think the Express one) they also mentioned that water bottles and books were banned from the seat pockets during take-off and landing. I'm willing to dismiss that "fright crew" as a bit wacko, though, given their series of weird announcements.

Why are laptops not allowed in the pockets? I've NEVER heard of such a thing on any other airline.

I heard this from an amusing FA on a flight once (not sure it was UA):

"Please do not place any heavy objects in the seatback pockets, as they may become UFO's if we stop short while taxi-ing. That's 'Untethered Flying Object, by the way'."

I'm quite sure this is a UX thing. Perhaps commuter aircraft avionics are considered more sensitive. Mainline UA flights allow cell phone usage after vacating the landing runway.

The 170 may be so new that they haven't gotten approval for cell phone use during taxi-in yet. Just a thought.

My two Skywest crews last week had no problem with the cellphone usage, after we landed (CRJ-50's). Both made announcements condoning it.

That was part of the announcement made on on my IND-ORD flights a month ago.

Interesting. But since I'd put my bag in the overhead, my loose laptop placed on the floor is far more likely to fly around than if it's secured in the seatback pocket (where it fits quite snugly).

Yes, but it will smack your ankles. Exiting the seatback pocket, it is more likely to take out your head.

That's the reason.

With the OP's comments about the overheads being skimpy....I'm hoping that's in relation to mainline overheads? I have no problems fitting my 20" Travelpro (rollaboard) into an overhead on a 170...other RJs I'm lucky if I can fit a fully loaded briefcase.

The "nothing in the seatback pocket" is an FAA directive that airlines are supposed to follow as part of their rules on carry-on baggage. It's for the reasons other posters have cited (not having the items fly about the cabin in emergencies during takeoff and landing).

The "nothing in seat back pockets" seems to be unique to Chautauqua E170s in my experience. I've heard this announcement on several (but not all) flights. And they didn't mean just laptops; one FA explicitly stated that "FAA regulations" permitted nothing other than the saftey-card, in-flight magazine, and barf bag to be in the seatpocket for takeoff/landing. And I've seen them enforce it against deadheading pilots' hats and pax newspapers and such. Seems like extreme paranoia to me. I can keep a giant hardback book on my lap but not a magazine in the seat pocket? Stupid.

Chautauqua E170s are also the plane that has in the safety recording, "federal regulations require that all passengers be aware of the location of the flight-deck door," which is one of the silliest anouncements I have ever heard.

As for the cell phones, my understanding is that the brand new E170 hasn't yet been certified for cell phone use after landing. So FAs tend to announce it often. But it is a hopeless battle for Chautauqua to fight as most UA pax are used to using cell phones after landing; my default behavior is to check my email/pages as soon as we are off the active runway. And "certifying" planes for cell phone use on the ground must be one of the biggest jokes out there. If there were a problem, it would have been exposed in the test flights as a taxiing aircraft is being bombarded by RF radiation from both inside and outside the plane, including cell-phone radiation from other nearby aircraft/vehicles/buildings.

Marty flew on something smaller than a 757 let alone on Express?

The EMB170 has F... Last Friday when I got back to ORD, I ran into the FA he had on that flight...