25 Apr 2024, 08:03 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 12 Sep 2019, 21:13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 12799 Post Likes: +5226 Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
|
|
Username Protected wrote: And the best part WIFI! Both as a passenger and as a pilot.
Unsure if any 200's have wifi, but definitely available on the 700/900
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 13 Sep 2019, 07:10 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/12 Posts: 3094 Post Likes: +5448 Company: French major Location: France
Aircraft: Ejet
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Auothrottles are just one more device to disengage the children of the magenta from aviating. I’ve never missed them. I certainly agree with the last part of your post. Having flown without a/t for the last 15 years or so, a/t are not an absolute necessity. But they do come in handy. And I don't think that it disengages you from flying. First of all, in 95% of the flight in the 145 for instance, the throttles (thrust levers!) would not move. During t/o and climb, they would be into the detent. During cruise, I would spend 30seconds adjusting the thrust, and maybe readjust every hour or so if need be. Descent is idle if I planned correctly. So that leaves us with the approach, where it would be idle until flaps 22/45, then preset to 55/65%, and then adjusted +-5%. Now with the ejet, it's the exact same except they retard by themselves once the altitude is captured and speed is close to cruise. It's just during the approach, and anytime we're below FL100, the PF has his hands on them, especially if it's a bit bumpy/windy as they are a bit slow to react. And like any proper company, we're allowed (encouraged) to disconnect the a/p and/or the a/t at our convenience. We've just shot a visual into Marseille, all handflown, lovely weather, pretty good fun! On the way back, close to minimum in Lille, why bother? Let's keep everything on, follow it, and if we need to go around, press one button, no drama! In my opinion, you can have all the automation in the world, or none, and your level of engagement only depends on you. Are you interested in what you're doing, or are you, like some captains I've had on the 145, simply going to set 80% N1, whatever speed that gives you so long as it does not overspeed, while you read the papers?
_________________ Singham!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 13 Sep 2019, 10:54 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/07/12 Posts: 664 Post Likes: +432 Location: Greater Cincinnati Area
Aircraft: Aerostar 601P
|
|
I've flown with a few of those. I agree with your point about the airplane only being as automated as the pilot allows. The issue I see is it allows the airline to hire from a deeper pool than they otherwise would be able to, because the training and flight standards department build profiles and procedures using automation as a crutch. Unfortunately not every airline pilot aspires to be an aviator.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 13 Sep 2019, 21:21 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/18/13 Posts: 1152 Post Likes: +767
Aircraft: 737
|
|
No way Jose. I’m going to learn how to do everything myself to perfection, using the autopilot to do only what I’m to busy to do if I become task saturated. I only use the AP when directed to by the books or the CA.
I’d like to be a LCA some day. I can’t teach what I don’t know. I better learn it all. Still, I truly believe the basis of being a good pilot is basic stick and rudder, including setting thrust manually.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 04 Oct 2019, 16:31 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/26/18 Posts: 130 Post Likes: +49
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Thanks man! I’m pretty happy here, I like it a lot! Reserve isn’t my favorite because I’m not flying enough, but that’s the way it goes anywhere I suppose.
I wouldn’t of thought it’d be easy to get FOD all the way up there, but I suppose there’s a reason we’re not allowed to use max reverse below 90kts or any TR at all below 60kts. I'm just a stupid corporate pilot but this comment made me think of a pirep I read by a CRJ pilot on a somewhat (barely) contaminated 9,200' runway... I was nice enough to find a screenshot of the pirep for BT. Use TR and brakes like your life (career) depends on it no matter how many times a pimple-faced captain says he/she has done this a "thousand times"!!! It is common for me (biz jet & turboprop captain) to call and FBO and hear something like this come out of the phone "The runway looks pretty good, but we haven't had anyone come in yet, so please let us know how it (runway) is."
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 26 Oct 2019, 15:56 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/18/13 Posts: 1152 Post Likes: +767
Aircraft: 737
|
|
I'm sitting in an Embraer 175 right now commuting back to DCA and NOW I get it. This thing puts the 900 to shame! Way bigger, better windows, nicer avionics, the works.
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 27 Oct 2019, 11:51 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/31/12 Posts: 3094 Post Likes: +5448 Company: French major Location: France
Aircraft: Ejet
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'm curious how the fuel burn compares, given the ERJ has to push a bigger cabin around everywhere.
They are nice inside. The erj, about 1.1 ton an hour around FL300. The emb170, about 1.6, and the emb190, closer to 2 tons
_________________ Singham!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 05 Nov 2019, 20:17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 12799 Post Likes: +5226 Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I find the ERJ175 to be a nice ride. However, the ERJ145 has to be the worst RJ I’ve ever been in. Noisy, uncomfortable, just a miserable piece. I believe on one propilot forum it was called the WSCOD
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: CRJ vs. ERJ Posted: 08 Nov 2019, 19:42 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/17/12 Posts: 589 Post Likes: +340 Location: Greensboro, NC
Aircraft: C170B, BE35, CRJ
|
|
My airline flies all three variants of the CRJ, though the 200 lines are rapidly disappearing. I think each of the CRJs have their own endearing qualities (even the Deuce). I love the Rockwell Collins avionics suite, and feel comfortable in the airplane with a real yoke. I use automation as little as possible and will generally hand fly below RVSM on the way up, and below 10K on the way down, captain’s mood permitting.
As a passenger, I love the 175. The larger overhead bins are a treat, and the larger windows are nice. Seat size appears to be the same, and I’ve commuted on Republic several times to self to PHL, or coming back from the CAMI chamber.
I’ve ridden on the 145 a bunch (50/50 jump seat to cabin), and other than not having FADEC, I think the 200 is a superior airframe. I was grateful for the rides each time, but I’m glad I didn’t go to Piedmont...
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|