CRJ or ERJ

Roger said:
Oh, well, clearly the whole subject is for girly-men, however, that is reason for mocking, not repeats of "it's not about the AIRPLANE it's about the (contract, base, pay, time off, etc)".
Click to expand...

I have a confession to make. I'd fly an MU-2 for about $5000/year less than a BE-99. Now where'd I put my Ipod, shades, and backpack?

Now, if you want some REAL airplane talk, how about an F4U vs. P-47 thread?
Click to expand...
Hose-Nose all the way, although there's certainly something to be said for an octet of Ma Deuce and a takeoff weight approximating a tank. If you'd mentioned the P-51, I would have revoked your Man Card, btw. Nice save.

PS. FW190 A-8 FTW.

PS B. Hussein Obama is a socialist pig.
Click to expand...
And he's not even 'Murican! It's on the interwebz!
 
Boris Badenov said:
Beatch, I *AM* The Captain. Uh, sometimes. I often ORDER the other guy to take snazzy photos of me pressin buttons n stuff. For the ladies, you know.
Click to expand...

Oh SNAP! Gotta make sure you yell "CAPTAIN'S AUTHORITY" when you do that though. People are required to drop what they're doing and do your bidding when you say that.

Protip: Wear the hat underneath the headset.
 
So back to the original topic of the thread-EMB vs. CRJ. How many on here have flown both? What kind of differences are there in design and systems philosophy between the 2 manufacturers? How about flying characteristics? I've heard that the CRJ200 is a pig in the climb and at altitude, and that the flap design is horrendous. I've heard that the ERJ is very nose heavy after touchdown on landing, any truth to it?
 
Ive been around enough and done enough homework to know about the QOL stuff but as was said above.. yeah I'm just looking for pros and cons of the PLANE... thats all. Just curious what those that have flown the two models think of them or what you would choose and why. I figured that with any good interwebs thread that it would stray off into a warning area. It comes with ther territory. I am getting a kick out of how many off shoots this thread has made though... sometimes into and beyond left field. :)
 
No personal knowledge, but from a buddy at SkyWest, the 700 is a dream to fly next to the 200. Like night and day. Can't speak to the bannana jet, but given time in service, size, etc, I'd think CRJ-200 vs. ERJ-145 would be a more fair comparison. There, are you happy, Roger? I feel dirty.
 
Boris Badenov said:
No personal knowledge, but from a buddy at SkyWest, the 700 is a dream to fly next to the 200. Like night and day. Can't speak to the bannana jet, but given time in service, size, etc, I'd think CRJ-200 vs. ERJ-145 would be a more fair comparison. There, are you happy, Roger?
Click to expand...
Sounds fair. Since an apt comparison is the 200 vs the 145, and we all know the 200 is basically worthless, we can confidently close this thread with the conclusion of EMB ftw. Besides, it's Brazilian.

I feel dirty.
Click to expand...
Hey, I know how that goes-and I have a confession to make. Most of my twin time is in the glass-cockpit, FADEC-engine, carbonfiberglass wundermachine currently in my profile picture. Therefore, I am a pansy beyond even an RJ pilot. There, I said it. Feels good to have that off my chest.
 
Roger said:
Most of my twin time is in the glass-cockpit, FADEC-engine, carbonfiberglass wundermachine currently in my profile picture. Therefore, I am a pansy beyond even an RJ pilot. There, I said it. Feels good to have that off my chest.
Click to expand...

Even my suspiciously effeminate BeatchJet doesn't have FADEC. You are well and truly a panty-wearing primadonna. Here, eat three of these handgrenades and call me in the morning if it hasn't gotten better.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Even my suspiciously effeminate BeatchJet doesn't have FADEC.
Click to expand...
And that, sir, makes YOU dangerous. How do you keep from shock-cooling?

Though, with a cruising manifold pressure of something like 50" Hg and RPM of about 2200 in the TwinScar, I suppose I am the dangerous one for running over square. Oh teh noez!!
 
Roger said:
And that, sir, makes YOU dangerous. How do you keep from shock-cooling?
Click to expand...

tom_cruise_val_kilmer_top_gun_locker_room.jpg


*chomp*

Though, with a cruising manifold pressure of something like 50" Hg and RPM of about 2200 in the TwinScar, I suppose I am the dangerous one for running over square. Oh teh noez!!
Click to expand...
Sometimes I reach over and raise the flaps while still on the runway. CAPTAIN'S AUTHORITAY!
 
Roger said:
And that, sir, makes YOU dangerous. How do you keep from shock-cooling?

Though, with a cruising manifold pressure of something like 50" Hg and RPM of about 2200 in the TwinScar, I suppose I am the dangerous one for running over square. Oh teh noez!!
Click to expand...

Zomg!!!111!1, and you call yourself a pilot??? I bet you raise flaps in the flare too!!! Where will it end????

Just kidding, I do all of those things too. I mean, my signature reveals everything! :)
 
There is minimal difference between an ERJ145 and CRJ700. This kind of like comparing a 172 vs a pa28. The most important thing is which base and which has the better schedules.

And by the way, the CRJ2 is the worst performing out of all of them. The ERJ145XR/LR have little to no performance issues including weight and balance. CRJ7/9s go higher and cruise a little faster but again minimal difference.
 
hrjet said:
There is minimal difference between an ERJ145 and CRJ700. This kind of like comparing a 172 vs a pa28. .
Click to expand...
Are there systems and design philosophy differences that are readily apparent to the pilot, and important in the normal and not-so-normal operation of the aircraft, a la Airbus vs Boeing? Or is it pretty much "Switches in auto and go"? Remember, I'm asking from the perspective of someone who has .5 in a 421 and unofficially like 2.0 in a Navajo as my Big Airplane experience.
 
I have a friend that was on the -145 at Beagle and then went to Skywest and now obviously fly's the CRJ.

I asked him this same question one day, and basically laid it out like this:

CRJ-200 < EMB-145 < CRJ-700

The CRJ-200 is a piece. The EMB-145 has fantastic systems for the most part, that work for the most part, and it's an easy aircraft to fly. Personally I can't get used to the rams horn crap, but some guys love it. I'm in the minority of guys that don't like it.

The CRJ-700 has a real yoke and better descent planning capability. Descents in the EMB-145 are done using mental math, and the FMS isn't any help to you. The CRJ-700 has the banana on the MFD that makes things a little bit easier for ball parking in my opinion, but after flying the EMB-145 I'm always going to end up doing the math in my head no matter what (and you should probably do this too).

Some guys will compare climb rates between RJ's, and it's not really much of a comparison. The CRJ-700 has the best power to weight ratio of out all the RJ's out there, and will out climb the CRJ-200, CRJ-900 and the EMB-145. The CRJ-200 gets bogged down easily, and where the EMB-145 can climb at 1,200 FPM at FL300, it's doing it at Mach .65. The CRJ-200 will climb at 500 FPM at FL300, and does it at Mach .70 or something like that. You're not flying an MD-11 where you can climb at Mach .80 and 6,000 FPM, so you're really splitting hairs in performance land.

The CRJ-700 has leading edge devices, which I would imagine makes speed control a bit easier. That being said, I've never had a problem going down and slowing down in an EMB-145.

The EMB-145 is the loudest jet in the history of mankind. You WILL need an ANR headset (a lot of guys are using the new Bose headset) or something that you can plug your ears up with (Telex 5x5 with a custom earmold, clarity aloft, something like that).

I would personally go where you could get a line the quickest. Nothing else matters in my mind.

Oh and at Beagle, the CRJ-700 trips are bound to be better once you DO get a line, but still if you can get more senior on the -145 quicker, go there.

OH, and the Beagle -145's have that toy FMS. That thing is a piece of crap.
 
Roger said:
Are there systems and design philosophy differences that are readily apparent to the pilot, and important in the normal and not-so-normal operation of the aircraft, a la Airbus vs Boeing? Or is it pretty much "Switches in auto and go"? Remember, I'm asking from the perspective of someone who has .5 in a 421 and unofficially like 2.0 in a Navajo as my Big Airplane experience.
Click to expand...

Both are "switches in auto and go". They both have the Fadec system for the engines as well, so that automates a lot of things relating to engine and thrust control in flight because it's all electronic instead of mechanical.

The ERJ though is sooo much more fun to fly. The speed limits for flaps and gear are a lot higher so you don't have to keep worrying about going over any limitations. Also the airplane is very maneuverable and easy to fly.

The descent planning, as it was mentioned by jtrain609, it doesn't show anything on map to help you out but it does give you a glide slope to follow down. Some people prefer to have something on the map because it's all about visualizing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top