EMB 145 vs CRJ 700

If anyone cares here is how I set my bids.
For my 3P OFE, DFE, LFE, OFC, DFC.
I have been 2 from the bottom on the EMB and life was not all that bad.
 
I have flown the CRJ 700 and ridden in an EMB 145 and I still love the RJ when compared to operation efficiency, speed, and fit.

From what I understand is that the 145 cruises at .78, while we cruise anywhere from .81 to .83. I think one time I saw .84 but don't quote me on that.

It seems as though the pilots have to climb into the cockpit of a 145 even more than a 700. Doesn't look like a lot of room for either person even a jumpseater.

The controls look nice on the 145 because it is different. But the 700 looks more like a real jet when comparing regional jets alike. Because when you take a picture of the seats in the 700, there is a farther look down the two by two seating. Whereas the 145, it is only 50 seats I believe.

Besides the noise of jets, the 700 gets pretty quiet at higher altitudes, which provides chances of taking your headsets off when they are squeezing your brain tight over hours of flying.

I think the larger jets though have more destinations and the smaller ones have shorter flights.

Hope this helps!
 
flyingmaniac said:
From what I understand is that the 145 cruises at .78, while we cruise anywhere from .81 to .83. I think one time I saw .84 but don't quote me on that.
Click to expand...


The fuel you burn flying at that speed....agh!

Flying fast just burns more gas. :)

Compare your fuel burn to a 757 flying at econ speed which is .78 or 79. We typically burn 7000 pounds an hour total when carrying 186 pax. ;)

She can do .84 easy.... just because you can doesnt mean you should.



In the CRJ 200 we were typically profiled at .74 but could do .78 or so if you pushed it. I normally flew it at .68 unless running behind... saved 500 to 1000 pounds a flight.
 
PeanuckleCRJ said:
The fuel you burn flying at that speed....agh!

Flying fast just burns more gas. :)

Compare your fuel burn to a 757 flying at econ speed which is .78 or 79. We typically burn 7000 pounds an hour total when carrying 186 pax. ;)

She can do .84 easy.... just because you can doesnt mean you should.



In the CRJ 200 we were typically profiled at .74 but could do .78 or so if you pushed it. I normally flew it at .68 unless running behind... saved 500 to 1000 pounds a flight.
Click to expand...

We're just getting started at .84 :beer:
Actually Econ at CI-30 usually comes out to be about .838...Anything slower than that and the nose is so far up in the air it isn't worth it.
 
rjmore said:
We're just getting started at .84 :beer:
Actually Econ at CI-30 usually comes out to be about .838...Anything slower than that and the nose is so far up in the air it isn't worth it.
Click to expand...

That's on a whale. They are designed for that speed and get sluggy when you go slow. Can't blow smoke up my butt. :)


Let's talk about RJ's and going fast. ;) Not gonna work.
 
PeanuckleCRJ said:
That's on a whale. They are designed for that speed and get sluggy when you go slow. Can't blow smoke up my butt. :)


Let's talk about RJ's and going fast. ;) Not gonna work.
Click to expand...

Haha...yeah but you brought up the 75 soooo I had to throw a little poo. :D
 
PeanuckleCRJ said:
The fuel you burn flying at that speed....agh!

Flying fast just burns more gas. :)

She can do .84 easy.... just because you can doesnt mean you should.



In the CRJ 200 we were typically profiled at .74 but could do .78 or so if you pushed it. I normally flew it at .68 unless running behind... saved 500 to 1000 pounds a flight.
Click to expand...

I'm with you...but really going .68 saved that much fuel? I like to test fuel usage on the ERJ and found the two kisses of death for fuel usage were going redline in the XRJ (.80) and early descents. The rest seems to be a wash on most flights....There's a fuel usage article on the ERJ on airline pilot central that I found to be fairly accurate.
 
Baronman said:
I'm with you...but really going .68 saved that much fuel? I like to test fuel usage on the ERJ and found the two kisses of death for fuel usage were going redline in the XRJ (.80) and early descents. The rest seems to be a wash on most flights....There's a fuel usage article on the ERJ on airline pilot central that I found to be fairly accurate.
Click to expand...

Very much so...dropped FF to 2200 to 2000 an hour. Transitioning to 250 knot idle descents from TOD also helped significantly.

I know my technique worked like a charm on the CRJ. Would only add a couple minutes to the flight time too...
 
I thought if you get there faster you've saved fuel you didn't have to use?

Besides flying out of Atlanta, the Pinnacle operation doesn't like to save fuel from what I was told by some of their pilots. And taxiing with the APU operating and both engines DOES NOT SAVE FUEL!
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Ahhh, so you were the • holding me up going into DTW all the time. ;)
Click to expand...

Were you the • always flying 320 on the arrival? :)

I'd keep the speed up into the hubs... remember we flew into the most redneck places possible in the midwest typically though. Not too much traffic into cedar rapids....
 
PeanuckleCRJ said:
Were you the • always flying 320 on the arrival? :)
Click to expand...

Of course! :) Nah, I was just flying profile, actually. I was pretty big on saving fuel. I programmed 4 degree descents into the box so I could do flight idle. With no wind, a 4 degree snowflake, and average payload, flight idle would give you exactly 290 knots. After 4,000 hours in that damned thing I had it pegged pretty good. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top