Flying Embraer's

FlyMarines09

FlyMarines09

Well-Known Member
Hey,

Been doing some reading on the ERJ's and they're pretty neat aircraft. I just have a couple quick questions about them...

Any Embraer pilots out here? I'm curious about the flying characteristics of the ERJ's. Is there much difference between the 135/140/145 vs the new 170/175's? I know the E-jet series aircraft are fly-by-wire. Is it a nice aircraft to hand fly? Are they responsive and yet stable? The CRJ's are nice to hand fly from what I've read and heard. The control column on the ERJ's are kind of odd...

Also, for the RJ guys, what are the SOPs in the US for say American Eagle, Republic, ExpressJet, ect regarding hand flying? How much hand flying actually goes on in the average commercial aircraft? I've heard that it depends on weather and traffic density and SID's and things of this nature. Obviously you can hand fly any aircraft as long as you want, but what do the SOPs state?
 
Not on the ERJ, CRJ or any jet but at Mesa I had one captain who wouldn't use the autopilot at all. Sometimes it was a little bit annoying.
 
I fly the EMB 145 and from my experience:

1)the control column feels perfectly natural. Looks weird but feel normal....sometimes crosswinds are tough as it feels as though you are pulling or pushing the wing down, but not bad.

2) handflying is cake...stable, even in turb air. I enjoy it, however I also enjoy very much my autopilot...ha!

3)At XE we used to have the 135 as well as the 145(multiple variations). The 135 is a little sports car and if it had a closet for my bag I wouldve preferred the 135 over the 145.

4) we have 145 er, lr and xr models. I havnt seen an ER in a while as I am on the UAX side, but the LR climbs like a pig in the summer when its heavy. And the XR is a dream to fly...its the latest version and by far the best. It climbs well, has a high MGTOW, and can carry a ton of extra gas. Dont even get me started on the ER...that plane is weight restricted often and has a really heavy nose on t/o and landing.

Hope this was helpful
 
triple7 said:
Dont even get me started on the ER...that plane is weight restricted often and has a really heavy nose on t/o and landing.
Click to expand...


Do you guys still have them or did they all get upgraded to the LR? We still have them, and they're pigs. Maintenance and performance-wise.
 
Our first 25 ERJs at ExpressJet are the -145ER version. 24 still fly. They've been upgraded in a manner of speaking, so they are technically -145EP's.
 
Yeah, the -ERs are junk. Fly like Mack trucks and climb like them, too. I never had too much of an issue with the -LRs, particularly the -LR2s. They still don't climb very well on hot days, but they weren't bad overall.

Loved the XR. Good performer, but turned into a pig in the low 30s at the XJT climb profile (M0.60?). I'd always bump up the pace by 0.05 mach once I was in the high 20s and it'd do much better.

I remember hand flying the aircraft quite a bit; it's definitely very stable and easy to handle. I hated the bull-horn yoke, but I grudgingly got used to it. As far as automation is concerned, well, it's an RJ. It's meant to be cheap to operate, which meant that certain niceties like autothrottles and VNAV weren't there (it could have had both, though). Most climbs and descents were done in V/S mode simply for smoothness (the SPD and level change modes were junk), but the drawback there is a lack of speed protection. The airplane would simply try to maintain the inputted vertical speed value until it stalled. Ask the XJT crew who stalled it in the high 20s about that.

There were plenty of times where you'd turn off the automation and hand fly. I'd generally keep the jet until after I'd accelerated to climb speed above 10,000. On the way down, I'd disconnect the AP and F/D once I was cleared for the visual approach. Some guys really loved the flight guidance with the autopilot turned off, but it's just easier to get rid of the junk and fly the airplane like, well, an airplane.
 
Yea I can't imagine how bad the ER's would perform without the EP "upgrade". They still have weight problems. I think they ought to remove 3 seats and strip down the galley. They usually fly on short routes anyway. Then commuting pilots might have a shot at getting the jumpseat.
 
Van_Hoolio said:
Yea I can't imagine how bad the ER's would perform without the EP "upgrade". They still have weight problems. I think they ought to remove 3 seats and strip down the galley. They usually fly on short routes anyway. Then commuting pilots might have a shot at getting the jumpseat.
Click to expand...

I deal with EP's all the time and they aren't that bad with the EP mods. I took 2 jumpseaters in one the other day. I resent them more for the single FMS nowadays. The bag fees have actually helped, I think, since more bags get counted as gate checks instead of standards now.

In regard to the original questions:

1. Yes there are a lot of differences between the 145 series and the 170 series. I don't know how the 170's handle because I've never flown one, but I'd guess it's a lot better than the 145. The 145 really isn't great in regard to control feel in my opinion because it's really heavy on the pitch control (requiring a lot of trim use to get anything done) while at the same time is hyper sensitive on roll. This is probably because the roll/yaw controls are hydraulically boosted whereas the pitch control is all mechanical. While I've not flown other jets, a baron, for instance, feels a lot smoother to me control-wise.

2. You can usually hand fly as much as you want. Most guys turn on the autopilot between 6 and 12,000 MSL on climbout and turn it off prior to intercepting the final approach course on arrival, because the autopilot is horrible at doing that. It will S-turn all over the place unless conditions are just right when trying to intercept a localizer or VOR radial. The SOP's say you can and should handfly periodically, even without the flight director. Sometimes the autopilot is MEL'd and we handfly all day. Couple that with an FMS MEL for a real "blast from the past".

When does it have to be on? The SOP's say that an autopilot has to be "installed and operative" for operations in RVSM airspace. Whether or not that means it actually has to be used has been the topic of some debate, but unless you're a masochist, there's really no reason not to use it up there. Autopilot use also is "strongly recommended" for Type A RNAV SID/STAR procedures (used to be mandatory) and it has to be used for CAT II (or CAT I monitored) approaches, obviously. Other than that, hand flying is fair game.

3. Personally I hand fly less as time goes by, and I've become more comfortable with the automation over the years. I still have a strong aversion to allowing the autopilot to intercept a final approach course (outside of a CAT II/mon) and to the use of speed hold mode. I usually engage the autopilot around 5-6000 AGL on climbout and turn it off just prior to intercepting the localizer (or final approach course if it's a visual/non precision). This translates to roughly 10 minutes of any given flight being hand-flown. As I said earlier, the 145's autopilot is iffy at best when it comes to making a smooth turn to final on conventional (ground based) nav. Most FO's I fly with tend to hand fly more than I do on departure but hand fly less on arrival, go figure.
 
FlyMarines09 said:
Is there much difference between the 135/140/145 vs the new 170/175's? I know the E-jet series aircraft are fly-by-wire. Is it a nice aircraft to hand fly? Are they responsive and yet stable? The CRJ's are nice to hand fly from what I've read and heard. The control column on the ERJ's are kind of odd...
Click to expand...

I liked the feel of the ERJ series more than the EMB-175. The E-Jet feels a bit artificial -- not surprising, since as you know, it's fly by wire and you're pushing against a spring. Only the ailerons are normal hydraulic controls.

Now that I have about 1500 hours in the ERJ and 2000 in the E-175, I can say that I like the -175 more because it has better climb performance and more powerful in general. At first people said it wouldn't come down as fast as the ERJ but I've found that to be not true. You can do 250 knots until a 5 mile final and be configured and stable at 1000' with calm winds. The thing really comes down quick with flaps 3 at about 190 knots.

FlyMarines09 said:
Also, for the RJ guys, what are the SOPs in the US for say American Eagle, Republic, ExpressJet, ect regarding hand flying? How much hand flying actually goes on in the average commercial aircraft? I've heard that it depends on weather and traffic density and SID's and things of this nature. Obviously you can hand fly any aircraft as long as you want, but what do the SOPs state?
Click to expand...

I can't remember what my company's book says exactly, but it essentially it says that a pilot should keep themselves proficient at hand flying the airplane, and keep the workload in mind while doing so.

There are no hard restrictions on autopilot use other than the aircraft limitations of turning it on after a vertical mode has been selected (1000') and off at 70' on final.

I usually hand-fly up to 10,000 to 25,000 feet. I like to have it nice and trimmed out before I let 'George' take over, even though in this airplane the aileron is really just an artificial feel unit.

On the way in, if it's a nice day and not busy I might turn it off at 10,000' but usually if we're coming in to a busy class B type airport, I'll leave it on until we're at least cleared to intercept. I know I can hold a heading and altitude -- proficiency can be done whenever, but it's nice to keep things nice and precise and managed well when you're flying a parallel ILS etc.

Once in a while we're in a spot when I would leave the A/P on but something happens where I'll click it off. Like just a few days ago. OVC005, we're at about 3000' AGL and the plane ahead of us must have just passed in front of the glide slope signal because it went from center to one dot high real suddenly. The autopilot was going to dive and chase the thing down, even though it was about to come back up, so I clicked it off. Just an example of a time when I prefer to do it myself rather than watching the automation have a tough time with it.

I have not landed with the autothrottles on in the E-Jet in the last 1800 hours flying it. I find them distracting on short final and rather than override a system I prefer to turn it off. An exception is if I am flying an approach to minimums with the autopilot coupled. As long as the autopilot is on, I leave the throttles on most of the time. But, I haven't flown an ILS to lower than about 500' ceiling in the last two years of 121 flying, so I can't recall the last time I landed with the throttles on. I think they occasionally do a lousy job of adjusting thrust on final. i.e. 5 knots fast, back to IDLE at 500 feet if you don't override them. Well, technically, in my FOM that no longer meets stable approach criteria because the engines are not spooled up to an approach thrust setting. I can sit there and force my hand against them and make sure they don't come all the way back or I can turn them off and do it myself with very tiny adjustments all the way down final. It's a no brainer.

Landing with throttles off is an increasingly popular trend among pilots that I fly with in this airplane.
 
Nice writeup Nick. The CRJ-200 is becoming an antique in the RJ world, so I've always been curious about auto throttles.

As for hand-flying, I'll echo what the majority of guys have said: it depends, there are times when its actually more workload to twist the bugs versus click it off, and most guys engage it between 8,000 and 18'000, but that can vary.

Nick said:
I liked the feel of the ERJ series more than the EMB-175. The E-Jet feels a bit artificial -- not surprising, since as you know, it's fly by wire and you're pushing against a spring. Only the ailerons are normal hydraulic controls.

Now that I have about 1500 hours in the ERJ and 2000 in the E-175, I can say that I like the -175 more because it has better climb performance and more powerful in general. At first people said it wouldn't come down as fast as the ERJ but I've found that to be not true. You can do 250 knots until a 5 mile final and be configured and stable at 1000' with calm winds. The thing really comes down quick with flaps 3 at about 190 knots.



I can't remember what my company's book says exactly, but it essentially it says that a pilot should keep themselves proficient at hand flying the airplane, and keep the workload in mind while doing so.

There are no hard restrictions on autopilot use other than the aircraft limitations of turning it on after a vertical mode has been selected (1000') and off at 70' on final.

I usually hand-fly up to 10,000 to 25,000 feet. I like to have it nice and trimmed out before I let 'George' take over, even though in this airplane the aileron is really just an artificial feel unit.

On the way in, if it's a nice day and not busy I might turn it off at 10,000' but usually if we're coming in to a busy class B type airport, I'll leave it on until we're at least cleared to intercept. I know I can hold a heading and altitude -- proficiency can be done whenever, but it's nice to keep things nice and precise and managed well when you're flying a parallel ILS etc.

Once in a while we're in a spot when I would leave the A/P on but something happens where I'll click it off. Like just a few days ago. OVC005, we're at about 3000' AGL and the plane ahead of us must have just passed in front of the glide slope signal because it went from center to one dot high real suddenly. The autopilot was going to dive and chase the thing down, even though it was about to come back up, so I clicked it off. Just an example of a time when I prefer to do it myself rather than watching the automation have a tough time with it.

I have not landed with the autothrottles on in the E-Jet in the last 1800 hours flying it. I find them distracting on short final and rather than override a system I prefer to turn it off. An exception is if I am flying an approach to minimums with the autopilot coupled. As long as the autopilot is on, I leave the throttles on most of the time. But, I haven't flown an ILS to lower than about 500' ceiling in the last two years of 121 flying, so I can't recall the last time I landed with the throttles on. I think they occasionally do a lousy job of adjusting thrust on final. i.e. 5 knots fast, back to IDLE at 500 feet if you don't override them. Well, technically, in my FOM that no longer meets stable approach criteria because the engines are not spooled up to an approach thrust setting. I can sit there and force my hand against them and make sure they don't come all the way back or I can turn them off and do it myself with very tiny adjustments all the way down final. It's a no brainer.

Landing with throttles off is an increasingly popular trend among pilots that I fly with in this airplane.
Click to expand...
 
Wow some of you guys must have a nice autoflight system. Most of the ERJs we have at CHQ are very strange when it comes to being precise. As much as I'd want the airplane to intercept on it's own, I find myself taking over to ensure there is no RA going into places like O'hare. It gets frustrating when you bracket better than the airplane can.

For the OP, personally I have found that the ERJ is "ok" handling-wise. The null zone in the artificial feel unit is a little too wide for my taste and I find myself over-controlling slightly at times. Other than that, the airplane is very simple to fly. The 135 flares different than the 145, but it's not too bad.
 
Hey thanks for the input. I really like the ERJ's and E-Series aircraft. I appreciate the feedback. I gained a lot more insight than I thought I would. Hopefully that can be an aircraft I'll be flying.

Do airlines that operate the 135 and 145 cross train their pilot to fly both?

Also, this kind of brings up another question I have. With airlines that operate different types of aircraft, does that airline place you in the aircraft that they need pilots for? Or do you always start as a FO on their smallest aircraft and upgrade to Captain then upgrade to larger aircraft as FO? I would think that openings mixed with seniority is the determining factor for that.
 
It's the same type rating for both the 135/145.

Also, regarding which aircraft you're on, you put you're bid in, and you end up on the equipment that your seniority can hold.
 
FlyMarines09 said:
Hey thanks for the input. I really like the ERJ's and E-Series aircraft. I appreciate the feedback. I gained a lot more insight than I thought I would. Hopefully that can be an aircraft I'll be flying.

Do airlines that operate the 135 and 145 cross train their pilot to fly both?

Also, this kind of brings up another question I have. With airlines that operate different types of aircraft, does that airline place you in the aircraft that they need pilots for? Or do you always start as a FO on their smallest aircraft and upgrade to Captain then upgrade to larger aircraft as FO? I would think that openings mixed with seniority is the determining factor for that.
Click to expand...

Be a man, fly a turboprop.
 
jynxyjoe said:
A real turbo prop (1900), not an overgrown weed wacker.

If you ain't /A with Pratts, you ain't blank.
Click to expand...

A super modified weed whacker, mega whacker to me exact.

You arent a real man until you can fly a turboprop with your feet up while reading the USA today.
 
FlyMarines09 said:
Hey thanks for the input. I really like the ERJ's and E-Series aircraft. I appreciate the feedback. I gained a lot more insight than I thought I would. Hopefully that can be an aircraft I'll be flying.

Do airlines that operate the 135 and 145 cross train their pilot to fly both?

Also, this kind of brings up another question I have. With airlines that operate different types of aircraft, does that airline place you in the aircraft that they need pilots for? Or do you always start as a FO on their smallest aircraft and upgrade to Captain then upgrade to larger aircraft as FO? I would think that openings mixed with seniority is the determining factor for that.
Click to expand...

It varies. I once jump-seated with a pilot at a mainline carrier who had never flown the B737 at all until he upgraded to captain. He had spent his entire FO career in the 757/767. Needless to say his FO's were helping him a lot when it came to little quirks, tips, and tricks about the 737. So yes, it's possible to go straight into a new airplane as a captain. It all depends on seniority.

As a newhire you generally go wherever the company has a need for you. Sometimes a newhire might go straight to a 777 or 747 as an FO, if that's where the company needs pilots.

In regard to the 135/145, when my company had 135's, all pilots flew both A/C types interchangeably. The only difference was that the most junior captains were labled "135 captains" and got paid about 15% less when they actually flew a 135. They got regular 145 pay when they flew a 145 though, which was most of the time because there were only 30 or so 135's compared to ~ 250 145's. The worst thing about it, was that minimum guarantee (minimum salary) was based on the 135 pay, so unless you flew more than 75 hours a month you weren't really making any more money than you would've as a senior first officer if you were a junior captain. The FO's had no such system, they were all paid according to a single payscale.
 
USMC-SSGT said:
A super modified weed whacker, mega whacker to me exact.

You arent a real man until you can fly a turboprop with your feet up while reading the USA today.
Click to expand...

Yeah... how is that a real man? Real men don't have room to put their feet up, wouldn't read a USA Today because their enroute chart is up trying to figure the reciprocal radial for the airway intersection coming up, all while joking about the bar last night after that 10th leg.
 
jynxyjoe said:
Yeah... how is that a real man? Real men don't have room to put their feet up, wouldn't read a USA Today because their enroute chart is up trying to figure the reciprocal radial for the airway intersection coming up, all while joking about the bar last night after that 10th leg.
Click to expand...

Youll have to pardon my ignorance. I am unfamiliar with the above terms. Are these aviation related? I vaguely remember the word radial but its been a while. Enroute charts I am familiar with, those are issued to us to keep the sun from coming in the side windows.


Enough thread hijack for today, back to your wing mounted engine lust.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top