Type and Training difficulty (E145 vs. E175)

T

Taylor814ce

Well-Known Member
Hi,

Don't have a single hour logged from 121 world. Yes, I plan to best prepare, focus, and study my butt off during training. With that said, what is your experience training with Q, E145, and E175?

I have heard that E145 training is bit more difficult than se E175. Anyone been in class for both share your experience?

How about Turbo prop vs Jet? I.g, Q200/300 vs. ERJ145? (Commutair)

When someone says "you'll need to build the plane ground up with E145", is this negligible difference than say 175 or is it night and day difficult?

Thank you!
 
I have no experience with the 175 but the 145 training program that I went through wasn't too bad. If you stay engaged during ground school and study maybe one hour per day after class you will have plenty of time to learn any of these airplanes. These programs are designed to get you through so I wouldn't worry too much.
 
Taylor814ce said:
Hi,

Don't have a single hour logged from 121 world. Yes, I plan to best prepare, focus, and study my butt off during training. With that said, what is your experience training with Q, E145, and E175?

I have heard that E145 training is bit more difficult than se E175. Anyone been in class for both share your experience?

How about Turbo prop vs Jet? I.g, Q200/300 vs. ERJ145? (Commutair)

When someone says "you'll need to build the plane ground up with E145", is this negligible difference than say 175 or is it night and day difficult?

Thank you!
Click to expand...

Everyone likes to pretend that whatever plane they are on is a hard plane and that they really had to work. In most of today's 121 world, the level of systems knowlege you need is a joke. "You'll need to build the plane ground up" simply does not exist. You might get asked where the air for the PACKS come from, is it high pressure or low pressure; but "building the plane" is getting asked to draw the entire air cycle machine.

Just study what you're told in training, and most people have zero issues.
 
As someone who went from right seat in the 170 to the left seat on the 145 here are a few things to note:

1. no auto-throttles (oh the horror)
2. no VNAV (but you can program the FMS to give you a descent marker and change the rate of descent)
3. It's a "dumber" plane, meaning unlike the 170 where everything is done through the FMS, there are inputs for engine flex and other parameters at various locations in the cockpit
4. Good thing is, it's the same Embraer layout...the AFCs are almost identical.
5. Pack and Anti-Ice operation is not automatic like the 170...some operators take off with the packs off the APU and not the engines
6. both have FADECS
7. 170 has nicely powered engines, 145 XR has good power, LR has ok power, but the EP and MP models are terribly under powered

I've been through 3 indocs (Saab, E170, E145) and none of the training programs had us build the airplane

hope that helps a bit
 
Also keep in mind in airlines with several fleet types, sometimes one is notoriously bad while the others are good. Mesa had a similar thing, the Dash 8 training was insane, lots of washouts, training folks wanting to "prove" themselves, etc. while the CRJ was much, much more laid back.

In my experience, it seems the more "automagic" the airframe, the less focus on systems building there is in ground school. As long as you have a good fundamental knowledge of instrument procedures, what seems to hang guys up the most is the automation. Given all things equal I'd personally elect for the 170 product over the 145, but I have no experience flying either, just lots of jumpseat time in both. The 145 to be frank seems like a low end jet even compared to the CRJ.

Here's an example of training programs. Despite being gone for a couple years I still remember that the CRJ has CF34-3B1 engines and has 28 N1 fan blades. When someone asked a ground school instructor in my new hire class how many fan blades the Airbus has, his response was this. "So you know when you see a hockey player and he smiles and he has missing teeth, do you notice that?" "Yes". "OK, I'm pretty sure you're going to be able to tell if you're missing an N1 blade on your walk around, why does it matter how many there are?".

True story!
 
wheelsup said:
Here's an example of training programs. Despite being gone for a couple years I still remember that the CRJ has CF34-3B1 engines and has 28 N1 fan blades. When someone asked a ground school instructor in my new hire class how many fan blades the Airbus has, his response was this. "So you know when you see a hockey player and he smiles and he has missing teeth, do you notice that?" "Yes". "OK, I'm pretty sure you're going to be able to tell if you're missing an N1 blade on your walk around, why does it matter how many there are?".

True story!
Click to expand...
*slow clap*
 
Pick whatever airplane has the base(s) that you want, and has the most movement. Airplanes are all the same at the end of the day. If I were you, I'd hope to get the airplane with the least amount of automation so I can brag to my friends that I am a better pilot than they are.
 
Taylor814ce said:
When someone says "you'll need to build the plane ground up with E145", is this negligible difference than say 175 or is it night and day difficult?
Click to expand...

Like others have said the plane doesn't matter as much as the training department.

I have 3 types from 3 different training departments. Each training department has had its own strengths and weaknesses. The plane I was training on seriously wasn't an issue.

Honestly airline systems may seem like "building the plane" when compared to training in a Seminole or Cessna but it really isn't that bad. As long as you put in the work you will do just fine.

The people that typically fail out are the ones that treat the training like it is their freshman year of college.
 
Last edited:
Nick said:
Your observation is a testament to how utterly unsatisfactory the flight spoilers are in the EMB-145 series.
Click to expand...

Many a jumpseat I've rode on the 145 to get around, and every time I see that handle used....well I completely agree with you.
 
As a new hire FO, here is basically what you need to know to pass your oral and sim:

*Limitations
*Emergency Action Items (Memory items)
*What happens when you push ______ button on the overhead panel questions...
*Limitations
*Emergency Action Items
*Flows and Callouts
*Limitations
*Emergency Action Items
*Simulator Profiles
*Limitations
*Emergency Action Items

See a trend here? It doesn't matter what you fly, you still have to know the same set of info about whatever aircraft your on. Some airlines may harp a little more on systems, some on flows and Callouts, but in the end, your responsible for all of it no matter where you go. Oh, and make sure you memorize your limitations and emergency action items cold. Those are the "make or break" of any oral and check ride. I've heard of pilots at various airlines muddling their way through systems questions, but if they knew the limitations and emergency action items, they passed. Conversely, I've heard of pilots failing because they didn't know the limitations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top