Aguilo From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 243 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2679 times:
Doesn't it seem like ERJ145s are somewhat underpowered?
Considering their small size and narrow aerodynamic fuselage, they seem to take forever to get the front tires off the tarmac - the engines seeming to spool up power quite slowly. Little to no push back in your seat either. Even a DH8 or a SAAB340 has SOME oomph on take off, surprised the jet powered ERJs don't.
Seems they have "just enough" power but not much extra
Nwairlinkfo From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2538 times:
I do not fly the ERJ, but I'm willing to bet depending on which airline you were on, that they utilize FLEX takeoff's. These are reduced power takeoff parameters which require less thrust and longer takeoff rolls to preserve engine life. It could be that the ERJ does have a low power engine take-off, but I can tell you that in the CRJ our FLEX reduced thrust TO is MUCH less than the full power version. There is a HUGE difference in feeling between the two. EX: You will think to yourself.....wow that is really a lot of thrust on the full power takeoff and on the other you will think: is that enough to get off the ground! Hope that helps.
Ha763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2458 times:
The 145 has a thrust to weight ratio of 0.31, compared to the 777-200ER's 0.29. There is no question that the 777 is not underpowered, as are all twins. I have to agree that you have experienced reduced thrust takeoffs.
Aguilo From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2396 times:
Thanks NWAirlinkFO, didn't know about that low power take off - very interesting though!
My ERJ expereinces have all been 145s on CO, US and DL.
Out of curiosity: When do you use the Full Power version? Does the airline monitor what settings you are using? Wouldn't it be more "fun" to just slip that baby into full power all the time? Do they monitor your fuel consumption or something on a per pilot basis?
757LGW From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 152 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2219 times:
The ERJ may be a little underpowered considering it is a Regional Jet and is expected to operate out of short runways. I remember that when Jetmagic wanted to fly the ERJ 135 into LCY it had to use the engines from the ERJ 145 as the ERJ 135 engines were not powerful enough to operate out of LCY's short runway.
DeltaMD11 From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 1701 posts, RR: 32
Reply 11, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1900 times:
It's not very uncommon these days that a pilot does not set full-power for takeoff. Why burn more fuel and put more stress on the engine and it's components when it is not needed? Of course a lot of factors play into this though such as weight, temperature, runway length, humidity, winds...but in favorable conditions it's a common practice.
Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
USAIRWAYS321 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1849 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1872 times:
Also, many airlines do monitor fuel consumption by pilot, especially in times like these when the economy is relatively poor and fuel prices are rising. If a pilot uses a higher amount of Jet A than the average too often, he will likely find himself sitting down with the higher-ups, an unpleasant experience.
Ryanair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1873 times:
You see many ERJ's at MAN, which is my local airport. They certainly lack the oomph on take-off, they take up quite a bit of runway, and the initial climb off the ground is quite shallow. But the reason for this is probably because the airlines utilize the Flex reduced take-off thrust procedure like Nwairlinkfo said.
Sulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2037 posts, RR: 31
Reply 16, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1766 times:
Full 'rated' power takeoffs are performed regularly by crews, to ensure that the engines will manage the task. All this means is that the crew will not enter any assumed temperature for the engines EPR or N1 setting, nor will they use any derates.
Typically, assumed temperature or 'flex' power settings are the norm.
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.