Beechbarron From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 134 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2859 times:
Hey guys. I've noticed here in ATL that CRJ-200's of ASA use almost as much runway as a 727-200 to get airborn. What gives? They have an awesome thrust to weight ratio!
C172Akula From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 979 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2691 times:
I remember leaving Salt Lake about a year ago, I was coming back to Calgary after ferrying a plane down to Denver. That CRJ just didn't want to leave the ground in any real hurry, but other than that I quite enjoyed the flight. Although I miss Delta flying into YYC, a RJ is pretty small for a 2 1/2 hour flight.
Ziggy From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 178 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2609 times:
Slats pertain to the leading edge of the wing and the capability of them being raised flush with the wing or lowered to create more airflow over the top of the wing. Basically think of flaps for the front of the wing.
Buckfifty From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1314 posts, RR: 21 Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2562 times:
The lack of slats also contributes to the 200's susceptibility in icing conditions (like the Fokkers). Strange, for a plane that is designed in Canada...
Kohflot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2554 times:
The CRJ isn't any less capable in icing conditions than any other jet aircraft with a bleed air anti-ice system, as long as ice stays off the wing. You might have a bigger problem on your hands if it does start accumulating, but as long as everything's working right there's no problem.
I also don't think the CRJ has an issue with takeoff speeds. The airports y'all have mentioned (ATL, SLC) have nice long runways. That being the case, the crew can choose a lower thrust setting for takeoff.. which reduces the stress on the engines, but also makes for a longer takeoff roll. If the plane is operating out of shorter fields, they'll pick a higher setting and use less space. This is just a generalization and there are other factors that affect takeoff distance (temperature, density altitude, wind, etc.).. You also mentioned a hot airport and a hot-and-high airport. Any plane will have a longer takeoff roll from those places.
Landing is what's real fast on the airplane, and yes.. the plane does have the tendency to at least appear that it's pitching down on final approach. Some people joke that the plane is just flown into the ground with the gear down..
The fact (or in some cases, perception) that the CRJ has issues with takeoff/approach speeds and icing is due to the fact that the it has what's called a "critical wing". It's kind of a fancy term, but can be boiled down to this.. it's critical to keep a good, steady flow of air over it. The wing is thin, and rather skinny.. as a result, it's great in the cruise.. nice and fast. The problem is the smaller surface size means it requires more airflow to do the same job a larger wing can do with less. As mentioned earlier, slats would help quite a bit in slowing the plane down on approach, but it's still got that little, skinny wing that wants a lot of wind to do its job.
Beechbarron From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 134 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2510 times:
Thanks guys, that helps. Still though, I wonder why Canadair didn't design the wing w/ slats? After all, it is a regional jet and they fly into many small airports.
CV640 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 948 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2493 times:
The reason for no slats was to keep the wing as efficient and clean as possible. even with slats flush they do give some drag, os that was the main reason. As for runway requiremenst, they aren't that bad. Landing requiremenst are actually quite short. As for take off, yes at heavier weight it can be quite long, but we routinely fly them in and out of 6000 (even a few slightly shorter) foot strips with ful loads, although we couldn't go at the aircrafts max range.
ATA L1011 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1361 posts, RR: 7 Reply 12, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2459 times:
No the Bae146/Avro doesnt have slats/leading edge either.
Twa902fly From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 3048 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2417 times:
the nose down approach is really awesome. Ive done that into LIT, ORD and IAD on a CRJ and its awesome to look out the window pointing down until abotu 20 seconds before touchdown.
TWA902
life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! 
, 134 posts, 
From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6180 posts, 
From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 979 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2000, 1363 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 179 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
