Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CRJ-200 Question  
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2536 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © James Richard Covington, Jr


Is it true that there are no LEDs on the CRJ -200s.
If so would it imply that these aircrafts would require a longer Runway length for T/O,compared to if they were manufactured with LEDs.
Also what was the reason.
Anyone.
regds
HAWK


Think of the brighter side!
8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2509 times:

It is true... there are none.

ASA flies the -700 from ATL to EYW (4800 ft) because the 200 can't takeoff from EYW on the way home (the 700 is still restricted)

As for the reason... The Challenger didn't have them.



User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8726 posts, RR: 43
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2503 times:

LEDs = leading edge devices, like slats?


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4212 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2481 times:

Hey ya'll... LED's = leading edge devices like slats or Krueger flaps. The CRJ-700 does have them...the 200 and 440 don't. This is also the reason why the CRJ looks like its diving for the runway at a faster speed...because it is.  Smile


Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2452 times:

hehe, I used to refer to the approaches of CRJs as "Canadian kamikaze attacks"  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2434 times:

I thought the decision on whether or not to put LEDs on the aircraft's wings was more a function of size and weight than anything else. I don't think the Fokkers have them either, and I'm not sure about the Embraers. I also recall a story sometime ago about Bombardier offering a retro-fit for the 200s, but the airlines balked due to the cost.


Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2433 times:

The Challenger and the CRJ (emphasis on the latter) don't really have a need for the slower speeds that leading-edge high-lift devices would produce. Most airfields that the CRJ utilizes have sufficient runway length for most all operations.


I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1879 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2392 times:

I always wonderd why when I fly on the CR2s they take so long to get airborn, seems to me that the A320s get in the air faster then that darn CR2! AM I right?

User currently offlineMiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 720 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2361 times:

Comair used to operate CRJ-200's out of EYW. Did it a few times myself. Made it no problem, especially with 20 degrees of flaps. Hell, Eastern used to take 727's in and out of EYW. Short-field performance in the CRJ is at least average, however you can't land in EYW with a wet runway. The reason you get the perception that CRJ's spend so much time on the runway is because of reduced thrust. GE and Bombardier have calculated the minimum thrust setting required to safely depart the pavement while saving the engines. If there's 10000 ft of runway, no sense in aging an engine prematurely. Trust me, a CRJ can operate short field.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic CRJ-200 Question
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
CRJ 200 10th Stage Question posted Sun Jun 11 2006 23:03:09 by UAL Bagsmasher
CRJ-200 HYD SOV Question posted Sun Sep 4 2005 16:02:46 by UAL Bagsmasher
CRJ-200 APU's posted Wed Aug 9 2006 06:18:05 by MesaMXORD
CRJ 200 Aileron Droop posted Fri Jul 7 2006 00:54:26 by UAL Bagsmasher
Maximum Fuel Capacity In ERJ-135/145 CRJ-200 posted Tue Jul 4 2006 23:53:25 by DLX737200
Here Is How You Get A CRJ-200 From SFO-HNL posted Wed Jun 14 2006 03:26:43 by MesaMXORD
CRJ-200 Maintenance Fam. Manuals posted Wed Apr 12 2006 17:45:06 by UAL Bagsmasher
Diff Between CRJ-200 And ERJ-145 posted Sun Jan 29 2006 06:21:26 by Fly2YYZ
CRJ-200 Technical Help posted Sun Jan 15 2006 22:17:02 by UAL Bagsmasher
CRJ-200 Collins FCC Diagnostics Guide posted Mon Jan 9 2006 00:22:50 by UAL Bagsmasher

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format