Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Northwest1988 wrote:An Expressjet (Continental) E145 was the first plane I ever worked on the ramp back in 2008. Loved working them and would take one over a CRJ-200 any day to either work or fly on.
usflyer msp wrote:Am I the only one that remembers when they were called the EMB-145 Amazon?
EMBSPBR wrote:usflyer msp wrote:Am I the only one that remembers when they were called the EMB-145 Amazon?
Or nicknamed "the jungle jet" ...
EMBSPBR wrote:A summary of the ERJ - Embraer Regional Jets family civilian models produced (source: Embraer; wikipedia):
ERJ 135ER - Extended range, although this is the Baseline 135 model. Simple shrink of the ERJ 145, seating thirteen fewer passengers, for a total of 37 passengers.
ERJ 135LR - Long Range - increased fuel capacity and upgraded engines.
ERJ 140ER - Simple shrink of the ERJ 145, seating six fewer passengers, for a total of 44 passengers.
ERJ 140LR - Long Range (increased fuel capacity (5187 kg) and upgraded engines.
ERJ 145STD - The baseline original, seating for a total of 50 passengers.
ERJ 145EU - Model for European market. Same fuel capacity as 145STD (4174 kg) but an increased MTOW 19990 kg
ERJ 145ER - Extended Range, although this is the Baseline 145 model.
ERJ 145EP - Same fuel capacity as 145ER (4174 kg) but an increased MTOW 20990 kg.
ERJ 145LR - Long Range - increased fuel capacity (5187 kg) and upgraded engines.
ERJ 145LU - Same fuel capacity as 145LR (5187 kg) but an increased MTOW 21990 kg.
ERJ 145MK - Same fuel capacity (4174 kg), landing weight (MLW) and MTOW as in the 145STD, but a changed MZFW (17700 kg).
ERJ 145XR - Extra-long Range (numerous aerodynamic improvements, including winglets, strakes, etc. for lower cruise-configuration drag, a ventral fuel tank (aft location) in addition to the two main larger capacity wing tanks (same tanks as in the LR models), increased weight capacity, higher top speed and more powerful engines.
Legacy 600 - Business jet variant based on the ERJ 135.
Legacy 650 - Business jet variant based on ERJ 135 and is a longer-range version of the Legacy 600, giving it a range capability of 7,220 km (3,900 nmi)
Harbin Embraer ERJ145 - joint venture with Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation.
solracfunk14 wrote:EMBSPBR wrote:A summary of the ERJ - Embraer Regional Jets family civilian models produced (source: Embraer; wikipedia):
ERJ 135ER - Extended range, although this is the Baseline 135 model. Simple shrink of the ERJ 145, seating thirteen fewer passengers, for a total of 37 passengers.
ERJ 135LR - Long Range - increased fuel capacity and upgraded engines.
ERJ 140ER - Simple shrink of the ERJ 145, seating six fewer passengers, for a total of 44 passengers.
ERJ 140LR - Long Range (increased fuel capacity (5187 kg) and upgraded engines.
ERJ 145STD - The baseline original, seating for a total of 50 passengers.
ERJ 145EU - Model for European market. Same fuel capacity as 145STD (4174 kg) but an increased MTOW 19990 kg
ERJ 145ER - Extended Range, although this is the Baseline 145 model.
ERJ 145EP - Same fuel capacity as 145ER (4174 kg) but an increased MTOW 20990 kg.
ERJ 145LR - Long Range - increased fuel capacity (5187 kg) and upgraded engines.
ERJ 145LU - Same fuel capacity as 145LR (5187 kg) but an increased MTOW 21990 kg.
ERJ 145MK - Same fuel capacity (4174 kg), landing weight (MLW) and MTOW as in the 145STD, but a changed MZFW (17700 kg).
ERJ 145XR - Extra-long Range (numerous aerodynamic improvements, including winglets, strakes, etc. for lower cruise-configuration drag, a ventral fuel tank (aft location) in addition to the two main larger capacity wing tanks (same tanks as in the LR models), increased weight capacity, higher top speed and more powerful engines.
Legacy 600 - Business jet variant based on the ERJ 135.
Legacy 650 - Business jet variant based on ERJ 135 and is a longer-range version of the Legacy 600, giving it a range capability of 7,220 km (3,900 nmi)
Harbin Embraer ERJ145 - joint venture with Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation.
You just forgot the Legacy 650E, the latest of the latest ERJ's!
Also: the last E190 will be delivered soon!
UA748i wrote:
Does that also included the E195? If so, for Embraer commercial, only:
E175 E1
E175 E2(?)
E190 E2
E195 E2
That's assuming the E175 E2 catches a break. Yikes. An efficient, but small, lineup
leleko747 wrote:Although first marketed as ERJ-170/175/190/195 and certified as such (ERJ-170-100/200, ERJ-190-100/200), Embraer quickly dropped the ERJ label to their E-Jet products.
AABusDrvr wrote:EMBSPBR wrote:usflyer msp wrote:Am I the only one that remembers when they were called the EMB-145 Amazon?
Or nicknamed "the jungle jet" ...
There were several, much less complementary nicknames used by the crews that flew them at my old airline.
In the back it was a nicer experience than the CRJ-200, but with over 5000 hours flying the ERJ series, I'm hard pressed to find something good to say about them. I don't miss them at all.
CATIIIevery5yrs wrote:AABusDrvr wrote:EMBSPBR wrote:
Or nicknamed "the jungle jet" ...
There were several, much less complementary nicknames used by the crews that flew them at my old airline.
In the back it was a nicer experience than the CRJ-200, but with over 5000 hours flying the ERJ series, I'm hard pressed to find something good to say about them. I don't miss them at all.
.
Like ‘Barbie Jet’ and ‘Disposable RJ’
solracfunk14 wrote:You just forgot the Legacy 650E, the latest of the latest ERJ's!
solracfunk14 wrote:Also: the last E190 will be delivered soon!
leleko747 wrote:I believe the OP is referring to the original ERJ family only, not including the E-Jets.
Although first marketed as ERJ-170/175/190/195 and certified as such (ERJ-170-100/200, ERJ-190-100/200), Embraer quickly dropped the ERJ label to their E-Jet products.
leleko747 wrote:I believe the OP is referring to the original ERJ family only, not including the E-Jets.
Although first marketed as ERJ-170/175/190/195 and certified as such (ERJ-170-100/200, ERJ-190-100/200), Embraer quickly dropped the ERJ label to their E-Jet products.
lightsaber wrote:CATIIIevery5yrs wrote:AABusDrvr wrote:
There were several, much less complementary nicknames used by the crews that flew them at my old airline.
In the back it was a nicer experience than the CRJ-200, but with over 5000 hours flying the ERJ series, I'm hard pressed to find something good to say about them. I don't miss them at all.
.
Like ‘Barbie Jet’ and ‘Disposable RJ’
I loved the E135. a little rocket for the morning commute
LoL. In the late 1990s, RJs were routinely called Barbie jets. It was just as common to call the CRJ that.
The reality is an ATP raised pilot costs.
I think there is a new market for replacement, but new engines and a more modern wind. I could see 3-across as the cross section.
Since the last was a business jet, we can expect use for decades.
Lightsaber
EMBSPBR wrote:
Insertnamehere wrote:Love flying on the E145 personally I find it much more comfortable when you have the A seat over the E175 and even the 737.
atcsundevil wrote:EMBSPBR wrote:
This is a very nice tribute to a great family of aircraft. Well done.
armagnac2010 wrote:An an immaculate safety record, so far, no fatal accident, which is really amazing considering the size of the fleet and the kind of operations.
EMBSPBR wrote:Harbin Embraer ERJ145 - joint venture with Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation.
B747-437B wrote:EMBSPBR wrote:Harbin Embraer ERJ145 - joint venture with Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation.
The type certificate for the Harbin built 145s (which are jointly ANAC/CAAC certified) states that they are 145 LI variant.
MohawkWeekend wrote:Why do pilots not like them? Their impressive safety record (no losses in the North America) is downright amazing considering the age and experience of her pilots.
MohawkWeekend wrote:Why do pilots not like them? Their impressive safety record (no losses in the North America) is downright amazing considering the age and experience of her pilots.
MohawkWeekend wrote:Why do pilots not like them? Their impressive safety record (no losses in the North America) is downright amazing considering the age and experience of her pilots.
ThePinnacleKid wrote:MohawkWeekend wrote:Why do pilots not like them? Their impressive safety record (no losses in the North America) is downright amazing considering the age and experience of her pilots.
Not sure on the source on that... but from my experience almost every single pilot I know who has flown the ERJ has loved it; myself included. She will always have a very special place in my heart as my first airliner to fly and first to hold Captain on. The ERJ was an absolute blast to fly (minus the cockpit noise - she def is exceptionally loud). When I left her, I had just under 7k hours flying the 145 series and to this day I miss flying her even though I've been flying 767's now for 3 years... (don't get me wrong I love the 76 flying and the plane is great.. but the ERJ was just an absolute joy)
As to additional nicknames for the Amazon beyond Jungle Jet, Electric Reset Jet (ERJ), and Flying Lawn Dart; my personal favorite and used most by myself was calling her the Taco Rocket!
clickhappy wrote:the Taco Rocket!
What is the meaning behind this name?
leleko747 wrote:UA748i wrote:
Does that also included the E195? If so, for Embraer commercial, only:
E175 E1
E175 E2(?)
E190 E2
E195 E2
That's assuming the E175 E2 catches a break. Yikes. An efficient, but small, lineup
I believe the OP is referring to the original ERJ family only, not including the E-Jets.
Although first marketed as ERJ-170/175/190/195 and certified as such (ERJ-170-100/200, ERJ-190-100/200), Embraer quickly dropped the ERJ label to their E-Jet products.
Woodreau wrote:I extremely disliked the Embraer as a pilot.
It's avionics were an afterthought. The FMS boxes didn't even talk to each other. To go direct. it required both crewmembers to press Direct To on their own respective box. I just never bothered entering Direct To if I was Pilot Monitoring. The Pilot Flying's box is going direct to, mine is going somewhere else.
.
flight152 wrote:Woodreau wrote:I extremely disliked the Embraer as a pilot.
It's avionics were an afterthought. The FMS boxes didn't even talk to each other. To go direct. it required both crewmembers to press Direct To on their own respective box. I just never bothered entering Direct To if I was Pilot Monitoring. The Pilot Flying's box is going direct to, mine is going somewhere else.
.
Not if you had the better Honeywell FMS’s.
Woodreau wrote:The FMS boxes didn't even talk to each other. To go direct. it required both crewmembers to press Direct To on their own respective box. I just never bothered entering Direct To if I was Pilot Monitoring. The Pilot Flying's box is going direct to, mine is going somewhere else.
Woodreau wrote:There is a lot of negative learning that takes place when a new regional airline pilot starts out on an Embraer that they have to unlearn when they move to an Airbus or Boeing. You have to bypass a safety guards to do normal functions, like start an engine or start an APU. Now you have a generation of Embraer pilots who have no qualms about lifting a safety guard and activating it. Lifting a safety guard is supposed to be a rare event that forces you to think about - hey do you really want to do that?
Woodreau wrote:On an Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, the knobs on the flight control panel correspond to the glass panel - airspeed tape is on the left side of the PFD, heading is in the bottom center of the PFD and altitude is on the right side of the PFD. On the flight control panel, the left knob controls airspeed, the middle knob control heading, and the right knob selects altitude.
On an Embraer, (135/145 175/195) They swapped the airspeed knob and heading knob - so heading is the left knob, airspeed is the middle knob and altitude is the right knob. So when these Embraer pilots move on to the next airplane and fly a Boeing or an Airbus, they have to unlearn the Embraer FCU. 95% of the time these pilots are okay, but when things get busy and things start getting hectic in a critical phase of flight, the ex-Embraer pilots flying an airbus/boeing will grab the wrong knob and grab the airspeed knob when they meant to turn the heading knob. or vice versa. It happens often, and when it happens, you do CRM and point out the deviation, they go oh oops. and it gets fixed.
Woodreau wrote:Every system on the airplane is manual - bleed management, fuel management, DC power management, except for anti-ice. the only system where you don't want automatic operation - anti-ice - is automatic. It would be nice if it's the other way around, everything automatic except for anti-ice.
Woodreau wrote:We called ERJ-135/145s mobile flying roadblocks, because they fly so slow, and we get slowed down to not overtake an Embraer flying at M.72 or climbing out at M.56.
MEA-707 wrote:As someone from Embraer itself is active here, I am behind airlinerlist.com and always wondered: 15 MSNs have not been used as far as I know, 591, 1028, 1076, 1081,1085, 1088, 1093, 1097,1101, 1103, 1104, 1108,1112,1115,1116. What happened? Cancelled orders, or being delivered but unknown to the spotter world?
If they weren't built, I guess total production would be 1226 instead (1240 minus 15 plus the odd numbered prototype PT-ZJA )
Crosswind wrote:Woodreau wrote:There is a lot of negative learning that takes place when a new regional airline pilot starts out on an Embraer that they have to unlearn when they move to an Airbus or Boeing. You have to bypass a safety guards to do normal functions, like start an engine or start an APU. Now you have a generation of Embraer pilots who have no qualms about lifting a safety guard and activating it. Lifting a safety guard is supposed to be a rare event that forces you to think about - hey do you really want to do that?
The clear plastic flaps over the engine start/stop controls are there to prevent accidental knocking. They are not the red guard switches you see on other critical systems that you wouldn't normally touch. There is no guard over the APU start/stop.
The guards are there because not long after they entered service, a crew meaning to shut the APU down with the start/stop knob during climb, turned an engine start/stop selector off. When they closed the thrust levers during descent, they satisfied the system logic, and the engine shut down. The guards were installed shortly after that.Woodreau wrote:We called ERJ-135/145s mobile flying roadblocks, because they fly so slow, and we get slowed down to not overtake an Embraer flying at M.72 or climbing out at M.56.
Baffled by those comments. Just dug out my old AOM... climb profile according to Embraer is 240kt to 10,000ft. 270kt until conversion to M.65 to cruise. Standard cruise M.78. MMO.80. I'm aware some versions were MMO.78 but sill .72 to cruise and .56 to climb seem very slow. I'd be particularly concerned at high weights with the buffet margin, and that turbulence speed is M.63.
Again, it's been over a decade since I've flown it, but at the time the factory FLC schedule was 270 to .56.
I didn't think the aircraft was amazing, but it did the job. It wasn't my first jet, it flew ok, wasn't a massive fan of the control locks or the resulting heavy in roll, light in pitch response because of how the flight controls were designed. The flight deck was noisy... but in over 3 years I never had any emergency of significant issue with it. I always felt safe with it, for the size of aircraft I thought it was sturdy with good redundancy.
My first leg after OE as a captain on the 145 I got to enjoy declaring my first emergency, and doing an overweight landing with the O2 mask and smoke goggles on, while the ARFF gave us a parade down the runway. Twice more I had to use the masks and smoke goggles on the ERJ. I wont shed a tear when the last one becomes a beer can.