ERJ vs CRJ?
 

If given the option to choose an airplane between flying a CRJ or an ERJ. Which should I choose? Any suggestions?

Ok, I'll bite.

Between the 145 and the CRJ I'd choose the CRJ, in particular the 700/900. Wider cockpit, synoptic pages.

Between the CRJ and the 170/175 I'd take the 170/175. Because autothrottle a and engines under the wings.

There is probably no valid reason to prefer one over the other, although the ERJ may have slightly more advanced cockpit systems if you like to play with the tech.

The real question comes down to pay, location, and schedule which all depends on the airline in question. ERJ probably pays more than 200, but will be more senior.

The EJ will however look much more like a "real" airliner on your facebook page.

This is going to be a great thread. GREAT thread, I tell you.

Why do people care what they fly? In the end if they pay me appropriately and I do not have to commute, I'll flying a GD Metroliner for all it's worth. Turboprop, back-mounted jets, wing mounted jets, auto-throttles, who cares. It's just a freaking job. As long as you dont hate your life at it, forget about it when you are with your family and it allows you to have a good QOL, screw the rest. Do office workers ask if they like one cubical better than the other?

Well, all else being equal I'd rather fly jets than props. Same reason I'd rather fly planes than helos: noise, vibration, and number of survival-dependent moving parts.

That's like asking: "Which is better, melanoma or prostate cancer?" Both are survivable with long term commitment and the sooner you can move on, the better.

Take the job that offers you the "best" quality of life. Today's quick upgrade/flow/guaranteed interview (insert additional bait & switch promises HERE) can become tomorrow's 10 year right seat prison at the swipe of Anderson's/Smisek's/or....wait for it...Parker pen.

ERJ vs. CRJ is irrelevant to what really matters. They're both a means to an end...maybe.

This has been discussed one or two times maybe but the consensus is this in order of best to worst.

175/CRJ7/CRJ9/E145 then distant last CRJ2

Take whatever job lets you live in base and never commute. I honestly don't know how commuters do it long-term.

As for the airplanes, the CRJ (even the -200), when compared to the 135/145, is wider, heavier, and gets fewer 'OMG this is a tiny airplane deathtrap' comments from pax. And while the -200's overhead bins are tiny, I can still stuff my rollaboard in them, whereas I can hardly even fit my little crew cooler in the overheads on a 145.

The CRJ 7 and 9 are in a completely different league, weight and performance wise. The 900 is large enough that pax think it's a 'real' airplane, and the -700 actually has an excess of power, to the point that you often have to manually limit the climb rate above FL300 so it doesn't exceed the pressurization system's ability to catch up. There is simply no comparison between the 7/9 and a 145.

The ERJ175, on the other hand, has specs very close to the -900. Passengers love it, and the interior beats the CRJ hands down. I've never flown the airplane so can't comment on the flying characteristics aside from what you already know (it's the only RJ with autothrottles, etc.)

Again, though, choose the job and QOL first. Airframe should be the last deciding factor.

Dunno why everyone hates the 200. It's a roomier cabin than the 145, and while its ECS system and climb capabilities are pathetic, it handles delightfully when you hand-fly.

How about the one that gives you the most days off. I mean really, an airplane is an airplane. These boards are getting ridiculous. Although, I am interested to read what FaceBiter has to say. That guy is pure gold. Someone light up the FaceBiter beacon while I get my popcorn ready.

The 200 cockpit maybe an inch wider but you feel caved in because of the small windows. The erj has bigger windows and better seats(when new) as well as the cockpit being deeper in length, you can recline near flat. The ERJ has the fadec which the 200 does not, more automated. Also it can climb to its service ceiling fully loaded in one try.

Embraer is growing and Bombardier is struggling. The E170 type might be more advantageous for future opportunities, especially if you're interested in working abroad. Also, the 170/190 type allows you to go to a mainline operator "pre-typed".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After almost 30yrs of this it's about paycheck and schedule. After a couple months the wow factor turns to boredom.

I always thought the erj was more comfortable as a passenger, there is a real chance to get the single seat. I would take the single seat on an erj then any airplane in the sky where I have to sit next to someone.

this is so stupid...especially since for tallflyer he'll switch airlines soon and can tell us which one he likes better...trying to get all those regional types on one cert

Um, last time I checked we're both on our third regional.

That said, you're on your third airplane, I'm only on my second.

Did I pee in your Cheerios one morning back in our Landcare days or something?

Coke vs. Pepsi

I'll choose whichever one pays me more, allows me to live where I want to, and gives me the best career progression. Other than that, they are the same thing. Small differences that amount to very little.

Anyone that chooses their airline based on CRJ 200 vs. ERJ 140 is foolish. CRJ 200 vs 170/190 or CRJ 900 vs Q400 is a completely different argument...choose the airline that has airplanes that will still be flying in 6 years.

Take the one that allows you to live in base or has the easiest commute. Don't chase the plane.

This. I know you won't believe it, but shiny jet syndrome is going to wear off fast. After a year tops, it is just a job. Never let the type of plane you are going to fly at a regional play into the decision process.
In the end, whether it is a beat up old dash 8, or a shiny new mini 737, they are all just airplanes and the autopilot does most of the dancing whilst you pass the hours in the cockpit with boredom.

Personally, my favorite flying was on a turboprop: more challenging, less automation, less long legs....etc...

Go after the important stuff: living in base, best contract, best future, fast upgrade.

Definitely! It's more like a mainliner than an RJ.

No erj operator pays more than AWAC on the lonely old 200.

To add to what comrcap said its down to $$$.

True, but I'd rather live in base for an ERJ operator than commute anywhere else.

True. The money and time saved by living in base equals far more than a couple of dollars an hour in pay.

Either way you are flying an RJ for peanuts. Go where you will have the best QOL. If money over the next few years is crucial then 9E would be worth looking into as they are by far the best starting regional pay.

Another plus for the "9" is that you have to use judgmental oversteering. Just like a heavy! And you get to wear your epaulettes upside down so that lesser RJ drivers can tell that you are an oversteerer.

I like to think every time I see a 200 over steer they are just doing it to be funny.

Sweet baby jesus are you guys a ratard? What RJ is better? What airplane look the kewlest on my instagram?

"Chicks are too dumb to realize United Express isn't really United."

Engines under the wings? Is this airliners.net? Get a grip.

This is a gem right here. ELOHEL. Wowza.

Who cares what it's more "like", the fact that a regional FO's 1st year take home pay to fly the Brazilian space shuttle is less than what Delta gave in profit sharing alone to two of the guys who dumped the lav on the damn thing. Those are the things that matter.

I was hoping for more from you. That wasn't a full swing, come on maaaaan.

Bro, I've never even let loose. You don't even know what a full FB swing is.

Word.

(Filler)

As far as engines under the wings go, I don't see the appeal. On the 175 I can't imagine you could cross-control very much during a crosswind landing, or you'd get an engine strike. Those engines look like they're just ready to eat some pavement.

Of course, I've never flown one, so I speak from a position of ignorance. Any -175 drivers on here who can tell us?

Overwing jet seaplane time > than all of this CRJ vs ERJ nonsense.

http://barrieaircraft.com/images/beriev-be-200-02.jpg

Some Delta Mad Dog driver is probably laughing his a-s-s off as we speak.

Boy are you out of touch. Accelerate/slow to 35 knot T/O performance?

Lose of engine at V1 may result in negative clime performance?

None of you guys are willing to fly that anymore.

16-18° depending on strut compression. Quite a bit more than you'd think by just looking at it.

Interesting, thanks!

How does it perform up high compared to a -200? Or a -700?

I don't care who you are, that is one awesome-looking ride. Is it vodka-powered?

Yep, it's a Beriev Be-200.