How about these hanging off the "sissy horn" yoke guys?
Attachment 476

Any takers? You can buy these on Amazon!

Try landing a Citation X in an X-wind and you'll love the CRJ.

what about the climb performance? How many step climbs does the CRJ have to do to reach FL300 and above? I know we don't have to do any in the ERJ all the way to 370. From talking to others that fly the CRJ it seems they generally cruise at lower altitudes for this reason. I've never flown the CRJ but it seems like it would get annoying to have to level off 2 or 3 times to get through FL300. That cockpit is nice and quiet though :)

Depends on the OAT really. Anything close to ISA and it'll do OK up to mid 30's. ISA +5 and above, you'll be doing 500 FPM at 20,000 feet, and can probably make it to upper 20's before leveling off.

Not talking about the plane, talking about the rams horn. Probably wouldn't matter which aircraft, just plain sucks in a x-wind. The dorknob was a bear, high wing, T-tail, narrow gear. Thank god it had a yoke.

On another subject, was in an XR today coming from the east coast to IAH. Mid 30's, in the detent, ISA -4. .77 was the fastest it would go.

Must have been bent or something...

I did .80 all the way in the xr from BNA to EWR shes a beast and ram horns or not, a x-wind landing is a x-wind landing. An airplane is an airplane guys come on now...............

Flying between ORD and RIC this morning at 370, I had to pull the go-levers back from the detent (at CRZ setting) to keep from overspeeding the LR. Are you remembering to put your gear up after you take off?

Is that what was causing all that noise?

Seriously, it wouldn't go any faster. Maybe it had tired engines.

Yep, but having a wide set of handle bars with a low pivot point hitting your knee vs. a narrow conventional yoke that you can easily get full deflection if necessary is not "an airplane is an aiplane thing".

I have little legs, haha nah I know what your saying have to keep your knees pretty much tucked around the control column, kinda hard to manipulate rudders and yoke at the same time ;)

It must have been really tired. 45,000lbs in the LR today and we would have sped right past .78 if we kept the thrust levers in the detent. If you are at XJ, do you guys have any EPs?

I usually stay out of the "Whose shiny regional jet is better" argument, but me and the lil' lady have been drinking all day and I'm bored. I launched my plastic death tube (EMB-145LR) out of LGA one day with a Comair CRJ right in front of me going to the same place. After we outclimbed it, we beat it and landed a few minutes before said CRJ. Everything I've ever had to deadhead on tells me the ERJ is much more comfortable. So that leads me to believe that I'd rather ride in a ERJ than a CRJ anyday. I'd also rather fly a ERJ than a CRJ. But I've never flown a CRJ because I still have my dignity....

Edit - I'm removing the comment about Comair taxiing slow in CVG. Block or better...I'm going to start taxiing at the speed of nothing. It would be nice if they turned their strobes off though....

Very true. But you gotta admit, after spending 2000 hours with a yoke, coming in to do an x-wind with the rams horns is a bit tricky the first few times. All in all, I like landing the ERJ in x-winds more than the CRJ now. It just grows on ya.

.... BTW, had an XR from IAH-CLT the other day. Climbed to 370 to get around some buildups and the darn thing would over speed every time in the CRZ setting. 47 on board too. Gotta love the XR. :D

The E145 (non-XR) will outclimb a CRJ-200 at altitude but my experience on the jumpseat of the 145 and flying the CRJ says the taco rocket ain't faster than a CRJ once you get it on the step in cruise.

As a passenger I prefer the CRJ because of overhead bins on both sides (easier to get a PNT bag in), 2x2 seating and it is a bit quieter. I think I'm an exception though because I hate the single-seat side of the EMBs because of how the fuselage rolls under, taking away legroom. As a jumpseater I prefer the CRJ because it has a bigger cockpit than the ERJ, but its only marginally better. I'm thankful the CRJ-200 doesn't have XR range, because I couldn't handle 4 hour segments in such a small cockpit or cabin. The 145 does land like a real airplane though, instead of the dive-bomb approach in the CR2.

They are both cheap jets that are fairly reliable means of hauling ~50 back and forth. One is not any better than the other...

i like the CRJ better. Just a gut feeling, that's why (I know it's silly) I won't go to EXJ to fly the needle jet.

CRJ.

Why? Cockpit noise level, bag storage, seat ergonmoics, ceiling height, fire handle placement (I developed a habit of hanging on to the emergency exit foot step in the CRJ - I live in fear of grabing the ERJ fire handle and creating a single engine landing opportunity), yoke, yaw damper, auto pilot, engine starting procedure, anti ice system, climb detent (-700), passenger O2 mask emergency deployment knob location, avionics - almost everything about the avionics, FMS, MFD, speed bugs, method of selecting de-rated takeoff power, TCAS display, VNAV display, CAS display, PTT button, nav/com radios; thrust reversers, foot rest, chart holder, overhead map light (CRJ-700), jumpseat, overhead bin size, cabin aisle headroom (and I'm short), pax seat comfort (neither are good, but CRJ is better), under seat foot/bag room, noise level, cabin seat headroom and APU noise level.

The ERJ seems to climb much better, but cruise much slower (ERJ Mmo .78 vs CRJ Mmo .85) on the other hand I was climbing at 290 kts in the CRJ, vs 240 to .56 in the ERJ. Also the CRJ-200 has a MTOW of 53000, while the ERJ-145(LR) has a MTOW of only 48,501.

What I do prefer about the ERJ is the closet behind the cockpit for crew bags, the bigger-than-a-phone-booth lav, takeoff detent, a/c packs (except the noise), and the BOS base.

That's with 600 CRJ hours and 50 ERJ hours, ask me again in 6 months and we'll see if the ERJ has grown on me.

Exactly which part of the ERJ's starting procedure gives you trouble?

Doesn't give me any trouble... its the Captain's job. ;)

I don't like the starter being a knob with a spring loaded plastic guard. I don't like the TLs having to be in the idle position with no idle detent, or better yet a shutoff detent.

I did like a start pushbutton, and a stop pushbutton. I liked TLs that you advanced out of the shutoff position to introduce fuel. Or returned to shutoff to stop fuel.

Nothing wrong with the ERJs staring procedure. I just liked the CRJs better.

Just face it - Those crazy Canadians and their Molson logic make a far superior aircraft

You're kidding right? :eek:

Sh!t, I'd fly a 152 if someone paid me $150K and I could be home every night.

The only time I've ever had a captain start the engines is if I'm busy with something else...

Do you have trouble operating the spring loaded plastic guard or something? I know they can be tricky, but c'mon;) The thrust levers have an idle detent, its called the stop. The only way to get 'em further back is to deploy the reversers. The shutoff detent is in the same place. Engines won't shutoff unless the thrust levers are at the idle stop.

They just replaced the buttons with a knob. Oh forgot, the knobs trip you up.;) What do you have against letting the FADEC introduce or stop the fuel? I always felt like some retarded yoga student trying to start the CRJ engines.

To each his own. I prefer the ease of use of the ERJ vs the CRJ, the automatic anti-ice (no more worrying about blowing the engine plugs), the automatic engine starts, etc.

Robthree, I don't know about you- but I love the FADEC system in the ERJ. I'm not too fond of screaming down the runway at 70 knots, trying to match the N1s to the carats. And as for the engine start- gotta love that too. It's fool-proof in the ERJ.

Oh well, to all their own.

The dornknobs was even more fool-proof and required even less input from the pilot.

Wow... that's hard to imagine. All we do is turn a knob and start a timer. :D

Thats if you use FLC in the ERJ. 8-10 (weight dependent) degrees up below from 1500'-10000' and 3-5 (again weight dependent) degrees up from 10000'-FL300 and then 1000fpm to altitude. Above 10000', 270-290kts in the climb is standard.

Well, for the start it was about the same. When it was running, less input and button pressing to make sure you had the right setting. Just put it in the detent and Mr. FADEC did all the rest.

I'll only use FLC below 10k on a climb, in a descent flight idle and -1800 fpm will usually yield about 240. Above 10k, I only use FLC in an XR, in everything else I use VS mode or SPD in smooth air only to stick to the profile.

That's pretty interesting. Ours is similar. Only we have to select the mode for the detent.... oh the humanity! :D

Mr. FADEC is a beautiful thing though! :cool:

How is the the weight restrictions with both jets? It seams that the ERJ 140/45 has more problems with wt restrictions than the CRJ? I also remember someone saying previously (Prob SAAB) the 145XR doesn't have many of the restrictions that the other have. Too me, when I worked at Eagle, throwing bags, the crews were always dealing with restrictions. I recently flew out of SLC on a CRJ to DEN. We were full with 50, 3 crew members, and a jumpseater as well. I can't ever remember seeing a ERJ being able to do that in my Eagle days no matter what time of year it was. The DBQ-ORD flight was 28 min so their fuel loads weren't outrageous, even in wx and gnd holds which is everyday life in Chicago. Correct me if I am wrong please!

ANP, any regional aircraft is going to have weight restrictions. Some more than others. Maybe we've exaggerated the ability of the 145, but the 145XR really is a different beast. As long as your landing structural weight isn't a problem, it will go at max gross- no problem, at least according to the ATOG charts. We've had no problems with a heavy load and headwinds IAH-PSP. Turned out to be 3:32 total flight time. But I don't have a lot of experience with the thing at hot and high airports, so take my post with a grain of salt.

Although, with a creative crew- weight problems can be solved quite easily. A few empty galley carts here, some half weights there. Do a'la CHQ and leave bags, maybe even an FA. :D If fuel's a problem, carve out some of the contingency fuel and cruise a little lower.

Got ya, Thanks!

I won't argue that the 140 isn't weight restricted too often. Generally though, it is for zero fuel weight, not enroute burn to make landing weight.

Well, I'm flying the ERJ now. But believe me, the 328's was just easier to use and more pilot friendly. On a go around you didn't have to pull BACK into the detend and THEN press a button for the proper power setting. In cruise, just pull it back into the cruise detent. No worrying about going through a "weak" detent", seeing T/O Reserve on the EICAS and then pulling it back and pressing another button. Then have some idiot CA **** his pants because of what just happened.

The engine shutdown was a more positive method as well. Lift the trigger and pull the thrust lever back, simple. No worrying about having the TL not at the stop and turning the knob and NOT having the engine shut off.

uhhh max thrust!!! full foward homie

Till when? Point I'm getting at is put it in the detent and thats it. PNF doesn't have to do anything, like verify the power is set correctly while trying to help aviate, navigate, or communicate

Until the thrust levers don't go forward any more.
Seriously man, your training on the ERJ must have been pretty bad if these simple things gave you problems.

Nice avatar...I work at NASA.

-LAFF

I think your reading/comprehension skills must be "pretty bad". No ****! All the way till it won't go foward anymore! Thanks!

WHEN do you pull it back, press a button for climb power is what I wrote. Get it now??

Point I'm getting at, the 328's FADEC was easier to manage and required WAY less pilot interface to get what you wanted. I never said it gave me problems. But the more unnecessarily complicated something is (the ERJ's FADEC) the more prone it is to have issues.

So from this thread, we have come to the conclusion then that the ERJ climbs better, but the CRJ cruses better. Which has been my observation. Both are in dyer need of slats, and more power.. the ERJ certainly could use a more critical wing.. both are however, short range, commuter jets and do a fine job at making regional airline Exec rich, while we view the jobs as "Career builders" and accept crap wags to fly them..

Sums it up, I think.. eh?