Emb 120

[Cowboypilot]

Hello all.
My employer is considering buying a ex regional EMB 120. Could some of you with experience in the aircraft give me some "numbers". The EMB website doesnt help much. Some questions I have are:
What is the max fuel cap.? What is the burn rate first hour, second. If topped off how many pax can you get on? What is the "real world" best cruise altitude? TAS at that altitude? What does the "A" mod to the engines do for you?
Please feel free to ad any info you can. If aquired we will reoutfit to 19 pax.
Thanks in advance.

 

[tbkane]

MGW 25529
MTOW 25353
MLW 24802
ZFW 23148

Max fuel is 2928??? Per side It had a four hour range don't remember exact hourly fuel burns but I think we just said about 1,000 per hour was average. It will cruise at 23,000 but above that it was not very good. It will do 250ish in cruise depending on weight and temp. I don't remember the A mod. The above number are for the RT the ER is higher.

Scary I haven't flown it since 2001 and have typed on three other airplanes since but those are the only numbers from any airplane I can still dig out.

Would be a great airplane with 19 pax you can load it up full fuel and take a lot of bags... We were usually weight restricted to about 25-27 pax in summer due to weight, and bags.

 

[duck_killer]

EMB 120 ER MTOW 26433
Zero fuel Weight 24030
Fuel burn rule of thumb 1000 an hour
With the new FAA weights with 30 pax you can only take 750+/- in the back, and even then you might have to move the crew bags inside. More importantly the FAA is about to rule the collins FMS unsuitable for enroute navigation. And if the FAA has its way the go around weights when in icing conditions will shave 1500+/- pounds off of landing weight.

From a pilots perspective though she is a bute to fly.

 

[Baze]

Geez... the FAA just can't leave the poor Bro alone.

Yes, she was fun to fly.

 

[Palomino]

most fun you'll have at the airline level these days

3000# gas will get you just about anywhere

1000#/hr is an excellent wag

don't run the packs on high - they will fry

Brasilia mantra: adjust power - adjust trim (rudder)

quite a machine, but very finicky. master that plane and the rest of your career will be a piece of cake.

and please don't call it 'the Bro'. it's an Emb-120 Brasilia.

 

[Baze]

I'll call it whatever I want to.

Turbo Taco, Mexican King Air, Brasilnut, Brasildo... with affection, of course.

 

[wms]

Manzier !

 

[WalterSobchak]

The Bro-zilla!

 

[Mookie]

What about "Bra?" or Bra-Killya.

I think it's uncle Pedro Brasilia's family project. the system integration is like each family member got a major system, designed it, and then threw it all together at the end. It has something like 34 electrical busses, right?? I still don't "really" know what happens during a "soft transfer." thank you very much a neill...

Mookie

 

[Palomino]

call it what you like...but they all sound silly and childish.

yes, i'm a bit sensitive about my first type rating. but i like the plane and appreciate what it gave to my career.

then again...i never had a prop overspeed to attempt murder on me either. then i might have a number of not-so-nice names to call the Brasilia.

flame away SkyWest'rs!

 

[Baze]

What about "Bra?" or Bra-Killya.

I think it's uncle Pedro Brasilia's family project. the system integration is like each family member got a major system, designed it, and then threw it all together at the end. It has something like 34 electrical busses, right?? I still don't "really" know what happens during a "soft transfer." thank you very much a neill...

Mookie

Yeah, how did I leave "Bra-Killya" out?

Palomino, the EMB-120 is my ONLY type rating. The names may be childish, but there's nothing wrong with having a little fun. After all, we should try
to have at least some fun when we're flying. We can't always talk about
our CBA and the amendable date, etc.

 

[twin beaver]

I like "vibroliner" ;-)

RT Weights
Ramp 25529
Takeoff 25353
Landing 24802
Zero Fuel 23148

ER Weights
Ramp 26609
Takeoff 26443
Landing 25794
Zero Fuel 24030

As far as engines, 118 vs 118A/B, The A/B's are newer with slightly higher temp/torque numbers. I've never flown with straight 118's, so no other info. We operate the A's and B's interchanably.

Max fuel is 2866 pounds/side.
Good alt is 200-250, depending on leg length of course.
Overall I love flying the Brazilia.

 

[erj-145mech]

EMB 120 ER MTOW 26433
Zero fuel Weight 24030
Fuel burn rule of thumb 1000 an hour
With the new FAA weights with 30 pax you can only take 750+/- in the back, and even then you might have to move the crew bags inside. More importantly the FAA is about to rule the collins FMS unsuitable for enroute navigation. And if the FAA has its way the go around weights when in icing conditions will shave 1500+/- pounds off of landing weight.

From a pilots perspective though she is a bute to fly.

If they are going to be flying part 91, there are no standard FAA pax weights to contend with, specially with only 19 seats.

 

[Cowboypilot]

thank you, but please keep some operational experience coming. I got some weights, but how about an average empty weight. What is the max fuel at 19 pax.
Thanks again.

 

[Palomino]

i recall an empty weight of around 17,000 lbs give or take.

so my guess is...

30 pax @ 190 = 5700
45 bags @ 30 lbs = 1350

17.0
5.7
+1.4
24.4

26.4
-24.4
2.0 fuel with full pax/avg bags in a 30 seat config

19 pax @ 190 = 3610
1000# bags

17.0
3.6
+1.0
21.6
26.4
-21.6
4.8 fuel with 19/avg bags

that's how i remember the numbers for an ER model. but, it's been 7 years since i've flown one.

 

[Mookie]

try to get ahold of some of the guys who fly them for nascar teams. i iheard that Jr. E has one of skywest's old bra's.

mookie

 

[Flyin2low]

Get to know where the flap reset button is. Don't hold in icing conditions. Aux Gens will fail every other leg. Cool airplane.

 

[CF34-3B1]

I hope your company has substantial maintenance assets, or a big MX budget.

It's not that the 120 is unreliable, but as others have pointed out, it's a very complex airplane systems wise.

And despite the Mexican king Air nickname, she's no King Air when it comes to systems.

Great airplane though, in almost 3000 hours, it only tried to kill me twice.

 

[Coool Hand Luke]

Hello all.
My employer is considering buying a ex regional EMB 120. Could some of you with experience in the aircraft give me some "numbers". The EMB website doesnt help much. Some questions I have are:
What is the max fuel cap.? What is the burn rate first hour, second. If topped off how many pax can you get on? What is the "real world" best cruise altitude? TAS at that altitude? What does the "A" mod to the engines do for you?
Please feel free to ad any info you can. If aquired we will reoutfit to 19 pax.
Thanks in advance.

Cowboy, we are a 91 corp flight dept and we added an EMB-120 (RT) to our fleet in 2005. Purchased from Skywest who got it from Comair. Used to be 162CA. The FAA allowed us to go to a low utilization mx plan after a year of operations under our belt. Have had very few mx issues. I would for sure recommend the PW118A/B and an ER model if you will ever do much high/hot or long legs.

 

[deluxxx]

In my oppinion the E-120 has poor flying characteristics. It is heavy on all axis, and consitently needs to be trimed. I have only flown the ER model, and the specs above are correct. The engines are very reliable, however the propellers are the planes Achiles heal. The other systems are pretty simple and reliable. Reoccuring problems are gear door locks coming un done, as well as flap dissagreements. Max speed is 272 kt and this can be achieved under power straight and level. Like most turbo props it can slow quickly. One virtue of the E-120 is its ability to land in a short distance. Are fleet of 60 are very reliable over all and we have few major mx problems.

 

[jdlilfan]

try to get ahold of some of the guys who fly them for nascar teams. i iheard that Jr. E has one of skywest's old bra's.

mookie

Waltrip racing has a 'bro. Flew in once for a quick turn. Had a cartoon dog on the tail. I don't remember them taking a lot of fuel though, maybe 1600 lbs?

 

[CarjCapt]

Brakilla

Fine aircraft except for two things, no rudder auto trim (except for the flying pilot saying to the none flying pilot "Trim"), and the propeller from hell.

Prop had to have three different ways to prevent a overspeed and they didn't always work. I know I had my overspeed and thankfully it was on the ground. The fuel topping worked and stopped the overspeed at 108%. In a word Scary. By the way when the engine was feathered it actually only went 56% and I had to shut it down. The information about the prop speed and what actually happened was via the FDR.

Good aircraft just be careful with the condition levers. Slow and smooth is the mantra. Also never take off with without the electric feather pumps working my company tried to get me to fly with one broken and I refused.

 

[Coool Hand Luke]

In my oppinion the E-120 has poor flying characteristics. It is heavy on all axis, and consitently needs to be trimed. I have only flown the ER model, and the specs above are correct. The engines are very reliable, however the propellers are the planes Achiles heal. The other systems are pretty simple and reliable. Reoccuring problems are gear door locks coming un done, as well as flap dissagreements. Max speed is 272 kt and this can be achieved under power straight and level. Like most turbo props it can slow quickly. One virtue of the E-120 is its ability to land in a short distance. Are fleet of 60 are very reliable over all and we have few major mx problems.

For the record he is talking about KIAS. KTAS is 290 at reduced power (730 T6 & 900 lbs. hour in the mid 20's) and I see that every day. 300-310 KTAS if I really want it (750 T6). As for the flap problems, we never land with more than flaps 25...never had one single flap issue. I hear full flap landings will give you problems, but you sould really never need full flaps on landing now matter how short the runway. If you need full flaps, you probably don/t have the runway to get back out.

 

[indianboy7]

. If you need full flaps, you probably don/t have the runway to get back out.

It's done all the time....places like Oxnard, Imperial, Crescent City, Arcata, whenever we feel like it......full flaps landings are a non-event in the thing.......most of the time if the flap computer has a problem, it clears itself up in a few minutes.....

 

[Ben Dover]

From a pilots perspective though she is a bute to fly.

Do you have a bad memory, or did you just never encounter turbulence or icing conditions?

 

[Cardinal]

Burrito Bomber, with all the love the term entails. Like most turboprops she does really well at FL240. Certified to 32 back in the day, limited to 28 with RVSM these days. She'll get there, but if you're heavy it might take 35-40 minutes. Also it helps if it's ISA-10 or -20, but then you'll probably freeze your tail off with the packs running full tilt, so you won't want to stay there for very long.

You'll fill the cabin with smoke several times before nursing the packs becomes second nature. I did it just yesterday. The gear retracts at it's leisure, just be patient. Buy a sunshade for the cockpit. It's a pleasant aircraft, and you can't beat the capabilities (295kts, 29 pax) for 1000/lbs hr.

 

[Crizz]

Great performing plane with many quirks.

If you're 6'+ you should probably look elsewhere if you like to have feeling in your legs.

 

[CF34-3B1]

the one thing that really bugged me about it was the way the windshield heat distorted the view when you turned it on. Still don't know how they got that certified.

 

[John Pennekamp]

For the record he is talking about KIAS. KTAS is 290 at reduced power (730 T6 & 900 lbs. hour in the mid 20's) and I see that every day. 300-310 KTAS if I really want it (750 T6). As for the flap problems, we never land with more than flaps 25...never had one single flap issue. I hear full flap landings will give you problems, but you sould really never need full flaps on landing now matter how short the runway. If you need full flaps, you probably don/t have the runway to get back out.

I flew them for one company where the standard profile was flaps 25 unless performance limited. Then I flew them for ASA who always did full flaps. It lands SO much better at 25, if you use it all you must land with power or it'll drop onto the runway with a spine crushing thud most of the time. Also, at flaps 25, you're already configured for icing conditions.

We never had too many flap problems at the company that used 25, but lots at ASA with full flaps. Mostly assymetries and disagreements as opposed to outright failures. I've done several no flap landings... fast, but not a big deal to stop.

The -120 is probably the fastest turboprop of its generation. At the first company, we regularly flew them at 300TAS+ and FL280. We had 118A/B engines, which gave better climbs at higher allowable T6s. ASA pulled them back to 270ish and flew them in the low 20s with straight 118s.

Those that whine about it being a mx hog are correct, but that's with the abuse of 20 cycles per day in an airline setting. In a corporate setting I suspect that the airplane would be a lot more reliable, and cheaper to maintain.

At about $2 million per airplane on the used market, it'a about the most bang you can get for the buck in a turboprop. I'd say go for it.

 

[Cardinal]

Those that whine about it being a mx hog are correct, but that's with the abuse of 20 cycles per day in an airline setting. In a corporate setting I suspect that the airplane would be a lot more reliable, and cheaper to maintain.

I'd concur. We have a small fleet, and it becomes quite clear that each tail has a "personality." And probably 30-40% of significant write-ups are repeat items. One tail has an APU Gen that randomly kicks off line, one pops a windshield heat CB once a week, one has a funny sidetone issue. These are known issues that are just proving near impossible to fix over the course of months. If a crew is dedicated to the aircraft there won't be many surprises. Persistent annoyances, perhaps, but not broke at an outstation shockers.