Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Compass EMB Options

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
I'm surprised how much more fuel the 170 burns compared to the 145.

I don't have specifics, but I know that a full weight 145 at around M.74 is roughly 2400lbs/hr at FL360.

How many seats are on the Compass planes? Is it the 76 seat config?

You are kidding right?? The 170 is nearly twice as heavey with larger engines. I would also imagine more drag causing specific range/Nautical mile per poud to go down. Even empty with just the two pilots the CRJ7 probably burns more than the EMB 145. Couple of weeks ago @FL410 we were still burning a little over 3000/ hr.

On a side note, when I was an FE on the E-3 AWCS we were happy with 12,000/hr. If I remember right, been almost 6 yr, in cruise @ FL310 .72M we would burn in the range of 18,000-20,000/hr.
 
No I'm not kidding. That's 50% more fuel for 50% more seats and 50% more weight. I guess it makes sense, but it wasn't what I had in my head as far as a guess.

I've ridden on a few 170s and they are great planes, but I'm just surprised at the fuel differences regardless of the different engine mounting, etc. It wasn't meant to be any kind of a put down, just an expression of my surprise.
 
Hey no offense or compliment taken. I didn't design the thing, I just fly it.

Sure it's only 26 more seats, but twelve of those seats are first class, which bring in more money than the average coach seat. (i know, i know, not all the time) But it's also only one extra person (+1 FA) to move 76 people instead of 50. Even if fuel costs per seat are equal, the economics are superior.
 
Hey no offense or compliment taken. I didn't design the thing, I just fly it.

Sure it's only 26 more seats, but twelve of those seats are first class, which bring in more money than the average coach seat. (i know, i know, not all the time) But it's also only one extra person (+1 FA) to move 76 people instead of 50. Even if fuel costs per seat are equal, the economics are superior.

By that theory everyone should be flying A-380s, right? The most economical aircraft for the mission is mission specific.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom