CRJ 200 vs. E-145. What are the differences?

[sleddriver77]

Just curious about the major operational differences between the CRJ and the ERJ. I am looking for actual unbiased INFORMATION, (Yeah, I know... Why'd I come HERE for that.) from people who have flown or been operationally exposed to both. I am NOT looking for the perspective of the uninformed who have ridden or jumpseated in both- I have that myself.

Thanks

 

[labbats]

The ERJ can fly up to max altitude at any weight. The CRJ is listed to fly to 410, the ERJ to 370. The CRJ has a faster speed limitation (.82 to .78 for the ERJ I think) than the ERJ, but in reality it never goes that fast while the ERJ has no problems at any altitude/temp.

Basically the CRJ has higher limitations, but doesn't have the reserve power to meet them. Plus I hate the low windows.

 

[amcnd]

Having flown both!! I would say this. If I just wanted to go around the patch and do some landings and fun flying, I would chose the ERJ. Its more fun to fly!! but who is going to let you take one out for fun!! But If I was going to fly one for a job 90hrs a month in weather hot and cold, and all around every day flying I would take the CRJ 200.

 

[BoilerUP]

The -200 isn't nearly as smart as the 145 family, ie if you want cowl heat you turn the wings on, then the cowls, then wings back off. No FADEC; thats the job of the PNF.

You don't really "flare" the 200 in the purest sense; you round it out about 10-15 ft and more or less keep the nose level until the mains touch.

Obviously the 200 is a poor climber compared to just about anything; if you are keeping 290 in the climb you are down to about 500fpm in the mid 20s. If you got a good head of steam (320) in the low teens, it sustains the climb much better.

Some IDE guys at CHQ or some TSA people at AWAC or SKW would know better than I would...

 

[honeycomb]

The CRJ (not the 700/900) is a 15 year older (approx.) design. No FADECS and the such. (Though that is not a problem.)

I like the Avionics in the ERJ better (with the Universals) and I like the CRJ as far as systems and pilot operations.

The ERJ is a clean cockpit. I like the PTT on the Glareshield. I like the CKBKRS in the overhead (and not behind me).....etc.....on and on. BUT, the ERJ is an Airbus (in likeness) approach to systems automation. I DO NOT LIKE THAT approach.

When I move a switch I want that system to do what I told it. In the ERJ that is not the case. If the airplane thinks it is on the ground (when it is actually in the air) you do not get Anti-Ice/Electrical (changes)/You still have T/R's/No Pressurization change over/etc. If it thinks it is in the air when on the ground....well now you get NO Anti-Skid/No GLD's/No T/R's/No electical shift/No steeeering/etc.....

On the ERJ if the switch says (on/off/auto).....ON does not mean ON.....nope....it means if the computer wants it on then it will be ON....

In the CRJ (in likeness to Boeing) if I turn something ON it comes ON. And the switches follow the Boeing model. Things go foward for Normal Ops.

On the ERJ if things are normal just look up and look for lights out (sort'a) and the switches at the 12'o'clock position.

I like that (the last two) much better.

I do like the Ram's Horns though. I wished the CRJ had the Cockpit of a ERJ and I would be very happy indeed.

They are both busssssssssy for the NFP regardless of which one you fly.

I dis-like the ERJ overall and I favor the CRJ in all operations. The ERJ is a little more modern. (And, a POJ other than avionics.)

Just my .02......

 

[Rogue5]

The -200 isn't nearly as smart as the 145 family, ie if you want cowl heat you turn the wings on, then the cowls, then wings back off.

I am confused by this statement. Why would you cycle the wing A/I in order to turn the cowl A/I on? There is no limitation that requires this.

Just reach over and turn on the cowls...

 

[honeycomb]

I am confused by this statement. Why would you cycle the wing A/I in order to turn the cowl A/I on? There is no limitation that requires this.

Just reach over and turn on the cowls...

Early on the CRJ's would get grounded because it would BLOW the Blow Out Plug on the Cowl Engine Anti-Ice. Looks like a plunger. No MEL at the time. And, no flight into known icing. ON and ON. We started carrying a kit in the hell hole for such an event. But the a/c was grounded until fixed. I was told later that the a/c was allowed to fly with rev on board as long as not into icing conditions.

Anyway it is not in any publication that I could find (years ago). It was Trib-ul-knowedge not to turn the Cowls on without first turning the Wings on.

Less force to the cowls and therefore (in theory) would not blow out the Blow Out Plug.

But, Nothing at the time I flew it that was in print.

 

[Rogue5]

Early on the CRJ's would get grounded since that would BLOW the Blow Out Plug on the Cowl Engine Anti-Ice. Looks like a plunger.

Anyway it is not in any publication that I could find (years ago). It was Trib-u-knowedge not to turn the Cowls on without first turning the Wings on.

Less force to the cowls and therefore (in theory) would not blow out the Blow Out Plug.

But, Nothing at the time I flew it that was in print.

Interesting.

Well I've been flying the CL65 for three years and I've had that 14th stage plunger blow out once, and it was after using the wing and the cowls together. I've never used the wing/cowl/wing method for the cowl A/I alone and its never been a problem.

 

[honeycomb]

BTW, I have had over 7 mx Emergency's in an ERJ. And, only one in a CRJ.

I have had 5 engine failures in the Allison/RR engines on the ERJ and none on the CRJ.

I hate those Allison/RR egines. The 3007 series is pure crap. At least when I flew them. They burn more fuel for less thrust. They have less of a bypass and is the only reason they are marginal at best at 370.

I have been to 410 four times in a CRJ. Twice on factory delivery's and twice with Rev on board. If you have any experience it can be done under the right circumstances. But, the GE's are not good up at 370 either.

The speed issue is funny too me. The CRJ can do anything an ERJ can do, in regards to speed, at the same weight. And, with less fuel burn.

I'll take the GE's any-day over the (now) RR's. That is.....Six days a week and Twice on Sunday.

I have a lot of bad things to say about the ERJ's airframe and components. At least in comparision to other a/c I have flown including the CRJ.

 

[honeycomb]

Interesting.

Well I've been flying the CL65 for three years and I've had that 14th stage plunger blow out once, and it was after using the wing and the cowls together. I've never used the wing/cowl/wing method for the cowl A/I alone and its never been a problem.

I believe it has been taken care of by Bombardier. I never blew one. And, I don't recall if I always followed the (un-offical/not in print) company policy.