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

CRJ700 Series 701/705

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

T-handle

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
344
Curious, what is/are the difference(s) between the series 701 and 705? And are there any significant differences between the CRJ700 and CRJ900?
 
Differences 101

Differences between the 701 and the 705: The 705 is basically a CRJ900 that is configured with 70 seats. They did redesign the wing to get an extra 300 nm range out of it. You'll see the redesign of the wing in the winglets, they stick out from the wing at about a 55 degree angle instead of the near 90 degree angle that you see on most RJ's. The first one won't be ready to fly for another couple of months. I believe it was Air Canada that wanted these. They wanted to be able to fly from Montreal to Vancouver year round so they ordered enough of these 705's for Bombardier to stick them on the assembly line. So far, no other carriers have ordered any.

I can't speak for many of the differences in the -70 and -90 except to say that the -90 holds 90 pax, has bigger engines, and performs about the same as the -50, maybe a little better. Nearly all the systems are the same between the --70 and the -90. The pilot reference manual (kind of a Bombardier POH) is the same for the 2 aircraft.
 
evidently you do not need differences training between the 700 and 900 or so i was told.
 
US Airways was the first to order these, though they later had to change the order from 705s to 701s because the 705s were a pretty straightforward violation of US Airways scope at that point.



Iflyamouse said:
Differences between the 701 and the 705: The 705 is basically a CRJ900 that is configured with 70 seats. They did redesign the wing to get an extra 300 nm range out of it. You'll see the redesign of the wing in the winglets, they stick out from the wing at about a 55 degree angle instead of the near 90 degree angle that you see on most RJ's. The first one won't be ready to fly for another couple of months. I believe it was Air Canada that wanted these. They wanted to be able to fly from Montreal to Vancouver year round so they ordered enough of these 705's for Bombardier to stick them on the assembly line. So far, no other carriers have ordered any.

I can't speak for many of the differences in the -70 and -90 except to say that the -90 holds 90 pax, has bigger engines, and performs about the same as the -50, maybe a little better. Nearly all the systems are the same between the --70 and the -90. The pilot reference manual (kind of a Bombardier POH) is the same for the 2 aircraft.
 
The 700 also has a forward lav. The 900 has dual aft strakes on the bottom of the empennage in place of the fairing on the top of the fuselage on the 700.
 
A question off topic:

Are autothrottles standard on the CRJ700 and 900? And if so is there also vnav and autoland?

Thanks
 
The 700 also has a forward lav.
United Express' CRJ-700s is in a two class configuration but only one lav in the rear but it's a larger size than on the CRJ-200. I've flown on ASAs CRJ-700 and they have two lavs but just one class configuration. Different operators with different configurations.

Are autothrottles standard on the CRJ700 and 900?
No. Just advisory VNAV like on the CRJ-200.
 
Last edited:
I actually had a USAir mainline Jumpseater ask, "This airplane has no autothrottles?!?" (referring to the 701) "That ought to be a safety issue!!"

What a tool.
 
After flying the avro for just a few months and going back to a no auto throttle airplane that UsAir guy is right. It is a safety issue.

At Mesaba you could always tell the captains that came from being an f/o on the Avro. They would always forget to add power after leveling off from a descent.
 
I'll remember what you said about the 900 performing similar to the -200 when I pass you at FL370 at .83 mach. (Gotta watch that RVSM crap)

The 900 seats 86, has the option of a rear galley/rear galley door. Front and Aft Lavs. Large closet for pilot junk. There are no operational differences between the 700 and 900, although the 900 lands at a much higher pitch attitude. The biggest difference from the 700 to the 900 is the 20' fuselage plug fore of the wing.

And I can tell you these things as fact about the 900 because no one else owns or operates them. We have 38.
 
Ace McCoy said:
After flying the avro for just a few months and going back to a no auto throttle airplane that UsAir guy is right. It is a safety issue.


It is not a safety issue it is a situational awareness issue. Apparently they had none.
 
bitememesa said:
I'll remember what you said about the 900 performing similar to the -200 when I pass you at FL370 at .83 mach. (Gotta watch that RVSM crap)

control yourself young padawan you are turning to the dark (JO) side.

the light is the 700, the mac daddy of CRJ's.
:p

not to brag, but some people can take the airplane SAFELY above 370. i remember someone at mesa setting the shaker off in a 900 while climbing high. now who might that be?
 
some long 700 routes i'm aware of:
ORD-NAS
DFW-BUF
DFW-NAS
XNA-LAX
IAD-AUS

the 700 is right around 2000nm range (1947 for the ER)
 
Last edited:
That can't be as bad as Latrobe, PA to Kapuskasing, ON (CYYU) in a Jetstream 31. At least you had an autopilot.

The amazing thing was most of the time it was warmer way up there (500 miles north of Detroit) than when we left PA.
 
right now they are doing semi-cons w/ xna-lax and dfw-sba
but ord-nas i would think is a transcon
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom