Emb145 ----> Ce750

[pdub20s]

How easy is the transition from the 145 into the 750? The instrumentation (PFD,MFD, EICAS) are very similar. And I know they have the same engines.

 

[t-bone]

I don't know anything about the EMB-145, but I know that the engines on the 10 have been de-rated down to 7000ish pounds of thrust (on the newer models, 6700ish pounds on the older serial numbers). I'd assume there is a difference in ITT limitations that go along with the change in thrust.

You'll enjoy the fact that your first line of defense when it comes to thunderstorms is now to go up, rather than around, the storms. You can usually see the tops from FL430 or FL450, making it much easier to pick your way through the storms.

 

[CALRepublic]

just be ready to do TEB-LAX-HPN in one day...

 

[pdub20s]

I don't know anything about the EMB-145, but I know that the engines on the 10 have been de-rated down to 7000ish pounds of thrust (on the newer models, 6700ish pounds on the older serial numbers). I'd assume there is a difference in ITT limitations that go along with the change in thrust.

You'll enjoy the fact that your first line of defense when it comes to thunderstorms is now to go up, rather than around, the storms. You can usually see the tops from FL430 or FL450, making it much easier to pick your way through the storms.

7426lbs of thrust on the 145. i sure hope the wx radar is a lot better than the 145s

 

[fischman]

7426lbs of thrust on the 145. i sure hope the wx radar is a lot better than the 145s

I have never flown the X, but it is a Cessna product. Not the best built airplanes in the Bizjet world. I wouldn't count on a fantastic radar.

 

[bosdrx]

How easy is the transition from the 145 into the 750? The instrumentation (PFD,MFD, EICAS) are very similar. And I know they have the same engines.

I flew the EMB 145 before I came to the X. There are a lot of similarities that makes the transition fairly easy. What I found was that although they're similar, they're just different enough to be a little confusing. This had me forgetting that they were, in fact, two different airplanes... There are small changes in the engines, the screens have different features, etc. But, knowing the powerplant, and avionics did take some of the pressure off. I managed to catch up on some zzz's during the numerous fmz classes. Good luck!

 

[pdub20s]

I flew the EMB 145 before I came to the X. There are a lot of similarities that makes the transition fairly easy. What I found was that although they're similar, they're just different enough to be a little confusing. This had me forgetting that they were, in fact, two different airplanes... There are small changes in the engines, the screens have different features, etc. But, knowing the powerplant, and avionics did take some of the pressure off. I managed to catch up on some zzz's during the numerous fmz classes. Good luck!

but im sure that the X has more get up and go than the 145 ;-)

 

[CRJFlyer]

I'd say so!!! we climb around .80 at maybe 2000 ft/min in the FL30's....No problems getting to FL410 or higher.. Except when ISA is on the plus side then I've seen 1200'/min up to the higher altitudes..

From what I remember I think the CRJ out performed the ERJ as far as climb rate vs. TAS... I "raced" a buddy of mine outta MCO once. He took off just before us, and was on the same route up north..We were talking to each other over 123.45 and I think we were climbing faster and were at a high TAS..Of course the CRJ sucked a$$ once it got above @FL250.. Not sure how the ERJ performed through the 20's. You'd definitely like the performance of the X.

 

[pdub20s]

I'd say so!!! we climb around .80 at maybe 2000 ft/min in the FL30's....No problems getting to FL410 or higher.. Except when ISA is on the plus side then I've seen 1200'/min up to the higher altitudes..

From what I remember I think the CRJ out performed the ERJ as far as climb rate vs. TAS... I "raced" a buddy of mine outta MCO once. He took off just before us, and was on the same route up north..We were talking to each other over 123.45 and I think we were climbing faster and were at a high TAS..Of course the CRJ sucked a$$ once it got above @FL250.. Not sure how the ERJ performed through the 20's. You'd definitely like the performance of the X.

can the X out climb a 757 or 767 from start to finish??

 

[realityman]

Unlikely. The X is not a very good climbing aircraft. Yeah, our speeds are incredible, but vertical speed (going up) leaves a lot to be desired. And heaven help you if you need to climb with the anti-ice on.

I'd say at an average weight, the X can get from sea level to FL430 in about 32 minutes. If you're taking off heavy, count on 40+ minutes. And that's at temps somewhere around ISA.