Embraer 170/190 performance questions (for ops downunder)

[Shed Driver]

I’m after some performance information on the E170 and E190.

There are a few companies downunder looking at operating the E-jets, into small outback airports that normally only have Dash 8’s/ Brasilia’s and occasionally 146’s and Fokker 100’s. These companies have released press release stating the E170/190 will out perform all current jets and their runway requirements are equal to turboprops.

These airports have marginal facilities, short runways (less than 2000m (6500ft) and high temps (30º - 40º C / ISA +15 - +25).

Embraer data on their web site only gives figures for ISA at sea level.

So what would the take-off weight and payload operating from the following runways (dry and wet runway figures)?

Temperature for all airports ISA+15 and ISA +25. Must be enough fuel on board to fly 500nm. All runways are 30m (98’ wide) and do not have turning nodes.

Airport 1

Elev: 600 ft
TODA: 2060m (6759ft)
ASDA: 2060m (6759ft)
LDA: 2000m (6562ft)

Airport 2

Elev: 400 ft
TODA: 1759m (5771ft)
ASDA: 1750m (5741ft)
LDA: 1410m (4626ft)

Airport 3

Elev: 400 ft
TODA: 1860m (6201ft)
ASDA: 1800m (5906ft)
LDA: 1800m (5906ft)

Airport 4

Elev 1600 ft
TODA: 1784m (5853 ft)
ASDA: 1770m (5807ft)
LDA: 1770m (5807ft)

Airport 5

Elev: 1800 ft
TODA: 1770m (5807ft)
ASDA: 1797m (5896ft)
LDA: 1797m

Airport 6

Elev: 950 ft
TODA: 1640m (5381ft)
ASDA: 1900m (6234ft)
LDA: 1900m (6234ft)

Also what would the average fuel burn per hour be for the E170/190?

Thanks in advance

Shed driver

 

[Longhorn]

Rule of thumb for the 190 is the following.

6000 lbs first hour
4000 lbs per hour there after
1000 lbs per approach
comfortable landing fuel of 5000lbs

28880 lbs = +/-5 hours of fuel with 5000 landing and 1 approach. Range works out to around 2200-2300 miles without an alt. Like I said, all numbers above are rule of thumb but work really well. As for the above rwy's, I dont think they would be much of a problems with T/O 1 and flaps 4 for takeoff. We do it out of BTV all the time with the runway construction and if my memory serves me right the toda is about the same.

lh

 

[Falcon Jet 1]

I saw th issue pf BCA about the HUD, and saw on the glareshield that they had ballast dump?WTFIT?

 

[Longhorn]

?? Never heard of that. We do have a water dump button that is used to, well, dump water in the potable water system during the decent but that is over on the FO's side. Sorry I could not help with the ballast dump. I dont know about the 170 though, maybe they have one, but the 190 does not.

 

[ALGFLYR]

Just looking at the unfactored landing distance in the QRH for the 170, at max landing wt. of 72,300#, on a dry runway it is 2,505 feet. On a wet runway, it is 3,910 feet. That assumes maximum manual braking. Thrust reversers are NOT included in the calculation. Altitude corrections for a dry runway is add 50 feet per 1000' above SL, and 85 feet per 1000' wet. Not sure about the 190, but I would assume it is a little more. Would have to get out the manual for the TO calculations but I have taken off out of KEYW (Key West, Florida) in the summer with 72 pax and had no problems with a flap 4 T/O. Not sure the runway distance right now, but it aint very long...

 

[LearLove]

Yeah what he said above. The best comparison for us here in the US would be EYW (key west, FL) 5000 and 90 F plus in the summer. Flaps 4 TO no problem.

 

[ALGFLYR]

Not sure why I couldn't edit my last post. Anyway, I should have said thrust reversers are NOT included in those calculations...

 

[Longhorn]

ALGFLYR,

Edit feature times out and goes away. I fixed it for you though.

 

[Shed Driver]

Thanks for the replies so far.

The company proposing to use the E170 and 190 is looking at tapping into the Fly-in Fly-out (FIFO) resource/ mining operation. This kind of operation involves flying mining staff from capitol city airports to small country airports or airports built at the mines. They are proposing using the E170LR and 190LR.

Most of these flights are currently operated by Bae146’s and Fokker 100’s. The 3 companies currently operating are achieving 95%-99% reliability with these types. Other types used are the Dash 8, Brasilia and the Saab 340. The companies operating these types are also achieving 95%-98% reliability.

The company is also looking at getting 90 mins ETOPS approval for the 190 so it can operate to the pacific islands.

Their latest press release states the “170 will operate from a 1300m runway and fly 600nm with a decent payload. Nothing else in the market can touch that”

What has the reliability been like and what tends to cause most of the problems.

Cheers
Shed Driver

 

[Longhorn]

Our reliability has been much improved on the 190 since first getting them. Dont quote me but I think now its around the 96% to 98%. As to the issues, mostly computer related. Its been the "No Dispatch" msgs that were a problem. Flight control, parking brake, etc...they all have an associatied no dispatch msg to go with them. We just downloaded a new version of the primus software and that seems to have fixed many of the issues. In the last few weeks, for me anyways, things have gone really smoothly.