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

 

[trainer8]

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

E170 would be restricted for most take-offs with those temps and field lengths.

I figure 5000 lbs/hr for the burn for the 1st hour, than 4200 for the next. 400-500km stage lengths would be just over an hour of flying, say, 1.3 - 1.5 hours.

Figure the BOW at 48000 lbs. plus 78 pax (14,820) and 55 bags (1,650) plus fudge factor (2200 lbs of x-tra Jet A)...(you Aussies don't have a suitable runway every 50 KM like we do). That will put you just under 72,000 lbs. Max TO weight is 82000, but you are almost at your zero fuel weight in this scenario.

With temps in the 40 C range, performance is going to take a hit, even with a Flaps 4 TO...it would be tight, especially for Airports 2-6 squeakers at best. If they are making those claims, I'm sure Embraer is involved. The EJets are evolving, geting larger engines and airframes.

There is no way the E170 could beat the DHC-8-400 at runway performance. For 70 seats and bush type flying, you will not beat the de Havilland Dash-8-400. What you have described above...It's what the Dash-8 series was made for. Air Tanzania and SAA use them for their utility aerodromes in Africa. Aramco uses them in Saudi.

T8

 

[Aerosurfer]

they can get up and out, but those are some short runways to operate full and/or hot. Wet runway numbers...forget about it, that would just not be pretty at all. I guess a flex (reduced) takeoff is not an issue either

The performance numbers would not be that friendly for what you are looking for. Dont forget ATRs would be perfect, quciker than the dash (except -400) and can hold anything.

 

[Baronman]

I ran the numbers and I think the 170 can do it if you pay 50 seat FO rates and a buck or two more on the capt rates. That seems to be the biggest factor in 170 ops.

 

[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 and what tends to cause most of the problems.

Cheers
Shed Driver