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
ERJ Limits
- Thread starter SSDD
- Start date
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
Superpilot92
LONGCALL KING
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2004
- Posts
- 3,719
Depends on what airline you are talking about. With ExpressJet aircraft most or all of our aircraft have had weight modifications to allow more weight on board. If its a short flight you might run into a Landing structural issue. I have never seen a CG limit on the ERJ.
siucavflight
Back from the forsaken
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2003
- Posts
- 3,512
If its Eagle forget about it they are usually restricted to around 47 pax even when its clear and a million. Also they don't do their own w and B so they can't try to work the numbers. that said you never know. TSA and Chautauqua's ERJ's should be able to accommodate, but it will be tight. These are all almost landing weight restrictions. Also on the CRJ had 4 years on the airplane and never once had an issue of CG, that seems to be a Skywest thing. They use a 4 pax zones, which I believe is where the problem is. any way I have a new job where i am based at home so no more commuting for me (at least not without having a paid for ticket.) good luck.
say again
I love her ARSE!!!!
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2005
- Posts
- 4,006
WOW!! So where is the problem if the CG was never an issue???
DoinTime
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 2,523
The problem with either of these airplanes is how much luggage people decide to bring with them. If you commute on a typically business travel route during the weekdays (like MCI-MSP) where people don't bring much, if any, luggage you are going to be screwed. If there is no luggage in the cargo bin there is nothing left to hold down the tail.
siucavflight
Back from the forsaken
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2003
- Posts
- 3,512
As a summary - the ERJ is fast but can't take everybody and their bags. The CRJ is slow but it can get everybody and their crap on board.
So with no alternate you may well find that the ERJ is still weight limited, I don't think I've ever seen a CRJ weight limited with no alternate (yes, I'm sure it happens, now regale us with your tails of being weight limited doing SLC-ATL in a 200).
So with no alternate you may well find that the ERJ is still weight limited, I don't think I've ever seen a CRJ weight limited with no alternate (yes, I'm sure it happens, now regale us with your tails of being weight limited doing SLC-ATL in a 200).
DrewBlows
Go Tigers!
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2003
- Posts
- 2,031
What? Who said the CRJ is slow? Who gives a crap anyway?
When CHQ took over CVG-TOL, my commute became difficult. CMR had been doing it with a 40 or a 50 seat CRJ (the frequency was more too, but Delta can be blamed for that), then CHQ put an EMB-135. I was kicked off the jumpseat a handful of times because it was zero fuel weight limited. The crews always tried to help, but it didn't always work. One thing I can say for certain is the jumpseat on the ERJ is far more comfortable than the chairs in the terminal in CVG.
Depends on what kind of ERJ you're in. A weight modded 145LR or a 145XR will take everyone and their bags plus a hefty amount of fuel.
Then they'll all be sold off by the end of Q2 2008.
I guess with your extensive experience you would know...thanks for the update...good luck with FO training noob.
OK then, it's slower than an ERJ, or at least thats what the ERJ guys keep telling me
msuspartans24
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Posts
- 129
OK then, it's slower than an ERJ, or at least thats what the ERJ guys keep telling me
I think you've been told wrong.....ERJ .78 (XRJ .80) and I think the CRJ is either .80 or .82
Thank you for thinking so highly of me and my crystal ball; but, actually I don't know....nor does anyone else.
Honestly, I'm pretty frustrated that the airline that I had been hoping to get on with for a long time because of their "stability" tells me three weeks into training that we may be sucking air by '08. Anything can happen in this industry as we're all aware. It's just kind of a kick in the face that it happened only a very very short time after my introduction to the 121 world.
Nothing may happen at all. I haven't really heard any more good rumors lately. It's been pretty quiet on that front. Three weeks ago I couldn't turn around without someone saying the words "HEY!! Guess what I just heard...".
I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say that you're relatively high on the seniority list. It's obvious that I'm very low. IF something happens it will affect you, me and everyone in between. At the end of the day we're all on the same team. If we go down we do it together. The same holds true if we prosper.
I'm very curious and frustrated about this situation as I'm sure you are as well. I chose to deal with my frustrations with an attempt at humor. It was obviously lost on you. I'm sorry for being new to the Eagle family. Everyone is "new" at some point in their careers; but, thanks for your attempt to make me feel like "part of the team".....
Last edited:
dojetdriver
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2004
- Posts
- 1,998
Have you ever done some of the Mexico stuff? In particular, LAX-ZCL?
On more than one occasion, had to leave bags behind. Or, good thing there were plenty of actual half weights, otherwise, not everybody would have got on. Seems like I saw it in IAH a few times as well.
The only times I ever had problems taking an OMC was on short flights, a lot of bags, and an alternate i.e- ord-sbn Never had a CG problem, that being said with mesa and skywest going to the electronic W and B via acars the CG may become more of a problem. more accurate than using a chart and plotting a point.
Stifler's Mom
MILF...MILF...MILF
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 5,125
Only downhill. (50-seater):blush:
Nope, sure haven't. With all the Mexico flying out of IAH, I've been spending most of my time up in the northeast in and out of Sewark. Bleh. TC and DD really kill MATOW though.
Gay..
siucavflight
Back from the forsaken
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2003
- Posts
- 3,512
haha. Actually most of my ex girlfriends have taught me that lesson.
With that said, have you heard any good rumors?
Speedtape
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2004
- Posts
- 1,973
Crj200 is flight planned for .74. It can go a little faster and does.
The Crj700 is flight planned for .80. It always goes faster.
The Erj may be a little faster than the Crj200, but over an hour flight or even two, it makes little difference. If a Erj is behind a Crj the Erj will not be any faster than a Crj. If a Crj700 is behind an Erj, it will pass the Erj like it is standing still. But, so what?
The Crj200 usually has no C.G. issues. It may have a landing weight issue that became more prevalent when passenger weights changed a couple of years ago. It usually is only a problem when an alternate is required and there is no close alternate.
If an ERJ flight is anywhere near full, you will never get on. My experience has been with Eagle. Their loads are generally heavy, so it's usually not a viable option. The crews and customer service are always great, but it boils down to the hard numbers. Hopefully, these weight mods will happen soon.
Please keep us posted.
The Crj700 is flight planned for .80. It always goes faster.
The Erj may be a little faster than the Crj200, but over an hour flight or even two, it makes little difference. If a Erj is behind a Crj the Erj will not be any faster than a Crj. If a Crj700 is behind an Erj, it will pass the Erj like it is standing still. But, so what?
The Crj200 usually has no C.G. issues. It may have a landing weight issue that became more prevalent when passenger weights changed a couple of years ago. It usually is only a problem when an alternate is required and there is no close alternate.
If an ERJ flight is anywhere near full, you will never get on. My experience has been with Eagle. Their loads are generally heavy, so it's usually not a viable option. The crews and customer service are always great, but it boils down to the hard numbers. Hopefully, these weight mods will happen soon.
Please keep us posted.
Last edited:
GINCHBLASTER
Registered Abuser
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Posts
- 223
on a regular EMB-145LR, without an alternate, I find that its usually limited to the max zero fuel weight. Even if its a short flight. Yeah the fuel burn is way less, but that just means you don't have to put that much on. 195lbs for a winter pax weight, along with not having lighter weights for carry-ons, is what kills us at chq. Hopefully for the commuters sake there are a couple of kids on board.
Alchemy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Posts
- 492
On the ERJ, the problem for jumpseaters and commuters in general is Zero Fuel Weight. That's a hard limit and there's really no good way to work the numbers. What you have is what you have.
If the plane is full, I've never had a CG issue. The only time CG is a problem in my experience is when you have a half full flight and almost everyone is sitting in the front part of cabin. Move folks to the back and you're fine. Either that or it's a full flight with just a few bags in the cargo compartment. In that case you just add a few hundred pounds of ballast and you're good to go.
If the plane is full, I've never had a CG issue. The only time CG is a problem in my experience is when you have a half full flight and almost everyone is sitting in the front part of cabin. Move folks to the back and you're fine. Either that or it's a full flight with just a few bags in the cargo compartment. In that case you just add a few hundred pounds of ballast and you're good to go.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
