JungleJet not macho enough?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: LHR
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK guys, lets be quite honest about this. The 145 is a cheap Brazilian budget jet, originally designed for the American market with their unlimited runways..... the Trabant ( I was going to say Skoda) of the aviation world.
It has achieved a popularity amongst aviation bean counters because it is just so cheap and can offer the illusion of jet comfort to a public who in many cases would probably be better and more comfortably served by something like a Dash 8 Q400. It is in short a con.
Its "Budget" features as in the CX fleet include:-
No cat 111 capability.
No autoland capability.
No autothrottles
No reversers
Rubbish radar (As a result, frequent lightning strikes and turbulence enounters)
General Aviation type FMS installations which are highly deficient in some respects (VNAV for example) and contain first generation processors which are far behind the capacity of more appropriate bespoke commercial designs.
A performance envelope stretched to the limit, with ambitious European routes beyond its capabilities (with a full pax load anyway)
Inadequate passenger room, let alone space for anything other than a briefcase and terrible headroom.
From an operational point of view it is skittish and unstable and requires a disproportionate amount of pilot skill to land it in difficult conditions.
As for BACX providing a "Club" service in it.....that is the greatest P$££ take of the lot.
I am personally surprised that there have not been more incidents arising from these bean counter induced deficiences and would not be the slightest bit surprised if what happened to this crew could have happened to anyone else unfortunate enough to have been flying it that day in those conditions.
It has achieved a popularity amongst aviation bean counters because it is just so cheap and can offer the illusion of jet comfort to a public who in many cases would probably be better and more comfortably served by something like a Dash 8 Q400. It is in short a con.
Its "Budget" features as in the CX fleet include:-
No cat 111 capability.
No autoland capability.
No autothrottles
No reversers
Rubbish radar (As a result, frequent lightning strikes and turbulence enounters)
General Aviation type FMS installations which are highly deficient in some respects (VNAV for example) and contain first generation processors which are far behind the capacity of more appropriate bespoke commercial designs.
A performance envelope stretched to the limit, with ambitious European routes beyond its capabilities (with a full pax load anyway)
Inadequate passenger room, let alone space for anything other than a briefcase and terrible headroom.
From an operational point of view it is skittish and unstable and requires a disproportionate amount of pilot skill to land it in difficult conditions.
As for BACX providing a "Club" service in it.....that is the greatest P$££ take of the lot.
I am personally surprised that there have not been more incidents arising from these bean counter induced deficiences and would not be the slightest bit surprised if what happened to this crew could have happened to anyone else unfortunate enough to have been flying it that day in those conditions.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ghengis Cant
How many landings per year require CAT 111?
How many landings therefore require autoland?
How does no auto throttle limit the operation of the aircraft?
How does no thrust reverser limit the landing capability?
How good does a RADAR have to be to avoid lightning strikes?
How many other radars have a TURB mode?
The FMS is a little limited, as is the cabin luggage space.
How many pilots would be out of work if airlines didn't have a cheap to buy/lease, cheap to operate, reliable little jet. what are the real alternatives?
It's all about the money cause if you don't make any you shut down.
How many landings per year require CAT 111?
How many landings therefore require autoland?
How does no auto throttle limit the operation of the aircraft?
How does no thrust reverser limit the landing capability?
How good does a RADAR have to be to avoid lightning strikes?
How many other radars have a TURB mode?
The FMS is a little limited, as is the cabin luggage space.
How many pilots would be out of work if airlines didn't have a cheap to buy/lease, cheap to operate, reliable little jet. what are the real alternatives?
It's all about the money cause if you don't make any you shut down.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genghis chill out man, the Jungle Jet 'aint that bad and our pax would never thank us for thrashing around in the mid twenties dodging CBs all Summer long now would they, Dash 8! yeah whatever.
I've had several trips on the Jungle Jet and found them very pleasant. I'm a tall lad and didn't suffer any discomfort with leg or headroom thks, and its speediness was a real bonus.
I preferred it to the Canadair.
I preferred it to the Canadair.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SP,Brasil
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well let's see.... 900+ delivered out of the 1200+ ordered.
- No fatal accident so far.
- M 0.70+ cruise at 37.000 feet.
- A hell of a money maker.
Are u sure u want to compare this aircraft to a Dash??
You are definitely entitled to your opinion but the numbers speak for themselves. Keep in mind this is a regional aircraft and was built when Embraer was almost bankrupt.
I agree the aircraft is not perfect, but have talked to a number of pilots who fly the airplane and they all agree it's a nifty aircaft to fly.
Gengis, please let me understand why you have so much hatred in that little heart of yours??
Mork
- No fatal accident so far.
- M 0.70+ cruise at 37.000 feet.
- A hell of a money maker.
Are u sure u want to compare this aircraft to a Dash??
You are definitely entitled to your opinion but the numbers speak for themselves. Keep in mind this is a regional aircraft and was built when Embraer was almost bankrupt.
I agree the aircraft is not perfect, but have talked to a number of pilots who fly the airplane and they all agree it's a nifty aircaft to fly.
Gengis, please let me understand why you have so much hatred in that little heart of yours??
Mork
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hhhhmmm Gengis has one of these aircraft wronged you in a past life or something.
A few of your facts are incorrect
I believe you will find that Swiss had their E145's CATIII approved with a HUD system.
Thrust reversers are apparently available although at a weight penalty of some 880kgs is the result.
Cheers
A few of your facts are incorrect
I believe you will find that Swiss had their E145's CATIII approved with a HUD system.
Thrust reversers are apparently available although at a weight penalty of some 880kgs is the result.
Cheers
ZbV
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Samsonite
Age: 51
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emb135/145
Never flown either. However I do PAX on them probably once or twice a month.
Cabin is noisy, tiny with absolutely no space to take any carry-on with you. Overhead lockers are a joke even compared to Fokker 50 or the Dash.
Only spot where there is any legroom on the Embryojet is at the overwing exits. The 3 abreast seating never works for me anyways as I seem to get the window spot with a "BIG fella" of 28.5 stone sitting next to me.
While flying the ride is uncomfortable if there's any rough air around (High wingloading? Or stiff wing?). It flies like a small airplane it is.
Speed of 0.7M @ FL370 won't make a difference on a 200nm to 300nm sector. EMB145 is about 5 to 10 minutes faster than DHC8-400Q. Mind you on some sectors TP will actually be faster than a jet.
Still how much legroom or ellbow space do you have in any of the competitors? Not much or not at all.
My preference is still a larger cabin of Fokker 70/100 or a DHC product be it DHC8 or CRJ.
JJ
Cabin is noisy, tiny with absolutely no space to take any carry-on with you. Overhead lockers are a joke even compared to Fokker 50 or the Dash.
Only spot where there is any legroom on the Embryojet is at the overwing exits. The 3 abreast seating never works for me anyways as I seem to get the window spot with a "BIG fella" of 28.5 stone sitting next to me.
While flying the ride is uncomfortable if there's any rough air around (High wingloading? Or stiff wing?). It flies like a small airplane it is.
Speed of 0.7M @ FL370 won't make a difference on a 200nm to 300nm sector. EMB145 is about 5 to 10 minutes faster than DHC8-400Q. Mind you on some sectors TP will actually be faster than a jet.
Still how much legroom or ellbow space do you have in any of the competitors? Not much or not at all.
My preference is still a larger cabin of Fokker 70/100 or a DHC product be it DHC8 or CRJ.
JJ
Beacon Outbound
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: "Home is were the answer machine is"
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used to work for an ACMI provider. The 'jungle jet' was a major source of income for the company (replacing it when one or more broke down that is).
Needless to say they were well liked, but maybe for the wrong reasons.
Needless to say they were well liked, but maybe for the wrong reasons.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GC
It not an illusion the jet comfort it is jet comfort because its a jet, the FMS is ok no worse than any others that I have flown with and has some features that I wish were on the type I'm flying now. Cat III I think you will find that the 145's ordered by Crossair are Cat III capable. For its size the 145 is not difficult to land, a bit tricky in a strong X wind, but then again what acft is easy to land when its gusting 30 knots accross the runway. The company I operatted with had good reliability with them in four + years I can only remember dropping one or two sectors and the 145 was always top of the reliability stats at the end of each month. Never needed reverse even in the wet, the only stopping problem I heard about was on a wet rubber contaminated concrete runway. If Embraer hadn't rushed the acft into service and had done further performance tests then the acft wouldn't have been so runway limited. IMHO of 25+ years flying on a dozen or so different types the EMB145 is a delight to fly and operate, whether or not it is built rugged enough to be around for 20 years, will be interesting to see. For those who like it its a great acft for those who moan about it probably moan about most things.
Cheers.
BFF.
It not an illusion the jet comfort it is jet comfort because its a jet, the FMS is ok no worse than any others that I have flown with and has some features that I wish were on the type I'm flying now. Cat III I think you will find that the 145's ordered by Crossair are Cat III capable. For its size the 145 is not difficult to land, a bit tricky in a strong X wind, but then again what acft is easy to land when its gusting 30 knots accross the runway. The company I operatted with had good reliability with them in four + years I can only remember dropping one or two sectors and the 145 was always top of the reliability stats at the end of each month. Never needed reverse even in the wet, the only stopping problem I heard about was on a wet rubber contaminated concrete runway. If Embraer hadn't rushed the acft into service and had done further performance tests then the acft wouldn't have been so runway limited. IMHO of 25+ years flying on a dozen or so different types the EMB145 is a delight to fly and operate, whether or not it is built rugged enough to be around for 20 years, will be interesting to see. For those who like it its a great acft for those who moan about it probably moan about most things.
Cheers.
BFF.
Re “Rubbish radar (As a result, frequent lightning strikes and turbulence encounters)” from Ghengis Cant, suggests that he should seek advice from the manufacturer on Lightning strikes, but as he appears not to be an operator that might be difficult.
Embraer had concerns that the 135/145 aircraft, which appeared to suffer more than the average (expected) number of lightning strikes and commenced a research / customer information plan in 2001.
The problem involves the A1/A2 B1/B2 ratios: - for the less technical minded in ‘Tech Log’ - the frequency and location of lightning strikes are proportional to the ratio of fuselage length and wingspan, the fuselage diameter and the window size; thus a long / thin aircraft might suffer more strikes than a ‘fat’ aircraft; as an example for Ghengis Cant the 757-300 could have more strikes than a 757-200.
The strike location is just as important as the total number i.e. composite structure and possible electronics damage.
Best practice in minimising lightning strikes by avoiding cbs does not require an exceptional weather radar, only a good crew.
--------------------
Unless specifically authorized everything else is forbidden.
Embraer had concerns that the 135/145 aircraft, which appeared to suffer more than the average (expected) number of lightning strikes and commenced a research / customer information plan in 2001.
The problem involves the A1/A2 B1/B2 ratios: - for the less technical minded in ‘Tech Log’ - the frequency and location of lightning strikes are proportional to the ratio of fuselage length and wingspan, the fuselage diameter and the window size; thus a long / thin aircraft might suffer more strikes than a ‘fat’ aircraft; as an example for Ghengis Cant the 757-300 could have more strikes than a 757-200.
The strike location is just as important as the total number i.e. composite structure and possible electronics damage.
Best practice in minimising lightning strikes by avoiding cbs does not require an exceptional weather radar, only a good crew.
--------------------
Unless specifically authorized everything else is forbidden.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SP,Brasil
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found this one at another site. It's a poll of the favorite RJ or TP.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...dex.main?id=49
By the way, Jungle Jet seems politically incorrect. I like the name CoEx calls their airplane, EXPRESSJET or maybe what Rio Sul used to call them, JET CLASS.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...dex.main?id=49
By the way, Jungle Jet seems politically incorrect. I like the name CoEx calls their airplane, EXPRESSJET or maybe what Rio Sul used to call them, JET CLASS.
Last edited by Mork; 6th Sep 2005 at 18:57.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: sunny country
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...By the way, Jungle Jet seems politically incorrect. I like the name CoEx calls their airplane, EXPRESSJET or maybe what Rio Sul used to call them, JET CLASS.
...or Jatinho B*** Mole ou Rolha de Aerovia, as many Brazilian airline pilots call the Brasilia jet
...or Jatinho B*** Mole ou Rolha de Aerovia, as many Brazilian airline pilots call the Brasilia jet
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aren't the flightdeck instruments and avionics (and FMS I'm assuming) Honeywell kit? I thought it was quite up to date; certainly looks the part, but then again I've always been easily impressed by flashing lights and bright objects.
I think it's a very elegant aircraft, either way!
I think it's a very elegant aircraft, either way!
Difficult to argue against its sales success. As for political correctness, don't see anything wrong with Jungle Jet or even Pencil Jet, Mork. Make it a private joke that you know how many thousand km away the factory is from the nearest jungle. What it's called in Brazil is something else altogether but, then you hardly see them in Brazil any more.
I wonder, though, if the designers of the Bandeirante ever imagined in their wildest dreams (thirty-odd years ago) that their hull would eventually be attached to jet engines.
I wonder, though, if the designers of the Bandeirante ever imagined in their wildest dreams (thirty-odd years ago) that their hull would eventually be attached to jet engines.
If you want to fly a "Man's Airplane", try flying very loud aircraft with large, complex radial engines and ancient flight instruments, mostly from the 1940s or 50s, over forest fires in the western mountains. 
The younger generation seems to think that planes with no FMC are macho planes. 
One of our First Officers was an Instructor Pilot several years ago in San Jose dos Campos, Brasil, after he retired from the Navy. He instructed pilots from various countries.
Isn't S.J. where the simulators are? Do the Embraer jets have good APU bleed air? This is the most important thing with summer time operations, unless you are fortunate to work in a cooler/dryer climate than here.
The younger generation seems to think that planes with no FMC are macho planes. One of our First Officers was an Instructor Pilot several years ago in San Jose dos Campos, Brasil, after he retired from the Navy. He instructed pilots from various countries.
Isn't S.J. where the simulators are? Do the Embraer jets have good APU bleed air? This is the most important thing with summer time operations, unless you are fortunate to work in a cooler/dryer climate than here.