E170/5 to E190/95 systems differences

[Alpine Flyer]

Are there any systems differences between the "large" and "small" Embraer jets? I do know they have different engines and nacelle shapes and differently sized wing and gear, but are there any differences in electric, hydraulic, pneumatic, etc. systems?

Thanks!

[Roj approved]

It's been +10 years since I last flew one, but if I remember, they were basically the same systems wise.

Just different Weight limits, Thrust Rating etc

I assume the E2 will be different due to the improved FBW, but Embraer will have worked hard to reduce the differences to reduce training cost for the airlines to upgrade to the E2.

[poldek77]

It's been a couple of years since my last flight and that's what comes to my mind at the moment:
- starting engines at 195 was often longer - after the previous flight the temperature (ITT?) was high and FADEC delayed applying fuel until the temperature decreased appropriately (a kind of dry motoring for a couple of seconds)
- flight controls system for 195 included Tail Strike Protection.

[Bluebird340]

I currently fly E190 but have flown also E170 couple of years ago. There are very few differencies between different versions. Most of them being quite obvious as already mentioned.

E190 has tail strike protection fitted in fly by wire system. Also there are very small differencies between flap settings. Flaps 1 on E190 is 7 degrees while on the E170 it is 5 degrees. Flaps full on E190 is 37 degrees compared to 35 degrees on the E170. From pilots point of view this is not very relevant since flaps are operated by positions like in an Airbus.

Takeoff flap positions on the E170 are 1/2/4 while on the E190 position 3 is also available.

Also there are three external emergency lights on each side of the fuselage on the E190. These are of course due to overwing exits which are not required on the E170.

There is one additional smoke detector fitted in the cargo hold on the E190 (4 in FWD and 3 in AFT).

There are some differencies in limitations like gear speeds, max brake temps for takeoff, engine limits, fuel etc. Performance wise it is quite interesting that required landing distance is almost similar eventough max landing weight is approx 10 tons higher on the E190.

I think on E170/175/190/195 most differencies come from the equipment and software installed. There might be different avionics software or different fadec software installed. Also there are several optional equipment like airstairs, HUDs, autobrake etc.

[Downwind_Left]

Originally Posted by Bluebird340

There are some differencies in limitations like gear speeds, max brake temps for takeoff, engine limits, fuel etc. Performance wise it is quite interesting that required landing distance is almost similar eventough max landing weight is approx 10 tons higher on the E190.

The 190 has significantly bigger main landing gear wheels and brakes than the 170. Flying both types side-by-side, off the same limiting runway close to MTOW for each type, the 190 is usually far less limiting. There have been many times off short and obstacle limited runways I’ve wished I was in a 190 and not a 170... never the other way around.

As for system differences, E90/195 also has a Mach Trim system that the E170/175 do not.

[TopSwiss 737]

Another difference is configuration change compensation:
E170/5: Configuration change compensation with horizontal stabilizer due to
speed brakes actuation only.
E190/5: Configuration change compensation with elevators and horizontal
stabilizer due to landing gear, flap/slat and speed brakes actuation.

PITCH TRIM SCALE E175:
• Five tic marks at 2º and 1.75º DOWN, 5.5º, 9.25º, and 13º UP.
• Green takeoff band: 1º DOWN to 6º UP.

PITCH TRIM SCALE E190:
• Five tic marks at 4º and 0.25º DOWN, 3.5º, 7.25º, and 11º UP.
• Green takeoff band: 2º DOWN to 4º UP.

[Alpine Flyer]

Originally Posted by Downwind_Left

The 190 has significantly bigger main landing gear wheels and brakes than the 170. Flying both types side-by-side, off the same limiting runway close to MTOW for each type, the 190 is usually far less limiting. There have been many times off short and obstacle limited runways I’ve wished I was in a 190 and not a 170... never the other way around.

For a brief time we had to use an E170 simulator when the E190 wasn't available for technical reasons. I was astonished that the 170 had higher approach speeds than the 190 for identical weights while it had been the other way round with "enlarged" versions of planes I had previously flown. Must be the smaller wing.

[captnmd]

Any current pilots on these E195-E2 willing to share some cbt/Simulator notes with me?

I'm looking forward to start training for these jets in few months time