Jennings Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Can someone tell me (and I've Googled until I'm blue in the face...) what the differences between these EMB models are? I'm confused at all the designations, and there's nothing I can find on the Embraer web site that says anything other than "170" and "175"... Tks! J Embraer ERJ-170-100SE 170SE Embraer ERJ-170-100ST 170ST Embraer ERJ-170-100SU 170SU Embraer ERJ-170-100LR 170LR Embraer ERJ-170-200LR 175LR Embraer ERJ-170-200SD 175SD Embraer ERJ-170-200SU 175SU Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ojsguilty Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 The best I can come up with is... Embraer ERJ-170-100STD - Standard Range - 1800nm Embraer ERJ-170-100LR - Long Range - 2000nm Embraer ERJ-170-100AR - Advanced Range - 2100nm Really - ERJ-175s... Embraer ERJ-170-200STD - Standard Range - 1700nm Embraer ERJ-170-200LR - Long Range - 1900nm Embraer ERJ-170-200AR - Advanced Range - 2000nm David Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted November 9, 2010 Author Share Posted November 9, 2010 I guess what I should have asked is, are there any physical differences externally, or is it just a 170 and a 175?? J Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ojsguilty Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 From what I could find, they are the same dimension. (well - the 170s and 175s are different obviously, but the same within the model) David Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted November 9, 2010 Author Share Posted November 9, 2010 Tks man. That's what I came up with, but I just couldn't find any hard data one way or the other. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ojsguilty Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Well - I got most of the information from Embraer's website... Here's the handy link - http://www.embraercommercialjets.com/#/en/downloads I'm sure I had more PDFs somewhere on this dang PC... of course I can't find it now... LOL David Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lenny Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 No physical differences. The 170 is single class and the 175 has first class seating. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ojsguilty Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Well... According to Embraer - the 170 is 98'1" overall and the 175 is 103'11". So - there are physical differences. David Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted November 9, 2010 Author Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) Right, but not between the different 170 and 175 subtypes. It's just the two fuselage lengths, with internal differences in fuel capacity, etc. The designations on airliners.net (where I copied those from) are confusing as heck. Embraer doesn't even mention that there are different models of the 170 and 175, and they don't use the "-100LR" type designations at all that I can find. Not sure where those are coming from. J Edited November 9, 2010 by Jennings Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tnuag Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) If you go to http://www.embraercommercialjets.com/#/en/downloads you can download the Airport Planning Manual for each variant plus specs - will that help. If you need anything else PM please. I am biased though, having worked on the 170 program and been at the roll out of the 170 and 190 I couldn't be anything else! Neil Edited November 9, 2010 by tnuag Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Piltdown Man Posted November 19, 2010 Share Posted November 19, 2010 If you go to http://www.embraercommercialjets.com/#/en/downloads you can download the Airport Planning Manual for each variant plus specs - will that help. If you need anything else PM please.I am biased though, having worked on the 170 program and been at the roll out of the 170 and 190 I couldn't be anything else! Neil I just hope you are not to blame for the wretched guidance panel and appalling aileron loading. Fix these two items and while you are at it, re-write the FMS to make the pages consistent and incorporate an idle descent then I might be more positive. Until then, I'll not be it's greatest fan. PM Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tnuag Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 I just hope you are not to blame for the wretched guidance panel and appalling aileron loading. Fix these two items and while you are at it, re-write the FMS to make the pages consistent and incorporate an idle descent then I might be more positive. Until then, I'll not be it's greatest fan.PM You may not be it's grestest fan, but is has sold well, so someone must like it. I think it is a pretty impressive effort - I was there when the An 124 landed with the parts for the first aircraft: Rear fuselage - France, Wings - Japan, Main landing gear - Germany, Engines - USA, Empenage - Spain & Belgium. When you consider that Embraer has gone from zero to No.3 manufacturer in the world in 30 or 40 years I also find that impressive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony P Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 , so someone must like it. Bean Counters! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted November 20, 2010 Author Share Posted November 20, 2010 (edited) Hi Neil I've actually downloaded all that stuff, but none of it mentions any of those sub-designations in my OP. I don't know if they're actual Embraer designations that are only used in technical manuals or what. But the only place I've found them used is in photos on airliners.net. J PS: A friend flies the 190 for jetBlue, and he said they're a maintenance nightmare compared to their A320s. Much more fragile. I like the looks of them, but those engine nacelles look impossibly puny for such a big airframe. Almost toy-like. Edited November 20, 2010 by Jennings Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tnuag Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 Hi NeilI've actually downloaded all that stuff, but none of it mentions any of those sub-designations in my OP. I don't know if they're actual Embraer designations that are only used in technical manuals or what. But the only place I've found them used is in photos on airliners.net. J PS: A friend flies the 190 for jetBlue, and he said they're a maintenance nightmare compared to their A320s. Much more fragile. I like the looks of them, but those engine nacelles look impossibly puny for such a big airframe. Almost toy-like. Hi Jennings, Have you looked at table 2.2 in the 170 APM? It does mention STD, LR, SU and SE and gives weights and numbers of pax. N Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Piltdown Man Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 (edited) ...but those engine nacelles look impossibly puny for such a big airframe. Almost toy-like. Small they might be, but they do perform well and the E-Jets certainly don't lack puff. The CFM engines fitted to the E-Jets are the most controllable engines I've ever used, my own (modern) car included. And yes it has sold well, which is very convenient if you are looking for a job. But the Flight Mode Panel is still a load of complete and utter whatsit. PM Jennings: Does Embraer's E-Jet website answer your questions? It appears that there are four main variants (170, 175, 190 & 195) which are differentiated by their lengths which vary from 31.7m to 38.7m. The two smaller variants share the CF34-8E engines and 26m wings and the two larger aircraft have the CF34-10E engine and 28.7m wings. It also appears that all aircraft are available in three range versions of Standard, Long Range and Advanced Range. I'll guess that the -100/-200/-300 suffixes relate to the range option chosen. PM Edited November 25, 2010 by Piltdown Man Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.