Jump to content

Talk:Embraer ERJ family/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Proposed move

Safety Record

I have witnessed a runway overrun in Bilbao Spain. No serious injuries. I have photos to prove it!

No user ID provided.

Runway overruns are fairly common compared to mechanical accidents, and 99% of the time are caused by a combination of bad weather and pilot error. Though I'd be personally curious to see the pictures, tacking it onto the article would not be demonstrative of the overall safety record of the aircraft.--Dali-Llama 13:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree totally, but since you mentioned 2 incidents, I just wanted to add some more information. This time again as you rightly said, it was due to bad weather and pilot error. By the way, I designed the flaps, speed brake and ground spoiler for this aircraft, so I am quite proud of its safety record! Still no ID provided

":Runway overruns are fairly common compared to mechanical accidents, and 99% of the time are caused by a combination of bad weather and pilot error... REALLY...? MAYBE you have to consider another fact: Some ERJ-145's DO NOT HAVE Thrust Reversers installed (those are an OPTION), relying entirely on the otherwise excellent, advanced carbon composite brakes to stop the aircraft... provided that the tyres still have the required adhesion to the runway surface, of course. Here in Mexico, Aeromexico Connect has only wheel brake models, and we have seen AT LEAST two, possibly three incidents where the aircraft was unable to stop in time, or was swept across the runway (skidded) due to acuaplanning or lack of traction-adhesion to the runway. On the other side, I can attest to the top quality of Aeromexico's crews training and qualifications. A relatively light, fast aircraft that happens to lack Thrust Reversers in order to "save" some money in added maintenance or initial cost, does not appear to be a wise decision. Amclaussen, Mexico City. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.20 (talk) 01:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

just came down in one, in the rain (ERJ145-Continental express-Lubbock International) it felt like the pilot was earining his pay, but no problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.16.68.19 (talk) 03:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Give it a try. I still think it's going to be hard to remain NPOV, but if we think it's too "dramatic", then we could always remove it. I am interested in seeing the pics, personally, BTW =)--Dali-Llama 20:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
This is the original newspaper article. It´s in Spanish, sorry! http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/avion/sale/pista/aeropuerto/Sondika/elpepiesp/20010124elpepinac_34/Tes/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.81.199.196 (talk) 10:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I've been on these family of planes several times on express jet and I think any accidents such as runway overrun is due to pilot error. I've had some very rough landings (rouugh enough to jarr your head and make you jump in your seat) despite very good weather conditions and no wind which leads me to believe that pilots with less experience fly these, where as more experienced ones fly the bigger ones like the 747-400. I've never had a rough landing on a 747-400. 132.178.170.118 (talk) 18:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I had a very rough landing on a Tower Air 747. We landed at SeaTac in nice weather. There was no forthcoming explanation. Tower Air folded soon after.--Degen Earthfast (talk) 19:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

A note on the 7 December 2009 accident of SA-8625 from Cape Town to George: Ultimately the CAA found that the accident had happened shortly after the runway at George had been rehabilitated (bituminous fog-spray sealant applied which "had a profound effect on the runway friction coefficient, resulting in low runway friction" http://www.caa.co.za/Accidents%20and%20Incidents%20Reports/8719.pdf), in the first substantial rainfall after the rehabilitation work had been done. CAA recommended that the runway surface be resurfaced as a remedy. Essentially the new surface was too smooth, though CAA claimed that it was "within standards". Landings at FAGG in wet conditions were severely restricted until the 1800m of runway surface was resurfaced in March 2010 to correct the deficiencies. Essentially, the runway was slippery when wet, the aerodrome operator and runway contractors knew that the surface was substandard, but nobody thought it important to inform/warn aircraft operators, but all arses were covered. mikro2nd (talk) 10:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Concern vs. Company

Fine, change it. "Concern" is just as valid as "company." Just please don't refer to it as an "error." See [1], definition 2. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 15:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I have never heard that definition of concern (at least not as much as "company"), so I apologize for the error remark. Despite that, it's still better if we use a term which is commonplace and simple, especially since a lot of people who come to wikipedia do not speak english as a first language.--Dali-Llama 16:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

World Trade Center 1995 advert by EMBRAER

How about that - EMB145 Beyond basics? Now I know where Al Qaeda found the inspiration. --Yuriy Lapitskiy 09:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Al Qaeda didn't do it. it was an Inside Job See Here!--Degen Earthfast (talk) 19:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:EMB R-99A.jpg

Image:EMB R-99A.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Operating Cost

I would like to see the following cited:

"By some accounts, the ERJ 145 has a cost of ownership of about $2,500,000 per year."

That sounds like a lot of operational money to be spent on a $16m aircraft. If we can't find a valid citation, I'm going to delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ComptonOtterPop (talk • contribs) 00:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Civilian Operators

-my apologies, forgot the wiki formatting code stuff...just rode this sexy ride a couple of times, hit up the website and learned continental express is running 229 ERJ145. However, website and in plane source (continental magazine) disagree on powerplants. Website says Rolls or Allison, in plane doc said Rolls or GE. When I first saw the impeller, I thought GE, but I am no scholar on jet turbines...here is the website link: https://www.continental.com/web/en-US/content/travel/inflight/aircraft/default.aspx?camp=virtual_expert —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.16.68.19 (talk) 03:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Untitled

What is the saftey record of this aircraft?

Off-hand, I know only of two incidents--both due to pilot error. One accident was due to excessive descent rates by a Rio-Sul pilot in southern Brazil. He hit the ground four times faster than was certified speed. Here's the Press Release. The other was a Continental Express flight which overran the runway on a snowy day. Neither was due to any type of failure on the aircraft's part. --Dali-Llama 03:52, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

ERJ 170

Needs an update to add the ERJ170 (E70). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.195.224.102 (talk) 16:35, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Nope. The E-170 (ERJ-170) is a wholly different aircraft, and is already covered at Embraer E-Jet family. - BilCat (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Article name

Why isn't this article named the Embraer Regional Jet or something similar? Just curious. --Degen Earthfast (talk) 17:47, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Numbers built

- Number built: 890 as of January 2012 - In May 2011 a total of 990 ERJ 135/140/145 remain in service, with 5 further firm orders.

There's something strange going on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.222.122.112 (talk) 10:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/erj145/
    Triggered by \baerospace-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
  • http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/embraer_legacy/
    Triggered by \baerospace-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

main pic

The current main pic shows it from the side over a busy vegetation background. I propose another pics, more from front and over a sky background : --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:49, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

  • current
    current
Agree it needs to change, any of the left facing approach shots would do but AN0969536 is a nice clear shot. MilborneOne (talk) 18:37, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 11 November 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 00:40, 19 November 2017 (UTC)


Embraer ERJ 145 family → Embraer ERJ family – This family of aircraft comprises three different models and the page name should reflect that. The new name will also match the names of Embraer's other aircraft, the Embraer E-Jet family and the Embraer E-Jet E2 family. RickyCourtney (talk) 22:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

  1. support embraer calls it ERJ family--Marc Lacoste (talk) 15:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

SImulation software award winning update for ERJ 145

Hello wikipedians, I just want to make an edit on this page to include a simulation software that was developed for the aircraft ERJ145, I'm an aircraft maintenance technician and would like to include this because it is essential information to know more about the aircraft, here is the link to the source of the software for your review. The package that includes the ERJ-135, ERJ-145 and ERJ-145XR

https://www.simflight.com/2010/01/24/review-feelthere-erj-145v2/

Looking forward to hearing from you soon. (Arielazo (talk) 15:02, 1 December 2019 (UTC))

No, it doesn't belong in this article, just promotional spam for a video game. - Ahunt (talk) 16:21, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Embraer_ERJ_family/Archive_1&oldid=1257500122"