Help Barb get her CRJ 700!

[Barbr]

Conversation last night:

Me to my hubby: "Hey, do you like it? It's our new CRJ paint!"

Him: "Umm... we're not buying it for our airline (FS Passengers)."

Typical, raining on my parade...

:-?

[ozzy72]

Get in and out of smaller airfields? More economical on fuel

[Sean_TK]

Depends on the routes you would use. You may be better off with the CRJ on routes from hubs to small airfields, whereas the 737 may be better on routes between hubs.

Overall, I would use 737s mainly at fairly sizable airfields, and CRJs to get into the niche regional regions.


Here is a list of airliners by seat-capacity, for what its worth to you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ai ... t_capacity

Obviously not all inclusive, but it should give you a general idea of what to look for.

You might also want to take a look at the Dash-8 Q400. Seats around 70 and is very economical. (turboprop)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_Dash_8

[ShaneG_old]

You might also want to take a look at the Dash-8 Q400. Seats around 70 and is very economical. (turboprop)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_Dash_8

Just make sure to tighten the lug nuts.

[Sean_TK]

Yeah, buy some spare tires and you'll be fine.

[Isak922]

[quote]Yeah, buy some spare tires and you'll be fine.

[BigTruck]

Like the others said, the CRJ would be able to fly you into more airports as it can probably land on shorter runways than a 737.

That and it looks much prettier than a 737 in my opinion, but that's a whole different thread topic  :)

[Barbr]

Thanks guys, I appreciate your expertise!

Well, I bought it anyways, I took my husband's advice "under advisement"  ;)  As with the actual Lufthansa flights, I did a Dusseldorf -> Nice, which was fun. It seems like the plane has a higher take-off / landing speed than the 737-800, so can it really go to smaller airports?

It also seems to burn quite a lot of fuel! I wonder if in real life it's really that cost economical.

-Barb  :)

[expat]

For what it is worth, here is my input. The CRJ is an illegitimate son of a lady who works odd hours on a Saturday night and does not have time to pull her underpants up........from a maintenance point of view that is. It is a horrible little aircraft. Any aircraft that you have to climb over the centre console to get into the cockpit should have been put down at birth Give me a 737 NG over the CRJ anytime.

Matt

[Barbr]

For what it is worth, here is my input. The CRJ is an illegitimate son of a lady who works odd hours on a Saturday night and does not have time to pull her underpants up........from a maintenance point of view that is. It is a horrible little aircraft.

Wow, you certainly seem to have a lot of experience with the CRJ. It would be neat if the maintenance specific to each aircraft was modeled within FS Passengers such that the "cost to own" is reflected.

Just wondering: What makes one plane so much harder to maintain than another?

[aussiewannabe]

It also seems to burn quite a lot of fuel!

Check the fuel burn rate in the aircraft.cfg file.
I had a Citation 2 that came with fuel burn rate correction. Turns out it was the same model as another one I have. It had a poor range even at cruising speed. Changed it from 2.5 to 1.5 and got an increase in range of 600-700nm.

[expat]

For what it is worth, here is my input. The CRJ is an illegitimate son of a lady who works odd hours on a Saturday night and does not have time to pull her underpants up........from a maintenance point of view that is. It is a horrible little aircraft.

Wow, you certainly seem to have a lot of experience with the CRJ. It would be neat if the maintenance specific to each aircraft was modeled within FS Passengers such that the "cost to own" is reflected.

Just wondering: What makes one plane so much harder to maintain than another?

The CRJ is just a Challenger on steroids, so from a maintenance point of view it has everything shoehorned in to very small spaces. Under the cabin for example, accessed from under the aircraft is an avionics compartment that runs just about the length of the aircraft. My shoulders touch the side walls. You lay on your back, belly or side when working here. If small tight places are not your cup of tea, then this aircraft will not be one of your favorites to work with. Also brake units and main wheels are changed on your knees with with the back of your neck pressed up against the underside of the wing. I changed an APU once and myself and the guy with me nearly put her on her tail due to the C of G being changed by two guys doing a two man task

Matt

[Barbr]

Check the fuel burn rate in the aircraft.cfg file.
I had a Citation 2 that came with fuel burn rate correction. Turns out it was the same model as another one I have. It had a poor range even at cruising speed. Changed it from 2.5 to 1.5 and got an increase in range of 600-700nm.

How would one find the "correct" number?

[Sean_TK]

This also begs the question in regard to your flying style. If you are using excessive engine power for flight operations, you will probably have a bit of a fuel issue.  ;)

Once again, purely from an economic standpoint. (While keeping in mind desired seat capacity.) I recommend the following:

Dash-8 Q400
SAAB 2000
Fokker 50
Fairchild Metroliner

[aussiewannabe]

How would one find the "correct" number?

Here's what I've found:
fuel_flow_scalar (found in aircraft.cfg) - Scalar for modifying the fuel flow required by the engine(s). A value of less than 1.0 causes a slower fuel consumption for a given power setting, a value greater than 1.0 causes the aircraft to burn more fuel for a given power setting.

Examples:
Airbus A321( fuel_flow_scalar = 1 )
Aircreation582SL( fuel_flow_scalar= 1.000 )
Boeing 747-400( fuel_flow_scalar = 1.0 )
Beech Baron 58( fuel_flow_scalar= 0.9 )

I found this for a POSKY CRJ-700
fuel_flow_scalar = 1.035


Sean is right. You might be using excessive engine power which is burning your fuel more than it should.

Below 10,000 ft, you should not exceed 250kts (approx. .37 mach). I'm sure there are some charts online that show what speed the CRJ-700 should be at certain altitudes as you climb. I see that the max for this AC is .86 mach. There are converters online such as
http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_conv ... ty-ex.html if you would rather go by knots.

Does your AC come with an autothrottle (A/T) switch by chance?

Chris