Isn't the -140 also certified as an EMB-145 something-or-other? -- David Mueller / HNL dmueller7@xxxxxxxxx http://www.quanterium.com ...to quote Jose: "Fan of confusion"... --------- Original Message --------- DATE: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:14:19 From: Jackson <fubar@xxxxxxxxxx> To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: >Hi There Jose, >Forgot to mention that there is also the EMB-145LU and EMB-145LP >versions.... > >Anyway, let's see if I can shed some light on the subject... > >Basically, you have the baseline EMB-145LR and EMB-145ER versions. These are >externally indistinguishable although the latter has a 43,328 lb. MTOW while >the former's MTOW is pegged at 45,415 lb. The significant weight difference >can be ascribed to the ER's wet wing stub, which also has higher-rated >engines. Not unexpectedly, these two versions offer different field and >flight performances, notably in what regards TOFL, Max cruise speed, rate of >climb and range. The LR's FAR-approved maximum range with 50 pax stands at >1,270nm, as opposed to the ER's 820nm under the same conditions. I guess >that is why you won't see all that many ER's stateside > >All other variants are derived from the two above mentioned versions and >identifiable differences range from ERs that have the necessary plumbing to >modify them into LRs (in this case they are EMB-145MPs), to airframes that >were delivered with different galley and main cabin configurations, >powerplants and sundry items. Predictably, the EMB-145EU and EMB-145EP are >derived from the EMB-145ER, while the EMB-145LP and EMB-145LU are derived >from the EMB-145LR > >All these versions (EP, ER, EU, LP, LR, LU and MP) are externally >indistingushable. To make matters worse, you'll possibly note that some >US-based airframes have airstairs while others do not - and both are LRs. >Moreover, there are airframes that were delivered with one version of the >AE3007A and over time exchanged it for higher-rated engines. God only knows >what designations those airframes received - if any. > >At least the EMB-145XR can be recognized straightaway by its winglets, while >the EMB-145RS is a remote sensoring airframe with all sorts of boondoggles, >doodads and antennas sprouting from the fuselage. The EMB-145SA is very >easily identified by a dorsally-mounted "canoe" that houses a phased-array >surveillance radar. Yet, Embraer has deemed fit to designate the maritime >patrol version of the EMB-145 as "EMB-145MP"... I guess the folks over at >Marketing had it their way this time. > >Finally, there is also the EMB-145KE and EMB-145KL. The KE is still on the >drawingboard, but I understand that the EMB-145KL is the corporate shuttle >version of the regional jet. > >I hope that I have throughly confused you.... > >Cheers > >Jackson