CRJ-700 and 900 vs A-10

These aircraft actually are using the same engine. Why A-10 is DYING above FL200 and CRJ could fly just fine at FL370?

1 Like

Part of the performance is based on the overall design and aerodynamics of the A-10, look at the S-3 Viking which used the same TF-34 engines. The original TF-34 on the A-10/S-3 was adapted for civilian use as the CF-34 and was first adopted for the Challenger series, then the CRJ1/2. Eventually on to the CRJ7/9 and E-170/75. Over the past 25 years it’s been upgraded and advanced.

A couple of notes and caveats:

The E-190/95 engines, have an incestuous relationship. The CF-34-10E are dirived more from the CF-34s big sibling the CFM56

The USAF is considering using 8 of them to re the engine the B-52 rather than a quad jet otherwise it would cost even more money to redesign engine pylons and wings.

This article was written in 2012:

Differently developed engines actually.
A-10 has 2 GE TF34 engines, capable of producing 9,000 lbf.
The CRJs have 2 GE CF34, which produce 13,500-14,500 lbf each.

CF34 on CRJ9 and CRJ10 are rated about the same thust as TF34.

1 Like

The TF-34 has 9,065 lbf (40.3 kN, 4.111 kgf) thrust which powers the A-10/S-3/S-72/RQ-170.

The CF-34-3 has 9,220 lbf (41.0 kN) thrust which powers the CL600/CL850/CRJ200

The CF-34-8C has 13,790–14,500 lbf (61.3–64.5 kN) thrust which powers the CRJ700/900/1000

The CF-34-8E has 14,500 lbf (61.3–64.5 kN) thrust which powers the E170/5

The CF-34-10E has 20,360 lbf (90.6 kN) thrust which powers the E190/5


1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.