Cumulonimbus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4258 times:
I was wondering how well the Q's are doing. I have heard that several airlines are looking at them, Including ATA,Delta,and US!!! Is there any truth to this? How are the order books currently? Will it have any future with fuel prices rising as they are?
S12PPL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4214 times:
This topic is becoming as regular as "When will NW replace they're DC9's, and "Why are Air France planes so dirty?" lol
I wouldn't expect any airline you mentioned to buy the Q400 any time soon. Especially since US is supposed to be bankrupt in about two and a half weeks, and out of business. And, ATA just basically announced they're in no possition to buy new planes.
Cumulonimbus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4180 times:
Funny reply S12PPl!!! when will NW replace there DC-9's or when is Air france going to wash there planes!!? But the point about US and ATA is Right on the Money. Delta is up in the air and the most legit I think because I was talking to Pilots and a Ramp Manager said There new CEO likes the Q's. Makes you wonder?
Ps for FS 2004 I modded an Air France Plane with the wash me Written on it covered in Dirt!!
A330323X From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 3039 posts, RR: 46 Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4120 times:
I have heard that several airlines are looking at them, Including ATA,Delta,and US!!! Is there any truth to this?
Bombardier was trying very hard to sell US the Q400, and Dave Siegel was quite interested in using them at Piedmont. They'd really be a good fit for markets like AVL, CHO, EWN, FAY, HHH, OAJ.
However, Bruce Lakefield doesn't seem at all interested in a new turboprop order at this time.
I wouldn't expect any airline you mentioned to buy the Q400 any time soon. Especially since US is supposed to be bankrupt in about two and a half weeks, and out of business.
Whatever some people think US is supposed to be doing in two and a half weeks, it hasn't stopped them from taking delivery of about 60 new aircraft so far this year, including about 40 from Bombardier, with more coming every week.
I'm the expert on here on two things, neither of which I care about much anymore.
Olympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 8 Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3887 times:
I don't think the backlog of orders for the Q400 is very healthy right now. I doubt if Bombardier has come close to the sales break-even point yet. Reliability problems in the early days - particularly with SAS Commuter and Augsberg Airlines, seemed to take a long time to overcome, and that didn't help sales.
Carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2883 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3782 times:
Problem with turboprops is the image portrayed to the general public. The public thinks if its a turboprop, it's old, noisy, slow, & less safe.
Most of us on this net think otherwise, but we are only a fraction of the world population.
Sales will be slow at best for any t-prop for the time being.
Here in Japan, the Q400 are being ordered because comparable size RJs cost too much to operate. RJs are classified as jets, so despite their lower gross-weights have to pay a greater airspace fees, etc to comparable t-props. Also at Itami there are slots issues that allow only t-prop operations.
Air Nippon & Japan Air Commuter selected the Q400 over the ATR basically because it has greater Japanese content.
S12PPL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3667 times:
It's not supposed to be a totally comfortable airplane, Zweed. It's a regional turbo prop for crying out loud. The 5 or 6 times I've had the pleasure of flying on her, she's performed increadibly. I think it's a great airplane, and I'd fly on it every chance I get. I think she can out perform any other turbo prop out there.
N1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26005 posts, RR: 78 Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3088 times:
QX actually seems to prefer their Q400s to their CRJ700s. They even converted some orders to Q400. The reason is that they are just as fast over most missions and much, much more efficient. I think they mention something as ridiculous as a 30% break even load factor. LAX gets them more and more for services to vacation resorts like Sun Valley, Utah and Bozeman, Montana
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Hz747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1634 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3052 times:
LAX to Bozeman? Are you sure?
A while back in Airliner World, they talked with the head of Horizon Airlines. He brought up the Q400 and said that most customers were not reluctant to fly on a prop plane, and for routes that are about 350 miles, there is no performance difference in time between a RJ, or Q400.
I have only flown on the shorter Q-series, and let me tell you: Don't fly through a thunderstorm in one of those! US Airways Express, LGA to Ithaca, and the aisle way became a river of vomit. What's worse, is as we were walking to the terminal, I saw a 1900 taking off into that mess!
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3011 times:
No, that's not entirerly true...QX changed two options because they had more routes applicable for the 400 instead of the 700 in the delivery period where their obligation to purchase is in force. The 700's will still likely increase in number as longer hauls are introduced. Under 500 miles, the Q is significantly cheaper to operate (source is AVITAS).
As a passenger that has flown both---I'll take the RJ over the Q, anyday.
The Q may likely be the most economical 70 seater in the air--but it will shake your teeth out. I've never had that problem in the 700's.
Arrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2647 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2870 times:
"The Q may likely be the most economical 70 seater in the air--but it will shake your teeth out."
C'mon, Greg. You've clearly never flown any piston props -- they do shake your teeth out. I've never flown the Q400, but I've flown dozens of trips on the 100 and 300 models (the non-Q versions) and I found them to be extremely comfortable, given their design parameters. I'm scheduled to fly on a 100 this Sunday, and I'm looking forward to it.
Expecting a Dash 8 to give you the same comfort and ride as a 777 is ridiculous. That's like expecting a Ford Escort to give you the same comfort as a Rolls Royce.
T-props are extremely efficient compared to the RJs, and on the short legs (500 km or less) an airline that wants to stay in business and offer a reasonable ticket price would be nuts to use jets. Horizon in the US and Flybe in the UK are proving this out right now. With crude oil at $45/bbl, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few more Q400 sales -- they would pay for themselves in a couple of years just in fuel savings over the RJs.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
Carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2883 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2812 times:
Hz747300, it doesn't matter what type of plane one sits in, if you fly through a thunderstorm, the plane is going to get tossed around. I have been tossed around in anything from a Saab 340 to a 744. That's why planes tend to go around these clouds.
Planemaker, thanks for the educating lesson. I didn't realize it was that much Japanese content.
SuperDash From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 572 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2521 times:
I don't call it SuperDash for nothing. I think it is as comfortable as coach on a 777. Horizon's planes are great rides with great legroom. I would rather be on the Q400 over any RJ and any jet as well (as long as I don't have to fly 2000 miles). I hope to see more in North America. I think this is just another mistake the major carriers have made. RJs cost too much. They pay way too much for regional feed. The Q400 could dramatically cut costs while giving a great base of revenue. Northwest, for example, could cut their costs by 50% on the DC9 runs that are under 2 hours. And guess what? They probably don't fill many more than 70 seats any way, so there would likely be little spill (or hey, add another flight if there is). Anyway, thank you Horizon for being a great airline with great planes and free beer.