Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canadair Q400 Vs. ATR72-500  
User currently offlineAirbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 9
Posted (15 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4310 times:

I personally think the ATR is more successful and a more capable and efficient regional turboprop aircraft. But recently when visiting , I learnt that the Q series, esp. Q400 is a better workhorse. Speed is almost the same as the BAe 146. Apart from speed, there is still a lot of aspects that are way better than the ATR. But one thing I do not like about the Q Series, Fokker F27, F50 and Dash planes which have their landing gear under the prop. engine...Looks stupid. Instead, although the Beech King Air 350 has sumfin like this, it looks better.... what do you think?

Airbus Lover

ps:i know that most turboprops has 2-2 seating at 31 pitch. what do you think of making them business class seats (the ill Legend Airlines concept) on these turboprops.....although they are used on short hops... maybe a 2-1 seating, perhaps? what do u think.?

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineWatewate From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 2284 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (15 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4241 times:

If the destination has enough high-yield business travellers for 2-1 seating, I'm sure jets would be used on that route. Most frequent travellers prefer jets over props so it doesn't make sense to outfit a prop with luxurious seating when another airline can jump in with more comfortable jet service to entice passengers.

User currently offlineAirbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (15 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4235 times:

i think you're right..what about a 2-2 with lots of legroom?

User currently offlineAC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (15 years 5 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4215 times:

Whether you like the looks of it or not, the landing gear placement further outboard is better for stability and handling of these aircraft.

I'm admittedly not much of an ATR fan... but I personally feel that the Dash8 is a superb little aircraft all-around. From the perspective of some guys I know who worked on the ramp, it's the best of the small aircraft in terms of maintenance and ground handling. It has great handling, and good field performance, and an excellent safety record. While I've never had the opportunity (yet) to fly on the Q series aircraft, I'm sure it's pretty nice, I've generally found the older Dash8's I've flown to be fairly good.

As to seating, I dunno. I tend to agree with the idea that jets are flying the longer flights, where extra amenities are more important. Seems that jets are preferred by passengers, although I'm not much of a fan or regional jets... so while I like the idea of using Dash8Q series aircraft to fly short feeder routes in a more spacious seating arrangement isn't bad, I doubt there's enough of a demand for the improved service for short hops...

One other thing... technically it's not the "Canadair Q400"... Bombardier is the company that makes the Dash8's now, but while it also owns Canadair, the Canadair name isn't really correct to apply to the Dash8's... it's either deHavilland Canada, or Bombardier that is described as the manufacturer of the Dash8's now, usually Bombardier anymore with the DH name just being applied to the factory where it's built...

User currently offlineEnglandair From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2000, 2228 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (15 years 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4208 times:

I read under a photo that SAS Commuter wasn't happy with their Q400s because of engine trouble. Know anything?

Also, does anyone know when JY's (British European) Q400s will be delivered?


User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4652 posts, RR: 37
Reply 5, posted (15 years 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4198 times:

The ATR can carry LD3 containers in its fuselage (If it is a cargo model). Can a cargo QSeries do this?

"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlineCNBC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (15 years 5 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4190 times:

I'm Canadian so my vote goes to the Q400.

User currently offlineDannyboy From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (15 years 5 months 4 hours ago) and read 4172 times:

I'm extremely biased toward the dash. First off Canadian Regional operated both, and which do you think we got rid of? The ATR of course. The dash IS a better workhorse. The new Q series are very nice and quiet, not to mention they handle icing conditions a little better than the ATR. As to SAS having problems with the engine, well it is a new a/c and alot of new products do go through their own set of teething problems (eg 777) so don't be too quick to judge. Rumour had it SAS was also unhappy with certain aspects of the 737ng and they just ordered or took up some options on more so who's to say.

User currently offlineSteman From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 1480 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (15 years 5 months ago) and read 4161 times:

SAS and Bombardier have fixed the problems with the -Q400 after the carrier has been forced to ground the fleet.
De Havilland Canada chose to put main gear legs under the engines nacelles in order to have a wide wheel base to operate not only from normal runways but even from unprepared strips, making the DHC-8 attractive to potential military customers. Till now all the version of the DHC8 have had almost the same success as the ATR42 in the military field.
Anyway both aircraft are very good, the Q400 being a bit more advanced than the ATR72-500.
As I am Italian I prefer the ATRs but I can say that Bombardier is doing a great work on its regional turboprops and jets



User currently offlineCorey777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (15 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4153 times:

I've never ridden on any ATR a/c, so I can'tmake a comparison, but the Dash 8 was the smoothest-riding and quietest turboprop I've been on. The high wing also allows better views IMO--except when the gear is down.


User currently offlineBoeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2286 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (15 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4146 times:

No comparison for me -- in terms of comfort and stability in bad weather, the Dash 8 is far superior. I have flown both many times.

Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3804 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (15 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4147 times:

I have flown both a few times and in some pretty bad weather, especially with the ATR...I personally did not like the ATR, I found the ride to be very rough and the seating was smaller then on a Dash-8. I guess it is personal preferance but for me the Dash is far superior to the ATR. I have even flown on an AN-24 and I found it to be a more comfortable ride then the ATR. Interms of advancement the new Dash's are also superior with more modern avionics and engines, and overall design.

"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineAcvitale From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 922 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (15 years 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4127 times:

For a look at F or Business class on the Q400 go to http://www.MidwestWingsAirlines.com and check out the fleet type look at the Q300 and Q400 they have both with a premium cabin configuration.

It includes photos and seatmaps.

The costs of operation on the Q300/Q400 are lower then the ATR42 and ATR72 respectively and they offer a quieter cabin and CATIII landing capabilities.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
A340-300 Vs A340-500/600 During Turbulences posted Fri Aug 4 2006 10:29:11 by LY777
MD-87, B-717, B-737-600 A-318 Vs. B-737-500 posted Wed Aug 17 2005 16:47:54 by KC135TopBoom
CCM Of France Orders 6 ATR72-500 posted Tue Jun 14 2005 21:18:54 by PRGLY
A350 Vs A330-500 Difference? posted Fri Apr 15 2005 02:18:56 by Mark777300
VS A340-500 Orders? posted Mon Oct 11 2004 04:41:44 by Ua777222
Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7 posted Sat Jul 31 2004 21:38:59 by Cumulonimbus
No APU On ATR72-500's? posted Thu Nov 20 2003 10:50:40 by SM777
RJ-100 Vs 737-500 posted Fri Oct 25 2002 21:21:14 by PA121
Avro RJ Vs 737-500/600 posted Wed Mar 28 2001 00:10:25 by Lahaina
A340-300E Vs. A340-500/600? posted Mon Jan 29 2001 12:13:27 by VH-BZF