Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Don't More US Carriers Fly The Q400?  
User currently offlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1456 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12160 times:

AFAIK only Horizon and Colgan (operating for CO Express) operate the Q400 in the US. Several still operate Dash 8's but how come no one else uses the Q400? Especially on the East Coast, CO seems to have a nice gig going where they run the Q400's out of EWR to places like DCA et al.

71 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePackcheer From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 326 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12152 times:

We get the Q400 from CO on EWR - RDU..


Things that fly, Girls and Planes...
User currently offlineNws2002 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 855 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12153 times:

There was a rush for carriers to have an "all jet" fleet at the express level back in the late 90s. Many passengers view turboprops as inferior, older technology. As they say perception is reality, and its difficult to change passenger perceptions.

User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24651 posts, RR: 86
Reply 3, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12115 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting LHCVG (Thread starter):
AFAIK only Horizon and Colgan (operating for CO Express) operate the Q400 in the US

Frontier/Lynx?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15499 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 12117 times:



Quoting Nws2002 (Reply 2):
There was a rush for carriers to have an "all jet" fleet at the express level back in the late 90s.

This was part of it, and some carriers are paying the price now.

Another large factor is that in the USA there are a lot more routes that are long enough to give a RJ a real advantage over the Q400. A Q400 can do a higher percentage of European routes as well as a jet, but the fraction of routes where the turboprop won't give up anything is lower in the US. There are plenty that still short enough for the Q400, but not like in Europe.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16694 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 11991 times:

CO/Pinnacle have reported their performance have exceeded expectations, the aircraft is perfect for regional routes up to 500 miles from EWR. Currently they are operating 14 (one was lost tragically in Buffalo), with 15 more on firm order for 2010. CO also has purchase rights with Pinnacle for an additional 15, those would most likely be for IAH.

When CO Connection receives their next batch of 15 Q-400s it would enable them to convert every frequency/route of up to 500 miles from EWR currently operated by ERJs to the larger more efficient Q-400. 29 Q-400s would be operating 95-100 daily flights from EWR.

Quoting LHCVG (Thread starter):
Colgan (operating for CO Express)

They actualy fly under the CO Connection banner.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineIAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11952 times:



Quoting STT757 (Reply 5):
CO also has purchase rights with Pinnacle for an additional 15, those would most likely be for IAH.

Hurry please, the SF340's are so slooooooow and currently have no RNAV capability.

Any time frame for the extra 15 to be delivered?



Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3559 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11950 times:



Quoting Nws2002 (Reply 2):
As they say perception is reality, and its difficult to change passenger

No, its not changing because almost every passenger prefers a jet over a prop because of the noise factor.


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5641 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11897 times:

Because we (the US) are a very different market from much of the rest of the world.
Between our cities, we have LONG DISTANCES. I mean, you can fit all of France inside Texas. And, due to cheap airfares, lots of people fly. So, consequently, Southwest can put a zillion 737s a day between Houston and Dallas, or a half-zillion between Dallas and Midland, whereas the number of people who wish to fly from Nice to Basle are.. limited.
If you look at some of the RJ flying, like Continental's IAH-MSP, IAH-BOI (in the past), IAH-IAD, the Dash 8s just can't do those routes, even though they're very economical aircraft.
In the future, as tree-hugging regulations get tighter, I expect you'll see the airlines forced into Dash operations, for appropriate routes anyway.
But for now, passengers like to GO FAST- that's why they're flying in the first place. And on most routes longer than a few hundred miles, the Embraers and Canadairs of the world better meet the GO FAST need, and, most of all, they DO IT WITHOUT PROPELLERS.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24109 posts, RR: 23
Reply 9, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11844 times:



Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 7):
Quoting Nws2002 (Reply 2):
As they say perception is reality, and its difficult to change passenger

No, its not changing because almost every passenger prefers a jet over a prop because of the noise factor.

I haven't noticed much difference between the noise level on a Q400 and most regional jets, if you avoid the Q400 rows very close to the propellers. Q400 is also more comfortable than a CRJ-100/200.

Low fares are the most important factor to most passengers, and with the Q400's lower operating costs vs. the average regional jet, their operators can afford to offer lower fares and still cover costs.


User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6731 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11788 times:

One question I have is can the Q400 have wi-fi and seatback tv's?


Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineDavids1258 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 1 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11780 times:

I had looked forward to this aircraft, they do look cool from the outside or on approach. But on a recent Horizon flight, the seating was so uncomfortable and the interior so bland. Not anxious to go back. A buisness class could work for me.

User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22319 posts, RR: 20
Reply 12, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11712 times:



Quoting ArmitageShanks (Reply 7):
No, its not changing because almost every passenger prefers a jet over a prop because of the noise factor.

The DH4 is nowhere near as loud as older AT7s (which are louder than newer AT7s, too).



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 800 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11713 times:

I think the keywords here are "distance and time".

In Europe it might be fine to fly the Q400 on domestic routes and the same could be said for US East Coast routes with short distances, but for all the longer 70-seater routes a prop is just to slow.

I don't think it is as easy as a lot of people make it sound: "The airlines just wanted an all jet fleet in the nineties".

That sentence might be a part of the whole equitation, but overall there are other reasons for the props leaving the fleets. In North America the distances flown by small airplanes are so long because everyone wants to fly directly to his destination that jets like the E170 / E175 are just the better option.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15499 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11699 times:



Quoting CARST (Reply 13):
"The airlines just wanted an all jet fleet in the nineties".

AA did this at least partly because of the MQ 4184 accident. All of the props went to MIA, SJU, and DFW to help keep them out of icing conditions.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineSurfandsnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2797 posts, RR: 30
Reply 15, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11672 times:

I would say you have several issues here.

1. Scope clause contracts - these differ from airline to airline, but aircraft the size of the Q400 are often restricted in number or prohibited altogether to protect mainline jobs

2. First class/economy plus products - The U.S. legacies have been investing in first class cabins (and UA has even put in economy plus seating) on larger regional aircraft. Not sure if the Q400 was really designed with this in mind.

3. Passenger perception - Americans are adamantly opposed to prop planes for whatever reason. Whether they are slow, noisy, uncomfortable, or even less safe is unknown to me, but they certainly are not well liked - quite a few people will actually avoid these planes for bigger jets!

4. Operating conditions - whereas Europe tends to have relatively mild weather, many parts of the U.S. can suffer from brutal winter conditions. The crash of the American Eagle ATR-72 in the 90's caused AA to move all props down to MIA and SJU, where they don't face snow, ice, etc. Basing these aircraft in Chicago, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Detroit, etc. could have deadly consequences...



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22319 posts, RR: 20
Reply 16, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11648 times:



Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 15):
Basing these aircraft in Chicago, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Detroit, etc. could have deadly consequences...

NW has used props throughout the upper midwest for years with no problem, and EN has used Dash-8s in the northeast without a problem.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15499 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11642 times:



Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 15):
The crash of the American Eagle ATR-72 in the 90's caused AA to move all props down to MIA and SJU, where they don't face snow, ice, etc. Basing these aircraft in Chicago, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Detroit, etc. could have deadly consequences...

I think that AA may have overreacted a bit after MQ 4184 and made the ATR a bit of a scapegoat. But that was a big part of why they went all jet at ORD.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineUs330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3842 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11633 times:



Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 8):
But for now, passengers like to GO FAST- that's why they're flying in the first place. And on most routes longer than a few hundred miles, the Embraers and Canadairs of the world better meet the GO FAST need, and, most of all, they DO IT WITHOUT PROPELLERS.

I've read on this forum that the Q400's actually have superior economics to the RJ's on shorter stage lengths--500 miles or less--how CO is using them, basically.
You are right--there are plenty of routes that the Q400 flat out cannot fly given range issues, but on certain missions--high density short range routes--they work quite fine. Horizon, in fact, is disposing of their entire CRJ-700 fleet and will solely operate the Q400.
If gas prices rise, you will almost certainly see more carriers turn to the big capacity props for these short stage lengths, since the speed advantage of a jet is neglible.

Yes, Europe and America are two different markets, but that doesn't mean that there aren't areas that do not resemble each other.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24109 posts, RR: 23
Reply 19, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11597 times:



Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 15):
Operating conditions - whereas Europe tends to have relatively mild weather, many parts of the U.S. can suffer from brutal winter conditions. The crash of the American Eagle ATR-72 in the 90's caused AA to move all props down to MIA and SJU, where they don't face snow, ice, etc. Basing these aircraft in Chicago, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Detroit, etc. could have deadly consequences...

ATR-42s have been operating in extreme Canadian arctic conditions only a few hundred miles from the North Pole for years. And Dash 8s and many other propeller types serve virtually every Canadian airport with scheduled service, most of which experience more extreme winter conditions than airports in colder parts of the U.S.

You're also wrong about Europe. Many airports in Europe regularly experience snow, ice, freezing rain etc. I've experienced more delays due to those issues at airports in Europe than in North America.


User currently offlineSilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1963 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11592 times:

The distance issue is not entirely accurate. A large percentage of the population is in the northeast, California and Florida, the routes in those areas would be run much more efficiently with a Q400.

The perception issue is the biggest problem, scope clauses come in second and the lack of funds to acquire new aircraft is the third major problem with large turboprop sales in the US.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15499 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11586 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
ATR-42s have been operating in extreme Canadian arctic conditions only a few hundred miles from the North Pole

True, but often it is too cold there to have icing conditions. In extremely cold temps, the air loses almost all moisture, hence it sometimes being too cold to snow. But turboprops do operate regularly in icing conditions with no problems at all.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1336 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11499 times:

- Props are old fashioned and noisy. Jets are cool and fast.

- Props are largely stuck to the ramp, RJs get a jetway at a lot of stops. Props can sit on the hot ramp with the A/C off with the door closed waiting for the prop to stop, while RJs typically open the door right away.

- With RJs pushing most props out, that leaves the 19 seat props as a lot of users only prop experience. These are cramped due to fuselage curvature, no F/A (and therefore no drinks or snacks, etc).

- Yeah the Q400 is fast, but other props can be much slower. So everything thinks all props are slow.

- UA pretty much replaced its 737s with CRJ-700s (and I guess some ERJ-170s). So DEN-CLE is now an RJ flight. So is (mostly) DEN-ATL. Not sure how well a Q400 works on those longish flights.


User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7348 posts, RR: 32
Reply 23, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11454 times:



Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 15):
The crash of the American Eagle ATR-72 in the 90's caused AA to move all props down to MIA and SJU, where they don't face snow, ice, etc. Basing these aircraft in Chicago, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Detroit, etc. could have deadly consequences...

That was a consideration, but the real reason to move the ATR aircraft was the pilot contract agreement between American and their mainline pilots about American Eagle. The ATR aircraft were all 'sold' to Executive Airlines ( OW ) of Puerto Rico. The way it was explained to me is that the ATR aircraft do not count against the American pilots vs American Eagle pilots percentage / ration.

Even today the ATR aircraft flying out of DFW are flown by Executive, not by American Eagle ( MQ ). That separate pilot contract gives American more flexibility with American Eagle to use jets.


User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7348 posts, RR: 32
Reply 24, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 11386 times:



Quoting LHCVG (Thread starter):
Several still operate Dash 8's but how come no one else uses the Q400?

Geography and economy are the biggest reason.

Inventory is another big reason.

The US airlines have been converting as many mainline aircraft routes to regional aircraft as possible over the past decade or two. These are mostly jets due to the distances involved even though they have a similar passenger capacity to the Q-400.

Only in the past couple years have US airlines started to get rid of some of the smallest regional jets. These would be the prime candidates for replacement by the Q-300 or the Q-400, but the Q-400 entered service long after the last round of prop aircraft purchases by US airlines.

Currently the US airlines have an excess of fully depreciated prop aircraft, be they Saab 340 or ATR aircraft.

Even US Airways regional fleet of smaller Dash-8 aircraft on the east coast have many extra aircraft.

Only new operations, like the CO in the Northeast and Lynx, have looked at the turboprop market from a fresh aircraft standpoint. In both cases, regional jets were replaced with Q-400 aircraft.

However, a big negative for selling the public on the aircraft was the crash outside Buffalo. I've heard more than once that if it was a jet, the crew would have been more experienced, better and not made the mistakes. I even heard it sitting in the Seattle airport food court watching the Horizon birds about a week ago. Some man told his wife "You never want to fly on one of those. It's the kind which crashed at Buffalo. The pilots they put on those are too young and inexperienced."

Give the US airlines time. Horizon has shown how a well managed turboprop fleet with regional jet supplements can work.

When the economy stabilizes, and it becomes economical to replace the existing turboprops and more smaller RJs, expect to see more Q-400 aircraft in the US.


25 IAHFLYR : CO Connection (Colgan) at EWR is using jetways for the Q400. And it takes how long for a prop to stop once the fuel is cut? Gotta toss a flag on that
26 Prebennorholm : Large numbers of turboprop planes, mainly Dash-6, Dash-7, Dash-8 (-100 to -400), F27/F50, ATR-42/-72, Saab 340/-2000, are making up the main, local t
27 Ikramerica : AA used jetways for the ATR in Chicago, too. First hand experience, and it was nice considering it was 25 degrees and sleeting outside. But I'm old s
28 Kith : Props make $$ On a lot of routes RJ's don't. Passengers will adjust if its an issue of having service or no service. Case closed. -Matt in KITH
29 Silentbob : Actually I have reads in several reputable sources that the great lakes area in the US is unlike anywhere int he world in regards to icing conditions
30 Cubsrule : But - again - XJ and C5 use props in the Great Lakes area with no problem.
31 ArmitageShanks : But they are still much louder than CRJ-ERJ. I flew on both types (CRJ and Dash) last week and the CRJ is almost silent compared to the Dash 8.
32 Cubsrule : It really depends on where you are sitting, doesn't it? The CRJ and ERJ, like most rear-engined airplanes, are much, much louder in the back.
33 ULMFlyer : I partly disagree with you. I've flown a lot on Q400s and ERJ145s out of and into EWR and find their noise levels comparable. But I totally agree on
34 Antoniemey : I wonder if you encountered one of my in-laws.... I heard something very similar from one when we went to NY for a wedding recently. Of course, I poi
35 Czbbflier : Weather conditions / icing / are all absurd reasons. (Deadly consequences?! Gimme a break!) Air too cold? At times, perhaps, but what about the other
36 WIGGAM : Props can lose money like any other airplane ever designed/manufactured. Yes they burn less gas, but they are still multi-million dollar machines tha
37 Pilotpip : You do realize the "C" in "DHC" stands for Canada right? Never mind the fact that there are plenty of carriers in the US, Canada, Northern Europe, As
38 WIGGAM : I am not overly familiar with the Dash's, but I know the Q400 has an apu. They do battery starts, and they CANT run the APU in the air, so the APU se
39 ThegreatRDU : If that was the reason who cares? that's not reason anyway it's all about price for the passengers were talking about RJ flying, not all have 2 class
40 MPDPilot : I just wanted to add my two cents here. First, I think there are two big reasons why airlines keep CRJs and ERJs over Props. One, image, for the same
41 Thegreatchecko : This is probably a flame or a post based on little to no knowledge, but here goes... The funny this is that I've flown the Q400 into what is arguably
42 AirframeAS : LynxAviation (F9) here in DEN doesn't seem to have any problems with their Q400's. I am having trouble following your point on this.
43 Crj 900 : A couple points here. Yes the Q400 could have seat back tvs and WiFi, it boils down to which airline wants to cough up the money to have the aircraft
44 Par13del : I think one of the problems with turbo props has been that the OEM's simply decided that their economic advantage was then end all and nothing else ma
45 Packcheer : A question for those of you very familiar with the Q400. Here at CAE we get almost all CRJ/ERJ with the exception of US (Piedmont only, PSA uses CRJ-2
46 BMI727 : These might be a bit long, but the other routes you quoted are right in the Q400's sweet spot. This is part of the reason that I don't think that MKE
47 TheGreatChecko : The Q400 could do them all. It just depends on the economics of the trip and how many people are flying the route. F9 is currently using the Q400 to
48 TheGreatChecko : The Q400 could do them all. It just depends on the economics of the trip and how many people are flying the route. F9 is currently using the Q400 to
49 DocLightning : I keep on hearing this argument but it's just not true. Australia has even longer distances between cities. Europe has roughly the population density
50 WIGGAM : It is strange to me to have an APU that can't be used in the air, on an airplane. That is all I meant. I think it has something to do with with fire
51 Antoniemey : We are, however, a nation that easily clings to stereotypes. The stereotype is that WN is the cheapest, props are noisy, uncomfortable, and unsafe, a
52 Viscount724 : And LIS-SVO is within 45 nm of JFK-LAX.
53 Cubsrule : It's near the outer limit of what is economically sensible, but the Q400 could do a route like DEN-ORD or DEN-SDF. It's not near the aircraft's range
54 Parton87 : I have never understand why you americans used jetways for small jets and props! In europe walking from the tarmac to the terminal is common, even wi
55 BMI727 : There are a lot of routes that can be flown economically with a turboprop here, but the proportion of those routes seems to be higher in Europe. Once
56 Post contains links ThegreatRDU : A Q400 with 70 seats at a typical 300nm sector and one way fares at $100 needs only a 35% load factor the rest is profit potential... http://www.q400
57 Cubsrule : It's amazing what one little letter will do... 2000 Km, not Nm...
58 BMI727 : No, it's not Newton meters. I feel secure in saying that the Q400 can fly further than 1300 nanometers. The range is more like 1300 NM.
59 Cubsrule : I was trying to emPHAsize...
60 Viscount724 : Bombardier quotes 1362nm but manufacturer range figures are always optimistic since they don't consider winds, high temperatures, assume no cargo, an
61 Cubsrule : ...which is why I said 2000 km, which is actually more than that 10-15% reduction.
62 TheGreatChecko : The Q400 can cruise about 350 knots. The burn at that speed is approximately 2800PPH. Fully topped off, the tanks can hold 11,724 lbs of fuel. That gi
63 Ikramerica : Also, RJs are often replacing mainline into airports that already have terminals and jetways built for 727s and 737s and MD80s and DC9s, etc. So why
64 T5towbar : Yes. I hear the same thing (rumors, of course), since they are gearing up for their arrival at Terminal A - with the FL departure and gate(s). That w
65 Micstatic : I would rather have the ERJ 1-side over a CRJ any day.
66 Packcheer : Obviously you are a smaller built individual.
67 Antoniemey : Not necessarily. I'm 6'2" and 210 lb and I feel the same way. It's worth having the cramped seat to not have to share a row with someone you don't kn
68 MPDPilot : I am about the same size and I have to agree. Even if you get really uncomfortable you can just get up and walk or get lost looking out the window.
69 ADent : It depends on how is it done. Some tarmac prop setups are plywood tunnels (carpeted) with no heat, no seats, no signage and accessed by a service sta
70 413x3 : The American tax payers were paying for all those airports to build jetways, so why not, the builders thought.
71 RFields5421 : Back 45-50 years ago I remember magazine advertisements and television commercials about jet service and jetways. The focus of the advertisements is
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...
Why Haven't Any US Carriers Ordered The 7E7? posted Sat Jul 31 2004 02:56:39 by Horus
Why Only Two US Carriers With The B734? posted Fri Oct 24 2003 06:12:51 by VH-BZF
Why Don't DL/US/NW Fly From LHR? posted Fri Jun 13 2003 11:21:42 by NoelG
Why Don't US Carriers Fly To The ME posted Fri Jul 13 2001 16:36:12 by Bokratensa
Why Don't US Carriers Fly To SA? posted Tue Feb 1 2005 12:59:45 by Bluepoole
Why Don't More People Fly Into Smaller Airport? posted Sat Mar 27 2004 23:34:44 by YEGaircanada
Why Don't More Carriers Have ATC? posted Wed Feb 25 2004 01:55:57 by SHUPirate1
Why Only Few Charter Carriers In The US? posted Fri Jan 4 2002 10:59:25 by Flying-Tiger
Why Don't More Airlines Fly FRA-DEN? posted Mon Mar 26 2001 21:24:49 by Wishihadalife
Why Don't More Airlines Have Chan. 9-like Feature? posted Sat Mar 7 2009 07:24:32 by RJpieces