cumulonimbus
Posts: 508
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:13 pm

Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:38 am


Hello Folks,

I was wondering how Horizon feels about the CRJ 700 and The Q400. Does the airline like one better than the other or does the airline Plan on ordering more of the metioned aircraft? I personally like the Q400 a lot better but how does Horizon feel about these two aircraft?

Mike
 
CWUPilot
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:49 am

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Sun Aug 01, 2004 5:29 am

In a presentation I saw by some of the higher-ups and a pilot, they seemed pretty excited about all three aircraft that they operate. I know that they recently or will soon order more crj's for their new partnership with frontier airlines. I like the 200s and 400s a lot and for an RJ, those 700s aren't bad either.
"The worst day of flying still beats the best day of real work."
 
S12PPL
Posts: 3603
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:26 am

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Sun Aug 01, 2004 5:42 am

From what I could tell, alot of pilots at QX HATE the Q400 for it's APU reliability issues. I've also been told by a QX training pilot "It's like flying a locamotive with wings...."
Next Flights: 12/31 AS804 PDX-MCO 2/3 AS19 MCO-SEA QX2545 SEA-PDX
 
Bronko
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2001 3:28 am

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Sun Aug 01, 2004 6:04 am

A locomotive with wings? I was under the impression the Q400 was the 757 of turboprops, have a similiar "thrust" to weight ratio.

Anyone know where I look up performance numbers on a comparitive basis?
Jet City Aviation Photography
 
S12PPL
Posts: 3603
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:26 am

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Sun Aug 01, 2004 6:37 am

It may be, Brokno. But that's just one opinion of one QX training pilot. It's still an un-reliable plane, though. It's APU has got to be one of the worst designs out there. Even if the APU is working, QX has to plug the plane into a GPU because they die so often. I still remember pushing one Q400 out, and because the APU was working, the pilots had us disconnect the ground power so they could start during push. About 1/4 of the way out, I heard over the head set "*censored* APU!" When asked if we needed to stop and connect ground power they said "No, we got it." Then about 30 seconds later *censored censored* APU bleed!" So, the plane has it's problems, and we can hope that Bombardier is working them out. Now, I will say the first officer wasn't screaming, but he was pretty upset at the APU.
Next Flights: 12/31 AS804 PDX-MCO 2/3 AS19 MCO-SEA QX2545 SEA-PDX
 
LineMechQX
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 6:02 pm

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr

Sun Aug 01, 2004 7:58 am

??? Locomotive on wings? never heard that terminology before. It does have a tremendous thrust to weight ratio. Though I'm not sure where to look to compare it to other aircraft. though this gives a general idea http://q400.com/q400/en/performance.jsp
Apu's have been proven to be very unreliable, one of the big reasons is its not designed as an "airworthy" component. Its only for use on ground and as soon as the FADEC receives its MGWOFW signal it dies. Its only benefit is bleed air for ECS operation with engines off. It doesn't allow for hydraulics, AC power, or deice system troubleshooting. The apu is easily and often deferred (MEL) for 120 days. A more trying issue with the Q400's has been its MLG, they are complex, and between it and PSEU problems, we've had a high rate of return to fields, and ferry flights for gear swings. (Though I still say that's better then the CRJ's problem of dumping fuel overboard mid flight, and spitting out turbine blades)
Horizon does have a place for all of our aircraft. The powers that be are constantly tweaking our route structure and schedule to put the aircraft to the best use.
We do have options to convert our remaining 10 crj orders into Q400's as we did last month with one of our Crj deliveries due next year. I don't think it would surprise anyone if they did this again in the future. We’re relying on the Q400 to help us meet growing capacity needs in high-density, short-haul routes like Seattle-Portland as well as in other routes where the Q400 costs less to operate than the CRJ-700. Anyhow that's all I have to say about that right now.

Late
 
ushermittwoch
Posts: 2530
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:18 pm

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr

Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:25 am

Well, since I do not want to make this into too much of a grammar/spelling topic, I'll say that after flying on the old Dashs and the CRJ-700, I'd go for the Dash.
Maybe it's because I like turboprops in general, or because I didn't get to experience too much flying on the CRJ (Louisville to Cinci isn't that far).
Where have all the tri-jets gone...
 
FinnWings
Posts: 633
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 6:03 am

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Sun Aug 01, 2004 11:20 am

It's APU has got to be one of the worst designs out there. Even if the APU is working, QX has to plug the plane into a GPU because they die so often.

S12PPL, that is true indeed.... For the same reason it is also annoying aircraft for the ramp rats. The only aircraft where GPU has to be plugged all the time even it has an APU. There has been also quite a lot technical difficulties with Q400 in the winter conditions as well...

I think Q400 needs more attention by mechanics than other turboprops... Many airlines have stated that they have had a lot of technical difficulties with CRJ 700 as well and airlines have been annoyed, because Bombardier has been inefficient to fix most of the known bugs or they have done it too slowly... Overall, it seems that Bombardier has more reliability issues with their aircrafts than other manufacturers but otherwise CRJs and DHCs are excellent aircrafts and always pleasure to fly on them...

Best Regards,
FinnWings
 
dreamcraft
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 8:47 pm

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:48 am

I guess that is why Embraer has been winning more orders in recent times.
 
brons2
Posts: 2462
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:02 pm

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr

Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:30 am

I think Q400 needs more attention by mechanics than other turboprops... Many airlines have stated that they have had a lot of technical difficulties with CRJ 700 as well and airlines have been annoyed, because Bombardier has been inefficient to fix most of the known bugs or they have done it too slowly... Overall, it seems that Bombardier has more reliability issues with their aircrafts than other manufacturers but otherwise CRJs and DHCs are excellent aircrafts and always pleasure to fly on them...

I would say the same is true of their other industrial products as well, such as trains, snowmobiles and personal watercraft. I have owned some of these products and warranty service is terrible and issues are fixed slowly. I know this is a bit of a reach from aerospace products, but just check out sites like seadoo sucks dot com. Personally I am thinking of dumping my Bombardier Seadoos for Boeings, err I mean Yamahas or Kawasakis.

I think corporate wide Bombardier needs to work on their reliability!
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
 
FullThrottle
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 2:48 am

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:38 am

I was down at QX last week talking with the hiring personel and they said they were very happy with the aircraft they have. The Q400 is very cost efficient for the airline and about half ( i could be wrong) at working for Frontier express. With so many Q400 they are going to be flying them from SMF to PSP in the winter. Instead of the CRJ like last year.
Regaurding the APU issue, I am not very knowledgable about the systematic stuff but we were messing around in both the RJ and Q400 and they had the APU on for about 30 minutes. We flew a Q400 down from SEA - PDX and it was good flight. but on the way back the 200 we were suppose to come back on broke and they subsituted it with a CRJ. It was about 1/2 full and it climbed fantastically.
QX is adding another row to the CRJ to let everyone know. Take care.
 
SuperDash
Posts: 352
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 1:52 pm

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr

Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:59 am

Full Throttle-
Horizon is adding 4 seats to the Q400 and taking it to 74 seats. Thankfully they are not doing that with the CRJ.

Being an MVP Gold (now) with Alaska Air, I do love the Q400. Everyone that works the flights loves the plane as well (I didn't talk to the rampers about it). I know that the Q400 has excellent economics which are much better than the CRJ on runs under 500 miles. At 74 seats and the length of flight, it makes sense to run them Palm Springs-Sacramento and any other shorter haul run. I think Horizon likes both planes. However, the last 3 CRJs have been converted to Q400s. But that likely has more to do with the mission those planes were to fly than a like for either type.
 
SUPRAZACHAIR
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 3:27 pm

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:27 am

S12PPL & Flyboy80:
You two knuckle-heads were arguing about where Horizon can park their planes in EUG in another topic. Thats why Flyboy80 brings it up.  Big grin

Back on topic.

From a ramper's perspective:

I like the RJ better. With the exception of having to use the turboway to board/deplane, it's just slightly less of a pain to deal with. The foreward (carry-out) pit is much more easy access and load. No need to worry about plugging in ground power. And you can load the rear in one shot, i.e. no shelves. Everyone pretty much HATES the white tail (N539DS).
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jet City Aviation Photography


 
S12PPL
Posts: 3603
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:26 am

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:27 am

Yes....and I was told by an EUG employee that I was right, and he was wrong...so that's all I needed  Big thumbs up His airport friend may feed him info, but I highly doubt he was fed the info the airlines recieve. He isn't as important as he thinks he is Smile

And yes, the Q400 is a pain in the butt for rampers. The lav service pannel is practically on the ground, the front cargo door is a pain to access, and open/close. You have to pull the Ala 'Carte all the way around the airplane because of the GPU chord. You have to load the rear pit carefully because of the shelves, and keep a very careful count of how many bags are on what shelf....and I've all ready gone into the APU issues. This plane is a pain, and one of the worst ventures Bombardier has gone into in the last few years. If your going to make a regional turbo prop...spend some time making sure you as a company don't have to foot the bill every time your customers find a new problem with it mechanically YOU could have designed better. Bombardier, from what I've heard, has to have someone stationed at Horizon's maint. base at PDX to help sort out problems with the CRJ-700 and Q400..... If they still aren't stationed there, they were the first few years of this aircraft's operation with Horizon.

And, not all pilots like the Q400. I spoke with several Q400 pilots that were groaning because of the rumors they'd heard from QX HQ about the possibility of ordering more Q400's to phase out the Q200's when they're lease comes up...ouch.
Next Flights: 12/31 AS804 PDX-MCO 2/3 AS19 MCO-SEA QX2545 SEA-PDX
 
alexinwa
Posts: 865
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2000 2:08 pm

RE: Horizon And It's Opinion On The Q400 Vs The Cr7

Tue Aug 03, 2004 11:57 am

Just my two cents here.......I'm wondering why almost everyday day I see 1 or 2 -400's sitting either at the cargo ramp or just north of the N gates at SEA during the middle of the day.

I would think that they would be in the air, not sitting on the ground??
You mad Bro???

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 747fan, 910A, adamh8297, Beatyair, DeltaB717, Ducari, FAST Enterprise [Crawler], Mikey711MN, Motorhussy, NamGunner, phluser, raaadek, Wingtips56, Yahoo [Bot] and 286 guests