Return of the props
02-28-2009, 08:03 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,498
Props are what got this industry started my good man. There's a reason Horizon is going from the CRJ to the "Q'. In my opinion all regionals should operate anything from a BE1900 to the Q-400. Cost is minimal and if you fill up at least half the seats your turning a profit. Just my .02
03-01-2009, 06:11 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: LeftSeat PA-44
Posts: 528
I would rather walk than take a TP from CLT to XNA. It is a 2+ hour flight to begin with. And to counter the argument I know people are about to start it is hard to fill a 200 on that flight let alone a mainline jet. IMO TP have a place and so do RJ's, however I do think there are to many RJ's and not enough TP. It doesn't make sense to run a RJ from CLT to CAE, Nothin like sitting in line at CLT for 20 min just to fly 11 min to get there. All in all get to the airport 1 1/2 hours before the flight 20min taxi, 11 min flight, 2 min taxi in, 15 min waiting for your bag. When according to Google it is only a 1h 47m drive. Why people fly that it beyond me.
03-01-2009, 06:20 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Switch, Lever & Light Specialist
Posts: 1,065
The Q400 has near jet performance on shorter stage lengths. You can have your FAST JET......I'll keep my Q. Bet we'll be flying Q's for years to come. It's got great performance, VERY efficient, and it's quiet....all in all, a very fine machine.
03-01-2009, 06:25 AM
#46
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: A-320
Posts: 6,929
Well..........the Jet takes just as much time as the Q from EWR-RDU etc...but the Q is a slower aircraft. Also for the guys that never got the chance to fly a Turbo-Prop, you really missed out on a great experience. I prefer the hot wings/swept wing/above the weather flying of a jet but you learn how to fly in all kinds of weather in a Turbo-prop.
Only problem I have with the Q, is really the same problem I have with all Non Mainline airplane.the Pay, especially for its size and the amount of money it makes.......
Only problem I have with the Q, is really the same problem I have with all Non Mainline airplane.the Pay, especially for its size and the amount of money it makes.......
03-01-2009, 09:55 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: CA
Posts: 397
2 years ago i did a flight from Seattle to Spokane. Southwest was doing the same flight. They took off 1 airplane ahead of us and we were in the hotel shuttle waiting for them when we got to Spokane.
03-01-2009, 10:46 AM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 955
This is where the discussion should really be headed. (Rather than this "my jet is better than your t-prop" whining.) The Q400 has revenue generation potential similar to CRJ 700's in many markets, yet the payscale is lower than most CRJ 200's.
03-01-2009, 11:33 AM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: Swing that gear
Posts: 354
Horizon has been at it for a while and have better pay than most RJ 700's.
03-01-2009, 02:31 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 955
True, although I believe Horizon's Q400 rate was standard-setting when those airframes came online. I don't see a relationship between operational longevity and pay scales.
Last edited by waflyboy; 03-01-2009 at 06:12 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
