Q400 vs ATR

Discuss topics relating to Westjet.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

redbaron
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 12:32 pm

Q400 vs ATR

Post by redbaron »

So after the demos, what's the verdict from the Westjetters?
---------- ADS -----------
 
palm90
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 11:30 am

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by palm90 »

There is no question WestJet will go with the Q400. They had to make it look like they were shopping around to get a deal from Bombardier.
---------- ADS -----------
 
EI-EIO
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 604
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:16 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Contact:

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by EI-EIO »

More jobs for Toronto :D
---------- ADS -----------
 
Mach1
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:04 am

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by Mach1 »

Curse this high Canadian dollar and western affluence destroying all jobs in Ontario!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Maurice
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:11 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by Maurice »

While I do think it will eventually be a Q400 deal, the overall lower cost and fuel savings (especially in light of $100+ oil) from the ATR will make this a closer decision than most people think.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by rudder »

Will depend on stage length of anticipated routes. The ATR is slow therefore it probably is looking at a realistic passenger range of 500nm/2hrs. The Q400 could be used to replace some of the shorter/thinner B737 routes. The ATR cannot. The Q400 can likely find fuel cost savings if operated at less than maximum speed if necessary. I would be shocked if it was not the Q400 that was announced.

By the time the dust settles there will probably be over 100 Q400's operating in Canada at 3 airlines.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
hifliers
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:27 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by hifliers »

I hear the single engine service ceiling on the ATR is too low to be able to do YLW-YEG.
---------- ADS -----------
 
BE20 Driver
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 571
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by BE20 Driver »

Like many others, I had assumed Q400. It would be hard to say no to lower aquisition cost and lower fuel cost. Aside from the astronomical cost of pilot salaries (lol), those must be the two biggest costs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Realitychex
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 493
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 2:37 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by Realitychex »

Maurice wrote:While I do think it will eventually be a Q400 deal, the overall lower cost and fuel savings (especially in light of $100+ oil) from the ATR will make this a closer decision than most people think.
The Q400 is a fuel pig unless you slow it down and at asl's in the 400 to 450m range, the ATR is far cheaper to operate.

I suspect they'll be quite a lot of 737 substitution flying in markets under 350 miles and a number of those markets will be in the rocks.

It'll be an interesting decision, and not a hard to figure out with bottom up analysis, as was done prior to WJ launch and on the 737NG vs Airbus 32X deal.

Execution is the key.

Interestingly, Neeleman went with ATR's in Brasil.


8)
---------- ADS -----------
 
onspeed
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:48 pm
Location: yyz

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by onspeed »

I wonder how much the fact that WJ's two main competitors operate the Q400 will weigh into the decision making if the do decide to go with the ATR...
---------- ADS -----------
 
rigpiggy
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2858
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 7:17 pm
Location: west to east and west again

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by rigpiggy »

The PPC's are transportable right, methinks westjet would save training costs buying the Q400 as a large pool would already be trained
---------- ADS -----------
 
watermeth
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 3:32 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by watermeth »

a bit more to the equation :
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... 0s-369616/
Air New Zealand grounded its entire fleet of ATR 72-500 turboprops on 18 March after discovering hairline cracks around the cockpit windows of one aircraft.

Two of the carrier's 11 ATR 72-500s were quickly inspected and returned to service within hours, ANZ says.

Three aircraft require closer examination, five are "well-advanced" in the inspection process and one aircraft was in already grounded for planned maintenance, the Star Alliance carrier says.

The 68-seat ATR 72-500s, which are operated by Mount Cook Airline, are 10.9 years old on average.

Starting on Monday, ANZ will supplement Mount Cook Airline with some aircraft from the mainline fleet to restore two-thirds of the regional carrier's seating capacity.

The cracks were discovered during routine maintenance a Mount Cook Airline's base at Christchurch Airport.

Two years ago, ANZ moved heavy maintenance work for Mount Cook Airline's ATR 72 fleet from Christchurch to Nelson, the home of sister regional carrier and Bombardier Q300 operator Air Nelson.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AFLy
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:11 am

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by AFLy »

I fly a Q400 in a market that is shared with ATRs. They are embarrassingly slow and cruise much lower and in more weather over the same routes as us. Ok they may be cheaper to run per hour but their speed could cost them a revenue flight per day on a busy network. ie. have time for only 8-9 sectors instead of 10 or so.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Realitychex
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 493
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 2:37 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by Realitychex »

AFLy wrote:I fly a Q400 in a market that is shared with ATRs. They are embarrassingly slow and cruise much lower and in more weather over the same routes as us. Ok they may be cheaper to run per hour but their speed could cost them a revenue flight per day on a busy network. ie. have time for only 8-9 sectors instead of 10 or so.

Which airline is profitable? The one with Q400's or ATR's?
---------- ADS -----------
 
onspeed
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:48 pm
Location: yyz

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by onspeed »

For the cost of 4 Q400's you could purchase 5 ATR's, how many sectors could an extra airplane do?
---------- ADS -----------
 
AFLy
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:11 am

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by AFLy »

For the cost of 4 Q400's you could purchase 5 ATR's, how many sectors could an extra airplane do
Good point.

The Q400 operator is extremly profitable. I'm not sure about the ATR one. We also tried running our 400's at a reduced power/speed, but the savings overall were minimal and we now run at design cruise power settings much to the pleasure of our power hungry pilots :D . Im no business person and I know preferance has little to do with major decisions like choosing a fleet of aircraft to operate, but the Q400 is very popular in our markets and I'm sure Bombardier would make it worth WJ's time and money to have another 40-50 of a home built aircraft flying around locally.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Legacy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:05 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by Legacy »

onspeed wrote:For the cost of 4 Q400's you could purchase 5 ATR's, how many sectors could an extra airplane do?
Yes but what is the single engine service ceiling of the ATR? 11000? Cancel that thing from flying in the mountains.
---------- ADS -----------
 
onspeed
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:48 pm
Location: yyz

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by onspeed »

The 72-200 is 11000 worst case scenario, I'm not sure about the 600 but it is higher. I've never flown in BC, what would the MEA/MOCA be that they would have to maintain?

Could WJ use some sort of RNP procedure for a drift down on the high terrain routes to avoid issues?
---------- ADS -----------
 
redbaron
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 12:32 pm

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by redbaron »

onspeed wrote: Could WJ use some sort of RNP procedure for a drift down on the high terrain routes to avoid issues?
The ATR is not currently RNP capable.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
GottaFly
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 121
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:29 am
Location: Pacific

Re: Q400 vs ATR

Post by GottaFly »

I think the best thing WJA could do for positive media is to buy airplanes built in Canada by Canadians. WJA would look fantastic in the GTA papers and news networks by supporting the local economy.

The sector altitudes between YKA and YYC are between 10000 and 15000 depending on where you are. Mount Robson is just over 13000' tall to the north which is the tallest and there are about 30 more peaks that are over 11000' tall.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “WestJet”