Air Key West wrote:I should refrain from reacting to such an unrealistic post, but I cannot.
NCB, your write : "Pilots, mechanics and perhaps some customers would not be very happy with the turboprop aspect, but the airline would thrive." No, the airline would not thrive, because passengers would opt for the competition that flies jet aircraft instead. Nobody wants to be on a propeller aircraft for more than an hour (or at the very most an hour and a half block time), except you perhaps, NCB, because you have never been on a propeller aircraft on a longer flight and only make suggestions on the basis of theories you find in books or on the internet. I have flown the Q400 on a one-and-a-half-hour-flight and was very eager to get off. It's not a comfortable plane in spite of what the manufacturer and the airlines who bought the aircrat would like us to believe.
And sorry, you really have no sense of reality if you suggest to fly to Vilnius, Moscow or Lisbon on a Q400NG.
The Q400 isn't less comfortable than E-jets and CRJ's.
It's quieter and roomier and cheaper to operate. My best flight so far has been on a LH Regional Q400.
In terms of comfort, they are better than the E-Jets. They feel roomier by design.
My best flight so far has been on LH Regional Q400. Unlike my previous figures, the Q400 beats the E170 by over 20% and the E190 by over 15% on CASM. The CASM is about the same as B737-800 if you factor in the lower landing fees. The E-Jets are no competition to B737-800 or the Q400 in terms of CASM.
It's like comparing an Avro RJ to the E-jets.
I have nothing to be taught by a guy who wants ATR42/ATR72/E170/E175/E190/E195/A318 in SN's fleet nor the lunatics who follow his lead. Moscow is an A319 flight, so I don't know why mention it (I was talking range, but suddenly I wanted SN to operate the flight??).
As much as your mind is screwed up, the E170/190 combo are not profitable to run within SN's operations on the long flights in the winter, when only occupied by 40 passengers. SN shall not lose money for the passenger's comfort, instead it shall focus back on frequency, service and price.
SN would be better off letting those routes to LCC's and look for new thin routes to places like Strasbourg and many Flybe focus cities for that matter.
Comfort is one thing but an airline first looks at CASM and efficiency. We're on the eve of emissions trading in Europe. You are wrong to dismiss the Q400.
By the way, the SN Avro RJ's operate at around 780km/h compared to 620km/h of the Q400. 160km/h, big deal. Also, if you understood what I wrote, you shall have realised that I wrote some about lower yields. Price is what matters most to today's customers, not propellers/fans.
I know SN won't get the Q400's in such large numbers but that is what I would do, given that the MRJ is not being given its due value. E-Jets are half a generation behind the Sukhoi Superjet and a full generation behind the MRJ. In 10 years it would be what the Avro RJ is to us today: an expensive aircraft everyone wants to get rid of.
The Q400 instead can hold very well, especially if combined with Q400X.
Flybe operates the Q400 all the way to Malaga, some flights edge on the 3 hours.
But they must be really ridiculous and stupid to do that... that's why they are a miserable airlin unlike SN...
Those Embraer's they added? Expansion plans, aircraft bought at dump prices as I said before: Embraer was desperate to sell off its production line for 2010/2011.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... braer.html
I don't expect SN to go for a large Q400 fleet but that is what I would do on the eve of emissions trading...