Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Goodbye Q-400s, Hello More EMB-175s

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 18, 2014, 1:39 am
  #46  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Maryland
Programs: United, Turkish
Posts: 640
Originally Posted by qukslvr619
Not sure what the aversion is to Q400s in winter. Those were ATRs that had icing issues in that region and last I checked the Q400 became a lawn dart in BUF due to pilot error.
.
All high thin wing Turboprops have special icing issues. The precise role of icing as the trigger of the Cascading problems in buffalo is a matter of some dispute. I do agree that a better pilot response would have improved the probability of safety but I never fly in turboprops in icing conditions.
morelegroom is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 4:11 am
  #47  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 5,659
Originally Posted by morelegroom
All high thin wing Turboprops have special icing issues. The precise role of icing as the trigger of the Cascading problems in buffalo is a matter of some dispute. I do agree that a better pilot response would have improved the probability of safety but I never fly in turboprops in icing conditions.
There was no dispute on CO 3407 except amongst the tort lawyers.

"Better pilot response" like flying above stall speed.

Pilot error.
LaserSailor is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 4:54 am
  #48  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Virtuoso Travel Agent, Commercial Pilot
Posts: 2,117
Originally Posted by morelegroom
All high thin wing Turboprops have special icing issues. The precise role of icing as the trigger of the Cascading problems in buffalo is a matter of some dispute. I do agree that a better pilot response would have improved the probability of safety but I never fly in turboprops in icing conditions.
There is no dispute except amongst people with a specific axe to grind.

The only role icing played in that tragedy was prompting a discussion unrelated to the operation of the aircraft (violating the sterile cockpit rule) which may have been a contributing factor in distracting the pilots from actually flying the airplane.
Sykes is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 6:05 am
  #49  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: PBI / FLL / YUL
Programs: UA 1K, Delta Plat, AA Plat, Marriott Titanium, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Courtesy Card
Posts: 1,983
Originally Posted by LaserSailor
,,,served on the 1% of flyers who care about what plane they are on, as opposed to the rest of us who just want to get there and go make money.
Oh really, you've polled the flying public? Would love to see those results.

We fly economy at my company 100% of the time. Every single person I work with cares about not flying on uncomfortable, small planes. It's why we often book away from United on NYC-ATL. It's why I'd rather connect before flying EWR-OKC direct on UA. The conversion to the E175 will be much appreciated by many IMO, whether they consciously pay attention to aircraft type or not. I often catch people walking on the Q400 and saying "Another one of these crap small planes".
fjfv19 is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 6:23 am
  #50  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: DEN
Programs: UA MM Plat; AA MM Gold; HHonors Diamond
Posts: 15,866
Originally Posted by Sykes
There is no dispute except amongst people with a specific axe to grind.

The only role icing played in that tragedy was prompting a discussion unrelated to the operation of the aircraft (violating the sterile cockpit rule) which may have been a contributing factor in distracting the pilots from actually flying the airplane.
Not going to re-litigate 3407, but I can assure you that I will never schedule a prop in the Great Lakes region between November and April. There were a number of factors that were brought up in the discussion of the accident as to why a jet is a better choice than a prop in icing conditions, and they all made sense to me.
Bonehead is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 6:36 am
  #51  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,762
All high thin wing Turboprops have special icing issues. The precise role of icing as the trigger of the Cascading problems in buffalo is a matter of some dispute. I do agree that a better pilot response would have improved the probability of safety but I never fly in turboprops in icing conditions.
mmhmm, well, Porter safely operates a fleet of Q400's, based in Canada, where its "icing" conditions quite frequently.

Icing is dangerous but the aircraft (particularly the Dash 8's ) are designed to handle it just fine.
entropy is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 6:56 am
  #52  
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,106
Originally Posted by Bonehead
Not going to re-litigate 3407, but I can assure you that I will never schedule a prop in the Great Lakes region between November and April. There were a number of factors that were brought up in the discussion of the accident as to why a jet is a better choice than a prop in icing conditions, and they all made sense to me.
IIRC, CRJ-200s also have potential wing icing problems and very little margin for error, so just avoiding prop planes probably won't be enough if that's a concern.
exerda is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 7:09 am
  #53  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: DEN
Programs: UA MM Plat; AA MM Gold; HHonors Diamond
Posts: 15,866
Originally Posted by exerda
IIRC, CRJ-200s also have potential wing icing problems and very little margin for error, so just avoiding prop planes probably won't be enough if that's a concern.
I already avoid those, believe me. AA gets my monthly DEN--MAF business because the UA nonstop is a hellish ride on a 200. I shoot for the 145s or 700s/170s. There are also mainlines into ROC (I think...haven't checked in the last few months), BUF, and ALB.
Bonehead is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 8:14 am
  #54  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 5,659
Originally Posted by Bonehead
Not going to re-litigate 3407, but I can assure you that I will never schedule a prop in the Great Lakes region between November and April. There were a number of factors that were brought up in the discussion of the accident as to why a jet is a better choice than a prop in icing conditions, and they all made sense to me.
Your choice, but not a choice based on rational analysis of prop vs jet.

If the crew follows procedures and training, I'm happy for them to mitigate my winter travel risk.
LaserSailor is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 10:04 am
  #55  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: BRI
Programs: UA Premier Gold, DL FO, DL MM, Marriott Gold, Hyatt platinum
Posts: 914
Finally, a change I'm going to like!
Hawk Circle is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 10:26 am
  #56  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Programs: Whatever gets me there faster.
Posts: 746
Originally Posted by exerda
IIRC, CRJ-200s also have potential wing icing problems and very little margin for error, so just avoiding prop planes probably won't be enough if that's a concern.
There have been airworthiness directives in effect for a good, long while now that address these winter/icing issues. The only problem you're still likely to see is stuck flaps, but even that's a rare event.
DXjr is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 11:35 am
  #57  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,664
For people saying that this will result in fewer delays I hate to say that is inaccurate. For most airport flow programs props are not included and in only a few cases are included in the daily enroute separation programs.
ROCAT is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 1:34 pm
  #58  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by ROCAT
For people saying that this will result in fewer delays I hate to say that is inaccurate. For most airport flow programs props are not included and in only a few cases are included in the daily enroute separation programs.
A CommutAir captain told me that when IAD and EWR get jammed up with weather delays, UA tells them which flights to cancel to help relieve congestion. It's very rare when it's due to weather impacting prop aircraft specifically.
JimInOhio is online now  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 1:43 pm
  #59  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,881
Originally Posted by JimInOhio
A CommutAir captain told me that when IAD and EWR get jammed up with weather delays, UA tells them which flights to cancel to help relieve congestion. It's very rare when it's due to weather impacting prop aircraft specifically.
Correct that when flow is reduced, carriers get to choose which flights to cancel. However, Porter also used to specifically advertise that they were able to use a runway that most other aircraft can't at EWR because of the fact they fly Q400s with a capacity less than some others (not sure if that applies to the UAX Q400s, or how many seats they have compared to Porter). The idea being that when there's a backup of flights waiting for takeoff at EWR, their flights could skip a line because of this. Of course, if the congested NYC airspace is still the problem, that probably didn't help much.

Last edited by emcampbe; Sep 18, 2014 at 1:56 pm
emcampbe is offline  
Old Sep 18, 2014, 1:50 pm
  #60  
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
After a lengthy delay due to m/x on a Q400 this year, I say good riddance. Though I hope the Qs on RDU-IAD/EWR are replaced with two class planes instead of E45s.
CMK10 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.