QX leaves AK

Old Mar 11, 18, 9:47 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 406
QX leaves AK

Yesterday was the last day of service for QX in AK. N452QX ferried ANC-PDX yesterday and 450 scheduled for today. Although I look forward to more reliable winter operations, I thank all of the QX employees who were in state and hope they were able to find employment with AS or QX elsewhere.
beaver is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 1:29 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: PDX
Programs: AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 2,796
AS seemed to have grand plans for the Q400 in AK that just didn’t pan out. In reality about the only route it made sense for was ANC-FAI, and then the question became whether or not it was worth it to orphan three Q400’s in Alaska that were completely isolated from the rest of the network. I think we now know the answer.

I still would not be surprised, once the VX integration is complete and the QX issues (hopefully) quiet down to see the E175 take over some of the intra-Alaska flying. The 737’s are just too much capacity for some of those routes, especially in winter.

I know a lot of people won’t miss the Q400’s up there. AS received a ton of blowback, especially in FAI, when they made the switch that I don’t think they were expecting. I doubt it factored into their decision to take Horizon out of the state, but the return of the jets was definitely welcomed.
Chugach is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 1:33 pm
  #3  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend, Moderator, Information Desk, Ambassador, Alaska Airlines
Hilton Contributor BadgeIHG Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ANC, MRI
Programs: AS MVP Gold75K, AS 1MM, Maika`i Card, AGR, HH Gold, Hertz PC, Marriott LTG, SPG Gold, CO, 7H, BA, 8E
Posts: 41,905
I'm not sure if we'll see the E175's up here or not, as their cold weather performance is sub par IIRC. And that was a primary issue with the Q400 as well. Size wise, they are better suited. Also cargo is restricted on these aircraft compared to 737's.
beckoa is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 2:14 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: PDX
Programs: AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by beckoa View Post
I'm not sure if we'll see the E175's up here or not, as their cold weather performance is sub par IIRC. And that was a primary issue with the Q400 as well. Size wise, they are better suited. Also cargo is restricted on these aircraft compared to 737's.
As I recall, the E175 isnít certified to operate below something like -36 Fahrenheit. For that reason I doubt weíd ever see it in FAI (DL ran the E175 up there for a couple winters and had to cancel whenever there was a cold snap; I think itís one of the reasons they now send a A319 in the offseason) or doing any of the Arctic flying (SCC, BRW, OTZ, OME). But, I could definitely see it doing ADQ and the smaller towns in SE (CDV, YAK, PSG, WRG), and maybe even BET. The other benefit is it has the range and comfort level to easily do SEA-ANC, which would make rotations through the system easier.

Time will tell, but something tells me the current 73G/73H strategy on all of the intra-Alaska stuff is a stopgap.
Chugach is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 2:31 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,542
Chugach likes this.
UAPremierExec is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 4:28 pm
  #6  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 406
QX 9990 showing 5h39m ANC-PDX. That is a long time in a Q400. Wonder if they somehow add aux fuel tanks?
beaver is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 4:57 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pacific Northwest
Programs: UA 1MM, AS MVP, Bonvoyed Gold, Honors Dia, IHG Plat, ...
Posts: 9,842
Originally Posted by Chugach View Post
As I recall, the E175 isnít certified to operate below something like -36 Fahrenheit.
Dumb question: does that only apply to ground operations? I assume it's cold up there at 36k ft
be_rettSEA likes this.
notquiteaff is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 7:42 pm
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,192
Originally Posted by beaver View Post
QX 9990 showing 5h39m ANC-PDX. That is a long time in a Q400. Wonder if they somehow add aux fuel tanks?
They're not doing it with a fuel load of passengers and cargo.

Surely it would be easier to stop in Juneau and/or Vancouver vs. adding aux tanks.
notquiteaff likes this.
3Cforme is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 8:21 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: PDX
Programs: AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by beaver View Post
QX 9990 showing 5h39m ANC-PDX. That is a long time in a Q400. Wonder if they somehow add aux fuel tanks?
No passengers or cargo, and usually a tailwind flying south.
Chugach is offline  
Old Mar 11, 18, 8:22 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: PDX
Programs: AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by notquiteaff View Post
Dumb question: does that only apply to ground operations? I assume it's cold up there at 36k ft
I would think so. I seem to remember it being something to do with the APU.
notquiteaff likes this.
Chugach is offline  
Old Mar 12, 18, 12:12 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 55
My eye auto-corrected "AK" for "AS" which as you imagine gave me a jolt in my seat. E175 routinely operate out of MN. So now I am curious as to the reason for not going up to AK.
agurg is offline  
Old Mar 12, 18, 12:34 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,484
Originally Posted by agurg View Post
My eye auto-corrected "AK" for "AS" which as you imagine gave me a jolt in my seat. E175 routinely operate out of MN. So now I am curious as to the reason for not going up to AK.
Per above post, E175s are not certified to operate below -36. It's almost never that cold in Minneapolis so it's probably not really an issue there. Whereas in Fairbanks, at least historically, that's not a very unusual temperature in winter. May be less of an issue going forward given how quickly the climate is changing up there.
ucdtim17 is offline  
Old Mar 12, 18, 1:38 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: PDX
Programs: AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by agurg View Post
My eye auto-corrected "AK" for "AS" which as you imagine gave me a jolt in my seat. E175 routinely operate out of MN. So now I am curious as to the reason for not going up to AK.
Minneapolis is more on par with Anchorage in winter than Fairbanks.

My post (pure conjecture, by the way) suggested we might see the E175 in the more temperate parts of Alaska due to operational issues in extreme cold.
Chugach is offline  
Old Mar 12, 18, 3:14 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 581
Originally Posted by agurg View Post
My eye auto-corrected "AK" for "AS" which as you imagine gave me a jolt in my seat. E175 routinely operate out of MN. So now I am curious as to the reason for not going up to AK.
Fairbanks is much colder than MN. MN can get very low wind chills, but wind chill doesn't matter to the airplane. -36 ambient temperatures can occur in MN, but they are very rare. In normal winters FAI can have almost whole months where the temperature gets that cold.

There is no problem operating in ANC or JNU.

During cold snaps E175 flights are canceled in YYC and YEG too, but this happens much less frequently than FAI.
Aliquot is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: