ATR Replacement Decision

[Naki]

See here - hmm Mount Cook international??

[benwynn]

If they do go ahead and order E190's, I could definently see the possibility of International Trans-Tasmans, or flights to the smaller Pacific Nations. (Reading on the article, it already says that )

I feel it will be unlikley though, the ATR is what they'll get me Thinks..

[FlyingKiwi]

I'd love to see them order the E-190, but I really don't think it's going to happen, I personally think they'll go with the new ATR.

[Peppermint]

I don't know what it is, but I've never liked the E-190, or any ERJ for that matter. They just seem to make me bored.

What's the big difference between a turboprop and jet engines for regional flights? The only thing I can think of is that it would be faster and maybe take more passengers. What would the point be in getting ERJ's anyway? I thought the point of Mt Cook airlines/regional was to go into the smaller airports that the 737s, 320s etc can't? Or would the ERJ be able to go the same places as Mt Cook goes to now?

[victor_alpha_charlie]

ERJ's would be a stupid decision in NZ if they were not supposed to compete with 737's etc.
Sure, they are faster, but with the short trip times here that doesn't make much difference at all, so all you have is a slightly faster, slightly bigger ATR that burns way more fuel and can't land at some airports (A fully loaded ERJ-145 would struggle at NZWN).

I think they'll go ATR/Q400.

[benwynn]

then again, they could be greedy and get both

[Kelburn]

I like the Q400

[chickenman]

Me - I would love to see the ATR but think that for compatibility they might take Nelsons options on the Q400. Also the ATR is still a long way from entering the market and the Q400 is available now (ish).

The E190 couldn't be viable in NZ - they would kiss NZQN goodbye after the recent aircraft noise breaches.

Jamie

[Ian Warren]

Get a good Northwester in CHCH Rwy 11/29 both the ATR/Dash 8/Q300 types cause a ear buzzing drone at times , to the people who buy homes so close to an airport ...(WHY ? THEY DO)..'what ! the noise' .... I NOT(plane nutter) WORRY ..... its then others who complain ... the fuel bills .. I NOT(plane nutter)COMPLAIN , the Jets today just slip in , only noise being braking ... Why such an early replacement for the ATR .. another govt cockup ... ? used the 320 as an example , no many ground crew who work on the type .. the things that break down on them .

I believe the ATR was chosen for reason PAX getting off Concorde .. goggled 748s taken them to Mt Cook ...... ok they had there use by date .. so can anyone tell me why change the entire maintainace structure to service something that is viable , the speed,down time,weights,cargo, OR did they final get it right , ........ the airline saying OPP's

Opps we did it again

[victor_alpha_charlie]

Dad reckons new ATR's, and after he explained it to me, I agree with him

[Anthony]

QUOTE (victor_alpha_charlie @ Apr 21 2008, 06:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dad reckons new ATR's, and after he explained it to me, I agree with him

Care to elaborate on what he said (this sounds interesting)?

My thoughts have been the Q400:

• Air Nelson has options on them
• they're partially compatible with Air Nelson's Q300s
• They're available (compared to the ATR which is still in development I think)

But i reckon the E-Jets would look pretty nice in NZs colours, plus it would be cool to see the little jets around NZ i think.
Of course the economics fall on the side of a turboprop option, so for that reason alone we'll probably end up with another turboprop (not that I mind TPs).
Then again, maybe Mount Cook get some E-Jets and some turboprops - more flexibility.

Cheers
Anthony

[victor_alpha_charlie]

ERJ's are out of the question really, too expensive to buy/run etc.

Why not Q400's?
Very expensive to buy
Not really mechanically similar at all to Q300's
Expensive to run (Even though it's a turboprop- 2000shp a side means fuel guzzler)
Expensive to maintain
Cost of re-training pilots etc
ATR has served them well in the past, why change?

Personally I'd prefer they get Q400's out of the three options, I'd love to fly on one.

[greaneyr]

QUOTE (victor_alpha_charlie @ Apr 21 2008, 06:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ERJ's are out of the question really, too expensive to buy/run etc.

Why not Q400's?
Very expensive to buy
Not really mechanically similar at all to Q300's
Expensive to run (Even though it's a turboprop- 2000shp a side means fuel guzzler)
Expensive to maintain
Cost of re-training pilots etc
ATR has served them well in the past, why change?

All fair points here Tom.

About the only negative to going with ATR is the delay in them becoming available. But... if the present ATRs are performing well from a maintenance angle, this may not be a huge problem. Maybe NZM are just trying to plan ahead to avoid having an outdated fleet in the future.

[victor_alpha_charlie]

QUOTE (greaneyr @ Apr 21 2008, 07:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

All fair points here Tom.

About the only negative to going with ATR is the delay in them becoming available. But... if the present ATRs are performing well from a maintenance angle, this may not be a huge problem. Maybe NZM are just trying to plan ahead to avoid having an outdated fleet in the future.

Yeah, the things are hardly old now. Didn't they only get them in about 2000?

[greaneyr]

QUOTE (victor_alpha_charlie @ Apr 21 2008, 09:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, the things are hardly old now. Didn't they only get them in about 2000?

Actually I'm not exactly sure. I know they flew one at an airshow at Ohakea in the mid 1990s not long after they got them, but that was the -200 series. Did they actually get new aircraft when they moved to the -500 or did they just get them all upgraded?

[Anthony]

Some were registered in 1995 according to CAA.
The rest are 1999, 2000 and more recently.

So they're only 8 years old or so for some, and 13 years old for others.

Cheers
Anthony

[mavman]

Latest "rumour" is leases will be extended on existing ATR fleet, Q400 options will be taken up with these a/c to be leased out to other airlines and new build ATR-600's (not in production yet) will replace the current ATR fleet (in a few years)....
It has to be remembered that the -500 ATR's are still relatively modern technology and cost bugger all to operate, cheaper than the Q300 and with more seats.
This is however, a rumour, decision still weeks away so I may be way off track.

[Anthony]

This is a bit off-topic, but if Air NZ was keen on fleet commonality you would think they would have replaced the Saab 340 with the ATR 42, instead of the Q300.
The Q300 and ATR 42 aren't quite the same, but they're fairly close.

That, in some ways, is a good argument against the Q400 purely because of fleet commonality (not to mention they're not that common).

Cheers
Anthony

[Daniel]

QUOTE (mavman @ Apr 22 2008, 05:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Latest "rumour" is leases will be extended on existing ATR fleet, Q400 options will be taken up with these a/c to be leased out to other airlines and new build ATR-600's (not in production yet) will replace the current ATR fleet (in a few years)....
It has to be remembered that the -500 ATR's are still relatively modern technology and cost bugger all to operate, cheaper than the Q300 and with more seats.
This is however, a rumour, decision still weeks away so I may be way off track.

I have also heard that from some Mount Cook Pilots. Mount Cook can still have fleet commonality with Air Nelson if they go ahead and use their Q400 rights.
The options that Air Nelson has for the Q400 are so cheap that they can make a profit if they buy them and then sell them on.

QUOTE

That, in some ways, is a good argument against the Q400 purely because of fleet commonality (not to mention they're not that common).[/quote]

The fact is that Air Nelson have already brought the Q300. If they want fleet commonality they can go and get the Q400.

QUOTE

ATR has served them well in the past, why change?[/quote]

I agree. It would still be similar and it would make a fleet transition easier.
If Mount Cook was elected to go international then the Embraer 190 would be the best but otherwise i would like to see the new ATR.

Cheers
Daniel

Daniel

Sim-holic

 

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:42 pm

Posts: 946

Location: New Zealand

Top

[victor_alpha_charlie]

QUOTE (Daniel @ Apr 22 2008, 06:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The fact is that Air Nelson have already brought the Q300. If they want fleet commonality they can go and get the Q400.
Cheers
Daniel

What he was saying though Daniel is that a Q400 is not, in fact, very similar at all to a Q200/300.

It's like saying ANZ should have got A340's instead of 777's, because an A340 is the same as an A320.