View Full Version : Air Nelson Q300
1279shp
14th Jun 2005, 08:40
Been reported there's a new Q300 in NSN? Anyone confirm/deny?
Source a bit dodge, but then most in the crew-rooms are!;)
Massey058
14th Jun 2005, 10:04
Was in NS on Saturday and while it was busy no Q300 lurking, hangar doors were open but wasn't hiding in there. On a side note I hear that #2 will be based in New Plymouth.
Whisky Hatch
15th Jun 2005, 05:24
Nope, not yet.
And NP won't see one that early. Not as a base anyway.
1279shp
16th Jun 2005, 12:44
First one here now/very soon - ahead of sched from all accounts! - then one every 6 weeks we're told till 17 are in the country!
With loadings that the 1900's are having, might be a good idea for the new 'head boy', oops or 'head girl' to order a few more! :ok:
ZK-NSJ
17th Jun 2005, 09:15
dont they have options on the -200 to replace the 1900 and the -400 to replace the atr-72?
atyourcervix73
17th Jun 2005, 19:35
Gawd if they get the 400........despatch reliability will become a big word no-one will understand:yuk:
Plastic Planes ewwwwwwwwwww
1279shp
18th Jun 2005, 00:51
Yup, will be interesting to see the state of the Q300's in 20 years.
Like it will be for the 1900's. Can't imagine a 1900 still being in service on its 21st bday, ala the Bandit -ERU!
Aint the Q400 only about 20 knots slower than the 733?
I can see it now, NZ ceases to be an internal jet country, Props everywhere!
Oh boy, am I gonna cop some flak for this..
.......Props are for boats....
Ouch!;)
and by the way...
ZK-NEA is being painted this week. As of today (17 JUN) the aircraft is all white except for the blue and green tail. Next week the rest of the livery will be applied. The aircraft is actually ahead of target and ready for our acceptance process which starts on 11th July. Just 4 weeks now to the official handover ceremony on the 15th July!
haughtney1
18th Jun 2005, 10:55
1279.....um It depends on the cost index entered into the FMC off the 733 and the Q400........but the difference is a fair bit greater in terms of TAS, 350kts vs 430-450kts(on a good Day).
Block times wont be that different as the sector lengths are so bloody short.
Cheers H
Plus you get the joys of banging around in the lower levels... and the rigid landing gear... and the out-of-balance props... and the stuffed ANC system... and so on and so forth.
A real budget aircraft... avoid.
1279shp
19th Jun 2005, 01:18
Boring rego's, see on caa.govt.nz that there are a bunch of NE* series reserved.
Here's some interesting one in that range that are currently being used, and one very interesting one - the last!
NEI: C152
NEL: Eipper Quicksilver MXL
NEN: Zenair Zenith CH-200
NEV: PZL-104 Wilga 35
NEZ: De Havilland Canada DHC-8-102 60 Air National Corporate!!
I see too that there are two NG* left reserved!
Why is the last one interesting?
It's been around for ages possibly way back to the late '80's, used to have a sister ship, NEY...
Cloud Cutter
19th Jun 2005, 22:34
I was wondering the other day about the NG* regos on Air NZ's 733s, bit misleading aren't they?:D
MOR do you have anything positive to say about anything? I seem to recall on one of your recent Beech 1900 bashings, you gave the example of the Q400 as a quality turbo prop.
1279shp, that's not a completely stupid idea, particularly if fuel prices continue as they are. If only the propfan was followed through in the 80s! I can definately see Q400s replacing ATRs in near future.
It will be interesting to see how Ralph's replacement sees it all.
LongBoarder
19th Jun 2005, 23:21
Does anyone here work for Air Nelson? I need a contact for pilot recruitment.... and just PM me so that we are not giving an email out to the world :)
I would like to get a CV to them, and get some input as to my competitiveness in a postition for the DHC8-300.
And to answer some questions.... FAA ATP 4000TT C560 type and 1300 Turbine command. And previous DHC8-200 expirence but no type. And in the final processes of NZ immigration.
Thanks everyone.
LB
mattyj
20th Jun 2005, 05:12
LongBoarder
Just mail them your details at private bag 32 Nelson..or is that PO Box 32 Nelson...better still just do a search on this site..type in Air Nelson..and see all the people who have previously asked the same Q..you have to fill out the form they send back then wait with all the rest of us:ok:
Cloud Cutter
No I have plenty of positive things to say on a wide variety of topics.
The Q400 performs well for a turboprop, but is lightly (and poorly) built. I know this because I have had first-hand experience of them. I doubt you have even seen one.
We had a lot of problems with them. I lost count of the number of times I had to saddle up the trusty 146 and rescue a planeload of stranded pax from a dead Q400.
Maybe when you get beyond the right seat of your little turboprop, you will understand a little more about the industry.
Cloud Cutter
20th Jun 2005, 07:37
Maybe when you get beyond the right seat of your little turboprop, you will understand a little more about the industry.
Like the fact that there is unfortunately the odd tosser who we all must put up with.
That's right. Now go and do the preflight and make me a coffee...
:E :E :E
Cloud Cutter
20th Jun 2005, 20:58
Certainly boss, you like it white with one, and fertilised right?:}
No sugar or snot, thanks. Now behave yourself or you won't be getting any sectors today... :p
Damn uppity apprentices... ;)
Dupre
21st Jun 2005, 11:55
I just read about the planned upgrade of Kaitaia to take Nelson's new Dash 8's...
From the Far North District Council website
"The Far North District Council has approved loan funding for the project which will provide for aircraft of up to 15,000kg in weight.
The work is designed to accommodate domestic passenger and charter flights such as the Dash 8 aircraft which Air New Zealand has indicated will be introduced to Northland commuter routes in the future."
From the Bombardier website
"The Q300 (HGW) has a maximum take-off weight of 43,000 pounds (19,505 kg)"
Is it just me, or is there a bit of a problem with the weights!? Are there different versions of the Q300 with different MTOWs?
If so, what are Nelson getting?
Cheers,
Dupre.
mattyj
22nd Jun 2005, 05:51
since the one 1900 out of there daily is hardly ever full and air nz used to go in there daily with Friendships (which mustve been around the same weight as a q300) something doesnt add up there..
prospector
22nd Jun 2005, 08:51
Just a bit of history about the NZKT aerodrome, some may be interested.
In the mid 70's Air North, based in Rotorua, had a daily run up to NZKO via NZAA, ANZ had a F27 overnighting in NZKT, at one stage ANZ were short of an F27 and Air North contracted to do the KO and KT run with AC680FL's DBQ and DHF. It suited everybody, we got a payload, and ANZ saved some money. However, the local travel agent was missing out on commissions, being a person of some influence in local body government, he managed to remind the Labour Government that Kaitaia had been promised a national air link until such time as a rail link was established. As this rail link was never established, ANZ had to put the F27 back on the run, dont believe they even recovered crew overnight expenses let alone made any money on the run.
Prospector
1279shp
22nd Jun 2005, 21:35
Interesting becos its an old - really old! - Dash 8-100 that belongs to Air National. Tat was once Ansett NZ's that the ft Ozzie managed to coozer under the Air NZ banner.
Okay maybe not so interesting...
As for ZK-NG* Air NZ might be keeping them/re-using them, for the oft rumoured -granted cew-rooms - Boing NG's that may be coming. Seeing as we got lumbered with the Bus's becos of the aforementioned Ozzie.
If we were commited the Froggie prouduct, why wouldn't we have bought some bigger ones and not gone back to Boing?
Also don't Bombardier + Boeing have big $$ tie-ups in US with defence etc.
Plas Teek
23rd Jun 2005, 05:55
How about in English please?
That's pretty funny coming from someone with the username Plas Teek...:p
ZK-NSJ
23rd Jun 2005, 07:59
didnt boeing at one time own part of the dash-8-line?
Plas Teek
24th Jun 2005, 06:00
Well I couldn't use Semtex! and if I used plastic it just didn't have the same ring to it.
Raw Data
24th Jun 2005, 08:57
How about plastique ??? ;)
Plas Teek
24th Jun 2005, 22:30
Yeah, my wife reckoned that version, but knowing the readers of this, I guessed they would've thought it was like plast - t - q. :ok:
Chocks Away
26th Jun 2005, 00:18
No, Dupre that Dash 8-300 weight is correct and even the 15,000kg is shy of the Dash-100s' MTOW (15,650kg BRW).
Yep, Boeing did own the line ZK-NSJ , now it's Bombardier.
:ok: Keep the blue up.
1279shp
26th Jun 2005, 09:17
Okay so the last posting was lacking somewhat as far as accuracy of spelling goes. That's what co's are for!
More 'words' heard today: Boeing offered Air NZ a BIG deal on Q300, via fellow military contract partner and one time division DeHavilland/Bombardier. It was to 'help' ANZ make the right decision re long haul/medium haul acft.
Story went that once the 'Bus's can be disposed of, 6 or 7 to SJ and the rest flicked off o/seas to airlines screaming out for them - Jetstar?? - Boeing gets a phone call and next thing we're reading a headline about the acquistion of a whole bunch of 737NG's!
Hopefully or the young'uns in the crew will only have the A320 to look forward to! :{
stillalbatross
8th Jul 2005, 07:37
Hopefully or the young'uns in the crew will only have the A320 to look forward to!
1279 sorry mate but you sound like just another sad little small-minded kiwi. There's nothing wrong with the A320, if you ever travelled overseas you might see quite a few airlines are actually using them. And, if you ever read anything outside of the NZ Herald you would find that there isn't any tieup with Boeing and Bombadier, in fact the Canadian company is looking pretty sick at the moment with another record year of losses.
Vmo248
9th Jul 2005, 10:19
..selling it after a short time to Bombardier. They also had Shorts, hence the number of C-23 Sherpas in service in US military.
As for small minded, the A320 is one hell of a machine, its just that NZ is a Boeing country! :cool:
What you mean is "New Zealand was Boeing country..."
Vmo248
11th Jul 2005, 06:03
Looks nice in the scheme.:ok:
Chocks Away
12th Jul 2005, 11:44
...the last posting was lacking somewhat as far as accuracy of spelling goes. That's what co's are for! ...1279shp ???
What? If that was aimed at my post, which I think it was, I think you better do your research before opening your mouth kid.
The posts following showed you up anyway. By the way if you want some training/endorsement on them, let me know.:}
haughtney1
12th Jul 2005, 14:37
Scarebus booooooooooo!...gimmie my steriod enhanced trusty 757 anyday!!!
so what if the seats arent electric.....so what if the EFIS..is more like black and white rather than colour....
At least I can do .82..and not rattle the thing to bits:D
Actually the A320 is a nice machine..pitty it doesnt come with a control yoke I say..
I wonder MOR..do you take dandruff with your coffee?...Im sure I fly with a Capt like you:E
Hmmm... unless that was a sideways reference to Baldricks boss, I'm going to have to think about it for a bit... :p
1279shp
13th Jul 2005, 09:18
Chocks Away... woah nothing at all aimed at anyone!
Yup, went OTT suggesting co's are there for picking up errors.
As for rating.... hmmmm :)
stillalbatross
15th Jul 2005, 00:26
loook on the bright side. If airbus hadn't turned up Boeing might not have had any competition and you'd still be flying hundred series 727's, 737's or early 707's and throwing up posts like "wow, we just got a digital clock on the flight deck" or "hooray they just gave us a stick so we can tap the gauges better"
NZ is Boeing country because the inhabitants don't get out into the real world too often.
Let us not forget that it was a certain aeroplane company from Seattle back in 1974 who proclaimed a widebody aircraft with only two engines was the most unsafe unreliable form of long distance travel out there. Just after Airbus started pushing the A300. No doubt if you'd asked anyone in little ol' NZ back at the time they would have sworn black and blue Boeing was 100% on the money.
Plas Teek
19th Jul 2005, 09:10
Oh, I dunno, have a chat to an Air NZ Engineer about the Euro Trash........
He'll tell you about the extra time required to turn around an airbus compared to a boeing......and the associated problems....
I may be flying a B at the mo but could any day go to an airbus as well. Just to do the time to get back to something decent....
stillalbatross
22nd Jul 2005, 06:02
Unfortunately plas teek not all airlines around the world run on a handout charity basket case basis like Air NZ. They actually have to make money which is why only half the world is flying Boeing any more.
If you're in the airline business and required to turn a profit then you need to operate both types or you end up paying too much. Ask anyone in engineering about 777 parts prices. If you're in the flying game for fun then you can pay Boeing whatever they ask, everything they say you will believe. Are you going to tell me the 'bus stall protection is a bad thing too?
If your engineer is having troule turning the aircraft around maybe you should change engineers, plenty of other 'bus operators don't have the same problem.
Split Flap
22nd Jul 2005, 22:15
Its funny, I work on a regular basis with guys/girls that have flown both Airbus and Boeing and people who have flown only Boeing. The comments usually go something like this...
Pilot who has only ever flown Boeing... Airbus is a piece of crap will do anything to avoid getting on that thing blah blah
The Pilot who has flown the bus.... Great aircraft nice to fly roomy office easy to fly once you get the hang of it.
Im going to reserve my comments untill I have operated both types.
Of course an Eagle pilot would always tell you that a 1900 was the best aircraft anyway. :yuk:
Thump & Go
23rd Jul 2005, 00:44
Of course we all know that you're not a real pilot unless you've flown a jet....:yuk:
gee you guys make me laugh!:ok:
Lol - spot the turboprop pilot with an envy complex...!:p
Thump & Go
24th Jul 2005, 08:37
We have a WINNER!!!!!:ok:
Where's your tag team partner?
mattyj
26th Jul 2005, 03:59
28th was the day quoted..
..have they put the ribbons and balloons up at the hanger yet?
RevMan2
26th Jul 2005, 11:29
NZ is (or was) Boeing country because back in the late 60s, common sense prevailed in the BAC111/B737-100 discussion. You wouldn't believe the specious arguments being run up the flagpole at the time - "We have to support the Mother Country etc". My letter to the Herald calling for a decision to be based solely on economic analysis was published in abbreviated form. The truncation ran something like "Your correspondent X's argument - the Mother Country bit - is sadly representative of the sloppy thinking that's prevalent in this country"
Good editing, actually....
PS Can someone maybe post a snap?
A "snap"? My god, you must be pretty old... ;)
Don't you sometimes wonder what might have happened if the Brits had built the 1-11/Trident/VC10 with the right number of seats? The whole world might be different now...
RevMan2
26th Jul 2005, 12:35
Given that I was contributing to the general political discussion in the late 60s - yessss! But I'll admit to preferring "chronologically gifted"..... And I do use self service check-in to avoid the "Omigod, I wasn't even born when you joined the company". Have yet to encounter "Omigod, my parents weren't even born etc", but I'm sure that's only a matter of time. What's wrong with "snap" anyway? I could say "digital image with a resolution of ..." but that's a sheer waste of keystrokes. And just for the record, I also say "wireless"..
Back to the topic (if there was one...)
Sir Sidney Camm once said "All modern aircraft have four dimensions: span, length, height and politics" Aircraft in those days were designed by committee, populated by either trade unionists or landed gentry, depending on the government of the time. Nevil Shute's "In the wet" covers it (and a whole lot more) v.nicely indeed.
haughtney1
26th Jul 2005, 14:21
I flew with a salty Ex BA trident skipper the other day......ya gotta love the ability to apply reverse in flight......12000fpm ROD. Oh and the handlebar yoke:)
And just for the record, I also say "wireless"..
lol... do you also use "pantechnion", "motor omnibus" and "tramp steamer"... ;)
There is nothing wrong with "snap"... in fact it intrigues me that a lot of the new digital cameras make a noise that simulates a shutter "snapping"... so much for progress!
Sir Sidney was right, I remember thinking the same sort of thing when looking at the TSR2 at Duxford once...
RevMan2
26th Jul 2005, 20:09
Aaaah, so you know the rest of the quote, then. "TSR2 got the first 3 right"
Finally arrived at home base in Nelson just before 5pm today.
Here is a pic taken 5 mins after she landed. Sorry about the quality. Was dark, wet and cold. Plus the camera is crap.
http://www.geocities.com/cssdrumsnz/DCP_0792.jpg
RevMan2
28th Jul 2005, 09:25
Now, THAT's what I call a snap! Sweet-looking aircraft, although I'm sure I'll miss the retro-intimacy of the Saab. Not to mention the Metroliner......
RevMan2
"TSR2 got the first 3 right"
Indeed. It just looks right to me... typical of the daring, innovative British aircraft design of the period.
Operating specifics aside, the British aircraft always looked so much more elegant than the US aircraft. The VC10, in particular, is just gorgeous. I like the Trident too. The 1-11... well, not bad, but not as pretty as the other two.
I like my 146 too... no surprise that the Americans chose to copy it for the C141 Starlifter...
RevMan2
28th Jul 2005, 12:46
Q: Why does the 146 have 4 engines?
A: Because they couldn't fit 6 under the wings
Wanna bet?
http://www.viewthathouse.com/NZ images/rj-xxx.jpg
;)
RevMan2
28th Jul 2005, 18:39
And with the gliding characteristics of .......depleted uranium?
Well at least there has never been an accident involving any form of structural or mechanical failure on a 146, which is more than you can say for 737s that fall apart in mid air, or dive into the ground; 767's that deploy their reversers in flight; 747s that shed flap sections, or large portions of their fuselages... and so, and so forth.
Yes, they build 'em to last in the mother country. Sound as a pound.:ok:
RevMan2
30th Jul 2005, 05:22
Gee, I didn't think the hills behind Tahuna were that close.....
27/09
30th Jul 2005, 07:17
Well Small Cheese,
Dosen't look like any NZ background, any idea where the photo was taken, obviously during the ferry trip.
NoseGear
30th Jul 2005, 07:38
RTF Caption!:E It says Innusbruk during a refueling stop on the delivery flight.;)
Sure looks good, hope the boys and girls and NS enjoy it, I know I would have.
Nosey
Definitely Innsbruck. Spent half my life going in and out of there. Very interesting approach, MSA around there is 13,500'. gets even more interesting when it is murky!
Hans Go Around
2nd Aug 2005, 05:42
When can we expect to see Air Nelson's first Dash 8 operating the line?
BCF Breath
2nd Aug 2005, 09:11
About the second half of August.
Given what Plas Teek said earlier, I've heard similar. However it's not us pilots that buy aircraft is it....
In addition to the Airbus/Boeing minor scrap, has anyone thought to suggest to Mr Boeing to put a side stick on the 787? Man with those wide LCDs it would look rather cool to say the least!
haughtney1
2nd Aug 2005, 21:02
sidestick...? sidestick you say???? baaaaaaaaahhh..sidesticks are for sissys and airbus pilots.....(is there any difference:} )
BCF Breath
5th Aug 2005, 21:55
Oh, I dunno about that. Try saying that to an F-16 driver and see how long you remain in an upright position.
There's something to be said for an unobstructed view and a tray table stressed to 75 kgs..
And I'm not even flying the Airbus yet. Still a Boeing boy-o!
1279shp
6th Aug 2005, 01:50
That was painfully put there for only one purpose! Love the french!
belowMDA
7th Aug 2005, 22:14
Seeing this is a rumour thing and all....
According to the Boeing guys who were touring around in the 777LR, the 787 will have a sidestick. Also their explanation for the 777 not having one is that the US launch customers were dead against it.
pakeha-boy
24th Aug 2005, 15:09
haughtney1......next time you get laid,try it with a women and not a man.....dont knock what you havent tried.......Boeings original plan on the 777 called for a sidestick,but because YO-niteds retarded pilots union didnt want it,they stuck with the yoke...idiots....so this is the deal,the auto pilot gets thrown on 300 agl......diconected at 1000agl or an auto-land...for the next 6-12 hours they sit and look at a yoke...beauty ay!!! whilst me,sits at me seat ...eats me din din,reads me naughty books....and then when I,m bloody well ready ,invites one of the lovely lasses from the back to come at sit on "the tray".....where the yoke used to be and.......well Ill leave the rest up to your imagination wally.........airbus/boeing,I dont care....real pilots fly anything...kia kaha
haughtney1
24th Aug 2005, 17:57
Baaaahhhh..F16..poofs plane
gimmie an F15..twice the fun!!
Pakeha Boy.......gimmie a break..I heard you'd ahd more pricks than a pin cushion!
...on the upside I suppose I could take my laptop..and watch a DVD, unlike the people you talk about....I enjoy hand flying , and the A/P normally comes out at FL100/ 250kts......call me an old turbo-prop pilot, plus its fun:} :E
Oh and just so you know.....I like women..not ladies:hmm:
pakeha-boy
25th Aug 2005, 18:24
maaaaaaaaate!!!...not to get into a pissing match....but when I started flying turbo-props(ie bottom-feeders)...you were probably still in your "dads bags".....I,.. like yourself hand fly the bus as often as possible....flight directors off,auto thrust off,raw data...(let me know if you are following this)......26 years ago ,I started out in a super cub,with a stick....the point is no matter what instrument you use,as a far as I know,in kiwi,aus,pommyland,europe,when you pull back on the stick or yoke,the houses get smaller,push fwd they get bigger.....most companys want the automation and secondly all flight parameters etc ,can now be monitored by the ailrlines,from the ground,they know exactly what and who is doing it........by the way these women/ladies you talk about....are they two-legged or four legged......kia kaha
haughtney1
25th Aug 2005, 18:41
No pakeha..I wasnt in my dads bags....(and nope it aint a pissing contest or a willy size comparison) I started 14 years ago...on 172's..towing in a super-cub..progressed to the Navajoke...bandit...kingair...caravan....75/76...so Im not a snotty nosed kid. Ive had the opportunity to fly 320, 330, and 340 sims through various contacts....the automation is great...but I dont like the side-stick...oh and by the by..no disrespect intended..just a different view-point.
Two legs good four legs bad......hmmm....I recall a similar line in an Arthur Millar play once...........
pakeha-boy
25th Aug 2005, 19:12
mate....no disrespect taken.........I own a c-185....my 10 yr old flies it better than I do....the automation gets old,but this is not flying,its called managing,...the 185 is flying...the balance between the two,makes this job......by the way "sim-time "is in no way a comparison to the real thing....for the A320 @$600/hr sim-time you obviously have good mates.....Iflew the 727 Q100 model for 5yrs,...best bloody a/c I ever flown.....4 legs are good....,ie two shelias at once....just never got it ,did you.....fly safe...kia kaha
deadhead
28th Aug 2005, 14:23
haughtney, couldn't help but giggle at your reverse Orwellian (for it was he, not Mr Millar (sic), maybe you were thinking of witches...) quote, but then a good Freudian slip does a good laugh make...
The original was "four legs good, two legs bad" but the point you want to make is that somewhere along the line it became "four legs good, two legs better". A subtle history change while the peasants were looking the other way...
At least Mr Orwell (not his real name) accurately predicted the future (in another tome) as well as providing us with an accurate parody of history.
But, may I ask that you don't misspell Mr Miller's name? Crimes like that are as bad as misplacing apostrophe's. And we all hate that, especially Messrs Blair and Miller - they'd turn in their grave's.