It is a little difficult to NOT have another Qantas thread in the down under area of PPRuNe.
Or should Qantas talk be in the African area, or the helicopter zone??
It is important and inevitable there will be Qantas related threads in Dunnunda Reporting Points forum, however there is no excuse for the number of Qantas threads, most of which are either similar or related. And whilst some Qantas threads start on different topics they inevitably end up going down the same monotonous, tedious, repetitious, whinging route.
We know the problems at Qantas; we believe you; we don't need to be repetitiously reminded in every post, every Qantas thread! Please consider the Mods - we have to read all that cr@p!
Related threads will continue to be merged - unless Mod patience runs out then the superfluous and duplicated threads will be closed.
ATR's are on around 49% burn of Q400's for very similar load. The evidence will be borne out over time, what evidence do you need.. just look at the specs of both aircraft.
Considering the ATR72 has PW127 engines producing 2,750 shp (2,050 kW) each and the Dash 8 400 has PW150A engines rated at 5,071 shp (3,781 kW), one would expect the ATR to burn around 55% of the Dash 8 400 fuel burn, but considering the ATR72 cruises around 270 kts and the Dash 8 cruises around 360 kts, the seat/mile fuel burn of the Dash 8 400 appears to be only very marginally higher than the ATR72? But at the same time, the 33% higher cruise speed of the Dash 8 400 gives far better aircraft and crew utilisation? I suspect the Dash 8 400 would have lower seat/mile costs than the ATR72?