SAX Q400 problems...again?

[grjplanes]

The last few days all SAX JNB-GRJ flights have been operating with CRJ aircraft, this after earlier Q400 flights were delayed up to 4 hours a few times. Is one or both of them not flying at the moment, and why, because surely it can't be routine maintenance, then schedules would have been amended for it. It also meant they had to add additional flights on short notice, which resulted in 3 of the 4 flights yesterday (14/03) being delayed between 2 and 4 hours.

[Trawler]

Heard that the electronic prop control unit has malfunctioned and they are awaiting spares from Canada. The other Q400 running up to the DRC.

[George Tower]

Just out of interest how are pax finding the use of the Q400 on this route? Obviously slightly longer sector times and FL250 instead of FL310+ in a jet.......the economics make sense but does it work from a pax point of view? Genuinely interested......GRJ planes can you comment?

[Baron Bigglesworth]

Quite correct trawler - waiting for parts. In response to how pax see the Q400, unfortunately they see props and think - old and kak! The scimitar props, glass cockpit and performance mean nothing to them. From April SAX will run the Q400 to GRJ twice a day and the CRJ 200 twice a day, the Q400 going onto the JNB - BFN route. Not bad for pax, the CRJ runs about 35 minutes faster chock to chock.

Rumour SAX is bringing in 3 more Q400s and 2 - 4 CRJ 900 NGs? Rumour the fleet boss and chief trainer off to Canada for conversion?

[grjplanes]

Not exactly sure how pax feel about it in general, most don't know they'll be on a prop-plane untill the moment they step onto it. The flight itself is scheduled for between 2hours and 2h15min...but is sometimes done in 1h50. I personally have only flown the Q400 GRJ-JNB once, was quite impressed, although it's not as quiet as it's marketed to be...in my opinion. BUT, alot of the time the SAX flights is scheduled quite close to other airlines' flights on the JNB-GRJ route, and I know now that taking the 20minute later flight of Nationwide, will still get me 5 to 10mins before the SAX flight into JNB. Same for business people going down to GRJ, it's misleading, SAX first flight out of JNB at 07:10, then Nationwide at 07:40, still only scheduled to land at GRJ 5 mins later...and alot of the time it comes in before the Q400.
Still...SAX flights is nowadays mostly fully booked, and I believe they're cashing in on the route now, this after Airlink withdrew in January.

From April SAX will run the Q400 to GRJ twice a day and the CRJ 200 twice a day

Haven't seen anything of this yet, nowhere scheduled or announced...would be great though, they surely can do with adding that additional 26 seats daily, like I said above, flights are pretty full lately (Feb and beginning March, besides the obvious holiday period ahead)
Although did see Airlink to have 4 weekly BAe146 flights on the route as of today (19March) till end of April...seems they'll only be doing the route now seasonally (holiday periods)
Any clarity on this increase in flights, rumour or fact, from when?

Rumour SAX is bringing in 3 more Q400s and 2 - 4 CRJ 900 NGs?

Would be great! New Q400s...or secondhand of SAS...?

By the way, any idea why CPT-PLZ flights is suddenly being halved from 8 daily to only 4 daily as of April?

Oh, and also, it seems the Q400 operations is back to normal, had all 3 GRJ flights yesterday with them.

[nugpot]

By the way, any idea why CPT-PLZ flights is suddenly being halved from 8 daily to only 4 daily as of April?

Must be an error somewhere.

April:
SA 1805 CPT PLZ 06:30
SA 1806 PLZ CPT 08:05
SA1815 CPT PLZ 09:55
SA1816 PLZ CPT 11:35

SA 1823 CPT PLZ 13:30
SA 1824 PLZ CPT 15:05
SA 1391 CPT PLZ 17:00
SA1341 PLZ DUR 18:40

SA 1381 CPT PLZ 06:00
SA 1380 PLZ CPT 07:40
SA1813 CPT PLZ 09:30
SA1335 PLZ DUR 11:10

SA1338 DUR PLZ 13:00
SA 1388 PLZ CPT 14:40
SA 1829 CPT PLZ 16:30
SA1380 PLZ CPT 18:15

SA1330 DUR PLZ 06:00
SA1331 PLZ DUR 07:40
SA1334 DUR PLZ 09:30
SA1814 PLZ CPT 11:15

SA1389 CPT PLZ 13:00
SA1339 PLZ DUR 14:40
SA1340 DUR PLZ 16:55
SA1390 PLZ CPT 18:40

[Q4NVS]

The scimitar props, glass cockpit and performance mean nothing to them.

Baron Biggles
After about 1.2 hours on type (if I can remember that long ago), I noticed that the Q400 has Six Bladed Dowty R408 propellers and not that Scimitar Junk.

(Check your FCOM)

[Q4NVS]

Give an old DC9 a good paint job and interior and most PAX think they are in a nice new jet. A brand new Q400 is still an old aircraft to them.

Only 50% correct there - once they sit down between those DC9 Engines they soon dread the decision to fly with the Brand New "Old" Jet.

Having spent many a hour in the "Pointy End" on the GRJ Route (pax of which is known to be the fullest of everything), here is something you will appreciate...

Most (if not every single one) that made a "Prop" related comment when getting onboard, made it their business to come and apologise as soon as they get the chance while disembarking - don't judge a man/machine by the size of its prop!

The Bean Counters LOVE IT!
(And its always just about fully booked)

[grjplanes]

Still can't find that the CPT-PLZ flights on 8 daily, both SAA website and Amadeus give 4 flights daily...06:00, 09:30, 13:00 and 17:00 departures from CPT?

Also can't find any proof of the JNB-GRJ route to be 4 daily (2 Q400 and 2 CRJ), still 3 daily Q400. But, do note that the first 2 weeks in April, CRJ will be doing 1 of the 3 flights daily, but only for 2 weeks...the 2 Sundays having 2 Q400 and 2 CRJ...?

Any more clarity on the rumour of more Q400 and CRJ700/900, seen it mentioned in another thread as well?

[nugpot]

Any more clarity on the rumour of more Q400 and CRJ700/900, seen it mentioned in another thread as well?

Company is looking for larger aircraft from the same stable. Nothing signed yet.

[Roxstar]

Bigger planes for SAX, yeah right!

[skyshark]

Only 50% correct there - once they sit down between those DC9 Engines they soon dread the decision to fly with the Brand New "Old" Jet.


I beg to differ, those engines are rear mounted only really only affected the last few rows, as opposed to those 2 fans that are mounted mid section. Regardless of its age the DC9 is a jet and performs well in all conditions. It more than proved itself on the coastal route when it was operating. Does SAX meet the operating standard set by the DC9 operation.???.....

The Q400 is still a turbo prop, and we all know what screws are for!!!!!!!!!!

[reptile]

Originally Posted by skyshark

Does SAX meet the operating standard set by the DC9 operation.???.....

Operating standard???? WTF. The DC-9 were on a wet lease to SAX. SAX determined the standard, and did regular audits to ensure that the required standard was maintained. The DC-9 crews simply did what was required to keep payment coming.

If Executive Aerospace had the ability to operate a regular, profitable, frequency on those routes, they'd be doing so today. Since that company is now a bottom feeder in the SA aviation industry, I guess it answers your question.

[reptile]

Originally Posted by suitcaseman

We cant all be hotshot SAX pilots.

Right you are! But keep trying bagman, with a bit of luck you may just make the required grade one day.

[Parrot]

The Dash-8 might make the accountants happy, but as a pax I would far prefer to fly in a DC-9 than a Dash-8 ...even if I am in the last 3 rows !

Any argument that the Dash-8 is newer ..and therefore, in theory, should be safer/more reliable is wearing a bit thin given recent events.

Real airliners have jet engines

[George Tower]

I think this thread has decended into a load of rubbish now. I think the days of pprune are long gone where if you had a genuine interest in the subject matter you could ask questions and debate in a good spirit etc.

Any argument that the Dash-8 is newer ..and therefore, in theory, should be safer/more reliable is wearing a bit thin given recent events.

Real airliners have jet engines

In reverse order:

So what engines does the Dash 8-400 have? Piston? Radial?

The incidents you refer to i.e. SAS - had nothing to with the a/c's engines!

Is the DC-9 a good aircraft - yes, but its old, costly to run and maintain.....and let me guess you're one of the many that believe the airlines owe you cheap tickets.

[skyshark]

The CREW of the DC9 more than met the standard required by SAX, as for why Executive Aerospace is now on the bottom off the shark pile, ask its owner and management who were completely fing useless.

[putt for dough]

ZS-NMO

Heard SAX blocking Alpha holding point 21R yesterday. Nose wheel steering problem I believe. They eventually got towed.

[Gooneybird]

Real airliners have jet engines

This unfortunately reflects the attitude of much of the general public. I met a businessman in India happy to pay more to fly on an A320/B737 than and ATR because he felt safer on a 'jet'. He was actually very surprised when I explained the basic principles of turbo-prop and turbo-fan engines.
I guess it's a marketing thing.