PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Airlines, Airports & Routes (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes-85/)
-   -   Flybe-V1 (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/637085-flybe-v1.html)

oapilot 17th Nov 2021 17:53

Not unusual really, they’re all pretty active on LinkedIn.

As for eco credentials, the ATR is more fuel efficient than the Q400 for not that much time difference on U.K. domestic routes.

RogueOne 17th Nov 2021 18:27


..so is anything that slow. :E

Albert Hall 17th Nov 2021 20:35

If it is coordinated by Loganair, and it most probably is, then I thought it was quite a well-targeted social media low-level bombing run. I guess if Flybe are looking to take them on, it makes it clear that they'll hold their ground although I'd be surprised if anyone thought any differently. I can't think that many of the Flybe execs involved in the last war are still around, but the Loganair people certainly are. It will be a shame if it comes down to another pitch battle as the intense losses will take years to recover given the meagre returns in this market.

I think your fuel burn figures are way out. When I last looked at this about five years ago, the E145 trip fuel was fractionally below the Q400 on the same sector. If you fill both aircraft, the Q400 is far more efficient per seat, but if you're only carrying 40 passengers on either, the E145 was better. In other words, you need to fill the Q400 to make it any better environmentally - it's not a straight argument. The ATR beats both into a cocked hat, but its cruise speed is indeed a drawback.

BA318 17th Nov 2021 20:39

I doubt it’s co-ordinated. Loganair has had loads of posts like this on LinkedIn over the past few months with their crew and staff really promoting the carrier.

Flightrider 17th Nov 2021 20:49

Isn't this stuff about fuel burns all really rather missing the point? Several postings on here in recent days about companies not allowing their employees to fly at all and obliging them to use trains, yet there's a debate about the relative merits of a Q400 versus an Emb-145! The nuances of fuel burn differentials between one type and another are pretty irrelevant when anything with wings is perceived to be bad news for the environment. It's an argument that it's impossible to win in the court of public opinion beyond PPrune.

Del Prado 18th Nov 2021 05:32

Some very profitable routes out there still unserved.


crewmeal 18th Nov 2021 06:04

If they're taking on the old Dash 8's/Q400's that were in service before, lets hope the technical problems are soted out. Flybe realilibity performance was a big problem before they went bust.

Del Prado 18th Nov 2021 13:02

based on my experience of 60 flights a year over the previous 9 years I’d say tech issues were minor. I had one 5 hour delay down route due bird strike, 3 cancellations due weather and probably a handful of delays up to 2 hours due tech, staffing or weather issues.

Never seemed a particular issue for me and I’d be loathe to call that luck when my experience spanned 500 flights. Although I was on a route served once daily so I appreciate we’d more likely get an aircraft swap while a Belfast or Glasgow, for example, would be cancelled and pushed on to the next service.

TartinTon 18th Nov 2021 13:09


Utter garbage.

BusterHot 18th Nov 2021 15:16

TT, I’m not sure on what basis you feel able to make such a sweeping statement, but perhaps you’re talking about a different aeroplane to the one I used to fly. I flew it for 15 years, not out of choice, but because I couldn’t get off it and it was a bl***¥ nightmare. The number of delays I took ran into the high hundreds as aircraft were juggled by ops to try and avoid paying passenger compensation with delays rippling down the program, and dispatching under the MEL happened far too frequently. And don’t get me started on the ergonomics of operating the damn thing.

So I’m sorry, I have to agree with the previous post, but I guess it’s all a matter of perspective as to where you were sitting day to day.

TartinTon 18th Nov 2021 17:20

BusterHot...just going by the CAA official stats. Everything else is just hearsay/conjecture or personal opinion/gripe.

Dorking 18th Nov 2021 19:58

I agree unless of course you've actually operated the aircraft in which case you'd be only too aware of what's its problems were....as for the CAA figures I'm sure you'll remember the old adage about stats and lies etc

wanna 24th Nov 2021 12:59

New Regional Partnership
Loganair, Aurigny and Blue Islands announce partnership, creating the largest U.K regional airline, albeit individually owned and operated. With their individual niche markets and fairly strong (certainly in the cases of Aurigny and Loganair) local branding / reputation it will no doubt make Flybe's comeback even more challenging.

Sharklet_321 24th Nov 2021 15:25

This is exactly what is needed.

Will Flybe 2.0 acquire/partner with Eastern and try to enter the market that way I wonder?

ATNotts 24th Nov 2021 15:42

Makes things somewhat more difficult / interesting however the principal base is said to be BHX and aside of the Channel Islands, Aberdeen and Isle of Man they don't have a large presence there - but of course Flybe still has a little matter of Easyjet to compete with on the principal Scotland / BHX trunk routes.

The size of the operation that is indicated by staff numbers (new jobs created) I anticipate there'll be plenty to go at from BHX without going head to head with the new Loganair / Aurigny / Blue Islands alliance.

Sharklet_321 24th Nov 2021 15:54

What routes from BHX are you thinking Flybe 2.0 will do? I can't think of any pressing need on any route that isn't already served.... I'm struggling to understand the business case.

Jamie2009 24th Nov 2021 16:26

Don’t think Flybe need to start panicking just yet given the Channel Islands lot have 8 ATRs between them, hardly a massive fleet to bargain with. I wouldn’t be surprised if Flybe complain to the anti competition people.

I think they’ll fly to ABZ, INV, GLA, EDI, BHD, AMS, CDG, round the Channel Islands and regional France in the summer.

Possibly NOC, NQY, Germany.

I think aggressive pricing will be Flybe’s method of retaking market share🤷‍♂️. Not great for the airlines but the consumers will get some good deals that may encourage them to start flying again.

ATNotts 24th Nov 2021 16:38

STR, BER, HAM, LYS, MXP, TLS, NOC, BHD, AMS plus some seasonal French routes.

More than enough for a small fleet of around half a dozen DH4s to go at.

wanna 24th Nov 2021 17:38

Whilst the Channel Island airlines do only have handful of aircraft, Blue Islands with 5 ATR and Aurigny with 3 ATR, 1 EMB190 and 2 or 3 DO228 its LM with its large fleet, that combined means the partnership has around 54 aircraft. A number that shouldn't be looked down on. Its funny in some ways how LM and Blue Islands were both Franchise partners of the original Flybe, would be somewhat ironic if Flybe 2.0 ended up joining in and somehow becoming part of it all BUT one of the smaller partners.

Not sure how a anti competition complaint would stand, SI have been working with GR for sometime, SI and LM have also been working together for some time, its just a case that now SI, GR and LM are all working together. So far States of Guernsey, the Government of Jersey and the Scottish Government clearly haven't had issue, so maybe it will just come down to those pesky English.

All very exciting and no doubt will benefit the consumer, whether or not thats through harsh price wars or through cooperation to ensure the regions are genuinely connected and who knows maybe Flybe 2.0 would fit in there somewhere?

SealinkBF 24th Nov 2021 17:39


Definitely think this is an anti Flybe alliance.

All times are GMT. The time now is 17:32.

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.