Q400 performances

[discus2]

Hi guys,
I am Flying the ATR 72-500 .
Quiet and sweet but still sluggish.
Just was wondering about the rate of climb Q400 were getting at MTOW, typical cruising levels and time to get there, TAS in cruise that kind of stuff.
With the amount of power, it must quite impressive.
Are you limited to 250 Kts IAS and FL250 ?
I am still amazed by the poor rate of climb on the ATR a few 1oo´s FPM above FL140.
Thanks for all the infos,
cheers.

[Maude Charlee]

Assuming the temp is not too far above ISA, comfortably 2000fpm+ up to around FL120, and 1500fpm to max cruise at FL250, taking maybe 12-13 minutes or so. Max cruise is 360kts TAS.

Empty, it has a ridiculous rate of climb, almost 6000fpm initially and FL250 in 6 mins. Apparently. :E

In the descent, we're restricted to 245kts IAS below FL80, but up to that point 285kts IAS from around FL200 and below.

For a TP, it's a hoot to drive. Even with the powerplant derated to less than 5000shp it's ridiculously overpowered for what it needs to do.

[liftman]

...i am on old jet Bae 146, and since i don't like airbus really thinking to be back on turboprop...

Q 400 seem to be the best option, but Atr is best selling....what to do?

Prompt and sujjestion?

Where to get q 400 transition?

Cheers

[Alpine Flyer]

Don't worry, the Q400 will outclimb the -146 anyway and it's almost as fast at Mach 0.599....:)
I have not flown the Avro but the Q400 is a bit off-balance (or "unharmonious") on the controls with a rather stiff aileron and ridiculously nervous throttles which cannot be so much "moved" as "massaged" fore and back on approach. As a downside of the "lotsa power" you have to re-trim the thing whenever you move the power levers.
It's a shame Bombardier and Sextant Avionique (Thales) didn't use a little more 1990s technology when developing the -400. They were so set on providing a common typerating with the -100/300 that they failed to use the magnificently large EFIS screens to show decent synoptics pages (or even warnings/checklists) as well as provide auto-trim / yaw damping during power changes or even an autothrottle. That's the main drawback on an otherwise very capable airplane which is now past its teething problems.

Here's some info from "Flug Revue" on the time-to-climb records set by the Q400, among them 7'2" to 29500 feet....


Bombardier Aerospace announced that its new Q400 airliner established turboprop time-to-climb records in three flights from Davis Airfield in Muskogee, Oklahoma. The records have been submitted to the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale in Paris, France, for validation. The records cover time to three altitudes in three different weight categories. The Q400 climbed to 3,000, 6,000 and 9,000 metres (9,843, 19,685 and 29,527 feet) in each weight category, including one flight in the "unlimited weight" category to 9,000 m. The records claimed for flights to 9,000 m include: C1i weight class, 16,000 to 20,000 kg (35,274 to 44,092 pounds), seven minutes, two seconds, or 59 seconds faster than the eight minutes, one second established by the Saab 2000 in 1993. C1j weight class, 20,000 to 25,000 kg (44,092 to 55,115 pounds), eight minutes, 21 seconds, or three minutes, four seconds faster than the previous record of 11 minutes, 25 seconds held by the Grumman E2C Hawkeye military aircraft. C1k weight class, 25,000 to 35,000 kg (55,115 to 77,161 pounds), 11 minutes, 41 seconds. There was no current record in this category.

[liftman]

...Tks a lot...

I thought coming from a jet Q 400 would be probably the best option, but it is not selling a lot.....from this point of view Atr is top selling....

Am i wrong?

[kingtoad]

There are more Q400s here in Oz than ATRs, but then I guess we're upside down compared to everyone else. :ok:

[skywaytoheaven]

I cant see that the Q400 sells that badly. In the uk you see far more q4's than ATRs these days, thanks to Flybe. As mentioned also in Aus, and in the US with Horizon, Frontier, one of the Delta subs is getting them. You even see them in the middle east, Royal Jordanian has them, not sure how they dont melt out here though!

[rotornut]

While we're at it, what is the noise level like in the cabin? I was recently in an early 300 and it was noisy:eek:

[Maude Charlee]

It's not quiet, but not unbearably noisy either. Not dissimilar in noise levels to your average family saloon on the motorway.

[rotornut]

Hopefully quieter than my old Toyota Tercel! Anyway, the old 300 was awful but I understand Bombardier has an active noise cancelling system on the Q series.

[skywaytoheaven]

I can tell you that it's noisy, not sure why they bother with the Q! Only been on an ATR once, and it was all fairly similar.

[jumpdrive]

ATR sells more just because its a lot cheaper than Q400
just on the engine side U cannot compare the PW150 to the 127
just the number says it
PW1(5,0)00 shp RTO
PW1(2,7)00 shp RTO
that's why ATR is so, so , so sluggsih after 10,000
other factor; avionics & no APU
ATR guys were clever, make it cheap & youll sell more
just look the ATR & youll see
till all mickeyMouse Mattel plastic evrywhere
they make that one to be quiet(thank U)
but NOT FAST

any way i like much more the dash than ATR
specially the glassCockpit & the main door in the FRONT ja ja ja ja
where its suppossed to be

[GreginAlaska]

Can you land a Q400 on a gravel strip? The company I work for flies us from Anchorage Alaska to the Kuparuk River oilfield in 737s. The lease on them is up in 2008 and I don't think they are going to renew them. There has been talk of not being able to get "affordable" jet aircraft with gravel kits, I wonder if the Q400 might be an OK plane for us?

[rotornut]

Yes, tell them to buy it - our economy needs a boost!
Seriously, I have no idea about performance on a gravel strip. However, there's always someone who knows these things on the 'Prune...

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

I believe Hydro Quebec operates one or more 400s to ferry people to its sites in northern Quebec, and I *think* those are gravel strips of some kind. I'd have thought that a strip capable of taking a 737 must be of a similar standard, so I'd have thought Q400s were a possibility for you. I'm sure a smooth talking man in a suit would try to sell you one, anyway ... then ask engineering whether we could in fact do it or not. :)

[dv8]

We use the Q400 and in our OM it states
The aeroplane shall not be operated on surfaces other than hard paved runways.
Its ACN PCN (for planning purposes) are 20 and 50 respectively
If that helps

[Eliason]

Looked in my manual and couldn't find anything about the pavement of the RW, might have another look later...
A nice page for infos on the Q400:
http://www.q400.com

[airman13]

????? and ldg gear and flaps are in what position?....two live engines?....I've been flying ATR-42-500 since 1999 but I've never seen 100 FPM rate of climb at FL 140...actually this rate 100-200FPM occurs when reaching level 240 ,ISA +20 and 48 PAX....belive me....

[airman13]

ok.... a few hundred of feet abv FL 140 ....but on the next flight just after reaching FL 100, press IAS on AFCS (so called pitch mode) and adjust the pitch at 4 degrees UP.....in 2 minutes you could see a vertical speed of 1000 FPM and an IAS of 190-210 kts(as you know it depends of ISA ,weight,etc) and after half an hour you can reach FL240 or 230....having a rate of climb of 4-500 FPM.....try it!

[error_401]

airman13

fully agree - only saw 250 - 350 fpm once at FL 140 in India at ISA +22 and MTOM in a 42-320. :(

But try flying a Q400 at let's say FL 220 with 500 kg / h (both engines)...

Another reason to by ATR. At the end of the day both aircraft are doing the job and fly safely.

Would love to fly the Q400 once evtl. in the SIM to see the difference.

[discus2]

Hi there,
Guys, What I actually meant by a few hundred feet/min. was something like 700ft/min or less at MTOW after FL140 that s usually at ISA+10.
Also refering to climb perf. in FCOM in non icing conditions (certified to achieve 300ft/min) you never reach FL250 at MTOW. Only Icing conditions at 170 IAS get you to FL210 or higher (don t have the book in front of me for eaxcat figures, sorry). But then again, U can t really refer to that on that sunny day...
Now agree it is fuel efficient but as far as skyrocketting, seen better.
We are also very often very RTOW out of many places (eg SOU, BHD).
How is it for Flybe on the Q400 there ? thanks for that info, I d be curious.
Cheers.
:cool:

[flybe.com]

Maude Charlee -

Empty, it has a ridiculous rate of climb, almost 6000fpm initially and FL250 in 6 mins. Apparently.

Yes indeed, done that! Type III climb out of BHD, no pax just 4 crew. Hit FL250 over Strangford Loch! :ok: