DHC-8-300 TR cost

[airmen]

Does anybody knows the cost of the cursus for the TR of the Dash8-300?
Or any pilot flying this A/C for answering some questions
Thanks in advance

[Nichibei Aviation]

BAD TIMING DON'T DO IT UNLESS YOU HAVE JOB WARRANTY FROM A CARRIER.

SAS pilots are released on the market due to them dumping their 400's.
It would actually surprise me that you would have a job warranty because there is no large operator of Dash-8-300's in Europe...

[ReallyAnnoyed]

Actually, the SAS guys will be retrained on the replacement aircraft that SAS is getting which are MD87, CRJs and some AVROs (not specified which ones in the press release) :) Needless to say that the company of course pays for all conversions.

[airmen]

ReallyAnnoyed and Nichibei Aviation thanks for your answer, however my question was How much does it cost
I dont want to do the TR nor need advice, thanks, but I need to have the price of the TR (gnd and sim course) for my lawyer to help me.
Any body or any pilot having the price or a bill greatly appreciated!
Thanks a lot

[AlternativeProcedure]

I dont know the cost of the type rating, but I do fly the aircraft. Costs should be in the same league as an ATR type rating which from memory should be in the zone 13-15000 pounds. Anyway, you should call flight safety international Paris and ask that question.

AP

[flyingcamel]

Flybe bond for the q400 is £13,500. SHould be that kind of ballpark.

[Nichibei Aviation]

Actually, the SAS guys will be retrained on the replacement aircraft that SAS is getting which are MD87, CRJs and some AVROs (not specified which ones in the press release) :) Needless to say that the company of course pays for all conversions.


No. Only 30% of the Q-800 pilots are getting retrained.

About the price, it's about the same as any TR, as mainly it's the simulator hours+6 touch & go's.
Demand is less so price may be slightly higher: 25000€ is a good price.

[redflyer]

Q-800?
Probably about 30 feet longer than a Q400!:E

[Nichibei Aviation]

That's how they call them up there in Scandinavia.

I guess you learned something right now...don't pretend to know better when you don't ;)

[ReallyAnnoyed]

Perhaps you should learn a thing or two before you start lecturing others, Nichibei. We do NOT call them Q800, but dash 8 (although some call them crash 8 now). Furthermore, it is NOT only 30% who are to be retrained but all of the pilots who are offered a conversion course or temporary leave. The press release is in Danish, so I assume that you can not read it anyway.

[redflyer]

Obviously I know nothing. Of course the BOMBARDIER Q400 is going to be called a Q800.I only fly the Q800, sorry I meant Q400, for a living.

More to the point, BA citiexpress at the time bonded their pilots for £12,500 for a Q 300 type rating

If it's called a Q800 In japan. Well I stand corrected. Maybe it's similar to the Lexus/toyota issue.

[Nichibei Aviation]

http://avisen.dk/slv-er-farligt-flyve-dash8--120907.aspx
http://e24.no/kommentar/boerskommentar/article2036929.ece
http://www.finansnyheder.dk/news/shownewsstory.aspx?storyid=9621384
http://pub.tv2.no/dyn-nettavisen/printversion/article.jsp?id=1428857



Read the articles, all talking about Dash-8 Q-400's but refering to them as Q800's.
The Scandinavian people refer to these aircraft as Q800's since the incidents (even is that is the wrong name, I have mentionned it on purpose...)



Anyway here's the article in English:


STOCKHOLM, Nov 15 (Reuters) - Scandinavian airline SAS (SAS.ST: Quote (http://uk.reuters.com/stocks/quote?symbol=SAS.ST), Profile (http://uk.reuters.com/stocks/companyProfile?symbol=SAS.ST), Research (http://uk.reuters.com/stocks/researchReports?symbol=SAS.ST)) said on Thursday it plans to cut 230 jobs in its Swedish business, partly due to the grounding of its Dash 8 Q400 fleet after three of the aircraft crash-landed.

"This relates to SAS Sweden," SAS spokesman Bertil Ternert told Reuters. "They have identified excess staffing of 230 persons, both cabin crew and pilots."

The airline said its decision to give notice to the 230 employees was linked to the withdrawal from service of its 27 Dash 8 Q400 aircraft in a move it has estimated will cost it 600 million to 700 million crowns ($95 million to $111 million) this year.

Three Dash 8 Q400 turboprop planes, built by Canada's Bombardier (BBDb.TO: Quote (http://uk.reuters.com/stocks/quote?symbol=BBDb.TO), Profile (http://uk.reuters.com/stocks/companyProfile?symbol=BBDb.TO), Research (http://uk.reuters.com/stocks/researchReports?symbol=BBDb.TO)), crash-landed in the last two months. No one was hurt in the crashes.

"The chief reason is that we are not flying the Dash 8 Q400 anymore," SAS Sweden spokesman Mikael Lindberg said. "But we had already identified some excess personnel on cabin staff side."

"Now we will sit down with the unions and the ambition is that we be able to handle this and avoid layoffs.

"But it's too early to say what solutions we could find to avoid having to lay people off," he added, suggesting discussions would address prospects of seeking positions elsewhere in the group for affected employees.


One thing I would like to add: SAS has been reluctant to speak to the press about cutting flightcrew jobs and one obvious reason is that that would be very bad publicity for their big flight school. Obviously, SAS is going to make that happen as silently as possible, and try to find solutions with other airlines (such as Flybe) for their pilots.

Sorry but retraining crew to fly on dry-leased 180 pax MD-80's to operate routes where they operated 75 pax Q400's is just a big joke. Certainly when you consider that they are looking at replacement for the MD-80's they already have, starting from the end of 2008/beginning of 2009.

[FlyingNikonian]

Nichibei,

Scandi's do NOT referr to Dash8-Q400's as Q800's.
I'm Scandi, so I should know.
The articles you linked to,...well, it is like this;
Journo's are usually not very well informed on aircrafts and their names/numbers/what-not's. If the journo who writes the first published article gets it wrong, the others will "follow suit" and continue the error.

Why would this be bad PR for their (not any more by the way!) "big flightschool"? Because other SSTR-victims might not opt to by that rating?
Well, I'll have you know that not many self-sponsored pilots have been trained on the Q400 by (former) SAS Flight Academy. If any at all!

Next; SAS does not own the flight academy anymore. It has been sold to GECAT and is now called GECAT Flight Academy.

I hope your posts are "wind-ups", 'cause if not,....you've got some serious attitude problems!:rolleyes:

[airmen]

Alternative Procedure wrote: I dont know the cost of the type rating, but I do fly the aircraft. Costs should be in the same league as an ATR type rating which from memory should be in the zone 13-15000 pounds. Anyway, you should call flight safety international Paris and ask that question.


I did asked them but get no answer. After a call, they said that it is confidential as they give such info only to companys. My problem is that I followed the Q300 ground course and then left the company, now the company is charging me USD 26'000.- which I believe is obviously too high, especially when you know that companys have lower rates depending on the number of TR done.

Thanks anyway

[FlyingNikonian]

Since you mention the t/r cost i $..

Was the rating supposed to be FAA or JAA?

If JAA; The price sounds reasonable, I'm afraid.

Now to the next point; Did you sign a bonding-agreement, and then leave, or are they just going for the long-shot?

[airmen]

FlyingNikonian

Yes I did sign a bonding and it is JAA, but I did only the gnd course...

A bit expensive tough

[AlternativeProcedure]

26000 USD for Groundschool??? No way!!! Thats ridiculous. The only reason I can see them justifying it, is if they already paid flight safety the money for a set of crew and one didnt show up(i.e you) and there was no other employee from your company to replace you. Meaning that the company would loose the money. What country do you fly in and have you spoken to a lawyer?

[FlyingNikonian]

Altn Proc.,

The company isn't charging Mr Airmen for the groundschool. They're charging (or at least trying to) him for breaking a trainingbond.
They can argue that they've paid the flighttraining establishment for the course and now, that place on the course will be wasted. It's a whole different matter, that they most likely WILL fill that spot with someone else. They're just out trying to make some easy cash and since Airmen signed a bonding agreement, they have a pretty good case.

Airmen,

If I were you, I'd get in contact with a solicitor/lawyer/word-bender immediately. Hopefully you will get away.....
Good luck mate! Fight them!:ok: