Qlink Cobham 717s payload limited

[Troo believer]

Heard this the other day. 717s out of CBR can't make BNE with holding fuel requirements and are doing tech stops enroute. Apparently Tamworth is the logical stop but ops have instructed the crew to land at Williamtown for gas. Go figure? Also leaving bags behind. Another ill conceived plan by those that don't understand performance verse obstacle gradients for a twin engine aircraft limited by second segment capability at relatively high density altitude airfield with a destination that is notorious for extended traffic delays. In other words not enough grunt!

[Capt Claret]

Apparently Tamworth is the logical stop but ops have instructed the crew to land at Williamtown for gas. Go figure?


TW 12L/30R PCN 19/F/C/113 psi
717 ACN 35 to 19 158 psi tyres
WLM 12/30 PCN 41/F/B/245 psi


Go figure. ;) :ok:

[nig&nog]

I thought those big 21K engines would do the job, maybe they need to chip them up to 23k and climb like the clappers. That would be an awesome combination.

[RENURPP]

Also leaving bags behind. Another ill conceived plan by those that don't understand performance verse obstacle gradients for a twin engine aircraft limited by second segment capability at relatively high density altitude airfield with a destination that is notorious for extended traffic delays. In other words not enough grunt!
The 717 is well capable of doing the job. e.g. they depart Alice all year around with temps well above Canberra's, same or higher elevation, fly 1100nm with holding fuel for weather and traffic as well as 100kt headwinds at times, its not an aircraft issue.

If you limit your landcruiser to the same horsepower as a suzuki swift in an attempt to conserve fuel and costs, you probably won't tow much of a boat. In other words go back to Qlink management and ask why?
The aircraft is capable of lifting 125 pax bags + freight and hold for hrs out of Canberra.
I thought those big 21K engines would do the job They would, and I suspect after a couple of stops at Willi sone one might rethink their decision.

[FYSTI]

I hear its CBR obstacle clearance is the problem. Tech stop CBR-BNE for the premium market, another stoke of genius.

[RENURPP]

Well you hear wrong.
As I said, I suspect a couple of tech stops at Williamtown and some one may rethink their decision and hey presto, no longer a problem.

[The Baron]

While you're talking 717s, is there any reason why you guys wouldn't be able to use rwy 14 in BNE when it is offered ? I've heard a couple of crews say they require 01.
In one instance, ATC said there would be a extra 6 min delay for 01.

[RENURPP]

No, the physical dimensions are fine, same as the 737's I suspect, company requirement is the issue there.

[Capt Claret]

Hands up anyone who knows a Bean Counter who wouldn't analyse a route structure, only to find there's one aerodrome that would be limiting at the lowest power option, and not elect to go with the low power option to see how it pans out?

[neville_nobody]

I wonder if anyone's bonus is on the line in regards to going the cheaper engine option. :hmm:

[moa999]

Given these 717s are secondhand and there aren't any new ones, isnt it just take them as they come.

[Capt Claret]

Given these 717s are secondhand and there aren't any new ones, isnt it just take them as they come.

The difference between the bigger (21K) and smaller (18.5k) engines is something along the lines of: a screwdriver, a LAME, changes to the FADEC/ECU settings and AFM supplements. Oh, almost forgot, BIG maintenance $$$ too. There's a 20k option too (B engines) but I've not heard of it being used.

Some lessors won't agree to the bigger engines, others will.

[Horatio Leafblower]

So what you're saying is Qlink have hired Aeropelican' commercial management team :confused:

[waren9]

Er, nev, no.

The bonus has been paid by way of taking a cheaper option in the first place.

Fixing fcukups is on a whole nother speadsheet.

[RENURPP]

I have to say I don't think its unrealistic to have a look and see how it goes.
Qlink operate or will soon operate 5 717's 5 around canberra all with lower thrust, 13 with higher thrust everywhere else. The sectors are short, the runways are long, with Canberra being the exception for restricted weight the lower thrust may have been worth a try. I'm not sure how many times people or bags have been offloaded, I had one flight where we offloaded bags however that was due to a Dash going U/S and us taking their 50+ pax at late notice. Unfortunately that has happened on multiple occasions, maybe thats the reason?
Has anyone been via Williamtown?
In any case the aircraft is well and truly capable of doing the job and as CC said its an overnight adjustment with some manual changes, so if Qlink management determine its not viable as is, I suspect they will make a decision to change it.

It would be a case of how many days is the temp above the limit (34?) full load, holding at Brisbane etc. If that rarely happened then may work.

[Ken Borough]

Changes to certified limits cost dollars as the manufacturers (not unlike some pilots) want a slice of any additional action. Maybe, just maybe, QLink have done the sums and decided it ain't worth the money but they're OK to bear any pain as a result.

[FYSTI]

In that case Kevin, isn't the alternative proposition equally valid, manufacturers (like some pilots) don't get a slice of the action at lower certification limits.

[Blitzkrieger]

Nicely crafted wind up Troo Believer!

They are well aware of how to operate these aircraft at high density altitudes, as they have been doing it for years. Unfortunately they are also aware of the cost (as opposed to the value) of 21k engines. Dollars win every time.

[Capt Basil Brush]

No, the physical dimensions are fine, same as the 737's I suspect, company requirement is the issue there.

737-700 can land on 14/32 at BN, but there are only a few of those left over here.

737-800 is too heavy for 14/32. 56,000kgs from memory is their limit which is normally well below the average ZFW, let alone LW.

[ad-astra]

Capt Brush

Unless there is works on 01/19 which miraculously allowed the 56T limit to change to MLW for the 7378 recently.

It is now back to the 56T limit

All done with a pen and a need to solve a problem.

[The Baron]

By all reports , The Embraer 190 has been operating in and out of Canberra and BNE 14 with no payload restrictions. Reliability is very high too, beating the 737 fleet most months. Much newer technology, but is it fair enough to compare?

[Troo believer]

So it's true. The new old 717s with derated engines can't do the job to the full capability of the airframe due to performance restrictions. Alice Springs is lower by about 700' but hotter and most ops are off Rwy12 with no obstacle problems to bother with. It can get hot in CBR in the next couple of months. I guess some CBR returns will be covered by QF at short notice to help out, just like Qf does for Jetstar on a regular basis for nicks. Its like kids crying to Mummy for help when the going gets tough.
Now that's a wind up.
Incoming!

[porch monkey]

The Embraer more reliable than the 737? I'll believe that when you show me the figures.

[missy]

Heard this the other day. 717s out of CBR can't make BNE with holding fuel requirements
Yeah, heard that at some chrissie drinks.

The other day they planned SYD-CBR at FL320 - who are the kidding. Oh, and drop the silly four digit flights numbers - CuteJet don't have that many flights.

[Capt Claret]

Since when has CBR's elevation been 2486'? More like 100' difference in ASP's favour,.

A 717 with C engines (21 k) can take off at MBRW at 40C off RWY30, bleeds on, at ASP but with A engines (18.5 k) only 25C

[Check_Thrust]

Oh, and drop the silly four digit flights numbers - CuteJet don't have that many flights.

Ummm... You'd might want to take that one up with Qantas, they are the ones that decide the flight numbers

[Blitzkrieger]

So it's true,Troo believer, you admit this is a wind up.

I would do your home work if I were you. You are beginning to sound like a disgruntled wannabe.

While the decision to attempt the 18.5k engine option may very well be a mistake by QF. You can be assured that when this all beds down and the bugs are ironed out, the new old 717's as you put it will prove themselves, as they usually do.

[717tech]

I remember years ago modding the aircraft to 21k, I heard it didn't last long before they changed them back to 18.

[Compylot]

You are beginning to sound like a disgruntled wannabe.

Gentlemen, methinks that at this point I am going to come right out and say what I know everyone else is thinking, it is plainly obvious that 'Troo Believer' must of been knocked back and has missed out on a job with Qantaslink.

[newsensation]

No such company as Qantaslink

[RPG]

Are Cobham's 717's the heavy version or below 50 T mtow ??

[Blitzkrieger]

All of them are 53t MTOW

[RPG]

Thanks Blitz, are Cobham's doing plenty of recruiting this year for the 71' ?

[Troo believer]

Just to put the record straight. Yeah I got the elevation of Alice wrong after too many reds but it doesn't change the poor implementation of 717 s into CBR nor the nefarious way it's been operated as Qlink but with Cobham crew. Qlink wannabe no. Been flying jets before Qlink existed, when it was Sunstate flying Bandits, Shorts and Otters. Tally ho chaps.

[Capn Bloggs]

I remember years ago modding the aircraft to 21k, I heard it didn't last long before they changed them back to 18.
As one would wisely do when the extra thrust is not required. Up for summer, down for winter. Commonsense, my dear 717tech! You must have left Cobham pretty quick as they went back down to 18.5k six months after they went up to 21k or is your memory fading... ;) :ok:

Oh no, Compylot is back! :{

[Compylot]

Mentioning you've had a 'few reds' and using the word 'nefarious' all in the same sentence indicates to me that you actually are not a teenager on school holidays taking a break from flight sim nor someone who has been knocked back from an airline job, I stand corrected :ok:

[Icarus2001]

nor the nefarious way it's been operated as Qlink but with Cobham crew.Well wasn't it NJS crew before that operating the BAE146 for Airlink? Only for about, oh say fifteen years?

[ITCZ]

Yeah I got the elevation of Alice wrong after too many reds but it doesn't change the poor implementation of 717 s into CBR
Poor implementation of the 717 into CBR?

You're having a lend, aren't you!

How about this other 'poor implementation'?

http://www.aussieairliners.org/dc-9/vh-czf/1135.010l.jpg
Could it be a DC-9-31, parked at Canberra?

If it had -17 engines it might have put out 16,000lb thrust max.

23% less thrust than a C-modded B712, or 14% less than a standard donk B712.

Amateurs! No wonder that airline disappeared from Australian skies - thirty years later!! ;)

Are you telling me that a souped up DC-9-31 with 2,500lb to 5,000lb more thrust per donk, can't better what an Ansett-ANA diesel nine did in 1972?

nor the nefarious way it's been operated as Qlink but with Cobham crew
Nice to hear your 'professional' opinion of me and my mates.
So you think the Cobham B717 boys and girls should have been undercut by pilots on the 'single aisle jet' rate?



"Age shall not weary...."

[0tto]

So you think the Cobham B717 boys and girls should have been undercut by pilots on the 'single aisle jet' rate?

What's the base pay of a Cobham b717 captain in the 2013 financial year?

[Troo believer]

There is no way Ansett flew DC9s from CBR to BNE. It didn't have the range nor performance. Imagine trying to get a 9 to BNE at 8 pm with 60 holding plus traffic? The thing flew to Sydney or Melbourne from CBR and I believe it still holds the record for Cbr Syd block time 22 minutes. Comparing the two variants is like comparing a 737-100 to a 737-800. So How much does a 717 pilot earn? Nefarious! How about the other titbit of info that Cobham pay only a nominal amount to use the Qlink hangar in CBR. I was told $36/ month. Qantas folk have had enough and are far more willing to speak out for what's right fair and moral. The constant twisting and manipulation by Qantas Execs has gone on for too long and it's time to expose the charade for what it is. I don't care if Cobham flies 717 s for Qlink but FFS put Cobham on the side of the aeroplane and tell the public. They have a right to know. The only reason Jetconnect gets away with it is because its NZ based otherwise it would be called Qlink International. Now there's a good idea?
For the record 737 ng pavement limit for Tamworth is 65.0 tonnes. Go figure

[Check_Thrust]

I know 0tto's question was for just the Cobham Captain base pay but I thought I'd give them all for anyone that is interested.

From the various agreements:

Cobham:
Captain
FY12/13: $155,000
FY13/14: $158,875

First Officer
FY12/13
1st year: $85,250
2nd year: $89,125
3rd year: $93,000
4th year: $93,000
5th year+: $100,750

FY13/14
1st year: $87,381
2nd year: $91,353
3rd year: $95,325
4th year: $95,325
5th year+: $103,269

Eastern (Regional Jet - Single Aisle):
FY12/13
Captain: $153,734
First Officer: $99,928
(Could not find data for FY13/14)

Sunstate (Regional Jet - Single Aisle):
FY12/13
Captain: $140,688
First Officer: $91,447
FY13/14
Captain: $144,908
First Officer: $94,190

[Keg]

C'mon Rob. It's Qantas. It'll be somewhere between 0 and 3% with the flat 3 looking the likely option.

[Going Nowhere]

You'll be doing well to even get 3 out of them at the moment! :(

[Capn Bloggs]

tell the public. They have a right to know.

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/njs1_zpscee203f0.jpg (http://s521.photobucket.com/user/capnbloggs/media/njs1_zpscee203f0.jpg.html)

and

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w334/capnbloggs/njs2_zps8cd4f40e.jpg (http://s521.photobucket.com/user/capnbloggs/media/njs2_zps8cd4f40e.jpg.html)

Does Eastern or Sunstate have "operated by" on the side of their aircraft?

[Capt Claret]

There is no way Ansett flew DC9s from CBR to BNE. It didn't have the range nor performance.

TAA must've had better DC9s than Ansett then because I flew in one SYD to Townsville in 1980, and they often ran MEL-BNE-MEL, both longer stage lengths than CBR-BNE. :ugh:

[Capn Bloggs]

MEL-BNE-MEL, both longer stage lengths than CBR-BNE.
C'Mon Clarrie, sealevel ports with runways longer than 50 MCGs can't be compared to CBR 35 at 35°.

[nitpicker330]

I never flew the 9 but I do know that CBR was a problem especially at hot temps. Elev terrain temps etc etc.

[Capt Claret]

True Bloggs but the 71 isn't the only aircraft that can be payload limited ex CBR, 727, DC9 from the distant past, 737 300/400 from more recent past. If the decision is made to upgrade to C engines I'd guess the problem will possibly be no more.

[airdualbleedfault]

" jet like speeds", sorry couldn't let that one through to the keeper.
Wondering which jet is as slow as 360kts, the max cruise speed of the Q400?
Even the 146 would happily cruise at 400, most other jets are at least 100kts quicker than the Q400

Confucius say "props belong on boats"

[Fuel-Off]

And jets belong in spas... :E

Fuel-Off :ok:

[KABOY]

Bring back the 146, i don't recall it having severe payload restrictions ex-CBR in the summer!

For all its faults it could still uplift a decent payload off short strips.

[Icarus2001]

I don't care if Cobham flies 717 s for Qlink but FFS put Cobham on the side of the aeroplane and tell the public. It is on the side of the aeroplane by 1L. It is also on the boarding pass.

How does a thread about weight limits on a type end up about pilot salaries. (Rhetorical question) :ugh:

[Capt Claret]

I don't care if Cobham flies 717 s for Qlink but FFS put Cobham on the side of the aeroplane and tell the public.

Just think of all the code-share aircraft out there that will now need multiple titles on the fuselage.

The reality is that QantasLink is a single brand set up by Qantas. It's aircraft are owned by multiple entities and operated by multiple entities, some Qantas owned and at least one, not.

[Farm gate]

From memory the SIDs in Canberra only included terrain clearance in the late eighties, by which time the DC9s had retired. On hot days the Nine mostly departed on 17 with a lot of tailwind.

When the new SIDs included terrain clearance requirements the payload on departure for all aircraft dropped significantly.

I would expect that that is why the Nine operated with a higher payload than the 717?

[neville_nobody]

If this problem is actually true doesn't QF run afoul of IATA rules in regard to a non stop flight. You cannot advertise and charge people for a non stop RPT flight if you have to keep making tech stops enroute because it is no longer 'non stop'.

[Martin VanNostrum]

I flew the 9 for Ansett in the early '80's till they were retired in '82. I cannot ever remember operating CBR-BNE in it. From memory all BNE flights ex CBR were via SYD. We operated plenty of CBR-MEL and CBR-SYD though. You have to remember back then (30 years ago) BNE was a backwater and the airport was Eagle Farm which was small and basic. There was nothing like the traffic today. I just don't think there was the demand for CBR to BNE direct; however I may be wrong.

[Jack Ranga]

It's still a backwater from what I hear ;)

[Capt Claret]

All this palaver is probably moot in the long run. I suspect a statistical analysis at the end of 12 months will probably find a relatively small percentage of flights couldn't carry the load on the day, and an even smaller percentage made tech stops. And then when the engines are made into Cs, the refrain will be "problem, what problem".

[Flava Saver]

...also remember being in a TAA DC-9 TSV-SYD which also had a massive thunderstorm on arrival back in the early 80's, and we held for yonks...

[SIDS N STARS]

I pax'd on one of these birds last week. From where i was sitting, looked like every second seat pocket was missing/torn/half attached, unable to hold anything!! Due to short flight time, unable to use IFE.

Not just performance problems??

I dunno what the J class passengers get..

[4dogs]

Hey Clarrie,

What are the critical OATs for departure 35 for the A and C engines?

A rough look at the BoM max temps for the last 5 years for CBR airport for January shows a monthly mean of 30.3C with a standard deviation of 4.7C, based on 153 daily observations showing a range of max OAT of 23.4C, the highest being 42.0C. The distribution is a reasonably symmetrical approximation of the normal distribution, so even Alan's mathematical genii in Route Planning can easily calculate the probability of a particular temperature occurring during that month. For a slightly bigger bonus, they could probably develop a correlation estimate between the new airport data and the old airport data (kept from 1939 to 2010) and work it out on a daily basis to match the traffic data.

For a huge bonus, they could even talk to Yield about providing a daily seat limit, making it easier for the boys to manage the variations on the day.

Now, getting back to the troll's original bait, the cost of power by the hour for a 21K engine compared to an 18.5K engine is eye-wateringly disproportionate for the number of take-offs required above 18.5K. Let's just say you need 21K for 30 departures but the rest (say 120) are at maximum derate of around 15-16K: you pay for every minute of time in service as if you are spinning the fan off the front at max TGT through the emergency gate.

Would I assess the probabilities of getting away with 18.5K engines :E or would I just pay through the nose for 21K and look at it after 3 months? :eek:

Farm Gate,

Anybody limiting TOW to maintain OEI SID compliance at CBR either had big expensive engines or doesn't grasp the benefits of Special Departure Procedures... :{

Neville N,

I didn't realise that IATA had taken over from the ACCC in protecting consumers... :uhoh:

Stay Alive,

[Blitzkrieger]

SIDS N STARS, welcome to the wind up :)

Sorry to hear our newly re-fitted interior has been destroyed already.

Regarding the IFE, I am assuming you were travelling between SYD-CBR. How would mainline or the real q-link handle the IFE on a 25 minute sector?

Some one also mentioned the temperatures QF used to predict the performance of the 717. I am told the figures used were yearly mean temperatures (mean max in the hottest month of January 28.5 deg). Which would indicate to the QF performance guys that there would be no restrictions even with 18.5k engines. Obviously an overly simplistic approach you could say.

[Prince Niccolo M]

I am told the figures used were yearly mean temperatures (mean max in the hottest month of January 28.5 deg). Which would indicate to the QF performance guys that there would be no restrictions even with 18.5k engines.

which would indicate that it was a heads or tails bet that the OAT would be higher than 28.5 deg... :(

[UnderneathTheRadar]

which would indicate that it was a heads or tails bet that the OAT would be higher than 28.5 deg...

Almost but not quite.......

[How's it Hanging]

Most aircraft with weight issues off rwy35 in Canberra can go with 10kt tailwind off rwy17 at much higher weights.
Does that work for the 717?

[Blitzkrieger]

Yes it does.

[Typhoon650]

Any IFE on a 717 has got to be better than on Qantas's ancient 737's. Nothing like 3 or 4 tiny old CRT tubes (with obligatory safety tape on the bottom for anyone over 165cm tall) and a VCR for the latest and greatest.
How Qantas get away with charging at all for flying in a -200, I don't understand. It's like sitting in a doctor's surgery in 1980....

[Capt_SNAFU]

-200's your on drugs. Haven't even had 300's for years. The IFE in the 400's is crap but what do you expect when they will be gone soon.

As for performance issues not alone in that department. QF 737s had issues with de rated 800s going into places.:ugh:

Which would indicate to the QF performance guys that there would be no restrictions even with 18.5k engines.

Why is QF performance doing things for Cobham?

[josephfeatherweight]

Does not utilising the offset Type-A chart for RWY 35 (353 degrees) provide an OCTG of around 3.4%? Please note, I'm not privy to the Cobham SOPs, but can they not employ such methods to calculate departure, or is the 717 performance worse than that... From memory (and it's scratchy), the use of the offset Type-A chart permitted departures on RWY 35 ahead of RWY 17 due to the reduced gradient and the lower MSA to the north (4600' vs 5100'/7500' to the south).
Interested to know if I'm a) wrong or b)how they are specifically restricted by a 35 departure.
Thanks.
Joe Lighty

"Nobody's died from pressing..."

[qfpaypacket]

It won't matter soon... Once Network get their 20 red tail A320's I don't think the 717 or cobham will be needed much longer (Qf shorthaul either for that matter). Checkmate.

[Capn Bloggs]

Which would indicate to the QF performance guys that there would be no restrictions even with 18.5k engines.

Why is QF performance doing things for Cobham?
Snafu, who said QF Perf was doing anything for Cobham? QF would have done internal assessments regarding performance; these routes, after all, are QF routes.

Does not utilising the offset Type-A chart for RWY 35 (353 degrees) provide an OCTG of around 3.4%?
No. Have a look at the current Radar (http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/dap/SCBDP01-130.pdf) and RNAV SID and tell us what the gradient is. ;)

[Blitzkrieger]

"It won't matter soon... Once Network get their 20 red tail A320's I don't think the 717 or cobham will be needed much longer (Qf shorthaul either for that matter). Checkmate."

Haha, probably right! They are in the business of going broke ;)

[josephfeatherweight]

No. Have a look at the current Radar and RNAV SID and tell us what the gradient is.
Nah, I'm aware of the 6.6% gradient required for RWY 35 SIDs, but for my operations, that's not a show stopper when you can calculate other options.
Options (in order of ease/preference):
1) If you can achieve 6.6% to 3400' - great, easy.
2) Can't make 6.6% - what's the standard (straight ahead - as published in the RDS in ERSA) splay gradient? Can I achieve that? Can I also achieve the 25nm MSA by the end of the splay?
3) Can I use the 5 degree offset splay gradient (I think about 3.4% from YSCB RWY 35 Type A-Chart). Can I achieve that? Can I also achieve the 25nm MSA by the end of that splay?

Surely Cobham/Qantas/Virgin don't always have to achieve the 6.6% gradient requirement?

[Capn Bloggs]

3) Can I use the 5 degree offset splay gradient (I think about 3.4%). Can I achieve that?
How'd you work out 3.4% when the published departures on the 353 (5° rght offset) give a gradient of 6.6%? What splay dimensions are you using?

[mustangranch]

Am I missing something? Generally it is hot weather that causes this issue. Therefore it is probably cavok. What would stop a visual departure being requested? Just a thought, I am no doubt wrong.

[josephfeatherweight]

How'd you work out 3.4% when the published departures on the 353 (5° rght offset) give a gradient of 6.6%? What splay dimensions are you using?
As mentioned previously, using the YSCB Type-A Charts. Sorry, I'll amend my post to make it clear...

[Capn Bloggs]

Therefore it is probably cavok. What would stop a visual departure being requested? Just a thought, I am no doubt wrong.
My understanding is Hi cap RPT operators do not allow Visual Departures.

using the YSCB Type-A Charts
I'm not familiar with Type A charts. What splay left and right of the departure track centreline (in this case 353° from the DER/VOR/ECKKS) do they assume when coming up the 3.4% value?

[BPA]

HC RPT DEP at Willy are given a visual dep unless the weather requires a SID or Radar DEP.

[Capn Bloggs]

HC RPT DEP at Willy are given a visual dep unless the weather requires a SID or Radar DEP
That may be so, but do the crews then use visual tracking performance charts as opposed to IMC tracking performance charts?

[josephfeatherweight]

Ok - a few things to clear up.

The gradient is important to consider in the one-engine inoperative case - it doesn't matter if you're IMC or visual - the only difference is, if you're visual and you're not achieving the minimum gradient to avoid the ground, you'll get a great view of the it before you smack into it...

Type A charts are usually provided by the airport authority and cost a fair bit to a) produce and b) purchase. They identify ALL obstacles in the splay (based off the centreline, usually, but sometimes in special cases they do offset calcs such as at YSCB RWY 35) which is a straight line extending out to 15,000m with a 15 degree "splay" either side. The benefit of a Type A chart over the basic RDS info is that you can identify the most limiting obstacle and hence the most limiting gradient. Pretty sure the splay is based off 35' from the DER - haven't looked for a while and don't have my docs with me...

Anyway, with the above data, you can calculate less restrictive engine out climb gradient requirements...

[Capn Bloggs]

it doesn't matter if you're IMC or visual - the only difference is, if you're visual and you're not achieving the minimum gradient to avoid the ground, you'll get a great view of the it before you smack into it...
I don't know about that...if my performance was suspect I'd be ducking down one of the numerous valleys north of 35 so as to avoid the obstacle rather than sit there and hit it! :ok:

[Fuel-Off]

It won't matter soon... Once Network get their 20 red tail A320's I don't think the 717 or cobham will be needed much longer (Qf shorthaul either for that matter). Checkmate

Network have failed their CASA RPT audits TWICE! The guys at Fort Fumble have given them one more chance before they won't allow any more attempts.

Didn't see that in the staff newsletter did ya! :E

Fuel-Off :ok:

[Capn Bloggs]

BPA, just checked CAO 20.7 and above 22.7t you must calculate for IMC; no relief for VMC on-the-day:

in the case of V.M.C. operations by aeroplanes at or above 22 700 kg maximum take-off weight and all I.M.C. operations

[Going Nowhere]

Network have failed their CASA RPT audits TWICE! The guys at Fort Fumble have given them one more chance before they won't allow any more attempts.

Might be part of the reason MD bailed to VARA

[BPA]

Bloggs,

Visual DEPS are also issued out of TL.

In the four types of HC jets I've operated out of CBR never had a problem using 35 in summer and operating DCT to BN, CG and AD.

[0tto]

Might be part of the reason MD bailed to VARA

What was the reason they failed the application (Twice)? I thought WW is heading up the application process and he was previously the regulatory affairs manager.

MD was pushed aside from his chief pilot role and bailing out to VARA was a good way out (of Qantas) for him.

[Capn Bloggs]

Visual DEPS are also issued out of TL.
That may also be so. But you can't just say "oh it's visual, let's use the VMC only RTOW". Performance-wise, the type of ATC departure is irrelevant.

In the four types of HC jets I've operated out of CBR never had a problem using 35 in summer and operating DCT to BN, CG and AD.

Hence this thread! :) If you can get to BN off 35, you'll certainly be able to get to CG or AD...

[4dogs]

Ahh, Bloggs,

Leave you alone for a few years and you forget everything... := :uhoh: :oh: please throw the shovel out of the hole!

josephfeatherweight,

Yes, the OEI SDP gradient off 35 is around 3.2% - Type A is considered, along with other data, and there are procedural fudge factors for tree growth, survey errors, etc. That gradient is what underpins the RTOW calculations. :ok:

How's it Hanging,

Careful of the great myth that the gradient off 17 is so much lower than 35 - it is only 0.2% less, depending on how you plan to get out of the Tuggeranong Valley - and the tailwind may certainly erode that slight advantage when considering achievable OEI gradients... :eek:

BPA,

In the four types of HC jets I've operated out of CBR never had a problem using 35 in summer and operating DCT to BN, CG and AD.


I never had a problem either. In a couple of memorable cases, that was only because nothing failed and so otherwise erroneous planning was never put to the test.

Did you mean that you flew four types of high capacity jets that had no performance restrictions below MTOW up to 42.2 deg off 35? :ooh: :ooh: :ooh:

If so, I would appreciate you identifying the types and the departure path so that I can improve my knowledge of OEI performance of jet aircraft in Australia. Please?

And generally,

The aeroplane doesn't know if it is in VMC or in IMC. It can't climb any better just because you can see what is coming. Try a quick right turn off 35 OEI and see just how high Majura Range really is - particularly after discovering what a turn does to your climb!!! :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

Stay Alive,

[Icarus2001]

The guys at Fort Fumble have given them one more chance before they won't allow any more attempts. Which piece of legislation allows them to refuse an application?

[Joker89]

Why is it such a big surprise there are performance limitations out of CB. So 3.2% is the net gradient used for the CDP meaning you need 4.0% to get off 35 OEI. Given that's a fair bit more than the 2.4% min I'm surprised any jet can get off at mtow. From memory the jet I fly drops about 40t off mtow at about 25deg.

[No Idea Either]

Must be an airbus Joker............:O:O:O:O

[OneDotLow]

I don't think the surprise is that the jet is performance limited, Joker. As you say, most jets are limited at or approaching their MTOW.

The surprise(or lack thereof) comes from the fact that QF management oversaw the acquisition of another jet that is not entirely suited to the task employed.

If they haven't considered a 30+ degree day with 5kts tail and OEI, then they have not done their job properly and should be held accountable.

[Prince Niccolo M]

OneDotLow,


What I gathered from the thread was some obvious trolling and some vaguely serious discussions about route planning options. I'm not quite sure what propelled you into:

QF management oversaw the acquisition of another jet that is not entirely suited to the task employed.


Wasn't the discussion about deciding when and for how long you pay for the higher thrust rating?

I would have thought that being able to dial up the thrust (15 minutes on the tools and 45 minutes on the paperwork) on a pay-as-you-go arrangement is eminently flexible, both operationally and financially. :ok: :ok:

[OneDotLow]

But is it really that simple and cheap an exercise?

[Blitzkrieger]

Yes it is. The rest of the fleet has an upgrade approaching summer and a downgrade approaching winter, every year.

Cheap? Maybe not, but it depends on the value you put on being able to fill seats.

[Prince Niccolo M]

OneDotLow,


Looks like I'm slightly late to the game, but that's the price of being old and easily distracted...


Anyway, my reading of the tealeaves presented here is that it is all relative to your decision metrics:


- The simple things are increasing the thrust rating and writing the cheques to pay for it for as long as you do it.


- I gather that the cost for the increased thrust is particularly expensive.


- I surmise that having the flexibility to do a daily/weekly/monthly/seasonal change is particularly cheap compared to funding a permanently higher thrust rating


- making the decision is simple if you are happy with your decision metrics


- life rarely permits simple decision metrics when the cost of an error is high.


I have to admit that route planning and yield are most definitely not my bag, but my experience operating to and from Canberra suggests to me that it would be a very difficult market in which to closely modulate capacity (a consequence of performance) given the distortions due to Parliamentary sittings, the dominance of government-related travel vis a vis tourism and private travel and the effect of seasonal weather. :E

[Joker89]

I see the problem as having 40 min traffic holding at BN. This means you need to take around 3.5 hrs of fuel for a 1.5 hr trip if there is a tempo on. That's never going to be efficient.

[Troo believer]

This whole discussion misses one important question. The flying was transferred from a 737 to a 717 due to cost savings. Is the updated thrust required to do the job properly part of the new cost and how much cheaper is it really?
Who de- ices it in winter and who pays for it? Like everything in Qantas the true costs are a blurred paradigm of smoke and mirrors. We shut down the APU on turnaround to save fuel but the 717 doesn't cause Qantas picks up the tab. Why aren't Qlink pilots flying the 717 instead of Cobham. Surely it would be cheaper and offer career progression. Or here is something novel. Why can't some pilots from mainline fly the thing for free! Yep they're getting paid to do bugger all at the moment. Bucket loads of F/O's with 10,000 jet hours wanting a left seat. Go figure!

[neville_nobody]

The flying was transferred from a 737 to a 717 due to cost savings. Is the updated thrust required to do the job properly part of the new cost and how much cheaper is it really?

You assume it is about cost. It is about fulfilling the QF master plan, of breaking up mainline and replacing it with subcontractors.

Unfortunately at the rate they are going they could end up sinking the whole thing. Whether that is part of the plan or not is yet to be seen.

[Southern handler]

Been away from CBR for a couple of years but on those hot Canberra days we often had weight problems on the 734's on the CBR BNE route and also from memory on ADL

[Blitzkrieger]

Troo, if you wanted the discussion to focus on the industrial aspect, why did you start the wind up by taking a crack at the performance of the 717?

I am curious, who you are directing all this spleen at? I hope it is not the Cobham crews them selves, it would be a shame to perpetuate the whole "divide and conquer" strategy you claim the 717 is a part of, by making it a Cobham v's qlink/mainline thing. May I suggest you write a strongly worded letter to AJ stating you disapproval instead?

[Capt Claret]

The flying was transferred from a 737 to a 717 due to cost savings.

And here was I thinking the flying was transferred because aged 734s were retired and replaced with 738s, which in turn are to be used on better yielding routes more suited to the 738's capabilities. This left a hole. What to service the routes covered by the retiring 734s in the face of Virgin's Jungle Jet expansion?

[Australopithecus]

A friend was recently bemoaning the current 737 fleet utilisation numbers: twenty years ago the fleet average was around 10 hours/day...and a lease cost around $323,000/month for a -400

Today our resident math genius has driiven the daily use down to circa 6 hours while paying slightly more per diem for a lease.

The idea that 738 hulls are being freed up for more profitable routes is true in theory, but does not appear to have a basis in fact.

As an aside, it does cost QF a lot less for an overnight crewed by cabin crew on 33K/year (717, as revealed by one of their crew): 1/3 the mainliine cost approximately.

Can someone here reveal what meal payments the 717 "enjoy"?

[NowThatsFunny]

Capt Claret,

Are you suggesting there is some intelligence at Q to use appropriate planes on better yielding routes more suited to their capability? Surely you jest.

[Capn Bloggs]

Can someone here reveal what meal payments the 717 "enjoy"?
Quite a lot, considering it drinks around 2t per hour. With AVTUR at record prices, I'd reckon about $8000 a day! :eek:

[Prince Niccolo M]

Hey Clarrie,


Just curious, did you have an answer to the question about the critical temp for each engine that reduces the RTOW below MTOW for 35 at Canberra? :confused:

[moa999]

Australopithecus
At 6 hrs per day, plus say 2hrs turnaround time,

Where exactly are the 737s sitting outside of 9-5.

[tempsky]

moa999, I disagree with 6 hours for the 737, it is somewhere between 7:00 & 7:30 hours per day on the numbers I have seen. And still there looks like being a net increase of 7x 737 aircraft this year. Retirements of the 767 need to be considered, how this affects the average remains to be seen.
Where exactly are the 737s sitting outside of 9-5. You have made an assumption that they are doing straight (0:35) turnarounds - that isn't the case, except in limited space apron / high frequency outports (KTA,PHE,BRM etc). They tend to do longer turns, particularly during the middle of the day. The net result is two departure peaks, early morning and late afternoon / early evening.

[Derfred]

Net increase of 7?
They are retiring 3x -400's, so you are saying they are getting 10 new -800's?
I haven't seen that anywhere.

[tempsky]

My understanding is that a new -800's keeps coming every month until end of ~Q3 14 (a little vague on exact number & timing), while the -400's will be gone by the end of Feb. (Basically a 1:1 exchange until now). Net 7 new -800 airframes, but am willing to be corrected.

[Going Boeing]

Only 5 more B737-800s coming - delivered monthly from July to November 2014. I don't think that you can consider them as additional airframes as they are effectively replacing 255 seat B767's (there are not enough A332's being returned from JQ to replace the entire B767 fleet).

[airdualbleedfault]

Sorry, slightly off topic but to address fuel offs "concerns", Network RPT route proving flight booked for mid Feb, my mail is they failed nothing but as per usual CASA have asked for quite a lot of re writes and amendments etc. I think going from GA with jets to RPT was a little more involved than they thought.
But 20 red tail A320s? Highly unlikely. A few green tail 320s not out of the question tho, and who knows, with Jetstar Hong Kongs continued great performance there could be a few spare in the group shortly

[BPA]

Capt Claret,

Are the RWY35 figures from the full length (only used if operationally required) or from intersection 'N', which is used 99% of the time?

[Capt Claret]

What are the critical OATs for departure 35 for the A and C engines?


Just curious, did you have an answer to the question about the critical temp for each engine that reduces the RTOW below MTOW for 35 at Canberra? :confused:

The best I can do is give a comparison at ASP, 100' elevation less than CBR.

Bleeds off, nil wind, standard pressure.

RWY 12 A engines MTOW to ~ 29C, C Engines ~ 44C (A eng ~ 6 tonne less @ 44C)
RWY 30 A engines MTOW to ~ 27C, C engines ~ 43C

[andyn]

The 21k gives an extra 5T, I assure you!

[4dogs]

Clarrie,

Thanks for that. Although the departure gradients are substantially different, the figure do illustrate very nicely the advantage of the 21K engines over the 18.5K engines at ASP. :ok: :ok: :ok:

Andyn,

Welcome... :) ;)

Unfortunately for those folk who are not as familiar with the 717 performance, just promising an extra 5 tonnes doesn't mean a lot. Given that the uncontrolled variable is the OAT, the increase in critical temperature for MTOW tells most of us quite a lot about the advantages of dialling up increased thrust. :cool:

BPA,

You are quite right to highlight the typical N departure, but I think for this context the full length is relevant since that is your last option before restricting the load. :cool:

Stay Alive,

[VA7]

Quote: The best I can do is give a comparison at ASP, 100' elevation less than CBR.

Remember that one of the most (if not the most) limiting factor when determining RTOW is the obstruction weight limit which is a function of obstruction height and distance, temperature, airport elevation and wind, etc.
The obstruction height and distance from CB make it more weight limited than the Alice.

[Derfred]

Obstacle not obstruction.

An obstruction prevents passage. An obstacle can be avoided.

[Mach E Avelli]

So is CASA an obstruction to aviation, or an obstacle to it?

[waren9]

definitely the latter, very nearly the former

give it time

[scrubba]

I thought the modern view was that it was both, but never consistently or predictably... :sad: :sad: :sad:

[Village Idiot1]

Landings at Williamtown = 0
Premium pax bags left behind =0

Decision made by Qantas to retain 18.5k engines = time will tell.

Crap posted on prune 10/10

[mikk_13]

Alan should just get the Russians in. they are cheap and get the job done.

Here is a video of how they do it Canberra

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThoZNxy2JZk

[porch monkey]

Hmmm. Let me see. "Premium" pax bags left behind? 0 What about the other 75 to 100 poor bastards on board?

[bankrunner]

"Premium" hand luggage means the bags you hand to the lads on the apron right before boarding the aircraft on the DHC8 and 717, that they put in the hold and then retrieve for you as you get off because they won't fit in the cabin.

It's just QF putting a positive spin on the fact the aircraft you're flying on isn't a 737.

Nothing to do with the amount of money paid by the pax.

[Capn Bloggs]

Bankrunner, go for a ride in a 717 and report back about the overhead locker size.

[ITCZ]

Obstacle not obstruction.

An obstruction prevents passage. An obstacle can be avoided.
I've passed an obstruction, and I've passed an obstacle.
Based on those experiences, I'd live with passing an obstacle and avoid passing the obstruction.
Life's a beach, then you die.

[bazza stub]

Wasn't it hot over there this week guys? How'd you go or didn't you?

[The Hooker]

They flew in, they flew out and everything was normal.
All very much a storm in a tea cup, get over guys.

[Angle of Attack]

Ive been on plenty of 717 and MD-80's as a pax and yeah they arent bad, for 1 hour sectors they are OK, overhead lockers I think are only slightly smaller than the 737's by memory but I check my bags in so never use them, so cant make a definite statement about that. They still remind me of a Q400 stretched version on steroids though, however they do their job.

[Capn Bloggs]

They still remind me of a Q400 stretched version on steroids though
Arrrggghhh!!!!.....:{:{:{:{

[Angle of Attack]

Lol but better! :)

Im not trying to bag it just putting facts out in that it isnt massively inferior to the 737 especially on the sector lengths via CBR. In those short sectors the cabin crew would make a large impression over the aircraft. I have never tried the business class though anyone had experience with it? Ive heard the 717 is a beauty to fly though, havent had the pleasure....

[FYSTI]

True of false for each point.


Cobham CBR 717 contract is only for 1 year
717's used had 3,000 hour time remaining (engines?)
Derating allowed increase from 3,000 to 4,000 hours time remaining.

[travelator]

False, rolled into current Airlink contract that expires in 2018.
False, j config aircraft are some of the last off the production line.
Falseish, derate does increase time between component overhauls but I doubt those figures as each component has its own schedule and high bypass turbines don't have hard expirations (I think).

[airdualbleedfault]

Point 1, truish, one of the things QF loves about the NJS contract is the flexibility, they have always had the flexibility to close routes/bases on very short notice (Mackay, Rocky, Canberra, Hobart, Brisbane in the past). So the routes/bases are safe as long as they are profitable and/or do not require larger aircraft.

[R.Cruizo]

So it's the same as travelator said. Rolled into the same 2018 contract. They can shut and open bases as they wish.

[RENURPP]

It's been almost three years and I haven't heard of any tech stops in Willi (they may have happened, but very limited if any at all) All on the small A engines.
Over head lockers same size as 737, and only a fool would compare the ride as similar to the 400. I have to pax on them regularly and the 400 is noisy cramped and the landings are like a ride a Disney land. (I am not referring to the pilots ability)
Q streaming is good, if not always reliable, neither are the entertainment systems in other aircraft

[B772]

For those interested the AN DC9-31's did the following sectors with some difficulty at times.

ADL-PER with 80 pax in the late 1960's when there were only 6 x B727-177's and no B727-277's.

CBR-ADL, LST-OOL, BNE-MEL from Eagle Farm with an ALTN of LST, PHE-DRW when HLDG or ALTN required. On one occasion a DC9 diverted to GOV which was a big deal at the time as it was non controlled with a 30M wide runway.

I remember a ISA-BNE (1981) was a challenge one day with requirements in BNE.

The DC9-31 also operated SYD-NOU-VLI and return for Air Vanuatu. The first service was on 5 SEP 81. The return NOU-SYD was approx. 3.5 hours. If there were any requirements on SYD it was necessary to consider a fuel stop somewhere between ROK and NTL.

[Eastwest Loco]

LST OOL was an interesting one for TN.

If it was hot in LST or there were requirements on OOL the traffic staff would hand out PIR forms through the cabin before departure and the bags would be shipped via MEL.

East West also operated one DPO OOL nonstop which I signed out right on MBRW. Thankfully a clear day all up the East coast. No flexi thrust on that one!

Best all

EWL

[B772]

TN also operated an empty DC9 into Forrest to pick up pax from the u/s Indian Pacific for drop off at ADL.