Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Qlink Cobham 717s payload limited

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qlink Cobham 717s payload limited

Old 31st Dec 2013, 05:37
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Above the Trenches
Posts: 167
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?
The Baron is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 09:31
  #22 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 201
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!
Troo believer is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 10:56
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 1,013
The Embraer more reliable than the 737? I'll believe that when you show me the figures.
porch monkey is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 11:24
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: You live where
Posts: 408
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.
missy is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 14:28
  #25 (permalink)  

Bottums Up
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: dunnunda
Age: 63
Posts: 3,441
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
Capt Claret is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 19:54
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Queensland
Age: 36
Posts: 77
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
Check_Thrust is online now  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 20:19
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Sand dune
Posts: 191
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.
Blitzkrieger is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 22:56
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 288
I remember years ago modding the aircraft to 21k, I heard it didn't last long before they changed them back to 18.
717tech is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 23:07
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sky Heaven
Age: 29
Posts: 185
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.
Compylot is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2013, 23:42
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 250
No such company as Qantaslink
newsensation is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 01:30
  #31 (permalink)  
RPG
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 12
717 variant ?

Are Cobham's 717's the heavy version or below 50 T mtow ??
RPG is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 02:13
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Sand dune
Posts: 191
All of them are 53t MTOW
Blitzkrieger is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 02:39
  #33 (permalink)  
RPG
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 12
Thanks Blitz, are Cobham's doing plenty of recruiting this year for the 71' ?
RPG is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 04:59
  #34 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 201
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.
Troo believer is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 05:26
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 8,012
Originally Posted by 717tech
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...

Oh no, Compylot is back!
Capn Bloggs is online now  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 07:24
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sky Heaven
Age: 29
Posts: 185
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
Compylot is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 10:21
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,923
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?
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 15:31
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
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'?


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...."

Last edited by ITCZ; 1st Jan 2014 at 15:49.
ITCZ is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 16:28
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
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?
0tto is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2014, 21:09
  #40 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 201
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
Troo believer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.