Qlink Cobham 717s payload limited
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?
Thread Starter
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!
Now that's a wind up.
Incoming!
Heard this the other day. 717s out of CBR can't make BNE with holding fuel requirements
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.
Bottums Up
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
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
Oh, and drop the silly four digit flights numbers - CuteJet don't have that many flights.
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.
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.
You are beginning to sound like a disgruntled wannabe.
Thread Starter
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.
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.
Oh no, Compylot is back!
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
nor the nefarious way it's been operated as Qlink but with Cobham crew.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
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.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you think the Cobham B717 boys and girls should have been undercut by pilots on the 'single aisle jet' rate?
Thread Starter
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
For the record 737 ng pavement limit for Tamworth is 65.0 tonnes. Go figure