I disagree your point of how the FK50 are flying to the limit.... just exactly how can you explain it?

I think I can answer that question for you Skystar, from a pilot operators perspective the F50 is a fantastic peice of equipment even by todays standard (IMHO) over a 200 nm sector it doesnt make a lot of difference over any jet. XR has historically been a sound operator, however it operates principally in an RPT market, which is a different ball game to the contract charter market.

The Market "wants" a jet, the governments "want" a jet and as impractical as that may seem, thats what they "want"

Virgin has answered the call with the E-Jet as impractical as we all saw it at the time, but years on here we are, the E-jet perfectly positioned for exactly that role.

XR on the other hand are not, the market sees the F50 as old 1950's technology, dinosaurs, which should have been retired years ago and whilst the Charter market will accept that the modern day core RPT market will not.

It's sad, but a fact of life and XR will most likely become a casualty of that fact.

Xeptu, greatly written. I understand the needs & wants especially how people complain they want a Jet. [mind you pax are first to complain then ticket prices go up from the price of fuel]

Though maybe just wrong words by joepatroni

"It does seem that XR are flying these F5O's to the limit. One does have to ask why they have not announced any plans for upgrading these aircraft. Perhaps they know they have only have a limited time left on the protected routes and very soon they will be opened up to other carriers. They seem to be riding on the crest of the boom wave and not really investing in the core WA rpt sector. "

The FK50 still has plenty of time left, and is a beautiful aircraft piSS over a Dash 8 or ATR42 anyday!

Wholeheartedly Agreed! but they wont piss all over a Q-400 or an E-jet and thats what the competition is proposing.

If the F50 was running at minimum 80% full it would beat a QF400 or Ejet wouldnt it?

beat it in "what" aspects?

In being financially sustainable, and profitable on this route

note the screening comes in if the operator runs a jet on a route and it is an RPT service, regardless of aircraft size. So Port Macquarie, Mildura, etc are all required to screen DJ's Embraers I believe...

Skystar320 would you be kind enough to let us know if you are rated on the FK50, DHC8 or ATR42.

sure - the answer is no neither....

If you look at documents that are readily available over the internet you may find that the FK50 is more suitable to these ops?


Though I do have a soft spot for the FK50 as a pax

FK 50 had it's day??
 

:oh:Just a point of interest, Cityhopper (read KLM) is still operating Fokker 50's out of Amsterdam to destinations all over Europe.Perhaps they are finding it difficult to find a replacement?:confused:

Yep, but they are replacing the F100 with EMB170/190's. :ok:

The F100 is been replaced world over by the EMB-170/190. But the F100 still serves WA well based on its payload uplift out of hot high ports (Newman, Argyle, Mount Keith etc). I am not sure whether the E-170/190 can lift these payloads out of these type of airstrips, maybe it can?

But at a unit cost of around $6 million or for a very good example maybe $8 million, this is considerably cheaper than one would expect to pay for a E-170/190. You would have to fill a large number of seats to make the E-170/190 make as much return as the F100 would.

Off topic just a bit, but can any E-170/190 driver confirm that the aeroplane only has one autopilot and it cant handle Engine out Inop conditions, ie: You have to disconnect the a/p when a engine fails. Secure the engine, and then the a/p can come back on once the engine is secured. Heard this the other day and found it hard to believe for such a modern aircraft.

Kim-ex.

The E-jet autopilot has no problems controling the aircraft either during or following an engine failure.

Have a look on their website on Commercial Jets, and go to a link something to do with updating your fleet or something, and look at all the differences with the F100 to the Embraer 170/ 175 and the Embraer 190/ 195

PM me if you need a link...

joepatroni, how are Skywest flying the F50's to the limit?

Skywest had Bombardier do a demo flight of the Q400 some time back. The reps at the time bragged about how you just had to advance the power levers to max and then press buttons to set power. The guys and girls from Skywest later mentioned to the Reps that the F50 has had that for years. So those of you who have never flown an F50 or stuck your head in one you should, just to see how far Fokker were ahead of the times.

:ok:

They were ahead of their time in 1988 but 20 years later that may not be the case. Certainly the Embraer's seem to be getting good press from those that fly on them. Would be interesting to know what the difference in seat cost is between the two. I thought Embraer designed those jets to take the regional business away from turboprops so you would think they are comparable, cost wise to run.

EMBRAER

All round comparisons to a few jets (F100, AVRO etc)


Also,

You would think so,,,, but no... not necessarily... the F50 can be more cost effective than the Embraer jets, however as mentioned earlier, the jets are more what people want... perhaps not as cost effective but its what the people want, looks wise, comfort, for pilots, A/C systems, maint. etc, so does that therefore make it better?

I have to say a strong yes.... however at the very same time... no

Xf70 & Xf100
 

Maybe they finally get going with the "new" Fokker jets.

Fokker Aircraft

hasnt these aircraft been in the production queue for many years and without success?

XR also looked at the ATR42/72 family. these are gaining popularity in the region with ****** getting a second example and toll operating two as well as several pacific operators. ATR now have a rep in Australia to increase sales so could be a possible F50 replacement.

Will the pax keep coming back if they have to pay extra to check in bags, pay extra for a meal, no lounge and no frequent flyer points?

QF are bringing in 737s. Is this for the extra capacity? If so, does the Embraer have the capacity?

Interesting times ahead.

Most of these fly in fly out don't have much in the way of luggage and for the average Joe 23kg is more than enough. You can bring your own food if you want and I would imagine on the return to PER there wont be much to buy anyway. The Lounge is coming to PER. 190's carry 104 adults.
Lastly Velocity(FF) has been around for a couple of years.

Were have you been SIDS N STARS.

you'd be suprised how much luggage FIFO workers carry, especially if they need their own tools etc.

Isnt DJ going into the old AN lounge where Alliance are at the moment????? Thought Alliance had full control over it?

QF are bringing in 727's because they need capacity, interesting times when DJ are bringing only a 70 seat EMB-170, not a EMB-190

All hail the resurrection of the 727. Horniest looking aeroplane made! :ok:

my mistake, the 2 is next to the 3, the 3 is next to the 2..........

I miss those 727's, what a great aeroplane they continue to be!

It must be starting to worry the powers that be,as I hear QF having been basing engineers in Karratha over the past few days.

Maybe QF are worried that if VB do this right they will lose a large sum of the WA profit.

I was under the assumption the E90 were being positioned in PER? E70 are needed on the east coast regional services.

Press release stated EMB-170's

I don't think so Skystar, pretty sure it's E190's coming to Perth. 3 initially, and that's not 2 because it's next to the 3 but actually three E190's to Perth.

ahhh yes you are right, sorry about that - my mistake! :ok::ok::ugh::ugh:

The E190 will be restricted come summer unless DJ uprate the engines. As they are currently de-rated CF34's. NJS did the comparison a few years ago. The E170 payload vs range and baggage was crap, and to operate in and out of the mine strips you would have to reduce the px in the tyres which then make the aircraft carry less in weight. So not a good aircraft for W.A. in the summer. The F100 does ok, but the real aircraft that does well is the 146-100/300 the 200 is very poor.

Meanwhile, QF Link is putting pictures of their "babes" on their 717s to match Branson's flying babes:

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w...loggs/babe.jpg

The skies over WA will be a colourful place in a few months!

Those bent wings on the XF70/100s are a bit sus. If anybody sees a wing like that, I'd suggest you run, because it's about to let go with a bang.

The 717 is off to Hawaiian Airlines to spend the rest of it's flying days doing 20 min sectors between the islands.

Speaking of 717s, apart from an increased fuel burn, it looks to me like the 717 is on a par or exceeds the capabilities/features of the E195, and it's quite a few million cheaper. Bring 'em on! :}

So where's the data comparing the e-jets to modern regional jets such as the CRJ and turboprops (old or new)?

As I posted earlier,

No CRJ or Turboprops, but have a look here, has a few planes to compare to

EMBRAER :ok:

hope that helps for now

Having worked on the f100, the embraer, and the 2,3,4,7,800 series 737s, the embraer is much quicker to load and unload than any of them...

The F100 only has one entry/exit door, and also has 3 seats on one side which slows things down. The 737 variants have 3 seats each side, which slows things down a fair bit, but with 2 entry exit doors.

The embraer with 2 entry/exit doors and 2 seats aside make it very quick to unload, clean, and load. Provided theres no training happening up front, and you get some efficient ground and cabin crew, its possible to turn them around in 15mins without rushing. Once the doors are open, its about 1-2minutes on a full business flight.

would be interesting to see if they will be painted as

VB

PB

or something else?

Anyone know for sure?



(if speculating please say so... )

Red Jungle Jet 190 observed at Perth today. If it wasn't Route Proving, what was it doing?