MERGED: ATR/Dash 8
 

Hi guys just wanted to ask pilots who fly ATR or Q300/400 about pro and cons about these two A/C...
Thanks

Which one to pick
 

Hi guys just wanted to ask pilots who fly ATR or Q300/400 about pro and cons about these two A/C
Thanks

That’s a very big / between the Q300 and the Q400

Ones fast. The other two are slow.

One is French Italian and the other two are French Canadian?

This guy REALLY hates the Q400

http://reddit.com/r/flying/comments/...is_is_awesome/

The ATR lugs around a few extra punters slower, lower, and looking more like an ice cube, with worse reliability and worse flying characteristics than the Q300.

Evening-

Serious question, does 'it' (the Q400) land or smack-down......????- for those that have.

Does not seem to be contemplated in the link provided by 'mattyj'.

Thanks.

Rgds
Happy Easter
S28- BE

Reading the reddit comments of the guy who REALLY hates the Q400, I now understand why paragraphs were invented .....:ooh:

Have a look at the accident/incident records/reports of both aircraft. One is somewhat worse than the other.... a story there I think??

Can't say much about the Q300, but the Q400 is a beast of a machine. Speed is the main point. Makes those longer regional sectors just that wee bit shorter. Consistently over take those pesky ATRs in the CLIMB, let alone in the cruise (and being told to slow down on descent because you're catching up to the 737 ahead):E
Can get to max ceiling at MTOW (although getting there in ISA+30 in the humid tropics is a bit enduring).

Effectively 5 hours fuel endurance so tankering really isn't an issue. You can always squeeze a bit more on for mum and the kids when it's full of pax and cargo. Short field performance is pretty good, given the size of the aeroplane (a small, big aeroplane - or a big, small aeroplane. Whichever way you want to look at it). Most importantly, the Q400 has an APU! Which makes life much more civilised when you're out west on a 40+ day. Whenever we saw an ATR parked next to us, we used to start the APU just to remind them that we had one! :}

Main vice, it's very unforgiving on the landings (especially lightweight). The gear struts go straight to the wing spar so any solid landings are amplified considerably because of that setup. The other was no autopilot available after a V1 cut (because of certification requirements) until aircraft is cleaned up and max continuous set. Landing single engine must be hand flown below 1000' (unless that has been changed again). Other vices (which were company induced) were dual FMS setup that weren't synchronised until just a few years ago. A few little rules that the company thought was better than what Bombardier had designed the thing to do (some procedures actually went against what the AFM stated).

Most common problem was those bloody ATRs just kept getting in our way! ;)

Certainly miss flying it, that's for sure!

Fuel-Off :ok:

Hmm and what about the specs, I'm trying to compile a compression sheet of both and wanted to know what pilots that have flown these 2 aircraft's have to say.... wiki has all the info i need but its nicer to hear from people that have time on type.

found this:

Proud to fly a Turboprop: Q400 vs ATR72 | The Flying Engineer

Outside of QFLink, I don't see anymore Q400's arriving in Oz however numerous ATR72's coming on the register including two for Hevilift in Brisvegas...

thanks :ok:

2 x ATR42-600's from VA...Mooranbah here we come maybe..

If you’re doing a dash/atr pros and cons, I think I’d be looking more at the pros and cons of the operator that your planning to work for. Group seniority, time to command, bases, lifestyle and the availability to move onto better, bigger and better paying aircraft in my opinion should be considered before deciding. Unless your planning on spending the rest of your life on THAT aircraft, then it doesn’t really matter.