QantasLink Fleet Reshuffle

[servicerequired]

Not sure whether anything has been announced, but I've noticed some ramping up of capacity around the QantasLink network ... does anyone know what the broader story is here? Could this be the precursor to a reduction of the ageing DH8 300 fleet?

NTL Q400 gone .. all flights E190
BNE ABX Q400 to E190
BNE TSV Q400 to E190
BNE GLT Q400 to E190 (most flights anyway)
BNE ROK Q400 to E190 (some, not all)
SYD GFF 200/300 to Q400
SYD MQL 300 to Q400

 

[Mule]

Had a late aircraft change yesterday afternoon BNE to CNS. 738 > E190. Lucky I didn't stump up the $40/head for Row 4. Final boarding called 30 seconds after the Lounge announcement.

I have had nothing but substandard experiences with relabeled Sunstate and Alliance flights over the last few years. As average as mainline has become, it is a massive downgrade of service. Yet, I always get consistent and pleasant service on a Jetstar A320 sitting in 1C from CNS to DRW and return without asking or screwing around at T-80.

Big brother has all but abandoned FNQ and it stinks.

 

[exceladdict]

NTL Q400 gone .. all flights E190

Great news!

 

[Himeno]

Will be nice when they get rid of the Q400s on CBR-SYD

 

[Wing Nut]

Will be nice when they get rid of the Q400s on CBR-SYD

Be nice when Qantas get rid of the bug smashers between BNE-CBR!

 

[dylarr]

OAG is another one that has gone from Q200/300 to Q400 for some flights.

In the schedule for later on this year, MIM is also scheduled to go from Q200/300 to Q400 for some flights.

 

[SeaWolf]

Will be nice when they get rid of the Q400s on CBR-SYD

Definitely would be, but I can't see that happening. Virgin tried that route with an all-jet fleet and it didn't work out. There's a handful of 717 flights between CBR-SYD but they seem to mostly be a relocation flight that happens to carry passengers.

The key driver on that route is frequency, but there isn't enough demand to make a lot of jet flights work and the turboprops are much more fuel efficient on a route that short.

I have to do that trip return at least once a month and I hate it, would be fantastic to see more jets but I get that it's just not practical.

 

[servicerequired]

Definitely would be, but I can't see that happening. Virgin tried that route with an all-jet fleet and it didn't work out. There's a handful of 717 flights between CBR-SYD but they seem to mostly be a relocation flight that happens to carry passengers.

The key driver on that route is frequency, but there isn't enough demand to make a lot of jet flights work and the turboprops are much more fuel efficient on a route that short.

I have to do that trip return at least once a month and I hate it, would be fantastic to see more jets but I get that it's just not practical.

What’s the beef with the props?

 

[GoldenTouchdown]

What’s the beef with the props?

Noisier and more vibrating ride. Jets are the best!

 

[dylarr]

What’s the beef with the props?

Came across this gem in today's edition of things I read that left me with fewer brain cells than before:

https://www.escape.com.au/travel-advice/qantas-code-you-dont-want-to-see-on-your-boarding-pass/news-story/70a7f5441e373a049228c2b439a894f6

Apparently flying on a turbo prop is so bad that it can induce a panic attack and the author suggests that a "code" (i.e. the flight number) on the boarding pass can be used to tell if you're on one or not. Hint - plenty of jet services operate on a 4-digit flight number, and the aircraft info is clearly displayed against each flight on qantas.com before you book...

 

[anat0l]

Noisier and more vibrating ride. Jets are the best!

At least the Q400s were more tolerable than the Saabs used by ZL!

I honestly don't think it vibrates considerably more in a turboprop than a jet, but naturally this has to be true simply by virtue of differences in weight and size of the aircrafts, which is further noticed and magnified during turbulence.

 

[SeaWolf]

What’s the beef with the props?

A few other people have already mentioned the noise and vibration, as well as feeling the turbulence much more due to their small size and light weight. I'll add that they're also quite cramped, especially if you're even a bit tall or broad, even if you are only in it for an hour or so.

There's a few other things that irritate me as well. You have to board them (at SYD) by either descending stairs and walking across the tarmac or getting bussed out to them, which is inconvenient, especially if you have carry on. CBR has a much better set up where you take an escalator down to the tarmac and walk along a covered walkway before turning off to your plane.

Carry on is a bit of a pest as well, given that the overheads can't fit a normal carry on. So when you walk up to the plane you have to hand the carry on over to the baggage handler and then, at your arrival airport, wait on the tarmac for the baggage handler to bring them out and you to collect it. It's generally pretty prompt but does partly thwart one of the big reasons to use carry on, not having to wait for bags. Also, if it's raining at either end this is a bit of a disaster, with both you and your luggage getting wet. I've bought a travel backpack that has side straps to compress it flat so that it'll just manage to fit into the overhead to work around this, but every time I use it my shoulders are reminded how convenient wheeled luggage is.

Overall the jets are just a smoother experience, but they're terrible economics on a route as short as SYD-CBR, so I can't imagine we'll start seeing a lot of them.

 

[Himeno]

What’s the beef with the props?

Too small. Often can't even fit a medium backpack in the overhead (much less a full size carry on). Worse for tall people then even LCC narrowbody.

It's not just the dash 8s that I don't like. I also try to avoid the smaller regionals like the CR2, CR7, E170, E145 etc.
The CR9 and the E190/195 aren't as bad, and the E175 is borderline. Anything smaller is painful and annoying.

When flying CBR-SYD, I try to book on QF8xx or QF15xx whenever possible. 8xx are 737s, though only operate at peak times normally during parliament sitting weeks. 15xx are 717s. QF14xx are dash 8s.

 

[jase05]

Too small. Often can't even fit a medium backpack in the overhead (much less a full size carry on). Worse for tall people then even LCC narrowbody.

It's not just the dash 8s that I don't like. I also try to avoid the smaller regionals like the CR2, CR7, E170, E145 etc.
The CR9 and the E190/195 aren't as bad, and the E175 is borderline. Anything smaller is painful and annoying.

When flying CBR-SYD, I try to book on QF8xx or QF15xx whenever possible. 8xx are 737s, though only operate at peak times normally during parliament sitting weeks. 15xx are 717s. QF14xx are dash 8s.

ADL-MEL still cops a daily Q300

 

[servicerequired]

Urgh ... listen to you all ... first world issues. Try living in MQL - I'm grateful that we have 4 x Dash 8 300 to MEL each day, and at least 1 x Dash 8 400 to SYD ... the 400 is like flying J.

... and doesn't Premium tagged hand luggage cough all over trying to jam something in an overhead locker anyway ... I only want my laptop bag in the cabin, not my jocks and socks.

 

[anat0l]

Urgh ... listen to you all ... first world issues. Try living in MQL - I'm grateful that we have 4 x Dash 8 300 to MEL each day, and at least 1 x Dash 8 400 to SYD ... the 400 is like flying J.

... and doesn't Premium tagged hand luggage cough all over trying to jam something in an overhead locker anyway ... I only want my laptop bag in the cabin, not my jocks and socks.

I get it - in some places, if that's all you have to connect you to the rest of the country (or world) easily, that's what you get. Better that than not to have it at all.

Most of us are in urban centres are relatively spoiled for choice when it comes to not only airlines but also aircraft choice and flight times...well, most of the time. Most people who started flying with jets think flying a bug basher is a backwards idea; not to mention a cramped one (relative to a jet). They carry roller luggage all the time and they want it near them so they can roll it right off (usually literally, i.e. jetbridges, not walking across tarmacs going up and down stairs) and right out of the terminal without breaking, cf. waiting for Premium Hand Luggage to unload.

 

[GoldenTouchdown]

At least the Q400s were more tolerable than the Saabs used by ZL!

True, those Saabs are even worse, oh the horror without noise cancelling headphones!

 

[anat0l]

Just thinking of Saabs.... so I once flew ZL on a Saab, but before the flight could take off, we had to unload a whole lot of baggage. With a full aircraft, we were told the weight of the plane with bags was too heavy. Volunteers had to offer to have their checked bags offloaded and uplifted on a later flight, then to be couriered to them free of charge. Took two rounds of asking for volunteers before we were good; naturally we did not take off on time.

Do QantasLink turboprop services suffer from the same risk, or rather is this kind of issue common?

 

[Himeno]

Not on one of the QF dash 8 flights I've been on.

On an American Eagle flight last year (ORH-JFK) the flight attendent was asked by the flight crew to pick 5 random people seated at the back to move into business for balance issues (E175).

 

[dylarr]

Do QantasLink turboprop services suffer from the same risk, or rather is this kind of issue common?

I take Dash8 flights regularly and I've only ever had baggage offloaded travelling to/from Lord Howe Island but that's fairly standard for that route due to the short runway (they also weigh everyone if there are more than 27 pax on the flight). Never had any issues with bags being offloaded for other destinations. Sometimes they've shuffled people around for weight and balance, but not often.