Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

canadair/Bombardier

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
If your only going to put 30-50 people on an airplane the 50 seater is more efficient than the 70-90 seaters.
The people saying the 200's aren't efficient and cost too much are the ones that made the initial purchase in the first place. And if they made such a poor decision then don't you think they should be fired?
 
If your only going to put 30-50 people on an airplane the 50 seater is more efficient than the 70-90 seaters.
The people saying the 200's aren't efficient and cost too much are the ones that made the initial purchase in the first place. And if they made such a poor decision then don't you think they should be fired?

Maybe so, but if canadair doesnt have to make a profit and can even operate at a loss, then why not dump the 50's and get C series or Q400's. That would give lots of canadians jobs and get us a more profitable aircraft
 
The 600's look nice, but doesn't bombardier own the Q400 now? that is why i said they would trade them for 50's. Canada subsidizes this company so if they take a loss it doesnt matter because the company exists just to have jobs.

Just seems that if we can get 33% more seats per segment and get an even swap, then why not.

Good thing that does not happen in the US (GM). I would hate for our government to step in and save failing companies because it would cost tens of thousands of US jobs (banking, auto industry, finance industry, health care etc.)
 
Maybe so, but if canadair doesnt have to make a profit and can even operate at a loss, then why not dump the 50's and get C series or Q400's. That would give lots of canadians jobs and get us a more profitable aircraft

You do realize that Skywest doesn't get to decide what airplanes they fly, right? Carriers like ours work on a contract that dictates what we fly and where we fly them. If Delta wanted to dump 50-seaters in exchange for t-props I'm sure they would do it. Getting back to reality though, Delta has long shown its distaste for t-props and I wouldn't expect to see any kind of revival of that mode of transportation until oil is back at $150/barrel for an extended period of time.
 
ATR came to Skywest to give them rides and propose sales, but the performance of the ATR offered was not to par I heard. This was about a year ago, and I do not think the 600 was in existence then.
 
I thought I had read an article a while back about ATR and Q400 production lines being completely maxed out with a/c already sold for the next couple of years. Googled it but couldn't find that article again. Anybody know?
 
SH has said alot of things in recurrent class. Has even 50% of it been true?

Delta does not like turbo props. The ones they just acquired will be going away.

I'll second that!
-Nobody should pay SH even the least bit of attention. That guy just makes me want to hurl! SH is all about SH, and doesn't give a rat about anyone else! What an assbag! I sure will be happy to see him hit the bricks one day (hopefully soon.)

I am so sick of SH coming to recurrent and spewing stuff he knows nobody buys! What a tool!
 

Latest resources

Back
Top