CJ Q400's and XJT in EWR

[jetpig32]

With the recent record volume and flow restricitons on NY's big three airports, I was curious if one of CO's main goals of intrtoducing Q400's in EWR was to utilize 11 and 29 for Q400 arivals. I do recall XJT performing this with the ATR. Any former XJT ATR pilots thoughts on this.

Considering XJT's ontime record in EWR is one of the worst in the industry (no thier fault, just CO takes the good slots to minimize their delays), the introduction of the Q400 with LAHSO operations for 29/11 seems like a very logical move. (not looking at the startup pains CJ will experience)

Researching the FAA's arival rate plan for EWR, using 11 in conjunction with 4R or 22L allows for 8 more arivals per hour. You combind this with a 20kt tailwind certification (which LYNX has), it seems like you have won some "free" slots into EWR.

No flame intended, but I could see XJT's EWR ops "downsized" in the next years. I dont work for either company, but it is good to see Continental spending some money to make some money. The amont lost on delays, misconnects, and cancelations could be offset, even if the CJ workgroup negotiate an acceptible rate on the Q400.

 

[70-SS]

With the recent record volume and flow restricitons on NY's big three airports, I was curious if one of CO's main goals of intrtoducing Q400's in EWR was to utilize 11 and 29 for Q400 arivals. I do recall XJT performing this with the ATR. Any former XJT ATR pilots thoughts on this.

Considering XJT's ontime record in EWR is one of the worst in the industry (no thier fault, just CO takes the good slots to minimize their delays), the introduction of the Q400 with LAHSO operations for 29/11 seems like a very logical move. (not looking at the startup pains CJ will experience)

Researching the FAA's arival rate plan for EWR, using 11 in conjunction with 4R or 22L allows for 8 more arivals per hour. You combind this with a 20kt tailwind certification (which LYNX has), it seems like you have won some "free" slots into EWR.


No flame intended, but I could see XJT's EWR ops "downsized" in the next years. I dont work for either company, but it is good to see Continental spending some money to make some money. The amont lost on delays, misconnects, and cancelations could be offset, even if the CJ workgroup negotiate an acceptible rate on the Q400.

hmmmmmmmmmm???????

 

[BirdCatcher]

With the recent record volume and flow restricitons on NY's big three airports, I was curious if one of CO's main goals of intrtoducing Q400's in EWR was to utilize 11 and 29 for Q400 arivals. I do recall XJT performing this with the ATR. Any former XJT ATR pilots thoughts on this.

Considering XJT's ontime record in EWR is one of the worst in the industry (no thier fault, just CO takes the good slots to minimize their delays), the introduction of the Q400 with LAHSO operations for 29/11 seems like a very logical move. (not looking at the startup pains CJ will experience)

Researching the FAA's arival rate plan for EWR, using 11 in conjunction with 4R or 22L allows for 8 more arivals per hour. You combind this with a 20kt tailwind certification (which LYNX has), it seems like you have won some "free" slots into EWR.

No flame intended, but I could see XJT's EWR ops "downsized" in the next years. I dont work for either company, but it is good to see Continental spending some money to make some money. The amont lost on delays, misconnects, and cancelations could be offset, even if the CJ workgroup negotiate an acceptible rate on the Q400.

Colgan Q400s will have the increased tailwind kit and increased GW kit on their aircraft so they can operate on 11/29. From what I hear, the contract with CAL states we will be able to operate on 11/29 for normail ops

 

[Apache 5]

Wonderful, heading into 11 with a 19kt tailwind on a plane thats completely utterly new to them. 11 with a 9 kt tailwind is hairy enough and then they really like you to hold short of the 4s.

We've offered to take 11 many of times when it is legal and safe; but more often than not, especially if you're coming in on the PHLBO, its more work for the controllers so they dont grant it. And thats not even to mention the tower guys who now have alot more on their minds with speeds/spacing, etc.

I doubt the extra 10kt of tailwind limitation is going to make a big dent in EWR performance. Its another CAL beancounter seeing the numbers the way he wants to see it with out any operational/cust service/etc etc considerations.

Where they gonna park em???? Thats a bigger concern I fear! Apparently its the footprint of a 737 and requires an extra 20ft of jetway extension.

Who knows, its a mess.

Again, the way those winds blow out of the NW up there in the wintertime...shooting down 11 doesnt sound like a good time to me. You say, ok then circle to 29? Fine, been Newark based for a long 1.5 yrs and done it maybe twice. I just dont think the controllers are crazy about that runway.

 

[MikeSF340]

The Q400s are going to use 11/29 for about 2 days before ATC figures out it really doesn't work. Before long the Q's will be doing the 30 mile downwind with everyone else. Colgan will do their best to get the operation up and running and it's gonna be a shti show for about the first year. XJT will be asked to fly extra segments and pick up the slack as usual. I'm an XJT pilot and I feel that the Q400 is a pretty good idea...in theory. However, it is not going to work anywhere near as well as CAL thinks it is.

 

[TexFlyer]

I'll have to agree with Mike340 & Apache5 on this one. I have been up there and offered everything I could to get out. Departing 11/29, lower initial altitude, routing and still its the system that will not allow it. The 400 is not going solve the problem by any means. That has been the problem with CAL lately. Oh it looks great on paper and theory, so lets spend a dime to make a penny.

 

[jetpig32]

All good inputs. Just trying to get some minds working here. Anyone actualy fly the ATR at XJT into EWR?
Check out http://www.fly.faa.gov/ois/
if your ever interested in ATC operations and how certain runways affect operations. Basicaly, every airport in the ZNY airspace interacts with eachother.

 

[TexFlyer]

Never flew the ATR but wished I did after all the stories I hear about it before 9/11. So the real EWR ATR drivers can correct me if I'm wrong. Many times before you could cheat the system and get VFR arrivals and departures down low along the river. I don't believe that is available anymore for 121.

 

[Superpilot92]

IT wont make that big of a differance. We use 11-29 all the time at XJT. Half the time I would request it only to be denied by the atc controller. The only difference would be the increased tailwind for the Q400. Thats if EWR tower allows it anyway. Alot is left to wonder about with this but i dont see much change coming to EWR except more delays.

 

[ratherbeflyen]

I would say, the only way it would make a difference is if the tower could assign a land and holdshort of 4R w/o concern for spacing on the crossing. Then 11 would a smashing success, but of course thats not possible. You still need spacing in the event of a go around. I would say that slower ref speeds might make the Q's a hinderance. For the colgan guys, get used to 170+ to the marker.