Jet no longer operates Airbus (jet) between Bangalore and Hyderabad!

[androdev]

They currently only operate ATR between B'lore and Hyd, even though they have three flights daily in this route! I hate/fear flying and ATRs make it even worse. This also puts a big question mark on Jet's No#1 tag, because Kingfisher operates Airbus in this route.

[badri]

Jet never operated airbus. They have boeing 737's.

By the way,the ATR's are also state of the art as far as safety is concerned. Just because they are turboprop does not mean they are old technology. They are just slow and slightly more noisy.

ATR's are also manufactured by the same company that owns airbus ( EADS). Hence there is no compromise on quality and safety.

[Mpower]

Turboprops are more fuel efficient than jet engines and it works out more profitable for the airline.

The negatives are noise and the low speed. Safety is on par but being a smaller plane, the ATR can jump around a bit in airpockets because of its size. Nothign to do with the engine.

[Rudra Sen]

Originally Posted by badri

By the way,the ATR's are also state of the art as far as safety is concerned. Just because they are turboprop does not mean they are old technology. They are just slow and slightly more noisy.

ATR is one of the most reliable short haul aircraft you can possibly imagine.

[phamilyman]

Fully agree. Its the cheapest and best.

And FWIW, only Indigo operates A320 on that route besides IC.

KF/Jet operate useless ATRs (have flown that sector in torrential rain - never again). But decent otherwise.

ATRs are so cheap that Spicejet has ceased 737 service on that route.

[akroy]

Jet Airways used to operate Blr - Hyd - Kol in the evening with B737-800. It used to be a very profitable flight always going full (it was fully loaded during my last 2 travels in 04-05) but This service was discontinued due to slowdown. Now they operate only the direct 9W-516/515 between Kol - Blr - Kol.

[androdev]

i'm just curious. while booking flight tickets do you guys consider if it is ATR and Airbus/Boeing?

I don't know the technical stuff, but i have flying phobia and ATR's take-off, landing, turbulence, air-pressure compensation, noise, etc. all add to it. i feel very safe in my car and trains :-) but flight is much more convenient.

[pypkmsrikanth]

I dont know how many of you have flown the Embraer Jet from Paramount, nice plane comfortable seats and similar pricing to KF and Jet and ofcourse the best food I have ever had among the Indian flight providers

[phamilyman]

akroy ji, in 04-05 crude was 50, this year march (when i've done the sector every month min) it was profitable only in ATR, with only a couple of bouncing flights (KF had a BLR-HYD-KOL-Agartala flight for eg)

@Androdev: of course, its THE parameter I select!!

@srikanth: You mean paramount? Oh its quite fantastic from what i've heard.

[jango]

Originally Posted by androdev

i'm just curious. while booking flight tickets do you guys consider if it is ATR and Airbus/Boeing?

I don't know the technical stuff, but i have flying phobia and ATR's take-off, landing, turbulence, air-pressure compensation, noise, etc. all add to it. i feel very safe in my car and trains :-) but flight is much more convenient.

I normally do not prefer the ATR's just because they require more flying time, when compared to the airbus.

On certain sectors you do not have a choice but to fly the ART.

[sfilinto]

Originally Posted by androdev

i'm just curious. while booking flight tickets do you guys consider if it is ATR and Airbus/Boeing?

I do. cause the travel time is crutial for me. ( I plan my travel such that i leave early morning reach my destination and start my work by 9:00 am. and comming back.... take the last flight into blr.)

Personally i hate the ATR cause the flying time is much longer then the boeing / airbus.

-SF

[appuchan]

ATRs are normally used when the passenger volumes are less than optimal for operating B737/A320 aircraft. It does not make any economic sense for airlines to fly such big planes with less than 50 passengers. Irrespective of number of passengers, there are quite a few fixed(nearly) components such as fuel, pilot salaries, cabin crew costs, landing/handling/parking charges at airports, general maintenance costs etc which are much higher than ATR.

[speedzak]

I'd love to travel in Jet airways/Kingfisher ATRs better than many airbuses/boeing 737s used by some airlines. Atleast, I can stretch my feet better. Regarding the noise, my Ipod/phone is the best. A noisekilling earphone is sure in the waiting.

[Steeroid]

Originally Posted by speedzak

I'd love to travel in Jet airways/Kingfisher ATRs better than many airbuses/boeing 737s used by some airlines. Atleast, I can stretch my feet better. Regarding the noise, my Ipod/phone is the best. A noisekilling earphone is sure in the waiting.

I prefer ATR's too. We actually look forward to our domestic flights being ATR - in most cases you can see the ground below you. The noise is an issue only during takeoff, which lasts a few minutes max.

As for flying time, the diff between ATR/Jet on the COK-BLR route for instance is about 45 minutes - hardly anything. Guess it would be a lot more for long sectors, but hardly enough to ruin your entire day. In any case, the longer sectors dont have ATRs.

Guess ATR flights cost less, too. So if you're in such a tearing hurry you can always pay for your jet.

[tsk1979]

I hope some budget airlines start Turbo props in 2000kms routes too.
Sure it will take 6 hours for the flight, but fuel savings will be huge, hence fare can be in the range of 2nd AC ticket!