MONTREAL — Bombardier Inc. is phasing out production of its Q200 and Q300 Dash 8 turboprop aircraft, made at the company's facility in Downsview, Ont.
The company said this morning that job losses will be minimal because most of the work will be transferred to the expanding Q400 program.
The Q200 and Q300 seat 37 and 50 people, respectively.
Montreal-based Bombardier has been focused on expanding its Q400 program. The aircraft seats 78 passengers.
A total of 950 people work on the Q200, Q300 and Q400 programs at Downsview, said Bombardier Aerospace spokesman Marc Duchesne.
The Q200 and Q300 backlog now stands at 17 planes and the assembly line will come to a stop in May of 2009 when the final delivery is made, said Mr. Duchesne.
D328 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 294 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7536 times:
Well looks like Piedmont will be going to ATR then....good for them.....?????
I wish and hope Saab would consider the 340 and 2000 once again, two of the best turboprops....
Too bad no more D328's.
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11144 posts, RR: 63 Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7397 times:
Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 3): Its going to be ATR's gain in this market in future...
That's just what I was thinking, especially with the ATR42-600 in development, it's just handing the entire 50 seat market straight to them on a plate... unless they are planning on creating a 'new' Q300 sized aircraft. Strange move by Bombardier indeed - they must be making more profit on the Q400s to warrant just producing this model, I wonder if Viking might purchase the rights and take up production of the Dash 8 if the Twotter re-run is a big hit?
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7384 times:
Maybe they'll just move to a Q500 instead at 95 seats...
Considering a backlog of merely 17 for 2 members of the family, they don't seem to be losing out on much by giving up this market to the ATR and others. The expanding market seems to be for 70+ seat regional aircraft...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
LifelinerOne From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1880 posts, RR: 8 Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 7262 times:
How much difference is there between the Q200's, Q300's and Q400's. Aren't these planes shortened versions of the Q400's or are there a lot of different parts needed (like important ones as different wings?)
If not, why can't they just roll them off the same line like the A330/A340? That way, you can keep the planes in your portfolio, enabling customers to buy a family of planes with a lot of commonality in them.
TwinOtter4Ever From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 213 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7176 times:
Quoting LifelinerOne (Reply 8): How much difference is there between the Q200's, Q300's and Q400's. Aren't these planes shortened versions of the Q400's or are there a lot of different parts needed (like important ones as different wings?)
Unfortunately the Q200 & Q300 are a very different beast from the Q400. Aside from the similarities of body shape and basic design, they use a different wing much higher powered engines, different landing gear. Not sure why they use a different landing gear manufacturer.. Q2-300 are messier-dowty while the Q400 are goodrich. I'm sure they wished they had stayed with Messier-Dowty on the gear. I don't think the old designs had any problems with gear issues. The Q400 are much faster planes and are more efficient as they break-even well under 50 passengers (34 I think, though that depends on fuel cost, etc.). I still sorta prefer the Q200 and Q300 for their reliability. Q400 bugs have tarnished the DASH8 name.
There is some talk of a stretch Q400 and some people have suggested a shortened Q400, though I would have a hard time seeing if that would make it much cheaper to operate than it already is.
If NZs Q300 order is anything to go by, which started off as an order for around 14x Q300s and now growen to 23+ Q300s, then a Q200 order would have growen easily to 25+ Q200s. Maybe the Q200s could have provided IVC with more frequencys, and maybe a IVC-ZQN link to help REALDEALs IVC Tasman flights!
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, RR: 37 Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7059 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 11): Maybe not now but I guess at a later date they have to resurrect them sometime again just like they did with the DHC 6 and Do 228.
But it doesn't make sense to keep the line open for say 6 planes a year, like as TwinOtterFever discribes, the Q200/300 was a separate production line from the Q400.
The ATR-42 doesn't sell well either compared to the ATR-72, but it's much easier for them to make one as these types are much more similar.
There are almost 2000 Saabs, Brasilia's, F-50s, DHC-8 (non Q400) and ATR 42s which are still fine and which will fly for another 10-20 years and do well on the 2nd hand market. Air New Zealand probably got a last chance to top up their order for Q300s if they really like them, and can buy 2nd hand from now on just like they do with the Beech 1900D which stopped production too.
By the time these 2000 aircraft are all falling apart, it might be time for a new cleansheet 30-50 seater. The basic wings and structure of the Q400 might be too heavy to make a successful shrink.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11319 posts, RR: 17 Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7033 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 15): Air New Zealand probably got a last chance to top up their order for Q300s if they really like them, and can buy 2nd hand from now on just like they do with the Beech 1900D which stopped production too.
Even finding second hand aircraft, like 19-50 seater Turbo-props is hard. NZ has only been able to source 1x 1900D from Japan, which will arrive shortly. NZ also uses a charter company who has J31s and 1900C and Ds for a fair amount of their 19 seater flights due to the lack of used aircrafts on the market.
Even if only 10 or less Q200s/Q300s are built each year, it would be better if those productions are combined with the Q400 line, as it will provide airlines who need those type of aircraft. The ATR42 only really competes with the Q300. The Q200 works well for airlines wanting aircraft sizes around the 19+ seats. Combining the production lines will also enable airlines like NZ who want to combine their fleets, which having a fleet of Q200s, Q300s and Q400s will reduce costs
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6802 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7033 times:
Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 15): By the time these 2000 aircraft are all falling apart, it might be time for a new cleansheet 30-50 seater. The basic wings and structure of the Q400 might be too heavy to make a successful shrink.
I don´t know if for many EU/US and Canadian airlines the older DHC 8, F50s, Brasilias are not too old in 5 years but maybe if they see the need they will opt for the ATR42-600.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
YULspotter From Canada, joined Mar 2006, 145 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6975 times:
You have to ask yourself how many orders have been placed for the Q200 or Q300 in the last few years? Not many at all. The demand simply isn't there and does not justify keeping the Q200 & Q300 line open.
Also, why would and airline order an older designed Q200 or Q300 when you can order a more modern Q400 who's break even PAX count is about the same as the max seating capacity of the Q200 (plus the Q400's extra seats).
Besides, Bombardier is busy enough with their Q400 & Global backlog at their De Havilland facility in Toronto.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11319 posts, RR: 17 Reply 20, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6948 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting YULspotter (Reply 19): Also, why would and airline order an older designed Q200 or Q300 when you can order a more modern Q400 who's break even PAX count is about the same as the max seating capacity of the Q200 (plus the Q400's extra seats).
Easy for airlines to choose the Q200/300s over the 400s. The Q400s would be too big for the routes, and would make it harder for the airlines to make a profit, when they need the same number of seats as the smallers Qs to be taken
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4009 posts, RR: 6 Reply 21, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6831 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 20): Easy for airlines to choose the Q200/300s over the 400s. The Q400s would be too big for the routes, and would make it harder for the airlines to make a profit, when they need the same number of seats as the smallers Qs to be taken
Did you even read his post? Why order an older technology plane with 37 or 50 seats when the Q400 makes a profit at around 35-40 seats?
Vhqpa From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 1383 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6831 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 20): Quoting YULspotter (Reply 19):
Also, why would and airline order an older designed Q200 or Q300 when you can order a more modern Q400 who's break even PAX count is about the same as the max seating capacity of the Q200 (plus the Q400's extra seats).
Easy for airlines to choose the Q200/300s over the 400s. The Q400s would be too big for the routes, and would make it harder for the airlines to make a profit, when they need the same number of seats as the smallers Qs to be taken
Futhermore the Q200's field performance is far superior to the Q400 which comes in handy particularly in mountainous regions such as NZ.
Vhq
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11144 posts, RR: 63 Reply 23, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6815 times:
Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 21): Did you even read his post? Why order an older technology plane with 37 or 50 seats when the Q400 makes a profit at around 35-40 seats?
Mainly because not all airports have runways which can take the Q400.
Also, is the Q400 certified form gravel and unpaved strips? I'm not sure on that one, but it's another major bonus for the smaller 100/Q200 especially.
FlyUSCG From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6726 times:
Quoting D328 (Reply 4): Well looks like Piedmont will be going to ATR then....good for them.....?????
Well god help us if we do. Some of the older pilots just want SOMETHING, but I think in the end, no pilots here want the ATR. Plus, we're not in the market for new 37-50 seaters. We are in the market for 70 something seaters. But of course US Airways mainline are the douches they are and are making it damn near impossible to get ANY new planes.
26 Bravo1Six: It is, with a gravel strip mod I believe. The Hydro Quebec Q400s operate off of gravel strips.
27 YULspotter: While I agree that the Q400 is too large from some carriers and may not be as well suited for some airports as the Q200/Q300, the reality is that very
28 Luisca: What type of Dash does Piedmont have? Q or non Q I have an interview with them in few weeks. Looking forward to hardcore old school IFR fliying in th
29 Planemaker: Messier gear is purchased while Goodrich is a risk-sharing partner. A heck of a lot. Aside from the airframe, wing, avionics, systems, & engine major
30 DYflyer: Exactly. In a couple of years it is time for Wideroe to start thinking about replacing their 100s. The Q400 is no candidate to replace those.
31 Cubsrule: I wonder if we're going to wind up with another 757 situation... That almost sounds like what you're describing (little demand for new frames but rob
32 Planemaker: It won't be a 757 situation. The move is correct for the short- to mid-term because there is going to be a glut of CRJ200s and ERJ-135/140/145s befor
33 Cubsrule: It seems like there's an assumption about the cost of fuel buried in that statement.
34 FlyUSCG: I believe the -300's WERE Q's but apparently it's too expensive to maintain so the system has been deactivated. But either way, we don't fly anything
35 Planemaker: Not buried... just what is being forecasted by the energy industry.
36 Cubsrule: Fair enough... It is worth noting, however, that there will be a point above which new Qs would be superior to old RJs, especially if regional carrie
37 JBo: I think, in terms of demand for turboprops, we'll probably see a new entrant in the 19-seater category before anything larger. There are only 400 or s
38 Cumulonimbus: Hmm Isin't the EMB 120 still in production? I thought Embraer offers them still if you wanted to buy some.
39 Aeronut: With the cancelation of the -200 and -300, I wonder if a second dash 8-400 line would be opened?
40 Tangowhisky: I think the real reason Bombardier is phasing these out is that they can not sell these SMALLER planes at a high enough price to make it profitable.
41 777ER: Yes I did thanks, and the post below further proves my point, as to why the Q400 would be useless for some airlines 100% correct. I'm surprised the Q
42 Silentbob: 200s had the controls for the Q system, never seen them in any of the 300s.
43 Flighty: I think so too. The fuel burn of a CRJ on a 300 mile flight is considerable. Imagine if you have an old DC-9 and a new A319. Given that the newer air
44 FlyingAY: At least there were deliveries still last year. What are the current options in the 30-40 seat segment? ATR42-500 is a fine plane and the -600 will b
45 777ER: Simple answer is nothing, unless you can find second hands
46 Vfw614: Well, both the Twin Otter and Dornier 228 will be produced again soon by Viking and RUAG respectively. So new 19 seaters will be available (though unp
47 MEA-707: There was some misunderstanding about this in this thread. The 'newest' airframe is fuselage 120359 which was built in 2001 already. The last few fra
48 R2rho: So they're basically handing over the market to ATR, which has no intention of abandoning it as they are developing the ATR-42-600. I admit it's a sma
49 Vfw614: Thanks for clearing that up. So, as I had assumed, there is virtually no new-built turboprop available between 20 and 48 seats and only one product i
50 Aeronut: At one time BBD looked at shortening the Q400 into an advanced Q300. This is probably the most logical way to upgrade the Q200 / Q300 and keep a comm
51 PA515: Bombardier's 31st January 2008 Program Status Report had a backlog of 17 and at least one has been delivered to Air Philippines since then. Has there
52 JBo: I've read it somewhere on here that the Brasilia may not be actively in production, but is not officially out-of-production. I think it's still theor
53 Planemaker: That was back in 2000. TPs are not leading RJs in sales. Just FYI, they have changed the model designation to the X600... in keeping with the all-new
54 Rikkus67: As was stated earlier, perhaps Viking could eventually take the Q200 & Q300 production over? They own type certificates on everything up to and includ
55 CRJ900: If the Q400 can break even with only 35 pax, why not just have the Q400 in the fleet and misuse it on certain routes...? Having 2 FAs onboard is alway
56 777ER: Because the Q400 might not be suitable for some routes which the Q200/300s operate on, and this has already been talked about further up the thread.
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 1658 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 6937 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 294 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11144 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1880 posts, 
From Uruguay, joined Nov 2007, 573 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6802 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 1383 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
