Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
ATR In Advanced Talks With GE, P&W For 90 Seat TP  
User currently offlineAirbusCanada From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 331 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 14150 times:

From Air Transport Intelligence News...sorry you need a subscription to read the whole article...but here are the main points...



•ATR having advance discussions with Pratt and Whitney and General Electric on powering a new, larger-sized commercial turboprop, possibly seating 90+ people.

GE Aviation is offering a turboprop engine based on a derivative of the GE38 turboshaft engine which they claim can deliver "double digit fuel burn improvement"

•Nothing specific about P&W's offering.

•ATR wants to make a decision by 2011 with service entry targeted for 2015-2016.

Enjoy...

[Edited 2010-05-26 06:54:22]

56 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetimboflier215 From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 1344 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 14122 times:

Is this a response to Bombardier looking at a stretched Q400, which would, I imagine, also seat up to 90 people? And would this be as far as the fuselage can be stretched, on either model, before you are looking at substantial redesign/new wings etc?

User currently offlineoykie From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2755 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 13731 times:

Quoting AirbusCanada (Thread starter):
ATR wants to make a decision by 2011 with service entry targeted for 2015-2016.

I believe that this is the future for short secotr flights. I wonder how fast they will get the turboprop. As fast as the A400?



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineKent350787 From Australia, joined May 2008, 977 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 13373 times:

What I find interesting is that the turboprop market is realistically left with two offerings worldwide, both of which are increasing in size. Not having read the full article (only the OP) it isn't clear whether ATP is looking at a clean sheet or a stretch.

I know I'm being a bit parochial, but surely there are other markets similar to Australia, where turboprops make sense but 70-90 seats is way too much capacity. Rex is the largest A340 operator in the world, and very happy with it - but the newest builds are 10+ years old. Skywest is the largest F50 operator, with a slightly older fleet. And surely not all Qantaslink routes can support 70 seats, although its Q400 fleet is growing.

So, is there a place for a new 30-50 seater?

Kent


User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5806 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 13325 times:

Quoting Kent350787 (Reply 3):
So, is there a place for a new 30-50 seater?

IMHO there is a place world wide for:

A new 10 seater to replace the Cessna 402 and the like
A new 36 seater to replace the 8-200
A new 50 seater to replace the 8-300

The 20 seat market is served by new production 6-400s

Notice a trend here? It's strange isn't it that DHC products have served the 15 to 50 seat market for 40 years or more and NONE of them were in production untill the DHC-6 was placed back into production this year? (OK, to be fair the 8-200/300 was in production until recently)

Long live DHC and current owners Viking!!!
(Now if the Oz Defence Department can convince them to put a modinised DHC-4 "Boo back into production!!!)

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 5, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13199 times:

The ATR 42 seats 50 and they aren't exactly flying off the shelves. BBD would build as many Dash 8-200/300's as you would want if you ordered enough of them...but nobody is, otherwise they'd still be in the catalog.

The market seems to be saturated with used models and will probably be for some time to come. The 70-100 seat market is probably where the future money is.

That's what BBD is betting and they've been in the business long enough to know, I reckon.



What the...?
User currently offlineKent350787 From Australia, joined May 2008, 977 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 13135 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 5):
The ATR 42 seats 50 and they aren't exactly flying off the shelves.

An interesting point - there are only a handful of them operating in Australia. What's the explanation for that then?

I agree that the used market for 30-50 seaters turboprops is saturated, mainly by the US switching to RJs!! And I also recognise that the Q200/300 is still available, although an ageing design.

But there will eb a time when the market isn't saturated, and the US airlines may be able to convince the public that jets aren't always better than props.

Then what?


User currently offlinegolli From Iceland, joined May 2007, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 13039 times:

Quoting oykie (Reply 2):
I believe that this is the future for short secotr flights.

  

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 5):
The market seems to be saturated with used models and will probably be for some time to come. The 70-100 seat market is probably where the future money is.

   I'm hoping to see clean sheet designs for up to 120 seaters, in the 2015-2025 time span.


Golli



Vinnie Colaiuta rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 8, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 12931 times:

Quoting golli (Reply 7):
I'm hoping to see clean sheet designs for up to 120 seaters, in the 2015-2025 time span.

I think we will see larger than 100 seat all new T Props in the next 5 or so years. GE want into the game. P&W is undoubtedly capable of making a 10+K hp engine, (they did bid on the A400), and there is little doubt the TP-400 engine will make its way onto a twin.

Oil isn't likely to get much cheaper in the future and there is little doubt that TProps will continue to be the fuel economy leaders.



What the...?
User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4358 posts, RR: 35
Reply 9, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 12742 times:

I think and hope they'll make the jump up with a wider fuselage. The Q400 are already long thin pencils, with 5 or even 6 abreast you have the ability to make a family from 80 to 160 passengers. And it would be cool to have big turboprops again, the last passenger turboprops which were bigger then 4 abreast were the L-188 Electra's, Il-18s, Vanguards, Viscounts and Britannia's built in the 1960s.


nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2036 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 12698 times:

I'm surprised ATR didn't mention the Europrop engine from the A400M, as although blighted by delays, should definitely be in production by the time their 90 seat aircraft is ready for service!

There are lots of secondhand 30-50 seater props cluttering the market, as technology hasn't really moved forward much, a new ATR42 is better, but not that much better than a late 80s one. A big leap is needed to kick start this sector again.



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 12684 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 8):
and there is little doubt the TP-400 engine will make its way onto a twin.
Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 9):
with 5 or even 6 abreast you have the ability to make a family from 80 to 160 passengers.

Agree, a big prop, lean wing and narrow fuselage stuffed with passengers is hard to beat. IMO fuel should rise dramatically to get everyone moving. A Counter Rotating Open Rotor would be at least a 5% futher energy efficient but wasn't born yet for a reason..

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...Turboliner28april.jpg?t=1274943657

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 10):
I'm surprised ATR didn't mention the Europrop engine from the A400M, as although blighted by delays, should definitely be in production by the time their 90 seat aircraft is ready for service!

I think the TP400 is 11.000 shp with growth potential. Too big for a 90-100 seat aircraft. The new GE38 version is optimized for 7000-8000 shp. It's build for heli applications sofar though.


User currently offliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2771 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 11676 times:

This is very interesting news! ATR had been mentioning their plans for an all-new prop design for a while, but this is the first concrete piece of information that I've seen so far - with an engine candidate and program milestone dates.

IIRC, I've read things about the new a/c being optimized around 90 PAX and up to 300nm. Finding a suitable engine was the key for launching the program, as the current fuel burn advantage of props had to be maintained against future jet designs - which implies double-digit efficiency gains.

Hopefully these plans will materialize and we get to hear more soon...

Quoting timboflier215 (Reply 1):
Is this a response to Bombardier looking at a stretched Q400, which would, I imagine, also seat up to 90 people? And would this be as far as the fuselage can be stretched, on either model, before you are looking at substantial redesign/new wings etc?

I wouldn't call it a direct response because this is an all-new aircraft (family?) versus a simple stretch of the Q400. A stretch would have been such a response, but ATR had already stated that they did not want to stretch their aircraft, but go for something entirely new. Of course, this would catch BBD off-guard as they're busy with the CSeries and probably can't develop an all-new a/c to counter the new ATR.
And yes, 90 PAX is pretty much the max you can get out of these airframes without substantial redesign.

Quoting Kent350787 (Reply 3):
Not having read the full article (only the OP) it isn't clear whether ATP is looking at a clean sheet or a stretch.

Clean sheet, as I said above. By the way, when was the last time anybody has seen a clean sheet turboprop design? I think the Saab 2000 was the last one, unless you consider it as a Saab340 evolution.

Quoting Kent350787 (Reply 3):
So, is there a place for a new 30-50 seater?

Maybe, maybe not. ATR and BBD don't seem to think so, and their sales numbers (Q200/300 discontinued, ATR-42 selling just a handful per year) confirm that. I think the 30-50 seat market is fine for now with the existing second hand a/c. Eventually, when they get old and a replacement is needed, I expect a company like Viking to step in and such an aircraft, but I doubt BBD or ATR will return to that market segment.

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 9):
I think and hope they'll make the jump up with a wider fuselage. The Q400 are already long thin pencils, with 5 or even 6 abreast you have the ability to make a family from 80 to 160 passengers.

If the design is optimized around 90 PAX, 5 abreast would give you easy stretch opportunities to 110 or maybe even 130 seats, but would be less efficient for a 70-seat shrink. 4 abreast would work for 70-90 seats, but offers little to no growth possibilities (see CRJ1000). 6 abreast is too wide for a 90 pax a/c. I hope for a 5 abreast.

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 10):
I'm surprised ATR didn't mention the Europrop engine from the A400M, as although blighted by delays, should definitely be in production by the time their 90 seat aircraft is ready for service!

That engine would be overkill for a 90-seat aircraft. However, two of those could certainly power a larger design [insert keesje's turboliner here]


User currently offlineDash9 From Canada, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 11614 times:

Quoting r2rho (Reply 12):
I hope for a 5 abreast.

Well BBD is a leader in turboprop and is currently developing a new 5-abreast airplane. Could the Cseries fuselage be 'reused' into a +/- 100 seats turboprop? Of course it would require a new wing and engines but still if the fuselage, cockpit, landing gears and interior can be leverage to the new turboprop that would drive down its development cost as well as share some Cseries development costs, making that project more profitable?

And I hopt this new place would be called Dash9  

just my two cents.

Dash9


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6920 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 11299 times:

I'm also surprised that an european engine is not considered, but maybe it was and europrop/RR/snecma had no interest.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4700 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11102 times:

At 7500hp, the GE38 should be able to power a 130+ seater...Just my two cents.


Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15828 posts, RR: 27
Reply 16, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 11012 times:

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 9):

I disagree. I think that a comfortable 2-2 like the EJet family is the way to go.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4903 posts, RR: 16
Reply 17, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10951 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 16):
Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 9):

I disagree. I think that a comfortable 2-2 like the EJet family is the way to go.

As self-loading freight, I completely agree! TP's are noisy and vibrate. I've flown in plenty of large turboprops in the old days and disliked them all.


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15828 posts, RR: 27
Reply 18, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10908 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 17):

Oh I wasn't referring to power, just interior configuration. That said there are others that feel the way you do, which is a factor. Kayak has a no turboprops filter along with their no RJs one.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4903 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 10794 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 18):
Quoting comorin (Reply 17):

Oh I wasn't referring to power, just interior configuration. That said there are others that feel the way you do, which is a factor. Kayak has a no turboprops filter along with their no RJs one.

Oh well, I stand corrected! Thanks for the tip about the Kayak filter.


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15828 posts, RR: 27
Reply 20, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 10782 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 19):
Thanks for the tip about the Kayak filter.

I haven't used that filter much, but I would guess that it doesn't make a distinction between a CRJ and an E-Jet, which is a shame because E-Jets are more comfortable than some mainline planes.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinegolli From Iceland, joined May 2007, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10754 times:

Quoting Dash9 (Reply 13):

   Fantstic idea.

Golli



Vinnie Colaiuta rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!
User currently offlineweb500sjc From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 749 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10673 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 20):

Quoting comorin (Reply 19):
Thanks for the tip about the Kayak filter.

I haven't used that filter much, but I would guess that it doesn't make a distinction between a CRJ and an E-Jet, which is a shame because E-Jets are more comfortable than some mainline planes.


I wish there was an e jet that did transcons. Those things are a mirical



Boiler Up!
User currently offlinesurfandsnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2907 posts, RR: 31
Reply 23, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10671 times:

A 90 seat turboprop?!? What a terrible idea. I'd pick the jet over the prop any day! I don't care what they say about the Q400, it is still not nearly as smooth of a ride as the similarly sized CR7 or E-170.

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 22):
I wish there was an e jet that did transcons.

I believe the E-190 is getting pretty close. I believe AC has flown them on YYZ-YLW and B6 put them on JFK-SLC one winter.



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15828 posts, RR: 27
Reply 24, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10648 times:

Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 23):
I believe AC has flown them on YYZ-YLW and B6 put them on JFK-SLC one winter.

I think that AC did YYZ-SAN as well.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
25 angelmonsteral : I personally think that they will have a range of a C130.And i think that American Eagle will be the first one to older one of those.But my question i
26 Post contains links and images DEVILFISH : Only this..... Quote: "'We're not being explicit right now in terms of what we need to do, but we intend to leverage our experience,' says P&W Ca
27 Post contains images A342 : Have you flown any modern turboprops? I've flown a number of times on the ATR -500 series and I'm very impressed. To me, they don't seem to be louder
28 Viscount724 : AC currently operates the E-190 on some fairly long sectors: YYZ-PDX 1822 nm, westbound block time 5:08 (starts June 17) YYZ-SEA 1791 nm, westbound b
29 r2rho : I encourage you to fly in a modern turboprop some time, your impression of them should change dramatically. Times have changed! Could maybe work. Of
30 Post contains links and images keesje : 2 years ago I opened a thread on tech ops on possible configurations for a 100 seater. ATR was testing the water for a "-900 ", GE launched the new GE
31 Aesma : You may change your mind when you see the fare.
32 Viscount724 : They're more prone to turbulence due to their 25,000 ft. maximum certificated altitude. You sometimes have to fly through weather while a jet would b
33 keesje : The A400M operates upto 37.000 ft, M .7
34 Viscount724 : I was referring to the current "modern turboprops" mentioned to in the post I was replying to. I made the assumption the poster was referring to airl
35 9252fly : Is it possible for a civilian airliner to operate at those altitudes and has there ever been one that was able to above the current limits? I find th
36 Post contains images lightsaber : First... Wow. that would be a tight timeline for Pratt to develop a new GTF based turboprop. It could be done... But GE just might be 'too ready' to
37 alangirvan : Turboprops are still about perception. Bryan Bedford got rid of a whole lot of Q400s from the Frontier Lynx fleet basically because they were turbopr
38 JBo : And possibly a new 19-seater given the limited number of Beech 1900D's available to go around, and the other 19-seaters going away. The Q200/Q300 are
39 r2rho : The PW127 currently powering the ATR's is 2700 shp. The PW150A on the Q400 is 5000 shp. And as you say, the GE38 is in the 7500 shp class. So why all
40 as739x : They are not limited to 25k per performance. It's due to no drop down O2 mask for each passenger. But the drop-down mask version does only give you a
41 Post contains images A342 : Alright, but the Do 328 prop and the Saab 2000 have a certified altitude of 31,000ft, IIRC. The Piaggio Avanti and Piper Cheyenne 400LS can even go t
42 lightsaber : With a large CFRP wing, it could even be a 150 seater in a LCC configuration. But I do not expect a plane that large. I expect ATR to request a custo
43 Kent350787 : Thanks for the correction - it only emphasises my points about the Australian market.
44 FRNT787 : The main reason was actually costs. The added costs of having only 11 Q400s, and the necessary support, management, certificate, and training costs e
45 A342 : I'm sceptical about shrinking the GE38. From my understanding, it is heavily based on the CFE738 turbofan and uses many of its components. So instead
46 lightsaber : A two stage single crytal HP turbine alone will help. Also, have 3 stages of power turbine is going to be an advantage over the PW150's two stage tur
47 Post contains images A342 : Thanks, that's the info I was looking for. Regarding the GE38's full potential:Yes, I agree that a 130-seater would be quite a risk for ATR. Not only
48 r2rho : That's exactly why I proposed a 110-seater - it's less risky. ATR would already be entering "unchartered" waters with a 90-seat turboprop. Going fo 1
49 Post contains links keesje : A little more on the GE38, it's a complete redesign for the CH53-K. http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engine...11-ge-pratt-present-proposals-0525 PW will
50 A342 : For one, I absolutely don't see a new 70-seat turboprop from ATR. After all, they have just made significant investments into their current products
51 Trucker : I might be inviting a flaming here but supose you wanted to get an 80-120 seat turboprop in the air on the cheap, how about doing this. They once took
52 milesrich : While the posters here either fondly remember the big recips and turboprops, or wish they could have experienced flying in them, today's passengers pr
53 Post contains links and images keesje : Yes lets do that! http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...s/tURBOLINERBIRTH.jpg?t=1275382347 In the end only Turboliner's tail stayed nearly the same.
54 lightsaber : I'm thinking they're a little flat footed, so the offered engine will be the best they can offer quickly. It will be a good engine, but GE has the ad
55 r2rho : I see the -600 series as a stop gap - introducing some small low-risk upgrades to keep the airframe up-to-date until the all-new design arrives. Acco
56 A342 : Exactly. IIRC, ATR has stated that they need to sell about 200 -600 series aircraft to achieve break even, so the ATR42/72 family will be around for
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Garuda In Talks With Boeing For 24 Aircraft posted Wed May 18 2005 05:18:43 by Xkorpyoh
ONT In Talks With JetBlue For More Flights posted Sun May 30 2004 01:39:07 by LoneStarMike
Air China In Talks With UA For Star Entry posted Sun Dec 9 2001 01:48:31 by Jiml1126
AA In Alliance Talks With China Eastern posted Wed Feb 24 2010 15:21:48 by DFWEagle
DL/AA In Preliminary Talks With Boeing On 787 posted Sun Jun 17 2007 18:58:37 by Ual747-600
DL In Merger Talks With NW: WSJ Part 2 posted Sat Jan 13 2007 08:20:06 by ANCFlyer
Delta In Merger Talks With Northwest Air: WSJ posted Wed Jan 10 2007 20:27:49 by WorldTraveler
What's The Future For 90+ Seat RJs posted Fri Dec 15 2006 16:45:28 by Tangowhisky
Bahamasair In Affiliation Talks With AirTran; AMR posted Mon Oct 14 2002 21:36:36 by MAH4546
US Airways In Codeshare Talks With... posted Fri May 17 2002 22:11:27 by Delta777