Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
ATR Outlines 90 Seater Plan  
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Posted (2 years 7 months 20 hours ago) and read 12726 times:

Flightglobal article suggests EIS of 2017 for a 90 seat turboprop.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...0-seater-development-plans-367122/

Quote:
The aircraft would be larger than the current ATR 72-600, he said, with a longer fuselage and the possibility of stowing luggage under the floor.

A number of new components - including the turbine and combustion chamber - are in development by P&WC's sister company Pratt & Whitney for its PW1000G geared turbofan, itself sharing a common core with the 1,000lb-thrust-rated PW800. These, and a separately-designed compressor, are likely to find their way onto any new P&WC turboprop, said Bagnato.

ATR forecasts a market over the next 20 years for around 3,100 regional turboprops: 500 in the 50-seat range, 1,000 90-seaters and 1,600 with 70 seats.

53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3222 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 20 hours ago) and read 12689 times:

"A highly efficient, high-capacity aircraft for short-haul routes should be a very attractive prospect," he said.

Okay, another 5 yrs till launch, good luck will play a big part in coming to the market at the right time.
Could be a winner.



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12981 posts, RR: 100
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 18 hours ago) and read 12280 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This sounds like a completely new aircraft, not just a stretch.

The efficiency of the engines will be key. The PW127 is more for simplicity than efficiency. Oh, they're not bad engines, there is just quite a bit of technology missing from them.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offline817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 2297 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 18 hours ago) and read 12251 times:

Im actually looking forward to seeing how this new aircraft turns out, hopefully it will be successful

Quoting LAXDESI (Thread starter):
possibility of stowing luggage under the floor.

This is a good idea, I think they should have done this long ago



Reality be Rent. Synapse, break! Vanishment, This World!
User currently onlinesandyb123 From UK - Scotland, joined Oct 2007, 1096 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 17 hours ago) and read 12038 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 2):
This sounds like a completely new aircraft, not just a stretch.

Yes I read this as a clean sheet design also.

Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 3):
This is a good idea, I think they should have done this long ago

I don't like the way the cargo hold is at the front of the ATR. Seems somehow disconnected to the cockpit. Is their access from the cockpit to the cabin during flight?

Sandyb123



Member of the mile high club
User currently offlineBasilFawlty From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 1321 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 17 hours ago) and read 12009 times:

Quoting sandyb123 (Reply 4):
Is their access from the cockpit to the cabin during flight?

Yes there is.



'Every year donkeys and mules kill more people than plane crashes'
User currently offlinefutureualpilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2602 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 17 hours ago) and read 11951 times:

Best of luck to them, I hope this ends up at mainline carriers and not regionals.


Life is better when you surf.
User currently offline817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 2297 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 17 hours ago) and read 11942 times:

Quoting sandyb123 (Reply 4):
Is their access from the cockpit to the cabin during flight?

As BasilFawlty says there is access during flight, I think it amazing the ATR carries any cargo at all. I stil wonder how they carry any cargo with the front pax door option  



Reality be Rent. Synapse, break! Vanishment, This World!
User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7184 posts, RR: 13
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 17 hours ago) and read 11896 times:

If it happens NZ will order this I am sure. Eventually just ATR42s/72s and these for the domestic prop fleet. Ideal for a number of routes they currently operate which do not warrant a 737 but do need more than the 66 seat AT7.

Could even be used on routes such as AKL-NLK, AKL-NOU range/etops permitting


User currently offlinefpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 882 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 16 hours ago) and read 11806 times:

Actually if they move the luggage and cargo under the floor, they don't really need to add that much to the fuselage at all and will give them a front pax door that can be used for jetways, like Dash8's can. I think it will be the real winner if the efficiency stays as good as it is now on ATR's, especially for European markets.

Personally I love the ATR's. It is a very robust product. Sure it's slower than the Dash, but it also burns quite a bit less fuel, and on short hops, the extra speed doesn't really matter all that much...


User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2176 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 16 hours ago) and read 11669 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXDESI (Thread starter):
the possibility of stowing luggage under the floor.

There is absolutely nothing under the cabin floor now? Just vacant space or lots of wiring 'n stuff?



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlinefpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 882 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 16 hours ago) and read 11653 times:

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 10):
There is absolutely nothing under the cabin floor now? Just vacant space or lots of wiring 'n stuff?

Yep, acctually if I rememeber correctly, all wiring is in the ceiling, but there are some hydraulic lines for the landing gear and some electrical cables that are landing gear related, but that's about it... But don't get me wrong, there isn't much room there... they will have to raise the floor or have a bigger fuselage cross section.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 15 hours ago) and read 11503 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 2):
The efficiency of the engines will be key. The PW127 is more for simplicity than efficiency. Oh, they're not bad engines, there is just quite a bit of technology missing from them.

Will ATR try to increase range and cruise speed and sacrifice some fuel efficiency?

Q400's higher range and speed hasn't helped it much against ATR. Could it help ATR against regional jets on sub-800nm missions.


User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1071 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 15 hours ago) and read 11423 times:

Quote:

"ATR has already entered discussions with incumbent engine provider Pratt & Whitney Canada and rival GE over possible powerplant options for the 90-seater, said Bagnato."

I wonder why they haven't invited Europrop International as a powerplant source?   



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently onlinesandyb123 From UK - Scotland, joined Oct 2007, 1096 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 15 hours ago) and read 11422 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 12):
Q400's higher range and speed hasn't helped it much against ATR. Could it help ATR against regional jets on sub-800nm missions.

With the cost of fuel still rising I think that there are a lot of missions that a new 90 seat prop could take from the Q400 and RJs up to even the ERJ175. On most UK & European domestic segments the slower cruise speed wouldn't impact much on flight times.

BE opted for the Q400, but it burns almost twice (?) that of the current ATR family. Ok, the ATRs are a bit slower but there is some wriggle room for a new air frame that competes on speed whilst still offering a efficient fuel burn.

Sandyb123



Member of the mile high club
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 15 hours ago) and read 11398 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 12):
Will ATR try to increase range and cruise speed and sacrifice some fuel efficiency?

I'm guessing both since they're going for a brand new engine and design, but the main focus is likely to be efficiency.

They've proven that speed isn't what sells these days.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7120 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 15 hours ago) and read 11296 times:

My question is will they finally have the a/c go 6 across versus the current 4, if they can get that done the a/c does not have to be that long to accomodate the 90 pax, I honestly think the Q400 is too long and slender.

User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 14 hours ago) and read 11214 times:

Reposting reply#31 by Wisdom from an older thread on the same topic that addresses speed and fuel burn.
ATR CEO: Will Invest In New 90 Seat Turboprop (by LAXDESI May 11 2011 in Civil Aviation)#menu27

Quote:
If you stretch the ATR72 3.5 meters for 5 more rows, with stronger keel beams and larger landing gear, the final product, let's call it the ATR-92, will be approximately 1.5 tons heavier.
If they hang the same PW150 engines as on the Q400 under its wings it will get another 0.5 tons heavier at most.

The ATR92 would then be 2 tons heavier than the ATR72, but still 1 ton lighter than the Q400.

This means essentially that weight wise, there's no reason to explain why the ATR92 shouldn't be able to fly at the same speeds as the Q400, given same shaft horsepower and less weight to push forward.

Now, this is where the wings can be a problem.
The Q400 wing is optimized to cruise at 350 knots. They have swept wings where ATR's are essentially straight wings.
The Q400 fuselage is not as efficient as the Q400's, because the landing gear stowage and the big vertical stabilizer cause a detectable amount of additional drag.

Considering that, the ATR92 may not be able to cruise at 350kts but perhaps it could make it to 325kts with 90 passengers, with the same fuel burn as the Q400.

The market exists and it's bigger than one can imagine at first thought.
The ATR92 wouldn't only compete against the regional jets in this seating capacity, it can open up to new markets that are not accessible with regional jets and where rail is inconvenient.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 10 hours ago) and read 10856 times:

Found an article which lays out a new turboprop by PW. Don't know if PW has made any progress since the announcement. The article suggests a focus on fuel efficiency, and not on cruise speed targeted at sub-500 nm missions.

As GTF is expected to provide 15% plus lower fuel burn, one would think that a 15% lower fuel over current turboprop is achievable.

Indian planning commission recently approved nearly $1 billion for development of a 90 seat regional aircraft. It will be nice if ATR and India can team up to jointly develop and manufacture a 90 seat regional aircraft. I don't see it happening though.
http://www.ainonline.com/?q=aviation...da-launches-new-regional-turboprop

Quote:
Pratt & Whitney Canada has launched an all-new turboprop engine for regional aircraft to replace the 1,800- to 5,000-shp PW100 series. It expects to run the core demonstrator in the second half of next year.

P&WC president John Saabas said the new engine will be “at least” 10 percent more fuel efficient than the PW100 series, which he claims is “still the most economical turboprop in its class.” There is, however, a demand for a “double-digit” fuel burn improvement, which can be met, he said, by using technology developed for the company’s latest small turbofans, in particular the new PW1000G geared turbofan powering the Mitsubishi MRJ and Bombardier C Series regional jets.


User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1718 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 8 hours ago) and read 10342 times:

From the article: the reliability of the PW100 is 99,97%... Well... If that ain't good... !!!

User currently offlinealangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 2106 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 10105 times:

"However, Bagnato said that it will not neglect its core market. "We have to be competitive over the next 20 years with the 50- and 70-seaters," he said." - from the Flightglobal story, so the 50 and 70 seater markets will still be important. Will ATR create a 90 seater that will have lower costs per airframe to operate than their own ATR72? So an ATR92 would break even with the same number of seats filled?

If the 50 seater and 70 seater markets are addressed by putting ATR92 technology onto the smaller planes - the
ATR72 NG would be an impressive hot and high aircraft.

I would expect the ATR92 will use London City Airport - I wonder if it will get into Toronto Island Airport? Right under Bombardier's nose.


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4395 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 9905 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 12):
Will ATR try to increase range and cruise speed and sacrifice some fuel efficiency?

I hope not. The point for them against CRJ900, E175, E190 is efiiciency. There they cannot sacrifice one percent. speed only is important at longer distance, so you have to increase speed and range and both cost efficiency.


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5420 posts, RR: 30
Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 9822 times:

ATR and BBD have both been making noises about a 90 seat turbo prop...I wonder when one of these companies will actually pull the trigger.


What the...?
User currently offlinedoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3402 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 6 hours ago) and read 9724 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 18):
As GTF is expected to provide 15% plus lower fuel burn, one would think that a 15% lower fuel over current turboprop is achievable.

Not really sure how this would be related. TPs have been geared for a while.



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 5 hours ago) and read 9399 times:

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 20):
Will ATR create a 90 seater that will have lower costs per airframe to operate than their own ATR72? So an ATR92 would break even with the same number of seats filled?

If one goes by Wilson's numbers, ATR92 will be about 18-20% heavier than ATR72. Will new engines and wings of ATR92 make it possible to nearly match the trip fuel burn of ATR? I doubt ATR92 will end up with lower trip fuel burn than ATR72.

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 23):
Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 18):As GTF is expected to provide 15% plus lower fuel burn, one would think that a 15% lower fuel over current turboprop is achievable.
Not really sure how this would be related. TPs have been geared for a while.

I see your point. Perhaps achieving 15% lower sfc with a new engine is going to be difficult.


25 JoeCanuck : I don't think ATR is going to have a free lunch with the weight. To get even close to the speeds of the Q, they will have to increase the strength, w
26 Post contains images r2rho : If ATR gets it right, this can only be a winner. There is definitely a market for an all-new, efficient, new generation 90-seat prop. RJ's beware! Thi
27 BMI727 : They don't need to be worried too much about speed anyway. Just don't let the new plane be slower than the 72 and they'll be fine. Speed isn't stoppi
28 zkncj : I would say we could see this happening on the AKL-NLK route soon as the -600 arrive. The friendships back in the day operated AKL-NLK. I'm pretty su
29 Post contains links and images PlymSpotter : It's good to see they won't be neglecting the 50-70 seat market, but I wonder if that will mean sticking with the current offerings for that range and
30 LAXDESI : Link in OP suggests that the fuselage will be longer than that of ATR72. I don't think you need a longer fuselage if ATR92 is built on a 5-abreast pl
31 Post contains images lightsaber : I do not see the concern for speed in the sub 500nm market. This will be about cost per butt-mile. Just the wrong thrust, no other reason. As you note
32 PPVRA : Very cool. Will be interesting to see how it turns out and how well it does. Best of luck to ATR!
33 queb : Is ATR has the money to launch a brand new airplane ($ 1.5-2.0 B minimum)? With annual sales of $1.3 B, I don't think so and it's probably the reason
34 joelyboy911 : The half of ATR that was Aerospatiale is now owned by EADS - I doubt they will have too much trouble sourcing extra financing. I expect they've been
35 bjorn14 : IIRC the -600s have glass cockpits that can handle all navaids. I would love to see a ATR32 or 36 as they would own that market to replace all the 12
36 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Yes they have glass cockpits, but I think they already have that EMB-120/SF340 replacement market cornered without needing a shortened aircraft. The
37 queb : Sure, but EADS (or Finmeccanica) will not fund a project if it is not profitable. In addition, ATR has just introduced the -600 series which must hav
38 Post contains images PlymSpotter : That depends where ATR are heading with this. Are they looking at a 90 seater clean sheet design with the intention to create a 120 seat stretch, whi
39 parapente : Quoting r2rho (Reply 26): This is not a stretch. It's all-new, ATR have said it several times. Thank you. Lightsaber Well lets see it then.This articl
40 r2rho : A 70-seat shrink of the 90-seater would work, but a 50-seat shrink would be too far. So it's either two separate families, or sacrifice the 50-seat m
41 parapente : Re this all 'new design'.for the sake of clarity...... ATR boss: ‘We will invest’ in 90-seat turboprop By AviationBrief Published: May 11, 2011 Al
42 alangirvan : Part of the discussion might be where is the sweet spot where a Jet takes over as more efficienct than a TP? Some years ago when Dornier was producing
43 zkncj : Not if you ZK- register them =), and ZK registered aircraft can operate domestically within Australia. Australia's 1-36 ratio is a bit over the top,
44 joelyboy911 : Off topic, but how many FA's on JetConnect 738s? Do they operate to the minimum standard - or have the same service levels as mainline QF?
45 gemuser : Who's Friendships did this and when? gemuser
46 zkncj : Some stage in the 1980s, I have only seen photo's don't have dates. They only have 4
47 alangirvan : The F-27s were used between Auckland and Norfolk Island until about 1983. Then AirNZ introduced 737-200s, about the time East West started using F-28s
48 gemuser : From about when? Any idea? Gemuser
49 alangirvan : Sorry, someone else will have to say when the F-27s started to NLK. But I had a quick look at Great Circle Mapper: AKL (37°00'29"S 174°47'30"E) NLK
50 bjorn14 : Not a chance, I just read in LFRA that the CEO says it's no sweat to keep the 42 line open because of 90% commonality with the 72 even though the 42
51 PA515 : From whenever the last two QF DC4's were retired. F27-500's ZK-NAN and ZK-NAO replaced them with an NZ/QF codeshare sometime before 1977. The alterna
52 ditzyboy : The Jetconnect flight operate with five FAs for service reasons. Qantas used to require 6 FAs on Trans Tasman 73H flights, thought this was reduced t
53 zkncj : With an ATR you could do it 3 times a week instead of the current weekly service
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...
Vietnam Airlines Outlines Fleet Plan posted Wed Oct 24 2007 11:08:49 by Flying-Tiger
ATR Outsells Q400-- Why? posted Wed Jan 18 2012 23:13:46 by RNOcommctr
Luton Airport- New Expansion Plan posted Mon Jan 16 2012 10:54:49 by U2380
ORF And PHF In The 80's And 90's? posted Thu Jan 12 2012 17:05:26 by 747400sp
Air Florida Flight 90: 30th. Anniversary posted Wed Jan 11 2012 23:10:17 by zippyjet
Chinese MD-90, Orders Possible? posted Mon Jan 2 2012 14:04:38 by PC12Fan
CO Q400 Vs. ATR posted Wed Dec 21 2011 21:43:37 by TWA772LR
AA's Discontinued Routes To Cover ATR Reduction posted Wed Dec 21 2011 13:40:03 by SJUSXM
Need An Update! DL MD-90 & DC-9-50 posted Mon Dec 19 2011 11:49:26 by Bigbird
TAM's Plan Over 10 Years? posted Mon Dec 12 2011 19:38:28 by VC10er