Erau From Canada, joined May 1999, 39 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1291 times:
in an effort to avoid major aiports, there is a new airline that is going to use turboprop aircraft to fly to all smaller cities and overfly the major airports in the us.
My question is if you were starting such an airline what turboprop would you choose and why.
Also I would like to know everyones opinion on whether or not this type of airline, flying circuitous routings to all smaller city, less congested airports would work?
N863DA From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 48 posts, RR: 7 Reply 1, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1156 times:
If I were to start an airline like this, if I had to choose a turboprop airliner, it would be the DeHavilland Canada DHC-8-Q400.
Given the choice however, I might consider using the Canadair Jet or even the Boeing 717. But, for all that, the prop of choice would definately be the Q400. And, for routes that didn't demand such size, maybe a Q300 or even DHC-8-200.
I know you didn't ask, but the airline would be based in Tallahassee or Jacksonville, Florida, or Savannah, Georgia, and called Confederate Air Lines. There would be a first-class section with eight seats (3x2 + 2x1) at the rear of the plane (in props First Class was always at the rear) on the Q400 and the Q300. Seat pitch would be 42" and the seats would have generous recline and meals (or failing that, large snacks) would be served on every flight.
Coach Class would have a seat pitch of 35" and snacks would be served on every flight. On flights over 1:30, a small meal would be served.
ATRpilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1096 times:
HA! Let me guess... you must be taking Commuter Aviation at riddle. Frank Richie still teaching that class?
I would probably choose a smaller turboprop with a low lease/initial aquisition cost and the lowest cost per seat mile. The biggest factor, however, would be the type and number of passengers you want to carry. If its a small number of people, you want a low breakeven point capacity wise. An aircraft like the J41 would fit the bill nicely. It has a flight attendant and a galley (an option) and is avalible on the used market in sufficient numbers. If you are going with more people, I would suggest the ATR42 (avalible new in the -500 version or used). It carries a large number of people and has a low breakeven point, and has those wonderfully reliable PW120 engines. Of course I'm biased, thats what I fly. The EMB120 and Dash 8 are also worth a careful look.
If you are flying really small loads of passengers, you might explore the 19 seat varieties like the BE1900 and J32... but, passengers don't really like these and business travelers might not go out of thier way to fly on your airline.
J32driver From United States of America, joined May 2000, 399 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (11 years 12 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1061 times:
Commuter aviation huh... wish the net had been around when I took that class!!!
To add to what ATRpilot said, stay away from the 19 seaters. My aircraft of choice for a turboprop would be the Dornier 328. Its expensive, but offers service almost equal to RJs. I believe the plane is flight planned for 360 KTAS. Don't bother with the J41. Nice airplane, but there are none to be found. You have to go overseas to buy one. If you want a used turboprop, get the EMB120. Commair has lots of them sitting unused and rotting in Springfield MO.
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (11 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 1053 times:
I guess it depends on where you're flying. I would suggest that the Dash8-100 (Q100 if you're buying new airplanes) is a good reliable aircraft with a good safety record, very ground crew friendly, low maintanance, apparently I've heard a great plane to fly as well. It's good really at any airport, but especially if you're flying in areas with poor weather, short fields, mountainous terrian, etc. If you're thinking of airports with any of that, I definitely favour the Dash8. But how's this for an alternative approach- using a Dash8-100combi. There would be potential to fly to small centers and haul a fair bit of freight in and out as well as passengers. In a coastal area you could fly seafood to market. In an mining or oil producing area there would be potential to haul core samples, and haul various other types of shipments. The ability to haul freight could potentially be valuable for your operation.
Another possible choice would be the Saab340. I don't believe it would be able to operate as a combi, but it wasn't mentioned by anyone yet and I think it should be considered. After all, with the RJ's coming on line, aren't NW and AA affiliates starting to sell off their SF340 fleets?
Overall, though, I think it should be noted that for the most part I think that small cities with enough demand generally already have service with 30-50 seat aircraft. Simply for that reason, unless you find several city pairs you're sure have enough demand for larger aircraft, then I think it would limit the operation to using 19 seaters. That would basically include the Metroliners, 1900D's, or Jetstream31's. There is one other potential aircraft I would consider, the PC-12. It's not very big, at only about 9 or 10 seats I think it was, but my understanding is that it only requires one pilot. It only has a single engine, as well, which would make it more economical to break into small markets. I don't know what it's like to fly on for passenger appeal, but it does appear to be gaining some acceptance as a commercial aircraft for serving small centres, at least with some small operators.
JETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3128 posts, RR: 37 Reply 6, posted (11 years 12 months 6 hours ago) and read 1029 times:
I come here to get away form posts like these. The last thing we need is another board to post questions like this. This is not the forum for this post.
J32driver From United States of America, joined May 2000, 399 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (11 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1008 times:
I believe this forum was meant to cover management topics as well. This is meant to be a technical discussion of a managements possible choice of airplanes.
If you have nothing to add to the topic, simply don't read it or post to it.
Wrench10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (11 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1004 times:
One aspect you really need to keep in mind:
Market research, how much of the flying public really want to fly on turbo aircraft. My experience with smaller cities is that while they seldom can support jet traffic, (70-85 seat) they are fed up with small aircraft. Especially here in the west during the summer months, with weight restrictions and everything that intails. ASk anyone that has flown out of Durango or Grand Junction CO in Aug.
One option, but it is a pipe dream, would be the Fokker F28. Jet power and configured to seat 65. But there are non to be had and good luck with finding parts or engines!!!!
Just remember you still need to make money. A lot of airlines have tried to do what you are asking, and failed. Many were poorly managed, but when you are talking secondary markets, you will never get the loads and consistant traffic you are going to plan on. In small towns many people would rather drive up to four hours to the nearest large airport and fly out on big and "perceived" saver airplanes. While we all know that any travel in the air is far saver than any other form of transportation, people just do not like to load up in a small airplanes.
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined May 1999, 39 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 48 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
