SWALUV
Topic Author
Posts: 148
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 7:43 pm

Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:06 pm

Hi Again,

With so little orders for the Q400, will this be the last version of the Dash-8? I understand that turboprops travel at slower speeds, which can effect there schedule's, but they also save more fuel. With the rising fuel cost, will we see more orders for the turboprop? Also do we think that the 50 seat regional jets will be retired early in-favor of more fuel efficient aircraft?

Plain Questions:
- Will the Q400 be the last Dash 8
- With the rising fuel cost, will we see more orders for turboprops?
- Also do we think that the 50 seat regional jets will be retired early in-favor of more fuel efficient turboprops?
 
baje427
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:31 pm

The Q400 might be the last Dash 8 but the ATR is doing extremely well and have plans to offer a 90 seat version the turboprop will be around for a while longer.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:41 pm

Bombardier can save the Dash8 line by upgrading the Q300. Throw on Q400 engines and avionics, minor aerodynamic advances, and strengthened landing gear for a higher MGTOW. Combine all of that and you got a pretty damn good turboprop. Especially one that is a great replacement for 50 seat RJ's.
And for my next miracle, I'm gonna turn water into funk!
 
silentbob
Posts: 1541
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:50 pm

Does the 300 really need the higher max weight or new engines? The gain in speed would come with a significant increase in fuel consumption.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:01 pm

I guess it does'nt need the higher max weight, but the Q400 engines should give it speed and range since they power a lager aircraft. I was thinking kind of like what Boeing did with the 77W wings and engines and put them on the 772 to make the 772LR, Bombardier could do the same with the Q's.
And for my next miracle, I'm gonna turn water into funk!
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:16 pm

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 4):
I was thinking kind of like what Boeing did with the 77W wings and engines and put them on the 772 to make the 772LR, Bombardier could do the same with the Q's.

The 772LR isn't selling all that well. It's a niche aircraft. If regional operators want speed and range, they'll go for jets. The name of the game these days is efficiency, the primary advantage of a turboprop for shorter flights which would be lost if you overpower them like you have described.
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
baje427
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:30 pm

The 50 seat market is not the way to go for turboprops BBD should instead try to make the Q400 more efficient while still having the speed.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:42 pm

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 2):

Bombardier can save the Dash8 line by upgrading the Q300. Throw on Q400 engines and avionics, minor aerodynamic advances, and strengthened landing gear for a higher MGTOW. Combine all of that and you got a pretty damn good turboprop. Especially one that is a great replacement for 50 seat
Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 4):
I guess it does'nt need the higher max weight, but the Q400 engines should give it speed and range since they power a lager aircraft.

Definitely not, this would ruin the aircraft and it's economics. One of the biggest issues with the Q400 is that it aspires for the speed of a prop but nears the fuel burn of a jet without actually being one. A Q300 with larger engines would be an economic nightmare, it doesn't need any strengthening or beefing up either and generally it doesn't need the Q400's speed for the missions it flies. The major issue for Bombardier is ATR; the 72-500/600 can do what the Q300 does in exactly the same situation with broadly similar costs but with almost 20 extra passengers, as such I see no way back for a new build Q300 unless it can break into new territory. Even the Q400 is being pinched from both sides.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:57 pm

Quoting baje427 (Reply 6):
The 50 seat market is not the way to go for turboprops BBD should instead try to make the Q400 more efficient while still having the speed.

There will be a 50 seat market, and it's best served by turboprops. That said, the Q400 can be revised, and there is a need for even bigger turboprops than the Q400, such as the expanded ATR, and even bigger, I think. It's been discussed in several previous recent threads.

-Rampart
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:06 pm

Quoting rampart (Reply 8):
That said, the Q400 can be revised, and there is a need for even bigger turboprops than the Q400, such as the expanded ATR, and even bigger, I think. It's been discussed in several previous recent threads.

Yes and no. There is a constant demand for aircraft with lower seat costs but, in the 50-100 seat range, whether that comes in the form of a turbo-prop or a regional jet with next generation engine technology is another thing.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:08 pm

Quoting rampart (Reply 8):
there is a need for even bigger turboprops than the Q400, such as the expanded ATR, and even bigge

The interesting thing is, the lines between jets and turboprops is beginning to blur just a bit. With GTF and the newer turbofans with higher and higher bypass ratios, it seems that they are getting closer to being turboprops inside of a housing. If you count the blades on a GenX on a 748, there are only eighteen blades I believe.

Anyway, that's just my non-technical, simplistic view of it.
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
User avatar
zippyjet
Posts: 5091
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:34 pm

Now with fuel supply and price an issue again we just may see the return of the UDF in some form. As others have said, ATR is doing well and the Dash 8 may get another look from other prospective customers.
I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:06 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 2):
Bombardier can save the Dash8 line by upgrading the Q300. Throw on Q400 engines and avionics, minor aerodynamic advances, and strengthened landing gear for a higher MGTOW. Combine all of that and you got a pretty damn good turboprop.

BBD designed such an aircraft, the Q500, 13 years ago. They discuss the concept again every few years but the market has never been interested in it.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
KarlB737
Posts: 2636
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:08 am

We kinda hit on this topic on March 28th:

Turboprop Resurgence In The US?

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...chid=5423383&s=Turboprop#ID5423383
 
PezySPU
Posts: 281
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:27 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:25 pm

Quoting baje427 (Reply 1):
The Q400 might be the last Dash 8 but the ATR is doing extremely well and have plans to offer a 90 seat version the turboprop will be around for a while longer.

Bombardier also followed with the announcement of their own 90-seat turboprop.
 
Tobias2702
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:49 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:43 pm

Quoting baje427 (Reply 1):
The Q400 might be the last Dash 8 but the ATR is doing extremely well and have plans to offer a 90 seat version the turboprop will be around for a while longer.
Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 7):
The major issue for Bombardier is ATR; the 72-500/600 can do what the Q300 does in exactly the same situation with broadly similar costs but with almost 20 extra passengers,

So, this explains why the Q300 falls back compared to ATR. But what about the Q400? Why aren't there more orders?
PA, AF, UK, BA, AB, DL, LH, FR, BD, A3, EZY, DY //// A319/320/346, B733/735/73G/738/744/763, AT4, 146, CR2, DH4
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:53 pm

The Q300 was BBD's 50 seater, comparable to ATR's 42. Considering there haven't even been a handful of sales for the 42=600, it doesn't seem like a very lucrative market segment at the moment. ATR is basically keeping the 42 alive since it shares so much with the 72. it doesn't cost anything to offer the plane for sale.
What the...?
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:12 pm

Quoting Tobias2702 (Reply 15):
So, this explains why the Q300 falls back compared to ATR. But what about the Q400? Why aren't there more orders?

There are several reasons I am aware of.

- Needs significantly more runway than the ATR 72
- Considerably heavier
- It is a fire and rescue (RFFS) category higher than the ATR 72
- Much more expensive to purchase
- Higher fuel consumption than the ATR 72 and being closed in on by the ERJs too
- One approach category higher

I don't think it was a bad design when developed - quite the opposite in fact; the Q400 is an exceptional piece of technology, but it's position in the marketplace has come under pressure from ATR below and especially Embraer above. Undoubtedly it is still a good aircraft for many airlines, but I think Bombardier placed their eggs in the wrong basket by centering the design around speed and performance.


Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 16):
Considering there haven't even been a handful of sales for the 42=600, it doesn't seem like a very lucrative market segment at the moment. ATR is basically keeping the 42 alive since it shares so much with the 72. it doesn't cost anything to offer the plane for sale.

It's not a big market now, but ATR see enough future in it to keep things ticking over as you say. It won't be long before large numbers of Saab 340s, J-41s, D-328s and the smaller Dash 8s need replacing. The jump to a 70 seater is likely to be too much for many of the markets they serve, so I can see the ATR 42 doing well. That said, I also can see a clean sheet 20-30 seater being developed in the coming years.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
baje427
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:20 pm

Is there no way BBD could make the Q400 more fuel efficient whilst maintaining the speed.?
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:44 pm

Quoting baje427 (Reply 1):
The Q400 might be the last Dash 8 but the ATR is doing extremely well and have plans to offer a 90 seat version the turboprop will be around for a while longer.
Quoting PezySPU (Reply 14):
Bombardier also followed with the announcement of their own 90-seat turboprop.

Design study right now internally is referred to as the Q400X. I believe a 3 frame stretch to permit 92 pax. Fuse would be comparable to the CRJ1000.

Whether or not the 'X' goes ahead I believe is strongly dependent on firming up the existing production line. The potential WS order for 40, QK and SG options for 15 each would be a huge boost in this direction. Cost to develop the 'X' would be pretty low.

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 5):
The 772LR isn't selling all that well. It's a niche aircraft.

Yes, a niche aircraft that cost very little to develop, since it was cobbled together from existing components. So the risk to Boeing was minimal. About 50 frames in service at the moment.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:45 pm

Quoting baje427 (Reply 1):
ATR is doing extremely well and have plans to offer a 90 seat version the turboprop will be around for a while longer.

Ooooooo!!!!! Don't tell Bryan Bedford that! LOL!  
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
LimaFoxTango
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 11:33 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:14 am

Quoting baje427 (Reply 18):
Is there no way BBD could make the Q400 more fuel efficient whilst maintaining the speed.?

What BBD is pitching to airlines now is that they could simply pull back the power and reduce fuel consumption. In other words, they are sacrificing the speed for fuel. Some airlines just don't need the speed that the Q400 offers. Don't think it can be done any other way.
You are said to be a good pilot when your take-off's equal your landings.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:33 am

Quoting LimaFoxTango (Reply 21):

At ATR speeds, it burns about 10% more than the ATR. Speed does give you options...faster trip times, the option of making up time or more trips per day. The Q also has twice the range of the ATR, and if you don't need the range, you can leave fuel on the ground and that means shorter takeoff distance, faster climb and more economical cruise with a full passenger load.

Porter has been doing great business out of Toronto Island at loads lighter than MTOW.

I may be in the minority but I think word of the Q400's demise is somewhat premature. I think they have the WS deal in the bag and more deals will be coming in. The vast majority of operators are making money with the planes and more will be buying.

Of course, that's just my opinion....your mileage may vary.
What the...?
 
User avatar
GCT64
Posts: 1303
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 6:34 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:11 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 17):
Higher fuel consumption than the ATR 72 and being closed in on by the ERJs too
Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 17):
I think Bombardier placed their eggs in the wrong basket by centering the design around speed and performance.

I think these are the problems the Q400 faces. Flybe have made a few comments about the Embraer 175 that suggest the cost of operating it is inline with the cost of operating the Q400.

In Jan 2011 they said "Directors expect that operating E-175 jet will give similar cost advantages to Q400". I have seen other references from Flybe management that suggest that some additional operating cost (for the Embraer) is offset by more attractive financing terms (from Embraer).

Anyway, Flybe are probably the most experienced airline in the world at understanding ERJ versus Q400 economics and they seem to be coming down marginally on the side of the ERJ package.
Flown in: A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A359,A388,BA11,BU31,B190,(..54 more types..),VC10,WESX
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6720
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:28 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 17):
It's not a big market now, but ATR see enough future in it to keep things ticking over as you say. It won't be long before large numbers of Saab 340s, J-41s, D-328s and the smaller Dash 8s need replacing. The jump to a 70 seater is likely to be too much for many of the markets they serve, so I can see the ATR 42 doing well. That said, I also can see a clean sheet 20-30 seater being developed in the coming years.

  
ATR seems to be doing a much better job of looking at markets outside of the massive North America region, a number of other regions need replacements for older turbo props and a number of them do not need the additional capacity of the Q400, the market for 50 seats is not strictly growth potential. Economics only goes so far when the max pax you are getting per flight is 30-40 but you are being told that the Q400 economics is the same as the Dash 8 with greater revenue potential.
On the flip side, flying on an a/c when the majority of seats are not filled creates a thought in ones mind, pax as well as staff.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:29 pm

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 23):

Flybe is also looking to expand into mainland Europe, and there is no doubt that the E-jets make sense for longer routes. Flybe isn't saying they are replacing the Q's. They have gotten rid of some, (at list prices), to a South African leasing company and judging from the press reports I've read, they plan on operating a mixed prop/jet fleet well into the future.

I haven't seen any release that indicates they plan on getting rid of any more.

The E-jets are for expansion, not necessarily replacement. WS has found it needs both jets and props...Flybe found the same.

Right on their site, they say that the Q's and e-jets together, form their fleet plans for at least the next 5 years.
What the...?
 
cbphoto
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 6:23 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:39 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 17):
It's not a big market now, but ATR see enough future in it to keep things ticking over as you say. It won't be long before large numbers of Saab 340s, J-41s, D-328s and the smaller Dash 8s need replacing

I'm not sure this is exactly the market they are looking at! How many large fleets of S340s, J-41s or D-328s exist in the world? You have a few niche operators of these types, but with Mesaba and Colgan both retiring their large fleets of Saabs, I say the market is past the point of replacement!

I think ATR has it's sights on replacing the ERJ/CRJ market! With the E135/145s for the smaller 600 series and the larger CRJs (200/700) with the ATR-72s!

Only time will tell if the major RJ operators will switch to props...again!
ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:26 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 25):
Flybe is also looking to expand into mainland Europe, and there is no doubt that the E-jets make sense for longer routes.

They do, the tipping point for BE is around 300nm I am told.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 25):
They have gotten rid of some, (at list prices), to a South African leasing company and judging from the press reports I've read, they plan on operating a mixed prop/jet fleet well into the future.

At near cost price, not list.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 25):
I haven't seen any release that indicates they plan on getting rid of any more.

The E-jets are for expansion, not necessarily replacement.

Quite a few more will be going. Out of 35 E-175 deliveries, all but 6 will directly replace Q400s. Admittedly I don't think this was the initial plan, but market and capital forces have dictated otherwise.

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 26):
I'm not sure this is exactly the market they are looking at! How many large fleets of S340s, J-41s or D-328s exist in the world? You have a few niche operators of these types, but with Mesaba and Colgan both retiring their large fleets of Saabs, I say the market is past the point of replacement!

The point par13del makes about ATR looking outside of North America is very relevant. At a rough tally there are around 1000 aircraft in service in this seat range around the world with many dozens of different operators. Even if ATR captured just 10% of that replacement market it is still sizable.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:55 pm

This was the GE team's proposal for a 70% more efficient 30-pax TP for NASA's N+3 study...

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
baje427
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:05 pm

Is QX happy with their Q400's from what I have read on airliners.net their is not too much positive ever posted about the Q400
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 5370
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:09 pm

Quoting planemaker (Reply 28):

Cute!    Do the engines have something in common with their Passport turbofan counterpart?
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
iFlyLOTs
Posts: 493
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:45 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:25 pm

Quoting planemaker (Reply 28):
This was the GE team's proposal for a 70% more efficient 30-pax TP for NASA's N+3 study...

I saw a design like that in Popular Science by Boeing for a hybrid turboprop that could potentially replace the 737 by 2035, it would use jet fuel for take off then the pilots would switch it to electrical power for the rest of the flight until landing
"...stay hungry, stay foolish" -Steve Jobs
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:30 pm

Quoting iFlyLOTs (Reply 31):
I saw a design like that in Popular Science by Boeing for a hybrid turboprop that could potentially replace the 737 by 2035,

You mean like this...

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:50 pm

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 30):
Do the engines have something in common with their Passport turbofan counterpart?

The design is for a ~2030 EIS time period so the technology is bleeding edge. If you are interested in the details here is the link to the final report which has a lot of really great information...

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...asa.gov/20100021005_2010021539.pdf
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 5370
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:56 pm

Quoting planemaker (Reply 33):
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...asa.gov/20100021005_2010021539.pdf

Thanks a lot.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 8:03 pm

Quoting iFlyLOTs (Reply 31):
I saw a design like that in Popular Science by Boeing for a hybrid turboprop that could potentially replace the 737 by 2035, it would use jet fuel for take off then the pilots would switch it to electrical power for the rest of the flight until landing

And here is the final report for Boeing's submission for NASA's N+3. Again, really good reading...

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...asa.gov/20110011321_2011011863.pdf


Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:15 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 27):
They do, the tipping point for BE is around 300nm I am told.

I've searched a lot for that info but I can't find it. They did receive very favourable financing which helped the deal along. Flight global reported this is how they closed the trip cost gap with the Q400. On fuel burn alone, the PW150 engines are significantly more frugal than the CF-34-8 engines. Cruise sfc for the CF is 0.68, while TO sfc for the PW150 is only 0.44, cruise sfc is 0.35...per engine.

There was an airline recently which got rid of new CRJ's in favour of E-jets, purely based on financing advantages .

This is a great example that there is much more to airline economics than fuel consumption, even in these times. Trip costs include everything...including the cost of aircraft ownership.

I did find this which explains the deal a bit better;

http://web02.aviationweek.com/aw/mob...=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

The article talks about the overall trip costs being almost equal but they don't mention the length of trip.

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 27):
Quite a few more will be going. Out of 35 E-175 deliveries, all but 6 will directly replace Q400s. Admittedly I don't think this was the initial plan, but market and capital forces have dictated otherwise.

I also can't find anything that shows that Flybe is actually planning on reducing their Q400 fleet any further. In fleet expansion projections, the Q400's are included in that, including the 12 options they have on order. With the commonality of the E-jets, Flybe still flies an essentially two type fleet.

Everything I can find is about expansion, not replacement. That doesn't mean it isn't happening, it just means I haven't found the information...and sometimes one needs a break from google.
What the...?
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:23 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 36):
I've searched a lot for that info but I can't find it.

In post 23 GCT64 mentions some of the quotes which have come from FlyBe on the subject, but I'm afraid I can't provide a further link as I received this straight from the horse's mouth. Essentially after the 195 deliveries FlyBe expressed their interest in ordering the 170/175 if it's economics could be brought in line with the Q400, a year or so later and they placed an order for 140 ERJ 175s (35 firm, 65 options and 40 purchase rights).

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 36):
I also can't find anything that shows that Flybe is actually planning on reducing their Q400 fleet any further. In fleet expansion projections, the Q400's are included in that, including the 12 options they have on order. With the commonality of the E-jets, Flybe still flies an essentially two type fleet.

Everything I can find is about expansion, not replacement. That doesn't mean it isn't happening, it just means I haven't found the information...and sometimes one needs a break from google.
http://www.flybe.com/corporate/media/news/1111/24.htm

It was tied up in the above press release a few months ago, I believe the 29 aircraft to be replaced includes those which have already been sold to South Africa to support the financing deal on the ERJs. The general plan seems to be to keep the Q400 on the short regional UK routes where it has an advantage and put ERJs on everything else. I've heard different variations of the original plan, ranging from keeping a small fleet of Q400s just for UK domestic routes and converting all the ERJ options, to getting rid of the Q400s altogether and converting all the ERJ options and using the purchase rights - presumably depending on the in service performance of the ERJ. Whichever, their hand was forced by the financing problems they had and the expansion plans have taken a significant haircut.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:29 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 36):
I've searched a lot for that info but I can't find it. They did receive very favourable financing which helped the deal along. Flight global reported this is how they closed the trip cost gap with the Q400.

It isn't the first time this has happened. The CRJ200 killed the SAAB 2000 and the ERJ killed the Dash-300.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 36):
This is a great example that there is much more to airline economics than fuel consumption, even in these times. Trip costs include everything...including the cost of aircraft ownership.

Yes, that is exactly one of the problems that BBD's latest models are facing.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:57 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 37):

That replacement plan goes through 2016...and seems like it includes the 9 already gone. That still leaves a pretty sizable Q fleet...but anything can happen in the meantime. The more fuel prices go up, the more it favors the Q and the more they favor commonality, the more it works for the E-jets.

Still, with the financing figured in, the trip cost comparison makes some sense.

Just to be clear, this doesn't take away from the capabilities of the E-jets on their own...which are considerable.

[Edited 2012-04-26 17:25:05]
What the...?
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sat Apr 28, 2012 2:41 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 39):
That replacement plan goes through 2016...and seems like it includes the 9 already gone.

That's my understanding. The first Q400 frames had to go before they could secure the 85% financing on the Embraer order, i.e. raise the 15% themselves.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 39):
. That still leaves a pretty sizable Q fleet...but anything can happen in the meantime. The more fuel prices go up, the more it favors the Q and the more they favor commonality, the more it works for the E-jets.

Personally I think they should keep the Q400s on UK regional flights and be very cautious about expanding internationally with the ERJs, it is a very risky strategy right now and they are about to announce some pretty poor results.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14479
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:03 pm

Quoting planemaker (Reply 32):
You mean like this...
Quoting planemaker (Reply 35):
And here is the final report for Boeing's submission for NASA's N 3.

The shape of the long slender wings with the bracing remind me of some of the training gliders I flew years ago. Maybe Boeing has a SGS-233 fan in house?


SGS-2-33A/1991923/L/" target="_blank">View Large SGS-2-33A/1991923/M/" target="_blank">View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Eisnor


SGS-2-33A/1931867/L/" target="_blank">View Large SGS-2-33A/1931867/M/" target="_blank">View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Barry Shipley



Of course they did not have the honking engines on the wings!
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
masseybrown
Posts: 4488
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:55 pm

It's worth noting that UA's Smisek, during this week's earnings conference call, was emphatic that the Pinnacle Q400's will continue flying for United one way or another. He said details of ownership and operation are still being negotiated, but left no doubt that these planes will continue flying as before.

No one brought up the question of additional purchases, however, nor did Smisek give any hints.

Edited for spelling of Smisek

[Edited 2012-04-28 09:58:06]
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2600
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:42 pm

I think turboprops will be around for many years to come. The engine design will undoubtedly advance but I can't see an end, especially for the Q400 anytime.

Not sure of Bombardier has bio-fuels in mind for future Q400 design, but that will come very soon..
"What good are wings without the courage to fly?" - Atticus
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sat Apr 28, 2012 8:00 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 41):
The shape of the long slender wings with the bracing remind me of some of the training gliders I flew years ago. Maybe Boeing has a SGS-233 fan in house?

I've actually flown the 2-33. Brings back some wonderful memories, those pics. Thanks.

For all you with a PPL, try gliding. It is a blast and gives you some real appreciation of what the term "airmanship" means. I don't recommend gliding a 767, as Rob Pearson did a couple decades ago, especially doing a sideslip, but hey, have a go if you absolutely need to.  Wow!
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3988
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sun Apr 29, 2012 1:57 am

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 44):
I've actually flown the 2-33.

After flying the Blanik, the 2-33 feels like a river barge.

Pearson has never been shy about largely attributing the safe landing in Gimli to his experience as a glider pilot. Any powered pilot will have their ego quite crushed on their first few glider flights.

Back to turboprops, both Pratt and GE are spending quite a bit of cash researching their next gen offerings. The 90 seaters on the horizon could have similar fuel burn to the current 70 seaters.
What the...?
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:02 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 45):

After flying the Blanik, the 2-33 feels like a river barge.


You're one up on me then !  
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 45):

Pearson has never been shy about largely attributing the safe landing in Gimli to his experience as a glider pilot. Any powered pilot will have their ego quite crushed on their first few glider flights.

Actually, despite outstanding airmanship, Pearson should have been fired. He was enormously lucky that his FO had trained at Gimli. Given that there was doubt at both YUL and YOW about how much fuel was on board, there was a simple solution: fill the tanks until they ran over. This would remove doubt and not put both the a/c and the pax in danger. He unnecessarily hazarded the aircraft, which to me is a firing offense.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5015
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: Future Of The Turboprop?

Sun Apr 29, 2012 12:25 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 46):
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 45):

After flying the Blanik, the 2-33 feels like a river barge.



You're one up on me then !

Some that I know are too large (weight-wise) to fit into a 2-33, and had to train in the Grob 103, so they will never get to know just how much a barge it is (or how much fun the 1-26 is.)
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos