Topic Author
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 11:41 pm

Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 4:37 am

The Saab2000 was always mentioned as being a fast and comfortable modern turboprop. Why did it sell so bad ,obliging Saab to end production and leave the whole market to Bombardier. Even SAScommuter didn't seem impressed!
SAA B747 SP, Luxavia B747 SP

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 4:57 am

Because airlines prefered jets.
Topic Author
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 11:41 pm

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 5:13 am

Well that's very nice telling me that airlines prefer jets!
I didn't know that! Maybe you could explain why SAScommuter switched from Saab2000 to Dash8Q-400
while Saab2000 was still being offered! There must be something wrong ;SAScommuter is Swedish seems?
SAA B747 SP, Luxavia B747 SP
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2000 3:58 pm

RE: SAS Not Happy With Q400

Mon Nov 06, 2000 1:51 pm

Maybe SK is now regretting having decided on the Q400, according to Flight International a week or so back, they grounded the fleet.


Posts: 7564
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 3:05 pm

Well the short answer is that airline passengers prefer jets.

The more detailed answer... I read several years ago in Aviation Week that Crossair was having difficulties with the large 6-blade props on the 2000s. The new turboprops like the Saab 2000 and Dash 8-400Q, are highly advanced with fancy new props, syncronizers, active and passive noise reduction equipment, all very expensive to keep up. So why fly those when you have these jets that fly as fast and as quiet and are less mx intensive.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 4:03 pm

Why didn't it sell?

Can you say: regional jet
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 6:50 pm

Okay, first of all - the Q400 is flying again. I saw plenty of them on saturday. The problem reported had something to do with the pitot-tube of ONE of their planes. The rest worked fine.

Why did SK go for props? No one except for those who decided knows. I spoke to a SAS mechanic a couple of days ago, and he couldn't understand why SK didn't go for jets, such as RJ's and so on. So, it'll be a riddle that never will be solved.

Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2000 2:07 am

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 7:07 pm

Airlines use props instead of jets to keep costs down. A prop is cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate.

The distances in Scandinavia are relatively short so the slower speed of the prop is not that significant.
User avatar
Posts: 2921
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2000 9:37 pm

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Mon Nov 06, 2000 7:15 pm

Didn't anyone read the article about the SAAB340 and the SAAB2000 in Airliners magazine, I think September/October.
It mentioned something about the The SAAB2000 was not a pure jet and it was being built about the same time as Bombardier and Embraer were marketing there regional jet.
Maybe someone could post the relevant parts of the article refering to the SAAB2000.
Why fly non stop when you can connect
Posts: 6409
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Tue Nov 07, 2000 2:17 am

The SAAB 2000 was designed when fuel prices were high in the mid 80'es.
Then fuel prices dropped and created the rush for RJs.
Now fuel prices are high again, and if they stay high, then regional turboprops will sell better again.

SAAB chose to discontinue airliner production because they could not make much profit on them. Labor costs are very high in Sweden. When they closed they were able to transfer production capacity to SAAB JAS-39 Gripen fighter planes.

The SAS DCH-8-Q400 problems are multiple:
1. Airspeed indicator (pitot tube). They bent two Q400s on hard landings caused by faulty airspeed indication.
2. Several faulty fire warnings in baggage compartment which caused diversions and evacuations.
3. Engine problems: Excessive oil consumption. They had one engine fire which started on spilled oil.

Some of them fly at the moment while others are being modified.
The last thing I read in the newspaper was that SAS has refused to take delivery of the last 18 Q400s on order until a string of shortcomings have been corrected satisfactorily.

Somebody said that inter-Scandinavian routes are short. Well, everything is relative. But the vast majority of inter-Scandinavian routes and domestic routes in especially Sweden and Norway, and also to a minor extent in Denmark, are serviced by B737-300/-500/-600/-700/-800 and DC-9/MD-80/-90. The Q400s will only exchange old F50s on very short and thin routes. Also on non inter-Scandinavian routes like Copenhagen to Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Hamburg and such.

Best regards, Preben Norholm
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
Posts: 1989
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2000 4:51 am

RE: Saab2000 ,why Didn't It Sell?

Tue Nov 07, 2000 2:55 am

I am an engineer, and I work on dash8s. They are not perfect, but no a/c is. I had the opportunity to see a Saab 2000 a couple of years ago, when it was on a promo tour. While it was technologically impressive, the cabin looked like a very long Metro! With three across seating, and fifty seats, it was very long and cramped looking. The aisle was lower than the seats to allow standing up, but overall the interior seemed cramped.
No doubt the Q400 is long too, but probably not so cramped.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: admanager, Alexa [Bot], Atlwarrior, Baidu [Spider], DOHspotter, FlyPeoria, frleahy, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], hOMSaR, hoons90, jfk777, mozart, MrHMSH, reasonable, rgrassick, SEPilot, styles9002, SurfandSnow, thekorean, Viscount724 and 340 guests