caleb1
Topic Author
Posts: 539
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:51 am

Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:46 am

I know that HA has a very long time to think about replacing their 717s, but since there is currently no viable jet aircraft that is able to perform the short sectors within the Hawaiian islands, why isn't a turboprop like the ATR 72-600 under consideration? What is wrong with Hawaiian being an all turboprop inter-island carrier? The ATRs or the Q400s are excellent aircraft and would seem to be the perfect replacement for the 717s. I don't think many passengers would mind, seeing as how the inter island flights are fairly short anyway. Actually, by the time the 717s need replacing, even better variants of either the ATRs or the Qs might be available. I think this would be a good idea, but I imagine there are many others who don't. If so, why not?
 
floridaflyboy
Posts: 1590
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 3:26 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:51 am

Not being an engineering or mx type, I have to wonder how one of these new-engine generation aircraft would perform on those segments (i.e. c-series, MRJ, E2, etc.)

Although, I'd totally love to see more turboprops plying the interisland skies!
Good goes around!
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 5:39 am

They operate ATR's or contract it out to Empire Air. But they do not seat as much and fly as fast.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6833
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 7:27 pm

I feel the MRJ is the best for HA seeing as they don't need the range of the Ejets. How many used Fokker 100 are there? Those would fit nicely.

The biggest hint to what they will order is how well the CSERIES performs on shorthaul.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
jolau1701
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 7:35 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:24 pm

I'm hoping for C-Series too.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 3043
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:42 pm

Hawaii seems like the perfect place for an ATR. The furthest route you could possibly fly can be done in only 45 minutes, 30 minutes or less for any other destination. With such short routes, a C-series (or any jet for that matter) would struggle to shave off more than 5 minutes on most routes, compared to the ATR. Especially since the ATR can cruise in at close to maximum speed and slow down right at the last moment, while the jets need to slow down quite a bit before.

:)
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8136
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:56 pm

I agree that the ATR72-600 could be a very viable option for HA. After all, they will have lower fuel burn per passenger than the 717-200, and could easily fly on a full-load between HNL and Hilo (ITO) or Kona (KOA). And the ATR72-600 would be perfect for the type of very high-frequency operations demanded for inter-island flights (for example to Lihue (LIH)).
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 749
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 8:57 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
How many used Fokker 100 are there? Those would fit nicely.


Hawaiian Airlines probably evaluated the Fokker 100 during the 1980s and 1990s (like they did their evaluation with the BAe 146). Professional companies like Hawaiian evaluate all potential aircraft-types capacity-wise and their decisions were most likely the result of extensive investigations and calculations.

Hawaiian decided against the BAe 146 and streamlined their inter island-fleet to the DC-9-51 and selected the Boeing 717. The Fokker 100 would have been a smaller replacement for the 139-seat DC-9-50. The Fokker 100 can fit up to 122 passengers but not with a First Class.

Regards
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
spacecookie
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 9:01 pm

I live on an island
And here are some islands around.
Crj and erj are just no that good in cost per seat, the main flights are with atr.
And air nostrum have a lot of crj but they can't compete that easy.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5527
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 9:09 pm

When speculating, remember that HA requires aircraft between the islands that can regularly take a dozen or more surfboards, oversized coolers & other items like tires, I've seen doors loaded in the belly of our 717. These planes are not only passenger carriers, but move a large amount of luggage, mail & cargo. Of course companies like Aloha Air Cargo do the major lifting, HA needs the cargo capacity that the 717 provides. HA in the past has flown Dash-7's & SD-330's & currently has the ATR-42 flying for them by Empire, I think HA recognizes people like jets & that they provide the belly space that is required for the myriad of items they carry & that there is a concrete need for a smaller aircraft in the fleet as well, to serve smaller Islands & communities. I see a mix for the foreseeable future of HA. As we know when HA finally starts replacing 717's there will likely be new planes to choose from & these planes being discussed, are going to be old news.
707 717 720 727-1/2 737-1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 747-1/2/3/4 757-2/3 767-2/3/4 777-2/3 DC8 DC9 MD80/2/7/8 D10-1/3/4 M11 L10-1/2/5 A300/310/320
AA AC AQ AS BA BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HG HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN WP YS 8M
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6833
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 9:46 pm

RWA380 wrote:
When speculating, remember that HA requires aircraft between the islands that can regularly take a dozen or more surfboards, oversized coolers & other items like tires, I've seen doors loaded in the belly of our 717. These planes are not only passenger carriers, but move a large amount of luggage, mail & cargo. Of course companies like Aloha Air Cargo do the major lifting, HA needs the cargo capacity that the 717 provides. HA in the past has flown Dash-7's & SD-330's & currently has the ATR-42 flying for them by Empire, I think HA recognizes people like jets & that they provide the belly space that is required for the myriad of items they carry & that there is a concrete need for a smaller aircraft in the fleet as well, to serve smaller Islands & communities. I see a mix for the foreseeable future of HA. As we know when HA finally starts replacing 717's there will likely be new planes to choose from & these planes being discussed, are going to be old news.

You raise a good point. At leas the beauty of the ATR and Q400s are they have tall cargo holds. Perhaps the Q400 combi would be a good fit?
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
jaybird
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 4:23 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 10:56 pm

I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up again .. it comes up almost quarterly it seems. If you do some searching you should be able to find out why turbos won't work .. why other jets won't work .. why cargo capacity is needed .. and why Hawaiian is buying more 717s ..
 
777PHX
Posts: 962
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:10 pm

jaybird wrote:
I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up again .. it comes up almost quarterly it seems. If you do some searching you should be able to find out why turbos won't work .. why other jets won't work .. why cargo capacity is needed .. and why Hawaiian is buying more 717s ..


Quarterly?

This is a weekly thread.

This is airlines.net, where the 15 year old armchair expert knows how to run an airline better than the people that actually run it.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5527
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Aug 15, 2016 3:07 am

jaybird wrote:
I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up again .. it comes up almost quarterly it seems. If you do some searching you should be able to find out why turbos won't work .. why other jets won't work .. why cargo capacity is needed .. and why Hawaiian is buying more 717s ..


It's been about 6 weeks, I felt what I said would help speed along the end of the thread by laying out the a.net culmination of responses to the subject over the years regarding capacity requirements. I feel it's usually a team effort. I look it like this, not everyone reads A.net every day, so there are bound to be repeated subjects as people speculate for topics to discuss. The topic does seems to raise a fair amount of interest however.
707 717 720 727-1/2 737-1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 747-1/2/3/4 757-2/3 767-2/3/4 777-2/3 DC8 DC9 MD80/2/7/8 D10-1/3/4 M11 L10-1/2/5 A300/310/320
AA AC AQ AS BA BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HG HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN WP YS 8M
 
User avatar
cathay747
Posts: 1115
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Aug 15, 2016 11:52 am

777PHX wrote:
This is airlines.net, where the 15 year old armchair expert knows how to run an airline better than the people that actually run it.


LOL yes indeed, and now that you don't need a paid-membership to be able to post, the bar will really be lowered and we'll have 10 year olds too now...including adults who ACT like 10 year olds!
Try a Little VC-10derness
 
spacecookie
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Aug 15, 2016 12:16 pm

777PHX wrote:
jaybird wrote:
I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up again .. it comes up almost quarterly it seems. If you do some searching you should be able to find out why turbos won't work .. why other jets won't work .. why cargo capacity is needed .. and why Hawaiian is buying more 717s ..


Quarterly?

This is a weekly thread.

This is airlines.net, where the 15 year old armchair expert knows how to run an airline better than the people that actually run it.

Well looking at the huge losses for some airlines
Maybee an 15 old can do it better.

As adults we should respect other people's opinion.
 
KaiTak747
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Aug 15, 2016 2:10 pm

b747400erf wrote:
They operate ATR's or contract it out to Empire Air. But they do not seat as much and fly as fast.


Speed is not really relevant on short sector lengths, no passenger is going to notice an extra 5 minutes of flight time.

Capacity and cargo do of course do matter to Hawaiian.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1935
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Aug 15, 2016 2:50 pm

caleb1 wrote:
...why isn't a turboprop like the ATR 72-600 under consideration? What is wrong with Hawaiian being an all turboprop inter-island carrier? ...I don't think many passengers would mind, seeing as how the inter island flights are fairly short anyway. I think this would be a good idea, but I imagine there are many others who don't. ...If so, why not?


One, Empire Air is already operating ATRs for HA - that this topic was started suggests an unawareness of that fact. IOW, the ATRs aren't exactly blossoming in the market, are they?

Two, passengers do mind being in a turboprop; years ago, there were two yuppie couples boarding one of our (then) brand new ATRs and one of the gents stated that it was a "converted World War II bomber." So I showed him the registration and airworthiness certificate - it was only 11 days old. There are many more such stories.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2223
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Aug 15, 2016 2:55 pm

I'm hoping the 717s stay as long as possible. And I'm sure they will. Regarding future replacement, the A319neo and the C-Series should be able to do the job. The PW GTF is supposed to be good at short hops with short turnarounds just like the BR715. But we'll see.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Tue Aug 16, 2016 4:06 am

KaiTak747 wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
They operate ATR's or contract it out to Empire Air. But they do not seat as much and fly as fast.


Speed is not really relevant on short sector lengths, no passenger is going to notice an extra 5 minutes of flight time.

Capacity and cargo do of course do matter to Hawaiian.


Speed is important when you have multiple frequencies a day and the aircraft is always in the air.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21555
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Tue Aug 16, 2016 4:17 am

JetBuddy wrote:
I'm hoping the 717s stay as long as possible. And I'm sure they will. Regarding future replacement, the A319neo and the C-Series should be able to do the job. The PW GTF is supposed to be good at short hops with short turnarounds just like the BR715. But we'll see.


Actually, the PW GTF has a bit of an issue with repeated heating and cooling and cycle time. ;-) If they can fix those issues well, then maybe we'll have something.

But the A319NEO is an awful lot of airplane to be doing short inter-island hops. That said, it's versatile enough that it could also run mainland trips. And HA has chosen PW for their A321NEO fleet.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
777PHX
Posts: 962
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:41 am

b747400erf wrote:
KaiTak747 wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
They operate ATR's or contract it out to Empire Air. But they do not seat as much and fly as fast.


Speed is not really relevant on short sector lengths, no passenger is going to notice an extra 5 minutes of flight time.

Capacity and cargo do of course do matter to Hawaiian.


Speed is important when you have multiple frequencies a day and the aircraft is always in the air.


Indeed. Especially with HA's insanely short ground turnaround times. 5 or 10 minutes difference on every flight adds up when a single frame operates 10 flights a day.
 
HAL
Posts: 1773
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 1:38 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Wed Aug 17, 2016 6:23 pm

777PHX wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
KaiTak747 wrote:

Speed is not really relevant on short sector lengths, no passenger is going to notice an extra 5 minutes of flight time.

Capacity and cargo do of course do matter to Hawaiian.


Speed is important when you have multiple frequencies a day and the aircraft is always in the air.


Indeed. Especially with HA's insanely short ground turnaround times. 5 or 10 minutes difference on every flight adds up when a single frame operates 10 flights a day.

It's more like 12 - 14 legs per day on their 717s.

HAL
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4013
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Wed Aug 17, 2016 7:19 pm

b747400erf wrote:
KaiTak747 wrote:
b747400erf wrote:
They operate ATR's or contract it out to Empire Air. But they do not seat as much and fly as fast.


Speed is not really relevant on short sector lengths, no passenger is going to notice an extra 5 minutes of flight time.

Capacity and cargo do of course do matter to Hawaiian.


Speed is important when you have multiple frequencies a day and the aircraft is always in the air.

Not as much as A.net makes it out to be. The variance on a stage of that length is going to be negligible when you factor in, ATC, taxi time, turn time (turning a turboprop is generally faster), etc.
 
777PHX
Posts: 962
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Wed Aug 17, 2016 8:24 pm

HAL wrote:
777PHX wrote:
b747400erf wrote:

Speed is important when you have multiple frequencies a day and the aircraft is always in the air.


Indeed. Especially with HA's insanely short ground turnaround times. 5 or 10 minutes difference on every flight adds up when a single frame operates 10 flights a day.

It's more like 12 - 14 legs per day on their 717s.

HAL


Yeah, I was going to say ~13 but I decided to stay conservative in case some snot nosed brat decided to challenge me on it. Thanks for confirming.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1072
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:27 pm

DocLightning wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
I'm hoping the 717s stay as long as possible. And I'm sure they will. Regarding future replacement, the A319neo and the C-Series should be able to do the job. The PW GTF is supposed to be good at short hops with short turnarounds just like the BR715. But we'll see.


Actually, the PW GTF has a bit of an issue with repeated heating and cooling and cycle time. ;-) If they can fix those issues well, then maybe we'll have something.

But the A319NEO is an awful lot of airplane to be doing short inter-island hops. That said, it's versatile enough that it could also run mainland trips. And HA has chosen PW for their A321NEO fleet.


Are you referring to the rotor bowing issue on the PW1100? Bombardier claimed it was not an issue on the PW1500 for CSeries. I suspect more likely it is less of an issue, but I'd be surprised if there were no maintenance or performance drawbacks at all to running PW1500's on Hawaiian Airlines turn times.

By the time HA needs to replace the 717's, there will no doubt be enough in-service data to give HA a very good idea how the PW1500 and other GTF variants will fare compared to their competitors at their operational tempo.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21555
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:35 am

iamlucky13 wrote:

Are you referring to the rotor bowing issue on the PW1100? Bombardier claimed it was not an issue on the PW1500 for CSeries. I suspect more likely it is less of an issue, but I'd be surprised if there were no maintenance or performance drawbacks at all to running PW1500's on Hawaiian Airlines turn times..


It really depends on how short the turn times are. If they are like 30 minutes, the rotor may not cool enough to start bowing.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3708
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:50 am

In order to put the t-prop debate to rest and blow major holes into the theory that it may be a good idea, all one has to do is break out a calculator and crunch some numbers.

Follow closely... 170 flights/day x 128 seats = 21,760 seats/day on mainline type aircraft, with cargo carrying capacity and space for bags.
Now, entertaining the silly premise that large t-props can replicate on a practical scale what HAL does with the 717s, let's crunch more numbers. 21,760 seats divided by 75 seats (on average in large t-props) = 290.1, rounded down to 290 flights/day. For real?

The suggestion that large t-props should replace the 717 based on the fact that the neighbor island market is short haul is not only flawed, it demonstrates one has no clue what HAL really does and what this market is all about. Replacing the 717s with t-props would force HAL to grow the operation to 290 flights/day. This is absurd. This kind of operation in facilities that are bursting at the seams and often inadequate for even the current operation, would be a logistical nightmare.

Hopefully, before 2 weeks time, when the topic is broached yet again, someone will read this thread and think twice about beating an already dead horse.
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:38 am

caleb1 wrote:
I know that HA has a very long time to think about replacing their 717s, but since there is cutrrently no viable jet aircraft that is able to perform the short sectors within the Hawaiian islands, why isn't a turboprop like the ATR 72-600 under consideration? What is wrong with Hawaiian being an all turboprop inter-island carrier? The ATRs or the Q400s are excellent aircraft and would seem to be the perfect replacement for the 717s. I don't think many passengers would mind, seeing as how the inter island flights are fairly short anyway. Actually, by the time the 717s need replacing, even better variants of either the ATRs or the Qs might be available. I think this would be a good idea, but I imagine there are many others who don't. If so, why not?

we need a q500. With capacity of 100 pax . 50%composite fly bybwire active sidestick control. Improved landing gear.increased cargo capacity.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2103
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 2:06 am

For those who champion the Q400, WP is trying it with three new, leased Q400s (hubbed at HNL, spokes to LIH, OGG, and KOA), and retiring their ATRs.
Back when AQ and HA were head to head, AQ finally gained majority market share interisland with their "all jet" fleet. Based on my decades of flying interisland, on every carrier here, and chatting with pax, flight time is secondary to cabin noise level. Mid-Pac's YS-11s were the all time noisiest, but load factors were high as a result of cheap fares. Mid-Pac "never made it up on volume". (My first post... I've been lurking on a.net for ... over a decade.)
 
User avatar
KanaHawaii
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 9:43 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 5:44 am

A coupe of thoughts on this:
1. The culture of Hawaii when it comes to air travel has been always driven by the idea that transportation between the islands should be both cheap and quick. Jet travel between the islands, when first introduced in the 1960's, was touted as modernizing the state, bringing the islands closer together. With the technology at the time - JT8D engined 737's and DC-9s, it made feasible sense. Because the people of Hawaii don't know really better, today they look at Hawaiian with its 717's as the first choice of travel, followed by Island Air.

2. While Hawaiian can downgrade to turboprops (which would probably add savings to operations, but the residents of Hawaii would never see the savings), the slack in available airline seats with the conversion would need to be absorbed by another airline or another form of transportation. In other island communities (French Polynesia, Maldives, etc) there are well established sea ferry operations. So transportation can be done throughout the entity at price points (ferry's being cheaper overall) that would service all populations. Hawaii currently has no commuter ferry between the islands. If Hawaiian would downgrade (which is what it would really be seen) its services to turboprop, without the associated new transportation services, all kinds of havoc could occur which both the state and industry could ill afford to experience.

3. (more conspiratorial) With Hawaiian being the largest transporter of people between the islands, using 717 jets which at one time was described to me as "flying out a B-52 bomber to go grocery shopping" they provide enough heft in the market to deter any real attempt by mainland operators (AS, UAL in the past) to enter the interisland market with anything better than what Hawaiian has. Putting asside the moment the fact that Hawaii is provincial in its corporate attitudes, the fact is that Hawaiian would be most formidable with what it has now to prevent new operators to come in at any strength. I think they tolerate Island Air right now as they, with the Q400's, still does not dent enough of the market for Hawaiian to take notice.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2103
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:19 am

Hawaii would be a great market for propfan (aka open rotor) airliners, given the stage profiles. I can see HA's refresh of its 717 fleet being propfans, but not turboprops (assuming propfans expand from the Airbus A400M; I would rule out Russian frames and powerplants). HA's load factor recently is about 83% (with 8F and 115 or 120 Y, depending on 717 version), so they have some flex in fleet planning.
 
YVRing
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:14 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 2:14 pm

I think I figured out the best solution. HA should pick up used EK A380's. One trip is cheaper than 5-6 trips. Yup my math works out. I expect that the electronics ban was due to HA lobbying trying to force EK into a more favorable deal. A380's for local flying and A350s for long haul. Done.

I'm gonna write a paper about this for my gr.8 business class.
 
Utah744
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 2:49 pm

When HA gets rid of the 717s they'll go to Delta.
You are never too old to learn something stupid
 
User avatar
precure787
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 3:30 pm

Ohana operates the ATR 42-500 aircraft on smaller islands and community airports, notably Lanai and Molokai. If the 717 were to be replaced, they'll likely fly a ATR 72-600.
Edward Zen/Precure 787
 
ericm2031
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:46 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 4:41 pm

Utah744 wrote:
When HA gets rid of the 717s they'll go to Delta.


Not sure DL would want them after the amount of cycles HA will have on them
 
User avatar
precure787
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 5:51 pm

ericm2031 wrote:
Utah744 wrote:
When HA gets rid of the 717s they'll go to Delta.


Not sure DL would want them after the amount of cycles HA will have on them


Probably not. DL will switch to the A320 NEO or the CSeries
Edward Zen/Precure 787
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:30 pm

Surely the Chinese would like to get a foothold in the US market with the Comac ARJ21 which appears perfectly suited for the 50th state and as a 717 replacement (which it pretty much is).

Image

Also, it would make sense to have some ATR-72's either with Hawaiian mainline or with Ohana which already flies the ATR-42.

Image
come visit the south pacific
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 7:26 pm

WPvsMW wrote:
For those who champion the Q400, WP is trying it with three new, leased Q400s (hubbed at HNL, spokes to LIH, OGG, and KOA), and retiring their ATRs.
Back when AQ and HA were head to head, AQ finally gained majority market share interisland with their "all jet" fleet. Based on my decades of flying interisland, on every carrier here, and chatting with pax, flight time is secondary to cabin noise level. Mid-Pac's YS-11s were the all time noisiest, but load factors were high as a result of cheap fares. Mid-Pac "never made it up on volume". (My first post... I've been lurking on a.net for ... over a decade.)

The good question is why WP stop operating their q400 aircraft in the past now only to realize that time is money and that the q400 is just faster than the "cheaper" and 100 kts slower atr .
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 7:29 pm

Motorhussy wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
Wasnt there a crj operator there in hawai? Which went bankrupt...


Sorry, not understanding the relevance to my post?!

Of course unfortunately they will never choose for a Chinese product which won't ever sell in the western world.
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 7:33 pm

FlyHossD wrote:
caleb1 wrote:
...why isn't a turboprop like the ATR 72-600 under consideration? What is wrong with Hawaiian being an all turboprop inter-island carrier? ...I don't think many passengers would mind, seeing as how the inter island flights are fairly short anyway. I think this would be a good idea, but I imagine there are many others who don't. ...If so, why not?


One, Empire Air is already operating ATRs for HA - that this topic was started suggests an unawareness of that fact. IOW, the ATRs aren't exactly blossoming in the market, are they?

Two, passengers do mind being in a turboprop; years ago, there were two yuppie couples boarding one of our (then) brand new ATRs and one of the gents stated that it was a "converted World War II bomber." So I showed him the registration and airworthiness certificate - it was only 11 days old. There are many more such stories.

I have heard that story too in my country . Atr=ww2 converted bomber .
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1228
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 7:33 pm

Utah744 wrote:
When HA gets rid of the 717s they'll go to Delta.

They might go to Delta as donor aircraft……..
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 7:40 pm

The island's air motivation for the q400: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bizjou ... t.amp.html
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18142
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 8:06 pm

Motorhussy wrote:
Surely the Chinese would like to get a foothold in the US market with the Comac ARJ21 which appears perfectly suited for the 50th state and as a 717 replacement (which it pretty much is).

Image

Also, it would make sense to have some ATR-72's either with Hawaiian mainline or with Ohana which already flies the ATR-42.

Image

Perfectly suited? Have you seen how bad the ARJ-21 has been performing? HA needs 12-14 cycles per day with a surge in high season to 17. Not to mention the capacity reduction. Even when debugged the ARJ-21 has the issue that they cut cooling to improve fuel burn. This increases the down time between flights.


To others:
HA would be well served by a stretched .mRJ if surfboard pockets we're added. Or the C-series, in particular the CS100. They could add Santa Barbara and a few other small cities with the type.

The A320 family has issues for HA due to the high cycles. A tough customer...

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Sun Mar 26, 2017 8:47 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Perfectly suited? Lightsaber


It's difficult to get across a-tongue-in-a-cheek sometimes but I'd hoped my "Surely the Chinese would like to get a foothold in the US market" and the "appears perfectly suited" would convey it.
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
KanaHawaii
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 9:43 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Mar 27, 2017 2:27 am

what a long story man.[/quote]

Sorry, been more a lurker on the boards than a poster and today the muse came out in me. I'll try not to take the response as an insult.
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3708
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:39 am

I'm just going to copy and past what I wrote 7 months ago...

In order to put the t-prop debate to rest and blow major holes into the theory that it may be a good idea, all one has to do is break out a calculator and crunch some numbers.

Follow closely... 170 flights/day x 128 seats = 21,760 seats/day on mainline type aircraft, with cargo carrying capacity and space for bags.
Now, entertaining the silly premise that large t-props can replicate on a practical scale what HAL does with the 717s, let's crunch more numbers. 21,760 seats divided by 75 seats (on average in large t-props) = 290.1, rounded down to 290 flights/day. For real?

The suggestion that large t-props should replace the 717 based on the fact that the neighbor island market is short haul is not only flawed, it demonstrates one has no clue what HAL really does and what this market is all about. Replacing the 717s with t-props would force HAL to grow the operation to 290 flights/day. This is absurd. This kind of operation in facilities that are bursting at the seams and often inadequate for even the current operation, would be a logistical nightmare.

Hopefully, before 2 weeks time, when the topic is broached yet again, someone will read this thread and think twice about beating an already dead horse.
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:28 pm

azjubilee wrote:
I'm just going to copy and past what I wrote 7 months ago...

In order to put the t-prop debate to rest and blow major holes into the theory that it may be a good idea, all one has to do is break out a calculator and crunch some numbers.

Follow closely... 170 flights/day x 128 seats = 21,760 seats/day on mainline type aircraft, with cargo carrying capacity and space for bags.
Now, entertaining the silly premise that large t-props can replicate on a practical scale what HAL does with the 717s, let's crunch more numbers. 21,760 seats divided by 75 seats (on average in large t-props) = 290.1, rounded down to 290 flights/day. For real?

The suggestion that large t-props should replace the 717 based on the fact that the neighbor island market is short haul is not only flawed, it demonstrates one has no clue what HAL really does and what this market is all about. Replacing the 717s with t-props would force HAL to grow the operation to 290 flights/day. This is absurd. This kind of operation in facilities that are bursting at the seams and often inadequate for even the current operation, would be a logistical nightmare.

Hopefully, before 2 weeks time, when the topic is broached yet again, someone will read this thread and think twice about beating an already dead horse.

B ombardier and atr were not so long ago studieng the possiblities of
develping a 100seat turboprop.
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:44 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
azjubilee wrote:
I'm just going to copy and past what I wrote 7 months ago...

In order to put the t-prop debate to rest and blow major holes into the theory that it may be a good idea, all one has to do is break out a calculator and crunch some numbers.

Follow closely... 170 flights/day x 128 seats = 21,760 seats/day on mainline type aircraft, with cargo carrying capacity and space for bags.
Now, entertaining the silly premise that large t-props can replicate on a practical scale what HAL does with the 717s, let's crunch more numbers. 21,760 seats divided by 75 seats (on average in large t-props) = 290.1, rounded down to 290 flights/day. For real?

The suggestion that large t-props should replace the 717 based on the fact that the neighbor island market is short haul is not only flawed, it demonstrates one has no clue what HAL really does and what this market is all about. Replacing the 717s with t-props would force HAL to grow the operation to 290 flights/day. This is absurd. This kind of operation in facilities that are bursting at the seams and often inadequate for even the current operation, would be a logistical nightmare.

Hopefully, before 2 weeks time, when the topic is broached yet again, someone will read this thread and think twice about beating an already dead horse.

B ombardier and atr were not so long ago studieng the possiblities of
develping a 100seat turboprop.

=SOLUTION
 
User avatar
nikeson13
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:35 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines and Turboprops

Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:57 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
azjubilee wrote:
I'm just going to copy and past what I wrote 7 months ago...

In order to put the t-prop debate to rest and blow major holes into the theory that it may be a good idea, all one has to do is break out a calculator and crunch some numbers.

Follow closely... 170 flights/day x 128 seats = 21,760 seats/day on mainline type aircraft, with cargo carrying capacity and space for bags.
Now, entertaining the silly premise that large t-props can replicate on a practical scale what HAL does with the 717s, let's crunch more numbers. 21,760 seats divided by 75 seats (on average in large t-props) = 290.1, rounded down to 290 flights/day. For real?

The suggestion that large t-props should replace the 717 based on the fact that the neighbor island market is short haul is not only flawed, it demonstrates one has no clue what HAL really does and what this market is all about. Replacing the 717s with t-props would force HAL to grow the operation to 290 flights/day. This is absurd. This kind of operation in facilities that are bursting at the seams and often inadequate for even the current operation, would be a logistical nightmare.

Hopefully, before 2 weeks time, when the topic is broached yet again, someone will read this thread and think twice about beating an already dead horse.

B ombardier and atr were not so long ago studieng the possiblities of
develping a 100seat turboprop.

=SOLUTION

Yeah, IF they develop it. Theres been no progress on it and it wont happen for awhile. Airbus is limiting ATR from developing it, and BBD has no money or time to develop one, so thats pretty much out of choice. And a 100 seat turboprop would still be too small, bringing up to almost 220 flights a day, an increase of 50/day vs now.
Nikolas

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