Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Polot wrote:First with Turkey before the Turkish Government pulled out and now they are trying with Germany.
Devilfish wrote:Polot wrote:First with Turkey before the Turkish Government pulled out and now they are trying with Germany.
The company owner's and CEO's names still seem Turkish to me though...? Another aircraft in this segment than the ATR-42 is good for competition, but market demand in 2025 might not sustain two TP players...let alone three.
Devilfish wrote:Flightglobal has a new, rather long article on the D328eco.....
https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers ... 82.article
vfw614 wrote:Devilfish wrote:Flightglobal has a new, rather long article on the D328eco.....
https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers ... 82.article
Nice article, thanks for the heads up. However, the article only considers the airliner market, whereas the manufacturer is targeting four more additional markets (into which the legacy Dornier 328 made some inroads) which promise less volume, but are probably less sensitive to pricing.
vfw614 wrote:- use of "Deutsche Aeropace" instead of "Dornier" to highlight German engineering and quality made in Germany.
Polot wrote:vfw614 wrote:- use of "Deutsche Aeropace" instead of "Dornier" to highlight German engineering and quality made in Germany.
Well that and the fact that they probably don’t have the rights to the Dornier name.
armagnac2010 wrote:Reading the original interview auf Deutsch (in German), I don't believe the avionics is a direct comparison with the ATR 42. The -600 avionics suites is actually quite up to date, and actually ahead of the 328 offering.
vfw614 wrote:Polot wrote:vfw614 wrote:- use of "Deutsche Aeropace" instead of "Dornier" to highlight German engineering and quality made in Germany.
Well that and the fact that they probably don’t have the rights to the Dornier name.
Indeed. From what I gather, the "Dornier" name is trademarked to some Airbus subsidiary.
vfw614 wrote:Long interview with CEO Dave Jackson with a German online aviation news site - not sure if I am allowed to link, so a summary of his main points:.
[...]
- he defines three markets: replacement of 30-50 turboprops operate by airliners / passenger niche operations (islands, small runways), particularly in Aisa / special misions (coast guard, border patrol, military, medevac etc.). He sees the biggest initial replacement market for Saab 340s, Dash 8-100/200s and Jetstream 41s for which the Dorner 328eco has the best size.
vfw614 wrote:- thinks the Dornier 328 has a competitive edge over the ATR42 because of better avionics (potential for single pilots ops), biofuel, faster speed and higher cruise altitude.
vfw614 wrote:- first prototpye in 2023 or 2024, sees EIS in 2025 as "absolutely realistic".
vfw614 wrote:- use of "Deutsche Aircraft" instead of "Dornier" to highlight German engineering and quality made in Germany.
What avionics suite will the D328eco use?
Phosphorus wrote:vfw614 wrote:Indeed. From what I gather, the "Dornier" name is trademarked to some Airbus subsidiary.
These guys too: https://www.lindauerdornier.com/en/
Probably, there is a long-standing "wall", in what business segments, who has rights to "Dornier" name.
I did some googling. As per various articles from December 2020, the D328eco will have a new, yet-to-be-identified avionics suite ("the latest"), so at this point it is difficult to make comparisons with the ATR.
armagnac2010 wrote:Well Ruag was also using the name Dornier for the 228 NG. Incidentally, the exact status of the 228 NG program is a bit fuzzy (it might illustrate the difficulties associated with re-launching a program). It seems General Atomics is now in charge; the question is whether they intend to keep production going, or need the factories to flood Europe with their Predators.
Boeing757100 wrote:I think we need some plane in the Do 328/JET category again. COVID has only made regional flying more popular.
Polot wrote:Missed opportunity to name company Reinrod and partner with Rekkof.
CRJockey wrote:TC957 wrote:I struggle to see how just a 2.1mtr stretch can accommodate 43 pax when the present 328 is a 31-seater.
43 pax would mean 4 extra rows which will need more than an extra 2.1 mtrs !
Agree. And I struggle with why on earth they wouldn’t aim for 50pax single FA design. And how they think their offering would be anything specially eco.
Well, I believe it when I see one flying.
vfw614 wrote:By what logic has there been a market for 34-37 seats and for 48-50 seats for 40 years, but not a reasonable market for 43 seats? Particularly not for a faster turboprop with less runway requirements and at a time where there are not 6-7 OEMs competing in the 30-50 seat market, but we are faced with an ATR monopoly offering a product that covers one end of that market?
As BawliBooch said, with all those naysayers around here we will be stuck with just one turboprop aircraft family for anything between 30 and 100 seats for the next 100 years. Soemone has to offer another regional turboprop at some point in the future unless we want to revert to horse-drawn carriages and steam engines....
- overall market is estinated at 4.000 aircraft, Deutsche Aircraft aims to produce more than the original 220 Dornier 328s.
SyracuseAvGeek wrote:What I was not aware of is the J328 is still operating commercial flights in the United States.
Taos Air (Advanced)
Denver Air Connection
And until recently North Country Sky.
Even found this trip report from someone who did the North Country Sky route from northern Michigan;
https://youtu.be/CPQpZJq6jy0
According to the video description, the route was stopped on the 30th of September
Electric airplanes are ideal for short hops.
meh130 wrote:TC957 wrote:I struggle to see how just a 2.1mtr stretch can accommodate 43 pax when the present 328 is a 31-seater.
43 pax would mean 4 extra rows which will need more than an extra 2.1 mtrs !
My guess is no galley and probably no lav, and very tight seat pitch (28") with very thin profile seats. Think very short run routes in Europe.
More likely config would be 37-38 seats.
Polot wrote:SyracuseAvGeek wrote:What I was not aware of is the J328 is still operating commercial flights in the United States.
Taos Air (Advanced)
Denver Air Connection
And until recently North Country Sky.
Even found this trip report from someone who did the North Country Sky route from northern Michigan;
https://youtu.be/CPQpZJq6jy0
According to the video description, the route was stopped on the 30th of September
Ultimate Air Shuttle was also operating the 328JET until they suspended ops in September due to COVID. Suppose to start up again this Spring we will see what happens.
armagnac2010 wrote:- overall market is estinated at 4.000 aircraft, Deutsche Aircraft aims to produce more than the original 220 Dornier 328s.
Didn't Embraer, which is contemplating launching a turboprop, quote a 1000 something figure?
With all due respect, Embraer has more credibility than Deutsche Aircraft / German Flugzeug...
Ty134A wrote:Electric airplanes are ideal for short hops.
Or are short hops ideal for electric airplanes?
lightsaber wrote:Ty134A wrote:Electric airplanes are ideal for short hops.
Or are short hops ideal for electric airplanes?
Electric will have, eventually, once the bugs are worked out, a low per cycle "fuel" and maintenance costs despite the huge weight of the batteries. Because of the battery weight, range will be incredibly limited. Changing out batteries will damage them... But out to 300nm I expect electric Aircraft to take over most pax flights.
Lightsaber
drdisque wrote:UA owns one EAS contract: IAD-PQI (previously EWR-PQI, may return to EWR post-COVID). They fly it with a Commutair E-145.
Every other EAS city flown as a UAX branded flight the contract is held by Skywest. So you're suggesting Skywest would be interested in replacing their paid off fully depreciated CRJ-200's that are operating these flights (keep in mind that they have a huge stockpile of CRJ-100/200 parts and frames since they basically inherited the entire Comair and ASA fleets in addition to the frames delivered to OO directly) with new-build unproven 43 seat props? Skywest gets these contracts on a significant basis on the fact that they're bringing in jet service.
SyracuseAvGeek wrote:What I was not aware of is the J328 is still operating commercial flights in the United States.
Taos Air (Advanced)
Denver Air Connection
And until recently North Country Sky.
FlyingElvii wrote:
Cessna’s new SkyCourier has the potential to reinvigorate the short-haul markets, the gap is definitely in the 30-50 seat group. Right-size for small cities, and would allow for some hub overflying, at a reasonable cost. Also, in the US, it can be operated at 30 seats, which puts it into another set of rules that operators like JSX, Countour, and others already take advantage of.
Having said all that I really hope the 328 works out for Dornier I've always wondered if they had gotten the 328TP, 328J, 428TP and 428J off the ground if they'd have done better, there was a whole generation of stretches of 30 seater aircraft in that era that besides for the Saab2000, never got off the ground.
iceberg210 wrote:FlyingElvii wrote:
Cessna’s new SkyCourier has the potential to reinvigorate the short-haul markets, the gap is definitely in the 30-50 seat group. Right-size for small cities, and would allow for some hub overflying, at a reasonable cost. Also, in the US, it can be operated at 30 seats, which puts it into another set of rules that operators like JSX, Countour, and others already take advantage of.
The problem I think all of the under 70 seat planes have is three fold.
1. Without a major decrease in operating cost it just doesn't pencil. The skycourier works great for exactly what it's designed to do but it doesn't bring any significant fuel or personnel cost improvements over current options. Folks aren't flying 1900's or 328's today, so flying skycouriers or 328eco's will only happen with a SIGNIFICANT decrease in cost. The 328 is trying to deliver this with new engines and possible 1 pilot operations. If they get that this hurdle will be over come (and granted the skycourier might be able to do the same with the Catalyst engine or 1 pilot operations albeit how feasible those are I don't know). The Embreaer Stout if offered in civy clothes will actually have a possible leg up here in that it's attempting (who knows if it'll work) via the electric cruise to substantially change the operational cost equation.
2. You have to somehow cover the capital costs both of production and for launch of aircraft. We know these won't be big volume sellers so either you have to find another market to make the assembly line spin between civil orders, or you have to dominate the small market. ATR does this for instance, they can keep the line moving with 72's to make the 42 pencil. Cessna has FedEx to help them on the skycourier, the 328 is looking for special ops orders along with not being a clean sheet so should in theory be cheaper, and the STOUT from Embraer is hoping to cover those costs through Brazilian Air Force orders.If I had to bet money I would actually bet on the Skycourier and STOUT because they have already fixed this issue to the extent they can (they might be still too expensive for the passenger market but they at least have a better chance of lowering those costs as they've locked up the market to subsidize the passenger launch and assembly costs).
3. This is I think the toughest and the reason why we still may not see significant uptake of these small planes in the US regardless of point one and two. The US market partially due to the regulation structure, and also the dominance of a few major airlines has signifant barriers to entry for a small player on such thin routes. Now you could solve some of this with changes to pilot regulations, FA regulations, or even mandating ease of interlining between airlines. The problem is you've either got to convince folks like Skywest, Delta, Alaska, whoever to add small planes to their arsenal which seems unlikely due to staffing constraints and other barriers, or a new player would need to emerge with that as their business plan. The small carrier though will be handicapped to some extent because even though I'd love to fly to Bozeman from Boise, there's a lot of folks who would instead flying through Portland or SLC if it means they get to amass miles on Delta or Alaska.
Having said all that I really hope the 328 works out for Dornier I've always wondered if they had gotten the 328TP, 328J, 428TP and 428J off the ground if they'd have done better, there was a whole generation of stretches of 30 seater aircraft in that era that besides for the Saab2000, never got off the ground.
iceberg210 wrote:FlyingElvii wrote:
Cessna’s new SkyCourier has the potential to reinvigorate the short-haul markets, the gap is definitely in the 30-50 seat group. Right-size for small cities, and would allow for some hub overflying, at a reasonable cost. Also, in the US, it can be operated at 30 seats, which puts it into another set of rules that operators like JSX, Countour, and others already take advantage of.
The problem I think all of the under 70 seat planes have is three fold.
1. Without a major decrease in operating cost it just doesn't pencil. The skycourier works great for exactly what it's designed to do but it doesn't bring any significant fuel or personnel cost improvements over current options. Folks aren't flying 1900's or 328's today, so flying skycouriers or 328eco's will only happen with a SIGNIFICANT decrease in cost. The 328 is trying to deliver this with new engines and possible 1 pilot operations. If they get that this hurdle will be over come (and granted the skycourier might be able to do the same with the Catalyst engine or 1 pilot operations albeit how feasible those are I don't know). The Embreaer Stout if offered in civy clothes will actually have a possible leg up here in that it's attempting (who knows if it'll work) via the electric cruise to substantially change the operational cost equation.
2. You have to somehow cover the capital costs both of production and for launch of aircraft. We know these won't be big volume sellers so either you have to find another market to make the assembly line spin between civil orders, or you have to dominate the small market. ATR does this for instance, they can keep the line moving with 72's to make the 42 pencil. Cessna has FedEx to help them on the skycourier, the 328 is looking for special ops orders along with not being a clean sheet so should in theory be cheaper, and the STOUT from Embraer is hoping to cover those costs through Brazilian Air Force orders.If I had to bet money I would actually bet on the Skycourier and STOUT because they have already fixed this issue to the extent they can (they might be still too expensive for the passenger market but they at least have a better chance of lowering those costs as they've locked up the market to subsidize the passenger launch and assembly costs).
3. This is I think the toughest and the reason why we still may not see significant uptake of these small planes in the US regardless of point one and two. The US market partially due to the regulation structure, and also the dominance of a few major airlines has signifant barriers to entry for a small player on such thin routes. Now you could solve some of this with changes to pilot regulations, FA regulations, or even mandating ease of interlining between airlines. The problem is you've either got to convince folks like Skywest, Delta, Alaska, whoever to add small planes to their arsenal which seems unlikely due to staffing constraints and other barriers, or a new player would need to emerge with that as their business plan. The small carrier though will be handicapped to some extent because even though I'd love to fly to Bozeman from Boise, there's a lot of folks who would instead flying through Portland or SLC if it means they get to amass miles on Delta or Alaska.
Having said all that I really hope the 328 works out for Dornier I've always wondered if they had gotten the 328TP, 328J, 428TP and 428J off the ground if they'd have done better, there was a whole generation of stretches of 30 seater aircraft in that era that besides for the Saab2000, never got off the ground.
iceberg210 wrote:FlyingElvii wrote:
Cessna’s new SkyCourier has the potential to reinvigorate the short-haul markets, the gap is definitely in the 30-50 seat group. Right-size for small cities, and would allow for some hub overflying, at a reasonable cost. Also, in the US, it can be operated at 30 seats, which puts it into another set of rules that operators like JSX, Countour, and others already take advantage of.
The problem I think all of the under 70 seat planes have is three fold.
1. Without a major decrease in operating cost it just doesn't pencil. The skycourier works great for exactly what it's designed to do but it doesn't bring any significant fuel or personnel cost improvements over current options. Folks aren't flying 1900's or 328's today, so flying skycouriers or 328eco's will only happen with a SIGNIFICANT decrease in cost. The 328 is trying to deliver this with new engines and possible 1 pilot operations. If they get that this hurdle will be over come (and granted the skycourier might be able to do the same with the Catalyst engine or 1 pilot operations albeit how feasible those are I don't know). The Embreaer Stout if offered in civy clothes will actually have a possible leg up here in that it's attempting (who knows if it'll work) via the electric cruise to substantially change the operational cost equation.
2. You have to somehow cover the capital costs both of production and for launch of aircraft. We know these won't be big volume sellers so either you have to find another market to make the assembly line spin between civil orders, or you have to dominate the small market. ATR does this for instance, they can keep the line moving with 72's to make the 42 pencil. Cessna has FedEx to help them on the skycourier, the 328 is looking for special ops orders along with not being a clean sheet so should in theory be cheaper, and the STOUT from Embraer is hoping to cover those costs through Brazilian Air Force orders.If I had to bet money I would actually bet on the Skycourier and STOUT because they have already fixed this issue to the extent they can (they might be still too expensive for the passenger market but they at least have a better chance of lowering those costs as they've locked up the market to subsidize the passenger launch and assembly costs).
3. This is I think the toughest and the reason why we still may not see significant uptake of these small planes in the US regardless of point one and two. The US market partially due to the regulation structure, and also the dominance of a few major airlines has signifant barriers to entry for a small player on such thin routes. Now you could solve some of this with changes to pilot regulations, FA regulations, or even mandating ease of interlining between airlines. The problem is you've either got to convince folks like Skywest, Delta, Alaska, whoever to add small planes to their arsenal which seems unlikely due to staffing constraints and other barriers, or a new player would need to emerge with that as their business plan. The small carrier though will be handicapped to some extent because even though I'd love to fly to Bozeman from Boise, there's a lot of folks who would instead flying through Portland or SLC if it means they get to amass miles on Delta or Alaska.
Having said all that I really hope the 328 works out for Dornier I've always wondered if they had gotten the 328TP, 328J, 428TP and 428J off the ground if they'd have done better, there was a whole generation of stretches of 30 seater aircraft in that era that besides for the Saab2000, never got off the ground.
FlyHossD wrote:SyracuseAvGeek wrote:What I was not aware of is the J328 is still operating commercial flights in the United States.
Taos Air (Advanced)
Denver Air Connection
And until recently North Country Sky.
Have passed through APA (Centenntial, the south side of Denver) a few times recently and have seen the Denver Air Connection 328Js there. Was also mildly surprised to see a Taos Air 328J there once. The last time through, we also noticed a 328Prop; IIRC, it was heading to COS. I'm guessing that it belongs to Northrup Grumman? Maybe Lockeed Martin? I'd appreciate any insights or info on those planes.
c933103 wrote:Will it able to.compete against ATR42?
vfw614 wrote:The manufacturer sees a large potential outside the airliner market, e.g. for ambulance, military or surveillance aircraft (where the Dornier 328ceo has carved out a niche as well). As for the airliner market, there will be nothing on offer in the 30-50 seat segment other than the ATR42-600 when it comes to replacing hundreds of DHC8-100/200, Saab 340, Embraer 120/135/140 etc.
PS: Worth noting that in 2019 an EIS of 2023 was promised. Now 2025 is mentioned.
ScottB wrote:BawliBooch wrote:if all aircraft manufacturers went by this logic, we might not have seen this competitive market that we have today. If Airbus had sat back and thought, oh the 150 seat market is crowded with McD, Boeing and BAC slugging it out, so we should stay away! But they did not! They did launch the A320 which went on to beat the pants off the 737 in the next 35 years. Same way, would Embraer launch the E135/145 and later the E170/190 if they followed the same logic?
BAC was already an also-ran in the 150-seat space by the time the A320 was launched. From the brisk sales of the 737 and MD-80, it was obvious the market segment was large and growing. The 30-to-40-seat turboprop market segment is not large, and it's not likely to grow. That's not to say that there is ZERO demand, but there's probably not enough for two profitable players.
The E145 (like the CRJ) was an attempt to address a new market segment, not an existing segment for which it is already known that demand is weak. And it was fairly clear that customers were expressing interest. The same can be said of the E170/190 project. We can even see the converse of this in the nonexistent order book for the E175-E2 -- despite the obvious gains in efficiency from new engines, the U.S. customers which had ordered hundreds of E175s will not order the E2 due to their pilot scope clauses.
rbavfan wrote:If they kept the E175-E2 weight down to meet the Scope clause the US airlines would be replacing the E175 with the E2's. Same issue with the Mitsubishi Aircraft SpaceJet that came in over scope weights. As such the airlines are ordering more 175's.
Revelation wrote:
If there was a realistic way to meet scope with equal payload and higher efficiency I think it would have been done already. Given we still see E175 selling, I think the answer is clear, there really isn't. Mitsu was flailing about, desperately trying to save a drowning program. I doubted they would have been able to deliver a scope compliant product, and now we know they won't.
