Relaunch of the Dornier 328

PlaneInsanity · Wed Dec 09, 2020 2:47 pm

I loved the Do 328. I flew on it with US Airways CAK-PIT, PIT-CAK several dozen times 2002-2203/4 and actually was on the last Do328 flight from PIT-CAK when they retired them from the fleet. It was a 17 minute rocket-shot flight!

vfw614 · Wed Dec 09, 2020 2:53 pm

armagnac2010 wrote:
vfw614 wrote:
T

It will be interesting to see how the Norwegians will built railways to replace DHC8-100 flights in the arctic or how remote destinations in Australia currently served by REX and their Saab 340s will be linked to the outside world in the future. Or Alaska and Canadian communities relying on RAVN or Air Creebec Dash 8 and First Air ATR42 remain on the map. Just to name a few.

ATR launched the ATR42S with such markets in mind.

Mid-term; Norwegians are looking at pushing sustainable aviation, electric and so on (not SAF fuel). They are using subsidies of public services for that purpose, aiming at replicating what they did for electric cars (through tax incentives Norway has one of the world highest proportions of electric cars).

But why should every single operator of DHCs, Saabs, Dorniers, Jetstreams, ATRs, Brasilias in markets where there will still be demand for 28-50 seats rely on the 48 seat ATR42-600 in the future, particularly those who will never be able to fill 50 seats and who never "upgraded" to the DHC8-300, Saab 2000, Embraer 145? In the market we are discussing the ATR42 over the past 35 years has had a market share of 15 per cent (400 out of 2.700 aircraft). Why should it have 100 per cent over, say, the next 20 years, even if the overall market is much smaller? The remaining market should be large enough for two slight different offerings. Whether the second one is the Dornier 328eco or something else - we shall see.

vfw614 · Wed Dec 09, 2020 2:57 pm

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.

Is it legal to have a 40seat passenger aircraft withut a lav?

Btw, how does it work in the 90seat Q400 - these have three or four additional rows compared to the standard Q400 layout of 74 or 78 seats?

https://www.bombardier.com/en/media/new ... ercom.html

And there is also a 78seat variant of the 68/70seat ATR72-600.

ScottB · Wed Dec 09, 2020 3:50 pm

vfw614 wrote:
There were 459 Saab 340s built, 354 Embraer 120s, 404 DHC8-100/200s, 327 Dornier 328, 100 Jetstream 41. Given that the high speed of the Dornier 328 also makes it an option as a replacement for stuff like Embraer 135, all in all we are talking about approx. 1.700 aircraft in the 28-37 seat category produced in the 1980 and 1990s. Then we have 50 Saab 2000, 213 Fokker 50, ca. 400 ATR42-300/500, 267 DHC8-300 and 65 ATPs, so another 1.000 50-seater turboprops. If there is a need for replacement for only a quarter of them, we are talking about more than 700 frames, not all of which will be ATR42-600s. So I can really see why this project is taking shape (and has already taken on board some prominent executives, e.g. the long term head of Airbus' alternative propulsion systems and technologies unit and a senior Embraer sales executive))

The number of aircraft produced across the broad market segment from 20 to 40 years ago is irrelevant because the industry today or even ten years from today isn't/won't be the same. You have to look at the number of in-service aircraft which is far, far smaller, and then adjust for the set of customers which can actually afford to pay for a new-build turboprop manufactured in a high-wage country like Germany.

Even if we take your assumption of 700 frames, with a service lifetime of ~20 years, that's 35 aircraft per year or three per month -- and you have to split the market with ATR.

vfw614 wrote:
It will be interesting to see how the Norwegians will built railways to replace DHC8-100 flights in the arctic or how remote destinations in Australia currently served by REX and their Saab 340s will be linked to the outside world in the future. Or Alaska and Canadian communities relying on RAVN or Air Creebec Dash 8 and First Air ATR42 remain on the map.

These markets exist, but they just aren't large. And they are part of what has continued to provide a limited market for the ATR.

CRJockey wrote:
While cost of capital might be higher for new aircraft, a lot of operating expenses like fuel, maintenance, noise related fees, etc. are significantly lower for new aircraft. The amount of effort needed to keep older, heavily used aircraft reliable is not to underestimate.

The problem in the end is the availability of capital in poorer countries. Yes, it costs more to keep the older aircraft going, but if you can't afford to drop $15-20 million each on new build then you have to go with used. That's a lot of money in countries where per capita income might be $1000/year.

YRA · Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:57 pm

What about the Cessna Sky Courier 19-seat option? That would be the lowest of the low end market-wise...

rsgolfpunk · Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:59 pm

In the US, assuming no scope changes, what is to prevent Embraer from continuing to produce the E170/175-E1 indefinitely to replace all of the CRJs?

WayexTDI · Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:16 pm

vfw614 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
The market has spoken: 217 Do328s and 110 Do328JETs were built, around 50 of each are still in service (including 20 for the US Air Force).

I think we need to move away from the idea that an aircraft programme has to sell 5.000 frames to be not considered a failure. There were 459 Saab 340s built, 354 Embraer 120s, 404 DHC8-100/200s, 327 Dornier 328, 100 Jetstream 41. Given that the high speed of the Dornier 328 also makes it an option as a replacement for stuff like Embraer 135, all in all we are talking about approx. 1.700 aircraft in the 28-37 seat category produced in the 1980 and 1990s. Then we have 50 Saab 2000, 213 Fokker 50, ca. 400 ATR42-300/500, 267 DHC8-300 and 65 ATPs, so another 1.000 50-seater turboprops. If there is a need for replacement for only a quarter of them, we are talking about more than 700 frames, not all of which will be ATR42-600s. So I can really see why this project is taking shape (and has already taken on board some prominent executives, e.g. the long term head of Airbus' alternative propulsion systems and technologies unit and a senior Embraer sales executive))

Never said you needed to sell x frames to be successful. But, to take your list:
- 459 Saab 340s built: produced over 16 years (i.e. 28-29 per year), been out of production for 20+ years;
- 354 Embraer 120s built: produced over 18 years (i.e. 19-20 per year), been out of production for almost 20 years;
- 404 DHC8-100/200s built: produced over 26 years (i.e. 15-16 per year), been out of production for over 11 years;
- 327 Dornier 328 built: produced over 11 years (i.e. 29-30 per year), been out of production for 18 years;
- 100 Jetstream 41 built: produced over 5 years (i.e. 20 per year), been out of production for 23 years.
Every single one of your example has been out of production for over 10 years, and most for 20 or more years... What does that tell you? That the market for such an aircraft is extremely thin.
The only aircraft in that market that's still in production is the ATR42, of which 484 have been built over 36 years (i.e. 13-14 per year); and it most likely only survives as being part of the ATR family (which includes a bigger 70+ pax variant), a standalone ATR42 would most likely have died years or decades ago.
I do not see how the Do328 can succeed as proposed; I'd love to be wrong though.

vfw614 · Thu Dec 10, 2020 11:34 am

Every single one of your example has been out of production for over 10 years, and most for 20 or more years... What does that tell you? That the market for such an aircraft is extremely thin.

No, it primarily tells me that the remaining market has been well served thus far by aircraft produced in the 1980s and 1990s, but these aircraft are now getting old and need replacement at some point.

The questions remains unanswered how the future of aviation looks in areas of the world that still rely 25-40 seater aircraft. The market for that type of aircraft has dramatically shrunk, but it has not disappeared completely and needs to be served in the future. There are still hundreds of aircraft in that category flying on all continents. It appears to me that those who argue that there is no market see these aircraft only as hub feeders for which they are clearly no longer viable.

Vio · Thu Dec 10, 2020 12:32 pm

I flew a lot on the Dornier 328J, back when Calm Air used to operate them. I was using it to commute back and forth from Winnipeg to the Arctic. (Churchill / Rankin Inlet). While I like the aircraft, from an aesthetical point of view, it was a nightmare to fly on. The bins were small and was always limited on cargo, frequently leaving our luggage behind. There's nothing like going up North for 14 days, and finding out on arrival your cooler with $120 worth of groceries was left behind in Winnipeg. It had other issues, like pretty crap x-wind limitations. We were all so happy when they switched it tot he 737 *First Air*.

I really don't see a market for this type of aircraft, unless it's short hops for people with no luggage. Probably a "business commuter" that goes from St. Moritz to Zurich. Up and down, over the mountains.

Edit:
I did a trip report on this about 9 years ago. I seemed to be a bit more enthusiastic about it then. Must've been one of my first flights on it.

viewtopic.php?t=972655

smithhaddon123 · Thu Dec 10, 2020 12:49 pm

Seven-bladed propellers :cloudnine:

oldannyboy · Thu Dec 10, 2020 2:21 pm

So, when is the new Fokker 100 going to fly?

BTW, I'm still awaiting the Tay re-engined 1-11...

ILNFlyer · Thu Dec 10, 2020 2:26 pm

Makes me wonder if the 728 can ever be fully developed and re-enter the market....

armagnac2010 · Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:30 pm

ILNFlyer wrote:
Makes me wonder if the 728 can ever be fully developed and re-enter the market....

The odds of the Dornier Do X finally making it in airline revenue service are much higher.

WayexTDI · Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:06 pm

vfw614 wrote:
Every single one of your example has been out of production for over 10 years, and most for 20 or more years... What does that tell you? That the market for such an aircraft is extremely thin.

No, it primarily tells me that the remaining market has been well served thus far by aircraft produced in the 1980s and 1990s, but these aircraft are now getting old and need replacement at some point.

The questions remains unanswered how the future of aviation looks in areas of the world that still rely 25-40 seater aircraft. The market for that type of aircraft has dramatically shrunk, but it has not disappeared completely and needs to be served in the future. There are still hundreds of aircraft in that category flying on all continents. It appears to me that those who argue that there is no market see these aircraft only as hub feeders for which they are clearly no longer viable.

Automarkers are offering less and less cars with manual transmission. Why? Because they were selling less and less of them; the ones who drive stick-shift did replace their cars with automatic ones.
Same analogy.

vfw614 · Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:27 pm

Not really. A Mercedes 350 with manual transmission is still a Mercedes 350 even if it has automatic transmission. What you are suggesting is that people who used to drive a Mercedes 180 all replaced it with a Mercedes 350. Which obviously is not the case.

WayexTDI · Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:30 pm

vfw614 wrote:
Not really. A Mercedes 350 with manual transmission is still a Mercedes 350 even if it has automatic transmission. What you are suggesting is that people who used to drive a Mercedes 180 all replaced it with a Mercedes 350. Which obviously is not the case.

What I'm saying is that, when a product no longer sells (i.e., stick shift cars or 30-pax airliners), manufacturers stop producing them, simply because their is no longer a market for it and it cost them too much to produce such low numbers.

All the planes you said are still flying and will need replacement are no longer produced, and, 10-20 years ago, would have replaced older aircraft at that time. Yet, the sales dried up then, they are no longer in production.
If there was such a market, BBD would have never stopped the Q200s & Q300s 10 years ago; again, since they did, what does that tell you?

The 4-engined ULH market no longer exists and those planes are no longer manufactured; all 2-engined ULH replacements are derivatives of LH existing planes. This is why the ATR42 is still being offered, even if it sells only a handful every year.
The Q200s and Q300s were quite different to the Q400, not allowing much commonality.

The Do328 as a standalone model has as much chances as a snowball in hell: slim to none.
If it was part of a family from 30-ish pax to 90-ish pax, then the chances would be higher (still not great IMO). As a standalone, nope.

lightsaber · Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:32 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
vfw614 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
The market has spoken: 217 Do328s and 110 Do328JETs were built, around 50 of each are still in service (including 20 for the US Air Force).

I think we need to move away from the idea that an aircraft programme has to sell 5.000 frames to be not considered a failure. There were 459 Saab 340s built, 354 Embraer 120s, 404 DHC8-100/200s, 327 Dornier 328, 100 Jetstream 41. Given that the high speed of the Dornier 328 also makes it an option as a replacement for stuff like Embraer 135, all in all we are talking about approx. 1.700 aircraft in the 28-37 seat category produced in the 1980 and 1990s. Then we have 50 Saab 2000, 213 Fokker 50, ca. 400 ATR42-300/500, 267 DHC8-300 and 65 ATPs, so another 1.000 50-seater turboprops. If there is a need for replacement for only a quarter of them, we are talking about more than 700 frames, not all of which will be ATR42-600s. So I can really see why this project is taking shape (and has already taken on board some prominent executives, e.g. the long term head of Airbus' alternative propulsion systems and technologies unit and a senior Embraer sales executive))

Never said you needed to sell x frames to be successful. But, to take your list:
- 459 Saab 340s built: produced over 16 years (i.e. 28-29 per year), been out of production for 20+ years;
- 354 Embraer 120s built: produced over 18 years (i.e. 19-20 per year), been out of production for almost 20 years;
- 404 DHC8-100/200s built: produced over 26 years (i.e. 15-16 per year), been out of production for over 11 years;
- 327 Dornier 328 built: produced over 11 years (i.e. 29-30 per year), been out of production for 18 years;
- 100 Jetstream 41 built: produced over 5 years (i.e. 20 per year), been out of production for 23 years.
Every single one of your example has been out of production for over 10 years, and most for 20 or more years... What does that tell you? That the market for such an aircraft is extremely thin.
The only aircraft in that market that's still in production is the ATR42, of which 484 have been built over 36 years (i.e. 13-14 per year); and it most likely only survives as being part of the ATR family (which includes a bigger 70+ pax variant), a standalone ATR42 would most likely have died years or decades ago.
I do not see how the Do328 can succeed as proposed; I'd love to be wrong though.

Unfortunately, I agree. The 19 seat Cessna will serve what market can only be served by turboprops. I see many 9-seaters, for notice this type if plane really stopped selling once the pilots required an ATP certificate.

Yes, the ATR42 limped along; I also subscribe to the theory only as part of the overall ATR family.

I'd love to see a new small turboprop thrive. There just isn't the market there was between road and rail expansion.

If anything, the small turboprop market will go electric to offset some of aviation's carbon impact.

Lightsaber

vfw614 · Thu Dec 10, 2020 8:50 pm

If there was such a market, BBD would have never stopped the Q200s & Q300s 10 years ago; again, since they did, what does that tell you?

That ten years ago there was no market because there were large numbers of 10-20 year old aircraft of that size in operation that needed no replacement for the foreseeable future and that there was no need for additional airframes as the market in which those airplanes were operating was shrinking.

The 4-engined ULH market no longer exists and those planes are no longer manufactured; all 2-engined ULH replacements are derivatives of LH existing planes.

Apple and oranges. 4 engined ULH planes have been replaced by 2 engined planes of the same size.

If we want to discuss that further, you will have to acknowledge that there is a trend in the market place to replace larger aircraft with smaller aircraft, i.e. the A380 and 747-8i are going out of production and will be replaced by smaller offerings such as the 777-9 and A350-1000. And the same is true for A330-200 / 787-8 sized aircraft that now face competition from the A321XLR. This all based on changing travel pattern and preferences (something on which the manufacturer of the Dornier 328eco also builds his business case to some extent (I am not saying that I buy into that as far as hub-bypassing travel is concerned).

This is why the ATR42 is still being offered, even if it sells only a handful every year.

While for many years the ATR72 was selling like hot bred and there were only a handful of orders for the ATR42, this has changed. In 2018, 40 per cent, in 2019 63 per cent and in 2020 thus far 60 per cent of all ATR orders were for the ATR42. Which, if anything, nicely demonstrates that the replacement market for smaller regional aircraft is heating up.

I am not saying that the Dornier 328eco will be a success. All I am saying is that I doubt that for the next decades there will be literally no market for 20-70 seat aircraft and all that can be offered successfully, if at all, is a the ATR42-600.

WayexTDI · Thu Dec 10, 2020 10:31 pm

vfw614 wrote:
The 4-engined ULH market no longer exists and those planes are no longer manufactured; all 2-engined ULH replacements are derivatives of LH existing planes.

Apple and oranges. 4 engined ULH planes have been replaced by 2 engined planes of the same size.

... that are part of an existing family.

Listen, I disagree with your analysis that the Do328 is needed (which was your original premise); so, let's agree to disagree, and I'm dropping off this convo.
If you strongly believe a renewed Do328 has chances, then put your money where your mouth is and invest all your economies in the project; I'm sure you know you'll become a billionaire soon.

ScottB · Thu Dec 10, 2020 11:20 pm

vfw614 wrote:
In 2018, 40 per cent, in 2019 63 per cent and in 2020 thus far 60 per cent of all ATR orders were for the ATR42. Which, if anything, nicely demonstrates that the replacement market for smaller regional aircraft is heating up.

It demonstrates NOTHING in the absence of actual numbers of orders. Hypothetically, those order numbers could have been 2 of 5 total ATR orders in 2018, 5 of 8 in 2019, and 3 of 5 in 2020, for a total demand of ten aircraft over three years. Apparently ATR has delivered one aircraft this year due to Covid. That isn't a market that's heating up.

vfw614 wrote:
If we want to discuss that further, you will have to acknowledge that there is a trend in the market place to replace larger aircraft with smaller aircraft, i.e. the A380 and 747-8i are going out of production and will be replaced by smaller offerings such as the 777-9 and A350-1000. And the same is true for A330-200 / 787-8 sized aircraft that now face competition from the A321XLR. This all based on changing travel pattern and preferences

If anything, the trend in the market is toward non-stops replacing connections or single connections replacing double connections. Instead of going AUS-DFW-LHR or AUS-DFW-LHR-HAM, you just go AUS-LHR or AUS-LHR-HAM. Or, in the case of the A321XLR, carriers without widebodies can enter certain markets which had previously required the range of a widebody, or carriers can adjust capacity to more closely match seasonal traffic flows; i.e. using a 787 in summer and A321XLR in winter.

If what you say about smaller aircraft replacing larger aircraft were true, we'd see airlines replacing E145s and CRJs with ATR-42s and ATR would be struggling to keep up with the avalanche of orders. That isn't reality.

Kent350787 · Fri Dec 11, 2020 12:27 am

REX, the largest S340 operator had been in discussions pre-Covid about a replacement fleet. In the Australian market, props are fine, but until now REX has always leased used at good rates (including its foray into ex-VA 738).

I still used ATRs as REX’s logical fleet update.

vfw614 · Fri Dec 11, 2020 12:50 am

If anything, the trend in the market is toward non-stops replacing connections or single connections replacing double connections. Instead of going AUS-DFW-LHR or AUS-DFW-LHR-HAM, you just go AUS-LHR or AUS-LHR-HAM. Or, in the case of the A321XLR, carriers without widebodies can enter certain markets which had previously required the range of a widebody, or carriers can adjust capacity to more closely match seasonal traffic flows; i.e. using a 787 in summer and A321XLR in winter.

If what you say about smaller aircraft replacing larger aircraft were true, we'd see airlines replacing E145s and CRJs with ATR-42s and ATR would be struggling to keep up with the avalanche of orders. That isn't reality.

I invite you to re-read my post carefully, not leave out part of my quote and distinguish between what the manufacturer says and what my position is. Which is: "I am not saying that I buy into that as far as hub-bypassing travel is concerned", this relating to the idea that smaller turborops by-passing hubs will to some extent replace hub operations with narrowbody jets as suggested by the manufacturer of the Dornier 328eco.

It demonstrates NOTHING in the absence of actual numbers of orders. Hypothetically, those order numbers could have been 2 of 5 total ATR orders in 2018, 5 of 8 in 2019, and 3 of 5 in 2020, for a total demand of ten aircraft over three years. Apparently ATR has delivered one aircraft this year due to Covid. That isn't a market that's heating up.

As far as the ATR orders are concerned, they are out in the public. A quick google search would have revealed that in the last 35 months, 64 orders for the ATR42 have been placed. And there is also the massive NAC deal with ATR from 2019 that includes a LOI and purchase rights for 70 yet-to-be-specified ATR models, either 42s or 72s.

Since the delivery of the first ATR42 36 years ago, a total of 485 airframes have been delivered, which means on average 13 ATR42 each year. So it is simply not true that in 2020 the ATR42 is doing badly and only kept alive because of the ATR72. This was true 10 or 15 years ago, but not today. The ATR42 has outsold the ATR72 in the past three years 64 : 58 (and those ATR72 sales included a few remarketed -500 models) and it has sold more airframes than in most years since its launch. Without the sluggish sales of aircraft in 2020 because of the pandemic, the figures would have been even better.

Apparently ATR has delivered one aircraft this year due to Covid.

Not sure where you get your facts from, but reality is that in 2020 ATR has delivered aircraft to, for example, TAROM, US Bangla, Aurigny, Braathens and Binter. And as you will be aware of, no OEM has delivered aircraft in massive numbers this year for obvious reasons.

Ty134A · Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:44 am

oldannyboy wrote:
So, when is the new Fokker 100 going to fly?

BTW, I'm still awaiting the Tay re-engined 1-11...

I know people here like to make fun of the idea of a reengined F100. Having a lot of experience with both 70ies and 100s, I kind of fail to see, how a reengined Fokker would be less attractive than any reengined Embraer EMJ. Especially looking at a potential Fokker 130, the one stretched to 130 seats envisioned once at the beginning.

Fokkers have so much extra structure in it to make them rugged aircraft. Embraers don‘t, they are limited by all means. Fokkers have virtually no trim issues, Embraers are basically useless for some airline configs trim wise.

The 737 got reengined up to a point at which it started to kill people due to poor characteristic. There would be no such limitations on a Fokker what so ever.

Only during icing conditions, Fokkers can be problematic. But no such problems emerged in the last few years.

Noshow · Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:50 am

Today it is competing with E2s and A220s. I don't see any realistic come back being possible.
It had it's time but even back then Fokker made a loss selling it. It was over engineered.

iceberg210 · Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:07 pm

The only hope for a small plane like this is to be in multiple markets. If the 328 only gets airline orders of course it's toast, but that's probably why the launch order when it was the Turkish project was Singapore Spec Ops if I remember correctly. If they can get some airline orders, some charter orders, and some spec ops, boarder patrol type orders they can probably make a go of it. However having said that I'm less optimistic about this plane than I was when they relaunched it with Turkey. Mainly because of Embraer's new STOUT. It's going after the same exact market but does offer a step change in tech along with getting the replacement order for Brazil's military fleet which to be honest would be the kind of thing that could single handedly launch a program (ala Fed Ex and Skycourier), without an order like that (and that one is gone now) it's going to be awfully tough for the 328 to get back in the air unless Germany has decided to do a Japan and shovel money in a black hole till planes fly out of it.

armagnac2010 · Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:20 pm

I agree with VFW614 there is a (small) market, and indeed ATR themselves have recently re-started pushing the 42 for this reason.

As noted, the ATR 42 survived only because of its commonality with the 72. The DhC8-400 differed too much from the earlier to -100/200/300 to maintain the later production and supply chain alive.

Interesting history kind of repeats itself. At the end of the seventies, some saw a market for a 30 seater, perhaps the last attempt to have a DC-3 replacement.
One of the few possibilities was to relaunch production of the Nord 262, a good but poorly executed concept, largely doomed because of issues with the Turboméca engine. Aérospatiale pushed for it, but the French Government, in a surprisingly farsighted moment, refused to support an old product with little future. Aérospatiale went back to the drawing board and found partners in Italy; the ATR was born.

vfw614 · Sat Dec 12, 2020 2:25 pm

I had a look at some of the reports on the project from 2019, so here is some additional information:

- there are plans to offer a "hybrid" propulsion system at some point; it can be easily adapted (one reason why a former Airbus specialist in alternative propulsion was hired as CTO)
- lots of tooling and parts have been kept by 328SSG with a view to a future re-start of the programme
- 125m EUR loan by the Federal Government, 80m investment by SNC and 6,5m by the state of Saxonia
- 250 employees at LEJ (plus 120 at 328SSG headquarters at OBF), so apparently a rather lean set-up and no goal to churn out airframes in massive numbers.

iceberg210 wrote:
If they can get some airline orders, some charter orders, and some spec ops, boarder patrol type orders they can probably make a go of it..

That's the plan. Their promo material shows five versions: passenger, medevac, surveillance, military and corporate.From what I gather, they plan for a much smaller percentage of orders for the passenger version than it is common for other turboprops. We will see. The Dornier 328 is extremely popular for sports charters and corporate shuttles here in Europe which explains thel asting success of operators such as Sun Air, Private Wings and .MHS Aviation (who have, IIRC, all bought up Dorniers withdrawn from use elsewhere for harvesting spares).

I am led to belive that the project will be a bit like Viking producing DHC6-400s should ot get off the ground.

VSMUT · Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:19 pm

vfw614 wrote:
Apparently ATR has delivered one aircraft this year due to Covid.

Not sure where you get your facts from, but reality is that in 2020 ATR has delivered aircraft to, for example, TAROM, US Bangla, Aurigny, Braathens and Binter. And as you will be aware of, no OEM has delivered aircraft in massive numbers this year for obvious reasons.

Don't be fooled by delivery date to the airline and production year. Many of those were built and delivered directly into storage as leasing company white-tails last year. AFAIK, they delivered one 2020 build to Air New Zealand, Binter, Mandarin, Air Saint Pierre and TAROM, and the first FedEx/ASL is scheduled to be delivered Monday. The BRA, US Bangla and most of the TAROM's were made in 2019.

by738 · Sat Dec 12, 2020 7:03 pm

will perhaps sell a few if theres a backer behind it, otherwise thats the last we’ll hear of it. Old tech, not efficient enough (I wouldn't imagine)

freakyrat · Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:58 pm

Boeing757100 wrote:
freakyrat wrote:
AWACSooner wrote:
That's still my favorite regional jet I've ever flown on...CMH-MKE back in '04 on Midwest Express. Thing took off like a rocket.

I flew on the DO328 Jet on Atlantic Coast/Delta Connection from CVG-SBN and from CVG-CMI. Great little airplane. Comfortable and a great view from the windows.

I wasn't alive back then, but did the 328Jets for DL connection ever fly into ATL?

No. Atlantic Coast Airlines only flew the Dornier 328 Jets out of Boston, LaGuardia, and Cincinnati for Delta Connection.

F9Animal · Sun Dec 13, 2020 3:47 am

My first flight on a 328 was pretty scary. They had to shut down the engine shortly after takeoff out of GJT. We made it back safe and sound. Ironically, it was their inaugural 328 flight too! The plane wasn't even painted in United Express colors.

As I have been told the 328 was way ahead of its time when it launched. I could totally see a 40 seat aircraft being successful. Really hope this works out!

ArcticSEA · Sun Dec 13, 2020 7:34 am

Boeing757100 wrote:
I think we need some plane in the Do 328/JET category again. COVID has only made regional flying more popular.

Was that a scientific poll?

Boeing757100 · Sun Dec 13, 2020 5:44 pm

Does this relaunch extend to the 328JET or just the prop version?

2175301 · Sun Dec 13, 2020 6:13 pm

lightsaber wrote:
(deleted quoted sections: See above)

Unfortunately, I agree. The 19 seat Cessna will serve what market can only be served by turboprops. I see many 9-seaters, for notice this type if plane really stopped selling once the pilots required an ATP certificate.

Yes, the ATR42 limped along; I also subscribe to the theory only as part of the overall ATR family.

I'd love to see a new small turboprop thrive. There just isn't the market there was between road and rail expansion.

If anything, the small turboprop market will go electric to offset some of aviation's carbon impact.

Lightsaber

While I agree that the new Cessna will likely dominate the most common 19 seat passenger market for future; keep in mind that it has a competitor that already owns the 19 seat market for "severe" conditions and float plane service: The Twin Otter 400 (I believe 158 produced in the last decade, with an outstanding order book). Admittedly, the Twin Otter 400 is a niche aircraft, but, perfect for what it does.

Have a great day,

vfw614 · Sun Dec 13, 2020 7:19 pm

Boeing757100 wrote:
Does this relaunch extend to the 328JET or just the prop version?

No.Initially just a turboprop with plans for a hybrid propulsion system at a later point.

oldannyboy · Mon Dec 14, 2020 10:48 am

Ty134A wrote:
oldannyboy wrote:
So, when is the new Fokker 100 going to fly?

BTW, I'm still awaiting the Tay re-engined 1-11...

I know people here like to make fun of the idea of a reengined F100. Having a lot of experience with both 70ies and 100s, I kind of fail to see, how a reengined Fokker would be less attractive than any reengined Embraer EMJ. Especially looking at a potential Fokker 130, the one stretched to 130 seats envisioned once at the beginning.

Fokkers have so much extra structure in it to make them rugged aircraft. Embraers don‘t, they are limited by all means. Fokkers have virtually no trim issues, Embraers are basically useless for some airline configs trim wise.

The 737 got reengined up to a point at which it started to kill people due to poor characteristic. There would be no such limitations on a Fokker what so ever.

Sorry my friend, I do apologize.

I would never make fun of an aircraft like the sturdy Fokker.

And I fully agree with all you say.

I am making fun (in a good way) of both the naive people who each and every time still want to believe to all these hopeless re-start programmes (like Rekkof) which are just ploys to extract $$$$ from clueless investors.... Rest assured, just as there will never be a new, re-launched, warmed-up Fokker there equally won't be any re-launched Do-328.

Only during icing conditions, Fokkers can be problematic. But no such problems emerged in the last few years.

Noshow · Mon Dec 14, 2020 1:03 pm

It's quite remarkable that finally not the fancy turboprops like SAAB, Q400 and Do 328 were the big sellers but the simple and almost primitive ATRs. However they were kept current and upgraded.
Maybe there is a lesson to be learned?

TObound · Mon Dec 14, 2020 10:45 pm

vfw614 wrote:
The manufacturer begs to differ:

Deutsche Aircraft anticipates that travelling habits and demands on airlines will change. Traditional large-scale hub and spoke operations will be restructured as the demand for short-haul, point-to-point, low-emission transport grows. Airlines will resize their fleets to accommodate smaller, more efficient and more eco-friendly aircraft, and seek to open underserved routes with direct services through “right sizing” operations.

It will be interesting to see how the Norwegians will built railways to replace DHC8-100 flights in the arctic or how remote destinations in Australia currently served by REX and their Saab 340s will be linked to the outside world in the future. Or Alaska and Canadian communities relying on RAVN or Air Creebec Dash 8 and First Air ATR42 remain on the map. Just to name a few.

A lot of those remote areas have substantial cargo requirements too. I see a bigger market in the future for something like the Q400CC (combi seating 50 pax) than a pure 40 seater to be honest.

BawliBooch · Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:36 am

Noshow wrote:
It's quite remarkable that finally not the fancy turboprops like SAAB, Q400 and Do 328 were the big sellers but the simple and almost primitive ATRs. However they were kept current and upgraded.
Maybe there is a lesson to be learned?

IMO, it comes down to the manufacturer's ability to scale up production and support. ATR, from the ground up were planning on volumes both to reduce cost and gain leverage.

The competition all had excellent products, perhaps even better than the ATR. But they simply failed to find the funding to scale up production to compete in the marketplace.

This is certainly true of Bombardier Canada. Despite backing of federal govts, the company was simply too lethargic and too set in their ways to think about scaling up production and support. Also a little averse to risk - Complete cop out of the < 50 seat market space where they could have given ATR a tough fight. Alas! BDC has little appetite for risk taking.

Excellent products - Dash 8, CS100/300. But bad business sense.

Reddevil556 · Tue Dec 15, 2020 9:42 am

I could see these being useful in Africa. I was at a location for a while where Fokker 50s came in multiple times a day. Those Fokkers have to be getting up there in age. But I don't see where a new build Do 328 would more advantageous than a second hand ATR or Dash 8. I don't think the US Air Force Do 328s (C-146?) need to be replaced any time soon.

bennett123 · Tue Dec 15, 2020 9:58 am

IMO, one major issue with the idea of developments based on F50/F70/F100, is that Fokker stopped making aircraft.

hz747300 · Tue Dec 15, 2020 10:39 am

Boeing757100 wrote:
I think we need some plane in the Do 328/JET category again. COVID has only made regional flying more popular.

I'd love this too.

Flying-Tiger · Tue Dec 15, 2020 10:45 am

Reddevil556 wrote:
I could see these being useful in Africa. I was at a location for a while where Fokker 50s came in multiple times a day. Those Fokkers have to be getting up there in age. But I don't see where a new build Do 328 would more advantageous than a second hand ATR or Dash 8. I don't think the US Air Force Do 328s (C-146?) need to be replaced any time soon.

There is a market for a newbuild prop existing, it comes down to how big it is. And part of this answer is how a newbuild Do328 (or else) will be priced at. Used planes can only fly so long, in many cases the spares supply drys up, training opportunities are becoming scare etc. And after 25-35 years of useful life they are worn out, no matter what. If one takes a look on when production of the SF3, S20, F50, EMB etc. stopped it becomes obvious that we´re fast approaching the 25/35 year barrier. Either something new comes up and offers a more-or-less 1:1 replacement, or the segment has to move up or down. Both probably not options with the most economic sense.

There will be a segment for FiFo operations, island connections, regional traffic, VIP/group travel etc. around the globe, and not every relation requires a 70 seater or is suitable for a Regional Jet.

WayexTDI · Tue Dec 15, 2020 5:29 pm

bennett123 wrote:
IMO, one major issue with the idea of developments based on F50/F70/F100, is that Fokker stopped making aircraft.

Which is OK since no one mentioned the idea of a development based on F50/F70/F100: we're talking about the Do328 here, although its historic manufacturer(s) have stopped making aircraft as well.

flyfresno · Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:00 pm

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.

Remember, though, that a lot of OO's CR2s are getting fairly long in the tooth. At this juncture, some are only 5ish years newer than many of the EM2s were when OO retired them. Yes, the CR2s have the major benefit of the common type rating with the CR7/CR9, so retiring them won't mean quite as much savings as retiring the EM2 did, but there's only so long you can keep operating a fleet just because it's paid off and you have a bunch of parts for it. I don't think OO will just go out and buy this a/c simply to operate it to EAS cities, BUT, if one of its partners decides to start operating it and give part of that flying to OO, it could make sense for them to then start replacing their CRJ EAS routes with it.

LucaDiMontanari · Wed Dec 16, 2020 2:09 pm

by738 wrote:
will perhaps sell a few if theres a backer behind it, otherwise thats the last we’ll hear of it. Old tech, not efficient enough (I wouldn't imagine)

The Do328's problem was never the "old tech" which is still quite up to date, if you disregard the lack of a fly by wire. Do you know of how many parts its wing main structure is build of? Two: a lower and an upper shell including spar, ribs/stiffers and skin, each milled out of a single big chunk of aluminium - one needs to go a long way down, until one can catch up to the same stability, low weight and low part count with composites. But it was actually such high-tech stuff, that made the Do328 inefficient. It's not its fuel burn (okay, that wasn't great either) but mainly it was way too expensive to build and thus to acquire, especially for the small regional airlines targeted as customers. Or better: it was way too small for its price tag, what pitched up fix costs per seat to an unhealthy level. Even for the pre-LCC mid 90's era, when it was totally normal to pay 600.- bucks return for a 50 minute hop like FRA-MUC.

The Do328 was basically a city bus with the performance and technology of a Lamborghini. Throwing even more up-to-date high-tech at it would most likely worsen the problem instead of solving it. So that's the reason why I can't see a great chance for that plane - opposite to the Embraer attempt to reuse the E-Jet part basket and thus can build a new turboprop plane as a part of a much larger family.

eraugrad02 · Thu Dec 17, 2020 5:12 am

I really think that this aircraft would be a hit for UA/AA/DL. For example, this plane would work great out of CLT to (FLO, PGV, ROA, EWN for AA), out of IAD to (LYH, ROA, etc for UA). Not all cities need aircraft that hold 50+ pax so in the name of passenger travel options, a lean fuel burning turbo-prop would allow many of these small to medium towns to see more frequencies (3 to 4 trips/day vs 2 CR2/E145. One reason I also think the Dornier 428 would be longer is not ONLY for extra seats but so that the plane could mount to passenger bridges. Even smaller airports are integrating jet bridges from groundlevel. I can't wait to see the 1st one in the skies.

Devilfish · Fri Jan 08, 2021 9:25 pm

Flightglobal has a new, rather long article on the D328eco.....

https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers ... 82.article

https://worldairlinenews.files.wordpres ... aqwiku.jpg

Perhaps this iteration of the 328 could survive with Sierra Nevada backstopping the project this time around? :scratchchin:

Polot · Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:04 pm

Devilfish wrote:
Flightglobal has a new, rather long article on the D328eco.....

https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers ... 82.article

https://worldairlinenews.files.wordpres ... aqwiku.jpg

Perhaps this iteration of the 328 could survive with Sierra Nevada backstopping the project this time around?

Sierra Nevada has always been involved with the relaunch attempts. They bought the rights to the aircraft in 2015 and have been trying to get it restarted ever since. First with Turkey before the Turkish Government pulled out and now they are trying with Germany.

744SPX · Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:18 pm

Apparently the D328eco is somewhat slower than the original (600km/h vs 620), maybe because of the stretch? (the ATR-42 is faster than the 72 by a fairly wide margin)

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net