Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 25403
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 7:27 pm

Canadian turboprop manufacturer De Havilland Canada is preparing to pause Q400 production.

Backlog of Dash 8-400s at the present time is just 17 aircraft. Once those are built, no more will be produced unless further orders are received.

The Canadian aircraft manufacturer notified suppliers to stop delivering parts to avoid building the so-called whitetails.

https://www.aerotime.aero/26970-De-Havi ... production

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
SpectralK
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2020 4:14 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 7:36 pm

It wasn't that long ago that the Q400 and the ATR were actual competitors, but in the past few years ATR just left them in the dust. It feels like the Q400 got lost in the shuffle during the whole Bombardier restructuring/selloff.
 
User avatar
UPlog
Posts: 727
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:45 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:10 pm

Unfortunately, I think Q400 is too much plane, too complex, and too expensive compared to ATR.

Whats the ATR backlog?
I fly your boxes
 
Noshow
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:16 pm

The powerful engines, fast turboprop concept didn't really work out. SAAB and Dornier had tried the same. Passengers "feel" turboprops to be old fashioned (by mistake). They never managed to get established as the green fast modern planes they are.
ATR is more of a slow simple truck. This worked better.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9620
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:37 pm

Yeh, it is the fault of passengers! :( a.net has a lot of posters awfully sentimental toward market failures. Point a hundred North American flyers toward an E75, a CRJ-900, a Q400, and an ATR and ask them which they want to take for an 800-mile flight. You could make it a straight match up between a Q400 and 737 that had MAX painted on the side in six foot tall letters and the Q400 still wouldn't win. Qs may have had good fuel economics (but not necessarily purchase or total operating economics) but nvh standards couldn't meet even early 90s CRJs.
 
bennett123
Posts: 10815
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:41 pm

What is nvh?.
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 5189
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:43 pm

UPlog wrote:
Whats the ATR backlog?


Don't know today's number, but in May 2020 was reported as 185
mercure f-wtcc
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 15175
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:45 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
Yeh, it is the fault of passengers! :( a.net has a lot of posters awfully sentimental toward market failures. Point a hundred North American flyers toward an E75, a CRJ-900, a Q400, and an ATR and ask them which they want to take for an 800-mile flight. You could make it a straight match up between a Q400 and 737 that had MAX painted on the side in six foot tall letters and the Q400 still wouldn't win. Qs may have had good fuel economics (but not necessarily purchase or total operating economics) but nvh standards couldn't meet even early 90s CRJs.


If ANVS is working - and sometimes it isn't - NVH on the Q400 isn't too bad at all. I had my family on a Q400 last summer. My wife, who like me is old enough to have bad memories of 70s and 80s props, was nonplussed. My kids thought that the propellers and the landing gear that emerge from the engines were cool. The free-flowing snacks and booze on PD probably helped.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
MEA-707
Posts: 3855
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 1999 4:51 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:51 pm

I am surprised they didn't stop sooner. The only big order, SpiceJet, is very problematic to get paid for. There are also about 100 Q400s available on the market, the whole fleets of FlyBe, Austrian, Eurowings, Air Baltic are or will soon be parked by their operators. That can't help much.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 15175
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:58 pm

bennett123 wrote:
What is nvh?.


Noise, vibration, harshness. It's a term you see more in the auto industry but very much applicable here too.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
Noshow
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:07 pm

Yeh, it is the fault of passengers! :( a.net has a lot of posters awfully sentimental toward market failures.


I did not blame the passengers I just mention what my impression of the reasons for the market failure are and I gave other examples. Airlines didn't manage to improve the turboprop image.

When I went on the Q400 on my typical feeder route in the winter we had to leave behind our baggage several times on several occasions for weight or volume or weight and balance issues, not sure why. But it happened several times. You start to prefer some CRJ next time.
Last edited by Noshow on Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:11 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
User avatar
armagnac2010
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:45 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:09 pm

ATR backlog is around 45 -42 and 175 -72. Pre-COVID, it was limited by factory space, they were competing with Airbus at the Saint Martin du touch plant.

Embraer recent market survey forecast some 1080 turboprop deliveries in the next 10 years. Bearing in mind ATR delivered around 80/85 airframes per year (pre-COVID), it leaves little room for another project, including at Embraer.

The Il-114-300, which flew in December, is a Russian market only product.

The Xian MA 700 is progressing very slowly and recent US sanctions will not help.

The Dornier 328ECO is too small, and probably belong to the Rekkof category.

Turkey recently voiced the idea of launching another 80/90 seater, but the country, at war with all its neighbours, is broke. They earlier gave up on the Dornier 328, which was a much more realitic project.

The regional market will be revived only if new, green propulsion systems become a reality. This is beyond alternative fuel (SAF etc.) which are just green washing.
 
744SPX
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:20 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 11:29 pm

Perfect situation for Embraer to take advantage of with its proposed nextgen turboprop. MA-700 is still Q400 tech.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 25403
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Fri Jan 15, 2021 11:34 pm

SpectralK wrote:
It wasn't that long ago that the Q400 and the ATR were actual competitors, but in the past few years ATR just left them in the dust. It feels like the Q400 got lost in the shuffle during the whole Bombardier restructuring/selloff.


BBD was not exactly doing well either with Q400 sales for a few years leading up to the sale to De Havilland.

As far as future orders, going to be harder to come by as my data shows 76 used Q400s available on the market now, with more coming.

The market has spoken and shown a preference for ATR family.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3455
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 12:50 am

LAXintl wrote:
SpectralK wrote:
It wasn't that long ago that the Q400 and the ATR were actual competitors, but in the past few years ATR just left them in the dust. It feels like the Q400 got lost in the shuffle during the whole Bombardier restructuring/selloff.


BBD was not exactly doing well either with Q400 sales for a few years leading up to the sale to De Havilland.

As far as future orders, going to be harder to come by as my data shows 76 used Q400s available on the market now, with more coming.

The market has spoken and shown a preference for ATR family.
Big part of that is due to the fact that Bombardier basically ignored the classic Dash 8 markets and didn't invest anything in incremental improvements of the 200 and 300 like ATR did with the -600.

BBD pumped all it's money into the Q400 and that was always going to run out of market... Covid has just moved that wall closer.

ATR just kept a product in play and it is now the only player pretty much.


Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
superjeff
Posts: 1424
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:14 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:04 am

bennett123 wrote:
What is nvh?.

Noise, Vibration, Harshness
 
zkncj
Posts: 4213
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: De Havilland to

Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:21 am

northstardc4m wrote:
Big part of that is due to the fact that Bombardier basically ignored the classic Dash 8 markets and didn't invest anything in incremental improvements of the 200 and 300 like ATR did with the -600.

BBD pumped all it's money into the Q400 and that was always going to run out of market... Covid has just moved that wall closer.

ATR just kept a product in play and it is now the only player pretty much.


ATR has done well to create them self an recurring market, by constantly working on improvements.

Look at NZ for example over the past 20 years, they have been through 3 fleets of ATR’s (-200s, -500s and now the -600s). Everytime they have also increased the fleet at the same time.

That model works great for ATR, airlines with the cash are able to by the latest up to date model and get the fuel saving etc. Then creates an second hand market for entry level airline that can’t outlay the cost of the new aircraft. While at the same time fueling an parts market that provides ATR with additional revenue.

If you take an 2000 build Q400, and 2020 build what is different between the two?
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3455
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: De Havilland to

Sat Jan 16, 2021 1:55 am

zkncj wrote:

If you take an 2000 build Q400, and 2020 build what is different between the two?


Well the Next gen upgrades would be on the new build vs 2000:

Lighter simpler maingear
Strengthen nose gear
Boarding door position option
Galley door no longer standard
Updated interior
Some avionics upgrades
...

Lower maintenance costs are the big selling point...

Advertised as better fuel efficiency but it's not as clear cut.

And of course 2020 could be a 90 seater, option wasn't available in 2000.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1504
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 3:54 am

MEA-707 wrote:
I am surprised they didn't stop sooner. The only big order, SpiceJet, is very problematic to get paid for. There are also about 100 Q400s available on the market, the whole fleets of FlyBe, Austrian, Eurowings, Air Baltic are or will soon be parked by their operators. That can't help much.


So, what I can gather is this:
- Longview owns both DeHavilland and Viking
- Bombardier owned, but sold the Q400 factory. The purchaser is not DeHavilland.
- Q400 line was going to have to move at some point (lease expires 2023)
- This 'suspension' isn't surprising if they have to move the line + covid

It would really be interesting if Longview/Dehavilland/Viking reopen the line to produce Q200/300 as well as 400.
 
2175301
Posts: 2069
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:21 am

ssteve wrote:
It would really be interesting if Longview/Dehavilland/Viking reopen the line to produce Q200/300 as well as 400.


I don't believe that Longview/Dehavilland is interested in entering the commercial aircraft market on that scale, and with that amount of money at stake.

Viking is focused on much smaller aircraft. Currently the Twin Otter, and the CL215 - CL415 aerial firefighter; along with parts and rebuild support for other models.

Viking also has a robust Beaver rebuild/conversion program - which in some cases strips off and discards everything except the frame itself. As used (and even "available" museum piece) Beavers are running low in supply for rebuild and upgrade - my understanding is that Viking is looking at restarting production of a modern Turbo Beaver - where they build the frame too. That may only be a market of 2 per year - but, it fits right into the conversion program line (all they add is a new factory fresh frame and eliminate disassembly of an old aircraft and potential frame repairs). The key issue is cost of certification of new production, and timing of entry of a new factory fresh Turbo Beaver model.

Have a great day,
 
VSMUT
Posts: 5498
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: De Havilland to

Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:05 am

zkncj wrote:
That model works great for ATR, airlines with the cash are able to by the latest up to date model and get the fuel saving etc.


Nitpicking, but fuel burn actually went up a little bit on the new versions.
 
ScottB
Posts: 7417
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:17 am

Noshow wrote:
The powerful engines, fast turboprop concept didn't really work out. SAAB and Dornier had tried the same. Passengers "feel" turboprops to be old fashioned (by mistake). They never managed to get established as the green fast modern planes they are.
ATR is more of a slow simple truck. This worked better.


Turboprops have a bunch of disadvantages which the Q400 still couldn't manage to address. Even the ANVS doesn't quite cut the noise and vibration to the same level as an RJ, so that's a minus for passenger comfort. They're slower than RJs, which makes them less competitive and increases the labor component of operating expense. Even a "high-speed" turboprop like the Q400 only gets to about 80% of the CRJ's cruise speed, and it's probably eating a fuel burn penalty to go that fast. The 27,000' service ceiling of the Q400 makes it less suitable for operation in climates (like much of the U.S.) where thunderstorms are frequent. If you can't get out of those clouds the convection is going to make for a nauseating ride, and most passengers really don't like getting tossed about for a couple of hours.

In the end, the market niche where turboprops win has gotten really, really narrow. For block times under 45 minutes to an hour, driving or high-speed rail tends to be more attractive (unless precluded by geography). Over about 90 minutes, a jet will have comparable or better economics. For most airlines, the advantages of operating a single regional type outweighs the cost savings of a turboprop for shorter sectors, and they'll also tend to get a price premium for offering the jet service.
 
T prop
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:33 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:58 am

Conair is picking up 11of the ex Flybe Q400's to replace thier legacy tankers...

https://www.airmedandrescue.com/latest/ ... refighting
 
A380MSN004
Posts: 824
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:07 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:12 am

Does this "pause" in the production will affect parts cost for current Q400 operators ?
 
bennett123
Posts: 10815
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:57 am

If they are coming from HEH it will be easy to identify them.

I will check my list today.
 
Noshow
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:28 am

A "pause" in production can erode the supplier base. Which will make it more costly to restart it and less likely to happen over time.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3852
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:35 pm

I have to wonder if de Havilland would consider re-engining the Q300, as there is a market for turboprops in the 50-seat class and right now, ATR would be unchallenged there.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22401
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:39 pm

A new Q-300 has merits, but they must update avionics to have at least basic predictive maintenance.

Noshow wrote:
A "pause" in production can erode the supplier base. Which will make it more costly to restart it and less likely to happen over time.

Paused production only restarts for military programs where the budgets allow such inefficiency.

Vendors are brutalized by pauses and their management have long memories.

Lightsaber
7 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 5291
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:56 pm

T prop wrote:
Conair is picking up 11of the ex Flybe Q400's to replace thier legacy tankers...

https://www.airmedandrescue.com/latest/ ... refighting


It really is a very good replacement for their CV580 fleet. Article states they've already purchased 19 airframes total so far in their conversion program.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
bennett123
Posts: 10815
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:23 pm

TProp

11 ex Flybe DHC8 and last known location.

DHC8

G-ECOC NRN HEH Aviation
G-ECOD NRN HEH Aviation
G-ECOG NRN HEH Aviation
G-ECOJ NRN HEH Aviation
G-ECOM NRN HEH Aviation
G-ECOT MST HEH Aviation
G-FLBC NRN HEH Aviation
G-FLBD NRN HEH Aviation
G-FLBE NRN HEH Aviation
G-JECZ NRN HEH Aviation
G-KKEV NRN HEH Aviation
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3455
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:58 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
I have to wonder if de Havilland would consider re-engining the Q300, as there is a market for turboprops in the 50-seat class and right now, ATR would be unchallenged there.


Re-engine with what through? The PW123 on the DH83 and the PW127M on the ATR -600s are still basically the same engine... there is much more needed than that.

The PW150 from the Q400 is a massive upgrade with theoretical 7000shp design power (just over 5000shp on it's current uses including the Q400)... it's not something that can just be downsized into the 50 seater either.

There is no powerplant currently on the market that is an improvement:

The CT7 series is the same vintage... the TP400 is way too big (bigger than even the PW150)... all the others are too small (GE H-, RR 500, etc)

There is the GE Catalyst but that's been stalled for some time and is still on the smaller side of the equation.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22401
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:09 pm

northstardc4m wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
I have to wonder if de Havilland would consider re-engining the Q300, as there is a market for turboprops in the 50-seat class and right now, ATR would be unchallenged there.


Re-engine with what through? The PW123 on the DH83 and the PW127M on the ATR -600s are still basically the same engine... there is much more needed than that.

The PW150 from the Q400 is a massive upgrade with theoretical 7000shp design power (just over 5000shp on it's current uses including the Q400)... it's not something that can just be downsized into the 50 seater either.

There is no powerplant currently on the market that is an improvement:

The CT7 series is the same vintage... the TP400 is way too big (bigger than even the PW150)... all the others are too small (GE H-, RR 500, etc)

There is the GE Catalyst but that's been stalled for some time and is still on the smaller side of the equation.

Pratt has prototypes that are much more efficient. I couldn't find a great link, but in the new Embraer turboprop threads, they have talked about the new Pratt engines in development:
viewtopic.php?t=1447161

Link on new turboproo in development:
https://airinsight.com/pratt-whitney-ca ... op-engine/


The industry is switching to new design turborop engines. That said, new airframes always have an advantage over old designs. If given a choice between a new engine where the only benefit to the operator us the new engine and a new design with a modern (lighter, more aerodynamic) wing, better packaged cabin (with solid modeling, so much easier), a better cockpit, and predictive maintenance avionics, which would you invest the engine R&D money on?

There is an obsession here on a.net that then engine makets are happy to re-engine old designs. They are not as a better aircraft helps sell the engines. e.g., the E2 jets received hand me down already designed engines as that is typically all a NEO business case justifies (e.g., A330NEO, E2-190/195).

The A32xNEO and MAX had very different business cases because both went down the same path.

Lightsaber
7 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
baje427
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:09 pm

northstardc4m wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
I have to wonder if de Havilland would consider re-engining the Q300, as there is a market for turboprops in the 50-seat class and right now, ATR would be unchallenged there.


Re-engine with what through? The PW123 on the DH83 and the PW127M on the ATR -600s are still basically the same engine... there is much more needed than that.

The PW150 from the Q400 is a massive upgrade with theoretical 7000shp design power (just over 5000shp on it's current uses including the Q400)... it's not something that can just be downsized into the 50 seater either.

There is no powerplant currently on the market that is an improvement:

The CT7 series is the same vintage... the TP400 is way too big (bigger than even the PW150)... all the others are too small (GE H-, RR 500, etc)

There is the GE Catalyst but that's been stalled for some time and is still on the smaller side of the equation.

Perhaps add some six blade props and composites along with lighter seating, led lighting and new avionics. Of course the funds needed to do this is probably unlikely to be recouped. If they could how long would it take for them to restart the classic Dash 8 line ?
 
VSMUT
Posts: 5498
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:20 pm

northstardc4m wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
I have to wonder if de Havilland would consider re-engining the Q300, as there is a market for turboprops in the 50-seat class and right now, ATR would be unchallenged there.


Re-engine with what through? The PW123 on the DH83 and the PW127M on the ATR -600s are still basically the same engine... there is much more needed than that.

The PW150 from the Q400 is a massive upgrade with theoretical 7000shp design power (just over 5000shp on it's current uses including the Q400)... it's not something that can just be downsized into the 50 seater either.


What they really needed 15-20 years ago was a Q350 powered by the ATR 72s PW127F/M. It would be way less powerful compared to the rest of the family, but would match the ATR more closely on economy.
 
User avatar
msp747
Posts: 527
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:26 pm

baje427 wrote:
northstardc4m wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
I have to wonder if de Havilland would consider re-engining the Q300, as there is a market for turboprops in the 50-seat class and right now, ATR would be unchallenged there.


Re-engine with what through? The PW123 on the DH83 and the PW127M on the ATR -600s are still basically the same engine... there is much more needed than that.

The PW150 from the Q400 is a massive upgrade with theoretical 7000shp design power (just over 5000shp on it's current uses including the Q400)... it's not something that can just be downsized into the 50 seater either.

There is no powerplant currently on the market that is an improvement:

The CT7 series is the same vintage... the TP400 is way too big (bigger than even the PW150)... all the others are too small (GE H-, RR 500, etc)

There is the GE Catalyst but that's been stalled for some time and is still on the smaller side of the equation.

Perhaps add some six blade props and composites along with lighter seating, led lighting and new avionics. Of course the funds needed to do this is probably unlikely to be recouped. If they could how long would it take for them to restart the classic Dash 8 line ?

I don't think they would restart the classic Dash 8 line. Any future smaller aircraft would be updated with all of the things you mentioned and be on-par with the 8-400. The chances of that seem slim though.
 
2175301
Posts: 2069
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:25 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Paused production only restarts for military programs where the budgets allow such inefficiency.

Vendors are brutalized by pauses and their management have long memories.

Lightsaber


Not totally true; but mostly.

Pauses and restarts also occurs where an aircraft occupies a fairly unique niche. Hence Viking was able to start production of the Twin Otter with upgrades as the Twin Otter-400 some years ago.

Due to the pandemic Viking also "paused" production of the Twin Otter 400 by mid 2020; which is fully expected to restart as they have an order book and customers who do want the aircraft in the future - just not right now in the current air-travel environment. Since there is no good alternative to some of what the Twin Otter does. I see its production continuing for many decades - at a low rate of production (2-6 aircraft per year). Viking is also doing about the same number of retrofits/upgrades per year of older aircraft as well.

While its supplier base is squeezed a bit, Viking's suppliers are already at just producing limited quantities of parts every year for Viking (well below the standard larger aircraft companies of 25/order minimum part contracts). Of course the aircraft are more expensive than if they were produced at a rate of 25+ per year. But, that is typical for its market niche.

I do not see that the success of Viking with low production/retrofit/upgrade numbers as translating over to the Dash-8 Series. While production might be restarted on the Q-400. It would likely just be to finish out the order book where clients actually want a new aircraft - and then the line closes. More likely in my opinion, the Q-400 line does not restart.

Have a great day,
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5509
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:31 pm

Noshow wrote:
The powerful engines, fast turboprop concept didn't really work out. SAAB and Dornier had tried the same. Passengers "feel" turboprops to be old fashioned (by mistake). They never managed to get established as the green fast modern planes they are.
ATR is more of a slow simple truck. This worked better.

It’s not by mistake. I’ve flown in a lot of Saab 2000s and q400s. They osscilate considerably more in turbulent air than a 737. And it’s really uncomfortable to peuple that don’t like turbulence
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 1026
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:45 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Vendors are brutalized by pauses and their management have long memories.

Yes, but part of that memory will be a global pandemic. *If* this is seen as being due to COVID, and *if* DHC uses the pause to move the line to somewhere that is credibly long term (perhaps announcing they are building the line to also produce a -300 size model), they might get a single mulligan on this one.

The suppliers will, after all, also be looking for whatever business they can get to get out of this global recession.
 
Noshow
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:08 pm

I honestly think Turboprops deserve more recognition and success.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7650
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:38 pm

Noshow wrote:
I honestly think Turboprops deserve more recognition and success.

When I went home to IAH during college I'm DFW, I always tried to make the Q400 flights. One of my favorite planes to fly on.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
gmcc
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:54 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:07 pm

32andBelow wrote:
Noshow wrote:
The powerful engines, fast turboprop concept didn't really work out. SAAB and Dornier had tried the same. Passengers "feel" turboprops to be old fashioned (by mistake). They never managed to get established as the green fast modern planes they are.
ATR is more of a slow simple truck. This worked better.

It’s not by mistake. I’ve flown in a lot of Saab 2000s and q400s. They osscilate considerably more in turbulent air than a 737. And it’s really uncomfortable to peuple that don’t like turbulence


And a 737 bounces around more that a 747 or a 777. A lot of the bounce has to do with the weight of the plane. The other fact is that 737s fly higher so they get over the weather that a prop has to fly through.
If they did bring back the 300 they could partner with universal hydrogen for a green solution.

http://www.smartaviation-apac.com/2020/ ... -retrofit/
 
bourbon
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:35 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 1:28 am

TWA772LR wrote:
Noshow wrote:
I honestly think Turboprops deserve more recognition and success.

When I went home to IAH during college I'm DFW, I always tried to make the Q400 flights. One of my favorite planes to fly on.

I use to do the same thing but up to DAL from IAH when I was dating a broad in Dallas. The only issue with the Q400 was reliability (some of it probably due to Colgate itself ) but the Q400 was the non rev dream as it always seemed the 145’s and 200’s were the preferred method of paying passengers.
I’d always wind up falling asleep on the Q400
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22401
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 1:29 am

2175301 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Paused production only restarts for military programs where the budgets allow such inefficiency.

Vendors are brutalized by pauses and their management have long memories.

Lightsaber


Not totally true; but mostly.

Pauses and restarts also occurs where an aircraft occupies a fairly unique niche. Hence Viking was able to start production of the Twin Otter with upgrades as the Twin Otter-400 some years ago.

Due to the pandemic Viking also "paused" production of the Twin Otter 400 by mid 2020; which is fully expected to restart as they have an order book and customers who do want the aircraft in the future - just not right now in the current air-travel environment. Since there is no good alternative to some of what the Twin Otter does. I see its production continuing for many decades - at a low rate of production (2-6 aircraft per year). Viking is also doing about the same number of retrofits/upgrades per year of older aircraft as well.

While its supplier base is squeezed a bit, Viking's suppliers are already at just producing limited quantities of parts every year for Viking (well below the standard larger aircraft companies of 25/order minimum part contracts). Of course the aircraft are more expensive than if they were produced at a rate of 25+ per year. But, that is typical for its market niche.

I do not see that the success of Viking with low production/retrofit/upgrade numbers as translating over to the Dash-8 Series. While production might be restarted on the Q-400. It would likely just be to finish out the order book where clients actually want a new aircraft - and then the line closes. More likely in my opinion, the Q-400 line does not restart.

Have a great day,

Ok, true My thesis was too strict. I needed the caviat that if a more successful competitor remains in production, pauses do not work.

I imagine being in the aircraft finance business.

Aircraft A remains in demand, remains in production

Aircraft B has struggled with sales, must pause production.

Both families of aircraft sold in good quantity.

Which would you rather finance? The Q400 or any other aircraft needs a major change to sell again. I think final production will go out the door, but no new orders.
7 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
BAeRJ100
Posts: 456
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:49 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 1:29 am

32andBelow wrote:
Noshow wrote:
The powerful engines, fast turboprop concept didn't really work out. SAAB and Dornier had tried the same. Passengers "feel" turboprops to be old fashioned (by mistake). They never managed to get established as the green fast modern planes they are.
ATR is more of a slow simple truck. This worked better.

It’s not by mistake. I’ve flown in a lot of Saab 2000s and q400s. They osscilate considerably more in turbulent air than a 737. And it’s really uncomfortable to peuple that don’t like turbulence


But that's not what the quoted post is saying. What does the Q400's handling in turbulence have anything to do with it being perceived as "old fashioned"? From the general public's point of view, it's simply down to being a turboprop.
B737/738/739/744ER/752/753/763/77L/77W/788/789
A223/320/321/332/333/346/359/388
MD82/MD88/717/F100/RJ85/RJ100/146-100/200/300
E175/190/CRJ700/900
 
bourbon
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:35 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 1:42 am

BAeRJ100 wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
Noshow wrote:
The powerful engines, fast turboprop concept didn't really work out. SAAB and Dornier had tried the same. Passengers "feel" turboprops to be old fashioned (by mistake). They never managed to get established as the green fast modern planes they are.
ATR is more of a slow simple truck. This worked better.

It’s not by mistake. I’ve flown in a lot of Saab 2000s and q400s. They osscilate considerably more in turbulent air than a 737. And it’s really uncomfortable to peuple that don’t like turbulence


But that's not what the quoted post is saying. What does the Q400's handling in turbulence have anything to do with it being perceived as "old fashioned"? From the general public's point of view, it's simply down to being a turboprop.

Honestly,
If someone slapped a thin metal housing that went around the prop 99% (think.. eurocopter tail rotor but far far far less robust ) of the traveling public would have no idea it was a turbo prop. The exposed blade just does something with peoples brain.
 
2175301
Posts: 2069
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 2:39 am

For those talking about upgrading the Q400 and perhaps earlier models....

For the money involved it would be a lot less risky for Longview/De Havilland to do a joint venture with Embraer. I believe that would have a lot less risk and better payback.

Embraer is looking for a partner - and De Havilland might work out.

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14407
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 2:46 am

A carbon tax might help the case for turboprops. As well as hybrid, hydrogen, electric options. However it would still probably not help the Q400, since the ATR burns less fuel.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
32andBelow
Posts: 5509
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 3:11 am

BAeRJ100 wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
Noshow wrote:
The powerful engines, fast turboprop concept didn't really work out. SAAB and Dornier had tried the same. Passengers "feel" turboprops to be old fashioned (by mistake). They never managed to get established as the green fast modern planes they are.
ATR is more of a slow simple truck. This worked better.

It’s not by mistake. I’ve flown in a lot of Saab 2000s and q400s. They osscilate considerably more in turbulent air than a 737. And it’s really uncomfortable to peuple that don’t like turbulence


But that's not what the quoted post is saying. What does the Q400's handling in turbulence have anything to do with it being perceived as "old fashioned"? From the general public's point of view, it's simply down to being a turboprop.

People perceive loud and bumpy and not as comfortable with old because why would a modern aircraft be less comfortable?
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7650
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 4:02 am

bourbon wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Noshow wrote:
I honestly think Turboprops deserve more recognition and success.

When I went home to IAH during college I'm DFW, I always tried to make the Q400 flights. One of my favorite planes to fly on.

I use to do the same thing but up to DAL from IAH when I was dating a broad in Dallas. The only issue with the Q400 was reliability (some of it probably due to Colgate itself ) but the Q400 was the non rev dream as it always seemed the 145’s and 200’s were the preferred method of paying passengers.
I’d always wind up falling asleep on the Q400

You had better luck than I did because more than a few times I ended up burning a while Friday afternoon playing the rollover game! This was 2011-13.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 1026
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: De Havilland to "Pause" Q400 production, future uncertain

Sun Jan 17, 2021 4:25 am

Aside from the type certificates, what all did Longview buy from BBD?

What is DHC without the Q? Parts and services?

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