I agree with most of your statements.
Especially this one...
Originally Posted by
MaxQ
1. Putting big engines that burn a lot of fuel for an extra 50 to 75 knots is a mistake on a turboprop. The laws of diminishing returns enters in and the fuel burns to go from a 270 ktas to 330 ktas defeat much of the reason to operate a turboprop.
The Q400 is a nice aircraft from a pilots perspective, being fast and all. However, if you want fast, why not operate a jet? Is a comparable RJ that much thirstier?
The Q300 uses very little fuel and gets 50 people to the hub. No 50 seat jet can compete with it economically on short sectors. I would not say the same about the Q400.
The Q400 is not a comparable replacement for the Q300/Saab 340/ATR and the respective markets.
I guess the trend will go towards larger regional jets (Embraer, Cseries) to keep unit costs low. Markets that do not support these planes will probably not support a Q400 as well.