Turboprops: Making a Comeback?
#31
weekends off? Nope...
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,940
I wouldn't be where I am today without my king air time, so it's all in jest. Plus, it's more fun to screw your way thru the air than to suck and blow!
#33
Many are going to British airline, Flybe
Bombardier Q400 turboprops dropped by Republic Airways | Financial Post
Bombardier Q400 turboprops dropped by Republic Airways | Financial Post
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,542
I honestly think a lot of turboprops will be parked over the next year as the pilot shortage at the regional level and the effects of FAR 117 make it virtually impossible for airlines to profitably operate smaller turboprops (B-1900, EMB-120, SAAB-340, Q-200...). See my thread:
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/re...ally-does.html
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/re...ally-does.html
#36
On Reserve
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 23
#37
Late to the party but here's my take...
PAX: I suspect the issue with PAX preferring jets is mostly OBE (Overcome By Events)...that was relevant when gas was cheap but the evidence shows when push comes to shove most PAX will sort fares by price on Orbitz and buy the cheapest.
Big Turboprops: Should have a future, as long as they're not too fast. Like somebody else said: fast = big engines = more fuel burn = little cost advantage over RJs. Again PAX sort ticket options by price, not time spent in cruise.
Big TP's MUST have significantly lower fuel burn to compete with RJ's...they are more complicated, so they're not cheaper to buy or maintain.
Small TP airliners: Nobody wants to make new ones. Why? Because they need all the same expensive technology that other airliners have but with fewer seats they have a smaller potential ROI. If it's a lucrative market, airlines will just fly larger TPs or RJs half empty and still make money. If it's not a lucrative market they'll be driving to the nearest big city (or flying on caravans courtesy of EAS).
PAX: I suspect the issue with PAX preferring jets is mostly OBE (Overcome By Events)...that was relevant when gas was cheap but the evidence shows when push comes to shove most PAX will sort fares by price on Orbitz and buy the cheapest.
Big Turboprops: Should have a future, as long as they're not too fast. Like somebody else said: fast = big engines = more fuel burn = little cost advantage over RJs. Again PAX sort ticket options by price, not time spent in cruise.
Big TP's MUST have significantly lower fuel burn to compete with RJ's...they are more complicated, so they're not cheaper to buy or maintain.
Small TP airliners: Nobody wants to make new ones. Why? Because they need all the same expensive technology that other airliners have but with fewer seats they have a smaller potential ROI. If it's a lucrative market, airlines will just fly larger TPs or RJs half empty and still make money. If it's not a lucrative market they'll be driving to the nearest big city (or flying on caravans courtesy of EAS).
#38
It was maybe two years ago now SkyWest's Chip was quoted in Aviation Week saying that if an airframer were to build a turboprop in the 30 to 50 seat segment with large engines using modern technology he would buy them. Unfortunately nobody has taken on the challenge.
The Brasilia has made loads of dosh for SkyWest over the years and if there was a modern replacement that wasn't weight restricted in places like Denver and Laramie in summer I'm sure SkyWest would be all over them like a rash.
RIP the mighty Bro!
Airfix
The Brasilia has made loads of dosh for SkyWest over the years and if there was a modern replacement that wasn't weight restricted in places like Denver and Laramie in summer I'm sure SkyWest would be all over them like a rash.
RIP the mighty Bro!
Airfix
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post