Saving 500kg fuel from LHR to AMS woud be great, but if the other costs are to high, you can't sell even one Turboliner.
Of course saving any 500 kg would be great, however that's not the situation on short haul >120 seat operations at this moment.
A ~120 seat Boeing 737-600 weighs empty : 80,031 lb (36,378 kg), A318 more.
A ~110 seat Fokker 100 weighs empty : 53,510 lb (24,272 kg)
Difference in OEW is 30% or 12.000 kg. That's the same as the payload weight of the 120 passengers + their luggage.
The limit of 1500NM is leaving only a small spectrum of ranges, where airlines earn money.
1500NM easily covers the 700 million Europeans and 800 millions Chinese living on the East coast and more then a billion people from Delhi.
Take the average structure weight of some comparable modern aircrafts (320/737) and subtract 10%. This would be more serious than scaling up from a very special kind of aircraft like the BAe146.
IMO Aircraft made for short haul operations are all significantly lighter then 737/A320. Thing is aircraft like the BAE146, F100, 737-100, DC9 and BAC One-Eleven where never replaced. Bigger aircraft offered more payload / range flexibility & fuel prices weren't a real issue (in the sense that it killed airlines).
I have the feeling Bombardier with its lighter dedicated more fuel efficient 110-130 seater will have a ball next week and in the coming years.. ATR is looking at stepping in too with a 100 seat prop.
ATR refers to new turboprop study as '-900'. At this moment Embraer is king of the hill. Airlines simply had no alternative during the last 10 years.
Again, here arrives the weight at the scene. You want to offer a short range aircraft, which is flying thousands of cycles (round about 100.000 cycles in 30 years ?!). And the weight is lower than anything known today. This could work, but the mechanicians would have to change a lot of structural parts during the life cycle. In this case, the maintenance costs would hit the roof.
True. Knowing in advance the aircraft will be used shorthaul, high frequency would be a design requirement. On the other hand giving in at range, payload, ceiling and speed would make everything lighter, aslo the structural loads. Adding metal in the places where it should be is a matter of good design, as well as e.g. good accessibility for inspection & repair.