Bombardier cuts Dash 8's

[To infinity & beyond]

From Australian Aviation:

BOMBARDIER CUTS SMALLER TURBOPROPS: Bombardier has informed employees that it will discontinue its 37 seat Dash 8-Q200 and 50 seat Q300 turboprops after current orders are finished in May 2009.
The Montreal based manufacturer's new Regional Aircraft president Steve Ridolfi said that the decision to drop the lower capacity Dash 8s was driven by market movement to larger capacity aircraft. “Due to a shift in demand towards larger turboprops, Bombardier Aerospace has increased the production rate of its 78-seat Q400 aircraft and will discontinue the production of its 37-seat Q200 aircraft and its 50-seat Q300 aircraft,” he said.
Bombardier plans to use the extra capacity at its Toronto facility to increase the production rate of the Q400 which has garnered strong sales recently despite problems with the type at SAS. Bombardier has also launched the NextGen Q400, which will feature enhancements to the cockpit and cabin, including new ceiling panels, LED lighting and larger overhead bins.
Cutting the smaller model Dash 8s could leave the ATR 42 as the only Western built turboprop with less than 60 seats. Turboprop values and lease rentals for these smaller aircraft have increased significantly in recent years as the price of oil has pushed many airlines to replace regional jets with more efficient turboprops.


Where does that leave QantasLink, Skippers and others for replacement aircraft into the future? Maybe we will see some more ATR's flying around.

[mention1]

Yes its a shame that in the last 10 years or so we have lost production of:
Dornier 328
Saab 340
Jetstream 42
Saab 2000
Metro's
Tw'otters
Brasilia's/Bandits
All because the thinking was that light RJ's would be the new Kings. Well, it hasn't come to pass and now the only new turboprops available are the ATR's and larger Dash 8's.

[Ejector]

Hi "mention1",

Just pointing out that "Tw'otters" are in fact in production in Canada. DHC6-400

I wonder if the Q200 & Q300's were still profitible? or just that the Q400 is more profitible for them.

If a compnay is forced to now order ATR42's, that must be a good selling point for the 72's, same kind.



:ok:

[THE IRON MAIDEN]

Perhaps in the years to come when the current and last of the new 8's and Braz's are retired they will be replaces with E170 and 190 and the like?

What ever happened to the RJs that Kendals had? CRJs where they? would something like that be of any use in the future?

Amazing how almost all the aircarft we have been using in oz in both GA and Regionals arent being made anymore.

C402, PA31, C310, C210, Saab, Dash.

Either we are behind the times and need to update our fleets.
or the manufactures dont see a market big enough here to warrnet making them. what are the Europeans and Yank reginals buying now? ATRs

[Flyingblind]

I have been discussing this with a few mates for quite a while, interesting development re early Dash 8's getting the chop.

I really cant see how a lower level operator is going to upgrade from Metro's to VLJ's,CRJ,Jungle Jets or the oft delayed 'C' jets.

Just simple economics really, fuel is heading north at a rate of knots that has to be seen to be believed and all predictions are its not heading the other way for quite a while yet. I would have thought new technology Turboprops would definitely have a role to play, not all routes need/require a jet due cost or distance.

So whats the thinking behind all the lost aircraft in the previous 10 years as posted by to infinity and beyond? are the manufactures aware of something regards jet ops that nobody else is? is P&W's geared such a game changer that affordable jet ops are now viable for all @125 USD a barrel?

Dream Mode/ON.

Perhaps its time for Australia to invent a modern,efficient,safe and affordable 19 seat turboprop, with say a nice financial incentive from the Federal Government and perhaps those terribly nice chaps from CASA could 'help' as well.

Brazil had gone and designed a range of successful aircraft, why not Australia? surly the new Government Report looking at Australian aviation could highlight the benefits such a program would bring to our industry?

Dream Mode OFF/.

yeah right! :ugh:

[nick2007]

Flyingblind.
Yes it's nice to dream.... but... to state the obvious....
Unfortunately such programmes cost a lot of money upfront (...we all know not to ever pay for anything upfront in aviation!), and it's a lot of money to gamble on the future of the 19 seat market (though I'm not sure what the market demand for these aircraft is at the moment or what it will be like in future.)

In addition, with a lack of large airframe manufacturers/assemblers in Australia (or any experience in designing for that market), we would be up against stiff competition - since if there is any money to be made in that field, all the other manufacturer's will have planned for it! (Remember, there are people out there who are paid by the designers/manufacturers to analyse the markets for future opportunities...).

[Flyingblind]

Fair Point mate, i just fail to see how the currant state of affairs can continue into the future.

Already we have pax stepping off/onto 30 plus year old 2nd/3rd tier feeders onto basically brand new jets, the difference is very noticeable to pax and i wonder how long they are going to wear it?

Just wondering whats going to replace these old birds in 5-10 years?

Can't all step up to Q400's

[Boney]

I believe they will still make an aircraft that fits the 300 shell, ie 50 seater but will be Next Gen with all the changes made with the 400, including getting along @ high speed. Basicly same aircraft but shorter.

[toolowtoofast]

The whole 'where to go to now' question for many 19 seat operators just got a whole lot harder. No B1900's, no more 19 seaters at all - so as renewing the fleet is not an option, the Q200 was probably the most logical step up.

Maybe China will fill the void with something?

[Gun_Knutt]

When Qlink retires the Dash-100's, Lord Howe are going to be in the preverbial. I've been told the 100 is the only machine that can do the job... I may be wrong however?

[Shark Slayer]

If a 100 can do Lord Howe then a 200 would eat it for breakfast.
Are you sure they are'nt using 200's ?

[Hugh Jarse]

Gun K,

LHI is almost exclusively the domain of the -200. -100's only go when the -200's are unavailable.:)

[Ejector]

LHI are the 200's breakfast. 100 can do it, but the 100's are kept for other reasons. They didn't want them deposited onto the local open market and get into the hands of APNG that was going to operate into Australia, they provided back up, that is when they had crew for them that is. Also the QF Dash sim is a non glass 100 for the fleet of glass 200's & 300's, so they needed some 100's in the fleet to justify the sim or,,,,, chop....... Of course, this is all just a rumor. :mad::D:=:sad::E:E:E

The 100's made QF link what it is today. Big move from the Short Boxes. :D:O

[Capt Claret]

Though it's been a while, I can't think of anything a DH8-100 can do that a -200 can't do, better. :ok:

[27/09]

Which means that to break even on the half-hour Canberra run you would only need 6 bums on your 72 seats!


Hmmmmm

I would have thought that the hourly costs would go up when the sectors get shorter, increased number of cycles per hour and all that. I think that more than six bums would be needed.

Also I bet Bombardier don't factor in ticket selling costs and ground handling costs into their figures either. These are the same no matter the length of the sector. Short sectors are comparitively more costly.

[Hugh Jarse]

Maybe with fuel prices looking like they're going to hit the moon, the Q400 really is the way to go for the regionals. Rumour from someone over at the Link, that when the Bombardier test pilots came over to analyse how the company were running their Q400's, they were asked what the break even point for a one hour sector was.
Answer? 12 pax!
Which means that to break even on the half-hour Canberra run you would only need 6 bums on your 72 seats!
There's no way a VLJ can match that in efficiency.The difference in the current climate is in the ability to CREW your aircraft.

Whoever has all the pilots wins the game. QLink and REX cannot replace those leaving, let alone meet projected expansion targets. The opposition is having less difficulty attracting pilots from REX and QLink.

Aircraft efficiency is worthless if you have insufficient experienced crew to operate them.:ugh:Particularly when they are leaving for your opposition....:=

6 bums on a 72 seater to break even on CB?

I believe in the tooth fairy.

[Flyingblind]

Hah! as if QL has to worry about getting only 6 bums on the Syd-Cbr route, the Australian Public Service will not travel VB unless a loaded gun is held to their head, why?

Free grog & finger food, plus it makes 'em feel important to sit up in the corner away from the Riff Raff.

[Jango Fett]

Yes its a shame that in the last 10 years or so we have lost production of:
Dornier 328
Saab 340
Jetstream 42
Saab 2000
Metro's
Tw'otters
Brasilia's/Bandits
All because the thinking was that light RJ's would be the new Kings. Well, it hasn't come to pass and now the only new turboprops available are the ATR's and larger Dash 8's.


Shame? You never have flown a Metro have you?:E