SAAB's new turboprop
why bring in a third???
Yes, of course it will end in tears for someone, with too many manufacturers chasing too few orders, but that's how markets (not just aerospace ones) work.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stairways to heaven
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cargo:
you bring a smile to my face. I don't think anyone disputes that old is worse than new, except Bugatti.
however, SAAB has the experience in avionics, simulation, manufacturing and integration so if their research comes up with a feasible model that can satisfy their sales network with offset financing or other incentives, I think they have a winner.
I remember everyone said the 340 was a total failure but they still managed to sell 450+. Not bad for a failure.
Therefore, SAAB may had some enquiries from a potential a launch customer.
you bring a smile to my face. I don't think anyone disputes that old is worse than new, except Bugatti.
however, SAAB has the experience in avionics, simulation, manufacturing and integration so if their research comes up with a feasible model that can satisfy their sales network with offset financing or other incentives, I think they have a winner.
I remember everyone said the 340 was a total failure but they still managed to sell 450+. Not bad for a failure.
Therefore, SAAB may had some enquiries from a potential a launch customer.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And they could not have been that much of a failure, because most are still flying. SAAB 2000s are quite rare and hard to find, yet operators still acquire and choose them over a used ATR 72 or Q400. It would seem since the ATR and Bombardier products are still in production, that supporting them must be cheaper than a SAAB 2000.
So obviously, the aircraft got something right, otherwise they would all be in the desert or turned into beer cans.
I would love to see an improved SAAB 2K with all the latest technology, I think it would make a fine aircraft. I think it was ahead of its time when released, but with oil only getting more expensive in the long run, turboprops (or whatever is the most efficient) will surely be the way to go on certain trip lengths. Especially when you start bumping into jet speeds like the S2K and the Q400 do.
So obviously, the aircraft got something right, otherwise they would all be in the desert or turned into beer cans.
I would love to see an improved SAAB 2K with all the latest technology, I think it would make a fine aircraft. I think it was ahead of its time when released, but with oil only getting more expensive in the long run, turboprops (or whatever is the most efficient) will surely be the way to go on certain trip lengths. Especially when you start bumping into jet speeds like the S2K and the Q400 do.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sqwak7700
Saab 2000 is absolutely the worst aircraft in its class in terms of pax comfort. Especially you can't get advantage of its speed on the short sectors and have to find routes which are 1) long enough 2) pax don't care.
Engines are most unreliable of whatever you can find on todays turboprops except CT7 which powers Saab 340. Maintenance costs are sky high both airframe and engines.
Operators "preferring" Saab 2000 to ATR72 and q400 simply have no money to get anything better (and btw this is wrong comparison, you should think along fokker 50, atr42 and dash8-300 line which are all 50 seaters). Saabs 2000s are very cheap to lease or buy these days, recently there was a portfolio transaction involving a bunch of them and I can tell you a single q400 would cost you more to buy.
and jackx123, anyone who ever been signing the checks to pay saab 340 or saab 2000 maintenance would never smile about this junk. So did I. what's about you?
I'm not following this but I believe this year there will be no original 1st tier operators remaining for either type. This tells a lot about SF340 if you think that there is no replacement in 33-36 seat category.
Saab 2000 is absolutely the worst aircraft in its class in terms of pax comfort. Especially you can't get advantage of its speed on the short sectors and have to find routes which are 1) long enough 2) pax don't care.
Engines are most unreliable of whatever you can find on todays turboprops except CT7 which powers Saab 340. Maintenance costs are sky high both airframe and engines.
Operators "preferring" Saab 2000 to ATR72 and q400 simply have no money to get anything better (and btw this is wrong comparison, you should think along fokker 50, atr42 and dash8-300 line which are all 50 seaters). Saabs 2000s are very cheap to lease or buy these days, recently there was a portfolio transaction involving a bunch of them and I can tell you a single q400 would cost you more to buy.
and jackx123, anyone who ever been signing the checks to pay saab 340 or saab 2000 maintenance would never smile about this junk. So did I. what's about you?
I'm not following this but I believe this year there will be no original 1st tier operators remaining for either type. This tells a lot about SF340 if you think that there is no replacement in 33-36 seat category.
Last edited by CargoOne; 26th May 2012 at 18:48.
The 340's haven't been replaced by Rex Australia.In fact,they've been acquiring more.
According to their website,they operate more than 51 of them.I've travelled on them as pax,they are fine,no complaints at all.
According to their website,they operate more than 51 of them.I've travelled on them as pax,they are fine,no complaints at all.
I'm not sure about this 'uncomfortable for pax' statement. I currently operate the ATR 72 and have flown in them plenty of times down the back as a pax and also flown the Q400 as a pax several times. I have only experienced the Saab 2000 once as a passenger (Edingburgh to Norwich with Eastern in 2005) and remember it as being impressively quiet, comfortable (and fast) in the cabin in comparison with the other types. I liked being in the single seat on the left. I admit that at that time, I wasn't regularly flying on TP's (was flying an Islander for a parachute centre at the time and was positioning back from delivering the aircraft for maintance) and may have been influenced by the complimentry bubbly and salmon sandwichs. (My boss, an ex Parachute Regiment Sergent, when I told how much I'd liked the in-flight sevices said "You bastard, do know how much that flight cost me!)
Last edited by Jump Complete; 26th May 2012 at 23:28.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cargo
I'll give you that the 2K is more comparable to the smaller ATR42 and Q300 with regards to seats. But if SAAB enter the TP market again I would guess they would stretch their 2000 in order to seat closer to 70 like the other bigger models.
I don't think I agree with your other sentiments though. You are entitled to your own opinion, but there are still many big airlines operating SAABs.
I'll give you that the 2K is more comparable to the smaller ATR42 and Q300 with regards to seats. But if SAAB enter the TP market again I would guess they would stretch their 2000 in order to seat closer to 70 like the other bigger models.
I don't think I agree with your other sentiments though. You are entitled to your own opinion, but there are still many big airlines operating SAABs.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having flown in a Saab 2000, an ATR 42 and a Dash8 Q400, I'd take the Saab anyday. A far more pleasant experience compared to the others.
Also, having once worked for the largest Q400 rotable component supplier in Europe, I can tell you that Q400 reliability is beyond poor. The support from BBD and the vendors isn't much better either.
Also, having once worked for the largest Q400 rotable component supplier in Europe, I can tell you that Q400 reliability is beyond poor. The support from BBD and the vendors isn't much better either.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's not that long since both ATR & Bombadier were thinking of getting out of the business
Building new SAAB's will just cut everyone's throats - 3 manufacturers chasing a marginal market
Building new SAAB's will just cut everyone's throats - 3 manufacturers chasing a marginal market
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saabs are the smallest cross-section comparing to all competitors. Many people cannot stand up in cabin without tilting their head. Extremely nice when it is a de-boarding time. Also because of smallest cross-section overhead bins are pretty nonexistent. You can fit a very slim case like laptop bag, nothing more. In the winter capacity of overhead bins are not sufficient to accommodate overcoats etc. Toilet is a joke. Galley is tiny.
The only relatively big airline operating SF340 is Australian Rex and they never been an original user. All american feeders has quit or at last stages of doing that. There are no big 2000 operators anyway. There are people who switched from SF340 to ATR42 or Fokker 50 even they had no prospects of more passengers. Simply the difference in total operating cost is pretty marginal and you getting much more seats as a bonus. I have first hand experience (or should I say misfortune?) operating these birds and therefore my opinion is a bit more based on a facts as opposed to observations from outside.
ps I especially like comment about 2000 seats vs A320 seats. There are several dozens of seats certified and used on A320s ranging from no-frills super slims to flat-bed suite-style installations, so without being specific it is quite pointless. Same time there are only 2 types of seats for Saab 2000, and I will keep my opinion about their comfort (and especially reliability) with me.
pps hopefully you know that Saab Leasing is set to be closed in 2 years and they actively disposing their portfolio? This is how much trust in this product people have...
The only relatively big airline operating SF340 is Australian Rex and they never been an original user. All american feeders has quit or at last stages of doing that. There are no big 2000 operators anyway. There are people who switched from SF340 to ATR42 or Fokker 50 even they had no prospects of more passengers. Simply the difference in total operating cost is pretty marginal and you getting much more seats as a bonus. I have first hand experience (or should I say misfortune?) operating these birds and therefore my opinion is a bit more based on a facts as opposed to observations from outside.
ps I especially like comment about 2000 seats vs A320 seats. There are several dozens of seats certified and used on A320s ranging from no-frills super slims to flat-bed suite-style installations, so without being specific it is quite pointless. Same time there are only 2 types of seats for Saab 2000, and I will keep my opinion about their comfort (and especially reliability) with me.
pps hopefully you know that Saab Leasing is set to be closed in 2 years and they actively disposing their portfolio? This is how much trust in this product people have...
Last edited by CargoOne; 27th May 2012 at 14:21.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Denmark
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People seem to forget the inservice disaster that was the S2000:
Saab improves 2000 dispatch reliability
The design goal for the Saab2000 was set at 99,2 % dispatch reliability,
With crossair and dba it fell as low as 98%
Proposed changes were not successful, and dispatch issues continued, where fleet wide, it was still below 98.5% in the northern winter 01/02. This resulted Deutsch BD cancelling their remaining order
Deutsche BA suspends deliveries of Saab 2000
"DEUTSCHE BA HAS suspended further Saab 2000 deliveries to its fleet, after both it and Swiss carrier Crossair were hit by poor dispatch reliability during the harsh European winter. "
Saab improves 2000 dispatch reliability
The design goal for the Saab2000 was set at 99,2 % dispatch reliability,
With crossair and dba it fell as low as 98%
Proposed changes were not successful, and dispatch issues continued, where fleet wide, it was still below 98.5% in the northern winter 01/02. This resulted Deutsch BD cancelling their remaining order
Deutsche BA suspends deliveries of Saab 2000
"DEUTSCHE BA HAS suspended further Saab 2000 deliveries to its fleet, after both it and Swiss carrier Crossair were hit by poor dispatch reliability during the harsh European winter. "
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stairways to heaven
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having no affinity to SAAB or any other t-prop it is still remarkable to see ignorant comments like this.
How can someone (Darwin) triple it's profit with a seemingly useless aircraft if, the maintenance and/or operating cost is higher than any similar aircraft? 6xS2000 and 2xQ400. Why not the other way around?
Including "news" that is 16 years old? It's like saying gas it record levels 16 years ago.
Disposing of an asset portfolio is - disposing. Nothing else. I would read into it that SAAB may want to use the proceeds to perhaps develop the new machine and set up a new leasing company.
Back to topic: It would be nice to get some insider what SAAB may consider. Two versions and what would be the DOC.
How can someone (Darwin) triple it's profit with a seemingly useless aircraft if, the maintenance and/or operating cost is higher than any similar aircraft? 6xS2000 and 2xQ400. Why not the other way around?
Including "news" that is 16 years old? It's like saying gas it record levels 16 years ago.
Disposing of an asset portfolio is - disposing. Nothing else. I would read into it that SAAB may want to use the proceeds to perhaps develop the new machine and set up a new leasing company.
Back to topic: It would be nice to get some insider what SAAB may consider. Two versions and what would be the DOC.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: GPS L INVALID
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could well imagine that there is a gap in the market between the currently available turboprops and the armada of regional jets (C-series, Embraers, the Superjet etc..) - wouldn't surprise me if they would present a large and economical turboprop (or even UDF?) for short to medium sectors. Interesting stuff. On the pax experience: I remember the Saab 2000 as very comfortable and a LOT quieter than any Dash or ATR I have been on - just the cabin felt a little cramped (on Crossair at least).
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CO
Age: 50
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go to the bottom of this page : Warbird Information Exchange • View topic - Grumman, the people that made the planes 12 SEPT 2010
and see pictures of the Fairchild / SAAB commuter project
and see pictures of the Fairchild / SAAB commuter project
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Timbukthree
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OpsSix said the "Q400 reliability is beyond poor". Hmm...just read that Toronto-based Porter Airlines achieved a 99.4 percent dispatch reliability with their Q400s. Other quotes on the internet indicate other airlines are experiencing 99.5 and 99.59 percent reliability. I do recall the collapsing landing gear problems associated with the Q400 a while back, but that problem was rectified. Passengers seem to like them, and controllers appreciate their near-jet initial climb rate.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: FG central
Age: 53
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm 184cm tall and quite big, I've never found the Saab 340 small or cramped. I don't even recall the lack of headroom as being even the slightest issue when boarding and I've flown in them several times.
I'll take a faster flight time over overhead bin capacity any day (it's not exactly hard to get the baggage out of the hold at a regional airport, is it?) Besides, under the seat worked just fine for me last time I flew one.....
I'll take a faster flight time over overhead bin capacity any day (it's not exactly hard to get the baggage out of the hold at a regional airport, is it?) Besides, under the seat worked just fine for me last time I flew one.....
Saabs are the smallest cross-section comparing to all competitors. Many people cannot stand up in cabin without tilting their head. Extremely nice when it is a de-boarding time. Also because of smallest cross-section overhead bins are pretty nonexistent. You can fit a very slim case like laptop bag, nothing more. In the winter capacity of overhead bins are not sufficient to accommodate overcoats etc. Toilet is a joke. Galley is tiny.
The S2000 engine is a version of the C-130J Herc engine the AE2100 so it cant be that unreliable. Any reliability issues in such a small fleet would be compounded due to the lack of operational spare aircraft to call on. The dispatch reliability articals quoted are from 1996 a year or two after the aircraft entered service, most if not all aircraft have issues early on and many far worse than 98%.
Noise level in the 340 is bareable and better if it has the ANC system. The S2000 has ANC similar to the Q400 so has good noise and vibration supression compared to other turboprops.
Most of this comparison to the older aircraft is a waste of time as SAAB will no doubt introduce an updated package that includes all modern avionics, engine, noise suppression and seating.
There are people who switched from SF340 to ATR42 or Fokker 50 even they had no prospects of more passengers. Simply the difference in total operating cost is pretty marginal and you getting much more seats as a bonus. I have first hand experience (or should I say misfortune?) operating these birds and therefore my opinion is a bit more based on a facts as opposed to observations from outside.
Last edited by 43Inches; 28th May 2012 at 05:45.