Looking at the article below 2,500 new TP's will be needed and there is also a comparison between A & B.

Proud to fly a Turboprop: Q400 vs ATR72 « The Flying Engineer

and for saab 2000 x wind of 40 kts is demonstrated that is not restrictive

excellent link jacx123!!

the fact they are both predicting a lot more demand still doesn't open the door to SAAB as they will have to meet the startup costs etc as previously discussed ad infinitum in this thread

Hullo Harry,

Is your point that you think production start up costs are a major obstacle for Saab, should they re-commence an STC derivative SF34 or SB2000 or are you saying something else entirely?

If you are talking about development and production start up costs for an all new larger aircraft, as some are suggesting, then I think I agree with you unless the risk was shared with a number of partners and history has shown that such partnerships are fraught with problems, such as Saab's original partnership with Fairchild in producing the SF34.

Oracle

I don't want to repeat the whole thread but to summarise - my position is:-

1. Even restarting production of any airliner is not low cost
2. Modifying or upgrading an old design is high cost
3. designing a new aircraft is immensely costly
4. the SAAB design was a good one but the operators at the bottom (<70 seat) end of the market cannot afford anything other than used aircraft in any numbers
5. even the current TP builders are struggling to make a consistent profit

thus the idea of Saab going back into production is unlikely - a pity but there you go - UNLESS they are relocated to China or similar where the profit motive is less pressing

I don't think you are right HH. A modern turboprop with 70 seats or more seats, good runway performance and plenty of poke is exactly what the airlines will buy. Jets are good but nothing can really match the kg/seat/nm fuel burn of a turboprop - especially if the sector times are similar. With current (and predicted) fuel costs, there is a large hole in the market.

PM,

The aircraft you describe is the Q400 which has sold in respectable numbers but costs $22m and can only be afforded by relatively well-healed carriers or those enjoying sovereign support.

Heathrow Harry was specifically discussing aircraft with <70 seats and, in general, this thread has discussed the demand for aircraft to replace the many 30 - 50 seats tps which are now getting very old. That there is a demand in this segment is not in doubt, it is just the inability of the carriers in the segment to afford anything other than very cheap used equipment which is the problem.

precisely Torquelink

it's a matter of financial capability and few airlines operating on thin routes can generate significant income - evern decent airlines such as AirNorth in Darwin operate Brasilias and Metros on most routes

HH:

Kindly share some of your wisdom regarding your above 1-5 points, backed up with factual numbers, since it seem you know something no one else does.:ok:

go read the last 50 years of Janes AWA, Flight & Flying

full of companies grossly underestimating time and cost of development, re development & upgrades on commercial aircraft

I wouldn't dispute any of HH's 5 truisms , though I disagree with his conclusion.

Having said that, 3 of the 5 points he made are irrelevant - relating to restarting production of an upgraded old design - which clearly isn't what Saab are contemplating.

Yes, developing a new design is horrendously expensive, no argument with that statement. However the fact that Bombardier and ATR are struggling to make a profit competing with each other (with two products, neither of which can be stretched much further) doesn't necessarily mean that an all-new 90-110 seat Saab with the new GE engine wouldn't do well in competition with jets in the under 400nm market.

Interesting to read the following quote.

"Maritime Airborne Surveillance is a fast growing market throughout the world. With the 340 MSA, Saab has a market position where we will be seeing a substantial increase in airborne systems," says Rickard Hjelmberg, Vice President, Maritime Surveillance Area within Support and Services.

No doubt Saab is busy with producing a sort of mini-AWACS on 2000 and 340 basis, however this is irrelevant to building of new aircraft. Vice versa Saab is cashing on hi-tech aviation related technologies, which is everything else than aircraft production (same model was successfully adopted earlier by BAE Systems). If you visit their facility at Linkoping, their hangars are full of airframes undergoing military conversion. But this has nothing to do with aircraft production.

I think we assume SAAB is developing a new 90 seater because they were in talks with GE regarding their new engine aimed at the 90 seat market. An artical recently suggests the CPX38 will be in the 4000-6000HP range. The original SAAB 2000 had a derated AE2100 set at 4150SHP. GE is looking for a 15-20% reduction in SFC on this engine with similar savings in maintenance costs due to electronic engine monitoring technologies.

Based on 15% fuel saving applied to the S20 it would have comparable fuel usage to the ATR42(500/600) per sector for a few more seats, 50 knots more speed and cruise altitudes up to FL310.

There is still some hope for a new 2000.

* I would expect the 15% reduction would be compared to current technology and offer much improvement over the AE2100 on the S2000.

43,

An interesting comment that contines this discussion. Furthermore the SB2000 airfame can be configured for up to 58 passengers by replacing the aft 'hot' galley with the smaller forward unit and istalling the 4 across back row bench and an additional seat row.

Extra passengers and new motors producing 15 percent lower fuel burn for the same performance would impressively reduce regional operator unit costs for airlines choosing to operate such an aircraft.

Harry,

I was amused when you cited 50 tears of reading Jane's, AWA, Flight and Flying as your authoritative references to JackX's request for clarification.

I think all your references are reliable organs, where the journalist's indeed did their jobs by reporting the news that aerospace companies (in this case made) and resisted the current journalistic tendency of trying to create the news themselves and fit it into a real time media grap or a sound bite.

My point is that aerospace companies (in this speculation - Saab) do their own thing, which is commented on by journalists at the time as news and afterwards as perspectives on the decisions that were made.

None of the high quality preiodicals you mentioned, to the best of my knowledge, has ever attempted to predict the future. They have only ever commented on the successes or otherwise of the decisions made by their subjects and indeed, when this discussion is over and Saab reveals what they will do, or not on this subject, Flight, et al, will write either a news breaking story or a nice little retrospective feature accordingly.

The Saab CEO has been talking to Bloomberg at Farnborough about a possible resumption of civil aircraft production (as a JV with India). I can't find an English-language link - here is the original Swedish report.

Google translates part of it as:

A complete translation from swedish:
 

Saab is considering resuming the manufacturing of civilian aircraft.

Saab considering resuming its production of civilian aircraft, an operation which has been down for 13 years.

July 11th, 2012 at 16:10
Bloomberg News writes after an interview with CEO Håkan Buskhe at this year's air show in Farnborough, England.

"We started the evaluation almost two years ago. It will not be a completely new aircraft, nor quite like the Saab 2000", Håkan Buskhe is reported to have said about the plans, which should require an initial customer in order to be realized.

Bloomberg News writes that the plans were raised due to increased fuel prices, which increases the demand for relatively fuel efficient so-called turbo-prop aircraft (propeller aircraft of the type that Saab 340 and 2000).

For any production, a joint venture with a not yet designated companies from India may be the case, according to Håkan Buskhe, but points out that the Indian market is not large enough alone to justify a resumption of production. India, according to Bloomberg News, expressed interest in a domestically-developed regional civilian aircraft.

Saab's media relation Manager Erik Magni says to News Agency Direkt that the discussions on civil aircraft production so far are at an early stage, and that decisions for production are not included. He also mentions that it is natural for Saab to keep up with the development of civil aircraft, given the large number of Saab 340 and 2000 still in operation.

"Today there is more than 450 Saab 2000 and Saab 340 (our civilian aircraft) in operation and they are expected to fly for years to come. We have a responsibility to keep us updated on the market and technology", said Saab spokesperson Karin Walka in an email to News Agency Direkt on Tuesday, speaking of the discussions on the possible resumption of production of commercial aircraft.

Methinks one or other has lost something in translation. :)

Bing translates the original Swedish as "There will be an entirely new aircraft"

Sounds like SAAB might be involved in the RTA-70 program. This is a high wing, T-Tail design starting at 70 seats. An all new design although some initial pictures and mockups looked like a cross between an ATR and the Dash 8. The program seemed to dissapear a few years back after the government wanted it changed to a turbofan design.

This is the correct translation :ok:

Yes it is. I am swedish myself and as such I know my own language... ;)

Thanks, that's crystal clear then. :*

Exactly. So:
"We might or might not be thinking of building an airplane, which might be based on another, if there is customers available. Maybe."

Talk about a bold statement.

Heard that a South Korean company is willing to share development risk and to me it seems a perfect match considering the ambitions to enter the global market. see samsung vs. apple etc

Yeah ! ... :E

.

Sure?

Acc. some german Dudes in an unlighted aviation hazard I got to proof that I can speak german (German national, born in Germany to German parents)...despite the fact that I own a German radio certificate that states that I can do radio in German and English. Following the English level 4/5/6 joke a few years ago...


Sorry for OffT.

Yep. The fact that Im acknoledge it at all should be proof enough but if you're unsure, dont hesitate to challenge me. :8

love logging in and seeing a post "mature" from a serious discussion to the airbenders, firebenders... makes my day guys! :}

anyways, had to post on this one as the OLD Saab cars were good, untill they went japanes and chinese and !!!!!. But... here me this, how in hell's sake is Saab thinking af just "designing" another TP when they have been out of it for more then a decade and can't even sell their prized fighter jet abroad anymore....ooohhh:ugh: I knows, they are now going to sell of everything with the aircraft, making one big splash (with the chinese or anyone interested in their now rapidly becoming outdated fighter jet technology) and then go bust, at least that department, as all the good old trustworthy companies are doing because the managers there are becoming so overly distressed with their appalling remunerations and rather just...move on to another company to disect.

:cool: of course I could be wrong... terribly wrong... but it would be one of my ways of saving the day

The company that makes SAAB cars and SAABs defence and aerospace corporation are two completly separate entities, and have been that way for some time. Sales at SAAB are regular and the Swiss signed up for new Gripens late last year so that program is still paying off.

The last statement from SAAB regarding the turboprop project was that it was going to be a joint venture with an un-named indian corporation. The aircraft will not be a new design but it also will not be the same aircraft production restarted. This lends to the idea that it will be a S2000 modified airframe with new technology.

The whole project may rest on whether SAAB wins the Indian MRMR contract.

http://farm9.static.flickr.com/8290/...bfa6dedee7.jpg

Have been apart but still swedish company's of origin, except the cars devision sold out long ago already. No transfer of technology with the product, no sell. Every fighter producer has/is selling the technology with it in the package. Saab's selling but nobody's buying. The Greens or nationalists are pushing for some 10 advanced variants but news abound that if there are no sales the days are numbered. That's the automobile devision and fighter jet devision, now on to the commercial aviation devision...

Selling to India or a cooperation? They are building/going to build a "new" aircraft but with selling of the technology or else it would just design and build them themselves and fly them over. Investments are also say in the company. Just like Airbus has to build it's aircraft in China, it goes along with the (unwanted?) transfer of technology so that in time they can build them themselves. They have the cheaper labour, the means/ infrastructure and at last the technology to do it.

Exactly my thoughts - interesting to see what does (or doesn't) happen now.

Well, at least Saab are considering getting back into civil aircraft manufacturing unlike their UK equivalent. BAE inherited pretty much all of the UK's civil aviation manufacturing heritage (other than Shorts and Britten-Norman) and rather than exploit this leadership position by developing new market-oriented products, they proceeded to invest the absolute minimum to warm over legacy regional and corporate aircraft in order to string them out for a few more years, then terminate them or flog them off (125). To complete their masterplan they then flogged off their (the country's) share of Airbus and exited civil aircraft manufacture to focus on the military. All this at a time when most observers could see that civil aviation was booming with huge regional and corporate opportunities being exploited by Embraer, Bombardier, ATR and others and with record large aircraft production rates being achieved. All the while military budgets were being continuously slashed! Smart or what?!

And now back to the topic . . .

The Convair was a great airplane, but if I remember correctly the hot wing was only certified for "light icing". I don't know if they upgraded it from the recip versions.

today's "Flight":-

"SAAB dismisses return to building civil turboprops"

it's pretty clear

"The company....insists Saab is not aiming to go back into producing commercial aircraft"

"The airframer says it still intends to sell all the Saab 340 & 2000 turboprops it owns to concentrate on its core business"

such a shame.

That Eastern Airways Saab 2000 in BA colours does look good - even better seeing the actual aeroplane with your own eyes. See it in the Isle of Man and i thought it looks great.


Interesting to see what operators of the 340 will do in future with the aeroplanes getting older and nothing new in the 30-40 seater market available to replace them.

Harry,

I haven't been able to locate the story you have quoted. Would you be able to insert the full text from "Flight" of what has been said, including details of the Saab spokesperson and any journalist that may have been involved in the piece.

What you have quoted seems to be at odds with the recent public statements of both S.A.L. and Saab AB in this regard and it would be interesting to read the full article to understand any contextual references associated with any clear decision(s).

Many thanks.

Sorry _ I don't have the time but it's on Page 13 of the 28 Aug- 3rd Sept edition - the one with "Ascent of Airbus" on the cover

Refers to Company spokesman, the Company etc etc and has words in quotes so I think we can take it as official

the journo was David Kaminski-Morrow in their London office

I suppose they have only ruled out CIVIL turboprops but really it looks as if they will re-manufacture older planes for any military contract - they have 82 leased out

or buy the magazine as I did............

About 3 years ago SAABs management made a statement that they would never return to civil aircraft manufacturing. Then this year they suddenly about face and state that they had been looking at it for 2 years.

Now they turn around and say its off the table again.

What it seems like is that the ATR sales spurred them into seeing if they could get significant interest in something civil and it just isn't there in the numbers they are seeking, so back to the shelf. By the vague nature of their comments I don't think they actually had a product in mind whether it be a 90 seater or S2000 re-born.

A number of other economic factors currently would limit any sales, primarily due to economic slow down, poor airline financial support and the price of oil not hitting the highs it was expected to get to.

A new (or updated) aircraft in the 20-50 seat bracket is needed but there just isn't the cash out there to justify it.

Saab Aircraft intends to develop a complete new fighter the Gripen E/F. They have a tentative agreement with Switzerland who will buy a whopping number of 22 aircraft for 3.1 Mio US$. Sweden will commit probably to an order of 40 to max. 60 planes. Saab toutes this in recent advertisements in Switzerland as " the most advanced fighter ". Originally planned to fly in 2015 the service date entry is now postponed to 2023.

I doubt that Saab will have the financial strength to survive this adventure and simultaneously develop/upgrade a new commuter aircraft. This segment is the only shrinking segment in air travel and the current Embraer/Bombardier/ATR will be challenged by new entrants like the Chinese ARJ, the Russion Superjet and eventually the Mitsubishi regional jet ( which is heavy loaded with government subsidiaries, that it might never take off ). Add to this lofty plans in India and Korea. Never try to catch a falling knife!

I have done numerous Crossair flight in the 340 and in the 2000. I must admit that I never felt comfortable in it ( maybe Crossair :ooh: was part of it )