Turboprop Resurgence

[TechBoy]

This is all very interesting and no doubt factually correct, but efficient aircraft are meaningless if pax don't want to fly them. I know that many pax don't care what the plane is (and some actually prefer flying props), but a significant number of (particularly biz) pax will choose a real jet over a barbie jet and a barbie jet over a prop. So that effectively leaves the realistic market for props to very small markets where the competition is RJs only. And as traffic grows over time, there will be fewer and fewer of those markets.

 

[OldpropGuy]

The original Piedmont attempted to avoid the then dreaded "commuter" title, which is now comparable to "express" by calling their Henson Dash-8's "The Piedmont Regional Airline." It appears to have been effective at the time.

This should bring back some memories:

 

[TBONEJ4J]

I posted this in August 2003.

Reading it now, I think the key thing is in the last paragraph...... "Why doesn't someone have the vision to see the difference between fatal marketing and poor product."

US Airways was always a follower, never a leader, even now. The whole 50 Seat RJ thing was 10 years too late. The E170 was a step in the right direction, but was too little too late. As early as 6 years ago and as a recently as 2 years ago, US Airways had a golden opportunity to get Q400s with a sweetheart deal from Bombardier. If there had been any vision coupled with marketing ability, US Airways would now have a killer product which no LCC could compete with. Too many Bean-Counters, and not one exec with airline product acumen. :down:

Maybe Parker and his team will be better, but except for Neeleman there is nobody in the US industry doing anything on the marketing end to run their airline business. The Bean-Counters have had their day, it's time to move on. B)




A quote from the VP of Marketing and Planning at Horizon Airlines.

Despite some initial concern about customer acceptance of the Q400 turboprop,
"from the customers' point of view, it has been very well received," Zachwieja
said. "It's roomy, with a 33-inch seat pitch, it's comfortable and it's fast.
It's the best ride in our fleet today." He also noted that the Q400 goes
head-to-head with Southwest Airlines (NYSE:LUV) in some markets that are 250 to
300 miles, and does well.

Further to that, according to a report in Flight International on the RAA Convention a few months ago, Horizon is not only doing well against LUV with the Q400, but is actually taking share from them in some of those markets.

Why? Because in those markets the breakeven Load Factor for the Q400 is somewhere aroud .79 @ $40 or so per seat (it's been a while since I read the article so the numbers might be a little off, but that's the ballpark figure).

Customers dislike Turboprops because of bad marketing and poor product. B1900 and Jestreams are good airplanes but provide a very poor product for sensitive human cargo. The Dash 8/100/200/300 is no B1900 or Jetstream and it provides a superior product(when the aircraft are at least cleaned and maintained to stop the trim rattling, anyway). The Q400 is in a different league entirely.

The Q400 provides a passenger product that far surpasses all of these aircraft and the ERJ135/145 CRJ200/700 Type, with financials that blow any of them away. On segments up to 500nm it can match any ERJ or CRJ or Boeing or Airbus, up to 1000nm it loses a bit on the block but the comfort element will certainly make up the difference if the alternative is the ERJ pencil size compartment.

Customers already gripe and moan about the tiny regional jets and how small and uncomfortable the cabin is. Nowadays, just about every passenger is concerned with the lowest fare, which is far more important to them than the type of aircraft they are on. If you fly them LGA-FLL on a B747 they'd still gripe about the airplane. Give them a Q400 LGA-FLL @ $60 one-way with a large cabin, a first-class section and performance numbers that match the RJ's with the comforts of a B737 and make a killing on the east coast, because no other airline will be able to offer a lower fare and still breakeven.

A golden opportunity is being missed here. Hell, I think I'll go to my Bank Manager and see if I can start an airline with Q400s. The first ad will be "Don't be fooled by the engines, this is the most modern and technically advanced airplane in the World". The next "Did you know that the Boeing 777 you are riding on is a propeller airplane? They just put a mask over the propeller so you don't see it."
Then "All Seats, All flights $60. New York to Florida at a price you like."

Why doesn't someone have the vision to see the difference between fatal marketing and poor product. Then, take an airplane with outstanding financials and performance, market it properly and give Southwest, JetBlue and AirTran some real competition.

 

[N924PS]

There was nothing ever really wrong with turboprops, just the stupid way they were handled. No businessman liked walking out in the rain and glycol in his 300$ shoes.

Manufacturers were to blame as well, forcing decades old designs upon the marketplace that were too small, too noisy, and customer adverse. You ever ridden in a J-41...?

Only in recent times with the Q series Dashes, new series ATR's, and the Do-328's did you finally see worthwhile airframes...

Only in recent times did you see an effort to utilize jetbridges and better facilities for "express passengers" and the turboprops rather than the "steerage-class" accomidations that they were forced to use before.

No wonder passengers said they hated turbprop flying. It was not so much the planes, as the overall poor experience.

Put it this way, part of the current problem with the CRJ and ERJ is that the very same mistakes have been repeated, and a "second tier" approach used in terms of service quality, just like with the turboprops... And soon enough you hear the term "puddle jumper jets" used by pax... And little (to any) real customer preference on short routes for a RJ over a decent Turboprop.

Rather than buying those CRJ's for PSA, investing in DHC-8/400's would have been paying off big time right now for Airways if they had followed the example of Alaska/Horizon rather than buying CRJ's like everyone else already had...

I can think of many short routes in the NE were the Q400 Dash would have ate RJ's for breakfast, and even been able to hold it's own against the LCC competitors...

Oh well.

[post="273112"][/post]​

The description of the way turboprops were handled then easily describes the way the RJ's (except the E170) are currently handled at non-jetway stations.

Last winter at LGA I observed a gentleman in a wheelchair being boarded on an E-145 in 35 knot winds and blowing snow. He was up on some kind of platform in the elements for quite a while before they got him boarded. Of course, then the ambulatory passengers had to endure the same harsh environment as they boarded.

The Dash-8 while slower than the RJ's provides a more comfortable cabin and save for a bit of vibration, a smoother ride. Did you kids flying the RJ's ever hear of slowing down in turbulence, or changing altitudes for a better ride? I guess they're still trying to log as much actual instrument time as they can for their resume's!

 

[FM2436]

It's sad really, US was behind the curve with RJs, so they rushed to catch up and wanted tons of them. Had they been smart and looked at their service and markets and ordered the Q400 along with RJs where appropriate, they would be a hell of a lot better off. How many flights under 400 miles are flown by an RJ?

Express fleet should be:
19 seat 1900D for Air Midwest/Colgan
37 seat Q200
50 seat Q300
70 seat Q400

50 seat E145 (with some of the extended ranges ones too)
70 seat E170
90 seat E190 (future)

Just think, instead of getting destroyed by B6 out of NYC to upstate New York, think how competitive Q400 service from LGA to BUF/ROC/SYR would be, and with low costs... oh well, we've never accused US management of being smart.

[post="273189"][/post]​

What Piedmont really needs are 60 Q300s. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Piedmont would need a seperate operating certificate for the Q400 from their 100s, 200s, and 300s. I fly on Piedmont's 300s often out of Salisbury. What a great, and quiet (compared to the 100's and 200's) airplane.

 

[fr8tmastr]

pdt would not need a seperate certificate for the 400, as far as the feds are concerned it's just another Dash. As far as the pax are concerned this is a whole different bird, I have ridden on it and I can tell you it is sweet.

 

[dash8roa]

Too bad the q400 still uses the inflatable leading edge boots. It is a real weak spot on the 100's,200's and 300's. :down:

 

[whlinder]

This is all very interesting and no doubt factually correct, but efficient aircraft are meaningless if pax don't want to fly them. I know that many pax don't care what the plane is (and some actually prefer flying props), but a significant number of (particularly biz) pax will choose a real jet over a barbie jet and a barbie jet over a prop. So that effectively leaves the realistic market for props to very small markets where the competition is RJs only. And as traffic grows over time, there will be fewer and fewer of those markets.

[post="273211"][/post]​

All that is true, but how many people actually pick flights based on the type of plane? If they did, few people would fly props or old planes. But the majority of passengers don't know a thing about planes. The frequent flyers care, but once they get on the Q400 and it is quieter than an RJ and just as fast (slightly slower in the air, faster in and out of the airport by reducing congestion) and more comfortable. Passengers care more about fares, and running Q400s around the northeast on routes under 400 miles that can't support a 737 is a lot smarter (IMHO) than running 50 seat RJs from 5 different operators on all those routes.

 

[Rico]

What many do not realize, is that in many cases, the Q400 is faster than a RJ or large jet being able to keep a more direct routing down low. When that advantage is not there, the Q 400 arrives only a few minutes after a jet would on the majority of the routes flown around the NE.

Great Idea, but I will be surprised to see it.

 

[PropPiedmont]

Piedmont, under US Airways (CCY) control, will never even have Q300s. Our entire 200 fleet used to be Q200s, until PDT was told to deactivate the Noise Cancelling Systems inorder to save maintenance costs. They really didn't break down that much, but the parts that usually crapped out aren't very cheap. The NVS really did make a difference, it was much quieter inside the cabin and cockpit.

If the Q400 does actually show up one day, I'm sure we'll here those famous words, "Due to aircraft fleet compatiblity we are deactivating all NVS equipment to better streamline our maintenance procedures."

Please save us Mr. Parker.

 

[jimcfs]

To educate those seated in the doghouse, I mean, in the passenger cabin , can someone please explain what happens, or to be more exact, how does the Noise Cancelling System work? Is it that much high maintenance or high cost to maintain? Is the difference in noise that great?

I, for one until reading the recent articles and looking at the Q400 website, was on the opinion that "jet" always meant better, "prop" meant "not jet" and therefore something I don't want to ride. Then again, I've spent enough time on B1900s, J31s, Dash-8s, 340's and Dorniers to know not all props are the same either. I think I'd rather go on a Dornier or a Saab than an ERJ for a 50 min flight.

 

[FWAAA]

I, for one until reading the recent articles and looking at the Q400 website, was on the opinion that "jet" always meant better, "prop" meant "not jet" and therefore something I don't want to ride. Then again, I've spent enough time on B1900s, J31s, Dash-8s, 340's and Dorniers to know not all props are the same either. I think I'd rather go on a Dornier or a Saab than an ERJ for a 50 min flight.

[post="273285"][/post]​

For me, a turbine engine is a turbine engine, whether the fan is encased in a cowling or not.

 

[Light Years]

Can anyone tell which is a CRJ700 and which is a DH8Q400?

[post="273151"][/post]​

The top two are Q400s, the bottom one is a CRJ700.

 

[TechBoy]

All that is true, but how many people actually pick flights based on the type of plane? If they did, few people would fly props or old planes. But the majority of passengers don't know a thing about planes. The frequent flyers care, but once they get on the Q400 and it is quieter than an RJ and just as fast (slightly slower in the air, faster in and out of the airport by reducing congestion) and more comfortable. Passengers care more about fares, and running Q400s around the northeast on routes under 400 miles that can't support a 737 is a lot smarter (IMHO) than running 50 seat RJs from 5 different operators on all those routes.

[post="273244"][/post]​

Price usually comes first, but the Internet has really changed pax control over the types of planes that they fly. Business flyers now typically pick their own flights from a corporate website and consumers buy more and more online. And every screen shows what type of plane is on the route. Many, perhaps even the majority, don't care. But enough do care that it would have a real revenue impact.

Now if you want to talk about using these small planes to open new point-to-point routes, that could be a crowd pleaser. Of course, it would disintermediate the value of the hubs and probably not be much of a net gain.

 

[PropPiedmont]

To educate those seated in the doghouse, I mean, in the passenger cabin , can someone please explain what happens, or to be more exact, how does the Noise Cancelling System work? Is it that much high maintenance or high cost to maintain? Is the difference in noise that great?

Here it is. This should help to explain.

http://www.q400.com/q400/en/quiet.jsp