By: skypilot62 - 22nd February 2003 at 09:07
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Mongu
Yep that’s the one! Only a quid to go in and currently a large display of Manx Airlines memorabilia, as well as crash relics, uniforms etc.
Check out: www.maps.iofm.net
Genuine nissen hut from HMS Valkyrie hospital behind the Grandstand being re-erected on the museum site.
By: mongu - 21st February 2003 at 19:56
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Well the S360 is probably the most disliked aircraft of recent years, from a passengers’ perspective. People did/(still do) try to avoid flying on those things. I remember flying to Ronaldsway several times in the 80’s on S360’s. My hearing was screwed up for hours afterwards – noisy and especially, unpressurised.
The ATP is fine as a passenger – I know pilots seem to dislike it, but from the cabin I have no real complaints (apart from seat pitch).
Skypilot – no, I haven’t been to the museum yet. I take it you mean the one on the airport perimeter, near King William’s ?
By: skypilot62 - 21st February 2003 at 10:22
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Just to throw my tuppence in the hat…
Having flown as cabin crew and flight deck (long story!) on the J41 and ATP, plus flown as passenger/jumpseat rider on SD360 (the mighty “Shed”) and Dash 8, my professional opinion, each has it’s own merits.
1. ATP – up to 70 seats, most 64-68 config. Good economy, roomy cabin and flight deck. Cat 2 capable. Semi-glass cockpit. Poor performance. Expensive maitenence costs and poor reliability. Very stable in poor weather, particularly into the IOM on a dark windy rainy night doing a circling approach from R/W 26 to 21 with lumpy ground in between (Mongu will know what I mean!)
2. J41 – 29 seats. Superb handling, good performance (2000fpm+ climb), even better with 1650hp “Gti” versions with water/methanol injection, as used at high alt. airfields. Great flight deck ergonomics, but a little cramped. Cat 2 capable. Almost full-glass cockpit. Cramped cabin, no stowage “2+29 sportscar” as my instructor called it! Very economical.
3. SD360 – Old technology, analogue flight deck, no auto pilot, good for short field (or beach – Barra) performance. Roomy cabin, average flight deck. Reliable.
4. Dash 8 – not so knowledgable on this one. Good cabin. Highly praised by colleagues who operate it. Good eceonmy, performance is moderate.
My a/c of choice? Purely from a pilot’s point of view, the J41 is superb. Not without it’s problems but a beauty to hand fly – a real pilot’s a/c, shame the 29 pax were forotten about!
MONGU – indeed “viva Skiaynin Vannin”!! Been to my museum at Ronaldsway yet?
By: cattleman25 - 20th February 2003 at 23:42
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Isn’t the Shorts 360 hard to beat as regards to economy?
By: KabirT - 6th February 2003 at 06:14
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Certianly am…. 🙂 …. yes the 748 is still being used. It was used by Indian Airlines later being replaced by the Do 228. Till recently it was used for VIP transport by the state of Maharashtra. Yes but now Indians are going a step further and producing aircrafts themselves. AerIndia 2003 started today and today articles poured down on the papers on Indian aerospace industry. I posted a few days ago pic of Saras and India as you must be knowing in military sector has the LCA and ALH.
By: wysiwyg - 5th February 2003 at 20:59
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Yes and the same company also license built the Aeronca Chief light aircraft which they called the Pushpak. Kabir should be impressed with us!
By: mongu - 5th February 2003 at 20:52
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Didn’t HAL licence build the HS-748 back in the 60’s and 70’s ? They seem to have lost out to Chinese licence building in the last 20 years.
By: wysiwyg - 5th February 2003 at 20:42
RE: Short-haul turboprops
India has an excellent history of license building aircraft.
I think the ATR will ultimately become the definitive turboprop freighter. It has great potential in that direction.
By: mongu - 5th February 2003 at 18:53
RE: Short-haul turboprops
It does seem that Fairchild are deadly, doesn’t it!
I can’t think why, I mean there aren’t any US turboprops are there (well, Beech aside) so it can’t be a manic CIA plot to increase US market share!
By: KabirT - 5th February 2003 at 15:39
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Yes ATR has a very active sales desk….ATR as you must be knowing is in talks of assebling the 72 in India….cost reduction. Plus there after sales service is very good…conversions of ATRs into F types are also offered by ATR i think which further gives contract to other companies. Also ATR has a decent resale value.
By: EGNM - 5th February 2003 at 14:27
RE: Short-haul turboprops
hmmm let me think with this poison apple buisness, Fokker/Fairchild FH-227 – Fokker went bust about 10/15 years later (not directly to do with Fairchild tho!), SAAB-Fairchild 340 – SAAB Stop production, Dornier-Fairchild, Dornier do bust – hmmmm
By: serendib - 5th February 2003 at 14:16
RE: Short-haul turboprops
I think customer service has a lot to do with ATR’s success. From what I have heard ATR sales directors are very agressive and very customer oriented, much more than Bombardier.
Sam.
By: wysiwyg - 5th February 2003 at 14:03
RE: Short-haul turboprops
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 05-02-03 AT 02:04 PM (GMT)]Saab paid dearly for that lack of backward compatibility. They also, like Dornier, took a bite of the Fairchild poison apple.
The Dash 8-400 did have some problems at the start but most aircraft do at the beginning. The A320 was initally referred to as the ‘John Wayne Plane’ in the early days because it was attracted to mountains, felled trees and killed Indians! Unfortunately the Dash’s problems became very public because everyone expected it to integrate perfectly from the very start.
By: mongu - 4th February 2003 at 18:52
RE: Short-haul turboprops
It’s shame Saab made such a fundamental design error in to making the 2000 backwards compatible with the 340. At least they still make nice cars!
The Dornier is a duck, I mean I can appreciate it is a good aircraft. From my limited perspective, it is certainly one of the better looking planes. But since the Fairchild involvement, hasn’t Dornier gone bust? I know a lot of airlines have not ordered the 328, 328jet and the 728jet due to doubts over the viability of the maker (Lufthansa pulled out of the 728 for that reason, I think).
I suppose one of the reasons why I initially disliked the Dash 8-400 was that when they were introduced, they were reported to the most useless aircraft ever built. SAS had tremendous problems with the fleet and I think a lot of passengers used other airlines out of protest. The latest airline to suffer is Tyrolean:
http://www.aua.com/quicklink.asp?show=press
“I have made it absolutely clear to Laurent Beaudoin, the Chairman of Bombardier Inc, the manufacturers of the Dash 8 / 400, that we are now calling for massive support in eliminating the technical problems we are having with this aircraft type,” stated Vagn Soerensen, CEO of the Austrian Airlines Group, at the start of a press conference to present a package of measures for the Tyrolean Airways Dash 8 / 400 fleet
By: wysiwyg - 4th February 2003 at 17:24
RE: Short-haul turboprops
Who can explain why people make the decisions they do. Perhaps the pricing is right, perhaps there’s political trading reasons, perhaps there’s something specific to the local conditions, perhaps there’s an excess of GPU’s in the far east, stc, etc.
By: serendib - 4th February 2003 at 16:28
RE: Short-haul turboprops
wysiwyg,
ATR seem to have a monopoly, regardless of the Dash-8 comparisons you pointed out. Bombardier has sold only 6 new aircraft in 2002 while ATR has sold 16 new and 53 pre-owned aircraft.
I am not sure if its because of agressive marketing or due to ATR’s being in this business for a longer time.
In Asia, ATR has a firm grip on the market and most regional airlines fly ATRs including India’s Jet Airways and Thailand’s Bangkok Airways.
Sam.
By: wysiwyg - 4th February 2003 at 11:04
RE: Short-haul turboprops
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 04-02-03 AT 11:05 AM (GMT)]Saab Aircraft are selling second user aircraft. Production stopped a few years back (5 years?). With the turboprop leasing market falling through the floor they need to reduce the size of their inventory.
By: serendib - 4th February 2003 at 03:14
RE: Short-haul turboprops
>Anyway, does anyone know why the Saab 2000 was so much of a flop? >One minute they introduce the thing, Crossair buys a few, then Saab >pull out of commercial aviation ?
mongu,
Excuse me for my ignorance. I know so little about commercial aircraft, hence my questions. According to http://www.saabaircraft.com they are still the selling Saab 340 and 2000 aircraft. What do you mean they pulled out of commercial aviation?
Sam.
By: wysiwyg - 4th February 2003 at 00:46
RE: Short-haul turboprops
The Saab 2000 was a beautiful bit of design but the cause of its failure was that current 340 operators couldn’t just buy/lease the 2000 and have the same set of flightcrew operate them. Get an ATR or a Dash and that’s exactly what you could do. Regional airlines need a small aircraft to go route proving and than a larger version to later exploit that route. This is why Aurigny must move on from the Saab 340. Although it is a better aircraft than the ATR they need the dual size coupled with relatively cheap leasing costs available at the moment.
The ATR text about Hotel Mode is a wonderful excuse for leaving a costly piece of kit off their aircraft! If it’s so great how come everyone else already had it before them (without the need to give it a fancy name) and decided the danger did not warrant the time it took to plug in a GPU. It’s a poor show that aircraft the size of an ATR do not have an APU. The ATR designers new they would not be able to carry enough passengers to rival the Dash if they had to carry an APU so they put the aircraft on a diet!
One aircraft type that has not hit the limelight here is the little Dornier. It is a superb aircraft. If only it had been available in a range of sizes.
Mongu – I don’t care where an aircraft comes from I judge purely on its operational capabilities. It grieves me dreadfully that one of the worst turboprops and one of the worst jets are British. Oh well at least we can claim half of Concorde! By the way Saab is Swedish (Fairchild did not get involved until well down the production line). Didn’t you just love the story of the ATP nosewheel?
Without wishing to upset the eastern bloc lovers, the Antonovs and Ilyushins cannot really be compared in this discussion as none of them hold UK certification. This would be a costly process and none of the aircraft in question are good enough to warrant the cost. Conversely the Russians, etc find western aircraft sufficiently superior to warrant the massive expense of certifying them in their States themselves.
By: mongu - 3rd February 2003 at 23:04
RE: Short-haul turboprops
It’s funny how pilots always seem to prefer North American aircraft – not being funny, but it is a consistent theme. I wonder what Euro pilots are like? I think it probably points to a different prevailing attitude amongst designers.
Anyway, does anyone know why the Saab 2000 was so much of a flop? One minute they introduce the thing, Crossair buys a few, then Saab pull out of commercial aviation ?
Sign In
January 31, 2003 at 11:43 pm