Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Samrnpage wrote:They will need upgrades though - the 328s are aging planes with old technology. I dont think this will happen.
LifelinerOne wrote:In 2015 the owner of 328 Support, Sierra Nevada Company, also tried to restart production. They announced their plans during that year's Paris Air Show. The idea back then was to partner up with Turkish engineering company STM and create a whole new family of jets, even up to 60-70 passengers.
In 2005 there was also an attempt to restart production and they actually did, but this ended quite soon after a few months after the new owner of the Do328 type certifcate, AvCraft, went bust.
So, I'm not seeing why it would be successful this time. This could turn into a new Rekkof-story...
Cheers!
cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
c933103 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
How about currently <19 seats market?
Samrnpage wrote:They will need upgrades though - the 328s are aging planes with old technology. I dont think this will happen.
PlymSpotter wrote:Thing is, the trip costs of a Do328 are practically the same as the ATR 42-600, whilst the latter offers a bunch of extra seats.
I question the market size here for a warmed over design.
Polot wrote:c933103 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
How about currently <19 seats market?
Those that rely on the <19 seat market can’t afford new jets. That is the trouble with the market. A ~70 seat prop does not cost that much more to design and build over a 19 seater. But the market is much much larger.
lightsaber wrote:I think the < 19 seat market needs to rethink the approach. First, go to a single engine (saves weight, maintenance, and costs). A high CFRP wing should be able to be made much cheaper than a 70 seater.
But a bigger issue will be pilot costs. Requiring an ATP for this small of an aircraft is a cost barrier.
Lightsaber
cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
lightsaber wrote:Polot wrote:c933103 wrote:How about currently <19 seats market?
Those that rely on the <19 seat market can’t afford new jets. That is the trouble with the market. A ~70 seat prop does not cost that much more to design and build over a 19 seater. But the market is much much larger.
I think the < 19 seat market needs to rethink the approach. First, go to a single engine (saves weight, maintenance, and costs). A high CFRP wing should be able to be made much cheaper than a 70 seater.
But a bigger issue will be pilot costs. Requiring an ATP for this small of an aircraft is a cost barrier.
Lightsaber
Dominion301 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
There's a lot of remote places on this planet where either a > 50 seater is complete overkill or where the airstrip itself can't handle an aircraft of that size.
Polot wrote:c933103 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
How about currently <19 seats market?
Those that rely on the <19 seat market can’t afford new jets. That is the trouble with the market. A ~70 seat prop does not cost that much more to design and build over a 19 seater. But the market is much much larger.
opticalilyushin wrote:There are many airlines out there that still operate and rely on aircraft in this size and capacity. Some others have upgraded to the ATR42 not through any desire, more through a lack of choice in the modern day market. In Europe Wideroe and Loganair are both looking to replace their Dash 8-100s and 200s/Saab 340s with similar sized aircraft..Loganair is looking at the ATR, while Wideroe were holding hopes that Viking might start up a Q200 line again (they love them!).
Upgrading to larger aircraft doesn't always work in such remote locations, and with such short runways. Some new 328s would be amazing, but they would need to work on the fuel efficiency..high speed comes at a price..
Dominion301 wrote:There's a lot of remote places on this planet where either a > 50 seater is complete overkill or where the airstrip itself can't handle an aircraft of that size.
cheapgreek wrote:Dominion301 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
There's a lot of remote places on this planet where either a > 50 seater is complete overkill or where the airstrip itself can't handle an aircraft of that size.
Airlines are not interested in planes under 50 seats and even some of those are being parked. Look at what airlines are ordering, RJ's 70 seats and higher, the CRJ-200 has been out of production for some time and the E-145 has few if any orders.
The days of very small cities having commercial service is gone. Two airports that lost commuter flights over the years were Groton,Ct and Bridgeport,Ct. There many other small airports without airline service as the economy makes it unprofitable. The EAS program is being cut as it is foolish to fly a plane with less than 10 passengers. Its a waste of 2 crew members to fly such a small number of passengers when they could move many more people and turn a profit. Ask yourself, if you were running an airline, would you commit to small planes that would lose money or buy larger ones to fill routes that can make money?
As far as remote places, air travel is not a right for every town, people move into these areas knowing full well air service is not a local option.
ScottB wrote:Dominion301 wrote:There's a lot of remote places on this planet where either a > 50 seater is complete overkill or where the airstrip itself can't handle an aircraft of that size.
This is true; however, for those markets, new aircraft have to compete with inexpensive used aircraft, and the lower fuel expenses of a new aircraft are often dwarfed by much higher capital costs. Also, the number of those remote places is gradually dwindling as ground transportation options are improved; i.e. the long, slow decline of traffic at many EAS airports in the U.S.
The other question is whether the total available market is large enough to pay for a new aircraft program. The proposed Do328 restart does help avoid much of the development cost, but low-volume aircraft assembly is expensive, which will add to the challenge of competing with used frames or misusing more widely available larger aircraft.
Dominion301 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:Its not going to go anywhere. With the pilot shortage and the move by airlines for regional planes with more than 50 seats, the days of 19-37 seats are over.
There's a lot of remote places on this planet where either a > 50 seater is complete overkill or where the airstrip itself can't handle an aircraft of that size.
c933103 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:Dominion301 wrote:
There's a lot of remote places on this planet where either a > 50 seater is complete overkill or where the airstrip itself can't handle an aircraft of that size.
Airlines are not interested in planes under 50 seats and even some of those are being parked. Look at what airlines are ordering, RJ's 70 seats and higher, the CRJ-200 has been out of production for some time and the E-145 has few if any orders.
The days of very small cities having commercial service is gone. Two airports that lost commuter flights over the years were Groton,Ct and Bridgeport,Ct. There many other small airports without airline service as the economy makes it unprofitable. The EAS program is being cut as it is foolish to fly a plane with less than 10 passengers. Its a waste of 2 crew members to fly such a small number of passengers when they could move many more people and turn a profit. Ask yourself, if you were running an airline, would you commit to small planes that would lose money or buy larger ones to fill routes that can make money?
As far as remote places, air travel is not a right for every town, people move into these areas knowing full well air service is not a local option.
Like ANA/JAL are going for aircrafts like ATR42 and Q400Combi to fill the demand on <50 seat market.
cheapgreek wrote:c933103 wrote:cheapgreek wrote:
Airlines are not interested in planes under 50 seats and even some of those are being parked. Look at what airlines are ordering, RJ's 70 seats and higher, the CRJ-200 has been out of production for some time and the E-145 has few if any orders.
The days of very small cities having commercial service is gone. Two airports that lost commuter flights over the years were Groton,Ct and Bridgeport,Ct. There many other small airports without airline service as the economy makes it unprofitable. The EAS program is being cut as it is foolish to fly a plane with less than 10 passengers. Its a waste of 2 crew members to fly such a small number of passengers when they could move many more people and turn a profit. Ask yourself, if you were running an airline, would you commit to small planes that would lose money or buy larger ones to fill routes that can make money?
As far as remote places, air travel is not a right for every town, people move into these areas knowing full well air service is not a local option.
Like ANA/JAL are going for aircrafts like ATR42 and Q400Combi to fill the demand on <50 seat market.
As I said in my second post, in the USA props are out but they seem to have some life left in other parts of the world. I took a flight on a Dash-8-300 a shot time ago and flying on those makes one feel like a second class traveler, noise,vibration, rough ride and unable to fly above bad weather, once people fly on RJ's, there's no going back. Just my observations after taking many dozens of flights on mostly Dash-8's and a few Beech 1900's. The Q400 has not done well in the USA and the ATR's cannot seem to get a foot in the door.
cheapgreek wrote:opticalilyushin wrote:There are many airlines out there that still operate and rely on aircraft in this size and capacity. Some others have upgraded to the ATR42 not through any desire, more through a lack of choice in the modern day market. In Europe Wideroe and Loganair are both looking to replace their Dash 8-100s and 200s/Saab 340s with similar sized aircraft..Loganair is looking at the ATR, while Wideroe were holding hopes that Viking might start up a Q200 line again (they love them!).
Upgrading to larger aircraft doesn't always work in such remote locations, and with such short runways. Some new 328s would be amazing, but they would need to work on the fuel efficiency..high speed comes at a price..
In the USA, small props are not a hot item. Saab's, Dash-8's, Beech 1900's, EMB110 & 130's, etc are all gone. From a financial viewpoint, they do not generate income and the number of connecting passengers they carry does not cover operating expenses. Even mainline planes are being ordered with more seats than those 10 years ago, the 737-600 and A318 are history and the A319 is a slow seller and Boeing enlarged the 737-7 to meet customer demand. Airlines are having a hard time getting new pilots and to use them on such low volume flights does not make good business sense. The new normal is a move to larger RJ's and halting service to small airports with low ridership. Airlines have no interest in flying to small outposts in Montana, the Dakota's, Idaho, etc.
The German company (Chalet B14, Outside Exhibit 35), a subsidiary of U.S.-based Sierra Nevada Corp., has been attempting to relaunch production. An MoU signed in 2015 with the Transportation Ministry of Turkey for that purpose was canceled in 2017, but plans to build a new, stretch version of the 328 in Germany appear on track, Brown said.
BlueSky1976 wrote:Samrnpage wrote:They will need upgrades though - the 328s are aging planes with old technology. I dont think this will happen.
What?
Check your facts again. Do-328 is more modern, lighter and faster design than any ATR or Dash. Its near-jet speed wasn't matched until Q400 came around. It was the best turboprop at its time, killed by RJs - the same fate was met by SAAB-2000. Absolutely amazing piece of metal and one of the best looking T-tailed propliners, ever.
LifelinerOne wrote:In 2015 the owner of 328 Support, Sierra Nevada Company, also tried to restart production. They announced their plans during that year's Paris Air Show. The idea back then was to partner up with Turkish engineering company STM and create a whole new family of jets, even up to 60-70 passengers.
In 2005 there was also an attempt to restart production and they actually did, but this ended quite soon after a few months after the new owner of the Do328 type certifcate, AvCraft, went bust.
So, I'm not seeing why it would be successful this time. This could turn into a new Rekkof-story...
Cheers!
Channex757 wrote:The word that will kill it stone dead? Support.
The market may well be for small numbers in multiple orders, but the lack of support will put buyers off. What good is a new Dorner 328 in Africa or South America if it goes tech and then there is a huge wait for spares, costing the operator contracts and money?
If anything, Cessna would be the ideal manufacturer. Cessna do parts and support literally everywhere on the globe. The small number of sales the Dornier might generate would not even scratch the cost of setting up proper support.
Samrnpage wrote:BlueSky1976 wrote:Samrnpage wrote:They will need upgrades though - the 328s are aging planes with old technology. I dont think this will happen.
What?
Check your facts again. Do-328 is more modern, lighter and faster design than any ATR or Dash. Its near-jet speed wasn't matched until Q400 came around. It was the best turboprop at its time, killed by RJs - the same fate was met by SAAB-2000. Absolutely amazing piece of metal and one of the best looking T-tailed propliners, ever.
Ok it might fly fast but its still a 25 year old design.
Samrnpage wrote:Ok it might fly fast but its still a 25 year old design.
c933103 wrote:Channex757 wrote:The word that will kill it stone dead? Support.
The market may well be for small numbers in multiple orders, but the lack of support will put buyers off. What good is a new Dorner 328 in Africa or South America if it goes tech and then there is a huge wait for spares, costing the operator contracts and money?
If anything, Cessna would be the ideal manufacturer. Cessna do parts and support literally everywhere on the globe. The small number of sales the Dornier might generate would not even scratch the cost of setting up proper support.
What? There are already numerous Dornier 328 operators in Africa, why would new buyers be any different?
Channex757 wrote:c933103 wrote:Channex757 wrote:The word that will kill it stone dead? Support.
The market may well be for small numbers in multiple orders, but the lack of support will put buyers off. What good is a new Dorner 328 in Africa or South America if it goes tech and then there is a huge wait for spares, costing the operator contracts and money?
If anything, Cessna would be the ideal manufacturer. Cessna do parts and support literally everywhere on the globe. The small number of sales the Dornier might generate would not even scratch the cost of setting up proper support.
What? There are already numerous Dornier 328 operators in Africa, why would new buyers be any different?
It doesn't work like that.
Existing Dornier users will have come through the bankruptcy and many will have stockpiled parts. New users will need to consider how hard it might be to operate with distant support. Just because others are flying older aircraft does not mean they will be parts donors for new aircraft. If (for instance) an undercarriage part breaks on landing, and the aircraft is in Tanzania, how easy will it be to get both a qualified mechanic as well as the relevant parts to the plane, and how long will it take?
Flying-Tiger wrote:Samrnpage wrote:They will need upgrades though - the 328s are aging planes with old technology. I dont think this will happen.
Don´t think this is question by anyone - technology certainly has moved further, and a lot of systems can or need to be updated. However, as the type certificate holder 328 Support Services should have all this readily available for support of the currentl fleet(s) anyway.PlymSpotter wrote:Thing is, the trip costs of a Do328 are practically the same as the ATR 42-600, whilst the latter offers a bunch of extra seats.
I question the market size here for a warmed over design.
Well, REX is operating 50+ SF340, Sun-Air 15 328Jet. I think there is a market available - the actual size is the question, both on the commercial as well on the public side. Plus the purchase (and lease rate) are different: the ATR 42-600 sells for about 20 million USD list price, the Dornier 328 sold at around 8 million USD list price in the 90ties, so about 12 million USD in today´s dollars. On the financing side that´s a huge delta.
Will certainly depending on how it´s going to be priced, too.
stratocruiser wrote:Flying-Tiger wrote:Samrnpage wrote:They will need upgrades though - the 328s are aging planes with old technology. I dont think this will happen.
Don´t think this is question by anyone - technology certainly has moved further, and a lot of systems can or need to be updated. However, as the type certificate holder 328 Support Services should have all this readily available for support of the currentl fleet(s) anyway.PlymSpotter wrote:Thing is, the trip costs of a Do328 are practically the same as the ATR 42-600, whilst the latter offers a bunch of extra seats.
I question the market size here for a warmed over design.
Well, REX is operating 50+ SF340, Sun-Air 15 328Jet. I think there is a market available - the actual size is the question, both on the commercial as well on the public side. Plus the purchase (and lease rate) are different: the ATR 42-600 sells for about 20 million USD list price, the Dornier 328 sold at around 8 million USD list price in the 90ties, so about 12 million USD in today´s dollars. On the financing side that´s a huge delta.
Will certainly depending on how it´s going to be priced, too.
I agree there could be a niche market, though limited, out there for a 30-33 seat turboprop like the Do328 if it can be competitively priced against the ATR-42 but operating economics would probably also be a major consideration for most airlines. Unlike the turboprop, I don’t however see a place for a rejuvenated 328Jet.
Polot wrote:The 328Jet failed once, I don’t know why one would expect it to be successful in a relaunch. Turning an aircraft and wing designed for a turboprop into a jet unsurprisingly results in a pretty crappy jet.
Flying-Tiger wrote:Though I had expected some more details to emerge last week during the Farnborough Air Show the only piece of information I was able to find is this:The German company (Chalet B14, Outside Exhibit 35), a subsidiary of U.S.-based Sierra Nevada Corp., has been attempting to relaunch production. An MoU signed in 2015 with the Transportation Ministry of Turkey for that purpose was canceled in 2017, but plans to build a new, stretch version of the 328 in Germany appear on track, Brown said.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aerospace/2018-07-17/328-support-highlights-dornier-conversions#