RJs to Turboprop

Kingairer

Kingairer

'Tiger Team' Member
Is the trend reversing?

Source:http://www.flightglobal.com

There were the strongest signs yet of a revival of the turboprop in the USA at the Regional Airline Association’s (RAA) annual conference in Dallas, Texas last week, when it emerged that Continental Airlines has issued a request for proposals (RFP) for 24 new 70-seat turboprops.

According to industry sources, the airline’s RFP specifies that 12 turboprops will operate from Continental’s New York Newark hub and an equal number from the carrier’s Houston hub. Both airports will lose capacity under a new feeder deal with its regional associate ExpressJet, which has to take 69 Embraer ERJ-145s out of its current 274-strong regional jet fleet.

Continental, which phased out its turboprops, now wants 24 70-seaters

The turboprop RFP, which the airline says is just one of several options “for our future regional flying needs”, marks the first serious interest in new-build large turboprops since the 1990s from a US legacy carrier.

Continental was among the pioneers in the USA of an effort to move to an all-jet regional fleet, phasing out its ATR and Embraer turboprops in favour of ERJ-145s. However, more recently the airline has begun to re-introduce some turboprop feeder services through contracts with Colgan Air, Gulfstream International and Regions Air.

ATR and Bombardier – the two producers of 70-seat turboprops in the form of the ATR 72-500 and Dash 8 Q400, respectively – are said to be excited about the potential prospects of the RFP. Both have been waiting and hoping for a revival of the turboprop market in the USA.
 
I bet the Colgan campers are getting all giddy and already starting rumors LOL.

I seem to remember somewhere that EWR won't allow any more turboprops in...but I don't have a source. Did anyone else hear the same thing?
 
It was a NY/NJ port authority ruling that was made several years ago. I believe it was done to try to alleviate further congestion in EWR. Piedmont still flies Dash 8's in there, but they were grandfathered in before the ruling.

That said, I'm sure CAL wouldn't have to lobby too hard to get an exception.
 
Alchemy said:
It was a NY/NJ port authority ruling that was made several years ago. I believe it was done to try to alleviate further congestion in EWR. Piedmont still flies Dash 8's in there, but they were grandfathered in before the ruling.

That said, I'm sure CAL wouldn't have to lobby too hard to get an exception.
Click to expand...

It probably has something to do with the slow speeds of props gumming up the works with the approaches. I doubt this would apply to something like the Q400 as I think they are extremely fast for a turboprop. They seat more than the ERJ's so to an extent they would alleviate some congestion.
 
I just don't see how 210-230 vs 250 in a jet would screw the works in a crowded terminal environment. Kind of like driving an old honda during rush hour - you're not going anywhere anyways.

Sounds more to me like politics than practicality.
 
wheelsup said:
I bet the Colgan campers are getting all giddy and already starting rumors LOL.
Click to expand...

We'll take our first Q400 delivery right after we get CASS approved right after we start Saab 2000 service right after we purchase Comair right after....
 
FO_SHIZZLE said:
It probably has something to do with the slow speeds of props gumming up the works with the approaches. I doubt this would apply to something like the Q400 as I think they are extremely fast for a turboprop. They seat more than the ERJ's so to an extent they would alleviate some congestion.
Click to expand...

We all fly 250 below 10,000 sir....except for Piedmont. :p
 
FO_SHIZZLE said:
It probably has something to do with the slow speeds of props gumming up the works with the approaches. I doubt this would apply to something like the Q400 as I think they are extremely fast for a turboprop. They seat more than the ERJ's so to an extent they would alleviate some congestion.
Click to expand...

I've NEVER had someone behind us told 'please slow your approach speed'.
 
Seggy said:
I've NEVER had someone behind us told 'please slow your approach speed'.
Click to expand...

I guess not on the actual approach, but maybe in the terminal area. I used to hear these Airways guys b!tch all the time about slowing for the dash's, and granted, I don't know how fast you guys can go but I used to thing it was below 250 unless you were in a descent. Just trying to figure out why they would restrict t-props and not RJs.
 
FO_SHIZZLE said:
I guess not on the actual approach, but maybe in the terminal area. I used to hear these Airways guys b!tch all the time about slowing for the dash's, and granted, I don't know how fast you guys can go but I used to thing it was below 250 unless you were in a descent. Just trying to figure out why they would restrict t-props and not RJs.
Click to expand...


Who knows? On Departures take for example at LGA if it is the Whitestone climb off 13 sometimes they have us turn left to a heading of 090 and maintain 3000 to get us out of the way. Saw a FEDEx Caravan at EWR they turned him IMMEDIATELY after departure to a heading of due North.
 
I think they were looking more at the capacity...they wanted to avoid having a bunch of small capacity 20-30 seat turboprops flying around....but they got essentially the same thing with RJ's.
 
Seggy said:
I've NEVER had someone behind us told 'please slow your approach speed'.
Click to expand...

just flew into EWR today in the B200, and they asked us to slow down to minimum approach speed...then go faster...then go slower again.
 
FO_SHIZZLE said:
I guess not on the actual approach, but maybe in the terminal area. I used to hear these Airways guys b!tch all the time about slowing for the dash's, and granted, I don't know how fast you guys can go but I used to thing it was below 250 unless you were in a descent. Just trying to figure out why they would restrict t-props and not RJs.
Click to expand...
Just stay out of my way there partna. giggity giggity goo!
 
It's about time someone finally figured out RJs are expensive to operate, especially on short flights.

I'm just surprised it's taken this long for people to start noticing/doing something about it.
 
pilot602 said:
It's about time someone finally figured out RJs are expensive to operate, especially on short flights.

I'm just surprised it's taken this long for people to start noticing/doing something about it.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the safety factor with JETS makes it worth the cost :sarcasm: :sarcasm: Those brand new prop driven aircraft look like they are going to fall out of the sky! :sarcasm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top