Update – Saab 2000

The actual 2000 programme was officially announced on December 15 1988 with a launch order for 25 firm and 25 options from Crossair. The project was given additional impetus at the recent Paris Air Show when American Airlines signed for 50 options for its AMR commuter network. Similar big contracts on the competing Challenger RJ (116 + at time of writing) only adds to the bullish long-term potential of this new class of aircraft. Indeed Saab marketing points to a market from now till the turn of the century of 1,300 new aircraft in the 30-40 seat class and an additional 1,400 in the 50 seat range. At least 1,000 of these will replace similar sized aircraft that have had to be retired due to age, noise or reasons of economy.

So where does the new Saab propjet fit into its new market niche? Cruising at 360kts at 20,000ft over ranges of 1,000nm, the 2000 will typically be around 100kts faster than the present range of 35-64 seat turboprops. It will also climb quicker and cruise higher thereby reducing relative fuel burn in both the cruise and climb profiles. Due to its higher speed Saab are also claiming higher levels of productivity for the 2000 than can be found in the present 50 sealers.

The new generation of high performance, very powerful turboprops also have greatly reduced fuel burns in comparison to older generation fifties designed similarly powerful engines in the Allison T56 class. On offer for the 2000, though not chosen at presstime, was the GLC38 from General Electric and Textron Lycoming, the PW300 and PW130 from Pratt & Whitney Canada and possibly Allison’s T406. These engines will all provide a maximum power rating of more than 4,000shp and in practice most would be flat rated to ensure maximum available power throughout the climb in addition to better overall hot/high performance.

The GLC38 is essentially a civilianised version of the GE38 turboprop which will power the US Navy’s new Lockheed P-7 ASW aircraft. Indeed, this powerplant will ultimately become a worldwide Allison T56 successor boasting an enormous leap forward in both maintainability, reliability, weight and offering significantly reduced fuel burn.

Not to be left out, Pratt & Whitney Canada are offering the PW300, a hybrid turboprop using the core and gas generator of the turbofan version of this new engine with the uprated gearbox of the PW124. Certification of the PW300 is expected next year in turbofan form (as a 5,000lb thrust engine for corporate aircraft) though the turboprop version won’t be ready till around 1993, the same year that the Saab 2000 itself enters service with Crossair. Pratts are also offering an uprated version of the existing PW100 family known as the PW130. This growth engine would feature a larger compressor and increased turbine size for an additional 25% increase in max power. This engine would be available perhaps a year before the PW300 and will also be offered to existing turboprop manufacturers who might want to increase the performance of their existing 50 and 64 seat aircraft.

The Allison T406 is actually a propfan project based on the core of the Allison 501. Both this engine and indeed the future of propfans themselves are less than optimistic in the present airline environment so this engine has to be looked at as being very much an outside chance in all respects.

With its relatively high power to weight ratio, the 2000 will be able to operate out of airfields of only 1,500m (4,900ft) and be able to climb to its cruising level of 20,000ft in just 11 minutes. The 2000 can of course cruise as high as 35,000ft though at this altitude, it naturally sacrifices speed in the interest of longer sector fuel economy. Power will be delivered through large scimitar shaped six bladed propellers which are also located well outboard of the fuselage in an attempt to further reduce cabin noise to jet standards.

Saab are claiming a fuel burn of around 550kgs on a typical 200nm sector and just over 1,100kgs on a 500nm flight. A 500nm sector would be typically flown (without ATC delays) in 102 minutes or about 12 minutes slower than a Canadair RJ and more than a half hour quicker than competing present generation turboprops according to Saab. In this context the 2000 would burn an anticipated 30% less fuel than the RJ for the 500nm sector and would also offer better seat cost specifics than present day turboprops due to its vastly higher potential utilisation capability.

Present day flyaway cost of the 2000 is given as $US11m 1988 dollars as against $US13m for the RJ. Both the Fokker 50 and Dash 8-300 come in at around $US1Om though of course these costs can vary by up to 20% depending on number ordered, status of the airline and terms of payment, etc. Naturally, Saab marketing executives prefer to compare the 2000 with the existing 50 seat turboprops over ranges of 200 to 500nm and don’t consider the jet RJ even remotely viable over what are presently typical commuter routes of just 45 minutes or around 180nm. From what we see though, Canadair and most of the airlines are looking towards the RJ as being a longer ranging hub bypass vehicle while Saab are betting a little in both directions with a product that will still be economically viable on the present 200nm type commuter sector in addition to being able to operate 600nm non stop point to point sectors that other turboprops cannot. Saab claim a limit to passenger acceptance of turboprops of 2. 5hrs though many operators and manufacturers tend to feel that a figure of two hours at best would be considered optimistic from a marketing point of view. In this mode the 2000 though can still cover a lot of territory and from Paris, Rome, London or Frankfurt can reach most other destinations that it would wish to connect in Europe.

Similarly, the densely populated north east sector of the USA offers a potentially lucrative environment for the 2000. Already in Europe many commuters are beginning to offer point to point services using the existing range of propjets. Air France for example flies Toulouse/Brussels in a 340 non stop in 2. 5hrs against a jet time of 4hrs 10mins (optimistically) by cutting out the tiresome stop at Paris. Similarly Nantes/Dusseldorf is only 2hrs 5mins in a 340 against twice that time by jet via Paris Orly.

In Australia such an aircraft could link Geelong (via its new Lovely Banks airfield) with Sydney or Adelaide. Canberra with Brisbane or Melbourne and Adelaide and Hobart with Sydney or Adelaide.

We get tired of repeating this in AA but if you don’t live in either Sydney or Melbourne then you are literally forced to transit those hubs to get almost anywhere else. While the likes of Compass and Capitol are naturally concentrating upon heavy jet equipment to tap these vast potential markets, we feel that the operator who wades into the marketplace around 1994 (providing the economy is ‘up’) with either RJs or 2000s will do well catering for the high yield business market with time saving hub bypass services designed to cater for the frequent traveller rather than the airline scheduler. While this is only our opinion, the dual prongs of strong traffic growth worldwide and ever increasing major airport congestion will ensure that much of the above ultimately comes to pass in the years ahead.

Development schedule for the 2000 calls for Saab to have the prototype ready for first flight by 1992 with certification planned for mid 1993, The first 2000 is scheduled to enter service with Crossair around September of 1993 or roughly a year and a half behind the RJ though by this time Saab will have delivered more than 300 340s to a customer base of nearly four dozen operators worldwide. By that time it is expected that total 340/2000 sales will be comfortably in excess of 600, something that gives Saab plenty of confidence in predicting a bright future for both the new generation 2000 and ongoing developments of the basic 35 seat 340.