DULLES, Va. – Turboprops are set for a big comeback in the USA. That’s the bet being made by European aircraft manufacturer ATR, which is turning to the U.S. as it tries to drum up sales of its turboprop models.
The company is fresh off a tour of the U.S. earlier this month, where the company showed off its latest ATR 72-600 plane.
“We know we’re not very well known here in the U.S.,” Patrick de Castelbajac said during the company’s visit to Washington Dulles International Airport, calling the multi-city demonstration a “first step in getting back into America.”
While the company has a limited presence with U.S. carriers, France-based ATR is well-known in other parts of the world. Globally, it is the top-seller of commercial turboprop aircraft. Its planes fly on regional routes for passenger airline brands like Air France, Air India and Virgin Australia.
ATR planes do fly for several small U.S. operators, but none that fly under the brand for any of the mainland USA’s major carriers. ATR hasn’t had a substantial foothold among mainland U.S. carriers since American’s American Eagle regional unit phased out the last of its once-large fleet of ATR turboprops in 2013.
American’s move mirrored a broader trend in the U.S. aviation market. Turboprops were once common at many small U.S. airports, flying connecting passengers to hub airports on routes of about 300 miles or less.
Then came the regional jet revolution, which took hold in the 1990s. The nation’s “mainline” airlines and their regional affiliates began buying regional jets by the hundreds, deploying many of them on routes where turboprops once ruled.
The rise of the “RJ” was short-lived, however. RJs proved unpopular with fliers, especially as carriers put them on increasingly lengthy routes. Perhaps more importantly for airlines, the dramatic spike in fuel prices in the late 2000s turned the tables on the RJs’ operating economics.
And so, big U.S. airlines began to phase out their RJs almost as quickly as they bought them, an effort that’s picked up steam this decade. In some cases, airlines have moved to larger, more cost-efficient planes. In other cases, they’ve thinned out RJ-heavy frequencies – or eliminated some routes altogether.
That’s where de Castelbajac senses an opening for ATR to get back into the U.S. market.
He believes ATR’s 50-seat turboprops make more sense for airlines looking to feed their hubs on very short routes.
Turboprops have a lower operating cost than regional jets, giving them an advantage on sub-300-mile routes like State College, Pa.-to-Washington Dulles or Abilene, Texas-to-Dallas/Fort Worth.
“Today we’ve got jets which are operated on routes of even less than 100 miles,” de Castelbajac says. “When you do a 100-mile route with a jet, you burn an awful lot of fuel. It’s bad for the environment. It’s also uneconomical because it costs a fortune.”
Turboprops have “the economics that enable airlines to operate the aircraft in such environments,” he says.
ATR’s 72-600 model that the company brought to the U.S. can seat anywhere from 50 to 72 passengers, depending on how airlines choose to lay out seats on the plane. ATR’s smaller 42-600s seat 40 to 46.
ATR sees its opportunities in two areas. One is in the “replacement market” for airlines looking to replace aging regional planes already in their fleets. The other is trying to convince airlines that turboprops will allow them to “restore connectivity” on short hub routes that have been reduced or eliminated, de Castelbajac says.
He acknowledges jets are faster, but argues that matters little on 200-mile routes where the scheduled flying time for an RJ may be only 5 or 10 minutes shorter.
“The time difference between flying a jet and turboprop is not that big,” says de Castelbajac. “Whereas the fuel impact, the cost, the impact on the environment is very significant.”
Still, ATR still faces challenges in winning a sale with a major U.S. airline or one of their big regional partners.
Canada’s Bombardier already has a foothold among U.S. carriers. Not only does it make RJs that still fly for large U.S. airline brands, it also produces the Q400 turboprop. The Q400 – as well as its “Dash-8” predecessor – has a sizable presence in the regional-affiliate fleets of several U.S. carriers, including American and Alaska Airlines.
As ATR looks to step up competition here, de Castelbajac says the company has already addressed one issue that caused it to fall out of favor with U.S. carriers. Previous versions of ATR aircraft did not have doors that could accommodate jet bridges, which are especially common in the U.S. market. Now, de Castelbajac says, ATR’s aircraft have doors designed to be used “in a place like the U.S., where you have an air bridge everywhere.”
On the passenger front, ATR will have to counter passenger perceptions that turboprop flights are more cramped and less comfortable than even small jets.
“There’s still a certain image of turboprops being less comfortable, less acceptable to the passengers,” John Moore, ATR’s Head of Global Sales, said during the event at Washington Dulles.
But he insists ATR’s latest turboprop design is actually superior to that of an RJ. He cites a wider cabin and two rows of large overhead storage bins that allow about two-thirds of passengers to stow roll-aboard carry-on bags.
Moore says the space of the ATR turboprop cabin also gives airlines flexibility to go beyond standard coach cabins and add first, business or premium-economy style seats.
“That’s why we want to show the product to the airlines,” he says. “They can see this is truly a cabin-class aircraft with good baggage space that can offer a similar product to their customers.”
USA Today
ATR sees potential come back of Turboprops in the US
