While it should come as no surprise that the C Series narrowbody on display here serves as the centerpiece of Bombardier’s presence at this Singapore show, the Canadian company’s sales aspirations for the region extend well beyond its newest product. Speaking with AIN just ahead of the start of the show, Bombardier Aerospace commercial vice president Colin Bole acknowledged that the company had let its laser focus on the C Series compromise efforts to sell Q400 turboprops in the region. Consequently, ATR has assumed an undeniably dominant position in the market, particularly in Southeast Asia, where the likes of Garuda Indonesia, Lion Air, Bangkok Airways and MASWings operate more than 300 of the Franco-Italian turboprops.
Although Bombardier (Chalet CD61) has sold Q400s in significant numbers to SpiceJet in India, QantasLink in Australia, ANA Wings of Japan and Japan Air Lines subsidiary Ryukyu Air Commuter, the company sees more potential to add to its Southeast Asian base in particular.
“To be very candid, we dropped behind in terms of market share in the Q400 against our competitor, I think primarily because we had our eye off the ball and too focused on the C Series,” said Bole. “We’re re-emphasizing the Q400 in the Asia Pacific region and we will certainly be coming out with some interesting new messages at the Singapore Airshow around that aircraft type.”
Bole cited Nok Air of Thailand as a prime example of the potential the Q400 holds for Southeast Asian airlines that need a high-capacity turboprop capable of carrying as many as 86 passengers. He also emphasized the Q400’s “quasi-jet” capability which, he said, allows airlines to more easily integrate the turboprop into a broader jet operation. “We’ve got a number of operators around the world that successfully operate hub-and-spoke operations or intermixed Q400s with 737s in particular, and Nok Air is actually one of those examples,” said Bole.
Bombardier also advertises the Q400’s “jet-like” appearance, characterized by front-door boarding, as opposed to the rear-door entrance in the ATRs. Meanwhile, the Q400’s baggage compartment resides in the back of the aircraft in a more traditional airline configuration, rather than between the cockpit and the cabin as in the ATRs. Finally, Bole pitched the Q400’s active noise suppression system, which, he said, “basically gives a jet feel in terms of the overall cabin environment.”
Although a bigger, faster and more expensive airplane than the ATR, the Q400 can operate just as efficiently as its competitor, insisted Bole. “One of the nice things about it is that, of course you can operate it with high-performance, and we have a cruise speed that can be close to 100 knots higher than the ATR. But on the other hand, you can easily throttle back and operate at a more traditional turboprop speed,” he said. “So you can trade off speed versus time without any noticeable penalty.”
The benefits boil down to the specific routes a particular operator flies, and that applies to the effect of falling fuel prices as well. For inter-island traffic, for example, or flying into small airports, a turboprop will always have an advantage over a jet, said Bole, who opined that airlines do not generally make fleet decisions based on spot fuel prices.
“You’ve got to think of an airline making a decision typically for 30 to 40 years,” he said. “They’re deciding not on one aircraft but on a fleet of aircraft that will come in over the next two, three, four, five, six years, then will be operating for 20 or 25 years, and the tail end of that fleet will then be probably around for another five years.
“And the other thing is...it’s very much a matter of hedging. An airline isn’t replacing 100 percent of its fleet at once. It is typically looking at 10, 15, 20 percent of its fleet being rolled over. So of course there is a fuel impact, but it’s so diluted at the end of the day that airlines are still very focused on the operational matters...fuel burn is an element, but it’s not as important as people often think.”
