Why ATR 42-500 and not Saab 2000 for PIA

[AP-BFU]

Why did pia buy atr and not saab 2000???

I have been working whit saab 2000 for 2 year now and even saab 340

and 2000 is a mashallah lovly bird

[Adnan Anwar]

Why did pia buy atr and not saab 2000???

I have been working whit saab 2000 for 2 year now and even saab 340

and 2000 is a mashallah lovly bird

PIA needed financing to replace the F-27's but could not find financiers for the SAAB 2000 as they were slightly used.

BUT for ATR 42's (because they were new), EU was happily provided export credit to PIA.

[AP-BFU]

[CoyBoy]

Beginning to sound like the botched ex-Philippine Airlines 744 deal discussions.

[bravo45]

I think on every operational level the Saab 2000 is much better than any other replacement available for PIAs F-27. I just can't grasp how such a solid performing aircraft with solid backing of the Saab 340 success could turn into a commercial failure.
With all sorts of speculation going around, I hope PIA can use the situation to its advantage and get a better deal on Saab 2000.
Hey PiaAP-BFU, can you elaborate how and why Saab failed to make an impression??? For one thing I know, its not the a/c that failed them. BTW do you work for Saab??

About the financing, I head Saab and Swedish Govt has always been ready to give a break. But I am not very informed about the financial side of buying through Saab or the reason why Saab 2000 wasn't able to thrive.

[Amaad Lone]

No.1 Saab-2000 is not in production anymore, therefore the supply of spare parts would always have been a problem. For example, a Saab-2000 got damaged in Germany, and needed a new landing gear. The price of the landing gear was more then the price of the airframe.

No.2 The fuel consumption of the Saab-2000 is twice as much as the ATR42-500. With oil running at $60 a barrel, the oil consumption of any aircraft should the priority.

The engines on the Saab-2000 are so large that they do not even fit in the fusalage of the aircraft itself. Should a Saab-2000 need an engine replacement in Gilgit or Skardu, PIA would have to transport the engine in a C-130.

Its never a good idea to purchase an aircraft not in production anymore.

Plus with only 64 Saab-2000s ever built it was a huge commerical failure, while there are over 600 ATR42s in service.

I am sure the Saab-2000 is lovely bird, but compared to the ATR42, its not a feasible/economical aircraft.

Amaad

[Adnan Anwar]

No.1 Saab-2000 is not in production anymore, therefore the supply of spare parts would always have been a problem. For example, a Saab-2000 got damaged in Germany, and needed a new landing gear. The price of the landing gear was more then the price of the airframe.

No.2 The fuel consumption of the Saab-2000 is twice as much as the ATR42-500. With oil running at $60 a barrel, the oil consumption of any aircraft should the priority.

The engines on the Saab-2000 are so large that they do not even fit in the fusalage of the aircraft itself. Should a Saab-2000 need an engine replacement in Gilgit or Skardu, PIA would have to transport the engine in a C-130.

Its never a good idea to purchase an aircraft not in production anymore.

Plus with only 64 Saab-2000s ever built it was a huge commerical failure, while there are over 600 ATR42s in service.

I am sure the Saab-2000 is lovely bird, but compared to the ATR42, its not a feasible/economical aircraft.

Amaad

Bravo Well said!

[AP-BFU]

[Ehsen Ali]

So if you were working with an ATR42 instead, then it would have been a problem or what? I didn't really get your explenation or reason for why PIA should have choosen Saab over the ATR?

[PK777]

No.1 Saab-2000 is not in production anymore, therefore the supply of spare parts would always have been a problem. For example, a Saab-2000 got damaged in Germany, and needed a new landing gear. The price of the landing gear was more then the price of the airframe.

No.2 The fuel consumption of the Saab-2000 is twice as much as the ATR42-500. With oil running at $60 a barrel, the oil consumption of any aircraft should the priority.

The engines on the Saab-2000 are so large that they do not even fit in the fusalage of the aircraft itself. Should a Saab-2000 need an engine replacement in Gilgit or Skardu, PIA would have to transport the engine in a C-130.

Its never a good idea to purchase an aircraft not in production anymore.

Plus with only 64 Saab-2000s ever built it was a huge commerical failure, while there are over 600 ATR42s in service.

I am sure the Saab-2000 is lovely bird, but compared to the ATR42, its not a feasible/economical aircraft.

Amaad

Exactly, The ATR was the best option for PK !! Hope they stick to it

[Moin]

Plus the ATR has a more spacious cabin versus the Saab which looks extremely claustrophobic. If the weigh the 2 options, the ATR comes out better no matter how you slice it.

[PakN'US]

Irrespective of what PIA buys, I hope there is no waste of precious $$$ and the deal is what is good for the country and the airlines itself; not for the politicians or any one in Authority. I am going to throw in couple of others option and that is DE Havilland DHC8 - Dash or even Embraer?

[AP-BFU]

[Falcon598]

Irrespective of what PIA buys, I hope there is no waste of precious $$$ and the deal is what is good for the country and the airlines itself; not for the politicians or any one in Authority. I am going to throw in couple of others option and that is DE Havilland DHC8 - Dash or even Embraer?

Well they already, I believe evaluated the Dash and they chose the ATR, because they would be able to get financing for it. Also using an Embrarer jet would not make much economic sense. Turbo-props use much less fuel than jets do and when oil is $60 a barrell that is taken into consideration. Plus the routes that the ATR will be used on are not to far apart so the time wouldn't make much a difference that is why ATR was choosen.

[PakN'US]

Falcon, I hope your assessment is right regarding PIA's evaluation of other turbo prop airtcrafts. However, I still believe that the price of oil is not going to stay at $60/barrell. That means PIA should think beyond lunch time. Secondly, The Embraers can also be used by our very special very very very important persons on their jaunts overseas thus saving the government exchequer few $$$. Granted the size of the entourage of the Rajas and Maharajas will be smaller but in tough times we need to tighten our belts. Just my 2 cents worth!