ATR's new chief executive Filippo Bagnato is convinced that turboprops still have an important role to play in the rapidly evolving regional market. He shares he views with Mark Pilling.
If you look at routes of 400nm and shorter there is progressively in terms of direct operating costs inevitably a big advantage for the turboprop. There is a difference of $20-$30 per seat for every trip.
Q: Industry watchers will most recently know you from your position as chief executive of Eurofighter. How do you feel about moving from the defence to the civil sector?
A: When the Alenia Aeronautics Division was reformed in 1996, I became a member of the assembly of ATR (which represents the partners in the company) so, using an Italian definition, I am coming back to an old love. ATR is a fascinating company for me.
It is party to an outstanding customer base with almost 700 aircraft everywhere in the world among over 100 customers.
Q: Demand for turboprops has fallen off sharply in recent years as regional jets have become more popular. ATR, for instance, only booked 10 orders last year and delivered just nine aircraft. Do you see the market recovering in the coming years?
A: I'm not a dreamer, but there is a situation we can see developing in the next few years that ATR and Bombardier may see an average market requirement of 50 aircraft per year.
I am seeing major airlines trimming their product policy in order to align their jets and turboprops to utilise the best aeroplane for the mission.
Q: Is there any evidence that airlines are beginning to bring turboprops back onto routes where they have been replaced by jets?
A: The policy of Italy's Air Dolomiti (which operates ATR-42s and -72s) is an example of how to select the right aircraft for the right route.
On longer legs at certain times of the day its owner Lufthansa uses jets; at other times and on shorter routes it uses turboprops.
In terms of comfort and with noise suppression, the new generation of turboprops finds increasing passenger acceptance. If you look at routes of 400nm (xxxkm) and shorter there is progressively in terms of direct operating costs inevitably a big advantage for the turboprop. There is a difference of $20-$30 per seat for every trip.
Q: How is the rising price of fuel making turboprops more attractive?
A: At Farnborough we will hold a press conference with Pratt & Whitney to explain what the advantages of turboprops are at this moment in terms of their lower fuel burn compared with jets. When you are talking of fuel at $40 per barrel, and that on average gasoline represents 50% of an airline's direct operating costs, it is not an insignificant effect.
Q: ATR has continuously improved the aircraft family over the 20 years of the programme. Do you see any need to develop an entirely new aircraft?
A: With the latest -500 family of ATR-42s and -72s, we have used today's maximum technology on both on the engine and aeroplane side.
Future developments will be according to the maturation of technology, but the expectation in the short term is we do not see further development. ATR is conducting life extension work on the aircraft, which is something appreciated by the customer and will increase the value of the asset for ATR and the customer.
Q: Would ATR ever enter the jet market?
A: At this moment we are not thinking about the jet market: we are devoted to the turboprop.
It is something we have thought about in the past, but the question is when will technology allow the regional market to justify another investment?
Redesigning a traditional aeroplane is not a justifiable investment. But you never know. In my opinion as an engineer, and not one of a manager, if you consider new engine technology and new structural technology maybe, it is something we could consider.
Source: Flight Daily News
