If you wish to contribute or participate in the discussions about articles you are invited to join SKYbrary as a registered user


SAAB 340

From SKYbrary Wiki

Name 340
Manufacturer SAAB
Body Narrow
Wing Fixed Wing
Position Low wing
Tail Regular tail, mid set
WTC Medium
Type code L2T
Engine Turboprop
Engine count Multi
Position (Front) Wing leading mounted
Landing gear Tricycle retractable
Mass group 3

Manufacturered as:

SAAB Tp100
SAAB 340
SAAB Argus
SAAB S100 Argus

SAAB 340

SAAB 340 SAAB 340 3D


Turboprop regional airliner. In service since 1984. Improved, more powerful version 340B since 1989. Last development 340B plus since 1994 which introduced changes developed for the larger SAAB 2000. Military versions TP100 for VIP transport and S100 Argus as AEW platform for Swedish Air Force.

Technical Data

Wing span 21.4 m70.21 ft <br />
Length 19.7 m64.633 ft <br />
Height 7 m22.966 ft <br />
Powerplant 2 x 1.735 SHP GE CT7-5A2 turboprops with 4 blade propellers.
Engine model General Electric CT7

Performance Data

Take-Off Initial Climb
(to 5000 ft)
Initial Climb
(to FL150)
Initial Climb
(to FL240)
MACH Climb Cruise Initial Descent
(to FL240)
(to FL100)
Descent (FL100
& below)
V2 (IAS) kts IAS kts IAS kts IAS kts MACH TAS 280 kts MACH IAS kts IAS kts Vapp (IAS) kts
Distance 1271 m ROC 2000 ft/min ROC ft/min ROC ft/min ROC ft/min MACH ROD ft/min ROD ft/min MCS kts Distance 1049 m
MTOW 1292712,927 kg <br />12.927 tonnes <br /> kg Ceiling FL310 ROD ft/min APC B
WTC M Range 13101,310 nm <br />2,426,120 m <br />2,426.12 km <br />7,959,711.292 ft <br /> NM

Accidents & Serious Incidents involving SF34

  • A320 / SF34, vicinity London Stansted UK, 2019 (On 12 February 2019, an Airbus A320 under the command of a Captain reportedly undergoing line training supervised by a Training Captain occupying the supernumerary crew seat was slow to follow ATC instructions after breaking off from an unstabilised approach at London Stansted caused by the First Officer’s mismanagement of the approach and lost separation at night as it crossed approximately 600 feet above a Saab 340B climbing after takeoff. The Investigation found that flight crew workload had been exacerbated after the Captain under supervision unnecessarily delayed taking over control and had then not done so in the prescribed way.)
  • BE20/SF34, vicinity Stornoway UK, 2011 (On 31 December 2011 a USAF C12 Beech King Air descended 700 feet below the cleared outbound altitude on a procedural non precision approach to Stornoway in uncontrolled airspace in IMC and also failed to fly the procedure correctly. As a result it came into conflict with a Saab 340 inbound on the same procedure. The Investigation found that the C12 crew had interpreted the QNH given by ATC as 990 hPa as 29.90 inches, the subscale setting units used in the USA. The Saab 340 pilot saw the opposite direction traffic on TCAS and descended early to increase separation.)
  • SF34 / B190, Auckland NZ, 2007 (On 29 May 2007, a Saab 340 aircraft that was holding on an angled taxiway at Auckland International Airport was inadvertently cleared to line up in front of a landing Raytheon 1900D. The aerodrome controller transmitted an amended clearance, but the transmission crossed with that of the Saab crew reading back the line-up clearance. The pilots of both aircraft took action to avoid a collision and stopped on the runway without any damage or injury.)
  • SF34 / E145, Stockholm Sweden, 2002 (On 16 December 2002, a Saab 340 being operated by Swedish airline Skyways and arriving at Stockholm on a scheduled domestic passenger flight and an Embraer 145 being operated by Swiss on a scheduled passenger flight from Stockholm to Basel almost collided at the intersection between taxiways ‘Z’ and ‘A’ in normal night visibility. Upon seeing the Saab approaching on a conflicting track, the Embraer 145 was stopped very suddenly and the other aircraft passed within an estimated 3 metres. No persons were injured and neither aircraft was damaged. The diagram below taken from the official report shows the intersection involved.)
  • SF34 / PA27, Nassau Bahamas, 2018 (On 22 September 2018, a Saab 340B taking off in accordance with its clearance at Nassau came close to a midair collision over the main runway after a light aircraft began an almost simultaneous takeoff in the opposite direction of the same runway contrary to its received and correctly acknowledged non-conflicting takeoff clearance for a different runway without the TWR controller noticing. The light aircraft passed over the Saab 340 without either aircraft crew seeing the other aircraft. The Investigation noted that the light aircraft pilot had “forgotten” his clearance and unconsciously substituted an alternative.)
  • SF34, Izumo Japan, 2007 (On 10 December, 2007 a SAAB 340B being operated by Japan Air Commuter on a scheduled passenger flight left the runway at Izumo Airport during the daylight landing roll in normal visibility and continued further while veering to the right before coming to a stop on the airport apron.)
  • SF34, Kirkwall Orkney UK, 2003 (On 12 September 2003, a Saab 340B being operated by UK regional airline Loganair on a scheduled passenger flight from Aberdeen to Kirkwall experienced a loss of pitch control during landing at destination and the rear fuselage contacted the runway causing damage to the airframe. Once the aircraft had cleared the runway, some passengers and some of the hold baggage was removed before the aircraft was taxied to its parking position because of a suspicion that the aircraft might have been loaded contrary to the accepted load and trim sheet.)
  • SF34, Lappeenranta Finland, 2008 (On 31 January 2008 a Saab 340B being operated by Czech airline Job Air on a scheduled passenger service from Helsinki to Lappeenranta under a wet lease contract for a Company called ‘Fly Lappeenranta’ which was not an aircraft operator. During the night landing at Lappeenranta, it departed the left side of the runway after touch down in normal visibility with snow falling. Propeller damage was caused when an attempt was then made to return the aircraft to the runway after the excursion. None of the 16 occupants was injured.)
  • SF34, Marsh Harbour Bahamas, 2013 (On 13 June 2013, a rushed and unstable visual approach to Marsh Harbour by a Saab 340B was followed by a mishandled landing and a runway excursion. The Investigation concluded that the way the aircraft had been operated had been contrary to expectations in almost every respect. This had set the scene for the continuation of a visual approach to an attempted landing in circumstances where there had been multiple indications that there was no option but to break off the approach, including a total loss of forward visibility in very heavy rain as the runway neared.)
  • SF34, Moruya NSW Australia, 2015 (On 9 January 2015, a Saab 340B encountered a flock of medium-sized birds soon after decelerating through 80 knots during its landing roll at Moruya. A subsequent flight crew inspection in accordance with the prevailing operator procedures concluded that the aircraft could continue in service but after completion of the next flight, a propeller blade tip was found to be missing. The Investigation concluded that the blade failure was a result of the earlier bird impact and found that airline procedures allowing pilots to determine continued airworthiness after a significant birdstrike had unknowingly been invalid.)
  • SF34, New York JFK USA, 1999 (An SF34 overan New York JFK 04R after an unstabilised ILS approach in IMC was continued to a deep landing at excessive speed and the aircraft overan into the installed EMAS.)
  • SF34, Savonlinna Finland, 2019 (On 7 January 2019, a Saab 340B made a late touchdown during light snowfall at night close to the edge of the runway at Savonlinna before veering off and eventually stopping. The Investigation attributed the excursion to flight crew misjudgements when landing but also noted the aircraft operator had a long history of similar investigated events in Scandinavia and had failed to follow its own documented Safety Management System. The Investigation also concluded that there was a significant risk that EU competition rules could indirectly compromise publicly-funded air service contract tendering by discounting the operational safety assessment of tendering organisations.)
  • SF34, Stornoway UK, 2015 (On 2 January 2015, the commander of a Saab 340 suddenly lost directional control during a within-limits crosswind take off and the aircraft left the runway onto grass at approximately 80 knots. No call to reject the take off was made and no action was taken to shut down the engines until the aircraft had come to a stop in the soft ground with a collapsed nose gear and substantial damage to the propellers and lower forward fuselage. The Investigation concluded that the most likely explanation for the excursion was the absence of any rudder input as the aircraft accelerated.)
  • SF34, en-route, Santa Maria CA USA, 2006 (On 2 January 2006, an American Eagle Saab 340 crew failed to notice a progressive loss of climb performance in icing conditions and control of the aircraft was lost when it stalled at 11,700 feet and was only recovered after a 5200 feet height loss. The Investigation noted that the aircraft had stalled prior to the activation of the Stall Protection System and that the climb had been conducted with the AP engaged and, contrary to SOP, with VS mode selected. It was concluded that SLD icing conditions had prevailed. Four Safety Recommendations were made and two previous ones reiterated.)
  • SF34, en-route, near Caltrauna Argentina, 2011 (On 18 May 2011, a Saab 340 crew attempted to continue a climb to their intended cruising level in significant airframe icing conditions at night before belatedly abandoning the attempt and descending to a lower level but one where their aircraft was nevertheless still rapidly accumulating ice. They were unable to recover control after it stalled and a crash into terrain below followed. The Investigation attributed the accident to lack of crew understanding of the importance of both the detection of and timely and appropriate response to both significant rates of airframe ice accumulation and indications of an impending aerodynamic stall.)
  • SF34, en-route, north of Edinburgh UK, 2017 (On 5 June 2017, a Saab 340B encountered an unexpected short period of severe in-cloud turbulence and icing soon after climbing through FL 100 on departure from Edinburgh and a temporary but constrained loss of pitch control occurred during which three successive Angle of Attack-triggered stick shaker activations occurred before the severity of the turbulence reduced and the intended climb could be resumed. The Investigation found that the crew had not responded to the problem in accordance with prescribed procedures and that at no time during the episode had they set Maximum Continuous Power to aid prompt and effective recovery.)
  • SF34, en-route, northern North Sea UK, 2014 (On 3 October 2014, the crew of a Saab 340 in the cruise at FL150 in day IMC did not recognise that severe icing conditions had been encountered early enough to make a fully-controlled exit from them and although recovery from the subsequent stall was successful, it was achieved "in a non-standard manner". The Investigation concluded that although both mountain wave effects and severe icing had contributed to the incident, the latter had been the main cause. Both crew understanding of airframe icing risk and supporting Operator and Manufacturer documentation on the subject were considered deficient.)
  • SF34, vicinity Mariehamn Finland, 2012 (On 14 February 2012 a Latvian-operated Saab 340 acknowledged an ATC clearance to make a procedural ILS approach to Mariehamn and then completely disregarded the clearance by setting course direct to the aerodrome. Subsequently, having lost situational awareness, repeated GPWS PULL UP warnings at night in VMC were ignored as control of the aircraft was lost with a recovery only achieved an estimated 2 seconds before ground impact would have occurred and then followed by more ignored PULL UP Warnings due to continued proximity to terrain before the runway was sighted and a landing achieved.)
  • SF34, vicinity Newcastle New South Wales Australia, 2012 (On 8 November 2012, the crew of a Saab 340 advised destination ATC at Newcastle in daylight hours that they were 'visual' and were so cleared. The aircraft was then observed to turn towards the lights of an industrial complex 6nm from the airport and descend and ATC intervened to provide guidance to final approach. Investigation found that the experienced Captain was guiding the First Officer, who had gained his professional licence 10 months earlier, towards what he had mistaken for the runway. Descent, perceived by the Captain as on 'finals', continued to 680 feet agl before a climb commenced.)
  • SF34, vicinity Sydney Australia, 2008 (On 3 November 2008, a Saab 340B being operated on a domestic passenger flight by Regional Express AL was tracking in daylight to join a 7nm final for Runway 34R at destination Sydney, when a passenger sustained minor injuries as the result of a transient encounter with turbulence that had led to a momentary loss of control of the aircraft and which was suspected as being of wake vortex origin.)
  • SF34, vicinity Sydney Australia, 2017 (On 17 March 2017, uncommanded engine indications on a Saab 340B en route to Sydney were followed by vibration of the right engine after which, as the crew commenced right engine shutdown, its propeller assembly separated from the engine. A PAN was declared and the flight subsequently reached Sydney without further event. The Investigation found that the propeller gearbox shaft had fractured because of undetected internal fatigue cracking in the shaft. Applicable in-service shaft inspection procedures were found to be inadequate and mandatory enhancements to these procedures have since been introduced.)
  • SF34, vicinity Zurich Switzerland, 2000 (On 10 January 2000, two minutes and 17 seconds after departure from Zurich airport, at night in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC), a Saab 340 operated by Crossair, entered into right-hand dive and crashed.)
  • SF34/AT72, Helsinki Finland, 2011 (On 29 December 2011 a Golden Air ATR 72 making a daylight approach to runway 22R at Helsinki and cleared to land observed a Saab 340 entering the runway and initiated a low go around shortly before ATC, who had observed the incursion, issued a go around instruction. The Investigation attributed the breach of clearance by the Latvian-operated Saab 340 primarily to poor CRM, a poor standard of R/T and inadequate English Language proficiency despite valid certification of the latter.)
  • SF34/SF34, vicinity Stornoway UK, 2011 (On 15 October 2011, a Loganair Saab 340 in uncontrolled airspace and inbound and level at 2000 feet QNH on a procedural non precision approach in day IMC to runway 18 at Stornoway received a TCAS RA ‘DESCEND’ when a second Loganair Saab 340 outbound on the same procedure descended prematurely to the same altitude contrary to ATC clearance. The subsequent investigation concluded that the failure of the controller to re-iterate the requirement to remain at 3000 feet outbound until advised had contributed the crew error. Minimum separation after the TCAS RA was less than 0.1nm horizontally when 500 feet vertically.)