Jorge Detlefs: They are no longer as popular as they used to be. The reason is solely public perception. This has been true since day one of the jet age. Turboprops are much more efficient and on short to medium routes nearly as fast as jets owing to the slower speeds of newer jets and the large security and flow delays. Heck, door to door on regional routes I can beat most airliners in my piston airplane. But in the 60s, the airlines that had jets got the customers, so large turboprops like the Brittania and the Vanguard went away. Turboprops became solely for regional airlines. With deregulation, the regional airlines have expanded hugely. They are no longer regional... you can cross the country on nothing but puddle jumpers. They can offer lower costs because their flight crews aren't unionized and get paid far less. To increase public demand they've mostly switched to regional jets. The airports they serve don't need the short field performance of the turboprop and pe! ople associate propellers with dangerous small aircraft....Show more
Arlen Lopiccalo: The bypass ratios of turbofan engines have been gradually increasing over the years. The latest turbofans have bypass ratios greater than 10 to1 making them a better choice for some flight profiles that were monopolized by turboprops.
Lauri Ohl: Besides the answers given above, turboprops require several extra systems to operate, a big one being a synchrophaser system. There is also prop balancing, servicing, added parts and the logistics to support that. The decision lies with fuel costs and distance of flights for the turboprops to be more economical.
Autumn Vacio: they are extra useful than jets for quick jumps - they could carry a extra useful payload than a renowned prop airplane, even with the reality that they commonly don't have the decision, or capacity to cruise at severe altitude like a jet. you commonly see them getting used for connecting flights between cit! ies that are close mutually (or with regards to jackson hollow! wyoming, the landing strip is too rattling short for an finished length jet to land - they ought to climb and climb to get over the mountains, and then very almost nostril dive - and pull up on the perfect 2d to land - it truly is down in a hollow (subsequently the call). even with the reality that they have got some staggering snowboarding/snowboarding slopes - you extra useful comprehend what you're doing even with the reality that, because there are not any 'novices slopes' they are all psychotically vertical....Show more
Raelene Cunnick: no mate. they are proven more efficient on short haul flights. you'd find heaps of Dash-8's, ATR72 and Saab's still in use by regional airlines and airlines that sly short haul flights
Tyree Allenbrand: not around here. the local puddle jumpers are all turboprops. they get the job done, and the airlines make money with them.i can see issues with the bigger turboprops vs. little regional jets (e.g. q400/atr72 vs little embra! er or crj), but that would still only work for longer flights.
Travis Sherrock: Expense is expense.Fuel is only one such bother. One also has the wear out phobias. Turbos are expensive enough, weigh enough, and are best placed far away fro the leading edge. But they can provide for ease of calculation of expense and leave a company knowing what is budgeted for so-as to prevent cash flow problems. These are tried and true technologies.Can't beat a 373 though....Show more
Nelly Kikuchi: i believe that the world wants fast.fast internet, fast comms, fast weaponsso the same would be for travelingi'm not too familiar with aircraft engines, but i believe that the jets now a days are faster and more efficient
Robin Marchione: No.Modern turbo props such as the dash8 Q400,or ATR72 are still very viable in the right circumstances.Turbo props have a lower optimum operating altitude than jets, but higher than piston aircraft(around FL220 is good for a dash8,or ATR72).! With that in mind on a short hop say from LBA-LHR(around 200NM,with a f! ew way points via the SID-airways-STAR)you are not going to climb all the way to FL360 ie the type of altitude that a typical turbofan passenger jet is most efficient at.in this situation for transporting 50 or so passengers a turbo prop is much more practical,and over 200nm with little significant time penalty.One thing that will be noticed though as general rule of thumb turbo props only burn around 2 thirds the fuel of a comparable sized jet for only a relativley small loss of speed.Also they tend to have better STOL capabilities.Thats why jets have to be able to land in 60% of the LDA,and turbo props and classB aircraft only have to be able to land in 70% of the LDA....Show more
No comments:
Post a Comment