Are turbo props here to stay?
- Thread starter FrankieFlyCRQ
- Start date
RightSeatGirl
KA'PLAH BITCHES!
I'm not so convinced that TP's have more then a decade's life left in them. As turbofan technology grows more and more efficient it's also creating engines that can propel a jet faster and faster. And that is rapidly closing the efficiency gap between the two power plants. A turbofan will likely always have a higher pounds per hour fuel burn, but the excess speed they can make means total fuel burn for a given leg is becoming the same for a turboprop on the same leg. Now granted, high efficiency turbofan technology is also getting applied to turbine engines in general so TP's are also getting more efficient, but under our current understanding of aerodynamics there is an upper limit to how fast a TP can fly that is well below that of a turbofan powered aircraft even the unducted fan types.
Snuggle
Well-Known Member
The Q is effecient for short flights. It is fast for a turboprop, I've seen it do 360 TAS at cruise altitude. Just this last trip I saw groundspeed of 430. I've never flown a Jet so I really don't know much faster they go, but I think bombardier said something like a 5 min. difference on a 300 mile leg between an RJ and a Q.
Orange Anchor
New Member
Like anything else, right tool for the right job. No, 'open rotors' will probably not be used for long haul but for short medium, there may well be a future.
I was surprised that CFM has announced a follow on engine to the ubiquitous CFM56 and it will be 18% more efficient. ???
Eh, Era wouldn't be your problem, Grant would.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
Snuggle,
Suffice it to say, significantly faster.
However, you're right, it's all about the short to medium haul flights.
If you look at flights (and I know I'll be corrected, but we'll do this the swag-way) from say about 400 nm and under the TProp is the absolute best in terms of efficiency. The chart below (thanks Bombardier marketing!!!) shows distance travelled in an hour (pretty dumb way to present it....but whateva) you can see that on shorter range missions, the time on a same-stage length flight (prolly a much better comparison) is within 10 minutes with a substantial fuel savings.
Now in turbojets, we are also limited in speed due to high-speed aerodynmic issues the way jets are built today. Obviously, airplanes like the proposed Sonic Cruiser from Boeing would allow for much more efficient aerodynamics, but as we all know, the conventional style airplane is still something cooked up by wizards and witches to the public. However, the airplanes are, like you said, far more suited to long hauls. I think some data I saw suggested 400nm +.
Gaining public acceptance that such a machine is safe for air travel would be an uphill battle, much like fruitlessly trying to educate the public on the safety and efficiency of turboprops after the Roselawn tragedy.
How is the flying public looking at the new gen tprops? I really don't know, as I've become unplugged to the everyday knowledge from the regional segment in the last 12 mos.
Anyway, another $5 of my 2 cents as I whittle time away waiting to start my line.....:drool:
Suffice it to say, significantly faster.
However, you're right, it's all about the short to medium haul flights.
If you look at flights (and I know I'll be corrected, but we'll do this the swag-way) from say about 400 nm and under the TProp is the absolute best in terms of efficiency. The chart below (thanks Bombardier marketing!!!) shows distance travelled in an hour (pretty dumb way to present it....but whateva) you can see that on shorter range missions, the time on a same-stage length flight (prolly a much better comparison) is within 10 minutes with a substantial fuel savings.
Now in turbojets, we are also limited in speed due to high-speed aerodynmic issues the way jets are built today. Obviously, airplanes like the proposed Sonic Cruiser from Boeing would allow for much more efficient aerodynamics, but as we all know, the conventional style airplane is still something cooked up by wizards and witches to the public. However, the airplanes are, like you said, far more suited to long hauls. I think some data I saw suggested 400nm +.
Gaining public acceptance that such a machine is safe for air travel would be an uphill battle, much like fruitlessly trying to educate the public on the safety and efficiency of turboprops after the Roselawn tragedy.
How is the flying public looking at the new gen tprops? I really don't know, as I've become unplugged to the everyday knowledge from the regional segment in the last 12 mos.
Anyway, another $5 of my 2 cents as I whittle time away waiting to start my line.....:drool:
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
Somebody must have found some alien engine technology. The 747-8 is predicting to be 16% more efficient than the -400 and still carry 16% more payload....
Miracles never cease....
mjg407
Well-Known Member
JA Yawd Bwoy
Well-Known Member
They've even thrown some glass into my old turboprop
I can't see your picture...
Snuggle
Well-Known Member
The public for the most part seems to be impressed by the Q400. It may just be the clean appearance since a lot of the planes are only a few months old, but I have noticed a lot of positive feedback from the passengers. It seems the majority enjoy the ride. I'd like to hear Qgar's opinion on this as she deals with the passengers a lot more then I do.
mjg407
Well-Known Member
USMC-SSGT
Well-Known Member
Ive seen 374 TAS on a good day in level flight. Certainly not the norm but 360+ is typically good 100% of the time.
So that still puts it in an odd black hole of airspace. Much faster than any competing prop and much slower than any competing jet (except the older slowtations.)
JA Yawd Bwoy
Well-Known Member
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
sure pm me
CirrusDriver
Well-Known Member
Starting next month we are using the 400 for PDX-LAS trip once a day!
Q400 - 2.45 block
737-7 - 2.15 block
Q400 - 2.45 block
737-7 - 2.15 block
Means nothing to me because I dont know where PDX is. LAS is vegas?
USMC-SSGT
Well-Known Member
PGT
Well-Known Member
It is a product of Bombardier.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
We are. The pax experience on the MegaWhacker is an order of magnitude better than the experience on something like the Beech. Never been on a Dash so I can't comment on that one.
The cabin size, noise reduction, etc. is all better.
