Originally Posted by
DarkSideMoon
Plus they don't need to get up high to be efficient, so you can hang out in less congested airspace without eating up gas, and on shorter flights you don't waste time climbing. Flights like ORD-CVG or ORD-IND, in a CRJ you waste all this time climbing up at 290 to get a few extra knots and fuel efficiency just to come back down after 20 minutes of cruise flight. A turboprop could level off at 20, cruise a few knots slower, and still get there in roughly the same amount of time while using way less fuel.
The new ATR 42 and 72 -600 have a modern glass cockpit, burn half the gas of a CRJ, and with the 6 blade prop they are quieter than a CRJ. You can get them with Enhanced Vision System and wi-if. Most US regionals have a route structure that would be well suited to the new ATR.
Since Airbus owns ATR, the 72-600 sim is located at the Airbus Center in Miami, the PFD/MFD/FMS, and systems are similar to what’s in an A320. ATR training is the Airbus method, which might make the transition to an Airbus a little easier when the opportunity to move up arrives.