|
Originally Posted by JetJock16
(Post 350118)
Any way you cut it T-Props aren't going anywhere, they're just way to efficient.
Here's some more numbers (all average): Horizon Q400 Pounds/hr: 2130 Speed: 262 Horizon -700 Pounds/hr: 2190 Speed: 351 Almost the same average fuel burn for going 33% faster. Turboprops are great for short hops but there is a reason the airlines don't use them on transcons :). |
Originally Posted by fosters
(Post 350136)
Yes, to a point.
Here's some more numbers (all average): Horizon Q400 Pounds/hr: 2130 Speed: 262 Horizon -700 Pounds/hr: 2190 Speed: 351 Almost the same average fuel burn for going 33% faster (therefore 33% less fuel burn). Turboprops are great for short hops but there is a reason the airlines don't use them on transcons :). T-Props are for hops less than 1.5 hours. Jets when compared to the same shorts routes are extremely inefficient. Just run the numbers for the CR9 between ATL and GSP then compare it to a Q400 on a similar short hope. (compare the CR9 to the Q4 because there are basically configured for the same number of seats) BTW, we usually burn about 3000-3600 lbs of fuel between ATL and GSP (25 minute FLT). We all know that on longer routes Jet are more efficient but when it comes to 400 miles or less, props will almost always win out. |
Have a good day all, I'm taking my little girl to the Zoo. Today she turns 2, it's sunny and 75 here in ATL. It's going to be a great day.
|
I don't know what the numbers are personally. That would require quite a bit of math and guessing, and also be operationally dependent. For example in the NE where you generally are kept lower and brought down from altitude further out and slowed the requirements would be different than out west where a jet can climb up to altitude quickly and then do an idle decent down at normal speed.
|
Originally Posted by JetJock16
(Post 350146)
Have a good day all, I'm taking by little girl to the Zoo. Today she turns 2 and it's sunny and 75 here in ATL. It's going to be a great day.
|
Originally Posted by fosters
(Post 350136)
Yes, to a point.
Here's some more numbers (all average): Horizon Q400 Pounds/hr: 2130 Speed: 262 Horizon -700 Pounds/hr: 2190 Speed: 351 Almost the same average fuel burn for going 33% faster. Turboprops are great for short hops but there is a reason the airlines don't use them on transcons :). |
not to rain on any ones parade,
http://se.yhp.waymaker.net/sasgroup/....asp?id=155746 maybe some problems can be fixed like any other machine, but is it worth the risk??? SAS doesn't think so. |
Originally Posted by mmaviator
(Post 350372)
not to rain on any ones parade,
http://se.yhp.waymaker.net/sasgroup/....asp?id=155746 maybe some problems can be fixed like any other machine, but is it worth the risk??? SAS doesn't think so. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Lx6IpmPh2P8 Btw, I noticed the flag in your avatar - have they switched to € in Slovenia? |
they are part of the EU now and almost everything is switched to that currency.
|
Originally Posted by fosters
(Post 350082)
That's an average ground speed over the entire leg, block to block. It includes time sitting and taxing. So that's why it's "low".
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:47 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands