Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will We Ever See Wider Bodied Turboprops?  
User currently offlineOrion737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 9662 times:

Im thinking like the 3-3 seating Viscount? With the fuel efficiency and ernvironmental affects of turboprops any chasnce of seeing larger ones, offering more and 2-2 abreast seating?

36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25838 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9587 times:



Quoting Orion737 (Thread starter):
Im thinking like the 3-3 seating Viscount?

The Viscount was only wide enough for 5-abreast (2-3) seating in it's most dense Y class configuration.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Clive Peace



You may be thinking of the much larger Vickers Vanguard which could handle 3-3 Y seating although one of the only 2 original Vanguard customers (Air Canada) used a much more spacious 2-3 layout in Y. BEA's were 3-3 in Y.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31234 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9545 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Turboprop? Unlikely.

UDF? Perhaps.


User currently offlineOrion737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 9558 times:

Id like a 3-2 wide turboprop cabin even

User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 9405 times:

Vanguard, Britannia, Electra, Il18, and especially Tu114... old glorious days of turboprops. Today, jet engines are way too efficient for turboprops comeback. But, may be, UDF one day...

User currently offlineHawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3202 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 9388 times:



Quoting RIX (Reply 4):
Today, jet engines are way too efficient for turboprops comeback.

For large aircraft and long haul flights, I agree. On the other hand, for the short flights, the turboprop beats any jet in efficiency. I don't expect to see many orders for new 50 seat jets, while Bombardier and Embraer focus on the larger jets and turboprops seem poised to make a comeback.


User currently offlineOrion737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9225 times:

I wish we could see a turboprop of the size of the Electra or Viscount/Vanguard with a wider fuesalage. Also a new 30 seater turboprop to replace the Brasillia and J31/J41

User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9162 times:



Quoting Orion737 (Reply 3):
Id like a 3-2 wide turboprop cabin even

What do you mean? That was a standard Vickers Viscount config, so why would you want a wider fuselage for the same thing?


User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9140 times:



Quoting Hawaiian717 (Reply 5):
for the short flights, the turboprop beats any jet in efficiency.

- yep, entirely agree, but by "comeback" I meant restoring their old glory, like being on par with medium haul jets like Viscount or Electra or Il18 were, or flying intercontinental, like Tu114 or Britannia did. That's a pity, I still consider my only flight on a "big" turboprop (Il18) one of the most memorable flying experience...


User currently offlineOrion737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9140 times:

Well an updated turboprop that could accommodate a wider cross section. The Viscount was great but is hardly available for airlines nowadays.

User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9084 times:



Quoting Orion737 (Reply 9):
updated turboprop that could accommodate a wider cross section

- why, one great thing about today's turboprops is they don't have "double-excuse-me" seats...  Smile


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4930 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8970 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Turboprop? Unlikely.

UDF? Perhaps.


What about a hybrid?.....  Smile

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Martin Stephen



Quoting Orion737 (Reply 6):
Also a new 30 seater turboprop to replace the Brasillia and J31/J41



Quoting RIX (Reply 10):
why, one great thing about today's turboprops is they don't have "double-excuse-me" seats...

Yes, why endure 3-2 or even 2-2 when 2-1 is so much more relaxed?.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stefano Capuzzo - SpotIT




"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8936 times:



Quoting Orion737 (Reply 9):
Well an updated turboprop that could accommodate a wider cross section. The Viscount was great but is hardly available for airlines nowadays.

Yes it could, but I still don't quite understand why you seem to want a wider fuselage but still 3-2 seating config (as in Post 3)......for what purpose?


User currently offlineKaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12260 posts, RR: 35
Reply 13, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8899 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 11):
Yes, why endure 3-2 or even 2-2 when 2-1 is so much more relaxed?.....

What's with the shoulder belt in the first row?



“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
User currently offlineMacilree From New Zealand, joined Dec 2006, 243 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8834 times:

Airbus are in the process of building a large 116 seat "cost-effective, high-speed turboprop aircraft" - the A400M! It is claimed that it will have "a cruise speed almost as fast as turbofan powered transports."

Half seriously, if and when its development is sorted out, I wonder if the TP400-D6 turboprop engine has a future on a commercial airliner.

What might motivate this? Possibly a massive increase in oil prices and/or severe restrictions on aviation emissions because of climate change? Airbus is claiming that "a turboprop engine consumes 20% less fuel per mission relative to a turbofan."



John Macilree
User currently offlineMacilree From New Zealand, joined Dec 2006, 243 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8771 times:

... and the A400M's seating configuration? 29 per row!


John Macilree
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4930 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8688 times:



Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 13):
What's with the shoulder belt in the first row?

Probably for handicapped or otherwise indisposed passenger?



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3807 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8653 times:



Quoting Macilree (Reply 14):
a large 116 seat "cost-effective, high-speed turboprop aircraft" - the A400M!

I'm unsure of how much effort they're putting out in making it a comfy ride though... But then I guess they'll mostly carry non-revs... Big grin

How's that for wide body Tprop?:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sergey Krivchikov - Russian AviaPhoto Team



Or:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Egan



BTW, the Il-18 also has 5-abreast seating:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Waser
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Javier Rodriguez - Iberian Spotters




Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 18, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8636 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 13):
What's with the shoulder belt in the first row?

Presumably because there's no partition or seatback upon which to brace oneself.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlinePiedmontINT From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 376 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7620 times:



Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 11):
Yes, why endure 3-2 or even 2-2 when 2-1 is so much more relaxed?

Or why endure 2-1 when 1-1 is even more relaxed?  Big grin


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim Perkins



Just like I tell our pax when they check-in, on Air Midwest, every seat is a first class seat!


User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4353 posts, RR: 35
Reply 20, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7567 times:



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 7):
What do you mean?

He probably meant; the big turboprops ATR-72 and DHC-8 Q400 are 2+2 (4 abreast) and very popular now, some airlines might like a bigger version, in which case 4 abreast would make it inefficiently long and thin, so he probably would like a new designed DHC or ATR with 5 abreast, 2 engines and 70-120 seats.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineR2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2735 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7453 times:

In my opinion, there's a good chance. I think we will eventually see "wider bodied" turboprops (320/737 size), but not "wide-body" turboprops. Long range routes will continue to be jets, the time savings are too important. But for the short-haul, expect a "comeback". Oil at 100$ will be back soon, and eventually stay there. Between two equivalent aircraft and missions, a turboprop always consumes less fuel (about 15%), which is becoming too important to neglect. 40-50 seat regional jets will be the first to fall. On a typical 1hr RJ flight, the difference in flight time with respect to a turboprop is very little, but the fuel savings are considerable.

Remember that current turboprops are based on designs from the 70's and 80's. There is much technological potential to be extracted from there using current technologies, as Airbus is discovering with the A400M (Mach 0.70 cruise speed - not bad!). The future aircraft may not be traditional props though. Expect to see developments in counter-rotating props and open rotor designs...  Wink


User currently offlineOrion737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6291 times:

MEA707 is my mind reader and he is so clever Im adding him to my Respected users list!

User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4930 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6207 times:



Quoting PiedmontINT (Reply 19):
Or why endure 2-1 when 1-1 is even more relaxed?

Now I have to find me a single-file seat row cabin photo that is not a private or business aircraft and seating at least 12 pax!  Smile But I hear that on the Beech, it's the ride which has to be endured?

As to the topic at hand, we'll have to wait if ATR's -600 series and BBD's proposed Q400 shrink would come to pass, although final configurations wouldn't likely be different.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 18):
Presumably because there's no partition or seatback upon which to brace oneself.

How do we explain these then?.....  Confused

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Maiani




"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31234 posts, RR: 85
Reply 24, posted (6 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6017 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 23):
How do we explain these then?  confused 

That plane operates in northern latitudes (per the caption) and likely in poor weather, so strapping in the passengers as well as the cargo could be a safety issue.


25 Post contains images MEA-707 : I think the Caravan standardly has them, I also saw them in moderate and tropical countries. These straps are safer then the standard ones around you
26 Post contains links and images KELPkid : We discussed this issue not too long ago in Tech/Ops: A Large Turboprop Transport: Feasible? (by KELPkid Oct 10 2007 in Tech Ops)
27 KaiGywer : But neither do seats in many other aircraft. Never seen this before.
28 Xtoler : It's probably just a safety feature. Our J41's had airbag seatbelts equipped on the seats up front. Glad to see we never had a reason for them to dep
29 WestJetYQQ : Please excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is UDF?
30 Post contains links KaiGywer : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unducted_fan
31 Rdwootty : I am sure that Channel Airways operated a Viscount with 3x3 seating?? Anyone remember or is it the mists of time?
32 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : I believe the only turboprop airliners wide enough for 6-abreast seating were the Vanguard, Britannia, Canadair CL-44 (which used the Britannia fusel
33 L1011 : Rdwootty: You are right. I flew on that Channel Airways Viscount 812 on Jan. 29, 1969 from GCI to JER. It was aircraft G-ATVR, and it had 6-abreast se
34 Lemurs : I think the question is: How many generations of development before Geared Turbofans (GTF) allows for such optimal hot-section tuning and control that
35 Viscount724 : Must have been very narrow seats (and aisle). That would be very similar to a 6-abreast DC-9.
36 Orion737 : Good old Channel, i would expect them to squeeze in 3-3 in a viscount, this is after all the pne airline to have 7 abreast in a single aisle aircraft!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will We Ever See An IAD-DXB Route? posted Sun Dec 24 2006 23:10:11 by HAMAD
Will We Ever See SAA Ordering 777s? posted Tue Nov 28 2006 10:19:58 by LY777
Will We Ever See Flights Out Of Carlisle Airport? posted Fri Aug 25 2006 10:45:42 by Ba757gla
Will We Ever See Another "Golden Days" Of Flying? posted Mon Feb 13 2006 04:01:27 by Blackhawk144
Will We Ever See A NWA A340? posted Sat Nov 5 2005 01:32:52 by AirWillie6475
Will We Ever See Airports Named After Corporations posted Thu Nov 3 2005 23:30:56 by RicardoFG
Will We Ever See Another Tri-Jet? posted Mon Aug 22 2005 04:48:35 by AirEMS
Will We Ever See Copa Crossing The Pond? posted Sun May 8 2005 02:38:10 by Snaiks
Will We Ever See Another Legend Out Of DAL? posted Tue Jun 15 2004 11:32:53 by FLY777UAL
Will We Ever See Another W/B TriJet? posted Tue Jun 1 2004 03:14:20 by Adipasqu