Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will We See Ever See A Large Turboprop Airliner?  
User currently offlineDash9 From Canada, joined Nov 2008, 196 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 30172 times:

hello
AFAIK as of now the largest turboprop available on the market are the Q400 and ATR72. Bombardier has been studying a possible strech called Q400x for some time and Embraer also talked of a possible new turboprop.

What specs would a new, bigger turboprop need to succeed against an equivalent sized jet? Speed, fuel economy, comfort, range? How likely it is that it could be based on an existing / planned frame such as the A320 or Cseries?

Dash9

79 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 30172 times:

I think the answer to this question is no.

Turboprops, even the Q400 are much nosier than jets, so they are disliked by pax, and they're also slower so they are only useful on short routes. If they're only good for short routes, then you need to have frequency. Most of the routes in Europe which could have used such a plane now have a train service, like BCN-MAD, and even the US has the Acela.


User currently offlineL1011buff From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 30100 times:

what about fuel efficiency?

User currently offlineGFFgold From Indonesia, joined Feb 2007, 443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 29999 times:

I see lots more potential for smaller turboprops in the developing world where urbanisation has outstripped surface transport infrastructure and where a comparatively short journey (as the ATR flies) might take many hours or even days by road or rail. Also between adjoining islands. Note the growth of Firefly out of PEN using ATRs, and the marked increase in scheduled short hops using small props around Indonesia and the Pacific.

User currently offlineTSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3068 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 29795 times:



Quoting Dash9 (Thread starter):
What specs would a new, bigger turboprop need to succeed against an equivalent sized jet? Speed, fuel economy, comfort, range?

I'd say the priorities on a new turboprop would be as follows:
1. Fuel Economy- This is a turboprop's main advantage over a similarly-sized jet. Better fuel economy = greater advantage.
2. Speed- Any propellor-driven aircraft is perceived as "slow" by the general flying public, so anything that brings turboprops and jets closer to parity in speed over short segments is a good thing.
3. Comfort- I've flown on CRJs and I've flown on a Q400, and comfort-wise there was no comparison: The Q400 won hands-down. An ad showing passengers packed into "Airline B's" CRJs versus those same passengers relaxing in comfort in "Airline A's" turboprops shouldn't be that hard to market.
4. Range- Since turboprops are only competitive with jets on shorter segments, a continent-spanning range shouldn't be a huge consideration.

Quoting Dash9 (Thread starter):
How likely it is that it could be based on an existing / planned frame such as the A320 or Cseries?

Highly unlikely. Fitting two jet engines under the wings of the aforementioned aircraft is enough of a headache as it is. Now try to imagine fitting two appropriately-sized propellors on those aircraft... it wouldn't work. That leaves you with only one other choice- four (or more) engines, and a redesigned wing upon which to mount them. The redesigned wing would probably be necessary to decrease or eliminate the current amount of sweep anyway, but then that leads to other problems, etc, etc... Much easier to design an aircraft to be a turboprop from the get-go.



Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1379 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 29691 times:

Sure - when jet fuels hits $8/gallon and the fuel efficiency of a prop makes a significant difference (at least 10%, bur probably more like 33%) in the price of a ticket.

User currently offlineLuv2cattlecall From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1650 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 29673 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
3. Comfort- I've flown on CRJs and I've flown on a Q400, and comfort-wise there was no comparison: The Q400 won hands-down. An ad showing passengers packed into "Airline B's" CRJs versus those same passengers relaxing in comfort in "Airline A's" turboprops shouldn't be that hard to market.

Couldn't agree more! It amazes me that search sites like Priceline and Hotwire still have an "avoid turboprops" option!

Aside from their Aviation X headset, I am no fan of Bose products, but I realize how highly the general public thinks of them - for example, 99% of the people I talk to are convinced that their noise-canceling headsets will eliminate crying babies, when in reality, they make them worse.

Bombardier should find a way to get Bose to make a tiny tweak to the ANC technology - which works wonders on the Q400 - and add the tagline "enhanced with Bose noise-cancellation technology" or something along those lines.

Does Nike tend to advertise with quips about their engineering and technology, or by dropping celebrity names? There's no use trying to convince most people that current generation turboprops are nothing like what they rode 10 years ago... so just drop some fancy names and watch the SLF pay up!



When you have to breaststroke to your connecting flight...it's a crash!
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 29507 times:



Quoting Dash9 (Thread starter):
Speed, fuel economy, comfort, range? How likely it is that it could be based on an existing / planned frame such as the A320 or Cseries?

I think ATR is working on a -900, a 100 seat Turboprop too.

A few yrs back I sketched a A320 sized (~150 seat) aircraft powered by two 11.000 shp engines. PPRUNE members helped in finetuning. It's has 3-3, APU powered electric drive to reduce noise / fuel during push back/taxiing, DLC & enough belly room for feeder services. Most high density traffic routes in the 500 million person European market are < 600nm. A 737/ A320 is made for 3000nm.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/TURBOLINERMAI2008.jpg
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/31945...-facing-a320-737-turboliner-3.html


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4395 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 29442 times:

I think that technologically the turbofan and the turboprop get clother and clother, and somehow a mantelled open rotor may be the long time solution - isn't the GTF alread more a turbo prop than a jet?

User currently offlinePWMRamper From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 621 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 29411 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 1):
Turboprops, even the Q400 are much nosier than jets

Are you including the Q400 in that statement?

Because I think the Q4's are MUCH quieter than any RJ.


User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4320 posts, RR: 36
Reply 10, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 29383 times:

Seeing that the biggest variants of the ATR's and DHC products are the most popular and they can't stretch them much further, it would be possible if they make a clean sheet 5 abreast fuselage design, which has potential to carry 65 to 150 pax.
A nice trip back on memory lane to the 1960s (Il-18, Viscount, Connie, Electra, DC-6/7) when the last 5 abreast propliners were built or in frontline service. (NB Vanguard and Britannia were 6 abreast)



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineAcelanzarote From Spain, joined Nov 2005, 830 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 29300 times:

Are not ATR making an ATR72-600, not sure on the details
but think its somehwat larger than the AT72-500?

cheers



from the Island with sun and great photo's.. Why not visit Lanzarote
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8003 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 28707 times:

If they can figure out a way to quiet down the 8-bladed propellers properly, Keejse's proposed Turboliner with its Mach 0.7 cruising speed would be perfect for under 1,000 nautical mile routes, especially if it can duplicate the 124-seat 32.8 inch seat pitch configuration used by Southwest Airlines. It would be perfect as a shorter-range replacement of the 737-300 on Southwest's routes on the intra-California and intra-Texas markets.

User currently offlineBmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 28517 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 1):
Turboprops, even the Q400 are much nosier than jets, so they are disliked by pax,

The Q400 has been noted to be much quieter than most jets and many passengers have a favorable rating of the Q400...

http://www2.bombardier.com/q400/en/quiet.jsp



The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
User currently offlineBrusselsSouth From Belgium, joined Aug 2001, 628 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 28324 times:

Actually, there's already been a large turboprop airliner : the Tupolev Tu-114.

It routinely flew for SU with 200 seats.



Regards
BrusselsSouth


User currently offlineDash9 From Canada, joined Nov 2008, 196 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 28219 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 7):
A few yrs back I sketched a A320 sized (~150 seat) aircraft powered by two 11.000 shp engines.

Thanks Keesje that is exactly the kind of turboprop I had in mind!

Quoting Acelanzarote (Reply 11):
Are not ATR making an ATR72-600, not sure on the details
but think its somehwat larger than the AT72-500?

nope, the -600 is only an improved -500, mostly on the avionic side.

Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
Fitting two jet engines under the wings of the aforementioned aircraft is enough of a headache

Understand. How about a common fuselage like the Airbus A300/310/330/340, but a custom-made wing? I'm thinking Bombardier here, since they are developping the 5-abreast Cseries, couldn't the reuse the fuselage for the Q400X project?


User currently offlineCaptaink From Mexico, joined May 2001, 5109 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 28133 times:



Quoting PWMRamper (Reply 9):

Because I think the Q4's are MUCH quieter than any RJ.

THe Q400 is supposedly quite quiet. But not all RJs are loud either. I find the ERJ rather quiet on full thrust , save for the wind noise. Personally I find ERJs the perfect short flight aircraft.



There is something special about planes....
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 28095 times:

I think the props have become more quiet. The engine I took for the Turboliner is at this moment the only modern one available > 10.000 shp (the An70 props engine seem not very quiet)

As we speak R&D (GE, RR, Airbus,Boeing) is focussing on Counter Rotating Rotors that promise an additional 5% energy effiency on top of conventional props. http://www.nlr.nl/eCache/DEF/12/623.jpg


User currently offlineOtnySASLHR From Spain, joined May 2007, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 27851 times:



Quoting BrusselsSouth (Reply 14):
Actually, there's already been a large turboprop airliner : the Tupolev Tu-114.

I think that the Saunders Roe might have been bigger:-

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © RAScholefield




oTny
User currently offline2travel2know From Panama, joined Apr 2005, 3580 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 27720 times:

And what happened to the civilian version of Airbus A400M ?


I don't work for COPA Airlines!
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 27260 times:



Quoting BrusselsSouth (Reply 14):
Actually, there's already been a large turboprop airliner : the Tupolev Tu-114.

Although very advanced, half Siberia was left with Noise induced hearing loss because of it. Its fifties technology. The worlds largest transport for some time, the Anteus, had them too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9S3h37GW2g
Its legendary bomber sister, the Bear..


User currently offlineAM744 From Mexico, joined Jun 2001, 1776 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 26596 times:



Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
2. Speed- Any propellor-driven aircraft is perceived as "slow" by the general flying public, so anything that brings turboprops and jets closer to parity in speed over short segments is a good thing.

Didn't the SAAB 2000 tried that one? I'm not privy on the complete story. Perhaps a better timing could help a large and fast turboprop.


User currently offlineGhYHZ From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 26346 times:

In the late '50s Canadair built a variant of the Bristol Britannia, the CL-44.

Loftleiðir Icelandic Airlines operated a stretched version of this, the CL-44J which had 189 seats.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 26328 times:



Quoting AM744 (Reply 21):
Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
2. Speed- Any propellor-driven aircraft is perceived as "slow" by the general flying public, so anything that brings turboprops and jets closer to parity in speed over short segments is a good thing.

Didn't the SAAB 2000 tried that one? I'm not privy on the complete story. Perhaps a better timing could help a large and fast turboprop.

Passenger perception is hard to stear but I think economies could do a lot. With the dense markets of Europe but also markets like RayChuang identified the flight times are so short the additional 5-15 minutes flight times are minor in the total travel time.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...s/Europecitypairs.jpg?t=1210977129

Aircraft like 737's and A320's are much more capable, expensive and heavy. That was acceptable when fuel was cheap, speed was king and no big props existed.


User currently offlineVoodoo From Niue, joined Mar 2001, 2074 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 26304 times:

Just tried to look for a drawing/mock-up images of the A340 IAE Superfan combo design from the '80s. Can't seem to find any with the obvious keywords. Its as if IAE/Airbus have been going through with a fine tooth comb to delete them?


` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
25 UALWN : In the 90s Crossair called their SAABs 2000 "Concordino", as they called their RJ85s "Jumbollino".
26 Saab2000 : I flew SAAB2000s for Crossair/SWISS for a few years and they were indeed nice airplanes. Now I fly the CRJ-200 and honestly, there's little compariso
27 GST : The trouble is that Turboprops usually operate shorter segments, and therefore cruise at lower altitudes with higher external air pressures as the no
28 LongHauler : Old habits are hard to overcome ... other than the usual readers on here. A friend of mine recently said she "flew on an old propeller plane to Halifa
29 Post contains images Keesje : Current RJ's (props) are also unpopular because of small cabins, very limitted carry luggage and noise. I think wider seats, light (roof top windows)
30 Rampart : That, I'm afraid, is the Achilles heel for this concept, much as I'd like to see a revival of sensible turboprops. If regional jets are said to be a
31 Manfredj : I think this is an interesting thread. I'll chime in with my favorite, which has already been mentioned. I think SAAB has(d) some of the best products
32 Post contains links Fanofjets : Nice picture of the SARO Princess! There is also some great footage of that aircraft on YouTube. Saunders-Roe had an even larger turbojet-powered ver
33 IMissPiedmont : It was indeed noisy but there is yet to be an aircraft made that is more fun to watch.
34 Rampart : Great collection of "paper airplanes"! I've had you "bookmarked" for some time now, and now I know you on A.net. I've always loved the Republic Rainb
35 Brilondon : Your right there. I have flown on a Q400 from Porter out of YTZ to EWR and found it to be a vast improvement over the CRJ or ERJ both AC and CO offer
36 Adam42185 : I love this idea!!
37 Robsaw : Quiet inside the passenger cabin and quiet on the ground under the flight-path are two entirely different things. The back of a Q400 isn't bad, but t
38 N1120A : Not really. That they don't really have that capability in real life is added to by the fact that they were engineered for short as well as medium ha
39 GST : I also fly Q400 very regularly between Belfast City and Manchester, and do not think that next to the props is any more uncomfortable than near the e
40 CV580Freak : Bring back the Viscount & Vanguard
41 FlyDeltaJets87 : It shouldn't have much of an impact, so long as the rest of the fuselage is properly strengthened. The Comet had problems because they used windows w
42 Timz : The only point of the turboprop would be to burn less fuel per seat, right? No other advantage, for anyone? So how much fuel would it save on a given
43 N1120A : That is a huge advantage, especially given the trend in energy prices.
44 Viscount724 : However the majority of Vanguards built, the 23 operated by AC, had much more spacious 5-abreast seating in Y class. BEA's (the only other customer)
45 Saab2000 : Vastly better runway performance is another huge advantage. The CRJ-200 uses a lot of runway when heavy. We can use RWY 8 in PHL when somewhat light
46 GST : Surely you realise without very specific information on loadings, aircraft profiles, engine types, speeds used etc etc it is impossible to quantify t
47 Timz : The thread is talking about "large" turboprops, which I take to mean 100+ seats. So we won't be comparing them to a CRJ. Feel free to specify to your
48 Prebennorholm : One problem with turboprop planes is that they don't go so high. At least they will have very limited climb capability at high altitude. The whole ide
49 HeyWhaTheHay : Maybe disliked by pax, but for general aviation noise for residents next to airports, they are MUCH quieter. HWTH
50 Dw747400 : The problem with cruise altitude probably won't be that big of an issue on short flights. For example, with a reasonably full payload (150 pax and 50
51 Thegeek : When I've been on a Q400 it seemed noisier than a jet. Perhaps I've been unlucky and sat near the prop. I suppose a 717 is noisy near the engines too.
52 Kappel : Indeed, and the same can be said about CRJ's. Sitting in the back next to an engine, or in the front of a CRJ700/900 makes a HUGE difference (same as
53 Sphealey : The word "ever" (and its counterpart "never") has to be balanced against the price of oil and competing liquid fuels. Should - or perhaps when - oil r
54 Post contains links and images Keesje : Props tend to make noise that can be tiring. I think the short trips, where props can be effective, are full of action / disturbances anyway. So I te
55 Captaink : I don't doubt that, but I was referring more to the passenger's perspective. With the RJ's engines usually way at the back you get the DC9 effect, th
56 EMB170 : Keesje, it's a nice drawing...I have one question, though. If you're designing a propliner in the 140-160 seat range category, the FAA/JAA would proba
57 9252fly : What are the chances of Bombardier going ahead with a DH4 stretch,is it a plug too much? Would the maximum seating capacity be 90 seats? Seems the eco
58 AM744 : A previous job required frequent travel to Manzanillo (ZLO) and my coworkers disliked Aeromar's (VW) ATR-42 for the mere fact of being a turboprop, s
59 TSS : Why not kill two birds with one stone and have the lavatories installed just ahead of the mid-cabin point and in line with the props, thereby elimina
60 FlyDeltaJets87 : There are mid cabin emergency exits under the wing in Reply 7. The safety demo and safety card would need to clearly show the escape route being away
61 GST : Not my experience with numerous Q400 flights, but having said that I havent ridden a DC9 so cant comment on that comparison. I remember flying on the
62 Brilondon : I'm no engineer, but I would think that maybe there may be an issue with the wing and economies of scale. You could only get so big and then you star
63 GST : You are not wrong in that assessment generally. It is worth noting though that the Dash 8 is an old design, but that its wing in various guises has b
64 R2rho : Oil will tell.... In any case, we are seeing a first step in this direction with the proposed Q400X stretch and the all-new 70-90 seat a/c that ATR is
65 Prebennorholm : The Tu-114 was pretty fast because it had supersonic propeller tips. The Tu-114 was very noisy because it had supersonic propeller tips. There are so
66 R2rho : Sure, but look at those old propellers. They're pretty conventional. Surely, a modern advanced scimitar bladed prop (which delays supersonic entry of
67 Timz : Because it turns fewer revs/minute, you mean? Or because it's smaller?
68 R2rho : Sorry if the numbers I put up were confusing, I was trying to say that at what seems to be a similar rotation speed of 800rpm, the Tupolev props tend
69 Viscount724 : The Tu-114's unusual (for a turboprop) swept wings were a significant factor in its high speed.
70 Prebennorholm : Absolutely correct, dear R2rho. Scimitar shaped blades are the way to go to get the most speed out of prop planes. Now I tried to convert 400knots in
71 Rampart : The Convair turboprops (and pistons?), the Britannia, HS 748, YS-11 all seem to have managed with an over-wing exit. -Rampart
72 GFFgold : Firefly in Malaysia marketed on 'putting the fun back into flying' and I think that could be developed further. Also, if your new turboprops are more
73 R2rho : Actually those numbers are also quoted from airbusmilitary.com Thanks for doing the further calculations, they give a pretty good idea of where the A
74 AirbusA6 : The rise of the LCC carriers espeically FR, shows that passengers are prepared to put up with a lot, for cheap prices, so surely a slightly slower, bu
75 RayChuang : I think thanks to modern technology, a turboprop airliner's perception as "slow and noisy" will so be going the way of the dodo bird. Keejse's Turboli
76 Viscount724 : As far as I know, Southwest's 737-300s and -700s both have 137 seats and the 737-500 has 122 seats.
77 GST : Hasnt Southwest always taken a specifically 737 subtypes only fleet policy for money saving? I doubt that anything but revolutionary fuel savings wou
78 RayChuang : GST, The big problem for Southwest nowadays is that with the high cost of fuel, the 737-300/700 has started to become less economical to fly on the sh
79 Jambrain : What do you mean? Energy = Force x Distance Same force 2x the speed needs 2x the power for 0.5x the time (i.e. same Energy) Jets need to fly high to
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 See 747-200s In New Delta Colours? posted Mon Aug 3 2009 13:31:30 by PillowTester
When Will We See PR's 777-300ER? posted Fri Jul 31 2009 19:32:10 by JetBlue777
Will We See Mainland US-GUM? posted Thu Apr 16 2009 19:19:57 by USAirALB
Will We See Another Long Haul Airline In HKG? posted Thu Jan 1 2009 19:41:48 by United Airline
Will We See More UA Flights Out Of JFK? posted Tue Dec 16 2008 00:50:53 by United Airline
Will We Ever See Another 737 Version From AA? posted Sun Nov 23 2008 21:20:19 by SXDFC
When Will We See A320s In Delta Colors posted Sun Jul 13 2008 21:29:21 by Rwex414
Will We See AC Flying A330 Or B777 To GIG? posted Fri Feb 15 2008 15:50:55 by Aircanada014
Will We Ever See Wider Bodied Turboprops? posted Tue Jan 1 2008 13:24:02 by Orion737
When Will We See Europe - HNL Non-stop Service? posted Sun Nov 18 2007 12:03:50 by HNL-Jack