c5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2565 times:
Is it based on distance? Would a 70 seat prop (filled up) on a 200nm route be more profitable than a 70 seat CRJ? Are there regions that props simply make more sense than jets?
"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 1, posted (1 year 12 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2494 times:
Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
Is it based on distance? Would a 70 seat prop (filled up) on a 200nm route be more profitable than a 70 seat CRJ?
It's based on time...an equivalent-technology prop is always cheaper than the same sized jet on a per mile basis because 1) the engines are more efficient and 2) they fly slower, so drag is lower, so the engines don't need to run as hard.
However, some costs (crew, some maintenance, aircraft utilization) are time-based, and the prop is slower so takes more time. Above a certain time threshold, the jet becomes more economical overall. The balance point moves with the price of fuel, which is why RJ's were wildly popular in the late 90's when gas was (relatively) cheap but are having a tougher go of it now.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2776 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
