levg79
Posts: 918
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2003 10:59 am

Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:00 am

Hey guys!

I was just wondering, having never flown in a turboprop, how is it different from a jet? Besides the fact that it's smaller, is it a lot less comfortable? I've heard that everyone on board gets sick all the time, but was wondering how true is that. One of the last times I flew, I had a choice of booking a jet flight, or a turboprop. Not to take any chances, I flew on a jet. Did I make the right decision? What do you guys think?
A mile of runway takes you to the world. A mile of highway takes you a mile.
 
brons2
Posts: 2462
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:02 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:03 am

I never pass up the chance to fly on a turboprop! They are every bit as safe as their larger cousins, and the takeoffs on a short runway are great!
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
 
BeltwayBandit
Posts: 474
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 4:25 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:06 am

Turboprops are noisier and in my experience tend to fly at lower altitudes. Smaller plane at lower altitudes generally means more exposure to turbulence. The fact that they have props rather than jets does not have any effect on turbulence.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:08 am

The Dash-8Q series is in fact roomier than the CRJ series. The aisle height, for example, is 7 inches higher.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
ntspelich
Posts: 740
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 2:35 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:11 am

Without a doubt jets have their advantages. However, I enjoy taking a couple of turboprop trips or segments each year. There's just something about the noise of the engines, the smallness of the cabin (at over 6'3" I don't know why I like the smallness of it) and the experience of walking out onto the apron to get to the aircraft. I've also found that typically you get to interact with your fellow pax on these flights due to the smallness of the cabin. It's also a good way to put the massiveness of other aircraft into perspective. There's nothing like taxiing along in IAD and going pass the big birds.

Call it nostalgia, but if time's not an issue and you don't mind a bit extra noise, I'd go for it next time.

NS
United 717 heavy, you're facing the wrong way. Any chance you can powerback to get off of my deice pad?
 
cchan
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:29 am

The ATR72-500s are good and reasonably large (sits around 66 - is that the largest passenger turboprop?). With a good airline, the interior is not much different to a jet.

Your experience will depend on which type of aircraft you're on. The smaller ones can be sometimes quite scary. Generally speaking, turboprops are not as comfortable as a jet, but getting on a short-haul turboprop flight is a good experience.

Personally, I don't really like single aisle jets. I would prefer a twin-prop for short haul domestic and a twin (aisle and engine) jet for anything more than 2 hours.
 
TWAMD-80
Posts: 962
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 8:25 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:43 am

You made a fine decision to fly on a jet, but if you get the chance, check out a turboprop. I just had my first turboprop ride this summer. It was on an ATR-72-200. I have to say though, it was a bit noisier than a jet, but overall it was a good experience. Also on the ATR there is a lot of room in the cabin. Haha, and nobody, myself included, got sick on that flight!  Smile

TW
Two A-4's, left ten o'clock level continue left turn!
 
BCAInfoSys
Posts: 2617
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 11:09 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:50 am

My main concern when faced with flying a turboprop, is the potential for turbulance. I made the mistake of flying a Skywest Embraer 120 from IDA (Idaho Falls) to SLC, and I have never been so sick in my life. But I also flew US Airways Express Dash-8 from AVP (Scranton/Wilkes-Barre) to PIT, and it was a great flight.

So, my advice: definitely go for a jet when there are significant mountains inbetween the two points. Otherwise, it's a toss-up. Jets and props both have their advantages and I like both, as long as I'm not tossing my chunks up over the Great Salt Lake.  Big grin
Militant Agnostic - I don't know and you don't either.
 
CLEspotter
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 7:50 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:58 am

I was on Shuttle America flight something from CLE to PIT and I got sick but we then borded the Dash 8 and let me say thats a heck of a nice, sturdy aircraft. I will always take up a chance to fly on the Dash 8 if you can.
 
rockyracoon
Posts: 1010
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2003 3:58 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:17 am

I've never gotten the chance to fly on one. I'd definetly love to give it a try as long as it wasn't a beech 1900, they seem a little sketchy as of late.

Tim
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6419
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:18 am

Most turboprop planes have the wing on the top of the fuselage. Many of them have the wing main spar running through the cabin.

If you are 6' or taller, watch out and don't bang your forehead against the lower cieling at the wing main spar when boarding/deboarding.

I would have loved to get that warning in advance.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:21 am

Big turboprops like ATRs or Dash 8-300 and-400 are very comfortable and roomy for a short trips. On longer routes (over 1,5 hour) the noise becomes annoying.
 
ssides
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 12:57 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:27 am

I have flown on several Saab340s and EMB-120s, and I have to say that despite the noise and bumps, they are fine planes. It feels more like "flying" to me; something about it makes you feel the gravity trying to bring the plane down (but not in a scary way). Of the two props, I prefer the EMB-120; it seems to have a slightly smoother ride.

Nevertheless, I am glad that RJs are replacing turboprops on many smaller-city routes. For the vast majority of the flying public, turboprops suck, and more jets means more customers.
"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:44 am

One thing more - avoid Junkstreams (JS41) - the are really crappy.
 
MD80Nut
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 6:43 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 5:09 am

I've flown on quite a few turboprops, from the Fokker F27 and Convair 640 to both sizes of the ATR, Saab 340 (my favorite) and the Dash 8. Turboprops tend to be a rougher ride due to the fact they fly at lower altitudes than jets and noisier as well, as other posters have pointed out. I wouldn't want to fly one for more than an hour or two, but I must admit most of my turboprop flights were good.

The roughest flight I've ever had was on a Dornier 228 from Grand Rapids, Michigan to Chicago's Midway airport during a snowstorm. I also flew on a Saab 340 out of Buffalo, NY to JFK through a snowstorm yet the flight wasn't very rough. I was very impressed with the 340's ride through a very intense storm!

Cheers, Ralph
Fly Douglas Jets DC-8 / DC-9 / DC-10 / MD80 / MD11 / MD90 / 717
 
patroni
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 7:49 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Thu Oct 16, 2003 7:16 am

Well, the modern turboprops like Saab 2000, Do-328, Dash-8-Q400 are in now way comparable to the older models like the Fokker 27. A Saab 2000 for example can cruise at FL290 and has an active noise reduction system, making it very quiet and vibration-free inside. Considering e.g. Swiss International, their Saab 2000's even offer more legroom and space than their Embraer 145 counterparts.

I nearly always prefer a turboprop over a jet....

Cheers,

Tom
 
ArgInMIA
Posts: 475
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2001 4:07 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 8:43 am

I Recently bought some noise canceling headphones.. I tried them on a 10hr 767 flight and they work wonders.. Now.. Do they work on turboprops? I'm going to fly on the Saab 340 and I want to know if they will do any good...
Alto.. Mucho mas alto.. hasta la cumbre
 
Okie
Posts: 3553
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:49 am

Turboprop=Low, Slow, Noisey
Not bad on a short flight. The only time I really enjoy them if there is some topography in which I would like to see. Most do not seem to land very well with any cross wind componet mostly due to their size in relation to slow speed I would guess.
ATR prop brake is interesting when sitting on the tarmac and taxiing.
 
CitationX
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 10:18 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 11:19 am

I've flown on Metroliners, SF340s, EMB-110s and EMB-120s. The SF340 and EMB-120 flights are as smooth and quiet as flying on an older 737-200 or DC-9-10. The cabins are comfortable and the block times on the routes I took them on (MRY-LAX, BUR-SJC) were only a few minutes longer than comparable jet flights.

The Metroliner was a fun plane to fly on. I'm 5'9" and still had to bend at the waist to get to my seat. It was a noisy little dude but fun to fly on. The narrow wingspan made me feel nearly every burble of air in the seat of my pants, but since I like to fly even small planes, that was okay.

The EMB-110 (a.k.a. "The Bandit") might have been the noisiest plane I have flown on since taking a nostalgia ride on a Island Airlines Ford Tri-Motor from ORL back in the early 1980s (which was something akin to flying inside a motorized, metal garbage can). The 3-across seating was snug, and it lacked pressurization ("POP" goes the ears!). Still the leather seats and rugged construction impressed me. Yep, I thought it was a fun ride, too.

About the only turboprop I would try to avoid is the Beech/Raytheon 1900/2900. My uncle is a corporate pilot for a Georgia law firm, who has thousands of hours in turboprop planes such as the Piper Cheyenne, Rockwell Turbo Commander and Beech Super King Air, tells me that the 1900/2900 are generally underpowered and especially dangerous in engine-out situations. He also says they are not rugged enough for consistent high-cycle, heavy load commuter airline use - after all, the basic airframe was intended for lower-cycle corporate use.
 
WMUPilot
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2003 2:48 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 11:22 am

I love our planes...hope to see a 2000 in our livery soon


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © James Richard Covington, Jr
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Al Courtney

JetBlue - Bringing humanity back to air travel
 
AApilot2b
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 12:38 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 11:54 am

If your comparing to regional jets, many of the turbo props are actually roomier inside (Dash-8, ATRs, etc...). I love the turboprops and take any opportunity I get to fly on one.
 
zrs70
Posts: 3314
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2000 4:08 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:05 pm

Most turboprops are great. But I vow to stay away from J-31/41's.
17 year airliners.net vet! 2000-2016
 
UPSfueler
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 9:40 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:15 pm

Yeah, give me a brasila, ATR, or Saab any day over an RJ. I prefer the turboprop because you get a better feel of the plane in flight than you do with an RJ.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:50 pm

The Dash8-Q400 is quite an aircraft. Pax capacity is up to 78. Cruise speed is 360 knots (over 410 mph) only some 30 knots slower than the 328Jet RJ. As stated earlier, aisle headroom is 6'5" - more than the CRJ. And with the Noise and Vibration Suppression system, together with the six bladed slower turning props, the interior sound levels are almost equal to the CRJ's. Cruise altitude is up to 27,000 feet.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
saab2000
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 6:19 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:54 pm

I fly a Saab 2000 for a living. When the pax board sometimes I stand and greet them and I am tired of the cynical comments about props and puddlejumpers and low-tech and slow and blah, blah, blah....

Most prop flights are short (very few are more than 90 minutes and most of ours are about 50-60 minutes) and frankly, a so-called "regional jet" would only be 2-3 minutes faster over those segments. I once dead-headed on an Avro in the cockpit for one of the segments we would normally fly and it was, if anything, slower than the Saab 2000. The speeds I saw indicated were not 1 knot faster than we fly.

Now, admittedly, the Saab 2000 is not the same as the 340. We are much faster. But the fact is that on short segments the few knots difference does not change the block to block time very much.

Our cabin is more spacious than an Embraer 145.

There are 3 places where I see an advantage for a small jet:

1. No vibrations. Even though the Saab has a low vibration level for a prop plane it is still more than a jet. As a pilot, it creates a higher level of fatigue.

2. Over longer segments they are faster, though not as much as some people think, since a large portion of the block-block time is spent rolling on the ground. The actual time in the air is not as different as most people think, especially on short flights.

3. But the real advantage is that they can fly higher. Our Saab is certified to FL310 and we used to fly that high but now with RVSM in place in Europe our company did not certify us for that and we are limited to FL280. This is not bad at all except that occasionally we are a bit closer to the "weather". The Embraers in our fleet can fly to FL370 and this 9000 extra feet does get them above more clouds.

Other than these three things I find no real advantage of a jet over a prop. And we have some real advantages, like the ability to operate in and out of some fields the jets can only dream about...  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
smrtrthnu
 
ArgInMIA
Posts: 475
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2001 4:07 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:54 pm

No idea if my noise canceling headphones will work or not on a turboprop?
Alto.. Mucho mas alto.. hasta la cumbre
 
Guest

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:00 pm

There's a reason they're called "torture props."
 
cchan
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:00 pm

What's wrong with a Jetstream 31 / 41? I quite like them.
 
saab2000
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 6:19 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:08 pm

ARGinMIA,

Yes, your noise-cancelling headset will work. Why wouldn't it? I have a Sennheiser active-noise-cancelling headset I use and it works quite well.

smrtrthnu
 
sevenair
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2001 7:18 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:57 pm

I flew SYY-EDI last month on S340 by Loganair, and the takeoff was just as excitingly fast as a 732, just the noise was really loud!! I loved it
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Sat Oct 18, 2003 2:19 am

If the active noise-reduction of your headset is specialized for use on jets, it will not work as fine on a prop because noises differ from those you hear when flying on a jet. But it will still significantly reduce noise.

That said, I love turboprops, especially the Saab 2000.
I support the right to arm bears
 
KingGeo3
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:50 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Sat Oct 18, 2003 2:36 am

One of the best flights that I have ever flown on was a United Express J41 PIT-IAD. It was the smoothest flight I have ever been on and the take off performance is impressive. The only drawback is no overhead bins.
Nobody respects me . . . :(
 
MD11Lover
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2003 4:40 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Sat Oct 18, 2003 4:55 am

Hi Guys! I just joined Anet since i ve been reading your messages and i really like the discussions that go on here, and now, would like to take part in them. In response to the topic of this particular discussion I love flying both turboprop and jet. I ve been flying all my life and have flown in turboprops many times. I would have to say my favourite time was when i flew a Let-410 in Honduras. The feel of flying low, and experiencing every bank and pitch to the fullest was amazing. Landing on a cross wind was also great. However, it does get scary during weather. Anyone flown a Let before? ATR 42 is my second favourite.

Regards.

Cesar
 
777MAS
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 7:10 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Sat Oct 18, 2003 2:25 pm

I've heard that everyone on board gets sick all the time, but was wondering how true is that. One of the last times I flew, I had a choice of booking a jet flight, or a turboprop.

I've flown on MH's Fokker F50s many times, and also a few times on the DH Twin Otter - never got sick once. Perhaps those who got sick flew on really small ones or old types that didn't have a pressurised cabin - the lower pressure might cause air sickness.....

While on this topic, in my part of the world, there's definitely quite a bit of prejudice against turboprops. Sometimes, when I'm making a booking thru MH's call centre, the staff at the other end of the line might helpfully point out that "it's a Fokker flight", as though to warn me in advance lest I complain later on. Why???!! Don't they know, or are they unable to accept, that their own company is operating a great plane like the Fokker 27/50?

 
CanadianNorth
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2002 11:41 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Sat Oct 18, 2003 2:39 pm

Ill take a turboprop over an RJ any day. I fly on the Dash-8 ussually 2 or 3 times a year and i love it, only when yer my height for the love of god mind the doorway/wing thingyer, yes they can hurt, trust me. But yes go for the turboprop!

CanadianNorth
What could possibly go wrong?
 
milesrich
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 2:46 am

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:43 pm

I never flew in a Britannia, or Canadair CL-44, or Vanguard, but the Electra was one heck of a comfortable airplane to fly in. Quiet fast, SNA-SFO in about 60 minutes, lots of room, especially in the days of 2-2 first class seating, the lo0nge in the back, and not too bad in turbulent weather, although going in and out of TVL could be pretty bouncy. Today's lightweight smaller turboprops are so-so. Everything is relative, compared to the DC-6, the Viscount was a great airplane. The F-27, in all its variants, was never one of my favorites, nor was the CV-580. All twin engine turboprops that operate on shorter segments are fine as long as the weather cooperates, but get a little turbulence, and none of them are particular fun. The worst airplanes to ride in, the SH-330 or 360, especially on a hot summer day in broken clouds. I will never forget an Air North Flight from ALB to ROC. 80 minutes of pure hell.
 
Mr_Planeman
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Turboprop Vs. Jet

Tue Oct 21, 2003 5:00 pm

I have been very fortunate and had the opportunity to sit in the cockpit on both the Dash 8-100 and the CRJ-700. The comfort in the cabin of those two aircraft is very good, and air-sickness must be a thing of the past. The ride on the Dash 8 was a really challenging one for the pilots, and watching the first officer work on the crosswind approach was a great experience. The CRJ flight was an ordinary flight (although two hours late) and the ILS approach for 25R at EDDF did not seem to be much of a challenge to the pilots. Starting flight training next year and with hopes of becoming a commercial pilot, I would prefer the Dash 8, mainly because of the opportunity to try my skills in rough conditions. Gives me the feeling of actually flying the aircraft.

Martin Aanestad

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A330NZ, aircountry, AR385, B77L, Baidu [Spider], BirdBrain, DeltaRules, flydia, flying505, Google Adsense [Bot], HAWKXP, justplanesmart, KTPAFlyer, LY777, MarcoPoloWorld, mh124, n562wn, powercube, qf15, QuarkFly, SAAFNAV, United1, unitedchicago, Viscount724 and 275 guests