Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
OccupiedLav
Topic Author
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 8:54 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:21 pm

DocLightning wrote:
And the ASE-DEN route is mostly Q400s.


Unfortunately, United and its subsidiaries no longer operates any turboprops. ASE-DEN has been all RJ for a few years.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2122
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:22 pm

luckyone wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Partially it is speed. If flying, why not save time? The other is fear of propellers. I know numerous people, not a majority, but enough, who dislike turboprops enough they will drive instead of flying.

Another aspect is the slow time in airports now. In the US, routes below 250nm are rare now. Between all the added delays, the fraction of short haul flying (<250nm) has plummeted. That is where turboprops thrive.
...

What turboprop market there is will be met by 9 seaters that do not require the hours.

Lightsaber


A great real example is Horizon Air, the Alaska regional, flying from SEA to Spokane, WA. $84 ea way 1 hr 5 min on Q400 for 284 mile by driving distance, expected by google to take 4.5 hours.

To fly I drive 1h10 min to airport, 20 min to park car, 1.5 hours at airport. Fly 1h5. At Spokane 1 hr in arrival and car rental. 1 hour drive to actual site. 6h10 min to get to destination.

To Drive 5h8 from home to Spokane Airport 329 miles, still 1 hour to site for same travel time. No plane fare, no $30/day parking at SEA, no car rental. Same time. I can pick the time I leave to match the appointment, possibly drive the night before and stay near the destination. Flying would need to save me at least 2 hours before I would consider it.

Just out of curiosity, does that require a ferry ride or do you go around via the Narrows?


I live on the Hood Canal west of Bremerton. I'll go to the Bremerton ferry dock if I am walking on, say for a ball game, or meeting downtown. I'll take the Edmonds ferry if going north to Everett or going to Vancouver. But it is faster and cheaper to drive over the Narrows Bridge (yes where Galloping Girdie fell) for anything south or east of downtown Seattle. The airport is always a drive around. I-90 going over the pass also always a drive around. Rush hour / road reports can change this. I-5 in Tacoma can have hour+ backups due to construction.
 
JettNC
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2018 9:20 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:34 pm

There was also concerns, beginning years ago, after several icing related accidents, especially in the northern latitudes. Many turboprops used rubber deicing boots for ice protection, where most jets used engine bleed air from the high or low stage compressor sections for more effective aircraft anti-icing.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8252
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:02 pm

N766UA wrote:
Because they suck for passengers. Even the Q400, the epitome of the modern, "quiet" turboprop, is far noisier and exhibits far more vibration than an RJ. They also sit down in the weather where the ride is rougher AND take longer to get you where you're going!


Bombardier's marketing team deserved a payrise for their success in perpetrating this talking point.

The ATR-72-600 is quieter than the Q400 and has notably less vibration.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1763
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:13 pm

JettNC wrote:
There was also concerns, beginning years ago, after several icing related accidents, especially in the northern latitudes. Many turboprops used rubber deicing boots for ice protection, where most jets used engine bleed air from the high or low stage compressor sections for more effective aircraft anti-icing.

I was told that some smaller business jets had their boots painted silver to not show their "inferior" technology. Appearance is important to passengers!
 
WeatherPilot
Posts: 555
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 1:51 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:22 pm

I think the Colgan Air 3407 crash outside Buffalo is what sealed the fate of the turboprop in the US. After that crash people’s perceptions of turboprops changed. The crash had nothing to do with it being a prop plane but it did hurt the image of them with people that don’t know any better.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:24 pm

Over the years I have taken many dozens of Dash-8 flights and they all were slow, unable to climb above bad weather, vibrated like crazy, overhead bins rattling and cabin noise was very high. On a route from LGA to ROA, I took a Dash and all of the above was present on that flight. Sometime later, I took a CRJ-200 on the same route, night and day difference. Why some get sentimental about props is beyond me. It's a natural progression of improved design, no more turbo jet engines but now fan jets. Even the Q400 is based on an old dated design and they all use inflatable leading edge boots that are a constant source of trouble. More recently I flew on an E-175 from HVN to PHL, light years better than the Dash's that used to ply the route. RJ's are here to stay and airlines and passengers want them, ergo no US based major carriers have props on order.
 
dtremit
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:08 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 12:22 am

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
MSP-FAR is often serviced by A320-321s. I even saw a 757-200 on the F concourse destined for Fargo.

As for props. My guess would be passenger preference for why they were replaced. On shorter routes they are fine and more efficient. But they are also loud.


For MSP-FAR on the 757’s and A320’s, Fargo is a close (or relatively close) place to RON a large aircraft if they’re trying to save room at MSP. Same reason for DL operating 737-900’s and sometimes 757’s on the GRR-DTW route.


I think you're hitting on another explanation -- the multiple hub airline model is uniquely popular in the US. A huge proportion of the very short flights in the US (like MSP-FAR) are now from a carrier's nearby hub airport. DL serves FAR from MSP, but not from DTW, as an example. They can use less efficient planes on these routes because they often fill in gaps in the schedule that would otherwise leave the aircraft sitting at the airport between banks.

MIflyer12 wrote:
Can you point to a fuel burn comparison (500 sm stage length?) of a 70-76-seat 2-class RJ (say a CR9 or E75) with a relevant prop? 50-seaters have little future in the U.S. market.


On a 300 nm stage, per 100 seat-kilometers, a CRJ-200 burns 5.43L of fuel, a CRJ-900 burns 5.25L, and a ERJ-145 burns 4.37L. That compares with 3.46L for a Q400, and 2.53L for an ATR-72 -- but 4.29L for a S340 and 4.76L for a Do328. The EMB 120 is a little better at 3.82L in that small class. Couldn't track down E175 numbers for that stage length.

You're right about 50 seaters not having a future, but from a historical perspective, they're what killed off props in the US. It's worth noting that the turboprops actually replaced by those regional jets in the US were those smaller, older, less efficient ones, in most cases. The ERJ-145 doesn't look so bad up against a S340, and most of the routes operated by the S340 wouldn't support a plane as big as an ATR-72 or Q400. If half the larger plane is empty, the efficiency gains go out the window.

And on a shorter flight, the excess of a CRJ-200 isn't really that large in absolute terms. On that 300nm stage, the gap between the most efficient and least efficient planes is ~$5/passenger on a full flight. Sell one or two seats to someone who hates props, and you make up the difference.
 
baje427
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 12:34 am

airlineworker wrote:
Over the years I have taken many dozens of Dash-8 flights and they all were slow, unable to climb above bad weather, vibrated like crazy, overhead bins rattling and cabin noise was very high. On a route from LGA to ROA, I took a Dash and all of the above was present on that flight. Sometime later, I took a CRJ-200 on the same route, night and day difference. Why some get sentimental about props is beyond me. It's a natural progression of improved design, no more turbo jet engines but now fan jets. Even the Q400 is based on an old dated design and they all use inflatable leading edge boots that are a constant source of trouble. More recently I flew on an E-175 from HVN to PHL, light years better than the Dash's that used to ply the route. RJ's are here to stay and airlines and passengers want them, ergo no US based major carriers have props on order.

To be fair Piedmont never operated newer versions of the Dash 8, while the weather issue remains when AVNS is working the Q series of the Dash 8 is a nice ride.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2052
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 12:42 am

From earlier today on FR24 (UTC time adjusted to yield middle of day in each case)
Europe incl Mediterranean/N Africa; 60+ ATR72s in the air
Asia; 110+ ATR72s airborne
Australia/NZ; 30+ ATR72
Central & South America; 35+ ATR72
North America......NONE!

I should add that in the USA whilst it is rare to find any ATR72 in daylight, you can find maybe up to six airborne simultaneously if you search for Fedex freighters skulking around under cover of darkness. I guess they daren't allow them out in daylight in case somebody sees one. :roll:

That pretty much tells you all you need to know.

I know there are around a dozen such aircraft in existence, but when I searched for "Fedex ATR72" on the database, it only came back with one photo.
Here it is, escaped from it's lair and bathed in glorious sunshine. Far, far away, in Brazil. :rotfl:

Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
AntonioMartin
Posts: 596
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:58 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 12:58 am

We prefer jets...I myself long for the days when PHX-TUS was on:Delta, America West, USAir and even TWA (I think Northwest and Eastern were even on the route as well) on Boeing 727, 737 and IIRC a 757 too!
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7577
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 1:04 am

peterinlisbon wrote:
Where I have seen turboprops have a lot of success is in countries where the distances are short but the roads are bad. For example, Costa Rica is a small country but it is very mountainous and it can take 8 hours to go 200km. So the turboprops flying to small airstrips can offer an alternative to those that can afford it. Obviously in the US, you could just drive 200km in an hour and a half so it's no contest. Another place where turboprops are popular is for services between small islands.


What you're really talking about is markets that lack competition, so monopoly operators can force props on the public. (Air Canada, I'm mocking you.) The smallest of the largest NINE U.S. passenger operators has over 90 mainline aircraft. Of those nine, just one (AS) has props - or contracts with prop operators. AS/QX used to have a pretty good lock on short-haul in the Pacific Northwest, and a pretty sizable fleet of Q400s. The DL brought 2-class RJs to SEA and AS scrambled to get E75s and cut the Q400 fleet. Markets (airport pairs) offering choice don't have consumers choosing props.
 
hz747300
Posts: 2412
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 1:31 am

CPHFF wrote:
This subject pops up about once a year. There are numerous post on A-net. Use the search function. It works 75% of the time


This!

I think that there are locations where props are fine, like the Pacific Northwest. Passenger preference is probably the driver. But after watching that guy do loops and rolls in The Sound, I would state that any notion that props are less strong than a jet are all gone from my mind. Certainly, in general aviation props are king!
Keep on truckin'...
 
User avatar
vhqpa
Posts: 1692
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:21 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:09 am

I think the US carriers are partly responsible for the aversion to props in the US. During the 90s they were all buying 50 seat RJs like no tomorrow, making it a marketing point that these jets were superior to "outdated" props. All of sudden it was uncompetitive to run relatively new Dash 8/ATR props when the competition flew 50 seat RJs. It didn't help that there were a few high profile accidents involving props at the time, but at the same time there were also quite few accidents with jets which seemed to get overlooked.
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
 
airlineworker
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:42 am

vhqpa wrote:
I think the US carriers are partly responsible for the aversion to props in the US. During the 90s they were all buying 50 seat RJs like no tomorrow, making it a marketing point that these jets were superior to "outdated" props. All of sudden it was uncompetitive to run relatively new Dash 8/ATR props when the competition flew 50 seat RJs. It didn't help that there were a few high profile accidents involving props at the time, but at the same time there were also quite few accidents with jets which seemed to get overlooked.


The customers preferred jets and a past study found when jets replaced props, ridership went up 20%. No major airline in the states is commiting to props and the newer RJ's are better of short runways, more fuel efficient and many offer a first class cabin. I've ridden both and hands down the jets are a better experience. The early 50 seaters are slowly being phased out and with the E series, CRJ-700 and 900's along with the Mitsubishi RJ's coming on line, the prop is a thing of the past. No OEM is willing to commit to a clean sheet prop as airlines have shown no interest.
 
User avatar
usdcaguy
Posts: 1502
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 12:41 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:05 am

jworks158 wrote:
I think the Cessna Sky Courier will be an interesting add to this market.

https://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/skycourier


Carriers will have to wait until Fedex starts operating them before they can see how well they do mechanically. The B-1900, the other 19-seater, is a great plane for certain markets, but keeping them running has often been an issue, and an EAS subsidy is almost always required where they make sense. In those markets, a lot of carriers have a hard time keeping the planes full, either through commercial/mechanical negligence or through a pure lack of demand. I do like the Sky Courier and hope it works, but we have yet to see a system whereby pilots, maintenance and ground crew can be paid well enough by carriers who fly 19-seaters. It seems that once you get below the 50 or 70-seater threshold, the economics of most planes are insufficient to meet the level of profitability investors expect these days.
 
OB1504
Posts: 3912
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:04 am

WeatherPilot wrote:
I think the Colgan Air 3407 crash outside Buffalo is what sealed the fate of the turboprop in the US. After that crash people’s perceptions of turboprops changed. The crash had nothing to do with it being a prop plane but it did hurt the image of them with people that don’t know any better.


Turboprops were dead long before then thanks to numerous crashes in the 1990s and early 2000s (Air Midwest 5481, American Eagle 4184, ASA 529, ASA 2311, Comair 3272... the list goes on and on) and the advent of the regional jet.
 
Pinto
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:30 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:12 am

A major part is that they aren't flexible. A CRJ, whilennot as effective, can do most Turboprop jobs better. The UA CRJ family can cover routes from 50-76 people up to 1300 miles. This all can be done without much extra cost. However by adding the Dash 8 then you have to factor in the cost of a new fleet type and planning routes where they could be effective. It just doesnt have the bang for the buck to be effective st the scale needed by US carries.
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 808
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 8:01 am

Cause once again, a certain region of the World; screwed things up for the rest of the world, just like this region did on 9/11.

As a result a truly advanced turboprop never the Embraer CBA 123 Vector never got the chance to enter service.

Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 808
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 8:02 am

KlimaBXsst wrote:
Cause once again, a certain region of the World; screwed things up for the rest of the world, just like this region did on 9/11.

As a result a truly advanced turboprop the Embraer CBA 123 Vector never got the chance to enter service.

Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
Max Q
Posts: 8171
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 8:15 am

KlimaBXsst wrote:
Cause once again, a certain region of the World; screwed things up for the rest of the world, just like this region did on 9/11.

As a result a truly advanced turboprop never the Embraer CBA 123 Vector never got the chance to enter service.




What a great looking aircraft that was, Shame it didn’t work out


As I said in the thread I started recently a big part of the problem with turboprops is the name, it implies a turbocharged piston engine


Most people see a propeller and assume it’s the same propulsion method as a DC3


First thing that needs to go is this dumb name and ‘Jet’ should be the first three letters in the new one


‘Jet prop’ has a nice ring to it, it’s technically accurate, underlies turbine reliability, performance, safety and just sounds good


Most of us on this site know it’s semantics but the general public doesn’t and good marketing can often make all the difference
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
airlineworker
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:38 am

Max Q wrote:
KlimaBXsst wrote:
Cause once again, a certain region of the World; screwed things up for the rest of the world, just like this region did on 9/11.

As a result a truly advanced turboprop never the Embraer CBA 123 Vector never got the chance to enter service.




What a great looking aircraft that was, Shame it didn’t work out


As I said in the thread I started recently a big part of the problem with turboprops is the name, it implies a turbocharged piston engine


Most people see a propeller and assume it’s the same propulsion method as a DC3


First thing that needs to go is this dumb name and ‘Jet’ should be the first three letters in the new one


‘Jet prop’ has a nice ring to it, it’s technically accurate, underlies turbine reliability, performance, safety and just sounds good


Most of us on this site know it’s semantics but the general public doesn’t and good marketing can often make all the difference


Quote, "What a great looking aircraft that was, Shame it didn’t work out." Looks don't matter to airlines or flyers, prop is a prop and calling it something else does not matter, it will never reach the desired qualities of the RJ's. They are slower, noisier, have less range and are unable to climb above bad weather. Going backwards is not a wise move. All research is going into improving the jet engine and great strides have been made in fuel efficiency, less noise and passenger acceptance.
Airlines don't live in the past and get nostalgic over old designs, if they did the Convair 580, Lockheed Electra,etc would still be in the fleets of the majors.
 
peterinlisbon
Posts: 1760
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:37 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:35 pm

Is it really true that passengers hate turboprops? I know they can be noisy on short trips they should supposedly offer the same kind of service at a lower cost. Most passengers just go for the lowest price and don't pay any attention to the aircraft type. However, what I've seen personally in terms of ticket prices is that it tends to be more expensive to fly on a turboprop than on a jet.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1609
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:45 pm

Agree with Max Q. Many passengers see a DHC-8 and think nothing of it. Others see a DC-3 but more modern. The fact that you have significant cabin vibration, turbulence due to lower altitudes, and flight attendants running around and asking people to move for sake of weight and balance don't help matters. It makes passengers think the pilot is wearing a bomber jacket, goggles and a scarf.

Last trip I ever took on a prop was CLT-AVL on a Q300. I enjoyed the flight but you could see the grimaces on the faces of others when the engines spooled up and you could hear the plastic interior window pane and overheads buzz like a swarm of bees.
 
smokeybandit
Posts: 1359
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:24 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:08 pm

Most people have no clue what plane they are flying on
 
dtremit
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:08 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:09 pm

usdcaguy wrote:
The B-1900, the other 19-seater, is a great plane for certain markets, but keeping them running has often been an issue, and an EAS subsidy is almost always required where they make sense. In those markets, a lot of carriers have a hard time keeping the planes full, either through commercial/mechanical negligence or through a pure lack of demand. I do like the Sky Courier and hope it works, but we have yet to see a system whereby pilots, maintenance and ground crew can be paid well enough by carriers who fly 19-seaters. It seems that once you get below the 50 or 70-seater threshold, the economics of most planes are insufficient to meet the level of profitability investors expect these days.


It's interesting in that context that the only other "clean sheet" commercial passenger prop is a piston plane -- the Tecnam P2012 Traveler being built for Cape Air. Smaller, obviously (9 passengers vs 19) but half the cost of the Sky Courier. For an EAS route that smaller size may make way more sense.
 
dtremit
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:08 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:12 pm

washingtonflyer wrote:
Last trip I ever took on a prop was CLT-AVL on a Q300. I enjoyed the flight but you could see the grimaces on the faces of others when the engines spooled up and you could hear the plastic interior window pane and overheads buzz like a swarm of bees.


In recent E190 flights I've heard both complaints about the "tiny plane" and relief about being on a "big plane." :roll:
 
airlineworker
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:28 pm

smokeybandit wrote:
Most people have no clue what plane they are flying on


They can tell a prop from a jet on the ground and even more so in the air.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10080
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:32 pm

Aren't turboprops significantly more impacted by adverse weather too?
I just remember a recent trip I took on a Westjet/Encore Q400 that was delayed 6 hours because of a little snow while everyone else was flying.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4232
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:02 pm

DocLightning wrote:
ScottB wrote:
The slower speed of turboprops makes them relatively unsuitable for all but the shortest routes, and those flights have become far less common as roads have been improved/expanded, speed limits have been raised, and air travel has been made more inconvenient by increased security theater at the airport.


Not only that, but in the United States, the population tends to be concentrated in the vicinity of urban centers on the large scale, while on the small scale, the population is spread out more (most stand-alone houses have yards that surround them). By contrast, in Europe, small and medium-sized towns are scattered all over the land, but within those towns, people live very close to each-other. This means that a greater proportion of Americans have cars and that the radius served by a major airport in the US might be quite a bit larger than in Europe.

But turboprops still get used here. I flew one BZN-SEA, for example. I flew one PDX-SFO. And the ASE-DEN route is mostly Q400s.


Good points however I would like to point out that ASE-DEN is CR7’s. United doesn’t have any more Q400’s.
 
domokun
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:46 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:18 pm

IMHO, I don't mind the Q400 when I fly SEA-YVR but I do mind when I fly SAN-SEA. If suspect segment length is a big factor from the PoV of most customers.
 
OccupiedLav
Topic Author
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 8:54 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:54 pm

airbazar wrote:
Aren't turboprops significantly more impacted by adverse weather too?
I just remember a recent trip I took on a Westjet/Encore Q400 that was delayed 6 hours because of a little snow while everyone else was flying.


Yes. As others have mentioned, turboprops have to fly at lower altitudes than jets, so they can't get out of a lot of weather. Also, others have mentioned that the deicing systems on Q400 often run into problems as they are not the same technology as those on the jets. Concerns about the deicing systems may have been the reason your flight got delayed, but 6 hours is a lot.
 
OccupiedLav
Topic Author
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 8:54 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 8:08 pm

domokun wrote:
IMHO, I don't mind the Q400 when I fly SEA-YVR but I do mind when I fly SAN-SEA. If suspect segment length is a big factor from the PoV of most customers.


Was the noise level and vibration on the Q400 the reason you did not enjoy the longer flights or was it just that it was a small aircraft? Apparently the Q stands for quiet and the aircraft has noise cancelling technology, but I am skeptical it makes any difference.
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2858
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 8:15 pm

Most routes are just too long in the US for props.
 
dakota558
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 6:03 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 8:35 pm

I see a lot of posts here talking about the de/anti-icing capabilities of turboprops. Can't speak for the ATR as I have little knowledge of it, but the Dash 8 (100 to 400 series) does not have any issues flying in icing conditions compared to a jet. I fly the Dash 8 100/200/300 in the northern part of Norway (and we can have winter conditions up 9 months a year), and I've never had any issues with icing to date. In fact, I find the boots to be quite effective in removing ice.
 
User avatar
kjeld0d
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:21 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:12 pm

OccupiedLav wrote:
There have been a few topics discussing the turboprop market and usage in the U.S.


Yes, just a few.... The real question is, what made the 763 more successful than the 764?
 
iberiadc852
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 8:23 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:16 pm

Much less density than EU, for example --> more routes where distance/flight duration overcome turboprop economics.
variety is the spice of life; that's what made the "old times" so good
 
Bhoy
Posts: 524
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:50 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:32 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
From earlier today on FR24 (UTC time adjusted to yield middle of day in each case)
Europe incl Mediterranean/N Africa; 60+ ATR72s in the air
Asia; 110+ ATR72s airborne
Australia/NZ; 30+ ATR72
Central & South America; 35+ ATR72
North America......NONE!

I should add that in the USA whilst it is rare to find any ATR72 in daylight, you can find maybe up to six airborne simultaneously if you search for Fedex freighters skulking around under cover of darkness. I guess they daren't allow them out in daylight in case somebody sees one. :roll:

That pretty much tells you all you need to know.

I know there are around a dozen such aircraft in existence, but when I searched for "Fedex ATR72" on the database, it only came back with one photo.
Here it is, escaped from it's lair and bathed in glorious sunshine. Far, far away, in Brazil. :rotfl:


They're in the database, just listed as FedEx Feeder rather than FedEx... here's all the pictures of ATRs (42 and 72) operating for FedEx Feeder taken in the United States:

https://www.airliners.net/search?aircra ... lay=detail
 
airlineworker
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:47 pm

dakota558 wrote:
I see a lot of posts here talking about the de/anti-icing capabilities of turboprops. Can't speak for the ATR as I have little knowledge of it, but the Dash 8 (100 to 400 series) does not have any issues flying in icing conditions compared to a jet. I fly the Dash 8 100/200/300 in the northern part of Norway (and we can have winter conditions up 9 months a year), and I've never had any issues with icing to date. In fact, I find the boots to be quite effective in removing ice.


I worked for years around the Dash-8-100, 200's and 300,s and the boots were always an issue, either being patched or complete boot replacement. The boot shop was always busy.
 
rigo
Posts: 186
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:52 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:20 am

baje427 wrote:
Passenger preference props were for a long time marketed as old technology and unsafe. Several US were early adopters of regional jets .Additionally regional jets have become more efficient and are more flexible operationally than props.


I've noticed that too ans not just in the US: a lot of people apparently believe that propeller aircraft are less safe than jets. Is there any basis whatsoever for that idea?
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14393
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:10 am

iberiadc852 wrote:
Much less density than EU, for example --> more routes where distance/flight duration overcome turboprop economics.


Agreed, but this is only an issue because of regional consolidation in the States. All three US legacies could easily use a fleet of 40 or 50 AT7/DH4 on sub-400 mile routes in and out of east coast hubs. But carriers/fleets of that size are all but gone.

One other issue that deserves some thought is runway capacity; though better than in the past, props do present some approach speed and spacing challenges vis a vis jets, especially large jets. I think most CLT controllers would tell you that the withdrawal of the EN DH1s and DH3s has made their life significantly easier.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21801
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:14 am

jetmatt777 wrote:
Good points however I would like to point out that ASE-DEN is CR7’s. United doesn’t have any more Q400’s.


Three years ago when I went to my niece's high school graduation it was Q400s. Got to see the deicing boots in action, which was pretty neat.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
dakota558
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 6:03 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:28 am

airlineworker wrote:
dakota558 wrote:
I see a lot of posts here talking about the de/anti-icing capabilities of turboprops. Can't speak for the ATR as I have little knowledge of it, but the Dash 8 (100 to 400 series) does not have any issues flying in icing conditions compared to a jet. I fly the Dash 8 100/200/300 in the northern part of Norway (and we can have winter conditions up 9 months a year), and I've never had any issues with icing to date. In fact, I find the boots to be quite effective in removing ice.


I worked for years around the Dash-8-100, 200's and 300,s and the boots were always an issue, either being patched or complete boot replacement. The boot shop was always busy.


You avoid at lot if issues with the boots if you avoid using them if it's too cold. It will be mostly at temperatures above -10c that you would really need the boots in either case. Also running them on the ground before departure will in most cases prevent them from being stuck in the air. To this date I have not had any issues with the boots, but it does happen from time to time that they need replacing, as most other parts of the aircraft.
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:28 pm

Guess that’s why the Q400 is killing the ATR in sales... no wait, actually it’s not.

sargester wrote:
They are slow... time is money... jets are fast... happy business people
 
User avatar
cougar15
Posts: 1439
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 6:10 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:31 pm

peterinlisbon wrote:
Where I have seen turboprops have a lot of success is in countries where the distances are short but the roads are bad. For example, Costa Rica is a small country but it is very mountainous and it can take 8 hours to go 200km. So the turboprops flying to small airstrips can offer an alternative to those that can afford it. Obviously in the US, you could just drive 200km in an hour and a half so it's no contest. Another place where turboprops are popular is for services between small islands.


… and in countries where the environmental impact/green footprint has much higher value than the good old US of A, but I guess that road would lead us to the Non-Av Forum! Enviromentaly friendly Europeans don't mind turboprops on short sectors!
some you lose, others you can´t win!
 
TheOldDude
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 1:17 pm

Rather than asking why turboprops aren't popular in the US we should ask what needs to change before they become popular.

As an example of a change that altered aviation think about the time many on this site thought the race to the bottom was here to stay. Yet conditions changed and the carriers that are improving the passenger experience the most are best rewarded in the marketplace. Even the venerable CRJ was updated to the CRJ-550.

Similarly, conditions can change in ways to favor turboprops. Some of the ways include (1) technologies to reduce vibration and noise, (2) increased importance of lower cost (e.g. slower economy), (3) pilot surplus reprise (markets tend to flow from shortage to surplus and back again). (Add on to the list you feel necessary)

In addition to conditions, some passengers can be sold on turboprop flights. I'm not speaking of those who are absolutely against props, but those who are (1) equivocal in their objection and unsure of technologies, (2) value environmental friendliness over other factors, (3) are very price sensitive, 4) are not time sensitive to the point where some additional time is a non-starter, and/or (5) are avgeeks. (feel free to add on to this list)

US consumers don't want props now because of the confluence of conditions and a lack of selling. Both can change. I'm not ready to write-off turboprops just yet. Stranger market turns have occurred.
 
SaschaYHZ
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 1:21 pm

I don't quite get the hate. I fly turboprops here on the east coast of Canada fairly often (and occasionally between YTZ-YUL) mainly on 1900s and Q400s, and I really don't find them all that uncomfortable or noisy. (ok, maybe the Beech's can be somewhat uncomfortable)
 
citationjet
Posts: 2548
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 1:28 pm

United787 wrote:
I would put a lot of it on AA 4184, the 25th anniversary which is coming up in two days on Halloween. I remember the night clearly because I was living in Champaign, IL at the time and we tried trick or treating in the same storm, it was a horrible night.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eagle_Flight_4184
The airlines reaction to the crash, particularly AA, sending their ATRs to Puerto Rico and Miami etc, only reinforced the idea that the turboprops were unsafe. At that moment, I think it was embedded into the minds of Americans that Turboprops were unsafe, deserved or not.


AA was putting turboprops on many routes in that time period. Here is an LA Times article from 1993 showing the public's thoughts on turboprops. This was a year before the AA ATR crash on October 31, 1994 (25 years ago today).
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-03-12-fi-10120-story.html
Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773,788.
 
sargester
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:29 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:22 pm

Armodeen wrote:
Guess that’s why the Q400 is killing the ATR in sales... no wait, actually it’s not.

sargester wrote:
They are slow... time is money... jets are fast... happy business people


I've flown porter from EWR to YTZ and AA from JFK to YYZ, both were morning departures and the jet is probably like 10-20minutes faster in the amount of time in the air (under an hour) the flight time on porter which as a whole is a great airline was about an hour and 10 compared to like a 50ish minute flight on AA
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14393
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Why are turboprops so unpopular in the US?

Thu Oct 31, 2019 7:34 pm

sargester wrote:
Armodeen wrote:
Guess that’s why the Q400 is killing the ATR in sales... no wait, actually it’s not.

sargester wrote:
They are slow... time is money... jets are fast... happy business people


I've flown porter from EWR to YTZ and AA from JFK to YYZ, both were morning departures and the jet is probably like 10-20minutes faster in the amount of time in the air (under an hour) the flight time on porter which as a whole is a great airline was about an hour and 10 compared to like a 50ish minute flight on AA


Of course, you can go wheels down to landside at YTZ in 20 minutes without breaking a sweat. Try that at Pearson.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos