Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Thu Mar 18, 2021 8:37 am

In general for aerodynamic purposes it does not make a real difference if you have a high or low wing, I could almost say there is no difference in fuel burn. What changes is roll stability, low speed manoeuvrability and take-off and landing characteristics (the high wing is better in this area). Also you can have the fuselage way closer to the ground with a high wing for easier access to the cabin. On the other side a low wing also helps with access to the engines and wing.

So I guess EMB is not interested in an aircraft with the capability for unpaved runways, particular good STOL capabilities and increased low speed manoeuvrability for a regional aircraft.

I think ATR would also not go that way again but back when the first ATR was designed, there were still a lot of "difficult" airports around that needed service and the market demanded certain capabilities.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:52 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
So I guess EMB is not interested in an aircraft with the capability for unpaved runways, particular good STOL capabilities and increased low speed manoeuvrability for a regional aircraft.


I do not believe that the intention is a project aimed at unpaved tracks and STOL characteristics ...

Preliminary details:

- cabin comfort similar to EJets;
- commercial operation in 2027;
- range of 80 to 100 passengers;
- low wing according to the new regulations for crashworthiness standards;
- T-tail.
Last edited by EMBSPBR on Thu Mar 18, 2021 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
docmtl
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:04 pm

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:59 pm

docmtl wrote:
Could it be possible that this new TP3 design is an "engine-flexible flying platform" in layman's words?

Older planes could be fitted with radials or in-line engines on their wings...

What I mean by this is: Will Embraer design and deliver a conventional-engine TP3 that will fly on "regular" turboprop engines as a launch design while the company validates a hybrid STOUT design and adopt the concept to the TP3 later on ?

docmtl


I found this note in the recent article about Embraer and Boeing projects, I guess it answers my previous question about engine versatility for the TP3.

"Notably, the aircraft initially will be a purely conventional design targeting a 15-20% improvement in fuel burn per seat compared to existing aircraft, but Embraer wants to design it in such a way that a hybrid element can be added in the future. New technologies could be incorporated incrementally into the new turboprop, and it could be a cost-efficient platform for a next-generation regional aircraft, taking fuller advantage of new propulsion opportunities in the 2030s. But Silva e Souza believes “it is going to take a long time for technically and economically viable options” to materialize."

Source:

https://aviationweek.com/forum/aerospac ... craft-soon

docmtl
 
Nean1
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Thu Mar 18, 2021 4:32 pm

edu2703 wrote:
AeroIN revealed a new illustration of the concept that Embraer is working on. Now being shown from the front.

Image

https://www.aeroin.net/embraer-revela-mais-detalhes-de-sua-futura-aeronave-turboelice/?amp


The slim and aerodynamic profile, as well as the power magnitude of the turboprops under discussion, suggests that this will be an aircraft with very high cruising speed.

Full FBY, state-of-the-art engines and the comfort of a modern regional jet. Will it meet the stringent technological requirements of our A.net colleagues?
 
CowAnon
Posts: 196
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:03 am

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Thu Mar 18, 2021 8:20 pm

edu2703 wrote:
Image

How much of a penalty results from mounting the engines to the top part of the wing, as opposed to the normal location underneath the wing?
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:13 am

why T-tail?
 
LucaDiMontanari
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:37 am

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 10:47 am

CowAnon wrote:
How much of a penalty results from mounting the engines to the top part of the wing, as opposed to the normal location underneath the wing?


Is this really a question? To be honest, you asked it initially wrong. Correct would be: How much of a penalty would results from mounting the engines to the normal location underneath the wing? Answer: look at your shredded propeller blades. There might be a slight aerodynamic benefit in cruise, but there are some inevitable limitations otherwise, that forbids such an arrangement. Imagine how high and thus heavy your landing gears would need to be, to get sufficient ground clearance - many greetings from the Tu-114 and its 10ft nose gear strut.

It might work with smaller engines, but then you need four of them, building essentially a modern Vickers Viscount. While I and many others here would totally like that, the airline beancounters won't. :hissyfit:
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 11:47 am

Armadillo1 wrote:
why T-tail?


Because the exhaust air from the engines will ruin the flow over the stabilizer in normal design. The engines will be mounted on top of the wings directly in front of the stab if it is not a T-Tail design.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:08 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
why T-tail?


Because the exhaust air from the engines will ruin the flow over the stabilizer in normal design. The engines will be mounted on top of the wings directly in front of the stab if it is not a T-Tail design.

Image
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:12 pm

also, i cant see a reason for such big wing fairing
MLG can be placed behind engines like in old planes or Dash8.
not so big Mach for area rule

is there proof its a real emb proposal?
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:40 pm

Armadillo1 wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
why T-tail?


Because the exhaust air from the engines will ruin the flow over the stabilizer in normal design. The engines will be mounted on top of the wings directly in front of the stab if it is not a T-Tail design.

Image


I never said it is not possible but if you want an efficient design you want as less drag as possible and having turbulent flow from the engines next or in worst case right on to the stabilizer will induce a lot of drag.

It's not like a normal configuration will be unstable just inefficient compared to a T-Tail.
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 3321
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 3:54 pm

I understand what their strategy seems to be. Build a next gen turboprop borrowing as much R&D from the E2 as possible to speed up development time and cut costs and get it in service before the projected ATR replacement is built sometime in the mid 2030's. With a lot of early build regional planes expected to be withdrawn from service by the end of the decade, there is a large market for a replacement, especially if it can deliver on its promises of 10 to 15% better fuel efficiency. My concern is that they could repeat the mistake of the Dash 8-400, by building a complex high performance turboprop with high operating costs that ultimately gets shunned in favor of a simpler, slower rival that is cheaper to operate. Not to mention that US regionals seem to refer jets to props. There is a large element of risk in Embraers's plan.
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:29 pm

I wonder if Embraer should partner with a different American company - Textron. They are nimble and turn out some pretty robust aircraft including more turboprops than anyone else.

I also offer that if the Biden Administration implements a fuel tax , turbo prop economics suddenly get better.
    300 319 320 321 707 717 720 727 72S 737 73S 734 735 73G 738 739 747 757 762 ARJ B11 C212 CRJ CR2 CR7 CR9 CV5 D8S DC9 D9S D94 D95 D10 DH8 DTO EMB EM2 E135 E145 E190 FH7 F28 F100 FTRIMTR HRN L10 L15 M80 M90 SF3 SWM YS11
     
    CowAnon
    Posts: 196
    Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:03 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:29 pm

    LucaDiMontanari wrote:
    CowAnon wrote:
    How much of a penalty results from mounting the engines to the top part of the wing, as opposed to the normal location underneath the wing?


    Is this really a question? To be honest, you asked it initially wrong. Correct would be: How much of a penalty would results from mounting the engines to the normal location underneath the wing? Answer: look at your shredded propeller blades. There might be a slight aerodynamic benefit in cruise, but there are some inevitable limitations otherwise, that forbids such an arrangement. Imagine how high and thus heavy your landing gears would need to be, to get sufficient ground clearance - many greetings from the Tu-114 and its 10ft nose gear strut.

    It might work with smaller engines, but then you need four of them, building essentially a modern Vickers Viscount. While I and many others here would totally like that, the airline beancounters won't. :hissyfit:

    I asked because with real and proposed turboprop/open rotor aircraft, the usual solution to the clearance/heavy landing gear problem is either to change to a high-wing aircraft or to move the engine from the wings to the aft fuselage. I haven't seen engines mounted to the top side of the wing very often, so there must be a reason that this configuration is avoided? But if it isn't that suboptimal, why wasn't it tried on the 737 NG or MAX?
     
    Nean1
    Posts: 516
    Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:53 pm

    CowAnon wrote:
    LucaDiMontanari wrote:
    CowAnon wrote:
    How much of a penalty results from mounting the engines to the top part of the wing, as opposed to the normal location underneath the wing?


    Is this really a question? To be honest, you asked it initially wrong. Correct would be: How much of a penalty would results from mounting the engines to the normal location underneath the wing? Answer: look at your shredded propeller blades. There might be a slight aerodynamic benefit in cruise, but there are some inevitable limitations otherwise, that forbids such an arrangement. Imagine how high and thus heavy your landing gears would need to be, to get sufficient ground clearance - many greetings from the Tu-114 and its 10ft nose gear strut.

    It might work with smaller engines, but then you need four of them, building essentially a modern Vickers Viscount. While I and many others here would totally like that, the airline beancounters won't. :hissyfit:

    I asked because with real and proposed turboprop/open rotor aircraft, the usual solution to the clearance/heavy landing gear problem is either to change to a high-wing aircraft or to move the engine from the wings to the aft fuselage. I haven't seen engines mounted to the top side of the wing very often, so there must be a reason that this configuration is avoided? But if it isn't that suboptimal, why wasn't it tried on the 737 NG or MAX?


    Perhaps because the turboprop assembly is quite different from an equivalent thrust turbofan, notably by the propeller's diameter?

    It seems quite obvious to me that Embraer will propose a smaller version (70-80 seats) thinking about the potential of the American market, its preferences and idiosyncrasies.

    Finally, the diameter and characteristics of the propellers mean that the performance in single-engine case deserves extra attention, especially for the rudder / elevator assembly. The choice of the powertrain will have an absolutely critical aspect, with the E3 being the first EMB aircraft with a totally innovative engine, not tested or launched by another manufacturer.
     
    User avatar
    EMBSPBR
    Posts: 817
    Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Fri Mar 19, 2021 8:42 pm

    Source: https://economia.uol.com.br/noticias/re ... idente.htm

    Excerpt (translated):

    SAO PAULO (Reuters) - March 19, 2021

    Embraer is actively working on new product development partnerships and expects to make an announcement soon,
    said Chief Executive Francisco Gomes Neto on Friday.

    Although the executive did not specify which new products are involved in the discussions,
    he said in the past that the company hopes to develop a new turboprop aircraft, but that it cannot do this alone.
     
    mxaxai
    Posts: 2647
    Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Fri Mar 19, 2021 10:26 pm

    CowAnon wrote:
    I asked because with real and proposed turboprop/open rotor aircraft, the usual solution to the clearance/heavy landing gear problem is either to change to a high-wing aircraft or to move the engine from the wings to the aft fuselage. I haven't seen engines mounted to the top side of the wing very often, so there must be a reason that this configuration is avoided? But if it isn't that suboptimal, why wasn't it tried on the 737 NG or MAX?

    Engines mounted on top of the wings have two major disadvantages: They're (much) worse to access for maintenance and the jetwash, pylon and nacelle interact much more with the airflow above the wing.
    For a jet engine, you either have to mount it completely above or completely below.

    For a turboprop, those disadvantages aren't as pronounced. The propwash will impinge on the wing either way, and you don't need to mount the engine quite as high up because part of the prop can go under and above the wing.
     
    JayinKitsap
    Posts: 2516
    Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Sat Mar 20, 2021 6:32 am

    EMBSPBR wrote:
    Noshow wrote:
    I think what Embraer does is very smart.
    Build simple, reliable airplanes that still are modern, capable and comfortable.
    Some manufacturers got carried away by too much innovation at the same time: materials, aerodynamics, engines and manufacturing.
    Keep it simple like ATR, E2, SkyCourier and such.

    :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

    Noshow wrote:
    Keep it simple like ATR, E2, SkyCourier and such. I think there will be more room for smart basic designs like their new turboprop.

    It is often not necessary to "reinvent the wheel".
    Just make it run better ...


    Noshow hit it out of the park on this one.

    Skycourier took a good engine and paired it up with a new plane that is probably easier to produce than the Caravan's are, added a quite good but simple cockpit that is state of the art but already debugged elsewhere. Nothing exotic, simple, reliable, efficient. Doesn't work for everything, but it gets the job done.

    The E2 is a very good plane, not the edge of the frontier but very competitive today. Doing the E3 using the hull, center wing box, LANDING GEAR, and the inner wing out to the engines, then going composite like the ATR 72 did from there makes a lot of sense.

    edu2703 wrote:
    AeroIN revealed a new illustration of the concept that Embraer is working on. Now being shown from the front.

    Image

    https://www.aeroin.net/embraer-revela-mais-detalhes-de-sua-futura-aeronave-turboelice/?amp


    Quite a good looking aircraft.
     
    User avatar
    JBo
    Posts: 1828
    Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 7:23 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Mon Mar 22, 2021 4:54 pm

    CowAnon wrote:
    edu2703 wrote:
    Image

    How much of a penalty results from mounting the engines to the top part of the wing, as opposed to the normal location underneath the wing?


    Almost every low-wing turboprop has the engines mounted either centered or above the wing. This rendering just looks unusual because the MLG aren't under the engines.
    I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
     
    Nean1
    Posts: 516
    Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Mon Mar 22, 2021 5:04 pm

    JBo wrote:
    CowAnon wrote:
    edu2703 wrote:
    Image

    How much of a penalty results from mounting the engines to the top part of the wing, as opposed to the normal location underneath the wing?


    Almost every low-wing turboprop has the engines mounted either centered or above the wing. This rendering just looks unusual because the MLG aren't under the engines.


    The main landing gear placement is out of the ordinary. I imagine that Embraer faced some questions:
    - Search of a wing / propeller assembly with the least drag possible.
    - Possibility of reuse the 175E1 MLG
     
    baje427
    Posts: 911
    Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Mon Mar 22, 2021 5:24 pm

    Nice looking bird,looks like a beefed up E120.
     
    CowAnon
    Posts: 196
    Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:03 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Mon Mar 22, 2021 5:36 pm

    mxaxai wrote:
    CowAnon wrote:
    I asked because with real and proposed turboprop/open rotor aircraft, the usual solution to the clearance/heavy landing gear problem is either to change to a high-wing aircraft or to move the engine from the wings to the aft fuselage. I haven't seen engines mounted to the top side of the wing very often, so there must be a reason that this configuration is avoided? But if it isn't that suboptimal, why wasn't it tried on the 737 NG or MAX?

    Engines mounted on top of the wings have two major disadvantages: They're (much) worse to access for maintenance and the jetwash, pylon and nacelle interact much more with the airflow above the wing.
    For a jet engine, you either have to mount it completely above or completely below.

    For a turboprop, those disadvantages aren't as pronounced. The propwash will impinge on the wing either way, and you don't need to mount the engine quite as high up because part of the prop can go under and above the wing.

    Thank you, that makes sense. I always enjoy your explanations.
     
    docmtl
    Posts: 44
    Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:04 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Mon Mar 22, 2021 6:09 pm

    baje427 wrote:
    Nice looking bird,looks like a beefed up E120.


    It seems the engineers at Embraer are already calling this bird the "Super Brasilia" or something like that.

    Whether bringing this name back will help the Marketing and Sales department down the road is another story :-)

    docmtl
     
    User avatar
    Aesma
    Posts: 14412
    Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Mar 23, 2021 1:28 am

    Armadillo1 wrote:
    also, i cant see a reason for such big wing fairing
    MLG can be placed behind engines like in old planes or Dash8.
    not so big Mach for area rule

    is there proof its a real emb proposal?


    All modern aircraft have these huge center wing boxes, from bizjets to widebody airliners.
    New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
     
    Kent350787
    Posts: 1906
    Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:18 am

    FluidFlow wrote:
    Armadillo1 wrote:
    FluidFlow wrote:

    Because the exhaust air from the engines will ruin the flow over the stabilizer in normal design. The engines will be mounted on top of the wings directly in front of the stab if it is not a T-Tail design.

    Image


    I never said it is not possible but if you want an efficient design you want as less drag as possible and having turbulent flow from the engines next or in worst case right on to the stabilizer will induce a lot of drag.

    It's not like a normal configuration will be unstable just inefficient compared to a T-Tail.


    It's an interesting point you raise. I assume that's why the SAABs have their V-tail?

    And speaking of SAAB, this looks like pitching at the 2000 market, with fuel costs hopefully making it more competitive and taking over the RJ market in the US.

    I can see Australia moving from a primarily DHC+SAAB market to almost entirely ATR over time if this is pitched at 80-100 seats and fully paved runways.
    S340/J31/146-300/F27/F50/Nord 262/ Q100/200/E195/ 733/734/738/744/762/763/77W/788/789/ 320/321/332/333/345/359
     
    744SPX
    Posts: 490
    Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:20 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:29 am

    Aesma wrote:
    Armadillo1 wrote:
    also, i cant see a reason for such big wing fairing
    MLG can be placed behind engines like in old planes or Dash8.
    not so big Mach for area rule

    is there proof its a real emb proposal?


    All modern aircraft have these huge center wing boxes, from bizjets to widebody airliners.


    That's likely why a center mounted wing is considered to be the most aerodynamically efficient of the three positions; no gigantic wing-body/wingbox fairing. Of course you still need somewhere to put the landing gear, so the TU-95 (which is one of the only aircraft to utilize a center mounted wing) has outboard gear pods in line with the inboard engines.
     
    GalaxyFlyer
    Posts: 7815
    Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Mar 23, 2021 3:05 am

    High or low, where the wing is placed has more to do with ground operations—prop clearance, loading, structure design and, yes, to some degree, fashion and what the builder is familiar with in design. Cessna and DeHaviland mostly have built high wings, Hawker Siddely and EMB low wing turboprops.

    Tough getting pax to crawl over the wing box!
     
    User avatar
    william
    Posts: 3460
    Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Mar 23, 2021 4:06 am

    edu2703 wrote:
    AeroIN revealed a new illustration of the concept that Embraer is working on. Now being shown from the front.

    Image

    https://www.aeroin.net/embraer-revela-mais-detalhes-de-sua-futura-aeronave-turboelice/?amp


    Is that the E2 nose? Looks like a new nose and windows.
     
    LucaDiMontanari
    Posts: 57
    Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:37 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Mar 23, 2021 1:39 pm

    CowAnon wrote:
    LucaDiMontanari wrote:
    CowAnon wrote:
    How much of a penalty results from mounting the engines to the top part of the wing, as opposed to the normal location underneath the wing?


    Is this really a question? To be honest, you asked it initially wrong. Correct would be: How much of a penalty would results from mounting the engines to the normal location underneath the wing? Answer: look at your shredded propeller blades. There might be a slight aerodynamic benefit in cruise, but there are some inevitable limitations otherwise, that forbids such an arrangement. Imagine how high and thus heavy your landing gears would need to be, to get sufficient ground clearance - many greetings from the Tu-114 and its 10ft nose gear strut.

    It might work with smaller engines, but then you need four of them, building essentially a modern Vickers Viscount. While I and many others here would totally like that, the airline beancounters won't. :hissyfit:

    I asked because with real and proposed turboprop/open rotor aircraft, the usual solution to the clearance/heavy landing gear problem is either to change to a high-wing aircraft or to move the engine from the wings to the aft fuselage. I haven't seen engines mounted to the top side of the wing very often, so there must be a reason that this configuration is avoided? But if it isn't that suboptimal, why wasn't it tried on the 737 NG or MAX?


    Ah, you referred to a jet? Okay, that's a different story. I'd say, the main reason to place the engine on top of the wing is surely ground clearance. But on a turboprop you can fit the actual turbine with its heavy gears and bearings basically on the surface of the wing and let the propeller use a part of the clearance below the wing, while a turbofan needs the whole casing on top of the wing - air streams loves free flows but hate thin, narrow ducts and sudden changes in cross section, with which you would end up, channeling say one quart of the bypass flow below the wing. You would thus also need the additional strut to keep the engine nacelle above and in front (or behind - hence the Honda Jet) the wing to avoid interference drag between nacelle and wing and some area ruling stuff. Something that you usually do not have to think that much about when designing a turboprop plane with its Mach .5 or .6 airspeed and slender engine nacelles...

    Conclusion: engines on top of the wings are fine with your average turboprop, but an aerodynamic nightmare for jets at transsonic speeds. Sure, this is basically true for an underwing design as well. But there at least you get good maintenance access for free.
     
    Nean1
    Posts: 516
    Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:10 pm

    https://aviationweek.com/special-topics ... ainability

    Sometimes something sensible still manages to be published.
     
    F9Animal
    Posts: 4569
    Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Apr 01, 2021 11:40 pm

    It appears Embraer is taking this pretty serious. Make no mistake about it, I feel like they are dipping into a market that really needs a boost.
    I Am A Different Animal!!
     
    Nean1
    Posts: 516
    Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Sat Apr 03, 2021 12:43 am

    https://www.aviationpros.com/engines-co ... latus-pc12

    The absolutely central aspect in the discussion of E3 obviously refers to the innovative turboprop. Never in Embraer's history has the company been the launcher of an engine.

    Certainly a central choice will also be the definition of the number and type of propeller. Recalling the case of the PC-12 with 7 propellers. Will the E3 have a slightly strange number like 9 or 10 propellers?
     
    Nean1
    Posts: 516
    Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Mon Apr 05, 2021 1:39 pm

    https://airinsight.com/since-there-is-n ... urboprops/

    " ....Since the US airline industry will remain under severe financial pressure for some time, the case for a revisit to the turboprop seems apropos. Offering what regional jets offer by way of cabin capacity and performance but at about 25% lower costs, what’s not to like? Moreover, rather than see several smaller communities lose air service because of regional jets costs, turboprops deliver both community connectivity needs at reasonable economics, which is to say more profitably than regional jets."
     
    WaywardMemphian
    Posts: 1660
    Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 9:05 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Mon Apr 05, 2021 2:38 pm

    Nean1 wrote:
    https://airinsight.com/since-there-is-no-new-regional-jet-that-is-scope-clause-complaint-lets-talk-about-turboprops/

    " ....Since the US airline industry will remain under severe financial pressure for some time, the case for a revisit to the turboprop seems apropos. Offering what regional jets offer by way of cabin capacity and performance but at about 25% lower costs, what’s not to like? Moreover, rather than see several smaller communities lose air service because of regional jets costs, turboprops deliver both community connectivity needs at reasonable economics, which is to say more profitably than regional jets."


    The #1 knock against the ATR's are the rear passenger load and it's compatibility with air bridges. Passengers in the US have come to expect the use of those when getting on and off.
     
    744SPX
    Posts: 490
    Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:20 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Apr 06, 2021 1:15 am

    Hopefully the engine will look like this: Tested to .90 mach and maintained double digit efficiency over equivalent technology turbofans at that speed, 20%+ at .8 mach:

    https://live.staticflickr.com/8484/8269 ... cb1c_w.jpg

    https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy ... QiOWrJ_sFw

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/198 ... 015257.pdf
     
    docmtl
    Posts: 44
    Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:04 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:17 pm

    Regarding the engine choice for the E3 concept: the announcement of the new open rotor RISE concept (discussed below in the ANet forum)

    viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1461795):

    Could such an engine be suitable for the new E3 design ? Any expected gains with the concerning speed, fuel burn and versatility (biofuel, electric or hybrid modes) on the 70-to-100 passenger turboprop scenario?

    What about time-to-market between the frame itself and the engine availability ?

    Thx for your insightful thoughts.

    docmtl
     
    docmtl
    Posts: 44
    Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:04 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Jun 17, 2021 7:47 pm

    It's odd to answer my own questions, but check the link below from yesterday's AW:

    https://aviationweek.com/forum/aerospac ... propulsion

    In summary, E3s will be launched with regular TP engines, but aiming at biofuels to be carbon-neutral at an early stage. Could become a platform for hybrid-electric or hydrogen-driven propulsion. If so, a 70-pax could become a 50-pax to accommodate for the hydrogen fuel tanks.

    As for developing a 50-pax TP, Embraer's view seems to lean towards turning this 70-pax platform into a 3-class-50-pax TP (CRJ550 someone ?).

    docmtl
     
    User avatar
    novarupta
    Posts: 75
    Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:32 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Sat Jun 19, 2021 10:37 pm

    WaywardMemphian wrote:
    Nean1 wrote:
    https://airinsight.com/since-there-is-no-new-regional-jet-that-is-scope-clause-complaint-lets-talk-about-turboprops/

    " ....Since the US airline industry will remain under severe financial pressure for some time, the case for a revisit to the turboprop seems apropos. Offering what regional jets offer by way of cabin capacity and performance but at about 25% lower costs, what’s not to like? Moreover, rather than see several smaller communities lose air service because of regional jets costs, turboprops deliver both community connectivity needs at reasonable economics, which is to say more profitably than regional jets."


    The #1 knock against the ATR's are the rear passenger load and it's compatibility with air bridges. Passengers in the US have come to expect the use of those when getting on and off.

    ATRs have used Jetbridges in the USA just fine (quite a few photos around to prove it too). Plus with ATR-72s you have a choice of forward or rearward pax doors as well.
     
    Nean1
    Posts: 516
    Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:16 pm

    https://airinsight.com/turboprop-will-b ... he-future/

    "Program launch expected in 2022

    Embraer’s CEO said that the OEM hopes to launch the program in 2022. “Internally, we are doing a lot of work on the concept. We have made some changes, using a slightly wider cross-section to leverage the E2 and E1 cabins that we already have and which are so well-respected by our customers and the end-users in the market. So we are looking to bring a much better passenger appeal to the turboprop segment: an aircraft with better performance, with better cost performance, much lower noise levels. We believe we have a turboprop in mind that we could bring to the market in the 2027-2028 timeframe which will really stand apart from the products that we have out there today.”"
     
    744SPX
    Posts: 490
    Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:20 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:25 am

    If they can provide a TP that cruises at 475-485 mph with fuel efficiency 10-15% better than the E2/MRJ (which is certainly possible technology-wise) this could be a game changer.

    The A400M can already cruise that fast and does it with a fat, cargo-style fuselage. ...and that's 15+ year old tech.
     
    User avatar
    par13del
    Posts: 10819
    Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Jun 24, 2021 4:13 am

    Hopefully they have seen what happened to the Q400 and will make a decision early on as to which market they are going to market this a/c, from the Q400 experience we know that the USA and non-USA market are miles apart in expectations from turbo-prop a/c, high speed has not been a detriment to the various ATR's that now dominate the space, outside of the USA of course which is where the bulk of the a/c reside.
     
    User avatar
    Aesma
    Posts: 14412
    Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Jun 24, 2021 8:15 am

    744SPX : I disagree. If/when fuel is 150$ a barrel, then maybe 10% is enough, but otherwise they need more, to compensate for the "dinky prop plane" stigma.

    In the US efficiency is clearly not paramount or airlines would do more to change their scope rules...
    New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
     
    mxaxai
    Posts: 2647
    Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Jun 24, 2021 8:47 am

    744SPX wrote:
    The A400M can already cruise that fast and does it with a fat, cargo-style fuselage. ...and that's 15+ year old tech.

    The A400M is also far too noisy inside for the general public. You'd have to provide earplugs.
     
    RickNRoll
    Posts: 1874
    Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

    Re: Embraer's has projects for a new turboprop plane [June/2020]

    Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:08 am

    TonyClifton wrote:
    Need something with more robust icing capabilities than the ATR. Ultimately are a get out of jail card, but not something you want to hang all day in upstate New York in a blizzard on.

    Still think a turboprop is the only real solution to replace 50 seat jets


    What icing problem?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3uN3limOcE
     
    LightningZ71
    Posts: 602
    Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:59 pm

    Re: Embraer New Turboprop Aircraft News and Discussion Thread

    Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:11 pm

    Given how short most of the stage lengths that the few turbo-props in use in the US market actually fly, the difference in cruise speed between the Q400 and the ATRs rarely makes much more than 10-15 minutes difference in total trip times. When your trip includes clearing security, dealing with baggage, as well as the actual flight, that's not even a noticeable difference for most people. For airline operations, the speed difference isn't big enough for them to truly take advantage of it and be able to run any additional stages in a single day in the vast majority of use cases. As long as it's within the ballpark of the ATR, that's good enough with respect to speed.

    After speed, it's going to come down to efficiency and revenue potential. If they can use a fatter cabin without loosing efficiency, there is an opportunity for them to add on a reasonable amount of cargo capacity. As we have seen recently, being able to move cargo can help improve the bottom line in many ways and could be a difference maker in the category.

    By my thinking on this, all they need to do is make their version of the ATR with a wider cabin, better cargo capacity, improved efficiency and lower operating costs and they will be able to make a sustainable program.
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 8

    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