Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Could steam make a comeback?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="Phoebe Vet"][quote user="rrnut282"] <p>Phoebe,</p><p>If you missed my point, a similar sized jet burns more fuel than one with props. Their block to block times on short to medium stage lengths are within minutes of each other. Even if it is a regional jet, it is less efficient. The only reason the airlines are buying them is the flying public has a perception that jets are better, right or wrong. Mostly wrong. They will take an out of the way routing to avoid prop flights. Airlines live and die by the load factor, so they buy jets to sell tickets. Their big problem is they can't pass these increased costs on to the consumers.</p><p>[/quote]</p><p><font color="#800000">Block to block times is a misleading statistic.</font></p><p><font color="#800000">On very short routes so much time is spent in the circling low speed approach and departure paths that faster aircraft are not able to take advantage of their higher cruise speeds. Of course flying faster burns more fuel. If a fanjet slows down 200 mph to turboprop speeds, the fuel economy is similar.</font></p><p><font color="#800000">If your point was valid then freight airlines would all be turboprop since the packages don't care about "sexy". But if you look you will see that turboprops are used only on very short routes with very small payloads, or into small airports where the jets just don't have enough runway.</font></p><p><font color="#800000">FedEx uses Cessna Caravans for short routes, not because they have propellers, but because they are single engine. Now THAT saves money, but the Feds won't permit single engine planes for scheduled transportation of passengers.</font></p><p><font color="#800000">Incidentally, short or unimproved field capability is the turboprops primary strong suit. The one thing that propellers do better is acceleration from stop. Fanjets need to get some motion induced airflow through them before they can make full power.</font></p><p>[/quote]</p><p>It is slightly off topic, but turboprops are almost as fast as jets, consume a lot less fuel, land and take-off at about two-thirds the speed, and make much less noise. See June(?) 2003 Airpower article on the Lockheed Electra, or Jon Lake, The Great Book of Bombers, on the Russian TU-95 Bear. </p><p>At least this is an antidote to the curse of modernism. Sometimes the older, less fashionable ways are better. </p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy