Turboprop vs. Jet

WSJ (July 9, 2012) reports that “Turboprop aircraft makers ATR and Bombardier are seeing orders swell as more carriers switch from jets.”  But the economics of this decision still is and will be muddled with regulations, and the final outcome is uncertain.  The switch to turboprop may be used as another example of economic decision making when a resource (fuel, in this case) becomes cost inefficient.  For more details on turboprop vs. jet, read here.  Currently the turboprop technology is more efficient for short routes and small airplanes, but the airlines apparently would like to see a larger size of aircraft.  General  Electric is looking to develop turboprop engines with greater efficiency.  // *

One Response

  1. Memmett

    Wednesday flew in Q400 from Denver to Eagle (Vail) Colorado for the first time. Agree that the new Turbo Prop Q400 is quieter than the older versions, but the ride is still rough (up and down, side to side) than a regional jet. Turbo Props fly LOW to the ground in rough air. Regional Jets (been flying the same route weekly for 14+ months)go Up and Over the rough air. I understand the fuel for the airline, but the ride for the customer in a Turbo Prop is very inferior to the ride in a regional jet.

    August 31, 2012 at 1:47 pm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>