Этот веб-сайт использует файлы cookie. Если вы будете просматривать или пользоваться этим сайтом, вы даете на это свое согласие.
Отменить
Вы знаете, что реклама помогает FlightAware в отслеживании рейсов?
Вы можете внести свой вклад в бесплатную работу FlightAware, разрешив показ рекламы на FlightAware.com. Мы следим за тем, чтобы наша реклама была полезна и не мешала работе с сайтом. Вы можете быстро включить рекламу на FlightAware или приобрести привилегированное членство.
Отменить
Back to Squawk list
  • 9

Airline Propellor Era is coming to an end

Размещено
 
A chapter of U.S. air travel came to a quiet end on July 4 when the final turboprop flight at American Airlines Group Inc. landed on Maryland’s Eastern Shore at dusk (www.bloomberg.com) Ещё...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


RRKen
Kenneth Schmidt 6
What about Airlines like Air Choice One, which use Cessna turboprops? They have yet to cease operations. And FedEx still uses 239 of the C208's, they are still operating. So why say the era is coming to an end?
tyketto
Brad Littlejohn 5
This is a good point, even when they say in the same article that QXE is still flying the Q400. So this reporter is is already disproving his own article.
btweston
btweston 3
Reporters don’t generally write the headlines, and sadly the headline is all most people read.
btweston
btweston 1
I don’t know... If you read the whole thing (specifically the last paragraph) you’ll see that they mention that turboprops are indeed flying. The main thrust of the article is that the big three airlines are no longer using them.

Also, I think it’s reasonable to differentiate between the mission of a 208 and a Dash 8 when talking about airliners.
RRKen
Kenneth Schmidt 1
I think the mission of the C208's and Q400's are about the same, they both carry passengers from point A to point B. The only difference is the range of travel.

While the last paragraph finally spells out that Alaska's regional carrier (and others) still fly the turboprop, the lead paragraph alludes to the entirety of U.S. air travel.

Since I am not a subscriber to Bloomberg, and am limited to four articles per month, I did not see the contradiction. Thus I have to depend on what is posted here.
btweston
btweston 1
No, the lead paragraph says that a chapter of US air travel came to a quiet end. The article then goes on to specify that the Big Three have moved away from turboprops.

And no, the 208 and and Dash 8 are not about the same. The Dash 8, in many ways, is a CRJ with props. The 208 is a very small aircraft that serves niche markets. Yes, it uses a gas turbine, but calling it an airliner because it goes from point A to point B is like calling a hired C150 an airliner. When compared to the size, speed and general use of planes like the Dash 8 on up the 208 is a utility aircraft. And I think the 208 is a great plane! It can do some truly amazing things. An airliner? Not so much.

Sure, we can disagree about semantics, but I think that the article, which is aimed at the general public (Bloomberg is not an aviation industry publication), does a fine job of making its point.
dbaker
Daniel Baker 6
This reminds me of the plethora of stories over the last year about the end of the 747, ignoring the fact that they continue to be manufactured and over 200 are in the air while I write this. The title, "Airline Propellor Era is coming to an end" is a bit different than the article's story, which narrows the scope to three airlines in just one country.

Also, it's funny that they say United ended their prop operations recently in Guam, which was a Continental operation -- the same company that ended their prop operations in their early 2000s and proclaimed an "all jet fleet" before going back to turboprops a few years later.
ianmcdonell
ian mcdonell 2
If it has props and carries RPT passengers then it is an airliner
Saying a Dash 8 or ATR is anything else does not make sense
The article is very clearly about American Airlines Group not the entire USA industry
yr2012
matt jensen 2
Ah, I'll never give them up. They'll work when your jet engines won't.
patpylot
patrick baker 1
there are sufficient routes that jet aircraft are not sensible to use for that the turboprop will be with us for a while. The big trunk carriers can do without those short routes suitable only for the prop birds, as they were never profitable- due to high costs and low revenues, except USAir, which was always able to charge outrageous fares-4, 5 and 600+ for flights taking an hour ....
propjoe
Joe Mayer 1
From a fuel burn perspective it has been explained to me as:
Longer flight than an hour, get on a jet.
Sorter than an hour, Turbo-prop is the way to go.
There are Turbo props almost as fast as a jet (Q400) but it will also burn almost the same fuel as a jet to achieve that higher speed. I've not been in a newer ATR (with six bladed props)but, I have been told of jet like vibration and noise levels?

I think if airlines would load the bags into the bottom of the plane and load the sheapeople via a jet bridge most would never notice if it had props or not.

There will always be a need for props in the military, however the newer High bypass Turbo fans blur the props short field advantage. Eight bladed NP2000 propeller on the old legacy C-130 is a great modification...
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
There are airports out there that a jet could never land at..heck the prop aircraft cut it close some times..that and a prop can land on a "non essential" runway where as most jets cannot..so there will always be a need for props in passenger travel too.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
I have to disagree with you... Turbo Probls burn MUCH less fuel. I remember the Dash 8 flying from KLGA to KROA. For a CRJ on the same route would burn more fuel on takeoff and Climb out than the Dash 8 100 would burn on the entire route and the CRJ would arrive only 20 to 30 minutes faster than the Dash. The fuel burn on the Turbo Props is much better than any jet, but by the same token the Turbo Fan's are getting more and more efficient every day.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
It most certainly is... and I hate to see it. I am glad to have been a part of it on the maintenance end for quite a number of years.... I remember working on the Dash 8's (100, 200, & 300's) and the YS-11 which many do not remember. the Propellor's got us this far with technology starting with Recips on DC's and early Boeings. they certainly carved history! Other than ATR (that I have not seen much of) and the Q400's seems to be the last one's left, and I really wonder how much longer that will last.
watkinssusan
mary susan watkins 1
another historical landmark in aviation history..
plow675984
Peter Low 1
Amapola (Sweden) have 15 Turbo prop planes in service
Alliance Airline (Australia) have 5 Turbo prop planes in service
Ethiopian Airlines have 21 in service 12 on order
Spicejet (India) have 23 in service with a further 25 on order
Flybe (UK) have 59 Turbo prop planes in service

I could go on ad nauseam, but I think you get the picture props/turbo props are a long way from dead yet !!
SeanSpringette
Sean Springette 1
Let me piggy back a little Peter, Liat in the caribbean operate all ATR 42 & 72's, Sea borne, based in San Juan is all Saab 340, Silver Airways which just took over Sea Borne is all ATR and Saab. Cape Air with their 402's. Im sure there are so many more we can list. Prop era is here to stay.

bimjim
Jim Lynch 0
What a pile of arrogant ignorant - stupid - CRAP.

First, the headline suggests this is a global phenomenon - where in fact it might not even be an American phenomenon. If you write an article that will go further than your local paper, start out by stating some parameters, that should not be rocket surgery for a responsible journalist.

Second, Silver (Florida) just bought a shyteload of ATRs to replace their Saabs, so how is THAT an "era coming to an end"?? And ATR is making more inroads into North America as (Dash-8) Bombardier's family-run management is revealed to be even more incompetent and ridiculous than previously believed.

Because the large airlines are divesting the Dash-8s, HOW does that translate into an "era coming to an end". Perhaps the era of that Bloomberg "reporter" being a "journalist" should come to an end - it sure would solve one problem.
linbb
linbb -1
Guess they forgot to tell us out west to quit flying them as they still fly the Qs out here.
Someone needs more research after another cup of coffee in the morning.
btweston
btweston 3
Someone needs to read the whole article before commenting.

Вход

Нет учетной записи? Зарегистрируйтесь сейчас (бесплатно) и получите доступ к конфигурируемым функциям, уведомлениям о статусе рейсов и другим возможностям!