Back to the fuel efficient future: airlines go turboprops
When it comes to cars, newer usually (but not always) mean more efficient. The airline industry, though is taking a look back at turboprop planes as a way to save fuel. As Marketplace reported the other day, the smoother and faster rides provided by jets are also more fuel-thirsty than planes powered by giant spinning blades. Therefore, more and more airlines are adding propeller-powered planes that, according to one Continental representative interviewed by Marketplace, are 30 percent more fuel efficient per seat than jet planes. In some cases, airlines can also use larger turboprop planes instead of smaller jet planes and carry more passengers. One of two companies that still makes turboprop planes, Bombardier in Canada saw a jump from 24 planes in 2006 to almost 100 in 2007.Photo by Maxf. Licensed under Creative Commons license 2.0.
[Source: Marketplace, thanks to Chris]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Peter Wang 4:01PM (6/06/2008)
Does it make sense to look at REALLY BIG turboprop planes? Full-sized planes that hold 200 - 300 people? Do the advantages scale up with size?
Reply
Karl-Uwe Strunzen 4:17PM (6/06/2008)
The other maker, the Franco-Italian ATR (the largest of the two), is reportedly looking into making a larger version, but I've no idea how things scale. They too, like Bombardier, can't produce enough of the current models to meet demand.
I wonder if it would be possible to make a double-decker, i.e. with a lot more seats by getting rid of the cargo area (small carry-on baggage only), thus making the ATR72 only slightly larger....
The EU is funding research into cleaner and more efficient jet and turboprop aircraft...
Reply
slk23 8:12PM (6/06/2008)
One disadvantage is cruising speed: turboprops are typically at least 100 mph slower than jets. That's not a big factor for shorter flights, but it adds an hour to coast-to-coast flights.
Reply
Derek 10:21PM (6/06/2008)
It's the same as slowing your cruising speed on the highway. Big "duh". Slower = lower fuel consumption.
Now, I'm not the most picky person when it comes to noise (the Aveo is pretty quiet, IMO) but turboprops are quite noisy inside.
Reply
Kevin Nugent 1:06AM (6/07/2008)
Well isn't that just obvious ?? i also agree with poster #3 on short commuter flights the speed difference will be nothing more than 10 minutes but when flying from new york to California the difference is immense . Adding to the fact that the longer the engine is running at higher rpms the more pollution it emits . So do the saving relay add up also considering the amount of co2 in the air
Reply
GenWaylaid 1:28AM (6/07/2008)
More sophisticated propeller designs like the ones on the C-130J Hercules can reduce the noise problem and improve efficiency slightly at the same time.
The issue of lower cruising speeds for prop planes was a key reason for experimentation with propfans, which had transonic propellers. The idea didn't go very far because of the unfortunate resemblance to a Cuisinart.
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4406/4406-142.jpg
The largest turboprop airliner of which I am aware was built in 1959 by the USSR from their standard big bomber of the time. The size of the propellers caused the fuselage to sit ridiculously high off the tarmac.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/art-19706/Tupolev-Tu-114-turboprop-airliner-prior-to-a-flight-carrying
Reply
Karl-Uwe Strunzen 4:14AM (6/07/2008)
The EU Clean Sky joint technology initiative includes, amongst other things such as green helicopters, a research area called "Green Regional Aircraft":
http://www.cleansky.eu/index.php?arbo_id=38
Reply