Going green.

[bri5150]

Why don't airlines market turboprops as "going green"? Instead, they cut them because pax don't like them. Just sayin'. Maybe the fuel savings is worth it?

 

[CptMurf]

I've been saying that for a long time. I can see the commercial 70 pax in front of a Q-400 with a sign on how long it took from point A to B. 50 pax in front of a CRJ200 with their time en route, on the same flight segment. Then the camera zooms out to show the gallons of fuel used on the flights.

 

[Abernathy]

Because airlines are run by former and future oil executives.

 

[Dash8don]

Like this?

http://http//www.airliners.net/phot...1725663/&sid=df8e89d2924750ae73a0f0c2059ae1d5http://www.airliners.net/photo/Hori...25663/L/&sid=df8e89d2924750ae73a0f0c2059ae1d5

 

[cbrown1]

Like this?

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Horizon-Air/De-Havilland-Canada/1725663/&sid=df8e89d2924750ae73a0f0c2059ae1d5

Link doesn't work.

 

[WIPilot]

Why don't airlines market turboprops as "going green"? Instead, they cut them because pax don't like them. Just sayin'. Maybe the fuel savings is worth it?

because few people really care about going green unless it is able to positively effect their pocketbooks while keeping equal or better quality of life.

 

[WalterSobchak]

Link doesn't work.

FTFY

 

[say again]

because few people really care about going green unless it is able to positively effect their pocketbooks while keeping equal or better quality of life.

Exactly!!!!!

 

[bri5150]

because few people really care about going green unless it is able to positively effect their pocketbooks while keeping equal or better quality of life.

I disagree. I am pretty sure hybrids cost their owners more money in the long run. Maybe I am wrong.

 

[glasspilot]

Going green is considered high tech. Nobodies building covered wagons under the "green" label are they?

People want green to be clean and high tech. Commercial aviation does not hit those marks with their turbo props. There are turbo props that do however...

Fast, clean, efficient turbo prop marketed as "green"


Here's a company that markets the "green" of their turbo prop

 

[trip]

because pax don't like them

+1 .

 

[CoATP]

Georgia Skies markets their Caravan as an "ECO JET"

 

[taters]

Horizon has a "green" Q400 with the associated hippie slogans on it

 

[glasspilot]

+1 .

Hate to bust your bubble. Pax don't hate turbo props. Ask 99% of them what a turbo prop is they won't know. Ask 99.5% the differance between a turbo prop and a jet they still won't know. Seriously, the man on the street doesn't care what's pushing the plane...thrust or torque. (I bet a few reading this didn't know that's the difference).

What pax hate is small planes. Pure and simple. They dislike being uncomfortable. Imagine that.

I flew a CRJ and I didn't get it at the time. My attitude was, "hey, would you rather be on a turbo prop" thinking some pax poor attitude was un-founded.

Now I ride on CRJs and ERJs as a paying pax and I get their point. They suck. Very uncomfortable. The erj-190 is nice, but that is KILLING upward movement my sucking flying from mainline so I dislike it on principle.

 

[JetSpeed219]

Horizon has a "green" Q400 with the associated hippie slogans on it

We've got 2 of them, nicknamed Shrek and Fiona...

 

[altimaklr]

You are delusional if you think people like a Q400 over a CRJ200. The cabin width is the same, seat pitch same, and the Q400 still shakes back and forth and makes twice the noise. Nobody likes to look out and see propellers, fact or not, people consider it antiquated and unsafe and therefore don't like it.

 

[AiRegency]

And CRJs are more comfortable then turboprops even if the cabin dimensions are exactly the same. It's because you have to spend a lot less time in the cabin of a CRJ then of a turboprop. Unless, of course, we're talking about really short hops in which case it doesn't make much of a difference. But even then, the average passenger would still rather not see props out there and the louder ride that goes with them.

 

[CptMurf]

And CRJs are more comfortable then turboprops even if the cabin dimensions are exactly the same. It's because you have to spend a lot less time in the cabin of a CRJ then of a turboprop. Unless, of course, we're talking about really short hops in which case it doesn't make much of a difference. But even then, the average passenger would still rather not see props out there and the louder ride that goes with them.

I would disagree. I would rather ride 50 minutes on a Saab than 50 minutes in a 200.

 

[AiRegency]

Even on a hot summer day?

 

[Metro752]

I doubt so. He's full of it.

 

[CptMurf]

Even on a hot summer day?

Even on a hot summer day. Not delusional, I flew it for 6 years. If you operate the HPs and pressurization right, it is much cooler than a 200.

 

[DoinTime]

I would disagree. I would rather ride 50 minutes on a Saab than 50 minutes in a 200.

Clearly Delta Airlines disagrees with you.

 

[CptMurf]

Clearly Delta Airlines disagrees with you.

As do a lot on here. ;-)

 

[glasspilot]

And CRJs are more comfortable then turboprops even if the cabin dimensions are exactly the same. It's because you have to spend a lot less time in the cabin of a CRJ then of a turboprop. Unless, of course, we're talking about really short hops in which case it doesn't make much of a difference. But even then, the average passenger would still rather not see props out there and the louder ride that goes with them.

A lot less time?

On short legs that's not true. It's minutes saved. The problem is saabs NEVER went ORD to SAV. CRJs do it and longer legs too. So the argument of RJs taking less time to be uncomfortable doesn't hold water. They just made the city pairs farther apart.

The only reason the word "regional" is in CRJ and ERJ is so mainline management could sell the loss of scope to those pilot groups. The city pairs are NOT regional and pax spend way too long sitting in uncomfortable aircraft.

30 minutes in a turbo prop, okay... 2.5 hours in a CRJ...not happy. Again, mostly nobody cares what pushes the air. People just hate to be cramped. I'm happy for CRJs. I've got over 3,500 hours in them with 1K+ PIC. They still suck. People hate them and theres a reason why. Too far for too long while too cramped. I'll take the 40 minute Saab or Dash-8 ride any day.

 

[AiRegency]

A lot less time?

On short legs that's not true. It's minutes saved. The problem is saabs NEVER went ORD to SAV. CRJs do it and longer legs too. So the argument of RJs taking less time to be uncomfortable doesn't hold water. They just made the city pairs farther apart.

The only reason the word "regional" is in CRJ and ERJ is so mainline management could sell the loss of scope to those pilot groups. The city pairs are NOT regional and pax spend way too long sitting in uncomfortable aircraft.

30 minutes in a turbo prop, okay... 2.5 hours in a CRJ...not happy. Again, mostly nobody cares what pushes the air. People just hate to be cramped. I'm happy for CRJs. I've got over 3,500 hours in them with 1K+ PIC. They still suck. People hate them and theres a reason why. Too far for too long while too cramped. I'll take the 40 minute Saab or Dash-8 ride any day.

Did you even read what you quoted? Let me highlight what you seemed to miss.

Unless, of course, we're talking about really short hops in which case it doesn't make much of a difference.

I can't tell you how many times I've been asked by a passenger before a flight that was recently swapped from turboprop to jet how surprised they were by the time saved between the two. And actually, the mostly ignorant, flying general public does seem to care about what pushes them around. For seem reason they really dont care for turboprops. As somebody else pointed out. Delta even knows this and is taking action to correct it. And another thing, mainline doesn't have to sell the loss of scope to there pilots... the pilots sold the scope off themselves! What planet are you from, anyway? You're gonna compare a 2.5 hour CRJ flight to the comfort of a 30 min Sob flight? You take any Sob flight and swap it with an RJ and it'll be more comfortable. That's a fact.