from prop to jet - how quick was the change

[diddy1234]

I was just wondering, after reading about the DC-6 and constellation how quick was the change from prop to jet power ?

Take for example at Heathrow, was there a mix of prop and jet aircraft movements for five years or was the change quicker than this ?

Was air traffic control a nightmare (different landing speeds of prop aircraft) ?

Id imagine that aviation spotting must have been more interesting back then as there was more variation in aircraft.

I am led to believe that the change was almost 'overnight' to jet aircraft.

[Flap40]

There is still one company using props on scheduled services to LHR (admittedly they are turboprops).

[Saab Dastard]

Overnight? Hardly.

I would say that there was a decade, from 1958 - 1968, when jets were phasing in and pistons phasing out for regular passenger services. Yes, the Comet started earlier, but it was many years ahead of its time (too many, sadly) and spent 4? years grounded 1954-58.

A lot of pistons went over to freight, or went to more remote / less developed parts of the world.

Also, the transition would have been faster and more noticeable at the major long-haul airports, with regional airports probably having a mixture later and longer.

Why should ATC be a problem - there's lots of airports today handling big jets and spamcans without problems, so why would large multi-pistons have caused any difficulties?

The speed differences weren't that great anyway, for several reasons. A Connie's touchdown speed was about 90-100mph (depending on model), while a current 744 is about 125mph. Not that great a difference.

SD

Edited - I assume that "prop" equates to piston, rather than including turboprops. There's lots of modern turboprops flying today.

[Fly380]

I'd say prop to jet and back to prop. Don't all the modern airliners have jet engines driving a blooming great fan at the front that provides all the thrust just like a propellor. A jet was an engine that provided a lots of hot air out the back end producing the thrust. Perhaps I'm just simplifying things.;)

[The SSK]

At Heathrow the BEA Vanguards and to a lesser extent Viscounts prolonged the transition phase.

I spent a week at Gatwick in (?) 1964 and saw just 2 jets – a Jetstar and the arrival of BUA’s first VC10. Apart from the BUA Viscounts, the commonest type was the DC6, which was the workhorse of the foreign charter carriers. At Heathrow at the time piston-engined aircraft were very rare indeed.

[tornadoken]

Long Haul: definitive pistons: last L-1649 delivery (LH), 2/58, DC-7C (KL), 12/58. Jet services (Comet 4, 707-120) began 10/58. By 1963 prime ports had no long haul scheduled pax pistons; converted freight awhile longer, till "free" pax-underbelly capacity did for them. Soon some of the largest carriers of cargo had no freighters.
Short/Medium Haul: last CV440 delivery (IB), 10/59. Lingered at prime ports against Caravelle/V.800/L-188 till DC-9/727 swept them away, 1965/66. Dribbled into bucket-and-spade, then early package-freight.
Some late-build big pistons, like L-1649A, never underwent a Major Overhaul. It wasn't just block speed disavantage: reliability, thus utilisation, thus cost per ATM of DC-8/30, 707-100, DC-9/30 was unexpectedly good, then of DC-8/50, 707-300B, DC-9/50, 727-200 was devastating. That's why even low-yield carriers for whom speed was not a competitive imperative (Britannia, Spantax) moved into (near-)new jets, dumping residual pistons into low-utilisation niches.

[The SSK]

PS I flew on a DC6 in July 1978. I believe it was one of the very last big piston operations by a European airline on scheduled passenger service - who knows - might even have been *the* last. It was replacing a planned HS748 (there's a clue), I couldn't believe my luck.

Although I have a notion that there was a DC6 service from somewhere in Europe (Frankfurt?) to Aden into the early 1980s.