Jet versus tuboprop
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Leeds
Age: 63
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet versus tuboprop
I dug out an old BA timetable from 1980, and noticed that the booked time for Leeds-Heathrow flights was 1 hour using a Viscount, exactly the same as on the new A319 service.
Now I know that this will be one of the shortest flights that BA do, but it surely means that flights to say Edinburgh or Glasgow would only be a matter of say 10 mins. longer with a tuboprop rather than a jet. I'd have thought that flights in general up to about, say, 300ish miles would have negligible difference in block time, given that so much time is spent at larger airports in getting to the end of the runway. There must be plenty of routes within Europe that would fit into this category.
I wonder if any manufacturer or airline has contemplated the possible fuel saving economics on having a fleet of larger tuboprop aircraft, not to mention the possible environmental spin they could put on such an operation?
Now I know that this will be one of the shortest flights that BA do, but it surely means that flights to say Edinburgh or Glasgow would only be a matter of say 10 mins. longer with a tuboprop rather than a jet. I'd have thought that flights in general up to about, say, 300ish miles would have negligible difference in block time, given that so much time is spent at larger airports in getting to the end of the runway. There must be plenty of routes within Europe that would fit into this category.
I wonder if any manufacturer or airline has contemplated the possible fuel saving economics on having a fleet of larger tuboprop aircraft, not to mention the possible environmental spin they could put on such an operation?
Last edited by BKS Air Transport; 3rd Jul 2012 at 14:57.
Now I know that this will be one of the shortest flights that BA do, but it surely means that flights to say Edinburgh or Glasgow would only be a matter of say 10 mins. longer with a tuboprop rather than a jet.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW
New York to Miami in 1960 with an L188/Lockheed Electra turboprop was about the same time as it is today with jets.
why?
well, air traffic control, crowded airports, not enough runways...oh, and the jets are being flown at optimal fuel savings speeds and the L188 Electra was being flown at max speed...jet fuel was really cheap then!
New York to Miami in 1960 with an L188/Lockheed Electra turboprop was about the same time as it is today with jets.
why?
well, air traffic control, crowded airports, not enough runways...oh, and the jets are being flown at optimal fuel savings speeds and the L188 Electra was being flown at max speed...jet fuel was really cheap then!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stockport
Age: 84
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I recall correctly, BEA's Vanguards, which were pretty fast for turboprops, were scheduled at 1:40 on the Heathrow-Edinburgh route. Current BA A319/A320 flights are scheduled at 1:20
I recall from the mid-1970s that the timetable allowed 70 minutes from LHR to EDI or GLA for a Trident 3, the captain always came on during taxi out to say the flight time would be 1 hour, and we were normally in the air for 50 minutes.
I don't recall how long the Vanguard took, but it allowed for a fairly decent cooked breakfast for around 140 passengers between GLA and LHR.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sussex UK
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe 'flight' times are from push-back to engine shut down. In the old days, you wouldn't normally spend nearly as much time taxiing and waiting around on the ground. So you could have a slightly longer time in air in a slower aircraft and still have a competitive overall timing.
And B Cal could also do a cooked brekkie and a second drink, if you needed one, between LGW & GLA, on a BAC111. Service !!! I was also a sucker for the mini-kilt uniforms. Sighs ......
And B Cal could also do a cooked brekkie and a second drink, if you needed one, between LGW & GLA, on a BAC111. Service !!! I was also a sucker for the mini-kilt uniforms. Sighs ......
Last edited by Dubaian; 4th Jul 2012 at 11:44.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Nearer home than before!
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today's uberfast turboprops like the Q400 and Saab2000 run similar block times to things like 146s but on sectors over an hour there's usually 10 minutes saving on a jet now.
The problem on the longer trips is the jets go much higher and really get the benefit so they eat TP alive on those.
It was fun trying to out run the jets into the TMA before the price of fuel went through the roof......
The problem on the longer trips is the jets go much higher and really get the benefit so they eat TP alive on those.
It was fun trying to out run the jets into the TMA before the price of fuel went through the roof......
I flew the Viscount and HS748 with BKS in the 60s and being LBA based I did it more times than I care to remember. So many times that I can even remember the routing down airway A1 after 40+ years, LBA-Oldham-Lichfield-Daventry-Garston. The average flight time was around 45 minutes but the block time could be as short as 55 minutes especially if you could land and clear at / or get airborne from block 16 on 27R at LHR which was right behind our normal stand when we moved from T2 to T1. We seldom had to hold inbound to LHR either and a visual approach was not unheard of.
I later commuted to LHR with BMA on the DC-9/F100 and the normal flight time announced was usually less than 35 minutes but with the taxy time at LHR or holding inbound, the block time was seldom less than an hour and could even be 1.10. Mind you the 32 minutes was still time for a hot breakfast on the morning flights!
The now sadly departed Chief Pilot of the day at LBA used to have the habit when he could of clearing airways at DTY and going VFR in a straight line to the LBA which could save a further 5 minutes or so. Met a goose there once at FL110 in a 748, whilst he was also northbound and probably squawking as he made a sudden swerve away his transponder clearly was defective as we never received a traffic advisory! (Thinks? - did we even have a transponder then - I think so)
Progress - what progress? i reckon if someone brighter than me could invent some sort of flow control system that minimised the taxy times and holding at LHR fares could be reduced considerably.
I later commuted to LHR with BMA on the DC-9/F100 and the normal flight time announced was usually less than 35 minutes but with the taxy time at LHR or holding inbound, the block time was seldom less than an hour and could even be 1.10. Mind you the 32 minutes was still time for a hot breakfast on the morning flights!
The now sadly departed Chief Pilot of the day at LBA used to have the habit when he could of clearing airways at DTY and going VFR in a straight line to the LBA which could save a further 5 minutes or so. Met a goose there once at FL110 in a 748, whilst he was also northbound and probably squawking as he made a sudden swerve away his transponder clearly was defective as we never received a traffic advisory! (Thinks? - did we even have a transponder then - I think so)
Progress - what progress? i reckon if someone brighter than me could invent some sort of flow control system that minimised the taxy times and holding at LHR fares could be reduced considerably.
