Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

ATR-92

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 23rd Dec 2016, 14:06
  #21 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The empty weight of the Q400 is around 17k kg, the empty weight of an Atr72-600 around 13k kg. Even if you fly exactly the same flight profile with an Q400 as an Atr72, someone has to pay for flying around 4k kg of aircraft. Bigger engines, landing gears, everything. For a Q400 the extra performance has to pay for the higher operating cost somehow, otherwise it's useless deadweight.
keesje is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2016, 17:36
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: IAD
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
There's very little point in putting winglets on a turboprop.

And don't call any aircraft a -800, it will only make the airlines think they need a bigger one.
Most modern designs have them - the TBM's, Pilatus', and as others said, King Airs, etc..

I didn't realize the ATR fuselage was wider than the Q400; I generally thought that was a larger aircraft in almost all respects.

Anyways, I think this concept has a TON of potential give recent advancements in turboprop technology, and the recent additional routes in the regional segment.
EstorilM is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.