1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

More efficient: prop or jet?

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by caliginousface, Dec 5, 2007.

  1. caliginousface

    caliginousface Frank N. Beans

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    42
    Hey all,
    Had a friend ask me, a plane a prop and jet of similar size, which is more efficient. Would like to hear more than just opinion if that's not too much to ask. Thanks!
  2. jynxyjoe

    jynxyjoe The Kickin' Chicken!

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2007
    Messages:
    4,025
    Likes Received:
    1,794

    depends. long haul its more efficient for a jet, short haul its t-prop time.

    watch the new dash 8 -400's blow the doors off 50-70 seaters on short hauls
  3. caliginousface

    caliginousface Frank N. Beans

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    42
    What qualifies as short and long haul?
  4. USMC-SSGT

    USMC-SSGT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,808
    Likes Received:
    53
    typically around 500 miles or less
  5. Mr.Maximus

    Mr.Maximus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    0
    Depends entirely on the mission. Type of flying I do - coast to coast & international - there is only one choice, and it has to cruise above .80M.
  6. caliginousface

    caliginousface Frank N. Beans

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    42
    Thanks for the answers btw, but he wants more that I can't give him (I'm a bad lover?).

    So...Why is a prop more efficient for short hauls. Why can they fly faster arrivals and/or approaches?
  7. E6BAV8R

    E6BAV8R New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    1
    The ole' shiny jets are much slicker through the air and therefore make it much harder for them to slow down so they generally have to start slowing down miles before a t-prop would.

    T-props have the huge props sticking out there that create massive amounts of drag and weight and it makes the airplane much easier to slow down if desired, as well as having the ability to move the prop angles to also help you in slowing down.

    In lamens terms ;)
  8. Cessnaflyer

    Cessnaflyer ?

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2006
    Messages:
    6,352
    Likes Received:
    1,136
    Enter the Unducted Prop Fan.

    [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva][FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva][FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0001821/L/[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

    I really wish this would come to fruition.
  9. Dugie8

    Dugie8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    1,191
    Depends on your definition of "efficient". The PC12 can carry more gas than most people have space in their bladder, that can be called efficient. A DC8 can carry about 95,000#s about 4500 miles on 150,000 pounds of fuel, that can be called efficient.

    Time and fuel used aren't always the best benchmarks, but they are probably the most common.
  10. Derg

    Derg Major Domo Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1969
    Messages:
    21,935
    Likes Received:
    20,140
    Depends on how far you'd like to fly!

    Jets whizz a lot of gas below the tropopause and you don't enjoy the economics of a jet until you're able to get up high and cruise for a long time.

    Turboprops are very efficient in the teens and low 20's.
  11. MusketeerMan

    MusketeerMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,632
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmmmmm.....well, I can go from Sacramento to San Diego in my Beech for about $175 AND stop on a dime. Can you?? :rolleyes:

    Oh yeah, it'll also take me about 4 1/2 hours.
  12. Realms09

    Realms09 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2002
    Messages:
    429
    Likes Received:
    0
    Different powerplants will be optimum for different speed (Mach) regimes.

    In order of increasing Mach,

    Turboprop -> Turbofan -> Turbojet -> Ramjet -> Scramjet -> Rocket

    Over short routes you are unlikely to average a high speed for very long, so there is no sense in carrying a high-speed powerplant. Even if each powerplant is operated in its optimum speed range, the turboprop will be the most fuel efficient. From an efficiency standpoint it is always better to accelerate a large mass of air a little bit than a small mass of air a whole lot. It would use less fuel to fly a turboprop transcon than it would an equivalent sized jet, but it would just take too damn long.
  13. Sidious

    Sidious Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Messages:
    869
    Likes Received:
    58

    That just looks wicked! Ive never even heard of this.
  14. B767Driver

    B767Driver New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    2,027
    Likes Received:
    6
    Just to add on...the propulsive efficiency of turborpops and jets have much to do with the speed at which they fly.

    A turboprop will reach about 80% efficiency at around 280kts, then drops off sharply.

    A jet's propulsive efficiency actually increases with speed. A jet would reach 100% propulsive efficiency if its inlet air equalled its exhaust velocity. Although efficient, you still have to throw a lot of fuel around to get the thrust levels to reach those speeds. Probably not a good idea on a 300 mile leg.

    So, the answer to your friend's question...how far do you want to fly?
  15. flyover

    flyover New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    On a transport type I'm guessing this would happen at some point after the wings separated from the fuselage? (Don't know much about arrowdynamics.)
  16. darrenf

    darrenf resident denizen

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Messages:
    11,634
    Likes Received:
    1,172
    I remember seeing these things in Popular Science in the early to mid 80's. I guess they haven't worked out so well, or the manufacturers are afraid of the public opinion regarding props.
  17. PeanuckleCRJ

    PeanuckleCRJ Poodle Wrangler

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    982
    Apparently the UDF made tremendous noise on the inside and outside as well as a lot of cabin vibration.
  18. taseal

    taseal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    0
    yeah I made a project on this. it was WAY too loud, vibrations were nuts, and wasn't as efficient as they thought ti would be.
  19. frog_flyer

    frog_flyer FredFlyer

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    4,887
    Likes Received:
    114
    I couldn't tell.
  20. caliginousface

    caliginousface Frank N. Beans

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    42
    Thanks for the responses!

Share This Page