On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:31:17 -0700 (PDT), parris_k@yahoo.com wrote:
>On 21 Apr, 11:00, john_k...@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote:
>> Finally, an EADS plane that may actually make money.
>
>Are you claiming the Airbusses don't make money?
No, I was joking about the A380.
>
>> CO is already
>> flying a bunch of Q400s for the reasons given here. =A0The difference in
>> flying times on short routes is negligible. =A0Comfort differences who
>> knows, but probably not much over short distances either. =A0The
>> military has been flying C130 turbos forever. =A0Wonder if this is part
>> of the reason?
>
>No. The reasoning behind the C130 was short take off and landing on
>rough strips. Turboprops are (or at least were, at that time) better
>for STOL operations as they can develop more power at low speeds than
>a comparable jet engine, for one thing. The C130 isn't exactly short-
>range either.
True, which is why I said I wondered if it was part of the reason, not
the only one.
|