Turboprops are sexier; change my mind

Tools said:
Ya, no. Jets are sexier.
Click to expand...

False
dd5f68b61b6ff9f139f4d69e4e6a8997.jpg
 
Sac Arrow said:
I mean, both of them are butt ugly, so it's all relative.
Click to expand...
Thank you. That was my thought. Some might call them sexy, but some guys like fat broads too. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm not one of them.
 
As far as sound goes:

I fly King Airs and Challengers for work. Audio-wise, there is no comparison, the King Air wins.

From startup with that "fwoosh" when you introduce fuel, to the roar of the props, the feather check, the pitch change when going into ground fine during taxi, or reverse when landing, yeah that's all eargasm material.

The Challenger is just so sterile audio-ly by comparison.
 
Someone post that abomination of the converted to turboprop Beech 18 compared with a radial version to let the OP know he is on crack.
 
RussR said:
As far as sound goes:

I fly King Airs and Challengers for work. Audio-wise, there is no comparison, the King Air wins.

From startup with that "fwoosh" when you introduce fuel, to the roar of the props, the feather check, the pitch change when going into ground fine during taxi, or reverse when landing, yeah that's all eargasm material.

The Challenger is just so sterile audio-ly by comparison.
Click to expand...
The old B200T and the B350s have always been my secret airplane crush!
 
Turboprops are definitely cooler, but the jets are usually far better at paying my bills.
 
Groundpounder said:
That's it?
Click to expand...
I had to read that a few times too. I concluded that "one" meant a turboprop, like a King Air or something, NOT a DO-328, which wouldn't be at a small airport and which would take a lot more fuel than $2600 worth.
 
popPilot said:
For some reason I find the Dornier 328 sexier than the Dornier 328JET.
Click to expand...
The Dornier 328 is an awesome airplane. Never got to fly one, but for a turboprop they were fast and for a jet they were slow.

Thought they had some pretty good tech in the cockpit for an early 90s design.

My 3000 hours in Dash 8 classics had me envying the speed of the 328. We had a 4 tube EFIS with dual UNS1s and even a HUD for the Captain but 265 knots true was painstakingly slow some days. If I remember right the DO328 was around 330 kts true.

In my fueling days the old guys talked about being able to rock the wings pretty good with just a slight pull on single point hose when it was connected to the right wing. I’ve always remembered that for some reason.

They’re (the TP version) largely gone in the US, regionals retired them in the early 00s. There were some outfitted for corporate use and Corning Glass had a few of those. I think the Army has some now, but that’s about it. There’s still some D328jets being flown by Key Lime / Denver Air Connection to Telluride.
 
Before I knew what a Dornier was or how to even pronounce it:

Napa Ground - "Arrow Seven Four Two, do you see that Dornier ahead of you?"

Arrow 742 - "Uh, well, I see a big jet looking thing in front of me."

Napa Ground - "Arrow Seven Four Two, follow the big jet looking thing to runway one eight right."
 
This is what I think of when someone says Dornier
 

Attachments

  • Do228NG_-_RIAT_2012_(18649688613).jpg
    Do228NG_-_RIAT_2012_(18649688613).jpg
    801.3 KB · Views: 11
EdFred said:
Someone post that abomination of the converted to turboprop Beech 18 compared with a radial version to let the OP know he is on crack.
Click to expand...

I can't help with the first but here's the second.

 
I saw the jet version of the Dornier while waiting for a CRJ at KAVP. To me, both versions look like winged potatoes.

I like sleek airplanes.

I-MARB-01.jpg


500px-T-7A_Red_Hawk_over_Edwards_Air_Force_Base.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top