Embraer Confirms Postponement Of Turboprop Project
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ธ.ค. 2022
- Brazilian aircraft manufacturer Embraer has been showing interest in developing a next-generation turboprop aircraft for some time now, and the news has been warmly received in most circles - after all, it's been a very long time since anyone came to market with a clean-sheet turboprop design. Despite the positive reception, Embraer has now confirmed to Simple Flying that it has decided to suspend the program.
Article: simpleflying.com/embraer-turb...
Our Social Media:
/ simpleflyin. .
/ simple_flying
/ simpleflying. .
Our Website
simpleflying.com/
For copyright matters please contact us at: legal@valnetinc.com - บันเทิง
![แขกคนแรกร้านแจ๊ส [ซี - เอมมี่] | iJazzKhunJang](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XP6C9kulFfc/mqdefault.jpg)
to me, yes it's a shame that it's been held back, but, with that being said, the engineers and program managers might have had a meeting to discuss how to make sure that this new aircraft will not have to endure the same problems that the bigger manufacturer's have had and want to get it right the first time. just my 2 cents on this issue. we have waited this long (over 30 years), so why not wait a little longer? good things come to those that wait.
They are certainly more green engines to be more developed before going forward with the project, Embraer do not manufacture the engines and there are no really game changes in the near future. RISE is still slated to much later in the decade. Embraer could probably make this turboprop available very fast but it would not have the economy/green credentials they want. Makes total sense to delay a little.
GE's T901 is at least 20% more efficient than the T700/CT7 is replaces, so it would definitely provide game-changing efficiency.
PW150C is brand new.
They wont develop a new engine when they only sold a hand-full of this engines.
Isn't the RISE project a little too big on an engine to serve on this potential aircraft from Embraer. I feel like Embraer's best option is to consult Pratt and Whitney Canada, who produced the PT6 and also some other engines that are found on turboprops like the Dash 8, ATR, and Embraer's past regional turboprops and also some jet engines found on Embraer's business jets. P&W Canada come out with updated models every now and then with higher efficiency, one of those might be perfect for Embraer.
@@thecaynuck he project is a proof of concept, and even so it is indented initially for close/mid range aircrafts so even if it is too big for a regional jet, once the concept works they can certainly design different sizes for different needs. The proof of concept engine will also probably tell them how small or how big they can go. Curiously, the RISE design allows for more thrust with smaller fans than conventional jet engines thanks to the open fan, so a small engine would generate more thrust.
That’s disappointing. We need a new turboprop as the Dash 8 and ATR designs are over 30 years old now and highly unlikely to take much more improvements without compromise
There is Airbus zeroE 100 seat hydrogen powered turboprop aircraft being a possible replace for the ATR72.
@@chrismckellar9350 That one will likely take even longer to develop as Airbus who are the main shareholder of ATR currently have little reason to build it without another new turboprop design
@@filledwithvariousknowledge2747 But if what PWC can offer is nothing better than a PW127XT, Embraer simply can't squeeze much gains over an updated ATR72.
It seems Airbus has been unenthusiastic on even stretching it for the same reason.
There are Q400's that were built within the past 10 years and have all the modernization improvements Bombardier gave them. They aren't all 30 years old.
@@thecaynuckBut the basic design is
good to see turboprops come back, even if it’ll take a while
The reason this project had to be put on hold is that there is no turboprop engine that could deliver the performance, reliability, and efficiency needed for this concept to go ahead as planned, and current engines all fall short of what's needed.
Also, this plane was designed from the start to be compatible with the CFM Rise engines as soon as they hit the market, and even facilitating a possible engine conversion of any predecessor engine used. The CFM Rise was delayed to much later in the decade, and with no suitable current engine in sight it makes no sense going further in its development.
In the end, Embraer has over 50 years of experience building turboprops for regional passanger and gargo civilian and military aviation, it is a product they can put to market very fast as soon as they have a suitable engine.
It seems that Embraer is waiting for the outcome of the type of the next generations of engines will power the next generation of turboprop aircraft especially since Airbus is planing for SAF and hydrogen engines for the 100 seat zeroE turboprop as a possible replacement for the ATR72 aircraft and Heart's 30 seat battery/electric turboprop ES-30 aircraft.
At least it’s not cancelled
That's a pity but I can understand their reasoning behind it. I'd like if they took the risk and went for it though.
I can't imagine the decision was one they wanted to make but if suppliers can't deliver what they need then it makes more sense to pause development instead of wasting resources just sitting around waiting for the right parts. I don't doubt this will get developed eventually and I'm sure Porter will be one of the airlines jumping on it to replace their dash 8s, especially now that they've started a relationship with Embraer with the E2s which are unlikely to be allowed at YTZ for the foreseeable future
For us old timers, its just an updated DC-9/MD80/717 with more efficient engines.
The MD-80 program actually experimented with similar turboprop engines that actually worked a lot more like jets. It never went to service, partly due to the extreme noise and other problems, but you can still see videos of the application.
It’s too bad.
Hopefully they don’t scrap the project entirely
Demand is quite viable, so hopefully an unlikely prospect.
Really good vid!
I'd move forward with it. Oil prices are going to achieve a new high due to limited exploration and discoveries globally. Efficiency will be key moving forward.
Oil prices will take a ling time to rise to current values again.
There are plenty of reserves left.
Awwhh man how cool would it be if Alaska/Horizon ordered these to replace dash 8s. Though pretty sure they’re not interested in props anymore and are going to be all ERJ 175
One thing is Americans are more negative towards turboprops than their counterparts on other continents.
Also the cost structure of regional airlines in North America seems to have favoured regional jets as well.
And to be fair, to match the performance and payload of regional jets, Dash 8 is not super efficient compared to jets, especially when the development of new turboprop engines seems to have plateaued.
@@steinwaldmadchen Dash 8 is efficient compared to jets, depending on the route length. Turboprops are more fuel-efficient on shorter routes, while jets are the better option for fuel efficiency sake on longer routes.
@@thecaynuck The question is by how much?
According to Wikipedia, Q400 burns around 25% less than CRJ700 and E170. Considering fuel is just 20%~40% of cost for a regional flight, this is far from decisive. Worse still, the lead evaporates when E2 and A220 easily burn 15~20% less than their predecessors, while the latest PW100 turboprop is just a few percent better than the one on early Q400.
ATR72, meanwhile burns just half the fuel of comparable regional jet like CRJ700 and E170. But this aircraft is strictly regional in terms of range, payload and speed.
Smaller airports cannot accomodate jets even small ones. That's why the turboprops are so popular. The Q400 is an amazing plane and adapts to all situations. Do we need a new one ? Is it economically feasible ? I think Embraer just answered our questions.
Don't forget the 50 seat ATR42-600 and ATR42-600S (short land/take off) and the 70 seat ATR72-600
Where are those airports wich can't accomodate jets?
That was true 40 years ago.
Is it still true today?...
@@chrismckellar9350 Yes you're right. I mention the Q400 bcz it's Canadian made and I,m Canadian.
@@tiagogomes3807 In Canada, Toronto has an airport with regular scheduled flights that cannot accept jets; check out YTZ. There are likely more..
@@Steve-xf4uv - Okay :)
Simple fly ☺
They need the CFM rise
I suppose for most airports and airlines,it is impossible to get saf at the moment.?or hydrogen.🤔✈️🕊️
I cannot understand why the New Rear Engined Turbo Prop has been postponed unless there are a lot more problems to fitting the Engines on the rear than they realized? let's look at Aircraft that did have rear engines, the one I have in mind was the Vickers VC 10 of some years ago, to fit four heavy Rolls Royce Conway Jet Engines a special beam had to be included in the Building to carry the weight, plus a very large Tailplane, To come back to Embaerer the Aircraft looks a proven design that is modified but to do a simulation picture is one thing, but to actually build an Aircraft is another, and the cost might have been a lot more than they realized ? nevertheless, the Idea and the design look good, and we all know that rear-engined Aircraft have in the past been quiet to fly in.
I feel if Embaerer does not build this Aircraft they could be throwing away the design idea to ATR.
Yes, I don't.
Two words: 'no engine'
With manufacturers turning away from smaller aircraft, there's a need for a turboprop in the 50 seat range for regional services.
Manufacturers are handing a nice chunk of the Third World to the Ilyushin 114-300.
Text and narration great. Trying to hear it through the totally unnecessary music sucked.
Is this a matter of consumer preference for turbofan jets instead of turboprops over the noise issue. That turboprops feather the prop to get better fuel economy is outweighed by extra complexity and maintenance costs??? Do consumers prefer a jet on the wing to one on the rear of the hull??
What are the benefits of turboprops over jets? Should we ask the major US airlines to bring turboprops back to their regular schedules?
Generally better short field capabilities. Shorter routes are best
Better fuel efficiency.
@@CheapBastard1988 and how does the fuel efficiency of a propeller plane compare to a bus or a boat for shot hops?
On shorter regional routes, they are more efficient than turbofan jets. Due to their STOL capabilities, they're able to land at smaller airports with no problems as well. Turboprops are actually jets with a propeller attached instead of a fan.
Sadly I think another aircraft manufacturer might take this opportunity to jump in and run with the concept and leave them behind. China anyone???
Possibly but part of me isn’t sure whether they’ll base it on an ancient design previously licensed built
There’s no market in China for this kind of plane. There’s no such thing as “low density” in China and even if there was, their train network competes with those routes.
China's not going to gain much customers outside of China, and their market doesn't call for turboprops anyways due to their country's density.
knew this scheme is just marketing.
I can understand some of the logic behind the postponement of the project. The turboprop Embraer could be a form of "industrial suicide". In my neck of the woods, Q400s are replaced by E175s. Would an Embraer turboprop directly compete with its own E175?
The Embraer next generation of 100 seat turboprop aircraft would compliment the E-Jet E2 family.
The E175 does not seem like a suitable replacement for the Q400. They fit different markets. Are you talking about Horizon Air by any chance, who recently just retired their Q400 through a special commemorativelast flight?
New Turboprop investment can only be justified of they provide 33% economics per seat to E series or A220 or smaller CRJ, 90% performance of range and speed of those regional turbofan. If not smaller regional turbofan will make those investments not worthy.
There are a lot of airports that have short runways for jets even Embraer's E-Jet E2 jets. ATR has a range of turboprop aircraft range from the 50 seat ATR42-600, ATR42-600s (Short landing/take off) and the 68-70 sear ATR72-600.
The new turboprop, while slower, was of a size to compete with the E-Jet family and Airbus A220s. Turboprops are more complex powertrains with greater risk of rock strike on a prop. Maintenance must cost more, costs more than fuel savings???
Passengers perceive turboprops as noisy, cramped, slow. Fan jets are the future for small turbine engines. Electric will go fans as quiet and can use 'blown' wing effect.
The A220 isn't really a regional aircraft, it used to be marketed as such but its range and size has made it more of a mainline fleet. The E-jet is kind of that middle ground. Turboprops, however, are more regional.
… should’ve been a pusher design … 🙄🤷🏽🤔
************ EMBRAER **************!
It’s nice that the props are behind the passengers in this design. Not just for noise, but for when the blades shed and come through the fuselage.
That's extremely rare in a turboprop aircraft. It's so rare that it's considered a non-issue.
They already had enhancements for the extremely rare chance of that happening. The fuselage right next to the props is structurally reinforced. It's extremely unlikely event anyways, and it can happen to jet engines too, as we saw with that Southwest engine failure that killed a woman sitting next to the engine.
I expect there to be interest in this aircraft in the America's and lower density locations in Asia. It's pretty much useless in Europe where the number of slots is limited and there's less and less point in using regional jets. The number of seats in regional jets just isn't enough, and this turboprop has the same problem. If it could move 200-250 passengers with very high fuel efficiency, things would be different. Then it could be ideal for very short haul flights.
Indeed is indeed your favourite word! 😝😂
Airbus might took this opportunity ‼️
What's interesting is that Airbus technically owns the ATR, so any new turboprop they design would affect ATR sales.
No, mistake not going ahead with the project!
What killed it: the Heart Aerospace ES-30.
Still very much untested.
@@Gameflyer001 It's real, instead of the Embraer that is just a drawing still years away of any testing, using old tech. I really hope that they come with something better than this tp.
Wow, talk about rose coloured glasses. That aircraft has, objectively, no foreseeable real-world airline utility and is, essentially, a platform for politically-motivated virtue-signalling for incredibly woke airlines like Air Canada.
This project already joined the European Regional Airlines Association, and with shareholders such as Saab and Bill Gates, with more than 200 orders from United Airlines, Mesa, Sevenair and others, it's the future, no matter the opinion of misinformed amateurs.
That project's going to be interesting to see if it works out
I expect part of the reason is to conserve cash. The E2 has sold poorly so that's not helping their cash reserves.
Finally even a manufacturer gets that prop planes are not efficient as jet planes
That's not true. On shorter regional routes, turboprops are more efficient than turbofan jets. Only on longer routes are jets more efficient. Due to their STOL capabilities, they're able to land at smaller airports with no problems as well. The future actually favors turboprops and also open-fan turbojets. Plus, turboprops are actually jets with a propeller attached instead of a fan. Turboprops aren't your typical piston engine planes you associate with propeller planes, it's modern engine technology.
@Narbo not necessarily. If I am going from Houston to Boumont then I might as well just drive there. If I am going from Houston to Little Rock Arkansas I would rather take an E145 which is faster rather then a slow prop plane that can barely handle speed.
It made no sense
Bombardier left the Q400 to rot, even though it was the best selling plane in its category. Why? To redirect efforts towards the CSeries, which they were not capable of selling anyway, and even if they did, they could never manufacture it (not enough capital by far). They sold the CSeries to Airbus for... 1$! And then the company for dismantled, with the Q400 going to some never heard of group.
Again first in comment 😮😂
When?
What motivated you to be first at a nothing burger ?
Not the the right time = No one actually wants to buy it