The Dornier 328-100 cruised at 330 knots at 20k ft. With 32 ppl on board. It’s faster than every airliner you mention. It also out performs all of them at altitude. Manufacturing has restarted under SNC for there ISR program.
The videos, particularly of the Cheyenne 400LS show pictures of the Cheyenne 111 and even the Cheyenne 11. Non pilots won't recognize the difference. I have flown them all.
You could say much more about the Piaggio Avanti.. truly in a class very much of its own.. That egg-shell smooth construction is unique inasmuch as it being so smooth there's no need for any de-icing system, it just cannot accrete ice.. I believe it benefitted from roughly 50% more wind-tunnel development than is commonly required for a front-line fighter aircraft. It's service ceiling is 42,000 ft, way above any other turbo-prop, faster than the small CitationJets but with a cabin the size of a KingAir.. when flying, I could hear the conversation of the passengers behind me. It's also a pilot's dream when landing. :>) Only the price was against it.. at circa 6 million $$$ many corporate executives were reluctant to buy a turbo-prop. At the golf-club they prized their desire to state that they had a company 'jet'.
I’ve probably flown on that Pen Air Saab. I used to fly all over Alaska for work and sometimes we’d even charter a Cessna Conquest. In the 1980s I commuted to worked in a Convair 580 for a few years. The first turboprops I flew in were P-3s 50 years ago. I probably spent a few hundred hours in them going places as an avionics technician going around South America a few times and many flights across the Atlantic and a few patrols in the Mediterranean.
I love those Convair turboprops. Such beautiful smoke trails. There is one in freighter configuration that flies between Kelowna, BC, Canada and Vancouver, BC, YVR. I met one of the pilots and rented him an apartment in 2008. You must have some great memories of your flights. I flew aboard a B-25 at an airshow, and later a De Havilland Beaver and Twin Otter with floats. I was such a relaxed passenger in those legacy aircraft.
Hi I am from India and here 8n my country we talk speeds in km/ hr and not 8n mikes/ hr. I therefore thank you for mentioning the speeds in km/ hr too. Thanks once again.
no mention of the new ATR 72-600 in this video. . . the SAAB 2000 regional turbo-prop aircraft is a stretched variant of the SAAB 340 & considered one of the best turbo-prop out there . . . it's reliable & incorporates a solid airframe . . .
Writing a heap of patronising information and feeding it into an A1 voice program,then mating it with a heap of video clips does not make a good informative production. 2 out of 10
The Sabb is loud and well abused in icing conditions.. that seems to have replaced the ATR (that does still has icing problems) for a while. The Merlin, well many are configured to get below the 10 person limit and gross weight of 12k lb.. Faster than the King Air 200 but I read a bit more tricky to fly. My pick would be the Cheyenne 400 as it has the speed, altitude and range for the below 12k lb class although it is low production and that is why King Air tends to be king of this class Noise wise, Kin Air's tend to rule due to the propellers being in front of the cabin and cockpit..
I flew on P180 EVO some time ago. Typical was 360-370 TAS on FL340-380, max power setting limited by 765 ITT. To get 401kt TAS you need to have ISA or below and push the engines up to 820 ITT, which significantly reduces the life of engines. Also, bear in mind that 9 pax is only achivable with 1 pax sitting in the toilet and one in the cockpit and they are childrens and fly without luggage 😂 otherwise MZFM will be exeeded. Harsh reality with 2 crew- 4 pax max, or 5 adults, but with 70% of fuel. 1000 nm with reserves. If more needed, pray for tailwind. Or max range speed and FL410.
HAHAHAHAHAHA, RIGHT. 5 thosuand EQSHP a side-with NO full span spar. Let's consider-having to replace aileron control cables-at EVERY 2C inspection. 4000 FH. Then let's consider flap roller fittings-at the same interval. Just for starters. Uh-NO. No fan of the Another Toulouse Reject-but sorry pal. FAA A & P 30 years heavy DC-9 MD-80 ATR42 ATR 72. And DHC-8-400.
@@pampasspmw you have a point right there-ATR engineering support is non existent UNTIL one coughs several thousand Euros or whatever-and then it is questionable at best.
The ATR won't carry enough ice to chill a highball. I have been in situations where I was at full power, de-icing on and had to call ATC to tell them I couldn't maintain altitude.
Interesting point however you are wrong. There are many airlines flying ATR42/72 in constant winter, snow, potential icing conditions with zero problems and incidents or crashes such as Finnair of Finland, DAT in danmark, different companies in Scandinavia Japan airlines regional partners, Hokkaido air system in snowy areas as Sapporo for example etc. The point is, every airplane has reduced performance in icing condition but pilots need to know and be aware of limitations. Regarding this in latest crash of Voepass in Brasil, there were several icing alarms not adresse and in key moment there was flight attendant present in cockpit distracting pilots in crucial situation. It is alwasy number of factors to be considered when it is most tragic outcome.
True that, but the narrator of this video kept mispronouncing the current company's name, 'Bombardier'. Hint: the r at the end is silent; think of how it would be in French since it is a French-Canadian company.
@@jerryrobison3262 Fun thing is that I worked on these birds when they first came out and were being flown by Eastern Metro Express airline. Really good bird compared to the little Jetstream 31 they were flying at the same time.
I have about 1,000 hours in the SAAB 340. It is a fine flying machine but fast is isn't!! It is a miserable climbing airplane in the summer and to fly it at those speeds you named you would almost have to abuse the engines at low altitudes!! PLUS, you were about 100 knots too fast for the Piaggio EVO. So far as the ATR is concerned, ask the people of Brazil what they think of it. From a specs standpoint this is a terrible video!!
Thank you for the very interesting information. Try to be specific and to call an aeroplane or airplane what it is. Aircraft goes also for helicopters and is NOT specific. Try to avoid the "air-craaahft"- fever that so many of experts unfortunately like to use.
As far as Merlin’s go we figure Ed Sweargin caught his wife with a mechanic and build the Merlin’s to get revenge on mechanics. I wonder how much beech lost on starships. They were always breaking. Finally beech tried to recoup some of their money by leasing starships.
The FAA as Beechcraft aviation trying to get it certified but the feds. Did not want to certify. This aircraft because the all carbon used to make this aircraft.
How about the EMB-120 Brasilia, and the Dornier 328?
The Dornier 328-100 cruised at 330 knots at 20k ft. With 32 ppl on board. It’s faster than every airliner you mention. It also out performs all of them at altitude. Manufacturing has restarted under SNC for there ISR program.
The videos, particularly of the Cheyenne 400LS show pictures of the Cheyenne 111 and even the Cheyenne 11. Non pilots won't recognize the difference. I have flown them all.
Fantastic video! I kept waiting for the Mitsubishi MU-2 with a cruising speed of 357 mph and STOL performance.
Yep. Good 'ol MuMu. Fast-and able to operate out of 1500 ft gravel/grass strips. Full span Fowler flaps.
@@stevenrobinson2381 Everyone skips the MU-2 for some reason.
I just bought one.
The Dornier 328-100 cruised at 330 knots at 20k ft. With 32 ppl on board.
You could say much more about the Piaggio Avanti.. truly in a class very much of its own.. That egg-shell smooth construction is unique inasmuch as it being so smooth there's no need for any de-icing system, it just cannot accrete ice.. I believe it benefitted from roughly 50% more wind-tunnel development than is commonly required for a front-line fighter aircraft. It's service ceiling is 42,000 ft, way above any other turbo-prop, faster than the small CitationJets but with a cabin the size of a KingAir.. when flying, I could hear the conversation of the passengers behind me. It's also a pilot's dream when landing. :>) Only the price was against it.. at circa 6 million $$$ many corporate executives were reluctant to buy a turbo-prop. At the golf-club they prized their desire to state that they had a company 'jet'.
Fl410 max
I’ve probably flown on that Pen Air Saab. I used to fly all over Alaska for work and sometimes we’d even charter a Cessna Conquest. In the 1980s I commuted to worked in a Convair 580 for a few years. The first turboprops I flew in were P-3s 50 years ago. I probably spent a few hundred hours in them going places as an avionics technician going around South America a few times and many flights across the Atlantic and a few patrols in the Mediterranean.
I love those Convair turboprops. Such beautiful smoke trails. There is one in freighter configuration that flies between Kelowna, BC, Canada and Vancouver, BC, YVR. I met one of the pilots and rented him an apartment in 2008. You must have some great memories of your flights. I flew aboard a B-25 at an airshow, and later a De Havilland Beaver and Twin Otter with floats. I was such a relaxed passenger in those legacy aircraft.
If talking fast, the Saab 2000 cruising at 370kts should be mentioned.
or the german dornier do 328 wit 330 kts
The Jetstream 41 is the hottest of them all. It even had a TAS gauge, which would show 300 Knots- true.
I don’t know…that sounds like it’s…
Knots-True!😂
Hi I am from India and here 8n my country we talk speeds in km/ hr and not 8n mikes/ hr. I therefore thank you for mentioning the speeds in km/ hr too. Thanks once again.
no mention of the new ATR 72-600 in this video. . . the SAAB 2000 regional turbo-prop aircraft is a stretched variant of the SAAB 340 & considered one of the best turbo-prop out there . . . it's reliable & incorporates a solid airframe . . .
Writing a heap of patronising information and feeding it into an A1 voice program,then mating it with a heap of video clips does not make a good informative production.
2 out of 10
Agreed. Accent variations are intolerable. The video does not even compare like with like. 1 out of 10.
The Sabb is loud and well abused in icing conditions.. that seems to have replaced the ATR (that does still has icing problems) for a while. The Merlin, well many are configured to get below the 10 person limit and gross weight of 12k lb.. Faster than the King Air 200 but I read a bit more tricky to fly. My pick would be the Cheyenne 400 as it has the speed, altitude and range for the below 12k lb class although it is low production and that is why King Air tends to be king of this class Noise wise, Kin Air's tend to rule due to the propellers being in front of the cabin and cockpit..
I flew on P180 EVO some time ago. Typical was 360-370 TAS on FL340-380, max power setting limited by 765 ITT. To get 401kt TAS you need to have ISA or below and push the engines up to 820 ITT, which significantly reduces the life of engines. Also, bear in mind that 9 pax is only achivable with 1 pax sitting in the toilet and one in the cockpit and they are childrens and fly without luggage 😂 otherwise MZFM will be exeeded. Harsh reality with 2 crew- 4 pax max, or 5 adults, but with 70% of fuel. 1000 nm with reserves. If more needed, pray for tailwind. Or max range speed and FL410.
nice video
Shame you missed the MU2 Mitsubishi
Exactly what I was thinking. Love your channel BTW 👍
DHC-8. The airplane the ATR wants to be!
HAHAHAHAHAHA,
RIGHT. 5 thosuand EQSHP a side-with NO full span spar.
Let's consider-having to replace aileron control cables-at EVERY 2C inspection. 4000 FH. Then let's consider flap roller fittings-at the same interval. Just for starters.
Uh-NO. No fan of the Another Toulouse Reject-but sorry pal.
FAA A & P 30 years heavy DC-9 MD-80 ATR42 ATR 72. And DHC-8-400.
I to am a A&P and have 20+ on both ATR and Dash and would rather work a Dash. I cant stand the ATR or there engineering support.
@@pampasspmw you have a point right there-ATR engineering support is non existent UNTIL one coughs several thousand Euros or whatever-and then it is questionable at best.
Who narrates these things? Can someone please tell this person it's a King Air...not a Super King...(long pause).....Air 350...
The piaggio avanti evo is 402 knots, not 500 knots. It’s the only turboprop aircraft which flies at an altitude of FL410 (41000 feet).
Piaggio. Italy. For the Eyetalians.
Which one is more reliable, T.p.engines or jet engines?
ATR-42/72 is not a safe airplane when get icy wings ! reengineering is necessary.
Most planes aren’t. Also the pilot needs to stay ahead of any icing conditions with equipment for de-icing.
The ATR won't carry enough ice to chill a highball. I have been in situations where I was at full power, de-icing on and had to call ATC to tell them I couldn't maintain altitude.
Interesting point however you are wrong. There are many airlines flying ATR42/72 in constant winter, snow, potential icing conditions with zero problems and incidents or crashes such as Finnair of Finland, DAT in danmark, different companies in Scandinavia Japan airlines regional partners, Hokkaido air system in snowy areas as Sapporo for example etc. The point is, every airplane has reduced performance in icing condition but pilots need to know and be aware of limitations. Regarding this in latest crash of Voepass in Brasil, there were several icing alarms not adresse and in key moment there was flight attendant present in cockpit distracting pilots in crucial situation. It is alwasy number of factors to be considered when it is most tragic outcome.
you say the merlin but show the metro
Just keep the ATR away from icing conditions.
Just one thing ! You forgot the EMB-120 Brasilia, the turboprop plane is faster the the Saab 340 aircraft !!!
Saab 340 not 3 hundred and forty
How many ot the Saabs have crashed?
Yes, just checked.. Most I ever tried for was 40k at the factory in Genoa.. Still, amazing turbo-prop :>)
Cessna 441 not four hundred and forty one
The number 340 sure gets used a lot in aviation. You have the Airbus A340..Convair 340, Cessna 340 and the Saab 340....any others??
The DHC-8, otherwise known as the Dash-8, was created by DeHavilland Corporation.
True that, but the narrator of this video kept mispronouncing the current company's name, 'Bombardier'. Hint: the r at the end is silent; think of how it would be in French since it is a French-Canadian company.
@@jerryrobison3262 Fun thing is that I worked on these birds when they first came out and were being flown by Eastern Metro Express airline. Really good bird compared to the little Jetstream 31 they were flying at the same time.
@@jerryrobison3262it is being built by dehaviland Canada again,this time in Alberta
I have about 1,000 hours in the SAAB 340. It is a fine flying machine but fast is isn't!! It is a miserable climbing airplane in the summer and to fly it at those speeds you named you would almost have to abuse the engines at low altitudes!! PLUS, you were about 100 knots too fast for the Piaggio EVO. So far as the ATR is concerned, ask the people of Brazil what they think of it. From a specs standpoint this is a terrible video!!
I rode in a Saab 340 between between milwaukee and cincinnati. It had a deferred rudder limiter. About a hundred and fifty knots.
Put an "s" on the end of the word airplane to make it plural.
So for your first example you cite an aircraft that went out of production a quarter century ago? LOL
No Mu-2, faster than most of the planes in this video.
Wasnt the Merlin known for a large number of ADs and poor reliability??
Antonov 140?
Ilyushin 114?
Thank you for the very interesting information. Try to be specific and to call an aeroplane or airplane what it is. Aircraft goes also for helicopters and is NOT specific. Try to avoid the "air-craaahft"- fever that so many of experts unfortunately like to use.
As far as Merlin’s go we figure Ed Sweargin caught his wife with a mechanic and build the Merlin’s to get revenge on mechanics.
I wonder how much beech lost on starships. They were always breaking. Finally beech tried to recoup some of their money by leasing starships.
The FAA as Beechcraft aviation trying to get it certified but the feds. Did not want to certify. This aircraft because the all carbon used to make this aircraft.
For Fs sake! Does tell us the damn speed instead of making a suffer through three minutes of boring, statistics, and filler. Thumbs down.
Twin turboprop aircraft are very difficult to handle during an engine failure at takeoff.
No, they are not. I have 5000 hrs in the EMB-120 and the average pilot has no problems with engine out procedures.
Q400
Its not three hundred and forty, its simply three hundred forty. 👎
actually, its simply 340 as in 3 followed by 40, no use of "hundred" or "and"
@@larryfreeman7979 Nope, three hundred forty.
ATR is a pile of crapppp!