>you will never fly aboard a Concorde why even live?

>why even live?
you're right, kys

>>1072071
Smaller cramped interior but jeez... across the Atlantic in 3.5 hrs instead of 8. And with people who can afford it, not the cheap losers on cheap flights. It would have been worth it.

>>1072079
>And with people who can afford it, not the cheap losers on cheap flights.
First class still exists, also Concorde's last days was full of ID75s

>>1072080
>First class still exists

Still 8 hours instead of 3.5

>>1072095
And you can't afford it either way, so, hmm. Go book your $199 each way flight to gatwick and grouse on the internet about how it's not like the good old days when people like you couldn't afford to travel

>>1072096
>you can't afford it either way

But that's wrong anon. Nice projection, though.

>>1072071
>Cries about old obsolete highly inefficient airplanes that nobody else cares about
Why don't you have a life? Are you confined to a wheelchair and/or are hideous and have no friends?

>>1072071

I saw the one in Seattle. The interior is incredibly small, not very nice at all actually, and the windows are tiny portholes.

No thanks.

>>1072071
My parents did. I was p jelly

>>1072121
christ you are angry
you realize we are on /n/ right?

File: Dornier-Do-228-turboprop-aircraft.jpg (301KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1000x667px

>the chance to fly in a commercial propeller aircraft is diminishing by the day

>>1072848
What? No it's not. There are tons of turboprop commercial aircraft still in use and still being sold.

I've never been on any plane. I'd imagine it would be pretty cool for like 10 minutes and then the next few hours would be as boring as riding a train.

>>1072851
It is getting quite harder in the US at least
There are only a couple of regional affiliates of the major air carriers who still have props
Many of the routes that used to be exclusively turboprop are now replaced with CRJs and the like which are actually not nearly as comfortable

American Eagle is down to one carrier with about 30 old DHC-8 100s and 200s due for retirement soon and only flying regional flights around Charlotte

United Express only has 1 carrier left with around 15 props mostly in and out of the short flights around the DC area

Delta Connection has gone completely regional jet after the last turboprop fleets were retired years ago

Alaska's affiliate Horizon Air still has a strong fleet of turboprops in the Northwest and still niche markets like Hawaii and Alaska with regularly scheduled turboprop service but its nowhere near what it used to be even 2-3 years ago.

>>1072977
>>1072851
People who are not plane foamers have a very strong bias against prop planes. Ask anyone who has worked in reservations, a common question is "that's not a prop is it?"

People will literally change their entire schedule around just to avoid flying on a scary prop plane.

The airlines know this, and are buying regional jets because it's the right business decision, regardless of how much it triggers autistic planefags who will argue about efficiency and how a turboprop is totally still a jet.

>>1072981
I know its to target the stupid who think props will kill them the moment they get in the cabin.
The CRJ is an uncomfortable piece of shit
The Dash 8s and Metroliners that used to commonly be on the routes I fly frequently were much more comfortable. With the CRJ they cram way too many seats in there and run less frequency

>>1072985
"Uncomfortable" could mean a lot of things. I am not a ham planet and small seats aren't that big a deal to me on short hops. I will say that other than the Q400, the noise and vibration difference between a prop and a CRJ is not trivial. I don't really have a big issue with this trend. Then again I am not as much of a plane foamer as some of you people. If I'm flying on a true museum piece, like an IL-62M, yeah, I'll get excited, but holy shit there is a thread in the catalog where some guy noticed that he flew on the same physical 767 for the second time in 8 years. Seriously guy? Who the fuck notices that shit? Are you people keeping a journal or something?

>>1072991
you clearly have never been to airliners.net

>>1072981
>People who are not plane foamers have a very strong bias against prop planes. Ask anyone who has worked in reservations, a common question is "that's not a prop is it?"
Yep
>People will literally change their entire schedule around just to avoid flying on a scary prop plane.
Yeah, but not because they're scary.

>>1072991
>the noise and vibration difference between a prop and a CRJ is not trivial.
It's because of this. Prop planes are just noisy as fuck inside, the NVH is exhausting.

>>1072985
>The Dash 8s and Metroliners that used to commonly be on the routes I fly frequently were much more comfortable. With the CRJ they cram way too many seats in there...
And if they were flying modernized Dash 8s instead of CRJs, they'd cram the seats in just as tightly. That's not a turboprops-vs-jets problem, that's an old-business-practice-vs-new problem.
>...and run less frequency
Yeah, it sucks. That's one of the few things I miss about smaller planes: frequent flights even at small regional airports.

>>1073002
Most props getting replaced with RJs are not modernized and it is quite the adjustment going from a prop where you had significantly more legroom and seat width to an RJ with more passenger density than it was originally envisioned to deal with.
Props had more weight limits which forced the airlines to spread seats apart and run more frequencies. I understand the business practices have changed but that doesn't make it right.