All internal combustion engines work the same. A turbine
just does it as a series of continuous events in different
sections of the engine and a piston engine does one at a
time so power is produced only 1/4 of the time in a 4 cycle
and 1/2 the time in a two cycle.
I'm going to print some T-shirts...

"SUCK
SQUEEZE
BANK and
BLOW

Get your mind out of the gutter, it is an engine"


The P&W PT6 is perhaps the most popular turboprop. It uses
air coupling between the power and reduction gear section.
Makes it better in many ways, but there is a loss of
efficiency.


"Emily" wrote in message
...
| cjcampbell wrote:
| Emily wrote:
| cjcampbell wrote:
| Mxsmanic wrote:
| cjcampbell writes:
|
| A turborprop
| increases safety, but now you are talking real
money, both in
| acquisition cost and in fuel and maintenance.
| Why are turboprops so much more expensive? I thought
gas turbines
| were supposed to be simpler and more efficient.
| They are simple, but much less efficient than piston
engines.
| Plus, parts are a lot more expensive and when things go
very bad, the
| maintenance costs are a lot more than a piston. That
alone scares a lot
| of operators off.
|
| Ok, actually, I don't know much about turboprops, but
that's the case
| for turbofans.
|
| From a maintenance standpoint, just think of a turboprop
as being a
| turbofan with a lot less blades.
|
| LOL...yeah, the whole gas generator and power tubine thing
seems a
| little to complex. I'm sure at some point I understand
it, but you
| forget what you don't use.