Top 5 Most Fuel-Efficient Turboprop Aircraft 2022-2023 | Price & Specs

Подписаться 55 тыс.

Просмотров 58 тыс.

50% 1

In this episode, we’ll take a look at the latest offerings from some of the best aircraft companies and discuss how much fuel each aircraft burns per hour. We have an exciting list of turboprops for you today, so please take your seat, fasten your seatbelts, and enjoy this one.
When buying a new plane or even just chartering one, the fuel efficiency rate along with the passenger capacity and range, is universally considered an important factor. When you buy a car, it's easier to find out how much gas it uses, because the technical specifications list it. When it comes to planes, however, things are a little bit trickier. Fuel costs can make up half, if not more of the aircraft's annual operating costs. For commercial jets and other large aircraft, these costs can range from hundreds of thousands to even millions of dollars. For the purpose of this list, we’ll look at the average fuel burn per hour, as well as some of their interesting features!
🛩️ If you enjoyed this episode, give us a LIKE, write a COMMENT, and SHARE the video!
🛩️ SUBSCRIBE and click the notification bell to get up-to-date with new uploads!
FOLLOW US:
/ aviationfederation
DONATE HERE:
www.buymeacoffee.com/AviationTV
OUR PLAYLIST:
• Top 5 Cheapest Private...
MORE VIDEOS:
Top 5 Most Fuel-Efficient Private Jets 2022-2023 | Price & Specs
• Top 5 Most Fuel-Effici...
Top 5 Most Expensive Turboprops 2021-2022 | Price & Specs
• Top 5 Most Expensive T...
Top 5 Fastest Turboprops 2021-2022 | Price & Specs
• Top 5 Fastest Turbopro...
EXTRA INFO:
Piaggio P.180 Avanti EVO
© Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A.
Engine Type: Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-66B Engine
Fuel Burn: 79 gallons per hour
Max Range: 1,770 nm
Max Cruise Speed: 402 kn
Price: starts at US$ 7.7 M
Pilatus PC-12 NGX
© Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.
Engine Type: Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6E-67XP Engine
Fuel Burn: 55 gallons per hour
Max Range: 1,803 nm
Max Cruise Speed: 290 kn
Price: starts at US$ 5.35 M
Kodiak 100
© Daher Group / Quest Kodiak
Engine Type: Pratt & Whitney PT6A-34 Engine
Fuel Burn: 45 gallons per hour
Max Range: 1,132 nm
Max Cruise Speed: 183 kn
Price: starts at US$ 2.2 M
Piper M600/SLS
© Piper Aircraft, Inc.
Engine Type: Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42A Engine
Fuel Burn: 39 gallons per hour
Max Range: 1,658 nmi
Max Cruise Speed: 274 kn
Price: starts at US $3.1 M
Daher TBM 940/960
© Daher Group / Daher TBM
Engine Type: Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A - 66D Engine
Fuel Burn: 37 gallons per hour
Max Range: 1,730 nm
Max Cruise Speed: 330 kn
Price: starts at US$ 4.45 M
OTHER VIDEOS:
Piston and Turboprop engines | What is the difference?
• Piston and Turboprop e...
5 Most Economical Private Jets In The World
• 5 Most Economical Priv...
Top 10 Turboprop Aircraft with Jet-Like Speeds but Cheaper Operating Costs
• Top 10 Turboprop Aircr...
DISCLAIMER:
The views expressed in our videos are our opinions and may not necessarily reflect those of the companies we feature.
Our content abides by the terms of Fair Use for education and commentary and the clips we feature in our editorials are owned by their respective copyright holders. The clips presented are for informational and non-commercial purposes only. For any business, media, or partnership inquiries, comment below or email: legal@emotionmedia.net
#FuelEfficient #TurbopropAircraft #Turboprops#AviationFederation

Наука

Опубликовано:

19 май 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 83

@AviationFederation Год назад

*What’s your assessment of these fuel-efficient turboprop aircraft? Which one deserves the top spot? Share your comments and flying experiences down below! To see more interesting aviation content, check out these other videos:* Top 5 Most Fuel-Efficient Private Jets 2022-2023 | Price & Specs ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MDv1qmdi_PI.html Top 5 Most Expensive Turboprops 2021-2022 | Price & Specs ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TOz14LOo-hE.html Top 5 Fastest Turboprops 2021-2022 | Price & Specs ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-IlwIybxx9w0.html&t

@jarrettporst4799 Год назад

Would love to see a breakdown for the top 5 turbo props then the top 5 jet aircraft and compare the weight moved over 1000miles and the cost of fuel to achieve.

@chikwenduobi6695 Год назад

Pilatus all the way.

@user-th4qb2ek9i Год назад

The "burn per hour" is not necessarily a good guide to efficiency, especially when speeds range from 183 to 402 KTS. Nautical miles per gallon should also be considered. This would still leave the Daher and Piper at 1 and 2, but the Pilatus would go up to 3, the Avanti to 4 and the Kodiak would drop to 5. If you factor in passengers and use gal/passenger mile, the Daher still wins,the Pilatus 2nd, the Kodiak 3rd, Avanti 4th and Piper 5th.

@cageordie Год назад

Or passenger miles per gallon. That's the best measure of commercial aircraft economics. The A220 can reach about 120 passenger miles per gallon.

@ubermenschen3636 Год назад

Nope. The Piaggio carries up to 10 passengers. Both the PC12 NGX and the P180 are the most efficient when measured by km/gal/ passenger.

@Molloy1951 4 месяца назад

Yessss

@ekaterina9555 Год назад

Really enjoyed! Thanks 👍

@patshes1951 Год назад

Kodiak 100 for me . Very practical aircraft. Thanks for the info Sophy.

@chinyereapakama298 5 месяцев назад

Insightful and straight to the point. Enjoyed the video. 😊😊😊😊

@cageordie Год назад

What about the Epic E1000? If I did my sums right you can load 2,300 pounds of people and cargo on an E1000, then brim the tanks with 1,100 pounds of fuel. At that load you have an 8,000 pound takeoff weight and can climb to FL340 in 15 minutes, then cut back to 265KIAS and cruise on for ove5 1600nm range. Autothrottle would be nice.

@patricksyquio5569 Год назад

Ur video has oriented me on turbo aircraft which has best fuel efficiency n price best value

@jeffreycash3662 Год назад

I love these vids.

@alkatelanis5412 11 месяцев назад

Nice video.

@robertwallace9215 11 месяцев назад

Very interesting line up, I personally like the TBM for the style and range. However the Kodak is a workhorse and is the bush pilot choice… I think the only thing missing from the safe land system is the parachute system of the Cirrus. If the TBM had that it would be mint.

@AviationFederation 11 месяцев назад

Safe and enjoyable flights, whether you opt for the sleek design of the TBM or the ruggedness of the Kodiak!

@ubermenschen3636 Год назад

The PC 12NGX should have the ‘go home’ or the emergency auto-land feature as part of the Honeywell avionic.

@philipcoombs6984 Год назад

DeHaviland Beaver and Twin Otter(DHC 6)? Reports would be much appreciated.

@larryswinford3472 Год назад

The Piper was pretty impressive to me. Thank you.

@AviationFederation 11 месяцев назад

You're welcome! We're glad you found the Piper impressive. Indeed, it's quite notable for its reliability and performance. Please stay tuned for more aviation content!

@billstreeter4716 Год назад

Nice

@drfranklowellrice5656 Год назад

TBM 940/960 will be my purchase

@kevinbarry71 Год назад

Airplanes have at least two fuel burn race at cruise. There's fast cruise and economy cruise. You don't mention which. Nor do you say the speeds quoted our fast cruise. I don't think you're going to get both the speed you mentioned, and the fuel economy you mentioned simultaneously.

@AviationFederation Год назад

Yes and no, but I understand your point. No reasonable pilot would think reaching the maximum speeds let alone cruise speeds will render the fuel burn rates indicated here.

@kevinbarry71 Год назад

@@AviationFederation I agree; so why not present both. Maximum cruise distance, and say the speed at which you would do it, and then maximum cruise and the fuel burn and distance you would get from that.

@stuw4055 Год назад

Yes. I agree. True efficiency should also be represented as fuel burn per Nautical Mile. Sure the Kodiac might burn less per hour but it also travels at roughly 2/3 the speed of the others. And where is the Epic e1000gx?

@DevrajSingh-qt2zk 8 месяцев назад

All 5 are good

@summittw Год назад

Missed the epic e1000

@drfranklowellrice5656 Год назад

I like the TBM 940/960

@lindseysmith5021 Год назад

Amphibious turbo prop aircraft

@OrLann-Tesseract- 9 месяцев назад

The Piaggio is really beautiful 😻

@AviationFederation 8 месяцев назад

The Piaggio Avanti Evo does have a striking and unique design that many find captivating! What aspects of its design do you find the most beautiful or appealing?

@RickarooCarew Год назад

so... I think... if fuel efficiency is a prominent feature in the budget... new turboprop aircraft are probably stretching that budget a bit... comfortable monthly payment doesn't sound very comfortable for long... but.. hey... I love this stuff

@RickarooCarew Год назад

te amo Piaggio ✌️❤️✌️

@cougarlove8542 Год назад

PC- 12 NGX would would be my choice.

@AirstripBum Год назад

My favorite is the PC-12.

@AviationFederation Год назад

You can never go wrong with that one! One of our absolute favourites here.

@kevingeary1472 Год назад

Epic e1000

@AviationFederation Год назад

Stay tuned for our upcoming special on the Epic E1000 GX!

@mafp22w Год назад

I would have liked to see the fuel used per mile traveled as well. A plane that flies twice as far in an hour that has twice the fuel burn, is the same efficiency.

@GS-wn2dw Год назад

Another user already inquired about the BIG ONE YOU MISSED...Epic E1000 ! Much more fuel efficient than TBM or PC12.

@yooliu9140 Год назад

It's true!!

@pedrocharafeddine 10 месяцев назад

Is not more fuel efficient than the tbm

@jeromeavila3195 Год назад

Pilatus is the best choice that can accomodate 10 passengers, which also fuel effecient.....

@inuwasirajo4672 Год назад

So Pilatus it's in terms of fuel economy passenger number range reliability and technology

@AviationFederation Год назад

Yes, Pilatus aircraft are generally known for their fuel efficiency, spacious cabins, long range capabilities, reliability, and advanced technology. Pilatus planes, such as the PC-12 and PC-24, are often used for corporate and private travel, air ambulance and cargo transportation, and government and military operations. Their ability to operate in short runways and remote locations also make them popular for off-the-beaten-path travel.

@trim486 Год назад

Semoga bisa memiliki Daher TBM 960 amiin

@guyrandom6151 Год назад

tbm looks much more cramped in the cabin is it that much smaller than the others or just an illusion of much tighter cabin

@AviationFederation Год назад

There's much to be desired in terms of headspace, but like what you said, it's probably also due to the overall shape of the fuselage.

@hedonzx822 Год назад

Where is the Epic??

@DevrajSingh-qt2zk 8 месяцев назад

Kodiak ,PC pilatus,1

@DevrajSingh-qt2zk 8 месяцев назад

Kodiak 100 finalised

@jhomrich89 Год назад

Never knew turboprop and fuel economy belonged in the same sentence lol. But seriously the Kodiak is my choice; Toyota land cruiser of the skys

@cageordie Год назад

Sorry, for the brain dump, but this has been discussed recently in a simulator forum. Compared to jets, the turboprops are economical. Compare the Epic E1000 to the Cirrus Vision Jet. The Epic carries more, further, faster, using less fuel. They burn fuel at similar rates in the initial climb, but the Epic E1000 is heading upstairs at 4,000 fpm and reaches FL340 from a MTOW departure in 15 minutes. The Cirrus takes more than twice as long to reach the economical cruise altitude, and still burns more fuel. When fueled for maximum range the Cirrus is a two seat jet. The Epic has a fifth more range with less fuel load and with way more payload. The Epic has an empty weight of 4600 and a maximum fuel load of 1,100 which brings us to 5,700 leaving 2,300 pounds of payload to reach the 8,000 pound MTOW. Which pretty much means you can take six well built men and their luggage. The Cirrus is 3,550 empty, takes 2,000 pounds of fuel and has a MTOW of 6,000 pounds. So for maximum range you are down to 450 pounds. Basically two people. The maximum zero fuel weight for the Cirrus G2+ is 4,900 pounds, so the maximum payload is 1,350 even on short trips, which is nearly 1,000 pounds less than the Epic with max fuel. And after all that the Epic E1000 can cruise as 334KTAS compared to 311KTAS for the Vision Jet G2+. But the G2+ does have autothrotle and you don't have to manage prop speed or be careful not to overtorque the gearbox at low altitude. The Eclipse EA550 is slightly better than the G2+, and climbs twice as fast, but still only has a useful load of about 6,000 pounds at maximum fuel and MTOW. Cruise is faster than the E1000 though. If you are transporting a handful of passengers the turboprops are the economical way to go.

@nomsi4263 Год назад

Wow, that's a powerful comparison

@road42 3 месяца назад

Pilatus PC 12 or the Kodiak 100 for me

@AviationFederation 3 месяца назад

Great choices! Both the Pilatus PC-12 and Kodiak 100 are versatile and capable aircraft. What specific factors make you lean towards one over the other?

@road42 3 месяца назад

@@AviationFederation the size, capacity, durability and efficiency. I like the Pilatus more because of the style. Looks better than the Kodiak, but it cost more than the Kodiak 100, so for practicality and efficiency, the Kodiak.

@herbscheit2061 Год назад

Piper m600

@AviationFederation Год назад

Great choice!

@aaronstandingbear Год назад

What would defeat the high cost of fuel would be to go electric as Tesla did. His Packard had power from the ambient charge around it. Aircraft converted to electric motors feeding off the ambient electrical charge of the earth. No batteries, no wires. No cost.

@darylklassen2142 Год назад

You missed the fastest most fuel efficient one! Where's the EPIC?

@brucewyoming2499 11 месяцев назад

PC 12 my choice

@AviationFederation 11 месяцев назад

The PC-12 is indeed a popular choice for those seeking a more fuel-efficient turboprop aircraft. With its single-engine design and advanced aerodynamics, the PC-12 offers excellent fuel efficiency and operating economics.

@DevrajSingh-qt2zk 8 месяцев назад

3 ,1 ,4,5 finalised 3 kodiak best

@n.j.s.givemeasmile2158 Год назад

It's hard to compare the airplanes fuel burn per hour in the first moment, because of there diffrent speeds.

@JohnathanMaravilla 7 месяцев назад

That’s why they did the average

@deanwells2859 11 месяцев назад

You should be embarrassed that you didn’t include the most fuel efficient turbo fan of them all being the EPIC E-1000. At 300 knots it is burning around 40 gph. It seems like your findings are skewed towards the Daher brand. The logical number 2 should have been the EVO.

@geoffhardy7438 Год назад

None of the aircraft mentioned here are on equal terms. Engines are different, bums on seats, wing surface area, Kodiak is not pressurised, props 3, 4 or 5 blade, undercarriage, fuel carried, onboard comfort etc. There are a number of aircraft that could have been included but my previous comment would still apply, you have to compare apples with apples. I would say that whoever the sponsor is wins.

@bookertee3057 Год назад

Kodiak 900 would be my choice.

@AviationFederation Год назад

The Kodiak 900 is an excellent choice! It has a rugged design and can operate in a variety of terrains and weather conditions.

@mr.commander3947 Год назад

kodiak 100 is a buy , with a strong landing gear body frame, land on kodiak island for bear,,, but where is the cessna plane?????? CEssna,,, where????

@Perich29 4 месяца назад

Be carefull because going green = going broke, the more green you go, the more broke your going to go.

@AviationFederation 4 месяца назад

Thank you for sharing your perspective. The balance between environmental considerations and economic viability is indeed a complex challenge. In your view, what factors should be prioritized to achieve a sustainable aviation industry without compromising financial stability?

@kakumian5159 Год назад

Lowest priced turboprops with lavatory

@douglascampbell7006 Год назад

Fail The Epic E1000GX is the least expensive, fastest, longest range, most efficient single turboprop on the market

@yooliu9140 Год назад

It's true!

@brycecampbell4845 4 месяца назад

This video is a waste. It's not comparing apples to apples. The amount of people each plane can carry should be the same or within 1 person.... And the ease and efficiency of maintenance should also a Major factor. The the normal and efficient cruise speeds should be considered. I'm about to buy a plane but not one of these. But if any of these were what I was looking for all your video did is create more questions and no direct comparable.

@AviationFederation 4 месяца назад

We understand your perspective, and we appreciate your feedback. Comparing different aircraft can be challenging, especially when they serve different purposes and have varying capacities. It's true that factors like passenger capacity, maintenance efficiency, and cruise speeds are crucial considerations when selecting an aircraft. If you have specific requirements or preferences, it might be helpful to consider hiring an aviation consultant to guide you through the decision-making process. They can provide tailored advice based on your needs and help you find an aircraft that aligns with your priorities. Feel free to share more details about your intended use, and maybe we can offer more specific information or suggestions based on your requirements (or other prospective buyers like you) in the future!