Propellor Planes: EMP resistant?

Hello all, I'm a new member of the forum.

I've got a bit of an odd first question and it's regarding propellor planes.

I live in London and work on the other side of town. I drive in to work each morning following exactly the same route. Over the last few weeks there has been an abundance of traditional propellor planes on the flight lines that normally carry jets.

On one occasion in the late evening (6.30 - 7pm) there were in the region of 8 of these propellor planes following the same line going south west out of the city.

So, my question is, do propellor planes offer a much safer and controlable method of transport should something like an EMP, nuclear or conventional missile attack occur?

Having had a quick look on the net I am pretty sure that the planes are some kind of 40-50 seater turbo-prop. What you would normally expect to be flying these routes are Embraer ERJ 135/145's or Falcon 2000's.

It just seemed very odd to me that in the current political climate that this change by the airlines would be sheer coincidence.

Anyone have an opinion on this?

Merkin

It's not the engine. It's the computer-controlled fly-by-wire system that's vulnerable to EMP.
Given that modern turboprops use the same engines as jumbo jets the engines are equally susceptible to exactly the same things.
The reason for a turboprop and not a turbofan is the propeller's greater "torque" as it were. It takes a larger "bite" out of the air, enabling a turboprop to take-off with a shorter run.
The reason for a tubofan (as in Airbus, 747, DC10) is it produces less drag, and can spin faster and more efficiently, allowing for increased cruising and maximum speed and greater range.

Both the fan and the propeller are powered by jets engines.

To be truly emp-resistant you need control surfaces operated by hydraulics, not computers and servos.

I'm sure an aeronautical engineer can explain with considerably more accuracy.

Ah, thanks for that, makes things a little clearer!

Now all I've got to figure out is why they have decided to replace these routes with propellor aircraft over jets.

Thanks again,

Merkin

Originally posted by Merkin
Ah, thanks for that, makes things a little clearer!

Now all I've got to figure out is why they have decided to replace these routes with propellor aircraft over jets.

Thanks again,

Merkin

- Costs per seat per mile after restrictions are taken into account (route, legal requirements, runway availability etc etc).

[edit on 5-11-2004 by sminkeypinkey]