In light of that other thread, what are the advantages of turbo prop planes over jets?

Do they require shorter runway distances or something? Are they more fuel efficient?

I have flown in a good number, btw, and they were always short to medium distances, but I wondered even as we flew why we weren’t just in small jets.

Much better speed off the treadmill.

Cheaper to buy, run and maintain, and more fuel efficient.

Downside is that obviously they’re a lot slower. Not so much of an issue if you’re only flying to Amsterdam where you don’t care that it might only be 45mins on a jet, but it’s an hour longer in a turboprop, but obviously an issue if you’re travelling further afield… Hence jets always used above a certain distance.

Turboprops make a satisfying thwhistle when the revs get up. Also, the blades can be used to chop veg.

And the faces of Nazi strong men guarding airfields, I suppose.

They’re much quiter than jets too.

I’m sure a while ago I read somewhere that prop-driven planes actually make much more sense for a wider range of things than they’re currently used for, and the fact that they seem a bit backwards compared to jets is a significant factor in why there aren’t more of them in airlines today.