Talk:Turboshaft

message: This article has been dramatically altered. When I last left it the claim was that the turboshaft and turboprop were similar, and differed primarily in historical terms -- that modern turboshaft and turboprop engines are basically identical.
web 84.73.58.149 changed this to state that turboprops are one type of turboshaft, and that a turboshaft is essentially any turbine with a PTO. I have seen this definition as well, but only on recently published statements. I had not seen this definition prior to 1990, or thereabouts.
Now it's possible that I simply never saw the "generalist" use of the term, but currently I simply think it's wrong. I think this is a recent phenominon, one created when someone got fed up trying to define the difference and failing when someone would introduce a new engine that "broke the rule"
Maury 13:31, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005

message: there is no mention of fixed turbine versus free turbine. this whole article discusses free turbine only.
:Fixed - but the vast majority of large turbo-shafts are or have been free-turbine designs, once the benefits became known.Petebutt (talk) 13:57, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Fixed turbine vs. Free turbine

message: What is the rough order of magnitude of the range of power outputs (shaft power) of typical turboshaft turbines used in aviation service today?
Also, what is the available power outputs of fixed/ground-based turbines.  I'm familiar with GE having a line of heavy-duty turbines in the 50-100 MW size that they consider "small scale" -- but what other offerings are in the market from a broader range of worldwide manufacturers? 
In both cases, some sense of the size/scale of commercial products would improve the article.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 17:22, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Power output of turboshaft turbines?

message: Are turboprops usually fixed shaft or free shaft designs? That seems like an important clarification. And for what it's worth I personally think it's pretty clear that a turboprop is just a form of turboshaft. AnnaGoFast (talk) 18:14, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Free turbine, for both turboprop and turboshaft.  There are still plenty around that aren't, but they're all old engines and even older designs. A turboprop is different from a turboshaft in that if it has considerable jet thrust, that's a useful advantage for it, not a waste of power and a difficult problem to silence.  Early turboshafts (which often were just land-based turboprops) could be very wasteful and noisy for this. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turboprops and free shafts 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Turboshaft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140413145013/http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=blog:a68cb417-3364-4fbf-a9dd-4feda680ec9c&plckPostId=Blog:a68cb417-3364-4fbf-a9dd-4feda680ec9cPost:361db9aa-4f91-4719-bab3-a7bc544c1019 to http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=blog:a68cb417-3364-4fbf-a9dd-4feda680ec9c&plckPostId=Blog:a68cb417-3364-4fbf-a9dd-4feda680ec9cPost:361db9aa-4f91-4719-bab3-a7bc544c1019
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:11, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: What is the alternative to turbo shaft? 203.171.96.126 (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia