"very close to jet speeds and altitudes" - uh, no. 400 mph tops and 28000 ft., whereas jets are in the 500-600 mph range, >40,000 ft. Comparing the Constellation to a modern 787.
"Jets are not the future anyway"
Yes, props may dominate in the future, as you point out you can probably more easily hybridize a prop with an electric motor, though there are more and more geared-fan "jets" these days so we shall see. The economics aren't quite there yet for hybrids.
"proper aerodynamics of now" - meh, maybe CFD helps a few percent at lower speeds, but a lot of the heavy lifting for sub-400mph wings/controls got done in WW2.
"That will make those pistons look real good."
If piston engines are so wonderful, why do all the smaller commuter planes, and even some of the larger 12-passenger float planes use turboprops then? Decent efficiency (>40%), lower maintenance (3,000-6,000 hours between overhauls vs. 1000-2000 hrs. for pistons) (edit: also reliability, but that is at least partially baked into the MTBH numbers...but no way are you taking a 2-engine piston prop airliner on long flights over water with current FAA regs) and hp per pound. Nobody is talking putting a Wasila diesel on an airliner, that's just too much dead weight, any efficiency increase gets wiped out by having to lift the extra pounds. People are still using DC-3's, but you typically see them running turboprops on them, because they can put out more power with less weight (than the radials they replaced) which means more payload per run. Saw a recent article that talked about how the Union Pacific railroad developed gas turbine locos - because they could deliver 3-4x more horsepower than similar sized diesels. Yes, even in an automotive application where weight is valued (for traction), turbines gave an advantage. And they ran them for some 14 years, even though they had their issues (sucking all the air out of tunnels, roasting birds in flight with 800F exhaust blast) - because they could run them on heavy residual oil at a cheaper ton/mile freight cost than the Big Boy steamers or the diesel-electrics. They only stopped when refineries got better at cracking the heavy residue oils and upgrading them, and the cost of the heavy oils rose, and they figured out ways to efficiently run multiple linked locos.
It's all about the money, and you certainly don't know enough about airline economics (I sure as hell know I don't and I have a Masters in Aeronautical Engineering) to make a convincing argument here.
![[pipe]](/data/assets/smilies/pipe.gif "[pipe] [pipe]")
