Given the relatively thin margins in aviation, I think it's probably less about nostalgia and more about the $1M USD price of e.g. a PT-6 turbine
Margins on transportation flights are thin. Margins on flightseeing are not. The company I worked for chartered a Beaver between $600-$700 an hour and a turbine Otter at double that. Seats for 45-minute flightseeing (through a national monument) were priced at $185-$250. 6 pax in an Beaver and 10 in an Otter.
This is why a lot of radial engine powered planes that are many decades old have no options for new engines if there are no turbine conversion available.
A radial looks, sounds, smells dangerous, like it's going to fly apart at any second, and that's awesome. Every so often some old warbirds fly over my neighbourhood and it's such a treat to hear those big radials thundering away. They should prescribe that sound as antidepressants.
Originally there was supposed to a 4 engined Lancaster as well but it wasn't deemed airworthy so that got postponed, even so, it was mighty impressive.
I’m always amazed how people don’t know this and think “jet fuel” is some magic stuff.
I’m missing steps, but I think it’s pretty much:
oil >> tanker fuel >> diesel >> kerosene >> jet fuel
With lead.
Most de Havilland Beavers in my area are still radial engines due to the nostalgia that sells to tourists. Most companies have converted their de Havilland Otters to a turbine engine. I have seen turbine Beavers from other areas. You can visually identify the engine by the shape of the plane nose. A radial engine plane has a big, round, blunt nose and sounds like an idling drag racer with a deep glug glug glug noise. A turbine engine plane has a pointy nose and sounds like the high pitch whine of a jet engine.