Applepie81 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 68 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3601 times:
The ATP never really sold well. It was updated in the early 90's as the Jetstream 61 but by that time the company had merged with ATR so the ATR-72 was the prefered option.
Why did the ATP fail in so many ways?
HAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2588 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3480 times:
I only rode as a passenger on the ATP, but from what I understand from my friends that flew it, it was a maintenance nightmare. Needlessly complicated and prone to breakdowns. It quickly got a reputation as a hangar queen, and airlines bought other planes to fit the niche.
It was kind of like the L1011 - a great plane to fly, once you got it out of the gate.
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
Sllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3445 times:
The market for big turboprops hasn't been good for a long time, and really suffered in the RJ craze. The ATP suffered against the Dash-8 and ATR-72 in that it didn't have a "smaller" child (I know, it was derived from the HS 748, but that's a significantly earlier "generation").
Performance was also, well, shall we be polite and say "stately?" I seem to recall an article in the last couple of years talking about a flight experience with Manx in the UK, and something telling was that, with a full load, they were only getting 500fpm climb at 8000 feet! Operating turboprops at sub-14000' really hurts on fuel burn, in my experience (remember that half the atmosphere of the planet is below the 14,000' level).
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29968 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3340 times:
Came out the same time the first RJ's arrived on scene.
ATR basicly has treated all of the Bae regional props as bastard stepchildren, since they mergered the two lines.
Unfortunatly the ATP also was not designed as a replacement for the HS.748, which is a wonderful rought field turboprop. This made it a harder sell with satisfied 748 customers who might be looking to replace that 30 year old aircraft.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.