FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4003 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3570 times:
I was talking to a pilot for Midwest Airlines who used to fly for AWAC. When he flew the ATPs, he said, an engine would frequently shut off spontaneously when landing. He told the pax that this was normal so they didn't freak out. The plane is a piece of crap, horribly unreliable, and ugly as hell.
Gg190 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 160 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3540 times:
Talking about it being unreliable, I now remember people talking about it being prone to landing gear faults. I remember one landing at Manchester, with one main gear that would't extent.
Also there was an incident on the Isle of Man when the nose wheel of one collapsed after landing, although I believe this was partly pilot error? (I may be wrong on that,so don't quote me)
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4003 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3497 times:
Still a lot better looking than a 762 though, eh Friendly Skies?
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15722 posts, RR: 47 Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3438 times:
"the ATP is just well, it has the ugliest nose in aviation,"
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4003 posts, RR: 6 Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3424 times:
Airsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 38 Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3386 times:
>>>Also there was an incident on the Isle of Man when the nose wheel of one collapsed after landing, although I believe this was partly pilot error? (I may be wrong on that,so don't quote me)
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3365 times:
There were signif reliability issues with the PW engines when first introduced. Also, the fact that the ATP was not built as a family of turbo-props reduced its marketability.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7694 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3333 times:
I think besides the fact that the BAe ATP were not paragons of reliability the plane didn't do well in terms of sales compared to the ATR42/72 series and the Saab 340/2000 series. And who wants to buy a new ATP today (if the plane had stayed in production) in when Bombardier CRJ and Embraer ERJ regional jets have taken over nearly all the regional market? Even the Bombardier Dash8-Q400 is a far better plane than the ATP.
Skidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 60 Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week ago) and read 3151 times:
The ATP is a reliable, functional aircraft. It is not prone to "engine faults" or "undercarriage problems" any more than any other aircraft.
The one's used by Manx and BRAL flew thousands of hours trouble free. They did have their quirks and no aircraft is completely reliable, but the ATP is no worse or better than any other.
As for comparing it to a Boeing 767 - you are now showing how completely off your rocker you are. Two different aircraft, for different functions and used in entirely different ways. And lets face it - looks are a personal preference - I mean, some people even like the look of the A.380!
However, before you start to slang off a thoroughly decent aircraft, I would try getting some reliable, accurate information on it. It may not be the fastest, smoothest and quietest aircraft flying, but it works and is certainly a damn sight tougher than many of the plastic machines on the market these days.
I know, I worked on the bloody things and handled the maintenance planning for them.
Christa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3069 times:
I am sorry but I am not off my "rocker".. I was simply making the point that I believe the BAE ATP to be a more attractive aircraft in my own opinion. I find the 762 quite ugly, quite squashed and not as sleek as the 763, 764 and Airbus counterparts.
Skidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 60 Reply 24, posted (8 years 3 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2826 times:
I have had 35 flights in ATP's and 14 in various D8's. The Q8 is marginally quieter but they are both about on a par for "comfort" such as it is.
However, the Q400 is much nicer than the ATP, but of course, much newer.
Just can't beat the "Bomber" though. Good, solid British engineering. Some might say, built like a brick ****house .
Keep travelling
Andy
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
25 Planespotterx: My first ever flight was in a ATP from MAN-Isle of Man, I have to admit being only 12 at the time I dont remember much but now nearly 21 I feel I was
26 Gg190: I've just looked at one of my aviation books, and the ATP uses the same engine as the ATR 72, Pratt & Whitney PW124. So if the ATP's engine's have pro
27 Bwaflyer: We used to have several at British World, and nicknamed them 'Another Technical Problem'. Noisy cramped, and with the most useless poky galleys. Don't
28 BuyantUkhaa: Well, I must be glad to be alive then, flying ATP's four times over (a short stretch of) the middle of the Atlantic. I quite liked them! Air Açores m
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 160 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4003 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2000, 559 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24621 posts, 
From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, 
. 
Printer friendly format 
