Originally Posted by Ian Corrigible
Given the large size of the 139's baggage hold (78 sq ft standard, 120 sq ft optional), could it just be a case of operator frustration over maxing-out before bulking-out ? This is going to represent a change from the norm, esp. for those transitioning from the 412's 28 sq ft hold.
I/C
120 sq. ft. optional baggage hold? If you're thinking about using the space between the main fuel tanks where the aux. tank is located, think again. There is a placard there indicating that no baggage is permitted between the tanks. Regardless, the "standard baggage hold" is huge compared to that of the medium Bells, and accessable from both sides as well.