British built Airliners. How many still flying?
I reckon you could count the number of four engined British aircraft still flying on the fingers of one hand and have fingers left over.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon you could count the number of four engined British aircraft still flying on
There are still a few 146s in service! But give it another 5 years (10 at most) and I think the only British built airliners still flying will be the preserved ones (with the possible exception of Islanders). Sad.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,371
Received 99 Likes
on
70 Posts
" If it was that bad, why did anyone buy it? They may not have foreseen its unreliability, but poor performance would have been a known factor surely"
Nobody really bought the heap of scrap, Waste of Space virtually gave the heaps of junk away in an attempt to enter the turbo-prop market.
Trying, and failing with outstanding ease, to use Boeing's practices of developing a known airframe and systems, the result was a freak of aviation.
Product support was useless, but it was an accountants dream with a 650 kg fuel upload from say MAN to GLA . BFS etc and only a very small pax load to make a profit.
A testimony to every budding design engineer as to how NOT to design an aircraft
Nobody really bought the heap of scrap, Waste of Space virtually gave the heaps of junk away in an attempt to enter the turbo-prop market.
Trying, and failing with outstanding ease, to use Boeing's practices of developing a known airframe and systems, the result was a freak of aviation.
Product support was useless, but it was an accountants dream with a 650 kg fuel upload from say MAN to GLA . BFS etc and only a very small pax load to make a profit.
A testimony to every budding design engineer as to how NOT to design an aircraft
Waste of Space virtually gave the heaps of junk away in an attempt to enter the turbo-prop market.
Yes, some muddled jumping to conclusions has been going on in this thread:
ATP was hardly BAe Manchester's "attempt to enter the turboprop market" as it was developed from the 748 (RR Dart engines, for those that need to be told).of which they sold nearly 400.
Fokker did a similar "upgrade" to make the Fokker 50 from the F27.
The commercial success of airliners is hard to judge as an outsider, but on the basis of 387 built if the 146/RJ wasn't commercially successful I'd be surprised. More Viscounts were built, but again who am I to say if it was a commercial success?
ATP was hardly BAe Manchester's "attempt to enter the turboprop market" as it was developed from the 748 (RR Dart engines, for those that need to be told).of which they sold nearly 400.
Fokker did a similar "upgrade" to make the Fokker 50 from the F27.
The commercial success of airliners is hard to judge as an outsider, but on the basis of 387 built if the 146/RJ wasn't commercially successful I'd be surprised. More Viscounts were built, but again who am I to say if it was a commercial success?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely, Avro had 'entered the turboprop market' way earlier than the ATP with the delightful 'Budgie'. I much preferred doing Manchester - Aberdeen on that aeroplane (good breakfast, too!) than the Business Air Saab 340s which offered an alternative service.
I actually preferred flying in the 'Skoda' (ATP) wastospace shuttle than the Titan ATR that sometimes replaced it (although the Titan Stewies were lovely !)
As long as I could sit right at the back away from the vibrator props
of course !!
I do however realise that the ATP was a complete screw up in many ways!
As long as I could sit right at the back away from the vibrator props
of course !!I do however realise that the ATP was a complete screw up in many ways!
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I've got a signed/numbered lithograph of a SATA ATP on my wall. Wonder if it will ever be worth anything (curiosity value rather than antique value)?
Paxing All Over The World
I was on the ATP a fair amount with Manx Airways (JE). My log book (a spreadsheet) tells me that the first ride was LHR to IOM October 1994. They used it on the midday rotation with the 146 (MIMA) on the morning and evening.
Mostly, I was on it from LTN to IOM in 2000/1/2 but that seems to have been it. As pax - it was OK. But I have read in the forums from drivers that 'the wings were in the wrong place and you had to know what you were doing'.
When I was on the Island in September, I saw a couple on stand as freighters - can't recall the name of the company but the IOM thread in A.A.&R. will know.
Mostly, I was on it from LTN to IOM in 2000/1/2 but that seems to have been it. As pax - it was OK. But I have read in the forums from drivers that 'the wings were in the wrong place and you had to know what you were doing'.
When I was on the Island in September, I saw a couple on stand as freighters - can't recall the name of the company but the IOM thread in A.A.&R. will know.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,371
Received 99 Likes
on
70 Posts
Posting in a hurry before you leave for work is not advisable.
I am well aware of the 748, Andover and the J31 / 41 fleets. The ATP was an attempt to enter the 50-60 seater turbo prop market when props were suddenly the "new big idea". Taking the lineage and upgrading the basic airframe and systems was , however, an unmitigated disaster.
In terms on maintainability it was horrendous. A few examples :
O2 bottle could not be charged in-situ.
Air stairs retract button..located on the base of the fwd pax door.
Rear doors...shoot bolts frozen.
Nose u/c...at least two grease nipples impossible to access.
Retro-fitted access panels
All the L/E de-icing boots were unique to each aircraft...interchangeable ?....no chance.
Engine and airframe anti-ice controllers....both buried in the belly
I/c jack plug.....British type !
Flap track drive motor....replenishment cap was 5/16 Whit. !
Loganair had an IFSD from..Woodford to MAN.
Weight and balance...."tight" is the only word here.
Horizontal stab...vibration.
Galley. No ovens, only a Bev. maker.
Engine change....how many days did it take ?
Product support?
The aircraft was a heap of junk and the original operators got rid as soon as they could. BAe wanted a "name on the tail" I understand, so they got BM and BA at a generous discount so the rumour goes.
The 748 / J31/41 fleets were, to a degree, successful, certainly the former. The Andover was short lived in comparison and the ATP was never going to be anything other than an abomination.
I am well aware of the 748, Andover and the J31 / 41 fleets. The ATP was an attempt to enter the 50-60 seater turbo prop market when props were suddenly the "new big idea". Taking the lineage and upgrading the basic airframe and systems was , however, an unmitigated disaster.
In terms on maintainability it was horrendous. A few examples :
O2 bottle could not be charged in-situ.
Air stairs retract button..located on the base of the fwd pax door.
Rear doors...shoot bolts frozen.
Nose u/c...at least two grease nipples impossible to access.
Retro-fitted access panels
All the L/E de-icing boots were unique to each aircraft...interchangeable ?....no chance.
Engine and airframe anti-ice controllers....both buried in the belly
I/c jack plug.....British type !
Flap track drive motor....replenishment cap was 5/16 Whit. !
Loganair had an IFSD from..Woodford to MAN.
Weight and balance...."tight" is the only word here.
Horizontal stab...vibration.
Galley. No ovens, only a Bev. maker.
Engine change....how many days did it take ?
Product support?
The aircraft was a heap of junk and the original operators got rid as soon as they could. BAe wanted a "name on the tail" I understand, so they got BM and BA at a generous discount so the rumour goes.
The 748 / J31/41 fleets were, to a degree, successful, certainly the former. The Andover was short lived in comparison and the ATP was never going to be anything other than an abomination.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: U.K.
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that the Chinese subcontracter put the fin mounts in the wrong place, so to save loss of Chinese face BAe modified the fus 0f the ATP to accept them. Not quite the way to deign an aeroplane.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apart from the Viscount, was any British airliner truly a commercial success?
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
It always amazed me when, upgrading two good turboprops in the 748 and the F27, Fokker got it so right with the F50 and BAe........
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
British jet airliners, eh?
Comet: The first jet airliner and therefore paid the price for venturing into then-uncharted aeronautical waters.
Trident: emasculated on BEA's insistence, losing the chance of the Medway engine and with it any chance of a significant market outside BEA.
VC10: magnificent aeroplane but built to meet a BOAC 'hot, high, short field' spec that went away when the Empire airfields were extended for the Boeings. Therefore not really worth re-engining with fan engines later in its life.
146 / RJX: Poor choice of 4 engines which should have been corrected for the RJX when suitable engines were available to make it a twin.
1/11: Great airframe. Probably the only one that could have gone on to greater things with updated engines and systems.
Of the turboprops only the Viscount seems to have been a real success, though the 748 did OK. But the latter faced a problem; it was designed as a DC3 replacement, but the airlines in out of the way places operating DC3s couldn't afford new aeroplanes!
The Vanguard was too late, but not as late as the Britannia. If Bristol had got their fingers out sorting its problems instead of taking 3 hour lunch breaks they could have taken the trans Atlantic prop market before the jets took over.
A sad history of often (not always!) brilliant designs, but not much else that's needed to seriously pursue a world market.
My take on it, anyway.
Comet: The first jet airliner and therefore paid the price for venturing into then-uncharted aeronautical waters.
Trident: emasculated on BEA's insistence, losing the chance of the Medway engine and with it any chance of a significant market outside BEA.
VC10: magnificent aeroplane but built to meet a BOAC 'hot, high, short field' spec that went away when the Empire airfields were extended for the Boeings. Therefore not really worth re-engining with fan engines later in its life.
146 / RJX: Poor choice of 4 engines which should have been corrected for the RJX when suitable engines were available to make it a twin.
1/11: Great airframe. Probably the only one that could have gone on to greater things with updated engines and systems.
Of the turboprops only the Viscount seems to have been a real success, though the 748 did OK. But the latter faced a problem; it was designed as a DC3 replacement, but the airlines in out of the way places operating DC3s couldn't afford new aeroplanes!
The Vanguard was too late, but not as late as the Britannia. If Bristol had got their fingers out sorting its problems instead of taking 3 hour lunch breaks they could have taken the trans Atlantic prop market before the jets took over.
A sad history of often (not always!) brilliant designs, but not much else that's needed to seriously pursue a world market.
My take on it, anyway.
Last edited by Shaggy Sheep Driver; 26th Nov 2013 at 20:45.
I propose the DH125 as the most successful British civil jet aircraft of all time. Many still flying, and well over 1000 built including derivatives. OK, perhaps not strictly an airliner, but we've already mentioned the Dove, for which the 125 was a replacement.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Much to reflect on in Shaggy Sheep Driver's summary of British airliners. It is amazing to consider how many talented engineers, designers, scientists technologists and craftspeople there were in UK, as well as plenty of factories and facilities for building planes. By rights UK should have been a major independent player in the international airliner business, alongside ship building, car van bus and truck making, computers and electronics, rocketry etc..
Other countries have managed to start airliner production, or increase existing production massively, while we have shrunk to sub-contractor operations; I am proud that we DO still produce some of the best engines, wings, undercarriage, props etc., but a lot of talent and potential has been wasted.
Other countries have managed to start airliner production, or increase existing production massively, while we have shrunk to sub-contractor operations; I am proud that we DO still produce some of the best engines, wings, undercarriage, props etc., but a lot of talent and potential has been wasted.
