Why did the BAeATP perform so badly?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why did the BAeATP perform so badly?
In comparison with the Fokker 50 and the ATR42 / 72 it was a commercial disaster. Why was this the case?
Fokker made their baseline F-27 into something better that sold well. What did BAe do so badly wrong with the HS748?
Fokker made their baseline F-27 into something better that sold well. What did BAe do so badly wrong with the HS748?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
........it is very good indeed on fuel
however it is very good at doing ice cube impersinations and the di-ice system often likes to have a rest.
Problems with the nose wheel didnt help.
Has now found an excellent role in freight - however it has also been know as
Antiquated technoligy Perpetuated.
however it is very good at doing ice cube impersinations and the di-ice system often likes to have a rest.
Problems with the nose wheel didnt help.
Has now found an excellent role in freight - however it has also been know as
Antiquated technoligy Perpetuated.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Age: 52
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In search of good operating economics its engines were underpowered. I had many a scary take-off from Sumburgh airport flying in ATPs. It was very fuel-efficient, but slow. Also at the time the ATP was launched it was facing stiff competition from the newly launched Regional Jets, which airlines and passengers preferred. The Fokker 50, ATRs and DHC -8s all had the advantage over the ATP of good short-field performance.
Steve
Steve
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: God's Country - Scotland
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In engineering lingo it was YUGO - you go fix
We had one that didn't fly straight!!
Ah them days of GLA-JER and GLA-GCI packing them in and fingers crossed that it comes back servicable>
Washing machine repair men in NOC were goog with tools!
We had one that didn't fly straight!!
Ah them days of GLA-JER and GLA-GCI packing them in and fingers crossed that it comes back servicable>
Washing machine repair men in NOC were goog with tools!
Its predecessor the 748 was of course the "Budgie", and in that vain I once heard the ATP refererred to as the "Advanced Turbo Pidgeon"!
To me it always looked just wrong with that extended noseleg and the consequently slightly drooping rear end.
To me it always looked just wrong with that extended noseleg and the consequently slightly drooping rear end.
Supercharged PPRuNer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Doon the watter, a million miles from the sandpit.
Posts: 1,183
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear scary stories from those who flew them that the ATP's climb rate on both engines was similar to a Dash 8-400 on one. 
It's single engine climb rate was, by all reports, interesting . . .
It's single engine climb rate was, by all reports, interesting . . .
ATP?
Avros Taking the P1ss.
Avros Taking the P1ss.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern ireland
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew many times on the ATP with Loganair, Manx, British Midland and BA from BFS and BHD to most Birtish regional airports. I have no recollection of major delays or cancellations.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: everywhere but home :-(
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've certainly called it the "Lada" when reporting a/c type. Also in common use was "A skip", "A parrot" ('cause it's bigger than a Budgie, but always as sick as..), "Skoda", "Yugo", "Another Terrible Plane" etc
It was good at stopping & descending. Defying gravity, however, was a very unequal struggle at the best of times. I've had in excess of 10,000fpm in descent (The PFD vertical speed indicator stops at 99 btw
). Landing LSI 09 and vacating down rwy 15 was regularly achievable...
Certainly in its early days there were numerous problems with hydraulics, pneumatics, PFDs blanking (not enough static wicks to dissipate St Elmo's
), engines & a myriad of other niggles.
It was slow, unreliable and I didn't particularly enjoy flying it compared to the 748 as it was quite fussy in rudder - you were always farting around with the rudder trim. Or maybe that was just me!
I guess that's why it didn't sell well?
Wouldn't have swapped the experience though. Happy days.
It was good at stopping & descending. Defying gravity, however, was a very unequal struggle at the best of times. I've had in excess of 10,000fpm in descent (The PFD vertical speed indicator stops at 99 btw
). Landing LSI 09 and vacating down rwy 15 was regularly achievable...Certainly in its early days there were numerous problems with hydraulics, pneumatics, PFDs blanking (not enough static wicks to dissipate St Elmo's
), engines & a myriad of other niggles. It was slow, unreliable and I didn't particularly enjoy flying it compared to the 748 as it was quite fussy in rudder - you were always farting around with the rudder trim. Or maybe that was just me!
I guess that's why it didn't sell well?
Wouldn't have swapped the experience though. Happy days.
