If you wish to contribute or participate in the discussions about articles you are invited to join SKYbrary as a registered user

 Actions

Difference between revisions of "ATP"

From SKYbrary Wiki

ATP
m
(7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
|Engine_Amount=Multi
 
|Engine_Amount=Multi
 
|Type_Code=L2T
 
|Type_Code=L2T
|Description=Turboprop regional airliner. In service since 1988. Modernized and stretched development of HS 748, also used in a freighter version. A total of 62 ATPs were built before the production ended in 1994. A newer development was the Jetstream 61 but it was not put into production.
+
|Description=Turboprop regional airliner. First flew in 1986 and in service from 1988. A significantly modernised and stretched development of the HS 748 which had new engines, composite propellers,EFIS and FBW Secondary Flight Controls and could accommodate up to 70 passengers. Many of the surviving examples have been converted into freighters. A total of 63 of the type were built before the production ended in 1996. The Jetstream 61 was a newer development which reached the prototype stage but it was not put into production.
|Wing_Span=30.6
+
|Wing_Span=30.63
 
|Length=26
 
|Length=26
|Heigth=7.6
+
|Height=7.59
 +
|Wing_position=Low wing
 +
|Engine_position= Wing
 +
|Tail_configuration=Regular tail (Dihedral)
 +
|Landing_gear=Tricycle
 
|Powerplant=ATP: 2 x 2.653 SHP Pratt & Whitney Canada PW126A turboprops with 6 blade propellers.  
 
|Powerplant=ATP: 2 x 2.653 SHP Pratt & Whitney Canada PW126A turboprops with 6 blade propellers.  
 
JS61: 2 x 2.050 SHP Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127D turboprops with 6 blade propellers.
 
JS61: 2 x 2.050 SHP Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127D turboprops with 6 blade propellers.
 
|Engine_Model=Pratt & Whitney Canada PW100
 
|Engine_Model=Pratt & Whitney Canada PW100
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 13:45, 22 March 2021

Aircraft
Name ATP
Manufacturer BRITISH AEROSPACE
Body Narrow
Wing Fixed Wing
Position Low wing
Tail Regular tail (Dihedral)
WTC Medium
APC B
Type code L2T
Engine Turboprop
Engine count Multi
Position Wing"Wing" is not in the list (Above cabin, Above rear fuselage, Above wing pods, Behind cabin, Both sides of fuselage, Both sides of rear fuselage, Both sides of rear fuselage and fin-integrated, (Front) Wing leading mounted, In fuselage, In rear fuselage, ...) of allowed values for the "Engine Position" property.
Landing gear Tricycle"Tricycle" is not in the list (Amphibian, Main gear retractable - tailwheel fixed, Partly retractable, Quadricycle retractable, Skids, Skids or tricycle retractable, Tailwheel fixed, Tailwheel retractable, Tricycle fixed, Tricycle retractable, ...) of allowed values for the "Landing Gear" property.
Mass group 3


Manufacturered as:

BRITISH AEROSPACE ATP
JETSTREAM 61


BRITISH AEROSPACE ATP

BRITISH AEROSPACE ATP BRITISH AEROSPACE ATP 3D

Description

Turboprop regional airliner. First flew in 1986 and in service from 1988. A significantly modernised and stretched development of the HS 748 which had new engines, composite propellers,EFIS and FBW Secondary Flight Controls and could accommodate up to 70 passengers. Many of the surviving examples have been converted into freighters. A total of 63 of the type were built before the production ended in 1996. The Jetstream 61 was a newer development which reached the prototype stage but it was not put into production.

Technical Data

Wing span 30.63 m100.492 ft <br />
Length 26 m85.302 ft <br />
Height m" m" is not a number.
Powerplant ATP: 2 x 2.653 SHP Pratt & Whitney Canada PW126A turboprops with 6 blade propellers.

JS61: 2 x 2.050 SHP Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127D turboprops with 6 blade propellers.

Engine model Pratt & Whitney Canada PW100

Performance Data

Take-Off Initial Climb
(to 5000 ft)
Initial Climb
(to FL150)
Initial Climb
(to FL240)
MACH Climb Cruise Initial Descent
(to FL240)
Descent
(to FL100)
Descent (FL100
& below)
Approach
V2 (IAS) kts IAS kts IAS kts IAS kts MACH TAS 266 kts MACH IAS kts IAS kts Vapp (IAS) kts
Distance 1463 m ROC ft/min ROC ft/min ROC ft/min ROC ft/min MACH ROD ft/min ROD ft/min MCS kts Distance 1128 m
MTOW 2293022,930 kg <br />22.93 tonnes <br /> kg Ceiling FL250 ROD ft/min APC B
WTC M Range 800800 nm <br />1,481,600 m <br />1,481.6 km <br />4,860,892.392 ft <br /> NM

Accidents & Serious Incidents involving ATP

  • ATP, Birmingham UK, 2020 (On 22 May 2020, a BAe ATP made a go around after the First Officer mishandled the landing flare at Birmingham and when the Captain took over for a second approach, his own mishandling of the touchdown led to a lateral runway excursion. The Investigation found that although the prevailing surface wind was well within the limiting crosswind component, that component was still beyond both their handling skill levels. It also found that they were both generally inexperienced on type, had not previously encountered more than modest crosswind landings and that their type training in this respect had been inadequate.)
  • ATP, Helsinki Finland, 2010 (On 11 January 2010, a British Aerospace ATP crew attempting to take off from Helsinki after a two-step airframe de/anti icing treatment (Type 2 and Type 4 fluids) were unable to rotate and the take off was successfully rejected from above V1. The Investigation found that thickened de/anti ice fluid residues had frozen in the gap between the leading edge of the elevator and the horizontal stabiliser and that there had been many other similarly-caused occurrences to aircraft without powered flying controls. There was concern that use of such thickened de/anti ice fluids was not directly covered by safety regulation.)
  • ATP, Jersey Channel Islands, 1998 (On 9 May 1998, a British Regional Airlines ATP was being pushed back for departure at Jersey in daylight whilst the engines were being started when an excessive engine power setting applied by the flight crew led to the failure of the towbar connection and then to one of the aircraft's carbon fibre propellers striking the tug. A non standard emergency evacuation followed. All aircraft occupants and ground crew were uninjured.)
  • ATP, Vilhelmina Sweden, 2016 (On 6 April 2016, a BAe ATP partly left the side of the runway soon after touchdown, regaining it after 155 metres before completing its landing roll. It sustained damage rendering it unfit to continue flying but this was not noticed until five further flights had been made. Investigation attributed the excursion to lack of pilot response to unexpected beta range power and the continued flying to the aircraft Captain's failure to ensure proper event recording, accurate operator notification or a post-excursion engineering inspection of the aircraft. Systemic inadequacy in safety management and culture at the operator was identified.)
  • ATP, en-route, Oxford UK, 1991 (On 11 August 1991, an British Aerospace ATP, during climb to flight level (FL) 160 in icing conditions, experienced a significant degradation of performance due to propeller icing accompanied by severe vibration that rendered the electronic flight instruments partially unreadable. As the aircraft descended below cloud, control was regained and the flight continued uneventfully.)
  • CRJ2/ATP, Stockholm Sweden, 2011 (On 21 January 2011, a Belarusian Bombardier CRJ200 failed to fly the prescribed missed approach procedure at night in IMC and when ATC observed a developing conflict with another aircraft which had just departed another runway with a conflicting clearance, both aircraft were given heading instructions to mitigate the proximity risk. The resulting CPA was 1.8nm at an altitude of 1600 feet. The subsequent investigation attributed the pilot error to a change of aircraft control in the flare when it became apparent that a safe landing was not assured.)