Bangkok Airways takes delivery of ATR 72-600

[george]

Bangkok Airways Takes Delivery of ATR 72-600

BANGKOK: -- Bangkok Airways has taken delivery of its latest ATR 72-600 aircraft.

The 70-seater ATR 72-600 aircraft is equipped with a new full-glass cockpit and features an improved layout with larger overhead compartments, offering extra comfort for passengers.

This ATR 72-600 will be servicing routes such as Samui, Sukhothai, Trat Lampang, Luang Prabang, Yangon and Siem Reap.

Currently, Bangkok Airways’ fleet consists of 29 aircraft; 8 ATR72-500s, 2 ATR72-600s, 8 A320s, and 11 A319s.

The ATR 72 is a twin-engine turboprop short-haul regional airliner built by the French-Italian aircraft manufacturer ATR. A stretched variant of the ATR 42, the aircraft seats up to 74 passengers in a single-class configuration, and is operated by a two-pilot crew.

The ATR 72 was developed from the ATR 42 in order to increase the seating capacity (48 to 68) by stretching the fuselage by 4.5 metres (15 ft), increasing the wingspan, adding more powerful engines, and increasing fuel capacity by approximately 10 percent. The 72 was announced in 1986, and made its maiden flight on 27 October 1988. One year later, on 27 October 1989, Finnair became the first airline to put the aircraft into service. Since then, at least 750 ATR 72s have been delivered worldwide.

ATR 72-600 Design

Passengers are boarded using the rear door (which is rare for a passenger aircraft) as the front door is used to load cargo. Finnair ordered their ATR 72s with a front passenger door so that they could use the jet bridges at Helsinki–Vantaa airport.

Air New Zealand's standard rear door aircraft can use jet bridges at airports with this equipment.

A tail stand must be installed when passengers are boarding or disembarking in case the nose lifts off the ground, which is common if the aircraft is loaded or unloaded incorrectly.


-- 2015-02-20

[canopus1969]

Hope they have changed the position of the "engine off" switches

[toybits]

Isn't this the same kind of plane that recently crashed in Taiwan?

[kinmaew]

You beauty mate!!! The original death plane from Laos and other places that don't like media reports or nosy foreigners poking around their affairs. Book it now and save heaps!! - PS have your will in order before boarding.

[hanno]

The pilot in Laos flew it into the ground in bad weather, the guy in Taiwan seemed to have lacked sufficient training (like quite a few of his mates that did not subsequently pass their tests).

[Torrens54]

Isn't this the same kind of plane that recently crashed in Taiwan?

They have quite a History..... and I have No Desire to ever fly on one of them.

Not even for FREE on a so-called "Media Educational."

[siam2007]

didn't an Airbus Crash lately in Indonesia ? Didn't a Boeing crash-land in SFO 2 years ago or so ?

better avoid those manufacturers too right ? and swim to overseas next time or take a "Minivan" with a 15 year old Thai driver

[brewsterbudgen]

What a lot of nonsense. The ATR-72 is a great little plane, used all over the world for short-hop flights and despite the two recent crashes has a good safety record. As others have said, crashes are caused by many different factors and are rarely down to it being one particular type of aircraft. The Comet was probably the last aircraft with a fatal design flaw.

[Asiantravel]

What a lot of nonsense. The ATR-72 is a great little plane, used all over the world for short-hop flights and despite the two recent crashes has a good safety record. As others have said, crashes are caused by many different factors and are rarely down to it being one particular type of aircraft. The Comet was probably the last aircraft with a fatal design flaw.

" The Comet was probably the last aircraft with a fatal design flaw."

What about Concorde?

Agreed ATR is a good plane. Flew on one last year in South America with Avianca .

[brewsterbudgen]

What a lot of nonsense. The ATR-72 is a great little plane, used all over the world for short-hop flights and despite the two recent crashes has a good safety record. As others have said, crashes are caused by many different factors and are rarely down to it being one particular type of aircraft. The Comet was probably the last aircraft with a fatal design flaw.

What about Concorde?

Didn't it crash because it ran over some debris from a flight that had taken off before it, which ruptured the fuel lines? I'm not an expert, but I don't believe Concorde failed because of a design flaw, but rather because it wasn't economically viable. Actually, I think it was a superbly designed aircraft that operated safely for many years and had one tragic crash.

[Asiantravel]

What a lot of nonsense. The ATR-72 is a great little plane, used all over the world for short-hop flights and despite the two recent crashes has a good safety record. As others have said, crashes are caused by many different factors and are rarely down to it being one particular type of aircraft. The Comet was probably the last aircraft with a fatal design flaw.

What about Concorde?

Didn't it crash because it ran over some debris from a flight that had taken off before it, which ruptured the fuel lines? I'm not an expert, but I don't believe Concorde failed because of a design flaw, but rather because it wasn't economically viable. Actually, I think it was a superbly designed aircraft that operated safely for many years and had one tragic crash.

I’m not an expert either but I just remember reading this a long time ago

“ Prosecutors say those earlier incidents pointed to defects in the plane's design that should have been fixed and that ultimately contributed to the fatal crash.”

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704022804575041111177341850

[brewsterbudgen]

What a lot of nonsense. The ATR-72 is a great little plane, used all over the world for short-hop flights and despite the two recent crashes has a good safety record. As others have said, crashes are caused by many different factors and are rarely down to it being one particular type of aircraft. The Comet was probably the last aircraft with a fatal design flaw.

What about Concorde?

Didn't it crash because it ran over some debris from a flight that had taken off before it, which ruptured the fuel lines? I'm not an expert, but I don't believe Concorde failed because of a design flaw, but rather because it wasn't economically viable. Actually, I think it was a superbly designed aircraft that operated safely for many years and had one tragic crash.

I’m not an expert either but I just remember reading this a long time ago

“ Prosecutors say those earlier incidents pointed to defects in the plane's design that should have been fixed and that ultimately contributed to the fatal crash.”

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704022804575041111177341850

That's fairly conclusive. But it did fly without serious incidents for many, many years and for a long time was considered the world's safest aircraft. The history of the Comet is very different.

[hanno]

The Comet probably had the worst safety record since the Wright brothers. Whereas the ATR's are some of the safest planes out there.