Jump to content

Talk:ATR 42

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cyberbot II (talk | contribs) at 10:54, 3 April 2014 (Notification of blacklisted links on the main page. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 7))). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Can someone make a photo gallery for all these photos? They're screwing up the section edit links something awful, and it looks kinda silly to have a giant column of photos running down the right side of the page.--chris.lawson 20:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this problem was solved with the article splits. - BillCJ 19:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Company

In the article is not mentioned that ATR is an Italian French company, with the shares equally divided between Alenia and Aerospatiale (now EADS) --82.89.191.143 10:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And this is relevant to the article about the aircraft ATR 42 exactly how? There is an article on ATR as a company already. 82.10.157.146 18:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need Consistency in Engine Power Listings

The article isn't consistent. In the text (ATR 42-200/300) it states the engines have 2000 shp, whereas the box at the bottom of the article lists those engines at 1800 shp. In the text (ATR 42-320) it states the engines for that variant have 2100 shp, whereas the box lists the engines at 1900 shp. In the text (ATR 42-500) it states the PW127E engines are rated at 2400 horsepower, whereas the box lists the engines at 2160 shp. In addition, the General Characteristics section (just above the box) lists the engine output as 1790 KW, which converts to 2400 horsepower.

Somebody should make the effort to find the correct rated power for each of the three engine types used in these three models. As a starting point, the Aviation Week & Space Technology issue for 29 October, 2007, p. 64 lists the engine power (for the ATR 42-500) at 2160 shp, so that is probably correct. Where did the 2400 shp number come from? Any help would be appreciated. Raymondwinn 08:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These P&WC engines have a nominal power and a "reserve take-off" power, to be used if an engine failure occurs during take-off, which triggers the so-called "uptrim" on the remaining engine, a ~10% increase in torque. So the PW120, for example, has this RTO power rated at 2000 shp (threfore the "20" on its model name, PW120), but normally it is used at 1800 shp, which corresponds to 100% torque. The PW121 can go up to 2100 shp (therefore the "21") on RTO but normally is used at 1900 shp. For the PW127, this name rule does not apply because there are many sub-models. ATR42-500 use the PW127E but they can be fitted with PW127F as well; many of these PW127 can be retrofitted into different sub-models very easily. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.68.105.129 (talk) 03:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ATR42-300 specifications

This article lacks specs for the 42-300. I'm not good at making wiki articles but if someone wants to format the below correctly that would be great.

MRM 17000KG MTOM 16900KG PAYLOAD 3006KG MZFM 15540KG MAX FUEL 4500KG ZERO PAYLOAD RANGE 2300NM WITH RESERVES ZERO PAYLOAD ENDURANCE 9:30 WITH RESERVES FULL PAYLOAD RANGE 1800NM WITH RESERVES FULL PAYLOAD ENDURANCE 6:00 WITH RESERVES

Thanks 78.146.179.212 (talk) 14:32, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Data Sheet

I found an ATR 42 data sheet - Data Sheet No. 01-02 / 23.01.02 at Instituto de Aeronáutica Civil de Cuba WhisperToMe (talk) 13:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Specifications

Is there any reason why we still have specs for the ATR-72 as it isn't part of the article any more? If not is there any reason why the article can't use a more normal specs template? Nigel Ish (talk) 14:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The same of course applies to the ATR 72 article.Nigel Ish (talk) 16:06, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I dont see any reason why the standard template cant be used (on both). MilborneOne (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessaryily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/atr_42/
    Triggered by \baerospace-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 10:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:ATR_42&oldid=602557527"