Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
Robin

MAS to buy 10 ATR aircraft

Recommended Posts

PETALING JAYA: Malaysian Airline System Bhd (MAS) yesterday signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with ATR in Toulouse, France, for the purchase of 10 ATR 72 500s and an option for five more worth a total of US$285mil.

 

The purchase was in response to the Government’s request that MASWings, a subsidiary of MAS set up to service the air routes of Sabah and Sarawak, expand its services to the two states.

 

MAS executive director and chief financial officer Tengku Azmil Zahruddin and ATR chief executive officer Stephane Mayer signed the MoU.

 

MASWings is expected to take delivery of the first five aircraft in 2009 and the next batch in 2010. ATR is a joint venture between EADS and Alenia Aeronautica. The ATR 72 500 is a turboprop six-blade propeller aircraft.

 

“The new aircraft will enable MASWings to expand its capacity by 150%.

 

“This will allow MASWings to meet the future demand in air travel within Sabah and Sarawak and connect more customers worldwide to the two states, which are ideal destinations for business and vacation,” Tengku Azmil said in a joint media release with ATR.

 

He added that with the fleet expansion, MASWings would progressively add new frequencies in addition to expanding its services to more destinations in Sabah and Sarawak.

 

MASWings, which started operating in both states on Oct 1 this year, currently has four Fokker F50 and four Twin Otter aircraft.

 

Meanwhile, OSK Investment Bank senior analyst Chris Eng said the acquisition of the aircraft for MASWings would not impact the country’s flagship airline negatively, as the Government footed the bill.

 

“It just shows that it is keen on maintaining a good level of service,” he said.

 

Eng added that the MoU signed between MAS and ATR in July for the purchase of 10 ATR 72 500s with an option to purchase another 10 for MAS’ low-cost carrier, Firefly, was another step in showing that it was serious in expanding the Firefly fleet.

 

Firefly was launched in April this year in Penang and recently started operations in Subang. It currently has a fleet of two Fokker F50 aircraft.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, very interesting....

 

Wasn't the favouRED airline running the RAS till Oct 1st? How come the Govt agreed with the purchase of the ATR after MH took over and not when the favou RED one was running it? Is the government concerned about safety, and competency? Was there a trust problem?

 

Does anyone really know the story of the darkest and most scandalous period of Malaysian Aviation?

 

The Red and Blue may be many bad things, but when the chips are down, it will always be there.

 

Anyway, the choice of the ATR is a prudent one although emotionally I'd go for the Bombardier Q series, faster, sexier, quiter. However its not popular in this part of the world. The ATR is operated by a number of airlines in this region.

Edited by Nik H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

News release from ATR:

 

47332f09a2e5dATR-MASWings2small.jpg

 

ATR and Malaysia Airlines Sign MoU for 10 ATR 72-500s

 

ATR and Malaysia Airlines (MAS) today signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the purchase of a fleet of 10 ATR 72-500s and options for 5 additional aircraft. The agreement, valued at some 285 US $ million including options, has been inked in Toulouse by Stéphane Mayer, ATR CEO, and Tengku Azmil Zahruddin, Executive Director and Chief Finance Officer of Malaysia Airlines.

 

These ATR 72-500s, configured with 68-seats, will be operated by MASWings, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Malaysia Airlines to expand its services in the states of Sabah and Sarawak in East Malaysia. The aircraft will be equipped as well with state-of-the-art technological innovations in passenger comfort, communications and navigation aid tools. The airline will take delivery of the aircraft in 2009 and 2010.

 

In July this year, Malaysia Airlines already signed an MoU with ATR to acquire 10 ATR 72-500s with options for 10 additional aircraft for Firefly, another 'wholly-owned subsidiary.

 

"The new aircraft will enable MASWings to expand its capacity by 150%. This will allow MASWings to meet the future demand in air travel within Sabah and Sarawak, and connect more customers worldwide to the two states, which are ideal destinations for business and vacations", said Tengku Azmil Zahruddin. And added: "As such, MASWings will progressively add new frequencies in addition to expanding its services to more destinations in East Malaysia".

 

Stéphane Mayer declared: "We are delighted with this new proof of confidence of Malaysia Airlines in the ATR aircraft for the expansion of the regional operations of its subsidiaries". And added: "We are very happy with the consolidation of our partnership and with the introduction in the Malaysian routes of state-of-the-art and highly-comfortable aircraft".

 

MASWings commenced operations in East Malaysia on 1 October 2007 and currently operates 4 Fokker 50 and 4 Twin Otter aircraft.

Since the beginning of the year, ATR has received orders for 88 new aircraft, some of them not yet unveiled. Since the beginning of the programme, ATR has sold 925 aircraft (414 ATR 42s and 511 ATR 72s) and has delivered 745 (397 ATR 42s and 348 ATR 72s), thus posting a current backlog of 180 aircraft.

 

 

The 500 series ATRs:

With its ATR 42-500 and ATR 72-500, ATR supplies state-of-the-art aircraft with the highest standards of comfort. The advanced six-blade propeller provides remarkably low noise levels. Low fuel burn and gaseous emissions contribute to make the ATR environment friendly. All ATR models are compliant with noise regulations and have a large margin with regard to Chapter IV (ICAO) noise regulations, effective 1st January 2006.

 

 

About Malaysia Airlines

Malaysia Airlines, the national carrier of Malaysia, is recognized as one of Asia's largest, flying more than 48,000 passengers to some 100 destinations across 6 continents everyday. The airline holds a lengthy record of service and best practices excellence, having received more than 100 awards in the last 10 years. The most notable ones include being the first airline to win the "World's Best Cabin Crew" by Skytrax UK consecutively from 2001 until 2004, "5-star airline" in 2005 and 2006, as well as No.1 for "Economy Class Onboard Excellence 2006" also by Skytrax UK.

 

 

About ATR

Toulouse, Southern France-based regional aircraft manufacturer ATR is the world leader in the 50 to 74-seat turboprop market. ATR forecasts revenues of around US$1 Billion in 2007, representing two successive years of 30% increase in turnover. ATR is an equal partnership between Alenia Aeronautica (Finmeccanica group) and EADS. ATR is certified NF EN ISO 9001:2000 and AS 9100 revision B:2004 / JIS Q 9100:2004 / EN 9100:2003, the worldwide quality standard in the field of aeronautics.

 

http://www.atr.fr/public/atr/html/press/re...fac6d6e54f7866c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Strictly from a spotter point of view,

Firefly : ATR 72-500

MASWing : Bombardier Q400

Cool!

MAS point of view,

buy more can get more discount. cost saving maa.. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no! More of the ugly ATR's. Looks like my hope of seeing Dash8-Q400 in this part of the world will still be a long time coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh no! More of the ugly ATR's. Looks like my hope of seeing Dash8-Q400 in this part of the world will still be a long time coming.

 

The Dash 8s have a problem with the landing gear :pardon:

 

Correct me if I'm wrong :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dash 8s have a problem with the landing gear :pardon:

 

Correct me if I'm wrong :)

Yes you are right. SAS has grounded their fleet. Q400 with high cycles seem to have developed gear problems. Could be design or maintainance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes you are right. SAS has grounded their fleet. Q400 with high cycles seem to have developed gear problems. Could be design or maintainance?

 

 

any atr pics???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latest Bombadier Crash Unrelated to Previous Mishaps

 

The Toronto Star

 

October 31, 2007

 

The landing gear malfunction that caused Scandinavian Airlines to permanently ground its fleet of Bombardier Inc.-built turboprops and prompted European safety officials to call for an “emergency crisis meeting” is not related to two earlier accidents that involved the same type of plane, according to Danish investigators.

 

In a preliminary report published Tuesday, Denmark’s Civil Aviation Accident Investigation Board said an inspection of the landing gear on the Bombardier Q-400 involved in the most recent SAS incident revealed a valve inside the gear’s actuator piston was blocked by a foreign “O-ring,” a circular elastic seal.

 

That, in turn, prevented the complete extension of the landing gear and caused the crash landing in Copenhagen on Oct. 27, according to the report.

 

“This O-ring did not come from the actuator, and its source is unknown,” said the report, which added that the investigation is continuing.

 

By contrast, preliminary investigations of two earlier SAS crash landings in Denmark and Lithuania, which also involved landing gear failures, pointed to a corroded component inside the Q-400’s actuator piston. No one was killed in the incidents.

 

Marc Duchesne, a Bombardier spokesperson, said the plane maker wants to determine how the debris found its way into the landing gear assembly following SAS’s decision in September to ground its entire fleet of 27 Q-400s for three weeks to conduct landing gear inspections and replace key components.

 

Despite the latest finding, SAS spokesperson Hans Ollongren said the airline did not intend to reverse its earlier decision to stop flying the Q-400.

 

“Will it influence our decision? No, it won’t,” Ollongren said. “And that’s because this decision was taken on the basis that our customers have lost confidence in this aircraft given recent events.”

 

Ollongren stressed, however, that SAS does not intend to sever its relationship with Bombardier, calling the Montreal-based maker of planes and trains a quality manufacturer.

 

“We don’t have a problem with Bombardier, we have a problem with the Q-400.”

 

Most other airlines that operate the Q-400 have so far expressed confidence in the aircraft, saying they do not intend to scrap future orders. There are about 160 of the planes in service around the globe. The only commercial operator in Canada is Toronto’s Porter Airlines, which flies four of the turboprops from its base at the Toronto Island airport and has plans to add another six to its fleet.

 

Robert Deluce, Porter’s CEO, said in an interview earlier this week that Porter has experienced no problems with the Q-400, although the airline did report one incident in December in which pilots were forced to manually deploy the plane’s landing gear before landing in Toronto.

 

At least two Japanese airlines reported similar problems—landing gear that failed to deploy—earlier in the year, but Bombardier said several months ago that it had fixed the problem by replacing a switch in the nose assembly.

 

Bombardier said in a statement Monday that it was “disappointed” in SAS’s decision to ground its Q-400 fleet while the accident investigation is still ongoing. The plane maker said that it has determined, with the help of Transport Canada and consultations with Goodrich Corp., which makes the gear, that there is no “systemic” landing gear issue with the Q-400.

 

It’s not clear whether the preliminary report by Danish authorities will have any impact on the European Aviation Safety Agency’s recent call for an “emergency crisis meeting” with Transport Canada and Bombardier to discuss the airworthiness of the Q-400.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

according to the investigation report by Danish authorities, a seal that was intended to be used for the nose gear has been used in a main gear assembly and caused the failure.

So this time it's not the aircraft's fault, but maintenence.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so agree with you, Alan, ATR is much much uglier than Q400.

 

Still lingers in me is the questions of why all happen on SAS (and SAS linked companies) where as other airlines like Jeju air and ANA is the only Q400 case that is not related to SAS? Could be SAS at fault? The CGH salty environment where SAS Q400 based at? If Bomboardier is at fault, why Flybe still have lots of confidence and mass buying them even after all this SAS incident?

 

But I guess I understand why MH chose ATR since ATR72 is direct replacement to F50 with the advantages of more seats and similar performance output. Where as Q400 is an total (almost) upgrade in every specs include range, speed and so on. MASWings is not going to operate flights more than 1.5 hours which Q400 able to fly 3.5 hours max. So it's going to be waste of range capability unless they decide to do BKI-SZB or BKI-KBR routes then they need Q400.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MASWings is not going to operate flights more than 1.5 hours which Q400 able to fly 3.5 hours max. So it's going to be waste of range capability unless they decide to do BKI-SZB or BKI-KBR routes then they need Q400.

 

Agreed. It will be a waste to them. So, lets just hope, after they've required all their ATRs, that they will do the routes: BKI-SZB, BKI-KBR or PEN-BKI/KCH... hmmm.... <_>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am so agree with you, Alan, ATR is much much uglier than Q400.

 

Still lingers in me is the questions of why all happen on SAS (and SAS linked companies) where as other airlines like Jeju air and ANA is the only Q400 case that is not related to SAS? Could be SAS at fault? The CGH salty environment where SAS Q400 based at? If Bomboardier is at fault, why Flybe still have lots of confidence and mass buying them even after all this SAS incident?

 

But I guess I understand why MH chose ATR since ATR72 is direct replacement to F50 with the advantages of more seats and similar performance output. Where as Q400 is an total (almost) upgrade in every specs include range, speed and so on. MASWings is not going to operate flights more than 1.5 hours which Q400 able to fly 3.5 hours max. So it's going to be waste of range capability unless they decide to do BKI-SZB or BKI-KBR routes then they need Q400.

 

The ATR can fly a 4 hour mission. So can the F50. Heck, most planes have an operating range of 4 hours. I don't think the range capability is much of a deal breaker.

 

I feel when the fleet rollover to the ATR is done, Maswings and Firefly will reach their best operating efficiency.

Amortisation of spares investment, simulator and manpower will be realised at a rate that will return best economics.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm, sorry for my ignorance. But if my memory serves me right, MAS has purchased this few months back already right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erm, sorry for my ignorance. But if my memory serves me right, MAS has purchased this few months back already right?

That was for Firefly and the latest is for MASwings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erm, sorry for my ignorance. But if my memory serves me right, MAS has purchased this few months back already right?

 

Your ignorance is pardoned. The earlier purchase was for Firefly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if all options are taken-up, we'll have 25 ATR72's in total ?

 

COOL !!! :pardon:

 

Agree there, guys: it's ugly looking (IMHO, especially the nose-part and wheel), but it IS comfortable from the passenger's point of view...just wait-n-see ;)

 

Like the cockpit-design too... :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree there, guys: it's ugly looking (IMHO, especially the nose-part and wheel), but it IS comfortable from the passenger's point of view...just wait-n-see ;)

 

Like the cockpit-design too... :good:

Comfortable for me, yes, for sure. not to have to worry for any propeller blades that might cut through the fuselage and cutting my body parts during landing... :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but it IS comfortable from the passenger's point of view...just wait-n-see ;)

 

Like the cockpit-design too... :good:

 

I've flown in ATR of Aer Arann DUB-CRK

 

It is indeed comfortable. Relative quiet as compared to Saab 340 of Logan Air/British Airways DUB-Londonderry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys I though the earlier purchase was for MasWings as well :p

 

Anyway, I'll look forward to fly the ATR... My only propeller was with F50 and I really like it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow , I love how the ATR looks ...

Never knew so many people disliked how it looks .. Hahaha ...

I dont have a photo of ATR 72-500 , but I've flown it in FS before

So here's a screenshot

fsscr221.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATR, since the cargo door/compartment located right behind the cockpit, is that mean the pilot need to climb into the cargo compartment before enter the cockpit? :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...