ATR 42 vs ATR 72-600
Side-by-side specs and an editorial comparison — fleet roles, economics, and the passenger experience.
| Spec | ATR 42 | ATR 72-600 |
|---|---|---|
| ICAO type | AT45 | AT76 |
| Manufacturer | ATR | ATR |
| Engines | 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127 | 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127 (turboprop) |
| Typical seating | 48 | 70 |
| Range | 716 nm | 825 nm |
| Cruise speed | Mach 0.42 | Mach 0.44 |
| MTOW | 18,600 kg | 23,000 kg |
| Length | 22.67 m | 27.17 m |
| Wingspan | 24.57 m | 27.05 m |
| First flight | 1984 | 1988 |
| Status | In production | In production |
How they compare
The ATR 42 and ATR 72 are one family in two lengths, and the choice between them is about seats and runways rather than technology. The ATR 42 came first, in 1985, as a 42- to 50-seat turboprop; the ATR 72 of 1989 stretched it by 4.5 m, widened the wing and added more powerful engines to seat 70 to 78. Both are now built as the -600 series, with the same Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127M engines, six-blade propellers, Thales glass cockpit and a common type rating, so an airline can run both with one pool of pilots. The current ATR 42-600 seats 48, flies about 720 nautical miles with a full load, and can use runways under 1,100 m; the short-field ATR 42-600S version of 2024 brings that down to 800 m. The ATR 72-600 seats 72 to 78 and flies about 825 nautical miles.
The ATR 72 is by far the more popular aircraft, with more than a thousand delivered against around 500 ATR 42s, because the stretch costs little extra to fly and most routes can fill the seats; its cost per seat is roughly 20% lower. The ATR 42 survives on routes and islands where 70 seats are too many or the runway is too short, from Scotland's Highlands and the Caribbean to Japan's Hokkaido and the Pacific.
Passenger experience
The cabins are the same cross-section, 2-2 with seats about 17 inches wide, a low ceiling, small bins and the rear boarding door that puts the front rows furthest from the propeller noise and the last off the aircraft. The ATR 72 is simply longer, with 18 to 19 rows against the 42's 12. Noise, ride and the -600 cabin with its larger bins and LED lighting are the same on both. Flights on either are short, often under an hour, and the view from a high-wing turboprop is excellent. For the best seat on either, take a window behind the wing on the right side; the row beside the propellers is the loudest.
Which to choose
For airlines the ATR 72 wins wherever it can be filled and the ATR 42 earns its place on thin routes and short strips. For passengers there is nothing to choose; an ATR 42 is an ATR 72 with fewer rows and the same ride.
Comparisons are editorial and based on public specifications. Not for operational use.