Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Swissair Fokker F100.  
User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2763 times:

Hi!

One of the most unique airplanes that operated in Swissair was infact the Fokker 100. I think that model had one of the most brief careers, maybe compared with the CV880 that stayed for a very short time and it was "on transit" from Convair until Swissair received the CV990 Coronado. I would like to understand what was the reasons why they ordered the Fokker 100, what was the airplanes the Fokker replaced and why they left so soon the airline.
Regards

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLifelinerOne From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1922 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2664 times:

Hi CV990,

had nothing to do, so I went in my archive to find you some answers...

Swissair was in the early eighties one of the airlines who was consulted frequently by Fokker when developing the new Fokker 100. Swissair wanted a fuel and noice efficient 100-seater and Fokker was developing a new one from the good old F28 Fellowship. The design and specifications of the Fokker 100 was changed often on request by Swissair, which resulted in some delays in the development. As a result of working closely on the biggest Fokker ever, Swissair became one of the launch customers and also was the first airline to take the Fokker 100 into service in 1988.

The Swissair-fleet:

11244 HB-IVA, delivered 29-02-1988, withdrawn from use 13-11-1995.
11250 HB-IVB, delivered 21-04-1988, withdrawn from use 25-11-1995.
11251 HB-IVC, delivered 01-06-1988, withdrawn from use 24-08-1996.
11252 HB-IVD, delivered 14-07-1988, withdrawn from use 01-06-1996.
11253 HB-IVE, delivered 12-08-1988, withdrawn from use 03-02-1996.
11254 HB-IVF, delivered 16-09-1988, withdrawn from use 04-05-1996.
11255 HB-IVG, delivered 21-10-1988, withdrawn from use 31-08-1996.
11256 HB-IVH, delivered 24-11-1988, withdrawn from use 17-09-1996*

*The HB-IVH made a special farewell Fokker 100 flight on 19-12-1996.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michel Gilliand


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon



Swissair decided to withdrawn the Fokkers from use because they outsourced their regional operations to Crossair who were operating the BAe146 at that time and aquired newly BAe RJ's after a contest between BAe (RJ85 & RJ100 and Fokker (F70/F100). The contest was held because Crossair wanted to operate one type of regional jet.

Hope this helps, if you have further questions, please ask!

Cheers!  wave 



Only Those Who Sleep Don't Make Mistakes
User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2630 times:

Hi LifelinerOne!

I just needed a very good answer to my question! And you did it! Thanks a lot for that insight and actually according to my expectations I wanted an answer from a swiss friend or from a dutch friend! I guess you won!!! Now I think you agree with me but why RJ85/RJ100 and not Fokker F70/F100???
I just want to tell you that I flew both airplanes, RJ85 from SWISS and Fokker F100 from TAM and I still need to understand why Crossair choosed the RJ and not the Fokker!!! 4 engines against 2? Short landing performance?
Regards


User currently offlineLifelinerOne From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1922 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2616 times:

Quoting CV990 (Reply 2):
Now I think you agree with me but why RJ85/RJ100 and not Fokker F70/F100???
I just want to tell you that I flew both airplanes, RJ85 from SWISS and Fokker F100 from TAM and I still need to understand why Crossair choosed the RJ and not the Fokker!!! 4 engines against 2? Short landing performance?

The short landing performance of the RJ made a difference because Crossair wanted to fly jets into London-City and the Fokker 70 wasn't certified for that yet. Also, BAe made a better deal regarding the costs of the plane and availability of the new jets. Crossair had to wait a little longer (about a year or so) before there was space on the Fokker 70 production line.

Cheers!  wave 



Only Those Who Sleep Don't Make Mistakes
User currently offlineMagyarorszag From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2546 times:

Quoting CV990 (Thread starter):
why they left so soon the airline.

I don't know if its true, but somebody working at SR told me that there was a joke saying: "Ten hours of flight, one hundred of maintenance!" Maybe somebody here can confirm that or say it's wrong!

Cheers,

M.


User currently offlineJasond From Australia, joined Jul 2009, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2536 times:

Quoting Magyarorszag (Reply 4):
I don't know if its true, but somebody working at SR told me that there was a joke saying: "Ten hours of flight, one hundred of maintenance!" Maybe somebody here can confirm that or say it's wrong!

Can't comment specifically on that but I heard it was the other way around. F-28's were operated in Australia with high utilisations, when replaced by BAe146's the big complaint always was lack of cruise and performance and much lower utilisation times due to excessive maintenance.


User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2528 times:

Hi!

Thanks for your feedback about the maintenance issue, but what can we say about TAM/Brasil? Those guys used and abused the Fokker F100 and it's my understanding that they actually grew up a lot and at this moment are maybe the best airline in Brasil thanks also for the way they operated the Fokker F100!
Regards


User currently offlineMagyarorszag From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2533 times:

Regarding what I said earlier, maybe was the maintenance "problem" linked to the fleet size. As SR only operated ten F-100s not eight (compared to 31 MD-80s probably co-maintained with SK & OS fleets), as mentioned by LifelinerOne. SR got two more aircraft in 1992, which they kept till 1996. They were registered HB-IVI/K.

Regards.

[Edited 2005-10-29 18:27:18]

[Edited 2005-10-29 18:27:55]

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Fokker F100's In Storage @ NWI posted Sat Apr 15 2006 16:35:32 by LHRjc
Fokker F100 Range posted Tue Apr 5 2005 21:19:02 by SBE727
New Fokker F100 Deal posted Wed May 26 2004 05:27:25 by Flying-Tiger
Your Favorite Fokker F100 Livery posted Mon Mar 1 2004 09:03:02 by Nwfltattendant
Fokker F100/F70 And F28 posted Fri Jan 12 2001 05:14:58 by Qantas737
Fokker F100 Worse Than ATR42! posted Sat Sep 16 2000 07:56:35 by TWA902fly
Fokker F100 - Why So Few? posted Mon Jul 24 2000 23:25:07 by PVDFlier
Fokker- F100 posted Mon Mar 1 1999 04:13:39 by Aircanada A320
Revival Of Fokker F70 & F100 By Rekkof posted Mon Sep 6 2004 15:02:57 by JCS
Can The Fokker F70/F100 Be Revived? posted Sun Jun 15 2003 07:08:40 by Indianguy