Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Fokker Revival  
User currently offlinePillowTester From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 245 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 8784 times:

The current issue of Air International has an article about the Fokker Revival plans. I wasn't aware this was an ongoing effort. I think that is pretty exciting.

What is the current status of this project? Does this mean new Fokkers will be produced? Anyone have this issue and read the article? I only saw the blurb on their website.


...said Dan jubilantly.
103 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBeaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 8751 times:

This is becomming a never ending story - Rekkof tried since many years to make people believe they gonna re-build aircraft based on Fokker F 70 technology but modernize it. They never ever build a singel aircraft and the project is dead !


Please respect animals - don't eat them...
User currently offlineLijnden From Philippines, joined Apr 2003, 564 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 8648 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Rekkof has made a business plan, created a webpage and seeks every so many months publicity. I would love to see a revival of the Fokker products. It is simply the best commuter jet around from a passengers' point of comfort.

At the same time I must look realistic at Rekkof and with the problems listed below and must wonder if a wonder will happen

The problems:

- The Fokker designs and AW certificates are belonging to another company
- There is no location to build the planes
- They have not received any orders to build the planes
- They missed out on the KLM (the largest Fokker user) MX and overhaul program
- Capital raising is a problem
- The Netherlands is one of the least attractive locations when it comes to costs. Especially if you compete against countries like Brasil



Be kind to animals!
User currently offlineBlast From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 120 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8382 times:

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
There is no location to build the planes

I thought Twente Airforce Base was a potential location together with Woensdrecht??
I would love to see Fokkers being built again. However, it seems to be nothing more than rumors so far unfortunately.


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8964 posts, RR: 39
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 8303 times:

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
It is simply the best commuter jet around from a passengers' point of comfort.

I'm not so sure about that.

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
- The Netherlands is one of the least attractive locations when it comes to costs. Especially if you compete against countries like Brasil

Embraer is a global company. While it designs the a/c in Brazil, a lot of it's parts come from the same suppliers Boeing, Airbus and BBD have. Not to mention other costs and issues they have to deal with that an European or North American company probably does not have to.

The lower costs issue is not always necessarly true. It may be in this case, it may not.. I do not know. I've heard of cases (my father is a Project Manager for a Thyssen Krupp subsidiary) that has been cheaper/equivalent costs to assemble big pieces of machinery in Belgium (IIRC) than in Brazil (you can blame government policies for that). Not to mention freight costs.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4695 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 8264 times:

Quoting Blast (Reply 3):
I thought Twente Airforce Base was a potential location together with Woensdrecht??

Latest I heard they were looking at LEY (but without ILS and ATC wich were promised years ago (after wich TTA relocated, and went bankrupt) I don't think this is such a good option)



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineFokker70NG From Netherlands, joined Nov 2005, 234 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 8184 times:

It's true, as far as I know, Rekkof still isn't dead at all. Last november they announced that if they will build new Fokkers, they will have new engines (my guess would be the BR715). At the same time, Fokker Services is rumoured to be in the process of retrofitting an existing F100 with new engines. I also read an article that Rekkof and Fokker Services are actually working together on this project, but I don't know if this is the infamous ignorant journalist interpretation or reliable information.

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
- The Fokker designs and AW certificates are belonging to another company

They belong to Stork, but Fokker Services (subsidary of Stork) actually is involved with Rekkof plans, because they would take care of MX etc. So this is not really an issue.

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
- There is no location to build the planes

There are enough hangars around. Last I've heard is that this isn't an issue either.

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
- They missed out on the KLM (the largest Fokker user) MX and overhaul program

As far as I know, Fokker Services is currently overhauling all the KL F100's. They even made an collaboration agreement with KLM Engineering & Maintenance recently.

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
- Capital raising is a problem

This doesn't seem to be the issue either. If they have orders, there are enough investors. But there are a lot of politics involved in all this. And as you know, every process that has to do with politics is difficult and slow. However, last thing I've heard (LifelinerOne wrote something about it her on A.net not too long ago) was that a big reputable company will backup the Rekkof project, and that would really make the whole project a lot more credible, especially for potential buyers.

Quoting JRadier (Reply 5):

Latest I heard they were looking at LEY (but without ILS and ATC wich were promised years ago (after wich TTA relocated, and went bankrupt) I don't think this is such a good option)

Latest thing I've heard was that Woensdrect would be the most likely location.

As far as I know, the Rekkof project isn't dead yet. I hope they will succeed eventually, let's wait and see.



Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. -Albert Einstein
User currently offlineDogfighter2111 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1968 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 8169 times:

Hey,

I beleive they are still going. Their website shows a whole load of info:

http://www.rekkof.nl/bannerframes/frame_home.htm

and not to mention an extended version of the Fokker (Rekkof)

http://www.rekkof.nl/about_rekkof/about_rekkof_development.htm

I'd love to see that one ^, IMO it looks like a VC-10 with 2 engines.

Thanks
Mike


User currently offlineTheSorcerer From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 1048 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 8166 times:

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 2):
- There is no location to build the planes

Couldn't they contract a manufacturer to build it for them?
thanks
Dominic



ALITALIA,All Landings In Torino, All Luggage In Athens ;)
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 8092 times:

They cannot even build a decent website...

Who wrote the AI article?

Peter

[Edited 2006-02-19 00:10:46]


The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineLhrmaccoll From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 7924 times:

I only just realised that Rekkof is fokker in reverse..
Oh I'm a moron!


User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 7769 times:

Let's look at this logically.

The EMB-170 is a direct competitor to the F70. And the EMB-190 competes directly with the F100.

Orders and options:

EMB-170/175: 334 F70: 25*

EMB-190/195: 468 F100: 0

Total: EMB: 802 Rekkof 25

I think it's pretty obvious the market has spoken.

Steve

* 1 order from Iran Air, which appears to be time-constrained. Rekkof must deliver aircraft starting in 2007.


User currently offlinePillowTester From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7686 times:

I think the lack of orders are possibly partly due to the Airline industry sharing the same "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude that most of us here on A.net have. Once they fly, I'm sure more orders will come. An upgraded and modernized Fokker lineup could be quite a competitive product. I hope it works!


...said Dan jubilantly.
User currently offlineFokker70NG From Netherlands, joined Nov 2005, 234 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7613 times:

Quoting Sllevin (Reply 11):

Orders and options:

EMB-170/175: 334 F70: 25*

EMB-190/195: 468 F100: 0

Total: EMB: 802 Rekkof 25

I think it's pretty obvious the market has spoken.

I think it's pretty obvious this isn't a good comparison at all, sorry. Rekkof doesn't have a lot of credibility, compared to Embraer. The "We'll believe it when we see it"-attitude, but also the fact that Rekkof is a very small company that isn't backed up by a big company (yet) that doesn't have the risk of going belly up tomorrow, make orders hard to get. But I wouldn't be surprised to see this situation change in the near future.



Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. -Albert Einstein
User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7499 times:

Quoting Fokker70NG (Reply 13):
Rekkof is a very small company that isn't backed up by a big company (yet) that doesn't have the risk of going belly up tomorrow


If Rekkof landed significant orders, they could have all the backing they want, sorry.

They can't get the orders becaue airline after airline has decided Embraer's aircraft are better, sorry. The only reason that they have one order at all is because it's from an airline that can't order the Embraer.

Airlines are greedy. If Rekkof could make them money, they'd buy it. It can't, and they haven't. Rekkof is and will always remain the fond dream of a handful of people, sorry.

Steve

[Edited 2006-02-19 03:52:54]

User currently offlineLijnden From Philippines, joined Apr 2003, 564 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6996 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Rekkof must make deadlines on decisions and have at least one updated 'prototype' ready to show airlines on shows or on demand, just like Airbus and Boeing do. All they have now are a poor web page, maybe some folders or brochures and a wonderful story.

I know that building aircraft is not only an issue of finding a empty hangar! It is a very complex puzzle of suppliers and creating a own infrastructure. Still, I think that The Netherlands is not the place to do this right now. Labour privileges, rights and costs are simply way out of line when compared to even other EU-countries. Together with a very strong environmental lobby in politics (Groen Links, PvdA, SP), who are against about anything, one must wonder why Rekkof wants to use The Netherlands at all? Countries like Latvia are better alternatives I think!



Be kind to animals!
User currently offlineLat41 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 471 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6912 times:

In the face of these new larger RJs, why would they continue that effort. Also if the 717 couldn't make it, why reheat the souffle?

User currently offlineFokker70NG From Netherlands, joined Nov 2005, 234 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6792 times:

Quoting Sllevin (Reply 14):
If Rekkof landed significant orders, they could have all the backing they want, sorry.

They can't get the orders becaue airline after airline has decided Embraer's aircraft are better, sorry. The only reason that they have one order at all is because it's from an airline that can't order the Embraer.

Airlines are greedy. If Rekkof could make them money, they'd buy it. It can't, and they haven't. Rekkof is and will always remain the fond dream of a handful of people, sorry.

To continue the sorrying, I will have to say that I stick with my opinion that this isn't a good comparison. To say that the 'market has spoken and decided that Embraer aircraft are better' is a little bit narrow-minded. Could you provide some technical data to back up your statement?
Of course there are many more things involved with fleet decisions. Do you think an airline would place an order with Rekkof when they're unsure whether the project will be a success, and how long they will manage to keep the productionlines open? Do you think they would take this guess so when Rekkof would be a failure in the end, they would have to go to Embraer where the production slots for their desired timeframe are given away to others? Do you think an airline would take the guess and pay deposits to a little company that could be belly up tomorrow because of lack of orders or a unfortunate change of the dollar exchange rate? Small companies that do not have income yet are vulnerable for all those little risk factors, where big companies have reserves to stay alive for the time being. This hasn't got anything to do with a better product.

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 15):
I know that building aircraft is not only an issue of finding a empty hangar! It is a very complex puzzle of suppliers and creating a own infrastructure.

Of course you're right. But I believe they already have suppliers and a whole infrastructure, waiting to be turned on, based on things I've heard from people who are (indirectly) involved in the project.

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 15):
Together with a very strong environmental lobby in politics (Groen Links, PvdA, SP), who are against about anything, one must wonder why Rekkof wants to use The Netherlands at all?

Vos (a GroenLinks politician) was actually the first one to ask the minister of economical affairs about his involvement in the project (back in 1998), and asked him if he would do everything he could to make the project succeed. The PvdA is also very interested in the whole Rekkof project.
They are not against Rekkof, because they know the economical gains outweighs the environmental 'losses'. Agreed, they seem to oppose significant air traffic growth, but they don't seem to be against Rekkof.

Quoting Lat41 (Reply 16):
In the face of these new larger RJs, why would they continue that effort. Also if the 717 couldn't make it, why reheat the souffle?

Rekkof always said they would start with F70 production, only to introduce the F100 a little later when there would be enough demand. The F70 (70-seater) is a very different market than the 717. Also, the F100 is not really comparable to the 717, because the 717 is basically a shrink, where the F100 is the largest member of the Fokker JetLiner family. OEW of the F100 is more than 5000kgs lower than that of the 717. Also, the F100 has a smaller brother, to complete a regional aircraft family, where the 717 hasn't. So for airlines wanting a flexible regional fleet, the F100 could be more attractive than the 717.

'nuff said.

[Edited 2006-02-19 18:19:30]


Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. -Albert Einstein
User currently offlineConnector4you From Canada, joined May 2001, 932 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6729 times:

Quoting Lijnden (Reply 15):
building aircraft is not only an issue of finding a empty hangar! It is a very complex puzzle of suppliers and creating a own infrastructure



Quoting Lijnden (Reply 15):
The Netherlands is not the place to do this right now. Labour privileges, rights and costs are simply way out of line when compared to even other EU-countries

That's exactly what Fokker is working on here and here


User currently offlineFokker70NG From Netherlands, joined Nov 2005, 234 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6659 times:

Quoting Connector4you (Reply 18):

That's exactly what Fokker is working on here and here

Officially there's no connection between Stork and Rekkof, apart from the deal between Rekkof and Fokker Services that the latter would do the MX on all new Fokkers. So this Stork Fokker subsidary hasn't got a lot to do with Rekkof. But hey, you never know what's going on behind the scenes...  Smile



Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. -Albert Einstein
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2751 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6644 times:

Quoting Fokker70NG (Reply 17):
because the 717 is basically a shrink, where the F100 is the largest member of the Fokker JetLiner family. OEW of the F100 is more than 5000kgs lower than that of the 717.

The 717 is not a shrink. It is based on the DC-9-32 fuselage. The DC-9-10 was the initial version of the 717. I would imagine that the newer engines ong the 717 explains some of the increase in weight.

By the way. How is the operating economics on the Fokker engines, compared to the 717 engines?

I like the F70 and F100 and would like to see more of them produces, but they have allot of obsticals to make it to the sky again. Maybe they need to further improve the F70/F100/F130 in order to make the airlines more interested?



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineConnector4you From Canada, joined May 2001, 932 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6570 times:

Quoting Fokker70NG (Reply 19):
you never know what's going on behind the scenes...

Looks like they will go private Somebody with big pockets  dollarsign   dollarsign   dollarsign  is ready to buy out all sharehoders . . . Will find more on March 10


User currently offlineWycombe From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6536 times:

Bring back the F27!
I guess there must be some still flying?


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6463 times:

Quoting Wycombe (Reply 22):
Bring back the F27!
I guess there must be some still flying?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Jong


50 years and still going strong.



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 41
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6451 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 4):
Embraer is a global company. While it designs the a/c in Brazil, a lot of it's parts come from the same suppliers Boeing, Airbus and BBD have. Not to mention other costs and issues they have to deal with that an European or North American company probably does not have to.

Not much different to the Fokker F70/100 status as it features about 65% US content. According my own estimation about 80 to 85% of all parts needed came from outside the Netherlands.
http://www.honders.net/tmp/F70coop.jpg

Quoting Connector4you (Reply 18):
That's exactly what Fokker is working on here and here

and probably the most important one : http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=10384

Quoting Fokker70NG (Reply 19):
Officially there's no connection between Stork and Rekkof

That's not true Joost, Rekkof did sign a deal with Stork(Fokker Services).... didn't I tell you that ?

Quoting Fokker70NG (Reply 19):
So this Stork Fokker subsidary hasn't got a lot to do with Rekkof.

We have everything to do with Rekkof, there can't be such a thing as Rekkof without Stork Fokker.
Rekkof needs Fokker where Fokker does not need Rekkof, infact they can start building tomorrow if they only wanted too.
Or maybe Rekkof is used by Stork Fokker for other purposes like market investigation.
Or maybe Stork/Fokker needs the name Rekkof due to lingering conflicts of interest(will be cleared up later in this post)
Or maybe it was never the intention for Rekkof to start building themsleves ?
Who knows(no I don't), guess things will become clearer around May of this year.

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 20):
By the way. How is the operating economics on the Fokker engines, compared to the 717 engines?

The 717 BR's where already selected as the new engine when Fokker was still in business so I guess that's what we will see if anything happens.

I've always updated you on the current situation but the situation right now is getting misty even for me.
Some people(foreigners) seem to think Fokker is dead where the truth is that Stork/Fokker is doing better then the old Fokker Aircraft ever did with involvements in:
B7E7(now 787)
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5758

B737NG
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=10413
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5773

NH90
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5750
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5762

F35 JSF
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5757
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5751
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5759
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=10640

A350/380(in case you did not know but the Famous Glare is a Fokker product)
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5760
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5682
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=7613

A400M
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=8992

Gulfstream G550
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5763

Dassault Falcon 7X
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=6073

Then there are numorious other projects like:
Boeings P8A multi mission Maritime Aircraft
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=10651

Royal Dutch airforce (k)DC10 and F16
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=9705
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=5766

and of course regular MX as well as component maintenance on the current Fokker fleet.
To sum it up the Stork/Fokker portfolio contains Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, Cessna, Dassault, Gulfstream, Lockheed Martin, Northrop, Grumman and P&W(it's getting hard these days to find an A/C without any Fokker content  Wink ).

All this shows that there might be a "little" conflict of interest when the F70/100 production is re-started.
An inocent bystander might even think: "Stork/Fokker is compensated by A as well as B(and others) for not building F70/100's anymore".

Looking at the list I guess it is fair to say Stork/Fokker has enough to do with or without Rekkof and also they got all the work without really focussing on aviation.
Because it is just now that the decision has been taken to make aviation really a core business with the sale of none aviation related companies.
http://www.stork-aerospace.com/page.html?id=10983
Apperently they made so much money that they will leave the stock market and buy all shares back in the next 3 years, for what ?
Is it to have their hands free for something else without the prying eyes of share holders looking over the shoulder ?
This combined with the stakes in new companies mentioned in reply 18 and this one is making me think...... what is going on here ?
A little voice is telling me there is something going on but as I am trained to understand technical matters this goes above my head.
If there is someone out there who can make chocolate out of this be my guest.

Have fun,



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
25 Post contains links and images Aviopic : Yes..... that is what I am doing in my "spare" time. View Large View MediumPhoto © Willem Honders Serial 10105 or F5 as we know it which is the
26 Post contains images Fokker70NG : I meant and said 'apart from the deal with Fokker Services'... I thought that Stork itself never mentioned any connection with Rekkof (yet)? I meant
27 Post contains images PPVRA : My point exactly Cheers
28 Mrocktor : No it's not. The E-jets are better: seat width 18.25in, aisle width 19.75in, aisle height 6ft7in, no middle seats, bigger windows. No contest. They n
29 Post contains images Aviopic : Yes but if you make a deal with Fokker Services you have a Stork deal after all it is one and the same thing. True not in public but we did receive a
30 Fokker70NG : Hmm, let's turn it the other way around, the E-jets may have 10cm (0.3inch) more aisle height, it's almost 0.5m (that's 20inch!) narrower than the F7
31 Post contains images PPVRA : I meant as in costs would equalize somewhat given that they rely on (many times) the same partners, or at least partners from the same countries. So
32 Post contains images Aviopic : There is little to no point in this discusion if you ask me. What matters is how much seats the operator wants to put in the given space. Some F100 o
33 Wycombe : Aviopic: That's interesting. Do you know who was operating the F27 in Australia? And what the VH registration was? i probably flew in it.
34 L-188 : Wrong airplane to bring back. Would be better to modernize the old F.28 and sell it as a F.28 and Yak-40 replacement.
35 Jsqvl1 : ...Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the F70 a modernized F28 already?
36 AMSSFO : why don't you think the F70 is exactly that?
37 L-188 : Way back when the F-100 came out, flying magazine described it as the smallest aircraft a large airline would own and the F.28 as the largest aircraf
38 Sllevin : I think you'll find yourself in a very small minority. I can't think of anyone I know who would agree with you. Just about everyone else hates middle
39 Post contains images Fokker70NG : That's no problem with me, I don't like to be the same as everyone else anyway My point was that while you can keep saying "Embraer is better", I've
40 Hardiwv : Sllevin: You better be careful when expressing your points here. Fokker discussions turn out to be very "fanatic" because of the frustation of a small
41 Ptrjong : You might be correct here, but which relevant bits on the F.28, then, were removed on the F.100/70? Regarding short field performance, I doubt the F.
42 Keesje : Only chance for new Fokkers would IMO be - a major OEM taking over (Asia?) - $2 billion available cash (subisidy) with long term pay back conditions -
43 Post contains images Aviopic : Of course I know Wycombe. Please let me know if you indeed flew it and if you know the crew. Have fun, Willem
44 Mrocktor : My sense of vision and my memory. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. I have flown both, the E-jet is so much better that it should not even be compare
45 727forever : I would love nothing more than to see the F70/F100 family come back to life. Despite their slow speed, they are a great airplane. In my mind there are
46 L-188 : Not quite that sure. Like Fokkers have been out of production for what 10 years now? The Yaks what? 15-20? You might be correct there, but did the F.
47 Petertenthije : Several reasons, but not weak product demand. 1) bucketloads of debt from developing both the F50 and F100 at the same time 2) very unfavourable exch
48 AMSSFO : Peter has nicely taken care of your first point, let me take your second one. You may also have noticed that already quite some F100s have left MHV o
49 Post contains images Fokker70NG : Don't forget to mention the management! Not really true, the F70/100 are actually a light-weight design. Let's face it: the Fokker 70 Maximum Zero Fu
50 L-188 : Hey Fokker70NG, Maybe you can answer the question I had. Is there a gravel kit available for the 70? I am pretty sure there was one for the 28. I stil
51 Post contains images Keesje : If Rekkof is seriously telling investors & decision makers "The investments will be little because the design is actually already" "The only thing th
52 Post contains images Fokker70NG : Sorry, I have no idea.. My guess would be no, I haven't read anything about it, and can't find anything about it on the internet. But I'm sure Aviopi
53 727forever : Thanks for answering my concerns. I hope that what you all say is correct as I would very much enjoy being held up by Fokkers in the US airspace syste
54 Planemaker : No reason to become a "fanatic." All you have to do is simply explain just why any airline would choose to buy the F70 versus the CRJ700/705 or the E
55 Mrocktor : Wrong. Comparing the F70 (high MTOW version) with the E170LR: (sources: embraer.com, rekkof.nl - same as yours) F70HGW/E70LR Pax weight: 7600kg(80pax
56 Beaucaire : Strangely enough nobody mentions the RRJ-95 which should become available in 2008... With a budgetet price 20 % below the Embraers,it should become a
57 Post contains images Hardiwv : Fokker is dead. Only some ex-employees (now frustrated and relegated to repairing "old" frames of aircraft not even built anymore) still blindly thin
58 Mrocktor : It really is starting to look like the RRJ may become a real offering, given the late movements on the business side (Finnemecanica involvement etc).
59 Planemaker : They just might perhaps overcome it earlier than expected. In the last couple of days I have read that Finnemecanica's 25% share involvement will be
60 Mrocktor : Yes, this is what got me thinking that the plane may be real. I think the fact that BBD finally folded their hand (posturing aside) may have given ot
61 Post contains images Fokker70NG : Wrong? Read again.. My post was about ZFW/pax, not about fuel consumption. Bear in mind that the EMB170 CF34 engines are 'brand new' and the Fokker R
62 Post contains links AMSSFO : Your calculation seems to be correct for the F70 according to http://www.rekkof.nl/product/graphs/payload_70.htm, but if I read the payload range gra
63 Sllevin : The SFC of the Tay is not 14% higher than the CF34. It's about 5%. Steve
64 Post contains images Aviopic : Just don't bother Joost. No matter how many times I scroll through this topic I still can't find anybody frustrated about anything but still some peo
65 Sllevin : Was that part of the same plan that had the MD-11's leaving the fleet starting next year? Given that KL already *has* a fleet of F70's and F100's, I
66 Planemaker : On top of the payments... don't forget all the other costs involved with introducing a brand new type into a fleet. What question in Reply 24???
67 Post contains images Fokker70NG : I hope you didn't miss the sarcasm But you're right (no sarcasm this time).. I'm afraid I'm beginning to understand why all those UN resolutions end
68 HAM : If there was a car company calling itself Drof which offered new built cars based on an (updated) old design, I would not buy it. I´d rather buy a ne
69 Post contains images Mrocktor : The Fokkers do have outstanding structural efficiency, I'm not denying that. On the other hand, straping on new engines, while it would certainly imp
70 Mrocktor : Okay, to try and make a valid (and fair) comparison I'll recalculate the F70 at 2000nm. Calculating the E70 at 2100nm is not fair since that range is
71 Post contains images LifelinerOne : I'm normally an active participant in the Rekkof topics, but as we all see, Joost has my part covered very well. I've received some personal messages
72 AMSSFO : That sounds very promising. I really hope we will hear more soon and, more importantly, that they will actually start building aircraft soon! I wish
73 DONS : I suppose you mean MSN 11301 PH-LMV? As far as I know this aircraft was returned to the lessor and is currently being re-marketed to start flying for
74 Post contains images Aviopic : That's what i heard to from KL insiders which I am not so your guess is a good as mine. My thoughts to but there is something else which I will expla
75 Keesje : Perhaps the first one leaves the fleet in 2010, the last in 2012?
76 Aviopic : Read previous post Kees, the 2010 issue. From your various posts in this forum I have to believe you are an aviation insider so you probably also kno
77 AMSSFO : But there are some other F100s parked at WOE. What about the ex EU Jet EI-DFZ for instance? Now I am at it, what's going to happen with the other fou
78 Sllevin : I agree; given the age, they are phenomenal aircraft. I like them, personally. Steve
79 Post contains images Fokker70NG : Sounds quite good... Could it be that the new name will be "Stokker"?  When are they planning to start retrofitting an airframe with new engines? I
80 Post contains images Mrocktor : See your first quote, it's a shrink . The plane is small for its wing, thus naturally tends to be good for long range (which is what I originally sai
81 Post contains images Aviopic : Oh yes if they really want to push on there are enough possibilities. Besides it's not uncommon to use a KL A/C for flight test and certifications of
82 Post contains images Fokker70NG : The article in Air International that was the reason for this topic.
83 Post contains links and images Aviopic : Don't think that's needed, it comes as a standard View Large View MediumPhoto © Mike de Bruijn There was even a F28 for carrier operations known
84 Ptrjong : Please try to write in a way that makes sense to most readers, not just to the person you're reacting to. So, new EU regulations will put limitations
85 Aviopic : I am sorry Peter but it is not always possible to say all I want to say. New EU regulations have nothing to do with noise. KL "tried" to operate the
86 SayAgain : @ Aviopic, maybe you can help at this one: There should be about 5 F100's parked in WOE, earmarked for Austrian (arrows). Are they allready completly
87 Post contains links and images Aviopic : Well I don't work at the WOE plant so I am not exactly aware of what is standing over there. I believe some ex-Jetso and EU jet frames are there. As
88 SayAgain : Thx Aviopic, Maybe someone else knows about the faith of the OS-earmarked F100's? Are they repainted yet? Are they still parked @ WOE or are they allr
89 Post contains images Ptrjong : I respect that of course Willem, though you really make me wonder what it does have to do with then... I also wonder why new EU regulations are not p
90 L-188 : You know the F.28 was one of the aircraft that Reeve Aleutian considered for it's ops before deciding on the YS-11 back in the 1970's. I understand t
91 Post contains images Aviopic : I thought they were..... will do a search when I am home tonight. I think they are officially issued otherwise how would I have known about them You'
92 AMSSFO : I can give you some info based on several sources: The following former AA/JetsGo F100s are currently stored at WOE and destined for OS (with date of
93 Post contains images Ptrjong : I just don't understand what these new EU regulations are about. Willem, I thought you said you knew but cuoldn't tell.
94 Aviopic : Yes, I know but I do not know what is public info and what isn't. After few "googles" learned me that the FAA is publishing new regulations but JAA i
95 Post contains images Fokker70NG : European publications are rather hard to find most of the times. In case of communication to the public the European institutions could learn somethi
96 Sllevin : I was reading that KL is taking over Regional's F70 fleet as well? I didn't realize that before, but certainly, if true, that probably explains the de
97 Fokker70NG : Unfortunately it's still no explanation, as the EU regulation issue Willem mentioned also applies to those F70's.
98 Aviopic : Don't exactly understand what you mean ? KL is operating the F70 fleet(former KL Cityhopper) for a long time already although daily mx is done by Mar
99 Post contains links DONS : Aviopic, there was a article on luchtvaartnieuws.nl a couple of months ago. AF-KLM are looking at the regional fleet and there is a possibilty the Re
100 Aviopic : I was aware of this but the info is the wrong way around. Currently there is only one regional fleet which is KLC who already operated the F70's all
101 Post contains links and images Ptrjong : View Large View MediumPhoto © Roy Loyson The Cityhopper titles are still on recently painted aircraft, but would be easy enough to remove, leavin
102 Post contains images DONS : Just to be sure, I don't mean the 21 F70's they have already, but the 5 F70's flying at Air France subsidiary Regional which may come to KLC. The wor
103 Post contains images Aviopic : Oeps, I am sorry Dons...... missed the AF part. It looks likely that the AF F70's will also be added to the KLC fleet and given time the F100's as we
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...
Revival Of Fokker F70 & F100 By Rekkof posted Mon Sep 6 2004 15:02:57 by JCS
Ajet (Helios) To Cease Operations/No Revival Plans posted Tue Oct 31 2006 15:55:03 by CY319
Whats Up With This Fokker? (photo) posted Wed Oct 18 2006 18:46:14 by Airfoilsguy
Fokker And KLM posted Mon Oct 16 2006 16:40:49 by Aviopic
Dnaindia: "Cades Digitech Will Make Fokker Aircraf posted Wed Sep 13 2006 12:49:41 by Petertenthije
KLM Fokker 70's And 100's Till When? posted Sat Aug 19 2006 10:02:00 by RootsAir
Fokker 28 Flying Between AMM Und DAM? posted Fri Aug 18 2006 15:14:20 by Airevents
Early Operations Of The Fokker F-28. posted Thu Aug 17 2006 17:52:22 by CV990
Skyways Operate Sundsvallsflyg Fokker F-50 posted Wed Aug 16 2006 06:21:00 by AndersNilsson
Canadian North Buys Another Fokker 100 posted Fri Jul 28 2006 02:30:46 by Markabcan