Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
F100- What Do You Think?  
User currently offlineLubcha132 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2776 posts, RR: 7
Posted (11 years 11 months 19 hours ago) and read 1833 times:

I am a pretty big fan of the Fokker 100. I've flown on them several times (Midway and AA) on 1-2 hour flights (EWR-RDU,PBI-RDU,ORD-BNA,ORD-EWR) and i must say that it is a great plane. For its size, it is very comfortable, and even sitting next to the engine isn't bad.

What do you think of the F100?

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (11 years 11 months 18 hours ago) and read 1797 times:

I like them as well; I enjoy when they deploy the giant speedbrake  Smile

Steve


User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3802 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (11 years 11 months 17 hours ago) and read 1742 times:

F100 is one of the few jet airliner types I have not experienced. "What I think" of the F100 is that it may be the logical replacement for the ancient DC-9s that remain in service with airlines who will eventually be looking for not-quite-as-ancient replacement types.

User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 11 months 14 hours ago) and read 1687 times:

This is from an AA perspective. The F100 was an expensive aircraft to maintain when compared to other aircraft. Since Fokker went BK and other suppliers were less than enthusiastic in supporting it AA had to manufacture itself some of the parts. This of course drives up costs. As does having to train technicians to work on a plane that has nothing in common with any other airplane in it's fleet.

User currently offlineUs330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3866 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (11 years 11 months 13 hours ago) and read 1655 times:

Aren't those the main reasons why AA is retiring them?

User currently offlineGregg From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 327 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 years 11 months 5 hours ago) and read 1580 times:

A very quite plane, but not very reliable, high flight cancelation, and heven forbid they have an accident, no exits behind the wing. I'm glad these planes (in the US) are going.

User currently offlineOA277 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 11 months 4 hours ago) and read 1543 times:

I really think it is one of the most spacious planes i've ever been in my life.
I've flown them a couple of times on the MAN-AMS route.
These birds belong to KLM UK.
I'm 6.3'' and i had space to take my shoes off and generally feel very comfortable.
I wouldn't mind flying them again!
OA277


User currently offlineTg 747-300 From Norway, joined Nov 1999, 1318 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 11 months 4 hours ago) and read 1540 times:

Having only flown a F100 once. (Air Inter from Ajaccio-Orly back in 1995) I don't remember much. But based on pictures etc. I think it's a very nice and good looking plane. The flightdeck is just not too modern  Smile and the aircarf has the lovly dc9 look. I have also heard that fokker planes are very well build since thay are more hand made than normal. Sadly fokker isn't around so I do understand that keeping the f100 flying might be expensive.

tg 747-300



intentionally left blank
User currently offlineCMK10 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 513 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (11 years 11 months 1 hour ago) and read 1491 times:

I always liked it. I used it on US from LGA-GSO, DCA-GSO and CLT-GSO. Fun little plane, I always remember that in the bathroom, you pushed a button to turn on the faucetts.
DC-10's Forever



"Traveling light is the only way to fly" - Eric Clapton
User currently offlineContrails From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 1832 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 11 months ago) and read 1475 times:

I've flown the F-100 a good bit, mostly on the DCA-ORD and TUL-ORD routes. Flew it once on the DFW-COS route. I've known people who thought it was a great plane, but I don't hold that view.

It's an "OK" plane, and I can think of other planes that I don't enjoy as much, and it is most certainly better than a puddle-jumper, but it is not a plane I look forward to traveling in. Imo, it's uncomfortable in the rear of the cabin, feels "crowded", and doesn't give the smoothest of rides. I thought the old DC-9's were better planes, but I didn't get to ride in a lot of them.

An AA pilot once told me, right after the Fokker company went belly-up, that getting parts would be a serious problem one day and he thought AA didn't think the purchase completely through. He didn't elaborate on what "completely through" meant.

I'd give it a 7 out of 10.



Flying Colors Forever!
User currently offlineAOMlover From France, joined Jul 2001, 1302 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1416 times:

I flew on a F100 once, on the Toulon-Orly route. The airline was Air Liberté. It is a very nice aircraft, I love the shape of this aircraft. Very comfortable.
I loved it.


User currently offlineChe From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 537 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1361 times:

I like them. The big windows are the best! They remind me a mini-MD80. Flown plenty of times on AA F100s

che


User currently offlineKKMolokai From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 760 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1313 times:

I am so glad we (AA) are getting rid of the F100s. These "Barbie Dream Jets" are nightmares to work! They're constantly weight restricted, seem to always have something wrong with them, and just are a problem child!

In my opinion, they aren't the most comfortable aircraft, in means of size and spaciousness, however, they're better than a prop! Their old looking interiors, and dated amenities don't help either.



We are the people of American Airlines. And we know why you fly.
User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1311 times:

What do I think? WHAT!! DO I THINK?!?!?!?!?

I think the F-100 is a P.O.S. Loud, Smelly, Makes Funny Noises I.F. I think it should be shut out.

Hey, You asked what I thought, and I told


User currently offlineLowfareair From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1290 times:

>>Loud, Smelly, Makes Funny Noises<<

We're talking about a F100, not a DC9 Big grin


User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1285 times:

Lowfareair: And at least the F-100's have real RR engines, before BMW got involved!  Smile

Steve


User currently offlineFokker Lover From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1269 times:

After working on them every day for 13+ years, I think I'm qualified to say it's a pretty good airplane. Once you understand, and I emphasize UNDERSTAND what makes them tick, it's a pretty easy plane to work on. The guys that don't understand them are the ones that bury their heads back in greasy, old, Diesel 9's

User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1250 times:

hated my segment on AA, ORD-ALB

would like to get another shot @ F100 before I really blast them, but that was one lousy trip with that craft.



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1231 times:

FokkerLover: I think that's a good point -- for operational usage as well. People tend to forget that the F100 was designed for very short routes, and then wonder why its so expenseive to operate on 1,000nm legs.

Steve


User currently offlineNKP S2 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1714 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1214 times:

Fokkerlover: AMEN!!! Man, you've nailed it to a tee. I cannot understand why that plane gave so many guys such an inferiority complex...And it's not just old Douglas die-hards either. I found it's a well engineered plane with a lot of maintainence friendly features...If some people would just "think outside the box". Quirky? Maybe. Perfect? No. ( "Dutch ovens" anyone? ) A Pain in the a$$ sometimes? Yes...but so is everything else. -- As for the "expensive to maintain" bit: The pigeon-holing of the A/C to oddball status seemed to doom the parts support to a precipitous ride down a slippery slope.

User currently offlineLeo From China, joined May 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1166 times:

The Fokker 100 made a problematic start in the USA because it was the first 'fully digital' aircraft to arrive there.

In those days, the US mechaniscs were not properly trained to deal with the advanced electronic maintenance facilities. They still 'kicked' tires and got out their spanners when things went wrong.

In close cooperation with USAirways and AA, Fokker identified that lack of maintenance training was one of the major issues with the aircraft's reliability. A program was designed to overcome these issues.

In Europe the aircaft always had a higher dispatch reliability because the A310 and other Airbus aircraft were more established and engineers were used to the new 'digital' way of thinking.

At AA the B777's introduction was smoothed by the 'digital' knowledge gained from the Fokkers.



User currently offlineTs-ior From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3450 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1164 times:


I assume to say that the Fokker 100 is a quiet elegant aircraft.Its lines are more or less similar to those of the MD-80s and the wings shape remembers me of the Caravelle ones...Am i wrong ?!!!
The first time i saw a Fokker 100 was in 1991 on an Exxon Aviation magazine.It was a quiet luxurious AA Luxury Liner with its shining metal belly,then i saw it on the Swissair livery,TAM livery and then on Deutsche BA colors.

Few are the Fokker 100s nowadays,and i would say that they would had a respectable career if Fokker is still alive !!!


User currently offlineBoeing777/747 From Belgium, joined Dec 2001, 643 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1157 times:

I flew the F100 aswell as the F50 as a passenger. Both aircraft are very, very, comfortable, spacious and quite. Fokker was far ahead in technique, unfortunately they went bankrupted.

User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1119 times:

Lowfareair: And at least the F-100's have real RR engines, before BMW got involved!

What is this supposed to mean. The BR715 is the best sounding engine in the air as of now (aside from it's parent figure the RB211). Actually, BMW didn't do much in the design phase of this engine. and if you notice, They do not put a BMW sticker on the sides of the engine anymore


User currently offlineD-aqui From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 203 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1117 times:

I have flown as a passenger in Swissair's F-100's right from their introduction into service back in 1989 between BSL and LHR several times and later in the 1990ies between ORY and Bastia on the French island of Corsica. In direct comparison to the DC 9-51 employed on the BSL-LHR sector I considered them to be a real improvement. They were by any means comfortable: spacious and quiet, even at the rear.

It was really sad to see the well-known name of Fokker from the aviation scene due to scrupulous and shady Daimler interests at the time.

Yes, from a passenger perspective it was and still is a good plane.

D-AQUI


User currently offlineDeltaRules From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3727 posts, RR: 9
Reply 25, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1070 times:

I've flown on several US F100s & I like them- it was a shame that they were retired. They were pretty comfortable, and as was mentioned above, sitting by the engine wasn't bad (I had to do it a couple times!) I think it's a pretty nice looking plane as well. I wish more carriers still had them.

DeltaRules



Let's Kick the Tires & Light the Fires!!
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...
Look At The MGX F100 What Do You Think? posted Mon Jul 10 2000 15:40:23 by Montenegro
Fly Baboo, What Do You Think Of The Name? posted Sat Nov 11 2006 00:50:21 by Dambuster
What Do You Think Of Varig Situation? posted Mon Jun 26 2006 19:45:38 by Thering
What Do You Think Of BBI? posted Fri Apr 28 2006 19:43:35 by TommyBP251b
What Do You Think On Munich Airlines? posted Fri Apr 7 2006 18:40:18 by TommyBP251b
What Do You Think About LAB posted Thu Oct 27 2005 00:53:25 by Coolsan
AirTran: What Do You Think? posted Fri Oct 14 2005 03:59:08 by Usnseallt82
What Do You Think Of The A350 Ads? posted Thu Oct 13 2005 02:56:39 by MarshalN
The New Alaskaair.com: What Do You Think? posted Fri Jun 17 2005 21:52:00 by S12PPL
What Do You Think Of Biometric Security? posted Wed Jun 1 2005 20:36:53 by RootsAir