Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
sf260
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:59 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Tue Dec 27, 2011 11:36 pm

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 31):

From your link, it seems that F100NG will be nearly 6,500 lbs. heavier than CRJ-1000. The link also suggests 16% lower fuel burn which is nice given that NG will be heavier by 3,500 lbs than the current F100.

From rekkof-website, the F100NG will seat 122. The CRJ1000 seats only 104 in its highest density config. The E195 seats also 122, but its OEW is some 2.3 tons higher

OEW/seat (in high density):
F100NG: 211kg
CRJ1000: 223kg
E195: 237kg

In that way, the case of the F100 seems valid. I'm curious how aerodynamics and engines turn out to have a total view...
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Wed Dec 28, 2011 12:48 am

Quoting sf260 (Reply 50):

While the RR725 is slightly more advanced than the CF34, it's nowhere near as advanced as the GTF or LeapX. While bypass doesn't tell the whole story, it is a significant componant of fuel eficiency and the 725 has a bypass ratio of less than 5....which makes it need to be a high altitude, long range engine to get anywhere near it's planned efficiencies.

It is somewhat more economical than the CF34 at cruise but probably no better during climb or at lower altitudes. RR brags that the 725 is designed to fly over commercial traffic...that puts it in the high 30's, low 40's to get the most from this engine.

Regardless, it will be more economical than the old F100 but unless Rekkof can offer some tremendous deals, I don't see how it can beat the brand new engines, regardless of OEW.

Somebody obviously thinks it can since they're sinking cash into the project but it's one advantage seems to be weight. On the downside, less than optimal rj engines, old aerodynamics, materials and systems and it's going to have to put on some extra structural load if it is going to be able to haul the extra fuel needed to become a 3000nm aircraft, which the site is claiming.

Something just doesn't seem to add up to me. Well, good luck to them.
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Wed Dec 28, 2011 11:18 pm

Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 49):
Why the sarcasm?

Because you ideas are overtaken by time.

Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 49):
You seem to be very enthousiastic about Fokker and it's products

My enthusiasm goes to a cold beer, Fokker is my employer.


Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 49):
but that the Fokker has an inferior airconditioning system is widely known

If you buy your self a RR silvercloud just to find out you can't park it in the city doesn't make the RR a inferior car.
You bought yourself a car unsuited fot your needs.

There are/were different aircon systems available.
Also apart from the 2 aircon packs a third system has been adde(optional) called RECAES which keeps the temp between 20 and 25 dgC without any input from the flight deck.

Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 49):
and it's an often heard complaint from Fokker-pilots..

Pilots can't be taken serious, you'll learn later on in your career.  
Quoting francoflier (Reply 48):
For all the historic and possibly affective ties between Fokker and Rekkof, the latter is never going to get any help from the former in making the F100 fly again...

Rekkof is a customer of Fokker just like Airbus, Boeing and the rest are.
Rekkof paid Fokker(since '96) for the storage of the calibers and structural components left from the former production line.
Rekkof paid Fokker to do part of the Redesign just like Rekkof paid for services from NLR, ADSE and others.
Rekkof is using the Fokker proto which will be modified in a Fokker facility(Woensdrecht) for which Fokker will be paid.
Fokker and Rekkof signed contracts for the after sales support(engineering, component, etc)
So I don't think I understand what you mean.

Quoting sf260 (Reply 50):
The CRJ1000 seats only 104 in its highest density config.

If this data is correct the CRJ1000 might have a payload/range problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRJ700#CRJ700
With max payload(12 ton) there only room left for 5 ton fuel, with the same payload the F100 will take a full 10 ton tank.
Data might be incorrect though.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 5916
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Wed Dec 28, 2011 11:52 pm

Quoting aviopic (Reply 52):
So I don't think I understand what you mean.

I mean that if Rekkof only got a 20 Million Euros operating credit so far, Fokker's future isn't exactly in their hand...  

I was just pointing that the Chinese aeronautical projects are backed by almost unlimited cashflow and a government with a severe ego crisis. Rekkof has a small government loan and an relatively obscure parent group...

Again, I wish to see a brand new F100 NG rolling out of that plant as much as you, but I don't see where the cash to make it happen is going to come from.
Even if it does, I unfortunately doubt the F100NG would be a commercial success.

Still, I hope.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:50 am

Congrats to Rekkof for getting this factory going. I'll admit to wondering how they will compete in a crowded market... But in my humble opinion, the 100 seat market is begging for a new more efficient airframe.

I've been a huge fan of the E-190 except for its engine fuel burn. (There is no touching the CF-34 maintenance costs...)

The competition:
CFJ1000: Short range (1,500 nm is not going to appeal to a US opperator), high wing loading, and enough change to cut maintenance costs (on the airframe), but so-so sales.
E-190/195: A great all around airframe. Heavy. The main issue is the fuel burn which could be fixed by a new engine (at some weight penalty.
MRJ-90: Light on payload (96 pax limit, in my understanding, to avoid a conflict with Boeing per 787 contract). Light on empty weight (0.6t less than CRJ-1000, if it meets weight). Advanced engines. Designed for good cycle life, very unproven (all aspects). Optimized for short range (1,770nm isn't impressive. US operators want inland hub to coast which is 2300nm or so).
F100NG: Light proven airframe. (Many of the bugs were worked out decades ago.) A new wing and engine will fix the fuel burn (w/winglets).

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 7):
It is a crowded market without a clear niche and competitive advantage for F100NG.

I'm a fan of new airframes. If this was an established contended still in production, I would have no doubt it would continue to sell. It will have a tough time against the two existing competitors and the MRJ.

What we have is the CF-34 with exceptional cycle life but a need for reduced fuel burn. Whomever supplies the Rekkof engine will have a challenge meeting cycle life.

Quoting md11sdf (Reply 13):

The Boeing 717 performs the same mission as the original F-100.

But was overbuilt for the mission. That and the BMR-715 does not have the cycle life to compete with the E-190/E-195. IMHO, that is the real competition.

Quoting roberts87 (Reply 29):
but to ask a honest question how Rekkof wants to differentaite themsevelves from the proven competition. Can anyone share some insight?

I too have that question.

Quoting aviopic (Reply 39):
3000NM(5500KM)
The 70NG will do the same distance without AFT !!

There will be a market for that. A market that was supposed to be the Superjets, but an opening was left open.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 45):
The cF-38 is still a very efficient engine and is well proven in the RJ market.

If you mean CF-34, it is an extreamly reliable engine with excellent costs per cycle. It leaves much open in terms of efficiency.

Quoting sf260 (Reply 50):
The E195 seats also 122, but its OEW is some 2.3 tons higher

If Rekkof is competing in the high density short haul market, then it has a niche! I would like to see more 'clear niches' though...

Lightsaber
 
queb
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:10 am

Quoting aviopic (Reply 52):
If this data is correct the CRJ1000 might have a payload/range problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRJ700#CRJ700
With max payload(12 ton) there only room left for 5 ton fuel, with the same payload the F100 will take a full 10 ton tank.
Data might be incorrect though.

With max payload (12 tonnes), there room for 6.5 tonnes. With 100 passengers (102 kg per pax), there is room for 8.5 tonnes. In addition, the CRJ1000 share the same wing (slightly modified) than CRJ700/900, it's very good for a double stretch aircraft.

Per Brit Air web site (which operates the two type), CRJ1000 fuel burn is 18% better than F-100 and operating cost 10%.

http://www.britair.com/pageLibre000108a1.php (in french)
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1512
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 2:36 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 54):
I would like to see more 'clear niches' though...

Hard to find them when there is so much competition, but from a passenger standpoint, compared to a CRJ, the F-100 felt much more like a full-sized plane.

I'd be curious how many passengers it would seat with First Class, E+, and Economy sections and modern slim seats and tiny galleys and lavs, and where that falls in scope clauses in the US.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 3:36 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 54):

If you mean CF-34, it is an extreamly reliable engine with excellent costs per cycle. It leaves much open in terms of efficiency.

The -10 is more efficient than the rest, and the NG will be more efficient yet. Will the RR725 be much better with an even lower bypass ratio than the CF-34 and optimized for high speed, long range cruise but operating RJ routing?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:35 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 57):
Will the RR725 be much better with an even lower bypass ratio than the CF-34 and optimized for high speed, long range cruise but operating RJ routing?

Unless there is a new technology 'lurking,' (e.g., CMC high turbine blades), I would bet on the CF-34. But I wouldn't bet against the GTF.   

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 57):
and the NG will be more efficient yet.

Do you mean the Tech-X? Or are you implying the CF-34 would be better for the F100NG?

Quoting queb (Reply 55):
Per Brit Air web site (which operates the two type), CRJ1000 fuel burn is 18% better than F-100 and operating cost 10%.

Impressive. Better numbers than I expected with the CRJ1000.

Lightsaber
 
Starglider
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:19 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:19 am

Quoting aviopic (Reply 52):
Quoting francoflier (Reply 48):
For all the historic and possibly affective ties between Fokker and Rekkof, the latter is never going to get any help from the former in making the F100 fly again...

Rekkof is a customer of Fokker just like Airbus, Boeing and the rest are.
Rekkof paid Fokker(since '96) for the storage of the calibers and structural components left from the former production line.
Rekkof paid Fokker to do part of the Redesign just like Rekkof paid for services from NLR, ADSE and others.
Rekkof is using the Fokker proto which will be modified in a Fokker facility(Woensdrecht) for which Fokker will be paid.
Fokker and Rekkof signed contracts for the after sales support(engineering, component, etc)
So I don't think I understand what you mean.

  

  


Starglider
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 8:36 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 58):
Unless there is a new technology 'lurking,' (e.g., CMC high turbine blades), I would bet on the CF-34. But I wouldn't bet against the GTF

I was comparing the CF-34 to the RR725. The -34 has a higher bypass ratio and has been continuously improved all the way to the -10 version, (the most efficient), on the e-195. As I mentioned, bypass ratio is far from the whole secret but with a bypass ratio less than 5, (and about 10% less than even the CF-34), I am dubious that they can get fuel burn numbers to beat even the heavier CS100.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 58):
Do you mean the Tech-X? Or are you implying the CF-34 would be better for the F100NG?

The Tech-X, (now known as Passport), is supposed to be a significant improvement over the CF-34 line and should be as close as one can expect to a bolt on replacement for current CF-34 applications. The engine will power the Global 7000/8000 and enter service by 2016...so if Emb. goes with the passport, it should prove to be a pretty easy conversion process. It'll be GE's smaller Leap-x. How it will do against the GTF is a good question.

I reckon that Rekkof still has time to choose a different engine but the 725 is available right now so if they want to get a good jump out of the box, that could be a good move...but they won't have much of a head start...if any...over the CS100.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 58):
Impressive. Better numbers than I expected with the CRJ1000.

BBD is touting that the first two operators are seeing 4% better numbers than contract...right out of the box. A nice bonus for the operators. It would be nice if this translated into more sales.

As for the Rekkof...I'm not one that automatically assumes that older can't be competitive, but we're looking at a lot of planes competing for a tough market. Emb, BBD, Sukoi, Antonov, ARJ, Mitubishi...all are in the same ballpark...(and let's not forget Boeing and Airbus haven't totally packed the sub 150 market in either)...and are in service now or will be in service before the Rekkof.

Tough row to hoe but we'll see. Definitely too close for me to call but I remain skeptical. They seem to be putting most of their eggs in the lighter weight basket but just like bypass isn't the whole story in engine efficiency, lightest OEW isn't the whole story with aircraft efficiency.
 
BrouAviation
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 6:31 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 10:30 am

Quoting aviopic (Reply 52):
Because you ideas are overtaken by time.

I fail to see why. It was just a guess, I said so from the beginning, but an airconditioning system seemed to me a rather large factor in the overal comfort on board of a business jet.

Quoting aviopic (Reply 52):
If you buy your self a RR silvercloud just to find out you can't park it in the city doesn't make the RR a inferior car.
You bought yourself a car unsuited fot your needs.

True, but is that what we are talking about here? Imagine a RR with the aircon of a Honda Civic. Would you think clients would accept that?

Quoting aviopic (Reply 52):

Pilots can't be taken serious, you'll learn later on in your career.

Hmm, now I could say something about pilots who lost their medicals while flying Fokker 100's, but I think I won't do that.
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 2140
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 2:54 pm

Quoting aviopic (Reply 52):
My enthusiasm goes to a cold beer, Fokker is my employer.

Had to chuckle at that one.   

Quoting queb (Reply 55):
Per Brit Air web site (which operates the two type), CRJ1000 fuel burn is 18% better than F-100 and operating cost 10%.

Yes, but is this comparison towards the F-100 or the F-100NG?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 3:17 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 60):
The engine will power the Global 7000/8000 and enter service by 2016...so if Emb. goes with the passport, it should prove to be a pretty easy conversion process. It'll be GE's smaller Leap-x. How it will do against the GTF is a good question.

The Passport has potential. A 54" BLISK fan is impressive. (IMHO, Williams was wise to adopt BLISK fans early.)

The 'big change' for the Passport is the high spool. 2 stage high turbine with a TEN stage high compressor.   

What is the Passport's actual overall pressure ratio? The numbers I read are *far too low* for a Ten stage high compressor.

You have a point on the BR725 though... It has technologies, such as a more advanced tip clearance control, that have little benefit on the RJ mission. However, the new high turbine should have a *significantly* longer cycle life than the BR715's turbine. (Why did RR go for cycle life over efficiency in a long range business jet engine?!?) The 725 also has a far more advanced nacelle (which should lower fuel burn a few percent more).

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 60):
They seem to be putting most of their eggs in the lighter weight basket but just like bypass isn't the whole story in engine efficiency, lightest OEW isn't the whole story with aircraft efficiency.

  

The shorter the mission, the lower the *desired* bypass ratio. Sort of odd for a long range business jet... but then again, it is an evolution rather than an all new design...

Lightsaber
 
queb
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:05 pm

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 62):
Yes, but is this comparison towards the F-100 or the F-100NG?

F-100 (non NG) of course. Just saying that if Reffok wants to have a significant part of the market, they need more than a newer engine and winglets, they need a NG engine. Don't forget, the E-Jets will be re-engined too with Passport or PW1000G by 2018.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:17 pm

Quoting queb (Reply 64):
they need a NG engine. Don't forget, the E-Jets will be re-engined too with Passport or PW1000G by 2018.

And the cycle continues.   

I'm amazed how ultra competitive the 70 to 100 seat market is going to be...

Quoting queb (Reply 64):
they need more than a newer engine and winglets

There is also some other wing modifications. The F100NG will burn less fuel than the CRJ-1000 (circa today).

All in all, good progress for the customer (passenger).

Lightsaber
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Thu Dec 29, 2011 10:31 pm

Quoting queb (Reply 55):
With max payload (12 tonnes), there room for 6.5 tonnes. With 100 passengers (102 kg per pax), there is room for 8.5 tonnes.

6.5 ton minus alternate and reserve is still quite a dent in range.

Quoting queb (Reply 55):
Per Brit Air web site (which operates the two type), CRJ1000 fuel burn is 18% better than F-100 and operating cost 10%.

I would have said the same if I was Brit Air, KL did as well after they got the E190.
In real life the average fuel burn difference between E190 and F100 at KL is 5 to 7% in favor of the E190, not bad for an old bugger like the F100.
I expect pretty much the same real life figures between CRJ1000 and F100.
There is not much to say about the difference in operating cost, Brit Air didn't have a Fokker flighthour contract but choose to keep A/C and component mx in their own hands(and Sabena technics) which made operations more complex and expensive than needed(you know the French).

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 56):
compared to a CRJ, the F-100 felt much more like a full-sized plane.

The CRJ is called a flying pencil for a reason  
On the other hand the F100 is developed as a small mainline a/c, nobody knew about RJ's in the early eighties.

Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 61):
I fail to see why.

Because you are using 10-15 year old "sticky" a.net level statements, while 10-15 years any given a/c is probably 3 times modified from nose to tail.
It's like the common heard statement from our US friends that the F100's were sold by American and US due to lack of spare parts, so you explain that those same frames are still happily flying around and probably not with parts missing just to hear the same crap again a month later.
While I think that any person with average brain activity should be able to figure out that a fleet of any given a/c is not going to fly for more than 25 odd years without very strong maintenance backup..........and spare parts, how hard can it be ?
Don't take it personal  
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 61):
but an airconditioning system seemed to me a rather large factor in the overal comfort on board of a business jet.

Not really, the aircon gets a workout with 100 steaming hot people on board.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fyodor Borisov - Russian AviaPhoto Team


With only a few people onboard there is less chance of a problem.

Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 61):
Imagine a RR with the aircon of a Honda Civic. Would you think clients would accept that?

I expect from someone who is going to spend RR money to understand the car's limitations upfront, I would.

Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 61):
Hmm, now I could say something about pilots who lost their medicals while flying Fokker 100's, but I think I won't do that.

My friend, a B744 Captain has been at home for a year which the same problem.
A T7 Captain I know quit due to the same problem.
Both and others have told me on numerous occasions about sick pax for the very same reason.

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 62):
Yes, but is this comparison towards the F-100 or the F-100NG?

According NG Aircraft the F100ng will burn about 5% less per 400nm trip compared to CRJ1000.
And at max density about 15 % less per seat per 400nm trip compared to CRJ1000.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 63):
The shorter the mission, the lower the *desired* bypass ratio.

I knew you would see the light some time  
The F100 fleet accumulated around 10 million F/H with 9 million F/C, to hell with BPR it is weight that counts.
Although the engine mounts have been rotated 10 degrees to make high bpr engines a possibility.  
Quoting queb (Reply 64):
Just saying that if Reffok wants to have a significant part of the market

Rekkof never said to be after a "significant" part of the market.
Due to the very low investment and loe number of employees the break even point will be between 50 and 100 frames !
More or less the same numbers as the current F100 would be 3 times awesome.

Cheers,
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Fri Dec 30, 2011 4:52 am

Quoting aviopic (Reply 66):
The CRJ is called a flying pencil for a reason

Oh my, the Do-17 lives on!   
(Sorry, I'm a history nut...)

Quoting aviopic (Reply 66):
The F100 fleet accumulated around 10 million F/H with 9 million F/C, to hell with BPR it is weight that counts.

1.1 hour missions have an optimal bypass ratio of ~5 to 6 with a conventional dual spool or ~9 with a GTF. New design twin spools will probably require a higher than optimal (by fuel/economics) bypass ratio for noise control. So we actually should see with the GE Passport with an interesting compromise... Thermodynamics will allow for a very high overall pressure ratio (new materials, blade designs enable the higher pressure ratio) will have to be matched with a *larger* fan than optimal for noise abatement.    So ironically, the CF-34 replacement is probably going to be optimized for a mission far longer than GE would normally choose... but is the best engine for the short mission that they can build today. In other words, for a given thrust, the bypass ratio of a conventional (non-GTF) twin spool with today's advanced core technologies is going to be optimized for a minimum 1.5 to 2 hour mission as it just won't be possible to provide meaningful cost reduction to further optimize for shorter missions.

Now the first question is probably "why wouldn't the GTF have that issue" and the answer is "due to a far more efficient low spool, for the same mission length, a GTF is going to be optimally designed with a 50% to 100% greater bypass ratio than a conventional twin spool." Thus, the GTF will not have to oversize the fan for noise control. (Partially due to the fan being geared down for lower velocity and partially as it is natural to extract more core energy in a GTF for the fan due to component efficiency.) Well... not at the near term realistic core technologies. Although, I do not see being able to optimize a GTF for below a 1 hour mission today...   

I was thinking of the even shorter missions the F100NG would often fly... Thus the 4.4 bypass ratio of the BR725 would be optimal for about a 45 minute mission. (Don't ask me why a long range business jet has a bypass ratio better optimized for quick hops and do recall it is an older generation core that doesn't have the high pressure ratio and thus doesn't have the noise control concerns.)

Quoting aviopic (Reply 66):
Although the engine mounts have been rotated 10 degrees to make high bpr engines a possibility.

 
Quoting aviopic (Reply 66):
Due to the very low investment and loe number of employees the break even point will be between 50 and 100 frames !

For the very high density short haul market, where I see the F100NG having a major economic advantage, there should be a market for 150 to 200. So there will be a profit. However, I do see the need to sell a larger fleet due to the economics of MRO support... However, Rekkof seems to have their processes in place to economically support a very small sub-fleet.

Quoting aviopic (Reply 66):
I knew you would see the light some time

I admit to being 'biased towards the US/Asian markets' as that is where I see the higher sales volume. When thinking in terms of the European markets (shorter missions), it makes sense.

I'm curious as to the weight/optimization of the winglets. Why do I now suspect the winglets are optimized for a short (say 45 minute) mission?   

Lightsaber
 
User avatar
CPHFF
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:03 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:10 am

Quoting MHG (Reply 33):
and since the wings on the NG are the only major part that´s a completely new design that should not really be of an issue

In my humble opinion, the whole concept seems very similar to the ARJ21. Older design, but a new wing, upgraded engines and avionics. Even though there are delays, there appears to be two ARJ21-700's that have actually commenced flight testing as per Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARJ21

Whouldn't the ARJ21-900 be a direct competitor to the F100 NG ?
 
BrouAviation
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 6:31 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:56 pm

I have of course no problem with accepting that the airconditioning system is not the dealbreaker for converting Fokker jets for private use, and I hope to see the Rekkof F100NG grace the skies very soon.

Quoting aviopic (Reply 66):
My friend, a B744 Captain has been at home for a year which the same problem.
A T7 Captain I know quit due to the same problem.
Both and others have told me on numerous occasions about sick pax for the very same reason.


What I want to point out is that I am fully aware of how engineers tend to look down on pilots of today and I understand why they do so most of the time. Many engineers long back to the days where a flight engineer was on board. I never said it was a unique Fokker-problem, but a solution of that problem starts with acknowledging it, and with that the attitude towards pilots you displayed isn't going to help.

Quoting aviopic (Reply 66):
I expect from someone who is going to spend RR money to understand the car's limitations upfront, I would.

Well, in that case I am glad you aren't a RR salesman. Most people buying RR's don't have a clue about technical (or financial, for that matter) limitations, and RR-owners are very well represented in the pool of potential private-jet customers.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1512
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Fri Dec 30, 2011 7:43 pm

Quoting CPHFF (Reply 68):
Whouldn't the ARJ21-900 be a direct competitor to the F100 NG ?

Sure looks like it. Didn't realize the DC-9 was living on in China. Ought to call it Salguod.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9310
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:45 pm

Quoting MHG (Reply 20):
Well, it is obvious that Boeing did not support the 717 the way they should (from a market perspective). The fact that at a certain point the orderbook did not receive additional orders is no testament per se for lack of sufficient demand. (If you have the B 736 in production you don´t want to have another frame competing in house ...)

Apparently the longer the 717 is out of production, the more the myth grows. This is a bunch of nonsense.
 
queb
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:08 am

Quoting CPHFF (Reply 68):
Whouldn't the ARJ21-900 be a direct competitor to the F100 NG ?

ARJ-900 development has been cancelled and replaced by the C919. Due to a lots of problems during flight testing (the program has been launch 9 years ago), only the -700 will see the light of day.

Quoting CPHFF (Reply 68):
Quoting MHG (Reply 33):
and since the wings on the NG are the only major part that´s a completely new design that should not really be of an issue

In my humble opinion, the whole concept seems very similar to the ARJ21. Older design, but a new wing, upgraded engines and avionics. Even though there are delays, there appears to be two ARJ21-700's that have actually commenced flight testing as per Wikipedia

Not enough time for a new wing, the demonstrator a/c must be ready for 2012.
 
alangirvan
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 2:13 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 4:19 am

Question may be - who exactly are the potential customers? There is a growing fleet of Fokker 100s in Australia, but this can be deceptive. The Fokker 100s are attractive because the operators pay a low cost per hour that they operate the plane. The planes have a very low monthly usage. The operators find the planes are good, but are a bit unhappy about the fuel burn. But, for the low hours they use the planes they could not justify the capital cost of new build Fokker 100 NGs.

Rekkof is building the prototype by converting an existing Fokker 100. I think the Australian operators would be very happy if their existing Fokker 100s could be be converted to NG standard.


The problem for US operators would be that the Fokker 100 would probably be operated by larger airlines' Mainline pilots, and surely it was staffing costs that was the problem for American and US Airways. AA and US now have smaller jets doing the jobs that Fokker 100s used to do for them. Is there any likelihood that AA and US pilots (or any other airline) would be happy for an associate airline to operate Fokker 100 NGa on their behalf?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 4:54 am

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 73):
There is a growing fleet of Fokker 100s in Australia, but this can be deceptive. The Fokker 100s are attractive because the operators pay a low cost per hour that they operate the plane. The planes have a very low monthly usage. The operators find the planes are good, but are a bit unhappy about the fuel burn. But, for the low hours they use the planes they could not justify the capital cost of new build Fokker 100 NGs.

The Allergiant model that requires purchasing aircraft at very low residual value *and* having significant downtime that over-rides the high fuel burn yet a high enough RASM to pay for the extended downtime.

The airlines of the world that apply that model are unlikely to be the F100NG customers.

Quoting CPHFF (Reply 68):
Whouldn't the ARJ21-900 be a direct competitor to the F100 NG ?

I've yet to identify a single niche where the ARJ21 is superior than existing airframes.

The F100NG at least has a huge advantage at high seating densities.

Lightsaber
 
User avatar
lollomz
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:21 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:24 am

It seems a little bit strange to me that none spoke about the Superjet in this thread. What do you think about this plane? Personally I think it Will be a great plane in the "100" size.
 
alangirvan
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 2:13 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:48 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 74):
The Allergiant model that requires purchasing aircraft at very low residual value *and* having significant downtime that over-rides the high fuel burn yet a high enough RASM to pay for the extended downtime.

Except the Australian Fokker 100s remain the property of Fokker Aircraft Services. The Australian operators, like Skywest say that their current Fokker 100s match the seat miles of 737-300s, so perhaps NGs will match 737-7 MAX.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 10:25 am

Quoting lollomz (Reply 75):

Actually, I did list it among the crowd a while back. The Superjet has a lot of potential but whether or not that potential will be realised outside of Russia will remain to be seen.

It's going to be interesting how it performs in service. It's a completely modern aircraft, including the engines, and I think once it gets some time in service, it will prove an interesting option for airlines.

They are also talking about a larger version in the 130 seat range.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 11:54 am

In the opening article they refer to the use of a "breakthrough" engine.There is IMHO only one "breakthrough" engine and that is the GTF.At a 120 - to perhaps 130 pax there is an engine (very nearly) ready and waiting.Anything less than the GTF would I feel condem them to absolute failure.

This sector is littered with the wrecks of failures and the marketplace is today (tomorrow) more crowded than ever.It does need a "breakthrough engine.Otherwise the whole project does not stack up.These are not,I imagine,foolish people so I guess we will just need to wait and see what they stick on the back of it to make it go.

They are certainly being quite coy about it.Whilst it certainly will not happen if ever there was a "gift" to try out the OR concept on, this would be it.
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 2140
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:33 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 77):
They are also talking about a larger version in the 130 seat range.

Fokker was toying with the idea of an F130 as well. Curious to see if that will pan out if the NG program gets the go.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 3:55 pm

Quoting parapente (Reply 78):
In the opening article they refer to the use of a "breakthrough" engine.There is IMHO only one "breakthrough" engine and that is the GTF

  

Quoting parapente (Reply 78):
These are not,I imagine,foolish people so I guess we will just need to wait and see what they stick on the back of it to make it go.

That is true. I'm also hearing rumors of RR and a new high turbine material. We'll have to see...

Lightsaber
 
MEA-707
Posts: 3882
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 1999 4:51 am

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sat Dec 31, 2011 4:14 pm

I think they first need to come up with a different name then Rekkof.
It's something we did as teenagers to write our names in reverse.
I am aware the name Fokker wasn't ideal for English speaking markets either, but Rekkof also reminds me of f*koff.
 
LifelinerOne
Posts: 1656
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:30 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sun Jan 01, 2012 8:36 am

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 81):
I think they first need to come up with a different name then Rekkof.

Done! Meet NG Aircraft.

http://www.ngaircraft.com/

Cheers!   
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sun Jan 01, 2012 12:33 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 67):
I admit to being 'biased towards the US/Asian markets' as that is where I see the higher sales volume. When thinking in terms of the European markets (shorter missions), it makes sense.

I've to admit thinking the US F100's would have been used in a different way than the EU ones.
Looking back at the data however this seems hardly the case.
I haven't made a complete calculation(didn't plan to do so either) but just overlooking the list my estimate would be around 1.5 hour/cycle.



Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 69):
What I want to point out is that I am fully aware of how engineers tend to look down on pilots of today and I understand why they do so most of the time.

I do not look down upon anybody, not even towards the garbage man.
Then again looking up to somebody doesn't work for me either  
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 69):
and with that the attitude towards pilots you displayed isn't going to help.

I called the mentioned B744 Captain "my friend", which says enough I guess.
But true there are types......... like ehhh some you sometimes meet at KL that don't really fit my type.

Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 69):
Well, in that case I am glad you aren't a RR salesman.

RR should be glad, I would give 'm all away for free.  
Quoting queb (Reply 72):
Not enough time for a new wing,

There has been more than enough time if one wanted to.
Some developments are dating back to the 9-ties.
The engine switch from Tay to BR(710 at the time) was already taken half way the 9-ties together with Gulfstream.
A new flight deck design already made in conjunction with USAirways.
So in essence work has been underway for the last +15 years.


Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 79):
Fokker was toying with the idea of an F130 as well. Curious to see if that will pan out if the NG program gets the go.

The F130 was technically not possible at the time, due to some changes in the NG design it will be a possibility in the future.

Quoting lollomz (Reply 75):
It seems a little bit strange to me that none spoke about the Superjet in this thread.

I think(and always thought) the superjet is the only real F100ng competitor simple because weight wise it is the only one close to the F100, although one might wonder why new from scratch designs are still heavier.
Also from the cruise speed and altitude you can derive it is pretty much designed with F100 like flight profile in mind.
2 possible problems, 1 the engines have to proof themselves, 2 these days one needs a well established support organisation to enter the EU(or probably any) market: is Alenia going to provide the expected level ?

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 81):
I think they first need to come up with a different name then Rekkof.

It isn't that long ago that anyone who dared mentioning Rekkof was ridiculed by a self proclaimed Planemaker, some Brazilian knowalls and a blook from Australia who all knew from 4000 nm away and without any inside information that Rekkof didn't exist, was nothing more than a hoax and only kept alive by a few nationalistic liars...........   
At least after all those years we are now talking about the name which probably isn't the best choice, hurray.
We'll get their in the end..........   


My best wishes to all of you,
  
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22904
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:20 pm

Quoting LifelinerOne (Reply 82):
Done! Meet NG Aircraft.

Is that the official corporation name? Much more pleasant than Rekkof which could be turned into some bad names.

Quoting aviopic (Reply 83):
but just overlooking the list my estimate would be around 1.5 hour/cycle.

Which is pretty long for this size of aircraft. I would expect much closer to the 1 hour mission.

Lightsaber
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Rekkof To Build A Major F100NG Plant In Brazil

Sun Jan 01, 2012 8:59 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 84):
Is that the official corporation name?

Both names are official.
Rekkof is used for the parts factory in Brazil which is not limited to parts for Fokker a/c but will produce parts for the whole lets say 50 to 150 seat segment.
The actual assembly of the possible F100ng will be done under the name of NG Aircraft here in the Netherlands.
Both ventures are part of the Panta Holding.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos