Just wondering why BD ordered the F70 & F100 when they had 735's in the fleet. I know common sense was not the strongest point at BD latterly, but back in the early 90's I thought they were a pretty well run outfit and it seems a little odd to have a relatively small sub fleet of Fokker's when maybe abusing the 735 may have made more sense, particularly out of LHR where it would have been fairly easy to have filled the few extra seats?
I guess they wanted a true baby 9 replacement, but intrigued to hear.
As an aside, it occurs to me the Fokker love never included the F50 when they had the F27 & Dash 7 to replace, but went with the ATP (which did no last long). Did the 50 ever get a look in? I guess the ERJ series ultimately replaced the rather motley regional fleet once the Loganair, Manx et al merry go round stopped...
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
RE: Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
IIRC, British Midland had plans to increase their Fokker-fleet but the collapse of the manufacturer necessitated a change of their original plans. The Fokker 70/100s enabled British Miland to replace their DC-9s. The Boeing 737-500 weren´t part of the original plan of British Midland despite being an operator of the 737-300 and 737-400. Shareholder SAS wanted to get rid of aircraft to adjust their capacities and the the inherited Linjeflyg 737-fleet was the best way to reduce their fleet. Earlier plans to transfer six DC-9-21s from SAS to British Midland to replace the DC-9-10s were shelved.
IIRC, British Midland were the launch-costumer for the BAe ATP. It appears that the ATP was seen as the best-suited aircraft for their needs.
| Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): ...but went with the ATP (which did no last long). Did the 50 ever get a look in? |
IIRC, British Midland were the launch-costumer for the BAe ATP. It appears that the ATP was seen as the best-suited aircraft for their needs.
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
RE: Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
| Quoting MD80 (Reply 1): It appears that the ATP was seen as the best-suited aircraft for their needs. |
Funnily enough not many others thought so...
particularly as a former 27 operator, the 50 seemed a shoe in.
| Quoting MD80 (Reply 1): being an operator of the 737-300 and 737-400 |
So were the Boeing's for growth? They were a very early customer and I thought Kegworth happened before they had even ordered any Fokker's, so the 733/4 must have been the original DC9 replacement. AFAIK, the Fokker was not ordered until around the 1992 time. LF was bought by SK on Jan 1 1993, so round about the same time.
Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
RE: Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
BD ordered the Fokker fleet for their regional bases (i.e. EMA originating routes) and not for their LHR based services.
The operating cost of the Fokker fleet was significantly below the B735.
Particularly the Fokker 70 was a favourite of Sir Micheal.
The operating cost of the Fokker fleet was significantly below the B735.
Particularly the Fokker 70 was a favourite of Sir Micheal.
RE: Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
| Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 2): So were the Boeing's for growth? They were a very early customer and I thought Kegworth happened before they had even ordered any Fokker's, so the 733/4 must have been the original DC9 replacement. |
The Boeing 737-300/-400 supplemented the DC-9-fleet. British Midland even added three additional DC-9-32s (the last three of Austrian Airlines which were replaced by three MD-87SR´s ) in 1990 and it is no secret that the management (and probably Mr. Bishop) really admired the DC-9.
| Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 2): Funnily enough not many others thought so... particularly as a former 27 operator, the 50 seemed a shoe in. |
It seems strange but the airline was enthusiastic to be the first operator of the BAe ATP and I think that the idea of operating a growing fleet of ATP's was a realistic one. IIRC, the Fokker F27 was more or less a "stop gap measure" for British Midland. The success of British Midland was (fleet-wise) based on the utilization of the Vickers Viscount and Douglas DC-9. In the 1980s, the airline also began to lease Shorts-aircraft and evaluated several aircraft to augment the fleet. The MD-80 was evaluated for a longer time but the requirements for services to Jersey (?) really had an impact and the use of MD-80s would have resulted in payload-penalties. The Airbus A320 was ruled out due to very high costs (of purchase I think) and a contract was signed with AWAS to lease the Boeing 737-300s. AWAS also took the DC-9-14/-15s and leased them back to British Midland until approx. 1994. The last DC-9-32 was retired in April 1996.
| Quoting factsonly (Reply 3): The operating cost of the Fokker fleet was significantly below the B735. Particularly the Fokker 70 was a favourite of Sir Micheal. |
That´s interesting to know! Do you know the reasons for the affection of Sir Michael for the Fokker 70?
Thank you!
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
RE: Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
| Quoting factsonly (Reply 3): BD ordered the Fokker fleet for their regional bases (i.e. EMA originating routes) |
It's hard to imagine now but prior to WW, EMA saw a variety of aircraft from BD on their regional routes. From my own experience, I can remember E135 and F100 aircraft on EMA-EDI at the turn of the millennium.
Forget A vs B - Give me E or BAe any day of the week!
-
- bunumuring
- Posts: 2538
- Joined:
RE: Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
According to one particular member of a.net, BM were close to ordering the 717 when Boeing ceased the program. He told me recently as part of a private, non-forum conversation so I'm not sure if he wants to be identified publicly as he worked for McDD at the time. It makes perfect sense to me that BM would fly the 717...
Cheers,
Bunumuring.
Cheers,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
RE: Why Did British Midland Order Fokker's?
Here is a PDF with an article about British Midland and their interest in the Boeing 717 as a potential replacement of the Fokker 70/100s and the "study follows a happy experience with its predecessor, the DC-9":
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...-%201021.html?search=midland%20717
Good to know!
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...-%201021.html?search=midland%20717
| Quoting factsonly (Reply 6): Sir Micheal saw the Fokker 70 as the new baby DC9-10. |
Good to know!
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: AABB777, AirbusA343, Antarius, Armadillo1, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], caflyboy, canyonblue17, DALCE, dallas6940, davidjohnson6, DEN1895, echster, Eirules, FATFlyer, fdxco, flight152, flightless, fraT, GettingHigh38k, guppyflyer, HB-IWC, hollywoodcory, hOMSaR, Ishrion, jagraham, Jimothy, joelliot, jplatts, jreeves96, jumbojettony, LawnDart, LAXdude1023, lightsaber, MEA-707, Meff56, mpsrent, NeperQiell, Noise, notconcerned, ORD14R, ordbosewr, PI4EVR, Planeboy17, RicFlyer, ROSSIGNOL, Rossiya747, rove312, runway23, ryanflyer, santos, Sceptical, seansasLCY, SGAviation, Tn55337, TransWorldOne, trueblew, TWA85, umichman, unusualattitude, Vctony, WidebodyPTV, Williamsb747, x1234, yulexpansion and 345 guests