Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:23 am

Hi All,

For some reason the Fokker 50 seems to be slower then other turboprop aircraft in the 50 to 58 seat category and slower then turboprops in the 19 to 40 seat category.

Why is that? Why is it slow? I mean the aircraft has two Pratt and Whitney PW125B turboprop engines which can produce a maximum of 2,500 shift horse power each.

Is this why the aircraft wasn't a popular choice for airlines in the USA?
 
AleksW
Posts: 103
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:18 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:42 am

How slow is it? Slower than the ATR-72?
Speed is only one of many, many aspects. For instance the Q400 is very fast, but there's always a price to pay for that. It consumes more fuel and has engines that are twice more powerful (5000 hp), while seating roughly the same amount of pax as the ATR-72
 
Clydenairways
Posts: 1306
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:27 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:50 am

Well it's comparable to the Dash 8-300 series which is the closest in size wise to it. I think the sales are US went mostly with the Dash and Europe was mostly the F50. EI,SK,UK,CLH,LX,KLC,OS
I left out the AT42,SF340 and E120 because the Dash8-300 was closest in size.
It is also an upgrade from an old 1950's airframe, the F27, with some aerodynamic tweaks to it, rather than a completely new design.
 
factsonly
Posts: 2977
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:12 pm

Let's look at some typical cruise data:

- ATR42-300 (1984) cruise speed: 270 KTAS - engines deliver 2.000 shp each.
- Fokker 50 (1985) cruise speed: 270 KTAS - max 305 KTAS engines deliver 2.500 shp each.
- Dash 8-300 (1989) cruise speed: 287 KTAS - engines deliver 2.380 shp each.
- Saab 2000 (1993) cruise speed: 360 KTAS - engines deliver 4.150 shp each.
- ATR42-600 (2010) cruise speed: 300 KTAS - engines deliver 2.400 shp each.

Speed is only one of many elements to judge an airframe or aircraft performance.

The Fokker 50 was indeed based on the Fokker F27 Mk500 airframe.
After 30 years of operational experience, the manufacturer chose to renew its turboprop in the 1980's with a new:
- cockpit,
- engines,
- systems,
- door arrangement,
- cabin.

As a result, the proven airframe of the Fokker 50 excelled in quality and durability, with a garanteed airframe life of 90.000 cycles and 90.000 flight hours.
No other short-haul turboprop comes near this life expectancy.
Regretfully, airframe durability and product quality carries a weight and a price, which in today's competitive air transport market is no longer such a hot issue.
So airlines buy Embraer and ATR instead.
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:36 pm

factsonly wrote:
Let's look at some typical cruise data:

- ATR42-300 (1984) cruise speed: 270 KTAS - engines deliver 2.000 shp each.
- Fokker 50 (1985) cruise speed: 270 KTAS - max 305 KTAS engines deliver 2.500 shp each.
- Dash 8-300 (1989) cruise speed: 287 KTAS - engines deliver 2.380 shp each.
- Saab 2000 (1993) cruise speed: 360 KTAS - engines deliver 4.150 shp each.
- ATR42-600 (2010) cruise speed: 300 KTAS - engines deliver 2.400 shp each.

Speed is only one of many elements to judge an airframe or aircraft performance.

The Fokker 50 was indeed based on the Fokker F27 Mk500 airframe.
After 30 years of operational experience, the manufacturer chose to renew its turboprop in the 1980's with a new:
- cockpit,
- engines,
- systems,
- door arrangement,
- cabin.

As a result, the proven airframe of the Fokker 50 excelled in quality and durability, with a garanteed airframe life of 90.000 cycles and 90.000 flight hours.
No other short-haul turboprop comes near this life expectancy.
Regretfully, airframe durability and product quality carries a weight and a price, which in today's competitive air transport market is no longer such a hot issue.
So airlines buy Embraer and ATR instead.


Where did you get that information from? There is no way surely that an F50 can get up to 305 KTAS? Surely that info isn't correct?
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:40 pm

AleksW wrote:
How slow is it? Slower than the ATR-72?
Speed is only one of many, many aspects. For instance the Q400 is very fast, but there's always a price to pay for that. It consumes more fuel and has engines that are twice more powerful (5000 hp), while seating roughly the same amount of pax as the ATR-72



I've heard people call the Fokker 50 a "slow tugboat" or "slow dutchboat"
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13998
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:49 pm

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
AleksW wrote:
How slow is it? Slower than the ATR-72?
Speed is only one of many, many aspects. For instance the Q400 is very fast, but there's always a price to pay for that. It consumes more fuel and has engines that are twice more powerful (5000 hp), while seating roughly the same amount of pax as the ATR-72



I've heard people call the Fokker 50 a "slow tugboat" or "slow dutchboat"


That proved a credible source for a insightful post. :rotfl:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Flanker7
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:38 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 3:51 pm

https://www.fokkerservices.com/about/fo ... /fokker-50

Here you can download a F50 document.
Flying blue only if possible
 
User avatar
Crosswind
Posts: 2592
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 4:34 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 4:06 pm

When I’ve operated around them in Europe they have always been limited to 210 KIAS maximum. Very frustrating if you get stuck behind one early in the descent or approach. I was told by someone who used to fly them the restriction was due to wing-spar life.

So I suspect that the published figures are no longer representative of the maximum speeds in service, for at least some operators or regulatory environments.

Regards
CROSSWIND
 
Max Q
Posts: 8505
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 4:13 pm

factsonly wrote:
Let's look at some typical cruise data:

- ATR42-300 (1984) cruise speed: 270 KTAS - engines deliver 2.000 shp each.
- Fokker 50 (1985) cruise speed: 270 KTAS - max 305 KTAS engines deliver 2.500 shp each.
- Dash 8-300 (1989) cruise speed: 287 KTAS - engines deliver 2.380 shp each.
- Saab 2000 (1993) cruise speed: 360 KTAS - engines deliver 4.150 shp each.
- ATR42-600 (2010) cruise speed: 300 KTAS - engines deliver 2.400 shp each.

Speed is only one of many elements to judge an airframe or aircraft performance.

The Fokker 50 was indeed based on the Fokker F27 Mk500 airframe.
After 30 years of operational experience, the manufacturer chose to renew its turboprop in the 1980's with a new:
- cockpit,
- engines,
- systems,
- door arrangement,
- cabin.

As a result, the proven airframe of the Fokker 50 excelled in quality and durability, with a garanteed airframe life of 90.000 cycles and 90.000 flight hours.
No other short-haul turboprop comes near this life expectancy.
Regretfully, airframe durability and product quality carries a weight and a price, which in today's competitive air transport market is no longer such a hot issue.
So airlines buy Embraer and ATR instead.



I don’t see how the F50 is ‘slow’ seems very competitive to me, one aircraft you left out in that category is the SF340, when I flew it I remember we normally cruised right around 270 knots TAS, which compares well to the others, it just didn’t climb very well


IIRC another aircraft in that category was the Brazilia which had a cruise speed around 300 knots

The standout of the group of course was the rather ill fated Saab 2000 with a very high cruise speed of 370 knots thanks to a huge power increase


I thought that was very impressive and by all accounts it was a good aircraft with a nicely updated cockpit and cabin


Unfortunately it came into service right as the massive RJ boom started and then no one wanted turboprops anymore



Turned out to be a mistake as they were uneconomic on many routes
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4566
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 4:19 pm

factsonly wrote:
Regretfully, airframe durability and product quality carries a weight and a price, which in today's competitive air transport market is no longer such a hot issue.
So airlines buy Embraer and ATR instead.


There are other reasons that become apparent when you park a Fokker 27/50 next to a Dash-8 or ATR. I happened to park next to a nice Fokker 50 once and got some nice comparison photos with my ATR. The Fokker makes really inefficient use of the airframe/weight, ie it is heavy for what it does. The newer Dash 8 and ATR really manage to pack out the airframe with passengers and cargo. Despite being 2 meters shorter and seating 20-25 less passengers, it has roughly the same OEW as the ATR 72. On the other hand if we compare it with the 50 seat ATR 42, which is almost 3 meters shorter and weighs 2 tons less. Sure, the Fokker 50 can seat 6 passengers more than the ATR 42, but only if you carry an additional flight attendant.
 
User avatar
BawliBooch
Posts: 1489
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:24 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:22 pm

Was there some AD that restricted speed in operational conditions? The Lockheed Electra 188 had something like that?
Mr.Kapoor's favorite poodle!
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sat Sep 12, 2020 12:24 am

Crosswind wrote:
When I’ve operated around them in Europe they have always been limited to 210 KIAS maximum. Very frustrating if you get stuck behind one early in the descent or approach. I was told by someone who used to fly them the restriction was due to wing-spar life.

So I suspect that the published figures are no longer representative of the maximum speeds in service, for at least some operators or regulatory environments.

Regards
CROSSWIND



I was referring to True Air Speed which as you know is the actual speed of the aircraft. Do you know what a rough figure TAS is?


Also - in regards to KIAS, see below:


SPEED LIMITATIONS
All speed limitations in KIAS unless indicated otherwise.
All altitudes mentioned in this section are pressure altitudes.
Maximum operating limit speed (Vmo)
Up to 21.000 feet: 224 KIAS
Above 21.000 feet: Vmo decreases linearly to reach 206 KIAS at 25.000 feet
The maximum operating speed shall not deliberately be exceeded in any regime of flight
(climb, cruise or descent), except where a higher speed is specifically authorized for test
flight purposes.
Maximum design manoeuvring (Va)
Va: 175 KIAS
Full application of rudder and/or aileron controls, as well as manoeuvres that involve an
angle of attack near the stall should be confined to speeds below Va.
Rough air speed (Vr)
Vr: 165 KIAS
Maximum flap extend speed (Vfe)
5º: 180 KIAS
10º: 180 KIAS
15º: 180 KIAS
20º: 160 KIAS
25º: 160 KIAS
35º: 140 KIAS
Prolonged use of flaps other than for take-off and landing is prohibited.
Maximum landing gear operating speeds (Vlo = Vle)
Extension (Vle): 170 KIAS
Operating (Vlo): 170 KIAS
Last edited by PerthBoy1987 on Sat Sep 12, 2020 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sat Sep 12, 2020 12:27 am

VSMUT wrote:
factsonly wrote:
Regretfully, airframe durability and product quality carries a weight and a price, which in today's competitive air transport market is no longer such a hot issue.
So airlines buy Embraer and ATR instead.


There are other reasons that become apparent when you park a Fokker 27/50 next to a Dash-8 or ATR. I happened to park next to a nice Fokker 50 once and got some nice comparison photos with my ATR. The Fokker makes really inefficient use of the airframe/weight, ie it is heavy for what it does. The newer Dash 8 and ATR really manage to pack out the airframe with passengers and cargo. Despite being 2 meters shorter and seating 20-25 less passengers, it has roughly the same OEW as the ATR 72. On the other hand if we compare it with the 50 seat ATR 42, which is almost 3 meters shorter and weighs 2 tons less. Sure, the Fokker 50 can seat 6 passengers more than the ATR 42, but only if you carry an additional flight attendant.



The question is then, why did Fokker make the F50 so damn heavy? Imagine a lighter F50 with those powerful PW125B engines - I am sure the cruise speed would of been higher - by how much, I'm not sure.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4566
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sat Sep 12, 2020 6:49 am

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
factsonly wrote:
Regretfully, airframe durability and product quality carries a weight and a price, which in today's competitive air transport market is no longer such a hot issue.
So airlines buy Embraer and ATR instead.


There are other reasons that become apparent when you park a Fokker 27/50 next to a Dash-8 or ATR. I happened to park next to a nice Fokker 50 once and got some nice comparison photos with my ATR. The Fokker makes really inefficient use of the airframe/weight, ie it is heavy for what it does. The newer Dash 8 and ATR really manage to pack out the airframe with passengers and cargo. Despite being 2 meters shorter and seating 20-25 less passengers, it has roughly the same OEW as the ATR 72. On the other hand if we compare it with the 50 seat ATR 42, which is almost 3 meters shorter and weighs 2 tons less. Sure, the Fokker 50 can seat 6 passengers more than the ATR 42, but only if you carry an additional flight attendant.



The question is then, why did Fokker make the F50 so damn heavy? Imagine a lighter F50 with those powerful PW125B engines - I am sure the cruise speed would of been higher - by how much, I'm not sure.


Because it was designed in the 1950s with 1950s methods and materials. Take the wing for example, the ATR has 72 has a largely composite wing and wingbox. I'd bet the Fokker 50 has an almost unmodified Fokker 27 wing, all metal of course.
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:20 pm

VSMUT wrote:
PerthBoy1987 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:

There are other reasons that become apparent when you park a Fokker 27/50 next to a Dash-8 or ATR. I happened to park next to a nice Fokker 50 once and got some nice comparison photos with my ATR. The Fokker makes really inefficient use of the airframe/weight, ie it is heavy for what it does. The newer Dash 8 and ATR really manage to pack out the airframe with passengers and cargo. Despite being 2 meters shorter and seating 20-25 less passengers, it has roughly the same OEW as the ATR 72. On the other hand if we compare it with the 50 seat ATR 42, which is almost 3 meters shorter and weighs 2 tons less. Sure, the Fokker 50 can seat 6 passengers more than the ATR 42, but only if you carry an additional flight attendant.



The question is then, why did Fokker make the F50 so damn heavy? Imagine a lighter F50 with those powerful PW125B engines - I am sure the cruise speed would of been higher - by how much, I'm not sure.


Because it was designed in the 1950s with 1950s methods and materials. Take the wing for example, the ATR has 72 has a largely composite wing and wingbox. I'd bet the Fokker 50 has an almost unmodified Fokker 27 wing, all metal of course.


But there might be one good thing about the F50 being heavy - it will last longer, very tough and strong.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4566
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sat Sep 12, 2020 6:43 pm

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
PerthBoy1987 wrote:


The question is then, why did Fokker make the F50 so damn heavy? Imagine a lighter F50 with those powerful PW125B engines - I am sure the cruise speed would of been higher - by how much, I'm not sure.


Because it was designed in the 1950s with 1950s methods and materials. Take the wing for example, the ATR has 72 has a largely composite wing and wingbox. I'd bet the Fokker 50 has an almost unmodified Fokker 27 wing, all metal of course.


But there might be one good thing about the F50 being heavy - it will last longer, very tough and strong.


Maybe, maybe not. There are other components than the airframe that will wear out and make it a maintenance nightmare long before. The newer, lighter airframes have a fair shot at earning in the difference by simply carrying more payload and/or costing less to operate. Besides which, there are ATRs soldiering on at over 30 years of age, so you really have to wonder how much value that added structure really adds.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sat Sep 12, 2020 10:12 pm

factsonly wrote:
...some typical cruise data:
- ATR42-300 (1984), Fokker 50 (1985), Dash 8-300 (1989), Saab 2000 (1993), ATR42-600 (2010).

Max Q wrote:
one aircraft you left out in that category is the SF340...

IIRC another aircraft in that category was the Brazilia
All good, except some of these are a bit lightweight. :lol:

So isn't it time somebody mentioned "The Elephant in the Room"?
<cough> HS748 / BAe ATP <cough>

For almost three decades the main/only rival to the Fokker F27 was the HS748.
Same pax numbers, same rugged design for rough field airstrips, both adopted as military transports.
They even shared common powerplants of very nearly identical power (Rolls-Royce Dart turboprop)

(Yep, that's a Turkish F27 at Gatwick in the days when you could fly 1500 miles crossing nine countries, all in an F27. :lol:
And an Air France example demonstrating a rough field landing, at night, with both engines shut down. Amazingly it flew for another 25 years)


Fast forward to the mid 1980's, and whilst Fokker updated the F27 to produce the F50, the HS748 morphed into the ATP.


As mentioned already, the Fokker 50 featured revised - cockpit, - engines, - systems, - door arrangement, - cabin.
But apart from the engines and six-bladed props was almost indistinguishable.
Whereas the BAe ATP was an even bigger makeover. In fact I'm not sure if anything from the original HS748 was left. :scratchchin:

And now for the all important CRUISE SPEEDS.
The original F27 was slow at 250 kn cruise, but the HS748 was even slower at 244 kn. :o

The Fokker 50 offered a small increase to 270 kn, but the totally re-designed BAe ATP still lags behind at 268 kn (ok, so it's a wash)
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sun Sep 13, 2020 6:43 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
factsonly wrote:
...some typical cruise data:
- ATR42-300 (1984), Fokker 50 (1985), Dash 8-300 (1989), Saab 2000 (1993), ATR42-600 (2010).

Max Q wrote:
one aircraft you left out in that category is the SF340...

IIRC another aircraft in that category was the Brazilia
All good, except some of these are a bit lightweight. :lol:

So isn't it time somebody mentioned "The Elephant in the Room"?
<cough> HS748 / BAe ATP <cough>

For almost three decades the main/only rival to the Fokker F27 was the HS748.
Same pax numbers, same rugged design for rough field airstrips, both adopted as military transports.
They even shared common powerplants of very nearly identical power (Rolls-Royce Dart turboprop)

(Yep, that's a Turkish F27 at Gatwick in the days when you could fly 1500 miles crossing nine countries, all in an F27. :lol:
And an Air France example demonstrating a rough field landing, at night, with both engines shut down. Amazingly it flew for another 25 years)


Fast forward to the mid 1980's, and whilst Fokker updated the F27 to produce the F50, the HS748 morphed into the ATP.


As mentioned already, the Fokker 50 featured revised - cockpit, - engines, - systems, - door arrangement, - cabin.
But apart from the engines and six-bladed props was almost indistinguishable.
Whereas the BAe ATP was an even bigger makeover. In fact I'm not sure if anything from the original HS748 was left. :scratchchin:

And now for the all important CRUISE SPEEDS.
The original F27 was slow at 250 kn cruise, but the HS748 was even slower at 244 kn. :o

The Fokker 50 offered a small increase to 270 kn, but the totally re-designed BAe ATP still lags behind at 268 kn (ok, so it's a wash)


There has to be a reason why Fokker made the F50 so heavy...maybe it was an obssession with making it a strong aircraft.

Also, Re - speeds of the F50. You said 270 knots, is that figure for TAS (True Air Speed)? Also that figure for 270 knots - is that for a light F50 or a fully loaded F50 with full pay, fuel, cargo etc? And is the 270 knots the max cruise speed?

Also, on airliners.net they have an F50 page and this link says Max cruising speed is 287 knots:

https://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/fokker-50/218

So really who is right?? And if airliners.net have incorrect information about other aircraft on their website then thats not good from them.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4566
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sun Sep 13, 2020 10:05 am

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
There has to be a reason why Fokker made the F50 so heavy...maybe it was an obssession with making it a strong aircraft.


As I already wrote, it is heavy because it is old. It was developed in an era where fares were astronomical, airlines were state-owned monopolies that often ran on subsidies rather than profits and fuel prices were low. They didn't have access to modern composite materials. At the time, regional airports across Europe often weren't paved, so it had to land on grass or dirt strips. Operating costs just weren't an issue, so manufacturers built the aircraft more sturdy.

The Fokker 50 was a limited upgrade of the Fokker 27 that was done without significant changes to the production apparatus. Any more significant changes would have incurred significant changes to the production lines and possibly required re-certification by the authorities, all of which was expensive. You don't just remove weight from an aircraft, much less 2 tons.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sun Sep 13, 2020 10:40 am

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
The original F27 was slow at 250 kn cruise, but the HS748 was even slower at 244 kn. :o

The Fokker 50 offered a small increase to 270 kn, but the totally re-designed BAe ATP still lags behind at 268 kn (ok, so it's a wash)

Also, Re - speeds of the F50. You said 270 knots, is that figure for TAS (True Air Speed)? Also that figure for 270 knots - is that for a light F50 or a fully loaded F50 with full pay, fuel, cargo etc? And is the 270 knots the max cruise speed?
It isn't stated, but my source usually specifies full payload, typical cruise.
The same source also provides a max speed which is a creditable 305 kn. :bigthumbsup:
But is that max cruise, or Vmo ?

Stating the obvious; sometimes you can view a variety of sources, and they all say the same.
And sometimes they are at odds with each other.
I quoted speeds from a single source, hoping for some consistency, even if all the numbers are technically "incorrect". :lol:
For the numbers above, my source was Wikipedia. Take it or leave it. (Note; wikipedia in turn will usually direct you to wherever they got their information from)

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
Also, on airliners.net they have an F50 page and this link says Max cruising speed is 287 knots:

https://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/fokker-50/218

So really who is right?? And if airliners.net have incorrect information about other aircraft on their website then thats not good from them.
We are straying into dangerous territory here, and I'm pretty sure forum rules/etiquette dictates I do not disabuse a.net in any way. :shakehead:

Let's just say a.net is one of many sources, and is equally capable of providing alternative facts. :duck:

A recent example I came across was a dearth (that's a luvverly word) of up to date information on the Boeing 777.
The 777-200LR was launched in 2000, but is now delayed until 2006.

Total 777-200 orders received as of early 2003 452, with 379 delivered.

First delivery {777-300} to Air France, is scheduled for March 2004.

Total 777-300 orders as of January 2003 stood at 121 (of which 56 300ER) with 44 delivered.

And here we are in 2020 still waiting for updates.... :scratchchin:

As for the Fokker 50 page;
a.net wrote:
Foremost of the improvements was the new generation Pratt & Whitney Canada PW125 turboprops driving advanced six blade props, giving a 12% higher cruising speed and greater fuel economy, and thus range.
12% on 250 knots is..... 280 kn. (which is yet another alternative figure) :lol:

Within the "Performance " section for the F50 we have five (?) different numbers;
Series 100 - Max cruising speed 287kt,
economical cruising speed 245kt.
Series 300 - Typical cruising speed 526km/h (284kt). Range with 50 passengers and reserves at high speed cruise....
or 1628nm for high gross weight option at long range cruise.

Series 300? Yeah, that's not a qualifier seen too often. You can find them on a.net as the Fokker 60 (4 built) and it quite possibly appears on the type certificate as the Fokker "F27-0604" :o

Summary; It's a minefield!
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 14, 2020 4:15 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
PerthBoy1987 wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
The original F27 was slow at 250 kn cruise, but the HS748 was even slower at 244 kn. :o

The Fokker 50 offered a small increase to 270 kn, but the totally re-designed BAe ATP still lags behind at 268 kn (ok, so it's a wash)

Also, Re - speeds of the F50. You said 270 knots, is that figure for TAS (True Air Speed)? Also that figure for 270 knots - is that for a light F50 or a fully loaded F50 with full pay, fuel, cargo etc? And is the 270 knots the max cruise speed?
It isn't stated, but my source usually specifies full payload, typical cruise.
The same source also provides a max speed which is a creditable 305 kn. :bigthumbsup:
But is that max cruise, or Vmo ?

Stating the obvious; sometimes you can view a variety of sources, and they all say the same.
And sometimes they are at odds with each other.
I quoted speeds from a single source, hoping for some consistency, even if all the numbers are technically "incorrect". :lol:
For the numbers above, my source was Wikipedia. Take it or leave it. (Note; wikipedia in turn will usually direct you to wherever they got their information from)

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
Also, on airliners.net they have an F50 page and this link says Max cruising speed is 287 knots:

https://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/fokker-50/218

So really who is right?? And if airliners.net have incorrect information about other aircraft on their website then thats not good from them.
We are straying into dangerous territory here, and I'm pretty sure forum rules/etiquette dictates I do not disabuse a.net in any way. :shakehead:

Let's just say a.net is one of many sources, and is equally capable of providing alternative facts. :duck:

A recent example I came across was a dearth (that's a luvverly word) of up to date information on the Boeing 777.
The 777-200LR was launched in 2000, but is now delayed until 2006.

Total 777-200 orders received as of early 2003 452, with 379 delivered.

First delivery {777-300} to Air France, is scheduled for March 2004.

Total 777-300 orders as of January 2003 stood at 121 (of which 56 300ER) with 44 delivered.

And here we are in 2020 still waiting for updates.... :scratchchin:

As for the Fokker 50 page;
a.net wrote:
Foremost of the improvements was the new generation Pratt & Whitney Canada PW125 turboprops driving advanced six blade props, giving a 12% higher cruising speed and greater fuel economy, and thus range.
12% on 250 knots is..... 280 kn. (which is yet another alternative figure) :lol:

Within the "Performance " section for the F50 we have five (?) different numbers;
Series 100 - Max cruising speed 287kt,
economical cruising speed 245kt.
Series 300 - Typical cruising speed 526km/h (284kt). Range with 50 passengers and reserves at high speed cruise....
or 1628nm for high gross weight option at long range cruise.

Series 300? Yeah, that's not a qualifier seen too often. You can find them on a.net as the Fokker 60 (4 built) and it quite possibly appears on the type certificate as the Fokker "F27-0604" :o

Summary; It's a minefield!



So it seems there is two types of F50s. The 100 and 300. Now it gets confusing. I always thought there was only one type of F50. The F60 is separate.
 
Max Q
Posts: 8505
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 14, 2020 5:19 am

Anyone still operating the ATP ?


I remember reading about ‘Air Sweden’ IIRC using a converted freighter version
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:01 pm

Crosswind wrote:
When I’ve operated around them in Europe they have always been limited to 210 KIAS maximum. Very frustrating if you get stuck behind one early in the descent or approach. I was told by someone who used to fly them the restriction was due to wing-spar life.

So I suspect that the published figures are no longer representative of the maximum speeds in service, for at least some operators or regulatory environments.

Regards
CROSSWIND



From what ive heard, the F50 is slow during climb and descent but during cruise the cruise speed is reasonable which probably to a certain extent makes the "slow tugboat/dutchboat" nickname as a bit of a myth
Last edited by PerthBoy1987 on Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:09 pm

PerthBoy1987 wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Within the "Performance " section for the F50 we have five (?) different numbers;
Series 100 - Max cruising speed 287kt,
economical cruising speed 245kt.
Series 300 - Typical cruising speed 526km/h (284kt). Range with 50 passengers and reserves at high speed cruise....
or 1628nm for high gross weight option at long range cruise.

Series 300? Yeah, that's not a qualifier seen too often. You can find them on a.net as the Fokker 60 (4 built) and it quite possibly appears on the type certificate as the Fokker "F27-0604" :o

So it seems there is two types of F50s. The 100 and 300. Now it gets confusing. I always thought there was only one type of F50. The F60 is separate.
Not quite!
Yes, it is confusing, and I probably didn't explain myself clearly enough - mea culpa!

The qualifiers "50-100" and "50-300" do not appear often, and I believe they were superseded by Fokker 50 and Fokker 60, respectively.

In all there are numerous models of the Fokker F27
F27-100, -200, -300/M, -400/M, -500/M, -600, -700, -050, -0502 (aka Fokker 50), -0604 (aka Fokker 60)
(& even more one-off variants of those sub-types)

Plus of course the two US models, the Fairchild F-27 and Fairchild-Hiller FH-227, and their sub-types e.g. F-27A/B/J, FH-227D/E (plus whatever others you can find)
And here's the kicker; Fairchild F-27s differed from the initial Fokker F27 Mk 100s in having ... heavier external skinning, :lol:

But getting back to the Fokker 50 & Fokker 60; they are both just sub-types of F27.
Fokker 50 and Fokker 60 are purely marketing names.

And as the OP, if you want to distinguish between the two, particularly as Fokker's failure meant the 60 only saw limited military service, then that is your prerogative.
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
PerthBoy1987
Topic Author
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:59 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:23 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
PerthBoy1987 wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Within the "Performance " section for the F50 we have five (?) different numbers;
Series 100 - Max cruising speed 287kt,
economical cruising speed 245kt.
Series 300 - Typical cruising speed 526km/h (284kt). Range with 50 passengers and reserves at high speed cruise....
or 1628nm for high gross weight option at long range cruise.

Series 300? Yeah, that's not a qualifier seen too often. You can find them on a.net as the Fokker 60 (4 built) and it quite possibly appears on the type certificate as the Fokker "F27-0604" :o

So it seems there is two types of F50s. The 100 and 300. Now it gets confusing. I always thought there was only one type of F50. The F60 is separate.
Not quite!
Yes, it is confusing, and I probably didn't explain myself clearly enough - mea culpa!

The qualifiers "50-100" and "50-300" do not appear often, and I believe they were superseded by Fokker 50 and Fokker 60, respectively.

In all there are numerous models of the Fokker F27
F27-100, -200, -300/M, -400/M, -500/M, -600, -700, -050, -0502 (aka Fokker 50), -0604 (aka Fokker 60)
(& even more one-off variants of those sub-types)

Plus of course the two US models, the Fairchild F-27 and Fairchild-Hiller FH-227, and their sub-types e.g. F-27A/B/J, FH-227D/E (plus whatever others you can find)
And here's the kicker; Fairchild F-27s differed from the initial Fokker F27 Mk 100s in having ... heavier external skinning, :lol:

But getting back to the Fokker 50 & Fokker 60; they are both just sub-types of F27.
Fokker 50 and Fokker 60 are purely marketing names.

And as the OP, if you want to distinguish between the two, particularly as Fokker's failure meant the 60 only saw limited military service, then that is your prerogative.



Sounds like you flew the F50. You seem to know a lot mate.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4566
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Tue Sep 15, 2020 8:27 pm

Max Q wrote:
Anyone still operating the ATP ?


I remember reading about ‘Air Sweden’ IIRC using a converted freighter version


West Atlantic Sweden, they supposedly had 38, but only 12-ish still fly today. In fact I saw one today - the first time I've seen one move under own power. There should be 5 other ATPs flying in Indonesia and Kenya according to planespotters.net.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Wed Sep 16, 2020 1:47 am

VSMUT wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Anyone still operating the ATP ?
I remember reading about ‘Air Sweden’ IIRC using a converted freighter version

West Atlantic Sweden, they supposedly had 38, but only 12-ish still fly today. In fact I saw one today - the first time I've seen one move under own power. There should be 5 other ATPs flying in Indonesia and Kenya according to planespotters.net.

These ATPs are like vampires; they only come out after dark. :lol:

Seriously, there are around eight in the air most nights, between midnight and 8am (European time)
As I write this, the first four have already started their routes.
SE-LGZ (based out of Oslo)
SE-LPS (EMA - Belfast BFS or IOM)
SE-MHK (recently routing Paris-Milan-Paris)
SE-LGX (Oslo to ?)

And in a couple of hours from now these other birds will probably wake up
SE-MAN will most probably shuttle between Malmo & Billund (Denmark)
SE-MAI will run between EMA and GCI (Guernsey)
SE-KXP between EMA and Jersey.
SE-MAM from Marseille to Malta (or v.v)

(Don't hold your breath for the Indonesian or Kenyan examples)

BTW it's "West Air Sweden" and "West Atlantic UK", who are both part of the West Atlantic Group.
And you will note that although these ATPs are all Swedish registered, most of them operate away from Swedish airspace.
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4566
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Fokker 50 Speeds

Sun Sep 20, 2020 12:29 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
(Don't hold your breath for the Indonesian or Kenyan examples)


The Kenyan company actually has an advertisement out, looking for ATP training captains.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Wacker1000 and 35 guests

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