This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fokker 100 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't there be something about the attempt by the Dutch government to entice Bombardier to buy the then bankrupt Fokker? 76.66.196.229 (talk) 13:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
The knot numbers for never exceed and maximum speed seem off (1 kn = 1.852 km/h, so 310kn or even 320kn cannot be 800+ km/h). I am not changing this in the article because I am not an expert and have no way of knowing if the Mach or km/h numbers are correct basis for adjustment. Can the author or someone truly knowledgeable about aircraft look into this?
Added British Airways to former operators category. Passenger on a British Airways Fokker 100 in 1999.
Cannot verify if they still operate this aircraft.
This site provides a picture of a British Airways Fokker 100: - http://www.pbase.com/aviationimagesrf/image/119967157/original —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oracoraque (talk • contribs) 05:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
The entry on Touraine Air Transport -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAT_European_Airlines - states that it was wholly (100%) owned by British Airways from August 1996 until May 2001.
I was a passenger on a British Airways Fokker 100 in June 1999. There was every indication that I was flying on a British Airways aircraft, not a code share partner or subsidiary aircraft. The aircraft was painted in British Airways livery, and the crew wore British Airways uniforms.
Would that not in fact make British Airways a former Fokker 100 operator?--Oracoraque (talk) 10:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
How can a publication from 2006 give us data on airplanes in use in 2009?--Idonthavetimeforthiscarp 14:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Why are there separate articles on the Fokker 100 and the Fokker 70? I always thought these were just two different versions of the same aircraft, like the Boeing 737-600, -700, -800 and -900 or the Airbus A318/19/20/21 which do not have separate articles on each variant? --87.160.154.24 (talk) 17:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Air Dolomiti is listed in the crash list but it is missing in the list of the companies who operate or operated the F100 — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiorgioG (talk • contribs) 14:07, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Fokker 100. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
((dead link))
tag to http://www.planepictures.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=268&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=0bba7879d2c01b91d2973fd89a23301cWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:31, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
I WP:BOLDly replaced the previous grounded picture to an inflight one. I think it's good looking, a little from above, but it's heading right, away from the article. A nice other candidate is the KLM one (which remind the Dutch origins), but maybe a bit too much from below. Dynamic though. Others are more usual approach from 3/4 views. Any preference? --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:22, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
--Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:23, 7 September 2019 (UTC)