Is it time for Fokker aircraft comeback?

Fokker was originally a Dutch aircraft manufacturer starting from 1912 and lasting in original form until 1996. Named after founder Anthony Fokker company in it's history was responsible for many successful and famous aircraft from WWI fighters up to regional airliners Fokker 70 and Fokker 100.

After company went to bankruptcy in 1996 the parts manufacturing business was bought out by Stork B.V. another important but slightly less famous company which wisely rebranded through name Fokker Aerospace Group (2010) to Fokker Technologies (2011) which has 4 business units which all carry Fokker name now:

- Fokker Aerostructures (Lightweight structures)

- Fokker Elmo (Wiring harnesses), when you say Fokker in Airbus this is what most people would think

- Fokker Landing Gear (Landing gear)

- Fokker Services (Aerospace services provider)

All this branding and rebranding may be where some of the confusion is coming from.

Out of the ashes of original Fokker as early as 1998 the new company (or an idea of the company) emerged, this time named as Rekkof Restart. At the time Rekkof was planning to re-start the production of Fokker F100 which was launched only eight years (1988) before original company shut-down and at the time was seen as good product which pilots, mechanics and passengers liked.

Similarly to Fokker Bombardier had very early start of what was later to become Bombardier C-series, as early as 1999 until project was fully launched in 2007. What made it possible for C-series to find first buyers was game changing technology available in Pratt & Whitney geared turbo fan GTF now known as PurePower.

Couple of years down the line, a different company named Netherlands Aircraft Company is working this time on successor of Fokker 100 called Fokker F120NG. What wasn't available in 1998 may be available in 2014 which is step change which would lift this aircraft above the competition which is the same generation of new engines namely P&W GTF family. Farnborough 2014 in July saw an announcement of the NAC that they are planning an aircraft based on existing airframe with modifications only on wing which include extending wingspan to accommodate for new winglet and some adjustments to the airfoil also including installation of PurePower 1X17G very similar to the one installed on Mitsubishi MRJ.

Hearing this news, few would remain sceptical as we have heard this before and it did not happen. However when maths is put on paper there is clear attraction for this proposal coming from two facts: fuel burn and weight. Fuel burn with new engine offers unbelievable saving of 50% compared to original Fokker 100. Imagine the reaction of existing operators when they are told that there is an engine for their aircraft which consumes only half of fuel!

Weight comparison comes as a total shocker. Comparing original classic Fokker 100 at maximum take off weight to competitors with similar passenger capacity reveals following (catalogue data):

Fokker 100 46 tons

Embraer 190 E2 57 tons

Bombardier CS100 58 tons

Superjet SSJ 100/95LR 50 tons

Airbus A318 68 tons

Boeing 737-600 66 tons

Although it is not straight comparison as different aircraft have slightly different numbers of passengers they can accommodate, they do not fly same distances and do not carry identical payload it can be clearly seen that the Fokker 100 configuration is inherently lighter. Maybe not a such a big surprise, Comac ARJ21 have similar weight which is saying interesting point about aircraft configuration with rear fuselage mounted engines. As a contrary to Comac ARJ21 which is aircraft which still needs certification from scratch (although it was developed following McDonnell Douglas MD80 built in China), Fokker 120NG may have the luxury to follow on the proven F100 and thus cut lot of development time and effort.

In terms of passenger comfort, current configuration offered by Fokker 120NG is 17,5" wide and 30”pitched seats with five abreast arrangement for 125 passengers configuration, which is amongst the widest in industry. As noise levels of new high by-pass engines are considerably inherently lower the noise in cabin so notorious for rear engine mounted aircraft could be expected to drop a lot.

In terms of development time commonality between Fokker F100 and F120NG could allow staged concurrent testing of structures and equipment on old F100 until full new F120 is available.

In mathematical sense putting these numbers down seems like a no-brainer winning case.

However there is economical, market view where there are some doubts if the market for 100 seaters exist and how big it is.

But then, maybe there would be a bigger market if there were good competitive products to fill it.