Talk:Fokker 100

message: 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)
replies: text: If you have a reliable source that's relevant to the 100, then feel free add it. However, it's probably better on the Fokker company page, if it's not already there. - BillCJ (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bombardier

message: 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?
:Not sure where the figures came from so I have changed to a referenced specification section. MilborneOne (talk) 21:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specifications 

message: How can a publication from 2006 give us data on airplanes in use in 2009?--Idonthavetimeforthiscarp 14:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Updated to last years figure with a ref. MilborneOne (talk) 15:14, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 1 

message: 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)
replies: text: I know other stuff exists is not a good argument but the Boeing 737 has five articles (overview, classis, ng, T-43 and MAX) and the A318 has its own article. So it is fairly normal to have articles on variants if we have enough material to support it. MilborneOne (talk) 18:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Fokker 70/100

message: 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)
replies: text: I understand they only wet-leased two aircraft for a while so not actually operated by them. MilborneOne (talk) 15:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  air dolomiti 

message: 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140406142510/http://www.aerobuzz.fr/spip.php?article4938 to http://www.aerobuzz.fr/spip.php?article4938
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321232627/http://www.aer.ita.br/~bmattos/mundo/airliner/fo100.htm to http://www.aer.ita.br/~bmattos/mundo/airliner/fo100.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100405081233/http://www.flyfokker.com/Stork/18515/FF_F100.html to http://www.flyfokker.com/Stork/18515/FF_F100.html
*Added  tag to http://www.planepictures.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=268&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=0bba7879d2c01b91d2973fd89a23301c
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:31, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: File:Network Aviation (VH-NHP) Fokker 100, in new Qantaslink "new roo" livery, taxiing at Wagga Wagga Airport (2).jpg|previous on-ground
File:Alliance Airlines Fokker 100 Bundaberg Vabre-2.jpg|current, nice arrangement but flying right 
File:Fokker 100, KLM Cityhopper JP6634049.jpg|other candidate, flying left (KLM)
File:2010-07-09 F100 Blue F-GNLH EDDF 01.jpg|Same, Blue Line
File:Fokker 100 Ostfriesische Lufttransport (OLT) D-AOLH - MSN 11265 (7106996815).jpg|same, OLT Jetair
File:DSC 0891-D-AOLH (10674670126).jpg|same, OLT
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)
replies: text: The ground image was only added recently the Montengro image was used before that so why not return to it. MilborneOne (talk) 10:34, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The Montenegro image is a little bland (simple side view), there was also another Alliance airliners before, a little more interesting but less than the right-flying one or the KLM.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 13:20, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  main picture 

message: File:Alliance Airlines Fokker 100 Bundaberg Vabre-2.jpg|current picture
File:Austrian Arrows Fokker F100 (1) (cropped).jpg|proposed picture, better shows the aircraft configuration
--Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:23, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Dont have a problem with changing the image. MilborneOne (talk) 08:54, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  main photo change