Dutch Royal Carriages, Cars, Ships and Airplanes


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
The ceremonial royal barge has been splendidly restored and is back in an annex to the building of the former Naval Arsenal (now shipping museum) in Amsterdam. The royal barge is not only restored for museal purposes, it can be used again if it pleases His Majesty to make use of it.

The bow of the royal barge: picture

The stern of the royal barge: picture

Neptune in gold: picture

The royal barge projected on the former Naval Arsenal: picture

Queen Juliana and Prince Bernhard in the royal barge: picture
 
Last edited:
Muhler said:
:previous: I could easily spend a couple of hours walking around these carriages simply admiring the craftsmanship - and kicking the wheels.
They are almost as sexy as steam locomotives. :p
Click to expand...


Does any European monarchy besides the UK, the Netherlands and Sweden still keep horse-drawn carriages in use ?
 
Mbruno said:
Does any European monarchy besides the UK, the Netherlands and Sweden still keep horse-drawn carriages in use ?
Click to expand...

Spain keeps horsedrawn carriages in use but the King seldom or never makes use of it. These carriages are used for ambassadors:

An ambassador arrives at the Royal Palace in Madrid: picture So to see this is a coupé (a two seater). In the Netherlands a gala berline (here a picture with coachmen in winter tenue) is used, followed by some standard carriages.
 
The restauration of the golden carriage will cost 1.2 million euros and will take 7 year. This news was announces by stable master Bert Wassenaar. The costs will be paid by the budget of the King.
 
Why is it that everything connected with the Royal House costs a gigantic fortune? The Royal House can buy 30 brand new gala state berlines (picture) for the renovation costs of the Glass State Carriage and the Golden State Carriage (2,4 million Euro).

At the other side, good that the Royal House is so precize with the patrimonium and good that the King manages to pay it from his own budget.
 
:previous:

I payed a visit there to see the barge a week ago,and it is in excellent condition as it is beautifully restored and ready to set to the waters if HM wishes so.
 
Yesterday in the program Blauw Bloed, that soft egg, Jeroen Snel, was mumbling all the time about the costs of restorations of the carriages and the incomes of the Royal House ("How much will their pay-rise be?") while he should have known that the incomes are following the general indexation for civil servants.

Pieter Klein Beernink, the political commentator of De Telegraaf, said it pretty good: "These carriages are works of art. The Rijksmuseum regularly purchases and restores works of art costing far more than this." Some politicians say: "Phew... 1,2 million for a carriage?" Focusing on the means of transportation. Wrong. It is 1,2 million for an eye-catching work of art.

It would not surprise Pieter Klein Berrnink when the King will continue to use the beautiful Glass State Carriage (picture) for Prinsjesdag. Reason: from Willem I to Queen Wilhelmina, this carriage has been used for Prinsjesdag. It is the oldest functional royal state carriage, from the earliest period of the Kingdom. It is therefore the "most historically correct" carriage, an aspect that will speak to the imagination of historian Willem-Alexander.
 
Duc_et_Pair said:
It would not surprise Pieter Klein Berrnink when the King will continue to use the beautiful Glass State Carriage (picture) for Prinsjesdag. Reason: from Willem I to Queen Wilhelmina, this carriage has been used for Prinsjesdag. It is the oldest functional royal state carriage, from the earliest period of the Kingdom. It is therefore the "most historically correct" carriage, an aspect that will speak to the imagination of historian Willem-Alexander.
Click to expand...


Hope that too. This is what comes the Golden State Coach the closest. And it was also restored and refurbished not long ago.

When it comes to the criticism about the costs about the restoration of the golden coach I can only say that it is some sort of a dutch national treasure, a"monument" familiar to so many generations by the dutch people and is a vehicle for the nation itself, not only for the King and Queen! And you wouldn´t let a national building rot down to pieces, would you? I think it isn´t any different here.
The historic impact of the GSC, both in its royal but also its critical aspects, is huge and must certainly be conserved!
 
Last edited:
I think the Golden State Carriage will only be used for royal weddings and jubilees. The restoration will last at least 7 years, if not more. The carriage is completely disassembled. Every item needs to be gilded, the paintings on the doorpanels need to be restored, the technical system (brakes, suspensions, etc.) need to ne renewed, the carriage needs to be refurbished. The costs are paid from the King's regular budget, so it is spread out over more years indeed. When the King does not use the carriage for Prinsjesdag, we may expect Princess Catharina-Amalia to use it on her wedding day.
 
Last edited:
Duc_et_Pair said:
Why is this news in this forum? The Royal House flies with a Fokker 70. The plane is under maintenance by KLM and is operated by pilots from KLM. The Government has announced that because all Fokkers leave the fleet, a new plane will be purchased. No formal decision has been made yet but it is in the line of logic that -for reasons of efficiency, costs and maintenance- it will be an Embraer too.
Click to expand...

Really...not so logic at all...No.The next government aircraft will be a Boeing 737NG.Point.

There will never be a Fokker 100NG or anything close to that,a station long passed in a far past...besides,the present Fokker aircraft are close to 30 years old and do need to retire in this heavy competitive world where modern technology is of the utmost importance.KLM's fleet mainly consists of Boeing aircraft,short and medium haul by 737's.Good choice,allthough I prefer Airbus.
 
Last edited:
I prefer an Airbus too. Because it is European. But actually Fokker (which still exists with 5.000 high-tech workforce but is no independent airplane constructor anymore) delivers for Airbus ánd for Boeing ánd for Embraer. So it will always be okay, I think.

I assume the new plane will have to fit in the KLM maintenance. Recently sparkling new Embraers started their routine in the KLM fleet: picture. So it is not excluded it will be an Embraer indeed.

For the Olympics in Rio, KLM has ordered a special orange livery for a Boeing 777. I thought it looked great. Just tweak it and the King can use it! Picture.
 
Last edited:
Duc_et_Pair said:
I prefer an Airbus too. Because it is European. But actually Fokker (which still exists with 5.000 high-tech workforce but is no independent airplane constructor anymore) delivers for Airbus ánd for Boeing ánd for Embraer. So it will always be okay, I think.

I assume the new plane will have to fit in the KLM maintenance. Recently sparkling new Embraers started their routine in the KLM fleet: picture. So it is not excluded it will be an Embraer indeed.

For the Olympics in Rio, KLM has ordered a special orange livery for a Boeing 777. I thought it looked great. Just tweak it and the King can use it! Picture.
Click to expand...

It's a 737,not a triple 7...way too large an aircraft for us.
Maybe it slipped your mind that HM is busy getting his 737 license too.....:)
 
Last edited:
I meant the orange livery on the KLM plane :). Then the King makes an advertorial as well for KLM.

The Belgians have an Embraer for the King, they should fire the one who did the awful livery: picture.

One would never guess but old communist Aeroflot from Russia makes fabulous liveries for their planes!

A Sukhoi SuperJet in gold and orange (picture).
 
lucien said:
Really...not so logic at all...No.The next government aircraft will be a Boeing 737NG.Point.

There will never be a Fokker 100NG or anything close to that,a station long passed in a far past...besides,the present Fokker aircraft are close to 30 years old and do need to retire in this heavy competitive world where modern technology is of the utmost importance.KLM's fleet mainly consists of Boeing aircraft,short and medium haul by 737's.Good choice,allthough I prefer Airbus.
Click to expand...

KLM's City Hopper uses Embraer regional jets. I traveled in one of those a few times in flights inside Europe.
 
RTL News again tried to stir up the image of a money-swallowing Royal House: the Fokker 70 from the Government Flight Services (picture) will fly without passengers (but with luggage) to Australia for the State Visit.

The King, Queen Máxima, their escorte, the ministerial delegation, etc. will fly separately with KLM. Costs: € 250.000,-- The fractions of the Socialist Party and GreenLeft are staggered and protest against the costs and the pollution caused by this royal travel.

The State Information Agency (RVD) stated that the Fokker 70 is not able to fly to Astralia in one go. It needs several stops to fuel, which would cause the King and his delegation to travel 60 hours to Australia and 60 hours back back. The other airplanes in the State Flight Service are 2 Gulfstream IV business jets and 4 Alouette III helicopters. None of these are suitable for long distance flights.

The RVD stated that in Australia and New Zealand the King and Queen make several stops and then the use of the Fokker comes handy as it is unpractical (and expensive) to use all regional flights "Down Under" with commercial airlines. Also it is "desireable from viewpoint of representation" that the King uses the Fokker indeed.

When the King and Queen went to China, they travelled with KLM as well and the Fokker 70 remained in the Netherlands. The RVD explained: the King and Queen had a program concentrated in and around Beijing. That is a difference with the Austrialia and New Zealand State Visits.

This "problem" will be solved when a new long-range airplane will replace the Fokker 70. One of the conditions is that it needs to reach far destinations in one go.
 
Last edited:
There was consternation when it became clear that not only the government Fokker 70 flew to Down Under without passengers. The consternation went bigger when it became clear the King and his escorte travelled to Australia by Emirates and not by KLM (Royal Dutch Airlines) or its alliance partner Air France.

It seems Emirates had the quickest connection and was cheaper than KLM, so on the first sight a good choice. But the Union of Airline Pilots was very sharp: Emirates is -unlike KLM or Air France- heavily subsidied and is a serious contender to the Groupe Air France/KLM, the biggest airline company in the world.

KLM is so cooperative to let the King fly in their planes to keep his pilot's license. That the King then uses taxpayer's money to fly with one of the biggest (and heavily state-subsidied) competitors to KLM Royal (!) Dutch Airlines has met total non-understanding.

I am afraid the Union of Airline Pilots is right. Possibly the King misses a political or PR antenna. No problem. His Household should have had his antenna. It should have been out of any question that the King of the Netherlands flies with a Dutch airline company, and -when no direct route available- to use KLM's alliance partner Air France.

The King (or his advisers) needs to fine-tune his antenna. That they simply went to Schiphol Amsterdam, studded with blue KLM airliners, and then go into the gate, boarding Emirates! Beyond belief.
 
Duc_et_Pair said:
There was consternation when it became clear that not only the government Fokker 70 flew to Down Under without passengers. The consternation went bigger when it became clear the King and his escorte travelled to Australia by Emirates and not by KLM (Royal Dutch Airlines) or its alliance partner Air France.

It seems Emirates had the quickest connection and was cheaper than KLM, so on the first sight a good choice. But the Union of Airline Pilots was very sharp: Emirates is -unlike KLM or Air France- heavily subsidied and is a serious contender to the Groupe Air France/KLM, the biggest airline company in the world.

KLM is so cooperative to let the King fly in their planes to keep his pilot's license. That the King then uses taxpayer's money to fly with one of the biggest (and heavily state-subsidied) competitors to KLM Royal (!) Dutch Airlines has met total non-understanding.

I am afraid the Union of Airline Pilots is right. Possibly the King misses a political or PR antenna. No problem. His Household should have had his antenna. It should have been out of any question that the King of the Netherlands flies with a Dutch airline company, and -when no direct route available- to use KLM's alliance partner Air France.

The King (or his advisers) needs to fine-tune his antenna. That they simply went to Schiphol Amsterdam, studded with blue KLM airliners, and then go into the gate, boarding Emirates! Beyond belief.
Click to expand...


The VNV,the Union of airline pilots is wrong!!

KLM doesn't fly to Sydney since many years but did so for decades with an ongoing flight to Melbourne and then back to Sydney and onwards to AMS via via many landings..

The VNV needs to tune THEIR antenna!!And,if TM would have flown with KLM,that might very well be seen as a statement in support of the cabin crew which group plans strikes at present.So no.

To fly Air France??Kidding!Out of the question,that would be seen by KLM staff as a stab in the back too.AF Always,ALWAYS,has two or three more cabin crew members on all their long-haul flights then partner and moneymaker of the two,KLM.That,that is cause for a deep resent,ment within the KLM cabin crews...The French talk of "meeting ends and changes in the crew and what they do"but totally fail to do anything to step down on their own but instead try to get AMS slots to move to CDG and,and cash from KLM from AMS to Paris...

No,one flies with them..And Emirates has a great product,so,the choice is easy,was easy.
 
Last edited:
I am afraid the VNV hits the right Trumpian/Wildersian/Brexitian/Le Pen note: the King of the Netherlands steps out of a beautiful royalblue KLM airplane. Period. There is no room for nuance. Maybe you are factual: Emirates is quicker: check. Emirates is better: check. Emirates is cheaper: check. But the Koning der Nederlanden flies with the Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij. Period.

That maybe KLM lands in another city than Emirates, okay. But hey... what was that empty Fokker 70 doing there, all the way down from Amsterdam? The King had his own airline present to bring him to every city in Australia!

No. The King (and especially) his Household need a fine-tuning in their political and PR-antenna.
 
I agree that the royal house should not advise the King to fly a flag of convenience (even an orange livery of EasyJet) of a foreign airline company especially on a state visit. There is perhaps more to this arrangement with Emirates than we know about?
 
In my old-fashioned opinion, I do think for State Visits at least, the country's national airline should be used , if not then the Royal Flight (if such a thing exists) should be used.

Having said that, if KLM does no already fly direct to Sydney, then a) it ought to be and b) it is obvious KLM could no be used as it would be unfair for a special KLM flight to go to Sydney just for one trip.
 
KLM does offer flights to Sydney, occassionally in cooperation with another affilliated airline, but that is quite common in that business afaik

If you're going on a trip that's mainly aimed at promoting trade/economics of your country (and that's what's always mentioned when such a visit takes place) it may be good show to actually use your country's companies :lol:
 
Last edited:
Lee-Z said:
KLM does offer flights to Sydney, occassionally in cooperation with another affilliated airline, but that is quite common in that business afaik

If you're going on a trip that's mainly aimed at promoting trade/economics of your country (and that's what's always mentioned when such a visit takes place) it may be good show to actually use your country's companies :lol:
Click to expand...

:)
Ergo,KLM has to open it's own scheduled flights to Sydney & Auckland instead of flying hip hop from one Skyteam member to another to get there.Many would welcome that.
 
My point is that the King and/or his Household seem to miss a fine antenna for how this sort of faits divers "land" in society. It is really not too difficult to understand that flying a Fokker 70 all the way Down Under (and return) without passengers would raise a stir.

Maybe there are completely logical and reasonable reasons for that, but a monarchy is not about logics and reasonability. It is all an image. Once again the image is set that "the most expensive Royal House of Europe" is swallowing good taxpayers' money: "Look! They just order the royal airplane to fly empty to Australia and New Zealand and back!"

That then this non-understanding is increased that -as an alternative- His Majesty did not fly with the national carrier KLM but with Emirates. Again... probably because of very reasonable and logical reasons, but one really needs a crystal ball to understand that this would fall poorly, PR-wise.

The Court seems out of touch, I must say.
 
Sometimes half the problem is the fact that its takes the media to discover this information rather than it just being announced up front.

I have to say I'm surprised that the Court would allow the King & Queen to fly on another country's flagcarrier for a State Visit (different if it was a private or low key visit). However, its the catch 22 situation isn't it - use the flag carrier and rely on its affiliate - Air France - or take the quicker and cheaper option? However I know a lot of other countries only use national airlines for official travel by royals - the UK royals for example usually stick to BA or at least another UK airline (easyjet or virgin at a push) but there are probably more UK airlines flying further than there are Dutch airlines.

I thought it was quite common for the Fokker to be flown empty to a country for a state visit for use internally - I had read previously that this happened - so is it just a case of the media creating a fuss about something that is usual practice? I have to say it appears wasteful but may save money in the long run and certainly looks better representationally for the Dutch King & Queen to be able to climb onboard their own jet.
 
Last edited:
tommy100 said:
Sometimes half the problem is the fact that its takes the media to discover this information rather than it just being announced up front.

I thought it was quite common for the Fokker to be flown empty to a country for a state visit for use internally - I had read previously that this happened - so is it just a case of the media creating a fuss about something that is usual practice? I have to say it appears wasteful but may save money in the long run and certainly looks better representationally for the Dutch King & Queen to be able to climb onboard their own jet.
Click to expand...


It is and it does tommy100.As I said before,KLM doesn't serve Australia nor New Zealand,and Air France is not an option,any Arab airline provides better and cheaper services then the latter.

Meanwhile the KBX is up for sale on the appropiate site and we're awaiting the introduction of a 737.
 
I'm surprised there are so many photos of the interior... Looks nice!
 
I would make the purchase if I could.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Muhler
Danish Royal and National Flags
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
Tatiana Maria
T
Iluvbertie
  • Locked
British Royal Family Engagements 2014
10 11 12
Replies
332
Views
48K
royal-blue
R
D
  • Locked
Some suggestions on how and where to see the Royal Family in 2012
Replies
14
Views
4K
NGalitzine
N
D
Royal Functions: Garden Parties, Court Presentations
Replies
15
Views
38K
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
E
  • Locked
PLEASE READ: Visitor messages, friends, and social groups
Replies
0
Views
6K
Elspeth
E

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom