Dutch Royal Carriages, Cars, Ships and Airplanes

[Duc_et_Pair]

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.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

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.

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.

[Duc_et_Pair]

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.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

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.

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.....

[Duc_et_Pair]

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).

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by lucien

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.

KLM's City Hopper uses Embraer regional jets. I traveled in one of those a few times in flights inside Europe.

[Duc_et_Pair]

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.

[Duc_et_Pair]

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.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

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.

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.

[Duc_et_Pair]

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.

[Dalriada]

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?

[Jacknch]

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.

[Lee-Z]

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

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Lee-Z

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

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.

[Duc_et_Pair]

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.

[tommy100]

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.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by tommy100

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.

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.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by lucien

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.

Fokker 70 For Sale | Buy a 70 | 293686 | Avbuyer

[tommy100]

I'm surprised there are so many photos of the interior... Looks nice!

[Dman]

I would make the purchase if I could.