Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is BOS A380 Ready?  
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8363 posts, RR: 10
Posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5070 times:

Question says it all. Is the new international terminal (E), able to handle the A380? What about the taxiways?

I know BOS is not expected to see the A380 on a regular basis any time soon but with LH's 3 daily flights (in Summer), consistently packed to the refters and the limited space at BOS, I wonder if LH could someday soon put one of their A380's on the route.

68 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7521 posts, RR: 23
Reply 1, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5013 times:

Being a native New Englander, I can tell you that the taxiways and runways at Logan are not Group VI aircraft compliant. The airport land is basically a man-made pennisula. Personally, I don't think an upgrade will ever happen. Look how long it has taken to advance the Runway 14-32 project (nearly 30 years for a runway to handle up to Group III aircraft) and the ground-breaking for it hasn't even started yet.

[Edited 2005-02-17 16:50:35]


"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineTockeyhockey From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 950 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4966 times:

who would fly an a380 to boston? it's not exactly a superhub. BWI and PHL are busier than BOS, and i couldn't see an a380 flying to either of those airports either!

User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4952 times:

Quoting Tockeyhockey (reply 2):
who would fly an a380 to boston?


I've been to many LH B744 flights between BOS and FRA and, I'm telling you, they have always been packed. And I don't even remember that last time LH was not asking for volunteers to board a later flight.

But, seriously, Logan is a loooooong way from being A380-ready. The taxiways and gates are one problem. The limited number of immigration desks is another. I have to admit that, when I read the subject of the post, I bursted out laughing!  Wink/being sarcastic

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineRj111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4952 times:

BOS-LHR/FRA could possibly justify an A380 at peak periods.

Edit: 13 seconds too slow  Sad

[Edited 2005-02-17 17:21:16]

User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8363 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4932 times:

I know where you're coming from, I'm a Bostonian myself however, the fact that it is a man made peninsula has nothing to do with it. From what I understand, weight is not an issue. And also, there is a big difference between construction that will promote traffic increase (new runway), vesus construction that promotes traffic reduction (1 LH flight vs. 2)  Smile

User currently offlineBOSSAN From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 255 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4912 times:

On the jetway side, Terminal E is the same terminal that's been in use since the early 80's. There's a proposal to add 3 jetways on a finger to the west, when demand increases. The terminal was designed for 747 spacing on some jetways. PHLBOS is right about the airport's size; it's about 2400 acres total, and changes can get caught up in neighborhood distrust of the port authority. (I remember a statistic that DEN is larger than the city limits of Boston, which has 590,000 residents and BOS)

If Lufthansa is filling their 3 flights per day in the summer, I'm sure they're happy. I believe that's 2 A343s to FRA and 1 A343 to MUC. In previous summers they've run as many as 2 A333s to MUC; during the winter the schedule drops to 1 747 to FRA.

I think Lufthansa has huge potential with upgauging their existing service before requiring an A380; going to 747s to FRA or 2 MUC dailies would add capacity, and if United and Lufthansa are revenue sharing over the Atlantic United could resurrect its BOS-LHR dailies (at the cost of reacquiring slots) and send some traffic onward on BMI.


User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8363 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4903 times:

SNATH, ence my question. I'm not familiar with the detail butI'd would think that the gate and immigration issue would be resolved during the modernization of terminal E.

And Tockeyhockey, I guess you didn't read my post. Hint: LH = Lufthansa. Hate to burst your buble but BOS gets more international passengers than BWI and PHL combined. And also, the A380 is not for hub-to-hub travel, no matter what Boeing says. Name one A380 customer (except LH), that has more than one hub. A big fat zero.


User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8363 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4891 times:

BOSSAN, I suppose when LH does get their A380's that will free up a few 747's for routes like BOS. You have a point there. Oh well.


User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 9, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4883 times:

From what I've heard Massport does want to make Logan A380 capable.

As for who would fly it...hard to say. Many airlines seem to prefer frequency to capacity. Although LH could offer 1xFRA and 1xMUC during the summer with the former on an A380 and the latter on an A330/340 I think they like being able to offer the consumer two flights to FRA and one to MUC.

BA is another airline that could also get away with using the 380 (if they ever order any) on it's flights, but again BA like being able to give passengers a choice of a morning, early evening, and night departures.

AF could also use the capacity, but as far as I can tell the 380 will be a three-class aircraft, something that AF will no longer be offering in Boston eventually (partially why we no longer see the 777).

As for airport capacity issues, the immigration and customs issues won't exist as much with three new baggage carousels and over 40 immigration positions to be open by the time the A380 starts flying commercially. The main problem I see is the wingspan and the relative compactness (is that a word?) of the gates.

For the foreseeable future I'd say that the only A380s landing in BOS would be diversions from JFK.

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4883 times:

Quoting BOSSAN (reply 6):
(I remember a statistic that DEN is larger than the city limits of Boston, which has 590,000 residents and BOS)

Yes, but DEN was actually built in the middle of nowhere, and over an hour's drive from Denver, where there was lots and lots of space. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be an option for the city of Boston.

Quoting BOSSAN (reply 6):
I believe that's 2 A343s to FRA and 1 A343 to MUC; during the winter the schedule drops to 1 747 to FRA.

This is correct. And I have been on all of them! But note that it's 1 very full 747 to FRA.

Quoting BOSSAN (reply 6):
United could resurrect its BOS-LHR dailies (at the cost of reacquiring slots) and send some traffic onward on BMI.

Oh the memories... I had done GLA-BOS through LHR many many times (when I lived in Glasgow). Shame they killed it. If I remember, the flights were mostly full too. I only remember one very empty flight (it was the BOS to LHR leg in the middle of the week).

Quoting Airbazar (reply 7):
I'd would think that the gate and immigration issue would be resolved during the modernization of terminal E.

During the modernization? I thought they had finished it. Seriously, are they still doing work on Terminal E?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8363 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4824 times:

During the modernization? I thought they had finished it. Seriously, are they still doing work on Terminal E?

Yes. They haven't quite finished the arrivals floor, and they haven't even started with the immigration section. At least that was the state it was the last time I went through it last October.


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4811 times:

Quoting Airbazar (reply 11):

Thanks for the info! This is actually good news. I actually really like the new departures area, but the luggage reclaim and immigration are pretty pathetic. Once my LH flight from FRA arrived just behind two other widebodies from Europe and we spent ages waiting in the plane, followed by more queueing at the immigration area. I really hope they are going to improve it (i.e. enlarge it) soon.

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7521 posts, RR: 23
Reply 13, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4806 times:

Quoting LH423 (reply 9):
From what I've heard Massport does want to make Logan A380 capable.


LH423,

Massport may want to want to have BOS Group VI aircraft compliant (heck, if they had it their way even BED would be Group VI aircraft compliant), but that doesn't meant that it's going to happen. Again, I point to the smaller Runway 14-32 project that was first conceived when I was 10 years old and you weren't even born yet. You must've read the Globe and/or Herald articles over the years on this project about the surrounding towns as well as former Gov. Mike Dukakis fighting Massport on this. What makes you think that they will roll over and play dead to Massport planning on a much larger scale project undertaking?

People, this has been mentioned on nearly every A380 airport thread; but I see that it needs to be mentioned again. With the A380, we are not dealing with the same scenario that airports nationwide faced when the 747 came out in the early to mid 1970s. Back then, every airline was upgrading their equipment to what we now call mainline jets and nearly every major carrier had at least one 747 in their fleet. Also, land acquisitions for airport/airfield expansion were a lot cheaper back then; read, less environmental permits to file and regulations to abide by. Plus the NIMBY factors was only just beginning to have a major influence over major construction projects. Keep in mind that it was in the '70s that Gov. Dukakis signed the now-infamous expansion moratorium at BOS.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8363 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4759 times:

What makes you think that they will roll over and play dead to Massport planning on a much larger scale project undertaking?

Just a thought here, but like I said, the runway contruction project promotes traffic increase while the Group VI aircraft compliance project promotes traffic decrease. They're contradicting projects so if these people really believe what they're preaching how are they going to oppose it? I don't think they'll lose risking both battles. I think they'll stick to their original battle and yes, roll over and play dead  Smile

By the way, I don't see how it is a much larger project. We're talking about increasing the turning radius on the taxi ways and larger spacing at 1 or 2 gates. That sounds like minor cosmetic changes to me, unless there's something more I'm missing.

Let me ask you this. Can the AN-225 operate at BOS. Has anyone ever seen the AN-225 at BOS? If yes, than I'd think that the runway/taxiway issue is a moot point.

I know, I'm beating a dead horse here. Sorry  Smile


User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1596 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4700 times:

There is a big difference between reinforcing, widening, and upgrading an existing runway to allow group VI aircraft than what it took 30 years to get an approval to build a new runway...

NIMBY can't say much on improving existing runways as this won't increase traffic. NIMBY can not prevent a QC2 compliant A380 land in BOS but lack of runway will and terminal space.

Whether or not Terminal E is able to support the A380 is another question... and my gut feeling is a big fat NO and it would take an additional investment that massport doesn't have. NW and JetBlue will leave Terminal E soon so it should free up this terminal to support larger planes or additional flights...

But time will tell... the A380 still has to prove herself....



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7521 posts, RR: 23
Reply 16, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4667 times:

Quoting Airbazar (reply 14):
We're talking about increasing the turning radius on the taxi ways and larger spacing at 1 or 2 gates. That sounds like minor cosmetic changes to me, unless there's something more I'm missing.

Let me ask you this. Can the AN-225 operate at BOS. Has anyone ever seen the AN-225 at BOS? If yes, than I'd think that the runway/taxiway issue is a moot point.


The big issue with Group VI aircraft like the A380 and the AN-225 (to my knowledge, I've never seen nor heard of any AN-225s ever being at BOS) is taxiway/taxiway and runway/taxiway spacing. The attached pdf file is the FAA Advisory Circular that covers airport design.
http://www.faa.gov/arp/pdf/5300-13.pdf
Chapters 2, 3, & 4 deal specifically with runway and taxiway sizes, layouts, distances, etc. for each Design Group Aircraft (which are defined by wing-span ranges).

In short, if the runways and taxiways have to be reconfigured to allow for wider spacing distances, you are indeed talking about expanding the peninsula; the folks at East Boston and Winthrop are really gonna love that!.

Speaking as one who's actually worked on airport projects, there many behind the scenes items that take place long before the first shovel hits the ground. The environmental impact statements and permitting process for such an expansion project of this magnitude being just only two of them.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineBOSSAN From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 255 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4636 times:

Taxiways look like much more of an issue than runways -- specifically, the clearance between the aircraft stands, taxiways A and K around the terminal area, and runways 15R-33L and 4R-22L are tight. If there's a chance of the wingtip of an A380 striking something, either the taxiways and runways would need to be moved, or all other aircraft would need to be moved off of the taxiways. Increasing this clearance would require moving three of the four 7000+ foot runways, which goes far beyond upgrading existing runways. That's on top of the current requirement for 200' wide runways (those four are 150').

Evacuating all other aircraft from the taxiways and adjacent runways sounds acceptable in a diversion emergency, but not as a multiple-times-per-day measure.


User currently offlineKBOS From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 429 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4603 times:

I don't recall an AN-225 ever coming to Logan, but his little brother has paid a visit.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Garfinkel




I don't care if the sun don't shine, I do my drinkin in the evening time when I'm in Rhode Island
User currently offlineBOSugaDL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4551 times:

I have my doubts about seeing an A380 pax version in BOS....but what about FX bringing it to town some day? FX's cargo ramp doesn't seem to be all that big at BOS and they bring DC/MD-10's and A300's all the time...If there is every an increase in FX ops at BOS it doesn't seem like they could expand the ramp, so why not bring in the big boy?...just my 2 cents

...but just to add to what someone else said, in reality I think the only time the A380 will be seen in BOS will be because of a JFK diversion


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4545 times:

Quoting Airbazar (reply 7):
And also, the A380 is not for hub-to-hub travel, no matter what Boeing says. Name one A380 customer (except LH), that has more than one hub.

Thus only showing that you misunderstand what both Boeing AND AIRBUS mean by hub-hub.

Not repositioning, but the fact that the aircraft will be mostly limited to airports with very heavy feed on both end.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 21, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4529 times:

and over an hour's drive from Denver, where there was lots and lots of space.

It has not ever taken me more than 25 minutes to drive from downtown Denver to DEN under any traffic conditions.

N


User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7521 posts, RR: 23
Reply 22, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4507 times:

Quoting KBOS (reply 18):
I don't recall an AN-225 ever coming to Logan, but his little brother has paid a visit.


Quote from the photograph (bold emphasis added):
a Volga-Dnepr (Heavy Lift) Antonov 124 lands at Boston's Runway33. Not usually allowed in Boston, the behemoth was chartered by a Boston Freight Forwarding company to transport 2 18,000lbs printing presses.

While the Antonov is a Group VI aircraft (232 foot wingspan), its being in BOS on January 2000 is a rare case exception. I'm sure that all other plane traffic was steered away from the Antonov 124's movement paths.
Quoting BOSSAN (reply 17):
Evacuating all other aircraft from the taxiways and adjacent runways sounds acceptable in a diversion emergency, but not as a multiple-times-per-day measure.


I agree.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 23, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4409 times:

Actually, while not a common occurance, the AN-124 can now be seen in Boston a few times a year. It's tight but I watched one take off. I think the biggest problem with the AN-124 is the runway length, not wingspan clearance. Actually, in 2004 I must have seen the AN-124 about 3-5 times.

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlinePvd757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3413 posts, RR: 16
Reply 24, posted (9 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4390 times:

From a semi-reliable source, Fedex has thought about bringing in their A380 in place of two MD-11s. They supposedly hold similar amounts ( 2 versus 1) and would help free up for more int'l routes. I don't know how this would affect traffic; it would depend on when they operated. What Logan can do is get a waiver of use that would allow the aircraft to operate. They would just have to restrict use around the aircraft while it taxis and while it utilizes a runway for ops.

25 Avianca : lh flights are always full, can remember 10 year ago when I used LH on the FRA-BOS rout, they had just one A-340-200 per day on this route, now 3 A340
26 MQrampBOS : If only Massport could just start over.... Since they can't build an island in the middle of Massachusetts Bay or flatten Framingham, they're going to
27 VS11 : I can see Massport making the necessary investment (if it is just up to the money) for A380. In addition to FedEx, VS, LH, BA can very easily fill in
28 PHLBOS : Excuse me, but the last time the airfield at BOS was expanded (sometime during either the '40s, '50s, or '60s), the peninsula was indeed expanded. As
29 Post contains images Airbazar : VS11, that's the way I'm thinking. BOS's space limitations are one of the selling points for the A380, along with slot restricted airports. There's no
30 Zrs70 : Actually, Terminal E was completed in the 70's! But the pointis still valid!
31 Post contains links and images KBOS : And here is Terminal E's first visitor...thanks to my Mom for letting me skip school and be there that day. View Large View MediumPhoto © James R
32 Post contains images Airbazar : I agree that Boston is NIMBY heaven, I'm one of them. But I'd pay higher taxes to make BOS A380 ready, and support a new runway The people who oppose
33 PHLBOS : Airbazar, Don't be so sure of that. It was NIMBY's (along with Fred Salvucci) that forced then-Gov. Frank Sargent to cancel the Inner Belt (I-695) an
34 ScottB : No, there are clearly several alternatives to deal with increased passenger traffic demand from the Boston area; i.e.: * Continuing "regionalization"
35 VS11 : What is/are NIMBY? I do not want BOS moved away, it is so convenient to get to. It is practically in the city, and the view from Castle Island is grea
36 RayChuang : Folks, I don't see BOS getting the A380-800 anytime soon. There just isn't enough high-density long-range traffic to justify using the A388 there, unl
37 PHLBOS : Not In My BackYard.
38 Post contains links and images Eilennaei : LH423 wrote: "I think the biggest problem with the AN-124 is the runway length," If we're talking about an airport with an elevation of 19ft and a run
39 PHLBOS : Since WN came to PVD & MHT, more people have been utilizing these airports as an alternative to BOS; especially on routes where the fares out of PVD
40 Bkonner : I agree VS11. I love Logan. I live in the North End, and its great to have the airport so close. I would never consider flying out of PVD. Not enough
41 LH423 : [quote=RayChuang,reply=36]There just isn't enough high-density long-range traffic to justify using the A388 there, unlike JFK, MIA, MCO, LAX and SFO[/
42 BOSSAN : I don't think that Logan, or the airlines serving Boston, need the A380. The terminal configuration is not the main issue with use of the A380; the ru
43 MQrampBOS : Try during the 70s. There's a pile at the end of one of the runways (can't remember which one) that can't be removed because it alters the border. Yo
44 Post contains images Iwok : Being a former Boston resident for 10-years, I can tell you that it often took me over 45 minutes to drive or T-it to the airport, from WITHIN the ci
45 LH423 : Of course...but it depends on where you're coming from. When I lived at home downtown, it never took me more than 35 minutes door-to-door. That means
46 PHLBOS : A back issue of Airliners magazine had an article covering the history of BOS. To my knowledge, there was no mention of the landfill pile that you sp
47 Airbazar : The A380 is designed with huge amounts of room inside intended for first-class seating, while many of the flights out of Boston only have business and
48 PHLBOS : In addition to Boston itself, the real estate rates for both central and eastern Masschusetts as well are way off the map; and have been for several
49 Flpuck6 : BA has 4-class service to LHR. They have the only 4-class service anyway. LH has 3-class service to FRA. They are consistently full. Their MUC service
50 JGPH1A : Hmmm - BOS is barely A340 ready ! Terminal E would need to be knocked down and rebuilt to get an A380 in there. FIS and departure area facilities can
51 LH423 : JGPH1A: Currently, that's correct. But by the time the A380 comes into service (much less actually serves Boston) there will be over 40 immigration bo
52 JGPH1A : Thanks for the info, LH423 - I really hope they can finally finish Terminal E, going through immigration has been hell for the last 1.5-2 years, havin
53 Airbazar : I still think they should have done a lot more with Terminal E. The check-in area could be bigger, and they should have gone forward with the new gate
54 LH423 : Yeah...it has been bad. The reason for that is that they're redoing the immigration hall one half at a time. The new section is just about to open so
55 SNATH : Thanks for the info re: immigration hall. I was not aware that they were still working on it. It's great news, as its current state is a bit miserabl
56 BOSSAN : FLpuck6, thanks for the list of services. NW/KL's A330 (ex-DC-10) to AMS is also 2-class. My general observation, LH423, is that the airlines have bee
57 Airbazar : My general observation, LH423, is that the airlines have been tuning their international services for maximum profit margin. Boston has certainly had
58 SNATH : Is this correct? As far as I know it went up to a B747 from an A340 during the winter and it's two A340s during the summer. Tony
59 Airbazar : I guess it depends on how you look at it. For a few years it was 1x747 + 1xA340 in the Summer. Now it's 2xA340's in Summer. To me that's a seasonal re
60 LH423 : As noted, LH never had double daily MUC service. Since the beginning MUC has always been seasonal. However, where it becomes more difficult to say wha
61 BOSSAN : LH423, thank you for correcting me on the Lufthansa and American flights; I must have mistaken proposed schedules for actuals in both cases. I realize
62 Post contains images LH423 : Well, why didn't you just say so? We could have saved ourselves so much time writing out these disserations! Then of COURSE Massport will do it. Anyt
63 Flpuck6 : LH423, I was referring to service from BOSTON! You know that I know that BA has 777s which are higher density and that the 763s are 2-class w/o PTVs!
64 Flpuck6 : By the way everyone, A new part of Immigration just opened ... they debuted the first half of the brand new immigration lanes within the past few days
65 Post contains images Airbazar : I was merely attempting to emphasize that now is not a peak in Boston's transatlantic capacity. It's very arguable, I'll give you that, but according
66 Post contains images MQrampBOS : Thanks for the update. Which issue of Airliners magazine was it? I'd like to read it myself. Also, I did a little research into this one. Under 43 US
67 MQrampBOS : I'd agree with you here, but where can we put it? There aren't really any viable areas in the region. Anything inside 495 is pretty much developed, s
68 PHLBOS : It was the Sept./Oct. 2002 issue. I'm not sure of the volume number. The front cover shows a TAM A340 in flight with a small photo of BOS off to the
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is LAX A380 Ready? posted Sat Oct 29 2005 20:27:50 by Kaitak744
AKL Is A380-ready posted Mon May 22 2006 23:36:47 by Jafa39
Is The 2nd A380 Ready To Fly Yet? posted Mon Jun 27 2005 14:34:10 by Nomad
Is Your Home Airport A380 Ready? posted Sun Mar 7 2004 13:11:39 by Qantasclub
Is Federal Express Hub-Memphis Airport A380-ready? posted Mon Jul 22 2002 00:14:29 by Bobcat
Is The A380 Available To Early For Its Market? posted Tue Oct 17 2006 11:06:45 by Grantcv
Is The A380 Coming To South Africa This Week? posted Sun Sep 17 2006 15:14:18 by Andz
STL New Runway A380 Ready? posted Fri Sep 15 2006 17:31:53 by PropilotJW
When Is The A380 Going Into Service posted Thu Aug 17 2006 14:22:48 by Rw774477
Why Is BOS-CDG Seasonal? posted Sun Apr 30 2006 03:06:29 by FURUREFA