Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Future Airbus A380 Versions, A380-900 LR?  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 30877 times:

Airbus indicates it plans to build the A380 for 40 years (like the 747)

A & B predict the market will triple in the next 20 years, most of the growth will be in Asia.

The 747 evolved from the -100 into the 200, 300 and -400, with combi & freight versions being added. Likely 747 adv passenger & freight versions will follow.



Airbus sofar has offered the -800 in passenger & freight versions. The -900 will probably be offered not to far down the road.

What future versions will be offered first in the next 20 years?

IMO a -900LR versions would be likely to move ~500-600 people on very long distances like Europe- Australia, Middle East-USA, Australia - Northern part of North America etc. in a physically acceptable way (DVT etc.)

A Combi version has been discussed many times, a shortened vesion seems unlikely; to expensive to make it light enough. Any other ideas?

63 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 30825 times:

A380-900 perhaps.
A380-700 doubtful.


User currently offlineDCrawley From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 371 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 30555 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
a -900LR versions would be likely to move ~500-600 people on very long distances like Europe- Australia, Middle East-USA, Australia - Northern part of North America etc. in a physically acceptable way (DVT etc.)

Wow, the thought of that sends shivers down my spine! The 747 is more than large enough for me on long trips when full, but to add all those other bodies on a flying tube? Sounds like a good way to raise the odds of getting sick or listening to a couple more babies cry (lol). But, best of luck to anyone who wants to fly one!

-D.K. Crawley



"Weather at our destination is 50 degrees with some broken clouds, but they'll try to have them fixed before we arrive."
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17017 posts, RR: 67
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 30134 times:

Quoting DCrawley (Reply 4):

Wow, the thought of that sends shivers down my spine! The 747 is more than large enough for me on long trips when full, but to add all those other bodies on a flying tube? Sounds like a good way to raise the odds of getting sick or listening to a couple more babies cry (lol). But, best of luck to anyone who wants to fly one!

It probably won't feel larger than the 744 since it's divided into two rather separate decks.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineKL808 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 30113 times:

wasnt there rumor that EK wanted to order a bunch of A380-900's?

Drew



AMS-LAX-MNL
User currently offlineIluv2pilot From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 30105 times:

I heard they're going to develop the A380ATW model. It's going to be able to take off and fly around the world non-stop. For example, let's say you want to go to JFK from JFK. You take off in the A380ATW and you land back at JFK 24 hours later.

It's only a matter of time before we can fly around teh world non-stop and end up where we started.


User currently offlineKennyK From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 30080 times:

Don't see the A380 that popular in 20 years  eyebrow 
Passenger numbers will at least double in 20 years, in some markets numbers will treble or quadruple, especially Asia, where the A380 is selling very well at the moment.

In 20 years the A380 will be so popular you won't be able to move at the major airports without walking into one they WILL be that popular because the A380 will be the only aircraft available to move so many passengers out of congested airports  crowded 


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6484 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 29907 times:

Quoting Iluv2pilot (Reply 8):
I heard they're going to develop the A380ATW model. It's going to be able to take off and fly around the world non-stop. For example, let's say you want to go to JFK from JFK. You take off in the A380ATW and you land back at JFK 24 hours later.

It's only a matter of time before we can fly around teh world non-stop and end up where we started.

I assume this is a joke. If not, would you care to defend the business case on this one?



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineSAS330GOT From Sweden, joined May 2004, 252 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 29687 times:

There is only one problem and that is the situation with oil. How much will it cost and how much will there be. The A380 is better in a economic way as you move more passengers to and that means less oil per passenger. But with new technology like the 787 it has similar numbers because of efficient engines. But neither will fly when there is no more fuel to run the engines.

I think the A380 will be popular at hubs and 787 between small airports like GOT connecting small cities with big once. Routes like GOT - EWR or GOT - MSP but at the same time on the FL410 crossing the pond there is going to be a A380 doing CDG - JFK or AMS - LAX. Both models are going to be extremely popular as they are needed.

What I forgot with any of the big airplane manufactures is to create the A380-800 LF (Low fuel) so it can fly on less amount of fuel or on another kind of fuel.

[Edited 2005-07-11 21:20:38]

User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10000 posts, RR: 96
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 29620 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
IMO a -900LR versions would be likely to move ~500-600 people on very long distances like Europe- Australia

Answering your original question, I think there's a good chance of an LR version of the A380 some day.

GE/P+W alliance have already committed to a "GenX"'d GP7200 to be in service within 5 years (presumably bringing the appropriate fuel consumption improvements) This was quoted by GE at the Paris Air Show.
RR will have to follow (if anything it's even easier for RR, in my view - a "Trent 1000'd" Trent 900 is, wait for it - a Trent 1000..).

Qantas have clearly stated that they're very interested in the hub-busting abilities of the 772LR. I would expect that if the 772LR proves the case for that length of sector, in that market, you'll see a Long Range A380 from Airbus.

Factor in a significant MTOW increase (already designed in), significantly more efficient engines (being planned already), and a progressive increase in the amount of composites used, and you might quite easily see a 9 500+ Nm range A380 in the next 7-8 years. Maybe not the biggest seller, though.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6):
It probably won't feel larger than the 744 since it's divided into two rather separate decks.

If anything, the A380 has to be the ideal ULR aircraft - so much real estate gives you endless options for passenger comfort/space per passenger etc.


User currently offlineBoeing Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 29291 times:

Quoting KL808 (Reply 4):
wasnt there rumor that EK wanted to order a bunch of A380-900's?

Yes. They've made it known that if the -900 were available now, they would cancell a lot of -800's and get the -900's instead.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 28550 times:

IMO the A380-900 would be an option for "can´t avoid" customers like BA, CX and JAL. They could introduce them on high density routes. B744s (adv) can become too small / expensive when traffic triples & hubs get slot restricted. Those airlines perhaps would skip the -800..

The -900 could theoretically fit 800-1000 passengers, an LR version of a flag carrier would require "living room" for it´s passengers similar to e.g. SQ´s 38 inch pitch 7 abreast economy class A340-500´s.

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00005513.jpg
B A MacDonald has some powerful software & creativity.. Great job, click the pic to see details..

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifieda...earch/photo_search.php?id=00005513

[Edited 2005-07-12 00:12:23]

[Edited 2005-07-12 00:14:17]

User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 28237 times:

Great work done on the A390 BA photo..but The WhaleJet with a BA logo ain't happenin' for a long time (if ever)  no 


"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 28114 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 9):
If anything, the A380 has to be the ideal ULR aircraft - so much real estate gives you endless options for passenger comfort/space per passenger etc.

Of this only makes the key ultralong haul dilemma worse: all that real estate requires more fuel to move, which means higher prices throughout the cabin. You aren't going to get that many more premium customers for a ULH VLA, so you will have to put in even more economy seats in a ultra longhaul VLA . If the higher prices attracts less economy passengers, you have less revenue to spread costs over. It makes me think the other direction might be the way to go, with a 788LR or 789LR or A358LR, with seating biased heavily towards first and business class seats.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5566 posts, RR: 36
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 28110 times:

This picture of the BA 380 is great. The most beautifull BA livery I have ever seen.

User currently offlineYUL332LX From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 28051 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 12):
Great work done on the A390 BA photo..but The WhaleJet with a BA logo ain't happenin' for a long time (if ever)

That's right, BA is not likely to operate the A390 anytime soon.  Wink

Airbus has already indicated that the A380-900 will feature the strengthened wing and structure of the A380F. An extra-range version of the A380-800 would most likely be based on the structure of the A380F too.



E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 968 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 28024 times:

>> IMO a -900LR versions would be likely to move ~500-600 people on very long distances like Europe- Australia, Middle East-USA, Australia - Northern part of North America etc. in a physically acceptable way (DVT etc.)

Keesje, a major consideration of DVT is not trip duration, but cabin pressure. A thinner atmosphere and lower oxygen concentrations puts far more stress on the circulatory system than remaining still for a long time.

If this "catches on," the A388 will be at quite a disadvantage to the 787 and A350 which will both feature higher pressure cabins and simmilar (or greater) range to the A388.


User currently offlineYUL332LX From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 27910 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 16):
Keesje, a major consideration of DVT is not trip duration, but cabin pressure. A thinner atmosphere and lower oxygen concentrations puts far more stress on the circulatory system than remaining still for a long time.

Indeed but the 772LR and 74A have or will have the very same problem. We'll have to wait and see how airlines cope with this issue.

SQ seems to be doing pretty well in this regard.



E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
User currently onlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9769 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 27841 times:

Wow, that BA Olympic A380 is indeed a very nice one. As to BA ordering the A380, I don't know. Who knows, but looking at the fact that LHR is one of the most congested airports it might happen somewhere in the future. In anyway LHR will be A380 paradise Big grin

A388


User currently offlineQFA001 From Australia, joined May 2000, 673 posts, RR: 54
Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 27820 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
IMO a -900LR versions would be likely to move ~500-600 people on very long distances like Europe- Australia, Middle East-USA, Australia - Northern part of North America etc. in a physically acceptable way (DVT etc.)

Whilst I personally like the idea, as Astuteman pointed out, the A380 would need to benefit from improved technologies for a "-900LR" to be able to fly 9,500nm+ segments. It would mean an effective improvement in range of >30%. So, an "-800LR" is a more realistic goal in the next 20-yrs than a "-900LR".

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 9):
If anything, the A380 has to be the ideal ULR aircraft - so much real estate gives you endless options for passenger comfort/space per passenger etc.

FWIW, I agree and disagree. An "A380LR" would at least be an ideal airplane to link hubs that are separated by very long distances (eg. BOM-LAX, LON-SYD). However, most potential ULR routes won't be conducive to such a large airplane (at least for daily operations). Over time, of course, more and more ULR routes will be conducive to the A380. In the end, that might be the impetus for Airbus to go-ahead with such a product?


User currently offlineSparkingWave From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 670 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 27784 times:

I think the A380 will have more competition in the future. Who knows what will happen?

Will it be like the 747? No. When the 747 came out in 1969-70, it didn't have a 777 or an A340 to compete with it. The DC-10 and L1011 came out shortly afterwards, but did not directly compete with the 747 in the same way the 774 and A340 does today.

Will the A380 last 40 years? It could happen, but what Boeing will come up with in the next 10-20 years (all-composite fuselage, bleedless engines, single-pilot avionics) makes me wonder just how successfully it will last...

And I'm both an Airbus and Boeing fan, so this isn't an A vs. B comment.
(more like an "Airbus don't kick back and sit on your laurels" comment)...

Sparkingwave



Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21505 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 27781 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 16):
Keesje, a major consideration of DVT is not trip duration, but cabin pressure. A thinner atmosphere and lower oxygen concentrations puts far more stress on the circulatory system than remaining still for a long time.

Who says? DVT comes from sitting in a confined position for a long amount of time, and is just as likely for someone with a broken leg or who can't move around much as it is for an airline pax. So offering room to move about on a ULR plane is key. Devoting more space to lounges and pax movement spaces would help greatly. An extra 1000 feet altitude won't do much.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAmy From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 1150 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 27371 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00005513.jpg

I hope this never happens. I don't want BA to order the A380. Being the largest 747-400 operator in the world I'd be suprised if BA did not go for the 747ADV instead... but that's another thread.

Personally I don't see the A380 lasting 40 years and here's why:

The 747 came about in an age where Jet aviation was still a reasonably unknown quantity. Before the 747 there were no widebody passanger jets. The 747 gas grown and developed to meet different needs for different airlines and remains as the most versatile commercial jet available with over 20 different models not including engine choices. In the times we live in now I don't think there is the room that the 747 had to dominate it's market. There are too many alternatives, both in the same class (747adv, although it is smaller) and point to point operations instead of large volume hub to hub. This is why I always have maintained that the A380 will not be a giant success and this is why I continue to do so.

There is also the fact that the A380 requires the airports it operates to to be modified so they can successfully operate it and this, in my opinion, is a hindrance to it's commercial success.



A340-300 - slow, but awesome!
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 23, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 27323 times:

Quoting YUL332LX (Reply 15):

That's right, BA is not likely to operate the A390 anytime soon

lol..my bad..I stand corrected, but the A380 isn't going to get ordered either by BA!



"Up the Irons!"
User currently onlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9769 posts, RR: 11
Reply 24, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 27297 times:

Quoting Amy (Reply 22):
There is also the fact that the A380 requires the airports it operates to to be modified so they can successfully operate it and this, in my opinion, is a hindrance to it's commercial success.

Didn't the 747 have the same situation when it came out for the first time? Look at how many 747s we see flying around these days. Why can't the A380 have the same? If airlines see the benefits of a A380 sized aircraft and order more of them, airports will adapt to that, just like how the 747 did in its time. I keep saying the same thing to people who argue that the A380 won't become as succesful because airports can't handle an aircraft of its size and have to invest a lot to be able to handle the A380. The A380 may not be that succesful yet, but over time the aircraft will become a regular sight at more airports, just like how the 747 became a normal sight at many airports nowadays. I just don't see the arguments of airports not being able to succesfully handle the A380 (or any other aircraft in its class) as that much of a success factor or hindrance for these aircraft. Over time these aircraft will be handled. Once airports see the demand for these large aircraft increase, they will invest for it. Handling these aircraft is a matter of time and not a matter of hindrance.

A388


25 Post contains images Cpsarras : Agreed. The A380 and variants will be succesfull, becaue large volume is the way for the future as it stands right now, if we do not come up with alt
26 Atmx2000 : There is a cost to just passengers fly long distances on VLAs flying to a few super hubs though, as you have to have more connecting flights to move
27 QFA001 : The A380 won't be the fuel efficiency king of the skies. The A350-800/900, 747Adv (if launched), B777-300ER and B787-8/9 will or do burn less fuel pe
28 Post contains images Lehpron : What is the point of going more than half-way round? Might as well go the other way with shorter range. Besides, if you wanted to go around the world
29 Astuteman : How about an alternative view - a 380-900 high density, ULTRA SHORT-RANGE version, (maybe even a new, smaller wing, lower TOW?), to ferry all our Indi
30 Ken777 : I don''t believe that the 380 is the holy grail for slot restricted airports - establishing a minimum size plane is. I've been at LHR and seen a small
31 Post contains images Starlionblue : Who cares as long as they pay for the slot? If the carrier wants to "waste" the slot like that, why not? The BAA could, of course, make it more conve
32 PM : Iluv2pilot, yeah, I've heard the same rumour. But apparently Qantas are concerned because they could only fly SYD-SYD eastbound. Even the A380ATW wou
33 Post contains images SAS330GOT : But it will be flying.... A lower payload is better then being a beer can. How about a Nuclear reactor onboard. That would be efficient. Fly for a de
34 Bolter : Interesting discussion going on here. I see everyone discussing the price of oil and how it is going to raise in the future. But does anyone know how
35 Post contains images BlueSky1976 : You mean A380? Well, I could see it with a BA logo happening in the next 10 years... If Virgin is successfull with it, BA will be stupid not to order
36 Post contains images Morvious : Well, It will depend how other Airliners will do it on the LHR route, like SAA, Qantas, Emirates, Singapore, Malaysia and Virgin. Also, other countri
37 Starlionblue : Not officially launched, but probably proposed (not offered) to the airlines.
38 N79969 : Despite Airbus's (and Keesje's) wishful thinking, I think it is very far from inevitable that JAL, BA, and CX will purchase the A380.
39 Boeing7E7 : Aviation fuel burn is really quite minor in the grand scheme of things. Furthermore, initial burn numbers for the 380 and 787 indicate per pax fuel b
40 SAS330GOT : I agree very well with you. The idea plane is one where you are 35 people on a area of a A380 and have each a little room. But no matter if a 787 or
41 Post contains links and images Keesje : - JAL, BA, and CX fly to all the worlds hubs from their hubs at this moment - the passenger market will probably triple in the next 20 years - the ai
42 HighFlyer9790 : I doubt that BA will ever order the A380-it would hurt its ties with Boeing. I totally agree!
43 Post contains links and images Keesje : View Large View MediumPhoto © Anthony Osborne Personally I have the feeling network requirements and sharp purchasing deals are more important f
44 Sllevin : Except that you are overlooking the net cost of moving people. In other words, someone flying EDI-LHR-LAX-PHX could well be costlier that flying EDI-
45 Boeing7E7 : A 787 has two 70,000 thrust class engines, an A-380 has 4. The Specific fuel consumption on each of the two 787 engines will be less than the specifi
46 Keesje : But what if one type has 2.5 times the number of seats (at same spec.) ? The 772ER is not a miracle on fuel consumption. The main reason the 359 is f
47 Post contains links QFA001 : I am not in the habit of making up facts, sir. The fact that the A380 will not be the most fuel-efficient airplane flying can be easily proven with f
48 Post contains links Boeing7E7 : Then it burns more fuel based on SFC and thrust to weight ratio. Fuel burn is not static, it's dependent on payload factors when all else (such as ru
49 B2707SST : Just to nit-pick for a moment, specific fuel consumption (SFC) is defined as pounds of fuel burned per pound of thrust produced. The GE90-115B is mor
50 Post contains images Keesje : The weight / fuel per seat is comparable. However this is just 10-15% of operational costs (e.g labor 35-40%). It uses less then twice the maintenanc
51 QFA001 : Based on current data, the B788 will burn about 10% less fuel per seat than an A388. 10%. IMO, that is not comparable but significant. The A350 will
52 WINGS : I would like to know the amount of seats you are compare for both the A350/B787 VS A380 to come to this conclusion? As am aware the A380 will be able
53 Post contains images QFA001 : The generic 3-class seating: A388 (555), A358 (253), B788 (223). IMHO, the two airplanes that stand to gain the most from the higher-than-perceived A
54 Keesje : I have yet to see an airline that is seriously considering buying A380 OR 787/350s. But hey, half the media / a.net firmly believes its a a380 vs 787
55 QFA001 : Just because one hasn't observed something doesn't necessarily mean that it hasn't happened or won't happen. On a global, macro scale, this very thin
56 Keesje : Most airline I know adjust their fleets to their long term network requirements, dictated by the market environment they are in, not what A&B have on
57 Post contains images N79969 : "- JAL, BA, and CX fly to all the worlds hubs from their hubs at this moment - the passenger market will probably triple in the next 20 years - the ai
58 Boeing7E7 : You show me an airline that makes a fleet decision beyond a 5-7 year period and I'll show you an anomoly. Airline decisions as a whole are very short
59 Sjoerd : Good thing that Airbus has both the A350 and A380 on offer then, they can let the airlines choose between their two products. Boeing can't give airli
60 WINGS : Very well spoken. I could not agree with you more. Regards, Wings
61 Iluv2pilot : Yes it was a joke! The point is that eventually airplanes will be able to fly anywhere, anytime. Don't see how you miss the joke though...
62 QFA001 : For perhaps the third time in this thread, I sense that you are attempting to put words in my mouth. I hope I am wrong about that. Nevertheless, I di
63 NW727251ADV : I believe the "LR" suffix is synonymous with Boeing so Airbus better not be offering an A380-900LR lol.
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...
Qantas, Airbus A380 Delays & The Boeing 747-8i posted Wed Aug 9 2006 21:09:47 by Keesje
Airbus A380 First Takeoff And Landing Video posted Wed Jul 26 2006 19:28:42 by Henpol747
Airbus A380 Sets World Record. posted Wed Jun 28 2006 15:30:42 by WINGS
Price For Airbus A380 posted Sat Jun 24 2006 12:38:32 by Morhas
Airbus A380 Hit By New Programme Delay posted Tue Jun 13 2006 18:40:37 by NYC777
WSJ: Airbus A380 Faces Operating Limits posted Mon Jun 12 2006 13:54:27 by Leelaw
Airbus A380. It's Progress. posted Thu Jun 8 2006 13:00:17 by WINGS
Airbus A380 Flys To London posted Mon May 15 2006 11:26:15 by Nicolasdec
Everything About: The Airbus A380 posted Fri Apr 21 2006 17:09:59 by Leelaw
Airbus A380 Orders For US Airlines.. posted Tue Apr 18 2006 18:07:38 by BHXDTW