Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
More One Demolition For The New York History  
User currently offlineAwysBSB From Brazil, joined Sep 2005, 561 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9074 times:

JetBlue Signs Lease for a New Terminal

Now the lease agreement between B6 and Port Authority is signed the sad future of the Eero Saarinen Terminal is guaranteed.  worried 
Sooner, we will see its concourses ‘747 Gates’ and ‘Rotunga’ being demolished to give place for a superfluous new terminal.  weeping 
As it is common ground, JFK does not enable enough runways and slots for justify the construction of larger terminals. Furthermore, the JFK neighborhood would be discontented with the idea of bringing more flights.
It is unbelievable, but there is no objective reason for a new T5 be constructed in JFK.

48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26605 posts, RR: 75
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9051 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Thread starter):
Sooner, we will see its concourses ‘747 Gates’ and ‘Rotunga’ being demolished to give place for a superfluous new terminal.

The Saarinen Terminal is protected as a historical landmark and jetBlue's plans for the terminal must, and do, keep with Saarinen's intent. The terminal won't be demolished, merely added on to to make it easier to facilitate a higher amount of traffic

Quoting AwysBSB (Thread starter):
As it is common ground, JFK does not enable enough runways and slots for justify the construction of larger terminals.

JFK is not slot-controlled



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5193 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9031 times:

Well at least they are keeping the centerpiece Eero Saarinen terminal intact.


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineRichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4278 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 8980 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Thread starter):
Furthermore, the JFK neighborhood would be discontented with the idea of bringing more flights.
It is unbelievable, but there is no objective reason for a new T5 be constructed in JFK.

And exactly how do you figure this to be true?



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlineAwysBSB From Brazil, joined Sep 2005, 561 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8875 times:

Quoting Richierich (Reply 3):
And exactly how do you figure this to be true?

Constructing a new terminal where does not support more air traffic is a move that can only be guided by subjective intents.


User currently offlineCactusA319 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2918 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8863 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 4):
Constructing a new terminal where does not support more air traffic is a move that can only be guided by subjective intents.

I'm sorry, what?

 confused 


User currently offlineKahala777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 8825 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 4):
Constructing a new terminal where does not support more air traffic is a move that can only be guided by subjective intents.



Quoting AwysBSB (Thread starter):
As it is common ground, JFK does not enable enough runways and slots for justify the construction of larger terminals. Furthermore, the JFK neighborhood would be discontented with the idea of bringing more flights.
It is unbelievable, but there is no objective reason for a new T5 be constructed in JFK.

You may to subscribe to a different language translation tool!

Questions for you:

Who are you saying would be "discontented"?

What "JFK neighborhood" are you referring to?

Why should there be a "objective" reason for anything new at JFK?

FYI- The old terminal has been an eyesore for years, anything added to or taken away from it would be more than welcome!


KAHALA777


User currently offlineFA4B6 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 8754 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Thread starter):
Now the lease agreement between B6 and Port Authority is signed the sad future of the Eero Saarinen Terminal is guaranteed.
Sooner, we will see its concourses ‘747 Gates’ and ‘Rotunga’ being demolished to give place for a superfluous new terminal.
As it is common ground, JFK does not enable enough runways and slots for justify the construction of larger terminals. Furthermore, the JFK neighborhood would be discontented with the idea of bringing more flights.
It is unbelievable, but there is no objective reason for a new T5 be constructed in JFK.

What a rediculous and uninformed post.

This new Terminal is more then welcome and I cant wait for it to be completed in 2009.


User currently offlineSelcalCheckOK From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 8748 times:

I think that T5 at JFK has had great history at JFK, but the fact is that the airport is changing and has been for a long time. The IAB was also a huge staple in its history, but that had to give way to the fact that the airport and that terminal needed a new structure to support all those airlines.

Its sad to see T5 go, but the landmark will not be destroyed.
The tubes and rotundas definetly hold history, but once again, the airport has got to change. T5 and T6 are old and they look worn down. A new terminal will bring a much better image to the airport.

I think 4 runways and the general area (size wise) of the airport fit quite well with the amount of traffic for one of the world's busiest airports. Ive been through JFKs phases for 20 years of being here, and i think that it deals pretty well with the amount of flights that it handles. Why would a larger terminal not be a good idea for JFK??

ck


User currently offlineAwysBSB From Brazil, joined Sep 2005, 561 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8688 times:

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 6):
You may to subscribe to a different language translation tool!

Excuse me, but I am doing by best!   

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 6):
Who are you saying would be "discontented"?
What "JFK neighborhood" are you referring to?

As far as I know people whom live near the great airports (like JFK) usually are unhappy with the aircraft noises.   

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 6):
Why should there be a "objective" reason for anything new at JFK?

Because in JFK there are air traffic, airport routine, security and several things that are objective and need to be deal with a rational point of view.   

Quoting SelcalCheckOK (Reply 8):
Why would a larger terminal not be a good idea for JFK??

4 years have gone and JFK is working well without T5.
Why a new and larger T5?  confused 

[Edited 2005-11-30 20:26:50]

User currently offlineMikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 54
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8608 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
4 years have gone and JFK is working well without T5.

T5 has not worked well in a loooong time  Smile T5 is currently not an operational terminal, just FYI.

Mike


User currently offlineKahala777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8572 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
4 years have gone and JFK is working well without T5.
Why a new and larger T5?

Two Words:

Expansion
Jet Blue

Ever heard of it?

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
Because in JFK there are air traffic, airport routine, security and several things that are objective and need to be deal with a rational point of view

Huh?

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
As far as I know people whom live near the great airports (like JFK) usually are unhappy with the aircraft noises.

People that live in Queens, and Kings County have been used to the noise of both airports for decades now. It is nothing new. For your information JFK has been in 24 hour operation for as long as I can remember. Just because some yahoo in Howard Beach gripes about noise, JFK will not put in place a curfew.

KAHALA777


User currently offlineDesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7786 posts, RR: 16
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8564 times:

I will lay out the objective facts:

1. T5 has not been operational since TWA ceased existance in 2000.
2. T5 as it exists now is not usuable as a terminal given current requirements. In its later years in use it was certainly marginal.
3. T6 cannot be expanded or upgraded any further. The current B6 operation pushes it to the max.
4. JFK is the only PANYNJ airport that has room to expand or add flights.
5. The T5/T6 replacement terminal has been in the planning stage for ~5 years now. Certainly any needed studies that were required have been done, and the feasibility of the new facility has been proven. The new terminal is part of a larger renewal of the passengar facilities at JFK. Most of which were well over 40 years old and in need of major upgrades and/or replacements. Thus far T1, T4, and T8/9 have seen replacement in whole or part. T7 has seen a major refurbishment.
6. JFK has existed as a major airport for longer than most of the surrounding neighborhoods in Queens have existed. Furthermore existing flight paths already do a decent job of reducing the noise and pollution impact.



Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
User currently offlineFA4B6 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8533 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
As far as I know people whom live near the great airports (like JFK) usually are unhappy with the aircraft noises.

Can't the same be said for anyone living near any airport? I mean, look at the LGB NIMBYs, for example.

I moved to South Ozone Park, Queens knowing full well I live right underneath short final for 13L. It becomes a part of your life, and the rotate what runways they use for arrivals so the 13's aren't always being used.

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
4 years have gone and JFK is working well without T5.
Why a new and larger T5?

As Kahala put it, JetBlue is almost maxed out at T6. T5 will bring a substantial amount of business to JFK and the community. The Saarnen building will remain, be renovated, and used once again. If anything, it'll be revived as the landmark and icon of JFK. I cannot wait to see it operational again.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 11):
Just because some yahoo in Howard Beach gripes about noise, JFK will not put in place a curfew.

Exactly!


User currently offlineASWISSinMAD From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 148 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8490 times:

As an-ex TWA employee myself, I am more than happy to see T5 redone and rehabilitated for Jetblue's operations.
Most of us have seen this terminal deteriorate so much that it really did hurt to take a look at it.

I've seen drawings in magazines of the new T5 after it is enhanced and expanded, and it looks fabulous! Now if only TWA was still here to use it....


User currently offlineJBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3179 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8440 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Kahala,

I agree with you on this subject matter... but cut AwysBSB a break!!! Whats with the attitude?

JBLU


User currently offlineJFKLGANYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3546 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 8357 times:

"As it is common ground, JFK does not enable enough runways and slots for justify the construction of larger terminals. Furthermore, the JFK neighborhood would be discontented with the idea of bringing more flights.
It is unbelievable, but there is no objective reason for a new T5 be constructed in JFK,"


What a BS post! JFK is the ONLY NYC area airport that has excess capacity. While there are slots in effect from 4-7 pm and it is crowded during the intl push, the rest of the day u could hold a track meet on the runways. JFK has the potential to handle 50+million passengers a year . . . and will.

The new terminal respects the landmark status of the old structure, incorporates the old structure, and gives JFK premier-hub airline, a hub terminal.

It's no different then T5 and LHR, is it??

PJ


User currently offlineAwysBSB From Brazil, joined Sep 2005, 561 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8275 times:

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 11):
Expansion
Jet Blue

Ever heard of it?

Currently, B6 is the only carrier interested in T5.

Quoting DesertJets (Reply 12):
I will lay out the objective facts:

1. T5 has not been operational since TWA ceased existance in 2000.
2. T5 as it exists now is not usuable as a terminal given current requirements. In its later years in use it was certainly marginal.
3. T6 cannot be expanded or upgraded any further. The current B6 operation pushes it to the max.
4. JFK is the only PANYNJ airport that has room to expand or add flights.
5. The T5/T6 replacement terminal has been in the planning stage for ~5 years now. Certainly any needed studies that were required have been done, and the feasibility of the new facility has been proven. The new terminal is part of a larger renewal of the passengar facilities at JFK. Most of which were well over 40 years old and in need of major upgrades and/or replacements. Thus far T1, T4, and T8/9 have seen replacement in whole or part. T7 has seen a major refurbishment.
6. JFK has existed as a major airport for longer than most of the surrounding neighborhoods in Queens have existed. Furthermore existing flight paths already do a decent job of reducing the noise and pollution impact.

Let me answer one by one of those objective facts you mentioned:  scratchchin 

1. T5 has not been operational since the end of 2001.
2. T5 as it exists now is not usable as a terminal for a very high passenger flow, if you consider current security requirements.
3. B6 does not need to centralize its operations in JFK and the T5 space supplies the B6 exceeding demand.
4. NYC airports do not have room for so many additions of flights, expansion will have to rely on wide-bodies. Look at London, which is served by 5 airport at least and two of them (LHR and LGW) are mostly operated with wide-bodies.
5. The plans for the replacement of any JFK terminal are very changeable and T5 have had other projects different of current B6`s. A very feasible project is the one that transforms the Eero Saarinen building into a baggage claim building and creates a new check-in building in front of the former, following a similar concept of T6. By this project the current whole T5 is maintained and used.
6. The quality of the lives that are in the surrounding areas of JFK is more important than an airport.

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 15):
but cut AwysBSB a break!!! Whats with the attitude?

Excuse me, what did you mean to mention?

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Reply 16):
It's no different then T5 and LHR, is it??

LRH`s T5 is being constructed over an area where sewerage was used to be treated and where there was no significant building.  biggrin 


User currently offlineDeltaMIA From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1672 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8203 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 1):
JFK is not slot-controlled

Yes it is; at least until 01JAN07.

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Reply 16):
While there are slots in effect from 4-7 pm and it is crowded during the intl push, the rest of the day u could hold a track meet on the runways.

Actually it is 1500-1959. During the summer slots are half hourly and during the winter they are hourly.



It's a big building with patients, but that's not important right now.
User currently offlineJetBluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2994 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8194 times:

I have no intent in offending you or attacking you, but I find many faults with your opinion as there is nothing factual behind it. Ergo, please read my counter-argument.

Quoting AwysBSB (Thread starter):
Sooner, we will see its concourses ‘747 Gates’ and ‘Rotunga’ being demolished to give place for a superfluous new terminal.
As it is common ground, JFK does not enable enough runways and slots for justify the construction of larger terminals. Furthermore, the JFK neighborhood would be discontented with the idea of bringing more flights.
It is unbelievable, but there is no objective reason for a new T5 be constructed in JFK

Nothing from Terminal 5 will be demolished; everything is being integrated into the new terminal, as pointed out in some posts above. In fact, most objects will most likely serve as a museum/lounge area.

JFK has 4 runways, which gives them an exceptional amount of flexibility (ATL has 4 runways and they're the busiest airport in the world!). Additionally, there are no slots except for 4-7pm, in which JetBlue doesn't operate many flights anyway (most West Coast night flights leave right after that). There is certainly space for an enlarged terminal as JFK takes up an amazing amount of space.

I, or most people on the board for that matter, have never heard of bitching residents. I don't know if you've ever been to JFK but most of the flight paths take you over the water, not the land until very short finals. Nevertheless, Idlewild has been an active, 24-hour airport for a very long time and any "uprisings" from surrounding neighborhoods would be amazingly ineffective.

In conclusion, there is an "objective" reason for the new Terminal 5 to be built. JetBlue has outgrown their current terminal and by doubling operations the state of New York and the tri-state area will profit handsomely. The city is locking in a long-term relationship with one of the most innovative airlines in the industry; what more could they possibly want?

JetBluefan1



Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
User currently offlineJetBluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2994 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8190 times:

Quoting DeltaMIA (Reply 18):
Quoting N1120A (Reply 1):
JFK is not slot-controlled

Yes it is; at least until 01JAN07.

JFK is NOT slot controlled. LGA is, but their slot controls are dropped on 01JAN07. I think that you were getting the two airports confused.

As long as we're on the subject, get ready for all hell to break loose when LGA's slots are dropped. G-d help us all...

JetBluefan1



Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
User currently offlineRichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4278 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8164 times:

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
As far as I know people whom live near the great airports (like JFK) usually are unhappy with the aircraft noises.

I would also like to point out that new, modern jetliners are a lot quieter than anything from 25 years ago. As much as people lament the passing of 727s into the great airline in the sky, A320s, 737s & 757s all have significantly smaller noise envelopes.



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlineBlackhawk144 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8164 times:

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 6):
You may to subscribe to a different language translation tool!



Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 11):
Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
4 years have gone and JFK is working well without T5.
Why a new and larger T5?

Two Words:

Expansion
Jet Blue

Ever heard of it?

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
Because in JFK there are air traffic, airport routine, security and several things that are objective and need to be deal with a rational point of view

Huh?

Quoting AwysBSB (Reply 9):
As far as I know people whom live near the great airports (like JFK) usually are unhappy with the aircraft noises.

People that live in Queens, and Kings County have been used to the noise of both airports for decades now. It is nothing new. For your information JFK has been in 24 hour operation for as long as I can remember. Just because some yahoo in Howard Beach gripes about noise, JFK will not put in place a curfew.

KAHALA777

Why are you being so rude to him? Every response you've given him was in some way snotty, and was very unneccessary.

So what if you are right? That gives you no reason to go out and treat people with that attitude

Anthony


User currently offlineF27XXX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8153 times:

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 11):
Two Words:

Expansion
Jet Blue

That's 3 words.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16885 posts, RR: 51
Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8151 times:

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 19):
Nothing from Terminal 5 will be demolished

The two gate areas and one or possibly both of the connector "tubes" will be demolished, the core of the terminal will stay but will no longer function for B6 as it once did for TWA. The Drop off/pick up ramps aswell as the ticketing and baggage claim will be in the new building built behind T-5, the view from the windows of T5 will no longer be of 747s but rather two levels of roadway.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
25 DeltaMIA : Nope not getting them confused. LGA as well is slot controlled between 0600-2359, which ironically coincides with its curfew, and will be until at le
26 JetBluefan1 : I'm 100% sure that JFK is not slot-controlled. I'll go look for a link... JetBluefan1
27 DeltaMIA : I am 100% certain it is. Out of the 7 slot controlled commercial airports in the US. JFK has a short window of slotted hours at only 1500-1959. Howev
28 Post contains images JetBlueAtJFK : No not really, It is kind of cool and everyone is used to it. No one seems to notice it and it is what got me interested in planes. You only notice i
29 Kahala777 : And..... What is the point behind your post? Pardon Me, I wasnt under the guise that it was anal night on Airliners.net... I will rephrase it for you
30 Blackhawk144 : You're being ridiculous to him, just lay off him, all right? Geez... Anthony
31 Brokenrecord : Where is LRH? I've never heard of this airport.
32 Kahala777 : It is a forum, I paid... Have a good night! KAHALA777
33 Post contains images AwysBSB : Oh, come on, have you never heard about La Rochelle?       Please, pardon me, I meant LHR or London Heathrow International Airport.    It is mi
34 Post contains images Brokenrecord : LOL. I was just giving you a hard time, but not in a serious fashion like KAHALA does.
35 Post contains images TheGreatChecko : Hate to be an ass.....but its really two words.... "jetBlue" not "jet Blue"? GreatChecko
36 Post contains images TWAAF9 : Not to sound like a know-it-all, but T5's last day of operation was on or about October 8, 2001. I flew in for the day just for the occasion. Beautif
37 Post contains images Lightsaber : ???? Last time I was at JFK the terminals were so overcrowded I couldn't call any terminal expansion "not needed" or superfluous. As other's noted, J
38 B707Stu : OK. This is one subject I feel very qualified to comment on. I grew up in Gibson, Valley Stream, 6 miles from JFK. As a kid I was there just about eve
39 Rampart : I have to agree, Blackhawk. If Kahala's internet persona carries over to his customer service... let's hope not, for the sake of reputable travel ind
40 Post contains links and images Revelation : And just what do you have against snots? They perform an important function. Maybe you should educate yourself here. especially the end of the third
41 Post contains images Simong : AwysBsB ......... your English is fine, and in my opinion anyone here can dispute your beliefs and statements as we are all free to do ...... but the
42 Petazulu : Kahala777 is a horses as@. We have all known this for a while. while he smetimes has thoughtful comments, to often his arrogance and simplistic view o
43 Notbluejet : The comment about B6 being the only one interested in the terminal is true because they are the only reason for the terminals construction. The termin
44 Post contains images Mir : Oh, just AN ENTIRELY NEW TERMINAL!!! BTW, does anyone know what they decided to do with T5 with regard to the connectors? Will they actually go to th
45 AwysBSB : Good morning everyone! The conclusion I am getting with this thread, and other threads of A.net, is that JFK should be among other airports to be unde
46 Post contains links BigOrange : New York area airports have a history of severe congestion. In 1968, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) adopted the High Density Rule (HDR or
47 Quig : Once JetBlue Moves over to the new T5 what will happen to T6 ? I am really excited about this new terminal, once this is open it will leave the Delta
48 Notbluejet : From what I was told T6 will be kept also.... Possibly renovated completely while things go full swing at T5?... "Oh, just AN ENTIRELY NEW TERMINAL!!!
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...
Spotting Article In The New York Times posted Sun Jun 11 2006 14:03:37 by BigPhilNYC
Structural Reinforcements For The New 787-9 posted Wed Jan 4 2006 22:11:12 by Atmx2000
Any Plans For The New US Airways Express? posted Sun Sep 4 2005 13:30:05 by AkjetBlue
Opening For The New JFK Terminal 8 posted Tue Apr 26 2005 02:36:01 by AA787
Next UAL 772 For The New Colors posted Sat Mar 26 2005 00:45:08 by Nbgskygod
64 More Firm Confirmations For The 787 By Summer!? posted Mon Feb 7 2005 06:03:11 by Jacobin777
Air Tran Expansion From The New York City Area posted Wed Jan 12 2005 05:28:43 by UNDAEROSPACE
Flights Of The New York Islanders? posted Fri Jan 7 2005 04:17:37 by Masonaries
Could PHL Be The Home For The New Virgin America? posted Tue Nov 18 2003 00:52:01 by SunValley
What Name For The New Qantas Discount Airline? posted Sun Nov 9 2003 13:45:41 by Lauda777