Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Well, It's Been A Year, Still No 787-10  
User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7750 times:

Seattle PI printed an article exactly a year ago that quoted Mike Bair as saying the 787-10 would probably be offered "within 12 months". It's been 12 months and still no 7810. I should think it would come any time now. If it doesn't get announced at Paris I'm going to think it's been back burnered. They could be quietly offering it now though, and would then likely announce a boatload of orders at Paris.  crossfingers 

Article


Airliners.net Moderator Team
53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7712 times:

I think the reason we haven't seen of the 787-10 yet, is because it just isn't such a good plane as it looked at first.

Don't get me wrong: I am not saying the 787-10 wouldn't be a fine plane!

What I am saying is that in the mean time there is a plane offered which seems like it can do all that the 787-10 promises too, but then just a bit better, more efficient, more comfortable and with some extra payload/range capabilities because contrary to the double stretched 787-10 this plane is actually aimed right at this spot of the market.

Simply stretching the 787-9 to the 787-10 would have been easy for Boeing and if the result would have been a plane better than the current planes in the seat class the double stretched 787 would end up, it would have been a very logic next step indeed, which is why Boeing talked so much about it till about a year ago.

But as Tim Clark has recently indicated, it has become obvious that the 787-10 will needs a range boost too to compete against the newly offered A350-900 and for that Boeing needs to do a lot more structural modifications to wing and landing gear plus they need to find more powerful engines and even then it remains to be seen if the result -albeit technologically possible- is still economically superior to compete head on with an all new product designed for this spot in the market...


User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 7531 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 1):

That's as may be, but considering that the -10 will just be a derivative, how many would they have to sell to make it worth it, 50, 70? The development cost will be relatively low so they don't have to sell that many for it to pay off.  Smile



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineBringiton From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 866 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7500 times:

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 2):
how many would they have to sell to make it worth it, 50, 70?

The point isnt that , they arent lookin just to break even they are looking to match or exceed the A350-900 or in more appropriate terms they are looking to EFFECTIVLY compete with the a350-900 . Boeing IMO will wait it out on the 787-10 , as it is any descision on the 787-10 would most likely be preceeded by a descision to add capacity and/or increase the current 787 production rate sometims in the future (maybe post 2010) . Boeing needs to look at the 787 , see where they can shed margins , and where they can improve and then come out with a product strategy for follow up models . Ofcourse there life has been made a bit easier by the fact that the competition wont EIS till 2013 and 2014 (for the -800 varient) so considering a 3-4 year cycle they have some time to look into what they can offer .


User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7434 times:

The short answer is: Wait until the Paris show, if there is an announcement to be made concerning the launch of the 787-10 or firm orders for the type, that is when we shall hear something. When the ""12 month"" announcment was made, it wasnt meant literally.....I think all that was intended is that the 787-10 is being studied and could be launched in the near-term future.

And, of course, the 787-10 will more directly compete with the A350XWB than the smaller members of the 787 family: Boeing has to get the 787-10 right, so why rush? Its a difficult launch decision, especially since the A350 family continues to be a ""moving target"" as far as specs and performance. There has been continued discussions as to whether the 787-10 will be a simple strech of the 787-9 or if Boeing will go with a more complicated program that some refer to as the 787-10ER....that issue must be resolved prior to launch, or will Boeing build both? Time will tell.

Lastly, the 787-10 will indirectly impact orders for the 777 family, so there is little advantage for Boeing to announce the launch the 787-10 until absolutely necessary.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12564 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7381 times:

Quoting Bringiton (Reply 3):
Boeing needs to look at the 787 , see where they can shed margins , and where they can improve and then come out with a product strategy for follow up models . Ofcourse there life has been made a bit easier by the fact that the competition wont EIS till 2013 and 2014 (for the -800 varient) so considering a 3-4 year cycle they have some time to look into what they can offer .

 checkmark 

Not to mention the improved 787-10 will compete squarely against the 777-200ER, which is still selling pretty well, so no big rush in moving on the -10.

A year ago they didn't know what they'd be up against with the A350, and I imagine they still don't. All they do know is the EIS is a long time in the future, so no big rush in defining the -10 when the order books are full of -3/-8/-9.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7381 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 1):
Boeing needs to do a lot more structural modifications to wing and landing gear plus they need to find more powerful engines and even then it remains to be seen if the result -albeit technologically possible- is still economically superior to compete head on with an all new product designed for this spot in the market...

Wing no, landing gear yes. Higher thrust engines will be provided by the A350 development. There isn't a huge rush for Boeing to develop the -10. They are waiting to see if the range and payload capabilities that Airbus is claiming on the A350-900 make the final specs. Until then we probably won't hear much on the -10 front. The more capable Boeing makes the -10 the more it threatens the 772LR. If it turns out that the final specs of the A350 aren't as good as first claimed then Boeing would have unnecessarily hurt the 772LR.

Also, Boeing is very busy trying to get the -8, -9, and -3 out the door. Any work that Boeing is doing on the -10 is probably initial design studies (like Y3 might be right now). More detailed studies will probably be done in the coming years when engineering resources and lessons learned from the -8 can be applied to -10.

They have 5 years until the EIS of the A350. That is a lot of time to apply lessons learned and new technology from both the 787 and the A350. There simply isn't a big rush like it is made out on a.net. EK has been saying for years they will choose between the 787 and the A350, but nothing ever happens. They are waiting for the final specs on the A350 and Boeing's response to those specs.

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 2):
That's as may be, but considering that the -10 will just be a derivative, how many would they have to sell to make it worth it, 50, 70? The development cost will be relatively low so they don't have to sell that many for it to pay off.

Contrary to popular belief, the -10 as it is would be a great replacement for the 772 full filling nearly all the missions it already does. Boeing would like to be able to get away with the simple stretch because it is cheaper and it doesn't encroach on the 772LR as much. They would sell a lot more than 50-70. Maybe they want to do a -10 now and then a -10ER later.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31007 posts, RR: 86
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7286 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The latest information from Boeing is that they are in fact going to go with their original plan of a simple stretch with the same 540,000lb MTOW of the 787-9 which allows them to use all existing systems, including propulsion.

As Norcal notes, this is a perfect 777-200ER replacement offering the same 7500nm+ range with more LD3 positions and better efficiency as well as better payload over range capability, though it might not quite be as good as the 777-200LR in this regard, as well as not having the raw range. This is the model I expect to see launched this year and should have a number of orders behind it with a ~2012 EIS.

After that, Boeing, GE and RR will no doubt start working on the 787-9LR and 787-10ER models with stronger wings, undercarriage and powerplants. You're probably looking around 2014-2015 for these which puts them essentially on par with the A350's EIS.


User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3392 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7286 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 5):
Not to mention the improved 787-10 will compete squarely against the 777-200ER, which is still selling pretty well, so no big rush in moving on the -10.

Selling well? Something like 16 orders the last 17 months is not selling well!


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31007 posts, RR: 86
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7276 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 8):
Selling well? Something like 16 orders the last 17 months is not selling well!

Bingo. The 772LR has pretty much replace the 772ER for all but add-on orders as it is more efficient and offers better performance on 772ER mission profiles, plus can fly mission profiles the 772ER can't.

This is why I believe a 540,000lb MTOW 787-10 is fine for the moment.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12564 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7241 times:

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 8):
Selling well? Something like 16 orders the last 17 months is not selling well!

It's not bad, considering the production line is sold out for the next three or so years.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
After that, Boeing, GE and RR will no doubt start working on the 787-9LR and 787-10ER models with stronger wings, undercarriage and powerplants. You're probably looking around 2014-2015 for these which puts them essentially on par with the A350's EIS.

 checkmark 



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12569 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7222 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 8):
Selling well? Something like 16 orders the last 17 months is not selling well!

Since Jan 2006, the 772ER has 10 sales.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineJayinKitsap From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 769 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7212 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):
The latest information from Boeing is that they are in fact going to go with their original plan of a simple stretch with the same 540,000lb MTOW of the 787-9 which allows them to use all existing systems, including propulsion.

The simple stretch would have the best CASM of the 787 line, in todays high fuel prices it makes sense to not lug around a heavier frame for range that may not be needed. There are a lot of 772 and 773's (non ER and LR) out there that are the first 777's needed replacement.

Yes, a -9R and a -10R would be excellent but can wait. I even love the concept of the -8LR which would be the -9R wing, gear, and engines with a -8 body.


User currently offlineSv11 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 161 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7199 times:

I am not sure a double stretch is the best way to go. Just look at the 767-400 which didn't sell well. Maybe Boeing should just build a new 300-375 seater to replace the 777 using CFRP etc.

sv11


User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3392 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7148 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 11):
Quoting Someone83 (Reply 8):
Selling well? Something like 16 orders the last 17 months is not selling well!

Since Jan 2006, the 772ER has 10 sales.

Even worse!

And AFAIK the orders have also been top-ups, and there is no reason why Boeing should need to protect the 777-200ER anymore


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31007 posts, RR: 86
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7111 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JayinKitsap (Reply 12):
I even love the concept of the -8LR which would be the -9R wing, gear, and engines with a -8 body.

I expect a 787-8LR could be done at 540,000lb MTOW herself, but I tend to believe that airlines will want more capacity, which is why I believe the 787-9LR to be more likely (since the 787-9 is already an "ER" plane).

Quoting Sv11 (Reply 13):
I am not sure a double stretch is the best way to go. Just look at the 767-400 which didn't sell well.

The 767-400ER had worse range then the smaller 767-300ER and similarly-sized A330-200. The 787-10 will have range equal to the 777-200ER, will carry about the same number of people in 9-abreast, has more LD3 and pallet cargo positions, and can lift a similar payload and fly it farther then the 777-200ER at greater efficiency.

A 787-10 is no 767-400ER.  Smile

Quote:
Maybe Boeing should just build a new 300-375 seater to replace the 777 using CFRP etc.

They will. It will be called Y3, but it probably will not see service much before the end of the 2010's or the start of the 2020's. More likely Boeing will triple-stretch the 787 and release the 787-11 in the interim, and even that may not happen since it is likely the 777-300ER will sell strong with deliveries right through 2015 and even later.

The initial customers for the A350-1000 will be airlines like LH with large A340-600 fleets that don't operate the 777-300ER because it is likely airlines that do operate the 777-300ER, even if they choose the A350 family, will still be adding 777-300ERs over the next decade to meet demand while they wait for the A350 to become available so they won't begin adding A350-1000s in earnest until the 2020's.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12564 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7060 times:

Quoting Sv11 (Reply 13):
I am not sure a double stretch is the best way to go. Just look at the 767-400 which didn't sell well. Maybe Boeing should just build a new 300-375 seater to replace the 777 using CFRP etc.

The main point is that Boeing doesn't have to make a rush decision.

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 14):
And AFAIK the orders have also been top-ups, and there is no reason why Boeing should need to protect the 777-200ER anymore

There's no reason to rush either. One can live quite well off top-off orders, as Airbus has shown with the A330.

It's 2007 now, there's no competition available till 2014 or 2015 and a lot can change in the next few years.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 6831 times:

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 14):
And AFAIK the orders have also been top-ups, and there is no reason why Boeing should need to protect the 777-200ER anymore

That is because the market is saturated right now. There is no need for a 777 replacement at this time. The need is for 767 and A300 replacements. The 200ER didn't slow down in sales because the A350 was announced. Another reason to hold off on the -10 is that Boeing can save production spots for the -8 and -9. If they do that then they will deny more of the 767 and A300 replacement market to Airbus. The -10 isn't needed until the A350 EIS.

Building the -10 as it is now doesn't protect the 200ER, it will destroy it. Boeing is protecting the 200LR right now by not building a -10ER. Very few 200LRs were bought for their pure range. Most were bought because they can do the 200ER missions more efficently or with more payload. A -10ER with 8500nm range will all but kill the 200LR. Boeing isn't ready to do that.


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6648 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 16):
There's no reason to rush either. One can live quite well off top-off orders, as Airbus has shown with the A330.

I assume you mean a340? The a330 has been gaining new customers last couple of years.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6556 times:

For what it's worth, this was in today's episode of The Wall Street Journal:

Quote:
The first test flight of Boeing Co.'s (BA) highly anticipated 787 could take place as early as late August, though it may not occur until well into September, the head of the program said Wednesday.

Mike Bair, 787 program chief, said during an investor conference that the company has "about a monthlong window" to test the first 787, but it has not set an exact date because that might cause the company to test the plane early. "The airplane will fly when it's ready to fly."

[...]

"In general we like the business model, it's working well," Bair said, referring to the 787 development program. He noted the company has had "some issues" with at least one supplier that was pressed for time. The issues caused "disappointment" for Boeing, but aren't seen as "chronic" problems.

Bair said other derivatives of the 787, named the 787-3 and 787-9, will hit the market in 2010. The 787-10 derivative of the plane was supposed to come out in the "back half of 2012," but has been pushed back to 2013 because of strong demand for the initial 787 models, he said.

Boeing Pleased With 787's Progress; Aug Test Flight Possible



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineFlysherwood From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6503 times:

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 8):
Selling well? Something like 16 orders the last 17 months is not selling well!

That's 5 more than A350XWB's that have been confirmed!  Wink


User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2826 posts, RR: 42
Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6497 times:

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
Seattle PI printed an article exactly a year ago that quoted Mike Bair as saying the 787-10 would probably be offered "within 12 months". It's been 12 months and still no 7810. I should think it would come any time now. If it doesn't get announced at Paris I'm going to think it's been back burnered. They could be quietly offering it now though, and would then likely announce a boatload of orders at Paris. crossfingers

Boeing is waiting for Airbus to firm up and commit to the A350. As soon as they know that, they will make the determination on if it is better to go with a 787-10, and slight touch ups to the 777, or if it is time for Y3.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 1):
I think the reason we haven't seen of the 787-10 yet, is because it just isn't such a good plane as it looked at first.

 Yeah sure

The 787-10 on paper is a great plane. The A350 on paper is a great plane. The question Boeing is trying to make is if the A350 warrants Y3 now, instead of Y3 later. But for them to actually make that call, Airbus has to show their cards and actually firm up (realistic) numbers for the A350. Airbus has repeatedly played the "don't order it now... wait till we finalize our plane, it will be much cooler" game and this time Boeing might just be playing it on them.


User currently offlineDank From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 907 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6497 times:

I have a feeling that Boeing has quietly shopped the 787-10 to airlines (clearly they have been doing this with EK, for example). If someone is really interested, they'll launch it. So far, this hasn't been so. Boeing has to ask themselves, how many -10s can they sell using the -9 specs, how many can they sell if the go with specs more to EK's liking, how will it impact other sales (both of -10s to other customers and other 772s), how will it balance against the extra development costs, etc. But again, Boeing can say what they want about delaying it because of demand for other models, but if an airline like BA or EK said they were ready to commit, the model would be launched today (maybe Paris will change things, but you'd think that there would be some rumors about it...).

cheers.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31007 posts, RR: 86
Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6479 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well waiting till later doesn't really hurt Boeing, since it allows them to continue to sell 777-200LRs and continue to refine the 787-10 in parallel with the A350's own development and movement towards EIS.

User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2826 posts, RR: 42
Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6451 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
Well waiting till later doesn't really hurt Boeing, since it allows them to continue to sell 777-200LRs and continue to refine the 787-10 in parallel with the A350's own development and movement towards EIS.

It's a good move by Boeing. Long term, if Boeing decides to launch Y3, the last thing they want is the 787 family overlapping with it. It's probably not bad for Airbus either. Airbus knows that either Y1 or Y3 is going to hurt them bad. A 787 style Y3 probably kills the A380 for good, puts a dampener of the appeal of the 350, but leaves the narrow body fight for a few more years out. Airbus on the other hand would have to respond immediately to Y1, or risk going out of business when A320 sales start to dry out.


25 Dank : Unless, of course, they lose 787 sales to the likes of BA, LH, EK, etc. who may not want to split orders between 350s and 787s. If they need to decid
26 Post contains images Astuteman : About the same time as the A350-900 - it's direct competitor. Interesting stuff...... There's all sorts going on behind the scenes here, isn't there?
27 Silver764 : The 767-400 was a niche plane for 2 customers. The 787-10 will be based for a broader range of potential customers.
28 BigJKU : Exactly. Boeing is not going to finalize the top end of the 787 program until the A350 is a known quantity. And they are right to do so. They need to
29 AirFrnt : Yep. The article mentions that one of the reasons the 787-10 hasn't solidified yet is simply because there is so much demand for the -8/-9. And I don
30 AirFrnt : That says it all.
31 Zvezda : The 787 and A350 are only a few inches different in cross-section. There is zero chance that Boeing would spend $10B+ to develop a new aircraft family
32 Post contains images Stitch : That Boeing has said they are looking to launch the plane as originally planned makes me believe that they have found interest in it. And that the 77
33 Dutchjet : Untrue.....while of course Boeing had hoped to sell more 764ERs, the development of the 764ER was a low cost development program (which was part of t
34 Post contains images Dank : Maybe my phrasing was a bit non-specific. What I meant was that I'm sure that if someone was interested to the point of being ready to buy, Boeing wo
35 Zvezda : Right, except that any decisions about Y3 will be taken only after Boeing decide more about the 787 family, not the other way around.
36 474218 : So why would Boeing invest a lot of money developing a new airframe, for a market that does not seen to exist at the present time?
37 Post contains images BigJKU : I agree totally. The 787 family will be fully planned out before Y-3 gets nailed down. The 787-10 is crucial in this because the 10 will define the E
38 Zvezda : The nearly non-existent demand is for aircraft with the CASM of the 777-200ER/LR sized larger than the A321. The 787-10 would have a much, much lower
39 SunriseValley : Or you could do like NZ who according to the ILFC 401K filing apparently have the opportunity of returning their 4 leased 772's in 2012/2013 right ab
40 WingedMigrator : At the same MTOW as the 787-9, it is unlikely the 787-10 could hit 7500 nm+ range. 7200 nm is more like it. I agree. My theory is that once you make
41 Post contains images Stitch : I only know what Boeing tells me. Seriously, even 7200nm should be good enough, especially since it is likely the 787-10 will haul more payload that
42 Post contains links Aminobwana : The answer to why the decision B787-10 was delayed was given May 23 by Jim MxNerney in URL: "Boeing affirms targets, demurs on single-aisle replaceme
43 Silver764 : hard to say, reading must discussions on the 764 it seems that development was minimal and I don't think I can recall CO or DL regretting buying. I i
44 Revelation : It's been pretty interesting to see these very airlines spending a fair amount of time talking about ordering airplanes and not doing it. I suspect t
45 Jacobin777 : ...given the nature of a CRFP monolithic fuselage-which is quite stable/rigid compared to current aluminium frames, it would probably be easier to st
46 Stitch : Perhaps Boeing is now considering a dual-track development of a 787-10 and a 787-10ER? The 787-10 would MTOW at or around 540,000lbs and would use all
47 Bringiton : dats pretty much how i see it although i dont see a move to offer the basic -10 first and then the LR unless they think that they can score some nice
48 Post contains links Rheinbote : Boeing Pushes 787-10 Back to 2013 http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/07/05/24/100bus_787001.cfm ...the market may need more 200- to 300-passenger jets o
49 Stitch : And yet many airlines fly the A330-300 instead of the more capable 777-200ER because they don't need the extra range (and extra structure to support
50 Aminobwana : " target=_blank>http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/07/...1.cfm The article you mention quoting Mr. BAIR should be read togethet with the article quoting
51 Rheinbote : Pardon me, but the article you quote is quite lousy. I listened to the conference webcast, and to me it appears that whoever wrote the article has st
52 Jacobin777 : ...I think Boeing will probably go with the 789 for their potential "LR" range..I think for a 787-10LR, a lot more modification would be done and the
53 Post contains links Zvezda : I called it twelve days ago: RE: EK Wants Lighter 77W; Denies 160 330/350 Order (by Zvezda May 12 2007 in Civil Aviation)#ID3405778 And more or less
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...
Paris:Still No 787 Customer! posted Wed Jun 15 2005 15:36:27 by RootsAir
It Has Been A Year Already! posted Fri Sep 15 2006 16:45:03 by Luv2fly
One Year And Still No Flying posted Fri May 31 2002 16:17:09 by Matt D
Official 787-10 Drawing+FAA Special Cert. For 787 posted Mon Mar 19 2007 16:28:45 by N328KF
What Engines Will The 787-10 Use? posted Wed Mar 7 2007 17:39:06 by EA772LR
FI: 787-10 To Face A350-900 Challenge posted Mon Jan 29 2007 11:26:06 by RichardPrice
New Austrian 777... Has It Been Named? posted Sat Jan 27 2007 16:53:12 by USAF336TFS
When Will The 787-10 Be Launched posted Tue Jan 9 2007 22:47:32 by T773ER
Drop 787-3 In Favour Of 787-9, -10? posted Mon Dec 25 2006 22:50:07 by Rheinbote
SQ Looks To Order The A350X - Wither The 787-10? posted Wed Dec 20 2006 15:26:45 by Stitch