Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?  
User currently offlineFiaz From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 94 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10021 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hey

When we look at the introduction of this new aircraft. i just want to ask if the 787 really is a replacement of another aircraft that Boeing built , because many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.
What do you guys have to say?

Fiaz

[Edited 2007-07-15 05:59:50]

50 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10001 times:

Nothing... its a new market aircraft.


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5551 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 9974 times:

Quoting Fiaz (Thread starter):
When we look at the introduction of this new aircraft. i just want to ask if the 787 really is a replacement of another aircraft that Boeing built , because many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.
What do you guys have to say?

QF have said in their press release at the time the orginal order was announced that they were buying the 30 B787-9s ordered as direct replacements for their B767-338ERs

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 911 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 9955 times:

Quoting Fiaz (Thread starter):
i just want to ask if the 787 really is a replacement of another aircraft that Boeing built , because many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.

While the 787 brings the range, payload, and economics to open a host of new city pairs, it is first and foremost a 767 replacement. Many, if not the majority, will be used for to replace aging aircraft of various types


787-8 will replace the 763ER, 764ER, and A332.

787-3 will replace non-ER 767, A300/A310

787-9 will replace A333, A343

787 will NOT directly replace the 757. The smallest 787 is still way larger than the 757-300.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 9942 times:

Quoting Fiaz (Thread starter):
many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.

The smallest 787s, the 787-3/8, have more capacity than the largest 767, the 767-400.

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 1):
Nothing... its a new market aircraft.

I agree but, if I were forced to choose one, it would have to be the 777.


User currently offlineFuturecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9919 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
The smallest 787s, the 787-3/8, have more capacity than the largest 767, the 767-400.

Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21413 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9914 times:

The 787 is a replacement of the 767, but with greater capability so that it brings markets that needed a 777 or A340 into a smaller aircraft size with better economics. The 787 does not create a new aircraft size class, nor does it currently attempt to bridge two families, and even a 787-10 would still only "bump" into the next aircraft class.

The 787-8 and 787-9 can replace 763, 764, A300, A332, A333, A342, A343 and MD11, and serve the same markets as all those aircraft.

The 787 does not generally replace the much smaller 762, though you may find it doing so for airlines that want the range and abilities of the 762ER, and thus where the A321 and 739ER can't fit that bill in any way. Because the economics are far superior to the 762ER, a 788 that only carries the passenger load of a 762ER on a route would still be more profitable than the 762ER it replaced.

The A350X, BTW, is a straight replacement for the A340 family, with aircraft roughly in the size classes of the 342/3, 345 and 346 in terms of floor area (though obviously not 1:1). It will replace those planes directly in terms of range and payload, with extra range to spare for some models.

The issue for Airbus is not the strategy, but doing it with one engine for all uses when they weren't first to market for new engines. If they can get the right engine from RR and GE, their strategy should pan out just fine, as replacing an aging quad platform with an uber efficient twin is what made the 767 so successful as a 707 replacement.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineLAXspotter From India, joined Jan 2007, 3650 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9902 times:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):
The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.

I think so too, a 787 isnt meant for the higher density routes than a 772 or 772ER or a 773/ER can handle. It seems to fit into the 763-764 capacity quite well, expect for its outstanding performance.



"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 911 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9844 times:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):
Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

Futurecaptain, the default 787 configurations have been selected to include a greater number of premium biz/first seats than the 767. For this reason, the 787-8 looks to be about the same size as the 767-300ER. In actuality, the 787-8 has more cabin floor area than the 764ER, and is bigger in exterior dimension.


User currently offlineBrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2991 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9821 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 8):
In actuality, the 787-8 has more cabin floor area than the 764ER, and is bigger in exterior dimension.

Yes, this is correct. Another reason to include a lower seating capacity is to make the range figures...at 9x in Y the 788 will have about the same range as a 763ER.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9804 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
I agree but, if I were forced to choose one, it would have to be the 777.

I disagree. The 777 is a much much bigger aircraft than the 787; it is almost the size of a 767. But I agree with EMBQA: It doesnt really replace anything, its a new market aircraft.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3320 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9751 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 3):
787 will NOT directly replace the 757. The smallest 787 is still way larger than the 757-300.

While its alot bigger than a 757-300, the Very low trip-costs for the 787 mean that its POSSIBLE to replace a 757-300 with one in most cases. I very much doubt that a 757 will ever be directly replaced by a 787, yet it remains it (just barely) has enough reach "down" to do it.

The problem is that lots of lovely comparisons that work on paper, don't in real life, as the 787 has 3243432 better things to do for an airline than be placed on a route currently served by a 757. The 787 IMO won't even replace much if any 767 for the first few years as the 787 is better used on new routes, or right-sizing other routes, than sending 767s to the desert. I suspect for the first few years the A300/A310 are in the most danger of getting shipped to storage, with a few high cycle/hour 767's needing D checks and engine overhauls joining in. 10 years from now though, Old 767 and even the oldest A330 will be going. Old A340 "classics" I suspect will be joining smaller "3rd tier" airlines instead of seeing storage unless the MX costs to remain in service are too high. For the 1st tier airlines, I would guess the A340 classic is the first plane to get dumped for only running cost reasons (IE fuel-burn) as the 767/A330 are too useful for shorter haul flights of which fuel burn isn't as big of a concern over the short/medium term.

The one I am wanting to watch for is how many 747's leave due to 787's. I would normally assume nearly 0, but with high fuel costs, its possible that an airline would use a 787 to replace a slightly larger airplane (777 for example) on one route, then use the replaced plane to put the 747 in line for a freighter conversion. I have no idea how common this might be, but its just within what I think is reasonable to happen.


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 9718 times:

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 2):

QF have said in their press release at the time the orginal order was announced that they were buying the 30 B787-9s ordered as direct replacements for their B767-338ERs



Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
The smallest 787s, the 787-3/8, have more capacity than the largest 767, the 767-400.

While the floor area of the 787-8 is greater than the 764, it isn't quite so simple. The 787 cabin width results in seat widths different from the 767 in different classes, so area doesn't tell you everything.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
I agree but, if I were forced to choose one, it would have to be the 777.

I would say the 767, when one takes into account increased space requirements for different classes. 8Y economy gets 777 seat width. And a lot of the space is used to bring business class to what used to be first class seat width. The 767 and 787 are both 6 abreast in business class despite the latter being much wider, which means a similar number of business class seats requires about 17% more area.

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):

Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.

Your ranges for the 787 are only for 3 class with 8 abreast economy versus 9 abreast. The ranges for the 767 are for 3 class and 1 or 2 class layouts. It's apples and oranges.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineNEMA From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 707 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 9686 times:

Most people are seeing this as a new concept aircraft rather than a replacement...

The technological side means you have to veiw it as a new era which is why Mr. Gallois of Airbus Industries chose to offer Boeing the congratulations, shown below from another thread.. This doesnt happen with a replacement!



"With the 787 rollout only hours away Sunday, Airbus sent a nice message to Boeing about its new plane."

"On behalf of the global Airbus team, I would like to offer you and your Boeing colleagues our congratulations on the rollout of your first 787 aircraft. Today is a great day in aviation history. For, whenever such a milestone is reached in our industry, it always is a reflection of hard work by dedicated people inspired by the wonder of flight. Even if tomorrow Airbus will get back to the business of competing vigorously, today is Boeing's day - a day to celebrate the 787."



There isnt really a dark side to the moon, as a matter of fact its all dark!
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 9622 times:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):
Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 10):
The 777 is a much much bigger aircraft than the 787; it is almost the size of a 767.

Cabin floor areas in square meters:

767-200 154.9
767-300 184.5
767-400 214.1
787-3/8 223.8
787-9 257.4
777-200 279.0
787-10 291.0
787-11X 324.6 (hypothetical)
777-300 330.4


User currently offlineAcidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1866 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9580 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting NEMA (Reply 13):

The technological side means you have to veiw it as a new era which is why Mr. Gallois of Airbus Industries chose to offer Boeing the congratulations, shown below from another thread.. This doesnt happen with a replacement!

Even in an industry as cut-throat as aircraft, everyone involved is still an airplane junkie and given the enormity of any undertaking of either Boeing or Airbus, they tend to let each other have their "day in the sun" with an unveiling.

The 787 sizewise seems to be a 767 replacement, but which can do the work of a 777 or even better. Look at how popular the 767 has been, as well as the 777. It seems that there are many customers though who would like something that is the size of a 767 which can do the range and efficiency of a 777. This bird though is slated to do even better than the 777.

We can't directly compare it to the 767 or 777 because it is completely new and has more to offer. That is not to say that the 767 and 777 are not great aircraft, they are wonderful! It's just that the 787 has the benefit of all sorts of new technology, design and improved processes.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
The 787 does not generally replace the much smaller 762, though you may find it doing so for airlines that want the range and abilities of the 762ER, and thus where the A321 and 739ER can't fit that bill in any way. Because the economics are far superior to the 762ER, a 788 that only carries the passenger load of a 762ER on a route would still be more profitable than the 762ER it replaced.

In certain fleets, the 787 is planned to take the place of the 767 and 777. For example, CO has just taken delivery of its 20th and last 777. CO plans to acquire a number of 787s. These 787s are supposed to beat the 777 in range and efficiency by a significant margin and everyone is very excited for them to come on the property, as that will enable much international expansion. 762s may disappear eventually, as they are spendy to fly and 752s with winglets (at least for CO) are doing many similar routes at a significant cost advantage. I hate to see that kind of replacement, but then again, we might see some 787s doing Europe routes for CO simply for the sake of fleet utilization. CO seems to be a one-stop-shop in the sense of taking one kind of a/c (767, 777) and putting it on all routes, as it is less costly to have specialized fleets like some other airlines (ie. NW with trans-Atlantic [333] and trans-Pacific fleets [332, 742, 744]).

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 11):

The one I am wanting to watch for is how many 747's leave due to 787's. I would normally assume nearly 0, but with high fuel costs, its possible that an airline would use a 787 to replace a slightly larger airplane (777 for example) on one route, then use the replaced plane to put the 747 in line for a freighter conversion. I have no idea how common this might be, but its just within what I think is reasonable to happen.

Whenever you bring in another more efficient widebody, interesting routes are now economically possible and/or more viable. The rumors I hear are that NW plans to move much of its trans-Pacific flying from 744s to 787s when they arrive. That is a significant shift, as NW has been quite a 744 powerhouse for years, besides being the launch customer of the type. Interesting new Asia routes are even predicted, as it will be more economical to transport smaller numbers of people on these trans-Pacific routes. Somewhere I read that SQ really didn't want 777s, that they felt they were too big, that in essence they wanted something the size of a 767 but which could do the work of a 777. I don't have the exact quote off hand, so I will probably receive flame  Smile



Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9552 times:

The most obvious type, as mentioned, is the 767. Boeing always compares performance of the 787 with the older 767.
I believe it will also touch on the 777 market share.

I also don't rule out that the smallest version will end up replacing larger 737s and A320s at charter/low-cost airlines.


User currently offlineOlle From Sweden, joined Feb 2007, 265 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9543 times:

But if the 783 has worse performance the A300 how shall it replace the B737 or A320 for the sam missions?


It is like putting a A380 on a B777 route...


User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 9527 times:

Why do you think it performs less than an A300? That wouldn't make sense.

I friend of mine who used to work at Transavia suggested they were looking at the 787 to replace their 737 fleet. (don't know when that will happen, probably after 10 years or so).

For charter flights, where you'r dragging as much tourists as you can to a certain destination, I can imagine a small 787 would be a good choice.


User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9561 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 9306 times:

I also remember the 787-3 being offered as 757 replacement as it is designed to operate in similar markets the 757 is currently used. Even though it is much larger than the 757 it operates the routes at lower costs and offers some growth to due to it larger capacity. The 757 was also introduced as the 727 replacement aircraft which is a much smaller aircraft. The 787-3 as 757 replacement aircraft would not surprise me as well.

A388


User currently offlineDTWAGENT From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 8821 times:

I thought the 787's where a new class of aircraft of their own. I did not think that it was made to replace anything. Since 763's and 764's are still being made. At least that is what I read from Boeing in our newspaper.

Chuck


User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 8423 times:

I guess that's what they want to communicate, as they don't want to stir any unrest when it comes to the 767 production line. However, it is a very similar aircraft in terms of size and range.

User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 3993 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 8397 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 10):
I disagree. The 777 is a much much bigger aircraft than the 787; it is almost the size of a 767. But I agree with EMBQA: It doesnt really replace anything, its a new market aircraft.

 checkmark  I especially have to agree with the latter. The 777 is MUCH bigger on the whole, and the range of the 787 is much more capable than that of the 767. BUT it appears most carriers will be using the 787 to replace their older 762s and 763s. This is the plan for AC, and most expect DL to announce a 787 order to start replacing their 763s before the end of the year.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8249 times:

I think there will be a bigger version of the 787 in the coming years. Not too soon, as it would then compete with the 777

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8221 times:

Quoting A388 (Reply 19):
I also remember the 787-3 being offered as 757 replacement as it is designed to operate in similar markets the 757 is currently used. Even though it is much larger than the 757 it operates the routes at lower costs and offers some growth to due to it larger capacity. The 757 was also introduced as the 727 replacement aircraft which is a much smaller aircraft. The 787-3 as 757 replacement aircraft would not surprise me as well.

Given the history of the 757 and the 727 replacement market, I'm sure Boeing doesn't want to make that mistake again. The 757 was too large to serve as a 727 replacement, and allowed the A320 to get a foot hold. Trying to sell the 787-3 as a 757 replacement is a mistake as it is not a replacement capacitywise. They will likely need something to replacement the 752/753 and the non ER 762/763.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
25 Kaitak744 : There is a difference in what Boeing designed the 787 to do, and what airlines will do with the 787. Boeing meant the 787 to have more space and comfo
26 Mike89406 : I think the same because it is paving the way for future generation aircraft to fly higher faster and eventually across the globe in quicker time tha
27 F27Friendship : The dreamliner is hardly faster, if faster at all. The sonic cruiser didn't make it, and no one is making a new concorde (except maybe a supersonic b
28 Mike89406 : Not significantly but mach .085 is still faster than most legacy airliners now, but thats not the point of my remark even though I mentioned speed. J
29 STT757 : The 787 "might" be able to bridge part of the 757, all of the 767 line and part of the 777 line. Carriers who operate the 757-300 "might" consider eve
30 F27Friendship : you are mistaken: the Convair 880 and 990 for example flew much faster than today's airliners, and there has been a tendency of slightly slower speed
31 Post contains images RICARIZA : I would say: 787-8 will replace the 763ER, 764ER, and could replace an A332. 787-3 will replace non-ER 767, could replace an A330/A310. 787-9 will re
32 WAH64D : They're going to have to use a B787-10 to kill off the B777, they have no choice unless they want to hand the entire market to the A350 and we know t
33 F27Friendship : that is a very probable developement
34 Keesje : The press is learning the world the A350 is the answer to the succesfull 787. In reality the 787 is the answer to the succesfull A330 The A350 is aime
35 Atmx2000 : The 787 goes far beyond the A330 in capabilities and will cover a greater market range. The A350 clearly overlaps the 787, but the majority of models
36 Boeing7E7 : In it's simplest form and in available variants it replaces the 767-300 (787-3), 767-300ER (787-8) and 767-400ER (787-9). Outside of that it represent
37 Post contains images DfwRevolution : You should either say "could" for all of them, or just accept that airlines have ordered 787 to replace all the aircraft I mentioned. For the foresee
38 Ikramerica : It does do something new. While old planes flew faster, they were not efficient. The 1970s saw a shift in priorities, so Aircraft like the 757 and 76
39 Post contains links Mike89406 : Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 30): you are mistaken: the Convair 880 and 990 for example flew much faster than today's airliners, and there has been a
40 XT6Wagon : Also what makes it more confusing is that the 787 is definitely geared to being efficient at both "domestic" and "international" configurations. Give
41 Mike89406 : We've been doing this with military jets for a long time but only now commercial avaition is starting to use it.
42 F27Friendship : This is only a marginal gain and I think they will hardly fly at the maximum speed, if they can save even more fuel by flying a little but slower. Wh
43 HughesAirwest : Actually the 787's width is between the 767 and the T7, however it is NOT a new market aircraft. Boeing has stated that the 787-3/8 were designed to
44 Zvezda : That's just good marketing. Boeing would be foolish to compare the 787 with the 777. Boeing certainly could build a 787 with all the payload/range pe
45 Jacobin777 : ...add the 48 aforementioned -200LR's with the 77 B777 -200F's (same platform) sold so far and that is a good 125 frames...I think Boeing has done qui
46 RICARIZA : Wrong.. not all of them....
47 Zvezda : If one is to analyze the RoI, then add in the 270 777-300ERs ordered so far. There is no question that the 777-200LR/F/300ER have produced a very nic
48 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ..I was only augmenting the statement by DfwRevolution.... ...I never made that assertion....
49 Zvezda : I didn't mean to suggest that you had. The assertion was made by several in this thread though.
50 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ...got it.. ....
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...
What Is: The Best Trip For Travel To Germany? posted Wed May 30 2007 08:58:31 by Tugger
What Is The Future Of Meigs Field? posted Mon May 21 2007 21:49:55 by Alberchico
What Is The Largest A/C To Fly In/out Of DCA? posted Wed May 9 2007 03:33:51 by 777fan
GIG Terminal 1 - What Is The Deal? posted Sun May 6 2007 17:55:43 by LongHaul67
LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal? posted Sat Apr 21 2007 02:51:23 by Centrair
What Is The Latest On Lynx(F9)? posted Wed Apr 4 2007 19:02:17 by Clickhappy
What Is The Point Of B787-300 And B787-800? posted Sat Mar 17 2007 02:12:33 by 8herveg
What Is The Largest Object To Be Airborn? posted Tue Mar 13 2007 17:02:03 by Airfoilsguy
What Is The Oldest Passenger Jet In Service? posted Sun Feb 25 2007 00:33:28 by JAM747
Caracas Spotting - What Is The Latest? posted Fri Feb 2 2007 00:58:46 by Airevents