Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AF/KL: New Single-aisle Jet Models Needed Faster  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8598 times:

Airbus and Boeing communicated a NB replacement will not be there before 2020.

As expected this is simply unacceptable to their customers.

Airbus and Boeing are both sitting on fat backlogs & working on twin aisles.

The current (cashcow) NB aircraft are marginally impoved versions of 20-40 year aircraft

The CFM56 is of .. 1975 and has a BPR of 5 ! Coming up with something better in 12 years is unacceptable for the airlines seeing the current fuel prices.

AF/KL CEO "The technology is there"

Airlines putting knifes in the backlogs, Bombardier CSeries getting some healthy support might lead to new insights at Airbus and Boeing.

The recent 2020 statements seemed like they lost touch with their customers..

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/...OWJONESDJONLINE000336_FORTUNE5.htm

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gL7MyGyJXam-XKoJtIHhOmc2TdmA

[Edited 2008-06-02 08:04:43]

75 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8548 times:



Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
Airbus and Boeing communicated a NB replacement will not be there before 2020.

As expected this is simply unacceptable to their customers.

OK, and so?
They will buy Chinese in place?


User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8512 times:



Quoting Breiz (Reply 1):
OK, and so?
They will buy Chinese in place?

I could see them going with the larger variant of the CSeries. It seats 119 pax in a mixed configuration. It's smallish, but it supposedly is going to have stellar per seat operating costs.


User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8484 times:

Well if the P&W GTF works on the A319+9 (and could be uprated for the A320) this could prove a good interim solution for these airlines.

The problem with a third manufacturer coming in to the full NB competition is the cost of entry - I'm guessing $5Billion at least..............


User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8454 times:

If AF/KL think the technology is there, why aren't they building planes?

User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8393 times:

Quoting Breiz (Reply 1):
OK, and so?

Invite MCNerney & Streiff at a IATA conference and have them say in front of 80% of their backlog that it just isn't possible to come for a better aircraft in the next 12 years because they are booked anyway.   

A late drink in the hotel bar with charming Hartman, Arpey, O'Leary, Dixon and Herb Kelleher might do wonders too.   

Question is why Boeing can develop a 787 in 5 years, but it takes 12 years to come up with something better then the 10-40 yr old technology 737. They can fool the press / big public but not the airlines. They have hundreds of engineers too.

[Edited 2008-06-02 08:24:44]

User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8386 times:



Quoting Sxf24 (Reply 4):
If AF/KL think the technology is there, why aren't they building planes?

If both OEMs have got 6 years production worth of orders there's not really any benefit to them of spending loads of cash to kill the oppositions cash cow as it would kill thier own


User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 8046 times:



Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 6):

If both OEMs have got 6 years production worth of orders there's not really any benefit to them of spending loads of cash to kill the oppositions cash cow as it would kill thier own

Despite the wild claims otherwise, the technology - particularly for propulsion - does not yet exist to support the development of an affordable NB airplane that offers the required 15-20% improvement.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21531 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7998 times:



Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
As expected this is simply unacceptable to their customers.

This has always been my argument. The airlines will not keep buying the 737 and A320 through 2020. Strong sales now do not indicated strong sales for 10 more years.

And the first company to see sales taper off will be Boeing I think, because the A320 is newer tech and has more space. If Airbus gets the GTF on the A320 and it makes a difference, that will really put the screws to Boeing…



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineSelwoode From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7836 times:

I wouldnt underestimate the effects of things like Kyoto or the ever rising costs of jet fuel...
I would also agree that the A320 family potentially have more life left to them, but if the fuel shocks start killing off more airlines...well....perhaps even if the big two have successors in the pipeline...now is probably not a good time to release a new model


User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3766 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7813 times:

I think it's only normal for customers to complain.

There might be 2 companies competing, but if neither is willing to put money in developing a new aircraft that airlines want, it might as well be a monopoly.

This would be a great time for Embraer/Bombardier to develop a slightly bigger single aisle aircraft family. Their aircrafts have been successful so far, I don't see why a bigger version of those in a market without solid competitors wouldn't be a hit. Especially when a 2% fuel consumption difference between to aircrafts can make or break a deal.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1289 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7813 times:

New NBs will be offered in 4-5 years and start delivering 5-6 years later.

Until then the way to go is winglets, narrow and lighter seats (more rows), more efficient engines if possible, removing the ashtrays, the toilet water reserve, etc, etc, etc.

Wide-bodies on shorter routes might also be more economical.



I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7718 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
Invite MCNerney & Streiff

Keesje, you do know that the guy in charge now at Airbus is Thomas Enders?


User currently offlineA380900 From France, joined Dec 2003, 1112 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7688 times:



Quoting Francoflier (Reply 10):
This would be a great time for Embraer/Bombardier to develop a slightly bigger single aisle aircraft family.

Isn't EADS big enough in Embraer to prevent them from entering the A320 market?


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7677 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
Question is why Boeing can develop a 787 in 5 years, but it takes 12 years to come up with something better then the 10-40 yr old technology 737. They can fool the press / big public but not the airlines. They have hundreds of engineers too.

The engine manufacturers are just as culpable as Airbus and Boeing. Possibly even more so.

OK, Boeing announces a new CFRP barrel, single-aisle, bleedless, all-electric plane to replace the 737 tomorrow. What engines are they going to hang on it, and how will it deliver the min 25% drop in direct operating costs the airlines are looking for?

GTF? Open-rotor? C-series? MRJ? SuperJet? Where are they today? Not ready for prime-time IMHO.

If the airlines really want the step-change they say they do (i.e. 5-10% better won't do), I just can't see them getting it any time soon.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12561 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 7457 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
Question is why Boeing can develop a 787 in 5 years, but it takes 12 years to come up with something better then the 10-40 yr old technology 737.

Stop with that 40 year old nonsense - there is very little about the 737NG that is forty years old, except perhaps its fuselage dimensions.

Quoting Selwoode (Reply 9):
if the fuel shocks start killing off more airlines...well....perhaps even if the big two have successors in the pipeline...now is probably not a good time to release a new model

Didn't John Leahy say that perhaps up to 30% of Airbus's backlog is of a risky nature?

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
AF/KL CEO "The technology is there"

AF/KL CEO is not having to make the decision to invest >$10B to get that new technology, nor does the AF/KL CEO have to manage the transition from the goose laying the golden eggs to the red haired bastard stepchild (see A380, B787).

Quoting Sxf24 (Reply 7):
Despite the wild claims otherwise, the technology - particularly for propulsion - does not yet exist to support the development of an affordable NB airplane that offers the required 15-20% improvement.

And the 15-20% required improvement is related to the need to raise the >$10B to fund the new airplane.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7372 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
And the first company to see sales taper off will be Boeing I think, because the A320 is newer tech and has more space.

Yes, the new A320 carries more passengers and cargo in a standard 2-class configuration farther than that old 737-800...

At the end of the day, the only reason that the A320 wins more orders is because Airbus is willing to basically give the aircraft away at a zero profit margin.

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 14):
The engine manufacturers are just as culpable as Airbus and Boeing. Possibly even more so.

Absolutely. At this point, there is no real operating cost advantage for Boeing to transfer the 787 technology to a NB aircraft with the current CFM engines.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 15):
And the 15-20% required improvement is related to the need to raise the >$10B to fund the new airplane.

Probably true, since the airlines won't pay a premium for a new design without the 15-20% improvement.


User currently offlineFrmrCAPCADET From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1718 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7314 times:

As soon as SW and other major customers of A and B decide that the engines are good enough to build the new NBs, A and B will build them. I suspect that it was in fact a concensus amongst best customers and A and B that we are now observing.


Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7201 times:



Quoting Breiz (Reply 12):
Keesje, you do know that the guy in charge now at Airbus is Thomas Enders?

A few days ago I walked around a corner & bumped nearly in to him  Wink didn't even know he was in the buidling.

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 14):
What engines are they going to hang on it, and how will it deliver the min 25% drop in direct operating costs the airlines are looking for?

GTF? Open-rotor? C-series? MRJ? SuperJet? Where are they today? Not ready for prime-time IMHO.



Quoting Revelation (Reply 15):
Quoting Sxf24 (Reply 7):
Despite the wild claims otherwise, the technology - particularly for propulsion - does not yet exist to support the development of an affordable NB airplane that offers the required 15-20% improvement.

And the 15-20% required improvement is related to the need to raise the >$10B to fund the new airplane

Well, I think it is time to get creative. No-one is asking for a solution for all requirements (range, load, comfort, noise) new compromises and a segementation of different market segments are to be found, e.g. little new technology, still - 25% DOC compared to 737/A320

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/turbolinermai17.jpg
click to enlarge, http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/229126/


I think we should be carefull copying things OEMS say on this matter. They are far from independent. You can bet Udvar Hazy will say something in the next few days. Remember he owns hundreds of current generation aircraft..


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21531 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7184 times:

AF/KL is a major customer, and they want to PUSH the companies to move faster.

Boeing pushed the engine companies to build 90k engines for the 777, and they did it. They pushed them for new economy engines for the 787, and 2 are providing it, already certified now.

But with the backlogs, the thinking is that there isn't the incentive to push the technology yet.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6979 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
his has always been my...and it makes a difference, that will really put the screws to Boeing…

Ikra I agree (  Wow! ) I guess Boeing will be the first to act. For a moment I thought maybe Airbus and Boeing were misleading each other by mentioning comforting timetable to the other side. Airlines like SW, AA and now KLM/AF are however getting frustrated.

I think Bombardier will launch their CSeries at the right moment. Maybe they even have a 150 seater in mind. I took some sketches and stretched the C130 5 rows (~160 inch) and the aircraft doesn't look out of proportion..



I think this "conflict" between Airbus & Boeing on one side and its customers on the other side is just in its early stages..


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6907 posts, RR: 46
Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6845 times:



Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 3):
The problem with a third manufacturer coming in to the full NB competition is the cost of entry - I'm guessing $5Billion at least..............

Try multiplying that by 4. A new entry will have much higher costs than an established manufacturer.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
If Airbus gets the GTF on the A320 and it makes a difference, that will really put the screws to Boeing…

 checkmark 
The fact that the A320 can accomodate a larger diameter engine will make it harder for Boeing to upgrade the 737 to match.
The airlines can jump up and down all they want.  hissyfit  They are not the ones who will have to fund the new development, and they do not have to make the performance guarantees. Boeing has repeatedly stated that they will not undertake a 737RS until they can see at least 15% operating economy increase; considering the investment necessary that makes sense. And everything I have read from people with real knowledge (not just speculation) says that that goal is just not reachable yet.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21531 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6744 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 20):
I think Bombardier will launch their CSeries at the right moment. Maybe they even have a 150 seater in mind. I took some sketches and stretched the C130 5 rows (~160 inch) and the aircraft doesn't look out of proportion..

The CSeries is the 717/MD80/DC9 replacement and couldn't come at a better time for this market. I agree that they will look to the 149 seat market if the technology works for them, because that's the sweet spot for both LCCs and for large majors that want a 100-149 seat family.

Just look at the shear numbers of MD80s, DC9s and even the 717s that will need replacing in the next 10 years or less. And by not being built by Airbus or Boeing, it gives those airlines some leverage on pricing and sends a message to A and B: "if you don't build it, we won't come… and we'll go elsewhere."



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineSXDFC From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2352 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6696 times:

Pardon my ignorance but whats GTF?


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21531 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 6638 times:

Grant Theft Flyingmachine.

or

more accurately,

Geared Turbo Fan



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 AirNZ : LOL!!! gotta love the same old 'excuse'. So, now enlighten us with your knowledge to back it up.
26 Keesje : Sounds like a "we know better what you need" strategy. Has been tried before. I think it is wise to realize that at Boeing and Airbus all the aircraf
27 Burkhard : It is astonishing indeed that there has been so many investments in the large engines by RR, PW and GE, and in A330/A340/A380/777/787/748/ and so litt
28 Post contains links Beaucaire : Sorry Keesje-opened another thread but this one fits better into this existing one.. Interesting statement by Cyril Spinetta,who told journalists in I
29 NicoEDDF : No, you totally misunderstand things. The A320 is the Airbus cash cow BECAUSE it is sold with zero profit margin. Don't you see?
30 Revelation : And that could all go away if they kill the goose laying the golden eggs and they take on $12B or so in debt and huge amounts of risk to produce what
31 AirbusA6 : Isn't the curent situation a bit like the early 80s when the market was dominated by 2 planes with origins from 20 years earlier, the MD80 and B737 Cl
32 Revelation : Back then, both of these planes had small wings optimized for short routes and low levels of automation. A320 came along and fixed that. What do you
33 Analog : Perhaps this is why the Europeans decided, at the last minute, to change the engine choice from the Canadian engine to then non-existent Europrop. Th
34 Post contains links and images YULspotter : The Bombardier website shows a 145 high density seat layout for the C130 so a 150 seater variant of the CSeries would not be that much of a stretch. h
35 Post contains links and images Keesje : Well in 06 I looked at a high density 2-2-2 medium range 3-3 wider seat fuselage, wider then an A320 but significant narrower then a 767. Aimed at th
36 Ikramerica : For all the talk about how the A320 is a more modern platform, we can't forget that it is still 25 years old from launch. Just as Airbus tries to cla
37 Post contains links Keesje : as expected: "Neither is in a position to launch a single-aisle program," contrary to the expectations of many aerospace experts, Udvar-Hazy said in
38 SeJoWa : Keesje, your graphics are much appreciated! One question though, what do you mean by "30% folding middle seats"? I'd prefer your input to a not all to
39 Nomadd22 : Maybe all seats staggered. I never thought staggered seats would fly on 3-3, but in 2-2-2 access to the window seat shouldn't be too bad.  
40 Post contains links Keesje : The short haul / high density 2-2-2 configuration has minimal seat width (17"cushion) and minimal aisle width (18"). people getting /in / out of thei
41 PavlovsDog : Keesje- How would a CSeries based Turboliner look/work? I imagine a new wing and center section would be the main differences. A 5-abreast fuselage wo
42 Post contains links Keesje : Pressure from the airlines won't go away : Air France's environmental commitment hinges on 737/A320 replacement About every ten years, we have been ab
43 Burkhard : Is the A350 light the first answer? If you want 30% more effciency, go big!
44 SEPilot : That is not the point. If the technology is not yet available (which according to the members of this forum with first hand knowledge, it does not se
45 RoseFlyer : It really angers and frustrates me when people say, oh the 737NG has been around for 12 years, so obviously it is outdated and Boeing is just being la
46 Ikramerica : Mid 1980s. Newspaper gets it wrong again. UH seems to think it's not the technology, but the will of A and B to work on them that is "not available"
47 Keesje : There have been improvements but minor ones, 1 percent, a half there.. Not like in the wide body segments. The CFM56 first flew in 197x and of course
48 Ikramerica : Yep, too true. HBR engines + lighter materials + new designs for various stages are needed, but the engine makers are like: "why bother? you are buyi
49 Post contains links and images Keesje : That could be the reality unfortunately.. MTU gave a good representation of the current situation last year and put it on their webside: http://www.m
50 Post contains links and images Keesje : Airbus and Boeing need to rethink plans He says Airbus and Boeing need to rethink plans to wait until at least 2015 to introduce narrowbodies because
51 Burkhard : There is no technology available or in the pipe that can be more than one percent better than an A320 advanced with GTF and maybe large winglets and c
52 Columba : I think they would be a possible candidate for the CSeries, too, as they really seem to want new planes soon. They would also be one of the first in
53 SEPilot : The bottom line is that Boeing and Airbus are both doing the best they can with the engines that are currently available. If the GTF proves successful
54 Columba : One idea: It is said that the GTF is too big to put under the 737 wings what if Boeing "resurrects" the 727 and put two GTFs on the back. Highly unlik
55 Scouseflyer : True, I can't wait to see the demostrator for the "radical wing" that A is looking at for the next A320 - from, what I understand it will have the mo
56 Burkhard : Wouldn't they fit under a 757 wing? No, before hanging them under an obsolete aircraft, Boeing might increase the gear length. I know this is not so s
57 Post contains links and images Keesje : If we have to believe what Boeing and Airbus say that is truth. However are they objective? Some suggest A &B have a healthy NB backlog and other thi
58 Burkhard : We agree that the ball is in the field of the engine makers. GTF is the only babe that showed up until now. If LEAP56 reached the point it can be put
59 Cricket : The point about A and B factoring in a lower fuel price base ($60/bbl) instead of current fuel prices ($140/bbl as of today) before deciding to make s
60 Post contains links Nomadd22 : That was the most times I've ever seen "massive" used in one paragraph. What ever happened to Boeings Muppet plane ideas? http://www.flightsimworld.co
61 Rheinwaldner : Why must there be a 15..20..25% drop? Airlines are looking of course for 50% or more!! But if they only get 30% improvement they would take it! They
62 Post contains images Keesje : I think the customers don't want to wait for 12 yrs after the A380 and 787 enter service.. Boeing and Airbus prefer to keep building 737 and a320 for
63 Cruiser : What would have been interesting is if in 2005, Airbus launched the A350 as a NB A320 replacement. That would have been the most interesting contest o
64 HapppyLandings : Here is what surprises me, there was no real demand for the A380 or 748. With the 350/787 and NG 320/737 they would have taken much more orders and ma
65 Scbriml : I don't think so. If Airbus came out with an A320E that was 5% more fuel-efficient, I very much doubt any large 737NG operator would consider replaci
66 Gigneil : The CSeries isn't getting healthy support. And has been for a LONG while. No you didn't. You don't work anywhere near him, or you'd have known Streif
67 Keesje : I don't work anywhere near him but still.. Merkel & some India hot shot were with him, security folks cleared the way.
68 FrmrCAPCADET : I cannot imagine that the major fliers of NBs are not in constant contact with engine makers and A and B. And that when they say it is time to go, it
69 ER757 : Great topic Keesje - so many ways to look at this. Both A & B have healthy order books for the existing products, so as you suggest that makes them le
70 SEPilot : But neither Boeing nor Airbus make engines. Right now they have nothing better available Exactly my thoughts. It appears that LEAP56 is having proble
71 Ikramerica : All companies always claim they are doing the best they can. That's right up until one of them comes out with something new, or another company comes
72 CEO@AFG : I'm sure the technology is there, I'm not however sure the investment capital is there for either Boeing or Airbus. Both have botched up their two new
73 Rheinwaldner : Ok, for 5% you may be right. But how about 10%. IMO that would suffice to completely eclipse the competitor (if fuel is so expensive as it is). That
74 Ikramerica : It would be enough for carriers that have 737NGs that will be 15 years old in 2013 to consider it, rather than taking new 737NGs. It would be enough
75 SEPilot : Not being privy to the inner workings at either the airframe or engine makers, I do not know where the ball really is. It is true that substantial pr
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...
AF-KL : 2 New Destinations In East-Africa posted Thu Dec 2 2004 16:06:45 by FLYSSC
AF/KL King Of The North Atlantic Skies? posted Fri Apr 11 2008 12:00:18 by Pihero
DOT Finally Grants ATI For NW/DL/AF/KL/AZ/OK posted Wed Apr 9 2008 15:32:15 by NW748i
DL-NW Merger Like AF-KL: What It Might Look Like posted Mon Mar 31 2008 20:23:16 by DL767captain
AF/KL Plan For AZ: Not Much Change posted Fri Mar 28 2008 03:54:06 by BlueFlyer
AF-KL: CityJet To Fly EIN-LCY posted Thu Mar 13 2008 03:08:18 by Airbuseric
Initial Loads - KL's New DFW Flight posted Mon Mar 3 2008 11:02:45 by Bartond
AF/KL/DL/(NW) Disadvantage In Asia/Pacific posted Mon Feb 18 2008 12:34:45 by GayStudPilot
Official: Italy Govt. Selects AF/KL posted Fri Dec 28 2007 07:26:27 by BuyantUkhaa
Alitalia Takeover: Confirmed: AF-KL Selected! posted Tue Dec 11 2007 14:33:05 by Nycfly75