Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
WSJ: 1/3rd Of B&A Orders Risk Cancelation  
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3221 times:

Brief fair use excerpt from The Wall Street Journal:

Quote:
As rising oil prices cause even the strongest airlines to struggle, Airbus and Boeing Co. face the possibility that as many as a third of their orders for new jets could be postponed or canceled.

Driven largely by demand from airlines outside the U.S., the rival manufacturing giants over the past three years have collected almost 7,000 orders for modern fuel-efficient jets. [...]

But the landscape is shifting as oil prices rattle the underlying economics of the airline industry. Some airlines, including JetBlue Airways Corp. and Delta Air Lines Inc., are already taking steps to defer deliveries or rid themselves of orders. Others are starting to repeat steps they took after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, such as permanently parking gas guzzlers and selling newer jets to leasing companies for cash before leasing them back on a monthly basis.

Mr. Udvar-Hazy predicts that 25% to 30% of the two makers' order books -- roughly equivalent to the number of planes that were intended to accommodate airline growth rather than replace aging planes -- could be subject to what he called the "flake-out factor" if oil prices continue their unprecedented rise.

[...]

John Leahy, chief operating officer for customers at Airbus, says the bulk of orders should be safe as long as business travelers continue to fill seats, but that's no certainty as oil prices rise. "I think oil is going to have to go a bit over $150 a barrel before it forces a world-wide recession, which is when you would expect to see business travel start to taper off," he says. If that happens, he adds, "airlines would obviously have to take a closer look at their plans."

Scott Carson, president of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, says the U.S.-based aerospace company has been in close contact with "a number of our customers," particularly as fare increases have failed to keep pace with rising energy costs. "I don't think I've talked to any airline that believes this is a phenomenon that can be sustained given today's business model," he says. "We haven't seen any cancellations," he adds, "but we have had a couple of carriers ask to move their deliveries out of 2008 and into later years."

[...]

Continental Airlines Inc. and US Airways Group Inc. have relatively large numbers of planes on order and say they are committed to taking them. [...]

This is a very long article and I encourage you to look at it. Basically, it appears that the synopsis is grim. I think the manufacturers can weather this — after all, they've got more orders right now than they can easily deal with, but it will definitely upset the market to a great degree. Older models are sure to be slaughtered.

Original article: Oil Surge May Cost Jet Makers Orders

[Edited 2008-06-24 21:18:04]


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBAW716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3075 times:

I think the 787 orders are pretty safe. This aircraft will dramatically cut fuel consumption and allow airlines the flexibility to operate medium to long haul flights with a low passenger load. In troubled times, you want a smaller, more efficient aircraft to operate routes when you are downsizing. I agree that there may be a lot of leasebacks on this aircraft, but I don't think orders are going to get cut substantially...unless Boeing has another serious delay in the delivery timetable.

The aircraft that are probably most at risk are those programs that are not selling particularly well now...specifically the Boeing 747-8i passenger aircraft. LH is the only passenger customer right now and while they are probably the strongest carrier in the world right now, Boeing will have to seriously review this program if no other carriers come to the table. Right now, bigger is not necessarily better...even the A380 might be a problematic exercise if fuel gets to $200/barrel, which I think will happen before all is said and done.

On the Airbus side, the A346 might be a dead duck; but as for the other Airbus aircraft, it's hard to say how their orders will be affected, especially for narrowbody aircraft.

Time will tell if the statements made in the original order will come to pass.

baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21529 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3043 times:

It's the 737, A320 and A330 sales that are at risk. Not all of them, but the sales to the carriers with huge growth plans that won't come to pass, or to the startup LCCs who have based their model on 737s, A320s or A330s.

The 777s are mostly 77Ws and going to established customers who are not struggling very much, as are the A380s, 748s (F and I), 787s. Some A350s are going to startups too, but they are so far off I can't see any cancelations in the near term.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2966 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 2):
It's the 737, A320 and A330 sales that are at risk.

Agree on the narrowbodies, not so much on the widebodies. There is a widebody shortage and the airlines that are parking aircraft are all parking narrowbodies. There may of course be some cancelations in widebody sales, and I think the 777 runs just as much risk as the a330. Maybe even more, as it's a larger aircraft, with more seats needing to be filled. Let's just hope this prediction will not come true.

Second, IIRC Leahy (or someone from Airbus) has voiced this concern a while ago already. They do seem to be a bit moderate in there tone in this article though...



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 offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1884 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2954 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 2):
The 777s are mostly 77Ws and going to established customers who are not struggling very much

In case you haven't noticed, both Jet Airways and Air India are in trouble - not to mention Kinfisher. If the trend continues, they may defer or cancel some of their 77W orders, unfortunately. Then there is also Air Canada, but for now they remain relatively healthy and I expect them to take all of their 777s for now.



STOP TERRORRUSSIA!!!
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2943 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well, if 30% of your backlog is at risk, it's better that it happens when you have the biggest backlog in your history.

Quoting Kappel (Reply 3):
There is a widebody shortage and the airlines that are parking aircraft are all parking narrowbodies.

They're mainly tending to park 737-300/400/500s and DC-9s/MD-80s. LH recently ordered additional A320s/A321s to allow them to replace their classic 737s. I would expect to see airlines like AA and DL start to park up their MD-80s and take 737NGs more quickly.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineFrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1607 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2921 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 3):
Second, IIRC Leahy (or someone from Airbus) has voiced this concern a while ago already. They do seem to be a bit moderate in there tone in this article though...

Indeed, it was John Leahy who said in an earlier interview that about 30% of their backlog might not be delivered... And that was before the sharp increase in oil prices. So it struck me as well, he doesn't seem to be very concerned now.

If oil prices remain at the current high level (and that's not a certainty IMO), in combination with heavy competition this will more than likely result in airlines go bust. And that may well include ones with orders for 330's, 350's, 777's or 787's. In another thread there's a discussion about the problems 9W is facing, and I'm sure they're not alone.

I agree that LCC's are most at risk. People will start cutting on unnecessary luxeries as weekend trips by airplane, it isn't as cheap as it used to be any more. I wouldn't be surprised if some start-ups never realised that oil would get a lot more expensive, thought that air travel would increase no matter what...



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21529 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2864 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 3):
There may of course be some cancelations in widebody sales, and I think the 777 runs just as much risk as the a330.

Think that all you want, but a look at the order books may change your mind.

Kingfisher, Jet, Hong Kong, AirAsia, US - that's 90+ orders at risk out of 400 outstanding, or nearly 25%.

On the 777 side, it's about 30 at risk out of 300+ outstanding, or 10%.

Neither of these take into account the potential slow down in air freight and the impact it would have on the A330F and 777F, but even then, the vast majority of 777F orders are going to be delivered.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 4):
In case you haven't noticed, both Jet Airways and Air India are in trouble - not to mention Kinfisher.

For a grand total of 18 undelivered between them. And I am not too worried about Air India in the long term. Deferrals are not the same thing as cancelations.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2732 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
Kingfisher, Jet, Hong Kong, AirAsia, US

I have no idea which aircraft will make more money for an airline, but in the case of Jet I severely doubt the a330 orders are .. uhhh... in doubt. Air Asia is IMHO well positioned for growth due to it's low cost business model and if IT will cancel any orders, I would suspect the a340 orders to go first. The a330's are excellent for regional and european routes.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
On the 777 side, it's about 30 at risk out of 300+ outstanding, or 10%

Which ones are those? I can imagine that if you think the Air Asia order is in doubt, the V Australia order is not so certain as well. As uncertain, I would count Biman, Garuda, Philippine, TAM, V Australia (total 32). Will the remaining CO and AA 777's ever be delivered (15 open orders) ? Will CX or KE defer deliveries (38 open orders)? There are 34 unidentified 777's. Who says those are certain now? If counting like that, the numbers are way higher.

But it's all speculation. But like I said, let's hope this prediction does not come true, and again... IMHO the narrowbody sales (a320 and 737) will most likely carry the brunt of cancellations by far.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 7):
Think that all you want, but a look at the order books may change your mind.

Sorry, not really. Again, IMHO, the 777 orders run just as much risk as the a330, but less risk than 737/a320 orders.



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 offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 9423 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2726 times:

"But the landscape is shifting as oil prices rattle the underlying economics of the airline industry. Some airlines, including JetBlue Airways Corp. and Delta Air Lines Inc., are already taking steps to defer deliveries or rid themselves of orders."
What orders are DL trying to defer or get rid of? Are they talking about the 737-800s that DL got rid of in BK?



yep.
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13114 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2674 times:

One related problem could be the declining values of some older a/c due to their the higher fuel consumption and costs. That could kill off trade in values that might have be used to defer some of the costs of new a/c and affect new orders.
Sharply declining numbers of start ups along with those who might buy used a/c will want to buy newer, more fuel efficient models. That will probably mean newer a/c holding or slightly increasing their values sharply reducing that of less efficient older models. With today's higher prices for scrap metals like aluminum, it could, like after 9/11, means a lot of a/c could be scrapped as the $$'s numbers work out better.


User currently offlineTravelhound From Australia, joined May 2008, 938 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2580 times:



Quoting BAW716 (Reply 1):
The aircraft that are probably most at risk are those programs that are not selling particularly well now...specifically the Boeing 747-8i passenger aircraft. LH is the only passenger customer right now and while they are probably the strongest carrier in the world right now, Boeing will have to seriously review this program if no other carriers come to the table. Right now, bigger is not necessarily better...even the A380 might be a problematic exercise if fuel gets to $200/barrel, which I think will happen before all is said and done.

Or ...... high oil prices might actually help 747-8i sales as the most optimum business case swings back to larger aircraft with lower seat mile costs (nothing more than an opposing argument)?

Strategically, I am not to sure Boeing would want to leave a whole market segment to Airbus.

Quoting Frigatebird (Reply 6):
Indeed, it was John Leahy who said in an earlier interview that about 30% of their backlog might not be delivered... And that was before the sharp increase in oil prices. So it struck me as well, he doesn't seem to be very concerned now.

I thought Leahy also said he expected Airbus to have more orders cancelled than Boeing.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12559 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2518 times:



Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 10):
One related problem could be the declining values of some older a/c due to their the higher fuel consumption and costs. That could kill off trade in values that might have be used to defer some of the costs of new a/c and affect new orders.
Sharply declining numbers of start ups along with those who might buy used a/c will want to buy newer, more fuel efficient models.

 checkmark 

I have a hard time seeing another AirTran nee ValueJet scooping up tons of older DC-9/MD-8x/737 classic narrowbodies to start up an airline. Seems most of the startups are following the JetBlue model of starting up with shiny new airplanes with low fuel and maint costs, and some amenties to draw away pax from the legacies. If the funding is there, it's a much easier route to go.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineKogge From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 75 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2429 times:

This is a very interesting subject. Mr Leahy already mentioned several months ago that as many as 30% of the orders backlog might be subject to cancellation...
I took the Airbus O&D Spreadsheet for May 2008, summed up the open aircraft per customer and assigned a "probability" to each customer taking all the ordered aircraft.
Using the probability and applying it to the number of oustanding orders I came to a number of deliveries which I see realistic.
The probability is just coming out of my imagination after watching the airline industrie since several decades.
And surprise, surprise, for the A330/340 wide bodies I came up with potential cancellations of 29% - pretty close to 30 !

I have made the same for the Airbus single aisle range, and came up with potential cancellations of 31% - also pretty close !

Details for the wide bodys:
A340: open orders 37, probable deliveries 19,25, cancellation 48%
A330: open orders 324, probable deliveries 246,41, cancellation 24%
A330F: open orders 77, probable deliveries 45,74, cancellation 40%
TOTAL: open orders 438, prob. deliveries 311,4, cancellation 29%

More details of my assumptions per customer, posted in pictures:

Big version: Width: 514 Height: 384 File size: 38kb
A340 Orders - how many will be delivered?


Big version: Width: 542 Height: 476 File size: 69kb
A330 Order Part1 - How many will be delivered ?

Big version: Width: 541 Height: 384 File size: 53kb
A330 Orders Part 2 - How many will be delivered ?


Big version: Width: 512 Height: 384 File size: 42kb
A330F orders - delivery probability


I did not post my imagination about the single aisle figures, as I do not know how these pictures come out in the post, and if they would be of interest to anybody.



Flown in Caravelle, Coronado, Friendship, Fellowship, Herald, Heron, One-Eleven, Trident, Viscount & others
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2395 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 8):
if IT will cancel any orders, I would suspect the a340 orders to go first

if it's the A345 orders that are at risk they'd better cancel quickly as 3 (I think) of then are already finished and waiting at TLS with 4 or 5 A330s for a big delivery jamboree in July.


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2384 times:

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 9):
What orders are DL trying to defer or get rid of? Are they talking about the 737-800s that DL got rid of in BK?

I believe so, to some degree, but the article in the original post specifically said FL has sold off two undelivered 737-800s and pushed 18 more out for four years. B6 is pushing 21 A320s (dunno which actual models) out for five years. DL has 36 737s on order, and 34 of them have been sold, though I'm guessing much of that occurred during bankruptcy. AA is accelerating deliveries. NW has committed to retaining its 787 order, but has pushed seven A320s back to 2012. US has canceled two A330 leases, but is retaining its order of 15 more. WN has pushed out its 2010 options on 737s by three years, but will take 29 airframes in 2008. Again, this is all from the article but I am paraphrasing instead of quoting to keep us within fair use guidelines.

[Edited 2008-06-25 06:34:51]


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2355 times:



Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 14):
if it's the A345 orders that are at risk they'd better cancel quickly as 3 (I think) of then are already finished and waiting at TLS with 4 or 5 A330s for a big delivery jamboree in July.

That's true. So I doubt they will cancel anything.



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 offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2968 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2319 times:



Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 4):
In case you haven't noticed, both Jet Airways and Air India are in trouble

Here is the thing, AI will not be allowed to fail and desperately needs a new fleet since most of the losses stem from bad fleet utilisation thanks to an aging fleet (20+ year old A310's and old, high cycle A320's) - the criminal part of the deal was that AI/IC paid top dollar for those planes from A&B. In a way, 787 delays have worked for AI.

9W is in trouble, can't seem to raise money, but unlikely to cancel long-haul orders.

IT needs long-haul planes more desperately than A32X's.

Connectivity into India is still poor and when the downturn ends around 2010 people will need the capacity.

Indigo on the other hand...



A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineDHR From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2007, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2045 times:

Air Deccan/Kingfisher might not defer but I know they are currently looking for buyers for about 10 A320 aircraft currently on the assembly line with deliveries from 08/08-10/09.

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21529 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2012 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 8):
I have no idea which aircraft will make more money for an airline, but in the case of Jet I severely doubt the a330 orders are .. uhhh... in doubt. Air Asia is IMHO well positioned for growth due to it's low cost business model and if IT will cancel any orders, I would suspect the a340 orders to go first. The a330's are excellent for regional and european routes.

Jet is in major trouble. All their plans are in doubt. Some of their planes may never be delivered.

Air Asia hasn't taken plane 1 widebody yet other than the 1 leased aircraft. They have 100 narrowbody (net) and 25 widebodies outstanding which would increase their capacity by an additional 150%. In a time of high fuel and market contraction, that kind of growth is risky. But the A330s may just be an entry on the books that never goes away but doesn't get filled either, eventually converted to A350s should the future bring changes.

Kingfisher is a crap shoot. Could cancel anything, and again, have widebody plans with no widebodies in service, and an Indian market not panning out as predicted with more international competition coming in all the time. Some of their planes could never be delivered. Others, of course, will be delivered shortly.

US could go BK and then all bets are off.

Hong Kong Air - who the heck knows? Going from 7x 738s to 30 A320s and 20 A330s is a big plan, but will it pan out in today's market?

Quoting Kappel (Reply 8):
Which ones are those? I can imagine that if you think the Air Asia order is in doubt, the V Australia order is not so certain as well. As uncertain, I would count Biman, Garuda, Philippine, TAM, V Australia (total 32).



I didn't count TAM because they are doing quite well and are taking the planes as we write. Either way they will retire MD11s and replace them with 777s, and the other 5 are not really at risk, unless you just count all airlines as risky.

Quote:
Will the remaining CO and AA 777's ever be delivered (15 open orders) ?

Yes, CO will take their planes. Even if CO were to go into BK, they would take the 777s.

AA are deferred anyway, and will probably be converted to 787s at a later date. Doesn't count as an at risk order, because a conversion would be wash. Unless AA were to go chapter 7. Which I doubt.

Quote:
Will CX or KE defer deliveries (38 open orders)? There are 34 unidentified 777's. Who says those are certain now? If counting like that, the numbers are way higher.

Deferred aircraft are not cancelations. And I don't think CX or KE are going to defer, at least not long term. KE is replacing 744s, and in this fuel environment, that even makes it more urgent. CX, even if they were to slow expansion, would do the same, taking 77Ws and retiring some of the 744s.

As for the 34 UFOs, no we don't know, but we'll find out soon, and from the grumblings around a.net, the carriers that may be involved would be the strongest ones, not the weakest.

I'm going to stick by my 30 or so 777s at risk and 90+ A330s at risk.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1812 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 19):
I'm going to stick by my 30 or so 777s at risk and 90+ A330s at risk.

You make some reasonable points Ikra, nothing against that. But I still think that the number for the a330's is a bit high. But we'll see...  Wink



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 offlineKogge From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 75 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1773 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 20):
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 19):
I'm going to stick by my 30 or so 777s at risk and 90+ A330s at risk.

You make some reasonable points Ikra, nothing against that. But I still think that the number for the a330's is a bit high. But we'll see...

Agree with Ikramericas figures for the Airbus widebodies.
If you look at my post (reply 13) I predicted 95 A330/340 at risk (plus 31 330F, but that may be a bit pessimistic...).



Flown in Caravelle, Coronado, Friendship, Fellowship, Herald, Heron, One-Eleven, Trident, Viscount & others
User currently offlineYellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6171 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1653 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 8):
TAM

Very Unlikely...S.& C. America (especially Brazil) always seems to hold up well during a downturn, partly because some are regulated markets.

LA, JJ, CM, TA all seem to do well. the carriers taht do go under (like VG) tend to be through sheer mismanagement.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
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...
WSJ: Boeing & Airbus Both Claim Victory posted Sat Jan 14 2006 17:35:26 by BoomBoom
Output Capacity Of Boeing And Airbus Lines posted Tue Sep 25 2007 15:24:30 by Stickers
Boeing & Airbus Amalgamate ..Could It Happen? posted Thu Aug 2 2007 17:01:25 by NEMA
Embraer Considering Jets To Rival Boeing & Airbus posted Mon Jul 16 2007 15:19:03 by Keesje
Why Can't Boeing & Airbus Find New VLA Customers? posted Tue May 8 2007 19:03:03 by Stitch
Why Do Airlines Use Boeing & Airbus? posted Sat Mar 17 2007 14:13:08 by Sampa737
Boeing & Airbus New Development Maxed Out? posted Mon Jul 31 2006 22:07:11 by United787
Why I Love Boeing & Airbus (and What I Don't Like) posted Sun Mar 5 2006 22:40:44 by JAAlbert
Pressure On Boeing & Airbus To Improve 737&A320? posted Sat Nov 5 2005 01:14:35 by Keesje
Number Of Boeing And Airbus Planes. posted Mon Nov 15 2004 17:44:30 by Djmatthews