Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A New B747NG To Compete With The A380?  
User currently offlineBOEING747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 319 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 24951 times:

Right now, the B747-400 is roughly 20 years old right now so I am wondering whether or not there will be a B747NG to compete with the A380 as of yet? The 747-8 is currently being built and used as a cargo freighter at the moment but there is no new passenger version out there yet?

73 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinechiawei From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 938 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 24944 times:

There is a 747-8 passenger for Lufthansa that is currently near end of production line.

That is the 747 NG you are talking about.


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4482 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 24948 times:

Quoting BOEING747400 (Thread starter):
The 747-8 is currently being built and used as a cargo freighter at the moment but there is no new passenger version out there yet?

The 747-8i (Intercontinental) passenger version is in production. It's been ordered by Lufthansa and Korean Air.

The simple explanation is that there is simply no room to make a profitable direct competitor to the A380. The market for Very Large Airplanes is so small that even Airbus' prospects of ultimately making a profit on the A380 program are in serious question.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 24876 times:

Quoting BOEING747400 (Thread starter):
The 747-8 is currently being built and used as a cargo freighter at the moment

Sorry, have I missed something? Where, and by whom, is the 748 being currently used as a cargo aircraft?


User currently offlinesolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 847 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 24880 times:

The 748i is hardly a hot cake and if Airbus go for the 380-900 version, Boeing 748NG might be in the race.

My   



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineYXwatcherMKE From United States of America, joined May 2007, 941 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 24698 times:

OMG man where have you been, have you looked at the their website at all in the past few years? What do you think the 747-8i is? It has not sold well yet because of the A-380 and the 777-200ER and company but I have a feeling that once the 747-8i is in production for LH that other carriers will want the aircraft. But because the 777-200ER and company the airlines that would look at the 747-8i and say, 'Oh I want that plane' just have not been doing so. May be and I really hope that there are airline exec's out there that see the747-8i as a true option for the future and order it.

[Edited 2010-12-20 11:48:44]

[Edited 2010-12-20 11:49:31]


I miss the 60's & 70's when you felt like a guest on the plane not cattle like today
User currently offlinewarden145 From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 496 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 24574 times:

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 7):
It has not sold well yet because of the A-380 and the 777-200ER and company but I have a feeling that once the 747-8i is in production for LH that other carriers will want the aircraft. But because the 777-200ER and company the airlines that would look at the 747-8i and say, 'Oh I want that plane' just have not been doing so. May be and I really hope that there are airline exec's out there that see the747-8i as a true option for the future and order it.

I have difficulty believing that it'll happen, but I sincerely hope you're right...at least for me, it'll be a sad, sad day when the 747 leaves the various airline fleets, and I want to see that day moved as far into the future as possible. But, I'm not holding my breath  



ETOPS = Engine Turns Off, Passengers Swim
User currently offlinealwaysontherun From Netherlands Antilles, joined Jan 2010, 464 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 23723 times:

[quote=BOEING747400,reply=0]
I see you joined A.net on the 11th of September 2001………..an amazing date for aviation.

I assume you don´t visit the website too often……….there are a lot of threads on the 748-8i.
The 747-8i isn´t selling very well though, Airbus brought out a brand new VLA instead of a refurbished one.

###"I´m always on the Run"###



"Failure is not an option, it comes standard in any Windows product" - an anonymous MAC owner.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18679 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 23072 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 2):

The simple explanation is that there is simply no room to make a profitable direct competitor to the A380.

A more accurate statement would be that there is simply no room to make a profitable A380-sized aircraft, period.

Quoting santos (Reply 8):
Or even a 707-NG?

That was the 757-200.

Quoting solnabo (Reply 5):
The 748i is hardly a hot cake and if Airbus go for the 380-900 version, Boeing 748NG might be in the race.

What room is there for an NG? It's the the most advanced engines and wing that exist.

Let's go over what modifications have occurred with each iteration of the 747:
741 was the original
742 had uprated engines and increased MTOW/range.
74SP had a fuselage shrink and concomittantly larger tailplane to offer longer range.
743 was a 742 with a stretched upper deck.
744 was the most radical re-do with new engines, aerodynamic improvements like the winglets and wing root fairings, new two-seat glass cockpit, electronic engine controls, and MTOW high enough to push the range past the magical 7,000 AND Mount Cook Airlines (New Zealand)">NM mark.
Yet the 748 is more radical still. Not only are there new GEnX-2b engines, but the wing is completely relofted AND, for the first time since the 747 was invented, the aircraft was stretched in two places.

There are other improvements that could have been made. The entire electrical system could have been re-done to an all-electric system like the 787. The whole aircraft could have been made out of CFRP. But these would have been huge modifications that would have eliminated any commonality with existing 747 models and would have cost Boeing even more in money and time. So the modifications were pretty minimal.

Even still, Boeing is predicting a CASM advantage over the A380.


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4593 posts, RR: 38
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 23020 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
Even still, Boeing is predicting a CASM advantage over the A380.


Which is impossible unless they compare seat counts with different pitches. Even LH, as a customer of both, predicts at comparable seat pitches the A380 will clearly have the upper hand in CASM.

That does not mean I do not like to see the B748 out there. I love planes, especially if they have more then 2 engines.  .

[Edited 2010-12-20 16:24:56]

User currently offlineU2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 321 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22971 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
Even still, Boeing is predicting a CASM advantage over the A380.

Boeing also 'predicted' that the 787 would be delivered and in service with ANA by 2008   
I'm joking obviously, I know it's got nothing to do with it. But if this does turn out to be the case then Airbus must have made some pretty big mistakes with their brand new aircraft, against a 'tweaked' 40 year old design.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 22881 times:

I once compared the A388 to B748 in the following thread:
A388 Versus B748 Economic Analysis (by LAXDESI Jul 26 2008 in Tech Ops)

After many useful comments from others, I came up with the following estimates for a 6,000 nm trip. My analysis assumes that A388 can offer 120 seats more than B748 for similar cabin layouts. The analysis below is updated to reflect current fuel prices.

A388 burns 53,007 gallons, carries 90,469 lbs. cargo, GSM(gallon seat mile) .0168, GTM(gallon ton mile) 0.0968
B748 burns 42,397 gallons, carries 84,050 lbs. cargo, GSM .0174, GTM 0.0919

A388 burns additional 10,610 gallons at a cost of $32,000
A388 earns additional $84,000 (120 seats X 70% LF X $1,000) in seat revenues.
Looks like both aircraft are equally matched in cargo potential, if not volume constrained.


The net trip advantage to A388 is $52,000--about $18 million annually.The B748 at list prices is about $40 million cheaper than the A388.


User currently offlinethegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 22633 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 12):

A388 burns 53,007 gallons, carries 90,469 lbs. cargo, GSM(gallon seat mile) .0168, GTM(gallon ton mile) 0.0968
B748 burns 42,397 gallons, carries 84,050 lbs. cargo, GSM .0174, GTM 0.0919

These figures do show that there may be a niche market for routes with a large amount of cargo compared to the passenger demand. If you compare 10/week 748i to 7/week A388 + 2/week A33F making a stop, the 748i could come out in front.

That's one reason that Airbus would build the A389. Another is that the A388 is likely to be volume constrained for belly cargo very often. Maybe the main positive of the 748i program is forcing Airbus to build the A389.


User currently offlinenitepilot79 From Turkey, joined May 2008, 250 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21387 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 3):
Sorry, have I missed something? Where, and by whom, is the 748 being currently used as a cargo aircraft?

Cargolux has one as far as I know.



En Buyuk Turkiye, Baska Buyuk Yok!
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8494 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21257 times:

Quoting nitepilot79 (Reply 15):
Cargolux has one as far as I know.

No 748Fs are in service yet. First delivery is planned for mid-2011.


User currently offline2707200X From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 8018 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21227 times:

Boeings strongest potential is the Y3 concept to challenge but not necessarily compete head on against the A380. The passenger variant 747 is on it's way out. I don't think the market has the space for a direct size competitor to the A380 like the NLA but a 747 size competitor like the Y3 that is bigger than the 777 or A350 does have the potential to sell well.


"And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by." John Masefield Sea-Fever
User currently offlineFX1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 21198 times:

Quoting nitepilot79 (Reply 15):
Quoting AirNZ (Reply 3):
Sorry, have I missed something? Where, and by whom, is the 748 being currently used as a cargo aircraft?

Cargolux has one as far as I know.

Nope, it is just in their colors but definitely NOT operating for Cargolux.

Quoting U2380 (Reply 11):
I know it's got nothing to do with it. But if this does turn out to be the case then Airbus must have made some pretty big mistakes with their brand new aircraft, against a 'tweaked' 40 year old design.

I enjoyed how you left out the whole other part of Doc's post about how the 748 is HARDLY just a "tweaked" 40 year old design....

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
Quoting solnabo (Reply 5):
The 748i is hardly a hot cake and if Airbus go for the 380-900 version, Boeing 748NG might be in the race.


What room is there for an NG? It's the the most advanced engines and wing that exist.

Let's go over what modifications have occurred with each iteration of the 747:
741 was the original
742 had uprated engines and increased MTOW/range.
74SP had a fuselage shrink and concomittantly larger tailplane to offer longer range.
743 was a 742 with a stretched upper deck.
744 was the most radical re-do with new engines, aerodynamic improvements like the winglets and wing root fairings, new two-seat glass cockpit, electronic engine controls, and MTOW high enough to push the range past the magical 7,000 AND Mount Cook Airlines (New Zealand)">NM mark.
Yet the 748 is more radical still. Not only are there new GEnX-2b engines, but the wing is completely relofted AND, for the first time since the 747 was invented, the aircraft was stretched in two places.

FX1816


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8640 posts, RR: 75
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 20394 times:

Quoting FX1816 (Reply 18):
I enjoyed how you left out the whole other part of Doc's post about how the 748 is HARDLY just a "tweaked" 40 year old design....

It does not meet todays certification requirements, it if hanging onto its "40 year old design" basis to be certified. For example todays requirement states that passengers must have two exit routes (forward and behind), making the forward section on the main deck, and upper deck not meeting todays requirements.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineFX1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 19659 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 19):
Quoting FX1816 (Reply 18):
I enjoyed how you left out the whole other part of Doc's post about how the 748 is HARDLY just a "tweaked" 40 year old design....

It does not meet todays certification requirements, it if hanging onto its "40 year old design" basis to be certified. For example todays requirement states that passengers must have two exit routes (forward and behind), making the forward section on the main deck, and upper deck not meeting todays requirements.

Ok, I guess it doesn't meet today's certification requirements so we should just tell Boeing they just wasted a crap load of money????  

FX1816


User currently offlineilanbwoy From Jamaica, joined Feb 2009, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 19421 times:

Was at the Boeing factory last weekend and saw the first prod 748i for lufthansa (well thats what our tour guide said). It is built and i think they are installing the interior. It should be rolling out in the next few weeks. The wings are huge and you def see the bigger hump if i'm not mistaken.

User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18679 posts, RR: 58
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 19355 times:

U2380 is right, though. The 748 is a heavily tweaked 40yo design. The basic hull shape, the frame, the internal fittings, the design of the nose gear, the shape of the cockpit windows, tons of the airframe, in fact, is identical to the 747-100. There is probably a very long list of identical parts from both models.

But, especially with the new wing, the parts list with each iteration has increased in variance. The 741 and 742 may have been almost identical, but the 741 and 748 are not.

It shows how little the platform has to do with the efficiency of the airliner and how much the wings, engines, and systems contribute.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 19302 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 19):
It does not meet todays certification requirements,

That must mean that it got certified under older rules, and therefore it can be built under those rules. Something similar happens in the home building industry that I am engaged in. I am currently building condos that were approved under the old codes, but the same would not be approved under the current codes.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24061 posts, RR: 22
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 18833 times:

Quoting huxrules (Reply 7):
707-NG? There were all those re-engined 707s with the CFM-56. I think thats as close as your going to get.

The only 707 airframes with CFM56 engines are military versions. One commercial 707-320C was converted to CFM56 engines for test purposes but was converted back to to the original P&W JT3Ds before delivery to the government of Morocco.

There was never a commercial CFM56 modification program for the 707 comparable to the program that converted 110 DC-8-61/62/63s to CFM56 engines.

Many military KC-135s were of course also modified with CFM56s replacing the original J57s (JT3C).


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8640 posts, RR: 75
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 18335 times:

Quoting FX1816 (Reply 20):
Ok, I guess it doesn't meet today's certification requirements so we should just tell Boeing they just wasted a crap load of money????

No need for the attitude.

The aircraft is grandfathered off the 747-100 design of 40 years ago, it will not certified to today’s FARs. I have given a clear example of a safety related regulation which the aircraft will not meet. It also has different crashworthiness requirements (lower) than aircraft certified today, that was the standard back then. To meet all of today’s standards the aircraft would be a lot heavier, and it would have reduced functionality.

It is going to appear as an amendment to the same certification document of the 747-100 first issued 40 years ago, the same document that also lists the 747-200, 747-300, and 747-400. All are variations of the original design.

Anyone promoting that it is a "new" aircraft is deliberately being misleading, it is certified as a variation of the original design. The 787 is a new aircraft, it is a new design that has to meet today’s (well actually more like 5 years ago) regulations.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineFX1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 18002 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 25):
Anyone promoting that it is a "new" aircraft is deliberately being misleading, it is certified as a variation of the original design. The 787 is a new aircraft, it is a new design that has to meet today’s (well actually more like 5 years ago) regulations.

And I NEVER said the 748 was a "new" aircraft, however there is quite a bit different between it and the very first 741. I see these planes flying here daily and they are very similar and yet very different.

FX1816


25 U2380 : Hence why I put the word tweaked in inverted commas. I know that the 747-8 isn't a minor change over the 744 (it’s taken longer to modify this than
26 EPA001 : But since this is not the case, this is just a hypothetical statement. The A380 is the VLA to go for, even LH and KE who are the only two customers f
27 Post contains links keesje : A new VLA topic. It's been a while. I think that is correct. We are talking hundreds over longer periods, divide that by 2... Maybe an optimized platf
28 AirNZ : It can be as 'different' as you want to make it....but it is still only a variation of a 40 year-old aircraft. That is pure reality and nothing will
29 Post contains images OyKIE : As others have noted the 747-8i must be viewed as a NG of the 747-400. I am one of the few that would like Boeing to stretch the -8i to 80 meters as
30 cloudyapple : I wonder how much commonality there is between a 100 and the 8I. Probably none! It just does not make sense to keep its grandfather privileges for 40
31 astuteman : Well, as an opinion I guess that works ok, but it's far from being a given as a "more accurate statement". There's no telling how close to profitabil
32 OldAeroGuy : Yes, there are. They are contained in FAR 21, specifically 21.101, commonly known as the Changed Product Rule (CPR). If enough change is made to spec
33 BrouAviation : Why? With the 748 clearly having more efficient engines and a more efficient wing, why wouldn't a lower CASM be possible? A 'tweaked' 40-year old des
34 LAXDESI : $1,000 represents the seat weighted average of tickets in all three classes of cabin. I doubt very much that airlines have a yield of $200-250 even f
35 gemuser : No it has not! See replies 17, 21, 23, 25, 28, 30 & 32. It is type certified as an amendment to the original B747 type certificate. Gemuser
36 XT6Wagon : Thats ok, neither does the A380... so whats your point? Only some new regulations matter, and those are the ones that Airbus complies with, but the o
37 Post contains images U2380 : Please don't say that I "shouldn't be taken too serious when discussing engineering matters" when your blinding love for the 747-8 has prevented you
38 Aesma : No. There is not a single piece of the current 911 that is also on the 1970 911. And of course the shape is not the same either (even if there is an
39 Post contains images astuteman : It may have more efficient engines, but it's nowhere near being more efficient aerodynamically The "more efficient wing" is still constrained by bein
40 FX1816 : A "homer" for Airbus are we??? Where did I ever say that it means Airbus made some pretty big mistakes with their VLA or that it is inferior in anywa
41 ADent : The 747-8 is the 747NG. Just like the 737-700 is the 737NG and followed the 737-300. If you want a 747-8NG - why? The 747-8 isn't even in service yet.
42 Burkhard : I can't wait for the first 748i to join the endless stream of aircraft passing over my head, joining the E190, E195, A319, A320, A321, A333, A343, A34
43 U2380 : Where did I ever accuse you of that? I was responding to Boeing predicting the 748 to have a lower CASM than the A380. Maybe the fact that the A380 h
44 Burkhard : Homer or not home, every Airbus fanboy is eagerly waiting for the 748i more than any other aircraft, since it is a real aircraft an not another JABT (
45 travelavnut : I'd love to see some sources to back this claim up Brou.. The A380's wing and nose are IIRC responsible for the better then expected drag coefficient
46 Post contains images OyKIE : NG as in the Next Generation 747-400. Nothing wrong at all with that. As an aviation nut, the more different planes, the better I know that at the en
47 zeke : The fundamental design needs to be common, if it was too much different the FAA would not grandfather it. OldAeroGuy has provide the reference for th
48 milesrich : Does the 747-8 have the same type of center fuel tank wiring that the -100 had? And seriously, does this mean that the 747-8 only has to comply with
49 Klaus : The issue back then has been addressed on the older ones as well as far as I know. So even if the -8 has a modified design there, that should be more
50 AirNZ : How are you arriving at that considering the 748 has not EIS, and none have been delivered?
51 warden145 : Nice to know I'm not the only one thinking that! I know this isn't the way of the future, but that doesn't mean I have to like it...I miss the old da
52 OldAeroGuy : Then you would be aware that there are very few current regulations that the 747-8I will not meet and those that aren't met will have a minimal effec
53 Post contains images DocLightning : Well, in fact, that's quite true! What a revelation!
54 FX1816 : This statement actually has no basis given the fact that how long has Airbus offered the A380 and how long has Boeing offered the 748?? Number of ord
55 AADC10 : It is still an apples to oranges comparison since it is between an operating aircraft and one that has yet to take its first flight. You can play wit
56 zeke : I think the term you are after out of the AC is "contribute materially to the level of safety of the changed product". I do not think Boeing is going
57 U2380 : Ok.. Right, I'm bored of this now. You have your view, I have mine. However.. Could you stop outlining unnecessary things with capitals? I'm not a ch
58 FX1816 : What do you mean I have my view and you have yours?? The 748 was offered after the A380 had started taking orders, being first doesn't equal better,
59 Post contains links keesje : The original prediction was to sell twice as much -8i as -8F's. Boeing said they were talking to 25 airlines before launch. It all went differently.
60 U2380 : I'll bite again. Ok, it doesn’t definitively say the A380 is better. However.. Since the 748 has been available the A380 has got more orders in the
61 astuteman : The 747 had probably been so successful as a freighter that the launch of the 748F on its own was probably unnecessary..... 744ERF's would still rule
62 Post contains links PolymerPlane : from FAR 25.807 http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...0B7BF86256E9B0069AB55?OpenDocument it says near each end of the cabin (within 60 feet of the p
63 stitch : The 747-8F order book was very strong out of the gate, so I think that most of the customers who wanted the plane ordered it when it was announced, s
64 CXB77L : What you're also forgetting is that Boeing has rejected some offers for the 747-8. I understand W3 were one of them - although I could be wrong. Boei
65 zeke : Who is saying that ? Correct the 747-8 was not offered before the A380, however a longer 747 the size of the 747-8 using whatever marketing name Boei
66 manfredj : I swear, if I hadn't had a nice meal before reading this post, I'd be frustrated as all hell. Seeing that I'm well fed, I'm calm an relaxed to the poi
67 Post contains images astuteman : Oh, I agree completely It's impressive how a 40 year design basis can be made to compete today. Bodes well for the longevity of the A380.... But if i
68 Burkhard : I'm sure of this, too. By 2030, I expect 800 VLA in the air, 600 A380 and 200 B748i is my guess. Just since those airlines that need 748i size aircra
69 AirNZ : The word 'only' was used merely as a figure of speech/point of reference, and clearly seen as such had you bothered to understand the context in whic
70 parapente : The thread starter is American,his call sign is a 747 (400 series) he knows about the 748.He is on this major aircraft forum.He does know about the 74
71 U2380 : Hmm, good point. It does leave us with something to discus when the last 'major' story disappears. If you look through a.net you can see loads of dif
72 manfredj : In the end, I think we all know the 748i is the underdog...it' just fact. Those who can't grasp the idea are true patriots, but naive. Having said th
73 travelavnut : Also both Brou and the thread starter seem to have dissapeared. Not true troll behaviour, but still...
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...
Airbus A300-800 Or How To Compete With The 783? posted Wed Feb 22 2006 09:20:55 by PADSpot
How Is Airbus Going To Compete With The 7E7? posted Sat Jun 12 2004 02:25:55 by BoeingBus
Was The A320 Built To Compete With The 757 posted Thu May 13 2004 02:06:14 by 747400sp
AF New Livery With The A380? posted Mon Dec 17 2007 10:37:17 by Excalibur
Aviacsa Gets Ready To Compete With New LCC's posted Sun Sep 11 2005 22:56:32 by Rojo
Qantas To Atttempt World Record With The A380! posted Tue Jan 18 2005 11:33:09 by Qantas077
What It's Like To Be In The A380 Cockpit posted Tue Jan 29 2008 16:33:48 by FighterPilot
Would The A350 Compete With The A340? posted Sun Dec 9 2007 09:40:21 by OD-BWH
Air France New Service To Dzaoudzi With KQ posted Wed Jun 6 2007 18:12:21 by Jimyvr
Did I See The New SQ First Class For The A380? posted Sat Apr 21 2007 15:01:45 by CXfirst