Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Tension Is Growing Between Airbus And Air France  
User currently offlineCarls From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 522 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26997 times:

My Portuguese is not that good but more or less this is the translation:

Airbus and Air France are having a sour time due to some leaked information shows that the A330 did not have any problem. AF CEO held a conference call where he states: "It is to early to get to any conclusion and we need to wait until the technicians bring us the results of their investigations, let's not point our finger in any direction yet"

Apparently the microphone stayed open and it was heard " I made this statement because Airbus"

AF representatives got mad due to the fact that Airbus was too fast in made Airlines Public Report stating that the information coming from the Black Box did not show any fault on the A330, so there was no need to make any safety additional recommendations.

However Airbus said that the report was approved by BEA, which is doing the AF447 investigation, Airbus states that their relationship with Air France is solid.

Air France's Executive President has been confirmed in his position but is waiting for the board of directors approval in July which perhaps will be the same time at which BEA will make their preliminary report public.

As a personal opinion I think Airbus did an unnecessary movement sending this report to the media and their customers. It is in fact pointing the finger toward Air France without any firm proof. At the same time AF has postpone their wide body order, I am wondering if this has anything to do with the "Airbus Bulletin"

Here it is the original article:
Sorry it is in Potuguese


Uma disputa entre Airbus e Air France surge no momento em que aumenta a pressão para explicar, por meio dos dados recuperados das caixas-pretas da aeronave, o acidente com o voo 447, que fazia a rota Rio de Janeiro-Paris em 2009. A tensão foi lançada por autoridades de alto escalão após dias de informações na imprensa apontando possíveis culpados e da divulgação de que o avião não sofreu grandes falhas mecânicas.

O presidente-executivo da Air France, Pierre-Henri Gourgeon, fez um apelo à imprensa, nesta quinta-feira, para ter cautela ao tratar das possíveis causas do acidente, que devem ser descobertas em semanas. "É impossível tirar quaisquer conclusões hoje sobre qualquer tipo de responsabilidade", disse. "Vamos esperar até que os especialistas nos enviem uma mensagem coerente antes de irmos numa direção ou em outra e especular", acrescentou, ao minimizar perguntas sobre seu futuro no comando da Air France-KLM, controladora da companhia aérea.

No entanto, em comentários captados posteriormente por um microfone e retransmitido por jornalistas, o executivo disse a um colega: "O jeito que respondi foi um pouco rude, mas eu tive de fazer isso por causa da Airbus".

Representantes da Air France se irritaram com o fato de a Airbus, fabricante do avião que caiu no oceano Atlântico matando todas as 228 pessoas a bordo, se apressar em divulgar que a leitura inicial das caixas-pretas não identificou falhas mecânicas, informando às companhias aéreas que não tem novas recomendações de segurança. "Não foi uma jogada muito limpa", disse à Agência Reuters uma fonte familiarizada com o pensamento da companhia aérea, acrescentando que o comportamento quebrou uma convenção.

A Air France também se irritou com a divulgação do boletim da Airbus pelo jornal Le Figaro, que publicou matéria apontando o dedo para a tripulação da Air France. A rádio Europe 1, porém, relatou nesta quinta-feira que a tripulação não era a responsável pela tragédia, deixando incertezas sobre as causas do acidente.

Crise - As reputações de ambas as companhias está em jogo por conta de um dos mais chocantes e inexplicáveis desastres aéreos da história. As duas enfrentam uma investigação criminal e podem ser alvo de possíveis reclamações das famílias das vítimas na Justiça.

Além de acontecer em meio a grande interesse da mídia, a análise dos dados das caixas-pretas também ocorre semanas antes da feira de aviação de Paris, em que a Airbus pretende anunciar um grande número de novas encomendas.

Conjunto de fatores - A Airbus negou que tenha vazado o boletim que enviou a cerca de 100 companhias aéreas, disse que o documento foi aprovado pelo BEA, escritório que investiga acidentes aéreos na França, e que lidera a busca pelas causas da tragédia. "Nosso relacionamento com a Air France é sólido", disse uma porta-voz da Airbus em Toulouse.

"Eles operam todos os nossos produtos, incluindo 180 aeronaves. Dividimos com a Air France o custo das buscas (pelas caixas-pretas) e todos temos interesse de apoiar as investigações e entender o que causou a trágica perda do voo 447", acrescentou. Uma porta-voz da Air France também negou desentendimentos com a fabricante.

Pierre-Henri Gourgeon, que já chefiou a autoridade de aviação civil da França, disse que a Air France revisou todas as suas normas de segurança. “A história provou que acidentes aéreos são geralmente o produto de diversos elementos que coincidem em um mesmo momento e lugar", afirmou. "Se surgir algo na investigação que ainda não cobrimos com as medidas já tomadas, vamos adotá-las para garantir que um evento como esse jamais se repita."

O presidente-executivo da Air France foi reeleito para o cargo por mais quatro anos pelo conselho da empresa nesta quinta-feira, mas a decisão precisa será aprovada pelos acionistas em julho, podendo acontecer simultaneamente à publicação das descobertas preliminares da BEA sobre o acidente de 2009.



http://veja.abril.com.br/noticia/bra...-tensoes-entre-airbus-e-air-france

70 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26925 times:

Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
Airbus and Air France are having a sour time due to some leaked information shows that the A330 did not have any problem.


If the A330 "did not have any problem" why did it crash?


User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1655 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26870 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 1):
Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
Airbus and Air France are having a sour time due to some leaked information shows that the A330 did not have any problem.


If the A330 "did not have any problem" why did it crash?

Euhm, well from the top of my head, it could have been pilot error.... could it not?

Not that I'm saying this is the case. The very simple bulletin of Airbus stating that "At this stage of the preliminary analysis of DFDR Airbus has no immediate recommendation to raise to operators." has been blown way out of proportions by the media. This thread is a prima example of that, it has been discussed to death in the other AF447 threads. I suggest this thread be deleted.

[Edited 2011-05-20 06:10:07]

[Edited 2011-05-20 06:10:27]


Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26792 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 2):
Euhm, well on from the top of my head, it could have been pilot error....


I thought Airbus FBW system had so many protections that it would not let the pilot make an error?


User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1655 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26737 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 3):
I thought Airbus FBW system had so many protections that it would not let the pilot make an error?

Than you do not know how the envelope protection works. It will for example not prevent CFIT.



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26739 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 3):
I thought Airbus FBW system had so many protections that it would not let the pilot make an error?

You are kidding, right?



Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26668 times:

Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
Airbus and Air France are having a sour time

This is completely normal during crash investigations. If, BIG IF, one of the primary cause comes out to be the pilots did not respond correctly to the systems shutting down on the A330 - it will be Air France training which is blamed.

The airline 'training' and the manufacturer recommendations are in conflict in a great many accident investigations.

One reason for the conflict is that the airline usually wants the manufacturer to share some of the costs of the settlements from the lawsuits, and the manufacturer of course does not want to do so.


User currently offlineCarls From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 522 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26603 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 1):
If the A330 "did not have any problem" why did it crash?



If you want you can read the original article in Portuguese and not my translation, then you can use your own words....
Perhaps I should used the word fault instead of problem.

For accuracy please read the original article and forget about my translation.

[Edited 2011-05-20 06:25:41]

User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 26448 times:

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Airbus already issue the notices about changing the tubes immediately after the crash in 2009? Since that was long expected to be a primary factor in the crash, wouldn't it make sense that two years later no other changes are necessary after examining the data since they've already been changed?

User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 26283 times:

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 10):
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Airbus already issue the notices about changing the tubes immediately after the crash in 2009? Since that was long expected to be a primary factor in the crash, wouldn't it make sense that two years later no other changes are necessary after examining the data since they've already been changed?

Exactly my thoughts. Airbus simply have stated that the evidence does not require (new) operator action. They never have blamed AF. AF was blamed by the media.

[Edited 2011-05-20 06:44:06]


Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1655 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 26200 times:

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 11):
They never have blamed AF. AF was blamed by the media.

  

And now we have this discussion going on in all of the threads concerning AF447, a damn shame if you ask me..

[Edited 2011-05-20 06:49:56]


Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 25377 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 2):
The very simple bulletin of Airbus stating that "At this stage of the preliminary analysis of DFDR Airbus has no immediate recommendation to raise to operators."

   I just cannot believe everything that's been extrapolated from ONE SENTENCE. It boggles the mind.

Some poor communications person at Airbus probably sent that out with the intention of telling operators "we're involved in the investigation, we're doing everything we can, we just don't have anything to say RIGHT NOW that you should know immediately."



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 660 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 25018 times:

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 6):
I thought Airbus FBW system had so many protections that it would not let the pilot make an error?

Is this a (bad) joke or are you serious? You can't exit the safe flight envelope (in normal law). You can still crash it.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 24285 times:

All Airbus has to, or AF is asking Airbus to, lower the price further for the upcoming order. This will indirectly compensate AF. After all, it is only a money issue.

User currently offlineSchorschNG From Germany, joined Sep 2010, 501 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 23967 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 2):
Not that I'm saying this is the case. The very simple bulletin of Airbus stating that "At this stage of the preliminary analysis of DFDR Airbus has no immediate recommendation to raise to operators." has been blown way out of proportions by the media. This thread is a prima example of that, it has been discussed to death in the other AF447 threads. I suggest this thread be deleted.

Exactly, "Lû et apprové" (read and agree).
Airbus didn't say much more that no immediately apparent problem was visible, so that no immediate action is required.
this is probably fully compliant with BEA.

Actually, most crashes (even those that end up finding issues or weaknesses in an aircraft's design) do not show that after a quick glance at the FDR data.

I wouldn't read too much into the Airbus message at this point.



From a structural standpoint, passengers are the worst possible payload. [Michael Chun-Yung Niu]
User currently offlinegoblin211 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 1209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 23852 times:

Brush it off your shoulders AF. It's a busioness transaction and personal conflictas shouldn't have anything to do with business at the end of the day. Besides, it's not like Airbus will really suffer from this, it's more like AF is taking this way too personally, more or less. this will blow over soon especially if all this is normal as someone on here said.


From the airport with love
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8971 posts, RR: 39
Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 23643 times:

Sounds like a whole lot of misunderstanding and that's about it.


"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9533 posts, RR: 42
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 23413 times:

Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
pelo jornal Le Figaro

The first thing I did was see if the word "Figaro" was present. Were AF, perhaps, reacting to the article in which Le Figaro claimed new evidence showed that "Airbus was not to blame"? The article that was subsequently shown to be inaccurate?


User currently offlineshufflemoomin From Denmark, joined Jun 2010, 480 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 22725 times:

Can someone clear up something for me? If the pitots are what measure airspeed and they are assumed to be a likely culprit. How will investigators who look at the blackbox data know if abnormal airspeed readings are caused by a faulty pitot or whether that was the the aircraft's true speed?

On a side note, I haven't been keeping up with this discussion, but if Airbus are saying there was no fault with the aircraft, wasn't there initially speculation that the aircraft flew right through a storm?


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21562 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 22606 times:

Quoting shufflemoomin (Reply 18):
On a side note, I haven't been keeping up with this discussion, but if Airbus are saying there was no fault with the aircraft, wasn't there initially speculation that the aircraft flew right through a storm?

Airbus is indicating that there is no additional fault with the aircraft at this time, based on what they already knew and had corrected.

This is not to say that the "laws" that are programmed into the aircraft to deal with the already fixed issue weren't also flawed. It would take longer to determine that than simply a data dump.

But Airbus PR department seems to want to try to be first at the expense of being right. Same on the WTO ruling. Gotta get their side of the story out before anyone else, then if something needs to be corrected, do it later when fewer people are paying attention.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineDLdiamondboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 21904 times:

This is to be expected, there is a lot at stake in the form of monetary compensation and reputation. One thing for sure is that the cascade effect was at work in this accident, just as in every accident save terrorism related crashes. Rarely is one single cause sited for a crash such as this. Taking a quick high level look at FDR data and analysis of the CVR is the right thing to do. This way they have some data to indicate that there is no major design flaw that would require operator notification or worse grounding of the global fleet.

User currently offlineGlideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1623 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 21377 times:

No one is going to hear 90% N1 and 2.5 up on the CVR. Draw your own conclusions. Just MO.


To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
User currently offlineindolikaa From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 161 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 20518 times:

Quoting shufflemoomin (Reply 18):
Can someone clear up something for me? If the pitots are what measure airspeed and they are assumed to be a likely culprit. How will investigators who look at the blackbox data know if abnormal airspeed readings are caused by a faulty pitot or whether that was the the aircraft's true speed?

When ACARS was reporting information back to Air France right before the crash, didn't those reports include position and time data from GPS/other navigational data source? I seem to remember that being mentioned at one time shortly after the crash. That information could certainly be used to calculate speed against what the pitots were reporting.

If a pitot was malfunctioning and reporting an incorrect airspeed, I would think a computer with access to live GPS or other navigational data (INS) would have already realized there was something wrong, since each can be checked against the other for consistency and alert the humans if there is a disagreement. How could you develop such a system and not utilize such redundancy?



Vote for Pedro
User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 20337 times:

Plase guys, do not start to speculate again about the cause.

It is so short before the official statement, that we all can wait, can´t we?


User currently offlineshufflemoomin From Denmark, joined Jun 2010, 480 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 20337 times:

Quoting indolikaa (Reply 22):
When ACARS was reporting information back to Air France right before the crash, didn't those reports include position and time data from GPS/other navigational data source? I seem to remember that being mentioned at one time shortly after the crash. That information could certainly be used to calculate speed against what the pitots were reporting.

If a pitot was malfunctioning and reporting an incorrect airspeed, I would think a computer with access to live GPS or other navigational data (INS) would have already realized there was something wrong, since each can be checked against the other for consistency and alert the humans if there is a disagreement. How could you develop such a system and not utilize such redundancy?


You're most likely correct. I hadn't thought of other systems like that. Well thought out. You're clearly more on the ball than I am.  


25 revo1059 : Shouldn't BOTH Airbus and AF just keep quiet until the investigation is done. That would be the best thing to do.
26 SEPilot : I suspect that what the retrieved data shows is that there was no failure that was not already known, hence Airbus's statement. And since every A330/3
27 DAL763ER : Pilot error in what? It's not like the pilot is doing any manoeuvres at 33000 feet. which is also weird because since they were half-way across the A
28 airproxx : Where the protections can turn out to be a real nightmare for pilots when it's downgraded.... You have a point here! Undercover there's a strong disc
29 rfields5421 : This has been discussed in depth on other threads - but the short answer is that the speed over the ground which you can obtain from the GPS/ INS dat
30 GoBoeing : Well, off the top of my head, flight into a thunderstorm or near one but through the hail that came from it. That said, I'm just answering your quest
31 Pihero : You're dead wrong as an indicated airspeed has , in its original form npothing to do or compare with GPS-derived speeds, which we call *ground speed*
32 Pihero : Coming from a group of people who call themselves a union and are certainly not blameless about the current AF climate, I'm certainly not holding my
33 AFGMEL : I read it as "nothing is immediately of concern to other A330 operators at this early stage" which would be a relief to the operators, not a blame gam
34 soon7x7 : Does anyone really think the real "dirt" on this event will become public domain?...unfortunetely,...I think not.
35 indolikaa : Who is "we" in the context of this discussion? I am aware of the differences between IAS and TAS. I am also aware of the associations and interaction
36 rfields5421 : The problem is that without some input from measuring devices on the aircraft - the computers can only guess at what might be the temperatures, wind
37 web500sjc : The problem is those intsturments aren't measuring the same thing, one is measuring speed through the air ( the pitot) and the other is measuring the
38 okie : I think you are correct in your analogy. Of course the investigation is not over yet but Okie's speculation is that Airbus is going to take a stand t
39 indolikaa : And that is where my assumption was incorrect. I thought there might be another type of measuring device available, whether that was an automated sys
40 Max Q : I see that Airbus now offers, as an option on some models, standard on others a display of Angle of Attack (AOA) in the same location as indicated air
41 Post contains images brindabella : Exactly. The aeroplane was on Autopilot and in fully-managed flight until (probably) the Autopilot flipped-out ... which is where the speculation abo
42 col : This topic name needs changing to "Tension is growing between A.Netters and Airbus". Can we please just wait until the BEA release their findings? All
43 ComeAndGo : Why would they publish a report about nothing ? If there was nothing to report, they would do nothing at all. After all the BEA can report itself.
44 pylon101 : Sure we are waiting for a preliminary investigation report. However, the short and strong statement of "Airbus" that they don't have recommendations f
45 Post contains images GBan : Not really. It only gives an opportunity to read things into it that were never meant do be said. Sure, but that doesn't give a clue either.
46 Post contains links and images David L : While the OP could be seen as a separate issue (I still suspect the whole thing might have been caused by that faulty Figaro article), this thread is
47 airproxx : Hi Pihero, You have a point here. This plot theory is clearly emotional, and needs to be based on true facts that are not beeing known at that time.
48 David L : Sounds quite extreme. How would other types handle a situation like that? How often does it happen? Edit: Damn! I didn't mean to post in this thread
49 Pihero : I certainly will criticize their arguments. This is the sort of BravoSierra that emanates from the circles I mentioned earlier. My first question on
50 pilotaydin : Well....first of all....very small flight envelope is a relative term, the Airbus has REC MAX altitude, which still gurantees a climb rate, and also
51 XaraB : Excellent posts, guys! Good to hear some sense from hands-on experienced people rather than journalists, union representatives, PR managers or conspi
52 Post contains links H53Epilot : Not according to the Nova episode which looked at the accident with known information and attempted to re-create. We'll soon see how close they were
53 Pihero : Another piece of refuse. What next ?
54 something : Contraindicated response to external impact on the aircraft. Years ago an AA A300 encountered severe wake turbulence from a preceding JAL 744 over Qu
55 rfields5421 : This event occured in the middle of the ocean - thousand miles from any reporting stations. Even a reporting station cannot have correct wind directi
56 Max Q : . Most Professional Pilots do have a good 'feel' for their Aircraft, however, in instrument conditions and / or at night in heavy turbulence with the
57 airproxx : Ok let's mak myself clear: this incident DID happen, but for obvious safety records and airline image, it never raised to a press release. Airbus is
58 pilotaydin : An aircraft is not safe or unsafe.... pilots are either safe or unsafe, and the decisions made in the cockpit make the entire situation safe or unsafe
59 Post contains images airproxx : I cannot agree more with you. I've recently met David Evans, one of the Qantas A380 pilots that were on the QF32 flight. He went to Paris for a confe
60 Pihero : how convenient ! Once again, as there were several instances, REFERENCES, please.
61 Pihero : Thank you for your advice, as for several reasons, I think I know these aircraft better than you 1/- I teach on them 2/- I don't spend my time with t
62 WN738 : They would have had to have been some seriously incompetant or idiotic pilots for them to crash the plane with no mechanical fault given the conditio
63 Post contains images virgin744 : I think this statement should be enshrined into every Airbus cockpit for all flight crew to appreciate and remember.
64 airproxx : Anyway, I know what I'm made of, maybe I should suggest you to ask yourself that same question. My argument is quiet viable, that's probably why you
65 Pihero : Never said anything like that. I'd like to know your experience. At the most, you've done a 320 type rating, followed by a Triple seven. And that qua
66 Post contains images brindabella : My time was on the A320, so the numbers are different, but not the concepts, AFAIK. IIRC (some years ago now), , MMO on the A320 was .82, which was w
67 travelavnut : Ahum...TK 737 crash in AMS, would that have been a 'Bus, it wouldn't have happenend. Now I'm no pilot, but that's an argument in my eyes.
68 pilotaydin : Wrong, the same wold have happened because the aircraft was in flare mode..... Ppl confuse this a lot for TK 1951 Airbus have issued an OEB aboutbthe
69 David L : But is the converse true? You're strongly implying that it is and yet no evidence I've seen would support that. It's true that there are a number of
70 Post contains links travelavnut : I stand corrected. Still I think that this... ..is quite a bit over the top. I've met plenty pilots and flight instructors (lot's of them in the exte
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...
RRJ Announced And Air France Is Interested posted Thu Mar 13 2003 17:25:11 by Aviatsiya
Alonso Talks About The Deal Between Airbus And AV. posted Mon May 19 2008 07:37:53 by 777jaah
What Happens Between Airbus And Virgin? posted Mon Apr 28 2008 20:03:28 by Plairbus
AZ And Air France -perspectives .. posted Sun Feb 24 2008 04:48:15 by Beaucaire
KLM And Air France In Atlanta! posted Fri Nov 3 2006 14:53:19 by Ruslan
Engine Commonalities Between Airbus And Boeings? posted Tue Aug 15 2006 04:00:31 by JAM747
Between Airbus And Boeing Orders posted Thu Dec 15 2005 19:25:06 by Aileron11
JAT Airways And Air France Near Miss? posted Wed Aug 24 2005 19:00:21 by Vlada
A380 And Air France posted Tue Apr 5 2005 17:07:59 by Breiz
Deal Approved Between USairways And Air Wisconson posted Tue Mar 1 2005 03:38:05 by ERJ145LR