Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A320 From US Air 1549 To Be Exhibited  
User currently offlineDaysleeper From UK - England, joined Dec 2009, 838 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 8448 times:

I was reading a little while ago that a museum in the USA was planning on re-assembling and exhibiting this in early 2012 but the most recent information I can find states that the museum only received the wings a month or so ago. So I was wondering if anyone knew when they plan to complete the exhibit, and if your able to see it uncompleted?

Not to distract from the incredible performance of the crew, but I was surprised and a little disappointed that Airbus and the A320 didn’t receive the credit they deserved for the role they played in this accident. Although thankfully now rare, there are still a few arrogant individuals that continue to believe an Airbus isn’t as rugged as an older, more traditionally designed jet, or that the Airbus FBW system would inhibit control in emergency situations.

So I’m hoping that it will exhibited in such a way to show just how critical the FBW system was in this accident and the last of the doubters will finally be silenced.

I suppose I better say this again too; I’m not in any way trying to detract from the crew performance as it was simply incredible. Nor am I saying that other aircraft wouldn’t have performed well. It’s just after all the negative press Airbus received over AA587 then in my view they deserved much more recognition than they got for this.

37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2603 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 8371 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
So I’m hoping that it will exhibited in such a way to show just how critical the FBW system was in this accident and the last of the doubters will finally be silenced.

In what way did the FBW system contribute to the success of this incident, as you seem to be suggesting?
Plenty non FBW aircraft have been ditch in the past with all or most on board surviving. Why is this A320 any different?

Airbus and AA got the attention they deserved fo AA587



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineplateman From United States of America, joined May 2007, 922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 8207 times:

The plane is at the Carolinas Aviation Museum right next to CLT. Flew to Charlotte recently just to see it and really is amazing. The wings were not on but had a long talk with a museum exec about future plans for it, which include what you say.

Happy to post some of the many pics I took if requested.



"Explore. Dream. Discover." -Mark Twain
User currently offlinemaxpower1954 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 1070 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 8184 times:

Speaking as a captain for the very airline in question, with many thousands of hours in Airbus, Boeing, McDonnell-Douglas and Fokkers...the results would likely been the same if Sully had been flying a non-FBW aircraft. FBW did not hinder nor did it contribute to the successful outcome.

[Edited 2012-03-05 08:30:14]

[Edited 2012-03-05 09:31:24]

User currently offlinerscaife1682 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 8147 times:

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 3):
.the results would have been the same if Sully had been flying a non-FBW aircraft.

How do you know? Is this just a guess? Do not get me wrong he did a great job but we cannot know for sure if the outcome would have been the same.

Quoting garpd (Reply 1):
In what way did the FBW system contribute to the success of this incident, as you seem to be suggesting?

The FBW system assisted with the controlled descent of the A320 at certain points the aircraft came close to stall speed but the system increased to rate of descent to avoid stalling.


User currently offlinedarksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1340 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 8000 times:

Hmmmm... You started off asking an interesting question. But this?

Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):

Not to distract from the incredible performance of the crew, but I was surprised and a little disappointed that Airbus and the A320 didn’t receive the credit they deserved for the role they played in this accident. Although thankfully now rare, there are still a few arrogant individuals that continue to believe an Airbus isn’t as rugged as an older, more traditionally designed jet, or that the Airbus FBW system would inhibit control in emergency situations.

Take this in the spirit of someone pointing out what appears to be confounding logic. This reads more than a little bit like fan-boyism. I know there's really no way nice way to say that, but I'm really not seeing the point of your question here. Who has said that FBW inhibited control (and under what law setting for that matter?) Who has said Airbus or the A320 aren't "rugged" enough for commercial use? I don't know of anyone (in the industry anyway) who really believes the 320 isn't up to code in all the required ways. Sorry, but I'm really not seeing the thrust of you question/argument. Frankly it has the appearances of a strawman argument.

To answer the broader question though, any aircraft up to legal standards would likely have caused the same result. The 320 performed great, and everyone knows it.



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6483 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7822 times:

This aircraft should be flying, but salvage operators got overzealous.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineDaysleeper From UK - England, joined Dec 2009, 838 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7741 times:

Quoting rscaife1682 (Reply 4):
The FBW system assisted with the controlled descent of the A320 at certain points the aircraft came close to stall speed but the system increased to rate of descent to avoid stalling.

Exactly

Quoting darksnowynight (Reply 5):
Take this in the spirit of someone pointing out what appears to be confounding logic. This reads more than a little bit like fan-boyism. I know there's really no way nice way to say that, but I'm really not seeing the point of your question here. .

Because it is related to why I want to know the status of the exhibit. I’ve read that they are going to focus on the aircrafts performance just as much as the crew’s so I was curious to what aspects of that this they consider a contributing factor.

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 3):
the results would likely been the same if Sully had been flying a non-FBW aircraft. FBW did not hinder nor did it contribute to the successful outcome.


I’m sure as a pilot you would like to think this is the case, and it perhaps is. There just isn’t enough information on how aircraft perform in this situation as thankfully it’s incredibly rare. All we do know is that in this situation the FBW system did exactly what it was supposed to do, and assisted the crew by allowing them to approach the river at the lowest possible speed without stalling.

Quoting plateman (Reply 2):
Happy to post some of the many pics I took if requested.



I’m certainly curious as to how it’s presented, as I stated above they have said that they will focus on the aircrafts role and how advancements in technology over the last 100 years have made such an accident survivable.


User currently offlineN471WN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1506 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7720 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Will the wings be reattached?

User currently offlinerj777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1772 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7713 times:

I'd love to see some of the pics you took.

User currently offlineplateman From United States of America, joined May 2007, 922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 7666 times:

As requested ... here are a collection of my photos. It was really neat to see up close. While the museum is pretty tiny, this was a highlight ... its about 5 minutes from the airport, so doable on a stopover, but you need a car or taxi. -Brian

One thing to keep in mind is most of the damage to the hull came from rescue vessels. I had a long talk with the head of volunteers who was really into sharing his information about the plane. He said he doubts that anyone other than staff will ever be allowed inside. Happy to answer other questions.

Bag tag from the flight:
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/317094_828966756885_7406307_39388047_1355365197_n.jpg

Rescue rescue caused this on the front
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/312651_828966432535_7406307_39388034_415499248_n.jpg

Side, with impact from hitting the Hudson clear
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/312617_828966457485_7406307_39388035_912151424_n.jpg

More damage from boats
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/310599_828966507385_7406307_39388037_1363417368_n.jpg

Cracked window
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/309789_828967141115_7406307_39388061_1207964547_n.jpg

How the plane made it from NY to NC ... slow and steady
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/308121_828966587225_7406307_39388040_215129474_n.jpg

Circles are where the birds impacted
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/307804_828966866665_7406307_39388050_1296586832_n.jpg

Windshield cracked from rescue boats
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/307711_828967126145_7406307_39388060_1863102432_n.jpg

From inside the crippled plane
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/302582_828966731935_7406307_39388046_1135163629_n.jpg

Safety cards from US1549
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/300262_828966697005_799992945_n.jpg

Damage from river impact
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/298784_828966607185_7406307_39388041_1124957454_n.jpg

Tail
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/298703_828966642115_7406307_39388042_768482477_n.jpg

http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/297166_828966821755_7406307_39388049_105881662_n.jpg

Back
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/296609_828966652095_7406307_39388043_1091210095_n.jpg

Hole
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee141/bmkbowler/294481_828966971455_7406307_39388055_1353174954_n.jpg

Hope you enjoyed!



"Explore. Dream. Discover." -Mark Twain
User currently offlineracko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4856 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 7610 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
a little disappointed that Airbus and the A320 didn’t receive the credit they deserved for the role they played in this accident.

There was a very good article in Vanity Fair about it two years ago: http://tinyurl.com/dgxfy2 (the URL redirects to VF, for some reason trying to post the link directly causes some sort of malfunction in the forum software)


User currently offlineGBLKD From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 7590 times:

Quoting N328KF (Reply 6):
This aircraft should be flying, but salvage operators got overzealous.

Eh?

The aeroplane collided with a large flock of geese which caused a lot of impact damage to the fuselage and wings, some of them were ingested into the engine cores turning them to two big lumps of scrap metal.

It then landed on the Hudson causing damage to the rear fuselage and tearing one engine clean off. Then the rescue boats came and did even more damage (as seen in plateman's awesome pics above) before it sank with only one wingtip and the V-stab showing.

I'd say that N106US had pretty much had it before the salvage contractor removed the wings which they had to do in order to move it from the quayside.

If anyone in the know can look at that aeroplane and tell us all that all of the damage was repairable and financially viable than please correct me but it looks it was never going to be airworthy again.


User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2603 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 7538 times:

Quoting rscaife1682 (Reply 4):
The FBW system assisted with the controlled descent of the A320 at certain points the aircraft came close to stall speed but the system increased to rate of descent to avoid stalling.

So a pilot of a 737 say would not be able to dip the nose a tad himself?

Are you perchance lending too much credit to FBW instead of pilot skill?



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinemaxpower1954 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 1070 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 7431 times:

The accident linked below was a mirror image of US 1549. It happened in 1963 to a TU-124, in day VFR conditions - a 100% successful ditching of a powerless jetliner in a flat calm river. All without FBW computers.

The only thing I'm trying to refute here is the insinuation that such a maneuver is virtually impossible without FBW. In the final evaluation, the skill - and luck - of the pilot is what determines the outcome.

http://rt.com/news/pilot-saves-lives-by-landing-on-a-river-in-1963/


User currently offlinerichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4233 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 7365 times:

Quoting GBLKD (Reply 12):
The aeroplane collided with a large flock of geese which caused a lot of impact damage to the fuselage and wings, some of them were ingested into the engine cores turning them to two big lumps of scrap metal.

It then landed on the Hudson causing damage to the rear fuselage and tearing one engine clean off. Then the rescue boats came and did even more damage (as seen in plateman's awesome pics above) before it sank with only one wingtip and the V-stab showing.

I'd say that N106US had pretty much had it before the salvage contractor removed the wings which they had to do in order to move it from the quayside.

If anyone in the know can look at that aeroplane and tell us all that all of the damage was repairable and financially viable than please correct me but it looks it was never going to be airworthy again.

I believe you are 100% correct and I cannot imagine a scenario in which this plane was ever going to fly again once it came into contact with the Hudson River. After the rescue, it was a matter of securing the aircraft and eventually salvaging it, probably for scrap but I like the museum idea a whole lot better! Wish I could walk down the aisle inside her but I know that will never be allowed to the general public.



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlineChimborazo From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2011, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 7327 times:

Quoting GBLKD (Reply 12):
If anyone in the know can look at that aeroplane and tell us all that all of the damage was repairable and financially viable than please correct me but it looks it was never going to be airworthy again.

Yes: they should have fitted 2 new engines, replaced the windshield and pass window, re-stocked the damaged Sprite and Coke cans, attached floats to the gear and flown it out on the runway it landed on!  

Sorry, couldn't help it, there was never a chance that would fly again. I was curious to learn the full extent of how much damage it had received (although I always imagined it would be a write-off) but those great pics show just how severe it was.

[Edited 2012-03-05 13:24:37]

User currently offlineGBLKD From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 7255 times:

Quoting richierich (Reply 15):
I believe you are 100% correct and I cannot imagine a scenario in which this plane was ever going to fly again once it came into contact with the Hudson River

Thanks, it looked like a total loss the second it "spalshed down"

Quoting Chimborazo (Reply 16):
Yes: they should have fitted 2 new engines, replaced the windshield and pass window, re-stocked the damaged Sprite and Coke cans, attached floats to the gear and flown it out on the runway it landed on!

I've worked at places where buses in equivalent condition have been bodged to the extreme and been back on the road so I guess anything's possible.

I'm glad you mentioned re stocking the catering, would make having to wear wellies on the ferry flight all worth it.
 


User currently offlinerscaife1682 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 7210 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 13):
So a pilot of a 737 say would not be able to dip the nose a tad himself?

Are you perchance lending too much credit to FBW instead of pilot skill?

Not at all just answering the question below.

Quoting garpd (Reply 1):
In what way did the FBW system contribute to the success of this incident, as you seem to be suggesting?

I am not saying this would not have been possible in a 737 or any other aircraft for that matter. I am just stating that the pilot was assisted in the final descent of the aircraft. I do not know if the a/c would have stalled or impacted the water. The pilot did an outstanding job in piloting the aircraft but the FBW assisted him all the way to the Hudson making several corrections to the rate of descent. Just making sure the A320 gets the credit it deserves....and this coming from a Boeing man  

On a side note great PICS

[Edited 2012-03-05 13:56:02]

[Edited 2012-03-05 13:56:23]

User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6751 posts, RR: 76
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 7174 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
So I’m hoping that it will exhibited in such a way to show just how critical the FBW system was in this accident and the last of the doubters will finally be silenced.

Oh, can of worms opened.

Quoting rscaife1682 (Reply 4):
The FBW system assisted with the controlled descent of the A320 at certain points the aircraft came close to stall speed but the system increased to rate of descent to avoid stalling.

There is one thing the FBW cannot do... that is, manage the energy so that you don't come in too fast and having to bleed off excess speed just as you were skimming over the river... or so that you don't screw up and when you're about to soften your descent rate just over the water, the stall protection kicks in and puts the nose down and then errr.... a bigger mess in the Hudson!

By the way, was the aircraft ever on EMER ELEC (RAT deployed)? Or did the APU take care of the electrics in the glide? If EMER ELEC and No APU, then the FBW went into degraded mode anyways... which means there was no stall protection.

FBW is wonderful, but pilot skills are still important... Put an idiot in front and the FBW can turn the plane into a disaster... the same goes for non-FBW aircraft.

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineGBLKD From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7150 times:

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 19):
By the way, was the aircraft ever on EMER ELEC (RAT deployed)? Or did the APU take care of the electrics in the glide? If EMER ELEC and No APU, then the FBW went into degraded mode anyways... which means there was no stall protection.

APU, Cpt Sullenberger started it pretty much as soon as the engines died.


User currently offlineContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1455 posts, RR: 44
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7110 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
Not to distract from the incredible performance of the crew, but I was surprised and a little disappointed that Airbus and the A320 didn’t receive the credit they deserved for the role they played in this accident.

Exactly what credit do you feel Airbus and the A320 deserve but were not given?



Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5143 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7095 times:

Quoting ContnlEliteCMH (Reply 21):
Exactly what credit do you feel Airbus and the A320 deserve but were not given?

Exactly what I'm wondering, I thought that two decade old debate about the 320 and FBW was dead.   



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineSXDFC From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2289 posts, RR: 19
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6599 times:

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 3):
How do you know? Is this just a guess? Do not get me wrong he did a great job but we cannot know for sure if the outcome would have been the same.

There's your answer...

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 3):
Speaking as a captain for the very airline in question, with many thousands of hours in Airbus, Boeing, McDonnell-Douglas and Fokkers...the results would likely been the same if Sully had been flying a non-FBW aircraft. FBW did not hinder nor did it contribute to the successful outcome.

The man has thousands of hours in the airplane involved.. if that's not enough then you may never find your answer..

Great pictures, truly a wonderful museum that I would love to visit one day, from what I understand you can board the airplane right? Or was that for the crew of that A/C only?



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinebond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5394 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6329 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
Not to distract from the incredible performance of the crew, but
Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
So I’m hoping that it will exhibited in such a way to show just how critical the FBW system was in this accident and the last of the doubters will finally be silenced.
Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
I suppose I better say this again too; I’m not in any way trying to detract from the crew performance as
Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
Nor am I saying
Quoting Daysleeper (Thread starter):
It’s just after all the negative press

 

It's quite obvious what your intent is here, and it has nothing to do with the aircraft being exhibited anywhere!

Please!


Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
25 ghifty : Interesting showcase. Though I have to say the stickers are unnecessary and tacky. +1. IIRC, a B737 crashed in swampy waters and it performed just fin
26 Post contains images GSPflyer : On Saturday, January 14, the day before the third anniversary of flight 1549, I was able to attend the event that the Carolinas Aviation Museum hosted
27 flightsimer : That's not a good thing. In fact it could have been a very bad thing had it happened a few seconds earlier. Do you know why the plane was at such a h
28 SXDFC : That plane I believe landed on a marsh and still flies for a major air carrier today..
29 AirPacific747 : What are you referring to? It was an Airbus A300 and wikipedia states that the accident was due to pilot error in response to wake turbulence.
30 Daysleeper : At no point have I said that this outcome would not have been possible in another type of aircraft, in fact I have said the opposite. Neither have I
31 garpd : So Airbus were cleared of blame and AA got scalded for their pilot training. That's what I meant. The OP appeared to intimate something much more neg
32 AirPacific747 : Okay, I misunderstood you then. I thought you meant 'Airbus and AA got the attention they deserved fo AA587' in a negative way.
33 garpd : That's why I get for speed typing on my mobile when on the move!
34 darksnowynight : And what about those of us who A. heavily prefer airbus products in many situations (e.g. all other factors being equal I will indeed book travel on
35 milesrich : Are you serious? the Hudson River is a tidal river, it is very brackish water, if not almost pure ocean water where it landed and then partially sank
36 ajhYXE : I can't speak for Chimborazo but I am 99 percent sure he was being sarcastic. What did you expect to happen? You started a topic discussing something
37 litz : I'd say the instant that airplane hit the Hudson (which is "known" for it's spic and span clean water ), it was about as likely to fly again, as hauli
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...
Why Do US Airlines Seem To Be So Against Cargo? posted Thu May 28 2009 17:50:48 by LHCVG
US: DCA-ATL To Be Discontinued posted Sat Aug 2 2008 14:41:20 by MSYtristar
Airline Lounges In US: Why Pay To Be Member? posted Sat May 10 2008 09:01:22 by Coal
US Air Has To Make "dramatic Changes" - Parker posted Wed Apr 16 2008 15:01:02 by LAXintl
Report/Rumor: Eastern Air Lines To Be Reborn With A319s posted Sun Nov 18 2007 00:48:01 by FCKC
Air Europa To Be Skyteam Associate In June 07 posted Fri Jan 12 2007 23:30:22 by Skyteam10001
Taiwan's Domestic Air Travel To Be Reduced By 50% posted Sun Dec 31 2006 10:17:05 by Vincewy
Air Paradise To Be Resurrected Out Of DPS posted Sun Nov 5 2006 08:02:08 by Jimyvr
Air Luxor To Be Reincarnated As Fly3x2.com posted Thu Nov 2 2006 20:55:40 by BuyantUkhaa
Air Luxor To Be Renamed posted Fri Oct 7 2005 23:30:52 by Breiz
Why Do US Airlines Seem To Be So Against Cargo? posted Thu May 28 2009 17:50:48 by LHCVG
US: DCA-ATL To Be Discontinued posted Sat Aug 2 2008 14:41:20 by MSYtristar
Airline Lounges In US: Why Pay To Be Member? posted Sat May 10 2008 09:01:22 by Coal
US Air Has To Make "dramatic Changes" - Parker posted Wed Apr 16 2008 15:01:02 by LAXintl
Report/Rumor: Eastern Air Lines To Be Reborn With A319s posted Sun Nov 18 2007 00:48:01 by FCKC
Air Europa To Be Skyteam Associate In June 07 posted Fri Jan 12 2007 23:30:22 by Skyteam10001
Taiwan's Domestic Air Travel To Be Reduced By 50% posted Sun Dec 31 2006 10:17:05 by Vincewy
Air Paradise To Be Resurrected Out Of DPS posted Sun Nov 5 2006 08:02:08 by Jimyvr
Air Luxor To Be Reincarnated As Fly3x2.com posted Thu Nov 2 2006 20:55:40 by BuyantUkhaa