Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Westjet Looking At The 737 MAX  
User currently offlinekrisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 month 4 hours ago) and read 9442 times:

In an interview with Flightglobal, Westjet president Gregg Saretsky said this about converting WS's current 737 orders into 737MAX frames “If it was possible, and if the price was attractive, that would be something we would be crazy to not be interested in.”

http://www.flightglobal.com/interviews/gregg-saretsky/fleet-plan/

Saretsky went on to say that Westjet is in talks with Boeing about the price tag for the 737MAX.
Its definitely not surprising that WS is looking at the possibility of upgrading their fleet with Boeing's latest version of the venerable 737 given that the airline is about to receive its 100th 737 from Boeing. There is no mention of the C-series or the A320NEO in the article.

Reading into Mr. Saretsky's remarks, I would guess that we will know relatively soon whether WS places a new order or converts its existing order in favour of the 737MAX. According to Boeing, the difference in list price between the -800 and MAX 8 is about $11 Million.

KrisYYZ

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineHiFlyerAS From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 963 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 4 hours ago) and read 9418 times:

You could take the name of any airline that flies 737NG aircraft and has orders on the books and insert it where it says "WestJet".

User currently onlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2470 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 1 hour ago) and read 9102 times:

Matter of when - the oldest are 11 years old and coming to the end of their leases and the 600's are obsolete.


Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 8631 times:

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 1):
You could take the name of any airline that flies 737NG aircraft and has orders on the books and insert it where it says "WestJet".

Not necessarily. Who would have thought AA would have split their order between Boeing and Airbus? Some have speculated that Delta may do the same when it comes time to replace the rest of the narrowbody fleet. WS won't need a/c in the numbers that AA and DL would need, so sticking with Boeing and not splitting the order isn't necessary.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 2):
Matter of when - the oldest are 11 years old and coming to the end of their leases and the 600's are obsolete.

11 years old is still relatively new when you consider that airlines like Delta, US Airways, United, American, and Southwest have a/c that are 20+ years old in their fleets. By the time DL takes delivery of all of AirTran's 717s, the bulk of those a/c will be over a decade old.

While the 736 is essentially a niche a/c in general, it seems to work for WS and when they do decide to replace those a/c, it would likely not be for a Boeing product as there is not a direct MAX replacement for it.


User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7891 times:

Quoting krisyyz (Thread starter):
In an interview with Flightglobal, Westjet president Gregg Saretsky said this about converting WS's current 737 orders into 737MAX frames “If it was possible, and if the price was attractive, that would be something we would be crazy to not be interested in.”

Since there is a "challenge" getting enough orders for the NG to fill all the slots until MAX production if fully up an running, I doubt that Boeing will be that crazy about this.
With some 2300 NGs on order and 5 years (plus ramp-up) before the MAX comes online, Boeing needs to secure a few more hundred orders for the NGs (if there are no delays).


User currently offlinekrisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7765 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 3):

While the 736 is essentially a niche a/c in general, it seems to work for WS and when they do decide to replace those a/c, it would likely not be for a Boeing product as there is not a direct MAX replacement for it.

That's a good point. Perhaps some of the 736 flying in Alberta and between YYZ and YUL, YOW and LGA could be transferred to the new regional Q400 service, there will be some medium-haul routes that will have to be up-gauged to 73Gs. The article does suggest that WS is looking at the Q400s to operate the eastern triangle routes as well as some new destinations in western-Canada.

KrisYYZ


User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7639 times:

Quoting Chiad (Reply 4):
Since there is a "challenge" getting enough orders for the NG to fill all the slots until MAX production if fully up an running, I doubt that Boeing will be that crazy about this.

If it's been a "challenge," it seems to be one Boeing is coping with very well indeed.

While Boeing, unlike Airbus, have not come out and said they will not accept conversions of existing orders into MAX's, that only means they won't have to make the rare, occasional exception like Airbus has done once. In fact, so far, nearly every MAX order or commitment has included additional NG's as well. Which makes perfect sense, as the EIS is @ 18 months later than the NEO.

Regards,

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6891 times:

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 6):
If it's been a "challenge," it seems to be one Boeing is coping with very well indeed.

Indeed. NGs sales are wonderful.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 6):
While Boeing, unlike Airbus, have not come out and said they will not accept conversions of existing orders into MAX's, that only means they won't have to make the rare, occasional exception like Airbus has done once. In fact, so far, nearly every MAX order or commitment has included additional NG's as well. Which makes perfect sense, as the EIS is @ 18 months later than the NEO.

IMO those 18 months are not to an advantage for Boeing. Boeing needs a larger backlog of the current version than Airbus (about 1900 for the A320 vs 2300 for the B737), which currently is less than 1 year of full production.


User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 6557 times:

Boeing is still looking for the launch MAX-7 customer. WS would seem to an ideal candidate since most of its current NG fleet is the 73G (unlike most NG customers).


Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13144 posts, RR: 100
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6527 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 1):
You could take the name of any airline that flies 737NG aircraft and has orders on the books and insert it where it says "WestJet".

   The difference is WS has been talking with Bombardier (at least for Q400s). WS would be silly not to use every ounce of leverage they might have.

Quoting Chiad (Reply 4):
I doubt that Boeing will be that crazy about this.

Who cares. This is business, not some emotion contest. It will be done by the money. At worst, Boeing will arrange 7 year leases for a bunch of 738s and then deal with selling/leasing off the used airframes at the initial lease expiration. Boeing has options.

Boeing is going to have to figure out how to accelerate the transition. That is just my opinion, but how I see the transition to be likely to occur.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 8):
Boeing is still looking for the launch MAX-7 customer.

WS would be wise to upgauge. There simply will not be much cost per flight difference between the 738MAX and 73GMAX.


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6187 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 8):
Boeing is still looking for the launch MAX-7 customer.

WS would be wise to upgauge. There simply will not be much cost per flight difference between the 738MAX and 73GMAX.

Boeing might be(come) very eager for a launch MAX-7 customer and be willing to discount to get WS aboard.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25383 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 6039 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):
WS would be wise to upgauge. There simply will not be much cost per flight difference between the 738MAX and 73GMAX.

I don't agree. Not many domestic WS markets warrant the 738, especially during the winter. And you're paying higher landing fees on every flight if you're using the 738 when the 73G would do the job.

And I can't see how there couldn't be some operating cost difference for flying around another 20,000 lbs. or so of weight. I think that's roughly the MTOW difference between the 73G and 738.


User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13144 posts, RR: 100
Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5962 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 11):
Not many domestic WS markets warrant the 738, especially during the winter. And you're paying higher landing fees on every flight if you're using the 738 when the 73G would do the job.

Then fly the 73Gs there until they are rotate out of the fleet. "Efficiency is relative." I do not see the -700 length being competitive in the mid run just as the 736 has been 'run out' of the market.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 11):
And I can't see how there couldn't be some operating cost difference for flying around another 20,000 lbs. or so of weight. I think that's roughly the MTOW difference between the 73G and 738.

So you're arguing the C-series for WS?  

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13144 posts, RR: 100
Reply 13, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5799 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Too late to append my last post.

I was reading an analysis that there are *zero* firm 737-7MAX orders. Is that correct? IMHO, how would WS finance the type? In particular after the 736s were returned to the leasing company and scrapped at a *very* young age as well as the A318s from F9. Heck, Allegiant is buying A319s due to their (relative to the A320) poor resale value allowing for some good deals. Note: I think Allegiant is only buying as their utilization rate skews the decision more towards the purchase price. Who is going to buy new build 737-7MAX at a price that is attractive to Boeing (versus Boeing selling more 738MAX)?

It isn't that the 737-7MAX would be a bad airframe, it is that the 737-8MAX is going to have that much better resale. I ask from the leasing company's perspective, who would want the 737-7MAX?

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 10):
Boeing might be(come) very eager for a launch MAX-7 customer and be willing to discount to get WS aboard.

So far the market is very interested in the 737-8MAX and 737-9MAX. I've posted before how every engine upgrade boosts the optimal gauge of an airframe.

For the 737-1/2 it was the 732
For the 737-3/4/5, the optimal 737 was the mid-sized 733 (but the 734 has done well, but not as well in sales)
For the 737NG, the 738 was the clear sales leader and clear resale value leader. (e.g., Lion Air went to the 738 after poor lease rates on the 739ER due to the 738 just having spectacular resale and WN upgauging).

For the MAX, I'm torn between the 738 and 739 being the best selling model (in the long term). The 738 has some advantages over the 739MAX (gate spacing, short field performance), but some of its advantages disappear (or will once the 739MAX is mature) such as range to Hawaii. But the trend is away from the 737-7MAX.

I just see a very poor resale market for the 737-7MAX that is analogous to the 736/A318 for efficiency is relative. Those that want the 73G will find the lease rates/resale price very attractive, but only for those with low utilization or the inability to fill the added seats on the 738MAX.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5471 posts, RR: 30
Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5715 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):
I just see a very poor resale market for the 737-7MAX that is analogous to the 736/A318 for efficiency is relative. Those that want the 73G will find the lease rates/resale price very attractive, but only for those with low utilization or the inability to fill the added seats on the 738MAX.

This all makes the CSeries sales pitch more compelling. I bet there are quite a few airlines which are very interested in the data coming from 'aircraft 0'.



What the...?
User currently onlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2470 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5683 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 3):
11 years old is still relatively new when you consider that airlines like Delta, US Airways, United, American, and Southwest have a/c that are 20+ years old in their fleets. By the time DL takes delivery of all of AirTran's 717s, the bulk of those a/c will be over a decade old.

Sure, but the aircraft could be approaching that by the time the MAX is in the fleet. So far WS are not flipping them out young like the European LCC's but remains to be seen what happens.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 14):
This all makes the CSeries sales pitch more compelling

I think there is a far greater "need" for the C Series as WS than AC. The single fleet LCC model has now gone out of the window with the Q400, but I wonder if they would want to diversify further from the model with a third fleet type?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 11):
I don't agree. Not many domestic WS markets warrant the 738, especially during the winter. And you're paying higher landing fees on every flight if you're using the 738 when the 73G would do the job.

And I can't see how there couldn't be some operating cost difference for flying around another 20,000 lbs. or so of weight. I think that's roughly the MTOW difference between the 73G and 738.

AFAIK, the argument is the extra revenue generated by the extra capacity more than covers - and then some - the additional cost. The order book (likewise at Airbus) and even things over WN (and U2 in the A camp) suggests that. The other question is for a smaller airline like WS, if you are operating the -8 anyway (and I still cant believe there will be no -9) then will it be cheaper just to operate the -7 too for commonality rather than introduce a whole new fleet type?

The million dollar question for WS is if they need the smaller capacity with the Q400 on board. If they do, then would the C Series be more efficient for the 600 and 700 routes plus open some new thinner point to point routes too long for a Q400, but not enough for a -8, or just abuse a -8 where necessary?

In Boeing's favor, I really can not think of any airports where the -8 (vs the -7) would be an issue to operate from that would not be served by the Q400 anyway, or where an upgrade in capacity (with the extra revenue potential) would be an issue.

I would also expect some -9's for Hawaii, CUN and key trunk routes like YYZ-YVR/YYC/YEG. AC use widebodies on a lot of these routes - OK, they have all the connections & Star traffic, but I still think there is enough O&D / leisure traffic to fill 24 extra seats.



Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5423 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):
I was reading an analysis that there are *zero* firm 737-7MAX orders. Is that correct?

Correct, none yet. Realistically, WN could swap some of their 150x MAX-8 order for the smaller MAX-7, if strategy or demand warrants it. But this likely won't be a consideration until later this decade. So Boeing needs a new MAX-7 customer to launch the type. The MAX-7 will enter service after the -8 and -9 though (target 2019)

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):
It isn't that the 737-7MAX would be a bad airframe, it is that the 737-8MAX is going to have that much better resale. I ask from the leasing company's perspective, who would want the 737-7MAX?
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):
I just see a very poor resale market for the 737-7MAX that is analogous to the 736/A318 for efficiency is relative.

If an airline sees the MAX-7 as the ideal aircraft and plan to operate the type long enough to achieve an ROI on the capital investment in-house (ie, without a resale component) then resale value becomes less important. Also, since the MAX-7 will enter service in 2019, any resale will likely not be before 2030....a very long time from now.

Getting back to WS, given that the 73G dominates their fleet, it's unlikely a wholesale upgrade to the MAX-8 is reasonable from a market standpoint, so a split MAX-7/8 order seems possible for WS.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13144 posts, RR: 100
Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5348 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 14):
This all makes the CSeries sales pitch more compelling. I bet there are quite a few airlines which are very interested in the data coming from 'aircraft 0'.

   Yes it does. 5 tons of weight savings are a big selling point as well as the GTFs.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 15):
So far WS are not flipping them out young like the European LCC's but remains to be seen what happens.

WS let leases expire on 736s. So they are managing their fleet for profit.   

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 15):
I think there is a far greater "need" for the C Series as WS than AC. The single fleet LCC model has now gone out of the window with the Q400, but I wonder if they would want to diversify further from the model with a third fleet type?

Agreed.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 15):
will it be cheaper just to operate the -7 too for commonality rather than introduce a whole new fleet type?

It depends on the sub-fleet size. For WS, I would argue the C-series would make sense.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 16):
If an airline sees the MAX-7 as the ideal aircraft and plan to operate the type long enough to achieve an ROI on the capital investment in-house (ie, without a resale component) then resale value becomes less important.

Except as collateral for the loan. Otherwise, I agree.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinepnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2243 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5337 times:

I also would imagine that WestJet has built into their contract that they can switch models up to xxx amount of time before the long lead items start production. That gives them the opportunity to respond to market conditions.

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25383 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5238 times:

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 15):
but I still think there is enough O&D / leisure traffic to fill 24 extra seats.

WS 73Gs have 136 seats and their 738s have 166 but I believe with the recenty-announced seating changes the 738s are going to 174 seats. That's 38 more seats to fill, not 24. Assume the difference would be about the same between the 73GMAX and 738MAX.

I guess my point is, if you have enough routes where you can't fill those 38 extra seats (or have to discount heavily), why not have a slightly smaller and cheaper aircraft for those routes, especially one that can be flown by the same crews? Many Canadian domestic routes are highly seasonal and demand varies widely.


User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13144 posts, RR: 100
Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5101 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
That's 38 more seats to fill, not 24. Assume the difference would be about the same between the 73GMAX and 738MAX.

Only a few of those need to be filled to cover the per flight cost differential. I too think that WS could come up with a revenue model that works with the 738MAX.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
I guess my point is, if you have enough routes where you can't fill those 38 extra seats (or have to discount heavily), why not have a slightly smaller and cheaper aircraft for those routes,

The issue is the 737-7MAX won't be that much cheaper; not once leasing costs are brought into the equation. But the C-series will be.   

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently onlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2470 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4988 times:

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 16):
Getting back to WS, given that the 73G dominates their fleet

It does, but it is worth noting that a lot more of the recent deliveries have been 800's compared to 700's.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
It depends on the sub-fleet size. For WS, I would argue the C-series would make sense.

Well, if all the 600's and say half the 700's are replaced with the C-Series that would be around 50 aircraft, but some of the 600 flying will be done with 20 Q400's . So up to 40 could be possible, which is a sizeable enough sub fleet IMO.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
WS 73Gs have 136 seats and their 738s have 166 but I believe with the recenty-announced seating changes the 738s are going to 174 seats. That's 38 more seats to fill, not 24

You are right as usual, I was going with the regular all Y 189 / 213.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
I guess my point is, if you have enough routes where you can't fill those 38 extra seats (or have to discount heavily), why not have a slightly smaller and cheaper aircraft for those routes, especially one that can be flown by the same crews? Many Canadian domestic routes are highly seasonal and demand varies widely.

However, the routes I mentioned are pretty constant. AC can fill at least 1x daily 767 to HI year round. CUN is pretty steady and the trunk routes will always be busy, add LAS in there too. Bearing in mind WS are now replacing the 757 Jazz flying this winter which is a lot less metal and their competetion Canjet & Sunwing both fly 189 seat 800's, I just think there will be room for 10-20 -9's as WS.



Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlineabrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5100 posts, RR: 55
Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4954 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
WS 73Gs have 136 seats and their 738s have 166 but I believe with the recenty-announced seating changes the 738s are going to 174 seats. That's 38 more seats to fill, not 24. Assume the difference would be about the same between the 73GMAX and 738MAX.

I guess my point is, if you have enough routes where you can't fill those 38 extra seats (or have to discount heavily), why not have a slightly smaller and cheaper aircraft for those routes, especially one that can be flown by the same crews? Many Canadian domestic routes are highly seasonal and demand varies widely.

= Given that WS system load factor is over 80% year round, I am pretty sure that there are enough routes that would have loads over 90% where they are spilling demand and the 739 would be easily filled.

Saludos,
A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25383 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4715 times:

Quoting abrelosojos (Reply 22):
Given that WS system load factor is over 80% year round,

For the year 2011 it was 79.7%. Close to 80% but not over.


User currently offlineabrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5100 posts, RR: 55
Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4548 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 23):
Quoting abrelosojos (Reply 22):
Given that WS system load factor is over 80% year round,

For the year 2011 it was 79.7%. Close to 80% but not over.

= Haha. Seriously? The 0.3% does not negate the argument I was making does it? Besides, I was being more up to date and talking about their 2012 LF which is 82.7% (http://www.westjet.com/guest/en/media-investors/performance.shtml).

Saludos,
A.



Live, and let live.
25 yyz717 : The LF is high, but does not seem to support a wholesale upgrade of the predominantly 73G fleet to MAX-8. Even with a MAX-8 fleet, a requirement for a
26 gmonney : To chip my $.02 in.... Doesn't an aircraft with more seats allow to have a ticket price a bit lower than an aircraft with less seats? Comparing the 73
27 Post contains images lightsaber : That is expressed as CASM (cost per available seat mile). Yes, the 738 does have a lower CASM than the 73G. You are correct that the lower CASM can b
28 abrelosojos : = I agree with both these points. I am not advocating a wholesale upgrade to the Max-7 fleet. In fact, I am not familiar with the operational dynamic
29 yyz717 : I'm sure there are some WS routes that could support the 739ER aircraft, but wouldn't this be a small (and hence inflexible) subfleet? Might make mor
30 Viscount724 : If you look at history, I think more airlines have run into serious financial problems by operating aircraft that were too big, not too small.
31 abrelosojos : = You're right of course. And with the 738 capacity increasing to 174, the difference with getting the 900 may be negated. Now only if the 900 had th
32 yyz717 : Boeing had a press release this week announcing that 739ER orders surpassed 500 with the conversion of an existing 73G order to the 739ER. Only 4 airl
33 lightsaber : Agreed. But that depends on the cost difference (CASM). If the larger airframe has a low enough CASM, as the 738 does versus the 73G, then the market
34 Post contains links rotating14 : And the survey says!?!?!? Its UA!! Source -----> http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.as...5676de-c0eb-4aa8-ba5f-e68323ebf8a7
35 yyz717 : No big surprise. This will shrink the 73G backlog which sits at just over 200 now. 32 of those are WS orders some of which I suspect will be converted
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...
Market Impact Of The A-320 NEO And The 737 MAX posted Fri Jul 13 2012 07:45:26 by BigJKU
AA Looking At The Middle East? posted Thu Dec 2 2010 17:51:00 by GlobalCabotage
Aerolineas Argentinas Looking At The 787. posted Fri Feb 19 2010 15:14:52 by FCKC
Westjet Looking At IAH, DFW And ORD posted Fri Jun 15 2007 00:36:38 by Thomasphoto60
Jetstar Looking At The A321 posted Thu Dec 21 2006 20:50:31 by Flying-Tiger
BA Still Looking At The A380 posted Fri Aug 4 2006 14:40:51 by FCKC
Horizon Air: Looking At The EMB-190 posted Thu Apr 13 2006 06:11:52 by AS739X
LAN Looking At The "new" Air Panama? posted Wed Dec 14 2005 01:17:44 by 2travel2know
Germanwings Still Looking At The 717 posted Tue Mar 15 2005 19:13:39 by 717fan
Rumor ATA Looking At The 717? posted Mon Apr 12 2004 22:22:22 by Timberwolf24