Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Does WN Only Fly 73NG's In/Out Of MDW?  
User currently offlineflaps30 From United States of America, joined May 2009, 283 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7068 times:

The other day, I was making a connection in MDW on my way to SLC and I had a 3 hour layover where I did a fair amount of plane watching. I must have seen at least 75 WN planes take off and land and every single plane was a NG version. Does WN only fly this variant of 737 in and out of MDW because of the short runways? Do they need a higher performing 737 than the -300 or the -500 for MDW? Does anyone have any insight on this?


every day is a good day to fly
34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineHOMsAR From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7030 times:

No. Just yesterday I flew a 737-300 MDW-CLE.

I've also flown 737-500s out of MDW recently.

They all cycle through MDW.



I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently offlinefghtngsiouxatc From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7019 times:

Short answer: no.

Are you basing your theory on all the 737s you saw having winglets? Most WN 733s now have winglets. Any WN 737 you see at MDW without winglets will be leaving the fleet sooner than later.

Easiest way to tell a WN 737 NG from a classic is the NG's have their flap canoes painted red, the classics do not. Also you can tell a classic by the retractable landing light under the wing.


User currently offlineflaps30 From United States of America, joined May 2009, 283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6988 times:

Quoting fghtngsiouxatc (Reply 2):
Are you basing your theory on all the 737s you saw having winglets?

No, I definately know how to spot a NG version. I am a very seasoned traveller who knows aircraft types very well. Also, most of the NG's have the WiFi "bubble" on top as well. Not to be picky, but the flap canoes are actually orange, not red.



every day is a good day to fly
User currently online737tdi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 766 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6877 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 3):
No, I definately know how to spot a NG version. I am a very seasoned traveller who knows aircraft types very well. Also, most of the NG's have the WiFi "bubble" on top as well. Not to be picky, but the flap canoes are actually orange, not red.




Well, No, they are red. At least what WN calls red. As far as the WiFi "bubble" (its a radome), only about 33% of the fleet has been converted. So can you really spot a NG?? The easiest way is to watch the anti-collision lights, are they synchronized? If not it's a 300/500. Look at the landing lights, are they all four together or are there landing lights outboard.

Not to be picky: (your words), they really are red. I have repainted several parts of this airplane. I'll relax now MR. seasoned traveler, no problems. I'm a seasoned WN mech. so there ya go. Take this as you will.


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5720 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6849 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 3):
No, I definately know how to spot a NG version. I am a very seasoned traveller who knows aircraft types very well. Also, most of the NG's have the WiFi "bubble" on top as well. Not to be picky, but the flap canoes are actually orange, not red.

Ooh, shouldn'ta got snobby with your response.
Anyhow, while I'm glad you saw 75+ NG's at MDW the other day, I just flew on a -300 in from OKC. So nope, either you're not as good as you think you are, or WN just happened to have a "NG Only" party the day you were there.


User currently onlineFL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1536 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6830 times:

MDW is not completely serviced by 737NGs but it has fewer 737 classics than I think people realize. For the weekday schedule this October, there are 231 WN flights out of MDW. There are 11 733, no 735, 204 73G/73W, and 16 73H flights. The 11 733 flights are to DTW, IND, and STL. So it definitely isn't rare to spot only 73Gs at MDW.


717,72S,732/3/4/5/G/8/9,744,752/3,763/4,772/3,D9S/5,M8/90,D10,319/20/21,332/3,388,CR2/7/9,EM2,ER4,E70/75/90,SF3,AR8
User currently offlinejaydub From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6691 times:

Looking at today's lineup for MDW (subject to change as the day goes on, of course):

Out of the 231 total departures scheduled...

  • 17 operated by -300's
  • 0 operated by -500's
  • 198 operated by -700's
  • 16 operated by -800's


So, is the MDW operation made up mostly of B73G's? Yes.
Is it "B73G-only"? Hardly.


User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6656 times:

Quoting fghtngsiouxatc (Reply 2):
Quoting flaps30 (Reply 3):
Quoting 737tdi (Reply 4):

Another easy way to tell a -300 from a -700 is the tails and the front end angle. To me, the tail on the -700 looks HUGE. Also, the front of the plane seems to have a bit of a downward angle, almost a CRJ-7/900 but not as severe, while the tail on the -300 looks smaller and the aircraft has more of an upward slope similar to a CRJ-200, but again not as severe. Also, I don't know if it's TRUE, but to me the winglets on the -300s look a bit shorter than the -700s.


User currently offlineflaps30 From United States of America, joined May 2009, 283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6524 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 5):
Ooh, shouldn'ta got snobby with your response.
Anyhow, while I'm glad you saw 75+ NG's at MDW the other day, I just flew on a -300 in from OKC. So nope, either you're not as good as you think you are, or WN just happened to have a "NG Only" party the day you were there.

OK, everyone just calm down!! No need to get all airliners.net on me!! The main point of my question was that since MDW has short runways, does WN need a higher performing aircraft such as the NG compared to the classic -300 and -500. I guess the answer is no but over 90% of the flights are NG. When the classics fly in/out of MDW, are they mostly using full power takeoffs? BTW, another good way to tell the NG's from the rest are the size and shape of the engines and pylons. The NG engines do not have that "flattened" look that the -300's have.



every day is a good day to fly
User currently offlineAlnicocunife From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 157 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6523 times:

Easy way to tell them apart is to look at the the end. The APU exhaust area on the NG's has two holes (one for exhaust one for compartment air). The classics only have one hole. Exhaust only.

User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22678 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6487 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):
does WN need a higher performing aircraft such as the NG compared to the classic -300 and -500.

Do they need the -700? Not usually - the biggest exception being when the runways are contaminated, when the 73G and the 733 perform quite a bit differently.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2894 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6458 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):
BTW, another good way to tell the NG's from the rest are the size and shape of the engines and pylons. The NG engines do not have that "flattened" look that the -300's have.

Wow, they sure jumped all over you!

I use the cross section of the engine pylons as an easy way to tell, with the classics being rectangular, and the NGs being more of a semi-circle. Useful for when you can't see the flap canoes or apu....



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6286 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):

I don't know why everybody here jumps all over each other when they think it is a stupid question. Granted, the question could have been worded better, but it is a legitimate question.

As for the runways, 6500 feet is plenty of runway for all of WN's 737s. Up until recently I thought MDW was mostly Classics!


User currently online737tdi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 766 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6213 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):
The NG engines do not have that "flattened" look that the -300's have.




This is all in good fun. Just another poke with the stick. 

The CFM56-3 and -7 are both round, it's the inlet that is flattened on the Classic.  

I am just kidding ya.


User currently offlinen471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1506 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6122 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I too spent sometime at MDW this past week and noticed that not all gates will be handling the 800"s-----I could see that some gates had the tarmac marks for 800's and some did not---I would have thought that for flexibility WN would want all gates "800-worthy"

User currently offlineSXDFC From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2289 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5791 times:

MDW is basically a HUB for WN, although they call it something different. Odds are you will see multiple 737 types out of there. I was last there in December 2010, and flew in on N637SW, and flew out on N917WN.

The Flap Canoe's are Red except for the ones behind the engine, they are black  



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinetimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6748 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5682 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):
since MDW has short runways, does WN need a higher performing aircraft such as the NG

You remember WN flew -300s out of SNA and DET. (No long trips out of DET, tho.)


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5720 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5260 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):
OK, everyone just calm down!! No need to get all airliners.net on me!!

LOL, if you don't want people to go a.net on you, then don't be snobbish when they answer your questions.... hint: it deters people from answering your future questions. Social skillz there, learn from my mistakes.

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 8):
Another easy way to tell a -300 from a -700 is the tails and the front end angle. To me, the tail on the -700 looks HUGE.

Indeed, the NG tail was heightened to give the vertical and rudder more authority in the event of single-engine operation, as the engines are now (well, depending on which box the customer ticks) possibly more powerful, particularly in the case of the -900. More powerful engine = larger yaw forces induced when one goes out = need for more vertical surface area and rudder to counteract those forces.

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 8):
Also, the front of the plane seems to have a bit of a downward angle, almost a CRJ-7/900 but not as severe, while the tail on the -300 looks smaller and the aircraft has more of an upward slope similar to a CRJ-200, but again not as severe.

The downward angle of the stubbier NG's is due to the stretching of the main gear. The nose gear was also stretched (thank goodness.... it's SO HARD to duck under the belly of a classic), but not as much.
For the MAX, the nose gear is going to be lengthened to the point that it doesn't even fit in the gear well; I'm wondering if this will give it a tail-dragger appearance. I kinda hope it does for the novelty, but I know that would wear off in about ten minutes, and then we'd just call the plane UGLY.


User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5218 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 18):

The 737MAX does sound like it is going to being sickeningly ugly. The winglets are apready horrible and if they stretch the gear like you say, it is going to be downright horrible. The 737-700 is the best looking aircraft in the world and they are ruining it.


User currently offlineflyabunch From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 517 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5187 times:

"all anetters.net" on me. I love it!

Mike


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15695 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5178 times:

Quoting jaydub (Reply 7):
So, is the MDW operation made up mostly of B73G's? Yes.
Is it "B73G-only"? Hardly.

It does seem that -300s are somewhat kept away from MDW, making up 25% of the fleet but about 7% of MDW departures, likely due to runway and range restrictions. With -800s it's the opposite, with about 7% of MDW departures despite making up only 4% of the fleet, which makes perfect sense considering that MDW is one of the bigger destinations and would need more seats.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineRamblinMan From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 1138 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5178 times:

The runways aren't THAT short. I rode an ATA 738 fully loaded from MDW nonstop to GDL. In their heyday they used to run 753s through there.

The runway length really comes into play during weather events...some fog will shut down MDW before it shuts ORD, same with snow.


User currently offlinefghtngsiouxatc From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3195 times:

I work at MDW ramp side, and 17 737 classic's per day seems a bit low, and I could have sworn I saw a 735 or two in the past couple days, too; but if that's coming from WN operations, I probably shouldn't second guess it.

I watch WN 737's take off at MDW day after day, and they all seem the same: normal. The only difference is the 738s sometimes use a bit more runway.

Keep in mind TZ used to send in 757-300s every day without a problem (except the time one hit the fence over by 22L. Woops!). 737 classics have no issue taking off out of MDW.


User currently online737tdi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 766 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3159 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 18):
Indeed, the NG tail was heightened to give the vertical and rudder more authority in the event of single-engine operation, as the engines are now (well, depending on which box the customer ticks) possibly more powerful, particularly in the case of the -900. More powerful engine = larger yaw forces induced when one goes out = need for more vertical surface area and rudder to counteract those forces.






I could be wrong here but I believe the max. output of the CFM56-7B is 27'000 lbs. of thrust (i.e. CFM56-7B27). This is what is currently run on our 800's and believe is the same as the 900. Our 700's are CFM56-7B24s with the classics running CFM56-3s at 20,000 lbs.. So yes you definitely need a larger rudder. Sorry about the off topic.


User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4540 posts, RR: 22
Reply 25, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3109 times:

Quoting fghtngsiouxatc (Reply 23):
I work at MDW ramp side, and 17 737 classic's per day seems a bit low, and I could have sworn I saw a 735 or two in the past couple days, too; but if that's coming from WN operations, I probably shouldn't second guess it.

OKC-MDW is normally a 735 and took it a couple times last month. So who knows. They might have upped it to a -300 or -700.



Any opinion/comment posted is that of my own and not that of Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5085 posts, RR: 19
Reply 26, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

WN started flying 737s into MDW in 1985. I remember the first flight. I was in law school then in Chicago.

WN was flying almost-exclusively 737-200s at the time; they had only recently taken delivery of the first -300 (November 30, 1984).

So, no, they don't need the 737-700 to use MDW's "short" runways.

You would have had more fun spotting when ATA was there. (RIP) I have flown 757-300s out of and into MDW, as well as 727s.


User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2982 times:

Another thing that I just remembered; wasn't it mentioned somehwere in another thread about s big FI announcment, that the takeoff run for the MAX at MTOW was to be around 11,000 feet? When WN gets these, I guess they're staying away from MDW?

User currently offlinegrain From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 92 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2971 times:

11,000 feet seems a little long even if it is at MTOW

User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2938 times:

Quoting grain (Reply 28):

I completely agree but, then again, there are certain performance kits they can have installed so I guess WN. probably will.

BTW, here's a thread about it from a while back. Hope this can shed some insight:

Questionable B737MAX Field Performance (by eaa3 Aug 22 2012 in Tech Ops)


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22678 posts, RR: 20
Reply 30, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2766 times:

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 27):
When WN gets these, I guess they're staying away from MDW?

Even assuming the 11,000 foot number is true, why would it follow that the Max would stay away from MDW? The 753 needs a lot more than 6,200 feet under certain conditions, but they flew in to and out of MDW every day when TZ flew (and NW flew theirs in too).



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8182 posts, RR: 24
Reply 31, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2708 times:

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):
OK, everyone just calm down!! No need to get all airliners.net on me!!

Considering that, based on jaydub's post, better than 9 out of 10 flights are NG's, I'd say it's probably pretty likely nearly all of the 737s you saw were -700s. But no, as others have said, MDW's runways have nothing to do with it, and classics fly there as well.

There could be 1 733 and 215 73Gs and people would still crap on you for suggesting MDW might be all NG's.



This Website Censors Me
User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5085 posts, RR: 19
Reply 32, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2685 times:

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 27):
the takeoff run for the MAX at MTOW was to be around 11,000 feet

There aren't a lot of flights on WN that would have any reason to go out of Chicago at MTOW, so the premise is wrong.


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8182 posts, RR: 24
Reply 33, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2633 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 30):
Even assuming the 11,000 foot number is true, why would it follow that the Max would stay away from MDW?

11,000 feet keeps it out of the vast majority of airports in the US, not just MDW. That number's gotta be wrong considering a 739 can do DCA-SEA off a 6800 ft runway.



This Website Censors Me
User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2516 times:

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 32):
There aren't a lot of flights on WN that would have any reason to go out of Chicago at MTOW, so the premise is wrong.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 30):

Even assuming the 11,000 foot number is true, why would it follow that the Max would stay away from MDW?

Alright, obviously I worded that in a way that was misleading. Let's try it this way; if the 11,000ft is actually true, it will keep some routes out of MDW from being operated by the MAX.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 33):
That number's gotta be wrong considering a 739 can do DCA-SEA off a 6800 ft runway.

I see your premise, but a 739 can't do that route without a capacity restriction. The new -900ERs can, and probably will.

Quoting flaps30 (Reply 9):
No need to get all airliners.net on me!! The main point of my question was that since MDW has short runways, does WN need a higher performing aircraft such as the NG compared to the classic -300 and -500. I guess the answer is no but over 90% of the flights are NG

Believe me, as you can see, A.netters seem to take things WAAY to literally or try to find things wrong to point out. They look for weirdly worder things (see above) and refuse to think about it before they respond. Don't take it too personally, it's harder to takes things in context when they aren't said in person.      


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...
Bad Day To Fly In/out Of SFO-OAK Area... posted Sun Mar 19 2006 21:24:35 by 777fan
Bad Day To Fly In/out Of SFO-OAK Area... posted Sun Mar 19 2006 21:24:35 by 777fan
Bad Day To Fly In/out Of SFO-OAK Area... posted Sun Mar 19 2006 21:24:35 by 777fan
Does BA Upgrade If They Run Out Of Seats In Y? posted Fri Dec 2 2005 02:10:57 by Brokenrecord
Does US Fly The EMB170 Out Of CLT? posted Thu Apr 14 2005 22:32:25 by Clrd4t8koff
How Many Widebodies Fly In/out Of LGA Everyday? posted Tue Sep 21 2004 18:06:33 by BG001
Does BA Upgrade If They Run Out Of Seats In Y? posted Fri Dec 2 2005 02:10:57 by Brokenrecord
Why Does UA Only Fly To LHR In The UK posted Wed Nov 7 2001 17:27:53 by Arsenal@LHR
Does BA Upgrade If They Run Out Of Seats In Y? posted Fri Dec 2 2005 02:10:57 by Brokenrecord
UA 777 Without PTVs In Y Out Of NRT? posted Thu Feb 11 2010 21:03:51 by speedbird0125
Does US Fly The EMB170 Out Of CLT? posted Thu Apr 14 2005 22:32:25 by Clrd4t8koff
Does US Fly The EMB170 Out Of CLT? posted Thu Apr 14 2005 22:32:25 by Clrd4t8koff
How Many Widebodies Fly In/out Of LGA Everyday? posted Tue Sep 21 2004 18:06:33 by BG001
How Many Widebodies Fly In/out Of LGA Everyday? posted Tue Sep 21 2004 18:06:33 by BG001
Why Does UA Only Fly To LHR In The UK posted Wed Nov 7 2001 17:27:53 by Arsenal@LHR
Why Does UA Only Fly To LHR In The UK posted Wed Nov 7 2001 17:27:53 by Arsenal@LHR
UA 777 Without PTVs In Y Out Of NRT? posted Thu Feb 11 2010 21:03:51 by speedbird0125
UA 777 Without PTVs In Y Out Of NRT? posted Thu Feb 11 2010 21:03:51 by speedbird0125
Questions About Flying In/Out Of AUA And Spotting posted Sun Jul 29 2007 15:32:50 by 777fan
Questions About Flying In/Out Of AUA And Spotting posted Sun Jul 29 2007 15:32:50 by 777fan
Questions About Flying In/Out Of AUA And Spotting posted Sun Jul 29 2007 15:32:50 by 777fan
Probable Delays/cancellations In/out Of SHA/PVG posted Sat Jun 23 2007 13:23:30 by Swiftski
Probable Delays/cancellations In/out Of SHA/PVG posted Sat Jun 23 2007 13:23:30 by Swiftski
Why Does DL Only Fly 8 777s? posted Sat Mar 3 2007 08:20:40 by FXramper
Probable Delays/cancellations In/out Of SHA/PVG posted Sat Jun 23 2007 13:23:30 by Swiftski
Why Does DL Only Fly 8 777s? posted Sat Mar 3 2007 08:20:40 by FXramper
XJT To Fly For DL Out Of LAX! posted Thu Mar 1 2007 04:54:02 by WestIndian425
XJT To Fly For DL Out Of LAX! posted Thu Mar 1 2007 04:54:02 by WestIndian425
Why Does DL Only Fly 8 777s? posted Sat Mar 3 2007 08:20:40 by FXramper
XJT To Fly For DL Out Of LAX! posted Thu Mar 1 2007 04:54:02 by WestIndian425