Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Emirates To Buy 100 777Xs If Boeing Builds Them  
User currently offlineraptor1090 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2011, 82 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2386 times:

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/emira...oeing-builds-new-model-478883.html
The title is self explanatory, and I guess is just Emirates' response to Boeing delaying the EIS beyond 2020.

"If that's good we may start offloading the later aircraft and flog them on the secondary air market to grab the new one because it has all the fuel efficiencies that we want. But we're not there yet," Clark said. Boeing has to play a balancing act with the EIS being not too late and neither too early for such a situation.

Another thing to note is that EK plants to retire its 77Ws 2017 onwards - isn't that a little too early for that?

65 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2423 times:

777-9X(74m) has better net operating revenues than A350-1000 in EK layout. 777-8X(72m, 77W length) too has better net operating revenue than A350-1000 in EK layout.

As per the link, EK wants both 777-8X and 777-9X.


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1704 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2414 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting raptor1090 (Thread starter):
Another thing to note is that EK plants to retire its 77Ws 2017 onwards - isn't that a little too early for that?

EK's fleet plan is to unload those 77W's once they reach a certain cycle length to avoid increased maintenance expenses. Some may be leased as well and those lease cycles are up.

Boeing is well aware that EK will buy a ton of 77X's if its offered. The issue is that EK wants those a/c to have a performance envelope most airlines do not need. I'm sure Boeing will try to split the difference between Clark's insistence on a plane which can fly full loads non-stop DXB to LAX and almost every other airline that will instead want the a/c to be more efficient at ranges 500 to 1000 miles less than EK wants.


User currently offlinemigair54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2418 times:

I think they will not be the only customers for the model, so i´m pretty sure that boeing will expedite a bit with this issue, they could have done a lot of more progress with this but they decide to do the B748 that we can see it´s not very popular or pax but it´s doing ok for cargo operators.

He also send a good message to Airbus about the A350-1000, i´m not sure what will happen but this kind of orders can make boeing start moving fast and secure 36bnUSD.... and not only that right now boeing has 115 B777 and many more on order so i´m sure the order will grow with options maybe up to 150 in the future and that huge money.

Seem like the B777 family will grow soon and continue being a cash cow for the guys in Seattle.

IMO, If this order materializes it will be also a big slap in Airbus face, because after securing the 70 A350 many people though that they will replace all the B777 with A350.

Lets wait and see, this is going to be interesting.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2416 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 2):
Boeing is well aware that EK will buy a ton of 77X's if its offered. The issue is that EK wants those a/c to have a performance envelope most airlines do not need. I'm sure Boeing will try to split the difference between Clark's insistence on a plane which can fly full loads non-stop DXB to LAX and almost every other airline that will instead want the a/c to be more efficient at ranges 500 to 1000 miles less than EK wants.

777-8X(77W length) should easily allow DXB-LAX without blocking seats. 777-9X would meet the needs of airlines that do not need more than 8,000nm design range.


User currently onlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1052 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2415 times:

GE is still moving ahead with the engine for the 777X.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....l/avd_11_08_2012_p01-01-514397.xml

"General Electric (GE) is sticking to a technology test plan for the GE9X engine for the Boeing 777X, despite continuing uncertainty over Boeing’s development timetable.

The engine maker is running a raft of technology demonstrations to support FAR33 engine certification in 2018 and entry-into-service in 2019. Boeing, which has not formally announced a firm schedule for the 777 derivative, still is believed to be aiming at introducing the aircraft by 2020."



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9720 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Quoting migair54 (Reply 3):
IMO, If this order materializes it will be also a big slap in Airbus face, because after securing the 70 A350 many people though that they will replace all the B777 with A350.

I think EK will always have a Boeing/Airbus mix which will mean that their 777 fleet will never be fully replaced by Airbus aircraft. Having both Boeing and Airbus aircraft gives EK less dependability on one aircraft supplier.

Quoting migair54 (Reply 3):
Lets wait and see, this is going to be interesting.

Yes, the 777 replacement will still be interesting to follow in the sense of how many will be replaced by Airbus models and how many will be replaced by the 777X and maybe even how many aircraft will be ordered as additional capacity (both Airbus and Boeing).

Another interesting topic will be, how will all those A380's and 777 that EK will dispose of in the future effect the (resale) value of these aircraft types? How will this impact the value of brandnew A380's and 777's?

A388


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30571 posts, RR: 84
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2427 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Clark said he'd "likely buy" the 747-8 if it had an 8300nm nominal range. Once Boeing (effectively) gave that to him, he responded with "we have no interest in the 747-8. We want a new 777."

Place a firm order with no-refundable deposits for 100 of them, TC, and I expect Boeing will make it happen.  
Quoting raptor1090 (Thread starter):
Another thing to note is that EK plants to retire its 77Ws 2017 onwards - isn't that a little too early for that?

EK leases their 777-300ERs for 12 years and their first frames, delivered in 2006, will be 11 years old in 2017 so they're right on the cusp of lease-return.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2414 times:

a classic case of ...

"If you build it, EK will come" ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ay5GqJwHF8

:D


User currently offlineodwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2421 times:

I just want to run a numbers exercise and get a few opinions.

Boeing list price for 777-300ER is $315mil. Let's postulate that in 2019 a 777-9 would have a list price of $360mil (bigger model, greater efficiency + 6 years of inflation). Boeing list price for 777-200LR is $291mil. Let's postulate that in 2019 a 777-8 would have a list price of $325mil (bigger model, greater efficiency + 6 years of inflation).

$360mil -9 / $325mil -8 as starting points for negotiations. For fun, let's go with a 75 -9 / 25 -8 split. Gives us an average starting price of $351mil per frame (weighted for the higher number of -9s to be ordered).

Next, let's go with a hefty 43% discount as launch customer. That gives an average frame price of $200mil. I know narrow bodies enjoy much higher discounts, but we are talking about a widebody family built to favor a specific customer's spec (e.g. EK's range and payload)

So that's a sale worth $20,000,000,000. Boeing delivered 82 777s in the past 12 months (Nov11-Nov12). So it represents multiple years worth of production slots (assuming slow/careful rampup...and the fact that you can't give ALL 100 of a high demand aircraft to one customer first...launch or not).

Now, let's require a 10% deposit in 2013 on all 100 frames. That's $2,000,000,000 cash in 2013 recieved towards development. That's allot of money. But that's also allot of lift (100 big planes) being developed.

Is that the kind of money an airliner needs to show an airframer to convince them to build a family of planes (777-8/9) to their specs? Is that enough risk sharing for an airframer to say, "OK, we will lock in the specs and build this airframe to favor your layout, range and payload requirements." Is this the kind of serious commitment it takes for an airliner to move a program up in priority (shoot for EIS of 2019 instead of 2021) and favor a vendor's specifications? Is it enough money to to risk alienating a few customers because you've built a plane with too much capability that has a higher costs (e.g. EK wants the full composite wing)?
Anyone have any past anecdotes to share (other than 767-400ER)?



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5449 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2421 times:

EK will wait for Boeing to present their "best and final" offer - and then say to Airbus "Ok, if you can beat this, we'll buy a hundred of them!". And repeat.  

I'm almost more excited to see what EK can get Airbus to do, because if it's really good we might see Boeing move right to Y3 or whatever they call a clean sheet design in that size range.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12408 posts, RR: 37
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2413 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 1):
777-9X(74m) has better net operating revenues than A350-1000 in EK layout. 777-8X(72m, 77W length)

Am I the only one to be kind of disappointed in the extra length of the 779X; I thought it would be around 76-77m; 2m (78") is barely the pitch of a F class seat row, or just over 2 Y class rows; not a lot of extra capacity.


User currently offlinemigair54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2412 times:

Quoting A388 (Reply 6):

I think EK will always have a Boeing/Airbus mix which will mean that their 777 fleet will never be fully replaced by Airbus aircraft. Having both Boeing and Airbus aircraft gives EK less dependability on one aircraft supplier.

Of course they will do and I think it´s a wise decssion giving the number of frames involved, but what i wanted to point out is that after EK ordering 70 frames we all though that the biggest part of the EK fleet will be around the A350 with more orders to come, but if they now place an order for 100 extra B777 that´d mean that we will not see many more EK A350 in a near future.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):

EK leases their 777-300ERs for 12 years and their first frames, delivered in 2006, will be 11 years old in 2017 so they're right on the cusp of lease-return.

are all the planes leased?? i understand than sometimes airlines lease planes and after the 10-12 years of lease the planes becomes property of the airline, i´m not sure about this because it´s quite a tricky issue usually. I would love to know more about this matter.


User currently offlineTP313 From Portugal, joined Nov 2001, 259 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 1):
777-8X(72m, 77W length) too has better net operating revenue than A350-1000 in EK layout.

Since when does Boeing propose an -8X with 72m length?


User currently offlineAtlflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 736 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2409 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 11):

I don't think anyone knows the true length the 777-8x or 777-9x will be...


User currently offlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 616 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2412 times:

What about the A350-1000 is making TC shun it so much?

User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4865 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2416 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 2):
I'm sure Boeing will try to split the difference between Clark's insistence on a plane which can fly full loads non-stop DXB to LAX

I believe EK operates on a basis that it “sells” a fixed payload on every flight and expects that flight to leave with that payload irrespective of the weather that the flight will experience. Using DXB-LAX as an example, for the last 120 days according to FlightAware, the shortest time was 14hr 55m and the longest 17hr 33m. Their published gate to gate time is 16hr 30m but from March of next year they are changing this to 17hr 20m. which is right on 8000nm. ESAD. Thus their insistence on 8000nm range . It is interesting to note that in the past 120 days , 48 flights have been in the 16hr to 17hr flight time range. This might well be the reason they are going to lengthen out their gate to gate times.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15718 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2415 times:

Quoting raptor1090 (Thread starter):
Emirates To Buy 100 777Xs If Boeing Builds Them 

The question is what will they buy if Boeing doesn't build the 777X. As long as Boeing makes new 77Ws better than older ones to the level that it's worth it to buy new ones, I think EK will stick with them. Boeing can probably keep enough orders for the 777 after the A350 shows up that they can keep the line moving if they want to develop a replacement. I can't imagine slowing down to the levels the 767 did when the 787 was being prepared.

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 15):
What about the A350-1000 is making TC shun it so much?

Probably capacity. The A350-1000 and 777-300ER are almost exactly the same length. The 777 however is nearly wide enough for ten seats per row in coach, and the X would probably make it even better. The A350 could do ten across, but it would be much tighter than the 777. (I want to say it's like 11 inches narrower or so). My guess is that Emirates likes the extra seats. The A350-1000 should be great for replacing 777-200s though.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10654 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Even that number wouldnt force Boeing to build it if Y3, something like a big 787, might be the better solution. I couldnt care less for a plane as for another big boring twin, but EK has to replace 50+ 77Ws in the 2020s.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 10):


EK will wait for Boeing to present their "best and final" offer - and then say to Airbus "Ok, if you can beat this, we'll buy a hundred of them!". And repeat.  

Sure.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5312 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2406 times:

Quoting raptor1090 (Thread starter):
Emirates To Buy 100 777Xs If Boeing Builds Them

"Show me the money."

Tim Clark loves to talk about what he's going to buy. He's a bit more reluctant to put deposits down.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2406 times:

Quoting TP313 (Reply 13):
Since when does Boeing propose an -8X with 72m length?

I am assuming, as wished by many on A.net, 777-8X at 77W length.

Quoting Atlflyer (Reply 14):
I don't think anyone knows the true length the 777-8x or 777-9x will be...

  One would think anything less than 4m difference does not make sense.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12339 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2407 times:

Quote:

"If Boeing produced the airplane that we want I can see easily that figure, bearing in mind that we've ordered 175 of them," Clark said in an interview with Arabian Business.

No real news here.

EK's business model is based on not keeping aircraft as they age, so indeed they will be rolling into the new models as they become available.

Quote:

"Unless Airbus have a 350 programme - but the 350-1000 isn't of the size of the 777ER today or the new 777. So it's not something that is that attractive to us at the moment unless they change it."

I guess someone should tell him that he has 20 on order.

Quote:

Boeing's reluctance or delay to go forward with the 777-8x and 777-9x stems from a fear that the new models may stunt demand for the 747-8, analysts say

I suppose so, but I imagine it's more about the suits making sure the boffins can finally get the 787-8s out the doors in acceptable numbers, and can build the 787-9 and 787-10X, and KC-45, and 737NEO first.

They have no real reason to announce the 777X for several years, since they can't hope to productize it till the end of the decade, given all the programs currently in motion.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Quoting raptor1090 (Thread starter):
Another thing to note is that EK plants to retire its 77Ws 2017 onwards
Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 1):
As per the link, EK wants both 777-8X and 777-9X.

It seems EK is the one that is keeping B's head spinning about 777X. 100 is attractive, but I doubt B can make EIS in 2017. A hurried 2017 EIS 777X could have too much compromise that the risk and ROI may not be worthwhile.

For EIS 2017, why not just do a 777NG (77W length) with new metal, lightened (not new) wing, an updated GE-90 and save a ton of R&D which can be used for discount to EK's liking and be done with it. It is also much easier for the supply chain to migrate to sustain volume delivery.

IMO, save the resource and move onto 787-11/12 for long term A350 competition. Otherwise, do a post 2020 EIS all CFRP 777-8X (77W length) and a 80m 777-9X and go after a market that is not touched by the A350 as well as the A380. Call it semi Y3 if you want.

As a 100 frames launch customer, wonder if EK also ask Airbus to build a A350-1100?  


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9977 posts, RR: 96
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2409 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 21):
I guess someone should tell him that he has 20 on order.

He does seem to overlook this..     
Quoting cosmofly (Reply 22):
As a 100 frames launch customer, wonder if EK also ask Airbus to build a A350-1100?

Almost without question.

Rgds


User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2408 times:

Quoting mffoda (Reply 5):
GE is still moving ahead with the engine for the 777X.

Nice engine for 787-11/12, so effort is not wasted.  


25 RickNRoll : Both manufacturers have found it's best not to believe him. He could change his mind later, if circumstances change. Clarke wants the most expensive
26 seabosdca : You'd think so. Certainly Boeing management have all been to business school. But sometimes companies get irrational about protecting products that a
27 Aither : EK has specific needs in terms of payload/range few airlines have. Tough choice. A perfect A/C for EK would mean a less perfect aircraft for 80% of th
28 Atlflyer : What range is needed for the 777x to fly at full capacity (all seats filled plus cargo) from DXB-LAX?
29 2707200X : If I know something, this should be a very damn good incentive to launch the 777x program.
30 sunrisevalley : [quote=Atlflyer,reply=28]What range is needed for the 777x to fly at full capacity (all seats filled plus cargo) from DXB-LAX? EK are asking for 8000n
31 tdscanuck : That's 7300nm still air great circle, so you probably need more like 8000nm when you include reserves. Then, since you want full payload, you're talk
32 thegeek : Why does EK need the 777X to do this? It has later versions of the A380 for this role doesn't it?
33 Atlflyer : So speculation has been that the 777-9x will have a range of around 8500nm. This would allow EK to fly DXB-LAX but not filled with cargo?
34 Post contains images lightsaber : While Tim Clark does talk a bunch, when he finds an aircraft he likes, he buys them for EK in record setting numbers. No one can ignore him as a poten
35 LAXDESI : Currently, EK is operating one flight with B772L on the route. Starting in December, it switches to 77W and stays at one flight till the summer of 20
36 thegeek : Right, but the potential for further upgrades to the A380's capability in the time it will take to bring the 777X to market cannot be ignored.
37 panais : Spot on. It seems that all Airbus needs is a more powerful engine, somewhere around 100,000 lbf. This will also mitigate the performance issues for t
38 fcogafa : Unless this suggests that they have quietly cancelled them, as another mid east airline has done, maybe in a deal as part of the latest A380 order. C
39 BMI727 : I have no reason to believe that they don't intend to take their A350-1000s. In Emirates' configuration, the 77W will seat significantly more passeng
40 Quokkas : According to Emirates Group Annual Report 2012 as at 31 March 2012 Emirates airline had 169 aircraft in its fleet, 163 passenger and 6 freighters. At
41 AirbusA6 : What effect will EK dumping 100 fairly new 77W on the second hand market have? I imagine these will be attractive to many carriers.
42 RickNRoll : Would Emirates do a ten across A350?
43 tdscanuck : Yes. When they give a single range figure, it's typically for a point on the payload-range curve significantly beyond maximum payload (often, it's fu
44 Stitch : At full passenger load, the A380-800 lacks the cargo volume of the 77W/777X so that might be playing a role in EK's fleet planning for their ULH miss
45 Atlflyer : Thank you for clarifying this!
46 RyanairGuru : I'm sure this will have been discussed before, but I'd appreciate if someone could give me a run-down on the answer. If Boeing continue to drag their
47 cosmofly : 100 frames of 748i will have little residual value by the time EK retires them so no one will finance 100 frames of 748i at EK's price. 20 frames, ma
48 BMI727 : Isn't the engine going to have less thrust than the GE90? Without a new wing or weight loss measures, simply slapping new engines on the 777 might hu
49 boysteve : I agree, but Boeing developed the 764 variant for just a few sales to DL and CO. Did Boeing loose money on this? If not there is nothing to stop them
50 cosmofly : The current 777X engine at near 100K thrust will not work. I am assuming a 115K thrust one with an improved core. It is only my idea and nothing more
51 cmf : Often repeated myth but that doesn't make it true. Boeing had every intention to sell the 764 to a lot more airlines. Flight global's archive is a go
52 odwyerpw : They took it on a pretty expensive world tour....they definitely wanted to sell more.... In fact, there was even a design study, the 764ERX, on the b
53 Post contains links Stitch : Indeed they did, but they still went forward and built the plane for CO and DL even when they proved to be the only customers rather than just offer
54 PW100 : Not sure if I understand this correctly. I understood that the 77W can't take cargo on the EK ULH mission (say DXB-LAX), and as a result EK need to b
55 RickNRoll : The Airbus website refers to ten across seating. Is it feasible or not, even if a tad uncomfortable.
56 Stitch : The issue with the A380-800 is not payload weight capability (it's a fair bit better than the 777-300ER's), but cargo hold space - the A380-800 has s
57 odwyerpw : Thank's Stitch, I've been looking for that info for years (unfortunately the actual hyperlink in the article is dead..just takes you to the 767 famil
58 thegeek : I still don't see it. I doubt that DXB-LAX is going out with a cargo volume significantly above that which would fit in an A380, and surely most of i
59 Post contains images imiakhtar : Interestingly, the 747X got to a sufficiently advanced stage that the UK govt allocated RLI funds for the Trent 600 as part of a joint development wi
60 Post contains images astuteman : The cargo hold space may well be an issue for the A380 in a lot of cases, but DXB-LAX isn't one of them There will be little if any cargo travelling
61 sunrisevalley : plugging these changes into the Piano-X UAE version of the A380 at 299t OEW the range at max passenger load goes out to 7900nm for the 489-seat versi
62 astuteman : Thanks for that. I'm guessing the EK 777-300ER's at what, 175t DOW and 365 pax will come out somewhere in the 7400Nm - 7500Nm range.. Rgds
63 Post contains images cmf : Just as they went forward and built the 747-8i for LH. But we don't hear that it was developed for just a few sales to them
64 Post contains images Stitch : Which is kind of odd when you think that LH has wanted a larger 747 since 2000 (as a compliment to the A3XX / A390).
65 Post contains images lightsaber : Los Angeles has been hit by this recession. While I'm certain TK is taking some traffic, I believe the big hits are: 1. Slight reduction in premium c
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...
Emirates To Announce 100 A350 And 20 747-8 posted Wed Oct 10 2007 08:07:18 by Carls
Emirates To Order 100 Planes Shortly posted Wed Jan 24 2007 14:57:39 by UAL777UK
Report: Emirates To Buy 10 X B748-F posted Sun Jul 16 2006 16:46:49 by PanAm_DC10
Market Rumor: Emirates To Buy BA? posted Thu Jun 15 2006 09:53:08 by N1786b
Aeroflot To Buy 22, Maybe 28, Boeing Aircraft posted Tue Dec 27 2005 07:59:57 by MidnightMike
Emirates To Buy More Aircraft posted Wed Mar 23 2005 09:26:00 by Jacobin777
Emirates To Have 100 Acft. By 2010 posted Mon Nov 5 2001 07:31:17 by Rwy31R
Emirates To Buy 6 777-300 posted Tue Jul 25 2000 16:19:40 by 777x
Emirates To Buy A3XX posted Mon May 1 2000 22:24:54 by John G
Emirates To Buy 10 A3XX! posted Sun Apr 23 2000 20:57:04 by WorldTraveller