Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
India - Singapore Expand Air Services  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26025 posts, RR: 50
Posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4760 times:

India and Singapore on Tuesday revised air services agreement to allow more flights between the two countries.

Demand for air services between both countries has continued to grow, with some routes seeing 50% growth in the last 3-years alone.

Currently there is a maximum of 430 weekly services to 12 cities operated by 8 airlines between the nations.

Under revision airlines will be allowed immediate 10% increase in frequencies, followed by another 9% in 2014. Total seat capacity between the nations will rise to 29,300 seats per week for the Indian side and 28,600 for Singapore.

SQ has already said it hopes to introduce services to new destination of Pune and add services to Delhi as part of the revision, while its LCC affiliate Tiger intends to also grow its own India network.

The nations also agreed to review the bilateral on semi-annual basis.

Story:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...a-strengthen-air-links/624694.html
and
http://www.business-standard.com/art...s-to-singapore-113040200454_1.html

=


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12565 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4676 times:

That's quite a massive amount of capacity, when you think about it - over sixty flights and 4,000 seats a day! I know Singapore has quite a significant population of Indian descent and of course, many Indians travelling to and from Oz would travel via SIN, but it's still a huge number.

Do the numbers cited refer to both directions (i.e. it would be around 210 flights a week in each direction, and around 14,000 seats?)

Why the imbalance in favour of Indian carriers (I know it's not huge - just interested to know why)?

They cite a 10% increase in frequencies - but is that also paralleled by a 10% increase in seat capacity?

Finally, do governments in both countries have to approve minimum fares, or can the lo-cos effectively charge what they like?

Good news for all carriers in question, no doubt!


User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1117 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4542 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
That's quite a massive amount of capacity, when you think about it - over sixty flights and 4,000 seats a day! I know Singapore has quite a significant population of Indian descent and of course, many Indians travelling to and from Oz would travel via SIN, but it's still a huge number.

I just wish a.netters can quit this "X country has Y number of people of Z country descent, hence it can support more flights" theory. It may be able to explain old-world travel patterns such as Europe-Australia, but in today's globalised world, it is hardly relevant. It is not as if only Singaporean Indians will travel to India, nor does it mean Indians will travel to Singapore just because there are Indians here.

However, Singapore is indeed a major tourist destination for Indians, who tend to hold Singapore in high esteem and a model to follow. There were 868,991 Indians who visited Singapore as tourists in 2011, making them the fifth biggest market for Singapore. Out of these, 652,060 arrived by air.

Conversely, 119,022 Singaporeans visited India in 2011 (99.9% of them travelled by air to India). Compare this to the 192,592 Australians who visited, for instance, despite Singapore being just a fraction of Australia's population.

Just doing very primitive calculations alone, if 652,060 + 119,022 we get 771,082. That's about 2,113 travellers per day per direction on average. Add in other travellers such as 5th freedom flyers and such, it is not hard to see why 4000 seats a day is not too far fetched.



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12565 posts, RR: 35
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4431 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 2):
I just wish a.netters can quit this "X country has Y number of people of Z country descent, hence it can support more flights" theory. It may be able to explain old-world travel patterns such as Europe-Australia, but in today's globalised world, it is hardly relevant. It is not as if only Singaporean Indians will travel to India, nor does it mean Indians will travel to Singapore just because there are Indians here.

I'm sorry if this came across as critical; it was in no wauy intended to be. I do take your point and I am not surprised that there is a lot of travel between the two countries. However, most air routes between two countries start because there is some cultural link between the two.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 2):
Just doing very primitive calculations alone, if 652,060 + 119,022 we get 771,082. That's about 2,113 travellers per day per direction on average. Add in other travellers such as 5th freedom flyers and such, it is not hard to see why 4000 seats a day is not too far fetched.

Again, I'm not saying it's far fetched. My objective in responding to the post was not in any way to deride or criticise the level of traffic or capacity between the two. I'm 6,000 miles away, freezing in Europe and you're in Singapore, so obviously much closer to the action, so you'll obviously have more information than me!

I'm glad to see growth in these markets, as I'm glad to see it anywhere; long may it continue for all airlines concerned.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13439 posts, RR: 100
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4368 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Interesting. While not large growth, it is growth and that seems to be lacking in too many of India's trade partners.

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
Total seat capacity between the nations will rise to 29,300 seats per week for the Indian side and 28,600 for Singapore.

Now that is interesting. Why the 'lopsided allocation?' I'm not used to seeing that. Is it due to the nature of O&D? For such a small difference, why didn't they just match them both at say 30k seats per week?

Quoting kaitak (Reply 3):
I'm glad to see growth in these markets, as I'm glad to see it anywhere; long may it continue for all airlines concerned.

I think we all share that sentiment.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26025 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4349 times:

I am not sure why the difference, however the bilateral has always favored the India side historically.

For example for beyond 5th freedom service, Singapore was limited to only 8 747 equivalent beyond flights via India with many destinations like London excluded, but India was allowed up to 21 weekly 747 equivalent 5th freedom services via Singapore.

Anyhow it seems the Singapore side is happy with this adjustment. They after all invited the Indians to come and talk.
Also one can be hopefully by agreeing to review this bilateral every two years, will bring further liberalization over time.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3479 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4320 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
SQ has already said it hopes to introduce services to new destination of Pune and add services to Delhi as part of the revision,.

Does Pune has enough runway to handle any of SQ's aircrafts?


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26025 posts, RR: 50
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4246 times:

Pune runways is 8,329ft.

Certainly enough for up to an A330 or even 777 on a relative short 4 hour hop across the Bay of Bengal.

But SQ also has Silk Air which they can use to build the market first with.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineblrBird From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 579 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4217 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
I know Singapore has quite a significant population of Indian descent and of course, many Indians travelling to and from Oz would travel via SIN, but it's still a huge number.


One more think to keep in mind is, Singapore is one of the first 'Foreign' country Indian's visit once they can afford air travel and most them might be making thier first travel!



from star dust....
User currently offlineblrsea From India, joined May 2005, 1426 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4167 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
For example for beyond 5th freedom service, Singapore was limited to only 8 747 equivalent beyond flights via India with many destinations like London excluded, but India was allowed up to 21 weekly 747 equivalent 5th freedom services via Singapore.

Even though India has more allocations, I don't think India is utilizing all of it. And as regards to beyond 5th freedom service, at present I don't think either India or Singapore are using those rights.


User currently offlinebrahmin From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3932 times:

This will be great for USA West Coast Indians. They could fill one flight per week.

User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4830 posts, RR: 44
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3895 times:

Market size demand in 2012 on the India-SIN sector was follows:

BOM - 535,000
MAA - 521,000
DEL - 389,000
BLR - 197,000
CCU - 90,000
HYD - 62,000
COK - 55,000
TRV - 54,000
AMD - 21,000

Source: Sheppard System for the period JAN-DEC 2012

Taking this into account, DEL-SIN is already a double daily B777 operated service by SQ where as MAA is only a daily A333. MAA should be the one that should be really increased to double daily A333 at least as the market demand is definitely there along with cargo.


User currently offlinekaran69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2893 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3748 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):
Taking this into account, DEL-SIN is already a double daily B777 operated service by SQ where as MAA is only a daily A333. MAA should be the one that should be really increased to double daily A333 at least as the market demand is definitely there along with cargo.

I think you forgot to consider that AI has 2 330s/321s , AIX 1 738, 9W 1 738 as well on that route, or were you purely speaking from SQs point of view?

Karan


User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4830 posts, RR: 44
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3633 times:

Quoting karan69 (Reply 12):
I think you forgot to consider that AI has 2 330s/321s , AIX 1 738, 9W 1 738 as well on that route, or were you purely speaking from SQs point of view?

SQ point of view only as apart from O&D, they will take a lot of pax via SIN to KUL, HKG, LAX, SFO, China, Japan and Australia.


User currently offlineojas From India, joined Mar 2008, 2981 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3574 times:

MI also operated MAA - SIN 5 weekly with an SQ code share and so does TR. So they are almost double daily there. And the nature of traffic between MAA and SIN, I don't see any logic in SQ in deploying their own metal on a 3.5 hour flight.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7):
Pune runways is 8,329ft.

Certainly enough for up to an A330 or even 777 on a relative short 4 hour hop across the Bay of Bengal.

But SQ also has Silk Air which they can use to build the market first with.

Pune's Apron is incapable of handling any wide body, so the question of SQ coming there does not arise.

With the increased bilaterals, from SQs side only a 3rd daily to DEL makes sense. The remainder of the expansion would be by MI, TR etc from Singapore's side. For MI surely PNQ, BBI, IXM, TRZ would be on the cards.



A lion does not concern himself with the opinions of the sheep
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3480 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 1):
That's quite a massive amount of capacity, when you think about it - over sixty flights and 4,000 seats a day! I know Singapore has quite a significant population of Indian descent and of course, many Indians travelling to and from Oz would travel via SIN, but it's still a huge number.

SQ also carriers a lot of passengers between the US and India.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 4):
Now that is interesting. Why the 'lopsided allocation?' I'm not used to seeing that. Is it due to the nature of O&D? For such a small difference, why didn't they just match them both at say 30k seats per week?

Politics. The biggest beneficiary here is SQ and its affiliates but they want to make it look like India is in control. Just because Indian carriers get more seats it doesn't mean they will actually carry more passengers  
Quoting blrsea (Reply 9):
Even though India has more allocations, I don't think India is utilizing all of it.

  
It's all about perception.


User currently onlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1736 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3392 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 15):
Politics. The biggest beneficiary here is SQ and its affiliates but they want to make it look like India is in control. Just because Indian carriers get more seats it doesn't mean they will actually carry more passengers
Quoting airbazar (Reply 15):
It's all about perception.

Exactly. I'm sure Indian officials are happy to tout that they "win" these talks, maintaining a larger share of the bilateral than their partner. The reality is that the carriers on the Singapore end will make most effective use of the allotment, so I'm sure officials in Singapore are more than happy to let India have a larger cap as long as they keep getting the capacity they want.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26025 posts, RR: 50
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3288 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 11):
MAA should be the one that should be really increased to double daily A333 at least as the market demand is definitely there along with cargo.

As mentioned by others, SQ also has Silk Air and Tiger in the market. Several days of the week Tiger is double daily. So combined somedays there are 4 SIA Group flights on the route.

Who knows, maybe Scoot will join in also one day !

Anyhow with Air Asia setting up its first Indian base at MAA also, I'd bet they will also add capacity to SIN in due time making it likely less appealing for SQ mainline.

Quoting ojas (Reply 14):
Pune's Apron is incapable of handling any wide body, so the question of SQ coming there does not arise.

OK thanks.

I guess SQ will utilize MI then to service Pune.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 500 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3197 times:

Quoting ojas (Reply 14):

MI also operated MAA - SIN 5 weekly with an SQ code share and so does TR. So they are almost double daily there. And the nature of traffic between MAA and SIN, I don't see any logic in SQ in deploying their own metal on a 3.5 hour flight.

They fill up their A333s so why is there no logic in this? Business travelers prefer SQ and there are a lot of them between India and Singapore.

Traffic between MAA and SIN:

Targeting business:
SQ Daily A333
AI 2x Daily A332, B744
MI 3x per week, Fri,Sat,Sun only, A319
9W Daily A738

LCC
6E (IndiGo) Daily A320
TR 2x Daily A320
IX (Air India Express) Daily B737

SQ only has a daily flight, so there is absolutely no reason to cut of a major city in India.


User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1117 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3076 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 3):
I'm sorry if this came across as critical; it was in no wauy intended to be. I do take your point and I am not surprised that there is a lot of travel between the two countries. However, most air routes between two countries start because there is some cultural link between the two.

And I apologise if my reaction come across as critical too, and I certainly did not intend to be personal. I am just slightly exasperated by reading this "X country has Y number of people of Z country descent, hence it can support more flights" theory in just about every thread discussing why a route is introduced or beefed up. While I agree with you about the commencement of flights part, I would still contend that it is usually much more applicable in earlier decades, and less so today.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 3):
Again, I'm not saying it's far fetched. My objective in responding to the post was not in any way to deride or criticise the level of traffic or capacity between the two. I'm 6,000 miles away, freezing in Europe and you're in Singapore, so obviously much closer to the action, so you'll obviously have more information than me!

I do not think you are criticising or deriding it either (well...certainly not anywhere close to the often protectionist reactions from people criticising each new EK route). I just feel it is good to remind people that DUB and SIN are not exactly carbon copies, and there is actually a sizeable market in SIN itself. Despite Singapore's small size, it is still 5 million people afterall, more than countries like New Zealand, Norway or Ireland. Singapore also has the world's highest number of millionaires per capita, and attracts more tourists than all of Korea, Japan, Indonesia, India or Australia.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
Anyhow it seems the Singapore side is happy with this adjustment. They after all invited the Indians to come and talk.
Also one can be hopefully by agreeing to review this bilateral every two years, will bring further liberalization over time.
Quoting airbazar (Reply 15):
Politics. The biggest beneficiary here is SQ and its affiliates but they want to make it look like India is in control. Just because Indian carriers get more seats it doesn't mean they will actually carry more passengers

Bingo.

There are other reasons as well, with lop-sided agreements common for Singapore's ASAs with other countries. Mostly, this is due to simple geography, where Singapore has just one port-of-call, while others have many more. It is easier and more profitable for Singapore-based airlines to mount flights to multiple ports in another country, compared to the same country flying the same routes here. A balanced agreement is therefore seen by some as being advantageous for SIN-based carrirs.

This is partly also why you see SQ flying much more to Australia's various cities than QF to Singapore. This pattern is repeated for just about every other multi-port destination.

Another reason is the Singapore government's efforts to build and maintain the air hub status here. They have publicly stated that they would much rather sacrifice SQ and have more airlines and people using SIN, than to have SQ monopolising and driving out competition. Which is also partly why more countties have fifth-freedom rights out of SIN than the other way round, a situation which QF capitalised heavily until recently.

In this case, therefore, Singapore hopes that Indian carriers may fly through SIN to destinations such as Australia or Indonesia, for example. Hence the generous concessions given to them. It also helps that SIN-based carriers are not exactly clamouring to fly via India to other places as that market remains weak and they can simply mount non-stops to Europe anyway. On the other hand, fifth-freedom out of Australia and China will be much more valuable, which their respective governments are aware of and hence they deny.

Quoting blrBird (Reply 8):
Singapore is one of the first 'Foreign' country Indian's visit once they can afford air travel and most them might be making thier first travel!

Just curious, but by the use of quotation marks on the word 'Foreign', do you mean to say Singapore is not exactly a foreign country to India? 

Anyway, it is true that many Indians do see Singapore slightly differently, which I believe is largely due to the huge number of Indian nationals who have worked in Singapore as labourers for decades (and more recently, increasingly as professionals). Many of them return to their homelands with memories of this country, and bring their whole families over to visit once they can afford it to show them around. Some even proudly show their families the buildings they helped to build.

It is a special connection which is hard to explain in a few words.  



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineinfinit From Singapore, joined Jul 2008, 598 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3020 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 2):
Conversely, 119,022 Singaporeans visited India in 2011 (99.9% of them travelled by air to India). Compare this to the 192,592 Australians who visited, for instance, despite Singapore being just a fraction of Australia's population.

Wow.. yeah, considering the population of Singapore I never would have expected that

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 19):
Just curious, but by the use of quotation marks on the word 'Foreign', do you mean to say Singapore is not exactly a foreign country to India?

Perhaps he's alluding to Sg's name, Singapura meaning Lion City in Sanskrit!


User currently offlineairdfw From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2855 times:

I am curious why there is no 'open skies' between India and Singapore?

User currently offlineTheAviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 417 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2847 times:

PNQ need to sort out it's airport + runway. It is still under IAF and needs an expansion. Being one of the main software hubs and lots of other industries around there are good amount of pax who will find it useful to have direct flight from PNQ to to various international destinations.

PNQ runway might be enough to accommodate A330 or even B777 but airport infrastructure needs an upgrade to handle the load.


User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 500 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2822 times:

Quoting TheAviator380 (Reply 22):
PNQ need to sort out it's airport + runway. It is still under IAF and needs an expansion. Being one of the main software hubs and lots of other industries around there are good amount of pax who will find it useful to have direct flight from PNQ to to various international destinations.

PNQ runway might be enough to accommodate A330 or even B777 but airport infrastructure needs an upgrade to handle the load.

The infrastructure has never been a limitation to increase flights: just look at the old "international terminal" in BLR. Just a shoddy corner of the main building. The first time I flew in there was one Indian Airlines A320 to Singapore at around midnight. About 7 years later, that same single corner with only 2 gates had between midnight and 3 AM the following flights: a SQ 777 to SIN, a TG 777 to BKK, a MH 777 to KUL, a LH A340 to FRA, a AF A340 to CDG, an AI A310 to somewhere and a AI A320 to SIN. Complete chaos but somehow it worked. I could not believe the difference when the new airport opened ...


User currently offlineTheAviator380 From UK - England, joined Feb 2013, 417 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 23):

As someone mentioned above apron and parking space is not big enough to handle 330 and 777 in PNQ. You right about BLR..but LH use their 747 to BLR isn't it? and AF uses their A330-200 ? to add on to it, I heard 9W interested to start MUC-BLR  


25 AngMoh : That's the new BLR airport which is nice. You should have experienced the old one... (and I was talking about the old one in the centre of the city)
26 Post contains images TheAviator380 : JA ja I know what you mean...Cheers.
27 LAXintl : Ask the Indians. Singapore is incredibly liberal and has an openskies policy with nations that are willing to reciprocate as matter of policy. India
28 icanfly : Will SQ be allowed to fly the A380 to India?
29 himmat01 : The new agreement still does not allow SQ to fly the A380 to India.
30 VIDP : So does the new bilateral paves way for the 3rd SQ flight from Delhi?
31 airdfw : I thought with US-India there is open skies, then why not with SG?
32 mercure1 : Simply out, America is not threat to India, but folks like Singapore, UAE, Europe and lots of other nations could pose significant challenges for Indi
33 LAXintl : Historically India has been virtually a closed economy with strong government involvement including ownership of entire industries and strong regulato
34 upwardfacing : True, but I don't think the part about Apple is quite right. Their interest in the Indian market is fairly recent actually. Regarding protectionism, i
35 Post contains links LAXintl : Here is story -- Apple is banned per Indian government regulations from opening their own stores. Indian government requires stores to source 30% of
36 lightsaber : I thank you for the time of the response. I agree that the Singaporean carriers will benefit the most. It is interesting how wrapped up some are in '
37 aeroblogger : FDI in aviation has been permitted for many years now.
38 Post contains links LAXintl : No it was only in 2012 the law was changed for airlines. India Lifts Ownership Restrictions On Foreign Airlines http://www.aviationweek.com/Article..
39 upwardfacing : There is a subtle difference between imposing a blanket ban on Apple Stores versus imposing the 30% local sourcing requirement, though they have the s
40 aeroblogger : Not according to the article you linked to: There was only one (1) type of company which was restricted from FDI, and that was foreign airlines. Fore
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...
Air India Reworks Paris CDG Services posted Sat Aug 7 2004 02:17:16 by B747-437B
Australia Singapore Air Services Agreement posted Wed Sep 24 2003 01:24:34 by KQ777
Japan - Taiwan Liberalize Air Services posted Wed Mar 27 2013 08:58:49 by LAXintl
Air Services Agreements / Canada & Other Countries posted Sun Mar 17 2013 16:12:40 by flightsimboy
Trinidad And Tobago Air Services In The 1970s. posted Sun Jul 15 2012 10:22:30 by doulasc
Companies That Subsidize Air Services posted Sat Jan 7 2012 08:32:32 by aa777lvr
More Air Services To And From Charlottesville, VA? posted Mon Jan 2 2012 15:17:49 by OldDominion727
Virgin To Expand Caribbean Services In 2011 posted Sun Aug 29 2010 08:03:58 by david_itl
Should Ryanair Expand Domestic Services Next? posted Fri Aug 21 2009 23:49:30 by EE-Kay
A380 To Star At India Aviation 2008 Air Show posted Tue Oct 14 2008 03:22:33 by Aviationbuff