Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
United 787-10 & A350  
User currently offlinenuggetsyl From United States of America, joined May 2006, 213 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 13855 times:

I am lost on the logic. Why would united order the 787-10 and a350?

72 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 13854 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting nuggetsyl (Thread starter):
Why would united order the 787-10 and a350?

Well, the rumour is that they're converting their A350-900s to -1000s (and topping up), so they'll end up with a fleet of 787-8s, -9s & -10s plus the A350s. Very nice fleet mix and gives them great flexibility to put the right plan on the right routes.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31001 posts, RR: 86
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13831 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Because they will serve different roles and missions.

The A350-1000 can serve as the replacement for the 747-400 on high-traffic routes.

The 787-10 can replace the two-class domestic configuration 777-200 on Hawaii routes and the three-class international configuration 777-200 on Trans-Atlantic and Trans-Pacific missions.

The 787-10 can also replace a number of the two-class and three-class international configuration 777-200ERs on Trans-Atlantic, Trans-Pacific and South America missions.

The A350-900 can replace the remainder of the two-class and three-class international configuration 777-200ERs on Trans-Atlantic and Trans-Pacific missions with long stage lengths and/or high payload weights that will challenge the 787-10.

[Edited 2013-06-18 08:22:54]

User currently offlinenuggetsyl From United States of America, joined May 2006, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13668 times:

Unless united is going to dump the 777, would it not be better to order the 777-x with such a large fleet already?

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31001 posts, RR: 86
Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13636 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting nuggetsyl (Reply 3):
Unless united is going to dump the 777, would it not be better to order the 777-x with such a large fleet already?

It appears that United is going to "dump" the 777.

United appears to be modeling themselves more along the lines of European and Asian "tier one" carriers with a lower-density, more comfortable future fleet. As such, they do not need the range of the 777-8 or the capacity of the 777-9.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16872 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13593 times:

Quoting nuggetsyl (Reply 3):
Unless united is going to dump the 777, would it not be better to order the 777-x with such a large fleet already?

The 777s are being replaced, as are the 767s and 744s. Eventually the UA widebody fleet will consist of 787-8, 787-9, 787-10 and A350-900 and or A350-1000.

Quoting nuggetsyl (Reply 3):
would it not be better to order the 777-x

The 777-8X and 777-9X will not be available until after 2020 sometime.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineAVENSAB727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 937 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13475 times:

Cant wait to see the A350 and the 787 10 myself, these look like great airplanes.


Always look on the bright side of Life!
User currently offlineslimshady From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 197 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13370 times:

I belive UA ordered both the 787 and the A350 back in 2008/2009 timeframe, before the nitty gritty details of the range/routes could be truly defined.

Seems like there was rumblings about pitting Airbus and Boeing against each other in a bidding war and UA (pre CO merger) had a huge ego (and probably still does) and would expect Airbus and Boeing to kneel before the arrogant and mighty United Airlines to get the best pricing. All bashing of the Tilton regime aside, IMHO it was foolish to have different types & manufacturers to perform somewhat similar missions. The cost to maintain and operate two types/manufacturers far outweighed the benefits. IIRC, even Gordon Bethune referenced this in a 2009 conference call.


In addtion, this topic was discussed in depth.

United Airlines To Buy Both 787 And A350 (#2) (by Diamond Dec 8 2009 in Civil Aviation)


User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1045 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13301 times:

UA has the following to replace:

747 - 23
767 - 51
777 - 74
Total = 148 Units

Assume the 25 A350-1000's replace the 747's. So, only focus on the 125 777/767's. Then, their current order of 65 is 60 units short of a full replacement of the 767/777 fleet. Will undoubtedly be future top up orders for the 787 and possibly A359's, but certainly room in the remaining 60 units for a good size 777x fleet if needed. About 40 of the 60 units are late build CO units and have at least 10-15 years left so that explains the gap. There is some need also to replace a portion of the 41 TATL PMCO 752's at some point also.

UA will have the following options:

787-800 with 219 pax at 8200 mi.
787-900 with 259 pax (approx 40 more than 788) at 8500 mi
787-10 with 299 pax (appox 40 more than 789) at 7000 mi
A359 with 314 pax (approx from EADS website) at 8100 mi
A351 with 350 pax (appoxfrom EADS website) at 8400 mi

Sure makes the A359 unlikely - we'll find out later in the week if the rumors are true. Certainly could see a 777x for some heavy routes (FRA, NRT, HKG, etc).


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13204 times:

Do not believe the 777-9X is off the table. It is a class larger than even the A350-1000.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31001 posts, RR: 86
Reply 10, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 13182 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting slimshady (Reply 7):
All bashing of the Tilton regime aside, IMHO it was foolish to have different types & manufacturers to perform somewhat similar missions.

If that was ever really the plan.

When UA said they ordered 25 A350-900s to replace 24 747-400s, people thought they were nuts and asked why they didn't go with the more appropriate and logical A350-1000. And this week UA is expected to convert those 25 A350-900 orders into 25 A350-1000s and then convert 10 of their 50 A350 options to firm orders for A350-900s.

I am 100% convinced that when UA signed their deal with Airbus it had a conversion price and slot assignment for the A350-1000. The questions to me are how favorable were those prices and did UA expect Airbus to improve the A350-1000 beyond it's initial specification when it entered service? In other words, did UA expect the A350-1000 that entered service to be better than the one Airbus marketed at the time they signed the deal? (Airbus announced their revised A350-1000 intentions almost 18 months after United announced their intent to order.) And did they negotiate pricing that allowed them to get the better plane for the same price as the original specification?

I am also pretty confident UA knew that Boeing would launch the 787-10 and put it into revenue service before the end of the decade. So they could see how that plane panned out as a 777-200 family replacement and then either buy it, swapping the A350-900s for A350-1000s, or keep the A350-900 as the 777-200 family replacement (exercising the options they had) and look to the A350-1000, 747-8 or A380-800 as their "real" 747-400 replacement.

Then again, maybe I'm giving Tilton and Company too much credit.

But I tend to think not.


User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 13048 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
Then again, maybe I'm giving Tilton and Company too much credit.

Stitch, my friend, I think you are. I'm not convinced that they'll up their A-350 order without Boeing offering them a sweet deal on the 779s. I could very well be wrong, but I think Boeing still has a few Aces up their proverbial sleeves.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineslimshady From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 197 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 13013 times:

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 8):
UA will have the following options:

787-800 with 219 pax at 8200 mi.
787-900 with 259 pax (approx 40 more than 788) at 8500 mi
787-10 with 299 pax (appox 40 more than 789) at 7000 mi
A359 with 314 pax (approx from EADS website) at 8100 mi
A351 with 350 pax (appoxfrom EADS website) at 8400 mi

Sure makes the A359 unlikely - we'll find out later in the week if the rumors are true. Certainly could see a 777x for some heavy routes (FRA, NRT, HKG, etc).

747-8 with 465 pax at 8000 NM range. (IMO unlikley, but it is still technically an option)



I just LOVE playing armchair airline manager. :-P


User currently onlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12475 posts, RR: 37
Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12780 times:

Quoting slimshady (Reply 12):
I just LOVE playing armchair airline manager. :-P

Absolutely; why do they need to pay these MBAs $100k a year, when they can get all their fleet planning answers here?  
Quoting slimshady (Reply 12):
747-8 with 465 pax at 8000 NM range. (IMO unlikley, but it is still technically an option)

But for today's KE order (about which I'm delighted!), I would have thought the 747-8 pretty much dead; however, to UA and most carriers I think it is. It won't fly for UA. The 777X, on the other hand, I think, may be a possibility.

That said, we need to look at more than just more seats; will the difference in capacity between the various types actually translate into extra revenue; if it's just Y seats sold at a discount - and the airline can't sell them at a profit, then it's probably not worth all the effort to support a new fleet, train pilots etc etc; - particularly if the 777X-9 only offers 30-40 seats. Realistically, given that it's only a small increase in size over the 77W, it's not likely to seat very many more than the A350-10. What will it deliver than the 350 can't? It won't be range, it won't be capacity and it's not going to be commonality (if it's a stand alone fleet, once the older 777s have gone).


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31001 posts, RR: 86
Reply 14, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12731 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
Then again, maybe I'm giving Tilton and Company too much credit.
Quoting USAF336TFS (Reply 11):
Stitch, my friend, I think you are. I'm not convinced that they'll up their A-350 order without Boeing offering them a sweet deal on the 779s.

The 777-9 only works for UA as a 747-400 replacement.

And if UA does convert their 25 A350-900s into 25 A350-1000s, if they're not going to be used to replace the 24 747-400s, then they would have to be for up-guaging 25 current 777-200ER routes. And does United have 50 daily city-pairs where they need ~350 seats?


User currently offlineQANTAS747-438 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1963 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12691 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
The A350-1000 can serve as the replacement for the 747-400 on high-traffic routes.

How is an A350-1000 a 744 replacement?



My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
User currently offlineTP313 From Portugal, joined Nov 2001, 260 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12619 times:

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 15):
How is an A350-1000 a 744 replacement?

Just ask British Airways


User currently offline817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 2388 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12597 times:

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 15):

The same way the 77W can be considered a 744 replacement.



Reality be Rent. Synapse, break! Vanishment, This World!
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5467 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 12597 times:

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 15):
How is an A350-1000 a 744 replacement?

It's a dandy 744 replacement for an airline that is most concerned with high-yield premium travelers. Can accommodate essentially the same premium cabins while being far, far cheaper to fly. You lose a bunch of seats in the back, but UA really doesn't seem too concerned about that.


User currently offlinecv990coronado From South Africa, joined Nov 2007, 342 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 12257 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 18):
It's a dandy 744 replacement for an airline that is most concerned with high-yield premium travelers. Can accommodate essentially the same premium cabins while being far, far cheaper to fly. You lose a bunch of seats in the back, but UA really doesn't seem too concerned about that.

Exactly as BA has done and others to follow I would imagine. The last 20-30 Y class pax are very often at extremely low yields. With today high fuel costs and probably still higher ones in real terms to come it's a no-brainer.



SSC-707B727 737-741234SP757/762/3/772/WA300/10/319/2/1-342/3/6-880-DAM-VC10 TRD 111 Ju52-DC8/9/10/11-YS11-748-VCV DH4B L
User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 11878 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
If that was ever really the plan.

Well said Stitch. I have been trying to figure out why they would convert entirely to the A351 when they obviously would need at least a few A359s. The price guarantees for a swap with slot positioning and further A359 re-buy argument makes sense. In fact, if you aren't correct then I think the only other explanation is that UA does not have their act together; something I am very resistant to believe.

tortugamon


User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 937 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 11353 times:

Quoting slimshady (Reply 7):
Seems like there was rumblings about pitting Airbus and Boeing against each other in a bidding war and UA (pre CO merger) had a huge ego (and probably still does) and would expect Airbus and Boeing to kneel before the arrogant and mighty United Airlines to get the best pricing. All bashing of the Tilton regime aside, IMHO it was foolish to have different types & manufacturers to perform somewhat similar missions. The cost to maintain and operate two types/manufacturers far outweighed the benefits. IIRC, even Gordon Bethune referenced this in a 2009 conference call.

How is order 2 different size aircraft that are slated to serve to different purposes arrogant? UA order the 788 and the A350 to cover 2 completely different market segments and to replace to completely different aircraft the 788 pre merger were going to replace the 3 class 763 and post merger sUA order is still slated to replace the 3 class 763. The A359 were slated to replace the 744 (although it now seems like that order might change). But I still fail to see whatever useless point you were trying to make the only thing that is obvious is that you have no clue what you are talking about because the 788 and the A359 were never going to perform similar missions at United pre merger and both of these aircraft are not even the same size. The A359 will be able to accommodate a lot more people than the 788 and although UA could have order the 789, for the missions that UA would need to cover (LAX/SFO-SYD, ORD-HKG) the A359 was a better fit cargo and passenger wise.


User currently offlineYTZ From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 2008 posts, RR: 24
Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 11352 times:

Pure speculation but what if UA's plan is to upsize.

A350-1000s can initially replace the 744s until the 777-9X comes along. At that point, UA uses the A350s on routes where it wants additional growth above what the 787-10 can provide.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31001 posts, RR: 86
Reply 23, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11339 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting YTZ (Reply 22):
Pure speculation but what if UA's plan is to upsize.

As I asked in Reply 14, that would give UA 50 airplanes (25 x 777-9 and 25xA350-1000) with between 315-350 seats in three-classes (Global First, Global Business and Economy). Does UA have that many city pairs that need that level of capacity?


User currently onlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3795 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (1 year 3 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11310 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Does that mean in the long run the only Boeing models in the whole United fleet will be the 737 (NG and MAX) and the 787? Unless United orders the 777-8X and/or 9X but it doesn't look like they are interested in it.

Likewise the only Airbus model will be the A359 and A3510? Unless United orders the A320NEO.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
A350-1000, 747-8 or A380-800 as their "real" 747-400 replacement.

Among the above 3, they are more likely to choose the A350-1000.

So this is what the United fleet will be like in 2025 and beyond:

B737-800/900ER/MAX
B787
A350

They are getting rid of the 757s, 767s and early 777s.



Ben Soriano
25 tortugamon : MAXes take over for the 757 787s take over the 767 787/A350 take over for the 777/747 Makes sense to me. I do not see them as a large 777-8/9x buyer.
26 TWA772LR : It will be a sad day when a Boeing airliner is no longer the flag ship of United Airlines. But I'm still optimistic that a 77X will be in United color
27 boilerla : UA's 747 config of 374 seats will be very close to the A350J seating capacity of approx. 350 seats. If UA drops international F on the A350, which is
28 Post contains images tristan7977 : Those former CO 777's have a long way to go. I can see the former UA 777's being replaced soon, as they are aging, I wonder what they would do to N777
29 sweair : Everyone throws the 350 seats around, remember this is marketing numbers, like 407 is for the 777-9X. EK will put about 320 seats in their A350-1000.
30 cosyr : Is it possible to put 10 across on the A350? If not, I say bring them on. I would take 787's with 9 across even if the seat is .5" narrower than 10 ac
31 Stitch : Yes, but only LCCs and charter operators (like Air Asia X) are likely to do so. I don't expect any major commercial airline (BA, UA, SQ, CX, etc.) to
32 waly777 : Here we go again with this. You do know 10 abreast 777's and 9 abreast 787's offer pretty much the same seat width @ 17"-17.3"? A 10 abreast 350 will
33 SonomaFlyer : I don't think its so much an issue with the width of the seat as it it having to climb over more people to reach an aisle. Since the VAST majority of
34 na : Not an ideal replacement as the A3510 is considerably smaller, only good if they have no intention and hope to grow. Perfect. Half a class at maximum
35 bobnwa : Why do you think that would be a "sad" day?
36 cv990coronado : Give me a 767 any day over 777 whether it's 9 or 10 abreast. Much more comfortable and quieter. In economy for me the first choice 767 then A330/340/7
37 TheRedBaron : Eventually United will order the A380 the attack of Pacific rim carriers, EK, BA and LH will push them to that market with a similar product. Its matt
38 fun2fly : Um, unless they add frequency which is desired by the business traveler or add additional direct service city pairs via their 8 hubs which is also de
39 FriendlySkies : You make it sound like the future UA fleet will be 90% Airbus. The 737s and 787s will make up the fast majority of the future fleet, with ~50 or fewe
40 Stitch : I expect the goal is to raise RASM by reducing capacity. With less seats to sell, Average Sale Price per seat will go up as UA will not have to deepl
41 Post contains links and images SonomaFlyer : UA often has to discount their seats heavily in order to fill the 744s. They aren't going to worry about buying an aircraft simply to match the 374 s
42 RDH3E : This has been show to be a myth through the comments of many a CEO. Speculating here but I recall somewhere around 20 frames is enough to get economi
43 Post contains images jayunited : The A351 can replace UA's 744 because they can cover the missions that the 744 currently fly and do is more efficiently. It isn't all about passenger
44 STT757 : I'm thinking UA needs to replace the 744s ASAP, and the A350-1000 seems to be a good compromise between going with the existing technology of the 77W
45 yellowtail : and IAH-LHR, FRA, NRT, EZE, GIG, GRU
46 STT757 : I think those are better suited for the 787-10.
47 AADC10 : Even though the seating capacity of the 787-10 and A350-9 are similar, the A350-9 is expected to have more range, which may come into play on some EW
48 tortugamon : Don't you think FRA, PEK, ICN, KIX, LHR, and NRT could be 787-10 territory as well? Not sure if the traffic would support the extra ~25 seats all yea
49 STT757 : Those are all 744 destinations, UA is flying 2x daily SFO-FRA with the 744, the A350-1000 as discussed is less capacity than a 744. The 787-10 would
50 tortugamon : Even to Osaka? Did not know that. But if they downsize further and add frequency couldn't that lead to higher RASM? Most of the airports mentioned ha
51 STT757 : Yup, they moved all the 744s to SFO, except for LAX-SYD/MEL and the Inter Asian flights.
52 KarelXWB : The conversion to the -1000 is now a done deal. During the press conference, United said the 777-200ERs will be replaced by the 787-10 and the 747-400
53 Post contains images Stitch : So looks like UA's future fleet, in terms of direct replacements, will be 35 A350-1000s and 115 787s (a mix of -8 / -9 / -10). That's going to be pret
54 Post contains images EPA001 : Yes, as expected 25 conversions from the A350-900 to the A350-1000 + 10 new firmly ordered A350-1000's. . That is an impressive line-up indeed. And m
55 fun2fly : So, here is what UA will end up with. A lot like the CO strategy of having a/c with +40 or 50 seat increments: UA's 788's = 219 seats Figure 35-40 mor
56 Stitch : They'll order at least another 40 787-10s to complete the 777-200 family replacement.
57 scbriml : They do have options on A350s as well, do they not? So the final number of A350s may be more than 35. Agreed.
58 RDH3E : The 789 is closer to a replacement for UA's 772s. UA's densest international 777 is 269 seats. Sticking with the theme of downgauge is better than up
59 FriendlySkies : I'd say there's still a good chance we see some A359s, for the reasons stated throughout the thread. The 787-10 simply does not have the legs to repl
60 Stitch : It's been reported in another thread that UA said they plan to use the 787-10 for the bulk of their 777-200 family replacements. I expect the 787-9s
61 RDH3E : I would think the missions probably overlap significantly for both range/payload reasons so the dividing line between 789-781 will probably be somewh
62 cosyr : Here we go again with what? I think it is a pretty valid opinion that even if the seats are identically sized, one more middle seat is less comfortab
63 1337Delta764 : And once UA retires its 764ERs, expect DL to pick them up in a flash.
64 SonomaFlyer : While its unfortunate that it looks unlikely UA will order the 77X in the near-term, their fleet planning makes sense. UA wants to narrow down their i
65 tortugamon : I think that is a popular belief and I agree to a certain extent. However, I am not sure I would have done it any differently. The 777x is not a 772
66 STT757 : That will not be before 2020-2025, by then they'll be 20-25 years old. Even then I could see them being put back onto Hawaii routes.
67 United1 : They have 40 options on the A350 family... I would bet that there will be some 359s and additional 787-10s ordered when the time comes to replace the
68 sweair : For Airbus a big order in the US would be the 757-ish A321 derivative. There are some airlines that got used to having these excellent long and thin N
69 tortugamon : Does anyone know the fuel burn of a 752 vs a 788? I would like to see that on a trip and seat cost basis. 757 is no Prius. MAXes and NEOs will very c
70 FriendlySkies : The A321NEO seems to be closer in that regard...I personally hope that Airbus can pull it off sooner than later, as a 321 would be a much more comfy
71 Stitch : That UA converted their entire order to the -1000 order and then added 10 more makes me believe the A350-900 is not planned to be part of UA's future
72 tortugamon : Good point. And if they do need more legs, the 787-9 in their configuration should not be too much smaller and will more than handle any trip they ca
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...
United Airlines To Buy Both 787 And A350 (#2) posted Tue Dec 8 2009 22:33:47 by Diamond
United Airlines To Buy Both 787 And A350 posted Mon Dec 7 2009 19:45:42 by AeroPiggot
United Close To 787 Or A350 Order posted Thu Nov 19 2009 19:44:08 by Zone1
QF's Expansion Weighs A350 And 787-10 posted Mon Feb 4 2008 16:58:13 by Stitch
FI: 787-10 To Face A350-900 Challenge posted Mon Jan 29 2007 11:26:06 by RichardPrice
Can QR Change The LoI For The A350 To The 787-10? posted Thu Dec 22 2005 20:03:04 by NYC777
772NG Or 787-10 To Compete With A350-900? posted Fri May 20 2005 00:53:18 by NorCal
Boeing Launches The 787-10 Dreamliner posted Tue Jun 18 2013 02:07:14 by moderators
United May Expand A350 Order posted Fri Jun 14 2013 08:55:51 by ap305
Boeing 787-10 Launch Imminent posted Thu Jun 13 2013 13:33:36 by KarelXWB