Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Re-use Of Reg-numbers In Some Countries?  
User currently offlinebluesky73 From UK - England, joined Oct 2012, 346 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 month 19 hours ago) and read 5106 times:

Hi all,

In the UK the reuse of aircraft registrations is not permitted yet in other countries such as Germany reuse is fine.

Does anyone know which countries can and which cannot reuse? Also once UK reaches G-ZZZZ will it return to G-AAAA or start a new sequence?

Cheers bluesky73

36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineemirates773 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 40 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 19 hours ago) and read 5078 times:

According to the CAA in the UK this is what is the current situation:

There are two different types of registration marks currently issued, in-sequence and out-of-sequence marks. These differ in the fee for registration of each one, see forms and fees. In-sequence registrations have been used since 1919 starting at G-EAAA to G-EBZZ and then starting again at G-AAAA. The current sequence reached G-CBAA during 2001. Each aircraft in turn is allocated the next sequential mark within a range of three blocks of registrations (e.g. if the next mark to be issued is G-CBAA then an in-sequence mark is any between G-CBAA and G-CBCZ which has not already been used, this means there are always 75 in-sequence marks to chose from).

There are no longer any historical registration marks available for issue (i.e. between G-AAAA and the current in-sequence range) unless it is the original aircraft that is being re-registered or restored to the UK Register. Generally an original aircraft can return to any of the UK registration marks that it has previously carried.

Each aircraft is allocated only one in-sequence mark although it is possible for the same aircraft to have an unlimited amount of out-of-sequence marks in its history. Registration marks cannot be re-used on different aircraft even if the original aircraft that carried the marks has been registered overseas or destroyed.

source: CAA Website

Just a couple to start with: Australia re issue registrations e.g VH-EBL on a B747-238 now on a A330-203, Singapore re issue e.g 9V-STE on a A310-324 is now on an A330-343E. Possibly the UAE as well as some VIP aircraft have carried the same marks on differeing frames.



Emirates. Keep Discovering.
User currently offlineBrusselsSouth From Belgium, joined Aug 2001, 628 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 18 hours ago) and read 4985 times:

Quoting bluesky73 (Thread starter):
Does anyone know which countries can and which cannot reuse?

Not sure about the exact legal conditions, but Belgium definitely reuses since I recently flew on a helicopter (Robinson R44) registered OO-SJC. A quick Google (or Airliners.net) lookup shows that OO-SJC used to be a Sabena Boeing 707.

Regards
BrusselsSouth


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7742 posts, RR: 17
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 15 hours ago) and read 4829 times:

In Denmark they re-use old registrations. Here are two different Dornier 328 Jets with the same operator and registration, OY-NCP:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Niklas Ahman
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Roger Andreasson


And South Africa is another that reuses registrations. Here are two Comair aircraft both registered ZS-OAO:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Louis Vosloo
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sean Mowatt


As previously mentioned, Germany reuses registrations. Here are two different LH Boeings both registered D-ABIH:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Björn Höglund
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George Polfliet



User currently offlinebluesky73 From UK - England, joined Oct 2012, 346 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 15 hours ago) and read 4783 times:

So far it appears to be only UK that doesn't reuse the registration? How about the US can you reuse a reg in US?

I wonder if CAA will change this in future or open up a new sequence after G-ZZZZ? I'm sure it's a legacy thing but seems strange many countries do reuse yet some, especially UK don't.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7742 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 14 hours ago) and read 4700 times:

Quoting bluesky73 (Reply 4):
I wonder if CAA will change this in future or open up a new sequence after G-ZZZZ? I'm sure it's a legacy thing but seems strange many countries do reuse yet some, especially UK don't.

With 25 letters (as the CAA does not use 'Q') and a four letter sequence there are 390,625 different possible registrations in the current system. If they decided to start to use 'Q' then that number would increase to 456,976. That's a huge number of aircraft.

In sequence registrations reached G-CAAA in 2001 - see Thread Opener - and in the middle of this year, eleven years later had progressed to around G-CHAA. That means the CAA have used one third of the available G-Cxxx registrations in eleven years. At that rate the G-Cxxx series will last until 2033, the G-Dxxx (G-Exxxx are already used) series to 2066 and the G-Fxxx series to 2099.

So with a further 19 initial letter registrations beyond "F" available, at the current rate of useage there are sufficient unused registrations to last well into the 25th century. So today I do not think anybody in the CAA will be worrying too much about where to go next.  


User currently offlineKFlyer From Sri Lanka, joined Mar 2007, 1234 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 14 hours ago) and read 4681 times:

Here in Sri Lanka old registrations are re-used. However, I believe that it is up to the airline to request for the reg.
4R-ALB was originally a 707

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Richard Vandervord


... and now an A330

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Vollmar




The opinions above are solely my own and do not express those of my employers or clients.
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 14 hours ago) and read 4678 times:

The US reuses registrations after a certain number of years - I'm not sure of the exact time frame, but there are many photos on A Net of one reg # and two completely different types of aircraft.

User currently offlinebohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2751 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 13 hours ago) and read 4624 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 7):
The US reuses registrations after a certain number of years - I'm not sure of the exact time frame,

It is a very short time frame. I remember when I was at ACA when we lost N304UE, a J-41, in a fatal accident in CMH. About a year later, a new executive noticed the gap in the numbering sequence and had the next J-41 delivered registered N304UE. Obviously this created a lot of negative emotions at the airline and over 600 employees signed a petition to have the number changed out of respect for the crew and passengers who died in the accident, as well as all others who were affected by it. ACA changed the registration to N324UE.

Some major corporations in the US will re-register their newest corporate jet with the same N-number that was on the old jet it replaced, giving the old jet a new N-number.


User currently offlinebluesky73 From UK - England, joined Oct 2012, 346 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 11 hours ago) and read 4549 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 5):
So with a further 19 initial letter registrations beyond "F" available, at the current rate of useage there are sufficient unused registrations to last well into the 25th century. So today I do not think anybody in the CAA will be worrying too much about where to go next.

Ha ha fairpoint that is quite a long way off always good to think long term, especially with Easyjet apparently looking at a large order .

Microlite, hot air balloons and having quite a few aircraft registered in later half of alphabet (G-VHOT, G-ZZZA etc must reduce by several decades but agree CAA might not be panicking quite yet.

With the Germans and other countries reusing registrations and many have the 4 digit suffix, X-XXXX they won't ever run out then. Some countries like keeping to certain regs. Lufthansa use D-AI** for airbus industry, D-AB** for Boeing and D-AE for Embraers.

Interesting that UK might be the only country (not confirmed) to not reuse registrations marks.


User currently offlineAM744 From Mexico, joined Jun 2001, 1787 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 7 hours ago) and read 4344 times:

Pretty sure in Mexico they are reused. Don't know the details though.

User currently offlinejoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3188 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 7 hours ago) and read 4341 times:

Quoting bluesky73 (Thread starter):
Does anyone know which countries can and which cannot reuse?

Netherlands: a registration can be re-used 30 years after the registration has been withdrawn from the register.

Registrations can be marked as 'never re-use'. This is common practice for registration that have been involved in an accident with (deadly) victims. For example, PH-BUF (which was involved in the Tenerife crash) will never be re-issued again.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 3):
As previously mentioned, Germany reuses registrations. Here are two different LH Boeings both registered D-ABIH:

D-ABYA is also a nice one. The first LH 747 and the first 748 share the reg:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Art Brett - Photovation Images
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Royal S King



User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26021 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 6 hours ago) and read 4302 times:

Registrations in Canada can be reused without any restrictions as far as I know. CP recycled many registrations. For example, CF-CPC was used on a Lockheed 14, DC-4, DC-6 and 737-200. C-FCRA was used on a 747-200, DC-10-30 and 747-400.

Quoting bluesky73 (Thread starter):
Also once UK reaches G-ZZZZ will it return to G-AAAA or start a new sequence?

They will never get to G-ZZZZ. Just calculate how many aircraft would have to be registered to reach that point.


User currently offlineTimRees From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2001, 355 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 5 hours ago) and read 4223 times:

Countries I can think of that re-use registrations not already mentioned include;

Iceland and Luxemburg

Countries which don't seem to re-register (please correct me if incorrect) include:

Spain, Italy, Portugal, France, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland.

Spain has a shorter lifespan of registrations left as they are already registering in the EC-LSx range and so are more than half way through their available numbers. When I started spotting in around 1971 they were still using EC-Bxx numbers so at this rate they will run out in only around 50 years! Not that I will need to worry about that.....


User currently offlineicelander From Iceland, joined Dec 2011, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 5 hours ago) and read 4218 times:

As Tim mentioned above, Iceland definitely do.

in the last 25 years, TF-FIA has been a 727, a 737, a 757 and a 767.

Mark.


User currently offlineFlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2104 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 4 hours ago) and read 4202 times:

The UK also has the: -

* M- series registrations, which have been allocated to the Isle of Man
* VP- series reigistrations, which are allocated amongst UK Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories
* VQ- series registrations, which are allocated amongst UK Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories
* VS- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZB- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZC- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZD- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZE- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZF- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZG- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZH- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZI- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZJ- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZN- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZO- series registrations, which are unallocated
* ZQ- series registrations, which are unallocated
* 2- series registrations, which are unallocated

So this might explain why there has never been any interest in reusing registrations!



Let's Go British Caledonian!
User currently offlinebluesky73 From UK - England, joined Oct 2012, 346 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4039 times:

I thought VP/ZB etc were all government or military?

Quoting TimRees (Reply 13):
Countries which don't seem to re-register (please correct me if incorrect) include:

Spain, Italy, Portugal, France, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland.

Thanks Tim so the UK doesn't appear to be only country that doesn't re-use the registration.

Shame UK doesn't have option to keep a reg as some of the Virgin registrations are unique and shame they can't reuse.


User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5164 posts, RR: 43
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4014 times:

Air Canada does this all the time. Here are a couple examples:

A DC-8, became an A320:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Udo K. Haafke
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Kryst - YXUphoto



A B737 became an E190:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alain Rioux
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Todd Martin




Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlinestarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17186 posts, RR: 66
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4000 times:

Re-registration can lead to some "issues": http://johnandmartha.kingschools.com...ur-gunpoint-at-the-airport-ordeal/


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26021 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3950 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17):
Air Canada does this all the time.

I think that's fairly recent. If memory correct TCA/AC neverr reused a registration before the CP merger.


User currently onlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1368 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3940 times:

I wonder about Bahrain and Oman, they use A9C-** and A40-** most of the time and that's only two letters to choose from. Granted they're pretty small countries.

User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5164 posts, RR: 43
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3930 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
I think that's fairly recent. If memory correct TCA/AC never reused a registration before the CP merger.

They did for some of the early A320s, they were old DC-8 registrations.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31712 posts, RR: 56
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3899 times:

Why should reuse of Registration marks be an issue, if the previous owner has deregistered the same.......


Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26021 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3824 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 21):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
I think that's fairly recent. If memory correct TCA/AC never reused a registration before the CP merger.

They did for some of the early A320s, they were old DC-8 registrations.

Yes, looks like the last 5 DC-8-54F combis, C-FTJO through C-FTJS


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michel Gilliand
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jeremy D. Dando


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Udo K. Haafke
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bill Campbell


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michel Gilliand
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alevik


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wolfgang Mendorf
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Nigel Fenwick


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Udo K. Haafke
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jeremy D. Dando



User currently offlinetan1mill From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 98 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 weeks ago) and read 3798 times:

Quoting joost (Reply 11):
Registrations can be marked as 'never re-use'. This is common practice for registration that have been involved in an accident with (deadly) victims.

Does anyone know if this is also true in the US?



Love many, Trust few, Always paddle your own canoe.
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 25, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3850 times:

I did a quick search of NTSB fatal accidents in the US from 12/01/78-12/01/88 of Boeing aircraft. The reg # of the PanAm 727 which crashed in New Orleans has been reused.

The reg # of the Air Florida 737 which crashed in DC has not been reused and the 'status' of the aircraft is listed as not current - but it does show the reg # still applies to the AF 737.

A search of McDonnell-Douglas shows the reg # of the DC-9 which crashed in Minnesota in April 89 was reused. The World Airways DC-10 which crashed at BOS is listed as deregistered so the number is available.

The Lockheed L-1011 which crashed at DFW - the reg # is unassigned and available.

Some other results - the TWA 800 aircraft reg # was reserved by an individual in Minnesota in July 2011.

The AA 757 which crashed in Columbia is deregistered and the # is available.

The US Air 737 which crashed near Pittsburgh is still registered.

The United Airlines 737 which crashed near Colorado Springs is deregistered and the # is available.

The US Air 737 involved in the fatal runway collision at LAX is deregistered and the # is available.

The PanAm 103 reg # has been reserved since Nov 93 by an individual in Connecticut.

The ValuJet DC-9 reg # has been reserved since Mar 99 by an inividual in Florida.

The United DC-10 which crashed in Souix City reg # is deregistered and available.

The AA DC-10 at Chicago reg # has been used since mid-2007 for a small private aircraft.

Of the 9/11 aircraft

AA Flt 77 reg # has been reserved since 9/15/2006 by an individual in Marylan
AA Flt 11 reg # has been reserved since 9/15/2006 by the same individual
UA Flt 175 reg # has been deregistered and is available.
UA Flt 93 reg # has been deregistered and is available.


User currently offlinestarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17186 posts, RR: 66
Reply 26, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3814 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 22):

Why should reuse of Registration marks be an issue, if the previous owner has deregistered the same.......

Note my reply 18, though I will admit it is a bit of a special case.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinebond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5455 posts, RR: 8
Reply 27, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3830 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 22):

Why should reuse of Registration marks be an issue, if the previous owner has deregistered the same.......

I'm not sure anybody implied it was an issue.

Quoting starlionblue (Reply 26):
Note my reply 18, though I will admit it is a bit of a special case.

Yes, that was more of a failure of the police and intelligence folks, rather than an issue with re-registering. As is in the article:

"It would have taken only about a minute on www.FAA.gov for them to search the registration number in question to learn that number had been re-assigned to a different aircraft."


Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 28, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3761 times:

One of the more distasteful reuses of a registration in my mind:

Buddy Holly, Richie Valens, and The Big Bopper died on board a V-Tail Bonanza, registration N3794N.

The registration was turned around and re-used on a 1967 Mooney M20!

 

And that was after the tail number should have become (im)famous.



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26021 posts, RR: 22
Reply 29, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3752 times:

Quoting tan1mill (Reply 24):
Quoting joost (Reply 11):
Registrations can be marked as 'never re-use'. This is common practice for registration that have been involved in an accident with (deadly) victims.

Does anyone know if this is also true in the US?

Only if you pay the annual fee to reserve the registration. Anyone can do that. I think the fee is quite low. It used to be $10 a year


User currently offlinebond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5455 posts, RR: 8
Reply 30, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3748 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 29):
Only if you pay the annual fee to reserve the registration. Anyone can do that. I think the fee is quite low. It used to be $10 a year

Yes, although that's not quite the same thing. In this case, the number is simply not being used because you've reserved it, and need to renew it every year - not because the FAA put a 'never re-use' flag on it.

...and yes, still $10/year!


Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlinebluesky73 From UK - England, joined Oct 2012, 346 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3726 times:

Also noticed Austrian Airlines reuse registrations. Not sure if they can reuse soon after a de-register or they have to wait so many years?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Udo K. Haafke
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dennis Löffler



User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31712 posts, RR: 56
Reply 32, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3618 times:

On the topic of reservation of Registration numbers for a future use at a fee, Can that be done.....something like reserving a domain name.


Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26021 posts, RR: 22
Reply 33, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3471 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 32):
On the topic of reservation of Registration numbers for a future use at a fee, Can that be done.....something like reserving a domain name.

It can in the U.S., for the low $10 per year fee. You don't even have to own an aircraft.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31712 posts, RR: 56
Reply 34, posted (2 years 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3425 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 33):

It can in the U.S., for the low $10 per year fee. You don't even have to own an aircraft.

$10 seems a low price......Especially for Aviation costwise.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 35, posted (2 years 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3395 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 34):
$10 seems a low price......Especially for Aviation costwise.

Having had worked with I.T. with another US government entity (the FCC, or Federal Communications Commission), I wouldn't be suprised if the entire US aircraft registry is maintained by one person on a computer running Microsoft Access   Cue the guy who's going to disprove me now...   



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 36, posted (2 years 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3373 times:

That would be Access 95

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Re-use Of Reg-numbers In Some Countries?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Use Of Tack Cloth In Airline Industry posted Mon Feb 8 2010 04:09:23 by preptech
Use Of Helmets/parachutes In First Flight posted Mon Dec 14 2009 13:08:53 by Rcair1
Use Of Metric System In Aviation posted Sun Apr 27 2008 10:40:02 by DocLightning
Use Of Speed Brakes In Icing Conditions? posted Fri Jan 30 2004 23:20:41 by Mr Spaceman
Use Of Tablets In Aircraft Maintenance posted Wed Mar 28 2012 16:53:16 by withak
Use Of Autoflight In Emergencies posted Thu Jun 18 2009 03:29:15 by Faro
Only 4600ft Of LGA Runway 4 In Use Tonight posted Sat Dec 14 2002 06:05:15 by AA 777
The Use Of Scanners In Flight? posted Mon Apr 1 2002 14:21:12 by Vh-daq
The Use Of Chevrons On Planes posted Fri Jan 27 2012 06:51:30 by sweair
Mass Of Air 'Consumed' In Propulsion posted Sun Nov 27 2011 02:58:50 by faro

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format