JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:41 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
Well how are people going to evacuate from 28" pitch seats if their legs are broken near the knee joint?


How would that person evacuate with a 40" pitch?


PDX88 wrote:

You can't be serious. Pretending a passenger would be lost to fend for themselves in a foreign country after an airline accident is insane. The amount of assistance they would receive from the airline would cover everything you questioned and then some. You think the passengers of Asiana 214 are still stranded at the airport in San Francisco? There is no excuse for bringing any personal items with you.


It's up to the passenger to plan for unforeseen circumstances. For example, when I fly, I wear cargo pants so my passport, wallet, phone, necessary medication and such are on my person at all times. I back up my phone and computer before I leave, just in case.

I can say with 100% certainty, that if my emergency exit is being blocked by somebody playing with their luggage, they will be moved out of the way.


OB1504 wrote:

The current policy is “Exit now so you don’t die.”

If that’s not enough to motivate people to evacuate quickly, then I don’t know what is.


:checkmark:
What the...?
 
flyaustralian12
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:54 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:32 am

Planesmart wrote:
flyaustralian12 wrote:
wow, just wow. Many people just don't seem to get it. Reduced seat pitch DOESN'T always mean less leg room. It can mean more.

An aircraft with old thick seat backs that replaces the seats with slimline seats, can increase legroom room, without changing seat pitch.

Conversely, they can reduce seat pitch & still maintain the same legroom. It really is that simply. Seat pitch is not a measure of legroom.

Yes, it can mean the status quo, or even more room, but have any of us in recent times actually encountered more post-pitch reduction?

If leg room is increased with slimmer seats, wouldn't airlines find and publish a new measure, to show effective room has increased?
you'd think so wouldn't u. Obviously airline marketing people aren't that bright.
 
flyaustralian12
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:54 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:36 am

Planesmart wrote:
planecane wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
If passengers consider the minimum practical pitch is 27 inches, then a reduction from 32 to 30 is effectively a 40% reduction, and to 28 inches is an 80% reduction.

If human body upsizing and seat pitch downsizing continues, there will be no point undertaking trial evacuations, as body parts will be trapped and / or broken, so zero mobility.


What on earth kind of math are you using? First, what does minimum practical pitch have to do with percentage reductions. 2nd, do you know how to calculate percentage reduction?

32-30=2

2/32=.0625

.0625x100=6.25%

Going from 32 to 30 is EXACTLY a 6.25% reduction in pitch, nowhere near a 40% reduction.

Also, even though it doesn't seem logical, the highest increase in body upsizing tends to occur at the lower economic classes which are less likely to fly. I guess it causes more of an issue on Spirit type airlines where people look for rock bottom cost as the less money you have, the more important the lowest fare becomes.

I fly 6-10 times a year mostly on AA or Southwest. It is rare to see a truly enormous person. Even watching boarding for people that I pray aren't sitting next to me, there are typically only a handful of noticeably larger people on a full 737.

Please read and comprehend my post.

'PRACTICAL' pitch I assumed to be a minimum of 28 inches. Perhaps airlines can get it down to 26 inches.

'Practical' assumes a pitch of 1 inch is impossible. You assume 1 inch is practical and possible.

Damned lies and statistics.
u obviously don't understand that reduced seat pitch doesn't always mean reduced legroom - only if the seats remain the same. Many airlines(not just LCCs) are now throwing out old seats with thick seat backs & installing new slimline seats, so they can either maintain legroom, with reduced seat pitch or increase legroom room with same seat pitch.


Each aircraft is certified with maximum seats. Eg. think the most seats on a B738 or A320 is 189. You can put more seats than this by reducing seat pitch.
 
PDX88
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:17 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:17 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
It's up to the passenger to plan for unforeseen circumstances. For example, when I fly, I wear cargo pants so my passport, wallet, phone, necessary medication and such are on my person at all times.


That's not true at all. If I lost anything in an aircraft fire, you bet the airline would be responsible for replacing those items. A passenger shouldn't be punished because they didn't fully prepare for the plane to crash.
 
User avatar
Super80Fan
Posts: 1104
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:14 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:06 am

Judge1310 wrote:
Super80Fan wrote:
yonikasz wrote:
I think that a 28" seat pitch is great. Not to sit in but it allows airlines like Spirit and Ryanair to do what they do best, get someone from A to B cheaply. If you want anything more than that you pay more. But having low prices puts downward pressure on the legacies. They have been selling more leg room economy seats for how long now? I don't get why people get upset about this. You get what you pay for.


No, you don't. These "new" 28 inch seats, no seat assignment, no carry-on bag, no changing your flight tickets replaced the old ones that included all that. The ones that include seat assignments, carry-on bags, changes etc are now more expensive.

Can't wait for the next economic collapse so some of these airlines go out of business. At least airlines like Allegiant, Frontier, Spirit, Ryanair etc don't lie to you about what you are getting.


Such a curmudgeon -- you must be the belle of the ball at dinner parties... :roll:

When airlines go out of business, not only do tens of thousands of people lose their jobs, but prices will go up (basic economics) because trust and believe, those LCCs and ULCCs would up their prices in a New York minute if they could get away with it.


That's the price you pay for working at an airline with an identity crisis. WN, B6, AS, and HA sepearate themselves from the rest and offer decent amenities for the price, NK, F9, and G4 don't lie to you about their product, and at least Delta treats even their cheapest/least loyal customers like humans. United & American on the other hand could go out of business tomorrow and I wouldn't shed a tear.
RIP McDonnell Douglas
 
User avatar
Super80Fan
Posts: 1104
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:14 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:09 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
It's up to the passenger to plan for unforeseen circumstances. For example, when I fly, I wear cargo pants so my passport, wallet, phone, necessary medication and such are on my person at all times. I back up my phone and computer before I leave, just in case.


I dress prepared on every flight and have my phone/wallet on my person while my medication is a second away in my bag under the seat. However if an accident were to occur, it would definitely be up to the airline to pay for my belongings, hotel/travel expenses, medication etc.
RIP McDonnell Douglas
 
Judge1310
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:55 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 4:04 am

Super80Fan wrote:
Judge1310 wrote:
Super80Fan wrote:

No, you don't. These "new" 28 inch seats, no seat assignment, no carry-on bag, no changing your flight tickets replaced the old ones that included all that. The ones that include seat assignments, carry-on bags, changes etc are now more expensive.

Can't wait for the next economic collapse so some of these airlines go out of business. At least airlines like Allegiant, Frontier, Spirit, Ryanair etc don't lie to you about what you are getting.


Such a curmudgeon -- you must be the belle of the ball at dinner parties... :roll:

When airlines go out of business, not only do tens of thousands of people lose their jobs, but prices will go up (basic economics) because trust and believe, those LCCs and ULCCs would up their prices in a New York minute if they could get away with it.


That's the price you pay for working at an airline with an identity crisis. WN, B6, AS, and HA sepearate themselves from the rest and offer decent amenities for the price, NK, F9, and G4 don't lie to you about their product, and at least Delta treats even their cheapest/least loyal customers like humans. United & American on the other hand could go out of business tomorrow and I wouldn't shed a tear.


In a word: SAD...
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:05 am

Super80Fan wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
It's up to the passenger to plan for unforeseen circumstances. For example, when I fly, I wear cargo pants so my passport, wallet, phone, necessary medication and such are on my person at all times. I back up my phone and computer before I leave, just in case.


I dress prepared on every flight and have my phone/wallet on my person while my medication is a second away in my bag under the seat. However if an accident were to occur, it would definitely be up to the airline to pay for my belongings, hotel/travel expenses, medication etc.


Compensation is a different topic. I'm talking about getting the heck out of a plane in an emergency and then being inconvenienced or worse, because I didn't consider the possibility of losing all of my stuff on board.

I recommend always packing your most valuable and/or necessary stuff on your person, or right at hand in case the worst happens. Even under your seat might be inaccessible after an accident. Generally, you have time before the nasty touchdown to collect some things. Don't wait until the last minute.
What the...?
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:55 am

flyaustralian12 wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
Please read and comprehend my post.

'PRACTICAL' pitch I assumed to be a minimum of 28 inches. Perhaps airlines can get it down to 26 inches.

'Practical' assumes a pitch of 1 inch is impossible. You assume 1 inch is practical and possible.

Damned lies and statistics.


u obviously don't understand that reduced seat pitch doesn't always mean reduced legroom - only if the seats remain the same. Many airlines(not just LCCs) are now throwing out old seats with thick seat backs & installing new slimline seats, so they can either maintain legroom, with reduced seat pitch or increase legroom room with same seat pitch.

So which airlines have reduced pitch and fitted new seats to maintain or improve leg room?
 
planecane
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:38 am

Planesmart wrote:
planecane wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
If passengers consider the minimum practical pitch is 27 inches, then a reduction from 32 to 30 is effectively a 40% reduction, and to 28 inches is an 80% reduction.

If human body upsizing and seat pitch downsizing continues, there will be no point undertaking trial evacuations, as body parts will be trapped and / or broken, so zero mobility.


What on earth kind of math are you using? First, what does minimum practical pitch have to do with percentage reductions. 2nd, do you know how to calculate percentage reduction?

32-30=2

2/32=.0625

.0625x100=6.25%

Going from 32 to 30 is EXACTLY a 6.25% reduction in pitch, nowhere near a 40% reduction.

Also, even though it doesn't seem logical, the highest increase in body upsizing tends to occur at the lower economic classes which are less likely to fly. I guess it causes more of an issue on Spirit type airlines where people look for rock bottom cost as the less money you have, the more important the lowest fare becomes.

I fly 6-10 times a year mostly on AA or Southwest. It is rare to see a truly enormous person. Even watching boarding for people that I pray aren't sitting next to me, there are typically only a handful of noticeably larger people on a full 737.

Please read and comprehend my post.

'PRACTICAL' pitch I assumed to be a minimum of 28 inches. Perhaps airlines can get it down to 26 inches.

'Practical' assumes a pitch of 1 inch is impossible. You assume 1 inch is practical and possible.

Damned lies and statistics.


Your post was not easy to comprehend. You are saying a 40% reduction in EXTRA pitch going from 32 to 30. What the real discussion is about is leg/knee room. If the pitch was 32" and is reduced to 30" BUT the seats are 2" less thick, the leg room won't change. The comfort of the seat might but the leg and knee room will be the same. That's a fact, not an opinion.

I'm not arguing that less pitch is a good thing. However, less pitch allows lower fares to be charged. If the FAA mandated 34" pitch, fares would have to go up due to supply and demand. Most flyers don't want to pay more for extra pitch. When booking on AA (my most common "assigned seat" airline), if I book early, almost all of the MCE seats are open. It's not until people think they are the only seats available (due to regular coach that aren't released for assignment yet) that they start filling up.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 6064
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:03 pm

planecane wrote:
However, less pitch allows lower fares to be charged. If the FAA mandated 34" pitch, fares would have to go up due to supply and demand. Most flyers don't want to pay more for extra pitch.


Single engine ops should lower fares even further, there are thousands of Cessanas flying safely with just one engine.
 
c933103
Posts: 2743
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:06 pm

In reality, the difference between 28" and 31" or 31" and 34" are 10% each, how much travel demand would it affect if the ticket price is 300USD instead of 270USD? If it's really affecting the demand that much then the thing that need to cut would be airport and government tax instead
 
planecane
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:07 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
planecane wrote:
However, less pitch allows lower fares to be charged. If the FAA mandated 34" pitch, fares would have to go up due to supply and demand. Most flyers don't want to pay more for extra pitch.


Single engine ops should lower fares even further, there are thousands of Cessanas flying safely with just one engine.


I detect the sarcasm but seating pitch is a comfort issue whiel single engine ops is a safetey issue. Every so often, there is a news stroy about a cessna landing on a highway due to engine trouble. I don't see the same stories with multi-engine aircraft.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 6064
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:45 pm

planecane wrote:
I detect the sarcasm but seating pitch is a comfort issue


Safe and successful evacuation is not a comfort issue, whichever way FAA and airlines want to spin this.

FAA has to respond to a lawsuit, they provided their response. It doesn't end here. This will be settled by the judiciary and/or legislative branches of the government.
 
planecane
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 4:13 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
planecane wrote:
I detect the sarcasm but seating pitch is a comfort issue


Safe and successful evacuation is not a comfort issue, whichever way FAA and airlines want to spin this.

FAA has to respond to a lawsuit, they provided their response. It doesn't end here. This will be settled by the judiciary and/or legislative branches of the government.


The judiciary will not have anything to do with it. They interpret the laws. There is no law providing a minimum pitch. If one gets made then the judiciary will only be involved in cases of an airline breaking the law.

If a law gets made with a minimum pitch higher than 28" then fares are guaranteed to go up.

Even at Spirit pitch the evacuation won't be any different vs 34" pitch. The limiting reagents on evacuation speed are the exit and, to a lesser extent, the aisle. Even if people could instantly jump from their seat to the aisle and if the aisle could hold everyone in single file, the evacuation wouldn't be any faster because people have to get out the exits one at a time.
 
travelsonic
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:59 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:57 pm

stratclub wrote:
And really seat back thickness doesn't have much to do with seat pitch. When you are sitting down, the distance between your tailbone and your knee caps does.


I'm not too sure that seat thinkness can be completely excluded from the equation... even if more of it ends up being psychological.

I mean, the seat back thickness has to, at least a little, impact how much space a seat takes up forward/aft wise, therefore logically, how would it not stand that becoming ultra slim would allow the same amount of seats with more knee space?

I mean, sure, it is hard to fathom or visualize now, but if science can eventually allow us to make every day objects from things like graphene, thin carbon fiber that is 20x stronger than steel, the amount of thinning that could be done to a seat would be quite remarkable.

Honestly, I think innovation and technological advancement might be the way to go to solve this problem.
 
flyaustralian12
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:54 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:19 am

Planesmart wrote:
flyaustralian12 wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
Please read and comprehend my post.

'PRACTICAL' pitch I assumed to be a minimum of 28 inches. Perhaps airlines can get it down to 26 inches.

'Practical' assumes a pitch of 1 inch is impossible. You assume 1 inch is practical and possible.

Damned lies and statistics.


u obviously don't understand that reduced seat pitch doesn't always mean reduced legroom - only if the seats remain the same. Many airlines(not just LCCs) are now throwing out old seats with thick seat backs & installing new slimline seats, so they can either maintain legroom, with reduced seat pitch or increase legroom room with same seat pitch.

So which airlines have reduced pitch and fitted new seats to maintain or improve leg room?

Almost every airline on earth inc AA
 
pdp
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:14 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Sat Jul 14, 2018 7:51 am

Planesmart wrote:
flyaustralian12 wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
Please read and comprehend my post.

'PRACTICAL' pitch I assumed to be a minimum of 28 inches. Perhaps airlines can get it down to 26 inches.

'Practical' assumes a pitch of 1 inch is impossible. You assume 1 inch is practical and possible.

Damned lies and statistics.


u obviously don't understand that reduced seat pitch doesn't always mean reduced legroom - only if the seats remain the same. Many airlines(not just LCCs) are now throwing out old seats with thick seat backs & installing new slimline seats, so they can either maintain legroom, with reduced seat pitch or increase legroom room with same seat pitch.

So which airlines have reduced pitch and fitted new seats to maintain or improve leg room?


Ryanair have recently gone to slimline seats which have given them a couple of extra inches pitch for the same seating config. On their new MAX 200s this extra space will be gone as they'll be squeezing in another 20 or so seats into something the same size as their current - 800s. There are other changes too, but shunting the new slimline seats together will deliver a large chunk of it.
 
stratclub
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Sat Jul 14, 2018 7:20 pm

flyaustralian12 wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
flyaustralian12 wrote:

u obviously don't understand that reduced seat pitch doesn't always mean reduced legroom - only if the seats remain the same. Many airlines(not just LCCs) are now throwing out old seats with thick seat backs & installing new slimline seats, so they can either maintain legroom, with reduced seat pitch or increase legroom room with same seat pitch.

So which airlines have reduced pitch and fitted new seats to maintain or improve leg room?

Almost every airline on earth inc AA

Well not completely, but the usual difference in seat pitch that matters is the distance between the structural element aft of your hips of the seat at just below knee level knee level and that structural element of the seat in front of you at just below knee level.. The most important measurement is how much room you have in front of your knees. Thinner seat backs? Just less claustrophobic and they do give you slightly more room at knee level because the structural element is about a foot lower than your knees..
 
flyaustralian12
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:54 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Sun Jul 15, 2018 1:54 am

stratclub wrote:
flyaustralian12 wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
So which airlines have reduced pitch and fitted new seats to maintain or improve leg room?

Almost every airline on earth inc AA

Well not completely, but the usual difference in seat pitch that matters is the distance between the structural element aft of your hips of the seat at just below knee level knee level and that structural element of the seat in front of you at just below knee level.. The most important measurement is how much room you have in front of your knees. Thinner seat backs? Just less claustrophobic and they do give you slightly more room at knee level because the structural element is about a foot lower than your knees..
there are so many things that can be done to seat design to increase legroom, without changing the pitch.


It's pretty simple really. Don't understand why many people don't seem to understand.


Think like this ...


If you take a chainsaw & cut the seat back down by a few inches in thickness you increase legroom by a few inches, without actually moving the seats. Seat backs, tray table & magazine slots will continue to be slimmer & seats might actually get shorter. By angling the base of the seat, passengers won't even notice.

While majority of passengers want cheaper fares, seats will keep evolving, it's really a simple as that.

Tha major complaints seem to be from fat people, who don't want to pay extra for premium economy or business class. A storm in a teacup really.
 
travelsonic
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:59 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:37 pm

flyaustralian12 wrote:
stratclub wrote:
While majority of passengers want cheaper fares, seats will keep evolving, it's really a simple as that.
.


Exactly.

IMO, it is hard to visualize it now, but I see the eventual ability to utilize graphene as one of the biggest advancements that could be made in terms of ultra slimming. Imagine, if graphene finally became commercially feasible in seat construction, just how thin the components of a seat could become (minus the cushioning) while still maintaining the structural integrity needed to be safe for use in airplanes.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:23 pm

Pitch definitely doesn't tell the whole story. I was on a Westjet Q400 recently and I was very surprised at how much legroom I had with a reported 30" pitch. I'm 6'1" and I could stretch my legs out and my knees easily cleared the seat in front of me.

Seats designs are getting much more clever and efficient. Relatively simple changes like thinner backs and moving the seatback pocket above the tray, make a world of difference.
What the...?
 
Gasman
Posts: 1880
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Sun Jul 15, 2018 10:00 pm

kitplane01 wrote:
Posters ...

I want to be clear. Are you upset that people are choosing price over comfort? Because it seems to me that letting consumers choose is a good thing. And that our opinion matters less than what consumers actually want.

Consumers complain about comfort, and then choose the cheapest seat possible. Revealed preference is when you can tell what people want not by what the say, but by what they do. And consumer's revealed preference is for cheaper travel.

Yet people who espouse the above always forget to mention that airlines also put something ahead of comfort - and that is profit, and shareprice.
 
User avatar
kitplane01
Posts: 936
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:58 am

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Mon Jul 16, 2018 5:54 pm

Gasman wrote:
kitplane01 wrote:
Posters ...

I want to be clear. Are you upset that people are choosing price over comfort? Because it seems to me that letting consumers choose is a good thing. And that our opinion matters less than what consumers actually want.

Consumers complain about comfort, and then choose the cheapest seat possible. Revealed preference is when you can tell what people want not by what the say, but by what they do. And consumer's revealed preference is for cheaper travel.

Yet people who espouse the above always forget to mention that airlines also put something ahead of comfort - and that is profit, and shareprice.


I do t think that’s the right way to look at it. Smaller seats lower cost, and that lowers price. Airlines would much rather sell you a first class ticket. More profit in that.
 
planecane
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: FAA: Seat size not their concern

Mon Jul 16, 2018 7:10 pm

Gasman wrote:
kitplane01 wrote:
Posters ...

I want to be clear. Are you upset that people are choosing price over comfort? Because it seems to me that letting consumers choose is a good thing. And that our opinion matters less than what consumers actually want.

Consumers complain about comfort, and then choose the cheapest seat possible. Revealed preference is when you can tell what people want not by what the say, but by what they do. And consumer's revealed preference is for cheaper travel.

Yet people who espouse the above always forget to mention that airlines also put something ahead of comfort - and that is profit, and shareprice.


Businesses exist to make profit and public companies exist to use profit and growth to increase stock price which can benefit thier customers if the customer owns the stock or mutual funds/etfs that contain it.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos