Thenoflyzone
Topic Author
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 4:42 am

AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:23 am

AF has applied with the Canadian Transportation Agency for YVR-PPT flights. The agency approved the license.

https://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/a-2019-131

"Route 3" is YVR-PPT.

https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/text-te ... ?id=100050

Interesting development.

Seems AF needs to get creative with PPT. With UA launching SFO-PPT a few years back, and French Bee now operating ORY-SFO-PPT, fares and yields to PPT are down. Tourism to Tahiti is on the rise, and Canada-PPT has no non stop service, so this might give them the boost they need to make PPT profitable.

WestJet would provide all the feed they require from the rest of Canada.
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 4359
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:45 am

Holding authority does not mean service will commence. Way back in the day even UTA held authority for Canada-Tahiti. For info, the primary point of sale location in Canada to French Polynesia no surprise is Montreal and greater Quebec province.
mercure f-wtcc
 
DTWLAX
Posts: 910
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:19 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:53 am

Is this to capture the Canada market to PPT or to compete against the SFO-PPT carriers? If it is to up against UA and French Bee, why doesn't AF make LAX-PPT a daily flight? What is stopping them from making it daily?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3198
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:59 am

YVR could make for an better transit experience than LAX for the passengers.
 
x1234
Posts: 491
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:10 am

Canada allows international to international sterile transit I believe (and still allows it as French/EU citizens just need a passport check) which is MUCH faster than a whole CBP process in LAX currently.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2142
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:51 am

I guess CDG-YVR-PPT would just be considered 2 separate Canada-EU flights and not 5th freedom?
 
9252fly
Posts: 946
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:19 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:58 am

The shortest route between CDG-PPT goes almost directly over YVR,. WS feed would help in supporting the flight to PPT.. Currently AF operates a few times a week between CDG-YVR , perhaps AF will add a PPT tag-on to the existing service? The intransit experience for passengers in YVR should be positive.
 
YYZORD
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:36 am

Is there a chance that FJ will launch NAN-YVR if PPT-YVR is successful?
 
USAirALB
Posts: 1991
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:25 am

YYZORD wrote:
Is there a chance that FJ will launch NAN-YVR if PPT-YVR is successful?

Didn't they do this with a 738 before that flew NAN-HNL-YVR?
RJ85, F70, E135, E140, E145, E70, E75, E90, CR2, CR7, CR9, 717, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 744, 752, 753, 762, 772, 77E, 77W, 789, 319, 320, 321, 332, 333, 343, 359, 388
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6881
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:31 am

USAirALB wrote:
YYZORD wrote:
Is there a chance that FJ will launch NAN-YVR if PPT-YVR is successful?

Didn't they do this with a 738 before that flew NAN-HNL-YVR?


They did yes, given FJ recent expansion NAN-YVR seems plausible.

PPT-YVR while unserved would be a significantly smaller market, a new Canadian CEO for AF probably plays a part in this? And YVR is quite new for AF isn’t it?

PPT-LAX is always said to be high yielding, but struggles for AF with the costs, I guess they see a need to keep PPT, I’d have thought a codeshare with TN over LAX/PPT with TN dropping CDG. It used to also have NZ and earlier QF on it, now you have recently had PPT-SFO added on both UA and French Bee.
 
c933103
Posts: 3786
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:04 am

YYZORD wrote:
Is there a chance that FJ will launch NAN-YVR if PPT-YVR is successful?

NAN-YVR is a rather long flight just a bit shorter than Australia-YVR. Do FJ have suitable aircraft to fly the route?
Say NO to Hong Kong police's cooperation with criminal organizations like triad.
 
787X30
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:16 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:30 am

9252fly wrote:
The shortest route between CDG-PPT goes almost directly over YVR,. [...]

But almost directliest over LAX. :scratchchin:
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 3821
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:43 am

787X30 wrote:
9252fly wrote:
The shortest route between CDG-PPT goes almost directly over YVR,. [...]

But almost directliest over LAX. :scratchchin:


True, but LAX has the disadvantage of having to pass through immigration which takes up several hours. Immigration in Los Angeles is one of the worst in America, when I was there it took me over 2 hours to pass through it. That would mean the aircraft would have to wait on the ground for about 3 to 4 hours and it's a dreadful experience for the passengers. In Vancouver, they can keep the passengers on board, have the aircraft refilled and be on their way again. That would easily save a few hours. Plus the passengers wouldn't need to apply for a US visa or ESTA.

International to international is far more smooth in Canada than it is in the USA as passengers don't have to pass through immigration.
 
787X30
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:16 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:31 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
787X30 wrote:
9252fly wrote:
The shortest route between CDG-PPT goes almost directly over YVR,. [...]

But almost directliest over LAX. :scratchchin:


[...]

International to international is far more smooth in Canada than it is in the USA as passengers don't have to pass through immigration.

Point taken, but wouldn't contrafactual statements on geography somewhat help to obscure or divert from more valid points to complement or relocate existing service.

Sectorial partition trans YVR would be more even than trans LAX, while fuel uptake from hot PPT would have to be c1H30 more for YVR. This might mean a PLD hit, while it might pose a supply task for the island airport.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3198
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:41 am

c933103 wrote:
YYZORD wrote:
Is there a chance that FJ will launch NAN-YVR if PPT-YVR is successful?

NAN-YVR is a rather long flight just a bit shorter than Australia-YVR. Do FJ have suitable aircraft to fly the route?


They have a couple of leased A350s coming on board this year that could do it, there a330s make to LAX/SFO so should be able too.

If FJ was todo it would beer carefully time connections to SYD/AKL to help full the aircraft up with the budget market between New Zealand/Australia and Canada.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5410
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:38 am

787X30 wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
787X30 wrote:
But almost directliest over LAX. :scratchchin:


[...]

International to international is far more smooth in Canada than it is in the USA as passengers don't have to pass through immigration.

Point taken, but wouldn't contrafactual statements on geography somewhat help to obscure or divert from more valid points to complement or relocate existing service.

Sectorial partition trans YVR would be more even than trans LAX, while fuel uptake from hot PPT would have to be c1H30 more for YVR. This might mean a PLD hit, while it might pose a supply task for the island airport.


CDG-LAX-PPT is right on the Great Circle Route CDG-PPT - as in zero incremental distance. CDG-YVR-PPT isn't 50 statute miles farther. This is not a deciding criterion.

As for YVR offering better ITI transit, one has to ask how many people are flying CDG-PPT, with just 3x weekly LAX-PPT (as a continuation of CDG-LAX). Strong demand CDG-LAX is proven. CDG-YVR isn't daily even in summer, and drops to 3x weekly Sep-May.
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2356
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 11:47 am

LAX-PPT may indeed be high yielding, but do the fares cover AF's costs? For example, do AF crew still stay at the Le Meridien in Newport Beach for a few days?
If YVR is subbed for LAX, it would probably be a cost cutting drive with most pax CDG originating.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6881
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:12 pm

c933103 wrote:
YYZORD wrote:
Is there a chance that FJ will launch NAN-YVR if PPT-YVR is successful?

NAN-YVR is a rather long flight just a bit shorter than Australia-YVR. Do FJ have suitable aircraft to fly the route?


Easily within range of an A332, 3hrs shorter than Australia is a lot.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 3821
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:26 pm

eta unknown wrote:
LAX-PPT may indeed be high yielding, but do the fares cover AF's costs? For example, do AF crew still stay at the Le Meridien in Newport Beach for a few days?
If YVR is subbed for LAX, it would probably be a cost cutting drive with most pax CDG originating.


Most likely the move is just done to avoid the immigration process at Los Angeles. Not only does that save time, but also it makes the experience for the passengers more comfortable as they don't have to stand in line for hours for immigration only to get back to the aircraft immediately after.

By the way, does anyone know how immigration laws in Mexico are? Do international to international passengers have to clear immigration like in the USA or not? What if they'd use Tijuana as an intermediate stop instead of Los Angeles or Vancouver? I mean, Los Angeles and Tijuana are only a very short distance apart and if it would save hours it might be worth the move.
 
910A
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:11 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:51 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
.
By the way, does anyone know how immigration laws in Mexico are? Do international to international passengers have to clear immigration like in the USA or not? What if they'd use Tijuana as an intermediate stop instead of Los Angeles or Vancouver? I mean, Los Angeles and Tijuana are only a very short distance apart and if it would save hours it might be worth the move.


And where would all passengers making connections to various points in North America find their connections? As to your comment that LAX and TIJ are only a short distance apart, on a good day it's a 2 1/2 drive; over 220km.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 3821
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:20 pm

910A wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
.
By the way, does anyone know how immigration laws in Mexico are? Do international to international passengers have to clear immigration like in the USA or not? What if they'd use Tijuana as an intermediate stop instead of Los Angeles or Vancouver? I mean, Los Angeles and Tijuana are only a very short distance apart and if it would save hours it might be worth the move.


And where would all passengers making connections to various points in North America find their connections? As to your comment that LAX and TIJ are only a short distance apart, on a good day it's a 2 1/2 drive; over 220km.


I wasn't talking about connecting passengers, which are only very few on this flight. The majority of them fly Paris to Tahiti and North America is just a fuel stop on the way. In that case, what does it matter where exactly that fuel stop is? But if that fuel stop is too inconvenient like Los Angeles, it's only logical they look for an alternative fuel stop.

As for Tijuana being only a short distance away, I meant that it would only be a small detour. Hardly worth mentioning. Of course that's not counting people getting off at the fuel stop, but those numbers are very limited. Not enough to base a business decision on.
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2356
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:24 pm

Are you referring to AF pax going to CDG or PPT?
If CDG, then one of the CDG -LAX terminators or via any DL hub.
If PPT, the thinking is most AF pax may be ex CDG, so North American pax going to PPT can use TN via LAX, UA via SFO.
I doubt there is sufficient ex Canada demand to support the PPT tag, hence thinking YVR would primarily be a transit stop.
 
DTWLAX
Posts: 910
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:19 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:41 pm

[quote="PatrickZ80"

I wasn't talking about connecting passengers, which are only very few on this flight. The majority of them fly Paris to Tahiti and North America is just a fuel stop on the way. In that case, what does it matter where exactly that fuel stop is? But if that fuel stop is too inconvenient like Los Angeles, it's only logical they look for an alternative fuel stop.

As for Tijuana being only a short distance away, I meant that it would only be a small detour. Hardly worth mentioning. Of course that's not counting people getting off at the fuel stop, but those numbers are very limited. Not enough to base a business decision on.[/quote]
LAX is not just a fuel stop on the way to PPT. AF sells CDG-LAX tickets as well on the flight. So moving the flight to CDG-TIJ-PPT will result in AF losing the CDG-LAX passengers. Pretty sure TIJ does not have the demand that CDG-LAX has.
 
c933103
Posts: 3786
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:45 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
By the way, does anyone know how immigration laws in Mexico are? Do international to international passengers have to clear immigration like in the USA or not? What if they'd use Tijuana as an intermediate stop instead of Los Angeles or Vancouver? I mean, Los Angeles and Tijuana are only a very short distance apart and if it would save hours it might be worth the move.

It seems like international to international transit passengers at Mexico usually have to clear immigration like USA, however people without Mexico Visa (from places that are not permitted to visit Mexico Visa-free) can transit through Mexico under a special procedure. Under the procedure, travellers must be "supervised" by custom during that time period, which including being keep inside a special room, with hand luggages and passport and tickets being keep separately by staffs until it's time to board when travellers will be lead directly by staffs into the plane. Sometimes travellers might also be asked to pay certain amount of "fine" although it is actually not something required by regulation.
Say NO to Hong Kong police's cooperation with criminal organizations like triad.
 
NZ321
Posts: 1071
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:21 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
787X30 wrote:
9252fly wrote:
The shortest route between CDG-PPT goes almost directly over YVR,. [...]

But almost directliest over LAX. :scratchchin:


True, but LAX has the disadvantage of having to pass through immigration which takes up several hours. Immigration in Los Angeles is one of the worst in America, when I was there it took me over 2 hours to pass through it. That would mean the aircraft would have to wait on the ground for about 3 to 4 hours and it's a dreadful experience for the passengers. In Vancouver, they can keep the passengers on board, have the aircraft refilled and be on their way again. That would easily save a few hours. Plus the passengers wouldn't need to apply for a US visa or ESTA.

International to international is far more smooth in Canada than it is in the USA as passengers don't have to pass through immigration.


International-international connections may be smooth in Canada but I doubt your account of customs at LAX is current. Recently my experiences have been under 1 hour since upgrade to Tom Bradley. So not sure that LAX is quite the obstacle that it was.
Plane mad!
 
alan3
Posts: 313
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 6:13 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:37 pm

If AF launched this route then much of the plane would be filled with PPT-CDG passengers, giving less seats to passengers boarding in YVR. Not so much an issue on YVR-PPT but YVR-CDG is usually quite full, especially in summer.

I wonder if AF would add additional flights that are just YVR-CDG on the extra days of the week? Or would all of the YVR flights be part of the PPT extension?
 
IAHWorldflyer
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:50 pm

Concerning Mexico, they use a similar antiquated system as the USA. You must first be stamped into Mexico at immigration, then go to your connecting gate, at least in MEX. I think TIJ would be similar. Plus, there are virtually no connecting opportunities in TIJ for other North american travelers.
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 4359
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:52 pm

Per news in Tahiti there are no such plans.

What is happening is AF will annouce service jointly with Westjet via LAX and requires the underlying authority in order to offer the codesharing service.
mercure f-wtcc
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:33 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
eta unknown wrote:
LAX-PPT may indeed be high yielding, but do the fares cover AF's costs? For example, do AF crew still stay at the Le Meridien in Newport Beach for a few days?
If YVR is subbed for LAX, it would probably be a cost cutting drive with most pax CDG originating.


Most likely the move is just done to avoid the immigration process at Los Angeles. Not only does that save time, but also it makes the experience for the passengers more comfortable as they don't have to stand in line for hours for immigration only to get back to the aircraft immediately after.

By the way, does anyone know how immigration laws in Mexico are? Do international to international passengers have to clear immigration like in the USA or not? What if they'd use Tijuana as an intermediate stop instead of Los Angeles or Vancouver? I mean, Los Angeles and Tijuana are only a very short distance apart and if it would save hours it might be worth the move.


Mexico transit would be easier. However, AF would have no feed at MEX. I’m actually surprised that no one hasn’t tried YVR as an intermediate stop to France, especially Air Tahiti Nui.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2142
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:42 am

mercure1 wrote:
Per news in Tahiti there are no such plans.

What is happening is AF will annouce service jointly with Westjet via LAX and requires the underlying authority in order to offer the codesharing service.


That makes more sense.
 
Thenoflyzone
Topic Author
Posts: 2815
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 4:42 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:34 am

mercure1 wrote:
Per news in Tahiti there are no such plans.

What is happening is AF will annouce service jointly with Westjet via LAX and requires the underlying authority in order to offer the codesharing service.


Those applications with the CTA would look something like this:

https://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/a-2019-132

Replace Delta with WestJet.
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
 
A350OZ
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:51 am

Thenoflyzone wrote:
mercure1 wrote:
Per news in Tahiti there are no such plans.

What is happening is AF will annouce service jointly with Westjet via LAX and requires the underlying authority in order to offer the codesharing service.


Those applications with the CTA would look something like this:

https://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/a-2019-132

Replace Delta with WestJet.


Seems they have applied for an been granted both then: direct YVR-PPT service as per Determination -131, and codeshare services on WestJet YVR-LAX (continuing to PPT on AF) as per Determination -132. The latter then clearly does not support the theory of them swapping LAX for YVR as the mid point.

I must say though, if their priority is the PPT-CDG vv. market then YVR would be the far more logical choice, from a passenger experience perspective. If they would run via YVR 3-4 weekly (and making YVR-CDG daily in the process), and then work with TN to better connect transit pax at LAX (off the TN terminator and onto the AF terminator, and vv.), then they could even offer both. However, flying their own metal all the way to Polynesia may not be viable without the incremental uplift that LAX offers over YVR. We will see what happens.
 
Bhoy
Posts: 359
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:50 pm

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:59 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
787X30 wrote:
9252fly wrote:
The shortest route between CDG-PPT goes almost directly over YVR,. [...]

But almost directliest over LAX. :scratchchin:


True, but LAX has the disadvantage of having to pass through immigration which takes up several hours. Immigration in Los Angeles is one of the worst in America, when I was there it took me over 2 hours to pass through it. That would mean the aircraft would have to wait on the ground for about 3 to 4 hours and it's a dreadful experience for the passengers. In Vancouver, they can keep the passengers on board, have the aircraft refilled and be on their way again. That would easily save a few hours. Plus the passengers wouldn't need to apply for a US visa or ESTA.

International to international is far more smooth in Canada than it is in the USA as passengers don't have to pass through immigration.

I don't know how it is in AF, but I flew NZ1 about 10 years ago, and when deboarding at LAX, pax are split between through passengers to AKL, queue to left, CBP check (there were 2 or 3 desks, just for this one less than planeload of pax, and straight back in to the gate, and all other passengers turn right to presumably join the main immigration queue.

The stop is scheduled as 2 hours, so don't see how AF would be any slower? It's not ideal, but the complexity on a through flight is somewhat overstated (I flew back from Auckland on NZ4 connecting to NZ2, and CBP/claiming luggage is indeed a bigger inconvenience on non-through flights.

(Nb this was when they operated to T2 rather than TBIT)
 
upperdeckfan
Posts: 904
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:59 am

Re: AF applies for YVR-PPT

Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:41 am

DTWLAX wrote:
[quote="PatrickZ80"

I wasn't talking about connecting passengers, which are only very few on this flight. The majority of them fly Paris to Tahiti and North America is just a fuel stop on the way. In that case, what does it matter where exactly that fuel stop is? But if that fuel stop is too inconvenient like Los Angeles, it's only logical they look for an alternative fuel stop.

As for Tijuana being only a short distance away, I meant that it would only be a small detour. Hardly worth mentioning. Of course that's not counting people getting off at the fuel stop, but those numbers are very limited. Not enough to base a business decision on.

LAX is not just a fuel stop on the way to PPT. AF sells CDG-LAX tickets as well on the flight. So moving the flight to CDG-TIJ-PPT will result in AF losing the CDG-LAX passengers. Pretty sure TIJ does not have the demand that CDG-LAX has.[/quote]

This is about YVR against LAX/SFO as stopovers on AF's CDG-PPT, TIJ have nothing to do on this discussion.

I don't see CDG-LAX having many connecting passengers besides a few spots in CA, NV and AZ but as O&D is so significant (DL/AF is 3xd summer and 2xd winter) there is no way they're going to cut frequency on LAX-CDG to relocate the PPT tag-on to a location they don't currently serve.

Scenario here might be reducing capacity but not frequency on LAX-CDG (A388 out) and increasing frequency on CDG-YVR (currently 5xw summer and 3xwk winter) to accomodate the PPT tag-on.

My 2 cents.
748,744,742,741,772,773,762,763,
764, 789, 732,733,735,737,738,739,
752, 722, 717,74M,DC10,DC9,M82,
M83, M87, M88,310,319,320,321,332,
333, 343, 346,359,388,L1011,CR2,
CR7, CR9,CRK, E175,E190,ATR42,
DSH8, CS1,CS3

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