• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10
 
rrlopes
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:29 am

planecane wrote:
tullamarine wrote:
Gemuser wrote:
I disagree Tullamarine. IMHO the key bit is the research by the Charles Perkins Centre [USYD] & Monash [MEL] and its firstly for CASA and secondarly for the pilots because if CASA don't buy off on it the project is dead. Having real research numbers from two respected universities will very definately improve th chances with CASA. That statement assumes that the results are supportive and if not they may well lead to new ways of doing things that satisfy both CASA & the pilots.

Gemuser

So if it is only to test the effect on the flight crew, why have any passengers at all particularly as a largely empty cabin won't prove much? I can't believe QF have be talking about and spending money on Sunrise for over 2 years without knowing if it is even practical even if there is a capable plane; this doesn't make business sense. If QF do it quietly without press onboard, I may have more faith but they know how to milk free advertising and I think we all know they won't miss the opportunity.

I think they want to evaluate how passengers handle such a long flight. If people don't tolerate it well they won't sell many tickets especially not at price premium.

I can't imagine sitting in economy for 20 hours straight. Not being able to lay down when you'd be awake almost a full day sounds like a nightmare to me. You've got to get to the airport which takes some time and arrive there 2 hours or so before the flight. If the flight time is 19 hours+, by the time you land you would have had to have woken up a good 22 hours earlier. If you can't get some decent sleep enroute you'll be miserable when you arrive.

I have extreme difficulty falling asleep for more than a few minutes in an economy seat. I've slept most of two flights in my life. Once when I was really sick with a high fever and probably shouldn't have been flying. The other after a very late night/morning at the end of a business trip in Las Vegas. Basically I have to be completely exhausted to sleep in economy.


This is all just conjecture on my part, but they'll probably have to test cabin crew as well, not only flight crew. This justifies having some pax in order to simulate what the workload will be for the (I assume) 2 shifts of cabin crew. I assume the number of 40 pax is not pulled out of a hat, it probably has to do with how many pax one cabin crew has to handle during most times they're on active duty.
 
smi0006
Posts: 2301
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:42 am

I think this is great - yeah sure 75% of project sunrise is marketing- but look at all the free publicity QF gets for having names their aircraft RFP ‘Project Sunrise’ you couldn’t buy the airtime they are getting for it!! Hats off to QF PR team, they are earning every penny.

In saying this, I think it’s low brow to mention the pilot industrial agreements, and use this as a leverage tool. I note QF gave staff travel bonuses to most of their employees, as opposed to actual cash - really costing the company very little.... I hope QF don’t push their employees too hard and misread them. Their HR team needs to manage the culture as carefully as the PR team have managed to brand and free PR.

Curious to see the fatigue results and how this will impact rostering and layover times. Pretty rough I’d imagine to do a SYD-JFK-SYD layover, have two days at home and then do a SYD-LHR-SYD layover in the opposite direction, then a SYD-HKG-SYD overnight - that’s got to destroy the body clock!
 
moa999
Posts: 549
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:43 am

Surely though it wouldn't be that hard to extrapolate from the existing 787 routes (even if they have to put the crew in a room for a few hours at the end of the flight).

But Qantas likes to get it's free publicity
 
User avatar
Qatara340
Posts: 1685
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 2:07 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 9:19 am

This is bullocks.

Qantas knows what goes on on 20 hour flights. They already operate 17-18 hour flights Perth to London, and Singapore Airlines 19 hours to New York, and several 16 Hour flights.

What's going to be the effect on 20 hour flight on passengers? Nothing really. Maybe extra jetlag. Nothing that other flights wont experience anyways.

Publicity. Period.
لا اله الا الله محمد رسول الله
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13990
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 9:26 am

Qatara340 wrote:
This is bullocks.

Qantas knows what goes on on 20 hour flights. They already operate 17-18 hour flights Perth to London, and Singapore Airlines 19 hours to New York, and several 16 Hour flights.

What's going to be the effect on 20 hour flight on passengers? Nothing really. Maybe extra jetlag. Nothing that other flights wont experience anyways.

Publicity. Period.



I would have thought to be meaningful a return flight should be operated. Crew will be expected to have a short rest on ground and return.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 7886
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 9:41 am

rrlopes wrote:
planecane wrote:
tullamarine wrote:
So if it is only to test the effect on the flight crew, why have any passengers at all particularly as a largely empty cabin won't prove much? I can't believe QF have be talking about and spending money on Sunrise for over 2 years without knowing if it is even practical even if there is a capable plane; this doesn't make business sense. If QF do it quietly without press onboard, I may have more faith but they know how to milk free advertising and I think we all know they won't miss the opportunity.

I think they want to evaluate how passengers handle such a long flight. If people don't tolerate it well they won't sell many tickets especially not at price premium.

I can't imagine sitting in economy for 20 hours straight. Not being able to lay down when you'd be awake almost a full day sounds like a nightmare to me. You've got to get to the airport which takes some time and arrive there 2 hours or so before the flight. If the flight time is 19 hours+, by the time you land you would have had to have woken up a good 22 hours earlier. If you can't get some decent sleep enroute you'll be miserable when you arrive.

I have extreme difficulty falling asleep for more than a few minutes in an economy seat. I've slept most of two flights in my life. Once when I was really sick with a high fever and probably shouldn't have been flying. The other after a very late night/morning at the end of a business trip in Las Vegas. Basically I have to be completely exhausted to sleep in economy.


This is all just conjecture on my part, but they'll probably have to test cabin crew as well, not only flight crew. This justifies having some pax in order to simulate what the workload will be for the (I assume) 2 shifts of cabin crew. I assume the number of 40 pax is not pulled out of a hat, it probably has to do with how many pax one cabin crew has to handle during most times they're on active duty.


Someone can correct me, but IIRC the Qantas International and QAAC flight attendant EBAs already allow for a 24 hour duty day with overtime penalties. Therefore the flight attendants aren't a cause for concern for Qantas.

The difference with the pilots is that neither CASA nor AIPA (the pilots union) currently allow such an an extended duty day. They therefore have to win over both.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 7886
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 9:47 am

Qatara340 wrote:
This is bullocks.

Qantas knows what goes on on 20 hour flights. They already operate 17-18 hour flights Perth to London, and Singapore Airlines 19 hours to New York, and several 16 Hour flights.

What's going to be the effect on 20 hour flight on passengers? Nothing really. Maybe extra jetlag. Nothing that other flights wont experience anyways.

Publicity. Period.


It's not bollocks. It is publicly, no doubt, but Qantas can benefit from meausing this to support their case for CASA and AIPA.

Qantas own experience with 17 hour flights is irrelevant. CASA and the union already permit such flights. SYD-LHR is 1000 miles longer than SIN-EWR, and the 20 hours quoted is eastbound with the wind. Westbound could be hitting 22 hours depending on the route flown.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
vhtje
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:40 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 9:58 am

Qatara340 wrote:
This is bullocks.

Qantas knows what goes on on 20 hour flights. They already operate 17-18 hour flights Perth to London, and Singapore Airlines 19 hours to New York, and several 16 Hour flights.

What's going to be the effect on 20 hour flight on passengers? Nothing really. Maybe extra jetlag. Nothing that other flights wont experience anyways.

Publicity. Period.


No, it's not bullocks. It is being done, at least partially, to satisfy Australian law. QF must supply data and research for any changes to their fatigue management system. See post 55:


benjjk wrote:
By Australian law, the required changes to the Qantas fatigue management system must be underpinned by research and data. Even though 3 flights isn't a huge sample size there's no better way to do this research than... to do the actual flights. So whilst there is absolutely a large marketing angle to these flights, some of this work is necessary to getting the program off the ground.
I only turn left when boarding aircraft. Well, mostly. All right, sometimes. OH OKAY - rarely.
 
pabloeing
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:27 am

Smart move in Boeing.....B777-9X and QF can start the proyect Sunrise one year before.....
 
planecane
Posts: 1148
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:39 am

pabloeing wrote:
Smart move in Boeing.....B777-9X and QF can start the proyect Sunrise one year before.....


Plus, it would allow for a more premium configuration or a significantly more comfortable economy section. They could do 9 abreast seating and more legroom.

Boeing's compelling offer can be selling the number of 777-9 frames needed for project sunrise at the price of a 777-8 with a further reduction for the cost of increased fuel burn from EIS until the -8 is produced (if it ever is). I'm sure there would be a clause for additional compensation if they decide to cancel the -8.
 
moa999
Posts: 549
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:39 am

Very smart.
Give them a good deal on the 777-9, which can then replace 380s down the line as more suitable aircraft become available.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:43 am

zeke wrote:
Qatara340 wrote:
This is bullocks.

Qantas knows what goes on on 20 hour flights. They already operate 17-18 hour flights Perth to London, and Singapore Airlines 19 hours to New York, and several 16 Hour flights.

What's going to be the effect on 20 hour flight on passengers? Nothing really. Maybe extra jetlag. Nothing that other flights wont experience anyways.

Publicity. Period.



I would have thought to be meaningful a return flight should be operated. Crew will be expected to have a short rest on ground and return.
That can't happen. What is your definition of "short"?
 
AsiaTravel
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:28 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:45 am

Starting Sunrise one year earlier but at what cost? I see the following cons:
-The risk that the 777-8X will never be built. EY order is gone, QR is looking at the 35K and EK is negotiating its order.
-Does QF need the 777-9X? A380s are here until 2029 at least.
-Operating a plane that isn't the most optimized for ULH.
-The additional cost of reconfiguring planes once 777-8X enter the fleet.

Overall, it sounds like a riskier deal than simply getting the A35KULR.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:50 am

pabloeing wrote:
Smart move in Boeing.....B777-9X and QF can start the proyect Sunrise one year before.....
They have spare 777-9 lying around with a white tail?
 
pabloeing
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:53 am

AsiaTravel wrote:
Starting Sunrise one year earlier but at what cost? I see the following cons:
-The risk that the 777-8X will never be built. EY order is gone, QR is looking at the 35K and EK is negotiating its order.
-Does QF need the 777-9X? A380s are here until 2029 at least.
-Operating a plane that isn't the most optimized for ULH.
-The additional cost of reconfiguring planes once 777-8X enter the fleet.

Overall, it sounds like a riskier deal than simply getting the A35KULR.

The B777-8X is delayed...not cancel
Boeing needs the B777-8X too....for EK....QR....
B777-9X is ideal for A380 replacement
sure that Boeing have a ideal price for compensation the B777-9X reconfiguring
 
JibberJim
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:33 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:05 am

RickNRoll wrote:
pabloeing wrote:
Smart move in Boeing.....B777-9X and QF can start the proyect Sunrise one year before.....
They have spare 777-9 lying around with a white tail?


Don't you need at least 4, probably 5 planes to run a daily service?
 
AsiaTravel
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:28 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:19 am

pabloeing wrote:
AsiaTravel wrote:
Starting Sunrise one year earlier but at what cost? I see the following cons:
-The risk that the 777-8X will never be built. EY order is gone, QR is looking at the 35K and EK is negotiating its order.
-Does QF need the 777-9X? A380s are here until 2029 at least.
-Operating a plane that isn't the most optimized for ULH.
-The additional cost of reconfiguring planes once 777-8X enter the fleet.

Overall, it sounds like a riskier deal than simply getting the A35KULR.

The B777-8X is delayed...not cancel
Boeing needs the B777-8X too....for EK....QR....
B777-9X is ideal for A380 replacement
sure that Boeing have a ideal price for compensation the B777-9X reconfiguring


B777-8X is delayed for now but we know that both QR and EK are evaluating alternatives. It may not lead to anything new but it adds risks, and that is the last thing QF needs in an already risky project.

I hear that the -9X is a good replacement for the A380 but QF need that replacement in 10 years, not in 2021 or even 2025.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:30 am

pabloeing wrote:
The 777X-9 seats more than 400 passengers, depending on an airline’s configuration choices and has a range of 14,185 km with that number aboard.

At a lower passenger number of 300, the range is extended to the 17,000km required for the ultra-long-range missions but additional, palatalized, fuel tanks may also be needed the sources suggest.

The smaller 777X-8, which will seat 350 passengers and has a range of 17,220 km.
Apparently the Boeing strategy of offering the larger 777X-9 will also enable Qantas to operate the flights a little earlier than the originally anticipated start date of late 2022 eaerly 2023.



Where do they get these capacity figures from? I know you can seat more than 400 in the 779 but the 4 classes I believe QF is looking at it will not happen. I would also like to see how you get 350 seats in the 778 when it is 4 meters shorter than the 77W and EY only has 330 seats in its 3-class 77W and this is at 10 across Y.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5847
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Qantas plans to operate 3 Project Sunrise research flights by end of 2019 using 787-9 aircraft

Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:41 am

jayunited wrote:
airnorth wrote:
And the article.


Exactly please read the article as airnoth suggested.
Qantas estimates flight times of around 19 hours, however during the northern hemisphere winter JFK-SYD nonstop could easily top 20 hours. Qantas needs to conduct research on the effect this type of long haul nonstop travel has on the human body, on the traveler and more importantly on the crew.


Are you kidding? This is a timid punt by QF. The SYD-JFK and SYD-LHR flights are ~900sm and 1500sm longer than PER-LHR which they've been running. This isn't going to the moon - which was done 50 years ago, BTW. The idea this needs anything other than economic decision making is ludicrous.
 
User avatar
CarbonFibre
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:02 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:07 pm

So LN929 & 941 to be delivered via LHR ?
 
sxf24
Posts: 865
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:25 pm

marcelh wrote:
qf789 wrote:
In an interview with Bloomberg TV Alan Joyce ruled out the 787, it’s between the 778 and A350

https://twitter.com/karomiziolek/status ... 69249?s=21


I don’t want to split hairs, but it’s between the A350 on one side and the B778 + “compelling” offer on the other side. And Qantas is the winner :bigthumbsup:


The A350-1000ULR doesn’t exist yet either, so there’s going to be a compelling offer from Airbus as well.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21414
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:25 pm

zkojq wrote:
aryonoco wrote:
And AJ says: "This is ultimately a business decision and the economics have to stack up. One of the hurdles is a deal with our pilots to fly the aircraft. We’re asking for them for some productivity gains – just as we did with the introduction of the Dreamliner – and those discussions are ongoing."

Translation: we don't want the crew to have layovers any longer than the existing layovers for PER-LHR-PER crews.

Isn't making longer flights while reducing crew rest a bad look in today's safety conscious social media savvy world?

What would be the impact of just going with the current contractual standards?

Are we at risk of having pilots accepting less safety in favor of getting desirable trips to choice destinations?

Can three flights give researchers a solid enough data set to make projections across dozens if not hundreds of potential pilots?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 7886
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Qantas plans to operate 3 Project Sunrise research flights by end of 2019 using 787-9 aircraft

Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:30 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
The idea this needs anything other than economic decision making is ludicrous.


There is a serious lack of reading comprehension in this thread. Which part of neither CASA nor AIPA will allow such extended duties are people having difficulty understanding?
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
texl1649
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:39 pm

Boeing to offer 777-9x’ with palletized extra fuel tanks as stopgap until 778?

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/boe ... t-sunrise/

“Apparently the Boeing strategy of offering the larger 777X-9 will also enable Qantas to operate the flights a little earlier than the originally anticipated start date of late 2022 eaerly 2023.

Recent cutbacks by Etihad Airways to its 777X order have freed up delivery positions.

While the 777X-9 is too big in the long term for the Project Sunrise mission the aircraft is now the largest aircraft available for an Airbus A380 replacement.

Boeing anticipates that Qantas would retain the 777X-9 as 777X-8s are delivered.

However, the Boeing offer faces very tough competition from Airbus with its A350-1000.”
 
mig17
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:00 pm

texl1649 wrote:
Boeing to offer 777-9x’ with palletized extra fuel tanks as stopgap until 778?

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/boe ... t-sunrise/

“Apparently the Boeing strategy of offering the larger 777X-9 will also enable Qantas to operate the flights a little earlier than the originally anticipated start date of late 2022 eaerly 2023.

Recent cutbacks by Etihad Airways to its 777X order have freed up delivery positions.

While the 777X-9 is too big in the long term for the Project Sunrise mission the aircraft is now the largest aircraft available for an Airbus A380 replacement.

Boeing anticipates that Qantas would retain the 777X-9 as 777X-8s are delivered.

However, the Boeing offer faces very tough competition from Airbus with its A350-1000.”

MTOW increase on the 777-9?
727 AT, 737 UX/SK/TO/SS, 747 UT/AF/SQ/BA/SS, 767 UA, 777 AF, A300 IW/TG, A310 EK, A318/19/20/21 AF/U2/VY, A332/3 EK/QR/TX, A343 AF, A388 AF, E145/170/190 A5/WF, Q400 WF, ATR 72 A5/TX, CRJ100/700/1000 A5, C-150/172, PC-6.
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:08 pm

mig17 wrote:
texl1649 wrote:
Boeing to offer 777-9x’ with palletized extra fuel tanks as stopgap until 778?

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/boe ... t-sunrise/

“Apparently the Boeing strategy of offering the larger 777X-9 will also enable Qantas to operate the flights a little earlier than the originally anticipated start date of late 2022 eaerly 2023.

Recent cutbacks by Etihad Airways to its 777X order have freed up delivery positions.

While the 777X-9 is too big in the long term for the Project Sunrise mission the aircraft is now the largest aircraft available for an Airbus A380 replacement.

Boeing anticipates that Qantas would retain the 777X-9 as 777X-8s are delivered.

However, the Boeing offer faces very tough competition from Airbus with its A350-1000.”

MTOW increase on the 777-9?


Not necessarily, additional fuel tanks and reduced payload can work with the current MTOW
 
marcelh
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:09 pm

sxf24 wrote:
marcelh wrote:
qf789 wrote:
In an interview with Bloomberg TV Alan Joyce ruled out the 787, it’s between the 778 and A350

https://twitter.com/karomiziolek/status ... 69249?s=21


I don’t want to split hairs, but it’s between the A350 on one side and the B778 + “compelling” offer on the other side. And Qantas is the winner :bigthumbsup:


The A350-1000ULR doesn’t exist yet either, so there’s going to be a compelling offer from Airbus as well.

The A350-1000ULR is a tweaked A35K which does exist. Don’t forget Qantas is eager to get real live data from the B779, not the B778. Just because the flight tests being delayed, it looks Boeing is offering something additional to compensate the delay of the B778/9.
 
mig17
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:43 pm

AECM wrote:
mig17 wrote:
texl1649 wrote:
Boeing to offer 777-9x’ with palletized extra fuel tanks as stopgap until 778?

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/boe ... t-sunrise/

“Apparently the Boeing strategy of offering the larger 777X-9 will also enable Qantas to operate the flights a little earlier than the originally anticipated start date of late 2022 eaerly 2023.

Recent cutbacks by Etihad Airways to its 777X order have freed up delivery positions.

While the 777X-9 is too big in the long term for the Project Sunrise mission the aircraft is now the largest aircraft available for an Airbus A380 replacement.

Boeing anticipates that Qantas would retain the 777X-9 as 777X-8s are delivered.

However, the Boeing offer faces very tough competition from Airbus with its A350-1000.”

MTOW increase on the 777-9?


Not necessarily, additional fuel tanks and reduced payload can work with the current MTOW

A 352t MTOW and 181t OEW 777-9 takes 414pax on 7525nm with 129t of fuel (352-181-41=129).
London Sydney is what >9300nm, you will need 129*9300/7525=160t of fuel for the same 352t TOW 777-9 to fly there. That leaves the following payload : 352-160-181=11t. Without MTOW increase the 777-9 will fly no more than 110pax on the route. Maybe a little more considering the fuel burn will be better than expected but less than 200pax for sure.

The 777-9 at 352t can't be a Sunrise plane, even momentarily.
727 AT, 737 UX/SK/TO/SS, 747 UT/AF/SQ/BA/SS, 767 UA, 777 AF, A300 IW/TG, A310 EK, A318/19/20/21 AF/U2/VY, A332/3 EK/QR/TX, A343 AF, A388 AF, E145/170/190 A5/WF, Q400 WF, ATR 72 A5/TX, CRJ100/700/1000 A5, C-150/172, PC-6.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:49 pm

mig17 wrote:
AECM wrote:
mig17 wrote:
MTOW increase on the 777-9?


Not necessarily, additional fuel tanks and reduced payload can work with the current MTOW

A 352t MTOW and 181t OEW 777-9 takes 414pax on 7525nm with 129t of fuel (352-181-41=129).
London Sydney is what >9300nm, you will need 129*9300/7525=160t of fuel for the same 352t TOW 777-9 to fly there. That leaves the following payload : 352-160-181=11t. Without MTOW increase the 777-9 will fly no more than 110pax on the route. Maybe a little more considering the fuel burn will be better than expected but less than 200pax for sure.

The 777-9 at 352t can't be a Sunrise plane, even momentarily.


I don’t think it’s even slightly plausible that Boeing would propose flying 100-200 pax on a 779 to QF. I also don’t think it’s likely this is a fabricated story, so something else must be afoot, imho.
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:55 pm

mig17 wrote:
AECM wrote:
mig17 wrote:
MTOW increase on the 777-9?


Not necessarily, additional fuel tanks and reduced payload can work with the current MTOW

A 352t MTOW and 181t OEW 777-9 takes 414pax on 7525nm with 129t of fuel (352-181-41=129).
London Sydney is what >9300nm, you will need 129*9300/7525=160t of fuel for the same 352t TOW 777-9 to fly there. That leaves the following payload : 352-160-181=11t. Without MTOW increase the 777-9 will fly no more than 110pax on the route. Maybe a little more considering the fuel burn will be better than expected but less than 200pax for sure.

The 777-9 at 352t can't be a Sunrise plane, even momentarily.


It can work with a reduced payload but it doesn't mean that it's the obvious choice or if it's the most viable one...
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:58 pm

mig17 wrote:
Without MTOW increase the 777-9 will fly no more than 110pax on the route. Maybe a little more considering the fuel burn will be better than expected but less than 200pax for sure.

The 777-9 at 352t can't be a Sunrise plane, even momentarily.

Agreed. I assumed it was a joke.

I actually think we have people making things up on forums such as this. Dodgy aviation news sites who browse forums then post a rumour which was taken from a forum. This then causes more members of the forum to become convinced. It is a game of guessing.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 2:02 pm

How many planes does the world need that can fly 20 hours?
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
mig17
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 2:58 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
How many planes does the world need that can fly 20 hours?

Solar Impulse ...
But with a significant 20 to 30t payload? 2 : A345 and 77L.

A359ULR isn't far behind with 19h and 789 with 17h.

Soon the A35K and 778 will be 20h planes with close to 30t payload and far more efficient than A345 and 77L were.
727 AT, 737 UX/SK/TO/SS, 747 UT/AF/SQ/BA/SS, 767 UA, 777 AF, A300 IW/TG, A310 EK, A318/19/20/21 AF/U2/VY, A332/3 EK/QR/TX, A343 AF, A388 AF, E145/170/190 A5/WF, Q400 WF, ATR 72 A5/TX, CRJ100/700/1000 A5, C-150/172, PC-6.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:03 pm

Sorry, my question was ambiguous. How many planes are likely to be bought to fly 20 hours? The underlying point, that particular market niche may be pretty small.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:25 pm

cpd wrote:
qf789 wrote:
At today's FY2018/2019 results Qantas has announced they will conduct 3 research flights operating both JFK-SYD and LHR-SYD using 787-9 aircraft. These aircraft will be used as delivery flights of 787-9's Qantas will take delivery of in October, November and December

Each flight will have a maximum of 40 people onboard and the flights will be used to gain data from passenger and crew health and well being. The data will then be shared with CASA to help inform regulatory requirements associated with ULH flights

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... australia/


Could this mean a second Project Sunset to set the sun on Project Sunrise if these tests don’t work out favourably or the pilots don’t deliver efficiency improvements?

It doesn’t seem completely set that this will all go ahead.


It very well could. I'm of the opinion QF and CX should wait until the A350 NEO with the Trent Ultrafan and a couple more airframe optimizations to get the economics into a more favorable position. With the Ultrafan's 7% gains over the XWB, you could put an 88,000lb thrust engine on the -900ULR, get 250-300 seats and full cargo with the existing fuel tank config, and keep the same 18,000km range (technically +250km based on the simplified napkin math, but that will be lost in the rigorous calc).

If they were to hold off and wait for the economics to improve, that would push PS out to 2026.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:42 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Sorry, my question was ambiguous. How many planes are likely to be bought to fly 20 hours? The underlying point, that particular market niche may be pretty small.


Well, we already have the 6 flying with SQ, not to mention another 4 to eventually cover SIN-ORD, then there's CX's plans for HKG-MIA (3 at least).

MAS will eventually want direct flights to JFK as Malaysia tries to compete with Singapore, so 3 there. Plus another 2 to cover Chicago.

ANZ will want 3 to cover AKL-LHR at some point.

BA or VS competition with QF and ANZ for direct UK-AU/NZ service (9?)

Lufthansa may want a couple aimed at business travel between the Germans, Austrians, and Swiss to AU/NZ (5?). I don't really see direct flights between Zurich and AU/NZ ever being a thing unless Perth is made very economical by the A350 NEO or 787 NG.

And then there's U.S. - Johannesburg, which frankly only Delta would attempt given they actually have A350s in their fleet and none of the U.S. 3 have even considered the 777X, instead going all-in on the 787 and A350. So there's another 3.

MAAAAYBE Perth-LAX, Perth-ORD, or Perth-JFK, but that would just be insufferable for such a small Aussie capital (2-3?)

So I would say 15-31 craft on top of what is probably 7-8QF craft (need redundant planes in the event of a grounding) and the existing 6 Singapore. So maybe 30-46 craft worldwide.

The A350 NEO and eventual 787 NG will make the 777-200LR completely redundant for Air Canada and Qatar Airways, who are the only ones operating ultra long haul routes with it. I don't see those being replaced by the A350ULR or the 777-8 unless capacity needs explode to the point Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto, and Doha suddenly can't handle having 2 slightly smaller flights rather than 1 big one
Last edited by patrickjp93 on Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
pabloeing
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:49 pm

¿Brand new B77L can do the job from SYD to LHR too?
Last edited by pabloeing on Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:52 pm

pabloeing wrote:
¿Brand new B77L can do the jon from SYD to LHR too?


On paper, no, but that's before you limit cargo or pax, so there's room to play with the numbers.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 3:56 pm

marcelh wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
marcelh wrote:

I don’t want to split hairs, but it’s between the A350 on one side and the B778 + “compelling” offer on the other side. And Qantas is the winner :bigthumbsup:


The A350-1000ULR doesn’t exist yet either, so there’s going to be a compelling offer from Airbus as well.

The A350-1000ULR is a tweaked A35K which does exist. Don’t forget Qantas is eager to get real live data from the B779, not the B778. Just because the flight tests being delayed, it looks Boeing is offering something additional to compensate the delay of the B778/9.


Tweaked is putting it mildly. The A35K already maxes out the wing tanks, and there's not enough wing box space left to cover the remaining fuel needs.

I suspect more a tweaked A359ULR. Same wings and full wing tanks with PIPs, slightly up-rate the engines for MTOW, and completely fill out the wing box tank. That's the most economic way to get 200+ butts in the air for that kind of distance with the current engines available, unless Airbus wants to give the GE9X a try until the Ultrafan :P
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3884
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:19 pm

Revelation wrote:
Isn't making longer flights while reducing crew rest a bad look in today's safety conscious social media savvy world?

I agree with you entirely, mate. Somebody should take this up with the ME3 in particular.


Revelation wrote:
What would be the impact of just going with the current contractual standards?

The issue is that flights of this length aren't covered by the current pilot group EBA. Obviously a longer flight will make the crew more fatigued, thus they will want either more crew onboard or longer layovers in LHR/JFK.

Revelation wrote:
Can three flights give researchers a solid enough data set to make projections across dozens if not hundreds of potential pilots?


Indeed though presumably the testing program has been agreed to by CASA already.
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21414
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:45 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
It very well could. I'm of the opinion QF and CX should wait until the A350 NEO with the Trent Ultrafan and a couple more airframe optimizations to get the economics into a more favorable position. With the Ultrafan's 7% gains over the XWB, you could put an 88,000lb thrust engine on the -900ULR, get 250-300 seats and full cargo with the existing fuel tank config, and keep the same 18,000km range (technically +250km based on the simplified napkin math, but that will be lost in the rigorous calc).

If they were to hold off and wait for the economics to improve, that would push PS out to 2026.

Interesting quote of +7% gains, can you provide a source?

All I found was ( ref: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... e-ultrafan ):

Rolls-Royce (Chalet 93) reports "great progress" with the UltraFan engine that it plans to run in a testbed in 2021. With lean-burn/low-emission combustion, an advanced core with ceramic-matrix composites and super nickel alloys, as well as a power gearbox (PGB) to reduce fan speed, program building blocks are falling into place, according to Rolls-Royce civil aerospace future programs chief engineer Phil Curnock.

Other characteristics include carbon/titanium (CTi) fan blades and composite engine casing to reduce weight. The manufacturer aims to complete design and analysis this year, ahead of manufacture and assembly in 2020.

Ok, we have a lot of new tech ...

UltraFan is a scalable design planned to be 25 percent more fuel-efficient than R-R's first-generation Trent engine and suitable for new single- or twin-aisle aircraft entering service from the mid-2020s. It represents the company's most-significant step in engine architecture since the RB211 three-shaft powerplant pioneered around a half-century ago.

The consistent drive for improved fuel-burn has driven gas-turbine development for at least 40 years, according to UltraFan chief engineer and head of program Andy Geer. "After five evolutions of the Trent [itself derived from RB211-524 technology], Rolls-Royce has identified the need for a step change to meet the demands of the next decade on civil large engines."

So we have five iterations of Trents getting 25% gain, thus an average of 5% per generation, and this being a "step change" getting us more than the average, or 7%?

Yet when you think of the spend for all new tech bases for fan, gear box, composite case, core metallurgy, etc plus "rebalancing the workload" / eliminating the LPT causing every turbine stage to change, it seems to be a huge spend to get "only" 7%.

zkojq wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Isn't making longer flights while reducing crew rest a bad look in today's safety conscious social media savvy world?

I agree with you entirely, mate. Somebody should take this up with the ME3 in particular.

Same to you, all good points, especially with respect to the ME3.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
dampfnudel
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:42 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:59 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
In the days of prop liners, we already operated routes this long. TWA flew west coast USA - Europe scheduled flights that exceeded 18 hours in the L1649. The first westbound return LHR-SFO was 23 hours and 18 minutes aloft.

Well, conditions have changed since then. We’re better at monitoring the physiological status of people and analyzing the results. Passengers are more likely to be overweight today, taking drugs that didn’t exist back then (and in some cases didn’t even exist 20 years ago), have medical conditions like hypertension, be less compliant to authority, take children with them, etc.
A313 332 343 B703 712 722 732 73G 738 739 741 742 744 752 762 76E 764 772 AT5 CR9 D10 DHH DHT F27 GRM L10 M83 TU5

AA AI CO CL DE DL EA HA KL LH N7 PA PQ SK RO TW UA YR
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:03 pm

Revelation wrote:
Interesting quote of +7% gains, can you provide a source?

All I found was ( ref: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... e-ultrafan ):

Rolls-Royce (Chalet 93) reports "great progress" with the UltraFan engine that it plans to run in a testbed in 2021. With lean-burn/low-emission combustion, an advanced core with ceramic-matrix composites and super nickel alloys, as well as a power gearbox (PGB) to reduce fan speed, program building blocks are falling into place, according to Rolls-Royce civil aerospace future programs chief engineer Phil Curnock.

Other characteristics include carbon/titanium (CTi) fan blades and composite engine casing to reduce weight. The manufacturer aims to complete design and analysis this year, ahead of manufacture and assembly in 2020.

Ok, we have a lot of new tech ...

UltraFan is a scalable design planned to be 25 percent more fuel-efficient than R-R's first-generation Trent engine and suitable for new single- or twin-aisle aircraft entering service from the mid-2020s. It represents the company's most-significant step in engine architecture since the RB211 three-shaft powerplant pioneered around a half-century ago.

The consistent drive for improved fuel-burn has driven gas-turbine development for at least 40 years, according to UltraFan chief engineer and head of program Andy Geer. "After five evolutions of the Trent [itself derived from RB211-524 technology], Rolls-Royce has identified the need for a step change to meet the demands of the next decade on civil large engines."

So we have five iterations of Trents getting 25% gain, thus an average of 5% per generation, and this being a "step change" getting us more than the average, or 7%?

Yet when you think of the spend for all new tech bases for fan, gear box, composite case, core metallurgy, etc plus "rebalancing the workload" / eliminating the LPT causing every turbine stage to change, it seems to be a huge spend to get "only" 7%.


I'm building that off of the Trent 700's final PIP and the quoted upgrade from Trent 700 to Trent 7000 and the 3% difference between the XWB and 7000 quoted by Airbus' PR docs. so 1.25 = x *1.03*1.13.

x=1.073... or 7.3% uplift over the XWB, but mind you this is thrust-specific rather than whole-system, so once the final weight reductions come in, it will be higher than this I'm almost dead certain.
Last edited by patrickjp93 on Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21414
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:13 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
I'm building that off of the Trent 700's final PIP and the quoted upgrade from Trent 700 to Trent 7000 and the 3% difference between the XWB and 7000 quoted by Airbus' PR docs. so 1.25 = x *1.03*1.13.

x=1.073... or 7.3% uplift over the XWB, but mind you this is thrust-specific rather than whole-system, so once the final weight reductions come in, it will be higher than this I'm almost dead certain.

Your math, and your conclusion that we should get a result even better than +7% for UltraFan vs XWB are all quite reasonable to me.

Trying to do all the math using so many poorly specified data points is a challenge.

To add even more complexity, there was said to be some gains between XWB-85 and XWB-97 due to "Advance3" tech such as advanced cooling and blade clearance that some may have thought was only going to appear in UltraFan, so in theory if the datum is XWB-97 perhaps something is lost going to UltraFan, but probably not enough to change the results in a meaningful way.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:20 pm

mig17 wrote:
A359ULR isn't far behind with 19h and 789 with 17h.

Soon the A35K and 778 will be 20h planes with close to 30t payload and far more efficient than A345 and 77L were.


789 goes over 17 routinely...nearly 18 actually on some of the westbound legs to Oz.

SYD-LHR would seem to be closer to 21 or 22. I see this route as 3 hours further than something like PER-LHR or IAH-SYD.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2221
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:32 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Sorry, my question was ambiguous. How many planes are likely to be bought to fly 20 hours? The underlying point, that particular market niche may be pretty small.


Probably not a whole lot. In addition to Qantas, maybe Singapore Airlines and British Airways could be potential customers. Maybe even South African Airways in the future.

But I think this Project Sunrise is more than just sales, it's prestige.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17477
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:46 pm

pabloeing wrote:


Where has Boeing said the delay is one year?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:49 pm

Patrick - thanks for that estimate of 30-46. It will be interesting how much A and B will be willing to spend to get pieces of that market.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
Erebus
Posts: 1049
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:56 pm

Revelation wrote:
Yet when you think of the spend for all new tech bases for fan, gear box, composite case, core metallurgy, etc plus "rebalancing the workload" / eliminating the LPT causing every turbine stage to change, it seems to be a huge spend to get "only" 7%.


From what I've read, one of the key drivers behind the UltraFan concept is to develop an engine that is readily scalable to varying thrust requirements while retaining many common elements. This looks like RR spending big upfront so that down the line, they will be able to produce derivatives for different applications cheap and quick. Cutting down engine development time was often mentioned.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10

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