Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
wingnutmn
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:27 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 1:46 pm

This could work if Boeing designs the plane with the intention of using current generation GTF engines, but also build the plane with the knowledge of a NEO coming out shortly after EIS. This is a 6-8 year project and from reading other posts, engine technology is still 10-15 years out for the next generational advancement.

Wingnut
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing! It's a bonus if you can fly the plane again!!
 
jwjsamster
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:12 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:12 pm

I think Boeing has enough on their plate right now with the 737MAX grounding and the 777X issues, they'll cross that bridge when they get to it.
 
User avatar
jscottwomack
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:44 pm

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:38 pm

Once they get the Max back in the air, it will be a high priority to design and launch a clean sheet. Too much negativity behind the max.
TWA, Ozark, Braniff, Piedmont, USAir, American, Delta, Frontier, Midwest Express, Western, Eastern, Southwest, Northwest, PanAm, United, Mississippi Valley, Britt, Continental, Trans America, Midway, America West, National, American Trans Air, Sun Country
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 434
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:55 pm

Boeing's further aircraft developments will always be "families," but I think you're overstating how far a "family" can be taken.

A single aircraft family could not cover 737, 757 and small-767 duties. Its simply impossible.

What we could get is a family that covers the 737-800 to 757-200 range (which is what I see the NSA being)... competing with the A320neo family but not the A220 family (which will address the smaller 110-160 market).

The "MoM" is still arguably necessary since the A321 only covers the lowest end of that. We need something with roughly 230-270 pax and 5000nmi range.

In short, one family could feasibly cover the 737-8 to 757-200 market, but we'll still need a MoM jet for above that (a 767 replacement), and the A220 is serving the market below that.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2570
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:02 pm

It should be possible to develop a single 797 fuselage for the whole spectrum of sizes if you go for the traditional 3 + 3 layout.

It would probably be a good idea to develop two sets of wings though. One set for short haul, another for longer flights. And possibly two sizes of engines as well.

Either way, I think the smallest variant would have to be 737-800 size, and the longest 757-300 size at most.

Further shrink would leave it ineffective against the A220 series. Further stretch would make it too inconvenient to embark and disembark.

The problem is that Boeing identified the "Middle of Market" to be around 767-300 size, so this solution would likely only cover part of it. And that in direct competition with Airbus A321XLR and possible further stretches of that variant.
Last edited by JetBuddy on Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Galvan316
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:43 pm

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:03 pm

StudiodeKadent wrote:
be taken.

A single aircraft family could not cover 737, 757 and small-767 duties. Its simply impossible.




Why is this impossible? not in anyway arguing just wondering :)
ORD and MDW is where youll find Me!
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 434
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:14 pm

Galvan316 wrote:
StudiodeKadent wrote:
be taken.

A single aircraft family could not cover 737, 757 and small-767 duties. Its simply impossible.




Why is this impossible? not in anyway arguing just wondering :)


We're dealing with an excessively large scope of missions. The 737 is a workhorse, mostly domestic/regional, narrowbody. The 767 and 757 have to do TATL and shorter-TPAC routes with around 250ish passengers.

Its just more efficient to have two separate aircraft families... one for 737/757 replacement, and one for 767 replacement.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27217
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:29 pm

Galvan316 wrote:
In the wake of the 737-Max crashes and subsequent PR nightmare facing Boeing, could it be feasible that the 797 be a clean slate "family" type aircraft?


The chances are probably greater now that the Chairman and CEO positions have been divested. The Boeing Board is now likely to be even more "risk averse" than before, so I expect NMA is now unlikely to go forward at this time- especially if the business case is as shaky as some believe.

So this would move NSA (the 737 replacement) to the front of the queue and as they did with the 757 and 767, I could see Boeing tying NSA and NMA together to see if they can build a family that can leverage as much common technology, systems and production techniques as possible to both de-risk the programs compared to doing them separately and to reduce the development and production costs.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:38 pm

Stitch wrote:
Galvan316 wrote:
In the wake of the 737-Max crashes and subsequent PR nightmare facing Boeing, could it be feasible that the 797 be a clean slate "family" type aircraft?


The chances are probably greater now that the Chairman and CEO positions have been divested. The Boeing Board is now likely to be even more "risk averse" than before, so I expect NMA is now unlikely to go forward at this time- especially if the business case is as shaky as some believe.

So this would move NSA (the 737 replacement) to the front of the queue and as they did with the 757 and 767, I could see Boeing tying NSA and NMA together to see if they can build a family that can leverage as much common technology, systems and production techniques as possible to both de-risk the programs compared to doing them separately and to reduce the development and production costs.


:checkmark:
I totally agree,

A paired program (à la 757/767 program) is felt more than ever

:arrow: NMA - 797X / NSA - 808X? ...
"No limit to my poooWer!!!
Do it! "...
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13998
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:53 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Galvan316 wrote:
In the wake of the 737-Max crashes and subsequent PR nightmare facing Boeing, could it be feasible that the 797 be a clean slate "family" type aircraft?


The chances are probably greater now that the Chairman and CEO positions have been divested. The Boeing Board is now likely to be even more "risk averse" than before, so I expect NMA is now unlikely to go forward at this time- especially if the business case is as shaky as some believe.

So this would move NSA (the 737 replacement) to the front of the queue and as they did with the 757 and 767, I could see Boeing tying NSA and NMA together to see if they can build a family that can leverage as much common technology, systems and production techniques as possible to both de-risk the programs compared to doing them separately and to reduce the development and production costs.


:checkmark:
I totally agree,

A paired program (à la 757/767 program) is felt more than ever

:arrow: NMA - 797X / NSA - 808X? ...


Combining with NMA too much will risk becoming inefficient. If it can't do 100 minutes, 180 seats 6 times a day, you might forget e.g. LCC sales.

:point: Now even Richard Aboulafia (on Forbes) seems convinced, even taking into account 737MAX program devaluation an FSA is the best idea longer term. Even though he refers to a middle market plane. Everybody with which OE his hart is.

Yet if they curtail new jet development spending in order to repair their balance sheet and to resume returning cash to shareholders, they will lose market share quickly.... This shift would have big implications for Boeing suppliers, and the entire aviation industry.


Image
Source : https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardabo ... 21xlr-nma/

To narrow it down a bit, 200-230 seats up to 4000NM seems a good target. Getting bigger, more powerfull might disqualify it in terms of efficiency.
Fighting A321s has become an uphill battle. Trying to outmuscle it in terms of capacity & range will disqualify an FSA for overweight / costs.
Shrinkining / lightening up, proved an illusion so far for both Airbus and Boeing designs, when there is serious competition.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:23 pm

StudiodeKadent wrote:
Galvan316 wrote:
StudiodeKadent wrote:
be taken.

A single aircraft family could not cover 737, 757 and small-767 duties. Its simply impossible.



Why is this impossible? not in anyway arguing just wondering :)


We're dealing with an excessively large scope of missions. The 737 is a workhorse, mostly domestic/regional, narrowbody. The 767 and 757 have to do TATL and shorter-TPAC routes with around 250ish passengers.

Its just more efficient to have two separate aircraft families... one for 737/757 replacement, and one for 767 replacement.



Do you define a family to have a common wing?

If you have a family that has two or more wingsets and two or more fuselage sets - then much more possibilities open up.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:56 pm

I was thinking about this last night.

The big problems between trying to amalgamate (i) a 5000nm 250 seat aircraft with (ii) a 1000nm 170 seat aircraft are:
(1) MTOW differences mean structural weight (OEW) for the former is prohibitive for the latter.
(2) The wingsize needed for the former leads to prohibitive zero-lift drag for the latter.

Putting practicalities and feasibility aside for a brainstorming exercise. In a perfect world, there would be:
(a) means of thinning structures depending on TOW and
(b) changing the wingsize depending on TOW and mission range.

That would lead to a single aircraft that could operate both ends of the operating spectrum of (i) and (ii).


Then how could either of (a) or (b) possibly actually be delivered. (Again, leaving aside the finer points of feasibility - just very high level conceptual stuff only - and some of this is really off the wall mental!)

Options include:
- attachable wingtip sections which could be swapped on/off at the gate depending on mission profile. This would affect both OEW and lift/drag.
- secondary members for undercarriage which could be swapped on/off at the gate depending on TOW. This would affect OEW only.
- morphable LE slats which can extend forward to increase wing area (at 0deg deployment angle). This would affect lift/drag only.
- morphable TE flaps which can extend aft to increase wing area (at 0deg deployment angle). This would affect lift/drag only.
- expandable torque box (fore-aft), which can lengthen to increase wing chord. This would affect lift/drag only - but could also increase fuel tank capacity.
- variable thickness structural members throughout aircraft. Pump or extract liquid metal into airframe at the gate depending on TOW and then stiffen via electrical charge.
- extendable (not foldable) wingtips & active camber control in adjacent area to increase/reduce wingspan & area as required for mission. This would affect lift/drag only.
- quick attach electrical propulsors for heavier TOW missions. Can be removed at gate for shorter range (lighter missions). This would affect weight and drag.


Any other mental ideas welcome!


Of the above, the morphable LE slats/TE flaps may be achievable & feasible on a new program in 10 years. The rest... erm. Work in progress!
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13998
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 2:48 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
I was thinking about this last night.

The big problems between trying to amalgamate (i) a 5000nm 250 seat aircraft with (ii) a 1000nm 170 seat aircraft are:
(1) MTOW differences mean structural weight (OEW) for the former is prohibitive for the latter.
(2) The wingsize needed for the former leads to prohibitive zero-lift drag for the latter.

Putting practicalities and feasibility aside for a brainstorming exercise. In a perfect world, there would be:
(a) means of thinning structures depending on TOW and
(b) changing the wingsize depending on TOW and mission range.

That would lead to a single aircraft that could operate both ends of the operating spectrum of (i) and (ii).


Then how could either of (a) or (b) possibly actually be delivered. (Again, leaving aside the finer points of feasibility - just very high level conceptual stuff only - and some of this is really off the wall mental!)

Options include:
- attachable wingtip sections which could be swapped on/off at the gate depending on mission profile. This would affect both OEW and lift/drag.
- secondary members for undercarriage which could be swapped on/off at the gate depending on TOW. This would affect OEW only.
- morphable LE slats which can extend forward to increase wing area (at 0deg deployment angle). This would affect lift/drag only.
- morphable TE flaps which can extend aft to increase wing area (at 0deg deployment angle). This would affect lift/drag only.
- expandable torque box (fore-aft), which can lengthen to increase wing chord. This would affect lift/drag only - but could also increase fuel tank capacity.
- variable thickness structural members throughout aircraft. Pump or extract liquid metal into airframe at the gate depending on TOW and then stiffen via electrical charge.
- extendable (not foldable) wingtips & active camber control in adjacent area to increase/reduce wingspan & area as required for mission. This would affect lift/drag only.
- quick attach electrical propulsors for heavier TOW missions. Can be removed at gate for shorter range (lighter missions). This would affect weight and drag.


Any other mental ideas welcome!

Of the above, the morphable LE slats/TE flaps may be achievable & feasible on a new program in 10 years. The rest... erm. Work in progress!


I think many interesting future options. The big question would be if in terms of certification, costs and required time to market it is feasible. More efficient than 2 seperate (wing, wingbox, wingpylon, engine, landing gear, fuel storage) sub assemblies, fully optimized for 2 different capacity range segments. While having the benefit of cockpit, fusealge, tail, system commonality of both.

Image

In my opinion at this stage, full focus should be on a fully optimized (light, cheap, modular) 150-200 seat 3000NM solution.To safe the (cracking) 737MAX backlog and NB marketshare.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Kikko19
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 4:45 pm

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 2:57 pm

So many revolutionary ideas. We can make as many paper planes until the new engines will be developed. So 10 years from now? Or 15?
 
ILNFlyer
Posts: 521
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:29 pm

SELMER40 wrote:
Delta has already said they want 200 airplanes. How many requests does Boeing need to announce production?


Well, that would appear to be enough to the general public. Boeing is looking for the long game, to make sure this is not a 200 frame program. I doubt they will launch unless they see 1,000 solid orders ahead over the next several years.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:43 pm

Lufthansa wrote:
Theres always the risk here too that airbus will quickly respond with a stretch of the A321 with a bigger wing.
Think 753 size bird and bigger landing gear. I wonder if lightsaber knows if how much potential for growth the
PW geared turbofans have?

It looks like Boeing have got themselves into a bit of a sticky situation here. They can't let Airbus steal the narrow body
market at higher profit margins, and they could strategically step in and offer A330s dirt cheap to hurt Boeing
wide body products.

If they go ahead with any 767 update it needs to be minimal. Their focus has to be sorting out this narrow body mess.
I suspect they're going to need a lot more modifications than they've let on.

They can't really offer A330s dirt cheap in any compelling way to new customers, and the existing ones have already placed fairly large orders. Boeing can easily ramp 787 production back up to 14/mo if they capture more orders, so offering good discounts is well within their ability to keep Airbus in check. Boeing's business and marketing teams are certainly smarter than that.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13998
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:54 pm

ILNFlyer wrote:
SELMER40 wrote:
Delta has already said they want 200 airplanes. How many requests does Boeing need to announce production?


Well, that would appear to be enough to the general public. Boeing is looking for the long game, to make sure this is not a 200 frame program. I doubt they will launch unless they see 1,000 solid orders ahead over the next several years.


If a viable light aircraft way better than the 737 and slightly better than the NEO, newer PW1000 and LEAPX versions:
- 100+100 from IAG, DL, United.
- A Chinese 300 ac trade deficit order,
- Southwest for 200+100,
- Ryanair 200,
- Lessors, 1000.
- Many others interested in long term competition / choice..

Depending on conversion rights, price, conditions, financing, engine choice.. Not impossible.. Increasingly likely even

Image
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-797-whats-next/
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:56 pm

wingnutmn wrote:
This could work if Boeing designs the plane with the intention of using current generation GTF engines, but also build the plane with the knowledge of a NEO coming out shortly after EIS. This is a 6-8 year project and from reading other posts, engine technology is still 10-15 years out for the next generational advancement.

Wingnut

The Trent Ultrafan is the next generational advancement, and RR's targeted EIS is 2026. Carbon fan blades, geared fan, no need for stator vanes, so much, much lighter for its size than its predecessors and competition. The only thing missing is CMC components. Combustors are unlikely to see any generational improvements pretty much ever again, so apart from variable flow to optimize all stages of flight, there's only so much more you'll get out of the Sterling Cycle, maybe another 7-8% in SFC after those techniques are all integrated.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1802
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:23 pm

keesje wrote:
If a viable light aircraft way better than the 737 and slightly better than the NEO, newer PW1000 and LEAPX versions:
- [...]
- Southwest for 200+100,

That goes against a.net knowledge that Southwest will never ever, under any circumstances, order any other airplane than the 737.
[end sarcasm].
 
Geoff1947
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 11:28 pm

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:33 pm

keesje wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
Stitch wrote:

The chances are probably greater now that the Chairman and CEO positions have been divested. The Boeing Board is now likely to be even more "risk averse" than before, so I expect NMA is now unlikely to go forward at this time- especially if the business case is as shaky as some believe.

So this would move NSA (the 737 replacement) to the front of the queue and as they did with the 757 and 767, I could see Boeing tying NSA and NMA together to see if they can build a family that can leverage as much common technology, systems and production techniques as possible to both de-risk the programs compared to doing them separately and to reduce the development and production costs.


:checkmark:
I totally agree,

A paired program (à la 757/767 program) is felt more than ever

:arrow: NMA - 797X / NSA - 808X? ...


Combining with NMA too much will risk becoming inefficient. If it can't do 100 minutes, 180 seats 6 times a day, you might forget e.g. LCC sales.

:point: Now even Richard Aboulafia (on Forbes) seems convinced, even taking into account 737MAX program devaluation an FSA is the best idea longer term. Even though he refers to a middle market plane. Everybody with which OE his hart is.

Yet if they curtail new jet development spending in order to repair their balance sheet and to resume returning cash to shareholders, they will lose market share quickly.... This shift would have big implications for Boeing suppliers, and the entire aviation industry.


Image
Source : https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardabo ... 21xlr-nma/

To narrow it down a bit, 200-230 seats up to 4000NM seems a good target. Getting bigger, more powerfull might disqualify it in terms of efficiency.
Fighting A321s has become an uphill battle. Trying to outmuscle it in terms of capacity & range will disqualify an FSA for overweight / costs.
Shrinkining / lightening up, proved an illusion so far for both Airbus and Boeing designs, when there is serious competition.


Very strange chart. A chart showing orderbook by model would have some meaning. To take an arbitrary view on seat capacity and combine the facts (orders) to (deliberately ?) obfuscate seems disingenuous to me.

Geoff
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:38 pm

sxf24 wrote:
Pray tell, how does a NSA do better than current generation narrowbodies in fuel burn, per seat economics and passenger comfort while using engine and production system technology that can support a rate of 60 per month?

Until you can answer that question, your talk is cheap (and probably intended to troll).


All composites or Al-Li fuselage with composite wings, GTF+ engines (Trent Ultrafan derivative most likely), higher pressurization/humidity, and take a fuselage the dimensions of the A320 and sculpt out some internal room like they did for the 777X.

It's not like Boeing lacks the capital to partner with Mitsubishi on the composites production and buy however many printing machines they need for the CFRP wings.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13998
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: A New 797 Hypothesis? Could this be possible?

Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:08 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
wingnutmn wrote:
This could work if Boeing designs the plane with the intention of using current generation GTF engines, but also build the plane with the knowledge of a NEO coming out shortly after EIS. This is a 6-8 year project and from reading other posts, engine technology is still 10-15 years out for the next generational advancement.

Wingnut

The Trent Ultrafan is the next generational advancement, and RR's targeted EIS is 2026. Carbon fan blades, geared fan, no need for stator vanes, so much, much lighter for its size than its predecessors and competition. The only thing missing is CMC components. Combustors are unlikely to see any generational improvements pretty much ever again, so apart from variable flow to optimize all stages of flight, there's only so much more you'll get out of the Sterling Cycle, maybe another 7-8% in SFC after those techniques are all integrated.


Looking at opportunity to capitalize on new technology is good idea coming from a stable situation when your product is passing a level of maturity in a typical product life cycle. Projecting that on the MAX would be a slightly naive. They have to come up with something good asap to avoid taking further blows. That means coming down to the ground, taking whats available & make the best of it.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
ILNFlyer
Posts: 521
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:59 pm

when the original 757 was developed, was there a -100, or was the smallest the -200?
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1802
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Boeing 797 FSA as 737 replacement gaining ground.

Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:15 pm

ILNFlyer wrote:
when the original 757 was developed, was there a -100, or was the smallest the -200?

Seems it was offered:
By 1978, development studies focused on two variants: a 7N7-100 with seating for 160, and a 7N7-200 with room for over 180 seats. New features included a redesigned wing, under-wing engines, and lighter materials, while the forward fuselage, cockpit layout, and T-tail configuration were retained from the 727. Boeing planned for the aircraft to offer the lowest fuel burn per passenger-kilometer of any narrow-body airliner. On August 31, 1978, Eastern Air Lines and British Airways became the first carriers to publicly commit to the 7N7 when they announced launch orders totaling 40 aircraft for the 7N7-200 version. These orders were signed in March 1979, when Boeing officially designated the aircraft as the 757. The shorter 757-100 did not receive any orders and was dropped; 737s later fulfilled its envisioned role.

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