pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 12:25 pm

My first topic post :cloudnine:
Do Delta A330NEOs have the 242 ton MTOW offered currently? If so, do they plan on upgrading to the 251 ton MTOW, and retroactively upgrading the current NEOs? Thank you for your insight, experience, and polite corrections.
Last edited by pnut on Sat Oct 26, 2019 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
United857
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:37 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 12:39 pm

All A330neo’s have at minimum 242T MTOW. I think Delta intentionally waited a bit In the production line sequence before taking their first A330neo in order to get 251T.
A319 A320 A321 A333 A343 A346 A388 B712 B733 B737 B738 B739 B744 B748 B752 B764 B772 B77L B77W B788 CRJ2 E145 E17S E190 MD88 MD90
AA AC B6 CA CX CZ DL EK FM HU JL KA LH LX MU NH TK UA US
 
pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:10 pm

Thanks for that info! I would really be excited to see if the current NEOs would be "upgradeable" to the 251t MTOW to provide maximum utility and scheduling flexibility. It seems that Delta is really utilizing the boost in range/payload and fuel economy with its TPAC and TATL flights from SEA. I also wonder if, when more A339s are onboarded, the A33Xs (GE powered -242ton) will be relegated to the A333 (P&W -233ton) routes? AFAIK, the A33X have been mixed in, but do utilize their range capacity on flights such as: LAX-HND, JFK-TLV, and JFK-ATH (which may have been subbed with A333 before). I do love this plane! :hyper:
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
United857
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:37 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:30 pm

I meant to say that I think all DL's A339s are already 251T cuz they purposefully waited a bit longer than originally planned in order to get the extra payload capability.

In terms of routes, even if the A333 has enough range, the fuel savings of the A339 would be more significant the longer the route, so I would not be surprised if the 242T GE A333s get relegated to the shorter routes currently served by the 233T PW A333s. If I recall correctly, below around 1,500nm the A333 is actually still more fuel efficient than the A339 due to being lighter, burning less fuel in the climb (remember altitude is essentially stored potential energy, which means the more mass, the more energy it takes to reach a given altitude).
A319 A320 A321 A333 A343 A346 A388 B712 B733 B737 B738 B739 B744 B748 B752 B764 B772 B77L B77W B788 CRJ2 E145 E17S E190 MD88 MD90
AA AC B6 CA CX CZ DL EK FM HU JL KA LH LX MU NH TK UA US
 
pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:45 pm

Thanks again for the info! I was under the impression that the 251ton MTOW wouldn't be offered until 2020?

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ar-450991/

I'm sure for the current route structure, the 242ton Neo more than suffices, however, I'm sure the 251ton will provide significant margin and cargo benefits and/or allow further inroad into the TPAC arena from SEA, where the Neo seems to be hubbed for now. Would MSP and DTW get NEO TPAC love (lookin' at DTW-NGO here :duck: )?
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 6198
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:51 pm

pnut wrote:
Would MSP and DTW get NEO TPAC love (lookin' at DTW-NGO here :duck: )?


That's a sensible route, but sensibility might get overridden for utilization or base assignment reasons, like 339s concentrated at SEA and 359s at DTW. Even with accelerated deliveries DL is 15-18 months away from having a 339 fleet of ten or more.
 
pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:56 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
pnut wrote:
Would MSP and DTW get NEO TPAC love (lookin' at DTW-NGO here :duck: )?


That's a sensible route, but sensibility might get overridden for utilization or base assignment reasons, like 339s concentrated at SEA and 359s at DTW. Even with accelerated deliveries DL is 15-18 months away from having a 339 fleet of ten or more.


-do you think, hypothetically, the GE A33Xs could handle that route? Or could DL be utilizing the smallest workable plane to match yield with the A332 fleet on this particular route (DTW-NGO)?
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8963
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:05 pm

The current Delta A330-900 are 241 t frames and will most likely stay 241 t frames.

The first A330-900 251 t frame is MSN1967, right out of FAL seen on the 22nd of October still without engines and has to do it´s test campaign before we talk of deliveries of that version.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9735
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:11 pm

United857 wrote:
All A330neo’s have at minimum 242T MTOW. I think Delta intentionally waited a bit In the production line sequence before taking their first A330neo in order to get 251T.

Most of DL’s waiting was because of the Neo delays.

They are currently 242T frames. I’m not sure if they can be upgraded to 251T in the future.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 6198
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:17 pm

pnut wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
pnut wrote:
Would MSP and DTW get NEO TPAC love (lookin' at DTW-NGO here :duck: )?


That's a sensible route, but sensibility might get overridden for utilization or base assignment reasons, like 339s concentrated at SEA and 359s at DTW. Even with accelerated deliveries DL is 15-18 months away from having a 339 fleet of ten or more.


-do you think, hypothetically, the GE A33Xs could handle that route? Or could DL be utilizing the smallest workable plane to match yield with the A332 fleet on this particular route (DTW-NGO)?


DL claims a range of 6,790 statute miles for the 339, 6,536 for the 332, and 5,343 for the 333 (without specifying whether it's the 242T or a lesser MTOW). They certainly can't coax a full 767 that far.

I would guess that DTW-NGO is very auto-related (Toyota!), not leisure, and probably wouldn't see much demand stimulation so it would be hard to fill the extra seats of a 339 at good (for DL) fares.
 
pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:37 pm

Slightly off my own topic (forgive me), however I had a very interesting tidbit of information from an ops manager out of IST when DL flew there. I know it is purely anecdotal and informal, but he stated that there would be a switch from 767 equipment to A330 for a period because of "weight restrictions" on the 767 equipment. This was before the A33X was in the fleet, which led me to think that the 233t A333 P&W fleet had better payload capability at range than the 767 out of IST at the time. Sure enough, the following weeks (for a very brief period), the A333 was sent, before going back to the 767, and eventually the discontinuation of IST altogether.
I do know, the 76T/P fleet, with the 410?k lbs MTOW are pretty long legged, but it suprised me to think the A333 would be any better than those at the far edge of the useful range bracket.
(Btw: IIRC, DL has two flavors of 767-300er, one that is 408Klbs with a blocked D1 seat for pilot rest, and a 410/412Klbs "pacific and african" config with either two D1 seats blocked or an underfloor bunk, mainly used on TPAC out of SEA and LOS/ACC out of ATL when it sees 767 service. These regularly fly block times upward of 12-13+ hrs, whereas the 408k variants primarly stay TATL, longest being SEA/PDX/SLC-CDG/AMS/LHR)
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6617
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 7:02 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
The first A330-900 251 t frame is MSN1967, right out of FAL seen on the 22nd of October still without engines and has to do it´s test campaign before we talk of deliveries of that version.

I could have sworn I had seen it in the background with engines on in a video at Blagnac...or was it the 242t demo frame..... :confused:

"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8963
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 7:23 pm

Devilfish wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
The first A330-900 251 t frame is MSN1967, right out of FAL seen on the 22nd of October still without engines and has to do it´s test campaign before we talk of deliveries of that version.

I could have sworn I had seen it in the background with engines on in a video at Blagnac...or was it the 242t demo frame..... :confused:



There are still both one A330-941 and the A330-841 busy doing test flights.

That was October the 13th:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... -KHtkoN-w0
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9735
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 7:58 pm

Devilfish wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
The first A330-900 251 t frame is MSN1967, right out of FAL seen on the 22nd of October still without engines and has to do it´s test campaign before we talk of deliveries of that version.

I could have sworn I had seen it in the background with engines on in a video at Blagnac...or was it the 242t demo frame..... :confused:


That A339 is F-WTTE (MSN1813) which is currently stored, obvious based on the lack of engines. It was the 2nd Neo built, and presumably is awaiting refurbishment and/or a customer for the frame.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6617
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 10:34 pm

Thank you both for the clarification. BTW...regarding this.....

mjoelnir wrote:
and the A330-841 busy doing test flights


.....There was a comment in the A330neo P&D thread that parts had arrived for KU's first A338. I find it odd since there was no mention of it on Airbus' site, and U7's A338s were supposedly firmed up and scheduled for delivery within this year, ahead of KU's. Unless a milestone payment was missed and the order for two is now uncertain...or A is being extra meticulous during testing in anticipation of tighter scrutiny at certification :?:
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8963
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sat Oct 26, 2019 11:31 pm

Devilfish wrote:
Thank you both for the clarification. BTW...regarding this.....

mjoelnir wrote:
and the A330-841 busy doing test flights


.....There was a comment in the A330neo P&D thread that parts had arrived for KU's first A338. I find it odd since there was no mention of it on Airbus' site, and U7's A338s were supposedly firmed up and scheduled for delivery within this year, ahead of KU's. Unless a milestone payment was missed and the order for two is now uncertain...or A is being extra meticulous during testing in anticipation of tighter scrutiny at certification :?:


I think A330-800 certification is imminent. But Airbus usually keeps on flying test flights right past having done all certification flights. They start testing possible improvements right away.

The first frame for Kuwait, MSN1964, is in the FAL.
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1029
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 9:33 am

Devilfish wrote:
Thank you both for the clarification. BTW...regarding this.....
mjoelnir wrote:
and the A330-841 busy doing test flights

.....There was a comment in the A330neo P&D thread that parts had arrived for KU's first A338. I find it odd since there was no mention of it on Airbus' site, and U7's A338s were supposedly firmed up and scheduled for delivery within this year, ahead of KU's. Unless a milestone payment was missed and the order for two is now uncertain...or A is being extra meticulous during testing in anticipation of tighter scrutiny at certification :?:

RR may have something to do about this - deliveries of the Trent 7000 has been slow and may have caused delays in delivery.
 
sf260
Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:59 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 11:42 am

As far as I am aware, the 251t MTOW option includes some physical reinforcements in the wing & wing box. It will be very difficult to go from 242t to 251t version (read: impossible without an Airbus modification SB, which is currently not in the planning as it will be very complicated to do this after production).

Additionally, the 251t MTOW A330 also will have an improved landing gear, requiring an overhaul every 12Y, up from 10Y.

Do we already know which airlines have ordered this 251t variant? Airbus wouldn't develop it if the demand isn't there.
 
SQ317
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:49 pm

sf260 wrote:
As far as I am aware, the 251t MTOW option includes some physical reinforcements in the wing & wing box. It will be very difficult to go from 242t to 251t version (read: impossible without an Airbus modification SB, which is currently not in the planning as it will be very complicated to do this after production).

Additionally, the 251t MTOW A330 also will have an improved landing gear, requiring an overhaul every 12Y, up from 10Y.

Do we already know which airlines have ordered this 251t variant? Airbus wouldn't develop it if the demand isn't there.


I think AirAsia X were keen so it would have the payload-range for Europe
 
NW747-400
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 1999 4:42 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:11 pm

pnut wrote:
(Btw: IIRC, DL has two flavors of 767-300er, one that is 408Klbs with a blocked D1 seat for pilot rest, and a 410/412Klbs "pacific and african" config with either two D1 seats blocked or an underfloor bunk, mainly used on TPAC out of SEA and LOS/ACC out of ATL when it sees 767 service. These regularly fly block times upward of 12-13+ hrs, whereas the 408k variants primarly stay TATL, longest being SEA/PDX/SLC-CDG/AMS/LHR)


There are several flavors of B76W at DL. I like to call it the mix and match fleet:

76L:
4 door config
36J seating config
PW4000 or CF6 powered
408k or 412k MTOW
No lower lobe pilot rest

76T:
4 door config
36J seating config
All CF6 powered
All 412k MTOW
Lower lobe pilot rest installed

76Z (most common):
4 or 6 door config
26J seating config
PW4000 or CF6 powered
408k or 412k MTOW
No lower lobe pilot rest

The 6 door versions are hand-me-downs from Gulf Air, plus one frame built for Continental that was never delivered and made its way to Delta (N394DL).

76T’s were the Africa / “deep Asia” frames. Those flights required 4 pilot crews, but most of that flying has transitioned to the A330 fleet and the 76T is now used interchangeably with the 76L because they share the same cabin seating configuration.
 
pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 10:13 pm

NW747-400 wrote:
pnut wrote:
(Btw: IIRC, DL has two flavors of 767-300er, one that is 408Klbs with a blocked D1 seat for pilot rest, and a 410/412Klbs "pacific and african" config with either two D1 seats blocked or an underfloor bunk, mainly used on TPAC out of SEA and LOS/ACC out of ATL when it sees 767 service. These regularly fly block times upward of 12-13+ hrs, whereas the 408k variants primarly stay TATL, longest being SEA/PDX/SLC-CDG/AMS/LHR)


There are several flavors of B76W at DL. I like to call it the mix and match fleet:

76L:
4 door config
36J seating config
PW4000 or CF6 powered
408k or 412k MTOW
No lower lobe pilot rest

76T:
4 door config
36J seating config
All CF6 powered
All 412k MTOW
Lower lobe pilot rest installed

76Z (most common):
4 or 6 door config
26J seating config
PW4000 or CF6 powered
408k or 412k MTOW
No lower lobe pilot rest

The 6 door versions are hand-me-downs from Gulf Air, plus one frame built for Continental that was never delivered and made its way to Delta (N394DL).

76T’s were the Africa / “deep Asia” frames. Those flights required 4 pilot crews, but most of that flying has transitioned to the A330 fleet and the 76T is now used interchangeably with the 76L because they share the same cabin seating configuration.


Thanks for the great info! I love to learn about airline subfleets within subfleets and their intended missions! Great post! :wave:
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 10:23 pm

sf260 wrote:
As far as I am aware, the 251t MTOW option includes some physical reinforcements in the wing & wing box. It will be very difficult to go from 242t to 251t version (read: impossible without an Airbus modification SB, which is currently not in the planning as it will be very complicated to do this after production).

Additionally, the 251t MTOW A330 also will have an improved landing gear, requiring an overhaul every 12Y, up from 10Y.

Do we already know which airlines have ordered this 251t variant? Airbus wouldn't develop it if the demand isn't there.


I guess DL wouldn't be a stranger to having a non-uniform A330 fleet. They must have needed the NEO fast. This will make, IIRC, 5 types of A330 with 3 types of engines at DL: A339/251T/T7000, A339/242T/T7000, A33X/CF-6, A333/PW4000, A332/PW4000. Any inherent complexities to fleet planning y'all see, other than the obvious weight and fuel capabilities? Any reason they couldn't have leased used -CEOs (a la AC/VA/TAP) until a uniform NEO arrived? The A33X surely could have handled the PAC routes from SEA until 251T arrived?
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8963
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 10:37 pm

pnut wrote:
sf260 wrote:
As far as I am aware, the 251t MTOW option includes some physical reinforcements in the wing & wing box. It will be very difficult to go from 242t to 251t version (read: impossible without an Airbus modification SB, which is currently not in the planning as it will be very complicated to do this after production).

Additionally, the 251t MTOW A330 also will have an improved landing gear, requiring an overhaul every 12Y, up from 10Y.

Do we already know which airlines have ordered this 251t variant? Airbus wouldn't develop it if the demand isn't there.


I guess DL wouldn't be a stranger to having a non-uniform A330 fleet. They must have needed the NEO fast. This will make, IIRC, 5 types of A330 with 3 types of engines at DL: A339/251T/T7000, A339/242T/T7000, A33X/CF-6, A333/PW4000, A332/PW4000. Any inherent complexities to fleet planning y'all see, other than the obvious weight and fuel capabilities? Any reason they couldn't have leased used -CEOs (a la AC/VA/TAP) until a uniform NEO arrived? The A33X surely could have handled the PAC routes from SEA until 251T arrived?


I assume for what the main occupation of the A330-900 will be, the 241 t version is plenty. Perhaps they will take the 251 t version with crew rest, as they will need that to use the full capabilities of having 9 t more fuel.
 
Jimothy
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:49 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 11:02 pm

Purely hypothetical question: could Delta’s A332 or A339 (242t or 251t variant) fly Austin-Tokyo/Seoul?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8963
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Sun Oct 27, 2019 11:53 pm

Jimothy wrote:
Purely hypothetical question: could Delta’s A332 or A339 (242t or 251t variant) fly Austin-Tokyo/Seoul?


gcmap:
AUS - NRT 5,680 nm
AUS - ICN 6,061 nm

range A330-200 7,250 nm
range A330-900 242 t 6.490 nm
range A330-900 251 t 7,230 nm

I assume flying west AUS to ICN could be tight for the A330-900 241 t with a full load.
 
pnut
Topic Author
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Mon Oct 28, 2019 12:09 am

mjoelnir wrote:
pnut wrote:
sf260 wrote:
As far as I am aware, the 251t MTOW option includes some physical reinforcements in the wing & wing box. It will be very difficult to go from 242t to 251t version (read: impossible without an Airbus modification SB, which is currently not in the planning as it will be very complicated to do this after production).

Additionally, the 251t MTOW A330 also will have an improved landing gear, requiring an overhaul every 12Y, up from 10Y.

Do we already know which airlines have ordered this 251t variant? Airbus wouldn't develop it if the demand isn't there.


I guess DL wouldn't be a stranger to having a non-uniform A330 fleet. They must have needed the NEO fast. This will make, IIRC, 5 types of A330 with 3 types of engines at DL: A339/251T/T7000, A339/242T/T7000, A33X/CF-6, A333/PW4000, A332/PW4000. Any inherent complexities to fleet planning y'all see, other than the obvious weight and fuel capabilities? Any reason they couldn't have leased used -CEOs (a la AC/VA/TAP) until a uniform NEO arrived? The A33X surely could have handled the PAC routes from SEA until 251T arrived?


I assume for what the main occupation of the A330-900 will be, the 241 t version is plenty. Perhaps they will take the 251 t version with crew rest, as they will need that to use the full capabilities of having 9 t more fuel.


Thanks for the info! Is there a new type of crew rest that is available on the NEO? (Compared to the Lower Deck Mobile Crew Rest - A33X/A333- both Pilot and F/A; Aft Bulk Cargo Crew Rest- A332 -both Pilot and F/A) I wasn't sure if there was any space for overhead crew rest, and rumor was that the aft-cockpit crew rest option didn't satisfy some contractual space issues with pilots. IIRC, AA has the aft of cockpit bunk setup for pilots on their A332, at least, PLUS a blocked First class seat.
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12670
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Mon Oct 28, 2019 12:48 am

mjoelnir wrote:
Jimothy wrote:
Purely hypothetical question: could Delta’s A332 or A339 (242t or 251t variant) fly Austin-Tokyo/Seoul?


gcmap:
AUS - NRT 5,680 nm
AUS - ICN 6,061 nm

range A330-200 7,250 nm
range A330-900 242 t 6.490 nm
range A330-900 251 t 7,230 nm

I assume flying west AUS to ICN could be tight for the A330-900 241 t with a full load.

DL's A332 are well below the maximum TOW offered, and don't have the range described above. The longest routes they've flown are DTW-PEK and SEA-HKG, the latter being almost the exact same distance as AUS-NRT, and both being well shorter than AUS-ICN.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6617
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Delta A330NEO MTOW Question

Thu Oct 31, 2019 8:40 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
I think A330-800 certification is imminent. But Airbus usually keeps on flying test flights right past having done all certification flights. They start testing possible improvements right away.

Now clarified to be..... :arrow: .....

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-461887/
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield

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