Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
T4thH
Topic Author
Posts: 1085
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 pm

Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:39 pm

Dear all, please do not mix it with the already announced increase of the MTOW for the A220-300 (this year) and A220-100 (according to my knowledge next year).

This is new.
https://www.flightglobal.com/programmes/airbus-to-hike-maximum-zero-fuel-weight-on-a220/136499.article
 
VV
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:06 pm

T4thH wrote:
Dear all, please do not mix it with the already announced increase of the MTOW for the A220-300 (this year) and A220-100 (according to my knowledge next year).

This is new.
https://www.flightglobal.com/programmes/airbus-to-hike-maximum-zero-fuel-weight-on-a220/136499.article



Are they expecting to carry heavier passengers or are they trying to sell more and more high density configuration or has the empty weight gone up?
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:14 pm

VV wrote:
T4thH wrote:
Dear all, please do not mix it with the already announced increase of the MTOW for the A220-300 (this year) and A220-100 (according to my knowledge next year).

This is new.
https://www.flightglobal.com/programmes/airbus-to-hike-maximum-zero-fuel-weight-on-a220/136499.article



Are they expecting to carry heavier passengers or are they trying to sell more and more high density configuration or has the empty weight gone up?


Doesn't Southwest allow two check-in bags for example? By raising the MZFW the "average passenger" can get heavier thus actually more luggage can be loaded per passenger.
 
VV
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:21 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
VV wrote:
T4thH wrote:
Dear all, please do not mix it with the already announced increase of the MTOW for the A220-300 (this year) and A220-100 (according to my knowledge next year).

This is new.
https://www.flightglobal.com/programmes/airbus-to-hike-maximum-zero-fuel-weight-on-a220/136499.article



Are they expecting to carry heavier passengers or are they trying to sell more and more high density configuration or has the empty weight gone up?


Doesn't Southwest allow two check-in bags for example? By raising the MZFW the "average passenger" can get heavier thus actually more luggage can be loaded per passenger.


Or maybe it is simply because a weight reduction program did not work out well.
 
T4thH
Topic Author
Posts: 1085
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:41 pm

VV wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
VV wrote:


Are they expecting to carry heavier passengers or are they trying to sell more and more high density configuration or has the empty weight gone up?


Doesn't Southwest allow two check-in bags for example? By raising the MZFW the "average passenger" can get heavier thus actually more luggage can be loaded per passenger.


Or maybe it is simply because a weight reduction program did not work out well.


Please note, maximum zero fuel weight increase is optional, it can be additional ordered.

...and I have hoped, someone is able to explain it here/to me, because I do not understand, for what it is needed?...Why someone shall order it, I just do not understand what the benefit will be.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20346
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:42 pm

Airbus has been good at going through prior structural analysis and finding margin, from OP link:
"Airbus is planning a further performance tweak to the A220 family by increasing the maximum zero-fuel weight and maximum landing weight of the twinjet.

A220 programme manager Florent Massou tells FlightGlobal that the change will be introduced as an option on both variants of the aircraft – the -100 and -300 – in 2022, subject to regulatory approval."

I'd rather see a 1.8t decrease in empty weight (best of all worlds).

The A220 has been exceeding promise. Customers, or potential future customers, obviously want more capability. The question is who and how many will they buy. ;)

Airbus claims goal of 20% cost cutting on track:
https://www.flightglobal.com/air-transp ... 64.article

I personally think this is needed for a WN bid. US airlines tend to budget about 10kg more per passenger+bags. 1.8 tons might just be enough to swing a bid. Or perhaps retain a customer.

If the E2 had a 1.8 ton increase in MZFW, MLW, and MTOW, I would celebrate as I think, for larger variants, it would sell more.

Same with say A321, or -10 MAX, or even a widebody.



Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20346
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:48 pm

T4thH wrote:
VV wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:

Doesn't Southwest allow two check-in bags for example? By raising the MZFW the "average passenger" can get heavier thus actually more luggage can be loaded per passenger.


Or maybe it is simply because a weight reduction program did not work out well.


Please note, maximum zero fuel weight increase is optional, it can be additional ordered.

...and I have hoped, someone is able to explain it here/to me, because I do not understand, for what it is needed?...Why someone shall order it, I just do not understand what the benefit will be.

The benefit is higher payload. The A220 is a bit shy in MLW and MZFW for the highest density configurations. The current 18.7 ton maximum payload assumes a lighter fitting budget and catering/crew than I would assume. For that is 116.8kg/pax, plenty. Boeing uses 105 kg/pax for a reason. Add free added bags and go up to 115kg/pax. I'm not saying all 1.8 ton are needed, but when doing an increase, one goes for the maximum that is cheap and doesn't effect schedule.

I know it is splitting hairs, but I assume about 4 kg more per passenger in fittings. I assume 110kg more crew and 80kg more catering. So 17.87t payload. My math has an ULCC wanting 18.4t payload, so a 0.7t of the increase was a minimum, by my math.

I speculate Airbus learned a bunch in the Spirit negotiations and adapted. If I'm wrong and Spirit wanted a ton more, they would have it.

PiPs like this increase sales. To whom is the question.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6302
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:50 pm

T4thH wrote:
VV wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:

Doesn't Southwest allow two check-in bags for example? By raising the MZFW the "average passenger" can get heavier thus actually more luggage can be loaded per passenger.


Or maybe it is simply because a weight reduction program did not work out well.


Please note, maximum zero fuel weight increase is optional, it can be additional ordered.

...and I have hoped, someone is able to explain it here/to me, because I do not understand, for what it is needed?...Why someone shall order it, I just do not understand what the benefit will be.


The difference between ZFW and Operating weight equals payload.
 
VV
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 4:13 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
T4thH wrote:
VV wrote:

Or maybe it is simply because a weight reduction program did not work out well.


Please note, maximum zero fuel weight increase is optional, it can be additional ordered.

...and I have hoped, someone is able to explain it here/to me, because I do not understand, for what it is needed?...Why someone shall order it, I just do not understand what the benefit will be.


The difference between ZFW and Operating weight equals payload.


Either they have OWE issue or they try hard to show higher payload capability ( e.g. high density config) or both.
 
T4thH
Topic Author
Posts: 1085
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 10:13 pm

VV wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
T4thH wrote:

Please note, maximum zero fuel weight increase is optional, it can be additional ordered.

...and I have hoped, someone is able to explain it here/to me, because I do not understand, for what it is needed?...Why someone shall order it, I just do not understand what the benefit will be.


The difference between ZFW and Operating weight equals payload.


Either they have OWE issue or they try hard to show higher payload capability ( e.g. high density config) or both.

OK, than I( think, I know, which airline/s have asked for it; the airlines in the pacific area,, the island hoppers, who will have to carry as much freight as possible additional to the PAX from the islands to the islands. Else, the goods have to be transported by ship, which will be slow, so freight transport will be important for them.

So Air Vanatu will be interested, who have already ordered 2x A220-100 and 2x A220-300.

Air Niugini has also announced interest in the A220 or the E2 family; and they are interested to be the PW 1500/1900 maintenance base for the pacific region. But it seems more likely now, they will chose the E2 as compensation, as they have cancelled the contract for the B737 Max.
https://corporate.southpacificislands.travel/airbus-220-300-visit-sparks-air-niugini-interests/

Pretty sure, the other two airlines in founding in the pacific area, who have already announced their interest in the A220 will be also interested.
1. WF Aviation (Wallis and Futuna Aviation) from Wallis and Futuna; They have selected to order two A220-100, which they want to lease. they are active working, as can be seen on their Facebook page. If they will ever start, is of course a complete another question, I have still some doubts, but who knows...
https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Airline-Company/WF-Aviation-892453231112668/
Other sources:
The story: https://corporate.southpacificislands.t ... om-wallis/
Use a translator.
http://mahina-events.com/wf-aviation-un-projet-qui-donne-de-lespoir/?fbclid=IwAR1aMHqdBhnjb5VQNZacSDdWlUwTAtiKBOgSmwrvnvB_CyWcLCJ5FUyvkN4

2. Air Oceania in founding from New Caledonia.
https://simpleflying.com/air-oceania/
https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/83528-new-caledonias-air-oceania-formally-incorporated
 
TObound
Posts: 783
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:53 pm

All part of the slow and steady progress to the 225. BBD probably had a billion dollars worth of PIPs left on the table to clean up and making the type ready to go further.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20346
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 1:30 am

T4thH wrote:
OK, than I( think, I know, which airline/s have asked for it; the airlines in the pacific area,, the island hoppers, who will have to carry as much freight as possible additional to the PAX from the islands to the islands. Else, the goods have to be transported by ship, which will be slow, so freight transport will be important for them.

So Air Vanatu will be interested, who have already ordered 2x A220-100 and 2x A220-300.

Air Niugini has also announced interest in the A220 or the E2 family; and they are interested to be the PW 1500/1900 maintenance base for the pacific region. But it seems more likely now, they will chose the E2 as compensation, as they have cancelled the contract for the B737 Max.
https://corporate.southpacificislands.travel/airbus-220-300-visit-sparks-air-niugini-interests/

Pretty sure, the other two airlines in founding in the pacific area, who have already announced their interest in the A220 will be also interested.
1. WF Aviation (Wallis and Futuna Aviation) from Wallis and Futuna; They have selected to order two A220-100, which they want to lease. they are active working, as can be seen on their Facebook page. If they will ever start, is of course a complete another question, I have still some doubts, but who knows...
https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Airline-Company/WF-Aviation-892453231112668/
Other sources:
The story: https://corporate.southpacificislands.t ... om-wallis/
Use a translator.
http://mahina-events.com/wf-aviation-un-projet-qui-donne-de-lespoir/?fbclid=IwAR1aMHqdBhnjb5VQNZacSDdWlUwTAtiKBOgSmwrvnvB_CyWcLCJ5FUyvkN4

2. Air Oceania in founding from New Caledonia.
https://simpleflying.com/air-oceania/
https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/83528-new-caledonias-air-oceania-formally-incorporated

Facinating. Knowing about these sales campaigns makes the option make more sense. So in addition to packed to the wall ULCCs, TPAC flights too. I suspect KE too, but only after... errr... Recent panic reducing Eastern Pacific flying. Or LCCs flying to islands.

To win a few small airlines is very worth such a low cost PiP.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13546
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 5:56 am

VV wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
T4thH wrote:

Please note, maximum zero fuel weight increase is optional, it can be additional ordered.

...and I have hoped, someone is able to explain it here/to me, because I do not understand, for what it is needed?...Why someone shall order it, I just do not understand what the benefit will be.


The difference between ZFW and Operating weight equals payload.


Either they have OWE issue or they try hard to show higher payload capability ( e.g. high density config) or both.


If they had anything like an OEW problem we would have known for years, as the frame is in Service for quite a while now with customers increasing orders. This is just Airbus constantly improving its line up as they have done for decades, probably prompted by a specific sales campaign.

lightsaber wrote:
T4thH wrote:
OK, than I( think, I know, which airline/s have asked for it; the airlines in the pacific area,, the island hoppers, who will have to carry as much freight as possible additional to the PAX from the islands to the islands. Else, the goods have to be transported by ship, which will be slow, so freight transport will be important for them.

So Air Vanatu will be interested, who have already ordered 2x A220-100 and 2x A220-300.

Air Niugini has also announced interest in the A220 or the E2 family; and they are interested to be the PW 1500/1900 maintenance base for the pacific region. But it seems more likely now, they will chose the E2 as compensation, as they have cancelled the contract for the B737 Max.
https://corporate.southpacificislands.travel/airbus-220-300-visit-sparks-air-niugini-interests/

Pretty sure, the other two airlines in founding in the pacific area, who have already announced their interest in the A220 will be also interested.
1. WF Aviation (Wallis and Futuna Aviation) from Wallis and Futuna; They have selected to order two A220-100, which they want to lease. they are active working, as can be seen on their Facebook page. If they will ever start, is of course a complete another question, I have still some doubts, but who knows...
https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Airline-Company/WF-Aviation-892453231112668/
Other sources:
The story: https://corporate.southpacificislands.t ... om-wallis/
Use a translator.
http://mahina-events.com/wf-aviation-un-projet-qui-donne-de-lespoir/?fbclid=IwAR1aMHqdBhnjb5VQNZacSDdWlUwTAtiKBOgSmwrvnvB_CyWcLCJ5FUyvkN4

2. Air Oceania in founding from New Caledonia.
https://simpleflying.com/air-oceania/
https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/83528-new-caledonias-air-oceania-formally-incorporated

Facinating. Knowing about these sales campaigns makes the option make more sense. So in addition to packed to the wall ULCCs, TPAC flights too. I suspect KE too, but only after... errr... Recent panic reducing Eastern Pacific flying. Or LCCs flying to islands.

To win a few small airlines is very worth such a low cost PiP.

Lightsaber


Doesn´t adding an ACT in the fuselage also need higher in fuse weight allowance, and without the tank installed that turns simply into higher MZFW? Wasn´t a 3000L ACT in the pipeline? Would go well with 1.8t more list in a not super dense, but heavy cabin with a fully lie flat front.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
CRJ900
Posts: 2391
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 6:29 am

Air Canada has introduced the SpaceFlex aft galley/2 lavs in their A223 (already several videos on youtube showing the tight lavs and reduced galley) so I will imagine that Air France will go for 150 Y slimline seats @ 30 inch pitch with SpaceFlex - perfect for their Euro/North Africa network with variable demand for C/Y and loads of baggage. The extra weight options will come in handy for AF.
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13546
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 7:06 am

CRJ900 wrote:
Air Canada has introduced the SpaceFlex aft galley/2 lavs in their A223 (already several videos on youtube showing the tight lavs and reduced galley) so I will imagine that Air France will go for 150 Y slimline seats @ 30 inch pitch with SpaceFlex - perfect for their Euro/North Africa network with variable demand for C/Y and loads of baggage. The extra weight options will come in handy for AF.


Unless Air Baltic already has SpaceFlex i don´t think you need it for [email protected]".

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
CRJ900
Posts: 2391
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:28 am

tommy1808 wrote:
Unless Air Baltic already has SpaceFlex i don´t think you need it for [email protected]".

best regards
Thomas


Using several videos from youtube as a reference, the airBaltic A223 have only one aft lavatory and 148 seats (row 1AB has been replaced with a large closet/crew storage) and three seats in the front have "not for passenger use" or something like that printed on the seat so that available capacity is 145 seats.
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3615
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 10:57 am

This has European LCC written all over it, as a Y150 configuration becomes more manageable. I also see this being pitched to airlines like IndiGo.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 11:44 am

Ahh, I did an estimate of the weight growth per metre of fuselage added a few months back.

It'll be on a thread somewhere - I think it ended up around 750 kgs per seat row (inc. passengers at 100kg each).

So 1.8T gets you 2 extra seat rows for "free", or if your prepared to sacrifice payload, then 3 extra seat rows with 400 kg payload sacrifice.

Of course, those numbers are rough as sandpaper, but you get the idea.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20346
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 11:54 am

tommy1808 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
T4thH wrote:
OK, than I( think, I know, which airline/s have asked for it; the airlines in the pacific area,, the island hoppers, who will have to carry as much freight as possible additional to the PAX from the islands to the islands. Else, the goods have to be transported by ship, which will be slow, so freight transport will be important for them.

So Air Vanatu will be interested, who have already ordered 2x A220-100 and 2x A220-300.

Air Niugini has also announced interest in the A220 or the E2 family; and they are interested to be the PW 1500/1900 maintenance base for the pacific region. But it seems more likely now, they will chose the E2 as compensation, as they have cancelled the contract for the B737 Max.
https://corporate.southpacificislands.travel/airbus-220-300-visit-sparks-air-niugini-interests/

Pretty sure, the other two airlines in founding in the pacific area, who have already announced their interest in the A220 will be also interested.
1. WF Aviation (Wallis and Futuna Aviation) from Wallis and Futuna; They have selected to order two A220-100, which they want to lease. they are active working, as can be seen on their Facebook page. If they will ever start, is of course a complete another question, I have still some doubts, but who knows...
https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Airline-Company/WF-Aviation-892453231112668/
Other sources:
The story: https://corporate.southpacificislands.t ... om-wallis/
Use a translator.
http://mahina-events.com/wf-aviation-un-projet-qui-donne-de-lespoir/?fbclid=IwAR1aMHqdBhnjb5VQNZacSDdWlUwTAtiKBOgSmwrvnvB_CyWcLCJ5FUyvkN4

2. Air Oceania in founding from New Caledonia.
https://simpleflying.com/air-oceania/
https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/83528-new-caledonias-air-oceania-formally-incorporated

Facinating. Knowing about these sales campaigns makes the option make more sense. So in addition to packed to the wall ULCCs, TPAC flights too. I suspect KE too, but only after... errr... Recent panic reducing Eastern Pacific flying. Or LCCs flying to islands.

To win a few small airlines is very worth such a low cost PiP.

Lightsaber


Doesn´t adding an ACT in the fuselage also need higher in fuse weight allowance, and without the tank installed that turns simply into higher MZFW? Wasn´t a 3000L ACT in the pipeline? Would go well with 1.8t more list in a not super dense, but heavy cabin with a fully lie flat front.

best regards
Thomas

An ACT is another option for this MZFW increase. So another customer base that would want this PiP. However, a very narrow range of customers unless a small additional MTOW increase occurs.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
T4thH
Topic Author
Posts: 1085
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 12:44 pm

lightsaber wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Facinating. Knowing about these sales campaigns makes the option make more sense. So in addition to packed to the wall ULCCs, TPAC flights too. I suspect KE too, but only after... errr... Recent panic reducing Eastern Pacific flying. Or LCCs flying to islands.

To win a few small airlines is very worth such a low cost PiP.

Lightsaber


Doesn´t adding an ACT in the fuselage also need higher in fuse weight allowance, and without the tank installed that turns simply into higher MZFW? Wasn´t a 3000L ACT in the pipeline? Would go well with 1.8t more list in a not super dense, but heavy cabin with a fully lie flat front.

best regards
Thomas

An ACT is another option for this MZFW increase. So another customer base that would want this PiP. However, a very narrow range of customers unless a small additional MTOW increase occurs.

Lightsaber


David Neeleman has had confirmed, that Airbus is working on it (the A220 LR version)...and seems to have promised him, that they will fulfill his wish/dream. And regular, if someone wants to have it and it is possible to do and there is a demand for it, Airbus will do, what they have promised, to make the customer happy.
But we will see this PIP in some years only, in difference to all of the other ongoing and announced PIPs, which will come soon, like: ETOPS 180 (on request by KAL), MTOW increase and extended range (on request of Delta as example, A220-100 in 2021, A220-300 this year) and the now announced MZFW (2021), these are not just "software updates" and use of the "safety/additional" margins, as shown, as not needed for safety e.g.. For a A220 LR version (I will call it only LR version, the XLR will be something without ACT, instead a new tank) or the expected "A220-500 ", there will be much more work by engineers, much testing and changes in the production line needed.
LR/XLR source.
https://aeronewsglobal.com/airbus-a220-300lr-xlr-in-the-pipeline/
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13546
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus to hike maximum zero-fuel weight on A220

Tue Feb 04, 2020 3:52 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
This has European LCC written all over it, as a Y150 configuration becomes more manageable.


Most, if not all, don't bother with cargo and go for a light cabin outfitting. 18.7t should be plenty for them already, even in a dense 160 seat config.

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6

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