UAL New Fleet Purchase

marcouscg · Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:55 am

There is a new article that came out with an announcement of United Airlines has decided to purchase 150 new Aircraft between $150 Million to $300 Million Dollars. Though the official details about which aircraft has not been made? Does anyone have more Information on which Aircraft and how many precise are planned?

In June 2009, United asked manufacturers Boeing and Airbus to submit proposals to sell the airline up to 150 jets in a winner-take-all competition. United is taking advantage of declining sales at both plane makers to reap steep price reductions; the large size of this prospective order will also influence pricing.[74] The Wall Street Journal cited the average ages of four types of jets in United's fleet as follows:

Boeing 747 – 13 years
Boeing 777 – 10 years
Boeing 767 – 14 years
Boeing 757 – 17 years

Stitch · Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:02 am

Reuters states it is a narrowbody order: up to 130 next generation (A320neo/737MAX) and up to 50 current generation (A320/737NG).

davescj · Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:17 am

This will be interesting as PMUA was mostly Airbus narrow bodies and PMCO was all Boeing. Here's for a hope for a return to a Boeing fleet!

Dave

ual777 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:09 am

Quoting davescj (Reply 2):
This will be interesting as PMUA was mostly Airbus narrow bodies and PMCO was all Boeing. Here's for a hope for a return to a Boeing fleet!

I hope not! The A320 is the better aircraft. Its roomier, quieter, and more modern. The overhead panel on the 73 is straight out of the 1960s.

BMIFlyer · Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:19 am

I could see them doing a mixed order similar to what AA did, seeing as the 2 types (737 family and A320 family) have their own advantages, are good for some routes but not others (performance) and also fit into certain markets but not others (capacity).

This is just my opinion.

Lee

Adam T. · Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:23 am

I have to agree with ual777 - from a passenger perspective I much prefer the A320 family as opposed to the 737s for the reasons that it is roomier - on my recent trips my Air Canada A320 flight was much more comfortable than my Continental 737 flight to give an example. Just my opinion though.

United787 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:59 am

I see them adding more 739ER to start retiring some of the older PMUA 752s, it wouldn't make sense to add the A321 at this point since they aren't currently in the fleet and the range will be getting better on them. I don't see any current generation A320s being ordered since the newest one is already 9 years old.

As for the next generation, I think it is a toss up. I am pissed Boeing isn't taking this opportunity to produce an all new narrowbody given that this could be an opportunity to leap frog Airbus. Airbus is too busy on the A350 to start another all new aircraft but Boeing is just finishing up the 788 and 748...the 749 is just a stretch so...

Stitch · Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:04 am

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 4):
I could see them doing a mixed order similar to what AA did...

Agreed, both for delivery position availability and because they have a large enough pool of both to leverage new additions of each.

[Edited 2011-11-30 20:04:39]

qfa787380 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:13 am

Quoting ual777 (Reply 3):
I hope not! The A320 is the better aircraft. Its roomier, quieter, and more modern. The overhead panel on the 73 is straight out of the 1960s.

Well you haven't flown on a 737NG with the new Sky interior then!

cruiseshipcrew · Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:35 am

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 8):
Well you haven't flown on a 737NG with the new Sky interior then!

You beat me to it! The new 737 sky interiors are the most modern, updated interior of any narrow body aircraft on the market.

N62NA · Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:37 am

Quoting Marcouscg (Thread starter):
United Airlines has decided to purchase 150 new Aircraft between $150 Million to $300 Million Dollars.

Wow, that would be quite a deal. Each aircraft costing $1 million to $2 million.

atct · Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:39 am

Ive flown the new 737-900ER with the Sky interior...nothing better than the current Airbus or old 737 in my opinion. The overhead didnt like my rollaboard very much and the coach seat is still a coach seat. That being said it was SEA-IAH in 1A and the lighting was cool...though I slept through most of the flight.

Personally I hope to see a 737 order.

ATCT

laca773 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:06 am

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 8):

Well you haven't flown on a 737NG with the new Sky interior then!

Boeing really did do a great job updating and modernizing the 737NGs with the Sky Interiors. It's quite a job to do and is only available on new build a/c. 737NG already in service can't be modified.

I think we will see UA go with a sizable order of 739ERs since PMCO seems happy with them and they have worked well on routes that used to be flown mainly with 757s. The 739ERs (is the coding for it 73J?) will never be a full or an equal replacement for the 757 nor will the A321, which I feel many people think these two a/c are just enlarged and do not have strengthened wings, heavier, fuselage, modified landing gears and etc...

I do think it's going to be interesting to see what UA goes with in the 125 seat a/c thinking about the 73G & the A319. The 73G & A319 have good performance for airports where they have field performance challenges, (think MEX, BOG, the majority of Central America as well as the likes of SNA, BUR etc.) where the A320/73Hs have performance and payload restrictions. We all know how happy CO is with their 73H fleet. I guess it will come down to who offers the better deal.

Burkhard · Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:16 am

Quoting Marcouscg (Thread starter):
United is taking advantage of declining sales at both plane makers to reap steep price reductions

On which planat does the writer of such a nonsense live? A and B have record sales, and are mostly booked out for a decade - they can take record prices for delveries before 2020.

UAL777UK · Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:42 am

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 13):
On which planat does the writer of such a nonsense live? A and B have record sales, and are mostly booked out for a decade - they can take record prices for delveries before 2020.

I had to laugh at this as well, what complte nonsense.

I personally think it will be a split sale between A & B, but can we completely write of the C Series?

laca773 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:13 pm

Quoting ual777uk (Reply 14):
I had to laugh at this as well, what complte nonsense.

I personally think it will be a split sale between A & B, but can we completely write of the C Series?

Doesn't UA need a 100 seat a/c way sooner than when the C Series will be available to start scheduled passenger service?
I think we'll see UA go with the E90 if they finally decide they need to purchase a 100 seat a/c to join their fleet.

VC10er · Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:32 pm

I happen to like both very much. A "new" 737 is quite nice on the inside and a vast improvement. But the A320 has been a better airplane for the pax from the day it rolled off the line. So either would be ok with me. My primary issue is a silly one: I think an A320+21 is a much nicer looking airplane from the "outside"- she is a much more beautiful aircraft IMHO! I often prefer a Boeing plane's aesthetics like a 777 over an A330 and the 787 rocks, I even love the look of a 757. Whenever I look at a 737 she just looks old. Even a new one. I see a 707 or 727 (planes I love) but a friend of mine said yesterday at the airport (a friend who is a great designer but knows nothing about airplanes) said that a 737 looks like a "fat sparrow" and now I will never see anything else but a fat sparrow. I think that part of the A320 is her looks. Boeing should redesign the nose to look more like the 787 or a E190. I can't imagine they will mess with a nose cone and flight deck windows that seem to be perfect aerodynamically. There have been 7000 with that profile. But she does look like a fat sparrow!

I know nothing but if they go with all 737's won't that make their current A320's seem like a small subfleet in the giant fleet? If they go all A320 it gives them a nice mix. But, what do I know?

delta2ual · Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:37 pm

Quoting atct (Reply 11):
The overhead didnt like my rollaboard very much

What do you mean? Either your carry-on fits or it doesn't. If it doesn't-then it's not a carry-on and should be checked.

flash330 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:14 pm

How much does the decision to refurbish all of the current a320 aircraft factor into this? Can't see them refurbishing 150 odd aircraft unless they knew they were going to be an important part of the narrowbody fleet going forward

hannahpa · Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:27 pm

Quoting Marcouscg (Thread starter):
Boeing 747 – 13 years
Boeing 777 – 10 years
Boeing 767 – 14 years
Boeing 757 – 17 years

According to Airfleets.net:

747 avg age: 16.5 years
777 avg age: 12.4 years
767 avg age: 15.2 years
757 avg age: 17.7 years

Let's get the right info here......

KLASM83 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:28 pm

Quoting laca773 (Reply 12):
737NG already in service can't be modified.

Indeed. But, as usual, Heath Techna can supply a retrofit kit that pretty closely emulates the Sky Interior. It seems that every time Boeing releases a new cabin interior, HT is right behind them on a retrofit kit for a similar-looking one.

I am sure UA would probably not spring to make all their eligible Boeing NB fleet have this interior, but it would be interesting to see if they did.

Rdh3e · Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:39 pm

Quoting hannahpa (Reply 19):
Let's get the right info here......

He prefaced by saying that that was quoted in the article. Not to mention that those differences aren't really relevant to the discussion.

Quoting ual777 (Reply 3):
I hope not! The A320 is the better aircraft. Its roomier, quieter, and more modern. The overhead panel on the 73 is straight out of the 1960s.

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 8):
Well you haven't flown on a 737NG with the new Sky interior then!

I haven't flow on the new Sky Interior, but the s-UA Airbus fleet is more comfortable in almost all aspects than the s-CO Boeing 73's.

boilerla · Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:45 pm

Article here:
http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1322001384.html

doesn't mention the C-Series. Also says that the order will be for at least 50 of the existing generation of products, and up to 130 next generation narrowbody. That small of an order doesn't necessarily have to be split, especially since the 50 existing would be available for delivery next year.

This is obviously not for growth given Smisek's comments on the US domestic route network, so I imagine the bulk of this order will be to replace the non-TATL 757 fleet. Combined UA flies over 130 752s, right around the size of this order. The obvious replacements are the 739ER and A321, but doesn't fly the A321, and PMCO had 86 NGs on order. Leads me to believe this will be an order of 40-50 more 739ERs for immediate delivery with the rest being a MAX order. Wild guesses are fun

Would like to see a C-Series order to replace the 20 or so 735s plus replace some RJ flying, but I can't find anything online that mentions anybody but Boeing & Airbus being in the running. I'd love to be wrong though. They have already begun parking the 735s without a successor lined up so those routes will have to be upguaged to a 73G or 319.

joeljack · Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:55 pm

Quoting boilerla (Reply 22):
The obvious replacements are the 739ER and A321, but doesn't fly the A321, and PMCO had 86 NGs on order. Leads me to believe this will be an order of 40-50 more 739ERs for immediate delivery with the rest being a MAX order. Wild guesses are fun

This just makes my stomach turn as a UA elite. I absolutely love the 757 and avoid the 738 and 739 like the plague. I hate those things. I'll even book a CR7 or E170 over those 737's if possible. It's not a comparable aircraft in my book at all. The mid-cabin entrance with first left and coach right makes it the best narrowbody aircraft ever made. Many many additional reasons too...just not time to go into right now. This just sucks.

on a side note, I don't know anything about the A321, does that have a mid-cabin door? I do like the airbus' too even with a front door...I should probably reserve comment on the 321 until I've been in one.

kgaiflyer · Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:33 pm

Quoting joeljack (Reply 23):
This just makes my stomach turn as a UA elite. I absolutely love the 757 and avoid the 738 and 739 like the plague. I hate those things. I'll even book a CR7 or E170 over those 737's if possible. It's not a comparable aircraft in my book at all. The mid-cabin entrance with first left and coach right makes it the best narrowbody aircraft ever made. Many many additional reasons too...just not time to go into right now. This just sucks.

In a year, I fly UA and CO equally (try getting to ELP on UA or GEG on CO). So it amuses me when I hear "If it isn't Boeing, I'm not going" or "Airbus means no fuss."

It's a bloody airplane, people -- it's not a girlfriend.

Incidently, I've flown 738s with lousy seat pitch (WS for instance) and 320s with lousy seat pitch (AF for instance) . The lack of legroom and comfort is the fault of the airline and not the airplane.

[Edited 2011-12-01 08:34:57]

ual777 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:23 pm

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 8):

Well you haven't flown on a 737NG with the new Sky interior then!

I have, but I am also speaking from a pilot perspective as well.

Quoting rdh3e (Reply 21):

I haven't flow on the new Sky Interior, but the s-UA Airbus fleet is more comfortable in almost all aspects than the s-CO Boeing 73's.

The Sky interior is nice, but the CO seats are uncomfortable. They need to switch to the s-UA seats.

joeljack · Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:05 pm

Quoting ual777 (Reply 25):
The Sky interior is nice, but the CO seats are uncomfortable. They need to switch to the s-UA seats.

100% agree! Those CO seats are terrible in both first and coach. The reason my dad starting flying UA to begin with 20 years ago was the seats and it's still the same way. My dad's decision to fly UA way back when has brought him, his entire sales force and family to all fly UA almost 100% of the time and that's still true to this day. My dad won't fly on a CO metal plane, he did two roundtrips earlier this year on CO and boy did he complain to me about those seats. He buys his tickets through a travel agent and the agent knows only to send him through DEN or ORD vs IAH or EWR.

Interesting to note, when flying to EWR from OMA, he won't even take the ERJ's nonstop, he instead takes flights on UA through ORD so that he can get UA seats and first class. I do the same thing where I can, but don't have as deep as pockets as him.

Revelation · Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:16 pm

Quoting ual777 (Reply 3):
The overhead panel on the 73 is straight out of the 1960s.

You say that like it's a bad thing!

Signed,
Superfly

LOWS · Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:41 pm

Quoting joeljack (Reply 23):
on a side note, I don't know anything about the A321, does that have a mid-cabin door? I do like the airbus' too even with a front door...I should probably reserve comment on the 321 until I've been in one.

No, the A321s at LH and OS use the main (first) door. Of course, we have a different standard for Business on Domestic and IntraEuropean flights than in the US on seating.

gigneil · Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:48 pm

Quoting delta2ual (Reply 17):
What do you mean? Either your carry-on fits or it doesn't. If it doesn't-then it's not a carry-on and should be checked.

What crap. Some aircraft have awful bins, and some do not. My carryon fits lovely along the outside of a 767 but barely at all along the inside, and some 737s have bins in which my Macbook Air wouldn't fit in.

The Airbus bins at United fit a lot of rollaboard bags better than the 737 bins.

Quoting rdh3e (Reply 21):
I haven't flow on the new Sky Interior, but the s-UA Airbus fleet is more comfortable in almost all aspects than the s-CO Boeing 73's.

In every aspect period. You can't get past the seat belonging in an episode of the Flintstones.

NS

ourboeing · Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:06 pm

The only airbus fleet that they have is the old A319-20s and everything else is Boeing.

Won't it be cost effective for them to stick to one manufacturer?

mauriceb · Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:24 pm

Quoting OURBOEING (Reply 30):
The only airbus fleet that they have is the old A319-20s and everything else is Boeing.Won't it be cost effective for them to stick to one manufacturer?

They have A320s aswell, the combined airbus fleet is like 150+ frames, + 25 A350's on order... that is more than the total combined fleet of most random airlines... so u really cant say ''stick to one manufacturer''

But than again, youre name is "OURBOEING", so i can understand youre subjectivenes...

gigneil · Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:28 pm

Quoting OURBOEING (Reply 30):
Won't it be cost effective for them to stick to one manufacturer?

No. The commonality of a fleet of that size can be driven down by maintaining aggressive negotiations between the two manufacturers.

Plus, with the upcoming planes having less in common, this is a good opportunity to decide if they want the psuedo-nextgen platforms.

NS

bobnwa · Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:34 pm

Quoting OURBOEING (Reply 30):

Quoting OURBOEING (Reply 30):
The only airbus fleet that they have is the old A319-20s and everything else is Boeing.

Won't it be cost effective for them to stick to one manufacturer?

I don't see how sticking with one manufacturer would result in being cost effective. I would think just the opposite

Stitch · Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:52 pm

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 33):
I don't see how sticking with one manufacturer would result in being cost effective. I would think just the opposite.

Of the top of my head I can see savings being realized in things like a single crew pool, a single maintenance and spars pool and the ability to work "volume deals" on things like financing and insurance.

windy95 · Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:11 pm

Quoting davescj (Reply 2):
. Here's for a hope for a return to a Boeing fleet!

You have never done a heavy check on a 737 have you? There is nothing next generation about the NG or the MAX. Same tired old airframe.

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 8):
The overhead panel on the 73 is straight out of the 1960s.

Well you haven't flown on a 737NG with the new Sky interior then!

Pretty interior but he was talking about the Cockpit overhead. Still original design in the cockpit except for some new glass on the NG. Otherwise the A320 is way ahead. I am talking strickly from an technicians point of view. The 737 needs to be totally redone. With the NG they put lipstick on a pig and tried to pass it off a something futuristic. It is not. When will we see fly by wire on a Boeing narrow body?

Rdh3e · Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:13 pm

Quoting windy95 (Reply 35):
Pretty interior but he was talking about the Cockpit overhead. Still original design in the cockpit except for some new glass on the NG. Otherwise the A320 is way ahead. I am talking strickly from an technicians point of view. The 737 needs to be totally redone. With the NG they put lipstick on a pig and tried to pass it off a something futuristic. It is not. When will we see fly by wire on a Boeing narrow body?

I think part of the problem for Boeing is they needed to keep so much the same to convince the FAA to keep the same type rating in order to sell customers on the "training savings" of not switching to Airbus that they weren't really able to update the cockpit as much as they'd like to.

thebry · Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:19 pm

Quoting N62NA (Reply 10):
Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 8):
Well you haven't flown on a 737NG with the new Sky interior then!

You beat me to it! The new 737 sky interiors are the most modern, updated interior of any narrow body aircraft on the market.

Exactly! I had the benefit of flying on one of AAs new 738s with the new Boeing Sky Interior just last week (DFW - SFO). The new bins make the cabin feel a lot roomier, and the new LED lighting is just awesome -- very soothing. Another really nice (but subtle) feature I noticed was that the bins are black on the inside, so even when they're open, there's the perception of increased vertical space. The new hinged latch (taken right from the 787) is pretty trick too. Overall, they really nailed the details.

Quoting delta2ual (Reply 17):
Quoting atct (Reply 11):
The overhead didnt like my rollaboard very much

What do you mean? Either your carry-on fits or it doesn't. If it doesn't-then it's not a carry-on and should be checked.

Agreed. The new bins are absolutely huge, and can accommodate large hand luggage wheels first. I was surprised at how much more luggage fit given the new design.

captainstefan · Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:22 pm

Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 24):
The lack of legroom and comfort is the fault of the airline and not the airplane.

The A320 is approximately 5" wider on the inside than the 737 - legroom isn't necessarily the issue, width of the seats is.

TWA772LR · Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:37 pm

Love the UA A320s. Flew on from ORD-IAH in August and it just killed CO's 737s in comfort. However, if CO could change the seats from the current ones to the ones on the Airbus, it would be the greatest thing ever! Also on the A320, the condensation coming out of the ac vents was a cool effect.

boilerla · Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:38 pm

The 739ER has an option for a rear door but no airline chooses to order it. It's only needed if you have more than 186 seats, which AFAIK is why the 757 has one, because it can be easily configured to have that many seats (although UA's are just shy).
739ER Extra Door..... What Airlines Use It? (by rj777 Sep 19 2011 in Civil Aviation)

The 757 is a nice plane, but it's stupidly ineffecient these days and some of UA's are over 20 years old. With DL and AA getting rid of theirs, UA would be competitively disadvantaged unless they replaced them ASAP.

My flight last night on a UA 757 had a broken overhead monitor and my 1st class seat had what looked like a whiteout stain on it, so I'd be very happy to see a 739 with DirecTV & WiFi replacing my LAX-ORD runs.

kgaiflyer · Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:08 pm

Quoting joeljack (Reply 26):
100% agree! Those CO seats are terrible in both first and coach

CO and UA don't manufacture seats.

Are you speaking of the B/E Aerospace seats, the Koito seats, the Thompson-Aero seats, the Weber seats, or something else?

[Edited 2011-12-01 14:51:24]

kgaiflyer · Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:20 pm

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 38):
legroom isn't necessarily the issue

Oh no?

Unless (as on WS ) someone reclines their seat requiring you to splay your legs.

cubastar · Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:55 pm

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 38):
The A320 is approximately 5" wider on the inside than the 737 - legroom isn't necessarily the issue, width of the seats is.

Let's see.......5 more inches of cabin width, spread across 6 coach seats. Believe that comes to about .833 of an inch more for each of the 6 rears that will sit in them. (or 2.116 cm for each seat, if I can still calculate) Seriously, I don't believe that I would notice the difference.

captainstefan · Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:43 am

Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 42):
Unless (as on WS ) someone reclines their seat requiring you to splay your legs.

Sorry, I was mentioning the post i replied to - seat pitch is much more controllable by individual operators than the width is.

Quoting cubastar (Reply 44):
Seriously, I don't believe that I would notice the difference.

Every little bit counts to me. That's enough room to stow (read: hide from FAs) my point-and-shoot during deparutre

ourboeing · Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:47 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 34):
Of the top of my head I can see savings being realized in things like a single crew pool, a single maintenance and spars pool and the ability to work "volume deals" on things like financing and insurance.

Very well summarized!

Southwest is the biggest example of that model.

liftsifter · Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:57 pm

If United chooses to go with the 73MAX then they reall will have to go with the sky interior. Which is verryy costly.

tommy767 · Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:59 pm

Quoting joeljack (Reply 23):
This just makes my stomach turn as a UA elite. I absolutely love the 757 and avoid the 738 and 739 like the plague. I hate those things. I'll even book a CR7 or E170 over those 737's if possible. It's not a comparable aircraft in my book at all. The mid-cabin entrance with first left and coach right makes it the best narrowbody aircraft ever made. Many many additional reasons too...just not time to go into right now. This just sucks.

The CO 737s will be getting E+ so that will help in the long run. Otherwise I completely agree with you. The CO 737s are terribly uncomfortable in Y. AA and DL have way more comfortable 737s. I took a CO 737-700 on EWR-LAX in 2005 and there wasn't even enough room to open a laptop without it hitting the seat in front of me. Not a fun flight.

UA's A32S and 757s are much more comfortable.

Quoting joeljack (Reply 26):
Interesting to note, when flying to EWR from OMA, he won't even take the ERJ's nonstop, he instead takes flights on UA through ORD so that he can get UA seats and first class. I do the same thing where I can, but don't have as deep as pockets as him.

That understandable. I'd never want to be trapped on an RJ for that long.

ytz · Fri Dec 02, 2011 4:59 pm

I think UA will go with Boeing for 130 739ERs to be delivered over the next few years. They already have tons of orders for the 737NG which they can shuffle around to fully replace the 752s and 753s. I don't see them replacing the 735s.

To me the big question is what happens with the A320 replacement (probably starting in 2016/2017).

I see a couple of trends. With industry consolidating, there should be some reduction in capacity (mostly coming through aircraft retirements) and some consolidation on routes, favouring larger aircraft.

This is why I can also see the Cseries coming in at the bottom end. I know most folks are skeptical. But in this economy I could see airlines negotiating scope clauses that allow aircraft as big as the A319/73G/CS300 to be operated by regionals, or serious concessions to bring these aircraft into mainline service.

Does anybody know what the mix is for their 737NG fleet (and orders) at the moment?

ytz · Fri Dec 02, 2011 5:03 pm

Any thoughts on the A350 order? I know they're meant to replace the 747s. But does that order still make sense for the merged company? I would think UA would be better suited to go all 787 with -8s, -9s and -10Xs. And maybe a handful of A380s. I am wondering if that makes more or less sense than what's on the books right now: flying the 788, the 789 and the A359.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net