This went off topic but it's circling back.

EK has a very large fleet. They have 60 A380s or will any day now. And over 100 77Ws, as well as some other aircraft in smaller numbers. But historically, they currently aren't dramatically bigger than a few other carriers in their heyday, and pretty much even when factoring in population growth and worldwide air travel growth. JL for example.

Going from what EK is NOW, to what they plan it be, is still uncharted territory. If they truly want to be operating 120 A380s at once, plus 125 773/9s, plus 50-60 A359/789s, that would be larger than we have seen before, but as of yet, it hasn't actually happened. It's just planned. What has happened is a carrier that has grown quickly to a large size that we have seen before (in a way we have seen before) in a country/region that came from little to be a financial powerhouse who doesn't think it will ever end (a story we have seen before) has run into trouble when the country hit stagnation, the airline met strong competition, and there was more opportunity to bypass the stopover.

Getting from "one of the largest ever" to "the largest ever by nearly a factor of 2" is not as easy as it sounds and doesn't simply involve ordering more aircraft or building a new airport. As I've been saying for years, the more you want to move passengers, the more you need to do so at the expense of other carriers, and the more you will meet resistance from the governments representing those carriers. And we are seeing that now from all around the globe. And of course there is competitive pressure in the region from QR, TK, etc.

It's still a very risky move for Airbus to commit a large amount of money to the A380NEO on the promise of one airline doing something that hasn't been done before,

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 196): Which is telling. And if Airbus was confident in January that they could make a decision somewhere in the middle of March, it means that their business case was already very far in development, regardless the outcome.

True. But it doesn't mean the it's favorable. Just that the study is being done and probably because it has to be done now in order for the future of the A380 line to be more concrete and less uncertain.

The question I have is: what happens if Airbus pitches the NEO to the board, but also of course has information on improvements that could be made without a NEO, and the board says "No NEO, just make an A380E and be done with it."

Won't EK still have to buy 100+100 to keep their model going? Would an 7% improved A380E through PiP and Aero tweaks be enough to keep the line going rather than a 15% improvement from an expensive NEO project?

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 199): Well we know that the RR engine is quite heavier than the EA one

Do we? Neither manufacturer has completed a design for a 380neo engine yet, let alone built one.

Quoting speedbored (Reply 198):

I read it from a reputable online source. Aviation Week, Flightglobal, Airwise, etc. It was understood that the RR engine prototype was not as good as Airbus liked and that Airbus involved EA into the fray. I'm confident that someone in this thread has read it and knows where it is from.

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 202): I read it from a reputable online source. Aviation Week, Flightglobal, Airwise, etc. It was understood that the RR engine prototype was not as good as Airbus liked and that Airbus involved EA into the fray. I'm confident that someone in this thread has read it and knows where it is from.

You mean this article in Leeham?
http://leehamnews.com/2015/03/09/notes-1-from-istat-2015/
Totally unsubstantiated rumour from an unnamed source.

There are people who post on here who work for the manufacturers concerned and they say that they haven't heard this rumour. I wonder why that is?

Leeham are sticking by their story this week, quoting 'Market Intellegence' as the source in a front page article

http://leehamnews.com/

[Edited 2015-03-16 16:15:40]

Tim Clark is saying that Airbus promised to take the NEO to the board by now, saying they blew the deadline. http://customstoday.com.pk/emirates-...ision-on-a380-superjumbo-relaunch/

Toulouse doesn't look very enthusiastic about this. The Leeham story linked above definitely shows Leahy looking hard at GP7200 PIP as an alternative to RR Advance. Seems like odds of NEO are decreasing...

[Edited 2015-03-16 16:30:12]

From the story:

Quote: But Market Intelligence indicates the Advance is facing unexpected challenges, prompting Airbus to talk with Engine Alliance about major Performance Improvement Packages (PIPs).At the ISTAT conference last week, we had a hallway conversation with an engine company official who believes EA could get 5% better fuel burn improvement out of the GP7200. This means Airbus would have to come up with 5% improvements for the airplane. Is this an impossible goal? Not according to John Leahy, chief operating officer-customers for Airbus. We spoke with Leahy Thursday in a telephone interview. Leahy said any major improvements to the A380, even with an EA PIP approach, would be “in excess” of 10%.

http://leehamnews.com/2015/03/15/thi...bus-considers-neo-pips/#more-14779

[Edited 2015-03-16 16:50:35]

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 205): The Leeham story linked above definitely shows Leahy looking hard at GP7200 PIP as an alternative to RR Advance.

Err, no it does not. You are clearly seeing words in the article that are just not there.

It is entirely based on "gossip" from the hallways of ISTAT so should be treated as entirely unsubstantiated rumour until it can be attributed to a source at Airbus, RR, or EA.

The comment "Airbus is now talking with Engine Alliance about upgrades to the GP7200." could be made at just about any time and still be correct - Airbus are pretty much always talking to the engine manufacturers about improvements, developments and upgrades.

Quoting speedbored (Reply 201): Do we? Neither manufacturer has completed a design for a 380neo engine yet, let alone built one.

Agreed that we still don't know, and the RR engine is still far away from being "chosen", but our resident engine expert on Anet has stated that based on the data we have, its close to a ton heavier... so I would stick with that statement, because if RR had a 10 to 15% better engine with the same weight it would be a no brainer using it on a A389, improve the airframe put folding wings and create a unbeatable CASM aircraft.

I see your point but since we are just hearing crickets from Airbus, I'd tend to side on the RR is too heavy for the NEO camp
TRB

Quoting speedbored (Reply 203):

Affirmative, that's the one. So here's the thing. I know that without substantiated evidence one really can't prove much but Leehamnews.com is not exactly Hubcapaviation.com I would guess that Scott has been around the block and knows something and while he's not perfect, I doubt that him and Bjorn would publish something that they didn't think was in the least credible.

I hate playing the "what if" game but if the the engine that Airbus wants RR to build is not where it needs to be by the time EK needs an answer(which is oddly now), what then? We can argue that it doesn't exist for it to be in a test phase but it would make sense that if EK needed an answer near term, RR would have had to have been testing something in order to give EK a thumbs up or down. That's just me though.

Do we think that Boeing would want Airbus to launch the A380neo? I think it could be good for Airbus and Boeing could want it at the same time. I believe the Boeing, as a whole, would love to see it launched but I am interested to hear if others disagree.

Personally I can see the business case but don't see it as a slam dunk. I would need more info.

Quoting speedbored (Reply 206): It is entirely based on "gossip" from the hallways of ISTAT so should be treated as entirely unsubstantiated rumour until it can be attributed to a source at Airbus, RR, or EA.

Not everything is golden information right from an OEM. If we waited that long there would not be much to speculate about on here. I agree that the source is a secondary source rather than a primary and we should understand that. But its better than crickets. My rumor mill doesn't have better information in it.

tortugamon

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 209): Personally I can see the business case but don't see it as a slam dunk.

Not sure about the 'business case,' tortugamon. Up to now, Emirates continue to state that if the A380NEO is launched, they will order "100 to 200" of them. They still have about 50 current-model A380s on order.

On the other hand they have already ordered 150 B777Xs for delivery from 2020.

I suspect that a mere further 100-aeroplane order for the A380NEO would not recover the cost (to Airbus) of developing the new model. And, apart from Emirates, the A380 is only getting orders at 'niche' levels from other airlines.

Everything depends, in the end, on WHY the A380 isn't selling in large numbers. It may indeed be because it needs new engines to improve performance. Or it may be because the forthcoming 'big twins' will be able to carry 400-plus passengers at lower cost? And therefore that the A380 (with or without new engines) will shortly be just plain 'out-of-date?

[Edited 2015-03-16 19:20:52]

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 211): Not sure about the 'business case,' tortugamon. Up to now, Emirates continue to state that if the A380NEO is launched, they will order "100 to 200" of them. They still have about 50 current-model A380s on order. On the other hand they have already ordered 150 B777Xs for delivery from 2020. I suspect that a mere further 100-aeroplane order for the A380NEO would not recover the cost (to Airbus) of developing the new model. And, apart from Emirates, the A380 is only getting orders at 'niche' levels from other airlines. Everything depends, in the end, on WHY the A380 isn't selling in large numbers. It may indeed be because it needs new engines to improve performance. Or it may be because the forthcoming 'big twins' will be able to carry 400-plus passengers at lower cost? And therefore that the A380 (with or without new engines) will shortly be just plain 'out-of-date?

   Bingo!

Plus, as I said, it's very bad business if you develop a type that's going to sell heavily to 1-2 carriers (in this case, EK and SQ, perhaps), and sell only mere handfuls everywhere else every now and then.

Big twins are the future, but is the A380 out of date? Well...I'd say, no...not yet, at least.

I bet Leahy has made sure that Tim Clark knows that if they go the A380 Neo route they will need to buy a ton of A350 and drop the number on the 150 frames 777X from Boeing.... its a wrestling match, and compromises will be made, is either Airbus gets the cake or Tim gets its remaining A380CEOs and buys whatever we wants (be it A350 or triple sevens 2.0)

TRB

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 213): I bet Leahy has made sure that Tim Clark knows that if they go the A380 Neo route they will need to buy a ton of A350 and drop the number on the 150 frames 777X from Boeing.... its a wrestling match

I'm willing to bet that probably won't happen. I actually expect the number of 777Xs ordered from EK to slowly go up in the years ahead.

EK's wanted this plane more than anything else.

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 214): EK's wanted this plane more than anything else.

What's in a username eh?  

I'm pretty sure they've been very keen on the A380CEO AND A380NEO from the outset. It's a bit of a stretch to suggest they wanted the 777X "more than anything else"

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 212): Bingo!

LOL. NAV25 has had the A380 as out of date ever since it became known that it would be an Airbus ....

I have a salt cellar here if you need one  

Rgds

Can someone illuminate us as to why the RR Advance should be heavier? It will (of course) have the same or similar thrust range as existing engines.It is swapping out a metal fan for a carbon fan (and less blades), it is swapping out a metal casing for a carbon casing,it is swapping out metal compressors for ceramic blisks.All of which are lighter not heavier.
Thats a big part of the reason for doing all of these changes in the first place.If a better combustion chamber and higher temp/pressures plus the aforementioned changes simply leads to a heavier and only slightly better engine then RR has been wasting their time and money and perhaps should simply 'give up'.All rather unlikely I feel.

Could the imminent EK order of A350 or 787 affect the A380neo decision? Could TC say that if Airbus provides him with the A380neo, then he'll also buy a big amount of A350s - otherwise he'll go with the 787?

In any case, Airbus really has to put a lot of trust in the EK business model to assertain the neo investment.

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 202): the RR engine prototype

There is no prototype. There is no RR Advance engine; as of today "Advance" is nothing more than a technology platform from which new engines can be designed and build. The first concept was a model for the 777X.

Quoting parapente (Reply 216): Can someone illuminate us as to why the RR Advance should be heavier?

Efficiency comes with a weight penalty. An Advance based A380 engine will most likely be heavier than a T700/GP7200. However, weight saving materials like CTi fan blades might still make it a bit lighter than a TXWB (A350) engine.

Quoting parapente (Reply 216):

Well we are no engineers, but I guess a higher BPR means larger fan and more weight.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 218):

[QUOTE]There is no prototype. There is no RR Advance engine; as of today "Advance" is nothing more than a technology platform from which new engines can be designed and build. The first concept was a model for the 777X.[QUOTE]

I'm not denying that it is a platform but RR must have tested, baked or hatched something to test or at least run in order for Lehman to say what they said. Even more damning is the fact that no one has stepped forward to refute those statements.

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 211):

WHY? BECAUSE it's in date matee!!!

And they'll keep selling! Big twins won't get near capacity or CASM wise. Whether you like it or not with your whimsical "facts" that aren't even worthy of Wikipedia editing.

No used by date on the A380 so far, and glad to see Airbus delaying any launch or talks on the neo for now. Incremental improvements important only for now. Mr Clark relies on the A380 for business so Airbus can afford to wait. And Airbus knows that even if it loses the 70 frame order of widebodies to the 787-10 which I think would be far more suitable for Emirates than any A350, someone else will be more than happy to buy the A350. They can sell a load more A350-1000s as John Leahy used to complain about not enough slots. The delay will give time for other airlines like SQ to step in for a purchase as the time for renewal of early frames comes.

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 220): Even more damning is the fact that no one has stepped forward to refute those statements.

You realise that most companies have a rule of not refuting rumours, because that puts them in a sticky situation when they are asked to deny something specific and refuse to...?

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 220): I'm not denying that it is a platform but RR must have tested, baked or hatched something to test or at least run in order for Lehman to say what they said

These days most of the early development is done using data analysis and computer models, which can be very generic in nature.

So no, RR doesn't have to have done anything more than look at some data on a screen at this point.

OK fair enough there is no physical 'advance'prototype,that is quite true.But for someone to say "its (too?) heavy" someone must have calculated something somewhere.
But I can't believe that RR made the 'advance' so public - even with an EIS potential date without knowing what the product target was. Can't see it being for a Boeing plane.They are on the 787 and the 777 deal is done.So it has to be Airbus.Right now it can only mean the 380.So its hardly likely that they would 'clean sheet' an engine with built in fundamental issues (weight) at the outset.

If (if) they do get the 380 project, then I can see this same engine going on to power 350 derivatives in the future post (say) 2025.Its about the right size after all.But that's another story really.

Quoting parapente (Reply 223): But for someone to say "its (too?) heavy" someone must have calculated something somewhere.

Doesn't mean those calculations are anything more than initial figures at this stage, even if RR were the ones who did that calculation and let it slip to third parties, who in turn mentioned it during a "hallway chat"...

There are loads of decisions still to be taken, loads of things being investigated etc.

Quoting moo (Reply 222): So no, RR doesn't have to have done anything more than look at some data on a screen at this point.

I think they have been flying a new fan on the T1000 that is destined for the advanced and I think they have/had a demonstrator running.

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 225): I think they have been flying a new fan on the T1000 that is destined for the advanced and I think they have/had a demonstrator running.

Correct. First flight was October last year.

Quoting moo (Reply 224): There are loads of decisions still to be taken, loads of things being investigated etc.

And as always in a thread about the A380, way too easily conclusions are drawn and gossip is made out to be a fact which can not be changed anymore...... Nothing new here (sadly enough  )

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 227): And as always in a thread about the A380, way too easily conclusions are drawn and gossip is made out to be a fact which can not be changed anymore

Conversely, just because it is a negative story about the A380 doesn't automatically mean that there is not some truth in it

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 228): Conversely, just because it is a negative story about the A380 doesn't automatically mean that there is not some truth in it

Maybe not. But usually most of the speculation is just that, speculation. And frequently is negatively brought as facts which nobody at tis time here on A-net can have knowledge of. Or do they do have the knowledge, but are not at liberty to publicly write about it.

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 227): And as always in a thread about the A380

And now we have the A380-defenders-at-all-costs-and-complain-when-something-negative-is-said-'ers in the thread as well. So we have a quorum.   Shall we get back on topic?

Quoting moo (Reply 222): So no, RR doesn't have to have done anything more than look at some data on a screen at this point.

Surely they are doing a lot of analyses based on changing fan sizes and materials, changing the BPR, experimenting with new materials to allow for higher temperatures....all of which requires significant effort beyond 'looking at some data on the a screen'. Sure once they have the data from these tests they will put the results into their models to see what a hypothetical complete engine might look like from an SFC perspective. But I am sure that is not just a plug and play model either that will take significant analyses.

My point is that I wouldn't doubt that RR has invested $ Billions in this up to this point and they will surely find a home for their new product. I am sure they have a pretty good idea of what is the best they can do for the A380 come 2020.

Now how they relayed that information to Airbus and why anyone at Airbus would leak that information is up for speculation. Maybe this leak is meant to indicate that EA is still in it to push RR to be more flexible on pricing / dedicated resources and what not. And maybe it is an EA rumor just to throw wrenches. And just maybe Scott's sources don't know what they are talking about.

tortugamon

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 230): And now we have the A380-defenders-at-all-costs

What and who are talking about? I am just brining perspective into the thread that there is too much speculation and nothing more.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 230): Surely they are doing a lot of analyses based on changing fan sizes and materials, changing the BPR, experimenting with new materials to allow for higher temperatures....all of which requires significant effort beyond 'looking at some data on the a screen'. Sure once they have the data from these tests they will put the results into their models to see what a hypothetical complete engine might look like from an SFC perspective. But I am sure that is not just a plug and play model either that will take significant analyses.

All true. But we know the Trent-XWB is about 1 ton heavier than the Trent-900. And it also larger than the A380 requires when it comes to thrust. So with the advanced scaled down to the required thrust requirements I can only see a moderate gain of weight which should be easily offset by the improvements such a hypothetical version of the RR-Advanced would have compared to the Trent-900.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 230): And just maybe Scott's sources don't know what they are talking about.

That is where my money would be bet on. But that is just speculation of course.  

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 230): I am sure they have a pretty good idea of what is the best they can do for the A380 come 2

I'm sure they have, too. They are definitely doing a lot of design / simulation / technology testing / proof of concept work - like the composite fan testing, for example.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 230): Now how they relayed that information to Airbus and why anyone at Airbus would leak that information is up for speculation. Maybe this leak is meant to indicate that EA is still in it to push RR to be more flexible on pricing / dedicated resources and what not. And maybe it is an EA rumor just to throw wrenches. And just maybe Scott's sources don't know what they are talking about.

   Right now without inside information, we really can't know for sure either way.

My own guess on the rumours is that I think RR might be telling Airbus that they could struggle to deliver a fully compliant (with performance and weight requirements, etc.) engine in the timeframe that Airbus / EK requires, and that Airbus has been talking to EA about potential enhancements to provide interim improvements prior to the neo.

Or it could just be that Airbus have been talking to EA about performance enhancements to help with some on-going A380ceo sales campaigns and a number of different rumours have got mixed up to make 1+1 = 9.

But I think I'll wait until we hear anything officially before making my mind up. I am guessing that Tim Clark will probably end up spilling the beans first.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 200): the promise of one airline doing something that hasn't been done before,

Have I overlooked your concerns when EK shopped 150 777X's?

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 225): I think they have been flying a new fan on the T1000 that is destined for the advanced and I think they have/had a demonstrator running.

I didnt say they hadn't done actual physical work, I said all they have to have done at this stage is data analysis.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 230): Surely they are doing a lot of analyses based on changing fan sizes and materials, changing the BPR, experimenting with new materials to allow for higher temperatures....all of which requires significant effort beyond 'looking at some data on the a screen

No, all of that can be done in analytical systems these days, with the results verified by demonstration.

You don't embark on a seriously expensive R&D project without some idea of the numbers to begin with, you pretty much know the outcome of a change from the analytical model before you verify it physically - you aren't looking for surprises, you are looking for validation of the model.

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 231): So with the advanced scaled down to the required thrust requirements I can only see a moderate gain of weight which should be easily offset by the improvements such a hypothetical version of the RR-Advanced would have compared to the Trent-900.

But all we 'know' is that 'it is overweight' - we don't know compared to what, do we? It seems plausible that Airbus tasked them with taking weight out of the engine and RR has not been able to for probably very good reasons. RR has never been as good on weight as they are on efficiency of the engine itself.

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 231): I am just brining perspective into the thread that there is too much speculation and nothing more.

Of course! If we didn't speculated this forum would have 5% of the posts that it does and we would lose out on this little tidbit:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 231): But that is just speculation of course.

 

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 200): It's still a very risky move for Airbus to commit a large amount of money to the A380NEO on the promise of one airline doing something that hasn't been done before,

I agree that it is risky but I would place a large bet on EK's growth continuing at a similar pace especially once they enter DWC.

The reason I say that is because when you look at their operation from a # of passenger, fleet size, destinations, and a number of other size parameters they are not even in the top 10. And the larger they get the easier it is to open a new route. For many routes they could add a larger aircraft or more frequencies even now, let alone 10 years from now. Lots of growth left.

Quoting speedbored (Reply 232): My own guess on the rumours is that I think RR might be telling Airbus that they could struggle to deliver a fully compliant (with performance and weight requirements, etc.) engine in the timeframe that Airbus / EK requires, and that Airbus has been talking to EA about potential enhancements to provide interim improvements prior to the neo.

That could be it as well. RR has a lot on their plate right now. They are extremely capable and if anyone can pull it off they can but its a tall order and we know that Sir TC is pushing the envelope on what is possible and RR has to say what is realistic.

I don't see the neo launched though unless they can clear 12% fuel burn in the same configuration. I do wonder how far into 2020 we need to go for that to be possible.

tortugamon

I don't think Rolls will just say "Well we gave it the ol' college try" and shut down the Advance study just yet, but since the whole Neo case is based on what the engines can give and Rolls paying for most (if not all) of the party, given the timeframe that Clark needs an answer I ll give it a "we ll wait and see".

If Airbus is indeed ready to go for it Clark can wait some more to get the specs he needs. The problem up to now was that TLS was saying "We don't know if we want to do it". Now it seems that it has moved to "We ll probably do it but we need to get it right", something that I think for a short time frame is enought for EK . I m willing to bet that somewhere inside all those conference rooms Leahy has said "If we do it, you better put some A350s in the mix" which as Clark said he fully expects to hear.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 230): And now we have the A380-defenders-at-all-costs-and-complain-when-something-negative-is-said-'ers in the thread

Remind me again where exactly can we find something positive said about the A380 ?     

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 235): But all we 'know' is that 'it is overweight'

Overweight indicates its heavier than planned which is certainly not the case (the engine doesn't even exist). Newer generation engines are heavier than before, that's something different than being 'overweight'.

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 213): I bet Leahy has made sure that Tim Clark knows that if they go the A380 Neo route they will need to buy a ton of A350 and drop the number on the 150 frames 777X from Boeing....

That would be counterproductive for Emirates, considering they are an expanding airline and the A350-1000 is a fair bit smaller in an EK standard configuration than the 777-9.

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 213): its a wrestling match, and compromises will be made, is either Airbus gets the cake or Tim gets its remaining A380CEOs and buys whatever we wants (be it A350 or triple sevens 2.0)

Even if Tim Clark get sthe A380neo, he's still going to buy whatever he wants from Boeing if it meets the airline's criteria (which the 777X does).

Quoting 14ccKemiskt (Reply 217): Could the imminent EK order of A350 or 787 affect the A380neo decision? Could TC say that if Airbus provides him with the A380neo, then he'll also buy a big amount of A350s - otherwise he'll go with the 787?

I do not believe it will because I believe Tim Clark orders the planes that he believes (based on research by his management team) will best support the continued profitable expansion of Emirates. He cancelled his A350s in favor of additional A380s and a large 777X order and did so with a decent idea of what Boeing was promising for the 787-10 (since that program was formally launched around the same time as the A350 cancellation). I therefore am of the opinion that if he wants a smaller plane for "regional" missions, he felt (at least at that time) that the 787-10 is the one that is best for that role and Airbus launching - or failing to launch - an A380neo will not influence that decision.

[Edited 2015-03-17 06:42:54]

Quoting moo (Reply 234): You don't embark on a seriously expensive R&D project without some idea of the numbers to begin with, you pretty much know the outcome of a change from the analytical model before you verify it physically - you aren't looking for surprises, you are looking for validation of the model.

I agree with you in large part. Boeing changed the design of the cowlings/ailerons on the 777x after wind tunnel testing of a model. I know GE has been building and testing ceramics to see how high their temperature tolerance is. I agree that most of the aircraft design is analytical but there are still tests to generate data where the models have not been created; such as CMCs and RR's data on CFRP blades.

Quoting Ab345 (Reply 236): Remind me again where exactly can we find something positive said about the A380 ?

I once left IST a day earlier than I had to just so I could fly on her (and they were upgrading me but honestly it was mostly bc of the plane). From the passenger perspective commercial aviation is better with the A380 in it.

See that is positive!  

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 237): Overweight indicates its heavier than planned

...or heavier than requested ?

tortugamon

Thread now archived. Please click on this link to continue:

EK Looking To Order Up To 200 A380NEOs - Part 2 (by American 767 Mar 17 2015 in Civil Aviation)

Ben Soriano