Welcome to the New Year – Part 2

January 3, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline News | 2 Comments

World Alliances

I’m not sure we’ll see much in this territory for SkyTeam or Star Alliance.  They’ll continue to succeed and be smart in their attempts to gain more dominance in more parts of the world.  I think Oneworld is going to be smarting through this next year as a function of health problems at founding members American Airlines and QANTAS.  I also think that gaining the LATAM membership is not nearly as “sure” as they think it is. 

The Middle East

After ordering an insane amount of widebodies in 2011, Emirates will order another insane amount of widebody aircraft and beat up on Boeing about its 747-8i.  This has begun to feel like an addiction problem.

India

The airline industry in India has imploded and we’re just watching the mushroom cloud of debris settle.  For 2012, more explosions and more governmental heads will push even deeper into the sand.   Air India has already become the new Alitalia.

The Far East

Chinese airlines will order more aircraft and I expect we’ll see orders from them for 777s and A380s and possibly some A350s.  Not unlike 2011.  I don’t think we’ll hear about any stunning orders from that part of the world, however. 

China will tout its COMAC C919 even harder and most of us will try desperately to keep from laughing even harder.  Ryanair will back away from this aircraft quietly, I think. 

Japan will find ANA deploying more and more 787s on more and more routes with more and more success with that aircraft.  JAL will take delivery of its 787s and find that they not only work well for JALs needs but actually exceed expectations.  I think we’ll see an order for some more Boeing aircraft from JAL this year and I think it will be the 737MAX and 777-300ER.  No huge numbers but large enough to make a splash.

South America

LATAM got its approval from Brazilian and Chilean authorities (barely) and LATAM will begin consolidating its operations to make more money.  I think we’ll see a largish order from LATAM and it will be for an airliner to replace aircraft on both the Brazilian and Chilean side of the airline.   The aircraft of choice will be, I think, the Airbus A320NEO and I think they’ll bump up orders for the 787 and 777 as well.   TAM has 27 A350-900s ordered and I think that order *might* be at risk.  The strategy of using Airbus for narrow bodies and Boeing for wide bodies seems to be a smart one for airlines in that region.

I don’t think we’ll see more consolidation in South America but I do see South America becoming a bit of a battle ground between airline alliances.  Most see LATAM going with Oneworld and while I can’t disagree with the arguments, I think that SkyTeam and/or Star Alliance might just swoop in with one hell of a package that may be too hard to resist.  If this happens, Oneworld and American Airlines gets kicked in the groin in South America.

Aerolineas Argentinas?  The Alitalia of South America in 2011 and the same in 2012.  Enough said.

Europe:

British Airways managed to get through 2011 without any huge problems and saw Willie Walsh move up to the CEO position of International Airlines Group which means Willie’s still in charge.  Iberia, British Airways’ sister airline, saw Willie stirring things up with plans for a LCC subsidiary.  Iberia pilots decided to strike because shooting onself in the foot can’t be just an Indian thing.   IAG also managed to get a tentative deal to buy BMI from Lufthansa and become the Emperor of slots at London Heathrow . . . maybe.

Virgin Atlantic didn’t die, didn’t find new partners and didn’t extricate itself from the chokehold that Singapore Airlines has on it.  Richard Branson actually didn’t make the news very often except to shout, stamp his feet and act insulted that Virgin Atlantic wasn’t able to do a deal to win BMI.  Expect Virgin Atlantic aircraft to start carrying some message against the IAG deal for BMI.  I actually think that Virgin Atlantic will have to find an airline alliance to join and if I’m right, I would lay very heavy odds on it being the Star Alliance. 

Lufthansa did itself a favor and got rid of BMI and I expect they’ll continue their very conservative mangement of the airline and the subsidiary airlines.  I do wonder how much longer Lufthansa can rely upon its A340 aircraft and somewhat expect Lufthansa to bite the bullet and buy the 777.

KLM/Air France:  I see nothing here at all.  Not in 2012.  I don’t expect a large widebody order nor a narrowbody order. 

I do expect Ryanair to make an order and I do think it will be the 737MAX.  In fact, I think it may well end up being the 737MAX-9 instead of the 737MAX-8.  Instead of repudiating the C919, Michael O’Leary will just quit talking about it.  Instead, he’ll suggest stripper poles could be installed on Ryanair aircraft. 

All in all, I think it will be a tough year for European airlines.  The financial crisis on that continent will make it very hard to earn an honest profit and Middle Eastern airlines will continue to erode the long haul traffic that European airlines have enjoyed for decades.

Tomorrow, a summary of what I see for 2012 and the world airline industry.

Emirates goes Boeing Big

November 18, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets, Airline News | 1 Comment

Emirates has signed a deal with Boeing this past week for 50 more 777-300ER aircraft with a list value of $18 Billion.   It’s a big deal for Boeing and a big one for Emirates although Emirates is rather used to making big deals. 

Emirates already has the largest fleet of 777 aircraft and they like and use the -300ER very effectively on their routes.  They also have 50 A350-900 and 20 A350-1000 on order.  And let’s not forget the the massive number of A380s still to be delivered. 

That’s a lot of capacity.  Consider that Emirates uses the -300ER in capacities ranging from 354 seats to 442 seats.  I suspect that some of these -300ERs will replace -200LRs which will then be used to replace A340-500s that are not nearly as economical as the -200LRs.  In addition, I think even more of the -300ERs will replace some aging -300/-200 standards currently used for high density flights to cities in medium haul range of Dubai.  That will also reduce the number of Rolls Royce Trent powered 777s in their fleet and convert the focus more fully to GE90 engined 777s.  That said, there will still be quite a few -300ERs coming online as additional capacity. 

Can they fill those aircraft?  Regionally, Emirates serves cities that are mega-dense with populations and make money doing so by cramming as many people into coach as possible.  Globally, Emirates is expanding to new cities in ways that does make one wonder if there is much low hanging fruit left for them.  Take for instance their new flights to cities such as Seattle, Dallas, Buenos Aires, Dublin, Harare, Lusaka and Rio de Janeiro.  Not a one of those cities is a mega dense destination such as those flights they’ve had to cities already served. 

I continue to question the viability of Emirates in light of the evolving landscape for point to point routes around the world made possible by the latest generation aircraft coming online.

This order also gives Emirates a whip to use on Boeing.  Boeing is now talking about what the next generation 777 should look like.  It is a given that we’ll see a new wing and likely new or improved engines as well.   Increased use of composites is also probably a given.  Some think the -200LR gets stretched a bit with the goal of similar range and the -300ER gets stretched more with a goal of more payload over existing range. 

Neither of those configurations necessarily makes Emirates thrilled.  Emirates model is based on high capacity, long range flights and they’ll want to see more range with similar payloads in lieu of more capacity with similar range.  To an extent, neither option is mutually exclusive.  Airlines such as Emirates can configure aircraft for less than high density capacity and get more range.  But only to a point.

This order gives Emirates and its CEO Tim Clark the opportunity to start bludgeoning Boeing into building a high capacity, ultra-long range aircraft that they need and want.  Its become clear that the A350-1000XWB is not going to be that aircraft.  Not the way Emirates wants them.  Emirates will threaten order cancellation if it doesn’t get its way with a definition of those next generation 777s that meets its needs.

Will Boeing crumble?  I think not.  Boeing has rightfully valued Emirates as a customer but also recognizes that meeting the missions of other airlines is more important than just one airline.   It doesn’t like all its eggs in one basket and building an Emirates 777 will result in other airlines being less than enthusiastic for the aircraft.   However, I do think that Emirates can nudge Boeing into more performance overall and that would be good for everyone involved.

The A340

November 15, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development, Airline Fleets, Airline History | 2 Comments

Lufthansa Airbus A340-600(Flickr)

I got asked what I thought of the A340 last week by a reader of FlyingColors and decided to give some thought to that subject and write a post.

The truth is, the A340 was probably the first Airbus aircraft that I really liked visually.   I liked the slender appearance of the widebody fuselage and I liked the four engines and how they were hung on the wing in a proportion that just seemed a bit sexier than other 4 engine aircraft. 

I liked Airbus’ approach to the A340/A330, too.  I’ve always been fond of the parts bin approach to creating value for a customer and the A330/A340 development was certainly that. 

A fuselage that got borrowed from its first twin-aisle aircraft and CFM engines that were derived from the A320 aircraft.  Need a medium range hauler?  Use our A330.   Need a long range widebody?  Try our A340.   Going trans-Atlantic?  Use our A330 and if you’ve got trans-Pacific routes, we have this lovely 4 engine aircraft for you. 

And you got to have pilots that could fly both. 

It was a beautiful approach and a real answer to what was needed at the time.   It was way better than McDonnell Douglas’s offering in the MD-11 and Boeing really didn’t have an aircraft that even fit the needs at all. 

ETOPS was changing the game at the same time, however.  So was engine development.

The MD-11 was a bit flawed in that it really needed a truly new wing and better engines to achieve its mission.  But the ever frugal derivative player, McDonnell Douglas, played things just a bit too frugal.

The 747 was simply a different class of aircraft.  The 767 was too small and too short ranged to fit the gap.

Airbus did a great job with those aircraft in offering a sweet spot solution for both capacity and range and then made a strong business case for both of them by making them as common as possible.  You cannot blame any airline who went that route.  It was, in the context of the times, the perfect solution.

What we didn’t really count on was engine manufacturers being willing to truly make game changer engines and ETOPS going far past anything anyone could envision.  The 777 was born and it was an even bigger game changer.  First an aircraft that solved the A330 problem just a little bit better.  Not fantastically better but it offered just a touch more capacity and bit more cargo capacity and it did it with engines that were more revolution than evolution.

The A330 has survived because of its improved derivatives and any airline using them makes great money.

The A340 got hampered by a few things.  It needed a bit better wing  and better engines (and finally got both in the A340-500/600).  The CFM engines were a great choice going in but the Rolls Royce Trents were the answer to a question that got asked a bit too late.

Airbus bet on 4 engines being preferred for long haul, trans-oceanic routes and given the dominance of the 747 in that market, it wasn’t a bad bet.   Their mistake was in underestimating Boeing’s ability to look forward.  Boeing saw the possibilities in ETOPS and extra high by-pass engines that were more reliable than anyone could have conceived of a generation earlier.  And it should have given its customer base at the time.

Airbus was hampered by a bit of McD disease and by multi-government ownership at the time.  It didn’t have enough capital to go “all in” on designs and knew it had to make its business case on flexibility which meant derivatives.  In fact, it often only got capital for new investment if that investment benefitted its owners in the form of jobs programs for their citizens.

While thinking about this post, it occured to me that Airbus even produced a 747-SP.  The A340-500 derivative.  It could fly fantastic distances but without enough passengers to make it cost effective.   Then the 777-200LR came along and was capable of doing *that* mission better and cheaper.

The 777-200ER and 777-300ER killed the A340 in all forms (And EADS CFO just admitted it in the press).  It could haul more passengers and cargo for the same or longer distances for less money.  It was that simple.  Boeing made the business case on trip costs and won. 

Even if hindsight is 20/20, you can’t say that Airbus made a mistake with the A340.  The A340 killed the MD-11 and exposed the weaknesses of owning 747s.  It did its job very well but it arrived just a little bit too late to enjoy its success for very long.  Timing is everything.

I would criticize Airbus for the A380.  Yes, it has made a few airlines some good money.  It also ignores the model(s) for long haul travel over the broad spectrum in favor of trunk routes.  It will never enjoy the numbers or prevalence of the 747.  On the other hand, neither will the 747-8i. 

I’m not sure the A350 is the answer either.  I don’t think it fits long, thin routes as well as the 787 and its planned derivatives.  I don’t think it fits the long, large capacity routes quite as well as the 777 either.  Its smallest derivative is an A330 replacement at best and I question whether or not it will ever get built.  Its largest derivative so far doesn’t respond to the 777-300 as a game changer either.  They are free to prove me wrong.

It’s not that I think the A350 won’t sell.  It will.  But I think it’s destined to be a player among a fairly small core group of airlines.  Much as the A380 is and will be.  Boeing took a page from the Airbus playbook and built the 787 to fit a nice, broad piece of medium and long haul routes and positioned itself to answer the largest A350 with a next gen 777 or next gen new build large capacity, widebody aircraft.

Boeing one ups Airbus over the next 20 years with its product line up and does it in a way that has the gaps covered in distance, capacity and service. 

With all of that said, I still think the A340 is one hell of an elegant and pretty airliner.  It lends itself to the great airliner liveries of the world.  Just look at these:

(All images from Flickr under their Creative Commons License)

B-HXJ

 

Etihad

EC-GLE "Concepción Arenal"

G-VGAS

Emirates to Dallas / Fort Worth

September 29, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline News | No Comments

Emirates Airlines is going to launch non-stop service between Dallas / Fort Worth and Dubai February 2nd of 2012 using Boeing 777 aircraft and I’m a bit surprised. 

While this fits in with Emirates strategy to be a carrier for the world, I question whether or not the power of American Airlines has been fully considered.  Yes, Emirates has had quite a bit of success competing against other Oneworld alliance customers.  Yes, Emirates offers a world class service product.  No, Emirates is not a part of an alliance and the DFW area is a network hub for the entire region.

How do you compete against American Airlines who possesses a world class network in this region when you have no alliances or codeshares to provide feed from that same region at that same airport?  Furthermore, how do you compete against an airline with arguably one of the strongest frequent flyer programs known and in a city where the entire frequent flyer concept was invented?

I don’t think American Airlines will necessarily respond to this flight with flights of their own to that region.  They don’t need to.  Travelers from this area can get to any point they want in the world via American Airlines either non-stop or through connections as good or better than what Emirates can offer with the possible exception of the Middle East itself.

DFW isn’t really an oil region.  Yes, we have ExxonMobil here with their headquarters and even Halliburton.  Those are headquarters and not operations.  The ties that DFW has to the Middle East are tenuous at best.  The ties that DFW has to Africa are almost non-existent. 

Perhaps Emirates can succeed with a single flight per day.  However, that flight isn’t a real threat to AA or Oneworld.  for areas that do have ties to the DFW region, there are already better, direct flights on American or Oneworld partners.  Europe is well served.  India is well served.  The Far East is well served.  And you can fly QANTAS direct to Australia.

When Emirates started service to Houston, that made sense to me.  There are strong ties to areas between Houston and what Middle Eastern and African regions Emirates serves.  This one doesn’t have a very good argument on its behalf. 

Regardless, it will be fun to go to DFW airport and photograph an Emirates 777 landing.

The 777 and its future

September 14, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development | No Comments

Now that Boeing is on the home stretch in defining what it will do to provide the 737 MAX line, we should expect to see some movement towards improving the existing 777 line.  This will start to take place at Boeing outside our view but let’s take a look at the drivers.

First, engines are going to be a factor.  The GE90 is relatively new but let’s not forget that it fits in between 1st generation high bypass engines and the latest high bypass engines.  There is already talk that Boeing wants the GENx engine uprated from 100K to 110K thrust.  That’s a smart sweet spot and it will gain a percentage point or two in fuel efficiency but that only works if other things are done.

Weight reduction while maintaining seat and load capacity will be a driver.  I think we’ll see all parts of the aircraft examined for weight savings and through use of carbon fibre technologies.  One of the obvious places, in my opinion, is in creating a new wing.  A new wing capable of carrying more load more efficienty and made from newer, lighter technologies helps a lot here. 

The fuselage will likely remain the same in construction.  However, I think we may well see stretches occur.  I think we’ll see a slight stretch to the 777-300ER and a marginally bigger stretch to the 777-200LR.  The gap between the two will narrow slightly but both will carry more passengers.  I think the -300 will be limited in some respects by the fact that it is already a very long aircraft and they won’t want to make it much longer for fear that it will won’t fit within airline operations at many airports. 

Whatever Airbus does to define the A350-1000 will be the driver for what Boeing chooses to do with the 777.  However, Boeing has to time their upgrades to be available at roughly the same time that the A350-1000 will enter into service.  There could be an entry into service as much as 1.5 years later but not much past that.  That will limit, in some respects, the kinds of re-engineering Boeing can afford to do on the 777. 

When do we hear about it?  Not before fall 2012, I think.  Perhaps even later than that.  Right now, Boeing will likely conduct internal trade studies in all areas of the aircraft and try to be ready to pick a direction on or about the time we really know the definition of the A350-1000.

What happens with the 777?

July 14, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | 1 Comment

Airbus has announced its plans for the A350-1000 and airlines have responded with yawns or, in the case of one airline, a bit of outrage.  Airbus can still change their minds about the final definition of this airliner but not without more delay or a commitment from an engine maker that would be pretty unrealistic.  So we know what the A350-1000 will look like, more or less.

And what is Boeing’s best response?  I’m not sure the timing is right for an all new widebody large capacity airliners to sit just above the 777-200ER to just below the 747-8i.  But I do think the timing is right to greatly improve the 777.   Imagine the pain Airbus feels with a 777 update that provides a better wing constructed of composites, a fuselage that is slightly lighter due to some composite use and engines that are bit more fuel efficient as a function of incorporating GEnx engine technology.   What if Boeing can offer a 777-250/777-350 that offers more seats, 500 to 1000nm range improvement and/or a slight upgrade in payload capacity?

That little squeak you heard is Airbus salesmen contemplating that scenario.  I can see a strong business case for such aircraft and I think you would hear a lot of airlines bark out loud “sold!” if it was announced.   Does it get announced this year? No. Boeing has got to figure out the 737 replacement family, finalize the 787-9 production, get the 787-10 kicked off and then contemplate the 777’s future.  I wouldn’t expect anything developing on the 777 until 2014.

But it’s fun to think about the possibilities.

They did it again.

June 22, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets, Airline News | No Comments

American Airlines has ordered a 6th 777-300ER now and indicates more may be on the horizon.  One does have to wonder about the piecemeal orders they’ve made so far.  Why not order in blocks rather than an aircraft every few months?

Analysts aren’t so high on these purchases believing that it raises AA’s cash burn.  AA counters that the economics are excellent and will allow American to earn more and that’s probably true.

It’s a good aircraft and most airlines are migrating from -200s to -300s because if you can fill the aircraft, you do make more profit.  American has a number of routes that could benefit both across the Pacific and Atlantic oceans as well as potentially to South America.  It may well be a better way to grow capacity as well.

But I think analysts (and me as well) are wondering just when American is going to address other problems that are causing high cash burns.  That would be the failure to come to an agreement on new labor contracts with their staff that would permit the airline to get on with focusing on profitable operation of the airline.

AussieLand

June 11, 2011 on 12:44 pm | In Airline News | No Comments

Delta Airlines and Virgin Australia have gotten their approvals for an anti-trust immunity agreement to cooperate across the Pacific between the United States and Australia.  They did so, in part, by promising to keep up frequencies between the two countries.

This doesn’t mean that routes won’t be rationalized.  The frequencies will stay the same, the routes won’t.   These two airlines will deploy their 777 aircraft on routes that are complimentary rather than competitive.  Expect V Australia 777s to start arriving in San Francisco to replace QANTAS’ recently withdrawn flights.

Delta’s 777-200LR aircraft can potentially make the flight between Atlanta and Sydney (although with a touch of payload restriction) and provide competition to QANTAS’ new 747-400ER flights to Dallas/Fort Worth.

And for the first time, there is real competition for the QANTAS/British Airway/American Airlines Oneworld consortium.  Virgin Australia can provide domestic connections to Delta in Australia and Delta can provide domestic connections to Virgin Australia in the United States.

John Borghetti, CEO of Virgin Australia (and formerly an executive with QANTAS) has made it clear that he intends that Virgin Australia be a strong competitor with QANTAS rather than an constant underdog and he has experience with building networks as a result of working for QANTAS for many years.

Look for quite a bit of new competition on routes between the United States and Australia and I think United is going to be the airline to take the hit.  United has pretty old aircraft with a pretty old service product and no partners in Australia to assist with feed.  They also have no new large widebody aircraft to carry passengers with either although they will have the 787-8 with which they can start direct flights to New Zealand and Australia from cities in the United States that have never traditionally seen direct flights.

Southwest and International Flights

June 9, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline News | 1 Comment

Southwest CEO Gary Kelly spoke about using Baltimore’s airport (Baltimore Washington International – BWI) as a “hub” for international flights some time in the future.  He described it as being a number one consideration during conversations about Southwest going international.

Before anything else, don’t go presuming that Southwest is about to buy trans-Atlantic aircraft and start low cost services to Europe.  They aren’t as there is way too much on their plates right now.  However, it is another logical area to grow into once they are done digesting Airtran in about 3 years and provided the market exists at that time.

Quite a few might question using Baltimore but it does make sense.  It is relatively uncongested and offers the ability to not just draw those in Baltimore to its flights but also from the Washington D.C. and Philadelphia areas as well.  In addition, it connects nicely to all of the cities that Southwest services in the eastern half of the United States.  Furthermore, it is likely that any LCC airline taking on such a venture need not be tied to a major international airport such as JFK or Philadelphia or Washington Dulles.  In fact, they would probably want to avoid such airports because the cost of congestion is far higher than the cost of attracting people to some place like Baltimore.

Potential customers for this kind of airline service won’t be business oriented.  These will be leisure passengers looking for a great deal.  You won’t see business class on these airplanes but I do think you’ll see assigned seating.  (Assigned seating is almost a must for a widebody aircraft, IMHO.)

What kind of aircraft?  It won’t be 757s and I don’t *think* it will be 767s.  Although, it is interesting to contemplate the economics of an all economy 767-300ER new build aircraft for trans-Atlantic flights.  Many have thought that the 767 will remain competitive on such routes vs the 787 and that might be true.  787s?  Maybe but I think Southwest might have missed the train when it comes to advantageous pricing on that aircraft and I don’t think SWA will find used 787s on the marketplace anytime soon.

Airbus A330s almost seem interesting until you consider just how many people you would have in a high density, all economy aircraft like that.  It feels like too many and the same is true for the 777-200 (but I think you could almost make a business case for early build 777-200 “A” models that are starting to be retired by airlines such as United.)   The fact is that the 767-300 or 787-8 fits the size category almost perfectly and size will drive this choice. 

So will dispatch reliability because someone like Southwest needs an aircraft they can push into high utilization for such routes.  Not only would trans-Atlantic service require good load factors but it also requires frequency that uses that aircraft on 2 to 3 segments a day.  It’s doable and it is doable with the 767.

But at the end of the day, it’s all speculative right now and I do not expect SWA to announce anything like this at all until at least 3 years have passed.  In the meantime, they’ll gain experience operating Airtran’s international flights and learn how to deal with foreign travel.  They can buy and/or engineer new IT infrastructure that will meet the needs of such flights.  In short, don’t go planning a family vacation to London quite yet.

Watch Airbus to see what Boeing does

June 6, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development | No Comments

Airbus has committed itself to the A320NEO series recently and Boeing continues to decide to not decide on what it will do with the 737.  All the while hinting at a new aircraft development for a 737 replacement to enter into service around 2019/2020.   Except that Boeing has also hinted from time to time that a re-engine might be in order while also saying that customers don’t want a re-engine. 

In addition, Airbus will be releasing its configuration for the A350-1000 aka 777 killer in the next few weeks.  Boeing doesn’t believe it quite meets the mark without a new wing and Airbus has said nothing about a new wing.  Right now, on paper, the 777-300ER still beats the A350-1000.  Unless Airbus releases a configuration that causes people to pause and gasp, Boeing will most likely not feel too threatened by Airbus for the time being.

And that’s why I say watch Airbus to see what Boeing does.   Boeing knows it can probably win against Airbus with a 737 replacement in the time frame it is talking about while managing to keep customers interested in the current 737 through incremental improvements that should keep the two aircraft competitive.  I’ve felt that Boeing wants to know what Airbus’ move is on the A350-1000 so it knows where to commit its resources.  If the configuration and definition for the A350-1000 moves it into competitive territory with the 777, Boeing knows it needs to get to work on improving the 777 (an exceptional moneymaker for Boeing presently) in order to not lose those customers for the next 2 decades. 

Boeing likely believes it can cover the 777-200ER territory with a 787-10 (and perhaps an incremental improvement to the -10 as an ER model later).  This leaves it free to preserve the 777-300 in its current configuration or find improvements to the existing design or even design a new aircraft family to fit above 787-10 and finish alongside the 747-8i. 

But what Boeing doesn’t want to do is commit to launching 2 new airplane programs simultaneously.  Boeing already knows what will likely happen if it does that.   

With all of that into consideration, I think that once we know the firm definition for the A350-1000, Boeing will know how to sequence its next airplane programs.  It will be either a 737RS first with a 777 replacement kicked off 3 to 4 years later or a 777 replacement first with a 737 re-engine done simulataneously and a 737 replacement coming 10 to 12 years after the re-engine. 

I strongly believe that Boeing wants to do the former sequence (737 replacement / 777 replacement) because it puts Airbus into a corner.  With this strategy, Boeing probably has an all new line of aircraft using the latest technology spanning from 150 seats to 450 seats while Airbus has the A320NEO and A350 series but with a gap between the A320NEO and A350 being filled by what will be quite the aging aircraft:  the A330.   In fact, there already is a gap, although minor, between the A320 series and the A330 series.  And make no mistake:  The A330 will begin to die in another 2 years or so as a result of the A350 and 787 developments. 

My prediction?  I think Airbus will announce nothing that threatens Boeing’s competitiveness in the 777 models.  Sometime late in the fall or early in the winter while riding on an uptick with the deliveries of the 787 and 747-8i to customers, Boeing will announce a 737 replacement program with a big airline order.  Sometime around 2017 or 2018, we’ll see Boeing announce a replacement for the 777 sized  above the 787-10 and right up alongside the 747-8i.

The 777 moves into charter work

June 2, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline News | No Comments

Omni Air International has received 180ETOPS approval to fly the 777-200ER in its operations.  Omni is purchasing these aircraft used from United Airlines and that means they’re a bit lower powered and range restricted with the Pratt & Whitney engines than you find on many airlines’ 777-200ERs today.

But it is an interesting development because now we’re seeing 777s moving into charter and freight operations.  Freight operators are purchasing new build 777-200Fs.  Omni performs a variety of charters for both leisure markets as well as the US government.  The US government charters are flights to and from the US to the Middle East/Middle Asia areas. 

I suspect that we’ll see a number of these move into Omni’s operations to displace their DC-10-30s operating those routes today.  

This is a development because it means we’re seeing airlines retire older 777s and charter operations are seeing a use for the aircraft.  That means the cost of ownership and operation for these aircraft has reached an acceptable entry level for these operations.  I would not be surprised to see someone other than Boeing develop a freighter conversion for older 777s that should begin entering the marketplace soon.

British Airways and the 747

May 2, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

Evidently, there are rumours that British Airways may be giving the 747-8i a second (third?) look suddenly.   The airline made orders for the A-380 and 777-300ERs instead a few years ago but now there is strong speculation that they are revisiting their fleet plans for the future.

At the time, the A-380 made sense and even today it still does to some degree.  It’s a strong airliner and a proven earner now that we’ve seen several in a variety of fleets.  But British Airways circumstances have changed and I think that might be what is driving these rumours.

British Airways has now “merged” with Iberia and they also have their trans-Atlantic partnership going on with American Airlines and other Oneworld partners as well as a strengthening partnership in Oneworld to the Far East and Australia.  So why does the 747-8i make more sense?

Seats.  The A-380 has an advantage *if* you can fill its seats.  That’s a tougher prospect today.   Even more difficult is the fact that the A-380 doesn’t offer a lot of flexibility on routes it can be deployed on.  In fact, with the new Oneworld frequencies between JFK and London Heathrow, it doesn’t make sense. 

At the same time, nor does the 777-300ER quite fill all the needs either.  It is perfectly adequate for filling the role of older 747 routes but it isn’t quite up to the challenge of providing enough seats (in BA’s configuration anyway) one some of those routes where BA/IB/AA are partnering.  The 747-8i offers enough seats and the promise of a high load factor that makes it potentially more cost efficient to fly.

It’s also a bit more flexibile on what airports it can fly to than the A-380 as well as the fact that it is just plain cheaper to buy and potentially cheaper to maintain.  In the modern airline world, that’s real money to be saved.

Will they re-visit the idea of buying the 747-8i?  I suspect they will at least take another long look at it internally and now is the right time.  The 747-8i is quickly compiling hard data for airlines to look at and the airline will have some hard route data of its own in the near future.   How seriously it will be considered is anyone’s guess. 

Right now, BA is looking at operating the 787 soon, it has the 777-200ER, 777-300ER, 747-400 and orders for the A-380.  That’s a lot of widebodies of varying types and styles.  To add the 747-8i to the mix really, in my mind, requires thinning out that mix by one type. 

So, yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if they took a long, hard look at it internally.  I would, however, be surprised if there was an order in the next 12 to 18 months.  Downright shocked, actually.

2 More

April 20, 2011 on 1:00 pm | In Airline News | No Comments

AMR has said in today’s financial results call that it will order an additional 2 more 777-300ER aircraft from Boeing. 

Is American Airlines opening up piggy banks one at a time and counting their pennies and only ordering aircraft as it is sure it can pay for them?  This makes for 5 total aircraft ordered of the 777-300ER over the past 4 months.  The orders, so far, were initially for 2 with one added the following month and now an additional 2 more added.  Each of these aircraft will be delivered in the 2012-2013 time period.

Lufthansa and the 777

March 21, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

It has always surprised me that Lufthansa didn’t embrace the 777.  Yes, they’re a German airline and, yes, the German government, who is a stakeholder in Airbus, does want its airlines buying local but they’re not nearly so insistent on it as France might be.  Frankly, the A320 series fits the Lufthansa mission in Europe better, in my opinion.   And the A330 is a good aircraft for Lufthansa as well. 

But I never understood holding on to the A340s and I never understood holding onto the 747-400s.  To me, the 777 family was the solution for these aircraft and a much more fuel efficient one at that.   Now, strangely, Lufthansa is buying some 777s.  They’re buying them as freighters. 

Huh?  Those 747-400s will make fine freighters.  Seriously great freighters.  But I fail to see how a 777-200 Freighter is sensible for Lufthansa when it comes to cargo and the 777-200LR/-300ER isn’t sensible when it comes to its long haul passenger missions.   Lufthansa is in the enviable position of being located such that they don’t really require 4 Engines 4 Long Haul and the 777 would satisfy their needs with respect to every true long haul destination they have. 

With fuel consumption being a prime driver in fleets these days, one would think that the older A340-300s as well as the A340-600s would have been been better replaced by now with the 777.  The only good reason not to is the fact that there just isn’t much of a market for used A340 aircraft and as frugal as this airline is, that does make sense. 

Even their main competitor, Air France, has found the 777 to be the right aircraft for the very same missions.  So it leaves me wondering what their next choice in long haul will be.  The 777 or are they awaiting the A350-1000 definition to make that choice?  It’s notable that neither Air France nor Lufthansa currently hold orders for that aircraft. 

So, is the 777 Freighter an anomaly for Lufthansa or a try-out?

Delta and the MD-90

March 10, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | 2 Comments

Last week, Delta announced that it had agreed to buy 9 Boeing (McDonnell Douglas) MD-90 aircraft from JAL.   After these aircraft are refurbished, they’ll start entering Delta’s fleet next January.  Delta’s President, Ed Bastian, refers to these aircraft as “capital efficient” for Delta and it does simply add to Delta’s existing fleet of 19 aircraft.  In fact, Delta now plans to add a total of 39 MD-90 aircraft going forward.  These will primarily replace aging and inefficient DC-9-50 aircraft.

Capital efficient means that the cost to acquire these aircraft combined with the remaining lifecycle costs including fuel makes them worth operating for Delta.  In addition, these aren’t your grandfather’s DC-9s.  These aircraft have current generation IAE V2500 engines that are fairly fuel efficient compared to brand new aircraft presently.  They also replace fuel guzzlers and represent a net gain going forward as long as fuel prices remain somewhat stable (and by stable I mean out of the $4/gallon territory.)

Delta has so far pursued a strategy of making do with what it has and employing older aircraft longer and this is somewhat in conflict with most other airlines’ strategies.  As fuel has climbed in price over the past 4 years, airlines have, if anything, accelerated their purchases of newer, more efficient aircraft.

Is this the right strategy for Delta?  Well, as an interim strategy, it works.  These aircraft are good for a variety of routes that can largely transit 3 timezones out of 4 in the continental United States.  There are a finite number of them available (only a bit over 100 were ever built) and in the near future I suspect that many won’t be worth buying when considered against a new Boeing or Airbus aircraft.  From a financial standpoint, these are good buys for Delta and should work for them well over the next 4 to 8 years.

Delta’s fleet is pretty varied since its merger with Northwest Airlines a few years ago and while they have made an excellent show of managing this fleet, there are a number of types that could be pared down over time.  Reducing the number of fleet types would allow Delta to be even more flexible with its crew resources and more cost efficient when it comes to maintenance needs.  Remember that every fleet type requires an inventory of parts and employees trained to service that fleet type.

This doesn’t mean that I advocate that Delta buy Boeing only or any other manufacturer exclusively either.  With its fleet size, it could quite rationally settle on both the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737 aircraft and operate them simultaneously.  The same is true for long haul aircraft.   It could probably employ both Embraer and Bombardier regional jets as well.   However, for each category (regional jets / single aisle / medium to long haul aircraft), there should be at most two basic fleet types. 

In fact, by working with multiple manufacturers, it can speed deliveries, fit the most perfect aircraft to a variety of routes and maintain efficiencies in maintenance and repair at the same time.  What I don’t see happening is Delta operating Boeing and Bombardier CSeries as mainline aircraft.  I think Delta will play it smart and use the manufacturers that have proven products in each category. 

I think that over time, we’ll see Delta order Airbus A320NEO aircraft to replace existing aging Airbus A320s.  I think we’ll see an order for Boeing 737 replacement when and if Boeing offers a replacement officially.  I think we’ll see Bombardier CRJ900/1000 aircraft come online to replace older CRJ700/900 aircraft and I think we may well see Embraer E170/190 jets for other areas of the country such as shuttle-like operations.  In the long haul category, it’s not inconceivable to see 787 orders pulled forward again but for a mix of both 787-8 and -9 aircraft.  I think we’ll see them pick either Airbus A350s or 777s for their larger trunk and long haul routes.  I might give the 777 an advantage here to become a single type for that category as Delta could very efficiently operate both 777-200LRs and 777-300ERs in a nice mix.  They’ve already got very new 777-200LRs (and ERs) that are using the same GE engines the -300ER would use.  I’m not sure the Airbus A350 quite fits in as well as one would like it to when it comes to the trunk route / long haul category.   I do believe firmly that the 747s will ultimately go away and not be replaced.

Look for Delta to be making more and more announcements about its fleet over the next 2 years.  I believe its strategy will be incremental rather than huge orders for a particular family of aircraft and it will be done with strong emphasis on preserving its capital going forward into the next few years.

The 737 Replacement

January 28, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development | No Comments

Boeing’s CEO, James McNerney, reiterated Boeing’s view that re-engining the 737 even in light of Airbus’ A320NEO announcement is not the pathway to success for Boeing.  They continue to believe that if a new 737 replacement is forthcoming in the 2019/2020  timeframe, customers will wait.  I agree.

However, if customers are asked to wait until 2025, I’m not so sure.  There is only so much more additional performance that Boeing can get from either the airframe or the engine on the 737.  Let’s not forget that, in many respects, the current 737 lineup continued to perform well against the A320 in part because of the development of the winglets and the evolving refinement of the CFM engine.  Additional gains are going to be increasingly difficult to find.

Also of concern is McNerney’s announcement that research and development will be going down over the next couple of years and that they intend to cut back on some of their engineering resources which are extraordinarily high (say McNerney) at present while retaining their core capability.   While I understand the cravings for normalcy, this worries me. 

To really get a 737 replacement out in the 2019/2020 timeframe, it’s time to get started now.  You have effectively just 8 years to redesign another technically innovative aircraft that will compete for 20 years or more.  Schedule is more critical in accomplishing this than budget is.  It takes time to design innovative technology and implement it into a product that must be 99% reliable “out of the box”.   Boeing’s schedule for doing so is, in some respects, already eroding.

I think there is more time to consider options for the 777 line than there is for the 737 replacement.  Enough airlines and, in particular, 737 customers have signaled the very strong desire for a better airplane. To act as if you have all the time in the world or even little competition for these people is a bad idea.  Even Southwest acknowledges that they can handle transitioning to a new type and they don’t mean just transitioning to a new Boeing. 

There are 3 SuperLegacy airlines who’ll be shopping in the next 1 to 2 years for fleet replacement and 2 LCC carriers who need to find new efficiency gains in their fleet (Southwest and Ryanair) who could literally place enough orders to pay for the 737 replacement.   Having something that will significantly beat the A320NEO in the stated time frame that also provides for future efficiency and a product line capable of lasting 20 years is almost a necessity rather than something to study for another 2 years.

The 737 replacement won’t be an evolution of the 737.  It will be much more a revolution for single aisle aircraft much as the 787 is for medium capacity, twin aisle aircraft.   Furthermore, I think you would want to have that program on firm footing and about to produce new aircraft as you begin to enter into engaging on a 777 evolution or replacement later in the decade.

So what’s the hold up?

AA and the 777-300ER

January 19, 2011 on 1:33 pm | In Airline Fleets, Airline News | No Comments

American Airlines announced an order for (2) 777-300ER aircraft during their earnings call today and I don’t think anybody saw that coming.  It’s a notable order for several reasons.  First, it’s the first order by a US airline for that aircraft.  Second, it’s the first airliner for AA to add that is for growth rather than replacement.  Third, it’s a new engine type for AA since the -300ER uses GE90 engines instead of the Rolls Royce Trent engines that AA has on its -200ER aircraft.   Finally, AA plans to receive these in 2012 and that’s pretty quick. 

Although these aircraft come with slightly better range than the -200ER, I think these are about capacity growth on some particular long(ish) routes.  These could be for any of 4 basic areas:  DFW or Chicago to London (I doubt this), DFW or Chicago to India (maybe), DFW or Chicago to Japan or China and, finally, NYC or Miami to South America (I doubt this.  My bet is on flights to India, Japan or China with India or Japan being a higher probability.  Time will tell.

Texas and Australia

January 17, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline News, Airlines Alliances, Airports | No Comments

I think just about everyone was at least a little surprised at the announcement of the QANTAS flight between DFW and Brisbane, Australia.   It was a subject that would pop up on the radar now and then but generally dismissed with skepticism of it ever happening.  Particularly with the equipment that QANTAS had for making the flight, namely the 747-400ER.

Flights between the United States and Australia have been the domain of west coast cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco and the primary equipment has been the 747-400.  The aircraft available to make such a flight has already changed and is due to change a bit more in the future.  The 747 got used more because of its range and ability to haul a passenger load with a strong load of cargo.  Generally, long flights like that work best if there is enough demand for a 747 because seat costs go down.

Now the 777-300 is plying trans-Atlantic routes between the US and Australia and soon will be on routes between the US and New Zealand.  It’s a good aircraft for the trip because of the 777’s ability to fly it non-stop, carry a load of cargo and a fairly large complement of passengers.  We’ll see these West Coast to Down Under flights fracture a bit more in the future when the 787-8/9 come online with airlines.

So why the 747 and DFW?  Well, it’s notable that SFO is losing its flight with QANTAS but that makes sense now.  San Francisco is the domain of United, not American Airlines and QANTAS is partners with AA via Oneworld.  Los Angeles remains and it should remain as a Western US departure point between for Oneworld. 

Until now, Oneworld has had to feed all its traffic from all over the United States to either Los Angeles or San Francisco and while LA is a Oneworld focus city, all other Oneworld focus cities are east of the Rocky Mountains.  They are Dallas/Fort Worth, Chicago, New York and Miami.   In that group, there was only one city that made sense with the aircraft available today:  DFW.

The other thing that has changed is the new anti-trust immune cooperative agreements that are forming in Oneworld.  First there is the trans-Atlantic Oneworld partnerships and second is the trans-Pacific(Japan) Oneworld partnership.  Next is logically AA/QANTAS. 

With DFW and Los Angeles as that “hub”, Oneworld can feed traffic to DFW from points east of the Rocky Mountains and from points in Mexico, Central America and South America all to DFW.  Yes, AA can feed that 747 nicely.  And if they do it well enough, you can bet on seeing an Airbus A380 being switched into that route. 

DFW gets a nice boost from all of this as well.  It’s already started to transition back into a more “international” airport than it has bee in some time.  British Airways is now using a 747 on one of its flights to DFW and AA is using more 777s for its flights to Europe.  It will continue to grow as a Oneworld “hub” both because of its good location (not nearly as affected by weather as other potential hubs) as well as the availability of room to grow. 

I would be completely unsurprised at the addition of another direct route to Tokyo and a direct flight to China in the near future.   Currently AA has 2 flights to Japan via 777s and I think we may see one more or, alternatively, we may see JAL start flying one of those flights with its own 777.  AA has wanted to fly direct to China from DFW (and it should) but has so far been blocked by its pilots over duty time rules that AA wanted a variance for from the union.  The flight they wanted to do ultimately went to Chicago instead.  Expect AA to make another run at such a route.

One thing I don’t think we’ll see is a lot of additional routes from Los Angeles to Oneworld destinations.  It’s a crowded airport with limited room to grow.  Delta/Sky Team has a strong base in Seattle and United/Star Alliance has got strength in San Francisco.   Dallas / Fort Worth offers the growth opportunities now with the ability to fly longer range flights using the 787 and 777 and I think we’ll see more and more long haul flights from DFW.

I have to say that I’m very pleased for DFW and I see this as a very good development for American Airlines as well.  It’s nice to see opportunities created like this within Oneworld and on AA’s part, too.

Delta wants jets – lots of them

January 16, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | 8 Comments

It has been reported loudly that Delta is poised to issue an RFP (request for proposal) for as many as 200 jets and this is an order no manufacturer wants to lose.   The rumour comes just days after a record breaking Airbus order from IndiGo of India.

At this point, it’s still rumour but this one strikes me as pretty much dead on.   Delta has a huge fleet (720 aircraft with about 40 orders in place which include the deferred NWA order for the 787) and quite a few of those aircraft need to be replaced now or in the immediate future. 

Delta has the Northwest fleet comprised of the very old DC-9-5o, MD-88, MD-90, 757, 747 and some older Airbus equipment.  The Boeing fleet from Delta’s legacy side isn’t quite as old but there are some 757s and 767s in need of replacement as well.  Considering the widely varying fleet, it would come as no surprise that an replacement order is due.

Oil prices and future fuel prices will also drive the need for this order sooner than later if Delta’s goal of a consistent operating profit is to be realized. 

Pundits think this is Boeing’s to lose and I disagree.  Richard Anderson, CEO of Delta, has much more history with Northwest and he is no Airbus hater.  This will be an extremely heated competition and I will say that if Boeing were to lose this order or a significant portion of it, that will sting Boeing and its product line for years to come.

The prime driver for selection is going to be based on a number of items.  First and foremost, trip costs for aircraft to serve a particular grouping of routes.  We’ll see orders for single aisle aircraft to serve what I would call non-transcontinental routes.  In today’s world, that would be the Airbus A319 and Boeing 737-700.   Having trans-continental capability in the aircraft would be a plus but these aircraft are going to serve the focus cities of the airline with routes stretching out from the cities but not across the country.   The mission that the MD-88s, MD-90s, Airbus A319s and Boeing 737-700/800s are serving today.

The A319s are brand new and so are the Boeing 737-700s/800s.  This is going to be about replacing the McDonnell Douglas fleet.

Then there is a need for the larger trans-continental capable aircraft that remain single aisle serving longer trunk routes that won’t justify a widebody.  Currently, the Airbus A320 and Boeing 757 are serving those routes.  The A320’s arrived in early 1990’s and the 757s date from the early 1980s to the late 1980s.  The options for replacement here are the Airbus A320/321 and the Boeing 737-800 and 737-900ER.    Neither aircraft actually “replaces” a 757 which has great range and great payload.  I don’t think the A320s are going anywhere yet so this will probably involve a 757 replacement and they (Delta) may or may not want it to harmonize with their existing A320s.

Then there are the 767s.  Some are getting old and some are quite new still.  Delta needs an aircraft stretching between what a 757-300 offers and an A330-300 offers.  The 787 fits this and the fact that Delta has deferred its legacy NWA order for these makes me think that these aircraft won’t be candidates for replacement.

The 747s are pretty old and frankly I don’t think these we very well cared for either.  They need to be replaced and I do think we’ll see orders to do this on these aircraft.  None really serve routes that demand 4 engines so I think we’ll see a replacement oriented around 2 engines.

I think it’s anyone’s guess on the single aisle orders.  Airbus will fight like crazy to win this order with their A320NEO options and Boeing may well have to announce a 737 replacement at a great price to win it back.   Boeing should actually have great incentive to get going on the 737 replacement if Delta is truly interested.  With Delta, Southwest and, potentially, Ryanair all wanting a better 737, there is an exceptionally strong business case to get going on this.

If Boeing doesn’t offer a better 737 in this, I think the order goes to Airbus.

As for the 757/767 replacements . . . well, I’d give the edge to Boeing.  I think the 787 *is* a good answer for these aircraft.  They offer the right amount of extra capacity for growth, long haul capability, extremely high efficiency and flexibility.  I do think it possible that an order might be mixed between the A330 and 787 unless Boeing gets off its duff and gets that 787-9 into production.  The 787-9 is the A330 killer.

Since I don’t think the A330s are going anywhere, I don’t see much opp0rtunity for Airbus’ A350 in this mix.  It’s deliveries are too far off and the A330s just don’t need to be replaced for a long time.

I think Delta’s large widebody strategy is likely going to be a mix of 777-200s and the 777-300ER to replace the 747s.  They already have a fleet of 777-200LR with GE engines so I think they’ll order 777-300ERs with GE engines to replace those 747s.  It will do everything the 747 will do only more efficiently.  I do *not* think the 747-8i will enter into this order.  Delta doesn’t need the capacity and the 777-300ER will serve all the routes the 747 is currently serving with no problem.  The A350-1000 is far too far off and its ability to perform is simply way too unknown for this to be serious contender at Delta.

I do not think that Bombardier or Embraer will enter into this order at all.  They just don’t have a product that meets the needs of an airline like Delta very well at all.

Don’t expect an order announcement for about a year.  Delta will let the manufacturers fight it out with best and final offers for quite some time and it will take time itself to do a detailed analysis.   But I can’t wait to hear their decision.

Implications behind the 787 not fully considered

January 8, 2011 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development | 2 Comments

There have been some truly disappointing revelations about the 787 and its development over the past 2 months.  We have learned that more than 300 aircraft were priced at or below $76 million excluding engines.  A startingly low price for this class of aircraft no matter what it is made of.  We’ve seen just how bad the vendor management has been for this global product and it is highlighted by Boeing buying these facilities to run them themselves to achieve better production rates and quality control.  Finally, we’ve learned that many of the technological approaches involved in this aircraft are going to require a longer period to mature than was originally expected as well.

Richard Aboulafia has referred to this program as a disastrously executed, brilliant vision and that strikes me as real truth at this point in the program.  He also speculates that the 787-8 may well be the “interim” aircraft while the -9 actually ends up meeting the performance needs of airlines in the long run.  That, too, strikes me as real truth.

What hasn’t been considered yet is where the ultimate solutions found for the 787 influence future production.  I continue to believe that Boeing hasn’t laid a complete egg with this aircraft.  I think it will prove to be, in many respects, a legendary airplane over time.  I think it will have a long production run and favorable reviews through its lifetime. 

Once these solutions are found and that oh so necessary experience is, well, experienced, it will have a positive influence on future aircraft development.  Boeing may no longer be poised to earn scads of profit on the 787 but it is well positioned to use its body of knowledge to earn scads of profit on other aircraft it needs to build.  They will have gone through all the pain necessary to know how to apply these new technologies to a 737 replacement or a 777 replacement/enhancement and that will serve them well in the future provided they don’t let lose all those people involved in this program.

The 737 replacement may not use these exact approaches such as CFRP or an all electric architecture but it will use some variation on a theme for that technology and they’ll know how to do it better.  They’ll be past the hump, so to speak.  This speaks well for Boeing in the latter half of the next decade.  Right now, they’re hurting.

But also consider that Airbus hasn’t pushed the envelope nearly so much and they have a great deal of learning to go through still.  And as tough a road as Airbus has in front of them with existing programs, that forecasts still more pain in the future.

Copyright © 2010 OneWaveMedia.Com

windows xp product key

windows xp product key

winrar free download

winrar free download

winzip activation code

winzip activation code

windows 7 ultimate product key

windows 7 ultimate product key

winzip registration code

winzip registration code

windows 7 activation crack

windows7 activation crack

download winrar free

download winrar free

free winrar

free winrar

windows 7 product key

windows 7 product key

winzip free download full version

winzip free download full version

free winzip

free winzip

windows 7 crack

windows 7 crack

free winrar download

free winrar download

windows 7 key generator

windows 7 key generator

winrar free

winrar free

winzip freeware

winzip freeware

winrar download free

winrar download free

winzip free download

winzip free download