1. It seems to me that our government and Congress in particular has far bigger pressing problems to deal with than attempting to swat at airlines over frequent flier miles.  
2. Levying fines on Continental, ExpressJet and Mesaba for the Rochester, Minnesota incident is surprising everyone because it lays blame on everyone we, ourselves, would blame. 
3. Voting Midwest as a best airline (Zagat) is just strange given that it really isn’t an airline so much as a brand now. 
4. Nothing sells an aircraft like the head of state for the manufacturer.

Filed under: Airline News, Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about Airtran’s decision to enter the Milwaukee – Dallas / Ft. Worth market using Skywest Airlines.  That post is HERE.

I noted that American Airlines has virtually owned this market with Midwest also having a nice chunk and AA hasn’t really had much in the way of competition for that route.  Well, the American Airlines of old has responded.  According to the Airline Biz Blog, AA is adding flights to that route using American Eagle and those flights match up closely to Airtran’s announced times.  No one should be too surprised that AA has responded this way since it’s been their strategy to flood new competition with capacity and frequency and to capitalize on their hub connections. 

Will it work?  Many would give AA the advantage in this battle because they do have a tremendous number of connections through Dallas.  The problem is, my sense is that the main part of this route is traffic that originates and ends at those two cities.   I’m not sure there is a whole lot of connecting traffic.  Certainly there is some. 

However, American Airlines has kind of abused Milwaukee for several years charging very high fares for that route and Midwest has never challenged them much instead choosing to enjoy an uneasy level of detente.  Now we see Midwest, Airtran, American Airlines and, indirectly, Southwest Airlines in this market.  Interesting. 

The next move is up to Airtran.  If they keep Skywest aircraft (50 seat CRJ-200)on this route and don’t upgrade it to their own aircraft, I suspect American Airlines will win this fight.  If Airtran chooses to move their B717 or even their B737 (I suspect the former is a better fit) on to the route, I think American Airlines might just see their traffic erode badly.  Milwaukee to Dallas consumers are accustomed to the B717 and, I think, would enjoy the relative comfort and opportunity to upgrade to Business Class (cheap and easy to do on Airtran). 

Midwest is the unknown.  Frankly, they are using their Embraer E-170 aircraft (76 seats, all coach) on this route now and while it is certainly better than American Eagle’s ERJ-145s (50 seats, cramped coach), they still aren’t what those customers are accustomed to enjoying on that route.   Until less than a year ago, Midwest flew very comfortable 717 aircraft that included both a comfortable business class as well as a comfortable coach seat.  Airtran can offer that now.

Would AA add MD-80 or B737 aircraft to the route?  No, they don’t have aircraft available and the best they could do is, perhaps, a CRJ-700 via American Eagle.  However, those aircraft are already very busy on other routes. 

American called Airtrans’ bluff and even raised the stakes, so to speak.  American Airlines is not in the habit of giving up either so we can expect that they’ll keep these frequencies (and the lower prices) as long as they think they can to preserve the market share.    Right now, they are offering a matching $89 fare (each way) for advance purchase.  However, their remaining economy fares are $678 and $863 each way (there is a First Class fare for over $1700 each way but which requires a connection to someplace like Chicago so you can fly on a mainline aircraft).   I think we see where Airtran can offer real value here. 

So, we know two things.  First, it is up to Airtran to make another move or accept the status quo.  Second, there is way too much competition going on for Milwaukee traffic.  Some airline will have to quit.

Filed under: Airline News, Airline Service by ajax
No Comments »

Michael O’Leary, CEO of Ryanair in Europe has been demanding a new deal for up to 200 Boeing 737 aircraft between 2013 and 2016 according to Reuters.  Keep in mind that up to 200 aircraft likely means a firm order for between 50 and 100 aircraft with options for more.   Boeing, on the other hand, has so far refused to negotiate what is by all accounts a rock bottom deal on their 737.   More amusing is that Airbus has so far refused to offer a better deal on their aircraft since they’re already familiar with Mr. O’Leary’s tactics when it comes to negotiating.  He likes to play one manufacturer off another.

There are likely several things at play here.  First, Ryanair has often made a profit by “turning” their aircraft rapidly and selling them for a profit to other, smaller players.  A situation that has no doubt irritated Boeing as they are looking to sell to users, not distributors.  The original pricing for Ryanair was negotiated at a time when commercial aircraft sales for the industry and Boeing in particular were pretty flat and there is no doubt that Ryanair offered a serious opportunity for cash flow at a time when Boeing was in need of filling slots in its delivery schedule.

Not so much anymore.  Boeing has a health backlog of orders and many of them for airlines who will pay more per aircraft and be happy to receive their 737s early.  American Airlines has continued to up its orders for the 737 in light of the fact that no new next generation 737 replacement is due anytime soon from either Airbus or Boeing.   Other airlines are likely to do the same over the next year or two.  There is no incentive for Boeing to make an even better price to Ryanair.

And I think Mr. O’Leary knows it.  But by making his threats and going public with them, he has begun to set an argument for why Ryanair will likely do a couple of things in the next few years.  One will be slowing their growth.  The truth is, growth opportunities for them in their market(s) are becoming few and far between.  Second, they really can’t continue to “flip” aircraft in the next few years as there are plenty of other sources developing  for second hand NG 737 aircraft.  Slowing their purchases will give them a public rationale for slowing growth and reduced profits from sales of the 737. 

I also doubt that Mr. O’Leary will distribute money to either his executives (in the form of bonuses) or to his shareholders.  If there is one thing he knows, it is that an airline lives and dies by its cash holdings.   It’s a weapon that I don’t believe he would give up.  Instead, they may choose to invest it.

Mr. O’Leary has publicly spoken about creating a new trans-Atlantic airline in the future.   Whether or not it is just talk, we’ll never know unless he does it.  However, he does need the right kind of aircraft for developing his self-described premium/economy airline for the markets he thinks he can access.  Part of his plan includes flying to secondary airports again in the US to save money.  A plan that, I think, he’ll learn isn’t nearly as feasible as it might be on the European continent.   There are no secondary airports with good transportation to their major market centers.   You can take passengers to Hartford, Connecticut, for instance, but there isn’t a cost effective way to get from there to Boston or NYC. 

However, that doesn’t mean Mr. O’Leary can’t access a number of markets and do so profitably.  He is a master negotiator and there are plenty of US airports that would potentially welcome such an airline.  With lots of cash, reduced capital requirements for the Ryanair fleet and good timing, they can establish such an airline if they can find the right equipment to use. 

And that leads us back to Boeing.  I think Mr. O’Leary recognizes that the 787 might be just the right equipment for such an airline.  Both the 787-8 and 787-9 offer the right kind of efficiency, size and economics for make such a venture a success.  There is no way that he’ll buy second hand aircraft such as the 767 or the A330 for such routes.  Its difficult to find new(ish) aircraft on the used market that are worth purchasing and the A-330 probably is just too big for the routes.  But the 787 potentially offers the right package.  And I wonder if the current bluster about a deal isn’t about getting Boeing “prepped” to do a deal on the 787 with earlier delivery slots at great prices. 

Time will tell.  One thing I’m entirely certain of is that Michael O’Leary doesn’t have nearly as much contempt for Boeing as his bluster indicates.  Both companies have done very well with each other and both understand that its in their interests to find a way to continue to do business.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

Several airlines are implementing surcharges for peak travel days such as American Airlines and Continental Airlines but others too.

This strikes me a bit like the fees for checking the first bag.  In this case, airlines are advertising fares but charging surcharges for those peak days most attractive to the traveler.  It makes me wonder a bit on whether or not taxes are being collected on the surcharges and it makes me wonder if the surcharges aren’t a bit deceptive when it comes to advertising.   

If those surcharges are needed, why not just raise the fare $10 (or whatever the surcharge fee is) for those particular days.   Because then they would have higher fares when being shopped against airlines without surcharges.

Filed under: Airline Fees, Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

The Associated Press is reporting that US Airways pilots are asking for mediation in their contract negotiations, a step which is one of several on the path to going on a strike ultimately.   No, this doesn’t mean a strike is imminent.  I suspect that a federal mediator is going to be held off until the courts decide who actually represents the pilots. 

US Airways pilots have been in a dispute between the former America West pilots and the former US Air pilots since the merger of the two airlines.   Former US Air pilots refused to recognize a binding arbitration ruling that integrated the seniority lists and ultimately they held an election to de-certify their original union and create their own in the model of American Airlines pilots.   Originally, the two groups were represented by different branches of ALPA originally and the former America West pilots have refused to recognize the new union and have so far won court battles against the new union. 

Now each group is awaiting an appeal to be heard by the  9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the legacy US Air pilots are hoping to see the original ruling against them overturned.    The central issue at stake is that the legacy US Air pilots favor merging the pilots’ lists strictly on seniority.  This move would favor them because most of those pilots (legacy US Airways)  have considerably more seniority based on hire date than the former America West pilots.  The America West pilots favored a “blending” of the seniority lists with some jobs and opportunities fenced off for each group and that is basically what the binding arbitration ruled for.  Since that date, US Airways has been unable to completely merge their operations because each pilot group has been working under a different contract.

It’s my guess that the National Labor Relations Board will wait to assign a mediator until the 9th Circuit Court rules on who actually represents the pilots and under what conditions.  My suspicion is that the 9th Circuit Court will in fact rule in favor of the former America West pilots again mostly because the arbitration between the two groups was legal and binding and won’t want a precedent which allows for nullifying an agreement and changing unions if you don’t like the result.   In some ways, I’ve been surprised that US Airways hasn’t gotten involved in this dispute if only because it keeps their potential savings from fully integrating the two airlines from being fully exploited.  Given that this conflict has been going on for almost 4 years, I would think that the company would have lost patience by now.

Ordinarily, a company would not want to be involved in such conflicts because they’re a bit like getting in between husband and wife during a domestic dispute.  They’ll both turn on you.  However, enough time has passed that the company could legitimately advance the argument that they are being materially harmed by a group of employees who are advancing their own interests against both the companies as well as the other pilots.    There is no doubt that there is “economic harm” at this point. 

This situation is precisely why many airline executives view mergers unfavorably at this point.  Pilots’ unions hold the most power of any labor group and obviously  hold the power to severely impact a company’s ability to operate profitably to the detriment of every other  interested party.  A problem that has existed since the 1960’s really and a problem that should be solved if this industry is to find a way to thrive in competition.

Even if the 9th Circuit Court does find in favor of the former America West pilots, it is likely that the legacy US Air pilots will file an appeal with the Supreme Court.  However, that case is unlikely to be heard and most likely will get settled quicly with the Supreme Courts refusal.   Unfortunatley, the legacy US Air pilots have harmed their case at every turn with rash behavior.  First they rejected binding arbitration, then they filed suit against their national organization and when it appeared they may lose, they then de-certified their union and established a new one to represent their interests by holding a company wide vote in which they were the numerical majority in hopes that that would resolve the issue.   Courts don’t really like venue searches like that. 

What is certainly also sad is that both groups of pilots have been operating under old contracts and have had no opportunity to enter into contract discussions with management.  This has, so far, been to the management’s advantage in that if those discussions had been held 4 years ago and a contract in place 2 years ago, they would likely have seen raises and not had to negotiate under the cloud of the worst economic recession in decades.  No one won here and a pox on all three houses for not settling this 2 years ago. 

I’ll add a personal note by saying that I think the worse part about this is the US Air pilots refusal to even acknowledge that without the merger they would likely have gone bankrupt a third time.  So far, no airline has survived a 3rd bankruptcy and given the dire straits that US Airways was in prior to the merger, a third bankruptcy would have almost certainly meant liquidation and the loss of pensions and other benefits for all the employees.  It is never nice to admit that you were in a weak position to begin with but sometimes its necessary for succeeding in the future.   The only people in sympathy with them are themselves and their families.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

USA Today’s Today in the Sky blog is reporting that Vietnam Airlines is ordering 4 A-380 and 2 A-350XWB aircraft from Airbus and this strikes me as a bit odd.   The airline says it will use the aircraft for possible long haul routes to the United States and Europe but a little background into the airline tells me this might either be a vanity order or a political order.

First, while Vietnam Airlines does own and operate Airbus aircraft already (A-320 series and A-330 series), it’s chosen high capacity, long haul aircraft is the 777-200 at present (it owns 12) and has orders for the 787-800 and 787-900 (16 total with an original entry into service of 2010).   The 777-200 is an excellent aircraft for the airline for long haul, high capacity routes it might fly to both Europe and the United States already and if additional range or capacity is needed, they could add the 777-200LR or 777-300ER to the fleet and keep commonality in their fleet.  In addition, their soon to be arriving 787 aircraft are also already capable of the distances needed and engine type selections (not yet indicated) could already permit them to experience savings from similar (although not exactly the same) types being operated between the two aircraft (GE or RR).

In addition, the current economy has reduced leisure travel to Vietnam from both Europe and North America so much that one really does wonder how Vietnam Airlines expects to keep those A-380 aircraft full year round.  It is an aircraft that best serves high density, long haul routes that see lots of traffic all year.  In addition, the A350-900XWB doesn’t really offer them more in capacity over the 777 and offers less lift for cargo on similar long haul routes.   The kinds of routes that Vietnam Airlines is most likely to fly are already best served with a fleet in place (777) and a fleet about to arrive (787).

I have an odd feeling that this order is political.   Airbus hasn’t seen a new order for the A-380 since 2006 and its been a very dry season for the A-350 as well.  With the political ties that exist between France and Vietnam and the report that Vietnam will also see Airbus contract to have certain parts made in Vietnam, this feels like France once again bolstering Airbus and a much smaller state with economic ties to France giving in to pressure.  I suspect the likelihood of an Airbus A-380 ever showing up in Vietnam Airlines blue livery is very small if at all.  

France is one of Vietnam’s largest trade partners at present and it’s notable that this order came after France’s Prime Minister made a personal visit to Vietnam to promote trade between the two countries.  It has been quite common for French Prime Minister and French President to make visits to seal deals on behalf of Airbus in the past.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline News by ajax
5 Comments »

You did book your air travel a couple of months ago, right?   Don’t expect to find much available at this point for holiday travel because airlines are now either blocking their sale fares for those dates or adding a premium to them for certain days.   In short, they intend to maximize the income from peak demand days any way they can.

That said, there are a few strategies you can employ for a less expensive trip.  Traveling with a family?  If so, see if you can send your family ahead of you on a non-peak day while you travel on a peak day later so you can finish your work week.   Look for early departures to your destination.  A 6:00am flight might not sound attractive but if you save $100 per ticket, that’s a tidy sum for a family of 4.   Look for connections through a non-traditional city that might take longer but cost less. 

What if you have a lot of air miles and you want to use them?  Again, you’re likely out of luck but there are some thing you can check into.  See if your frequent flier program has any partners that travel the route you want.  They may have availability.  The Star Alliance now has not 1, not 2 but 3 partner airlines in the US (United, Continental and US Airways) and Sky Team has the rather huge network of Delta/Northwest.  Oneworld, I’m afraid, is limited to American Airlines but if you’re traveling to an international destination, you may still have a chance.

International destinations require some creative thinking for a cheaper fare.   Perhaps if you are traveling to the UK you might ordinarily use American Airlines but they’re rather expensive for the dates you wish to travel.  It might be possible to fly via one of the Oneworld partners using a different hub.  You may make 1 or 2 connections instead of flying non-stop but, again, the savings may be worth it particularly if you have a family.  It might be possible to fly Iberia to Spain and connect via Madrid or Barcelona for instance.  Or if you ordinarily use Northwest Airlines, you may have better luck checking KLM or Air France’s schedules for connections via Paris or Amsterdam. 

Holiday travel is also the time when checking luggage is certainly more of a risk.  Try to send gifts ahead of you via UPS, FEDEX or the USPS.  Consider what you are taking along for clothes.  Maybe you need to wear nice, dressy clothes once on your trip.  If so, considering wearing them for the flight so you can pack an extra shirt and tie into a smaller suitcase that you can carry on instead of checking.   This is a good strategy for taking along a bulky sweater or coat too.  

Finally, consider where your flight(s) may be connecting through.  Try schedule your holiday travel connections through southern hubs such as Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Memphis, Charlotte or Phoenix.   This doesn’t completely eliminate the risk of bad weather but it does help mitigate it considerably.  Try to leave as early as possible in the day as delays only get worse through the day when weather is involved.   Check your flight status the day before your trip.  Is there weather affecting one of the cities you are traveling to or through?  If so and you find your schedule flexible, try calling the airline and seeing if you can change your schedule to something better without penalty. 

If you find yourself stuck at a connection, look for opportunities to fly to a nearby city instead.  For instance, if you’re traveling to Chicago and weather has massive delays being experienced, perhaps your airline also flies to Milwaukee.  If so, they may let you change your destination to Milwaukee where family can pick you up or you can rent a car to travel down there.   Even if your chosen airline doesn’t fly to someplace nearby, perhaps a partner airline of theirs does.  Suggest that as a option to the gate agent if you are trying to re-book.

Have a strategy.  See what your options are *before* you leave and have a couple of backup plans you can suggest to an airline agent in the event of a cancellation.  Yes, they are supposed to have more resources than you in that situation but they also have limited time to think a problem through.  If you have a suggestion or two they can try, you may make your life and theirs much easier since you are signaling some flexibility and trying to work with the system instead being in war with it. 

I’ll also suggest this service.  It’s Cranky Concierge found HERE.  It is a travel service offered by Brett Snyder of the Cranky Flier blog.  For a low price, you get an ultimate airline geek who will help you with all those strategies I named and more.    I think for holiday travelers, this could be a huge value in the event something goes wrong with your flight(s).    I myself do this kind of thing for friends and family but chances are you don’t have an airline geek in your circle.  The Cranky Concierge can be your own personal airline geek and help get you there more reliably.

Filed under: Travel Hints by ajax
No Comments »

I find it interesting that of the established LCC carriers in the United States, only one of them seems unafraid to compete with major legacy airlines at their established hub and/or focus city airports.  Airtan. 

Every other successful LCC airline has followed a model of ducking and weaving away from the home territories of established major legacy airlines and, they, too have been successful.   However, I think Airtran has managed to prove you don’t need to be afraid of a legacy airline if you have the right product and prices.   I would applaud loudly if they ever came into DFW and provided some real competition to American Airlines by making DFW a focus city.

Filed under: Airline Service by ajax
No Comments »

The Dallas Morning News Airline Biz Blog is reporting that Airtran is arranging for commuter airline SkyWest to fly new routes on behalf of Airtran from Milwaukee, WI to several destinations including Dallas / Fort Worth and Washington D.C.

SkyWest will be using 50 seat Bombardier CRJ-200 aircraft for these flights and that interests me for a few reasons.  Due to long time personal connections to Milwaukee and living in Dallas for the past 40 years, I’ve long monitored what various airlines offer between the two cities.  Strangely, it’s a city pair that does have a lot of traffic but it has never been served very well by any one airline.

I suspect the establishment of this route is really for a few reasons.  One, it allows Airtran to compete with the current “dominant” player on the route which is American Airlines.    American Airlines at one time had as many as 5 frequencies on the route until the current economic decline.  Presently, they are serving it with 3 flights a day using Embraer ERJ-145 aircraft.    The flights haven’t been well served that aircraft because the flight duration exposes a lot of discomfort for the passenger during the 2.5 hour flight.  In addition, it has often been necessary to deny boarding to passengers due to weight and balance issues for making the flight.   The airplane often cannot carry a full load and enough fuel for the flight.

But American’s only real competition for non-stop flights has been Midwest Airlines.   Midwest has flown about 4 frequencies per day using the Boeing 717 and now the Embraer E-190.   Anyone who has flown Midwest on that route knows that that is a very comfortable flight and generally staffed with much nicer people.  Midwest has a loyal following on that route and I suspect Airtran wants to try to eat into it using price. 

Finally, by offering the non-stop flights, Airtran gets to tweak the nose of its newest competitor in Milwaukee, Southwest Airlines.   By starting this route now, Airtran has an opportunity to grow the business and offer a competitive distinction between themselves and Southwest in the Milwaukee market.  Southwest Airlines cannot fly that route as a non-stop yet because of restrictions placed on it due to their using Love Field airport in Dallas instead of DFW. 

Airtran is likely to be very successful on that route because American Airlines has never treated it as anything but an unloved step-child and much of the traffic between the two cities is O&D rather than follow on traffic.   American may retain some passengers for follow-on travel to regional destinations around Texas but I suspect that will be done by using 2 flights a day in the near future. 

In addition, Airtran has managed to endear itself to Milwaukee despite the ugly picture painted about themselves when they were attempting to take over Midwest Airlines.   Locals in Milwaukee like them and have found them to be a real alternative to Midwest Airlines both on price as well as quality. 

I think Airtran will manage to grow this route (as well as the others being served by SkyWest) and ultimately take them over with their Boeing 717 aircraft in the future.    Airtran will likely erode AA’s traffic first and then take over some of Midwest’s loads on price allowing them to ultimately become the dominant player in that city pair.  It’s doable using a CRJ-200 for now and upgradeable to a Boeing 717 pretty quickly in the future.

Filed under: Airline News, Airline Service by ajax
No Comments »

I found a fun quiz on world airlines on another blog this morning.  It’s timed and does include a lot of different world airlines.  You match the city it is headquartered in with the airline.  You can find it HERE.

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

In the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Continental President Jeff Smisek was quotes as saying that Continental may re-visit the idea of merging with United Airlines in the future.  The story can be read HERE.

Continental has experienced a rather rough dip in unit revenues over the past year even compared to other US legacy airlines.  The airline was much more devoted to the business traveler (particularly in the international segment) and the decline in business travel has hurt it more than some other airlines.   A merger with another airline could help Continental diversify its revenue sources and experience synergies much like the Delta/Northwest merger appears to be providing that mating.   To date, Delta / Northwest has not been profitable but it does appear to be weathering the economic recession in the airline industry quite well and its new found flexibility with both equipment and passengers seems to have benefited the airline.

However, I didn’t like the idea of Continental merging with United in 2008 and I don’t like it now.  United is saddled with a lot of debt, an angry labor pool and aging aircraft.  Continental, on the other hand, is much the opposite.   While Continental has a well trained management corps and their own employees are much happier, I don’t see what United brings to the table that they can’t already develop on their own over time.   The Denver hub would be of little value to Continental and is already a battleground between two LCC carriers and United.   United does have the better system over the Pacific but lacks the aircraft to modernize it while Continental has the better product for Pacific travel, it doesn’t have the spare equipment to spruce up those routes to compete against the likes of Delta/Northwest. 

To me, it seems that Continental would benefit more from smaller, more tactical mergers that dovetail more closely with their service and aircraft fleet.  Alaska Airlines is one partner that, in my opinion, would be an excellent fit for Continental.  It would give them an West Coast route structure, a fleet that meshes (mostly) with Continental’s, an employee group already accustomed to be treated well and a management corps that is doing remarkably well and which could augment Continental’s own management leadership nicely.    Even more important, Alaska Airlines is profitable at present.

The next best strategy for Continental is to start planning for the future.  They have a number of new long haul aircraft due over the next 4 years and despite how everyone feels in the airline world, this recession will be over someday in the future.  Continental could capitalize on their strengths and aircraft fleet by targeting United Airlines and its Pacific destinations for 2011 or 2012.  By selectively targeting United and US Airways, Continental could fair very well without taking on all the baggage any other legacy airline has to offer it. 

Joining up with United Airlines really doesn’t offer Continental much that it can’t already achieve except the Chicago hub for both domestic and international flying.  Continental’s Cleveland hub is a very distant second to United’s Chicago but I wonder if having that kind of market dominance in Chicago is worth the trouble of bad labor relations, old aircraft fleets and a group of executives that have shown themselves to be mediocre in everything they execute.   In fact, by joining the Star Alliance, I suspect that Continental will reap almost as much benefit with little trouble.

Continental’s new home in the Star Alliance is interesting to me in that Continental’s product seems to much more closely match that of other Star Alliance partners (Lufthansa, Singapore Airlines, Thai, Air Canada, Air New Zealand) than either existing US based Star Alliance member aka United Airlines and US Airways.   I suspect that member airlines will be quite willing to book more traffic on Continental for US domestic destinations than on United or US Airways.   If anything, US Airways becomes the odd man out and should begin considering finding a new home.  I’d suggest OneWorld.   Nonetheless, I’ll be monitoring Continental’s experiences in the Star Alliance for the next year as I do think it’ll make a positive difference in their fortunes.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

Air France just received their first A-380 and Lufthansa is right behind them.  Lufthansa is unusual in that it has orders for both a considerable number of A-380 aircraft as well as the new Boeing 747-8i. 

You can view a rather great video on Lufthansa’s new A-380 HERE.  It’s actually one of the better videos of an A-380 that I’ve seen.

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
No Comments »