Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:26 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 596 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 10:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 35561
fishfoodie wrote:
Saint wrote:
It turns out the Boeing MAX simulators didn't accurately represent an MCAS failure should one occur. Not directly relevant to either crash as simulator time wasn't required, nor even available outside of Seattle, but it speaks to the nature of what was effectively a coverup


It does speak volumes to Boeings commitment to quality control !!

Why not just bung on a copy of MS Flight Simulator, & pretend that, if people can land something on that; they can land a MAX in Hong Kong during a Typhoon :roll:

The first rule of any software modeling; is to compare the accuracy of the results of the model, to a wide variety of real datasets, (not exclusively using the same data you derived the model from), to determine the actual validity of the model !

The entire project was sales and marketing driven, rather than engineering.

The executive team should have had enough engineering experience to counter this, but I don't know how many engineers afre in the Beoing executive team any more.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 10:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5376
Niki Laudas death prompted me to look again at the loss of his airliner (B767 300ER) with all on board and what a surprise, it seems Boeing has form. The crash was caused by a thrust reverser activating during fight at maximum speed. Boeing denied everything but Lauda himself pressed the point and Boeing had to admit that they had only tested a thruster problem at 250mph, and CAA had signed them off on it.

They had to retrofit a lot of aircraft with a device to prevent activation unless wheels were down.

Lauda took Boeing on and forced them into admitting fault and fixing the problem. I guess surviving a race crash meant he had nothing to fear from any Boeing executive. Legend.

A bit of deja vu with the Max and their attitude.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 10:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 20, 2019 7:43 pm
Posts: 110
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 11:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13893
Location: South Oxfordshire
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


Because ultimately this will have little impact on the Boeing P&L

The only way this will impact Boeing is if the MAX doesn't get recertified at all. Then Boeing's in a pickle


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 7:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 20, 2019 7:43 pm
Posts: 110
Saint wrote:
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


Because ultimately this will have little impact on the Boeing P&L

The only way this will impact Boeing is if the MAX doesn't get recertified at all. Then Boeing's in a pickle



What about the billions in compensation it will have to pay out plus a protracted legal process with all the associated press?

Surely the airlines that bought the Max will also be seeking compensation for loss of earnings/reputation etc?

Lawyers gonna have a field day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 7:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13893
Location: South Oxfordshire
ForzaIt wrote:
Saint wrote:
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


Because ultimately this will have little impact on the Boeing P&L

The only way this will impact Boeing is if the MAX doesn't get recertified at all. Then Boeing's in a pickle



What about the billions in compensation it will have to pay out plus a protracted legal process with all the associated press?

Surely the airlines that bought the Max will also be seeking compensation for loss of earnings/reputation etc?

Lawyers gonna have a field day.


For Boeing, that's pocket change. It might have a short term impact but nothing in the long term.


On the other hand, if the MAX doesn't recertify then they're in real trouble - you would be talking about trillions directly, not to mention knock on cashflow implications for all their other programmes and future development plans. That's where the real risk lies, but investors know it's an incredibly small risk and don't expect it to come about


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 7:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9800
Saint wrote:
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


Because ultimately this will have little impact on the Boeing P&L

The only way this will impact Boeing is if the MAX doesn't get recertified at all. Then Boeing's in a pickle


Trump's Air Force will take care of that. No subsidies for Boeing, just a very big and loyal customer to make up for the losses.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 9:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20909
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/21/boeing-shares-rise-after-report-that-a-bird-strike-may-have-caused-737-max-crash.html

I don't get the logic, it was only a bird strike? Everyone still died like


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 9:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15780
sewa wrote:
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/21/boeing-shares-rise-after-report-that-a-bird-strike-may-have-caused-737-max-crash.html

I don't get the logic, it was only a bird strike? Everyone still died like

Yes, but you can't sue the bird.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 10:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19395
TheFrog wrote:
Saint wrote:
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


Because ultimately this will have little impact on the Boeing P&L

The only way this will impact Boeing is if the MAX doesn't get recertified at all. Then Boeing's in a pickle


Trump's Air Force will take care of that. No subsidies for Boeing, just a very big and loyal customer to make up for the losses.

This.
And not just Trump.

US Government has Boeing's back.


I think it's just about the only industry where there is ONE American company in a competitive world market.
Anywhere else, either there are multiple American companies, or the solo American so dominant the competition doesn't matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 10:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 20, 2019 7:43 pm
Posts: 110
sewa wrote:
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/21/boeing-shares-rise-after-report-that-a-bird-strike-may-have-caused-737-max-crash.html

I don't get the logic, it was only a bird strike? Everyone still died like




Sounds to me like it was a stool pigeon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3375
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-03/ ... s/11174710


fudge getting on that plane ever again...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:38 pm
Posts: 3313
camroc1 wrote:
fishfoodie wrote:
Saint wrote:
It turns out the Boeing MAX simulators didn't accurately represent an MCAS failure should one occur. Not directly relevant to either crash as simulator time wasn't required, nor even available outside of Seattle, but it speaks to the nature of what was effectively a coverup


It does speak volumes to Boeings commitment to quality control !!

Why not just bung on a copy of MS Flight Simulator, & pretend that, if people can land something on that; they can land a MAX in Hong Kong during a Typhoon :roll:

The first rule of any software modeling; is to compare the accuracy of the results of the model, to a wide variety of real datasets, (not exclusively using the same data you derived the model from), to determine the actual validity of the model !

The entire project was sales and marketing driven, rather than engineering.

The executive team should have had enough engineering experience to counter this, but I don't know how many engineers afre in the Beoing executive team any more.


The undercover reporting on the Dreamliner was very disturbing but obviously didnt cause enough ripples in the mainstream. Seems though the chickens have finally come home to roost with the MAX. Boeing seems to be a rotten apple these days having killed the traditional engineering first ethos. Funny hearing the CEO proclaim that the public should trust them to fix problems because they know how..... this is the same management that gutted the culture that underpinned "if its not Boeing I am not going".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 439
ForzaIt wrote:
What also amazes me is that the Boeing share price is bumbling along as if nothing has happened.


When it comes to passenger planes, Airlines don't have much choice. So Boeing will be just fine. Plus Boeing is still propped up financially by the US govt. They still have their inflated defense department contracts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 7:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 4405
Location: Chukity - puck!!!
Quote:
Russian low-cost airline Pobeda tells passengers not to switch seats on their flights because it complicates identifying victims in crashes, says tjournal.ru

Авиакомпания «Победа» объяснила запрет пассажирам меняться местами последующим опознанием при катастрофах


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26005
Location: Chickenrunning...
The Optimist wrote:
Quote:
Russian low-cost airline Pobeda tells passengers not to switch seats on their flights because it complicates identifying victims in crashes, says tjournal.ru

Авиакомпания «Победа» объяснила запрет пассажирам меняться местами последующим опознанием при катастрофах

Maybe they should give DNA before takeoff. :uhoh:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13893
Location: South Oxfordshire
Brumbieman wrote:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-03/some-boeing-737-max-planes-may-have-faulty-parts-faa-says/11174710


fudge getting on that plane ever again...


You've completely misunderstood the takeaway of this story (although to be fair so have the press). This is actually q story of the FAA doing it's job. In any machine as complex as an aircraft it's inevitable that so.ewhere in the supply chain defects will occur from time to ti.r. The truck is identifying and fixing them in a time6manner, which I thus vase yet have. Note also that a failure of this component would not be fatal in any shape or form, hence the 7 day allowance given to identify and fix things.

This is the system working as it should.

Doesn't change the fact that they screwed up MCAS right and proper


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20909
Saint wrote:
Brumbieman wrote:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-03/some-boeing-737-max-planes-may-have-faulty-parts-faa-says/11174710


fudge getting on that plane ever again...


You've completely misunderstood the takeaway of this story (although to be fair so have the press). This is actually q story of the FAA doing it's job. In any machine as complex as an aircraft it's inevitable that so.ewhere in the supply chain defects will occur from time to ti.r. The truck is identifying and fixing them in a time6manner, which I thus vase yet have. Note also that a failure of this component would not be fatal in any shape or form, hence the 7 day allowance given to identify and fix things.

This is the system working as it should.

Doesn't change the fact that they screwed up MCAS right and proper


Jesus, your typing is worse than an FAA inspector. You have missed the point, this is propaganda by Boeing, trying to look like they care again


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9800
What I still fail to understand is how they could come up with an automated system relying on a single input when redundancy is the basis of aerospace design... It is as if the MCAS had been designed by an undergrade intern...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26005
Location: Chickenrunning...
TheFrog wrote:
What I still fail to understand is how they could come up with an automated system relying on a single input when redundancy is the basis of aerospace design... It is as if the MCAS had been designed by an undergrade intern...


They rushed it to market. (Hopefully) some grizzly old-school engineer in the basement possibly highlighted the lack of redundancy, but was shut-down at board level.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26005
Location: Chickenrunning...
.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8113
Location: hovering over the red button
TheFrog wrote:
What I still fail to understand is how they could come up with an automated system relying on a single input when redundancy is the basis of aerospace design... It is as if the MCAS had been designed by an undergrade intern...


It seems like they didn't deem it a critical system in terms of COF requiring redundancy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 6:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 4405
Location: Chukity - puck!!!
Boeing 787 - Flying time bombs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvkEpstd9os


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20909
blindcider wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
What I still fail to understand is how they could come up with an automated system relying on a single input when redundancy is the basis of aerospace design... It is as if the MCAS had been designed by an undergrade intern...


It seems like they didn't deem it a critical system in terms of COF requiring redundancy

Because they do not understand basic engineering. There is nothing more critical than staying in the air. By the way I flew in a 737 800 to Porto, no issues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8113
Location: hovering over the red button
sewa wrote:
blindcider wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
What I still fail to understand is how they could come up with an automated system relying on a single input when redundancy is the basis of aerospace design... It is as if the MCAS had been designed by an undergrade intern...


It seems like they didn't deem it a critical system in terms of COF requiring redundancy

Because they do not understand basic engineering. There is nothing more critical than staying in the air. By the way I flew in a 737 800 to Porto, no issues.


Yes Sewa, Boeing does not understand basic engineering. Do you ever make any statements that are not moronic in the extreme?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15780
blindcider wrote:
sewa wrote:
blindcider wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
What I still fail to understand is how they could come up with an automated system relying on a single input when redundancy is the basis of aerospace design... It is as if the MCAS had been designed by an undergrade intern...


It seems like they didn't deem it a critical system in terms of COF requiring redundancy

Because they do not understand basic engineering. There is nothing more critical than staying in the air. By the way I flew in a 737 800 to Porto, no issues.


Yes Sewa, Boeing does not understand basic engineering. Do you ever make any statements that are not moronic in the extreme?

I think most of us understood that he was referring to board and management personnel rather than engineering staff.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 35561
Rinkals wrote:
blindcider wrote:
sewa wrote:
blindcider wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
What I still fail to understand is how they could come up with an automated system relying on a single input when redundancy is the basis of aerospace design... It is as if the MCAS had been designed by an undergrade intern...


It seems like they didn't deem it a critical system in terms of COF requiring redundancy

Because they do not understand basic engineering. There is nothing more critical than staying in the air. By the way I flew in a 737 800 to Porto, no issues.


Yes Sewa, Boeing does not understand basic engineering. Do you ever make any statements that are not moronic in the extreme?

I think most of us understood that he was referring to board and management personnel rather than engineering staff.

It has been reported that the executive level at Boeing has been hollowed out of engineers in favour of marketing/sales/general management over the past 15 years or so. It could be as simple as not understanding the risks involved in the decisions they were making.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20909
It's all about the money Cammy. Why listen to stupid engineers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18417
camroc1 wrote:
It has been reported that the executive level at Boeing has been hollowed out of engineers in favour of marketing/sales/general management over the past 15 years or so. It could be as simple as not understanding the risks involved in the decisions they were making.

Criminal corporate gr€€d


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 6:14 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2630
More problems with Boeing.

Safety worries about the 787 Dreamliner now.


"Airline pilots have voiced fears over the safety of a fleet of Boeing aircraft after a crucial fire-fighting system has been found to have the potential to malfunction.
Boeing has issued an alert to airlines using its flagship B787 Dreamliner, warning that the switch used to extinguish an engine fire has failed in a “small number” of instances. The switch also severs the fuel supply and the hydraulic fluid to prevent flames spreading."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... fety-fears


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 6:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4690
Glaston wrote:
More problems with Boeing.

Safety worries about the 787 Dreamliner now.


"Airline pilots have voiced fears over the safety of a fleet of Boeing aircraft after a crucial fire-fighting system has been found to have the potential to malfunction.
Boeing has issued an alert to airlines using its flagship B787 Dreamliner, warning that the switch used to extinguish an engine fire has failed in a “small number” of instances. The switch also severs the fuel supply and the hydraulic fluid to prevent flames spreading."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... fety-fears


wait & see; we'll get a stream of these; now that Boeing has had a sit down with it's engineering teams; & lawyers, & now they're going to have to start trying to retrospectively install quality in aircraft they've already sold !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 6:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19395
Jaysus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 7:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20909
fishfoodie wrote:
Glaston wrote:
More problems with Boeing.

Safety worries about the 787 Dreamliner now.


"Airline pilots have voiced fears over the safety of a fleet of Boeing aircraft after a crucial fire-fighting system has been found to have the potential to malfunction.
Boeing has issued an alert to airlines using its flagship B787 Dreamliner, warning that the switch used to extinguish an engine fire has failed in a “small number” of instances. The switch also severs the fuel supply and the hydraulic fluid to prevent flames spreading."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... fety-fears


wait & see; we'll get a stream of these; now that Boeing has had a sit down with it's engineering teams; & lawyers, & now they're going to have to start trying to retrospectively install quality in aircraft they've already sold !

I flew on a 737 to and from Porto. While there are issues and I critical of the shortcuts I think that is over egging the pudding. They are still an outstanding company and people will continue to use their planes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 7:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:57 pm
Posts: 10548
sewa wrote:
Because they do not understand basic engineering.


sewa wrote:
They are still an outstanding company


How many contradictory things can you believe before breakfast?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 7:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20909
A5D5E5 wrote:
sewa wrote:
Because they do not understand basic engineering.


sewa wrote:
They are still an outstanding company


How many contradictory things can you believe before breakfast?

I am free to criticise them for these failings without saying I'd never fly Boeing again. Maybe the difference is lost on you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 7:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:57 pm
Posts: 10548
sewa wrote:
A5D5E5 wrote:
sewa wrote:
Because they do not understand basic engineering.


sewa wrote:
They are still an outstanding company


How many contradictory things can you believe before breakfast?

I am free to criticise them for these failings without saying I'd never fly Boeing again. Maybe the difference is lost on you.




You are very generous with your definition of "outstanding company" if the threshold is below a basic understanding of engineering.


Presumably you also think that thalidomide is an outstanding treatment for morning sickness, young earth creationists are outstanding thinkers and the Hindenburg is an outstanding way to fly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20909
Thalidomide is back on the market with the toxic isomer separated. Its used for people in late stage cancer and aids. Anyhow Willie Walsh has just placed a massive order for 737's including 737 maxes. Says he has every confidence in Boeing, might just be the turning point, I suppose we have yet to see will most people board maxes though or will panic set in


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3202
sewa wrote:
Thalidomide is back on the market with the toxic isomer separated. Its used for people in late stage cancer and aids.


Oooooh we might get a Fliddy sequel? I didn't think he could be improved, but cancer AND AIDS...? It might just work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9800
So IAG gives Boeing a life line committing to the purchase of 200 B737 Max, when they operate a massive fleet of A320.

Is there a link with BA signing with Boeing for the maintenance of its 200 strong A320 fleet?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 13893
Location: South Oxfordshire
TheFrog wrote:
So IAG gives Boeing a life line committing to the purchase of 200 B737 Max, when they operate a massive fleet of A320.

Is there a link with BA signing with Boeing for the maintenance of its 200 strong A320 fleet?


This is just a Letter of Intent - it's the ultimate in cancellable orders, and ultimately I wouldn't be surprised to see it convert into 77X and 787 somewhere down the line (if not just be cancelled altogether). I also wonder just how big a discount was offered and guaranteed against any possible future order of ANYTHING, in return for something like this to be announced and shore up the share price.

Also completely overshadows IAGs order for 14 321XLRs, which will be used for US single aisle routes out of Dublin.

After doing some more digging, it seems that BAs share of these would be intended for Gatwick - so very much the low cost tourist end of BA operations. High value business operations out of Heathrow won't be risked by this. That would be consistent with the other target airlines for these planes - LEVEL, and Vueling.

EDIT - worth also noting that as of IAGs last annual report (December), IAG had confirmed orders of 92 A32xneo and options on a further 128, all to be delivered by 2023. How much do you want to bet that Willie Walsh is already on the phone to Toulouse - lower the price or we'll cancel and take the Boeing planes instead?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 596 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: danthefan, Edinburgh01, EverReady, Glaston, Google Adsense [Bot], inactionman, message #2527204, OomPB, Oxbow, Raggs, redderneck, RichieRich89, shereblue, sockwithaticket, Troll, Zakar and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group