Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

LAX772LR · Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:38 am

Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks... but all that aside, at least Boeing has finally come to grips with reality.

Boeing finally conceded publicly Tuesday that while the all-cargo model of its 747 jumbo jet will continue to sell, the longtime “Queen of the Skies” has no future as a passenger plane.

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/bo ... ger-plane/

I get that the model popular for what it once did for aviation.... four decades ago. But now it's just an obsolete relic of a bygone era; I can't believe it's taken them this long to see what just about everyone else has already long-since known.

KarelXWB · Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:54 am

The sad part is, if a vendor admits the airplane will not sell anymore, you know they will stop making further efforts.

frigatebird · Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:10 am

When airlines adopted 10 abreast Y for the 777-300ER, the 747-8i's niche market shrunk to just a very tiny piece of the market. When Boeing launched the 777-9, the market for the 747-8i disappeared completely. It will probably disappear from Boeing's website/pricelist soon.

I hope the freighter market will improve enough to enable Boeing a production rate of at least 12 per year, if not I don't think the 747-8F can be kept alive either.

MrHMSH · Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:15 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks

I think that might be treason.

na · Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:22 am

No surprise here.

But so sad.
For me the 747 is and will remain the most attractive airliner ever, its design has a character and uniqueness no modern airliner will ever reach. Its sad to see that boring, generic twinjets take over. Aviation is loosing a lot of appeal with this uniformity creeping forward. I never understood how someone can be enthusiastic about something generic like that fat sausage 777 or the slick A350. Technically they might be brilliant, but look at them: they are just like grey suits - yawn.

Dutchy · Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:55 am

frigatebird wrote:
When airlines adopted 10 abreast Y for the 777-300ER, the 747-8i's niche market shrunk to just a very tiny piece of the market. When Boeing launched the 777-9, the market for the 747-8i disappeared completely. It will probably disappear from Boeing's website/pricelist soon.

I hope the freighter market will improve enough to enable Boeing a production rate of at least 12 per year, if not I don't think the 747-8F can be kept alive either.

+1, I am afraid the 2/3 VC-25 will be the last of the mighty 747. I don't see them producing 12 a year. They are at 6 at the moment.

BlueSky1976 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:03 am

The writing was on the wall the minute Boeing launched 777-300ER. People, it's time to MOVE ON.

Your "queen" is DEAD.

Tedd · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:03 am

I`m sad to hear this news too. I had some great flights over the years, & always felt that
it had a safety margin over other planes, so always did my best to fly one. I thought it
the right course to build a successor to the -400, but was disappointed that Boeing
" hamstrung" it`s full potential ( in hindsight not greatly as it happens ) by not offering an
engine choice. There were many -400 customers who chose RR, ( BA being the largest
operator of the type ) but Boeing chose to ignore them, which I thought at the time was
a retrograde step. The B747-8i was probably the best iteration of the series, but it turned
out not to be a match for the A380 which stole it`s sales, so limiting it`s success. With the
recent turn of events it looks like the A380 may well have had it`s day too as Mr Tinseth
points out. To lose one of these VLA`s will be sad, to lose two would be a crying shame.

Revelation · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:21 am

He's pronouncing the A380 as dead too:

“We don’t see much demand for really big airplanes,” Tinseth said. Furthermore, he added, “we find it hard to believe Airbus will be able to deliver the rest of their A380s in backlog.”

And:

“The biggest airplane in the market moving forward will be the 777X,” Tinseth said.

Hard to argue, given the last few years of A380 sales:

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_A ... deliveries

BN727227Ultra · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:27 am

na wrote:
. Its sad to see that boring, generic twinjets take over. Aviation is loosing a lot of appeal with this uniformity creeping forward. I never understood how someone can be enthusiastic about something generic like that fat sausage 777 or the slick A350. Technically they might be brilliant, but look at them: they are just like grey suits - yawn.

Also, the loss of T-tails on mainline aircraft.

VirginFlyer · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:33 am

BN727227Ultra wrote:
na wrote:
. Its sad to see that boring, generic twinjets take over. Aviation is loosing a lot of appeal with this uniformity creeping forward. I never understood how someone can be enthusiastic about something generic like that fat sausage 777 or the slick A350. Technically they might be brilliant, but look at them: they are just like grey suits - yawn.

Also, the loss of T-tails on mainline aircraft.

I also lament the decreasing diversity of airliner designs, however the principle of convergent evolution seems to be at play here, so I think we're more or less stuck with it. Fly on quads and T-tails while you can! Be thankful there even was once a quad-jet T-tail!

V/F

Strato2 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:46 am

Revelation wrote:
He's pronouncing the A380 as dead too:

Of course. That's his job. He or his comrade also said the A320NEO is just catching up with the 737NG.

Gr8Circle · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:53 am

LAX772LR wrote:
I can't believe it's taken them this long to see what just about everyone else has already long-since known.

So, you're one of those who believe that all the wisdom of the world exists only on a.net? Obviously Boeing know this long ago, much before it probably even occurred to you.....but they did what they had to do as a manufacturer, as against as an armchair a.netter, and kept the model alive as long as they thought they could benefit from it.....

PPVLC · Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:54 am

I'm sure many here who are saying the 747 is not that great never had to opportunity to fly one either as passenger or crew. The 747 is a SUPERB aircraft.
A dystopian future with airports full of boring twinjets awaits. We are doomed.

Keith2004 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:08 pm

VirginFlyer wrote:
BN727227Ultra wrote:
na wrote:
. Its sad to see that boring, generic twinjets take over. Aviation is loosing a lot of appeal with this uniformity creeping forward. I never understood how someone can be enthusiastic about something generic like that fat sausage 777 or the slick A350. Technically they might be brilliant, but look at them: they are just like grey suits - yawn.

Also, the loss of T-tails on mainline aircraft.

I also lament the decreasing diversity of airliner designs, however the principle of convergent evolution seems to be at play here, so I think we're more or less stuck with it. Fly on quads and T-tails while you can! Be thankful there even was once a quad-jet T-tail!

V/F

Convergent Evolution is the best description I have heard of what has happened to aviation design!

Aesthetically as an Av Geek it is not pleasing, but looking at any ramp today its clear

20 years ago average ramp at a major airport was 747, 7X7 Twins, T-Tails, DC-10, L1011, A-320 fam, A3XX widebody
20 years from now it will be 7X7 Wide body Twins, 737, A320 Family, A3X0 Wide body Twins

50 years from now 737 will still be there cause it is immortal :lol:

I will Still enjoy buy RIP 747 and VLAs in general :tombstone:

SRT75 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:19 pm

“We don’t see much demand for really big airplanes,” Tinseth said.

So we're going to build bigger airports that can handle more movements of smaller aircraft? Maybe. I think the VLA may have a renaissance when our major hubs start hitting capacity (which will happen soon if it hasn't already happened).

Keith2004 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:30 pm

SRT75 wrote:
“We don’t see much demand for really big airplanes,” Tinseth said.

So we're going to build bigger airports that can handle more movements of smaller aircraft? Maybe. I think the VLA may have a renaissance when our major hubs start hitting capacity (which will happen soon if it hasn't already happened).

And these VLA may still be twins if technology evolves as it is

leleko747 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:31 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound,

Ok, that's entirely up to you.

LAX772LR wrote:
and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks...

Remove the blind in your eyes.

LAX772LR wrote:
But now it's just an obsolete relic of a bygone era

Guess what: that's why it is being retired.

I fail to see this as a serious thread, it looks more like OP moaning because he doesn't like the plane and want to trigger a war.

Anyway, the end of the 747 (at least as a pax model) is indeed near and the humanity is now walking towards a boring twinjet future. Nothing new to see.

georgiaame · Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:51 pm

Mark my words, and there is historic precedent, in about 15 years, there will be hewing and hawing about the need to reopen the 747 line because no other aircraft on the market can fit the flight profile. It's gonna happen. God rest the Queen. Until you've flown upstairs in a Delta 747 to Asia, you haven't lived.

frmrCapCadet · Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:31 pm

Describe what kind of car you want, sports two door, small sedan, medium or large sized sedan, small medium or large SUV, They will almost all look the same regardless of brand. Aerodynamics/ fuel efficiency are the driving force in this. Park a Tesla next to a Prius, and the side profiles are amazingly close. I know which I would prefer. LOL

The last new car a bought was an exception to the above, and that was in part why I bought it. Not boring, and a little funny looking.

The best ever 747 flights I was on were the EVA passenger/freighter trips. 200 people in a 747, easy to board, relaxed, and great service. More than made up for the horrible boarding time of 2AM.

ty97 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:38 pm

No surprise at this news, but I can be sad about it anyway.

Tedd · Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:48 pm

georgiaame wrote:
Mark my words, and there is historic precedent, in about 15 years, there will be hewing and hawing about the need to reopen the 747 line because no other aircraft on the market can fit the flight profile. It's gonna happen. God rest the Queen. Until you've flown upstairs in a Delta 747 to Asia, you haven't lived.

A special experience to fly upstairs on a B747. I managed to get an invite into the cockpit of a BA 747, sat
in the jump-seat for 20 mins with the pilots answering my questions on the plane & routing, & I remember
how quiet & a relaxing environment it was.The pilots too were very pleased their new plane ( a 400 ) indicating
there wasn`t better anywhere.

Keith2004 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:56 pm

georgiaame wrote:
Until you've flown upstairs in a Delta 747 to Asia, you haven't lived.

I did DTW-NRT and PVG - DTW upstairs last month...I don't know how I will ever beat a flight experience like that one :cloudnine:

Queue "Don't be sad its over be glad it happened."

Pilots let me sit in cockpit for pitures and handed out 3D cards to everyone in upper deck, felt like a private jet!...makes you almost forget there are 300+ people down below :lol:

I wonder why nobody else ever did J class 1-1 upstairs, felt more first class than business.

MIflyer12 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:04 pm

SRT75 wrote:
“We don’t see much demand for really big airplanes,” Tinseth said.

So we're going to build bigger airports that can handle more movements of smaller aircraft? Maybe. I think the VLA may have a renaissance when our major hubs start hitting capacity (which will happen soon if it hasn't already happened).

The list of major airports that are maxed out on movements isn't that long. More than a few of those see an average gauge much, much smaller than VLA size (DCA, LGA, LAX).

As for projections of infinite passenger growth, prudent strategists would ask 'Where does carbon pricing cause an inflection in demand?' Just more of the same isn't going to work.

lightsaber · Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:30 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks

I think that might be treason.

We must call the brotherhood together to discuss this distressing blasphemy. For it is written the 747 is the Queen, and she shall rule the skies.

Being serious, I love the plane, my favorite. But I find myself clicking on other widebodies for ticket purchases because of comfort. However... It is with pride I have only crossed the Atlantic on 747s to date.

As long as BA and LH fly them from LAX, I see no reason to change (alas, AF has retired the type).

Wow, we have KE (pax), DL, and UA all phasing out the type in passenger service in calendar 2017. By 2020, the 748 will be keeping the fleet flying as the 744 will no longer have the economies of scale to keep flying without help from the -8.

So the question is, will the 744 or A346 be retired first from passenger service?

LIghtsaber

BN727227Ultra · Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:42 pm

georgiaame wrote:
Mark my words, and there is historic precedent, in about 15 years, there will be hewing and hawing about the need to reopen the 747 line because no other aircraft on the market can fit the flight profile. It's gonna happen. God rest the Queen. Until you've flown upstairs in a Delta 747 to Asia, you haven't lived.

Quick! Someone buy the tooling!!!111!!!

robsaw · Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:43 pm

Have only flown on a 747 twice. First time 33 years ago on Wardair. The distinguishing recollection was meal service on real china in economy class. Second time was on BA in 2015.

While it may have been interesting for many passengers 33 years ago when widebodies hadn't yet proliferated - air travel is now a commodity service and the vast majority of passengers have no clue nor any interest in the aircraft itself.

ILNFlyer · Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:51 pm

Boeing's admission is significant not only for B, but for Airbus as well.

ILNFlyer · Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:53 pm

BN727227Ultra wrote:
georgiaame wrote:
Mark my words, and there is historic precedent, in about 15 years, there will be hewing and hawing about the need to reopen the 747 line because no other aircraft on the market can fit the flight profile. It's gonna happen. God rest the Queen. Until you've flown upstairs in a Delta 747 to Asia, you haven't lived.

Quick! Someone buy the tooling!!!111!!!

Sure thing. I will put it in my warehouse right next to the 757 tooling I picked up. 8-)

ZeeZoo · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:00 pm

georgiaame wrote:
Mark my words, and there is historic precedent, in about 15 years, there will be hewing and hawing about the need to reopen the 747 line because no other aircraft on the market can fit the flight profile. It's gonna happen. God rest the Queen. Until you've flown upstairs in a Delta 747 to Asia, you haven't lived.

What precedent was that whereby the production line was restarted 15 years after being shut down?

Stitch · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:26 pm

ZeeZoo wrote:
What precedent was that whereby the production line was restarted 15 years after being shut down?

None, but not a week goes by on a.net without someone opening a thread about how Boeing should bring back the 757-200, either in original spec or "MAX'd". georgiaame was joking that we'll see the same for the 747 at some future date.

ASQ400 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:33 pm

georgiaame wrote:
Mark my words, and there is historic precedent, in about 15 years, there will be hewing and hawing about the need to reopen the 747 line because no other aircraft on the market can fit the flight profile. It's gonna happen. God rest the Queen. Until you've flown upstairs in a Delta 747 to Asia, you haven't lived.

You're probably right. I would expect a.net to be around 15 years from now.

ZeeZoo · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:34 pm

Stitch wrote:
ZeeZoo wrote:
What precedent was that whereby the production line was restarted 15 years after being shut down?

None, but not a week goes by on a.net without someone opening a thread about how Boeing should bring back the 757-200, either in original spec or "MAX'd". georgiaame was joking that we'll see the same for the 747 at some future date.

Ahhh, okay. I was going to ask in the 757 thread on the front page whether the fawning over the jet was a tad too much but didn't want to be feasted upon either.

ASQ400 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:35 pm

Keith2004 wrote:
SRT75 wrote:
“We don’t see much demand for really big airplanes,” Tinseth said.

So we're going to build bigger airports that can handle more movements of smaller aircraft? Maybe. I think the VLA may have a renaissance when our major hubs start hitting capacity (which will happen soon if it hasn't already happened).

And these VLA may still be twins if technology evolves as it is

They will also leave niche status in the 2030s and '40s, long after the 747 line shuts down

USAirALB · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:36 pm

robsaw wrote:

While it may have been interesting for many passengers 33 years ago when widebodies hadn't yet proliferated - air travel is now a commodity service and the vast majority of passengers have no clue nor any interest in the aircraft itself.

I actually beg to differ. While yes, society these days has less interest in the joys of aviation than say 30 years ago.

I will say that because of social media, you do see more and more people taking pictures of their plane at the gate, their boarding passes, the cabins, the meals they get on board, etc. I would count that as an interest.

I would also say that most millenials who just even have a little experience traveling internationally can see the significance that an 787 or A380 has.

Stitch · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:51 pm

USAirALB wrote:
I will say that because of social media, you do see more and more people taking pictures of their plane at the gate, their boarding passes, the cabins, the meals they get on board, etc. I would count that as an interest.

I posit it is more interest in sharing their day-to-day life than a specific interest in aviation. They're on vacation, so they're taking pictures of everything just as they do every other day of their lives.

NameOmitted · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:52 pm

ZeeZoo wrote:
What precedent was that whereby the production line was restarted 15 years after being shut down?

DHC-6-400! Let the Twin Otter live forever! The Queen of the North... ok... maybe not, but still a pretty neat aircraft.

and yeah... restarting production on a $6.5 Million bush plane which has no peer and is needlessly complex for most operations so also has no economic incentive to build from a clean sheet is probably not a precedent.

PlanesNTrains · Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:53 pm

Taxiing in SEA yesterday, a Kalitta 747 took off and then a LH 744 landed, both on the near runway. It was fun to hear several people comment "Oh! A 747!" It stands out and is iconic. She'll be missed.

F9Animal · Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:22 pm

From a passengers perspective, the 747 is and always will have a place in my heart. I still think it's a beautiful plane, and just gives me the rapid heartbeat when I see one. It saddens me to know they will eventually close the line.

SeaDoo · Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:30 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks... but all that aside, at least Boeing has finally come to grips with reality.

Boeing finally conceded publicly Tuesday that while the all-cargo model of its 747 jumbo jet will continue to sell, the longtime “Queen of the Skies” has no future as a passenger plane.

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/bo ... ger-plane/

I get that the model popular for what it once did for aviation.... four decades ago. But now it's just an obsolete relic of a bygone era; I can't believe it's taken them this long to see what just about everyone else has already long-since known.

I have not heard to the queen of the skies referred to as the hunchback of Puget Sound. I did a google image search and not one picture of a Boeing 747 came up. Your use picture did come up. That was a surprise to me. I have heard of the hunchback of Mukilteo. It was an ugly 767 that never was produced. I find Boeing 747's, especially the longer up deck versions to be beautiful planes. What do you think of the Silkway Airlines 747's?

Another example of how different strokes for different folks.

nikeherc · Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:05 pm

For those worrying about hubs being over stressed by smaller airplanes, the trend to more direct flights opened by the 787 and to some extent the A-350 will provide some relief. Also, up-gauging from 330s and 767s to 787-9s and 10s and from 772s to 773s, 778s and 779s as well as A-350-900s and 1000s will relieve much of that ramp crowding. That said, I regret that I haven't had the opportunity to travel on an 747.

aemoreira1981 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:17 pm

One now must wonder if the 787-9F and 777-8F will come with swinging tails optional to replace the 747's nose loader.

Stitch · Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:20 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
One now must wonder if the 787-9F and 777-8F will come with swinging tails optional to replace the 747's nose loader.

Existing 747-400Fs and 747-8Fs will have decades of service life ahead of them. There is also the An-124 fleet.

satx · Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:01 pm

nikeherc wrote:
I regret that I haven't had the opportunity to travel on an 747.

In my experience 747 interiors were often ignored and rarely updated on the inside. It was weird flying on an aircraft with ashtrays, drinking water spigots, and projection televisions with audio supplied by air hose headphones. Still, it was interesting to see how people designed aircraft back when intercontinental travel was a new thing. I personally missed out on L-1011's and DC-10's and wish I could have seen them as well, even in their dilapidated near-retirement state. I also missed out on the Concorde but the more I researched it the less I cared about it. Yeah, it went looked great and went fast and managed to clear a number of technological hurtles, but as a passenger it honestly didn't seem all that amazing on the inside. For me personally the early days of the 747 sound a lot more interesting than the later years of the Concorde. Besides, if you know what you're doing you can have a three hour flight on almost any intercontinental aircraft regardless of duration. :champagne:

PlanesNTrains · Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:12 pm

satx wrote:
nikeherc wrote:
I regret that I haven't had the opportunity to travel on an 747.

In my experience 747 interiors were often ignored and rarely updated on the inside. It was weird flying on an aircraft with ashtrays, drinking water spigots, and projection televisions with audio supplied by air hose headphones. Still, it was interesting to see how people designed aircraft back when intercontinental travel was a new thing. I personally missed out on L-1011's and DC-10's and wish I could have seen them as well, even in their dilapidated near-retirement state. I also missed out on the Concorde but the more I researched it the less I cared about it. Yeah, it went looked great and went fast and managed to clear a number of technological hurtles, but as a passenger it honestly didn't seem all that amazing on the inside. For me personally the early days of the 747 sound a lot more interesting than the later years of the Concorde. Besides, if you know what you're doing you can have a three hour flight on almost any intercontinental aircraft regardless of duration.

I flew on NW 742s three times, all when they had 2-4-3 seating. I think that was probably the time to have flown in Y on a 747. Ditto all my experiences on DC-10s being 2-4-2. Still, if you can get on one, time is ticking.

LAX772LR · Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:16 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
The sad part is, if a vendor admits the airplane will not sell anymore, you know they will stop making further efforts.

Kind of a chicken-vs-egg scenario though. The model has its limitations, especially compared to more modern aircraft, but it could've been competitive.

Not at the price they wanted for it though-- but then again, that would mean devaluing their sacred widebody cow of the time (77W), which of course they weren't about to do.

VirginFlyer wrote:
however the principle of convergent evolution seems to be at play here

Bingo!

And as nature has shown us since time immemorial, THAT'S where efficiency (and therefore progress/survival/maintenance) lies.... not in hanging onto relics of the past.

ZeeZoo wrote:
Or maybe highlighting the obnoxiousness of someone else gives me greater pleasure and hope, if they are intelligent enough, to be aware of their obnoxiousness.

Well, there's your fuck-up right there: show me where I've ever maintained denial or unawareness of being an abject asshole. I'll wait. :razz:

SeaDoo wrote:
I have not heard to the queen of the skies referred to as the hunchback of Puget Sound.

I forget where I first heard it, but been using that one for decades.

SeaDoo wrote:
What do you think of the Silkway Airlines 747's?

No particular opinion on it.

As stated I've never had any affinity for the 747, as it just seems so out-of-place among modern airliners-- but I will admit to having a real admiration for some of the colors it wore: particularly Wunala Dreaming and even more so Tropical MegaTop (RIP)

nikeherc wrote:
That said, I regret that I haven't had the opportunity to travel on an 747.

It's not too late....

JannEejit · Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:22 pm

Thirty six years after taking my first jetliner flight, I've yet to fly aboard 747 of any type. I need to rectify that situation soon, even if I just go somewhere and come straight back again !

Phoenix9 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:24 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks... but all that aside, at least Boeing has finally come to grips with reality.

Them's fighting words :box:

MoKa777 · Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:29 pm

Gr8Circle wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
I can't believe it's taken them this long to see what just about everyone else has already long-since known.

So, you're one of those who believe that all the wisdom of the world exists only on a.net? Obviously Boeing know this long ago, much before it probably even occurred to you.....but they did what they had to do as a manufacturer, as against as an armchair a.netter, and kept the model alive as long as they thought they could benefit from it.....

I like this comment. Can't say why, but I do...

cschleic · Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:33 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
The best ever 747 flights I was on were the EVA passenger/freighter trips. 200 people in a 747, easy to board, relaxed, and great service. More than made up for the horrible boarding time of 2AM.

We're you flying SEA - TPE? I recall boarding one of their combi 744s for that route in the middle of the night. Also rode a KLM 747 SUD (aka 300) combi once.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net