LPSHobby
Topic Author
Posts: 308
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:14 pm

Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:34 am

The title says it all, maybe with new landing gears and wings, would it be technically possible?
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10340
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:43 am

I don't think so.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Astronage
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 2:41 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:44 am

It would be a brand new plane and not a stretch anymore. You are in effect asking for a 757 competitor, Airbus will not move unless Boeing does go ahead with the MoM and if demand is there. They've been burned once with the A380.
 
LH526
Moderator
Posts: 1974
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2000 2:23 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:59 am

This plane would take ages to board. Go for a shorter compact A350 high density twin aisle short-medium range concept instead
Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:28 am

Anything is possible. I'll throw some numbers at you.

Such a stretch would add 10T extra payload and 10T of extra fuselage weight.

With the current wing that can lift 97T that would mean you'd only be left with enough fuel for a 15 minute flight.

You'd need a very long time 4000m runway as the tail would hit he ground.

So to make it work you'd need at a minimum a taller landing gear and a bigger wing that would then need larger engines. Pretty much an entire new plane.

You could only stretch the A321NEO 4-5 metres absolute maximum with the current wing, engines and landing gear. Fuel load and range would be significantly reduced to a 2500nm 'wikipedia' range. In high density config with divert fuel and west bound that would be below 1500nm realistic range. Not very versatile. It would be excellent on short trips. The A321 fits 240 seats at sardine can 28" pitch and 220 seats at comfort 31" pitch.

A 4 metre stretch would allow 250 seats with a comfort 31" pitch.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:57 am

Assuming the a321 is not already a 757 competitor :)

RJMAZ wrote:
Anything is possible. I'll throw some numbers at you.

Such a stretch would add 10T extra payload and 10T of extra fuselage weight.

With the current wing that can lift 97T that would mean you'd only be left with enough fuel for a 15 minute flight.

You'd need a very long time 4000m runway as the tail would hit he ground.

So to make it work you'd need at a minimum a taller landing gear and a bigger wing that would then need larger engines. Pretty much an entire new plane.

You could only stretch the A321NEO 4-5 metres absolute maximum with the current wing, engines and landing gear. Fuel load and range would be significantly reduced to a 2500nm 'wikipedia' range. In high density config with divert fuel and west bound that would be below 1500nm realistic range. Not very versatile. It would be excellent on short trips. The A321 fits 240 seats at sardine can 28" pitch and 220 seats at comfort 31" pitch.

A 4 metre stretch would allow 250 seats with a comfort 31" pitch.


Wait did I read that right? A plane that can fly 5-6 hours can only fly for 15 minutes if we increase the weight by 10%? Shocking!
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:30 am

CarlosSi wrote:
Wait did I read that right? A plane that can fly 5-6 hours can only fly for 15 minutes if we increase the weight by 10%? Shocking!

Yes, I'll give you the numbers.

The A321NEO weighs 51T. Normal passenger payload is 22T bringing the weight up to 73T. As the maximum takeoff weight is 97T there is enough room for 24T of fuel. It can fly 3500+nm with that much fuel.

A DC-8 length stretch would add 10T to the empty weight bringing it up to 61T. Passenger payload would go up 10T from 22T to 32T. This brings the weight with passengers up to 93T. As the maximum takeoff weight is still 97T that leaves only 4T left for fuel. That would be enough to takeoff fly a lap around the airport and land again.

This is why the A321 can only be stretched by 4-5metres.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 9481
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:53 am

How much (or could) going to a double-bogie (similar to the ones used on the Indian aircraft) allow for an increase of MTOW in their own right?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
bluefltspecial
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:27 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:25 am

While it's an interesting idea, keep in mind, as you lengthen an aircraft you stretch out the "bubble of pressurization"

nature is pretty strict in terms of what it wants, always looking to equalize itself, whether it a water level between to points, or air pressure differences. Nature it seems, would like a perfect bubble of air if it can't be equal, so as you stretch an aircraft out, you increase the amount of pressure that is placed in certain (middle) parts of the aircraft. In the case of the 757-300, IIRC, they had to strengthen the body of the aircraft, and this resulted in additional weight but also a reduction of the actual interior space of the cabin by about 5 centimeters (2.5 on each side).

Add your weight issues into this in along with a wing that was likely designed for an A320 (modified for the A321? I'm unfamiliar), the lift capability and terms of distance to fly, makes it inefficient, and the bonus of a wider cabin than the 737 becomes moot.

If you take a look at the DC-8, you'll notice that the windows are set far apart, this was due to the design of the aircraft hull, and resulted in better strength (aircraft like the E170/190 family have a similar design which makes window placement different). This is from what I understood, to be one of the reasons it was easy for them to continue to extend the DC-8 fuselage, longer and longer.

To make it work you'd need much stronger fuselage, stronger engines, a better wing, with better lift, and more fuel space.

Is it possible? Anything is possible in the aviation industry.
Is it likely to be a reality? Most likely not.
Better to start with a clean sheet design.
Save a horse, ride a Fly-boy....
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1083
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:41 am

The A321 has gone a long way from when it was new. A few improvements can be made such as the engines which are being already improved. The aircraft can already do 90% of what a 757 can do at a lower cost. The 757s are starting to go away and the A321 neo is the best replacement. Stretching the aircraft even a meter is not worth the cost and effort. :old:
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:43 am

LAX772LR wrote:
How much (or could) going to a double-bogie (similar to the ones used on the Indian aircraft) allow for an increase of MTOW in their own right?

The double bogie is simply to distribute the weight over more wheels. This was for poor quality airports.

The gear would still have to be made stronger. But al least the Indian double-bogie proved there is available space.

The wing loads would also increase with heavier weights. So it's not a simple process to increase the maximum takeoff weight. A bump up to 100T could be possible and this would help a lot if they do a small stretch. It would also help the A321LR, currently it can only carry a light 160-170 passenger payload if all three aux tanks are filled. A 3T MTO increase would allow an extra 20-30 passengers to bring it to 180-200 passengers which would increase profits.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:59 am

RJMAZ wrote:
CarlosSi wrote:
Wait did I read that right? A plane that can fly 5-6 hours can only fly for 15 minutes if we increase the weight by 10%? Shocking!

Yes, I'll give you the numbers.

The A321NEO weighs 51T. Normal passenger payload is 22T bringing the weight up to 73T. As the maximum takeoff weight is 97T there is enough room for 24T of fuel. It can fly 3500+nm with that much fuel.

A DC-8 length stretch would add 10T to the empty weight bringing it up to 61T. Passenger payload would go up 10T from 22T to 32T. This brings the weight with passengers up to 93T. As the maximum takeoff weight is still 97T that leaves only 4T left for fuel. That would be enough to takeoff fly a lap around the airport and land again.

This is why the A321 can only be stretched by 4-5metres.


Oh I see, it's a matter of how much of the MTOW is left for available fuel, in this case there isn't very much left due to the increased structural and payload weight. Not as surprising in that case.
 
winstonlegthigh
Posts: 148
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 5:15 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:19 am

LH526 wrote:
This plane would take ages to board. Go for a shorter compact A350 high density twin aisle short-medium range concept instead


Similar to what a 787-3 would have been if there had been any interest?
Never has gravity been so uplifting.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 24750
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:43 am

winstonlegthigh wrote:
Similar to what a 787-3 would have been if there had been any interest?


The 787-3 was the same length as the 787-8 (57m).

What LH526 is suggesting is a strong shrink - at least 10m or more (so from 67m to 50-55m).
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:50 am

There is already a thread on this topic by the same OP:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1380517
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:50 am

bluefltspecial wrote:
To make it work you'd need much stronger fuselage, stronger engines, a better wing, with better lift, and more fuel space.

Is it possible? Anything is possible in the aviation industry.
Is it likely to be a reality? Most likely not.
Better to start with a clean sheet design.

Yes, clean sheet all carbon A321-300!
 
User avatar
bluefltspecial
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:27 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:54 am

flee wrote:
Yes, clean sheet all carbon A321-300!


Let the B797 vs A321-3 discussions commence!
Save a horse, ride a Fly-boy....
 
rbavfan
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:19 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Anything is possible. I'll throw some numbers at you.

Such a stretch would add 10T extra payload and 10T of extra fuselage weight.

With the current wing that can lift 97T that would mean you'd only be left with enough fuel for a 15 minute flight.

You'd need a very long time 4000m runway as the tail would hit he ground.

So to make it work you'd need at a minimum a taller landing gear and a bigger wing that would then need larger engines. Pretty much an entire new plane.

You could only stretch the A321NEO 4-5 metres absolute maximum with the current wing, engines and landing gear. Fuel load and range would be significantly reduced to a 2500nm 'wikipedia' range. In high density config with divert fuel and west bound that would be below 1500nm realistic range. Not very versatile. It would be excellent on short trips. The A321 fits 240 seats at sardine can 28" pitch and 220 seats at comfort 31" pitch.

A 4 metre stretch would allow 250 seats with a comfort 31" pitch.


So your saying 30 passengers will add 10t to the weight? 30 passengers per Airbus specs would add 2.7t of payload. That would leave 7.6 t for fuel. still not good though. Oh yeah also the 97t limit is due to 2 wheel landing gear, not the wing.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:24 am

winstonlegthigh wrote:
LH526 wrote:
This plane would take ages to board. Go for a shorter compact A350 high density twin aisle short-medium range concept instead


Similar to what a 787-3 would have been if there had been any interest?


787-3 will not be that long to load as it has twin isles and it's seating would have been close to the 789 premium capacity. It would be just as fast to load as an equal size short A350.
 
AAvgeek744
Posts: 471
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:34 am

LPSHobby wrote:
The title says it all, maybe with new landing gears and wings, would it be technically possible?


Why? For what purpose?
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1445
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:18 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Such a stretch would add 10T extra payload and 10T of extra fuselage weight.

With the current wing that can lift 97T that would mean you'd only be left with enough fuel for a 15 minute flight.


Your model does not pass the sniff test.

I see your later numbers. Your saying that a 28% increase in fuselage length increases overall airframe weight by 20%.

The fuselage typically comprises around 10-15% of airframe weight.


Hmmm. Upon looking into some basic models, are you finding that weight is still pressure dominated? (I believe you should, and that the change is only around ~6.5T. If you were to calculate based on a bending dominated fuselage, then yes, you would see ~10T change.)
 
parapente
Posts: 1997
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:03 am

The question has been answered technically above.Its a vicious circle.You end up needing a new MLG,new wings and probably new engines -might as well change the fuse whilst you're about it.
Perhaps better to look at it the other way round (which others have done).Is there a market for a further stretch?Perhaps,at about 250 pax -but more comfortable than 28" pitch.So you look at 29"-30".I guess that needs about 3 mtrs stretch.
Then you have to ask whether the present MLG can be beefed up to take it - and that the pavement loading doesn't go too high.

The fact that Airbus started to offer something like this (a further stretch of the 321) about 15 years ago -but clearly did not get enough takers way back then suggests it is technically possible.

But does anybody want one?Its range would be severely compromised-2,500knm? It might be a sort of replacement for 762's and 753's and maybe the market is bigger now,15 years on? It would certainly tighten the operating 'box' of any 797.
It maybe what the 321 'Plus' is,who knows.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:22 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Your model does not pass the sniff test.

You must have a bad sense of smell :)

The 757-300 is 15% longer than the 757-200 and weighs 10.5% more.

So extending the A321 by 28.3% should provide a 19.8% weight gain based on that.

10T works out to be 19.7% increase on the A321.

So the numbers are spot on.

When an aircraft becomes too long and skinny weight goes up like crazy and your much better off going with a wider and shorter fuselage.

Another example. The DC-8 63 is 25% longer than the DC-8 50 but it weighs 28% more. The wing, engines and landing gear is pretty much the same.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:48 pm

All this goes to show that the A310-200 was a plane before its time. The general dimensions of that aircraft increasingly look like the ideal shape for MOM and it can haul LD3 containers as well.

Give it a light carbon wing treatment, FBW and some tasty new powerplants and it would do the job admirably. There would even be scope for the A313 longer range version. 2-4-2 is the most efficient cross section in its class too without sacrificing comfort.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 7359
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:13 pm

rbavfan wrote:
So your saying 30 passengers will add 10t to the weight? 30 passengers per Airbus specs would add 2.7t of payload. That would leave 7.6 t for fuel. still not good though. Oh yeah also the 97t limit is due to 2 wheel landing gear, not the wing.

Such a stretch would add far more than 30 passengers. The DC-8-63 is ~12.61m/41' longer than the A321. 30 passengers is 5 rows, would would take up maybe 13 of those 41'....
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:34 pm

Why not just order a Airbus 330-200 ? Around the same length and passenger number as the Dc-8-63
 
User avatar
Slash787
Posts: 361
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:37 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:41 pm

It would look something like this, but ofcourse with the Sharklets.

Image
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5238
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:14 pm

The A321 is already a stretched version of the basic A320. Airbus already stated several times that there wouldn’t be another stretched version of the A321, a sort of A322. It would require new wings, new tail fin etc... so it would be in fact another airplane.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1445
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:40 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
The 757-300 is 15% longer than the 757-200 and weighs 10.5% more.


But has a MTOW 7% more.

RJMAZ wrote:
When an aircraft becomes too long and skinny weight goes up like crazy and your much better off going with a wider and shorter fuselage.


My back of the envelope calcs would indicate that the weight is still driven mainly by the pressure requirements, not bending.


RJMAZ wrote:
Another example. The DC-8 63 is 25% longer than the DC-8 50 but it weighs 28% more. The wing, engines and landing gear is pretty much the same.


Yet MTOW is 13% higher.

Not like for like!

Compare some others in the DC8 family.
taking the -62 and comparing to -63, fuse length goes up 19%, OEW goes up 11%. MTOW goes up ~1%.
taking the -72 and comparing to -73, fuse length goes up 19%, OEW goes up 8%. MTOW goes up ~1%.

Work those ratios out for this A322 (@28% longer) and you get 19% and 17% OEW increases. Which are in between what we think - admittedly both are closer to your 20% than to my 13%.


You cannot take comparable aircraft for this - they don't exist - any historical stretch even approaching 28% will come with an MTOW increase. Which means an increase in structure beyond the fuselage itself.

Basic handwaving calcs would indicate stretching the A321 fuselage this much puts about 6.5-7T on the airframe. If you want to increase MTOW then your gonna have to add more structure - at which point I agree - 20% OEW increase is likely.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:31 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Work those ratios out for this A322 (@28% longer) and you get 19% and 17% OEW increases. Which are in between what we think - admittedly both are closer to your 20% than to my 13%.

19% is much closer to 20% than 13%.

You are going on about maximum takeoff weight but it's the maximum landing weight that is important.

Unless you dump passengers and parachute them out the door the stretch would be landing at 95-97T. This is 21-23% higher than the A321's 79.2T landing weight. This is where the 10T structure weight gain comes from.

Your 6.5T stretch would have to go to heavy maintenance for a C check after every landing.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1445
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:20 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Unless you dump passengers and parachute them out the door the stretch would be landing at 95-97T. This is 21-23% higher than the A321's 79.2T landing weight.


Yeah, your right. Just checked and the A321 is already at absolute max payload (MZFW) at 240 passengers. I never thought of checking that. Duuuuh.

You've a couple of tonnes of easy fat to MLW (allowing for fuel reserves), but that doesn't do any good the stretch has ate into it and more.

It'd need to have a MZFW of 96T to take the revised payload and stretched fuselage. Leaving nothing for fuel.
 
drgmobile
Posts: 883
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:06 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:51 am

[url][/url]
Astronage wrote:
It would be a brand new plane and not a stretch anymore. You are in effect asking for a 757 competitor, Airbus will not move unless Boeing does go ahead with the MoM and if demand is there. They've been burned once with the A380.


I don't see the comparison. The A380 is an outsized aircraft. It was always going to be a risky endeavour. I see no particular reason why Airbus would want to see wait for its competitors before launching a new aircraft model. Being first mover can be riskier, but if the aircraft is the right model for the customer, it can be a big advantage. Boeing has sold 50% more of the 787 than Airbus has the A350.
 
uta999
Posts: 361
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:58 am

drgmobile wrote:
[url][/url]
Astronage wrote:
It would be a brand new plane and not a stretch anymore. You are in effect asking for a 757 competitor, Airbus will not move unless Boeing does go ahead with the MoM and if demand is there. They've been burned once with the A380.


I don't see the comparison. The A380 is an outsized aircraft. It was always going to be a risky endeavour. I see no particular reason why Airbus would want to see wait for its competitors before launching a new aircraft model. Being first mover can be riskier, but if the aircraft is the right model for the customer, it can be a big advantage. Boeing has sold 50% more of the 787 than Airbus has the A350.


...and delivered about 500 more, despite a few snags along the way.
Your computer just got better
 
User avatar
JannEejit
Posts: 722
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: Would be possible to stretch the A321 to the DC-8-63 lenght?

Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:43 pm

rbavfan wrote:
winstonlegthigh wrote:
LH526 wrote:
This plane would take ages to board. Go for a shorter compact A350 high density twin aisle short-medium range concept instead


Similar to what a 787-3 would have been if there had been any interest?


787-3 will not be that long to load as it has twin isles and it's seating would have been close to the 789 premium capacity. It would be just as fast to load as an equal size short A350.


Just curious now, what was the DC-8-63 boarding/deboarding experience like ? I'm assuming multiple airstairs and not so many airbridges available. Was there a sweet spot for faster deplaning ?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos