Bloomberg: EK still in talks on 748I

[fliion]

Scroll down to middle of Asian order article.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-18/boeing-said-in-talks-with-china-s-icbc-for-747-8-jumbo-order.html

51 available production slots (A350 coincidence ?)

If there is any airline that can get these cheap ...it's EK. Every deal has a price where it's 'rude not to'.

Who else could buy them?

f.

[Emma Royds]

I would say that it has to be highly unlikely to see a 748 in EK colours flying pax.

Arguments on the pros and cons aside, it would be such a massive embarrassment for the guys at the top to admit that they have 'got it wrong'. The A380 is a brand within the EK brand itself and the company has thrown so much cash at the airframes as well as the PR and they must make it work.

A 748 in EK colours would spell disaster for Airbus too and their aspirations for the A380. It doesn't look good when your golden customer orders the competitor, as an afterthought.

Before anyone jumps on me - no I am not a 'Bus driver! :ok:

[GoreTex]

wonder why LH is getting rid of their 748s again, so soon after they arrived

[gennadius01]

51 available production slots (A350 coincidence ?)


I believe the "51 unfilled orders" is referring to the existing 747-8 backlog. Just over 3 years at the current rate, and obviously something Boeing is looking to increase.


I would say that it has to be highly unlikely to see a 748 in EK colours flying pax.


While I do find it highly unlikely as well, one could potentially see a usage for them in EKs fleet. Since the 777X won't come online until 2020 at the earliest, they could use some as interim lift, providing an incremental upgage between the 77W and the 380. If it had the added benefit to EK of helping put some pressure on Airbus to get them to do what they want with the 380, that would be a bonus for them I'm sure.


wonder why LH is getting rid of their 748s again, so soon after they arrived


What? All accounts are that LH is very happy with their 748s. They even accelerated delivery of the last 10 frames early this year, so that they could get them as early as possible. The way LH uses their birds, I wouldn't be surprised if their fleet of 747-8s is in use for quite a long time.

[thehonourablefong]

Can't see an quad with reduced cargo space, lower MTOW, reduced passenger space, and range making it into service unless Boeing pretty much give it away.

The new engines are all well and good but so long as the 380 gets them I doubt Ek will be interested, the 777/380 fleet mix wouldn't leave much space for a748...I would be interested to see the fuel burn per passenger when compared with that of a current-generation 380 on identical sectors as well, I doubt anyone actually knows. Fuel tanks are smaller, but they'd have to be to carry what 50 odd fewer pax.

LH may well be happy with their 748's, but it may fit their business model - the operation is entirely different to Ek, it also still decides to fly the 346 LH and makes rather less profit each year (that's another thread though).

So long as the marketing keeps it up, I know of plenty of people who prefer the 380's premium cabin when travelling any reasonable distance (me included, hate that middle seat in business), and while it may not work in most of the West, in other parts of the world people don't just want the cheapest price, they want to rub their mate's face in the fact they flew an EK 380 when they went on holiday, as ridiculous as that should be.

[gennadius01]

Can't see an quad with reduced cargo space, lower MTOW, reduced passenger space, and range making it into service unless Boeing pretty much give it away.


Hmm, not sure what you mean by this. The 747-8 has much more cargo capacity, after bags, than the 380 with a full load of passengers.

Also, I did say I do think EK taking any 747-8s is highly unlikely. I was merely positing a couple reasons for why they would possibly even think about it.

The new engines are all well and good but so long as the 380 gets them I doubt Ek will be interested, the 777/380 fleet mix wouldn't leave much space for a748...I would be interested to see the fuel burn per passenger when compared with that of a current-generation 380 on identical sectors as well

That's the issue though. The 380neo is anything but guaranteed at the moment. In fact, EK, the biggest advocate for doing it, has also said that they would continue to buy the current 380 if Airbus doesn't do it.

With respect to fuel numbers, I too believe it would be very interesting to see. Lufthansa currently operates both types, Korean will starting next year, and Transaero in 2016 I believe. The most recent numbers I recall seeing from some Lufthansa presentation showed the 747-8 burning a few tenths more than the 380, however that was before the 747-8 PIP and other improvements. It should be noted that later 380 frames have also continued to be improved in that timeframe.

As for marketing and how LH utilizes them compared to a 380, I believe that they deploy them with almost the same amount of premium capacity that a 380 has, and they utilize them in markets where there are not as many economy passengers typically, or they alternate seasonally with the 380 when the economy load is seasonal.

[glofish]

Read this:

777X Configuration Changes Revealed | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week (http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/777x-configuration-changes-revealed)

I can't see the 748 coming. It's a four-legged dinosaur, just as is the dugong.

AS per a LH colleague, the performance per nm/lb seems almost equal on 380, 77W and 748 (all in the LH extended fleet), which says it all: Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old. Impressive not.

Physics are the limit and transporting too much dead weight will punish you, even being the most fervent 380 or 748 fan.

Even Airbus rightfully sees the 77X as the most serious enemy (see article), not only for the 350, but even more for the 380. Upgrading it with new engines is pretty much futile, it does not fight the initial design handicap. Their reluctance to go ahead is therefore understandable, the resources have to go to the 350, to make it able to compete with the 77X. EK's offloading of the actual 350 says it all.

Wait for EK to cancel the last 50 380's if there is no re-engine program coming. Maybe not today, but when the "Asian face rubbing" fades out, the oil price picks up even more and the customers get a little scarcer and finally when the initial subsidies by cheap purchasing and leasing evaporates, i can see Timmy's successor correct some arrogant over-eagerness of today's management.

If there would be anything taking a space of a 380, it would certainly not be a 748.

[SOPS]

For those that think that LH are keeping the 747-8


Lufthansa to retire new B747-8s earlier than planned - Business Traveller (http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/lufthansa-to-retire-new-b747-8s-earlier-than-pl)

[gennadius01]

For those that think that LH are keeping the 747-8
The Aviation Week article that is based on was written about a misunderstanding of the reporter during an impromptu session with the then CEO on the sidelines of last year's IATA AGM. It was later clarified that they were talking about the 747-400s. The article text was kind of updated, but for some reason the headline and the lead in paragraph was not.

All subsequent interviews and reports talked about the 744s. If you think about it, the way LH uses their frames, it makes sense.

Additionally, Lufthansa recently accelerated their deliveries for the 748s, wanting to get more of them into service quickly, and seem to be quite happy with the revenue that they generate.

[GoreTex]

spoke to a LH captain while waiting for 2 hrs at the immigration in LAX, he told me that they are not happy with the 748, don't shoot the messenger

[donpizmeov]

Glofish,


Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old

The 773ER rolled out for the first time in Nov 2002. The 380 rolled out in Jan 2005.


The Don

[glofish]

Don

It is the initial design that i question. The initial design of the 777 and the GE90 came out in 1995 (sorry for the 25y, it's 20, ashes on my head ....). I am sure that the dugong has some potential left, but as i said, for the little numbers that will be sold i don't think Airbus will invest that much more in it.

We had that A vs. B before .... but here it is a 2 vs. 4 engined aircraft matter, so you can berry your dugong hat. The 4-legged Boeing has the same initial design (and re-design) handicap as the 380 and that's what i said on this thread: It will never be performing so much better as to raise big interest.

I am convinced that either one of the biggies is sold with discounts, or they flop. At EK the 380 enjoys a nice run, good for us all, but below the line it relies heavily on its initial price/lease paid. If Boeing desperately wants to follow suit, EK might get a bargain with the 748, they'd be foolish not to take advantage of the carnage between A and B. But i doubt that Boeing drops that low with the 77X up their sleeve.

[GoreTex]

glo,
I don't care how much fuel a 380 or 777 burns, the most important thing is the life style, so far the 380 was good to me, 4 turns in 5 years is not bad, I am sure I will get a some BOMs in the future but also some SFOs and IAHs.

Emirates Increases Capacity to San Francisco and Houston | News | Emirates (http://www.emirates.com/english/about/news/news_detail.aspx?article=1709104&offset=0)


anyway, hopefully less than 3 years for me, love the 4 engines, makes life easy for a pilot.

[nolimitholdem]

No one, including EK - especially EK - cares about your lifestyle. As some US trips go to the A380, new ones go to the B777 (BOS, ORD). Some, like JFK go from one to the other and back, or both (201/203/205). Or they add the aircraft with cargo capacity back to the route, as is heavily rumoured for destinations like LAX.

*shrug*

I think glofish has the most cogent analysis I've read.

I can't see the 748 coming. It's a four-legged dinosaur, just as is the dugong.

AS per a LH colleague, the performance per nm/lb seems almost equal on 380, 77W and 748 (all in the LH extended fleet), which says it all: Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old. Impressive not.

Physics are the limit and transporting too much dead weight will punish you, even being the most fervent 380 or 748 fan.

Even Airbus rightfully sees the 77X as the most serious enemy (see article), not only for the 350, but even more for the 380. Upgrading it with new engines is pretty much futile, it does not fight the initial design handicap. Their reluctance to go ahead is therefore understandable, the resources have to go to the 350, to make it able to compete with the 77X. EK's offloading of the actual 350 says it all.

Wait for EK to cancel the last 50 380's if there is no re-engine program coming. Maybe not today, but when the "Asian face rubbing" fades out, the oil price picks up even more and the customers get a little scarcer and finally when the initial subsidies by cheap purchasing and leasing evaporates, i can see Timmy's successor correct some arrogant over-eagerness of today's management.

If there would be anything taking a space of a 380, it would certainly not be a 748.

Nailed it. It isn't about A vs B, it's about whether a machine that may make money at $100 oil makes money at $150/bbl oil, $200/bbl oil...

[donpizmeov]

Or its about if it can carry 489 pax in three class configuration for 16hrs or not. Any twin doing that? Totally different markets.

The don

[Wizofoz]

Add PROFITABLY to that, Don.

We don't carry passengers for the fun of it. Doesn't matter what an Aircaft carries, it matters whether we can make money out of doing so.

[nolimitholdem]

Don't be too harsh wiz, no one ever explained loads versus yield to don. Better hope all those premium seats are sold full-fare. I mean, EK never oversells US flights, with all the attendant upgrades into J and F....dooooo theyyyyy? It's pure profit, baby. Fuel's cheap, after all. Pffft. hahah!

The seats argument makes sense in slot-constrained airports like Heathrow or Toronto. Anywhere else would gladly see multiple "twin" flights with "three class configuration" and, oh yeah, 20 tons of cargo a flight. But that's just from the station managers trying to move pax and cargo, what do they know.

LAX is about ego. It hurt too much to see everyone else running their 380's there so EK had to do so, being the launch/biggest/mostest/whatever ad nauseum customer.

Then quietly add a B777 flight later to pick up the slack. I expect that pattern will repeat.

[Dropp the Pilot]

Frank Zappa once defined the journalism surrounding rock music as "people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read".

I don't know why that came to mind.

[donpizmeov]

Limit,
You stop carrying your 20t after 12hrs due to Tow limit. Reduce it by 8.6t per hour after that. This would be why you only lift 37t of revenue out of SFO. Not much cargo there if you have have pax on board. This is why Glo stated the fuel burn per kg on these long sectors is the same for the 777 and the 380. Only the 380 carries 22t of revenue extra. Ek doesn't swap aircraft off routes to waste money. Same goes for the 748, LH may only load it the same as we do a 777, but it can carry its max ZFW a longer way.
The don.

[Machspeed]

I would say that it has to be highly unlikely to see a 748 in EK colours flying pax.


Because having all your eggs in one basket has "normally" always been a major mistake for airlines. Exception is the 737 & 777 programs. Just think, if another wing issue develops on the 380 just about the time we are about 75 airplanes. Ouch. That's a lot of seat miles lost.

[Wizofoz]

This is why Glo stated the fuel burn per kg on these long sectors is the same for the 777 and the 380

Don,

A quick look at SFO v LAX yesterday- distance within 200NM of each other.

The 777 to SFO had an available payload of 41T for a fuel burn of 124T, so pretty much exactly 3T of fuel to shift 1T of pax or freight.

The 380 to LAX had an available load of 56T for a burn of 201T-3.6T/T of payload- so 20% more per unit.

So it will depend on how much revenue you get for that extra lift v cost of fuel.

A major rise in fuel cost (did someone say Iraq?) will SERIOUSLY effect the 380s efficiency- and THAT'S before we get the 777-8/-9.

[fliion]

Gents

All talk is referencing fuel burn HOWEVER no mention of amortization cost.

There is a point in the curve whereby the monthly lease/note cost over fuel burn takes on more importance ie... if the aircraft burns more yet the fixed financing bill costs so much less then so be it.

How strong a position is Boeing in with 50 available production slots on an aircraft that is dead and no potential buyers out there. How much would it be to shut down the line?

Many variable others than 'trip cost' without taking account of fixed cost.

It's a numbers issue and Boeing does not hold a strong hand..I would speculate that EK could literally steal these to a point where running them to Lahore and back makes money.

Doesn't mean it's going to happen but...

Just sayin'

f.

[donpizmeov]

Fliion you are absolutely correct.


Wiz,


You almost got there, but your math let you down. Since you used the actual DOW for the Boeing, maybe it should be used for the Bus as well. Wouldn't it look like this;


213.6 - 176.8 = 36.8t not 41t. The extra 200nm would be 25min, so 4t fuel, which would take the 777 to MTOW, so carrying 36.8t to LAX for 128.9t burn, or as you worked out now 3.5t/t.


The Bus carried 52t and burnt 201.3. But it was 11t under TOW. So chuck on another 7t revenue and 4t fuel, so 59t carried for 205.3, or 3.47t/t.


Do you think those in charge of route development might have some idea of their craft? The bus carries 57% more for the same fuel/kg on long sectors. So does the 748i.


To put it another way, the Bus is carrying 85% of its zfw to LAX while the 777 carries only 60% of its own.


Now nolimitholdem, you can put your fingers in your ears and chant na na na na as much as you like, but guess which one carries your precious cargo?


The Boeing does burn less kg/kg and carry more cargo to all Indian destinations though.


The Don

[ekwhistleblower]

The Boeing does burn less kg/kg and carry more cargo to all Indian destinations though.

Don, the most sensible thing I have ever read on PPrune. Please send an immediate DCI (like an FCI but from the Don) to TC and make it so. Never did enjoy those curries on the flight that much, needs to be accompanied by a beer.

New slogan "777s to India"

[donpizmeov]

EWB,

DCI has been sent, recalled, then resent. Then recalled and resent. I also suggested a larger for the curry, and a brown beer for pudding. Hope that is ok.

The don.

[Wizofoz]

Where did you get that DOW from, Don- it's very high for a 300ER.

Looking at todays 225, using 176 as a DOW, it carried 44T for a burn of 122, and was a ton over MTOW.

Using that ton and your figure of an extra 4 for LAX, it could have carried 41T for a burn of 126- a ratio of 3.07.

[ekwhistleblower]

LoL, works for me.

We could maybe issue a slide rule with a 777 to 380, passenger/cargo/fuel converter so the Trip boys can see how much extra they are contributing to the profit share due to the fuel they are saving! The scale could be attached to a ring tone on the company phone that gives a hearty bugle call for each ton saved so the shorter the trip the more triumphant they would feel. Maybe even issue a new bag with a special slide rule pocket, note to AS.

[donpizmeov]

Wiz,


You were close again.


220 - 177.2 ( DOW from OMC ) = 42.8 not 44t. So 126 burn for 38.8 (max TOW again) = 3.25.


198.6 burn for 58.3 = 3.4 for the Bus, but 9T under MTOW.


It doesn't matter how many times you work it, the results are the same. The Boeing today could carry 64% of its ZFW, the Bus could carry 92%. Someone way above our pay grade knows what an economical load is.


The Don

[777boyo]

Gentlemen,

For us as Pilots to try to compare the relative economics and merits of the various types is an exercise in futility. There is no way we an even come close on the basis of fuel burn alone. There are way too many other costs involved which we are completely unable to assess -

Depreciation or Lease Costs - these will vary even by individual airframe, never mind fleet. And the cost of these will be allocated to individual routes or geographical area in some way using accounting conventions and company policy

Engineering - hourly, periodic, manpower, etc

Navigation/Overflight/destination handling -usually based on MTOW

Parking - also usually by weight or some other dimension

Crewing - salaries, accommodation, allowances, training. Some are overheads, some are variable costs.

Advertising/Promotion/Selling Costs - again, allocated to route by some accounting convention.

Catering - route specific, due to uplift at the other end

Share of the overall management "overhead" (DSVP cars, for example!)

The list goes on.... the above is not exhaustive.

The waters are muddied even more by the manufacturers, who will massage the numbers to their own marketing advantage - Cost per Available Seat Km will clearly favour the aircraft which has more seats. Trip cost will probably favour the smaller one, but Cost per Available Tonne Km on the other hand may favour the smaller airframe if its ability to uplift cargo is better than the bigger one.... It's a minefield, and I suspect there are very few people in the myriad EK departments who could really give an accurate number, other than a representative "average cost per block hour", or something similar. Then the revenue side of the equation is equally fraught with pitfalls in terms of assessing which type is optimal on a given route.

In short - don't waste your time and blood pressure by speculating on the basis of very limited information.

Have a look at Rigas Doganis' book, "Flying off Course", if you want an easily read intro to airline cost structures. And the Air Transport Association of America (ATA), also has some examples of airline costing models (excluding DSVP cars!) on its website (or at least, it used to - haven't looked recently).

Please forgive me if the above sounds like Grannies and Eggs - not my intention at all!

7B

[Dropp the Pilot]

You can always check in with someone who lives in the real world...

Strategic Aero Research

Emirates™ A380 retirements will force asset value plunge

Second hand A380 market non-existent

Emirates 777X impact on gas-guzzling A380

Continued A380 wing angst

For all the gimmickry that Airbus aligns with the A380, the impending countdown to the arrival of the 777X at Emirates delivers some unwelcome news.

Putting aside the commercial superiority of the 777X family, the Emirates' hold on the A380 order book poses questions as to how the second hand market will cope with near-zero demand for used A380s.

Emirates will be handing back two-dozen A380s to Doric/Amedeo as well as expediting the retirement of the overweight and several-times-over-rewired A380s as it inducts more of the type around the time the 777-9X also enters their fleet in 2020.

Amedeo™s dubious order for 20 A380s is already in jeopardy because Emirates doesn't want them and Amedeo has failed to place even a solitary unit elsewhere. Once these ageing A380s come out of Emirates fleet * where will they go? Who will buy them? Will Airbus further underwrite a depreciating asset and thereby kill off interest in new-build A380s? And then there is the leasing market in general* after ILFC ditched the A380 order, except the Amedeo order�, no leasing firm has ponied up to this toxic airplane.

Lets cut to the chase;* the possibility of the A380 getting new engines is nil. Such a move would kill any interest in the loss-making jet and would also compound Airbus™ financial capability to put a lid on the continued cost escalation to this $27bn-plus disaster. If Airbus does make the stupid move to give the A380 new engines, who exactly will stump up the cost?

Pratt & Whitney has no new large engine to offer. Its GTF engines are proving troublesome, GE will not be partnering with Pratt to provide an updated GP7200 engine and Rolls-Royce has eyes on new engines at the start of the next decade, which by all accounts would be too late for the A380.

Emirates™ savvy in commanding the near 50% of the entire A380 backlog speaks to its desire to access Europe (or threaten to dangle A350 and A380 orders) as well as making the most of its frequency-based model to use Dubai as a global transit nexus that could frankly be served with any large, long haul airplane the A380 has no exclusivity here.

Current A380 operators and customers have found that filling the A380 is not easy* and even on the rare flights that they have filled, they are not profitable.

Malaysia Airlines, Thai Airways, British Airways, Air France, Qantas, Lufthansa, Korean Air, Singapore Airlines, China Southern Airlines all have succumbed to John Leahy Kool-Aid that it takes an A380 to compete with an A380” nonsense, only to discover that they have slowed, not sped up A380 deliveries and in the case of Virgin Atlantic, have continually deferred it until they can fathom what to do with an obsolete airplane post-2018.

Airbus has spent over $1bn trying to fix the wing cracks already.
Emirates is feeling the strain here as the biggest victim to this design flaw that is compounded now by the metal fatigue in the wing spars* this will impact operational life, cycles and values.
Emirates was shrewd to conduct sale-leaseback deals to cash in on the then high value exclusivity of the A380 back in 2008 because so few examples were in service at that time.

Fast forward to today, Airbus is struggling to even give them away because airlines are wising up to the fact that the A380 has old technology engines, it's not a money spinner even if you fill it (yield is king, not capacity) and that the limitation of use restricts deployment.

While the 777-9X will deliver a mortal wound to the A380, it is actually Airbus™ biggest customer (Emirates) that is shaping up to be its biggest nightmare with its biggest flop of an airplane and there is nothing Airbus can do about it.

That no one is even discussing this inevitability points to an abject
understanding of how fatally flawed the entire A380 program and process was when it was launched back in 2000.

Emirates will be dumping A380s as Airbus railroads the program into yet another brick wall.

Ben Rich, M.C.C.
Latitudes Unlimited
International Maritime & Aviation Consulting

[ekwhistleblower]

Is that the Ben Rich that was a Trip captain with EK for a couple of years?!

[donpizmeov]

He would have to be over 60 now? Did he retire?

The don.

[Outatowner]

Once these ageing A380s come out of Emirates fleet * where will they go?
IF the worn out Dugongs don't end up being used for pilot accommodation once meydan is full, maybe Boeing will buy them like they did with SQ's lemon A340s years ago.
Then sell them back to EK for a couple of million apiece as a cheap sweetener to help persuade them to buy more 777Xs, like they did before. History repeating itself.
EK mgmt are such tight-fisted MFs they would still need something like that to persuade them to go with the obvious best deal but whatever...



OTTO destinations, where will all the two class high density 800 seat Dugong slave ships be going if not smelly india??

[stakeknife]

Some of u guys really do need to get out more! Seriously, go to work, do your job and then get a life! Having flown both Bus and Boeing , they are both just aeroplanes! They are both global companies using global 'talent' not exclusively European or American. Why oh why would a nationality favour either? Lots of Europeans & other nationalities involved with designing Boeing and americans working for Airbus and subsidiaries. Airline execs have all the figures and know what works for their companies, both are great aeroplanes! Now go take up a sport, read a book or spend some 'quality' time with the missus and stop worrying whether the B or A has the biggest knobs... The answer just may be in the mirror!

And breathe.

[TangoUniform]

Rich was "asked" to "retire" by the talking horse during the purge of 08-09. Seems a blog he was writing offended some of the more sensitive types among other issues between him and Mr. Ed.

[donpizmeov]

Great , now we get kicked outa Mayden and moved into a Dugong trailer park. The future looks bright.


The don

[GoreTex]

whiz,
seriously, if you think you have all the facts and all the insight why don't you join the bean counters?

we as pilots will never ever be able to calculate the real costs of a flight, thats why every airline has bean counters, it amuses me how guys like whiz start calculating efficiency of routes and airplanes, please stick to your flight director.

[GoreTex]

btw where is the guy who said they have to block 100 seats on the 380 to make it to LAX :D

IAH is about 100NM shorter than LAX from DXB

[Wizofoz]

Gore,

Having woken up one morning to find myself out of work because one set of bean counters couldn't count, I don't share your faith in their ability to not get it wrong!!.

[BobDole]

Do you think they really care what someone on pprune says or thinks? You can crunch an many numbers as you wish, and may even be better than they are, but in the end, its pointless.

We get paid to move the metal, what ever flavor it happens to be. They get paid to do everything else. Period.

:ugh:

And MY airplane is STILL better than YOUR airplane! :}

[Capn Rex Havoc]

Dropp the pilot-

Posted in another forum re "strategic aero research"
I'm afraid it looks like Strategic Aero Research is little more than a blog published by a Boeing fanboy. They appear to have no customers and have written 4 articles in their history, all in the past fortnight.

Looks like they have Zero credibility.

[Sheikh Your Bootie]

Indeed habibis, Mr Rich was indeed asked to leave EK. I can confirm he was also super popular with the EK F/O's :ugh::ugh:.
A Boeing fanboy article with gaping holes in it. I just can't be assed to start ripping the assertions apart, I have better things to do in my life.

SyB :zzz:

[Outatowner]

I seem to recall someone being given the heave ho after referring to the animals in the cabin as animals in the cabin.... or something like that. Is this he?

Still it's an interesting point and probably quite valid that the used A380 market won't exactly be hopping.

I'd possibly be interested in getting hold of one to build an eco-house out of and live like an eccentric. Depending on the price.

[Pearly White]

It doesn't sound like Emirates is particularly disenamoured of its A380s. It's announced it's buying more, along with more 777s.
Emirates' perpetually fresh fleet puts heat on rivals- Nikkei Asian Review (http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Companies/Emirates-perpetually-fresh-fleet-puts-heat-on-rivals)