The North American market is different in that there has been crisis brewing there for a long time. 9/11 didn’t suddenly break airlines, it just brought it all to a head – the final nail in the coffin for some.

Elsewhere, I think the outlook is good. The Iraqi issue has been sorted, and the effects of SARS are diminishing daily.

Even insurance is not a problem. In the UK in particular, insurance companies were badly run in the 1990s. They all lost money (or didn’t make any, nearly the same thing) on underwriting, but rescued themselves with investment gains. 9/11 made them wake up. In the immediate aftermath, they panicked and raised premiums too fast. Note, the actual new level of premiums wasn’t so bad, it was just that the rise came along so quickly. It’s like paying £1 a year for your phone bill, then suddenly getting a “real world” bill with no warning.

I would look forward to good growth and expansion in Asia and the Middle East. Europe will go nowhere until all this pathetic state subsidisation ends; when it does, the better run and profitable national carriers will grow massively from the carcases of the badly run airlines. I’d expect Lufthansa, KLM and BA to succeed. Air France has a question mark over it. SN Brussels, Swiss, Alitalia and Olympic are history. Others, well run but small, will become absorbed – like SAS and Austrian. Iberia…they are one of the few airlines who can still decide their own future. Swim or sink.

Well, the A346 isn’t much bigger than a B773, so I don’t see where the 747 enters into things!

Airlines might replace 747’s with the A346. But they could equally choose the 773. So the true competition is a 777.

Airbus would ideally have a widebody that is somewhat smaller than the A330-200, to replace the A300/A310. For a lot of airlines, the A332 is too big.

I believe Airbus will not alter their fuselage widths; it is more efficient to manufacture only two widths (one narrow, one wide) and merely alter the length. So we could be looking at either a shortened A330 or lengthened A320.

The basic A330 might be too heavy though; it is a brute of a widebody, I mean the same basic fuselage is taken to extremes in the A340-600! So, I think the more efficient solution is a stretched A320.

People usually whinge that the A320 wing couldn’t cope; well, I see no reason not to redesign the wing to the extent necessary. Just take an A321, stretch it, and replace the wings. Not sure whether the IAE V2500 is flexible enough to power such a behemoth. Maybe the Trent? I mean, the RB-211 powers a 757. The 757 would if anything be smaller than an A321 stretch, because the fuselage is slightly narrower.

So, to summarise:

Objective – create a 200-250 seater with the range to replace the A300-600 or A310.

Solution – stretch the A321, replace the wing, replace the engines and possibly add more fuel tankage.

It would be a fairly extreme derivative of the A320 family, but a less costly project than a clean start.

I know, but the point is that these things are less important than they used to be – the gap is narrowing.

But SAS are moving to an Airbus fleet. The 767’s are being retired.

Preston, the 1-11’s were made by ROMBAC (ROMania BAC) in Romania, under licence from BAC. Do you think you’ll ever see a Romanian made airliner again?!

I think the yellow by itself communicates the “taxi” theme. The black and white is just excessive.