Aircraft Finance Guide 2012

2012 Edition
INSIDE:
Sponsored by DVB Bank SE
AVITAS: MARKET OVERVIEW
DVB: ON THE HISTORY AND
FINANCING OF THE 777 AND A330
VEDDER PRICE: LOWERING RISK
ON PRE-DELIVERY PAYMENTS
IBA: EXAMINING THE TRENDS IN
ENGINE LEASE RATES
Finance guide 2012 cover rough 6b_Layout 1 17/08/2011 12:35 Page 1
AFG Yearbook 2012.indd 1 07/09/2011 13:52
The leading specialist in
international transport finance
www.dvbbank.com
Frankfurt/Main Hamburg London Cardiff Rotterdam Bergen
Oslo Piraeus Zurich Singapore Tokyo New York Curaao
DVB resized_DVB resize 26/07/2011 11:58 Page 1
2 GENERAL MARKET OVERVIEW:
THE RECOVERY TAKES HOLD
The aviation industry is recovering from the downturn
but recent woes have reminded us of the need to take
stock, forecast and evaluate. Introducing this years expert
analysis, Adam Pilarski, SVP at Avitas gives his overview of
the market.
8 STATE OF THE NATION:
LESSORS ASSESS THE MARKET
Paris orders, the sale of RBS, market saturation and the
introduction of Basel III aircraft lessors have much to
contend with. Mary-Anne Baldwin spoke to lessors on
these and other subjects.
16 LESSOR RANKING DATA
Aircraft lessors managed portfolios ranked by estimated
value.
22 PARTNERING FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTH:
HOW LESSORS, AIRLINES AND OEMS CAN
WORK TOGETHER
Todays airlines understand the benets that leasing can
deliver yet lessors must adapt to meet airlines growing
needs for exible nancing tools and customised solutions.
Ray Sisson, president and CEO, AWAS provides his views.
28 FINANCING THE 777 FAMILY
Few large aircraft programmes have enjoyed the fairytale
success of the 777. Airlines commented that the 747 was
too big or that the 767-300ER was too small. The 777
was welcomed as just right. Simon Finn, SVP, aviation
nance at DVB Bank gives his detailed nancial analysis
of the aircraft type.
36 FINANCING THE A330
Next year will be the 20th anniversary of the A330s rst
ight. With a competitor and successor taking shape, now
seems a good time to review the fortunes of this popular
aircraft and to ask what its future holds. Simon Finn, SVP of
aviation at DVB Bank investigates.
42 LOWERING RISK IN PRE-DELIVERY
TRANSACTIONS
The claw-back risk is of importance to everyone involved
in pre-delivery (PDP) transactions yet few understand its
risk or how it might affect a transaction. Cameron Gee,
shareholder at Vedder Price, de-mysties the claw-back
risk in the US.
46 HOW THE PRICE OF OIL IS
FUELLING ATM EFFICIENCY
Paolo Carmassi, president of Honeywell EMEAI, explains
how the price of jet fuel is making it important for airlines
to adopt new ATM technologies to improve their operating
efciency.
50 THE FUTURE OF ANCILLARY REVENUES
The US Department of Transportation (DOT) recently called
for airlines to provide in-depth reports on ancillary fees.
Raphael Bejar, CEO of Airsavings gives his views on the
matter.
54 ECAS: A MAJOR ASSET FOR THE
SALE OF ATRS ABROAD
Few doubt the magnitude of Export Credit Agencies (ECAs)
role in nancing commercial aircraft throughout the last
downturn, yet few mention their impact with regard to small
aircraft. ATR speaks out.
58 IRELANDS TAX ADVANTAGES
It is estimated that about 83bn ($117) worth of aircraft
are managed from Ireland. Why? Because of Irelands
extensive tax treaty network. Ailish Finnerty and Caroline
Devlin, both partners at Arthur Cox, explain the reasons for
Irelands allure.
63 DOING BUSINESS WITH CHINA:
THE RISKS AND REWARDS
China is a crucial aviation partner yet it is also notoriously
secretive and a potential threat to the Wests aerospace
sector. Are we playing with the enemy, or allowing caution
to hold us back? Scott Hamilton reports.
68 ENGINE LEASING UPDATE
More engine leasing companies have entered the market
and many airlines were either unwilling or unable to ofoad
spare engines in the last recession. Alex Derber looks at
the consequences.
74 TRENDS IN ENGINE LEASE RATES
As the market rises from the ashes of another recession
it is time for the analysts to assess the damage. Dr. Stuart
Hatcher, head of valuations and modelling at IBA Group
plays his part in the assessment as he evaluates engine
lease rates.
80 CURRENT TRENDS IN THE USED
AIRCRAFT MARKET
Over the years, there have been several signicant trends
in the evolution of used aircraft dispositions. Pete Seidlitz,
president of Bristol Associates, examines the changes.
86 CARGO CONVERSION:
CHOOSING THE RIGHT TIME
Deciding to convert passenger aircraft to freighters is
an important economic move that involves several key
variables. These can make yes compelling or no the
only option. Chris Kjelgaard reports.
92 ANATOMY OF A SUCCESSFUL NARROWBODY
FREIGHTER FLEET START-UP
Building a new freighter fleet is a complicated process.
At its heart is selecting the right aircraft for the job. Kevin
Casey, president of Pemco looks at some of the things
cargo operators may consider when expanding their eet.
96 FINANCING AIRCRAFT SPARES
Component OEMs encouraged airlines to nance spares
through costly initial provisioning (IP) programmes. That
was until two things changed it. John Avery, director of
supply chain services and Ian Malin, treasurer and chief
investment ofce at AJ Walter explain.
100 THE UK BRIBERY ACT:
DONT GET CAUGHT OUT
In certain circumstances, payments help things happen.
But the UKs new Bribery Act will make what seems a
normal course of action, an illegal one. Richard Mumford,
partner and head of the dispute division at ASB Law, a
specialist in aviation law, explains.
106 AIRCRAFT TRANSACTIONS
Full listing of transactions for Boeing and Airbus passenger
aircraft, 1H 2011
EDITOR
Mary-Anne Baldwin
mary-anne.baldwin@ubmaviation.com
STAFF WRITERS
Alex Derber
aderber@ubmaviation.com
PRODUCTION & DESIGN
The Magazine Production Company
Dean Cook
deancook@magazineproduction.com
FRONT COVER DESIGN
Kalven Davis
kalven.davis@ubmaviation.com
CIRCULATION MANAGER & E-EDITOR
Paul Canessa
paul.canessa@ubmaviation.com
INTERNATIONAL MEDIA SALES MANAGER
Alan Samuel
alan.samuel@ubmaviation.com
PUBLISHER & SALES DIRECTOR
Simon Barker
simon.barker@ubmaviation.com
GROUP PUBLISHER
Anthony Smith
anthony.smith@ubmaviation.com
AIRCRAFT FINANCE GUIDE 2012
The Aircraft Finance Guide (Print) ISSN 2044-8015 (Online) ISSN
2044-8023 is published annually in September by UBM Aviation
Publications Ltd.
Airline Fleet Management (Print) ISSN 1757-8833 (Online) ISSN
1757-8841. (USPS 022-324) is published bi-monthly, in January,
March, May, July, September and November by UBM Aviation
Publications Ltd.
Distributed in the USA by SPP c/o 95, Aberdeen Road, Emigsville,
PA 17318-0437, USA.
Periodicals postage paid at Emigsville, PA, USA.
POSTMASTER: send address changes to:
Airline Fleet Management (AFM)
c/o SPP P.O. Box 437 Emigsville, PA 17318, USA.
AFM UK annual subscription cost is 150.00 GBP.
AFM Overseas annual subscription cost is 170.00 GBP or $300
USD. AFM single copy cost is 25.00 GBP (UK) or $50.00 USD
(Overseas). Aircraft Finance Guide single copy cost is 55.00 GBP
(UK) or $110.00 USD (Overseas)
All subscription records are maintained at:
UBM Aviation Publications Ltd.
7th Floor, Ludgate House, 245 Blackfriars Road,
London, SE1 9UY, UK.
All subscriptions enquiries to:
Paul Canessa: paul.canessa@ubmaviation.com
Tel: +44 (0) 207 579 4873
Fax: +44 (0) 207 579 4848
Website: www.ubmaviationnews.com
Front cover sponsored by: DVB Bank
Printed in England by: Pensord
Distribution/Mailing: Flostream UK
The Aircraft Finance Guides and AFM magazine, part of UBM
Aviation Publications Ltd, have used its best efforts in collecting and
preparing material for inclusion in these publications but cannot
and does not warrant that the information contained within these
publications are complete or accurate, and does not assume and
hereby disclaims, liability to any person for any loss or damage
caused by errors or omissions in either the Aircraft Finance Guide
or in AFM, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence,
accident or any other cause.
This publication may not be reproduced or copied in whole or in
part by any means without the express permission of UBM Aviation
Publications Ltd. Airline Fleet Management is a licensed trademark
of UBM Aviation Publications Ltd. All trademarks used under license
from UBM Aviation Publications Ltd.
19992011, UBMAviationPublicationsLtd. All rightsreserved.
1 AIRCRAFT FINANCE GUIDE 2012
The leading specialist in
international transport finance
www.dvbbank.com
Frankfurt/Main Hamburg London Cardiff Rotterdam Bergen
Oslo Piraeus Zurich Singapore Tokyo New York Curaao
DVB resized_DVB resize 26/07/2011 11:58 Page 1
AIRCRAFT FINANCE GUIDE AIRCRAFT FINANCE GUIDE
T
HE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN THAT BEGAN in late 2007
was, from a global perspective, the most severe downturn
since World War II. The recession was largely triggered by a
nancial crisis in the US that spread quickly to other advanced
economies, particularly in Europe.
World passenger traffic dropped 1.5 per cent in 2009 yet
moving into 2010, passenger traffic growth was positive
across all world regions with particularly strong results in
Asia-Pacic. The Middle East, Latin America and Africa had
much lower bases but year-on-year growth was good. Moving
into 2011, world revenue per kilometer (RPK) trafc growth
is forecast at 5.2 per cent, largely due to the difcult year-on-
year comparisons but also due to the slightly lower forecasts of
economic growth and higher oil prices.
In order to stabilise the nancial industry and stave off further
economic damage, the US, UK, and several other European
countries approved bank bailout plans. Figure 2 displays
historic and forecasted GDP growth from 2007 to 2012 by major
world regions. As is shown, after a miserable 2009, positive
economic growth was estimated for all major regions in 2010
but forecasts for 2011 show slowed growth in the three major
regions of Europe, North America, and Asia.
General market overview:
The recovery takes hold
The aviation industry is recovering well from the downturn, cargo gures have been rising since 2010, and
airline protability is increasing. The industrys recent woes however, have reminded us all of the need to
take stock, forecast and evaluate. Introducing this years market analysis by the experts, Adam Pilarski,
SVP at Avitas gives his general overview of the market.
Figure 1: source, ICAO and AVITAS forecasts
Figure 2: source World Bank for historic data, AVITAS forecasrs for 2011 & 2012
OIL AND AIRLINE PROFITABILITY
Between 2000 and 2010, fuel accounted for between 13 and
33 per cent of an airlines total industry costs. The peak of
33 per cent occurred in 2008 when the price per barrel (pb)
reached $147 before subsequently falling to a low of around
$40pb in 2009 as the global recession deepened. As shown in
Figure 3, fuel prices climbed steadily from 2009 to 2010; by
the end of 2010, it was around $90pb. More recently, spot fuel
prices have measured close to $100pb due partially to unrest
in several Middle Eastern countries and differences between
the oil output gures of members of the Organisation of the
petroleum exporting countries (OPEC).
Figure 3 Source: US Department of Energy, June 2011.
Avitas forecasts that oil prices will remain between $80 to
$100pb for the remainder of the year. While we foresee that
in the long-term there will be signicantly lower oil prices,
these developments will not occur for a number of years. In
the meantime, high oil prices will have a signicant impact
on industry profitability. The International Air Transport
Association (IATA) estimates that each $1 increase in the
average annual fuel price leads to a $1.6bn reduction in airline
protability.
As shown in Figure 4, the most recent downturn is notable
not only for the level of nancial losses but also for its truly
global impact. While the post-9/11 downturn was primarily felt
by US carriers, this latest recession had a global reach. In both
2008 and 2009, airlines in the three most developed markets
North America, Europe, and Asia experienced signicant
losses. During 2010, the situation improved considerably with
overall industry protability reaching $18bn. Carriers in North
America earned a combined net profit of $4.1bn; European
airlines earned $1.9bn; and operators in the Asia- Pacic region
reported total net prots of $10bn. However, a series of events
over recent months have led most observers to signicantly
downgrade their outlook for 2011.
IATA considerably lowered its most recent estimates
regarding airline profitability. First published in June 2011,
IATA predicted aggregate prots would hit $8.6bn for the year,
however it now forecasts a much more modest $4bn. This
compares to an aggregate prot of $18bn in 2010. The aviation
authority said that increased fuel prices, the natural disasters
in Japan and political upheaval in North Africa and the Middle
East had all combined to generate a much more negative
outlook for the industry.
Figure 4 Source: ATA, ICAO and IATA.
NARROWBODIES
The decision by Airbus to go ahead with the A320 neo a range of new designs intended
to act as replacements for the A319, A320 and A321 has resulted in an important
development in the commercial narrowbody jet market.
In December 2010, the manufacturer launched the A320 neo programme with entry into
service (EIS) expected in late 2015. Shortly after announcing the programme, it began
booking orders. These reached unexpectedly high levels at the Paris Air Show (PAS),
such that by the end of June 2011, total orders and commitments for the A320 neo family
surpassed 1,000.
Airbus says the aircraft option will deliver a 15 per cent fuel saving compared with
existing aircraft and will have a 95 per cent airframe commonality with existing aircraft in
the family. There will also be a choice of engines; CFM Internationals (CFMI) Leap-X or
Pratt & Whitneys (P&W) PW1100G. Airbus will also install its wingtip devices, Sharklets,
as a standard feature and will upgrade its cabin.
In July, Boeing offered to re-engine its 737 for its cash-cow customer, American Airlines (AA).
It was the rst time Boeing agreed to deliver a counterpart to the neo, recently announced as
the 737 Max. It was a reaction to Airbus attempt to win AA as its customer with a competitive
$6bn nancing deal.
Of further note is the development of the C919 by Chinas COMAC. Aimed squarely at
the A320 and 737-800 market. The aircraft will accommodate 170 to 190 passengers and
will feature the Leap-X engine. First ight is scheduled for 2014 with EIS due two years
later. Orders to date have come primarily from operators in China, although COMAC has
also received a small number of commitments from GECAS and was reported to have had
discussions with Ryanair.
The Russian MS21 aircraft is also a potential competitor in that market segment. It will
be powered by the new P&W engine. Bombardiers CSeries narrowbody aircraft is smaller,
has enjoyed modest sales and is expected to y in 2012.
Figure 5 Source: OAG Aviation
WIDEBODIES
Following lengthy delays, Boeing now plans to deliver the rst
787 to its launch customer, ANA, in 3Q 2011 more than
eighteen months after its first flight. The programme is far
behind schedule but with more than 800 rm orders booked
so far, it is already a success for the manufacturer. The aircraft
is available in two versions: the 787-800, which carries 242
passengers and the 787-900, which carries 280 passengers.
The competing product from Airbus the A350XWB is
scheduled to y for the rst time in 2012 with EIS the following
year. The A350 is also a success having secured almost 600 rm
orders to date.
The A380 has now been in commercial service for more than
three years although its orderbook remains relatively modest
and somewhat concentrated.
Boeing will deliver the rst 747-8F later in 2011 to its launch
operator Cargolux. The maiden ight of its passenger variant
occurred in March 2011 with the rst delivery taking place in
2012. With rm orders at around 100 units, the 777 freighter is
also establishing a convincing presence.
Online Aircraft Values
Run specific aircraft values for over 35,000 commercial aircraft
using a serial number or registration, or run over 150 generic
aircraft types. With an annual subscription, you have unlimited
access 24/7, ensuring a quick pay back of your investment.
Key features:
Base, Current and Future Values (including Future Market Values)
Soft and Distress Values
Full-life maintenance adjustments
Custom inflation rates for values and maintenance adjustments
Serial or Registration number look up
Detailed specification adjustment options
Export to Excel
Professionally printed output
Portfolio Monitoring Service
With Portfolio Monitoring, it has never
been easier to track and monitor your
values. By using the import tool to load
up to 1,500 individual aircraft into multiple
folders, you are able to allocate your fleet
according to your classifications (e.g., by region,
aircraft type, lessee, equity vs debt, and
owned vs managed). You can easily
run different value scenarios and
export them to Excel.
Online Engine Values
Run maintenance-adjusted current and future engine values
for over 130 commercial jet engines.
Key features:
Quick selection by Manufacturer/Engine type
Differentiate between First Run and Mature engines
Bare, Partial or Full QEC options
Enter customized Overhaul and LLP information for an
adjusted value
Export to Excel
Call 703.476.2300 today for a free demonstration.
For more information about our online values, please visit www.AVITAS.com,
email info@avitas.com or call +1.703.476.2300 (US), +44.173.784.3756 (UK)
Values Anywhere, Anytime at AVITAS.com
Project2_Layout 1 26/08/2011 16:15 Page 1
Figure6 Source: OAG Aviation
Online Aircraft Values
Run specific aircraft values for over 35,000 commercial aircraft
using a serial number or registration, or run over 150 generic
aircraft types. With an annual subscription, you have unlimited
access 24/7, ensuring a quick pay back of your investment.
Key features:
Base, Current and Future Values (including Future Market Values)
Soft and Distress Values
Full-life maintenance adjustments
Custom inflation rates for values and maintenance adjustments
Serial or Registration number look up
Detailed specification adjustment options
Export to Excel
Professionally printed output
Portfolio Monitoring Service
With Portfolio Monitoring, it has never
been easier to track and monitor your
values. By using the import tool to load
up to 1,500 individual aircraft into multiple
folders, you are able to allocate your fleet
according to your classifications (e.g., by region,
aircraft type, lessee, equity vs debt, and
owned vs managed). You can easily
run different value scenarios and
export them to Excel.
Online Engine Values
Run maintenance-adjusted current and future engine values
for over 130 commercial jet engines.
Key features:
Quick selection by Manufacturer/Engine type
Differentiate between First Run and Mature engines
Bare, Partial or Full QEC options
Enter customized Overhaul and LLP information for an
adjusted value
Export to Excel
Call 703.476.2300 today for a free demonstration.
For more information about our online values, please visit www.AVITAS.com,
email info@avitas.com or call +1.703.476.2300 (US), +44.173.784.3756 (UK)
Values Anywhere, Anytime at AVITAS.com
GE Aviation
OnPoint is GEs consultative approach to aviation services
that focuses on meeting each customers goals and needs.
Through OnPoint, we offer exible solutions that lower
cost of ownership and deliver world-class support with
unparalleled operational excellence.
To learn more, visit www.geaviation.com/onpoint.
Tailored services with your specic business
requirements and nancial needs in mind.
67416_onpoint_solns_afg_yrbk.indd 1 8/22/11 1:46 PM
REGIONAL JETS
Figure 7 shows the trend in orders and deliveries for regional
jet aircraft since 1990. The two main manufacturers of 50-
seat aircraft Bombardier and Embraer both enjoyed
considerable success in the market in the 1990s and 2000s. In
recent years, however, the dynamics changed dramatically as
the older regional jets aged further and came towards the end
of their leases. More attention is now given to larger aircraft
in the 70 to 90 seat class and notably in addition to the two
traditional manufacturers in Russia and Japan.
Embraer followed from the success of programmes such as the
ERJ145 to develop its family of EJets. These small aircraft are
purpose built and capable of accommodating between around
70 and 120 passengers (depending on the variant). Each of
the models in the E170, E175, E190 and E195 range have an
established and signicant market presence particularly the
E190 and E195, which have a substantial backlog of rm orders.
Similarly, Bombardiers CRJ100 and CRJ200s remain in
widespread use, mainly by North American and European
operators, but are now falling out of favour to the advantage
of their larger siblings in the CRJ700 and CRJ900 families. The
largest version, the CRJ1000, entered commercial service in
December 2010.
From Japan, the MRJ series will offer a 70 to 80 seat and an
80 to 90 seat variant. Orders have already been secured from
ANA and Trans States Airlines with its maiden ight expected
to take place in 2012. The aircraft will feature Pratt & Whitneys
PW1200G geared turbofan engines.
The Russian manufacturer Sukhoi has produced the
Superjet 100, which ew for the rst time in May 2008 with
the rst delivery in April 2011. This will also offer a range of
designs within the 80 to 100 seat size class and is expected
to sell well to local carriers, although it has also secured
orders in Thailand, Italy and Mexico to date. The aircraft will
feature Powerjet engines jointly built by Saturn of Russia and
SNECMA.
Finally, the Chinese manufacturer COMAC has designed the
ARJ21, an aircraft offering 70 to105 seats (depending on the
variant). The aircraft is very similar to the DC9 in terms of general
conguration and is equipped with General Electrics CF34-10A
engines, aimed to be a selling point to operators outside China.
However, to date, the only commitment from outside the country
has been from GECAS, which ordered ve units.
Overall, the commercial aviation industry appears to be on
track toward the next peak in the market cycle, which AVITAS
forecasts to occur in 2017. The peak in the economic cycle
(which typically precedes the market peak) is forecast to be in
2013. However, the recent industry recession and the global
nancial crisis led to a severe tightening of liquidity for aircraft
nancing. The volume of nancial support provided by export
credit agencies (ECAs) will also begin to decrease at some point.
Of further concern are political uncertainties in the Middle
East, which are contributing to rising oil prices, thus depressing
worldwide trafc through the yield mechanism.
The next decade should bring wide changes to the operating
landscape, something that will affect aircraft manufacturers.
Bombardier and Embraer will face challenges in winning
further orders for regional jets as new players from Japan, China
and Russia are likely to have a significant impact on market
dynamics. Also, two new major widebody designs the 787
and A350 should be in commercial service within the next
two years and both have substantial order backlogs to be met.
Airbus has said it plans to deliver the first A320 neo in late
2015. Boeing will be close behind with its re-engine option, the
737 MAX. The aircraft will offer a seven per cent advantage
in operating costs over future competing aircraft, Boeing said.
Boeing forecasts global demand for more than 23,000 aircraft
in the 737s market segment over the next 20 years at a value
of nearly $2trn. The 737 MAX has already won 496 orders.
Deliveries are expected to begin in 2017, two years after Airbus
rolls out its A320 neo.
Figure 7 Source: OAG Aviation
GE Aviation
OnPoint is GEs consultative approach to aviation services
that focuses on meeting each customers goals and needs.
Through OnPoint, we offer exible solutions that lower
cost of ownership and deliver world-class support with
unparalleled operational excellence.
To learn more, visit www.geaviation.com/onpoint.
Tailored services with your specic business
requirements and nancial needs in mind.
67416_onpoint_solns_afg_yrbk.indd 1 8/22/11 1:46 PM
AIRCRAFT FINANCE GUIDE
W
EVE CLEARED THE APEX OF the financial gale
though weve yet to clear all the debris and wreckage.
The used aircraft market is yet to recover fully and bank
lending has not returned to pre-crisis levels. However,
much has been tided. ILFC was nationalised, CIT Aerospace
entered and exited Chapter 11 and AerCaps freefalling share
price has risen.
Next Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), which is 83 per cent
owned by the UK government, is to sell its aviation arm having
waiting for the maelstrom of the downturn to clear.
But which lessor will be able to ingest a company the size
of RBS Aviation? Following the Paris Air Show in June, BOC,
GECAS and owner of AWAS, Terra Firma, announced interest
in buying the company. ICBC and HKAC are also thought
to be contenders yet Avolon has been barred from Bidding.
Norman Liu, president and CEO of GECAS, said: Its of a size
that youd need pretty deep pockets. And remember that they
have an orderbook of some 100 planes, so the manufacturer
needs to be comfortable with whoever assumes those Or
else it would be some kind of piecemeal solution that might
make it more palatable.
Paris orders, the sale of RBS Aviation, market saturation and the introduction
of Basel III aircraft lessors have much to contend with. New and market-
leading lessors spoke to Mary-Anne Baldwin at the Paris Air Show on these
and other subjects. Plus, we give you low-down on who is moving and who is
losing with portfolio value data from Ascend.
State of the nation:
Lessors assess the market
According to data from Ascend which ranks lessors by their
portfolio value, RBS slipped two places to fth place and its
combined portfolio value (comprising both stored and in
service managed aircraft) fell $173.3m year-on-year. GECAS
and ILFC are the largest lessors remaining at rst and second
place respectively, however ILFCs combined value fell by
$5487.85m.
I know our balance sheet is growing and if we didnt sell
wed be growing even faster, says Liu. He adds that the
company tries to invest $6.5bn in assets each year and it must
invest $5.5bn just to stay at which is an enormous amount
compared to other guys out there. The net growth is about
$1bn in rough numbers but on a portfolio of $50bn thats not
a lot.
Robert Martin, CEO of BOC Aviation similarly told AirFinance
Journal that BOC would consider buying the company given
the right economics. However, he told AFM at the air show:
Its up to the UK government this is a nationalised bank
(RBS, parent of RBS Aviation) where the state has taken
majority shareholding, so the state must decide. In terms of
BOCs clout, it ranks sixth the same as in 2010 however its
combined portfolio value has risen by $783.7m.
Looking at other lessors that feature high in the rankings,
AerCap rose seven places to third, increasing its combined
portfolio value by $1838.4m year-on-year. CIT held its place at
fourth, and Babcock & Brown dropped two place to seven and
AWAS was up one to number eight.
Of particular note was Macquarie, which rose ve places to
10 and saw its portfolio value climb by $1312.45m. Boeing
Capital Corporation (BCC) dropped a signicant seven places
just making the top table at number 20. Its managed portfolio
value fell $503.95m.
THE NEW WAVE
As the larger lessors have been re-couping or
planning to sell, new entrants have come in to
scavenge what deals they can but according
to John Higgins, CEO of Avolon, there is room
enough for all. I dont think theres been a death
of the mega-lessor [a subject talked about across
the industry] just a lot of market opportunity and
people like ourselves have been able to step in
and satisfy that market demand.
In late June, Innity Aviation Capital announced
itself to the market. The new nance and leasing
company is a joint venture (JV) between Perella
Weinberg and three aviation industry veterans:
Richard Baudouin, co-founder of Aviation Capital
Group, and Khawer Ali and Jerrold Rosen, both
principals at KJ Aviation Services.
John Higgins, CEO of Avolon
Innity has already acquired its rst three aircraft, pre-owned
737NGs, which are currently leased to a major airline. It said
in a statement that it intended to invest further in jet and
turboprop aircraft, engines and other related assets as well as
mezzanine loans.
David Schiff, Partner at Perella Weinberg, stated his reasons
for joining the new venture. Recent disruptions in the airline
and aircraft leasing industries have resulted in significant
opportunities to provide needed liquidity and financing
solutions to airlines, leasing companies, and other owners of
aircraft and equipment.
Despite newcomers detecting signicant opportunities, others
namely established lessors have complained that there is not
enough capacity in the market. However, the success of Avolon,
and even more so of Air Lease Corporation (ALC), proves
otherwise. ALC raised $802.5m in its initial public offering (IPO)
in April. It sold 30.3 million at $27.56, four per cent higher than
the IPO price. Avolon has raised $3bn in capital since May 2010,
ordered 12 new 737-800NGs, eight new A320s and completed
sale and leaseback and portfolio transactions for over 60 aircraft.
Its base-case business plan, says Higgins, is to build a portfolio
of about $6bn over the next two years.
A converse criticism is that new lessors have been pricing
up the sale and leaseback market. To this, Higgins responds:
I have the insight so I can say with certainty that we havent
bid up, but clearly I cant make that information public, were a
private company.
What others believe is under-cutting, Higgins says is dexterous
negotiations. When airlines award a mandate they dont
award the mandate purely on the basis of economics when
I sit in front of an airline we trade off a number of things; our
experience, low risk, the economics, our understanding of a
particular operator and how they like to structure a lease in a
particular way.
Ive heard the commentary. But we are winning a small
percentage of the deals we bid on because we are very
disciplined... We dont want to do whatever deal is on the
market and then look back in a few years and say how did
we turn out to have 50 per cent of our book in this country?
However, he admits that when he sees a deal that fits his
portfolio the gloves may come off, chosing to be more
competitive if bidding for a deal in one region more consistent
with its portfolio build-up.
As a lessor that has a low cost of funding, BOC Aviation has
few concerns about what its CEO, Martin, sees as the natural
rise of the new entrant leasing company. When youre a new
company you have to rush to get critical mass and were very
happy to help them do that, well sell them aircraft with leases
attached to get them going. We sold to ALC in the early days
and to others, so we dont see them as a threat actually we
need new players because no one party can do the amount of
capital expenditure that is going in this cycle.
MEETING COMMITMENTS
Despite airline bankruptcies and route cuts, the top lessors have generally
kept their aircraft on lease. BOC boasts that it has not had an aircraft off
lease for ve years (it currently has 175 aircraft) and according to a report
written by Goldman Sachs which was released in May, only three lessors
had aircraft returned. ILFC had two of its 933 aircraft grounded when its
Indonesian customer ceased operators, however one of the two aircraft was
quickly re-leased. Other early returns included Aircastle and AerCap, which
had aircraft in the Middle East and Africa, both of which were affected by
political unrest.
Going forward however, high fuel prices appear to be putting pressure
on ILFCs customers. There were 17 customers ying 77 ILFC aircraft that
were two or more months late on their lease payments, up from 11 customers
in 1Q 2010While competitors have been able to re-lease aircraft quickly
and for relatively little cost after accounting for security and maintenance
deposits, more distressed customers could put pressure on lease rates in the
next few quarters. ILFC had 49 scheduled lease maturities at the beginning of
2011 and 137 in 2012, the report also said.
ILFC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of American International Group (AIG),
has so far entered into 114 lease commitments in 2011 and placed its rst
aircraft orders since 2007. Its CEO, Henri Courpron said, Airlines are
acknowledging ILFCs nancial strength and the appeal of our portfolio and
order book.
In the year-to-date, ILFC ordered 100 A320neo family aircraft and 33 737-
800s and has raised considerable nance. It secured a term loan facility for
$1.5bn and an unsecured bank revolver for $2bn. The company also raised
$2.25bn in unsecured public debt and tendered for $1.75bn in
bond maturities in 2012 and 2013.
ILFC is scheduled to take delivery of four new 737-800s worth
an estimated $175m this year. Its a light schedule, says
Goldman Sachs report, and it will allow ILFC to direct more of
its cash ow toward debt repayment.
In a similar recent report by Goldman Sachs, this time on
AWAS, it wrote: AWAS took a large ($292.7m) write-down to
its eet book value in 2009 after it concluded that the nancial
crisis had permanently impaired the value of much of its eet.
Since then, it has made relatively small adjustments to its eet,
and the aircraft it has sold have been at prices close to or above
book value. The current market value of the eet with no leases
attached is approximately $4.4bn, according to Ascend, which
is about $1.1bn or 20 per cent below the book value of $5.5bn.
We think this method of valuation probably understates the
actual value of the eet when leases are taken into account, and
we do not expect signicant write-downs in book value from
AWAS in the future.
The report estimated AWAS book value as being closer
to market value than that of some of its competitors most
notably ILFC. ILFC wrote down 155 aircraft by $1.5bn in 2010
and it may take up to $300m per year in further impairments.
Ascends valuation of AWAS eet is approximately 26 per cent
less than book value, says Goldman Sachs.
whaL happens when
you comblne:
More Lhan 23 years of
commlLmenL Lo Lhe
avlauon lndusLry .
wlLh unmaLched Lechnlcal
& asseL managemenL
experuse .
and a dynamlc growLh
plauorm wlLh scale,
global reach &
exlblllLy .
Innovanve Av|anon
I|nance So|unons
for Cur Customers.
www.awas. com
BURGEON OR BURST: BASEL III AND THE ASU
Martin admits he has renegade views on the market, as was
evident from BOCs lack of orders during the Paris Air Show.
While orders from other lessors were mounting, Martin
asserted that the industry is in a bubble. In 2007 we said there
was a bubble and a year later the bubble burst, he recalls.
We sat out and watched in 2007we were the guys who at
the bottom of the cycle picked up $2.5bn of equipment in the
space of three months. He plans to do this same this time.
The reason why were seeing a bubble this time is the launch
of the neo but frankly how people can say what the fleet is
going to look like in eight years time when you consider what
happened in the eight years from 2001 to 2009 Im amazed. In
reality, these (the orders made at Paris) are just options because
people put down a very small amount on them. These planes
still need 95 per cent of their nancing secured.
We believe that having gone through the bottom of the cycle
the amount of capital expenditure in dollar terms will go up
dramatically over the next three years. He cites a number of
reasons for this, rstly the 787, which is soon to start delivery
after a delay of three years. Then there is the roll-out of the 747-
800 and an increase in production rates for the A320 family,
737NG family and A330 family.
He notes the disparity between this increase in capital
expenditure and the low supply of money. On the latter side he
lists the Greek crisis, the EUs advice that European banks leave
aviation nancing, and the signicantly higher cost of export
credit pricing.
AIRCRAFT LESSOR - TOP 20 RANKING LIST
Aircraft Operating
Lessor A300 A310
A320
Family A330/40 A380
737
(CFM) 737 (NG) 747 757 767 777 CRJs
ERJ 135-
195 MDS Others
Combined
number of
aircraft
GECAS 3 S 3 IS
467 IS,
13 S
46 IS, 1 S
227 IS,
21 S
397 IS,
2 S
26 IS 22 IS, 8 S 70 IS, 4 S 35 IS, 1 S
233 IS,
32 S
149 IS,
12 S
34 IS, 4 S 33 IS, 2 S 1845
ILFC 5 IS, 1 S 3 IS, 1 S
370 IS,
16 S
121 IS,
2 S
77 IS, 4 S
197 IS,
6 S
14 IS, 2 S 64 IS, 1 S 53 IS, 1 S 70 IS, 1 S 8 IS, 1 S 1017
AerCap 1 IS
153 IS,
11 S
28 IS 41 IS, 3 S 25 IS 7 IS, 2S 6 IS 2 IS 5 IS 6 IS, 1 S 291
CIT Aerospace 1 IS
122 IS,
2 S
23 IS 11 IS, 70 IS, 2 S 11 IS 8 IS 1 IS 1 IS 252
RBS Aviation
Capital
118 IS,
2 S
2 IS
106 IS,
2 S
2 IS 9 IS, 4S 245
BOC Aviation 71 IS 6 IS 1 IS 64 IS 1 IS 19 IS 162
Babcock &
Brown Aircraft
Management
I S 81 IS, 4 S 8 IS
37 IS,
11 S
111 IS 5 IS 27 IS, 1 S 6 IS, 1 S 7 IS 8 IS, 1S 309
AWAS 1 IS 49 IS, 3 S 18 IS 1 IS 52 IS, 7 S 34 IS 7 IS 7 IS 19 IS, 1 S 1 IS 11 IS, 2 S 3 IS 203
Aviation Capital
Group
75 IS,
12 S
3 IS 37 IS, 9 S 76 IS, 5 S 3 IS, 3 S 7 IS, 1 S 9 IS, 5 S 5 IS 215
Macquarie
AirFinance
1 IS 72 IS, 5S 9 IS 12 IS, 2 S 51 IS 1 IS 4 IS, 3 S 1 IS 4 IS 2 IS 2 IS 124
Aircastle Advisor 1 IS 25 IS, 5 S 20 IS 15 IS, 2 S 29 IS, 1 S 13 IS, 1 S 10 IS 12 IS 1 IS 1 IS 129
Doric Asset Finance
& Verwaltungs
6 1S 3 IS 11 IS 6 IS 26
ICBC Leasing 17 IS 8 IS 2 IS, 1 S 11 IS 9 IS 7 IS 7 IS 62
MC Aviation
Partners/
Mitsubishi
Corporation
21 IS, 1 S 8 IS 5 IS 19 IS 4 IS 17 IS 2 IS 9 IS 86
Amentum Capital 13 IS, 2 S 7 IS, 1 S 13 IS 2 IS 6 IS 1 IS 4 IS 49
CDB Leasing 15 IS 14 IS 11 IS 1 IS, 4 S 3 IS 2 IS 2 IS 1 IS 54
Hong Kong Aviation
Capital
31 IS 12 IS 10 IS 4 IS, 1 S 2 IS 2 IS 6 IS 2 IS 70
DAE Capital 16 IS 11 IS 16 IS 5 IS 48
SMFL Aircraft
Capital
22 IS 5 IS 2 IS 31 IS, 1 S 2 IS 4 IS 77
Boeing Capital Corp 1 IS 17 IS, 4 S 5 IS 1 IS 32 IS 8 IS 28 IS, 1 S
101 IS,
26 S
224

Add a large amount of excess demand for money to a
restricted supply of money, and why would you be placing
large speculative orders? Its better to wait and nance this large
amount of cap-ex thats going to come through.
Avolons Higgins however, is confident that airlines and
lessors will continue to nd nancing though it may be a little
harder. Of particular impact will be Basel III, a new regulation
on the lending practises of banks, which will be gradually
introduced from 2013, and the Aircraft sector Understanding
(ASU), which from 2012 will support wider lending by
increasing the cost of export credit agencies (ECA) loans.
I think banks will continue to be very active in lending to
both airlines and lessors because fundamentally, aircraft are
good assets. I think on the technical level of how Basel III is
implemented there might be a slight shift down in the overall
tenor of lending (to below 10 years as opposed to 12) but Im
not expecting a shock factor from Basel III.
Liu of GECAS says: I dont think spreads will get much
tighter because of Basel III and return on equity. Bank equity
levels are going up in general, which means pricing will have
to go up. They (spreads) are not going to drop that much further
because of the regulatory requirements of [the] ASU theres
a lot of hullabaloo about it, but Im like, its relatively mild.
The ASU will affect lessors on varying levels. GECAS for
example, relies on its parent company for funding rather than
ECA or Ex-Im support. We tried an Ex-Im just to give it a whirl
when funding costs were different but now it doesnt make a lot
of sense, says Liu. However, lessors like Avolon, which hopes
whaL happens when
you comblne:
More Lhan 23 years of
commlLmenL Lo Lhe
avlauon lndusLry .
wlLh unmaLched Lechnlcal
& asseL managemenL
experuse .
and a dynamlc growLh
plauorm wlLh scale,
global reach &
exlblllLy .
Innovanve Av|anon
I|nance So|unons
for Cur Customers.
www.awas. com
Advanced aircraft f leet solutions to the world
We offer flexible fleet solutions
to our airline customers.
Our priority is to ensure that an assortment of top-quality aircraft and engine
selections are incorporated into our fleet options. Thus, ILFC can provide the most
flexible solutions for our airline customers. We work with the airframe and engine
manufacturers to offer the best value and product support packages. Our team
always stays abreast of the latest advances in aircraft technologies.
Meet our Fleet Planning team.
ilfc.com/fleet
to secure ECA and Ex-Im nancing by the end of year if only,
says Higgins to diversify its funding sources will be affected.
But the higher cost of ECA loans should mean airlines will
step back from purchasing and towards leasing aircraft,
bringing an overall positive affect to the market. If the market
continues to evolve the way we see it evolving I think there
will be increased demand for leasing as airlines will be
looking for alternatives to the ASU structure, says Higgins.
Maybe theyll do more debt nancing and capital nancing
and I would expect the new ASU to drive demand in operating
leasing but who knows what broader macro environment
well be in. The new ASU may be a more expensive product
than the previous version but it may be that theres high
demand for it at the time due to extraneous factors.
Its very simple, asserts BOCs Martin. When you put
the price of something up, the demand for it should fall but
that doesnt seem to tie with production. Most airlines order
aircraft when they see their revenue start to go up. They dont
think about the nancing side until the pre-delivery payments
start two years ahead of delivery. People havent considered
that the cost of nancing is going up.
LESSOR RANKING BY MANAGED VALUE
Aircraft operating lessor Est. value in-service aircraft [$m] Est. value stored aircraft [$m] Combined value [$m] 2010 Combined value [$m]
GECAS 34,564.60 962.35 35,526.95 34,950.21
ILFC 27,168.00 695.05 27,863.05 33,350.90
AerCap 6,955.35 219.8 7,175.15 5,335.75
CIT Aerospace 6,623.40 81.6 6,705.00 6,272.35
RBS Aviation Capital 6,369.60 108 6,477.60 6,650.90
BOC Aviation 6,249.90 N/A 6,249.90 5,466.20
Babcock & Brown Aircraft Management 5,756.10 149.3 5,905.40 6,027.45
AWAS 4,409.60 72 4,481.60 4,156.45
Aviation Capital Group 4,253.90 277.8 4,531.70 4,423.85
Macquarie AirFinance 3,738.55 61.55 3,800.20 2,487.75
Aircastle Advisor 3,278.65 149.35 3,428.00 3,037.90
Doric Asset Finance & Verwaltungs 2,743.60 N/A 2,743.60 2,350.35
ICBC Leasing 2,680.80 5.7 2,664.50 N/A
MC Aviation Partners/Mitsubishi Corporation 2,571.25 21 2,592.25 2,605.90
Amentum Capital 2,393.75 131.3 2,525.05 2,216.65
CDB Leasing 2,268.15 48.75 2,316.90 N/A
Hong Kong Aviation Capital 2,177.60 19.5 2,197 2,332.00
DAE Capital 2,069.25 N/A 2,069.25 1,854.70
SMFL Aircraft Capital 1,991.10 23.5 2,014.60 1,625.05
Boeing Capital Corp 1,984.60 272.95 2,257.55 2,761.50

According to Higgins, manufacturers production rates are the key
driver of stability in the industry. He says that despite hearing a
variety of opinions of the matter he has faith the OEMs will get it right.
Manufacturers, through this most recent cycle, have demonstrated
ability and a discipline around production rates which wasnt the same
in other down cycles Whereas they make announcements with real
intent about increased production rates and timelines, if the market
circumstances were to change I think the manufacturers would change.
Martins view however, like much of his market analysis, differs from
other lessors. Boeing and Airbus are not necessarily looking at overall
market supply and demand, they are just doing what their shareholders
want which is to produce the maximum number of aircraft.
Manufacturers sell aircraft to every customer who comes to buy aircraft,
rather like selling cars A lot of people who used to lease aircraft are now
buying them, and thats not because they can afford them, because then
they have to go back to a lessor to do a sale and leaseback. So the dynamics
of the market are changing. We are seeing a lot of aircraft coming onto the
market to replace aircraft that are coming off their rst leases so seven to
12 years old.
Because the manufacturers didnt cut their supply during the
downturn there has been a relative excess of aircraft coming into the
market compared to demand and at the same time weve had airline
consolidation with very little start-up [airline] activity the utilisation
of aircraft has gone up and weve needed less aircraft. What that means is
theres been aircraft thrown out of the market at an earlier age short-term
unemployed if you like.
In terms of leasing older used aircraft Higgins says: I wouldnt say theres
an absence of competition in that space. He notes that other lessors,
namely Aircastle, have stated their intent to buy older aircraft. In the case of
Aircastle, eight- to 15-years-old.
While Avolon has a particularly young eet, just 1.6-years-old on average,
he says the company is not averse to buying older models. We dont have
a binary policy of we dont do used airplanes. He adds that the company
has bought aircraft as old as ve years and because of its relationships with
airlines it has had a number of opportunities to buy more. The decision
will come down to risk adjusted returns and only after looking at the
nancial and maintenance risks and technological obsolescence will it
make a decision.
Advanced aircraft f leet solutions to the world
We offer flexible fleet solutions
to our airline customers.
Our priority is to ensure that an assortment of top-quality aircraft and engine
selections are incorporated into our fleet options. Thus, ILFC can provide the most
flexible solutions for our airline customers. We work with the airframe and engine
manufacturers to offer the best value and product support packages. Our team
always stays abreast of the latest advances in aircraft technologies.
Meet our Fleet Planning team.
ilfc.com/fleet
AAR Aircraft Sales & Leasing 149.25 In Service 20 1 2 1 1 1
AAR Aircraft Sales & Leasing 22.65 Stored 2 2
AELIS Group 0.95 In Service 1
AerCap 6955.35 In Service 66 7 6 2 1 153 28 5 6
AerCap 219.8 Stored 3 2 11 1
AerGlobe 12.6 In Service 3
AerGlobe 11 Stored 3
Aergo Capital 73.8 In Service 27 10
Aergo Capital 34.3 Stored 14 16
Aerolease International 81.8 In Service 4
Aerolease International 50.5 Stored 5
Aeron Aviation Corp 0.1 In Service
Aerospace Management Capital 58.8 In Service 4
Aerospace Management Capital 29.4 Stored 2
Aerostar Leasing 55.35 In Service 5 1
Aerostar Leasing 10.65 Stored 1
Aerovista 6.5 In Service 4
Air Lease Corporation 1994.55 In Service 22 1 4 22 3
Air Lease Corporation 46.8 Stored 1
Air Transport Leasing 1 In Service 1
Air Transport Leasing 4.1 Stored 1 1
Airbus Asset Management 219.75 In Service 6 8
Airbus Asset Management 20.5 Stored 4
Aircastle Advisor 3278.65 In Service 44 13 10 12 1 1 25 20 1
Aircastle Advisor 111.7 Stored 3 1 5
Aircraft Asset Management 234.35 In Service 1 7
Aircraft Asset Management 23.05 Stored 1
Aircraft Financing and Trading 12 In Service
Aircraft Financing and Trading 7 Stored
Aircraft Leasing & Management 886.9 In Service 23 2 10 8 4
Aircraft Leasing & Management 38.6 Stored 1 5 1
Aircraft Purchase Fleet 1429.55 In Service 53 10
Aireet Credit Corp 53.7 In Service
Aireet Credit Corp 67.5 Stored 3
Airlease International 1.5 In Service
Airlease International 2.05 Stored
Airline Capital Leasing 0.65 In Service 2
Airline Capital Leasing 4.7 Stored 1 1
ALAFCO & Novus Aviation 237.75 In Service 1 1 3 3 1
ALAFCO 1578.8 In Service 16 4 1 27
ALAFCO 96.95 Stored 3
Alandia Air 2.7 In Service
Alandia Air 5.7 Stored
Aldus Aviation 319.3 In Service 16
Alpstream 99.45 In Service 3
Alpstream 74.4 Stored 2
Amentum Capital 2393.75 In Service 13 2 6 13 7 1 4
Amentum Capital 131.3 Stored 2 1
Apollo Aviation Group 113.7 In Service 11 1 1 2 2 1
Apollo Aviation Group 89.7 Stored 5 3 2 2
Archway Aviation 58.1 In Service 3
ASL Aviation 254.9 In Service 5 5 15 1
Aurora Aviation Group 6.7 In Service 2
Aurora Aviation Group 4.2 Stored 1
Manager Value Status 737 747 757 767 777 A300 A310
A320
Family
A330
A340 A380
ATR42
ATR72 CRJs ERJs MDs
Automatic 46.5 In Service 3
Avation Plc 18 In Service
Avequis 344.15 In Service 7 4
Aviaco Traders International 3.7 In Service
Aviation Capital Group 4253.9 In Service 113 3 7 75 3 9
Aviation Capital Group 277.8 Stored 14 3 1 12 5
Aviation Leasing Group 38.7 Stored 2
Avico 39 In Service 1 2
Avion Aircraft Trading 189 In Service 6
Avline 7.4 In Service
Avmax Aircraft Leasing 112.95 In Service 7
Avmax Aircraft Leasing 41 Stored 3
Avolon 550.15 In Service 1 1 11
AWAS 4409.6 In Service 86 7 7 19 1 49 19 11
AWAS 72 Stored 7 1 3 2
BAE Systems 324.9 In Service 1 1
BAE Systems 118 Stored
Banc of America 643.55 In Service 13 5 1 2 7
Bank of Communications Finance 45 In Service 2
Bavaria International 257.6 In Service 10
Bavaria International 13.2 Stored 3 1
BBAM 6321.05 In Service 148 5 27 6 7 81 8 8
BBAM 149.3 Stored 11 1 1 1 4 1
BCI Aircraft Leasing 346.8 In Service 16 4 4 3 5
BCI Aircraft Leasing 7.75 Stored 4
Bluepoint Aviation 4 In Service 1
BOC Aviation 6249.9 In Service 65 1 19 71 6
Boeing Capital Corp 1984.6 In Service 22 1 32 8 1 2 28
Boeing Capital Corp 272.95 Stored 4 1
Bombardier Capital Leasing 10.9 In Service
Brihar Corporation 5.7 In Service 1
Business Aviation Services 11.3 In Service 2
Business Aviation Services 5.65 Stored 1
Capital Aircraft 0.3 In Service
Capital Aircraft 0.2 Stored
Capital Lease Aviation 65.9 In Service 3
Cara Capital Corp 1.45 In Service 5
Cara Capital Corp 1.05 Stored 3
Cargo Aircraft Management 410.05 In Service 2 30
Cargo Aircraft Management 99 Stored 1 8
CDB Leasing Company 2268.15 In Service 11 1 3 2 16 14 2 1
CDB Leasing Company 48.75 Stored 4
Changjiang Leasing Company 149.4 In Service 4 1
China Aircraft Leasing 247.7 In Service 8
CIT Aerospace 6623.4 In Service 81 11 8 1 1 122 23 1
CIT Aerospace 81.6 Stored 2 2
CIT Leasing Corp 27.55 In Service 2
Compass Capital Corp 27.45 In Service 1 4
Compass Capital Corp 1 Stored 1
CSDS Aircraft Sales & Leasing 4.7 Stored 1
DAE Capital 2069.25 In Service 16 5 16 11
DEFAG Leasing 68.2 In Service 1
Deutsche Bank 27.5 In Service 11
Deutsche Bank 11.8 Stored 1
A320
Family
A330
A340 A380
ATR42
ATR72 CRJs ERJs MDs
Deutsche Structured Finance 46 In Service 3 1 1
Deutsche Structured Finance 10.7 Stored 2
Doric Asset Finance 2743.6 In Service 6 6 3 11
Dornier Aviation 2.3 In Service
Dornier Aviation 4.6 Stored
ECC Leasing 167.7 In Service 23
ECC Leasing 110.85 Stored 12
Erik Thun 139.05 In Service 8
European Capital Corporation 0.3 Stored 2
FGL Aircraft Ireland 53.75 In Service 2 1
First Greenwich Kahala 81.5 In Service 7 1 4 10
First Greenwich Kahala 9.5 Stored 2 1
Fortis Aircraft 2.8 In Service 1
GA Finance Services 12.6 In Service 1 1
GECAS 34564.6 In Service 624 26 22 70 40 3 474 27 3 233 156 34
GECAS 962.35 Stored 23 8 4 1 3 13 1 32 12 4
GK MDT Services 22.45 In Service 4
Global Aircraft Leasing Partners 0.25 In Service 1
Global Aircraft Leasing Partners 0.25 Stored 1
Global Aviation Asset Mgmt 1046.2 In Service 17 22 3
Global Aviation Asset Mgmt 20.3 Stored 1
Global Aviation Leasing 2.75 In Service 2
Global Aviation Leasing 0.7 Stored
Global Knafaim Leasing 132.1 In Service 1 4 4 2 1 5
Global Knafaim Leasing 19.5 Stored 1
GMT Global Republic Aviation 271.25 In Service 5 11
GMT Global Republic Aviation 75.75 Stored 3 3
GOAL 598.3 In Service 2 2 1 10 6
GOAL 6.4 Stored 1
Guggenheim Aviation Partners 1089.6 In Service 7 5 17 7 4 3 6
Guggenheim Aviation Partners 28.15 Stored 1 1
Hong Kong Aviation Capital 2177.6 In Service 10 4 2 2 31 12 6
Hong Kong Aviation Capital 19.5 Stored 1
Hong Kong International 526.75 In Service 4 8
Hwa-Hsia Leasing 68.6 In Service 2 3 1
ICBC Leasing 2680.8 In Service 13 9 7 17 8 7
ICBC Leasing 5.7 Stored 1
Icelandic Aircraft Mgmt 6 In Service
Icelease 26.3 In Service 1 3
Icelease 5.6 Stored 2
ILFC 27168 In Service 274 14 64 53 70 5 3 370 121 8
ILFC 695.05 Stored 10 2 1 1 1 1 1 16 2
Intrepid Aviation Group 22.9 In Service 3
Investec Global Aircraft Fund 442.45 In Service 4 1 4 2
ITC-Leasing 0.45 In Service 2
ITC-Leasing 0.2 Stored 1
ITOCHU AeroTech 235.35 In Service 6 1 3
Jackson Square Aviation 822.8 In Service 13 1 8
Jet Trading And Leasing 41.25 In Service 1 1 3
Jet Trading And Leasing 9.3 Stored 2 3
JetFleet Management Corp 86 In Service
JetFleet Management Corp 26.95 Stored
Jetlease 2.5 In Service 1
Jetlease 2.5 Stored 1
A320
Family
A330
A340 A380
ATR42
ATR72 CRJs ERJs MDs
Jetran International 12.25 In Service 2
Jetran International 55 Stored 2 1 9
Jetscape 655.87 In Service 7 2 23
Jetscape 24 Stored 1 1
JT Power 3.75 In Service 2
JT Power 16.25 Stored 3 2
KAL Aviation 1.85 In Service 10
KAL Aviation 0.5 Stored 3
KG Aircraft Leasing 5.75 In Service 1
KJ Aviation Services 29.25 In Service 5
KV Aviation 12 In Service 3
Largus Aviation 55.05 In Service 1
Lease Corporation International 920.05 In Service 2 1 2 1 7
Lionhart Aviation Limited 104.8 In Service 4
Macquarie AirFinance 3738.55 In Service 63 1 4 1 4 1 72 9 2 2
Macquarie AirFinance 61.55 Stored 2 5
Magellan Group 1.8 In Service
Magellan Group 5.9 Stored 1
Mass Lease 42.2 In Service
Mass Lease 19.8 Stored
MC Aviation /Mitsubishi 2571.25 In Service 24 4 17 2 21 8 9
MC Aviation /Mitsubishi 21 Stored 1
MCC Financial Corp 1.8 In Service
MDT (UK) 16.8 In Service 1
Midair 4.75 Stored 1
Mitsui Bussan Aerospace 249.75 In Service 4 1 5 11
MK Aviation 12.6 In Service 2
Nordic Aviation Capital 901.05 In Service 10 1 76 4
Nordic Aviation Capital 41.25 Stored 5
Northern Lights Leasing 3.5 Stored 2
Novus Aviation 330.75 In Service 4 1 3 2 1 4
Novus Aviation 10.6 Stored 2
Nuomova 31.65 In Service 8 1
Ofer Aviation 167.9 In Service 4 2
Omega Air 0.1 Stored
ORIX Aviation 1419.15 In Service 36 3 7 1 35 6 2
ORIX Aviation 31.25 Stored 4 3
Pacic AirFinance 38 In Service 2 5
Pacic Coast Group 0.7 In Service
Palm Aviation 7 Stored
Pearl Aircraft Corporation 2.5 Stored 1
Pembroke Group 1899.9 In Service 22 2 8 13 4 2 1
Pembroke Group 21.2 Stored 1
Pembroke & Aircraft Financing 6.7 In Service
Pembroke & Aircraft Financing 10.2 Stored
Penerbangan Malaysia Berhad 946.5 In Service 17 12 4 1 9
Phoenix Aircraft Leasing 32.7 In Service 2 2 1
Phoenix Aircraft Leasing 4.8 Stored 1 2
Plane Business 6.2 In Service 1
Power Aircraft Services 4.25 In Service 1
Power Aircraft Services 2 Stored 2
Q Aviation 309.55 In Service 3 2 3 4 4
RAK Leasing 0.5 Stored 1
Raytheon Aircraft Credit 43.3 In Service
A320
Family
A330
A340 A380
ATR42
ATR72 CRJs ERJs MDs
FINANCING THE WORLD'S FLEET, ONE AIRLINE AT A TIME
Over $3 billion of committed aircraft purchases since 2010
Jackson Square Aviation is one of the world's
fastest growing privately-held aviation capital
provider, with a fleet of over 70 new and
committed next generation aircaft, serving
multiple airlines throughout the world.
Operating leases Finance leases
Engine finance Pre-delivery payments
Acquisition of three
Boeing 737-800s
Sale/leaseback of two
2010 Airbus A319-100s
2011 Boeing 737-800
deliveries
Sale/leaseback of five
2011 Boeing 737-800
deliveries
Sale/leaseback of
three 2011 Airbus
A320-200 deliveries
with PDP funding
Sale/leaseback of four
Boeing 737-800
deliveries and one 2008
Airbus 319-100
Sale/leaseback of one
2010 Airbus A320-200
delivery and one 2010
A319-100 delivery
PDP funding of four
2011 Airbus A320-200
deliveries and sale/
leaseback of two 2008
Airbus A319-100s
2011 Boeing 777-300ER
delivery and three
2011 Airbus A320-200
deliveries
2011 Airbus A330-300
deliveries
Sale/leaseback of
seven 2011-2012 Airbus
A320-200 deliveries
with PDP funding
Sale/leaseback of
three 2011 Boeing
B777-300ER deliveries
C
M
Y
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K
JSA_Update_PrintAd_July2011_Update_Final_UBM.pdf 7/11/11 5:16:13 PM
Raytheon Aircraft Credit 16.65 Stored
RBS Aviation Capital 6369.6 In Service 106 118 2 2 9
RBS Aviation Capital 187.15 Stored 2 2 4
Regional Aviation 0.8 Stored 1
Regional One 7.5 In Service 3
Regional One 11.55 Stored
Rockton Management 4.4 In Service 1
RPK Capital Management 44.2 In Service 3 2 1 3
Runway Asset Management 5.95 In Service 6
Runway Asset Management 1.9 Stored 2
Saab Aircraft Leasing 196.1 In Service
Saab Aircraft Leasing 50.15 Stored
Sahaab Leasing 318.25 In Service 11
Santos Dumont Aircraft Mgmt 506.35 In Service 11 1 2 2
Santos Dumont Aircraft Mgmt 19 Stored 1
Sberbank Leasing 74.35 In Service 6 1
Sberbank Leasing 67.5 Stored 2
Sean Ho Aircraft Leasing 40.2 In Service 2
Showa Leasing 453.75 In Service 2 7 10 1 5
Sigma Aircraft Management 18 In Service 4
Sky Holding 492.15 In Service 5 1 14 4 1 10 12
Sky Holding 77.4 Stored 17 4 2 7
Skytech-AIC 116.7 In Service 2
SkyWorks Leasing 1159.45 In Service 5 4 33 10 19 5 32
SkyWorks Leasing 137 Stored 1 4 20
SMFL Aircraft Capital 1991.1 In Service 33 2 32 5 4
SMFL Aircraft Capital 23.5 Stored 1
Sojitz Aircraft Leasing 109.3 In Service 11
Sojitz Aircraft Leasing 11.8 Stored 1
Sumitomo Mitsui 425.7 In Service 1 1 8 1 2
Sverigeyg Leasing 5.7 In Service
TAT Leasing Services 175.35 In Service 16
Ten Forty Corp 2 In Service
The Essence Group 5.4 In Service
The Flightstar Group 1 Stored 2
Tiger Aircraft Trading 34.7 Stored 17
Titan Aviation Leasing 14.15 In Service 1
Unconrmed 505.5 In Service 8 1 10 1 1
Universal Asset Management 71 In Service 1 4 6
Universal Asset Management 85.35 Stored 5 4 7
VEB-Leasing 306.15 In Service 1 3 2 4
Veling 371.9 In Service 6 3 4 2
Vietnam Aircraft Leasing 83.5 In Service 5
Volito Aviation Services 584.8 In Service 15 2 27 1
Volito Aviation Services 7.9 Stored 1 1
VTB-Leasing 467 In Service 12 3 5 3 9 2
Vx Capital Partners 155.05 In Service 2 10 2 9
Vx Capital Partners 4.6 Stored 1
Waha Leasing 45 In Service 2
Waha Leasing 2.75 Stored 1
World Star Aviation 84.5 In Service 20 2 2 1 1
Wor ld Star Aviation 35.6 Stored 19 2 2 1
A320
Family
A330
A340 A380
ATR42
ATR72 CRJs ERJs MDs
FINANCING THE WORLD'S FLEET, ONE AIRLINE AT A TIME
Over $3 billion of committed aircraft purchases since 2010
Jackson Square Aviation is one of the world's
fastest growing privately-held aviation capital
provider, with a fleet of over 70 new and
committed next generation aircaft, serving
multiple airlines throughout the world.
Operating leases Finance leases
Engine finance Pre-delivery payments
Acquisition of three
Boeing 737-800s
2010 Airbus A319-100s
2011 Boeing 737-800
deliveries
Sale/leaseback of five
2011 Boeing 737-800
deliveries
Sale/leaseback of
three 2011 Airbus
A320-200 deliveries
with PDP funding
Sale/leaseback of four
Boeing 737-800
deliveries and one 2008
Airbus 319-100
2010 Airbus A320-200
delivery and one 2010
A319-100 delivery
PDP funding of four
2011 Airbus A320-200
deliveries and sale/
leaseback of two 2008
Airbus A319-100s
2011 Boeing 777-300ER
delivery and three
2011 Airbus A320-200
deliveries
2011 Airbus A330-300
deliveries
Sale/leaseback of
seven 2011-2012 Airbus
A320-200 deliveries
with PDP funding
Sale/leaseback of
three 2011 Boeing
B777-300ER deliveries
C
M
Y
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K
JSA_Update_PrintAd_July2011_Update_Final_UBM.pdf 7/11/11 5:16:13 PM
Partnering for
sustainable growth:
How lessors, airlines
and OEMs can work together
Todays airlines understand the benets and options that leasing can deliver. Whether it is to provide eet
exibility, nancial portfolio management, or to hedge against technical obsolescence, leasing is a strong
part of an operators toolbox. Yet in order to meet airlines growing needs for exible nancing tools and
customised solutions, lessors must adapt to offer a fuller range of services. Ray Sisson, president and
CEO, AWAS provides his views.
T
HE AVIATION INDUSTRY IS DYNAMIC and always
evolving. Airlines, for example, have evolved from the
core ag carriers and regionals of the past, into mega-merged
global players, budget carriers, and hybrid airlines, all of
which are expanding rapidly from their continental roots.
The method by which airlines acquire aircraft has also
evolved. Today approximately 40 per cent of the worlds
active commercial eet is leased and it is estimated that the
gure will grow to over 45 per cent by 2015 and almost 48
per cent by 2020. Manufacturers project that in order to meet
demand the worlds eet will need to double by 2030. As
such, the importance of leasing has never been so great.
LEASING AS A GROWTH TOOL
The global economy has returned to a phase of
moderate but steady growth, now airlines and
lessors must evolve so that they are better able to
handle inevitable market shocks and to optimise
their business models for long-term protability.
Leasing has also become more popular because of myriad
post-recession policies that have significantly restricted
airlines access to more traditional funding sources
such as the capital markets and bank financing. Basel III
requirements and the tightening of Export Bank credit
further impact on this issue.
In a progressive relationship a lessor assists a customer with its
eet renewal by re-deploying assets that are no longer optimal to its
needs But in order to accomplish this, a lessor must have the scale,
reach and relationships to be able to shufe or grow a portfolio.
Lufthansa Techniks Aircraft Leasing and Trading Support (ALTS) is the fast, professional service that takes over
when a leased aircraft changes operators. We handle the full spectrum of checks and modifcation work, including
design, cabin furnishings and repainting all the way up to the necessary inspections and approvals.
In short, we take care of all the technical and administrative tasks of aircraft leasing for you, whether youre the lessor
or the lessee. Lets talk about it!
Lufthansa Technik AG, Marketing & Sales
E-mail: marketing.sales@lht.dlh.de
www.lufthansa-technik.com/leasing
Call us: +49-40-5070-5553
The shortest distance
between two owners?
Ask us.
More mobility for the world
239_210x278_LeasingLack_AircratFinanceGuide_ICv2_RZ01.indd 1 03.08.2011 11:09:53 Uhr Lufthansa Technik 0911.indd 1 18/08/2011 16:14
We often talk to our customers
about their fleets, work to
understand their unique operation
and develop long-term relationships
so that we can meet their needs and
anticipate their future requirements.
Customers tell us that they believe
their fleets should be a balanced
mix of leased and owned assets
with a percentage customised to meet the specic model of an
individual organisation.
An example of this type of progressive relationship is when a
lessor assists a customer with its eet renewal by re-deploying
assets that are no longer optimal to its needs. The asset is
handed to another more suitable customer and the former is
supplied with an asset more in keeping with its needs. But in
order to accomplish this, a lessor must have the scale, reach
and relationships to be able to shufe or grow a portfolio.
Another tool for airlines is the sale and leaseback model.
This is growing in importance as many customers have
placed signicant pipeline orders for newer more fuel-efcent
aircraft. With fuel cost being the single greatest operating
drain on an airlines bottom-line, access to modern aircraft
that can reduce fuel-burn by 10 to 25 per cent is critical to
sustained protability.
DRIVE FOR NEXT GEN TECHNOLOGIES
Airlines have seen the future and they have responded
by ordering a part of it. These orders promise to deliver
significantly lower operating and maintenance costs and
enhance fleet performance. The combination of next
generation airframes and new engine options are critical to
improving airlines operational efciency as well as providing
signicant environmental benets.
A mass of new assets will enter the market leaving the older
ones to be re-deployed. Airlines will need lessors to provide
creative solutions to manage their eet renewal programmes
and the nancing of new aircraft and sale and leasebacks will
play a pivotal role in this.
However, many of these aircraft will not be delivered until
two to five years time, perhaps longer and that is just for
existing orders. A large number of airlines are still looking
to upgrade and replace airframes of 20-years or older that
have become inefcient or are deemed unsuitable for further
investment due to low book values.
Airlines require aircraft that can be delivered in the near-term
and can still offer a 10 to 20 per cent operational benet versus
the aircraft they replace. By having a pipeline of efficient,
modern aircraft available, lessors can provide more immediate
solutions to customers who may not have delivery slots for
some time to come.
Ray Sisson, president
and CEO, AWAS
Lufthansa Techniks Aircraft Leasing and Trading Support (ALTS) is the fast, professional service that takes over
when a leased aircraft changes operators. We handle the full spectrum of checks and modifcation work, including
design, cabin furnishings and repainting all the way up to the necessary inspections and approvals.
In short, we take care of all the technical and administrative tasks of aircraft leasing for you, whether youre the lessor
or the lessee. Lets talk about it!
Lufthansa Technik AG, Marketing & Sales
E-mail: marketing.sales@lht.dlh.de
www.lufthansa-technik.com/leasing
Call us: +49-40-5070-5553
The shortest distance
between two owners?
Ask us.
More mobility for the world
239_210x278_LeasingLack_AircratFinanceGuide_ICv2_RZ01.indd 1 03.08.2011 11:09:53 Uhr Lufthansa Technik 0911.indd 1 18/08/2011 16:14 AFG Yearbook 2012.indd 25 07/09/2011 13:53
The goal should always be to provide flexible access to
the right technology. Another way to do this is for lessors to
collaborate with the manufacturer to jointly evaluate and create
a customised package for the customer. The manufacturers
have a unique set of tools at their disposal, which when
combined with a lessors services can deliver a more potent and
effective overall solution.
There is also a great opportunity for lessors and OEMs to work
more closely on airframe development. A lessor has a unique
perspective on what the customer wants and how eets evolve
over time. Together, we can help optimise a programme that
will be successful today and for many years to come.
UNDERSTANDING THE METAL
Providing a exible nancing option is critical but a lessors
ability to understand the aircraft, provide technical expertise
and consultation to an airline will be of even greater importance
as fleets expand and house new technologies. We are often
asked to partner with our customers to evaluate potential
options, appraise current aircraft performance and plan for eet
modernisation. A lessors ability to provide this level of value-
added service can determine the depth of a relationship as well
as the quality of the solutions it can deliver.
We work with the airline to seamlessly customise new aircraft
for delivery and to recongure and upgrade modern aircraft for
its next mission. The result is a better aircraft for the customer
and an asset that delivers optimal value over its lifetime.
We need to optimise the current marketplace conditions and
create partnerships that contribute to an airlines bottom line.
Furthermore, we need long-term plans. The industry has stood
resilient against three decades of violent shocks including four
recessions, two nancial crises, two Gulf Wars and uctuating
oil prices. We have learnt important lessons but we must build
these into our long-term plans if we are to protect ourselves
from further shock.
This is an extremely important period for the aviation
industry. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecasts
global growth at 4.3 per cent this year with BRIC nations
running at approximately twice this projection. Airlines
and lessors need each other more than ever. Emergence from
financial crises, a return to global growth and the advent of
game-changing technologies all lie ahead. Together, we must
seize the opportunities for growth and protability.
The goal should always be to
provide exible access to the
right technology. A way to do
this is for lessors to collaborate
with the manufacturer to
jointly evaluate and create a
customised package for the
customer. The manufacturers
have a unique set of tools at
their disposal, which when
combined with a lessors
services can deliver a more
potent and effective overall
solution.
By delivering double-digit fuel burn savings, Pratt & Whitney PurePower Engines provide next-
generation benefits today. With up to 20% lower operating costs, half the noise and dramatically
reduced emissions, these proven, dependable engines save operators up to $1.5 million per
aircraft per year. Discover real engines that are Flight Years Ahead
. At PurePowerEngines.com.
In reality, the PurePower
Engine already does.

Client: Pratt & Whitney Commercial Engines
Ad Title: Pure Power Engine Already Does - Blueprint
Publication: Aircraft Finance Guide
Trim: 210 mm x 278 mm Bleed: 216 mm x 284 mm
Its in our power.
PurePower_Blueprint_AircraftFinanceGuide.indd 1 8/17/11 1:32 PM

By delivering double-digit fuel burn savings, Pratt & Whitney PurePower Engines provide next-
generation benefits today. With up to 20% lower operating costs, half the noise and dramatically
reduced emissions, these proven, dependable engines save operators up to $1.5 million per
aircraft per year. Discover real engines that are Flight Years Ahead
. At PurePowerEngines.com.
In reality, the PurePower
Engine already does.

Client: Pratt & Whitney Commercial Engines
Ad Title: Pure Power Engine Already Does - Blueprint
Publication: Aircraft Finance Guide
Trim: 210 mm x 278 mm Bleed: 216 mm x 284 mm
Its in our power.
PurePower_Blueprint_AircraftFinanceGuide.indd 1 8/17/11 1:32 PM

F
OR FINANCIERS OF COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT, there
are important differences between financing smaller,
more prolic aircraft - such as the 737 or A320 Family - and
larger, more expensive aircraft like the A330, A340, A380,
747, 767, 787 and 777. The majority of airline routes are
served using smaller jets as passengers are typically airborne
for under two hours. Also, schedules are built around a
frequency of service primarily designed to appeal to the
business traveller, which dictates the use of smaller aircraft
so load factors remain high enough to generate satisfactory
yields. A notable exception is when serving high densities of
trafc between two major destinations. Such city-pairs are
best served using widebodied aircraft.
The costs associated with large aircraft make them suitable
mostly to the top-tier airline operators with commensurately
better nances. Consequently, the quality of the operator base
for widebodied aircraft tends to be less variable than it is for
single-aisles.
Ascend indicates that there are around 1,600 operators of
todays 22,700 commercial aircraft. While over 17,000 are
single-aisles operated by more than 1,400 operators, there
are only 5,000 widebodied aircraft flown by fewer than
500 operators. Once subdivided by aircraft size, one might
reasonably conclude that the market for widebodied aircraft
is considerably less liquid as there are fewer remarketing
opportunities.
The principal risk of nancing such aircraft is that a default
may occur. IATA believes that airlines worldwide lost $9.9bn in
2009, made $16bn in 2010, and will see this reduced to around
$8.6bn in 2011. As a result, it is generally perceived that the risk
Few large aircraft programmes have enjoyed the fairytale success of the 777. Over time, various airlines
commented that the 747 was too big or that the 767-300ER was too small so in the late 1980s, the
industry welcomed the prospect of a new aircraft type that was in true Goldilocks fashion just right.
But nding favour from airlines is not enough it must win over the nancial and investment community
if it is to command good liquidity and value in the market. Simon Finn, SVP, aviation nance at DVB Bank
gives his detailed nancial analysis of the aircraft type.
Financing the 777 Family
of airline default has diminished compared to two years ago.
It can be argued that widebodied aircraft operators have
increasingly better credit, meaning there is less chance of
default and more stability in aircraft values. However, the high
capital cost, high transition costs and reduced remarketing
opportunities associated with widebodied aircraft suggest
that the severity of any default would be much greater for a
single-aisle type. Appraisers base and market values implicitly
assume an aircraft in half-life maintenance condition is market-
ready, but it is important that nanciers and investors do not
underestimate the up-front costs of maintenance and cabin
reconguration required to achieve this market-ready status.
The value of the aircraft is one thing, but the value to the
seller may slide by many millions of dollars because of these
transition costs.
COMPETITIVE POSITION
The 777 would become remarkable for being the rst twin-
engine aircraft capable of serving routes over 7,000nm.
However, Boeing had to compete with two major aircraft
manufacturers Airbus and McDonnell Douglas. All
manufacturers believed the market needed an aircraft capable
of seating around 300 passengers in three classes to replace
and expand the market at that point served by the ageing DC-
10 and L-1011 tri-jet.
Entering service in 1990, the MD-11 was the rst replacement.
The MD-11 was essentially a stretched DC-10 derivative to
which McDonnell-Douglas incorporated the newest systems
technology and employed the popular General Electric (GE)
CF6-80C2 and Pratt & Whitney (P&W) PW4000-94 engines.
MD-11 tri-jets were aimed squarely at the long-range widebody
market and were marketed as being capable of seating close to
300 passengers in three classes.
Airbus took a different approach, splitting the market into
long-range and regional widebody offerings. The result was
the A330-300 and A340, which shared the same fuselage cross-
section as the preceding A300/A310 Family of widebodies.
However, wing, systems and engines were all new, giving the
new aircraft the range and efciency required to enter the new
market segment with the MD-11.
Airbus believed that twin-jet economics suited widebodies for
ights that averaged 3,000 -4,000nm, a surprising conclusion
given the consortiums A300/A310 development history. For
the long-range market, Airbus selected a traditional four-engine
solution. Hindsight suggests that this was not the optimal
decision but, it is easy to forget that airlines and regulators were
unconvinced by the use of twin engine aircraft for long-range
ights. Also, by choosing the CFM56-5C to power the A340,
Airbus believed it had calculated a weight advantage over the
twin-engine solution. However, the A340s climb performance
and cruise speed would eventually prove to be a competitive
disadvantage and four-engine maintenance costs would also
have their effect on the aircrafts operating economics.
Although Boeings board had authorised the 777 programme
in 1989, the competing aircraft had entered service while
Boeing was still determining the design. Boeing had planned
to deliver two variants of the initial 777 series, followed by
a longer-range development. The first of the two variants
was to supply what Boeing called the A-market and would
replace DC-10-10 and L-1011-1 aircraft, as well as satisfy
growth demand. The B-market demand would be for an
A340 competitor in the long-range market. In the early 1990s,
Boeing had already spoken publicly on the possibility of
stretching its A-market aircraft for its Asian customers. Unlike
the competitors, the 777 would be an all-new design new
fuselage, new wings (offered with a folding wingtip option
never selected by the airlines), new GE, P&W, and Rolls-Royce
powerplants and Boeings first commercial implementation
of a y-by-wire ight control system. These features and the
essential certication for Extended Twin Engine Operations
(ETOPS) would make the 777 an expensive development
programme but ultimately these decisions would reward
Boeing with strong overall market share.
There is further competition. Airbus offers the A350XWB
type. The -900 series will offer long-range capability for 314
passengers and the -1000 version will be smaller than the
largest 777 series aircraft but with arguably better economics.
Boeing has postulated another 787 series called the -10, which
would be approximately the same size as the 777-200 Series
and might also therefore, bleed market share away from the
777. In fact, given the considerable efciencies of the new 787,
even the smaller 787-9 may offer seat-mile costs that make it a
competitor to the 777-200ER.
THE 777-200
The 777-200A was the original name for the
A-market 777 offering, now known as the 777-
200. It entered commercial service with United
Airlines in June 1995. Boeing marketed this
initial offering with either two-class seating for
375 passengers or three-class seating for 305
passengers. A variety of weight schedules was
developed with the lowest schedule offering a
maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of 506,000lb
for a range of 4,100nm and the highest MTOW of
535,000lb giving a range of up to 5,210nm.
Other customers for the -200 included Air
China, All Nippon, British Airways, Cathay
Pacic, China Southern, Emirates, JAL and Thai
Airways International. While these customers still
retain many of their original aircraft more airlines
feature in the operator list due to secondary
market sales of aircraft originally delivered to
British Airways and United. Afrijet, Air India and
Transaero were all added to the operator list in
this way.
To date, relatively few 777-200 aircraft have been
remarketed a process that is further complicated
by Boeings decision to offer engines from all three
major manufacturers on the initial 777 Family.
The eet of just 87 777-200 aircraft with only 12
operators would be a tough remarketing prospect
but as operators of one original equipment
manufacturers (OEM) engines are usually
unwilling to accommodate the expense of introducing a second
OEMs product, sellers are left targeting an A-market that is split
between the three OEMs, not all of which operates the same
engine type. Otherwise, they may try to expand the operator
base by attracting a new operator.
Table 1 shows key market data for the various combinations
of engine manufacturers and airframes that compete in this
market. The statistics indicate that the 777-200 has proven
unpopular versus the dominant A330-300. The average age
of the 777-200 eet is almost twice that of the A330s and the
younger average eet age of the A330 indicates its sustained
demand. Additionally, no version of the A-market 777-200 has
achieved more than 10 operators while the operator base for the
Rolls-Royce-powered A330-300 offers much better remarketing
prospects. However, one should note that All Nippon, Japan
Airlines and United each have concentrations of the PW-
powered 777-200s.
Within the scope of a wider aircraft production programme,
aircraft of this seat-capacity and range play a key role for a
small number of airlines, particularly those in Asia. However,
the low volume of sales in this segment led Boeing to consider
it a niche market. The 777-200, with its minority share of the
segment, has generally failed to attract the favour of either the
operating lease companies or the asset-based lenders. While
not typical, the 2006 retirement of a 1995 vintage A-market
777-200 has also caused concern over the assumed useful
economic life of the 777-200. Some appraisers recorded big
market value changes for the 777-200. The weak market for
this original version of the 777 seems to be reected in the
volatility of its value.
Table 1
777-200ER
Boeings 777-200 Increased Gross Weight (IGW) was envisaged
to serve the B-market and offer competition against the A340-
300 and MD-11. If the design choices for the 777 may have
hindered its success in the A-market against the mid-range
A330-300, the all-new wing, engines and fuselage seemed
to lend a long-term advantage to the 777 once the long-range
markets were the target.
Boeing presented an aircraft capable of seating 301 passengers
in three classes. The IGW variants featured MTOWs ranging
from 580,000lb - 632,500lb with corresponding variation in
range from around 5,800nm - 7,300nm. Later developments
of the 777 wing and structure led to further evolution of the
weight schedules, until an ultimate MTOW of 656,000lb was
offered, extending the range of the aircraft to over 7,700nm.
Boeing subsequently renamed all versions of the 777-200
featuring an MTOW of 580,000lb or more as the 777-200
Extended Range (ER). This enormous variation of weights and
capabilities highlights the exibility of the 777 aircraft design.
The new weights also demanded more powerful engines to
facilitate runway and aircraft climb-out performance.
The 777-200ER entered service with British Airways in
February 1997 and went on to attract orders from a variety of
airlines. Air France, Continental, Japan Airlines and KLM all
ordered the GE90-powered versions. All Nippon, Asiana,
Korean and United Airlines preferred their aircraft powered
by the PW4000-112, while American Airlines, Delta, Emirates
and Singapore Airlines chose aircraft powered by Rolls-
Royces Trent 800. Today, with most orders for the 777-200ER
seemingly placed, Rolls-Royce appears to have won the engine
OEM market share battle from GE, with P&W having the
smallest share. Operating lessors were more condent of 777-
200ER liquidity and BOC Aviation, GECAS and ILFC have all
ordered the type over the course of its programme.
While Table 2 shows the position of all modern types
deemed to be in direct competition with the 777-200ER, it
should be remembered that market acceptance of all types is
also being affected by orders that are gathering for the new
advanced technology A350XWB-900 (229), 787-9 (208) and
perhaps in time, the 787-10. The latest version of the 777-200
Series the 777-200LR (Long-range) features the same
seat capacity as the 777-200ER and arguably also dilutes
demand for the -200ER.
Very few MD-11 passenger aircraft are listed in the table
above, as following the merger of McDonnell Douglas and
Boeing, operators lost condence in the type and market values
collapsed. The majority of the MD-11 eet was converted to
freighters. From DVBs perspective, passenger configured
MD-11s are the least liquid of the types shown. For all their
efciency and exibility, 777-200ER aircraft remarketing suffers
from the decision to offer a tri-source engine supply from
each of the major manufacturers. This disadvantage must be
weighed against the greater popularity and perceived efciency
of the 777-200ER eet, of which few are stored and for which a
small order backlog still exists.
Many banks have withdrawn from the sector and many that
remain prefer to contemplate business on a credit basis. In
better times, an asset-based lender would prefer to finance
the 777-200ER than the A340-300, as many Airbus operators
are thought to be examining fleet replacement plans. With
fuel prices escalating, the economics of the 777-200ER make
it less vulnerable to early retirement. Clearly, some care over
the airframe-engine combination is advisable as there are so
few operators. This will present something of a challenge for
remarketing. Avoiding too much exposure to a single operators
large eet is desirable.
THE 777-300
In March 1993, Boeing was rumoured to be in talks with
Cathay Pacic to switch some of its orders from the shorter
A-market 777-200 to a new larger or stretched 777. Boeing was
thought to have held further discussions with ANA, JAL and
Thai Airways International. The talks resulted in the launch of
the 777-300 Series featuring a fuselage stretch that increased
the marketed three-class seating capacity to 368 passengers or
451 passengers in a two-class layout. A commensurate increase
in belly hold cargo also came, which pushed the maximum
optional MTOW to 660,000lb giving the -300 a range of just
over 6,000nm. As with the shorter -200 Series, all three engine
OEMs offered power for the 777-300 but, airlines selected only
the PW4098 and Trent 895, deeming the GE90 unsuitable.
The precedents for high-capacity regional aircraft are mostly
from the Asian market. It was unlikely that the 777-300
would attract broad market acceptance, nor did it. Today,
just seven airlines (all operating into Asia) carry the small
global population of 60 777-300s. Ascend data shows that
ILFC, BOC Aviation and Pembroke collectively own 11
Rolls-Royce powered 777-300 aircraft. While the specifics
of the transactions are not known, it is unlikely that there is
signicant residual value risk for the lessors who, rather like
a bank, are likely to rely on the credit of the lessee and the
integrity of the long-term lease revenue.
The 777-300 is unusually difcult for its small operator base
to replace. The niche nature of high-capacity regional services
does not encourage manufacturers to build aircraft specically
Table 2
for such range and misusing long-range aircraft is theoretically
unattractive as operating costs are sub-optimal for the airlines.
While harbouring no illusions regarding the liquidity or
resale value of the 777-300 eet, it seems the aircraft remains
nanceable largely due to its airline operators. Without this, the
aircraft would rely on its asset characteristics alone and as the
market indicates, these are not sufcient to qualify the 777-300
for pure asset-based nance. Finally, while it has been possible
to compare other 777s with competitors on the basis of relative
seat-mile costs, comparable seat capacity and range capability,
when measured in this way, the 777-300 has no competition.
In June 1999, Boeing announced it was studying longer range
derivatives of the 777 and on February 29, 2000 the board
approved the launch. To achieve the additional range, the
aircraft would feature aerodynamic improvements in the form
of 6.5ft raked wingtips to reduce takeoff eld length, increase
climb performance and reduce fuel burn. A new and improved
gear was required to cope with the heavier weight schedules
and a semi-levered gear would enable the 777-300ER to takeoff
from elds with a limited runway length. In a departure from its
previous position on the 777 Family, Boeing gave GE sole engine
supplier status on the second generation aircraft, upsetting
airlines that had selected P&W or Rolls-Royce on rst generation
versions but gaining a formidable risk-sharing partner for the
longer-range 777 programme. For its part, GE developed a new
version of its GE90 able to supply either 110,100lb or 115,300lb
thrust depending on airframe requirements.
The rst of this new generation, the 777-300ER entered service
with Air France on April 29, 2004. The 777-300ER offers a
three-class seating capacity of 365 passengers and a range of
up to 6,240nm for the basic version and up to 7,930nm for the
version with the maximum optional weight schedule.
It seems overly generous, based on todays data, to describe
the comparison as competition. One unkind (and unnamed)
commentator was moved to describe the A340-600 as
road-kill. While undoubtedly harsh, it is hard to deny
the dominance of the 777-300ER. The picture may change
given the A350XWB programme and the undefined nature
of the A350-1000. However, Boeing and GE have worked
hard to achieve this dominance and are likely to introduce
ongoing improvements to maintain the competitiveness of
the 777-300ER. Without the complication of a multi-source
engine supply, the 777-300ER has much greater remarketing
potential than any preceding 777 Family member and thanks
to a signicant fuel burn advantage over the A340-600, its sales
volume has been sufficiently robust to suggest better-than-
average residual value retention going forward. As well as
depth, the 777-300ER market is also broad with 34 operators
having this version either in service or on order. With 101 777-
300ER orders, Emirates eet concentration may be an issue
for financiers. Some caution over advance levels may also
be advisable, as pricing seems to have been highly variable
depending on the nature of customers and their order activity.
THE 777-200LR AND FREIGHTER
The 777-200 Long-range (LR) is marketed by Boeing with a
three class seat capacity of 301 passengers and a range of up
to 8,240nm for the basic version and up to 9,450nm for the
version with the maximum optional weight schedule. The 777-
200LR entered commercial service with Pakistan International
Airlines in February 2006.
Perhaps it pales in contrast to the larger 777-300ER but
somehow the orderbook for the 777-200LR variant disappoints.
The payload/range performance results from incorporating the
structural changes made for the -300ER to the shorter airframe
of the -200 Series. But unsurprisingly, airlines were already
pleased with the performance of the very exible -200ER and
while many did not feel the need for the additional range or
belly-freight payload advantage of the -200LR, relatively few
routes demanded the performance of the new 777-200LR.
Using the -200LR on routes that can also be served using the
-200ER is another no-no as the LRs extra structure and weight
mean that the -200ER may be more economical. Another
complication is that more routes support use of the larger 777-
300ER and as long-range routes offer limited opportunity for
frequency (airport slot timing is often key), demand for the
-200LR looks likely to remain constrained. Airbus competitor
offering - the A340-500 - found a similar indifference for ultra-
long-range capability but also suffered more noticeably in the
nancial crisis as some airlines cancelled orders or realised
that their requirement for the A340-500 no longer remained.
Neither of these is easy to nance on the basis of the asset alone
but the A340-500 suffers from four-engine economics in an
increasingly environmentally conscious world, whereas the
777-200LR benets from its association with the overall success
of the twin-engine 777 Family. As with the A-market versions
of the original 777 Family, the 777-200LR is not considered
suitable for pure asset-based nance but may be considered in
combination with an appropriate airline/lessor credit. Further
pressure will come from the A350-900 and 787-9 which are

expected to offer seat-mile costs that will be very competitive
for the -200LR. Lastly, the 777-200LR may have more potential
for a life-extending role-change to cargo usage in the future
provided that market appetite for conversions does not dwindle
in the long-term and provided Boeings conversion costs can be
economically attractive.
The 777-200 Freighter (previously the 777-200 Long-range
Freighter) is capable of flying 4,885nm (9,045 km) with a
full 226,000lb payload and general cargo market densities.
Although the aircraft offers a lower payload than the 747-400F,
the same twin-engine economics that served the 777 so well in
the passenger market now offer good value to cargo airlines.
With the 747-400F out of production and the 747-8F due for
delivery in 2010, Boeing clearly intends to serve the future
needs of the large cargo aircraft market with a blend of the
777-200LRFs lower trip costs and the 747-8Fs larger payload
and lower freight-tonne-kilometre (FTK) costs.
Despite the worst conditions for the air cargo market for
many years, Boeing has collected more than 80 orders for
the 777-200F and several good quality airlines feature in the
customer list. In terms of investor and finance appeal, it is
necessary to weigh up the pros of the aircraft. These include
competitiveness, lack of competition, quality of operator base
and the ongoing need for efficient large cargo aircraft. Now
they should be considered against the cons, which include the
volatility of long-term demand for air cargo trafc, an increasing
supply of converted and affordable alternatives and the niche
nature of the large cargo aircraft market, which ultimately may
constrain liquidity. One advantage of taking risk on a freighter
investment is the lower transition costs that result from not
having to customise a passenger cabin before redelivery in the
event of a remarketing.
Like everyone else, the financial and investor community
would appreciate a black or white conclusion this aircraft is
bad or that aircraft is good but as ever, it seems we are forced
to recognise the inevitable shades of grey. B-Market 777s and
the largest of the longer-range derivatives the 777-300ER
have been the foundation of the aircraft types overall success.
While acknowledging the usual pitfalls of line numbers, their
associated specication constraints and normal variations in
engine modication standards and their potential to constrain
liquidity, it seems fair to conclude that market demand for the
majority of these long-range versions is sufficient to ensure
reasonable liquidity. This is not to say that default remarketing
would not produce sobering values but this would mostly
result from the shock of a distressed remarketing and the
transition costs, rather than any underlying issues. The shock of
a default would be considerable, not least because it is deemed
so unlikely this also lends stability to eet values.
The A-market 777s are an entirely different proposition.
These aircraft are generally not suited to pure asset-based
finance as they rely on strong market conditions for their
liquidity and value. In a weak market, the aircrafts ongoing
appeal to investors and financiers is largely dependent
on the creditworthiness of the counterparty. The smaller
quantity of A-market 777 sales, condensed over a shorter
period also suggests that the A-market versions will have a
shorter serviceable life than the more popular and long-range
versions. As the quality of the operator base is so crucial to
maintaining widebodied aircraft values, the older average age
of the A-market eet is already prompting some of the original
operators to divest numbers of these aircraft from their eets.
The resulting value volatility may well reduce the level of
advance in nancings and prompt more conservative residual
value assumptions for lower balloon positions at the end of the
loan term.
So thanks to the 777-300ER in particular, the 777 Familys
fairy-tale continues and while dark murmurings about the
possible impact of the A350-1000 have begun, whether or
not the fairy-tale eventually becomes Grimm will depend
on Boeings ability to protect the Family with technological
advancements and by ensuring that the 777-300ER and future
derivatives maintain their competitiveness. For todays long-
range markets though, the 777-300ER blend of range and
capacity remains just right and the aircraft is a rm favourite
with nanciers of larger aircraft.
BOEING 777 FAMILY GROSS ORDERS TO DATE
AOG CRITICAL ROUTINE
GLOBAL NETWORK OF SPECIALISTS
IN AEROSPACE TRANSPORTATION
24/7/365 Hotline: 00 8000 AOG TEAM
www.aln.aero
Your Parts have a Destination.
We know the Way.
Welcome to the
Aviation Logistics Network.
(00 8000 264 8326)
Winner 2011
Best Aviation
Logistics Provider
FPA_check ATEM112_ALNmod_ATEM 112 22/07/2011 13:23 Page 3
A
FTER IT SUCCESSFULLY INTRODUCED THE A300
in the 1970s, Airbus options for a new project included
three separate designs: a single-aisle aircraft; a larger capacity
derivative of the twin-aisle A300 (the TA9); and a long-range
four-engine design (the TA11). Despite consortium partners
support for the TA9 and a reluctance to compete head on with
other manufacturers in the single-aisle market, Airbus forged the
single-aisle, or what we now know to be the A320 Family.
However, studies for the twin-aisle projects continued and
another TA12 design emerging that would offer less range than
the TA11 but would also feature twin engines.
Around this time, the realities of programme nance began to
bite, as did the need for support from partner companies and
their governments. It became clear that developing the TA12
would negate the need for the TA11 and Airbus dropped the
idea of the long-range twin-engine TA12. It began instead to
examine ways to reduce programme costs by maximising
the commonality of parts used on both the TA9 and TA11. It
concluded that the two aircraft could share a common fuselage
cross section with the A300/A310. They could also share a
common wing, control systems (apart from the engines) and
common avionics. These aircraft would put Airbus in the big
league of commercial aircraft manufacturers alongside
Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas allowing it to offer products
for the short-, mid- and long-range passenger markets with a
support network to match. Airbus still needed to decide the size
of the two aircraft, it seemed sensible to target a size not offered
by Boeing (the A300 was in tough competition with the 767).
A twin-engine aircraft would be more efcient than the DC-
10 or Lockheeds L-1011 and there was no long-range aircraft
smaller than the 747SP. The aircraft would serve market
growth and replacement needs for early A300, DC-10 and
L-1011 aircraft.
Through the earlier A300/A310 and A320 programmes, Airbus
had developed its partnerships with the manufacturing supply
chain, created aircraft production procedures - logistics and
assembly, the use of advanced materials in the structure and a
philosophy for y-by-wire (FBW) control systems and digital
cockpits. Airbus was ready to bring this together in the A330 and
A340 aircraft without facing the constraints of its main rivals as
Boeing and Douglas derived their new aircraft designs from the
preceding 747 and DC-10 aircraft. On January 27, 1986, Airbus
supervisory board approved the TA9 and TA11 projects.
By June 1987, 10 airlines had placed orders for 41 TA9 and
89 of the larger TA11 aircraft enough for Airbus to ofcially
launch the two new aircraft types as the A330 and A340
respectively. Both aircraft would be assembled in the same
purpose-built state-of-the-art facility in Toulouse. The partners
ascribed a similar risk-sharing distribution to that for the A300.
Engines for the A330 would be growth versions of the CF6-80
and PW4000 (Rolls-Royce was to offer its RB211 derivative
later). CFM International was selected to supply CFM56-5C
engines for the A340 after the International Aero Engines (IAE)
consortium embarrassingly withdrew its Superfan engine.
Airbus had to increase wing area to compensate for the lost
performance. By 1988, the mid-range A330 twin-engine design
had been refined to feature a fuselage of identical length to
that of the long-range, four-engined A340. The A340 was
marketed in two series (each with different length fuselages)
with the A340-200 offering a range of 7,700nmi and seating 262
passengers and the A340-300 a range of 6,850nmi while seating
295 passengers, both in a three-class layout.
Next year will be the 20th anniversary of the A330s rst ight. With a competitor and successor taking
shape, now seems a good time to review the fortunes of this popular aircraft and to ask what the future
holds. Simon Finn, SVP of aviation at DVB Bank investigates
Financing the A330
THE A330-300 AND -200
The A330 was initially offered as just one series the A330-
300. It featured a range of 4,600nmi with two-class seating
for 335 passengers and a 204 tonne maximum take-off weight
(MTOW).
All aircraft programmes have their difculties; often design
weights increase and other features are altered or dropped
as the programme develops. At the time of the first flight
in November 1992, the A330-300 featured a MTOW of 212
tonnes and there was no sign of the variable camber wing that
had been vaunted as the initial designs were discussed. The
A330 did feature much of the advanced technology of the
earlier A320 and A340 aircraft. It had a type rating common
to the A340, y-by-wire ight controls and quiet, efcient
full authority digital engine control (FADEC) engines from a
choice of three suppliers: General Electric, Pratt & Whitney
or Rolls-Royce. The cockpit was very similar to the A320,
which allowed pilots to cross-qualify from one type to the
other with little additional training. This saved airlines
money and offered the possibility of better optimised ight
crew scheduling. Another feature of the aircraft markets has
been that airlines nearly always want more payload/range
than the initial version of a new aircraft provides. Airbus later
introduced a 217 tonne weight upgrade package for the A330-
300 that increased its range to around 4,850nmi.
By November 1995, the A330-300 was well established
and was being flown by airlines including Air Inter,
Aer Lingus, Cathay Pacific, Malaysia Airlines and Thai
Airways. However, the A330-300 market appeared not to
be developing as quickly as Airbus might have hoped and
slow progress was being made in face of the twin-engine
777. Like the A340, the new version offered trans-Pacic
range capability but with a twin-engine configuration.
Another mid-range 777 version with trans-Atlantic
range was pitched directly against the A330-300 and had
siphoned its orders.
Airbus launched a new series of the A330 with a shorter
fuselage. The A330-M10 would carry 253 passengers in three
classes around 6,400nmi, putting it in direct competition
with Boeings 767-300ER, which until then was very
successful. It would carry 293 passengers in a two-class
layout, at much lower seat-mile costs, with better climb
performance and greater payload and range than the 767-
300ER. Improvements to A340-300s wing structure would
be transferred to the new A330 giving it a 230 tonne MTOW.
A new centre-section fuel tank would provide the additional
range for the shortened twin-jet.
In August 1997, the A330-200 (formerly A330-M10) ew
for the first time with GE CF6-80E1 engines. It entered
service with Canada 3000 in April 1998. In December 1997,
the first flight of a PW4000-100-powered A330-200 took
place, followed by the rst ight of Rolls-Royces Trent 700
version in June 1998. Another 233 tonne MTOW option
further enhanced the A330-200 payload and range. A330-
200 structural changes would also be incorporated into the
production of the A330-300, allowing the 230 tonne version
an extra 700nmi range so that it could serve routes from
Europe to the US west coast or Europe to Asia.
COMPETITION AND SUCCESSION
Boeing initially responded with the 767-400ER, stretched from
the 767-300ER. The market did not respond well to another
767 variant without the performance now available from the
A330-200.
It seemed the A330-200 would take the lions share of the
market for the coming decade, but of course, Boeing would
not let that happen. In 2004, it announced the 787. It would
offer two series of 787 with greater range and efciency than
the A330s. The 242-seat (three class) 787-8 is smaller than the
A330-200. The 280-seat 787-9 is also smaller than the A330-
300 but both 787s offer much lower trip and seat-mile costs
and have superior all-round performance versus their larger
A330 Family competitors. The all new twin-engine 787 design
with its clever use of advanced materials, all new engines
and extensive application of new technology sold rapidly
until the global nancial crisis of 2008.
Airbus response included a 238 tonne MTOW option that
would take the A330-200 range to over 7,000nmi. Sales of the
787 slowed as it became clear that Seattle had major supply
chain issues and was struggling to meet its own programme
schedule.
As the global economy slowly improved, orders for the A330
returned while demand for the 787 seems to have stalled
pending clarity on its first delivery and the performance
capability that early aircraft will achieve.
In light of the 787, Airbus predicted trouble for the A330
and took additional action to protect its share of the market.
After some false starts, it offered the twin-engine A350 extra
widebody (XWB) Family. This features a new fuselage cross
section that is wider than the A330, extensive use of advanced
materials, and payload/range capability with operating
performance to rival the 787-9. The market responded
positively to the lead A350XWB-900 series, which is due to
enter service in 2013 approximately the same time as the
787-9. Two other series; the shortened 270-seat -800 and the
stretched 350-seat -1000 are planned to follow the -900 but
the ultimate performance and capability of both series are still
being dened.
Airbus also took steps to shore up the A330 by offering a
production freighter traditionally a means of bridging a new
aircraft programme (the A350XWB) when orders are expected
to diminish. It seems likely that the pricing of the passenger
aircraft was slashed in 2005 to stimulate demand for the A330
in the face of the 787. The freighter also had synergies with
the A330 multi-role tanker transport (MRTT) initiative, which
helped keep production costs to a minimum.
Airbus has recently begun to offer a further increase for
the A330-300s MTOW of 235 tonnes and has aggressively
marketed the efciency of this series. It claims that the long-
range designs for the new generation A350XWB or 787 aircraft
will not result in a signicant disadvantage to the A330, which
has a lighter weight schedule optimised for the mid- to long-
range mission rather than for trans-Pacic range capability.
For many years, the thought of building a competitor to
the 747 would be enough to cause Boeings rivals to weep as
it contemplated the sheer size of the investment required.
However, the passenger and airline reaction to twin-aisles had
been enough to tempt Lockheed and McDonnell-Douglas into
the market with their L-1011 and DC-10 aircraft largely
aimed at the US trans-continental and the trans-Atlantic
markets. The A300 and A310 achieved some success in
Europe, Asia, the Middle East and even with Boeings
favourite customer, American Airlines. But, Boeing soon
trumped the A300 and A310 with the 767, which sold in
great volume. Hindsight will not treat the A340 kindly given
its poor performance against those in the 777 Family with
comparable range. But, the A330 was a different story.
Five years after entry into service, there were over 130 A330s
in service with 25 airlines. Airlines in Asia were the biggest
operators. Cathay Pacic, Philippine Airlines, Korean Air,
Malaysia Airlines and Thai Airways all found the aircraft well
suited to their networks. In Europe, Air Lingus, Swissair and
Sabena were customers, though elsewhere demand seemed
a little low. Airlines were not convinced that the A330-300
offered the network exibility they could achieve with the
slightly larger and much longer range 777-200ER. Airlines
held that 300-seat aircraft should be capable of serving trans-
Pacic routes but having a 250-seater in the form of the A330-
200 was ne airlines were used to aircraft of this size across
the Atlantic or for intra-regional work on routes with too
much trafc for a narrowbody.
Demand is cyclical with peaks and troughs along the way but
the record shows that after an initial order urry, A330-300
orders were averaging perhaps just 15 per annum from 1995
to 2000, while A330-200 orders were averaging from 25 to 35
per year. Fast forward to the period of 2005 to 2010 and A330-
300 annual orders are suddenly averaging 35 to 40 with A330-
200 orders at an average of 60 per annum. It seems there was
always underlying demand for the A330-200 but demand for
the A330-300 was initially patchy and the market has grown
into the larger A330 as trafc has increased. The market seems
also to have been reassured of Airbus efciency. With long-
term fuel prices climbing relentlessly, network exibility now
plays second ddle to route efciency. Its true that you can not
deploy the A330 as widely as the 777 but judging by orders
there are plenty of routes on which it can be deployed more
efciently than existing competing aircraft.
FINANCING THE A330
The finance and investor market will always have its
favourite aircraft models. Usually, these are narrowbodied
aircraft types whose vast operator base coupled with lower
acquisition, maintenance and transition costs are a big draw.
For widebodies, the 767 was the golden child
of the early 1990s but as the 1990s,
ended affections were switched to
the 777. Financiers and investors are
somewhat like magpies conditioned
to want shiny objects, they drop the last as
soon as a more polished one comes along.
Widebodied aircraft are less liquid and feature
much higher acquisition, maintenance and transition
costs but they also tend to reside with the nancially stronger
airlines. This reduces the probability of default, a trait that is
attractive to banks in particular. The A330-300 in particular
has a good quality operator base and the breadth of appeal
for the A330-200 makes up for the more variable nature of its
operators.
Assuming the worst does happen, the tri-source engine
supply for the A330 may complicate remarketing as operators
would have to incur the cost of introducing another OEMs
engine to its eets. Within each basic engine type there are also
some undesirable engine variants that fail to deliver sufcient
performance and so impair value. Additionally, there are some
doubts regarding the scrap values of older A330s as the market
for the sale of engine material to MRO shops is small. In some
cases, these shops are exclusively required to use new engine
material at engine shop visits. This makes nancing for some of
the mid-to-old A330s unattractive.
Some other widebodied aircraft have suffered similar issues
but some more positive aspects of the A330 are not typical
among its competitors. Fly-by-wire (FBW) cockpits make it
easier for airlines to train and recruit pilots who have already
qualied on other Airbus FBW types, this lowers the associated
costs of adding A330s to an airlines existing A320 eet.
By far the biggest challenge however, is how to view the
A330s future residual value. A basic undersupply of aircraft
of this size means demand for the A330 will be high. Delays
to the 787 have exacerbated the problem causing airlines
such as Singapore to state that their orders for A330s were
motivated by the need for an interim eet until deliveries
of the 787 and A350XWB arrive. Almost all of the aircraft
delivered were placed on short-term five- or six-year
operating leases with an option for Singapore to extend them.
The airline has recently repeated this by adding another 15
A330-300 to its existing eet of 19. Singapore is scheduled to
receive 20 787-9 and 20 A350XWB with deliveries beginning
in 2013.
The A330 eet has an average age of less than seven years,
so the majority of in-service aircraft are still with their original
airline operators. Over 1,000 A330 passenger aircraft have
been sold and more than 750 are in service with 95 operators.
Ascend indicates that just 10 A330s are in storage today a
low proportion which reects low supply.
The A330 has also been a very popular aircraft with the
operating lessors who manage 44 per cent of the eet currently
in service. This is a high percentage and carries the risk that
airlines may choose to manage capacity in future downturns
by simply not renewing leases as they expire. With so many
airlines featuring on the order books of the 787 and A350XWB,
the threat to A330 residual values is clear. For all the caution
that these issues should encourage, the fact remains that for a
great many routes, the A330s are the most efcient aircraft of
their size available today (and more importantly for many years
to come).
It will take a long time before sufcient numbers of newer
competitors penetrate the market. The 787-8 is set to be the rst
new aircraft to threaten the A330 but it could be 2017 before
sufcient numbers of them are in service (though this does not
mean A330-200 values are immune to normal market forces).
The larger 787-9 and A350XWB-900 are not likely to reach
critical mass until perhaps as late as 2020, meaning that the
threat to A330-300 values are likely to be lower.
Ultimately, a financier has to finance whatever the market
is buying. Markets are never wrong, they buy the best aircraft
for the job (do not misunderstand this individual buyers
can easily be wrong and may wrongly purchase all kinds
of interesting stuff). At this time though, with a loan tenor
potentially stretching up to 12 years ahead of us, it does not
hurt to pay close attention to the implications to the residual
values of any aircraft being nanced today.
This places pressure on all parties in a transaction
especially those who want to continue using the same
cookie cutter that served them so well in the past. Someone
clever once said; There is no such thing as bad weather, only
poorly prepared people with inappropriate clothing. For now
and for some years to come, the A330 will stand as the most
popular widebodied aircraft available for nancing provided
we dress appropriately.
MARKET DEVELOPMENT: WIDE BODIED PASSENGER FLEET

(Excludes747 and A380)
I
N RECENT YEARS CLAW-BACK RISK has been an
important issue for participants in aircraft pre-delivery
payment (PDP) transactions. PDPs are progress payments that
a buyer makes to a manufacturer while new aircraft are being
built. They represent a substantial cash expense for the buyer, on
average 20 to 30 per cent of the price of the aircraft.
Claw-back (in the context of a US bankruptcy proceeding)
refers to the situation in which the buyer (the airline or lessor)
wishes to retrieve their PDP. In US bankruptcy cases, security
deposits are considered to be a type of cash collateral paid by
the purchaser (who is then considered and referred to as the
purchaser-debtor), and can be returned to them subject to a
ruling by the court.
As such, an airline or lessor, as the purchaser-debtor, has the
legal right to request that the OEM re-pay the cash collateral.
However, the airline requesting bankruptcy court approval
also has the burden of proving that each entity with an interest
in the collateral (i.e. the lender and the manufacturer) is
adequately protected.
Although there is no reported bankruptcy case that addresses
the use of cash collateral comprised of PDPs under an aircraft
purchase agreement, the analysis regarding whether a
bankruptcy court would allow PDPs to be used by a purchaser-
debtor is the same as for other types of security deposits.
The rst prerequisite is for the bankruptcy court to view the
PDPs as a security deposit. If or when that characterisation is
The claw-back risk is of importance to everyone involved in pre-delivery (PDP) transactions yet few
understand its risk or how it might affect a transaction. Cameron Gee, shareholder at Vedder Price,
de-mysties the claw-back risk in the US.
Lowering risk in
pre-delivery transactions
made, details of the equity cushion will be decided. Here, a
bankruptcy court would examine whether the interests of
the manufacturer and the lender the two parties having an
interest in the PDPs are being protected.
Exactly what constitutes adequate protection is decided on
a case-by-case basis, with the focus being that the aggregate
secured creditors interests should be protected from any drop
in value during the US bankruptcy process.
In most circumstances, a debtor looking to use such cash
collateral will seek to show that each creditor is protected by
the equity cushion i.e., the creditors other collateral has a
value greater than that of the debt owed to it.
Although there is no easy rule, most bankruptcy courts require
an equity cushion of at least 15 to 20 per cent with the exact
amount dependent on the facts and circumstances of each
case. Adequate protection can also be provided by other means
including replacement liens on other assets and/or required
periodic payments.
For both the manufacturer and lenders collateral is comprised
of the PDPs that were paid to the manufacturer, and the
intrinsic value of the purchase agreement. The value of the
purchase agreement is determined by comparing the purchase
price of the aircraft with the projected values for aircraft at the
time of scheduled delivery.
If the projected value is higher than the purchase price, the
equity cushion would cover the excess amount. If the equity
cushion provided by the intrinsic value of the purchase
agreement is sufcient, a bankruptcy court could then order
some or all of the PDPs to be returned to the purchaser-debtor.
In theory, this type of order would not be detrimental to the
manufacturer or the lender because the bankruptcy court
has determined that they remain fully secured. In practice,
however, this system is problematic for lenders for two main
reasons. Firstly, a bankruptcy court will second-guess the
lenders assessment of aircraft values and projected values
and may not agree with the lenders calculations.
Secondly, the bankruptcy court can only estimate the
projected values. It is far from a perfect process and creates risk
that a bankruptcy court may inaccurately assess the intrinsic
value of the purchase contract.
If a purchaser-debtor decides to reject the purchase agreement
and not purchase the aircraft, its ability to recover the PDPs
may be very problematic as in doing so it reduces the overall
value of the collateral and exposes both the manufacturer and
the lender to collateral risk. This risk is what is referred to as the
claw-back risk.
Yet, the risk of claw-back is remote. In practise, a claw-back
exists only when future aircraft values remain high (or the
debtor has sufcient alternative collateral to provide adequate
protection), but the debtor rejects the purchase agreement; this
situation rarely occurs.
Usually, a debtor will decide to reject its aircraft purchase
agreements in economic downturns during which the values
of aircraft are dropping. In such a situation, a debtor will have
difculty showing that the purchase agreement alone provides
a sufficient equity cushion to justify its use of the PDPs.
Accordingly, claw-back seems unlikely in the most probable
scenario.
Furthermore, the legal basis for a claw-back faces numerous
hurdles. Manufacturers will use precise and considered
language in their purchase agreement to minimise the chances
that the PDPs are characterised as security deposits; rather,
the manufacturer uses express contractual terms stating that
the PDPs, once paid, are the property of the manufacturer as
compensation for the cost of the construction of the aircraft.
Under the terms of most aircraft purchase agreements, the
PDPs are described as absolute and unconditional payments
as such only the manufacturer has an interest in the PDPs, not the purchaser.
Based upon the express terms of the purchase agreement, a purchaser-
debtor may have difficulty either characterising the PDPs as a security
deposit or other interest in which it has any reversionary interest. If the
manufacturers interpretation of the agreement is upheld the claw back of the
PDPs should not occur.
The claw-back risk described here is also mitigated in PDP financings
where there is little risk of a purchaser-debtor becoming the subject of a US
bankruptcy case. Where the bankruptcy laws applicable to the debtor do not
include similar concepts for a purchaser-debtor to recapture PDPs then US
claw-back analysis will not apply. However, there may be other claw-back
concepts that apply in the jurisdiction of a purchaser-debtor.
The effect of the claw-back risk analysis in the US has been that different
lenders have taken various approaches to PDP nancing transactions. Some
lenders accept claw-back risk as a necessary part of doing business because
of the remote chance it will occur, the protection the contract provides and
the legal impediments in place.
Some will proceed with the transaction but either discount the value of
their collateral to protect against the risk, have their transactions approved
on an unsecured basis or require that structural features be included to
minimise their risk.
Yet there are some who will reject the risk and the deal because of the
potential severity of the consequences a claw-back could completely
eliminate the value of their collateral.
The variety of approaches is a result of mixed advice on the likelihood and
potential effect of a claw-back. With a clearer understanding of how claw-
back risk affects PDP transactions it is hoped that all parties will be able to
better determine an approach that works for their specic circumstances.
Many thanks to Michael J. Edelman, shareholder, Vedder Price, for lending
his bankruptcy expertise to the writing of this article.
I
N TODAYS COST-CONSCIOUS ENVIRONMENT,
THE single biggest expense for every airline is fuel. The
International Air Transport Association (IATA) predicts
that fuel costs constitute 27 per cent of an airlines overall
operating costs in 2011, with the average price of a barrel of
oil reaching $96 over the 1Q of the year. The impact of this
rising expenditure is signicant. In May, IATA downgraded
its annual prot forecast for the aviation industry to $4bn - a
54 per cent fall compared with the $8.6bn prot forecast in
March 2011 and a 78 per cent drop compared with the $18bn
net prot recorded in the full-year before.
As every dollar increase in the price of crude oil results
in about $1.6bn in new costs across the industry each year
costs which European operators would need to pass onto
their customers the outlook is certainly gloomy. So what
can be done to help European operators mitigate the impact
of these increased costs? There are solutions to minimise
this issue. Significant technological advancements both
in development and available today can increase airline
efciency, drastically reduce fuel consumption and thereby
decrease overall fuel costs,
The modernisation of air traffic management (ATM) is a
key area that will have a considerable impact on airline
operational efciency. Single European Sky ATM Research
programme (SESAR), which is committed to driving
modernisation in European ATM, and IATA both indicate
that improvements in ATM alone could improve fuel
efciency by 10 to 12 per cent, with even greater gains to be
realised from research and development in new fuels and
technologies within airframes themselves. To put this in
perspective, even a one per cent efciency gain saves up to
500,000 tonnes of fuel per year in Europe.
How the price of oil is
fuelling ATM efciency
Paolo Carmassi, president of Honeywell EMEAI, explains how the current high price of jet fuel is making it
more important than ever for airlines to adopt new ATM technologies to improve their operating efciency
and, ultimately, their bottom line.
Paolo Carmassi, president
of Honeywell EMEAI
THE ROUTE TO USING LESS FUEL
As technology and advanced engineering are the foundations
of the aviation industry, it makes sense that technology plays
a central role in helping the industry combat the vexing
problem of the ever-increasing cost of fuel. With the smallest
improvements making big changes to fuel efficiency and
operating costs, let us take a look at one area where progress is
being made right now.
Instrument landing systems (ILS) have been in general use
since the 1960s, although the technology and concept dates
back to the early 1930s, when passenger air travel was quickly
evolving. With the number and frequency of ights continuing
to rise globally, there is an urgent need to provide an accurate
method of landing aircraft when visibility is poor. The idea of
using radio markers as data points was tested operationally in
1929 and faced its rst true test during a snowstorm in January,
1938 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, when the first scheduled
passenger aircraft landed using only ILS. The concept is still the
same today as it was 70 years ago, but technology has evolved
significantly, giving us new and improved ways to provide
precision guidance to aircraft approaching and landing. This
enables pilots to minimise missed approaches and so reduce
overall fuel consumption.
However, despite innovations in ILS technology, the
increasing growth in air travel means we are still striving to
meet the future ATM demands of today and tomorrow. ILS
suffers from a number of technical limitations, such as signal
interference, multipath effects (for example, due to new
building works at and around airports) and its limited ability
to manage only one approach at a time. These challenges mean
that airports regularly suffer reduced capacity as visibility
worsens. In the US alone, 15 of the top airports experience
greater than 25 per cent reduced capacity when ceilings are
below 200ft. In these situations, aircraft are often forced to circle
in holding patterns, which burns more fuel, or even worse, are
diverted to alternative airports, causing an extension to the
aircrafts total ight distance and further increasing fuel burn.
SESAR and IATA both
indicate that improvements
in ATM alone could improve
fuel efciency by 10 to 12 per
cent, with even greater gains to
be realised from research and
development in new fuels and
technologies.
GROUND YOUR COSTS, NOT YOUR AIRCRAFT
To overcome ILS challenges, Honeywell has embraced ground-based
augmentation system (GBAS) technology, which is installed at airports
to identify and correct small errors in GPS signals and then transmit this
information to arriving and departing aircraft. Honeywells SmartPath is the
rst Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certied GBAS implementation
introduced into the US National Airspace System (NAS). It helps modernise
ATM, increases an airports operational capacity and enables substantial
maintenance and fuel savings by allowing aircraft to y either complex or
straight-in approaches, depending on air trafc demands. Unlike existing
single runway systems, Honeywells GBAS can also support up to four
runway operations simultaneously. In comparison to ILS technology,
the potential savings for airports using GBAS could reach up to $500,000
per system, per year in reduced environmental and maintenance costs.
Currently, there are 25 SmartPath systems installed worldwide, including
the Newark, Grant County, Rio de Janeiro and Sydney airports.
Also designed to improve efficiency on approach, required navigation
performance (RNP) goes one step further by using GPS and Honeywells
inertial reference systems coupled with its ight management system (FMS)
and cockpit displays. RNP denes the navigation performance level required
to operate in a particular airspace or on a designated route (i.e. enroute,
terminal, or approach). RNP-approved systems provide the same onboard
capability to conduct traditional Area Navigation (RNAV) operations with
a higher degree of accuracy. This capability enables operations with reduced
obstacle clearance criteria for terminal area procedures as well as closer route
spacing - a major contributor to the benets of performance-based navigation.
RNP is independent of ground-based navigation aids, which allow airlines to
y optimised ight paths with continuous descent into airports surrounded
by challenging terrain.
In order to meet the future demands of air travel, Honeywell is now developing and
certifying a suite of avionics systems as part of the SESAR and US-based Next Gen
initiatives, to improve safety, situational awareness and overall fuel efciency. One
such system is SmartView Enhanced and Synthetic Vision EVS/SVS. Designed to
display detailed real-time images of the terrain and key ground-based objects, EVS/SVS
enables pilots to see runways and the surrounding land relief even in poor visibility
to make approaches easier and safer. By enhancing the pilots view with an accurate
synthetic image that increases the completion of approach and landing manoeuvres and
decreases the number of descent aborts, diversions and re-attempts, fuel is saved and
safety increased. Currently, pilots ying Category 1 approaches in bad weather must
decide whether to continue or abort a landing attempt at 200ft. With a certied EVS/
SVS system on the aircraft, the landing decision may be lowered to as low as 100ft,
increasing decision time and maximising the chance of a rst-time landing.
Eurocontrols Performance Review
Commission (PRC) estimated the cost to
users of unnecessary route extensions at
a staggering 2.2bn ($3.09bn), and the
environmental cost at 4.7 million tonnes of
CO2. To help mitigate this impact, SESAR
aims to reduce the environmental effect of
every ight by 10 per cent through increasing
system capacity by 70 per cent and reducing
delays associated with take off.
HOW TO SAVE $100,000
IN FUEL COSTS PER FLIGHT
Technology plays a key role in every stage of an aircrafts ight,
and by retro-tting or upgrading, airlines can achieve major
improvements to overall performance efciency and reduce
fuel consumption and overall ight time. In Europe, by 2020,
SESAR is hoping to cut average flight time by eight to 14
minutes, cut 300 to 500kg of fuel and reduce CO2 emissions by
at least 948kg per ight.
As a key member of SESAR, Honeywell is helping to
accelerate efficiency and achieve these objectives. One
way the company is doing so is with its newly certified
advanced trafc collision avoidance system (TCAS), which
can significantly reduce airline operating costs while
improving situational awareness and safety. Honeywells
recently certied TCAS with SmartTrafc maximises safety,
reduces operating costs and helps airlines gain efciencies.
Importantly, it enables an airline to incorporate in trail
procedure (ITP) on a transoceanic flight. ITP is designed
to reduce oceanic and remote area aircraft separation by
allowing aircraft to obtain a more efficient routing while
maintaining a safe, yet reduced distance from neighbouring
trafc. With the system, pilots can choose a more efcient
altitude during transoceanic ight routing and move to adopt
that route more quickly than with traditional TCAS systems.
The ability to change routes quickly and simply can enable
annual fuel savings of up to $100,000 per aircraft. Ultimately,
ITP and the next generation avionics system will allow
aircraft to y closer together and land more quickly without
sacricing safety.
LEANER AND GREENER
Overall, airlines are minimising their
environmental impact through more efficient
routing with the help of advanced flight
management systems (FMS). FMS help flight
crews compute the most efcient ight prole
and automatically navigate the aircraft. This
makes significant operational cost savings by
increasing the number of aircraft in the sky.
Eurocontrols Performance Review Commission
(PRC) estimated the cost to users of unnecessary
route extensions at a staggering 2.2bn, and the
environmental cost at 4.7 million tonnes of CO2.
To help mitigate this impact, SESAR aims to
reduce the environmental effect of every ight by
10 per cent through increasing system capacity
by 70 per cent and reducing delays associated
with take off and arrival to less than a minute.
In addition, synthetic fuels can also help reduce
emissions and ameliorate the nancial burden of
high oil prices. Through its petroleum technology
companyHoneywell UOPHoneywell has
developed a sustainable aviation biofuel to help
airlines make further strides towards lower CO2
emissions and lower fuel costs. Made from a
renewable green plant source, the biofuel requires
no change to the aircrafts engine technology
when used at a 50 per cent blend with a
petroleum-based jet fuel, and meets or exceeds all
specications for ight. This also offers up to an
80 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions
over full petroleum-based fuels.
Overall, as air travel continues to increase but
combines with volatile fuel prices, the need for
airlines to become more cost-effective, energy
efficient and environmentally friendly is now
more business critical than ever. Honeywell is
working with its partners across the industry to
bring next generation ATM technologies into
mainstream aviation as quickly as possible. As
the industry adopts these technologies under the
guidance of programmes such as Next Gen and
SESAR, the future impact of soaring oil prices
may not be as signicant a threat to the industry as
it appears today.
T
HE SUBJECT OF AIRLINE FEES is continually in the press;
most recently, the Department of Transportations (DOT)
call for fee transparency has added fuel to the re. Yet clarity
on additional fees should benet both consumers and airlines.
It is certainly not something that should cause airlines concern.
It is important to note that airlines already submit quarterly
reports, which list revenues from baggage and reservation
change requests. However, missing from the reports are, for
example, in-ight food sales, in-ight entertainment revenues
and other add-ons. These are currently reported collectively.
A SHIFT IN THE INDUSTRY
As from mid-August, airlines must disclose ancillary
revenue charges on their websites with a link listing all
fees. The DOT is still deciding whether airlines will have
to provide ancillary fee information to travel agents and
websites for further customer comparison. International
Air Transport Association (IATA) branded the recent
developments troublesome and its spokesperson, Perry
Flint, claimed they were a signicant intrusion into the
commercial marketplace.
New requirements on quarterly sales reports would
add 16 categories for submission. They aim to encourage
price transparency and to clearly inform travelers of all
additional fees and surcharges. This is not necessarily a bad
thing. Transparency can reward those airlines that develop
sustainable, non-fee-based ancillary revenue streams, in effect
creating a system of incentives that would be benecial not
only to airlines but to travelers and the industry as a whole.
A recent report from IdeaWorks highlights the increasing
pressure on airlines to nd new means to increase ancillary
revenues. Checked baggage fees are growing worldwide, with
The US Department of Transportation (DOT) recently called for airlines to provide in-depth reports on
receiving fees from a variety of sources. This is a heated issue and it is one that has been developing
since June 2010. Raphael Bejar, CEO of Airsavings, which helps airlines to lower costs and generate
revenue, gives his views on the matter.
The future
of ancillary revenues
some of the most notable changes coming from prime routes,
namely: New York to Rome, Los Angeles to Tokyo and Tokyo
to London, plus domestic US and intra-Europe ights. United
Continental announced a new initiative to add second baggage
fees to ights such as those covering Asia and the Middle East.
The report claries: the windfall of cash that bag fees provide
at a time of economic peril is simply too compelling to ignore.
In most cases, that is very true. There is little doubt that
ancillary revenues will increase whether or not they are
reported. Just like any fee structure, there is a natural give and
take, which means additional baggage fees will reach a ceiling,
although airlines are still experimenting with how high that
ceiling is. After reaching the potential in one ancillary revenue
category, airlines need a new source to tap into. In-cabin sales
are an essential part of airlines ancillary revenues. In the Asia-
Pacic region, 71 per cent of airlines use a duty-free model of
in-cabin sales to generate ancillary revenues.
LOOKING CLOSER AT ANCILLARY REVENUES
After a urry of new ancillary products and services, airlines
are searching for sustainable ancillary revenue solutions.
With the DOTs push towards transparency, sustainable and
long-term revenues can provide a more enjoyable passenger
experience while exploring advanced branding methods.
In other words, opportunity is knocking. IdeaWorks report
shows that ancillary revenues netted airlines more than
$22.6bn in 2010. Ancillary revenues recorded for 47 carriers
jumped a healthy 60 per cent to more than $21bn last year.
Delta Airlines made the second-highest ancillary revenue
with $3.7bn. Industry experts note that the worlds largest
carrier has embraced the ancillary revenues model, adding
fees like in-flight Wi-Fi, onboard dining, and on-demand
movies. In addition, the UKs airline easyJets 2H revenues per
seat are expected to improve by ve per cent, due in part to
ancillary revenue.
Air Berlin earned over 38m ($54.6m) in 2010 from duty-
free and in-ight sales; JetBlues even More Leg-room seating
option contributed $85m of revenue in 2010. Third-party
sources for Allegiant Airways show revenue sources such as
hotel accommodation and ground transportation topped $24m.
US Airways economy seating option, Choice Seats, pulled $30
to $40m revenue in 2010.
Ancillary revenue strategies can seem confusing to the
uninitiated. Why complicate things with such an assortment of
add-ons? Instead of focusing on each product and how it ties
to the rest of the onboard experience, it is more appropriate to
think of the airline shop as a convenient one-stop destination.
The ticket provides a chance to shop for destination-based
products, forgotten travel essentials and gifts. This branding
opportunity allows airlines to add value, add sales, and add
experience all the while keeping ticket prices down as an
incentive to enter and experience the airline shop.
The business class service can be greatly affected by the
length of travel times. One new revenue initiative allows
travelers to take advantage of local concierge services like hotel
reservations, ground transportation, and restaurant reservations
prior to touchdown. As the programme can be implemented
by airlines without any initial cost, it is an example of an
investment that increases ancillary revenue streams while
also increasing brand interaction. This new process could
conceivably be placed at any stage of the booking process and
with low costs to the user it provides airlines with plenty of
opportunity to increase revenue.
ANCILLARY REVENUES HEAT UP
Innovation breeds new opportunity in any industry. As
traditional fees reach their ceiling and as transparency
becomes increasingly important to both airlines and travellers,
airlines need to look at adding new products and services
that will create tangible value throughout the entire journey
starting in the booking path through to the very end of the trip.
Airlines are experimenting with goods and services that
show extraordinary promise. The popularity of concierge and
destination-based products is growing and it appears that more
airlines are willing to test and examine their efforts to produce
ancillary revenues of this kind. According to Amadeus and
Forrester in January 2011s Cross-Sell Your Way to Prot, By
offering these services, airlines and other travel suppliers could
fulll many of the product areas in which they dont currently
participate while also offering a more comprehensive travel
experience to their customers.
It may appear that consumers respond negatively to additional
fees however, the benefits additional services provide can
arguably out-weigh any qualms. Hotel stays, concierge services,
holiday insurance and weather protection are just a small
number of additional options to be enjoyed by the average
traveler. Moreover, as we see more airlines increasing their
sources of ancillary revenue the industry undoubtedly find
many more products and services to offer.
Untapped services promise substantial revenue increases, but
additional revenue can also be garnered from the technology
used to support these sales. Products and services will need
to be adjusted according to the demographic, route, season,
time, and carrier. Airlines should act now to experiment with
optimising their customer experience.
Businesses must learn to adapt, particularly in changing
times. The needs and desires of todays travelers have
changed yet airlines have the opportunity to change with
them. To do this they must incorporate more pre-sell, online,
mobile and virtual products into their offerings and create a
more transparent and sustainable ancillary strategy which
appeals to passengers. Every product and partnership has
the potential to generate revenue while also complementing
a journey.
Sustainable ancillary revenue has vast potential. In light of
industry expectations and the needs of passengers, airlines
should pursue new revenue streams and services now
regardless of pending DOT decisions. While fee-based ancillary
revenues have been criticised, sustainable initiatives provide
the chance for carriers to improve their reputation and prots.
Airlines need to start tapping into existing resources and
technology, starting with increased transparency.
It may be a simplistic view, but why complicate the ancillary
revenue debate any further?
Airbus. A350 XWB
D
URING THE DOWNTURN, ECAS STEPPED up their
support of aircraft acquistions buoying sales when
nancing for aircraft was hard to nd. The regional jet market
also needed help. Demand for the aircraft rose particularly as
airlines were nding that aircraft with fewer seats could provide
economic efciency on routes with lower passenger trafc.
Below, ATR discusses the importance of ECA funding for
its regional aircraft, a subject that in light of the 2011 Aircraft
Sector Understanding (ASU), which took effect on February 1
2011, is all the more topical.
Under the new ASU, regional aircraft are restricted to
the same nancing terms as larger jets this is a change
from the preceding 2007 ASU under which large and
regional jets were divided into two categories with different
nancing rules for each. But Bombardiers CSeries confused
matters; developed by a regional aircraft manufacturer, it
would have been dened as a Category 2 jet, yet it competed
directly with Airbus and Boeings Category 1 aircraft. The
result was that all categories were scrapped. Now all aircraft
are on an equal footing in terms of financing, meaning
regional jets are no longer subject to more favourable
nancing terms.
Under the ASU, ECA premiums will increase alongside
market conditions, meaning banks and nanciers will be able to
provide similar loan terms to ECAs. However, regional aircraft
due for delivery up to 2013 are subject to a waiver.
The role of Export Credit Agencies (ECAs) in nancing commercial aircraft throughout the last downturn
has been greatly touted. Few doubt the magnitude of their help in supporting airline eet development
and preventing the desert graves lling with whitetails, yet few mention their impact with regard to small
aircraft. ATR speaks out.
ECAs: A major asset for
the sale of ATRs abroad
ATR ON THE IMPACT OF ECAS
According to ATR, the Franco-Italian manufacturer of
turboprop regional aircraft, the company has been especially
successful since the recovery of the turboprop market in
2005. It has received over 500 orders over the last seven
years, representing more than a third of all orders made since
the company was founded in 1981. In the 1H 2011, ATR
announced orders for 88 new aircraft, including a record 60
orders announced at the Paris Air Show.
ATR has a sizable portfolio of 175 operators located in 94
countries yet it is often faced with the perception namely
from banks and nanciers that regional market operators
(those that operate ights of up to approximately 800km), have
a lower prole than their international counterparts.
Against this backdrop, the support provided by Export
Credit Agencies (ECAs) is a major, even indispensable, source
of financing for modest companies. Being a Franco-Italian
company, ATR has access to Frances ECA, Coface, and Italys
SACE. Both agencies support the export of ATRs by providing
responsible nancing along with credit insurance. They cover
up to 95 per cent of the banks financial undertaking in the
event of a customer default, therefore improving the economic
conditions of the loan for the airline.
In ratifying states, ECAs are governed by Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) agreements,
which promote fair competition. Under these export credit
ECAs have played a crucial role in maintaining the levels of ATR
deliveries and have allowed the company to deliver over 50 aircraft
per year these past three years record gures for the regional
aircraft manufacturer.
rules the products of one country will not be favoured
over those of another signatory state, for example Canadas
Bombardier or Europes ATR.
Following the last financial crisis and the severe lack of
liquidity, airlines increasingly resorted to export credit for
aircraft nancing. This is as much the case for Boeing or Airbus
jets as it was for regional aircraft like ATRs. For Airbus, the
share of aircraft delivered with the aid of ECAs rose from 20 per
cent to around 35 per cent (taking the amount covered by ECAs
in 2010 up to $10bn). For ATR, the proportion covered by ECAs
rose from 40 to 55 per cent in 2010 (to approximately $400m).
ECAs have therefore played a crucial role in maintaining the
levels of ATR deliveries and have allowed the company to
deliver over 50 aircraft per year these past three years record
gures for the regional aircraft manufacturer.
ATRs are also very popular on the used aircraft market
due to their enhanced reliability and low operating and
maintenance costs, this means that their high residual value
has become a real asset for both banks and ECAs. They know
that these aircraft can quite easily be placed with a leasing
company or airline.
In this context and to alleviate tensions concerning
government liquidity, the OECD recently (December 2010)
increased the cost of nancial support [under the 2011 ASU],
making bank nancing without the involvement of ECAs less
attractive. Naturally, for companies and manufacturers this
complicates the process of securing nancing for deliveries.
That said, it is interesting to note that over the 25 year-period
from 1986 to 2010, 204 ATR aircraft were nanced with ECA
support. That is 22 per cent of the 915 aircraft delivered. Of that
total, 711 or 78 per cent, were delivered without ECA support.
Only two of the ATR aircraft nanced with ECA support were
repossessed further to an event of default that is less than one
per cent of the total aircraft nanced with ECA support. Those
two aircraft were soon placed on ve-year operating leases and
then sold for cash.
For a signicant period, the default rate for ECAs has been
extremely low and the agencies have made profits. This is
because the strict nancial analysis of regional airlines must
be enriched with additional factual information. Some such
The demand for regional jets and forecasted
growth for the market should not be
underestimated, indeed it is little known
but approximately 30 per cent of the worlds
airports rely solely on turboprop operations.
information has proven important to the understanding of
regional airlines financial performance and must be taken
into account during a comprehensive credit assessment. For
example, some regional airlines operate subsidised routes,
others are subsidiaries of larger airlines. Also, regional carriers
can operate routes with no or limited competition and with
good or low but stable protability.
In addition, because of market growth, there is likely to
be more interest in financing turboprops in the future. The
demand for regional jets and forecasted growth for the market
should not be underestimated, indeed it is little known but
approximately 30 per cent of the worlds airports rely solely
on turboprop operations. Also, lower operating costs and
operational exibility are keys requirements for many airlines
and more nanciers should take the specicities of regional
airlines into account during credit assessments.
In order to respond to market demand next year, ATR will
increase its production to more than 70 aircraft. In this context,
ECA financing will remain a strong source of ATR aircraft
nancing when it is in the best interest of the client. There is,
however, an area in which ECAs are of limited assistance to
exports for example, import duties in certain countries. The
best example is China, with its 22.5 per cent import surcharge
on aircraft such as ATRs, which potentially compete with their
MA-60 turboprop, an aircraft that is neither certied in Europe
nor the US.
T
HERE ARE MANY REASONS WHY Ireland has become
a global hub for aviation finance and leasing activities.
Tax is only one of them but it is arguably the most important.
Though not a tax haven, Ireland does offer a very favourable tax
regime. It also offers a long-standing industry of aviation nance
professionals, from aircraft and engine lessors to nancers to
legal advisors.
IRELANDS ECONOMIC STANDING
Irelands current nancial situation has been well documented.
As a result, there has been some interest as to whether the
Irish Government may be forced to increase corporate taxes.
This stemmed not from the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) which supports Irelands tax regime, but rather from
discussions at EU level. Ireland has however insisted on
In the world of aviation nance, one jurisdiction stands head and shoulders above the rest Ireland. It
is estimated that there are at least 30 lessors active in the region including AerCap, GECAS, ILFC and
Boeing Capital. It is also estimated that about 83bn ($117bn) worth of aircraft are managed from
Ireland. Why? Because of Irelands extensive tax treaty network. Ailish Finnerty and Caroline Devlin,
both partners at Arthur Cox, explain the reasons for Irelands allure.
Irelands tax advantages
maintaining its corporate tax rates of 12.5 per cent, a position
taken by successive governments and supported across all the
main political parties in Ireland.
Ireland has continuously re-iterated its commitment to its tax
regime and in particular its corporate tax on trading prots. For
example, in The Strategy for the International Financial Services
Industry in Ireland 2011-2016, published by the Department
of the Taoiseach in July, 2011, it is states: Ireland is absolutely
committed to maintaining its 12.5 per cent corporate tax rate.
This commitment is protected in an EU context by the principle
of unanimity in taxation matters, and is accepted as part of the
EU/IMF Memorandum of Understanding. The view in Ireland
therefore is that the tax rate of 12.5 per cent is untouchable, and
this has been welcomed by those investing in Ireland.
When establishing an aviation leasing platform in any
jurisdiction, there are three principal issues that will be
of concern from a tax perspective, namely: that the entity
can receive lease rental payments from lessees in different
jurisdictions with little or no taxes withheld at local level; that
the entity suffers minimal tax; and that prots can be extracted
from the entity to investors in a tax efcient manner with little
or no taxes withheld in the entitys home jurisdiction.
Ireland has an extensive tax treaty network with
comprehensive double tax treaties signed with 63 jurisdictions
(of which 55 are in effect and the remainder are going through
the procedures required to become legally effective). The vast
majority of these treaties permit lease payments to be made
to an Irish lessor free of withholding tax in the lessees home
jurisdiction. This is a major advantage to Ireland as a favourable
jurisdiction for an aviation leasing platform as it ensures lease
payments can be received by the Irish lessor free of underlying
withholding tax in most cases.
TAX TREATMENT OF IRISH LESSORS
Until recently, an aviation leasing platform in Ireland was
generally established as an Irish resident trading company
availing of the 12.5 per cent rate of corporation tax which
applies to trading prots. This meant that the Irish company
was required to carry out a trade in Ireland requiring a certain
level of substance and activity. The capital cost of acquiring
the equipment would generally qualify for tax depreciation
(known in Ireland as capital allowances) over an eight
year period. The combination of the 12.5 per cent rate of
corporation tax and the generous capital allowances available
in respect of the capital cost incurred (together with deductible
financing and other costs) means that the Irish company
generally suffers a very low effective rate of tax.
Ireland has insisted on maintaining its
corporate tax rates of 12.5 per cent, a
position taken by successive governments
and supported across all the main political
parties in Ireland The view in Ireland
therefore is that the tax rate is untouchable,
and this has been welcomed by those
investing in Ireland.
An interesting new development has been the introduction of
an alternative means of structuring an aviation leasing platform
in Ireland, which simplies the trading analysis and lowers
the administrative requirements in Ireland. The new method
works best when investors wish to extract the prots from the
Irish vehicle (typically in a form of prot participating debt)
rather than earn and retain prots in Ireland, but it is of course
possible to combine it with other structures to achieve this.
Since the passing of Irelands Finance Act 2011, it is now
possible for a special purpose vehicle (SPV) established in
Ireland to undertake leasing of plant and machinery such
as aircraft, engines and rolling stock and to avail of the very
favourable tax regime afforded by Section 110 of the Taxes
Consolidation Act 1997 (Section 110), a regime which has been
widely used for many years in securitisation and structured
nance transactions.
The Section 110 regime applies to a company engaged in
the holding or management of a wide variety of financial
assets for example debt, share portfolios and all types of
receivables and now may also hold, manage and lease plant
and machinery.
Minimising tax costs on on-going activites and on cash
extraction are crucial to any leasing SPV or platform. The
taxable profits of a company operating within the Secion
110 regime are computed broadly following the financial
accounts of the company. As a result the cost of funding
and other business expenditure is generally tax deductible
and SPVs are usually structured so that their net taxable
prot is generally maintained at a negligible level as there
is no minimum prot required for tax purposes. Interest on
prot participating debt (or prot stripping debt) issued by
a Section 110 company is generally deductible for it in the
computation of its taxable prots.
In the past, advisers to an Irish leasing SPV or platform were
usually required to model the prots of the leasing activity
to ensure that timing issues related to the ability to claim
capital allowances/tax depreciation did not result in tax
miss-matches. In most cases, this will no longer be needed
under the new regime as the ability to deduct interest on
prot participating debt will resolve this issue as a matter of
legal structuring. This will reduce the administrative cost of
setting up leasing SPVs and platforms.
Ireland has an extensive tax network treaty it s a major advantage
to Ireland as a favourable jurisdiction for an aviation leasing
platform as it ensures lease payments can be received by the Irish
lessor free of underlying withholding tax in most cases.

Experience
KPMG is a leading provider of
cross-border advisory services
to the international aviation
fnance and leasing sector
www.kpmg.ie/aviation
2011 KPMG, an Irish partnership and
a member frm of the KPMG network of
independent member frms affliated
with KPMG International Cooperative
(KPMG International), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
To fnd out more about how we can help you, please contact
Tom Woods on +353 1 410 2589 or tom.woods@kpmg.ie
AirFinanceGuide_Advert.indd 1 02/09/2011 13:33

Experience
KPMG is a leading provider of
cross-border advisory services
to the international aviation
fnance and leasing sector
www.kpmg.ie/aviation
2011 KPMG, an Irish partnership and
a member frm of the KPMG network of
independent member frms affliated
with KPMG International Cooperative
(KPMG International), a Swiss entity.
All rights reserved.
To fnd out more about how we can help you, please contact
Tom Woods on +353 1 410 2589 or tom.woods@kpmg.ie
AirFinanceGuide_Advert.indd 1 02/09/2011 13:33
EFFICIENT PROFIT EXTRACTION
The Section 110 company, issuing prot participating debt
to its investors and getting a deduction for doing so, offers
a very efcient solution to prot extraction. It is obviously
crucial to any structure that payments to investors be made
gross and not subject to any withholding tax applying in
Ireland. Investors can rely upon an Irish domestic exemption
from withholding tax for SPVs, which permits interest
payments made to a person resident in an EU member state
(other than Ireland), or a country with which Ireland has a
double tax treaty, (a relevant territory) to be made free from
withholding tax, provided that the recipient of the interest
does not carry out a trade in Ireland through a branch or
agency with which the interest payment is connected. This
exemption applies automatically without any application
being required. As stated above, Ireland has an extensive
network of double tax treaties.
This exemption and other exemptions for example, for
interest paid on quoted eurobonds or commercial paper in
certain circumstances are available as a matter of Irish
law and are in addition to the usual tax treaty exemptions
that may be available provided appropriate procedural
formalities are followed.
There is a specic exemption from Irish stamp duty for the
acquisition of aircraft or any interest or share in aircraft. If
the aviation lessor is structured as a Section 110 company
and provided it remains so, stamp duty will not apply on the
issue or transfer of securities issued by it.
Typically any VAT suffered by an Irish leasing company
(whether a trading company or the newer Section 110
companies) will generally be fully recoverable. In any event,
a cash ow advantage may be obtained from the fact that
Irish VAT legislation confirms that management services
(which includes portfolio management services) supplied to
an SPV falling within Section 110 can be supplied exempt
from Irish VAT. This exemption from VAT strengthens
Ireland as a location of choice, as recent European Court
decisions have conrmed that these services are otherwise
within the VAT net.
As a general rule, the taxable profits of an Irish trading
company follow the accounting treatment. SPVs qualifying
as Section 110 companies can choose to calculate their
taxable prots using Irish GAAP as it existed in December
2004, unless they elect to use the GAAP applicable for
financial accounting purposes. This applies to existing
and new SPVs and can be useful in certain structures as
it eliminates the risk of a change in accounting rules and
generally solves any issues raised by IAS, such as potential
timing issues in the recognition of income and expenses.
The extension of the Section 110 regime to the leasing
sector is a very welcome addition to Irelands status as the
choice of destination for aviation leasing companies. This
new regime will operate side-by-side with existing structure
for leasing. Together with Irelands history in aviation
finance and leasing, its wealth of expertise in both areas
and its membership to the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD) and the EU, the future
looks bright for aviation nance in Ireland.
W
ESTERN AND EUROPEAN OEMS AND suppliers see
the potential in China and the prot it could deliver.
But while business opportunities beyond the Big Four airframe
OEMs (Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer) signal reward,
they are also fraught with risk.
Chinas AVIC is already flying the ARJ-21, a 70-90 seat
regional jet that competes against the incumbent 70-90 seat
E170/175/190, Bombardiers CRJ-700/900 and Mitsubishis
new MRJ.
The ARJ-21 uses Western engines (GEs CF34) and systems.
It looks like a mini MD-80 (which was assembled by Shanghai
Aviation Interests in the 1980s) but is heavier than its
competitor and almost certainly not as economical.
Furthermore, the ARJ-21 is years beyond its original entry into
service (EIS) date. It is now slated for late this year, yet critics
question whether even this delayed timeline will be met.
COMAC, affiliated with AVIC, is developing the mainline
C919, a 150-200 seat aircraft that bears a notable resemblance
to the A320. Specifications are similar but, like the ARJ-
21, the C919 appears (according to early data released by
COMAC) to be heavier. Like the ARJ-21, Western systems
are used extensively, but unlike the ARJ-21, the C919 has the
next generation engine the CFM LEAP-X, and the promise
of 15 per cent lower fuel burn versus the venerable CFM56.
The ultimate fuel efciency improvement is unclear given the
sketchy specications that have been released about the C919
and the suggestion that it will be heavier than the A320.
Regardless of the commercial viability of the two aircraft,
Chinas goal to create a competitive aerospace industry means
Western OEMs and suppliers are scrambling to take part in this
emerging sector.
For example, Safran signed a joint venture (JV) in December
2009 with China to develop components and eventually an
indigenous engine for the C919; GE formed a JV in January
2010 with AVIC for technology transfer for avionics; Airbus
built its A320 assembly plant in Tianjin and contracted with
China to provide composites for the new A350; Embraer has an
E145 assembly plant in Harbin; and Bombardier uses Shenyang
companies to build fuselage sections for the Q400 turbo-prop
and the new CSeries.
China now has the largest world economy behind the US and it is using this growth to make its
commercial aerospace industry a national priority. Furthermore, its government is building airports at a
pace so rapid, Western ofcials could only dream of matching it. China is now a crucial aviation partner,
yet it is also notoriously secretive and a potential threat to the Wests aerospace sector. Are we playing
with the enemy, or allowing caution to hold us back? Scott Hamilton reports.
Doing business with China:
The risks and rewards
THE KNOWLEDGE TRADE
In a congressional hearing in May 2010, Daniel Elwell, VP for civil
aviation of the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), testied that China
recognises its need to rely on the global supply chain in order to compete
with an international aircraft.
To produce viable, domestically-produced aircraft, China needs to
have access to these capabilities either within its own borders or through
imports, Elwell testied. But it added: The Chinese government would,
of course, prefer the former to the latter.
Members of the global supply chain are happy for new business but
by assisting the Chinese aviation market, Western OEMs and suppliers
are effectively supporting new competitors. Even more sensitive is the
prospect of China applying its rivals pioneering technical knowledge to
military projects.
Chinese officials have been ambiguous about this, at times
indignantly denying they would misuse this knowledge
or engage in industrial espionage, and at others, talking openly about such
technologys dual use for civilian and military products.
Members of the global supply chain
are happy for new business but
by assisting the Chinese aviation
market, Western OEMs and suppliers
are effectively supporting new
competitors. Even more sensitive is
the prospect of China applying
its rivals pioneering technical
knowledge to military projects.
The political and corporate ramications of either making or
admitting to these charges could be devastating. Yet The 2010
Report to Congress of the US-China Economic and Security
Review Commission is unambivalent. It states unequivocally
that China is taking civilian technology and applying it to
military development, sometimes in the same building.
Mary Saunders, deputy assistant secretary for manufacturing
at the US International Trade Administration (ITA), told a
congressional hearing in May 2010 that: China has increasingly
required that joint ventures be established as a condition
for awarding manufacturing contracts. These joint ventures
typically involve some element of technology transfer by the US
partner. The intention seems to be for China to develop domestic
capabilities in sub-systems in addition to airframes.
Chinese rms have used their leverage to extract offsets
agreements to transfer some of the aircraft production along
with related expertise and technology as part of the deals,
the report says.
Priority will go to foreign suppliers that design and
manufacturer products with domestic companies in China, an
unidentied deputy manager of COMAC said in 2008.
The Chinese government is unapologetic about demanding
technology and JVs in exchange for the privilege of doing
business in China. Western companies have little choice:
comply or be cut out. In a meeting in December 2010, hosted
by the department of commerce of one US state promoting its
supply chain in China, companies present were told they had
to provide Chinese JVs with the latest technology and they
also had to assume China was going to take their intellectual
property regardless of contractual safeguards. This was the
price of doing business. To stay ahead of the Chinese, the
Western companies had to continually develop the next
generation technology, the companies were told.
Louis Gallois, EADS CEO, was quoted by Londons Financial
Times (FT) in January about Chinas spying. Within 24 hours,
EADS strongly denied the report. (The FT characterised it as a
Gallois retraction.) In an unusual spectacle, Tom Enders, CEO
of Airbus (an EADS subsidiary), and a subordinate to Gallois,
six days later defended China.
Yet not long after Airbus opened its A320 assembly plant in
Tianjin, the press reported that Airbus had fended off at least
four major cyber attacks on the plant.
The transfer of knowledge is critical to the development
of Chinas aviation sector. Many consider both the ARJ-21
and C919 as concept aircraft with which the Chinese will
learn all they need to in order to build the next generation of
commercially competitive aircraft.
THE NEED FOR PARTNERSHIPS
WITH THE WEST
China currently lacks the technology and know-how for
completing such a difcult project, the congressional report
says. Engines are a particularly challenging area.
Despite progress in other areas of aviation, Chinas aviation
engine sector remains an Achilles heel. A major obstacle is
Chinas inability to successfully develop and manufacturer an
advanced turbofan engine.Without the ability to successfully
produce a turbofan engine, China will remain dependent upon
imported engines, the report adds.
This makes the JV with Safran for the eventual development
of an indigenous engine particularly signicant.
The ARJ-21 has some 200 orders and options, including
a handful with the US-based lessor GECAS, and regional
airlines outside China. The C919 still in its infancy with
a planned rst ight in 2014 and an EIS of 2016 received
its rst orders at the Zhuhai Air Show last November 55
rm and 45 options, a rather disappointing number given
the pre-show expectations of hundreds, as was forecast by
government ofcials.
Given the familial relationship between GECAS and GE
Engines (supplier of the powerplants on the ARJ-21 and
C919), the few orders from GECAS were not surprising.
Its order also aids the certication of the aircraft by the US
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). US president
Obama pledged in November 2009 to try and expedite FAA
certication of the ARJ21, potentially eliminating a key barrier
to future international sales, according to the congressional
report of 2010.
Chinese rms have used their leverage to
extract offsets agreements to transfer
some of the aircraft production along with
related expertise and technology as part
of the deals.
Report to Congress of the US-China Economic and Security Review
Commission, 2010.
IMPLICATIONS FOR AIRBUS AND BOEING
The decision by Airbus to set up an assembly plant in Tianjin
was somewhat controversial. From Airbus perspective, the
move was purely commercial: it supports Chinese sales.
Airbus has not overtaken Boeing in orders for single-aisle
aircraft a market monopolised by Boeing.
Airbus Enders explained his companys decision to co-
operate with the Chinese in a typically candid remark during
the Airbus Innovation Days media event in Hamburg, in 2009.
To paraphrase, he remarked that the Chinese are going to
develop a commercial aerospace industry and if Airbus did not
help, somebody else would.
So far, the venture is far more successful than the MD-80/
MD-90 assembly plant in Shanghai. The McDonell Douglas
plant assembled, virtually by hand, only some 40 aircraft
during its entire existence. When an AFM reporter visited
the plant in December 1988, it was by Western standards
extremely primitive and demanded so much power
that during daylight hours, electricity to other parts of the city
was rationed.
The A320 plant replicates the high-tech assembly line in
Hamburg and it is moving toward producing 48 A320s a year,
more than the MD-80/90 facility did in 10 years.
While Enders claims the skills needed to assemble an aircraft
are quite different to those needed to design one, both are part
of a large jigsaw.
Boeing has used the emerging competitors as a reason to seek
cost controls. During 2008s 58-day strike against Boeing by the
International Association of Machinists (IAM), Boeings CEO,
Jim McNerney, sent an email to his staff explaining why Boeing
needed to lower costs. Among reasons was the emerging
competition from Japan, Canada, Russia and China.
What McNerney did not include in the email was that
Boeings JVs in Japan, China and Russia helped to create these
new competitors.
Japan designs and builds wings and wing boxes for the
787. Boeing has a major engineering design centre in Russia
and is Chinas biggest aerospace customer, according to the
2010 report.
Among its Chinese suppliers are: BHA Aero Composites;
Chengdu Aircraft Corp; Hafei; Shanghai Aviation Industries;
Shanghai Commercial Aircraft and Xian Aircraft.
McNerney has ties to China that pre-date his tenure at Boeing.
During his long career at GE, he became president of GE
Asia-Pacic in Hong Kong in 1993 at a time when there were
no operations in China. McNerney headed the effort to enter
China and by April 2004, after he left GE, the company did
$4bn in business there. After McNerney became CEO of 3M,
a non-aviation company, he continued his interest in China,
expanding 3Ms business relationships there.
Yet McNerney does not believe Boeings close ties with China
are leading to the transfer of sensitive technological knowledge
or threat a Western dominance in innovation.
During Boeing 2010 earnings call in January 2011, New York
Times reporter, Christopher Drew, asked McNerney how he
feels about GE and other suppliers transferring technology like
the 787 core computing system to the C919, to which McNerney
answered: I dont think that threatens the proprietary nature
or innovativeness of our airplanes here. If I did, I would raise
my hand, but I dont see that. And we all have to strike a
balance between protecting our IP [intellectual property] and
innovation. And I dont know whats going on in the minds of
the GE folks. And I dont want to try to represent it either.
The 2010 Report to Congress of the US-China Economic
and Security Review Commission perhaps sums up the
current state of affairs best: Building upon the knowledge
gained from previous joint ventures with foreign aviation
manufacturers, as well as the experience acquired during
the development of the ARJ-21, the C919 is Chinas premier
commercial aviation project.
Despite progress in other areas of aviation,
Chinas aviation engine sector remains
an Achilles heel. A major obstacle is
Chinas inability to successfully develop and
manufacturer an advanced turbofan engine.
Report to Congress of the US-China Economic and Security Review
Commission, 2010.
69
R
ECESSIONS USUALLY PROVE TO BE
catalysts for deal-flow in the spare engine
market, as airlines seek to bolster balance sheets
by selling and renting back powerplants. That is
exactly what occurred during the rst downturn
of this century and many lessors were expecting to
add to their asset base in the run-up to the second.
That the latest drop in the cycle coincided with the
worst nancial meltdown in living memory would
have only heightened their appetite.
However, far fewer engines than expected were
offered for sale and leaseback deals. Low interest
rates and fuel prices, allied to the fact that many
airlines had already off-loaded spare engines
in the previous recession, meant there was far
less incentive for operators to sell, and far less
liquidity pressure on airlines than there had been
in the past.
When we hit this particular recession, there
were some differences in how airlines handled
their on-balance-sheet engine fleets. Airlines
horded cash because they were not clear how
and if banks would lend to them. There was
AIRCRAFT FINANCE GUIDE 2012
never a sudden inux of engine sale-leaseback opportunities,
but rather a steady flow that did not exhibit any market
pressure. Airlines were also using different means to raise
cash like signing up to credit card and receivables deals, says
Abdol Moabery, chief executive of aircraft and engine lessor
GA Telesis (GAT).
Since the recovery began, the situation has improved.
British component support specialist, AJ Walter Aviation
(AJW), moved into engine leasing in early 2011. Its director of
aircraft engine services, Steve Williams, describes a growing
trend to move engines off the balance sheets, particularly
among start-up airlines which traditionally outsource non-
core activities. Assisting this trend, he says, has been a rise
in funding opportunities that allow lessors to pursue sale and
leaseback deals.
A return to prot for many airlines in 2010 also saw tentative
capacity increases, increasing the need for spare engines.
Bobby Janagan, general manager of the lessor, Rolls-Royce
and Partners Finance (RRPF), says: Sale-leaseback is picking
up. Its not up to 2007/8 levels because people are taking new
deliveries and theres always a time-lag between the economic
recession and the aviation recession so we are only now
coming out of that bottom line.
The niche business of engine leasing
used to be somewhat counter-cyclical, as
lessors exploited hard times to buy assets
and drive sale and leaseback deals.
However, more leasing companies have
entered the market and many airlines
were either unwilling or unable to ofoad
spare engines in the last recession.
Alex Derber looks at the consequences.
Engine leasing update
RATES AND RESIDUALS
Tight availability of some engine lines during the downturn
meant that their lease rates held up better than expected.
Janagan reports a disparity between widebody and
narrowbody engine trends, with widebody engines continuing
to command pre-crisis rents throughout the downturn due
to a shortage of supply, while the opposite held true for
narrowbody powerplants. In the narrowbody market there
were a lot of speculators, both independents and airlines that
bought engines, so there was overcapacity in that market, and
that forced rental factors down in 2009/10, he says.
Despite the setback, Janagan says that narrowbody engine
lease rates have now almost completely recovered. This is
even true of older engine types, according to Williams at AJW.
There is a shortage of good quality lease engines in the market
and companies are reluctant to invest in the overhaul of lease
engines such as the CFM56 -3 because they are not sure of the
future demand prole. This then places an additional premium
on the engines that are currently in circulation, he says.
Residual values for older engines have also recovered, despite
the approaching introduction of new technologies such as
Pratt & Whitneys geared turbofan and a new variant of the
bestselling CFM56.
According to Moabery, lease factors the cost of rent as a
proportion of the engine value remain under one per cent
for newer engines, and between one and two per cent for
older types.
Residual values for narrowbody engines have endured
overall, he comments. While there were some distressed
situations in 2008 and 2009 that led to low-priced engine
availability, almost all have recovered, including the CFM56-3
and JT8D-200 series, which were hit the hardest in that period.
There may also be little near-term danger of new equipment
damaging residuals, as Janagan points out: Until aircraft get
parked and torn down, spare engines are required to support
the eet so values are likely to hold. Therefore we dont see
a major deterioration in asset prices because the A320 neo is
coming.
THE LEASING MARKET
Traditionally, engine leasing has been dominated by three large
independent players: Engine Lease Finance, GA Telesis, and
Willis Lease Finance plus manufacturer-afliated lessors such
as RRPF and GECAS Engine Leasing. In recent years, there
have been several smaller entrants to the market, including
AJW, ILFC (via its Aeroturbine subsidiary), Aersale and
Macquarie Aviation Capital.
One of the big three independents, Florida-based GA Telesis
has a portfolio of roughly 65 engines, including: CFM56-3C1;
CFM56-5A1/F; CFM56-5B; CFM56-5C3/F; CF34-3A1; CF34-
3B1; CF6-80C2B1F; CF6-80C2A2; CF6-80C2A5; CF6-80C2B6F;
PW4056; PW4077; JT8D-219; and V2500.
GAT, which also leases aircraft and provides component
support, offers short- and long-term leases ranging from 60 days
to 60 months. Moabery says that the company currently has
eight engines off lease.
A perceived problem for independent lessors in the past has
been total care maintenance. On selling engines to airlines
often at a heavy discount OEMs would seek to tie their
customers into all-inclusive repair contracts. However, this
made it difcult for an airline to sell and lease back an engine
because the lessor would also demand a maintenance reserve
to compensate for the hours and cycles burned off an engine,
effectively forcing the airline to pay twice.
Despite the rise of total care, however, Moabery appears
unconcerned: With so many emerging markets, it is likely
that younger airlines do not want to deal with engine fleet
management, so it can make sense to hand that over to an OEM
or third party. On a dollar for dollar basis, an airline is denitely
better off not going with a total care programme as it limits eet
exibility and the maintenance reserves are built in, and paid
over the long term. I dont think airlines look at total care as an
alternative to leasing and paying maintenance reserves. In fact,
we have leases with maintenance reserves with airlines under
total care programmes.
With a portfolio of 350 engines, RRPF is among the largest
engine lessors in the world. A 50:50 joint venture between
Rolls-Royce and GATX Capital, RRPF sources its engines
from the open market and directly from Rolls-Royce the
manufacturer at full list price, according to Janagan. One-
third of the companys portfolio supports Rolls-Royces total
care business, which guarantees spare engine support, while
the rest are leased directly to third parties.
That split may alter as airlines struggle to raise nance for
new engines from banks that are more willing to lend to a
stable operating lessor than an operator exposed to the myriad
pressures and crises of the air transport industry. Rolls-Royce
used to bundle together spare engine services with engine sales.
Now we are trying to do a separate lease so the engine can be
sold to whomever, says Janagan.
Unlike GECAS Engine Leasing, which stocks non-GE lines,
RRPF only offers Rolls-Royce and IAE engines. Engines
need a lot of technical understanding in terms of pricing,
maintenance and risk we dont want to speculate by
being on other engine types where we dont have that much
knowledge, explains Janagan.
In other ways, though, Janagan notes the similarities between
RRPF and other types of lessor: Were all doing one job,
which is nancing assets for airlines, and the market is getting
bigger because the price of engines is going up and banks are
reluctant to lend directly to airlines. Its about who offers the
best package, which is a combination of the return conditions,
maintenance requirements and the cost of the rent.
Since launching its engine leasing business in January 2011,
AJ Walter Aviation has built up its portfolio to 20 powerplants,
all CFM56 variants. Of these, half are on conventional leases,
while half are running off green time. Though the company is
concentrating on the CFM56 in the short-term, it plans to add
CF680, V2500 and PW4000 engines in the future.
To support its new leasing business, AJW announced in
February 2011 that it was opening an engine services division
in Wales. The companys CEO, Christopher Whiteside, said at
the time that he anticipated $50m worth of business within the
divisions rst 12 months.
CONTACT US TO: LEASE BUY SELL POOL EXCHANGE
AOG 24/7 SUPPORT
www.willislease.com +1.415.408.4769
WILLIS LEASE FOR ALL YOUR ENGINE NEEDS
ENGINE LEASING
Conserve your capital
Customized lease terms
to suit your requirements
All engine types
Short-term, long-term, AOG
POOLING
The means to keep your spares working for you
Easy access to spares when you need them
Online leasing reservation system
Pre-approved terms and conditions
TRADING
Buying and selling engines
Purchase / leasebacks
Convert non-liquid assets to cash
ENGI NE LEASI NG.
PLANE AND SI MPLE.
COMPETITION
Despite the small inux of players such as AJW, engine leasing
remains a niche market, requiring expert nancial, technical
and risk analysis. As such, it is unlikely to ever attract the glut
of private equity and institutional-capital backed vehicles that
entered the aircraft leasing market in the mid-2000s.
GATs Moabery describes some of the pitfalls awaiting
speculative investors: Securing an engine on lease is very
different to doing so with an aircraft. If a transaction is not
structured properly an investor can lose control or ownership
of their engine in certain jurisdictions. There are also issues
like performance management, foreign object damage and
PMA parts.
Parts manufactured by parties other than the engine
manufacturer (PMA parts) continue to be a divisive issue: PMA
suppliers see lessor acceptance as a vital step towards industry
acceptance, but lessors normally insist that no PMA parts (or
DER repairs) are installed on their assets in case they damage
the residual value.
All of our leases say there shouldnt be any PMA parts. As an
operating lessor we put greater focus on our residual value and
that is factored into the lease rental. If we allow people to put in
PMA parts then the rental has to go up to offset the reduction in
residual value, says Janagan at RRPF.
Another bone of contention is withholding tax, presently
applied to engine leases but not to aircraft. Janagan outlines
their nancial impact: As more people are starting to lease
engines its becoming a major issue and cost to the airline.
In some countries its ve per cent and in some countries it
goes to 20 per cent. Thats quite a lot to pay each month on
top of rentals.
If aircraft are treated as an exempt category for withholding
tax purposes, why not treat the next most expensive asset class
spare engines the same?
CONTACT US TO: LEASE BUY SELL POOL EXCHANGE
AOG 24/7 SUPPORT
www.willislease.com +1.415.408.4769
WILLIS LEASE FOR ALL YOUR ENGINE NEEDS
ENGINE LEASING
Conserve your capital
Customized lease terms
to suit your requirements
All engine types
Short-term, long-term, AOG
POOLING
The means to keep your spares working for you
Easy access to spares when you need them
Online leasing reservation system
Pre-approved terms and conditions
TRADING
Buying and selling engines
Purchase / leasebacks
Convert non-liquid assets to cash
ENGI NE LEASI NG.
PLANE AND SI MPLE.
Trends in engine
lease rates
As the market rises from the ashes of another recession it is
time for the analysts to assess the damage, tweak the forecasts
and welcome a new set of players to the table. Dr. Stuart
Hatcher, head of valuations and modelling at IBA Group plays
his part in the assessment as he evaluates engine lease rates.
T
HE MARKET IS RAPIDLY GATHERING pace and is lled
with the promise of what is to come. With their forecasts,
the OEMs have provided another glimpse of the future, airlines
have placed the orders, and lessors have contined to do battle
with new lessors as sale and leaseback margins are pushed to
the brink. Transaction volumes are key to many of the big lessors
as they know that new entrants and experienced competitors
outside the top ve will not be able to capture the best credits.
This leaves the others to take risks on operators with lower
credits and perhaps accept older equipment in order to achieve
the appropriate margins. In addition to this, the top ve are also
back to selling packets of aircraft to other lessors in order to
prepare for new deliveries and to spread their risk. The buyers
may not get the best terms, but at least they are striking deals
with airlines that hold good credit.
IBA sees something similar in the engine leasing market. For
many years, OEM lessors and big independent companies such
as Willis Lease Finance and ELFC have dominated the sector.
However, in anticipation of market growth, new money is
pouring in from banks, KG funds and numerous equity funds,
each wanting to buy a piece of the action. Of course, none of
this is new indeed it happened from 2005 to 2008 but it
does highlight the willingness of many typically non-aviation
entities to invest in this business.
As with aircraft lessors, the majority of engine deals are
through the sale of small portfolios with leases attached. The
engines are typically older but it is still a win-win situation;
the lessor is able to cycle the older assets out and yet retain the
management fees, while the buyer can invest in a market with
potentially much higher returns.
THE THREE TIERS OF LESSORS
The engine leasing market can be split into several different business
models, each with its own targets and expectations regarding a return
on investment. How these different entities do business can also have a
considerable effect on how lease rates perform.
At the top level are OEM lessors. The primary focus for the OEM lessor is to
support its parent by helping to manage supply and demand. They do this by
absorbing over-production, providing short-term leasing to cover the OEMs
eet-hour programme and maintaining market coverage by undercutting the
competition. To spread their own risk, the OEM lessors often sell portfolios to
independent lessors, MROs and investment groups.
Covering the middle ground are the large independent lessors and MROs
who will either buy engines from the OEM, the OEM lessors, or through sale
leasebacks with airlines. These companies will offer both long- and short-
term leased engines at rates that are typically higher than those offered by the
OEM lessors. Some cheaper deals are still available for good credits or long
lease terms, or where a large MRO contract is part of the process.
The nal group includes the rest of the market and satises much of the
demand. This vast number of smaller lessors, banks and equity funds will
typically buy their engines from the OEM lessors and large independent
lessors with leases attached. The investment quality of the transaction will
often depend on volume and margins. Given also that many companies will
require a shorter return on its investment period, many of the engine deals
contain older engines and less credit-worthy lessees to keep rental margins
above one per cent per month.
THE ENGINE TYPES AND
THEIR RATES
The most commonly leased engines are the
CFM56-5B, CFM56-7B and V2500-A5 families
of engines, which power the A320 and 737NG
aircraft. With over 16,500 engines in circulation
(tted and spare) powering nearly 8,000 aircraft
across nearly 500 airlines, the market remains
very liquid and a swarming battleground for
lessors.
This colourful market contains engines of many
different thrust levels and upgrade statuses which
can lead to a considerable contrast in rentals.
While the rule of thumb for new engine rentals
remains at around 0.82 per cent versus list prices,
the market for the mature and less fuel-efcient
engines has displayed a marked level of volatility
over the past two years.
Over the past 12 months, we have seen many of
the mid- to long-term monthly lease rates rise for
new CFM56-5B Tech Insertion engines to todays
rates of $60,000 for the -5B5/3 (A319), to $75,000
for the -5B4/3 (A320) and $80-85,000 for the
-5B3/3 (A321). The more mature P-designation
engines fair less well with rates of $40-70,000
Now that the
availability of
spare engines has
increased, lessors
will want to down-
sell their exposure,
which may lead
to a drop in rates.
Currently, these are
reasonably high
compared to the
average market value
of around $55-65,000.
Going forward, we
expect this market
to decline.
for the same thrust range as above. In some instances, we
encounter some lower (and much higher) rates but there is
often a much larger deal at play.
The competing V2500-A5 engines tend to fall within similar
boundaries for the new engines although an excess in the
market did lead to a slight softening of rates last year. A new
V2533-A5 Select engine is expected to lease for around $85,000
a month, while a 10-year-old non-Select engine leases at closer
to $65-75,000 and even lower when on shorter terms. The more
common V2527-A5 variant should lease for around $60-70,000.
For the CFM56-7B engines that power the 737NG family, rates
tend to follow a similar pattern although pound for pound, the
-7B engine would often fair a little better than the -5B model.
As these engines are the most numerous, shopping around
can lead to signicant variances in rental rate. And as some
recent short-term deals that performed at much lower rates
suggest, MROs and OEM lessors will go a long way to shut-out
the competition.
This space will prove interesting following the launch of
the Leap-X and PW1000G engines. We envisage that the
older variants will suffer rst as fuel efciency and on-wing
reliability will woo most airlines wishing to protect their yields.
We expect another 8,000-10,000 engine deliveries within the
current narrowbody sector before the first A320 neo enters
service and so it will be another ve to 10 years from today
before the current standard engines feel strong competition.
The growing population of the latest standard engines has
already (marginally) affected rates for the older variants and we
expect that to continue indenitely.
A concern for many is the effect on V2500-A5 engine values
and rates given that International Aero engines (IAE) has not
provided a new core in the same vein as CFM International
(CFMI) and Pratt & Whitney. Despite this, we still expect IAE
to offer an upgrade programme to incorporate at least some of
the savings promised by others, as they will not want to lose
market share.
The graph below shows a forecast of the fitted engine
population for the A320 until 2030. Given the number of
engines that need replacing and an engine production level
of only 80-100 a month, it would take between 11 to 14 years
just to replace the existing fleet, let alone grow the world
eet. Therefore, engines that are kept in-line with the current
modication status will still perform the best.
The next most prolic area is the ageing widebody market,
which utilises the CFM56-5C, the 94-inch version of the
PW4000, and the CF6-80C2 engines. Most lessors manage
signicant quantities of these engines and they trade regularly
in the leasing market. These are probably the largest engines in
which most lessors will comfortably invest. Their shop visit
costs are not outlandish and the LLP management for engines
averaging over six hours per cycle means there are several shop
visits between the replacement of parts.
Historically, the most stable engine has been the CF6-80C2
(FADEC). It is the most widely used widebody engine and is
relatively reliable and predictable. Despite a drop in 2008 to
2009 when many 747s were parked, the monthly rates for mid-
to long-term leases is still around $55-65,000.
The CFM56-5C market has been a little agitated recently
because of increasing part-outs of A340 aircraft. Until recently,
values for the -5C4 variant were reasonably strong as the
engines relatively short time on-wing meant the engine would
often be on lease.
Now that the availability of spare engines has increased,
lessors will want to down-sell their exposure, which may
lead to a drop in rates. Currently, these are reasonably high
compared to the average market value of around $55-65,000.
Going forward, we expect this market to decline as more of the
long-range twins enter the market. As the 787 nally makes
its appearance followed by the A350 and more 777s we
expect the retirement of more A340s, 767s and 747s and thus
an increase in the supply of spares.

SERVICING THE SMALLER MARKETS
At the other end of the market, we find the engines that
power the lighter aircraft. Many of these engines suffer from
the same market woes as the host aircraft, with the exception
of the larger CF34 derivatives, which are tted to Embraers
E-jets and larger Bombardier CRJs. In particular, the CF34-10E
series, which is tted to E190 and E195 aircraft, are in very
high demand and have lease rentals in the range of $45-70,000.
There is very little availability for the CF34-8C5 and CF34-8E5
and so rates are around $37-45,000 a month. In both cases, the
lower rates are indicative of longer terms to better credits and
not indicative of the market rate.
As much of the wind has been stripped from the C-Series
sails it is difcult to foresee where this market is evolving. With
much of the market emphasis on larger aircraft and difculty
in achieving fuel efciency in smaller engines, the CF34-10E
may remain a dominant player until we see what the C-Series
can do. We expect that it is more likely that the smaller and
less efcient CF34-8 engine will feel the pressure sooner with
the appearance of the MRJ and the Pratt & Whitney Geared
TurboFan.
The largest engines that power the long-range twins the
A340-500, A340-600 and A380 are still controlled by the
OEM lessors. There are three players within this sector; Rolls-
Royce with its Trent family, General Electric (GE) with the CF6-
80E and GE90 families and Pratt & Whitney (P&W) with the
PW4000-100 and -112 families.
Very few lessors own many of these engines, partly because
the purchase prices are very high and partly because most
of these engines are enrolled in ight-hour agreements with
the OEM and therefore the reserves are not held by the lessor.
Also, OEM lessors hold the lease margins low. For example,
despite a list price in excess of $30m, the GE90-115B engine
(which powers the 777-300ER) only leases for around $180-
210,000 as opposed to the $250,000 rate required to pay for
the nancing costs.
Some lessors have been able make this work but have
required a more realistic purchase price. Similar problems
have been encountered regarding other large engines but to a
lesser extent as rates have stayed higher. In this sector, the most
common engines we encounter are those for the A330. In order
of market share, these include the Trent 700, the CF6-80E1, and
the PW4000-100 engines. In all cases, the mid- to long-term
monthly rates range between $110-140,000 and depend on
availability, the thrust band and the lessor.
Looking forward, we believe that as more emphasis is placed
on the fuel and maintenance cost efciency of the long-range
twins, the A330 and 777-300ER market will remain reasonably
buoyant with more pressure placed on the older 777s, A340-
500 and A340-600 fleet. That said, with many of the larger
engines controlled by the OEM lessor, any pressure will remain
fairly well hidden from the rest of the market.
Apart from an increase in nancing from banks and despite
the substantial growth potential, the large engine market will
continue to be controlled by the OEMs.
TWO TO FIVE-YEAR TERM MONTHLY RATES FOR ENGINES
FROM EACH SEGMENT
MODEL AIRCRAFT LOW TYPICAL HIGH
CFM56-3C1 737classics $20,000 $32,000 $40,000
CFM56-5B5/3 A319-100 $45,000 $52,000 $62,000
CFM56-5B4/P A320-200 $50,000 $60,000 $65,000
CFM56-5B4/3 A320-200 $60,000 $70,000 $75,000
V2527-A5 A320-200 $55,000 $60,000 $75,000
V2533-A5 Select A321-200 $60,000 $70,000 $85,000
CFM56-7B22 737-700 $40,000 $55,000 $65,000
CFM56-7B24/3 737-700/800 $60,000 $68,000 $80,000
CFM56-7B26 737-800 $60,000 $68,000 $80,000
CFM56-7B26/3 B737-800 $70,000 $78,000 $83,000
CF34-8C5 CRJ700 $35,000 $37,000 $45,000
CF34-10E6 E195 $45,000 $60,000 $65,000
CF6-80C2B1F 747-400 $55,000 $63,000 $65,000
PW4060 767-300ER $55,000 $65,000 $68,000
CFM56-5C4 A340-300 $50,000 $60,000 $65,000
GE90-94B 777-200ER $140,000 $150,000 $190,000
GE90-115B 777-300ER $185,000 $210,000 $215,000
Trent 772B A330-200/300 $110,000 $120,000 $140,000
PW4168A A330-200/300 $110,000 $120,000 $140,000
CF6-80E1A3 A330-200/300 $110,000 $120,000 $140,000
The growing population of the
latest standard engines has
already (marginally) affected
rates for the older variants and
we expect that to continue
indenitely.
Leasing engines
worldwide.
Rolls-Royce & Partners Finance
Rolls-Royce & Partners Finance has more than 340
engi nes worl dwi de, representi ng over $2.5 billion
in market value - the largest worldwide portfolio of
Rolls-Royce and IAE engines. We have a proven track
record and over 20 years experience in tailoring spare
engine solutions, managing operating leases, sale
and leaseback and engine sales. This delivers the
highest level of technical, financial and leasing expertise
in the market today. Our financial power provides
customer benefits across our global network including;
reduced risk, cash flow preservation, the release of
engine equity, minimised residual value exposure and
engine acquisition financing.
Trusted to deliver excellence
http://rrpf.rolls-royce.com/RRPF/
+44(0) 207 227 9142
AirlineFleetAd.indd 1 02/03/2011 13:28
Leasing engines
worldwide.
Rolls-Royce & Partners Finance
Rolls-Royce & Partners Finance has more than 340
engi nes worl dwi de, representi ng over $2.5 billion
in market value - the largest worldwide portfolio of
Rolls-Royce and IAE engines. We have a proven track
record and over 20 years experience in tailoring spare
engine solutions, managing operating leases, sale
and leaseback and engine sales. This delivers the
highest level of technical, financial and leasing expertise
in the market today. Our financial power provides
customer benefits across our global network including;
reduced risk, cash flow preservation, the release of
engine equity, minimised residual value exposure and
engine acquisition financing.
Trusted to deliver excellence
http://rrpf.rolls-royce.com/RRPF/
+44(0) 207 227 9142
AirlineFleetAd.indd 1 02/03/2011 13:28
Current trends in the
used aircraft market
Without doubt, demand for used aircraft has improved over the last 12-18
months and over the years, there have been several signicant trends in the
evolution of used aircraft dispositions. Pete Seidlitz, president of Bristol
Associates, examines the changes.
A
NALYSIS OF THE USED AIRCRAFT market shows that
things are improving but even the best analysis can be
somewhat deceiving. For example, according to Ascend, at the
time of writing there were 54 747-400s shown in storage, but
after subtracting aircraft that are either under maintenance,
being recongured or actively being parted-out that number
drops to 20 aircraft. Many of these (such as those belonging to
British Airways) are being kept as reserves and are not being
actively marketed.
According to Ascends gures, there were approximately 815
used narrowbody aircraft (A320/737NG families) sold during
July 2009 to July 2010. During the same period in 2010-2011,
the number of sales jumped to 1,235; that is a 50 per cent
increase. Even widebody types such as the 747 experienced a
25 per cent increase in sales and a 15 per cent increase in lease
transactions. While this is encouraging, it does not reect the
pricing at which those sales were executed.
As an aircraft remarketing firm, our involvement in the
industry indicates that while there is improved liquidity
pricing has not changed measurably indeed, it had probably
eroded from the previous period. There is underlying logic
to this; over time, many owners have been able to bring their
book values down to a level where they can now mark price to
market for selling purposes and actually affect trades.
HISTORICAL TRENDS
Twenty-ve years ago, used aircraft traded on a fairly simple
supply and demand basis. First-tier carriers typically bought
only new aircraft and pushed older aircraft into developing
markets. Residual expectations were not high. Information
was less accessible prior to the introduction of the internet and
mobile phone technology and there was value in being able to
nd and match an aircraft seller and a buyer. Today, the market
is much more efcient and it is much easier to determine both
suppliers and potential users.
Over the years, the industry has become more focused on the
maintenance and technical attributes of a given asset. These
considerations include the variant, powerplants, avionics,
weights, and aircraft lineage. As salvage became an acceptable
outcome for an aircraft, scrutiny of the asset was drilled down
into the specic parts and components thus heightening the
importance of precise maintenance records. The rise of leasing
companies further intensified this need as lessors became
exposed to the costs involved in transitioning aircraft from one
user to another.
While some things have changed over the years, others have
not. One key to liquidity in the aftermarket is still to have a
large operator base for a specic type. Boeings 737 Classics still
trade fairly readily, even though many are as old as 25 years.
As the type has moved down the food chain of operators it has
created a number of additional options for placing incremental
aircraft. On the other hand, the market for old F100s is
constrained by a small original operator base and the attendant
issues in accessing spares globally (versus Boeing or Airbus).
Another factor that continues to affect values is fuel.
Increased fuel prices continue to reduce the desirability of
older technology aircraft and push operators to younger,
more fuel efficient equipment. It significantly contributes
to the shortening of an aircrafts useful economic life and it
has dampened demand and eroded pricing for four-engine
widebodies such as the A340 and 747. Yet, there is always a
market for less efcient aircraft if pitched at the right price.
NEW AIRCRAFT AVAILABILITY AND
BIFURCATED MARKETS
While reviewing remarketing trends over the past 12-18
months, we have observed that several market factors have
increased their impact on used aircraft. One obvious change
over the last several years has been the aggressive production
rates maintained by both Airbus and Boeing. Unlike previous
down cycles, recent rates were not significantly reduced.
In the past, we typically competed with other providers of
similar used aircraft types in a given campaign. More recently,
we competed with new aircraft as well either via the
manufacturer itself or more typically via a leasing company.
Pricing has become so aggressive on new aircraft that they
often provide a very attractive alternative, particularly in an
unstable fuel environment.
As lessors rent new or quite new aircraft to airlines with
increasingly weaker credits, it will be interesting to see how the
economics of those deals work out. It is our feeling that many
of these deals will unwind over time. While a small carrier
in a developing nation would love to have new technology
equipment, in many cases they do not have the resources
to efficiently operate and maintain new equipment, nor do
they have a sufcient combination of utilisation and yield to
sustain the more expensive operation. Furthermore, lessors
and nanciers are now beginning to realise that transition costs
to the next carrier can be signicant and can radically change
the protability of a given asset, even in the event of a friendly
default. While narrowbodies in particular (A320/737NG)
have a fairly wide user base and thus good liquidity in terms
of nding a replacement operator, factors such as down time,
low follow-on rates and delivery costs remain a potential drag
on the economics.
One trend that began several years ago and has accelerated
in the past 12-18 months has been the increased segmentation
of sub-markets, even within a given aircraft type. Factors such
as age, aircraft weights (and their upgradeability), existing
configuration, and any enhancements (such as winglets) in
many cases determine access to a given part of the market.
Probably the most dramatic change has been the increase in
chronological age as a determining factor of price. Age was
formerly viewed as a combination of chronological age and
the aircrafts total ying time, but an older aircraft with low
times still brought a premium. Today the relevance of the year
of manufacture is a key consideration in any deal. However,
airframe times certainly remain a factor particularly in terms of
weighing hours/cycles remaining within major AD thresholds
in one unit versus another.
Also, aircraft are assessed in age-specic groups; 10-years-old
or younger; 10- to 15-years-old; and nally those greater than
20 years old. Values can vary dramatically between the aircraft
groups.Aircraft over 25 years of age are highly illiquid to the
point at which the most value is in the engines. While there
is generally a linear depreciation of value in each group, once
an aircraft moves to the next older bracket there is a signicant
one-time loss in liquidity and thus a loss in value.
A number of factors contribute to this phenomenon. A
major contributor is the various age restrictions that many
civil aviation authorities place on aircraft imported into their
country. Russia has a semi-formal 10 year maximum age and an
informal 15 year maximum; Brazil, China, Indonesia, India and
others each have 15 to 20 year limitations. This is particularly
problematic as these countries are historically some of the
largest takers of older, used aircraft. Their rules have several
effects, such as cutting off demand for aircraft older than 15-
to 20-years-old and increasing demand for younger aircraft.
We have recently been involved in a number of transactions in
which there has been signicant pressure to close a deal prior to
the aircraft reaching a certain age. Rising to a new age threshold
will further limit an aircrafts potential market.
Financing is another particularly age-sensitive area. There
is abundant capital available for aircraft under 10-years-old,
aircraft of this age or younger are the most viable solution for
a leasing company seeking to build its portfolio quickly, and
for those who will use debt nancing to maximize the size of
its portfolio. The dramatic expansion of Export Credit Agency
(ECA) programmes both to a wider variety of carriers as
well as to leasing companies further augmented the capital
base for new, and in some cases used, aircraft. Lenders are
increasingly wary of long nance terms and high advance rates
against 10- to 20-year-old aircraft. The only exception would be
when a teardown could be comfortably incorporated into the
purchase price or implicit residual.
One would think that the impact of age on pricing would
lead to shorter nance terms reecting increased uncertainty
about future residual values. Shorter nance terms and lower
advance rates would logically lead to higher lease rates.
The Magellan Group provides integrated aftermarket aviation support services to the global airline industry.
We sell, lease, and manage aircraft, engines, and spare parts to over 250 customers in 50 countries.
Airframe Support
Regional Aircraft
ATR 42 / 72
Dash 8 100 / 200 / 300 / 400
Embraer 120
CRJ 100 / 200
Commercial Aircraft
Airbus A300 / A310 / A320 /
A340 / A330
Boeing 737 / 747 / 757 / 767
Engine & Parts Sales & Leasing
Regional Engines
All PW100 series,
including PW150
CF34 A1/B1
AE3007A1
Commercial Engines
CF6-50C2 / 80C2
PW4000
CFM56
V2500
Professional Services
Aircraft & Engine Management
Consignments & Purchasing
of Surplus Inventory
Aircraft & Engine Leasing
& Trading
Joint Ventures
Asset Management
Technical Advisory Services
www.magellangroup.net
Magellan Aircraft Services Charlotte, North Carolina 704-504-9204 | Magellan Aviation Services Shannon, Ireland 353-61-474800
158527_Ad1.indd 1 9/29/10 1:03 PM
FPA_check 110_ATEM 110 21/02/2011 09:29 Page 3
GROWTH OF TEARDOWNS
Another interesting and growing sector in the aftermarket
is teardown. There are an increasing number of both large
and small companies in this position. Many of the larger
companies have developed sophisticated distribution
channels for airframe and engine parts and can effectively
monetise an out-of-service aircraft. Smaller companies can
opportunistically acquire an airframe or engine to satisfy spot
market opportunities.
Aircraft part-outs are another segments that is able to
attract nancing. This end of the business involves risks and
returns that are higher than more traditional leasing. A rm
with a track record in teardowns and the ability to manage
the inherent risk provides a logical place for private equity
and for those seeking above average rates of return. From a
remarketing perspective, we have seen end of life specialist
firms bid quite effectively against airline operators for
increasingly younger assets. We were involved in a 1999
A321 and 1994 777-200, both of which went to part-out. In
each case, the economics worked signicantly better for the
aircraft to be parted-out than for it to y.
The only caveat is that that parting-out is sometimes viewed
as a panacea. If companies in that sector are too aggressive
in acquiring aircraft for dismantling, it is possible that a
signicant oversupply in parts would follow.
The velocity of transactions in the used market has
increased over the past year and a half. We have seen our
market fueled by emerging demand in regions such as Russia
and Eastern Europe where both operational and tax issues
tend to favor used aircraft. Parts of Asia as well as Latin
America have also contributed to demand. Interestingly,
China and India two huge growth markets tend to
acquire new aircraft and are not particularly strong markets
for used aircraft.
The fates of both the new and used aircraft markets are tied
to those of airlines, which in turn are affected by national
and world economies. Given the current lack of clarity
about global economies, we are mindful of their impact on
our market sector. While the used market has improved and
continues to improve, the recovery is still fragile.
FPA_check 110_ATEM 110 21/02/2011 09:29 Page 3
F
REIGHTER CONVERSION REPRESENTS ONE OF the
most interesting and challenging economic decisions for any
owner of a commercial jet, whether the aircraft is a narrowbody
or a widebody.
Factors such as the state of the cargo market, the availability
of aircraft for conversion, and what makes an aircraft a suitable
candidate (i.e. its age and operating history) are all highly
important. These must be considered with aircraft residual
values, the cost of conversion, the availability of nancing, and
even the state of the spare-parts market. Furthermore, when
an operator does choose to convert a freighter, it must decide
whether to own the aircraft or to lease it.
For instance, when it comes to choosing between buying
and converting an existing widebody aircraft versus leasing a
converted freighter from a third-party: One of the countervailing
issues is the lack of ability to get nancing, notes Robert Agnew,
president and CEO of Morten Beyer & Agnew. There is not a
lot of credit around. You have to buy the aircraft, sit on it for 120
days [while it is being converted] more if it is a widebody
and all that while you have committed capital and you have to
pay for the conversion. Its a costly process.
A basic economic equation governs whether and when a
passenger aircraft is suitable for freighter conversion. It must
be old enough or have accumulated enough ight cycles
for the aircrafts residual value to have declined to the point at
which the acquisition price, plus the cost of any maintenance
checks, plus the cost of conversion, leaves the owner with an
aircraft that it can either sell for a profit, or lease at a rental
which will achieve a suitable return on the owners investment
over a given time.
Cargo conversion:
Choosing the right time
For owners of commercial jets, deciding to convert passenger aircraft to freighters is an important
economic move that involves several key variables. These can make a yes decision compelling or no
the only sensible option. Chris Kjelgaard reports.
Robert Agnew, president
and CEO of Morten Beyer
& Agnew
THE RIGHT TIME FOR CONVERSION
In most cases, that given time is 10 to 15 years for a
narrowbody or 15 to 20 years for a widebody. Commonly
accepted wisdom is that, in order to be suitable for a
conversion, a narrowbody aircraft needs to remain in operation
for 10 years or more after being converted, says Usman
Ahmed, senior analyst with IBA Group. For widebody aircraft,
the expectation is that the converted aircraft will remain in
service much longer than 10 years, because the widebody
typically will not have accumulated as many ight cycles as
a narrowbody jet before conversion, so its useful remaining
life will be longer. Calculations on conversion candidacy often
use the 50,000-cycle gure as a rough estimate for an aircrafts
overall economic life, as structural safety rules on various
ageing-aircraft use this mark as a starting point for much
stricter inspection regimes that quickly eat into an aircrafts
economic viability.
In many cases, residual values and cycle accumulation will
create a sweet spot for freighter-conversion suitability when
an aircraft has been in service from 15 to 20 years since new.
The suitable-age range can even be as much as 22 or 23 years,
depending on an aircrafts ight-cycle accumulation, according
to Lars Becker, CEO of Airbus Freighter Conversions. In the
15 to 20 year age range, many narrowbodies have completed
30,000 to 35,000 cycles and many widebodies far fewer, so
they still have 15,000 cycles or more to go until they reach the
critical 50,000-cycle mark.
At the low utilisation rates at which cargo airlines typically
operate particularly cargo integrators such as FedEx or
UPS a remaining useful life of 15,000 cycles can keep an
aircraft in operation for well over 20 years. A freighters life
can be that long that the factors which eventually make an
aircraft uneconomic to operate are not a dramatic increased
maintenance costs associated with ageing-aircraft inspections,
but increasing fuel prices and stricter noise legislation.
Historically, notes Agnew, the magic number at which
a widebody freighter conversion used to make most sense
economically was when the aircraft was 20- to 25-years-
old. [Now] it seems to be a moving target and its moving
earlier, he says. This is due to factors such as fuel price in
the heyday of the 747-400, jet fuel cost a small fraction of what
it does now and operators now want twin-engine widebodies
for most long-haul routes and to the growth of export credit
financing to become a primary funding mechanism, which
has made new passenger aircraft widely available to smaller
carriers. Such airlines have become less interested in 15- to
20-year-old widebodies and for a time the residual values of
large widebodies fell sharply.
Until recently, that is. Because of a strong resurgence in the
cargo market following the crash of the industry, 747-400s have
become treasured candidates for freighter conversions. All
of a sudden, [values] bounced back to a signicant percentage
of their old values, says Agnew. We saw a 20 per cent value
jump as people went back for 747s to convert to freighters.
All things being equal, many 15- to 20-year-old passenger
aircraft will still be able to begin second lives as cargo aircraft
and make money for their owners and operators for long
enough to justify the costs of conversion. But not all things are
2 Cycle
Per Day
Cycle Accumulation
Frequency (annual)
Aircraft
With
(Cycles)
Years to
reach 50k
at 5 day
rate
Years to
reach 50k
at 6 day
rate
16,000 65 54
18,000 62 51
20,000 58 48
22,000 54 45
24,000 50 42
26,000 46 38
28,000 42 35
30,000 38 32
32,000 35 29
34,000 31 26
36,000 27 22
3 Cycles
Per Day
Cycle Accumulation
Frequency (annual)
Aircraft
With
(Cycles)
Years to
reach 50k
at 5 day
rate
Years to
reach 50k
at 6 day
rate
16,000 44 36
18,000 41 34
20,000 38 32
22,000 36 30
24,000 33 28
26,000 31 26
28,000 28 24
30,000 26 21
32,000 23 19
34,000 21 17
36,000 18 15
4 Cycles
Per Day
Cycle Accumulation
Frequency (annual)
Aircraft
With
(Cycles)
Years to
reach 50k
at 5 day
rate
Years to
reach 50k
at 6 day
rate
16,000 33 27
18,000 31 26
20,000 29 24
22,000 27 22
24,000 25 21
26,000 23 19
28,000 21 18
30,000 19 16
32,000 17 14
34,000 15 13
36,000 13 11
1 Cycle
Per Day
Cycle Accumulation
Frequency (annual)
Aircraft
With
(Cycles)
Years to
reach 50k
at 5 day
rate
Years to
reach 50k
at 6 day
rate
16,000 131 109
18,000 123 103
20,000 115 96
22,000 108 90
24,000 100 83
26,000 92 77
28,000 85 71
30,000 77 64
32,000 69 58
34,000 62 51
36,000 54 45
Frequency
Cycles Per
Day
5
Days
6
Days
1 5 6
2 10 12
3 15 18
4 20 24
Annual
Accumulation
Cycles Per
Day
5
Days
6
Days
1 260 312
2 520 624
3 780 936
4 1040 1248
Credit: Precision Conversions, Boeing 757 Cycle Accumulation
Data only
Usman Ahmed, senior
analyst, IBA Group
Lars Becker, CEO
of Airbus Freighter
Conversions
equal. For instance, notes Owen Geach, commercial director
of IBA Group, various developing countries have adopted
regulations that prevent imports of aircraft older than a certain
age. India usually bans imports of aircraft more than 15-years-
old, while China bans aircraft older than 20-years-old and
Nigeria aolder than 22-years-old.
Another problem, specific to and increasingly affecting
the 757, is that carriers and lessors have rushed to have their
aircraft retrotted with blended winglets. The 757 now seems
to have been ahead of its time. Boeing stopped producing the
aircraft not long before it took on a new lease of life with major
airlines as a transatlantic jet. The 757 remains in widespread
passenger service and the blended winglet adds enough
performance to make most passenger carriers want to have their
757 eets modied. As a result, more than 300 757s have now
been tted with blended winglets.
However, says Brian McCarthy, VP of marketing and sales for
Precision Conversions:
The alarming part for the afterlife of the airplane is that,
right now, you cannot convert a winglet-modified aircraft.
Precision Conversions holds a 757-conversion supplemental
type certificate (STC) and is currently converting its 30th
757 to freighter conguration. But through Aviation Partners,
Boeing controls all the engineering data on the 757s blended
winglet and to date has not made it available to any of the three
757 freighter-conversion STC holders so they can perform
the analysis necessary to demonstrate that their STCs are
compatible with the major structural modification that the
installation of blended winglets represents.
I would be quite concerned if I were an owner, says
McCarthy. Precision Conversions is working on a solution,
but [the winglet issue] is somewhat alarming for the value of
the airplane. Owners should pay special attention to that. If
they wait too long to convert their 757s to freighters and in the
meantime have blended winglets installed, residual values
will collapse immediately to scrap.
When certain 757s and 737 Classics get to the right age for
freighter conversions, the owner also has the option to part
them out, notes Geach. This is particularly true for owners
wishing to realise a prompt return on their assets. IBA Group
estimates that, in the current market, for every two owners
wanting to convert their 15- to 20-year-old 737-300s or other
aircraft to freighters, 10 are choosing to tear their aircraft
down to release the value inherent in engines and aircraft
parts. As a result, many aircraft suitable for conversion
feedstock, as they are collectively known will never
become candidates.
Another trigger to sell a passenger aircraft for freighter
conversion is if its passenger cabin requires a major
reconfiguration or refurbishment, says Wolfgang Schmid,
EADS EFWs VP of sales, marketing and customer support.
This is a job that can cost $12m or more for a widebody, he says.
If the operator decides the aircraft is not worth such a major
investment, a clear alternative is to convert it to a freighter.
Summary of the Conversion Costs and Down Time
Models Conversion Providers Aquisition Cost Conversion Cost (US$) Resale Value
727 PF
Aeronautical Engineers. Inc $0.3m - $0.75m $1.2m (2007) $1.5m - $2m
Avborne Heavy Maintenance $0.3m - $0.75m $1.090m (2002) $1.5m - $2m
Hamilton Aviation $0.3m - $0.75m $1.2m (2002) $1.5m - $2m
737-200
Aeronautical Engineers. Inc $0.3m - $0.75m $1.7m (2010) $1.5m - $2m
Stambaugh Aviation and Universal Cargo $0.3m - $0.75m $1.7m (2010) $1.5m - $2m
DC-9-30 Pemco World Air Services $0.3m - $0.75m unknown
L-100-20/30
Lockheed unknown
Individual Operators unknown
TU-204-100 Tupolev $0.3m - $0.75m Factory Built
Narrowbody
737-300 AEI, IAI Bedek, Pemco $2m - $5m $2.3m - $2.5m (2010) $5.9 - $8m
737-400 AEI, IAI Bedek, Pemco $3.5m - $6m $2.9m - $3.2m (2010) $8.5m - $9.9m
MD-80 Aeronautical Engineers. Inc $0.5m - $3.75m $2.2m (2010) $2m - $4.5m
757-200 Boeing, Pemco, Precision conversions $6m - $10m (1986 - 1992) $4.9m (2010) $14m - $18m
A320 Airbus $6m - $13m (1988 - 1995) $4.1m (2010) $13m - $20m
A321-100 Airbus $13m - $19m (1994 -2001) $4.5m (2010) $20m - $26m
Widebody
A310-300 EADS $4.5m - $10m $8.5 - $9m (2011) $9 - $11.5m (1985 - 1992)
A300-600 EADS, B/E Aerospace $6.8m - $18.8m (1988 - 2002) $9.5m (2011) $18.5m +
767-300ER IAI Bedek, ST Aerospace $12.5 - $22m (1990 - 1998) $10m - $13m $27m - $38m
777-200ER Boeing $50m - $69m (1997 - 2002) $35m N/A
747-400 Boeing, IAI Bedek $18m - $27m (1989 - 1995) $25m - $30m $47m - $57m
Owen Geach, commercial
director of IBA Group
Credit: IBA Group
MRO, Conve r s i on & Up gr a de s
Your Best Choice for Smart-Value
Conversion Programs: IAI-BEDEK.
Our technologically advanced passenger-to-cargo conversions
have made us world leaders in the eld.
We hold leading aviation authorities'
(such as FAA, EASA, CAAC, & CAAI)
Supplemental Type Certicate (STC) for:
- B737 - 300BDSF/-300BDQC/- 400BDSF
- B747 - 400BDSF
- B767 - 200BDSF/-300BDSF
For a most efcient and cost-effective investment, turn to
IAI-BEDEK one-stop Conversion & MRO House.
Its Time for Conversion
Israel Aerospace Industries
I
E-mail: bedek@iai.co.il
I
www.bedek-iai.com
MRO, Conve r s i on & Up gr a de s
Your Best Choice for Smart-Value
Conversion Programs: IAI-BEDEK.
Our technologically advanced passenger-to-cargo conversions
have made us world leaders in the eld.
We hold leading aviation authorities'
(such as FAA, EASA, CAAC, & CAAI)
Supplemental Type Certicate (STC) for:
- B737 - 300BDSF/-300BDQC/- 400BDSF
- B747 - 400BDSF
- B767 - 200BDSF/-300BDSF
For a most efcient and cost-effective investment, turn to
IAI-BEDEK one-stop Conversion & MRO House.
Its Time for Conversion
Israel Aerospace Industries
I
E-mail: bedek@iai.co.il
I
www.bedek-iai.com
ITS ALL IN THE TIMING
For freighter conversion to make sense, the
amount of available feedstock the supply
side of the equation must align with
customer demand. The process must also take
into account a temporal offset that depends on
the date of the conversion slot booked by the
customer and the duration of the conversion
process, which can vary from four to seven
months depending on the lead time for parts
and whether the aircraft being converted is
a narrowbody or a widebody. McCarthy says
Precision Conversions has now seen at least
two cycles of mis-match between supply and
demand, during which plenty of customers
want freighters but the feedstock is not available
for conversion. The scales then tip to having
many aircraft available but few customers who
want them.
Even when the stars do align, institutional
owners of converted widebody freighters can
still face an uphill battle in competing against the
economics of longer-lived new freighters if they
do not buy or convert their aircraft at the right
time, says Dan da Silva, VP of freighter conversion
for Boeing Commercial Airplanes.
Today, the overall cost of buying and converting
a 13- to 20-year-old Boeing 767-300ER can range
from $27m to $38m, according to Ahmed, but
da Silva says the cost might average $35m for an
aircraft with 15 years of economic life remaining.
For a lessor to make its business case stick at a 15
year life assumption, The lease rate would have
to be $450,000 [a month], says da Silva. The
obvious difculty for the market is that you cant
get $450,000 for a 767-sized freighter. You can get
$350,000 to $375,000.
What this means, he says, is that because Boeing
(or IAI Bedek) is never going to discount its 767
conversion price by more than about 10 per cent
and so customers will never nd major savings
there. Customers must wait until the residual
values of suitable 767-300ERs drop considerably
before they buy their aircraft or release them from
passenger service.
Continuing high 767-300ER residual values
point to another problem affecting the freighter-
conversion industry in recent times. Although
Boeing launched its 767-300ER conversion
programme with All Nippon Airways (ANA)
in 2006 knowing it was doing so ahead of the
market, the company believed that, by the time
the ANA conversion programme ended in late
2010, 767-300ER values would have fallen to
where many aircraft would be suitable for, and
available for, conversion. However, says da
Silva, delays to the 787 and A380 production
programmes, and Airbus false start with the
737-300 Conversion Programme
Conversion House Down Time Main Deck Containers Net Structural Payload (lbs)
(incl. Lower Deck)
AEI 90 days 9 88/125 39,779
IAI Bedek 60 - 70 days 8 88/125 + 1 60/96 39,118 / 38,318
Pemco 85 days 8 88/125 + 1 60/96 39,653 / 39,218
737-400 Conversion Programme
AEI 90 days 10 88/125 41,310 / 44,310
IAI Bedek 60 - 70 days 9 88/125 + 1 88/64 39,749 / 42,749
Pemco 85 days 10 88/125 42,450
767-200ER Conversion Programme
Aeronavali 140 - 150 days 20 88/125 92,134
IAI Bedek 110 days 19 88/125 84574
Credit: IBA Group
A350 in 2005, made airlines want to hang on to their 767-300ERs.
We hope the 767 market comes sooner rather than later, says da Silva. With the 787
delivering this year, we expect the values of 767s and the appetite of airlines to renew
and extend their leases on older 767s to denitely go down. At the [ISTAT] conference in
March [2011], the interest from leasing companies in talking to us about 767 conversions
had grown exponentially since the meeting in Munich [ISTAT, October, 2010]. Then,
it was the 747-400 they were interested in. Now, those deals are consolidating, and we
expect the same with the 767.
WHAT COMES NEXT?
Customers are keenly watching three other conversion programmes. At the time of
writing Dresden-based Airbus Freighter Conversion (AFC) has already launched the
A320 and A321 conversion programmes with an order from AerCap for 30 conversions
in 2011 to 2015. The company a joint venture involving EADS EFW, Airbus and
Russias United Aircraft Corporation and Irkut had been in discussions with other
potential customers for slots from 2012 onwards as it sought to ramp-up production
to 15 to 20 aircraft a year. Along the way, AFC
hoped to launch the A321-100 conversion
programme in 2013, says Becker, noting AFC
was in discussions with two potential customers
to provide A321-100s for prototyping the
conversion. Eventually, AFC expected to convert
as many A321s as A320s.
Since the interview with Becker, Airbus
withdrew the A320 and A321 conversion
programmes. Some believe this was because
Airbus wanted to focus its rescources on the
A350 and neo programmes, others believe it was
due to poor demand though ahead of Airbus
announcement Becker seemed to think otherwise.
He says a number of good candidates are
becoming available among older A320s with
residual values from $7m to $10m and soon
A321-100 candidates with values from $12m to
$15m should be available. AFC saw prime A320
feedstock as being aircraft that are 18- to 20-years-
old. We are getting some requests between 12
and 14 years but these are exceptions, he says.
Ahmed believes the sizable number of A320s
likely to reach the market for conversion during
the next few years may make it extremely
difficult to establish an eventual conversion
market for 737NGs. Once the A320 programme is
established, hundreds more A320-family aircraft
will continue to become available for conversion
over time, impacting 737NG freighter demand.
Agnew sees older A320s as being natural
freighter competitors for 737-400s, saying: I think
thats going to be the race. [The 737-400] offers
one more container than the -300 for essentially
zero cost. However, one big variable that could
dramatically impact the market for 737-300
and 737-400 conversions is how the new FAA-
mandated inspection regime for 737 Classics with
more than 30,000 cycles plays out following the
Southwest Airlines fuselage-rupture on April 1.
EADS EFW, meanwhile, is seeing a resurgence
in A300-600R conversions as up to six of the 32
former American Airlines aircraft are signed for
conversion (the rest of the eet is too run-out to
be suitable) and many of the 18 A300-600Rs that
Japan Airlines formerly owned, and the four
it formerly leased, are checked in. EADS EFW
is also expected to announce a significant new
conversion deal on ex-JAL aircraft. Once these
aircraft are converted, A300 conversions will end.
Meanwhile, A310-300 conversions will remain
at best a niche market, says Schmid. However,
some customers are close to signing A310-300
conversion deals, he says.
But the programme everyone has their eyes on is
the A330-300, an aircraft with no true competitor.
Its below the 777 and above the 767, notes
Schmid. Its the most-demanded aircraft and
there will be some pretty good candidates in two to three years time. In the beginning, the
airframes are pretty expensive but this is always the case, and then they get cheaper and
cheaper. Given a three-year development programme, Schmid hopes EADS EFW will be
able to offer A330-300 conversions from 2014 or 2015. The only problem is Demand is so
high there might not be enough A330-300s. Its denitely a hot item.
The company is not actively pursuing A330-200 conversions it has no wish to
interfere with Airbus solid market for new A330-200Fs and in any case no A330-200
is yet old enough to make sense as a candidate but Schmid notes that, once weve
done the A330-300, the smaller aircraft is an easy jump. However, while EADS EFW has
had some institutional-customer interest in converting A340-300s (and the job would be
essentially the same as that for the A330-300), Schmid says the company sees no end-user
market at present and would not accept any A340-300 conversions until operator interest
did become evident.
Another programme of great interest is the 777-200ER. Some carriers would love
the 777BCF in a couple of years, but they dont want to pay the prices, says da Silva.
Originally, Boeing looked at converting non-ER 777-200s rst, but there are so few of these
(and almost all are operated by United) that it quickly turned its attention to the more
capable model. A timing problem is that while there are some 415 potential 777-200ER
candidates, only a few are in the oldest batch, completed from 1995 to 1997. A large
number of 777-200ERs at prime age will be available later in the decade, and this is once
the 787-9 and the A350 XWB enter service, da Silva notes. He says Boeing expects to have
the rst conversion slots available from about 2016, following three years of engineering
development. EADS Ad_Layout 1 07/09/2011 11:42 Page 1
Building a narrowbody
freighter eet
T
O SUCCESSFULLY CONVERT A NARROWBODY freighter,
several key issues must be understood and appropriate
decisions must be made. Some decisions require complex
analysis for example, payload, volume, range, speed,
exibility and safety. Other considerations are more simplistic.
Take size and availability as an example. Narrowbody
freighters are often grouped into two size categories small
and mid-size. The small group consists of out-of-production
models like the DC9, 737-200 and 727-100 and in-production
aircraft such as the 737-300/400. The mid-sized group is
dominated by the out-of-production DC8 and 727-200 and the
in-production 757-200.
One should note that the A320 and A321 are not included
here due to Airbus recent cancelation of the proposed A320
and A321 freighter conversion programmes. Out-of-production
models are being replaced due to a myriad of issues including
operating efciency, age, cost and reliability. Replacing these
Jurassic aircraft are the popular 737-300/400 and 757-200s.
Together, these aircraft account for well over 200 freighters in
operation and there are more to come thanks to the availability
of attractively priced feedstock, particularly the 737 Classic.
Successfully building a freighter eet is an intricate process. At its heart is the need to select the right
aircraft for the job. Kevin Casey, president of Pemco World Air Services takes a look at some of the
considerations that cargo operators may take when expanding their eet.
Configuration is another major issue. Will the operator
choose a fixed all-freighter arrangement or would quick
change (QC) capabilities and combi/special mission
characteristics be preferred? If a basic freighter is the right
choice, which layout works best? Take the 757F. It comes in
14, 14.5 and 15 pallet congurations. If your freight density is
extremely light, say 7lbs per cubic ft or less, then maximising
volume with the 15 pallet arrangement (2.5 per cent net
volume) makes sense. However, if your payload density is
typical and it is important to have a forward hazmat container
or a supernumerary-capable vestibule, then the 14 or 14.5
arrangement makes better sense.
To be viable, a freighters capability and economics need
to closely match its route (payload, volume, distance).
Freighters that are strong in one profile for example the
757 on a 2000km, 60 tonnes, revenue tonne (RT) route, may
be uneconomical on another route for example a 1500km
40 tonnes RT payload route, which is better suited to the 737.
Many thin intra-region routes favor efficient medium-range
aircraft that have a smaller volume such as the 737-300F,
737-400F and 757-200F.
Express integrator operators are typically limited by volume
whereas general freight operators tend to be driven by weight
and a low utilisation environment, which makes fixed
cost amortisation a key consideration. Therefore, aircraft
acquisition and ownership costs are critical to a successful
operation in the narrowbody freighter market. The 737 and 757
acquisition costs are considered favourable, with the 737-300
of a particularly attractive value due to a large number of recent
retirements and the availability of well-maintained aircraft.
Although Airbus has indenitely suspended the A320 and
A321 conversion programmes, the tables to the right (drawn in
2Q, 2011) provide a cost analysis for four narrowbody freighters
OWNERSHIP ASSUMPTIONS
All in Jul 2010 $ 737-300SF 737-400SF A320-200SF 757-200SF
Airframe Acquisition Cost (Airclaims) $3,500,000 $7,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000
Conversion Cost $2,500,000 $2,900,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000
Total Acquisition Cost $6,000,000 $9,900,000 $15,000,000 $15,000,000
Useful Life 35 years 35 years 35 years 35 years
Age at acquisition 22 years 18 years 18 years 18 years
YOM 1988 1992 1992 1992
Remaining Life 13 years 17 years 17 years 17 years
Residual Value at End of Life $600,000 $990,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000
Cash - Principal & Interest - Monthly $73,770 $111,360 $168,727 $168,727
OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS
737-300SF 737-400SF A320-200SF 757-200SF
Maintenance Cost Per FH $843 $885 $850 $969
Flight Crew Cost Per BH $100 $100 $100 $100
Base Utliization (BH Per Year) 2700 2700 2700 2700
Base Utilization (FH Per Year) 2500 2500 2500 2500
Overhead ($/BH) 0 0 0 0
SECTOR: SGN-HKG
737-300SF 737-400SF A320-200SF 757-200SF
Maximum Take-Off Weight (lb) 139,500 150,000 169,800 240,000
Maximum Take-Off Weight (kg) 63,409 68,182 77,182 109,091
Strucutral Payload (kgs) and Tare 18,400 21,542 22,584 30,900
Structural Payload (tonnes) and Tare 18.40 21.54 22.58 30.90
Block Time (hr) 2.35 2.31 2.28 2.27
Utilization (BH Hr per Year) 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700
Tare (kg) 858 958 998 1,733
CASH OPERATING COSTS (US$ PER TRIP)
737-300SF 737-400SF A320-200SF 757-200SF
Principal & Interest 772 1,145 1,710 1,699
Flight Crew 235 231 228 227
Maintenance 1,563 1,605 1,513 1,712
Hull Insurance 259 255 251 249
Fuel (kg) 5,210 5,715 5,696 7,272
Fuel 3,514 3,855 3,842 4,905
Landing Fees 587 631 715 1,010
Navigation Fees 623 623 623 623
Airplane Ground Handling Fees 431 459 538 538
G&A 0 0 0 0
Cash Operating Costs $7,985 $8,805 $9,420 $10,964
COC/kg $0.455 $0.428 $0.436 $0.376
Relative COC/kg Base -22% -21% -32%
Relative Trip Cost Base -9% -2% 14%
Revenue $17,542 $20,584 $21,586 $29,167
Segment Operating Prot/Loss $9,557 $11,779 $12,166 $18,203
TABLE 1
TABLE 2
namely the 737-300, 737-400, A320 and 757 across
several routes. From this data, we can see that the 737-300F has
a cost advantage on a trip cost basis. The 737-400F is second
best at nine per cent. Behind it is the 737-300F at 15 per cent
and 35 per cent less cost per trip compared with the A320F and
757F respectively.
On a unit basis, the 737-400SF has a ve per cent advantage
over the 737-300F on routes under 27,000 tonnes. However, on
routes over 27,000 tonnes, the 757-200F is the most attractive
narrowbody freighter.
The freighter analysis above demonstrates that the 737-
300 and -400 are compelling choices below 27,000 tonnes
meanwhile the 757-200 is most effective above 27,000. But
picking the right aircraft model is just one step. In addition
to this economic analysis, special consideration may be
required to assess environmental issues such as high ambient
temperature, high elevation or short runways. These require
specialised capability and efciency route studies.
Once a carrier has performed these studies above and
selected the right aircraft and arrangement, there are additional
considerations that are often overlooked but can generate
a surprising impact on future operations. For example, a
common mistake is to under-estimate the value of reliability
and durability. The aircraft must go under sound conversion
to ensure low operating costs and a high future value. A cargo
operator should consider whether dispatch reliability will be
adequate; how often their service will be interrupted due to
reliability or design issues (for example SID inspection intervals)
and how much repairs will cost (including ancillary costs such
SECTOR: SGN-HKG
Aircraft 737-300SF 737-400SF A320-200SF 757-200SF
Engine CFM56-3C CFM56-3C CFM56-5 RB211-535B4
Characteristics Conversion Conversion Conversion Conversion
MOTW/lb 139,500 150,000 169,800 240,000
MLW/lb 116,600 124,000 145,500 198,000
MZFA/lb 109,6000 117,000 137,790 184,000
OEW without Tare / lb 66,000 69,000 87,085 116,000
Maximum Structural Payload / lb 43,600 48,000 (new -400) 50,705 68,000
Tare Containers / lb 1,892 2,112 2,200 3,820
Maximum Revenue Payload / lb 41,708 45,888 48,505 64,180
Revenue Payload (9lb/cu. ft Pallet,
5lb Bulk / lb)
38,406 43,906 45,170 68,550
Lower Hold Capability Bulk Vol. / ft. 1,068 1,376 1,114 1,830
Main Deck Cargo Capability
Pallet vol. 96x125 ft
2
. (Standard Dim.) 0 0 0 0
No. of 96x125 ft
2
. Pallet (Standard Dim.) 0 0 0 0
Pallet volume, 96x125 ft
2
. (Odd Dim.) 0 0 0 0
No. of 96x125 ft
2
.(Odd Dim.) 0 0 0 0
Pallet vol. 88x125 ft
2
. (Standard Dim.) 440 440 440 440
No. of 88x125 ft
2
. Pallet (Standard Dim.) 8.0 9.0 10.0 15.0
Pallet volume, 88x125 ft
2
. (Odd Dim.) 154 154 0 0
No. of 88x125 ft
2
. (Odd Dim.) 1.0 1.0 0 0
Container volume, LD3 ft
2
. 0 0 0 0
TOTAL MD CARGO VOLUME: ft
2
. 3,674 4,114 4,400 6,600
TOTAL WEIGHT BUILD UP / lb
Total Pallet Tare / lb 1,892 2,112 2,200 3,820
Adjusted (95%MD+50%LD) Total Cargo
Volume, tls
4,024 4,596 4,737 8,430
TOTAL CARGO VOLUME, ft
2
. 4,742 5,490 5,514 8,430
TABLE 3
TABLE 4
as damage caused by cargo door location). The
highest quality conversion will reduce overall
operating maintenance costs while maximising
aircraft availability to generate revenue.
Operators must look for expertise across a
myriad of issues to improve the chances of
success when starting up a eet of narrowbody
freighters. These include project planning and
analysis, aircraft sourcing, nancing and credit
requirements, maintenance requirements,
entry into service and retirement, plus the
cost, reliability and valuable of the conversion
programme and the freighter it produces.
Without expert help with these important
issues, a freighter owner/operator can spend
substantial amounts of money and never achieve
the success it desires. The bottom line is to do
ones homework, to buy a quality airframe and
to choose a proven conversion product from a
quality service integrator.
TABLE 5
TABLE 6
TABLE 7
T
HE FINANCING OF AIRCRAFT SPARES
was i rrevocabl y al t ered wi t h t he
introduction of low-cost carriers (LCCs) and the
maturation of the market for pooling parts. LCCs
refused to tie-up liquidity (even if they had it) in
buying non-revenue generating assets. In many
cases, LCCs operated aircraft on operating lease
arrangements and were even more averse to
tying up capital in spares.
Thankfully, and perhaps as a result, the market
for the commercial pooling of parts developed
rather than investing in the purchase of parts,
airlines could buy the right to access pooled parts
with costs based on their availability and on the
delivery of service levels.
The nancing of aircraft spares had traditionally been left to airlines, which were encouraged by
component OEMs to undertake capital intensive initial provisioning (IP) programmes that resulted in large
capital investments and sunken costs. That was until two things came along to change it. John Avery,
director of supply chain services and Ian Malin, treasurer and chief investment ofce at AJ Walter explain.
Financing Aircraft Spares
MARKET FORCES
The idea of sharing assets to enjoy an economy of scale is not a
new one. It developed in Europe in the early 1970s, driven by
the introduction of the new generation of large-scale long-haul
aircraft such as the 747 and DC10. Several co-operatives were
formed notably KSSU (KLM, SAS, Swissair and UTA) and
ATLAS (Air France, Alitalia, Iberia, and Lufthansa) which
shared the investment and complexity of these new and much
larger-scale challenges between them. In retrospect however, it
is hard to tell if these collectives saved much money.
The next step was made in the 1980s when legacy carriers
started offering support to smaller airlines (often the new
breed of start-ups) to support their existing engineering lines.
The attraction for the new airline was not only access to stock
but also access to technical support. The established airline
benefited by making a revenue that was higher than the
incremental costs.
What was missing from the market at that time however was
a mechanism to efficiently finance these assets. The legacy
carriers could only offer access to the stock they already
owned and had no appetite to make additional investment,
particularly into parts they could not utilise on their own
eet. So this was only a partial solution. Users often felt they
received an indifferent service and had a strong suspicion that
if there was a problem the parent airline would protect its own
interests rst. What was missing was a parts-savvy commercial
organisation with access to capital and the willingness to
invest yet the value of these highly mobile assets had to be
determined.
Still, nancing stock did become a third-wave interest the
rst being aircraft and the second, engines and it is now well
established and offers a number of options.
It is worth noting that component transactions are more
complicated than lending against aircraft or engine assets.
Fundamentally, this is driven by the sheer quantity of line
items, which can reach into the tens of thousands. Added to
that, lenders, particularly those in the USA who were the rst
to approach the market, had negative experiences in this asset
class. In an attempt to identify any unencumbered collateral for
secured nancing, borrowers often included large packages of
spare parts inventory. Very little discipline was applied to the
identication and selection of spare parts collateral and often
things went missing. The collateral consisted of low-value
expendables, consumables, and inventory supporting obsolete
aircraft types. The market significantly matured since these
early attempts and as airlines continue to rationalise their eets,
inventory obsolescence risk is mitigated.
ASSET BASED FINANCING:
RENT DONT BUY
Secured nancing is inherently less costly than
unsecured by virtue of a lien afforded on the
underlying assets. Put simply; you identify
assets you already own and borrow money
against them. A number of airlines that filed
for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the US
worked successfully with lenders to implement
these types of facilities. It is approached very
conservatively by virtue of the low-value
ascribed to spare parts in a down market (often
the driver of Chapter 11 lings). Also, much of
the remaining value is based on the assumption
that the operator will emerge from bankruptcy
and continue to operate any cessation of
operations compels the lender to dispose of assets
in uncertain times. But, if all goes well the airline
borrows potentially 20 to 30 per cent of the book
value of the asset, which becomes valuable cash
to ensure survival.
The idea that renting an asset is cheaper than
buying an asset requires careful analysis. In
addition to obvious cash flow considerations,
accounting and tax influence the decision.
The market for the leasing of aircraft parts is
still maturing but there is a good case for it,
particularly as it offers flexibility to structure
solutions suitable to a users needs.
The case is really driven by two factors;
economies of scale and specic asset selection.
Regarding specific asset selection, airlines
often nd it difcult to take a generic approach
to provisioning specific part numbers and
quantities must be chosen based upon the eet
composition, which will undoubtedly change as
the business evolves. While it is easier to trade
in and out of aircraft types, it is difficult for a
company to transition itself from spare part assets
unless the organisation is specically designed to
generate revenue from spare parts.
WHERE NEXT?
Asset nancing continues to grow in line with the air transport industry.
Similarly, investment in the asset nance industry has grown rapidly with
an increasing demand for newer, more fuel efficient and safer aircraft.
Rotable assets are seeing a similar trend. The business model of MROs for
legacy carriers is proving inadequate, except in certain instances where they
achieve economies of scale. Although some are responding to the market
changes, many are not. Organisations are responding to this emerging
demand by developing mechanisms to provide nance to the evolving MRO
market and to invest directly into it.
The market continues to mature and consolidate those who do not
utilise these new opportunities will face higher costs, while others will
make nancially and operationally motivated decisions to access such
arrangements. For the latter companies, one should expect to see a change
in behaviour as deals become larger and longer term. Airlines need to
make decisions that are smarter than ever before one of which should
be to consider the long-term solutions to stocking spares.
Airlines are in the business of selling seats and
do not have an efficient mechanism to dispose
of surplus stock. As airlines re-equip, they must
repeat this exercise. When valuing an airlines
inventory one will typically nd that half of the
assets are not being used, one quarter are slow
moving and the final quarter see regular use.
However, this is not necessarily because of poor
decision-making.
In most cases an airline inventory is not the
result of a single planned investment decision
but rather a series of decisions over time which
together result in an undesirable mix of parts.
This would not happen if the airline had instead
made a decision to buy a service level from
a parts pool, rather than simply buying and
stocking parts.
Any global aviation business will be aware that in certain countries, in certain circumstances, payments
help things happen. Sometimes, that is just the way things are done. But the UKs new Bribery Act will
make what seems a normal course of action, an illegal one. Richard Mumford, partner and head of the
dispute division at ASB Law, a specialist in aviation law, explains.
The UK Bribery Act:
Dont get caught out
THE LEGISLATION IN EFFECT
To put this into context, consider the following example. An
executive jet owned by a UK operator sits on the tarmac in
a foreign country. It is hot, and the important clients sitting
on board are eager to return home. The aircraft needs fuel to
takeoff, so the UK crew approach the local ofcials and ask to
buy some. The sale of fuel in that country is heavily regulated
and can only be purchased from a single ofcial source. The
ofcial in charge of the fuel tells the crew that they can only
buy fuel if they pay him $1,000 as a personal fee to send over
a tanker and re-fuel the aircraft. This happens every time they
land in this particular country and they have the cash ready.
They pay the ofcial; he sends over the tanker, re-fuels the
aircraft and charges them for the fuel.
The crew see nothing wrong with this. In that country it is
customary to pay the ofcial (all the airlines do) and, after all,
they are paying him to do his job, not to do something improper
or illegal. None of this takes place in the UK. Surely this will
not be affected by the Bribery Act?
Unfortunately, they would be wrong. Under the act, it will be
an offence to seek to inuence any foreign ofcial through the
payment of a bribe. The crew who pay and/ or offer the bribe
could be guilty of an offence that carries a sentence of up to 10
years in prison. If the aircraft operator has not taken adequate
steps to prevent bribery in its business, then it too will be
guilty of an offence and could face an unlimited ne. Its senior
management could be prosecuted if they consent to, or connive
in bribery. Only the foreign ofcial who demanded the bribe
remains unaffected.
Many aviation business managers reading this article can
see the problem that arises from this example. What were the
crew supposed to do? Had they refused to pay, they would
have been unable to leave. This could have caused signicant
delay, claims for compensation and loss of future business from
passengers, a damaged reputation and difculties next time
the operator ies into this particular airport. Unfortunately, the
Bribery Act has no defence of duress (i.e. it is not good enough
to claim that the crew had no real option but to pay the bribe).
Even if it did, this situation is precisely what the act is designed
to tackle.
T
HE UKS NEW BRIBERY ACT 2010 will instil a blanket
ban on all forms of bribery, altering the way UK companies
operate and potentially limiting their trade.
The new legislation will cast the US Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act and the Alien Tort Statute, both of which only
impair the ability of US citizens to pay bribes abroad, as its
benign counterparts. The tougher UK legislation covers
all acts of bribery, whether fullled or not; it covers bribery
both in the UK and abroad; and introduces criminal offences
committed by companies.
An OECD convention sought to outlaw
the bribery of foreign ofcials, but required
implementation into local law. It has taken
the UK 14 years to do so [but] it was
worth the wait, because the Bribery Act
appears to go signicantly beyond our
OECD commitment.
Scary, isnt it?
Only UBM Aviation has everything you need to see ahead. Sort of and not sure wont cut it any more. Get
a clear view of the aviation industry and move forward with confdence. Go with the people who have made
aviation intelligence their business for more than 80 years. We give you the freedom to innovate.
www.ubmaviation.com
The world without UBM Aviation
data analytics consulting events media
To understand why, some background to the act is required.
In essence, bribery and corruption in developing countries
is considered to distort and harm their legitimate growth
into modern, free economies with opportunities for all. An
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) convention in 1997, which was signed by 38 countries,
sought to outlaw the bribery of foreign ofcials, but required
implementation into local law. It has taken the UK 14 years
to do so under signicant external political pressure, chiey
from the US. But from a political (rather than commercial)
perspective, it was worth the wait, because the Bribery Act
appears to go signicantly beyond our OECD commitment.
The act was drafted to catch every potential instance of
bribery. Indeed, no bribe need ever be paid; a mere offer of a
bribe is sufcient and can be prosecuted, even if the bribe is
never paid and the improper conduct never takes place.
Politically, this is easy to understand you cannot eradicate
bribery by having legislation that essentially prohibits someone
from paying bribes, unless they really feel they need to.
Evidence of payment or improper conduct may also be hard to
establish.
Commercially, the issue is much more blurred. Many
businesses expect to occasionally pay to get things done in
foreign countries. But the act applies to all companies, even
charities that do business overseas so the aviation industry,
while hit hard because of its global reach, need not feel that it
has been singled out for special treatment.
It is also easy to understand why those states that have
implemented anti-bribery legislation might feel aggrieved at
those that have not. Consider another scenario. A country has
major oil reserves being exploited at a number of installations
400 miles up the coast from the capital. There is a steady ow
of personnel and equipment from the main airport in the
capital to a smaller landing strip at the oilelds.
The airports are controlled by the state and they put to tender
a single contract for the operation of those routes by helicopter
and aircraft. Company A clearly puts in the best tender.
However, Company B pays bribes to the ofcials making the
decisions. The ofcials offer to award the contract to Company
A if they will only match the bribes. Company A is based
in a country where it is an offence to pay bribes, so refuses.
Company B is not, so is awarded the contract.
Not fair, not right, but it happens all of the time. Even if
Company A had won the tender, it is quite possible that unless
it was prepared to pay bribes to gain access to maintenance,
fuel or other logistical needs, then its supply chain would have
dried-up, making the contract unworkable.
The only way to make this effective is to persuade everyone to
refuse to pay bribes but that ideal, could it ever to be reached,
is a long-term goal. Neither Russia nor China are signatories. Nor
is any country in the Middle East or Asia beyond Japan, South
Korea and Israel. South Africa is the only signatory in Africa.
WHAT CONSTITUTES A BRIBE?
Bribes do not only come in the form of cash-stuffed envelopes.
They can include administrative fees, commissions, grease
payments and other forms of apparent charging. More than
that, a bribe can be any advantage given to another, so could
include lavish hospitality, honours, political favours or other
benets without a strict monetary value.
The key to understanding whether something is, or is not, a
bribe is the purpose for paying it. If the purpose is to persuade
another person to do something improper, then it is a bribe. In
the case of a foreign ofcial, the test is even wider it only has
to be intended to inuence them in their role, whether it is to
do something proper or not. That is why the crew in the rst
example committed the offence, even though they simply paid
an ofcial to do his job.
Whether something is improper is crucially judged by how
a reasonable person would consider that conduct, were it to
take place in the UK. For these purposes, local foreign custom
is irrelevant. The only exception is where a foreign country
has written legislation expressly allowing bribery, but in the
opinion of the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), no such country
currently exists.
Scary, isnt it?
Only UBM Aviation has everything you need to see ahead. Sort of and not sure wont cut it any more. Get
a clear view of the aviation industry and move forward with confdence. Go with the people who have made
aviation intelligence their business for more than 80 years. We give you the freedom to innovate.
www.ubmaviation.com
The world without UBM Aviation
data analytics consulting events media
YOUR DETAILS
Full Name
Job Title
Company Address
City State
Post Code Zip Code
Country
Phone Fax
Email
Airlines
Administration
Technical
Operations
Manufacturer
Airframe
Avionics
Buyer Furnished Eqpt
Components
Engines
Helicopters
Raw Materials
Simulators
Ohaul Base
Airframes
Engines/Components
FBO
Allied to Field
Advertising Agency
Other please specify
Aviation Services
Academic Institution
Airforce
Airport
Airshow/Conference Co
Aviation Association
Form invalid unless fully completed, signed and dated
Sign here if you wish to receive
Aircraft Technology Engineering & Maintenance
Airline Fleet Management
Signature
Date
Upgrade your UBM Aviation subscription to a paid account with
our Special Offer Rates to receive extra benets not available to
those with a complimentary subscription. These include:
Free Access to digital back issues of ALL UBMA publications;
Exclusive online database access;
Financing & Investing in Aircraft Annual Guide;
MRO Yearbook 2011;
The Engine Yearbook 2012 and Aerospace IT 2012.
It only takes a couple minutes to complete our online form and once
your order has been processed you will have immediate access to all
paid benets. Existing paid subscribers can use the promotional offer
to extend all current subscriptions.
STANDARD 2010 SUBSCRIPTION RATES
1 year = 150 (UK), $300 (USA), 170 (ROW)
2 years = 260 (UK), $520 (USA), 300 (ROW)
3 years = 350 (UK), $700 (USA), 410 (ROW)
Subscribe online at: www.ubmaviationnews.com/
Bank
Consultants/Brokers
Enthusiast
Government Body
Ground Support
Insurance
Leasing Company
Legal
Non Aviation Publishing
Parts Dealers
Public Relations
Publishing
Regulatory Body
Software
Tooling
NEW AFM iPhone / iPad App
AVAILABLE AT
iTunes NOW!
PLEASE INDICATE COMPANYS PRIMARY AREA OF ACTIVITY
SUBSCRIBE HERE
FOR THE FULL ISSUE
SPECIAL OFFER RATES
1 year = 45 (UK), $90 (USA), 55 (ROW)
2 year = 77 (UK), $144 (USA), 94 (ROW)
3 year = 102 (UK), $204 (USA), 126 (ROW)
If applying online, please quote SPECIAL OFFER CODE: UBMANP11
FAX to +44 20 7579 4848. Or send your completed form to:
UBM Aviation Publications, Subscription Department, Ludgate House,
245 Blackfriars Road, London SE1 9UY
Subs Ad 278 x 210 iPhone iPad app version_Layout 1 21/07/2011 13:33 Page 1
ADEQUATE STEPS
All this may seem a little gloomy, and unfortunately it is. A
business will need to demonstrate that it has taken adequate
steps to prevent bribery within its organisation. There are
a number of elements to this. First, it will need to enshrine
anti-bribery into the framework and culture of its business.
Employment contracts should outlaw bribery and a robust
anti-bribery policy should be put in place. But it needs to go
further than this. Staff should be trained and monitored to
ensure they understand and comply with their obligations.
This might be achieved through on-line training with
testing that allows a business to demonstrate a basic level of
understanding.
A business should also consider its interface with the
outside world. Robust terms and conditions should demand
compliance by any supplier or customer with the anti-bribery
legislation; there should be warnings and disclaimers on its
website and in its marketing literature; suppliers, agents and
brokers should be kept under particular scrutiny and control to
ensure that they do not cause the business to fall foul of the act.
Finally, senior management should be very careful not to
derogate from the restrictions and procedures put in place.
They should take a step back from their daily roles and pull
apart the processes of the company to identify areas that
are at particular risk of bribery, employing more resources to
anticipate and minimise that risk.
None of this can prevent a member of staff nding themselves
with an impossible choice to make for example, the thirsty
aircraft stuck on the tarmac. By law, they must decline to pay
and take the consequences, hoping that eventually the errant
official will relent. In practice, this may take weeks and so
be entirely unworkable. By paying the bribe, they, and quite
likely the operator, will commit an offence. But will they be
prosecuted for it?
It is dangerous to assume not, but in order for a prosecution
to take place in the UK, a number of things would need to
happen. Firstly, someone would have to tell the UK authorities
(the police). Who would do that in these circumstances?
Probably not the ofcial, though his government might if they
wish to clamp down on corruption. It is also unlikely that the
passengers would, as they are probably unaware that a bribe
has been paid. The crew could, but would risk prosecution
themselves. However and this is the biggest area of risk
a disgruntled employee might. Departing and embittered
employees are the biggest source of risk for this type of
situation, and it is very dangerous therefore, for a company to
assume that payment of bribes might never come to light.
Of course, even if they do, the police would need to establish
an evidential case to a criminal standard of proof (beyond
reasonable doubt), and persuade the Crown Prosecution
Service (CPS) to take a prosecution. This would require them to
consider it in the public interest and worth the use of resources.
The latter point may depend on what message the police and
the CPS are trying to promote at that time. Essentially, the
higher prole the offender and the offence, the more likely it is
to be prosecuted.
In the oilfields example, the risk is much greater because
a spurned tenderer will be highly likely to report a winning
bidder if bribery is suspected.
The government issued a consultation towards the end of
last year. It is due to publish guidance three months before the
act comes into force, although that guidance is now late. It is
imagined that they are wrestling with these issues, but in reality
it is unlikely that anything will be done to substantially temper
the effects of the act for businesses in the aviation industry. So
now is the time to take the steps outlined above, particularly to
consider the business and areas of risk, so that a strategy can be
developed to minimise or remove those risks and protect the
business.
However, high prole or more substantial businesses will be
advised to look more closely at what they do and how they do
it in order to demonstrate that they have taken adequate steps
to comply. Whatever size of business, this should be part of a
current agenda and not delayed for long.
Senior management should
be very careful not to derogate
from the restrictions and
procedures put in place. They
should take a step back from
their daily roles and pull
apart the processes of the
company to identify areas
that are at particular risk
of bribery, employing more
resources to anticipate and
minimise that risk.
YOUR DETAILS
Full Name
Job Title
Company Address
City State
Post Code Zip Code
Country
Phone Fax
Email
Airlines
Administration
Technical
Operations
Manufacturer
Airframe
Avionics
Buyer Furnished Eqpt
Components
Engines
Helicopters
Raw Materials
Simulators
Ohaul Base
Airframes
Engines/Components
FBO
Allied to Field
Advertising Agency
Other please specify
Aviation Services
Academic Institution
Airforce
Airport
Airshow/Conference Co
Aviation Association
Form invalid unless fully completed, signed and dated
Sign here if you wish to receive
Aircraft Technology Engineering & Maintenance
Airline Fleet Management
Signature
Date
Upgrade your UBM Aviation subscription to a paid account with
our Special Offer Rates to receive extra benets not available to
those with a complimentary subscription. These include:
Free Access to digital back issues of ALL UBMA publications;
Exclusive online database access;
Financing & Investing in Aircraft Annual Guide;
MRO Yearbook 2011;
The Engine Yearbook 2012 and Aerospace IT 2012.
It only takes a couple minutes to complete our online form and once
your order has been processed you will have immediate access to all
paid benets. Existing paid subscribers can use the promotional offer
to extend all current subscriptions.
STANDARD 2010 SUBSCRIPTION RATES
1 year = 150 (UK), $300 (USA), 170 (ROW)
2 years = 260 (UK), $520 (USA), 300 (ROW)
3 years = 350 (UK), $700 (USA), 410 (ROW)
Subscribe online at: www.ubmaviationnews.com/
Bank
Consultants/Brokers
Enthusiast
Government Body
Ground Support
Insurance
Leasing Company
Legal
Non Aviation Publishing
Parts Dealers
Public Relations
Publishing
Regulatory Body
Software
Tooling
NEW AFM iPhone / iPad App
AVAILABLE AT
iTunes NOW!
PLEASE INDICATE COMPANYS PRIMARY AREA OF ACTIVITY
SUBSCRIBE HERE
FOR THE FULL ISSUE
SPECIAL OFFER RATES
1 year = 45 (UK), $90 (USA), 55 (ROW)
2 year = 77 (UK), $144 (USA), 94 (ROW)
3 year = 102 (UK), $204 (USA), 126 (ROW)
If applying online, please quote SPECIAL OFFER CODE: UBMANP11
FAX to +44 20 7579 4848. Or send your completed form to:
UBM Aviation Publications, Subscription Department, Ludgate House,
245 Blackfriars Road, London SE1 9UY
Subs Ad 278 x 210 iPhone iPad app version_Layout 1 21/07/2011 13:33 Page 1
AIRCRAFT TRANSACTIONS JANUARY-JUNE 2011
EQUIP Model New Owner/Operator Previous Owner/Operator Serial No. or No. of
(Orders)/ [Options]
Engine Model Date of Manf. or First Exp. Deliv. Transaction Type Date
Source: OAG Fleet iNet
JANUARY
328-310 Jetran JHK Development 3160 PW306B 2000-06 Sold 2011.01.14
328-310 Petra Aviation Jetran 3160 PW306B 2000-06 Sold 2011.01.14
707-366C Israeli Air Force Wilmington Trust 20919 JT3D-7 1974-06 Sold 2011.01.19
717-2CM Blue1 SAS 55060 BR715A1-30 2000-06 Sub-Leased 2011.01.31
717-2BL BCC Leasing Aerocaribe 55167 BR715A1-30 2003-02 Returned 2011.01.19
737-247 Northrop Grumman Northrop Grumman 19605 JT8D-9A 1968-07 Transferred 2011.01.06
737-230 Conviasa Rutaca 22124 JT8D-15 1980-11 Sub-Leased 2011.01.01
737-2Y5 Business Aviation Group Aerolineas Galapagos 23847 JT8D-15A 1987-06 Returned 2011.01.18
737-2Y5 South Florida Leasing Business Aviation. 23847 JT8D-15A 1987-06 Sold 2011.01.18
737-2Y5 Belina Export South Florida Leasing 23847 JT8D-15A 1987-06 Sold 2011.01.21
737-2Y5 Business Aviation Group Aerolineas Galapagos 23848 JT8D-15A 1987-06 Returned 2011.01.18
737-2Y5 South Florida Leasing Business Aviation. 23848 JT8D-15A 1987-06 Sold 2011.01.18
737-2Y5 Belina Export South Florida 23848 JT8D-15A 1987-06 Sold 2011.01.21
737-2X6C Esperanza Aviation Aloha Air Cargo 23124 JT8D-17A 1984-07 Returned 2011.01.11
737-347 BCI Moscow Airlines 23183 CFM56-3B1 1985-04 Returned 2011.01.18
737-3T0(W) Continental Airlines Continental Airlines 23374 CFM56-3B1 1986-02 Sold 2011.01.18
737-3T0(W) As & L Continental Airlines 23374 CFM56-3B1 1986-02 Sold 2011.01.18
737-347 BCI Moscow Airlines 23442 CFM56-3B1 1986-05 Returned 2011.01.18
737-322 Security Pacic Leasing United Air Lines 24250 CFM56-3C1 1988-11 Returned 2011.01.27
737-322 Wells Fargo Wilmington Trust 24250 CFM56-3C1 1988-11 Sold 2011.01.27
737-3K2 Jetscape Aircraf Jetscape Aircraft 24327 CFM56-3B2 1989-04 Transferred 2011.01.25
737-3K2 NAS Jetscape Aircraft 24327 CFM56-3B2 1989-04 Leased 2011.01.25
737-382 Triton Aviation Airlift Service 24365 CFM56-3B2 1989-02 Returned 2011.01.28
737-33A Viva Aerobus Ansett Aviation 25010 CFM56-3C1 1991-02 Leased 2011.01.01
737-33A CIT Aerospace NAS 25033 CFM56-3B2 1991-03 Returned 2011.01.05
737-3M8 Southern Aircraft Consultancy Tag Aviation 25040 CFM56-3B2 1991-02 Transferred 2011.01.06
737-33A Tonle Sap Airlines Astraeus Airlines 25119 CFM56-3C1 1991-05 Sub-Leased 2011.01.18
737-3Y5 Boeing Capital Leasing Moscow Airlines 25614 CFM56-3C1 1993-04 Returned 2011.01.31
737-36N Aircraft Finance Trust Aft Trust-Sub 1 28563 CFM56-3C1 1997-07 Sold 2011.01.21
737-31S Deutsche Structured Finance Nouvelair Tunisie 29116 CFM56-3C1 1998-02 Returned 2011.01.10
737-4Y0 Iraqi Airways Eastok Avia 23980 CFM56-3C1 1988-12 Sub-Leased 2011.01.01
737-4K5 Sky Wells Fargo 24129 CFM56-3C1 1989-09 Leased 2011.01.07
737-4S3 Transalpine Leasing Boeing Capital 24165 CFM56-3C1 1989-04 Sold 2011.01.27
737-4S3 Transaero Airlines Transalpine Leasing 24165 CFM56-3C1 1989-04 Leased 2011.01.27
737-4S3 Transalpine Leasing Boeing Capital 24166 CFM56-3C1 1989-04 Sold 2011.01.25
737-4S3 Transaero Airlines Transalpine Leasing 24166 CFM56-3C1 1989-04 Leased 2011.01.25
737-4Q8 Aurora Leasing ACG Acquisition 24709 CFM56-3C1 1991-08 Sold 2011.01.05
737-4B6 Buraq Air Transport Celestial Aviation 26531 CFM56-3C1 1993-03 Leased 2011.01.11
737-4K5 Wells Fargo Japan Transocean Air 27102 CFM56-3C1 1992-10 Sold 2011.01.10
737-46J Twelth Waha Lease RAK Airways 27213 CFM56-3C1 1994-02 Returned 2011.01.01
737-476 Qantas Airways Jetconnect 28152 CFM56-3C1 1996-10 Returned 2011.01.31
737-4M0 Sailplane Leasing Garuda Indonesian 29204 CFM56-3C1 1998-06 Returned 2011.01.01
737-4M0 Aercap Sailplane Leasing 29204 CFM56-3C1 1998-06 Sold 2011.01.15
737-4M0 Nok Airlines Aercap 29204 CFM56-3C1 1998-06 Leased 2011.01.15
737-4M0 Celestial Aviation Garuda Indonesian 29205 CFM56-3C1 1998-06 Returned 2011.01.01
737-548(W) Barkham Associates Air Baltic 24919 CFM56-3B1 1990-11 Returned 2011.01.01
737-548 Jetscape Aviation Jetscape Aviation 25737 CFM56-3B1 1992-02 Transferred 2011.01.25
737-548 Rossiya Airlines Jetscape Aviation 25737 CFM56-3B1 1992-02 Leased 2011.01.25
737-548 Jetscape Aviation Jetscape Aviation 25739 CFM56-3B1 1992-03 Transferred 2011.01.25
737-548 Rossiya Airlines Jetscape Aviation 25739 CFM56-3B1 1992-03 Leased 2011.01.25
737-524(W) Continental Airlines Wells Fargo 28911 CFM56-3C1 1997-11 Lease-Buyout 2011.01.14
737-524(W) Continental Airlines Continental Airlines 28911 CFM56-3C1 1997-11 Sold 2011.01.19
737-524(W) Wells Fargo Continental Airlines 28911 CFM56-3C1 1997-11 Sold 2011.01.19
737-524(W) Continental Airlines Wells Fargo Bank 28912 CFM56-3C1 1997-12 Lease-Buyout 2011.01.21
737-7BK CIT Aerospace CIT Leasing 30617 CFM56-7B22 2001-03 Sold 2011.01.28
737-790(W) Lucky Air ILFC 30663 CFM56-7B24 2003-09 Leased 2011.01.23
737-7BX(W) Southwest Airlines ACG Acquisition 30745 CFM56-7B20 2001-11 Leased 2011.01.28
737-73V Macquarie Easyjet 32423 CFM56-7B20 2003-12 Returned 2011.01.21
737-73V BOC Aviation Easyjet 32426 CFM56-7B20 2004-03 Returned 2011.01.30
737-790(W) Ethiopian Airlines CIT Group 33012 CFM56-7B24 2003-03 Leased 2011.01.09
737-790(W) Asky Airlines Ethiopian Airlines 33012 CFM56-7B24 2003-03 Sub-Leased 2011.01.10
737-7BD(W) 1263343 Alberta Enerjet 33920 CFM56-7B20 2005-06 Returned 2011.01.20
737-7BD(W) ACG Enerjet 33920 CFM56-7B20 2005-06 Returned 2011.01.20
737-7CT(W) ACG Boeing 38096 CFM56-7B22 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.20
737-7CT(W) Westjet ACG 38096 CFM56-7B22 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.20
737-7CT(W) Westjet Boeing 40338 CFM56-7B22 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.27
737-7KG(W) Dubai Aerospace Boeing (-32) CFM56-7B22 - Cncl-Order 2011.01.01
737-7DM(W) US Air Force Boeing 40706 CFM56-7B27 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.17
737-700(W) Boeing Business Jets Boeing (1) CFM56-7B27 2012-12 Ordered 2011.01.24
737-8K2(W) Enerjet Transavia Airlines 28248 CFM56-7B27 2002-04 Sub-Leased 2011.01.12
737-883 SAS Sas Struktur 28318 CFM56-7B26 2000-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.27
737-8K2(W) Jet2 Transavia Airlines 28375 CFM56-7B26 1998-07 Sub-Leased 2011.01.05
737-85F Macquarie Air Berlin 28821 CFM56-7B26 1998-10 Returned 2011.01.13
737-85F Calima De Aviacion Macquarie Aircraft 28821 CFM56-7B26 1998-10 Leased 2011.01.13
737-85F Enter Air Macquarie Aircraft 28823 CFM56-7B26 1998-11 Leased 2011.01.17
737-8AS(W) Germic Moscow Airlines 29936 CFM56-7B24 2002-10 Returned 2011.01.20
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-8AS(W) Germic Moscow Airlines 29937 CFM56-7B24 2002-10 Returned 2011.01.20
737-8BK(W) CIT Aerospace Virgin Blue Airlines 30620 CFM56-7B26 2001-10 Returned 2011.01.24
737-8Q8(W) Air Jamaica Caribbean Airlines 30645 CFM56-7B26 2002-04 Sub-Leased 2011.01.10
737-8Q8(W) T'way Air ILFC 30654 CFM56-7B27 2003-02 Leased 2011.01.21
737-8Q8(W) ILFC Yemenia 30661 CFM56-7B26 2002-07 Returned 2011.01.17
737-8Q8(W) Sunwing Airlines Eurocypria Airlines 30671 CFM56-7B27 2003-03 Returned 2011.01.27
737-8Q8(W) ILFC Eurocypria Airlines 30671 CFM56-7B27 2003-03 Returned 2011.01.27
737-8Q8(W) Flyrey MAS 30702 CFM56-7B26 2006-05 Sub-Leased 2011.01.12
737-8Q8(W) Flyrey MAS 30703 CFM56-7B26 2006-05 Sub-Leased 2011.01.01
737-8Q8(W) Wells Fargo ILFC 30720 CFM56-7B26 2007-03 Sold 2011.01.27
737-8AS(W) RBS Aerospace Ryanair 33557 CFM56-7B24 2003-12 Returned 2011.01.26
737-881(W) All Nippon Airways Arieru Leasing 33901 CFM56-7B26 2010-10 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.28
737-86N(W) Neos Celestial Aviation 34257 CFM56-7B26 2006-07 Leased 2011.01.26
737-8AS(W) Ryanair Boeing 35036 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.28
737-890(W) Alaska Airlines Boeing 35201 CFM56-7B27 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.25
737-8HG(W) Air India Express Kai Ting Aircraft 36338 CFM56-7B26 2009-06 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.12
737-8HG(W) Kai Ting Aircraft Air India 36339 CFM56-7B26 2009-09 Sold 2011.01.12
737-8HG(W) Air India Express Kai Ting Aircraft 36339 CFM56-7B26 2009-09 Leased 2011.01.12
737-8HG(W) Air India Express Kai Ting Aircraft 36340 CFM56-7B26 2009-11 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.12
737-8K5(W) Tui Travel Boeing 37248 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.31
737-8K5(W) Thomson Airways Tui Travel 37248 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.31
737-8Q8(W) ILFC Boeing 38819 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.28
737-8Q8(W) Xl Airways France ILFC 38819 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.28
737-8JP(W) NAS Boeing 39045 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.27
737-8JP(W) JSA Intl Boeing Company 39045 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Sold 2011.01.27
737-8JP(W) NAS JSA International 39045 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.27
737-8U3(W) RBS Aerospace Boeing 39920 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.14
737-8U3(W) Garuda Airways RBS Aerospace 39920 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.14
737-89L(W) Air China Boeing 40015 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.31
737-8KN(W) Flydubai Boeing 40241 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.19
737-846(W) Japan Airlines Boeing 40350 CFM56-7B24 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.27
737-846(W) JJ Phoenix Boeing 40350 CFM56-7B24 2010-12 Sold 2011.01.27
737-846(W) Japan Airlines JJ Phoenix 40350 CFM56-7B24 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.27
737-82R(W) Pegasus Airlines Boeing 40720 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.24
737-890(W) Alaska Airlines Boeing (2) CFM56-7B26 2012-12 Ordered 2011.01.25
737-8H6(W) MAS Boeing (10) CFM56-7B26 2016-01 Ordered 2011.01.30
737-8FVERX Boeing Boeing 40595 CFM56-7B27 2010-12 Transferred 2011.01.22
737-8FVERX US Navy Boeing (6) CFM56-7BE27 2012-10 Ordered 2011.01.21
737-990ER(W) Alaska Airlines Boeing (13) CFM56-7B27 2014-03 Ordered 2011.01.25
737-990ER(W) Alaska Airlines Boeing [15] CFM56-7B27 2016-02 Optioned 2011.01.25
747-341 Air Atlanta Icelandic Saudi Arabian Airlines 24108 CF6-80C2B1 1988-04 Returned 2011.01.03
747-446 Aersale Japan Airlines 25260 CF6-80C2B1F 1991-08 Sold 2011.01.07
747-481 All Nippon Airways 25645 CF6-80C2B1F 1993-04 Returned 2011.01.25
747-446 Wells Fargo Japan Airlines 26362 CF6-80C2B1F 1999-01 Sold 2011.01.24
747-422 Atlas Air United Air Lines 26892 PW4056 1996-08 Leased 2011.01.18
757-232 Federal Express Wilmington Trust 22909 PW2037 1986-05 Sold 2011.01.07
757-232 Federal Express Wilmington Trust 22912 PW2037 1986-09 Sold 2011.01.04
757-251 Kellstrom Wells Fargo 23197 PW2037 1985-06 Sold 2011.01.26
757-23A(ETOPS) Astraeus Airlines Saudi Arabian Airlines 24292 RB211-535E4 1989-02 Returned 2011.01.12
757-236(ETOPS) Santa Barbara Airlines Pegasus Aviation 24370 RB211-535E4 1989-02 Leased 2011.01.04
757-236(ETOPS) Neodell Thomson Airways 25593 RB211-535E4 1992-05 Returned 2011.01.15
757-236(ETOPS) Federal Express Neodell 25593 RB211-535E4 1992-05 Sold 2011.01.21
757-2Q8(WETOPS) Wells Fargo ACG Acquisition 25624 PW2037 1993-03 Transferred 2011.01.28
757-2Q8(WETOPS) Delta Air Lines Wells Fargo 25624 PW2037 1993-03 Leased 2011.01.28
757-236 Federal Express British Airways 25806 RB211-535E4 1994-01 Sold 2011.01.12
757-256 Privilege Style Sa Airways 26241 RB211-535E4 1993-07 Returned 2011.01.10
757-28A(ETOPS) Aerolinea Principal Chile Mint Airways 26276 RB211-535E4 1996-02 Sub-Leased 2011.01.22
757-2Z0 SF Airlines Air China 27269 RB211-535E4 1994-04 Sold 2011.01.01
757-236 Thomas Cook Airlines Wells Fargo 29945 RB211-535E4 1999-05 Leased 2011.01.17
757-236 Thomas Cook Airlines Wells Fargo 29946 RB211-535E4 1999-06 Leased 2011.01.27
767-281 Cargo Aircraft Mgmt Abx Air 23141 CF6-80A 1984-11 Returned 2011.01.25
767-246 Dynamic Jetlease Au7 23213 JT9D-7R4D 1985-04 Sold 2011.01.05
767-2EYER(TT) Boeing Boeing Defense 33689 CF6-80C2B6FA 2007-01 Returned 2011.01.12
767-2EYER(TT) Italian Air Force Boeing Company 33689 CF6-80C2B6FA 2007-01 Sold 2011.01.12
767-3G5ER Wilmington Trust ILFC 24258 PW4060 1989-01 Sold 2011.01.10
767-3G5ER Hawaiian Airlines Wilmington Trust 24258 PW4060 1989-01 Leased 2011.01.10
767-383ER BCI Tui Airlines 24848 PW4060 1990-07 Returned 2011.01.26
767-383ER Global Knafaim Leasing BCI 24848 PW4060 1990-07 Sold 2011.01.27
767-383ER Business Air Global Knafaim Leasing 24848 PW4060 1990-07 Leased 2011.01.27
767-319ER Omni Air Omni viation 24875 CF6-80C2B6 1991-05 Leased 2011.01.31
767-3Y0ER GMG Airlines Aerousa. 24948 PW4060 1991-06 Leased 2011.01.13
767-3Q8ER China Eastern Shanghai Airlines 28207 PW4060 1998-03 Sub-Leased 2011.01.01
767-36DER China Eastern Shanghai Airlines 35155 PW4062 2006-07 Leased 2011.01.01
767-36DER China Eastern Shanghai Airlines 35156 PW4062 2006-11 Leased 2011.01.01
767-381ER(W) All Nippon Airways Titan Leasing 40565 CF6-80C2B6F 2010-10 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.31
767-381ER All Nippon Airways Boeing 40566 CF6-80C2B6F 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.17
777-212ER Euro Atlantic Airways Biman Bangladesh 28513 TRENT892B 1998-05 Returned 2011.01.31
777-260LR Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 40772 GE90-110B1L 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.26
777-39MER Air France Boeing 37434 GE90-115B 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.20
777-39MER ALC Boeing Company 37434 GE90-115B 2010-12 Sold 2011.01.20
777-39MER Air Austral ALC 37434 GE90-115B 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.20
777-3F2ER Turk Hava Yollari Boeing 40710 GE90-115B 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.24
(Orders)/ [Options]
777-323ER American Airlines Boeing (2) GE90-115B 2012-10 Ordered 2011.01.18
A300B4-622R Wells Fargo Japan Airlines 641 PW4158 1992-05 Sold 2011.01.20
A310-222V Phoenix Aircraft Air Bagan 419 JT9D-7R4E1 1986-04 Returned 2011.01.14
A310-304 Global Principal Finance Royal Jordanian 416 CF6-80C2A2 1986-03 Sold 2011.01.07
A318-111 Avianca Wells Fargo 2328 CFM56-5B8/P 2004-10 Leased 2011.01.26
A319-112 CIT Leasing Royal Falcon Jordan 1124 CFM56-5B6/2P 1999-10 Returned 2011.01.23
A319-112 Wells Fargo Wilmington Trust 1124 CFM56-5B6/2P 1999-10 Sold 2011.01.23
A319-112 TACA Wells Fargo 1598 CFM56-5B6/P 2001-10 Leased 2011.01.21
A319-112 Lan Airlines Wells Fargo 1612 CFM56-5B6/P 2001-10 Leased 2011.01.10
A319-112 Aerolineas Galapagos ILFC 1866 CFM56-5B6/P 2002-11 Leased 2011.01.11
A319-132 ILFC Mandala Airlines 2784 V2524-A5 2006-05 Returned 2011.01.13
A319-132 ILFC Mandala Airlines 2797 V2524-A5 2006-05 Returned 2011.01.13
A319-112 Whitney US Leasing Wells Fargo 3790 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-02 Sold 2011.01.18
A319-112 Whitney US Leasing Wells Fargo 4275 CFM56-5B6/3 2010-04 Sold 2011.01.10
A319-112 Brussels Airlines Whitney Leasing 4275 CFM56-5B6/3 2010-04 Leased 2011.01.14
A319-132 Lan Airlines Airbus 4563 V2524-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.26
ACJ319-115 Aircraft Rental Leasing Global Jet Aircraft 2837 CFM56-5B7/P 2006-08 Sold 2011.01.13
ACJ319-115 Investec Intl Aircraft Rental Leasing. 2837 CFM56-5B7/P 2006-08 Leased 2011.01.13
ACJ319-115 Reliance Commercial Reliance Commercial Pvt. 2837 CFM56-5B7/P 2006-08 Sub-Leased 2011.01.13
ACJ319-115 Airbus Volkswagen Ag 4024 CFM56-5B7/3 2009-09 Leased 2011.01.01
A320-214 Unknown Lotus Airline 1054 CFM56-5B4/2P 1999-06 Returned 2011.01.21
A320-214 Celestial Aviation AFS Investments 1171 CFM56-5B4/P 2000-01 Sold 2011.01.14
A320-214 Hello Celestial Aviation 1171 CFM56-5B4/P 2000-01 Leased 2011.01.14
A320-233 Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 1339 V2527E-A5 2000-10 Transferred 2011.01.25
A320-233 Tam Linhas Aereas Wells Fargo 1339 V2527E-A5 2000-10 Leased 2011.01.25
A320-214 ILFC Turkuaz Airlines 2048 CFM56-5B4/P 2003-06 Returned 2011.01.28
A320-214 Sky Airline Air Malta 2665 CFM56-5B4/P 2005-12 Sub-Leased 2011.01.03
A320-214 Air Berlin Belair Airlines 2991 CFM56-5B4/P 2006-12 Returned 2011.01.21
A320-214 Azerbaijan Airlines Air Berlin 2991 CFM56-5B4/P 2006-12 Leased 2011.01.21
A320-232 Amentum Leasing Mandala Airlines 3524 V2527-A5 2008-06 Sold 2011.01.31
A320-232 Amentum Leasing Mandala Airlines 3543 V2527-A5 2008-06 Sold 2011.01.31
A320-212 Aerco Mandala Airlines 391 CFM56-5A3 1992-12 Returned 2011.01.13
A320-212 Wells Fargo Aerco 391 CFM56-5A3 1992-12 Sold 2011.01.26
A320-211 Smartlynx Airlines Israir 426 CFM56-5A1 1993-04 Returned 2011.01.07
A320-214 Philippine Airlines Avolon 4415 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-09 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.01
A320-214 Air Philippines Air Philippines 4415 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-09 Sub-Leased 2011.01.02
A320-214 Juneyao Airlines Airbus 4429 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.13
A320-232 Shenzhen Airlines Airbus 4435 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.21
A320-214 Philippine Airlines Avolon 4504 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-11 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.01
A320-214 Air Philippines Air Philippines 4504 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-11 Sub-Leased 2011.01.02
A320-214 Air Arabia Airbus 4539 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.06
A320-233 BOC Aviation Airbus 4543 V2527E-A5 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.12
A320-233 Arcu Aircraft Leasing Airbus 4543 V2527E-A5 2010-12 Sold 2011.01.12
A320-233 Lan Airlines Arcu Aircraft Leasing 4543 V2527E-A5 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.12
A320-232 CIT Leasing Airbus 4548 V2527-A5 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.17
A320-232 Spirit Airlines CIT Leasing 4548 V2527-A5 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.17
A320-232 British Airways Airbus 4551 V2527-A5 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.18
A320-232 Air Lease Airbus 4553 V2527-A5 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.27
A320-232 Air New Zealand Air Lease Corp 4553 V2527-A5 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.27
A320-214 Easyjet Airbus 4554 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.06
A320-214 GECAS Airbus 4555 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.31
A320-214 Acquarius Airbus 4555 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sold 2011.01.31
A320-214 Star Flyer Acquarius 4555 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.31
A320-216 AirAsia Airbus 4557 CFM56-5B6/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.20
A320-216 Thai AirAsia Airasia 4557 CFM56-5B6/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.20
A320-214 ACG Airbus 4558 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.20
A320-214 Bank Of Utah Airbus 4558 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sold 2011.01.20
A320-214 Virgin America Bank Of Utah 4558 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.20
A320-214 AFS Investments Airbus 4559 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sold 2011.01.25
A320-214 Virgin America AFS Investments 4559 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.25
A320-214 AWAS Airbus 4562 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.18
A320-214 AWAS Airbus 4562 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sold 2011.01.18
A320-214 Frontier Airlines AWAS 4562 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.18
A320-214 Saudi Airlines GECAS 4564 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.31
A320-214 Air Berlin Airbus 4565 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.19
A320-214 Air Berlin GECAS 4565 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.19
A320-214 Air Arabia Airbus 4568 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.31
A320-214 Air Arabia Seagull 4568 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.31
A320-232 Aerventure Airbus 4569 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.28
A320-232 Hainan Airlines Aerventure 4569 V2527-A5 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.28
A320-232 China West Air Airbus 4569 V2527-A5 2011-01 Sub-Leased 2011.01.28
A320-214 Aer Lingus Airbus 4572 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.21
A320-214 Cebu Pacic Air Airbus 4574 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.25
A320-214 BOC Aviation Airbus 4579 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.31
A320-214 Aeroot Airlines BOC Aviation 4579 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.01.31
A320-214 Niki Luftfahrt Airbus 4581 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.27
A320-214 Lift Ib Spain Spring Airlines 879 CFM56-5B4/P 1998-08 Returned 2011.01.07
A320-214 Senegal Airlines Lift Ib Spain 879 CFM56-5B4/P 1998-08 Leased 2011.01.07
A321-231 Asiana Airlines Wells Fargo 1174 V2533-A5 2000-02 Leased 2011.01.31
A321-231 Asiana Airlines AWAS 1970 V2533-A5 2003-05 Leased 2011.01.07
A321-231 Air Busan AWAS 1970 V2533-A5 2003-05 Sub-Leased 2011.01.07
A321-211 Bellevue Aircraft Leasing Atlasjet International 2117 CFM56-5B3/P 2003-12 Returned 2011.01.14
A321-231 Wind Rose Easyjet 2462 V2533-A5 2005-04 Leased 2011.01.27
A321-231 Wind Rose Easyjet 2682 V2533-A5 2006-01 Leased 2011.01.28
A321-211 Saudi Airlines Airbus 4542 CFM56-5B3/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.24
A321-231 Lufthansa Airbus 4560 V2533-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.01.12
(Orders)/ [Options]
A321-211(W) Thomas Cook Airlines Airbus (12) CFM56-5B3/3 2014-08 Ordered 2011.01.25
A330-243 MTAD Airbus 1186 TRENT772B-60 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.14
A330-343E Aerolinea Principal Chile Iberworld Airlines 1097 TRENT772B-60 2010-02 Sub-Leased 2011.01.05
A330-343 Air China Airbus 1187 TRENT772C-60 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.25
A330-343E Swiss International Airbus 1188 TRENT772B-60 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.21
A330-343E Saudi Airlines Airbus 1189 TRENT772B-60 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.12
A330-343 HKIA Leasing Airbus 1190 TRENT772B-60 2010-12 Delivered 2011.01.25
A330-343 Hainan Airlines HKIA Leasing 1190 TRENT772B-60 2010-12 Leased 2011.01.25
A330-303 GECAS Airbus (2) CF6-80E1A3 2012-01 Ordered 2011.01.24
A330-302 GECAS Airbus (10) CF6-80E1A4B 2014-10 Ordered 2011.01.24
A330-300 Tui Travel Airbus (2) 2015-04 Ordered 2011.01.27
A340-313X Hi Fly Adagold Aviation 117 CFM56-5C4 1995-08 Returned 2011.01.01
A340-313X Adagold Aviation Adagold Aviation 117 CFM56-5C4 1995-08 Sub-Leased 2011.01.02
A340-313X Hi Fly Air Algerie 450 CFM56-5C4 2002-01 Returned 2011.01.01
A340-313X Adagold Aviation Air Algerie 450 CFM56-5C4 2002-01 Sub-Leased 2011.01.02
A380-842 Qantas Airways Airbus 050 TRENT972-84 2009-08 Delivered 2011.01.31
A380-842 Qantas Airways Qf Eca A380 050 TRENT972-84 2009-08 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.31
A380-842 Qantas Airways Airbus 055 TRENT972-84 2010-07 Delivered 2011.01.13
A380-842 Qantas Airways Qf Eca A380 055 TRENT972-84 2010-07 Sale-Leaseback 2011.01.13
A380-841 Asiana Airlines Airbus (6) TRENT970-84 2014-04 Ordered 2011.01.06
FEBRUARY
717-2K9 Blue1 Bavaria Leasing 55053 BR715A1-30 1999-12 Leased 2011.02.19
717-231 Airtran Airways Hawk Leasing 55074 BR715A1-30 2000-07 Leased 2011.02.28
717-231 Airtran Airways BCC Leasing 55081 BR715A1-30 2000-12 Leased 2011.02.07
727-21 Al Salam Aircraft Express Camel Aviation 19006 JT8D-7A 1966-03 Sold 2011.02.01
737-291 OH Capital Assets Cavalier Sports Marketing 21069 JT8D-9A 1975-04 Sold 2011.02.14
737-205 Icaro Express Arrivair 22022 JT8D-17A 1979-10 Sold 2011.02.15
737-228 Trigana Air Service Wells Fargo 23004 JT8D-15A 1983-01 Leased 2011.02.01
737-3H4 Innity Trading Wells Fargo 22947 CFM56-3B1 1985-09 Sold 2011.02.18
737-3T0(W) Continental Airlines Continental Airlines 23375 CFM56-3B1 1986-02 Sold 2011.02.17
737-3T0(W) As & L Continental Airlines 23375 CFM56-3B1 1986-02 Sold 2011.02.17
737-3S3 ACG Acquisition Aerolineas Galapagos 23787 CFM56-3B2 1987-03 Returned 2011.02.17
737-322 Unknown Gol Transportes Aereos 23952 CFM56-3B2 1988-03 Returned 2011.02.18
737-322 Brickell Asset Mgmt Wells Fargo 24538 CFM56-3C1 1989-08 Sold 2011.02.28
737-33A Viva Aerobus Ansett Aviation 25032 CFM56-3C1 1991-02 Leased 2011.02.25
737-33A Webjet Linhas Aereas CIT Aerospace 25033 CFM56-3B2 1991-03 Leased 2011.02.04
737-33A Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 25138 CFM56-3B2 1991-10 Sold 2011.02.17
737-3Y5 BCC Leasing Boeing Capital 25614 CFM56-3C1 1993-04 Sold 2011.02.09
737-3L9 Celestial Aviation Norwegian 27337 CFM56-3C1 1994-03 Returned 2011.02.16
737-3L9 Sriwijaya Air Celestial Aviation 27337 CFM56-3C1 1994-03 Leased 2011.02.25
737-36M Ames-Camo Central Connect 28333 CFM56-3C1 1996-07 Returned 2011.02.01
737-36N Viva Aerobus Aircraft Finance Trust 28563 CFM56-3C1 1997-07 Leased 2011.02.11
737-4Y0 Sky King Wells Fargo 23866 CFM56-3C1 1988-07 Leased 2011.02.15
737-4C9 Enter Air Volito Aviation 25429 CFM56-3C1 1992-01 Leased 2011.02.04
737-436 Dillondell Air One [Italy] 25851 CFM56-3C1 1992-10 Returned 2011.02.01
737-46J East Air Twelth Waha Lease. 27213 CFM56-3C1 1994-02 Leased 2011.02.27
737-4K5 Wells Fargo Japan Transocean Air 27830 CFM56-3C1 1994-10 Sold 2011.02.28
737-548(W) Deta Air Barkham Associates 24919 CFM56-3B1 1990-11 Leased 2011.02.28
737-73S(W) Jet Time Elviria Leasing. 29083 CFM56-7B22 1999-09 Leased 2011.02.28
737-7BX(W) Southwest Airlines ALC B377 30746 30746 CFM56-7B20 2002-02 Leased 2011.02.28
737-73V(W) Wells Fargo Macquarie Aircraft 32423 CFM56-7B20 2003-12 Sold 2011.02.23
737-73V(W) Aeromexico Wells Fargo 32423 CFM56-7B20 2003-12 Leased 2011.02.28
737-7BD(W) Cameroon Airlines ACG 34480 CFM56-7B20 2006-03 Leased 2011.02.28
737-7H4(W) Southwest Airlines Boeing 36669 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.10
737-7H4(W) Southwest Airlines Boeing (1) CFM56-7B24 2011-11 Ordered 2011.02.07
737-83N(WETOPS) ILFC Saga Airlines 28249 CFM56-7B27B1 2002-04 Returned 2011.02.09
737-86N(W) Yakutia Airlines Oh Aircraft I-15 28617 CFM56-7B26 2000-02 Leased 2011.02.10
737-81Q BBAM Moscow Airlines 29052 CFM56-7B26 2000-04 Returned 2011.02.28
737-8F2(W) Turk Hava Yollari Anadolujet 29778 CFM56-7B26 1999-07 Returned 2011.02.01
737-8AS(W) Spicejet Wilmington Trust 29925 CFM56-7B24 2000-05 Leased 2011.02.18
737-883 SAS Moskovia Airlines 30467 CFM56-7B26 2000-07 Returned 2011.02.16
737-83N(WETOPS) ILFC Saga Airlines 30706 CFM56-7B27B1 2001-08 Returned 2011.02.09
737-838(W) Qantas Airways Boeing 34185 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.14
737-838(W) Jetconnect Qantas Airways 34185 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.14
737-86N(W) Celestial Amc Airlines 35220 CFM56-7B26 2007-09 Returned 2011.02.28
737-8K5(W) ACG Tui Travel 37252 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.17
737-8K5(W) Tuiy ACG 37252 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.17
737-8GJ(W) Spicejet Boeing 37365 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.04
737-8GJ(W) Virgodell Boeing 37365 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.04
737-8GJ(W) Spicejet Virgodell Ltd. 37365 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.04
737-86J(W) Pegasus Airlines Air Berlin 37746 CFM56-7B26 2009-11 Sold 2011.02.17
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-86J(W) Air Berlin Boeing 37760 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.15
737-86J(W) Air Berlin ALC B738 37760 37760 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.15
737-86N(W) GECAS Boeing 38011 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.01
737-86N(W) China Eastern GECAS 38011 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.01
737-86N(W) Shanghai Airlines Boeing 38011 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Sub-Leased 2011.02.01
737-86N(W) Xiamen Airlines GECAS 38012 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.16
737-86N(W) Shandong Airlines GECAS 38013 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Leased 2011.02.24
737-8K5(W) ACG Boeing 38097 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.16
737-8K5(W) Tuiy Nordic Bank Of Utah 38097 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.16
737-8JP(W) JSA Intl Boeing 39046 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.22
737-8JP(W) NAS JSA International 39046 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.22
737-81D(W) AWAS Boeing 39412 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.22
737-81D(W) AWAS Boeing 39412 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.22
737-81D(W) NAS AWAS 39412 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.22
737-8FE(W) RBS Aerospace Boeing 39921 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.02
737-8FE(W) RBS Aerospace Boeing 39921 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.02
737-8FE(W) Virgin Blue Airlines RBS Aerospace 39921 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.02
737-8KN(W) Flydubai Fly Leasing 40242 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.07
737-846(W) Japan Airlines Boeing 40351 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.09
737-846(W) JJ Phoenix Boeing Company 40351 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.09
737-846(W) Japan Airlines JJ Phoenix 40351 CFM56-7B24 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.09
737-86J(W) Air Berlin Boeing (-2) CFM56-7B26 - Cncl-Order 2011.02.01
747-281B(F) Veteran Airline Wells Fargo 24399 CF6-50E2 1989-07 Leased 2011.02.28
747-412 RB Leasing Pullmantur Air 26555 PW4056 1996-02 Returned 2011.02.28
747-412 El Al Wilmington Trust 26555 PW4056 1996-02 Sold 2011.02.28
757-251 Delta Air Lines US Bank 23846 PW2037 1988-07 Lease-Buyout 2011.02.07
757-21B ACG China Southern 25083 RB211-535E4 1991-03 Returned 2011.02.01
757-28A(ETOPS) Mint Airways Aerolinea Principal 26276 RB211-535E4 1996-02 Returned 2011.02.13
757-28A Westjet North American Airlines 26277 RB211-535E4 1994-12 Sub-Leased 2011.02.13
757-204 Jet2 Abbey National 26967 RB211-535E4 1993-01 Leased 2011.02.11
757-29J Aerolease Boeing Capital 27204 PW2037 1993-11 Sold 2011.02.18
757-29J Brickell Asset Mgmt Aerolease 27204 PW2037 1993-11 Sold 2011.02.18
767-246 Au7 Japan Airlines 23214 JT9D-7R4D 1985-06 Sold 2011.02.02
767-283ER ACG Avianca 24728 PW4060 1990-04 Returned 2011.02.01
767-3G5ER Wilmington Trust ILFC 24257 PW4060 1988-12 Sold 2011.02.03
767-3G5ER Hawaiian Airlines Wilmington Trust 24257 PW4060 1988-12 Leased 2011.02.03
767-383ER Icelandair Santa Barbara Airlines 25365 PW4060 1991-09 Returned 2011.02.22
767-33AER Aerosvit Airlines Royal Brunei Airlines 25533 PW4056 1992-08 Leased 2011.02.12
767-322ER Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 27114 PW4060 1993-02 Sold 2011.02.04
767-322ER United Air Lines Wells Fargo 27114 PW4060 1993-02 Leased 2011.02.04
767-322ER Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 27158 PW4060 1993-06 Sold 2011.02.04
767-322ER United Air Lines Wells Fargo 27158 PW4060 1993-06 Leased 2011.02.04
767-343ER GECAS Alitalia 30009 CF6-80C2B6F 1999-03 Returned 2011.02.20
767-346ER Japan Airlines Boeing 40366 CF6-80C2B7F 2010-11 Delivered 2011.02.03
767-316ER Lan Airlines Boeing (3) CF6-80C2B7F 2012-07 Ordered 2011.02.15
777-36NER GECAS Boeing 38290 GE90-115B 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.22
777-36NER Egyptair GECAS 38290 GE90-115B 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.22
777-319ER Air New Zealand Boeing 38406 GE90-115B 2010-12 Delivered 2011.02.15
777-319ER DAE Leasing Boeing Company 38406 GE90-115B 2010-12 Sold 2011.02.15
777-319ER Air New Zealand DAE Leasing 38406 GE90-115B 2010-12 Leased 2011.02.15
777-306ER Air France Boeing 39972 GE90-115B 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.07
777-306ER KLM Air France 39972 GE90-115B 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.07
777-3FXER Etihad Airways Boeing (3) GE90-115B 2013-04 Ordered 2011.02.07
777-32WER Tam Linhas Aereas Boeing (2) GE90-115B 2014-08 Ordered 2011.02.25
777-3M0ER Aeroot Airlines Boeing (8) GE90-115B 2013-10 Ordered 2011.02.28
787-9FX Etihad Airways Boeing (-4) GENX-1B70 - Cncl-Order 2011.02.01
A319-112 Calliope ILFC 2126 CFM56-5B6/P 2004-01 Sold 2011.02.28
A319-112 Aerolineas Galapagos Calliope Ltd. 2126 CFM56-5B6/P 2004-01 Leased 2011.02.28
A319-132 Belle Air Europe Belle Air 2335 V2524-A5 2004-10 Sub-Leased 2011.02.14
A319-112 Germania Unknown Lessor 3589 CFM56-5B6/3 2008-07 Leased 2011.02.24
A319-112 Brussels Airlines Whitney US Leasing 3790 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-02 Leased 2011.02.03
A319-132 Lan Airlines Bandurria Leasing 4598 V2524-A5 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.15
A319-132 Lan Airlines Bandurria Leasing . 4605 V2524-A5 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.17
ACJ319-115 Sonair China Sonangol 2675 CFM56-5B7/P 2006-02 Returned 2011.02.01
ACJ319-115 White Airways Sonair 2675 CFM56-5B7/P 2006-02 Sold 2011.02.02
ACJ319-133 Hilly Sky Group Airbus 4583 V2527M-A5 2011-02 Delivered 2011.02.22
ACJ319-100 Unknown Airbus (1) 2015-02 Ordered 2011.02.01
A320-211 GA Telesis British Airways 042 CFM56-5A1 1989-04 Returned 2011.02.28
A320-214 CIT LTU International 1385 CFM56-5B4/P 2000-12 Returned 2011.02.24
A320-214 Austrian Airlines CIT Leasing 1385 CFM56-5B4/P 2000-12 Leased 2011.02.24
(Orders)/ [Options]
A320-214 Genesis Lease LTU International 1441 CFM56-5B4/P 2001-02 Returned 2011.02.17
A320-214 Brussels Airlines Genesis 1441 CFM56-5B4/P 2001-02 Leased 2011.02.17
A320-214 CIT Leasing Air Jamaica 1747 CFM56-5B4/P 2002-02 Returned 2011.02.01
A320-214 Interjet CIT Leasing 1747 CFM56-5B4/P 2002-02 Leased 2011.02.02
A320-211 NBB Muse All Nippon Airways 219 CFM56-5A1 1991-06 Returned 2011.02.02
A320-232 CIT Leasing China Southern 2334 V2527-A5 2004-11 Returned 2011.02.21
A320-232 CIT Aerospace CIT Leasing 2334 V2527-A5 2004-11 Sold 2011.02.21
A320-232 ACG Wizz Air Hungary 2688 V2527-A5 2006-02 Returned 2011.02.01
A320-214 Azerbaijan Airlines Air Berlin 2865 CFM56-5B4/P 2006-07 Leased 2011.02.11
A320-211 Vueling Airlines Iberia 323 CFM56-5A1 1992-04 Leased 2011.02.01
A320-232 Lan Airlines Aeroasis 3264 V2527-A5 2007-09 Returned 2011.02.02
A320-232 Lan Airlines Aeroasis 3330 V2527-A5 2007-11 Returned 2011.02.02
A320-231 Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 376 V2500-A1 1992-10 Sold 2011.02.25
A320-216 AWAS Aircraft Purchase Fleet 3846 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-03 Sold 2011.02.23
A320-216 Alitalia AWAS 3846 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-03 Leased 2011.02.23
A320-216 AWAS Aircraft Purchase Fleet. 3906 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-04 Sold 2011.02.24
A320-216 Alitalia AWAS 3906 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-04 Leased 2011.02.24
A320-214 RBS Aerospace Easyjet 4157 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-12 Returned 2011.02.08
A320-214 Century Tokyo RBS Aerospace 4157 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-12 Sold 2011.02.08
A320-214 Easyjet Century Tokyo Leasing 4157 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-12 Leased 2011.02.08
A320-214 Easyjet Easyjet 4157 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-12 Sub-Leased 2011.02.08
A320-214 China Southern Airbus 4456 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.17
A320-232 Air China Airbus 4473 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.24
A320-232 Tiger Airways Airbus 4561 V2527-A5 2010-12 Delivered 2011.02.25
A320-214 Avianca Airbus 4567 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.10
A320-214 Wells Fargo Airbus 4567 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.10
A320-214 Avianca Wells Fargo 4567 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.10
A320-216 Indonesia AirAsia Airasia 4571 CFM56-5B6/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.01
A320-214 Juneyao Airlines Airbus 4573 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.15
A320-232 Lan Airlines Bandurria Leasing. 4576 V2527-A5 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.08
A320-232 Jetblue Airways Airbus 4578 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.10
A320-232 Hainan Airlines Airbus 4580 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.18
A320-232 Beijing Airlines Hainan Airlines 4580 V2527-A5 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.18
A320-216 Indonesia AirAsia Airasia 4582 CFM56-5B6/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.09
A320-232 Air Lease Airbus 4584 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.21
A320-232 Air New Zealand Air Lease Corp 4584 V2527-A5 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.21
A320-214 Spring Airlines GE Capital 4586 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.14
A320-214 Celestial Aviation Airbus 4589 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.17
A320-214 Aigle Azur Celestial 4589 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.17
A320-232 CIT Leasing Airbus 4592 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.22
A320-232 Wells Fargo Airbus 4592 V2527-A5 2011-01 Sold 2011.02.22
A320-232 Spirit Airlines Wells Fargo 4592 V2527-A5 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.22
A320-214 Niki Luftfahrt GECAS 4594 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.16
A320-232 BOC Aviation Airbus 4595 V2527-A5 2011-02 Delivered 2011.02.23
A320-232 Wells Fargo Airbus 4595 V2527-A5 2011-02 Sold 2011.02.23
A320-232 Spirit Airlines Wells Fargo 4595 V2527-A5 2011-02 Leased 2011.02.23
A320-232 Indigo Airbus 4603 V2527-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.17
A320-232 Indigo Orix Aviation 4603 V2527-A5 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.17
A320-232 Indigo Avolon 4609 V2527-A5 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.28
A320-232 Dubai Aerospace Airbus (-9) V2527-A5 - Cncl-Order 2011.02.01
A320-214 Dubai Aerospace Airbus (-9) CFM56-5B4/3 - Cncl-Order 2011.02.01
A321-211 MC Aviation Nouvelle Air Ivoire 1017 CFM56-5B3/P 1999-04 Returned 2011.02.27
A321-231 Atlasjet Intl AWAS 1950 V2533-A5 2003-03 Leased 2011.02.10
A321-231 Tam Linhas Aereas Airbus 4570 V2533-A5 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.22
A321-211 Niki Luftfahrt GECAS 4611 CFM56-5B3/3 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.24
A330-223 Hsh Nordbank Arik Air 1002 PW4168A 2009-05 Repossessed 2011.02.01
A330-243 Aircastle Advisor Airbus 1191 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.07
A330-243 South African Airways Aircastle Advisor 1191 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.07
A330-202 CIT Leasing Airbus 1198 CF6-80E1A4 2011-02 Delivered 2011.02.25
A330-202 Qantas Airways CIT Leasing 1198 CF6-80E1A4 2011-02 Leased 2011.02.25
A330-202 Jetstar Airways Airbus 1198 CF6-80E1A4 2011-02 Sub-Leased 2011.02.25
A330-223(HGW) Korean Air Lines Airbus 1200 PW4170 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.14
A330-223 China Southern Airbus 1202 PW4170 2011-02 Delivered 2011.02.22
A330-243 Zamrid Emirates 365 TRENT772B-60 2000-10 Returned 2011.02.01
A330-243 Zamrid Emirates 372 TRENT772B-60 2000-11 Returned 2011.02.01
A330-202 Novair Airlines Air Europa 814 CF6-80E1A4B 2007-02 Sub-Leased 2011.02.25
A330-202 Air Europa Novair Airlines 931 CF6-80E1A4B 2008-05 Returned 2011.02.25
A330-203 AirAsiaX Airbus (3) CF6-80E1A3 2012-04 Ordered 2011.02.28
A330-203 AirAsiaX Airbus [2] CF6-80E1A3 2014-03 Optioned 2011.02.28
A330-243 Aercap Airbus (-1) TRENT772B-60 - Cncl-Order 2011.02.01
A330-343E Saudi Airlines Airbus 1192 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.07
A330-343E Swiss International Airbus 1193 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.18
A330-343E Edelweiss Air Swiss International 1193 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.18
(Orders)/ [Options]
A330-343E Virgin Atlantic Airbus 1195 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.24
A330-343E Virgin Atlantic Aercap 1195 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.02.24
A330-343E Cathay Pacic Airbus 1196 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.25
A330-343 Air China Airbus 1199 TRENT772C-60 2011-02 Delivered 2011.02.21
A330-343E Aercap Airbus 1201 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Delivered 2011.02.28
A330-343E Virgin Atlantic Aercap 1201 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Leased 2011.02.28
A340-313X Unknown Lessor Air France 174 CFM56-5C4 1997-05 Returned 2011.02.07
A340-313X Finnair Wilmington Trust 174 CFM56-5C4 1997-05 Leased 2011.02.07
A340-313X Ames-Camo Iberia 414 CFM56-5C4 2001-05 Sold 2011.02.01
A350-900XWB Dubai Aerospace Airbus (-12) TRENTXWB-83 - Cncl-Order 2011.02.01
A380-800 Skymark Airlines Airbus (4) 2015-03 Ordered 2011.02.17
MARCH
737-229 Chilean Aeronautical Museum Lan Airlines 21596 JT8D-15 1978-08 Donated 2011.03.31
737-291 San Jose Sharks Sky King 21508 JT8D-9A 1978-04 Repossessed 2011.03.05
737-2Q8 Nas Air Georgian Star 21960 JT8D-15 1980-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.02
737-2T5 Georgian Star International Ave.Com 22395 JT8D-15 1980-12 Sold 2011.03.01
737-232 Global Aircraft Solutions Pamir Airways 23077 JT8D-15A 1983-10 Returned 2011.03.19
737-3T0 Continental Airlines Continental Airlines 23371 CFM56-3B1 1985-12 Sold 2011.03.29
737-3T0 As & L Continental Airlines 23371 CFM56-3B1 1985-12 Sold 2011.03.29
737-3T0 Unknown Global Air 23458 CFM56-3B1 1986-05 Returned 2011.03.01
737-3S3 Velvet Sky Safair 24059 CFM56-3B2 1988-01 Sub-Leased 2011.03.20
737-322 Midamerican Aerospace Wells Fargo 24250 CFM56-3C1 1988-11 Sold 2011.03.14
737-322 Apollo Aviation Wilmington Trust 24540 CFM56-3C1 1989-08 Sold 2011.03.25
737-322 Chanchangi Airlines Jordan Aviation 24662 CFM56-3C1 1990-04 Sub-Leased 2011.03.01
737-3Y0 Tag Aviation Wells Fargo 24680 CFM56-3B1 1990-09 Sold 2011.03.31
737-3Y0 European Aviatio Tag Aviation 24680 CFM56-3B1 1990-09 Sold 2011.03.31
737-3Y0 Southern Aircraft European Aviation 24680 CFM56-3B1 1990-09 Sold 2011.03.31
737-3G7(F) Aag Xiii Heavylift International 24710 CFM56-3B2 1990-01 Returned 2011.03.09
737-3Q8 Viva Aerobus Celestial Aviation 24962 CFM56-3C1 1991-09 Leased 2011.03.17
737-3M8 Aero North Southern Aircraft. 25040 CFM56-3B2 1991-02 Sold 2011.03.10
737-3M8 Kalstar Aviation Aero North 25040 CFM56-3B2 1991-02 Leased 2011.03.10
737-33A Trans Air Congo Wells Fargo 25138 CFM56-3B2 1991-10 Leased 2011.03.02
737-3Q8 Hainan Airlines China West Air 26325 CFM56-3C1 1996-01 Returned 2011.03.24
737-3Z0 Sf Airlines Air China 27373 CFM56-3B1 1994-09 Sold 2011.03.22
737-33A Aircraft & Engine Support Air Austral 27452 CFM56-3B1 1994-11 Sold 2011.03.09
737-33A Wells Fargo Aircraft & Engine Support 27452 CFM56-3B1 1994-11 Sold 2011.03.21
737-36N Babcock & Brown Thomson Airways 28594 CFM56-3C1 1999-03 Returned 2011.03.28
737-36N Hainan Airlines China West Air 28599 CFM56-3C1 1999-06 Returned 2011.03.24
737-36Q Desert Rainier Shandong Airlines 28761 CFM56-3C1 1998-02 Returned 2011.03.31
737-476 Qantas Airways Jetconnect 24439 CFM56-3C1 1992-03 Returned 2011.03.31
737-4Y0 Verto Aviation East Dover 24519 CFM56-3C1 1989-08 Sold 2011.03.25
737-4Y0 Transaero Airlines Verto Aviation 24519 CFM56-3C1 1989-08 Leased 2011.03.25
737-405 Wood Creek Aircraft Fjord Company 24643 CFM56-3C1 1990-04 Sold 2011.03.23
737-405 SAS Wood Creek Aircraft 24643 CFM56-3C1 1990-04 Leased 2011.03.23
737-429 Wells Fargo Wilmington Trust 25226 CFM56-3C1 1991-07 Sold 2011.03.28
737-4U3 Indonesian Air Force Garuda Indonesian 25714 CFM56-3C1 1993-09 Sold 2011.03.09
737-4U3 Indonesian Air Force Garuda Indonesian 25719 CFM56-3C1 1993-10 Sold 2011.03.09
737-405 CIT Aerospace SAS 25795 CFM56-3C1 1997-03 Returned 2011.03.31
737-4Y0 GE Capital Pamir Airways 26088 CFM56-3C1 1993-05 Returned 2011.03.19
737-430 Flyrey Acs Aircraft Leasing 27001 CFM56-3C1 1992-06 Leased 2011.03.08
737-430 Compass Air German Op 27007 CFM56-3C1 1992-08 Sold 2011.03.03
737-430 Air Italy Compass Air 27007 CFM56-3C1 1992-08 Leased 2011.03.03
737-48E ILFC Air One 27632 CFM56-3C1 1997-01 Returned 2011.03.18
737-505 European Aviation Wells Fargo 24648 CFM56-3C1 1992-01 Sold 2011.03.24
737-505 Southern Aircraft European Aviation 24648 CFM56-3C1 1992-01 Sold 2011.03.24
737-53A Aircraft & Engine Air Austral 24877 CFM56-3B1 1990-10 Sold 2011.03.09
737-53A Evergreen Trade Aircraft & Engine Support 24877 CFM56-3B1 1990-10 Sold 2011.03.31
737-522 Apollo Aviation Air Ivoire 25001 CFM56-3C1 1990-10 Returned 2011.03.16
737-522 Apollo Aviation Air Ivoire 25008 CFM56-3C1 1990-12 Returned 2011.03.24
737-5Y0 Air Nippon Ana Wings 25189 CFM56-3B1 1992-02 Returned 2011.03.29
737-5Y0 Nbb Creek Company Ana Wings 25189 CFM56-3B1 1992-02 Returned 2011.03.29
737-524(W) Utair Aviation Blf 28905 CFM56-3C1 1997-08 Leased 2011.03.21
737-54K All Nippon Airways Ana Wings 28993 CFM56-3C1 1998-09 Returned 2011.03.22
737-54K Hokkaido International All Nippon Airways 28993 CFM56-3C1 1998-09 Leased 2011.03.22
737-7BK CIT Leasing CIT Aerospace 30617 CFM56-7B22 2001-03 Sold 2011.03.01
737-7BK(W) Aeromexico CIT Leasing 30617 CFM56-7B22 2001-03 Leased 2011.03.18
737-7BD(W) Southwest Airlines Boeing 36726 CFM56-7B24 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.18
737-7K2(W) CIT Leasing Boeing 38125 CFM56-7B22/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.28
737-7K2(W) KLM CIT Leasing 38125 CFM56-7B22/3 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.28
737-700(W) Boeing Business Jets Boeing (-1) CFM56-7B27 - Cncl-Order 2011.03.01
737-85P Aircastle Investment Air Europa 28382 CFM56-7B26 1999-03 Returned 2011.03.07
737-81Q Aeromexico Wells Fargo 29052 CFM56-7B26 2000-04 Leased 2011.03.10
737-883 Scandinavian Airlines System Moskovia Airlines 30468 CFM56-7B26 2000-09 Returned 2011.03.21
737-81Q(WETOPS) Xl Airways Germany Miami Air International 30619 CFM56-7B26 2001-05 Sub-Leased 2011.03.22
737-8BK(W) CIT Leasing CIT Aerospace . 30620 CFM56-7B26 2001-10 Sold 2011.03.07
737-8BK(W) Sun Country Airlines CIT Leasing 30620 CFM56-7B26 2001-10 Leased 2011.03.07
737-8Q8(W) ILFC Sunwing Airlines 30637 CFM56-7B26 2001-02 Returned 2011.03.24
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Transavia Denmark 30650 CFM56-7B27 2002-05 Returned 2011.03.27
737-8Q8(W) Caribbean Airlines ILFC 30661 CFM56-7B26 2002-07 Leased 2011.03.11
737-8Q8(W) Air Jamaica Caribbean Airlines 30661 CFM56-7B26 2002-07 Sub-Leased 2011.03.12
737-8Q8(W) Aircraft 73b-30671 ILFC 30671 CFM56-7B27 2003-03 Sold 2011.03.18
737-8Q8(W) Aeromexico Aircraft 73b-30671 30671 CFM56-7B27 2003-03 Leased 2011.03.22
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-86N(W) Celestial Aviation Pegasus Airlines 32732 CFM56-7B26 2002-01 Returned 2011.03.19
737-8K5(W) Tabarak Aviation Travel Service Airlines 32907 CFM56-7B27B1 2002-03 Sub-Leased 2011.03.21
737-8AS(W) Okay Airways Wells Fargo 33557 CFM56-7B24 2003-12 Leased 2011.03.21
737-8AS(W) Airline Taimyr RBS Aerospace 33559 CFM56-7B24 2004-01 Leased 2011.03.11
737-8AS(W) Okay Airways Wells Fargo 33560 CFM56-7B24 2004-01 Leased 2011.03.21
737-8FE(W) Igaf Vbnc 4 34167 CFM56-7B26 2005-03 Sold 2011.03.18
737-8FE(W) Virgin Blue Airlines Igaf 34167 CFM56-7B26 2005-03 Leased 2011.03.18
737-8FE(W) Bali Australia Leasing Pty Vbnc 4 34168 CFM56-7B26 2005-04 Sold 2011.03.18
737-8FE(W) Virgin Blue Airlines Bali Australia Leasing 34168 CFM56-7B26 2005-04 Leased 2011.03.18
737-8F2(W) Anadolujet Turk Hava Yollari 34409 CFM56-7B26 2006-03 Sub-Leased 2011.03.01
737-8K5(W) Thomson Airways Sunwing Airlines 35134 CFM56-7B27B1 2006-12 Returned 2011.03.15
737-85C(W) Xiamen Airlines Boeing 37153 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.08
737-8K5(W) Amentum Capital Tui Travel 37253 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.01
737-8K5(W) Thomson Airways Amentum Capital 37253 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.01
737-8K5(W) ACG Tui Travel 37254 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.21
737-8K5(W) Thomson Airways ACG 37254 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.21
737-86J(W) RBS Aerospace Air Berlin 37743 CFM56-7B26 2009-02 Sold 2011.03.05
737-86J(W) Izmir Airlines RBS Aerospace 37743 CFM56-7B26 2009-02 Leased 2011.03.05
737-86J(W) RBS Aerospace Air Berlin 37745 CFM56-7B26 2009-09 Sold 2011.03.30
737-86J(W) Izmir Airlines RBS Aerospace 37745 CFM56-7B26 2009-09 Leased 2011.03.30
737-86N(W) Brookdell Celestial Aviation 37884 CFM56-7B26 2010-03 Sold 2011.03.11
737-86N(W) Norwegian Brookdell 37884 CFM56-7B26 2010-03 Leased 2011.03.11
737-86N(W) Tui Airlines Nederland GECAS 38014 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Leased 2011.03.29
737-86N(W) Shandong Airlines GECAS 38016 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Leased 2011.03.23
737-8JP(W) SMFL Aircraft Capital Boeing Company 39005 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.08
737-8JP(W) Norwegian Air SMFL Aircraft Capital 39005 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.08
737-8JP(W) Norwegian Air Boeing 39006 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.17
737-8JP(W) Dy2 Leasing Boeing Company 39006 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.17
737-8JP(W) NAS Dy2 Leasing 39006 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.17
737-8CT(W) ACG Boeing 39092 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.15
737-8CT(W) Westjet ACG 39092 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.15
737-8FZ(W) Babcock & Brown Boeing 39319 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.02
737-8FZ(W) MAS Babcock & Brown 39319 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.02
737-81D(W) AWAS Boeing 39413 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.31
737-81D(W) AWAS 39413 Boeing Company 39413 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Sold 2011.03.31
737-81D(W) Virgin Blue Airlines AWAS 39413 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Leased 2011.03.31
737-824 Continental Airlines Boeing 39998 CFM56-7B26 2010-12 Delivered 2011.03.16
737-824 Continental Airlines Boeing 39999 CFM56-7B26 2011-01 Delivered 2011.03.18
737-89L(W) Air China Boeing 40026 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.15
737-8H6(W) Malaysian Airline System Boeing 40131 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.15
737-8V3(W) Copa Airlines Boeing 40665 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.29
737-8V3(W) Copa Airlines Boeing 40666 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.03
737-8D6(W) Air Algerie Boeing 40861 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.30
737-8JP(W) SMFL Aircraft Capital Boeing Company 40867 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.01
737-8JP(W) NAS SMFL Aircraft Capital 40867 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.01
737-8JP(W) Dy2 Leasing Boeing Company 40868 CFM56-7B26 2011-03 Sold 2011.03.24
737-8ZQ(W) Tassili Airlines Boeing 40884 CFM56-7B26 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.30
737-8Q8(W) ILFC Boeing (33) CFM56-7B26 2012-08 Ordered 2011.03.07
737-8F2(W) Turk Hava Yollari Boeing (10) CFM56-7B26 2013-08 Ordered 2011.03.31
737-800(W) Unknown Boeing (1) CFM56-7B26 2012-08 Ordered 2011.03.31
737-8FVERX US Navy Boeing 40595 CFM56-7B27 2010-12 Delivered 2011.03.02
737-9GPER(W) Lion Air Boeing 37279 CFM56-7B27 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.08
737-924ER(W) Continental Airlines Boeing (11) CFM56-7B27 2012-01 Ordered 2011.03.02
737-958ER(W) El Al Boeing (4) CFM56-7B27 2013-02 Ordered 2011.03.22
737-958ER(W) El Al Boeing [2] CFM56-7B27 2014-11 Optioned 2011.03.22
737-9F2ER(W) Turk Hava Yollari Boeing (5) CFM56-7B27 2014-10 Ordered 2011.03.31
747-446 Aersale 25212 Aersale 25212 CF6-80C2B1F 1991-07 Sold 2011.03.24
747-446 Phuket Airlines Aersale 25212 CF6-80C2B1F 1991-07 Leased 2011.03.28
747-446D Wells Fargo Japan Airlines 25214 CF6-80C2B1F 1991-09 Sold 2011.03.15
747-446D Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 25214 CF6-80C2B1F 1991-09 Sold 2011.03.18
(Orders)/ [Options]
747-412 Orix Aircraft Singapore Airlines 27068 PW4056 1993-09 Returned 2011.03.10
747-412 Wells Fargo Wilmington Trust 27068 PW4056 1993-09 Sold 2011.03.10
757-258 El Al Sun D'or International 23918 RB211-535E4 1987-11 Returned 2011.03.21
757-28A Mint Airways Aerolinea Principal 24544 RB211-535E4 1990-03 Returned 2011.03.31
757-258 El Al Sun D'or International 24884 RB211-535E4 1990-10 Returned 2011.03.21
757-230 Vim Airlines Air Bashkortostan 25439 PW2040 1992-02 Returned 2011.03.11
757-236 Wells Fargo Air Greenland 25620 RB211-535E4 1992-03 Sold 2011.03.17
757-28A(ETOPS) ILFC Air Finland 25622 RB211-535E4 1993-02 Returned 2011.03.09
757-28A(ETOPS) Guggenheim Aviation ILFC 25622 RB211-535E4 1993-02 Sold 2011.03.11
757-204(BWETOPS) Air Finland Allegiant Air 26963 RB211-535E4 1992-03 Sub-Leased 2011.03.14
757-204 Jet2 Thomson Airways 26966 RB211-535E4 1992-12 Sub-Leased 2011.03.29
757-29J(WETOPS) Wells Fargo Small Planet Airlines 27203 PW2037 1993-10 Returned 2011.03.26
757-29J(WETOPS) Nordwind Airlines Wells Fargo 27203 PW2037 1993-10 Leased 2011.03.26
757-2Q8(W) United States Air Force L-3 Communications 28160 PW2037 1996-06 Sold 2011.03.22
757-28A(ETOPS) Thomas Cook Airlines Jazz Air 28203 RB211-535E4 1998-04 Returned 2011.03.31
757-231 Pacic Aircorp Ethiopian Airlines 28480 PW2037 1997-03 Returned 2011.03.28
757-231 Pacic Aircorp Pacic Aircorp 28480 PW2037 1997-03 Sold 2011.03.28
757-21K Thomas Cook Airlines Jazz Air 28674 RB211-535E4 1997-02 Returned 2011.03.31
757-23N(ETOPS) Airco Ehf Flycorp 30735 RB211-535E4-B 2000-05 Sold 2011.03.01
757-23N(ETOPS) Icelandair Airco Ehf 30735 RB211-535E4-B 2000-05 Leased 2011.03.02
767-246 Au7 Japan Airlines 23212 JT9D-7R4D 1985-04 Sold 2011.03.09
767-2J6ER Air Transport International Cargo Aircraft Mgmt 23307 JT9D-7R4E4 1985-08 Leased 2011.03.01
767-2EYER(TT) Italian Air Force Boeing Company 33687 CF6-80C2B6FA 2005-01 Sold 2011.03.11
767-346 Japan Airlines Zonet Aviation 23963 JT9D-7R4D 1988-05 Lease-Buyout 2011.03.31
767-346 Japan Airlines Zonet 23964 JT9D-7R4D 1988-05 Lease-Buyout 2011.03.31
767-33AER AWMS I Gol Transportes Aereos 27477 PW4060 1999-12 Returned 2011.03.25
767-316ER(W) Lan Argentina Lan Airlines 34628 CF6-80C2B7F 2006-06 Leased 2011.03.01
767-381ER(W) All Nippon Airways Ft Ice Leasing 40566 CF6-80C2B6F 2010-12 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.31
767-381ER(W) All Nippon Airways Tlc Property 40567 CF6-80C2B6F 2011-01 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.31
777-222ER T7 Aviation Leasing US Bank 26935 PW4090 1997-07 Sold 2011.03.23
777-222ER Omni Air International T7 Aviation Leasing 26935 PW4090 1997-07 Leased 2011.03.23
777-223ER American Airlines Wells Fargo 31477 TRENT892-17 2001-11 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.29
777-223ER American Airlines Wells Fargo 31478 TRENT892-17 2002-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.14
777-333ER ALC GE Capital 35254 GE90-115B1 2007-03 Sold 2011.03.01
777-333ER Air Canada ALC 35254 GE90-115B1 2007-03 Leased 2011.03.02
777-328ER Air France ALC 35542 GE90-115B 2008-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.30
777-3DZER Qatar Airways Boeing 38245 GE90-115B 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.17
777-319ER Air New Zealand Boeing 38407 GE90-115B 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.22
777-319ER Babcock & Brown Boeing Company 38407 GE90-115B 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.22
777-319ER Air New Zealand Babcock & Brown 38407 GE90-115B 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.22
777-367ER Cathay Pacic Airways Boeing 39232 GE90-115BL2 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.29
777-323ER American Airlines Boeing (1) GE90-115B 2013-02 Ordered 2011.03.31
777-367ER Cathay Pacic Airways Boeing (10) GE90-115BL2 2014-02 Ordered 2011.03.09
777-36NER GECAS Boeing (8) GE90-115B 2012-12 Ordered 2011.03.30
777-3B5ER Korean Air Lines Boeing (2) GE90-115B 2014-06 Ordered 2011.03.25
777-3DZER Qatar Airways Boeing (4) GE90-115B 2012-07 Ordered 2011.03.17
A300B4-622R Wells Fargo Japan Airlines International 730 PW4158 1994-02 Sold 2011.03.10
A300B4-622R Japan Airlines Nl Saturn Lease 797 PW4158 1999-11 Lease-Buyout 2011.03.28
A300B4-622R Japan Airlines Signet Lease 836 PW4158 2002-05 Lease-Buyout 2011.03.10
A300B4-622R Maximus Air Cargo Japan Airlines 837 PW4158 2002-07 Sold 2011.03.02
A310-304 Saga Airlines Ariana Afghan Airlines 562 CF6-80C2A2 1990-11 Returned 2011.03.01
A319-112 Germania Niki Luftfahrt 3019 CFM56-5B6/P 2007-02 Sold 2011.03.31
A319-112 Karthago Airlines Koralblue Airlines 3171 CFM56-5B6/P 2007-06 Returned 2011.03.03
A319-112 Hamburg Airways Amentum Capital 3533 CFM56-5B6/3 2008-05 Leased 2011.03.22
A319-112 Hamburg Airways Unknown Lessor 3560 CFM56-5B6/3 2008-06 Leased 2011.03.25
A319-112 Germania Unknown Lessor 3818 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-02 Leased 2011.03.03
A319-111 Easyjet Unknown Lessor 4624 CFM56-5B5/3 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.09
A319-132 Turk Hava Yollari Airbus 4629 V2524-A5 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.11
A319-111 Easyjet Unknown Lessor 4635 CFM56-5B5/3 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.16
ACJ319-115 Genting Singapore French Air Force 1485 CFM56-5B7/P 2001-05 Sold 2011.03.01
ACJ319-115 Tag Aviation Asia Genting Singapore 1485 CFM56-5B7/P 2001-05 Leased 2011.03.02
ACJ319-115 Senegal Air Force French Air Force 1556 CFM56-5B7/P 2001-08 Sold 2011.03.01
A319-115LR S7 Airlines ILFC 2279 CFM56-5B7/P 2004-08 Leased 2011.03.03
ACJ319-115 Comlux Aviation Airbus 4622 CFM56-5B7/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.11
ACJ319-115 Comlux Malta Comlux Aviation 4622 CFM56-5B7/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.03.11
ACJ319-100 Unknown Airbus (1) 2015-07 Ordered 2011.03.01
A320-214 AFS Investments Philippine Airlines 1210 CFM56-5B4/P 2000-03 Returned 2011.03.08
A320-214 Celestial Aviation AFS Investments 1210 CFM56-5B4/P 2000-03 Sold 2011.03.08
A320-214 Hello Celestial Aviation 1210 CFM56-5B4/P 2000-03 Leased 2011.03.08
A320-214 AFS Investments Xvii Air Jamaica 1751 CFM56-5B4/P 2002-03 Returned 2011.03.10
A320-231 Sky Airline Wells Fargo 179 V2500-A1 1991-08 Leased 2011.03.07
A320-214 Interjet [Mexico] ILFC 2048 CFM56-5B4/P 2003-06 Leased 2011.03.02
A320-211 Nouvelair Tunisie Libyan Airlines 222 CFM56-5A1 1991-06 Returned 2011.03.01
A320-232 Cyprus Airways CIT Aerospace 2334 V2527-A5 2004-11 Leased 2011.03.11
A320-232 CIT Aerospace China Southern 2343 V2527-A5 2004-12 Returned 2011.03.09
A320-232 Cyprus Airways CIT Aerospace 2343 V2527-A5 2004-12 Leased 2011.03.30
A320-232 CIT Aerospace China Southern 2345 V2527-A5 2004-12 Returned 2011.03.24
A320-212 Donbassaero Aercap 235 CFM56-5A3 1991-08 Leased 2011.03.01
(Orders)/ [Options]
A320-232 Onur Air ACG 2688 V2527-A5 2006-02 Leased 2011.03.22
A320-231 Myanmar Airways Cyprus Airways 295 V2500-A1 1992-01 Sold 2011.03.02
A320-212 Eastok Avia Wells Fargo 325 CFM56-5A3 1992-04 Sold 2011.03.31
A320-212 East Air [Tajikistan] Eastok Avia 325 CFM56-5A3 1992-04 Leased 2011.03.31
A320-232 Anadolujet Wells Fargo 3259 V2527-A5 2007-09 Leased 2011.03.15
A320-231 Wells Fargo Aerco 354 V2500-A1 1992-07 Sold 2011.03.21
A320-232 Wizz Air Hungary Wizz Air Bulgaria 3562 V2527-A5 2008-07 Returned 2011.03.01
A320-231 Khors Aircompany Wells Fargo 362 V2500-A1 1992-09 Leased 2011.03.18
A320-231 Sasof Tr-37 Wells Fargo 369 V2500-A1 1992-09 Sold 2011.03.14
A320-231 Jetran Aft Trust-Sub 1 373 V2500-A1 1992-10 Sold 2011.03.25
A320-214 ALAFCO Wataniya Airways 3739 CFM56-5B4/3 2008-12 Returned 2011.03.16
A320-212 Aviation Capital Partners Sparhorn 375 CFM56-5A3 1992-10 Sold 2011.03.28
A320-212 Avion Express [Lithuania] Aviation Capital Partners 375 CFM56-5A3 1992-10 Leased 2011.03.28
A320-214 ALAFCO Wataniya Airways 3791 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-02 Returned 2011.03.16
A320-216 Orix Aircraft Aircraft Purchase Fleet 3831 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-03 Sold 2011.03.09
A320-216 Alitalia Orix Aircraft 3831 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-03 Leased 2011.03.09
A320-211 Travel Service Airlines Smartlynx Airlines 384 CFM56-5A1 1992-11 Sub-Leased 2011.03.12
A320-216 Orix Aircraft Aircraft Purchase Fleet 3885 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-04 Sold 2011.03.09
A320-216 Alitalia Orix Aircraft 3885 CFM56-5B6/3 2009-04 Leased 2011.03.09
A320-214 ILFC Wataniya Airways 3907 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-05 Returned 2011.03.16
A320-214 ALAFCO. Wataniya Airways 4049 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-09 Returned 2011.03.16
A320-231 Sky Wings Airlines Iai Viii 405 V2500-A1 1993-01 Sold 2011.03.01
A320-232 Aegean Airlines Olympic Air 4094 V2527-A5 2009-11 Sub-Leased 2011.03.01
A320-214 Easyjet Switzerland Easyjet 4196 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-02 Sub-Leased 2011.03.11
A320-214 Aerventure Wataniya Airways 4235 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-02 Returned 2011.03.16
A320-232 China West Air Hainan Airlines 4482 V2527-A5 2011-01 Leased 2011.03.02
A320-214 Spring Airlines Airbus 4499 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.09
A320-214 Gulf Air Pembroke Capital 4502 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-11 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.02
A320-214 China Southern Airbus 4507 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.15
A320-214 Gulf Air Pembroke Capital 4541 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-12 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.02
A320-214 Avianca Airbus 4599 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.01
A320-214 Wells Fargo Airbus 4599 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.01
A320-214 Avianca Wells Fargo 4599 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.01
A320-214 Air France Airbus 4601 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.09
A320-214 Air France ALC 4601 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.09
A320-214 Air France Safe N03 Pty 4604 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.09
A320-214 Icbc Financial Leasing Air Berlin 4613 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.02
A320-214 China Southern ICBC 4613 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.02
A320-232 Indigo MCAP Europe 4614 V2527-A5 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.03
A320-232 Qatar Airways Airbus 4615 V2527-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.10
A320-214 Swiss International Air Lines Airbus 4618 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.18
A320-232 ILFC Airbus 4619 V2527-A5 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.15
A320-232 Sichuan Airlines ILFC 4619 V2527-A5 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.15
A320-232 Wizz Air Hungary Airbus 4621 V2527-A5 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.16
A320-232 Wizz Air Hungary HKAC 4621 V2527-A5 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.16
A320-232 Wizz Air Hungary HKAC 4628 V2527-A5 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.17
A320-232 Indigo Hkac Leasing 4630 V2527-A5 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.30
A320-214 Air Berlin Celestial Aviation 4631 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.14
A320-214 Belair Airlines Airbus 4631 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-03 Sub-Leased 2011.03.14
A320-232 Middle East Airlines Airbus 4632 V2527-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.31
A320-232 Indigo Orix Aviation 4637 V2527-A5 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.22
A320-214 AWAS 4641 Trust Airbus 4641 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-03 Sold 2011.03.17
A320-214 Frontier Airlines AWAS 4641 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.03.17
A320-232 Aerdragon Aviation Airbus 4642 V2527-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.25
A320-232 Sichuan Airlines Aerdragon Aviation 4642 V2527-A5 2011-03 Leased 2011.03.25
A320-232 Lan Airlines Bandurria Leasing. 4657 V2527-A5 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.31
A320-232 Onur Air Castle 496 V2527-A5 1994-09 Leased 2011.03.24
A320-214 Acg Trust 707 Air China 707 CFM56-5B4/P 1997-06 Returned 2011.03.31
A320-214 Jazeera Airways Airbus (-25) CFM56-5B4/3 - Cncl-Order 2011.03.01
A321-231 CIT Aerospace Sky Airlines 1670 V2533-A5 2002-01 Returned 2011.03.23
A321-231 Asiana Airlines CIT Aerospace 1670 V2533-A5 2002-01 Leased 2011.03.25
A321-211 Royal Air Maroc Atlas Blue 2064 CFM56-5B3/P 2003-10 Returned 2011.03.01
A321-211 Royal Air Maroc Atlas Blue 2076 CFM56-5B3/P 2003-10 Returned 2011.03.01
(Orders)/ [Options]
A321-231 China Eastern Airbus 4638 V2533-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.23
A321-211 ILFC Aer Lingus 815 CFM56-5B3/P 1998-04 Returned 2011.03.21
A321-211 Ural Airlines ILFC 815 CFM56-5B3/P 1998-04 Leased 2011.03.21
A321-231 Onur Air Wells Fargo 835 V2533-A5 1998-05 Leased 2011.03.22
A321-231 Turk Hava Yollari Airbus (10) V2533-A5 2013-01 Ordered 2011.03.08
A330-223(HGW) Korean Air Lines Airbus 1203 PW4170 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.07
A330-243 Avianca Airbus 1208 TRENT772B-60 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.24
A330-243 Wells Fargo Airbus 1208 TRENT772B-60 2011-02 Sold 2011.03.24
A330-243 Avianca Wells Fargo 1208 TRENT772B-60 2011-02 Leased 2011.03.24
A330-243 Echo Leasing One Zamrid 365 TRENT772B-60 2000-10 Sold 2011.03.04
A330-243 Virgin Blue Echo Leasing One 365 TRENT772B-60 2000-10 Leased 2011.03.04
A330-243 Vb A330 Leasing Echo Leasing One 365 TRENT772B-60 2000-10 Sold 2011.03.25
A330-243 Virgin Blue Vb A330 Leasing 365 TRENT772B-60 2000-10 Leased 2011.03.25
A330-243 British Midland Turk Hava Yollari 398 TRENT772B-60 2001-04 Returned 2011.03.31
A330-343E Iberworld Airlines Aerolinea Principal 1097 TRENT772B-60 2010-02 Returned 2011.03.07
A330-343E Turk Hava Yollari Airbus 1204 TRENT772B-60 2011-01 Delivered 2011.03.30
A330-343E Virgin Atlantic Airbus 1206 TRENT772B-60 2011-02 Delivered 2011.03.15
A330-343E Virgin Atlantic Aercap. 1206 TRENT772B-60 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.03.15
A330-343E China Airlines Airbus 1206 TRENT772B-60 2011-02 Sub-Leased 2011.03.15
A330-323E Aercap Aviation Airbus 1211 PW4168A-1D 2011-03 Delivered 2011.03.23
A330-323E Aercap Airbus 1211 PW4168A-1D 2011-03 Sold 2011.03.23
A330-323E Asiana Airlines Aercap 1211 PW4168A-1D 2011-03 Leased 2011.03.23
A330-342 ILFC Dragonair 132 TRENT772-60 1996-03 Returned 2011.03.04
A330-342 Air Transat ILFC 132 TRENT772-60 1996-03 Leased 2011.03.04
A330-342E Cathay Pacic Airways Airbus (15) TRENT772-60 2014-02 Ordered 2011.03.15
A380-841 Lufthansa Airbus 061 TRENT970-84 2010-08 Delivered 2011.03.15
APRIL
707-338C Omega Air RAAF 19629 Jt3d-3b 1968-07 Sold 2011.04.07
717-23S Aerolineas De Baleares Spanair 55067 Br715a1-30 2001-03 Returned 2011.04.19
717-23S Pembroke Capital Spanair 55067 Br715a1-30 2001-03 Returned 2011.04.19
717-23S Blue1 Pembroke Capital 55067 Br715a1-30 2001-03 Leased 2011.04.19
727-224 Bolivian Air Force Aerolineas Sudamericanas 22449 Jt8d-17r 1981-05 Sold 2011.04.01
737-244 Aergo Capital Aerolineas Galapagos 22581 Jt8d-17a 1981-08 Returned 2011.04.26
737-244 Rutaca Aergo Capital 22581 Jt8d-17a 1981-08 Leased 2011.04.26
737-2H4 Ishtar Airlines Iraqi Airways 23054 Jt8d-9a 1983-05 Returned 2011.04.18
737-2H4 Ajeton Ishtar Airlines 23054 Jt8d-9a 1983-05 Sold 2011.04.18
737-3T0(W) Grandmax Group As & L 23374 Cfm56-3b1 1986-02 Sold 2011.04.28
737-3T0(W) Orient Thai Airlines Grandmax Group 23374 Cfm56-3b1 1986-02 Leased 2011.04.28
737-33A AWAS Air Italy 23636 Cfm56-3b2 1987-08 Returned 2011.04.12
737-33A AWMS I AWAS 23636 Cfm56-3b2 1987-08 Sold 2011.04.12
737-3G7 Boullioun Aircraft Us Airways 23777 Cfm56-3b1 1987-06 Returned 2011.04.26
737-375 Pindell Blue Panorama 23808 Cfm56-3b2 1987-07 Returned 2011.04.05
737-3K2 Castle Norwegian 24328 Cfm56-3b2 1990-04 Returned 2011.04.22
737-3K2 Belavia Castle 24328 Cfm56-3b2 1990-04 Leased 2011.04.29
737-3Y5 Bcc Equipment Norwegian 25613 Cfm56-3c1 1993-02 Returned 2011.04.28
737-3Y5 Eastok Avia Bcc Equipment 25613 Cfm56-3c1 1993-02 Leased 2011.04.28
737-3Y5 Somon Air Norwegian 25613 Cfm56-3c1 1993-02 Sub-Leased 2011.04.28
737-3Q8 Boliviana De Aviacion Triton Aviation 26303 Cfm56-3b2 1994-06 Leased 2011.04.28
737-33A Vista Georgia Aerovista Gulf Express 27452 Cfm56-3c1 1994-11 Leased 2011.04.29
737-36N Bmibaby Babcock & Brown 28594 Cfm56-3c1 1999-03 Leased 2011.04.14
737-36Q Boullioun Shandong Airlines 28664 Cfm56-3c1 1997-08 Returned 2011.04.25
737-3S3 Salg-7 B.V. NAS 29245 Cfm56-3c1 1998-07 Returned 2011.04.06
737-4S3 Kv Aviation Holdings Orix Aircraft 24163 Cfm56-3c1 1989-03 Sold 2011.04.01
737-4S3 Comair KV Aviation 24163 Cfm56-3c1 1989-03 Leased 2011.04.02
737-4Y0 Nat Nuclear Sec Admin Aersale 24493 Cfm56-3c1 1989-06 Sold 2011.04.21
737-4Q8 ILFC Corendon Airlines 25374 Cfm56-3c1 1993-11 Returned 2011.04.28
737-4Q8 Enter Air ILFC 25374 Cfm56-3c1 1993-11 Leased 2011.04.29
737-4Q8 ILFC Corendon Airlines 25375 Cfm56-3c1 1994-03 Returned 2011.04.09
737-48E Yamal Airlines Wells Fargo 25775 Cfm56-3c1 1997-08 Leased 2011.04.05
737-405 Enter Air CIT Aerospace 25795 Cfm56-3c1 1997-03 Leased 2011.04.01
737-4B6 Celestial Aviation Buraq Air Transport 26531 Cfm56-3c1 1993-03 Returned 2011.04.18
737-430 ACS Air Italy 27003 Cfm56-3c1 1992-06 Returned 2011.04.01
737-446 Zonet Aviation Marubeni Aerospace 28087 Cfm56-3c1 1996-08 Transferred 2011.04.01
737-446 JAL Express JAL Express 28087 Cfm56-3c1 1996-08 Sub-Leased 2011.04.01
737-446 Zonet Aviation Japan Airlines 28097 Cfm56-3c1 1997-06 Transferred 2011.04.01
737-446 Japan Airlines Japan Airlines 28994 Cfm56-3c1 1998-05 Transferred 2011.04.01
737-446 JAL Express Japan Airlines 28994 Cfm56-3c1 1998-05 Leased 2011.04.01
737-4M0 Celestial Aviation Garuda Indonesian 29208 Cfm56-3c1 1998-10 Returned 2011.04.01
737-4Q3 Japan Airlines Japan Airlines 29485 Cfm56-3c1 1998-10 Transferred 2011.04.01
737-4Q3 Japan Transocean Air Japan Airlines 29485 Cfm56-3c1 1998-10 Leased 2011.04.01
737-59D British Midland Bmibaby 26421 Cfm56-3b1 1992-04 Returned 2011.04.15
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-59D Tag Aviation (Stansted) British Midland 26421 Cfm56-3b1 1992-04 Sold 2011.04.18
737-529 Aero North International Riau Airlines 26537 Cfm56-3b1 1992-05 Returned 2011.04.07
737-524(W) Utair Aviation BLF 28912 Cfm56-3c1 1997-12 Leased 2011.04.22
737-7Q8 ILFC Jet Lite 30727 Cfm56-7b22 2001-10 Returned 2011.04.30
737-7Q8 Wilmington Trust ILFC 30727 Cfm56-7b22 2001-10 Sold 2011.04.30
737-7Q8 Jet Time Wilmington Trust 30727 Cfm56-7b22 2001-10 Leased 2011.04.30
737-73V Sa Victoria BOC Aviation 32421 Cfm56-7b20 2003-07 Sold 2011.04.27
737-73V(W) Air Italy Sa Victoria 32421 Cfm56-7b20 2003-07 Leased 2011.04.28
737-73V Enerjet BOC Aviation 32427 Cfm56-7b20 2004-03 Leased 2011.04.28
737-73V BOC Aviation Easyjet 32428 Cfm56-7b20 2004-04 Returned 2011.04.04
737-73V Wells Fargo BOC Aviation 32428 Cfm56-7b20 2004-04 Sold 2011.04.27
737-7BD(W) Southwest Airlines Boeing 33936 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.14
737-7GL(W) Anadolujet Turk Hava Yollari 34759 Cfm56-7b24 2007-06 Sub-Leased 2011.04.01
737-7H4(W) Southwest Airlines Boeing 36672 Cfm56-7b24 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.28
737-7CT(W) BOC Aviation Boeing 37955 Cfm56-7b20 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.18
737-7CT(W) Westjet BOC Aviation 37955 Cfm56-7b20 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.18
737-7K2(W) KLM Boeing 39255 Cfm56-7b22/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.04.26
737-8K5(W) Tui Aviation Tuiy 27982 Cfm56-7b26 1997-06 Returned 2011.04.11
737-8K5(W) Nakayama Kosan Tui Aviation GMBH 27982 Cfm56-7b26 1997-06 Sold 2011.04.20
737-8K5(W) Jet2 Nakayama Kosan 27982 Cfm56-7b26 1997-06 Leased 2011.04.20
737-86J(W) Bank Of Utah ACG Acquisition 28068 Cfm56-7b26 1998-02 Transferred 2011.04.28
737-86J(W) Saga Airlines Bank Of Utah 28068 Cfm56-7b26 1998-02 Leased 2011.04.28
737-8Q8(W) Xl Airways Canjet Airlines 28218 Cfm56-7b26 1998-11 Returned 2011.04.27
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Aeromexico 28376 Cfm56-7b27 1999-03 Returned 2011.04.05
737-8K2(W) Transavia France Transavia Airlines 28376 Cfm56-7b27 1999-03 Sub-Leased 2011.04.08
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Sun Country Airlines 28380 Cfm56-7b27 2000-03 Returned 2011.04.27
737-85P Lombard Aviation Air Europa 28381 Cfm56-7b26 1999-03 Returned 2011.04.15
737-86N(W) Pegasus Airlines RAK Airways 28624 Cfm56-7b26 2000-05 Returned 2011.04.01
737-8S3 Sunrock Aircraft Saga Airlines 29246 Cfm56-7b26 2000-01 Returned 2011.04.13
737-8S3(W) Corendon Airlines Sunrock Aircraft 29246 Cfm56-7b26 2000-01 Leased 2011.04.13
737-8S3 Sunrock Aircraft Saga Airlines 29247 Cfm56-7b26 2000-01 Returned 2011.04.23
737-8S3(W) Corendon Airlines Sunrock Aircraft 29247 Cfm56-7b26 2000-01 Leased 2011.04.23
737-8BK(W) Jetairy Sun Country Airlines 29660 Cfm56-7b26 2007-07 Returned 2011.04.07
737-8F2(W) Turk Hava Yollari Anadolujet 29785 Cfm56-7b26 2000-04 Returned 2011.04.01
737-8AS(W) Spicejet CIT Aerospace 29926 Cfm56-7b24 2000-11 Leased 2011.04.13
737-85F(W) Macquarie Aircraft South African Airways 30007 Cfm56-7b26 2000-12 Returned 2011.04.01
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Sun Country Airlines 30389 Cfm56-7b27 2000-04 Returned 2011.04.20
737-883 La Darien Navegacion El Barrio Shipping 30468 Cfm56-7b26 2000-09 Sold 2011.04.18
737-883 SAS La Darien Navegacion 30468 Cfm56-7b26 2000-09 Leased 2011.04.18
737-8BK(W) CIT Aerospace Virgin Blue Airlines 30623 Cfm56-7b26 2002-04 Returned 2011.04.20
737-8BK(W) CIT Leasing CIT Aerospace 30623 Cfm56-7b26 2002-04 Sold 2011.04.20
737-8BK(W) Sun Country Airlines CIT Leasing 30623 Cfm56-7b26 2002-04 Leased 2011.04.20
737-8Q8(W) Caribbean Airlines East Trust-Sub 1 30720 Cfm56-7b26 2007-03 Leased 2011.04.05
737-8Q8(W) Air Jamaica Caribbean Airlines 30720 Cfm56-7b26 2007-03 Sub-Leased 2011.04.07
737-8Q8(W) Xl Airways Germany Canjet Airlines 30724 Cfm56-7b26 2007-05 Returned 2011.04.26
737-86N(W) Tuiy Nordic Celestial Aviation 32669 Cfm56-7b26 2006-02 Leased 2011.04.13
737-86N(W) Comair Celestial Aviation 32732 Cfm56-7b26 2002-01 Leased 2011.04.12
737-8Q8(W) Aircraft 73b-32796 ILFC 32796 Cfm56-7b27 2003-01 Sold 2011.04.01
737-8Q8(W) Aeromexico Aircraft 73b-32796 32796 Cfm56-7b27 2003-01 Leased 2011.04.08
737-86J(W) ALC B378 32919 Air Berlin 32919 Cfm56-7b26 2003-01 Returned 2011.04.30
737-8AS(W) Airline Taimyr Wells Fargo 33561 Cfm56-7b24 2004-02 Leased 2011.04.22
737-881(W) All Nippon Airways Boeing 33909 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.07
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Caribbean Airlines 34171 Cfm56-7b27 2009-06 Returned 2011.04.12
737-838(W) Qantas Airways Boeing 34194 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.22
737-8F2(W) Anadolujet Turk Hava Yollari 34408 Cfm56-7b26 2006-02 Sub-Leased 2011.04.01
737-8F2(W) Anadolujet Turk Hava Yollari 34411 Cfm56-7b26 2006-04 Sub-Leased 2011.04.01
737-8K5(W) Thomson Airways Sunwing Airlines 34690 Cfm56-7b27b1 2007-01 Returned 2011.04.07
737-8GJ(W) Transavia France Canjet Airlines 34901 Cfm56-7b24 2007-04 Returned 2011.04.22
737-8GJ(W) Transavia France Canjet Airlines 34902 Cfm56-7b24 2007-06 Returned 2011.04.24
737-8FH(W) Xl Airways Germany Canjet Airlines 35093 Cfm56-7b26 2007-01 Returned 2011.04.28
737-8K5(W) Thomson Airways Sunwing Airlines 35139 Cfm56-7b27b1 2008-02 Returned 2011.04.14
737-8Q8(W) Travel Service Airlines Somon Air 35275 Cfm56-7b26 2008-04 Returned 2011.04.19
737-85P(W) Air Europa Boeing 35493 Cfm56-7b27b1 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.27
737-85P(W) Dragon Aviation Air Europa 35493 Cfm56-7b27b1 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.27
737-85P(W) Shandong Airlines Dragon Aviation 35493 Cfm56-7b27b1 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.27
737-8KN(W) Corendon Dutch Airlines Flydubai 35795 Cfm56-7b26 2009-02 Sub-Leased 2011.04.28
737-8EH(W) Transavia Airlines Gol Transportes Aereos 35831 Cfm56-7b27 2010-01 Leased 2011.04.07
737-82R(W) Pegasus Airlines Boeing 35983 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.19
737-82R(W) GE Capital Boeing Company 35983 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.19
737-82R(W) Pegasus Airlines GE Capital 35983 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.19
737-8ZS(W) S7 Airlines Boeing 37084 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.27
737-8ZS(W) Eight Hundred Holdings Boeing Company 37084 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.27
737-8ZS(W) S7 Airlines Eight Hundred 37084 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.27
737-8ZS(W) Globus Boeing Company 37084 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Sub-Leased 2011.04.27
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Caribbean Airlines 37160 Cfm56-7b27 2009-04 Returned 2011.04.08
737-8EH(W) Transavia Airlines Gol Transportes Aereos 37600 Cfm56-7b27 2010-02 Leased 2011.04.12
737-86N(W) Nbb-34954 Lease Brookdell 37884 Cfm56-7b26 2010-03 Sold 2011.04.05
737-86N(W) Norwegian Nbb-34954 Lease 37884 Cfm56-7b26 2010-03 Leased 2011.04.05
737-86N(W) GECAS Boeing 38017 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.18
737-86N(W) Xiamen Airlines GECAS 38017 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.18
737-86N(W) Travel Service Slovakia GECAS 38018 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.28
737-86N(W) Garuda Indonesian Airways GECAS 38033 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.15
737-8V3(W) Copa Airlines Boeing 38139 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.13
737-8K5(W) ACG Boeing 39093 Cfm56-7b27b1 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.06
737-8K5(W) Jetairy ACG 39093 Cfm56-7b27b1 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.06
737-84P(W) Hainan Airlines Boeing 39223 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.29
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Boeing 39260 Cfm56-7b27/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.04.29
737-81D(W) AWAS Boeing 39414 Cfm56-7b26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.26
737-81D(W) Virgin Blue Airlines AWAS 39414 Cfm56-7b26 2011-04 Leased 2011.04.26
737-89L(W) Air China Boeing 40032 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.12
737-8KN(W) Flydubai Boeing 40244 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.21
737-846(W) Japan Airlines Boeing 40352 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.11
737-846(W) JJ Phoenix 3 Boeing 40352 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.11
737-846(W) Japan Airlines JJ Phoenix 3 40352 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.11
737-846(W) Japan Airlines Boeing 40355 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.18
737-846(W) JJ Phoenix 4 Boeing Company 40355 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.18
737-846(W) Japan Airlines JJ Phoenix 4 40355 Cfm56-7b24 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.18
737-82R(W) Pegasus Airlines GE Capital 40721 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.11
737-82R(W) GE Capital Boeing 40723 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.22
737-8D6(W) Air Algerie Boeing 40862 Cfm56-7b26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.26
737-82R(W) GE Capital Boeing Company 40877 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.12
737-8ZQ(W) Tassili Airlines Boeing 40885 Cfm56-7b26 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.15
747-446 Aersale Japan Airlines 24784 Cf6-80c2b1f 1990-05 Sold 2011.04.12
747-481 MCAP Japa All Nippon Airways 25641 Cf6-80c2b1f 1992-06 Returned 2011.04.14
747-446 Transaero Airlines Vebl-767-300 26360 Cf6-80c2b1f 1998-06 Leased 2011.04.29
757-23A(ETOPS) Thomas Cook Airlines Astraeus Airlines 24292 Rb211-535e4 1989-02 Sub-Leased 2011.04.29
757-21B Pals Vi Santa Barbara Airlines 24402 Rb211-535e4 1989-05 Returned 2011.04.01
757-256 Privilege Style Aerolinea Principal 26252 Rb211-535e4 1999-10 Returned 2011.04.05
757-256 ILFC Atlasjet International 26254 Rb211-535e4 1999-11 Returned 2011.04.08
757-256 ILFC ILFC 26254 Rb211-535e4 1999-11 Sold 2011.04.08
757-256 I-Fly ILFC Aircraft 26254 Rb211-535e4 1999-11 Leased 2011.04.08
757-2Q8(W) Utair Aviation Castle 26271 Pw2037 1993-11 Leased 2011.04.17
757-2Q8(W) Cargo Aircraft Mgmt ILFC 26273 Pw2037 1993-12 Sold 2011.04.13
757-2G5 Thomas Cook Airlines Jazz Air 26278 Rb211-535e4 1995-03 Returned 2011.04.06
757-231 Federal Express Pacic Aircorp 28480 Pw2037 1997-03 Sold 2011.04.06
757-236 Federal Express British Airways 28665 Rb211-535e4 1997-02 Sold 2011.04.15
757-28A Thomas Cook Airlines Jazz Air 28835 Rb211-535e4 1999-02 Returned 2011.04.18
757-256(WETOPS) Icelandair Air Niugini 29312 Rb211-535e4 2000-09 Returned 2011.04.30
757-25F Thomas Cook Airlines Jazz Air 30757 Rb211-535e4 2000-04 Returned 2011.04.27
757-25F Thomas Cook Airlines Jazz Air 30758 Rb211-535e4 2000-05 Returned 2011.04.15
767-231 Boeing Company Italian Air Force 22569 Jt9d-7r4d 1982-12 Returned 2011.04.07
767-283ER Aeromexico Wells Fargo 24728 Pw4060 1990-04 Leased 2011.04.01
767-319ER Castle Lot Polish Airlines 24876 Cf6-80c2b6 1992-01 Returned 2011.04.08
767-338ER Qantas Airways Ril Aviation 24929 Cf6-80c2b6 1990-11 Lease-Buyout 2011.04.12
767-330ER ILFC Aircraft ILFC 25137 Pw4060 1991-05 Sold 2011.04.14
767-330ER Blue Panorama ILFC Aircraft 25137 Pw4060 1991-05 Leased 2011.04.14
767-3S1ER Aft Trust-Sub 1 Luzair 25221 Cf6-80c2b6f 1991-07 Returned 2011.04.15
767-383ER Air Niugini Icelandair 25365 Pw4060 1991-09 Sub-Leased 2011.04.19
767-328ER Jb 27427 Gol Transportes Aereos 27427 Cf6-80c2b6f 1995-04 Returned 2011.04.01
767-33AER El Al AWMS 27477 Pw4060 1999-12 Leased 2011.04.01
767-3Q8ER ILFC Kenya Airways 29383 Cf6-80c2b6f 1999-03 Returned 2011.04.15
767-304ER(W) ILFC Thomson Airways 29384 Cf6-80c2b7f 2000-01 Returned 2011.04.04
767-304ER(W) Tui Airlines Nederland ILFC 29384 Cf6-80c2b7f 2000-01 Leased 2011.04.04
767-33AER AWMS I Hawaiian Airlines 33423 Pw4060 2002-12 Returned 2011.04.12
767-316ER(W) Lan Airlines Lan Argentina 34629 Cf6-80c2b7f 2006-05 Returned 2011.04.01
767-381ER All Nippon Airways Fi Walnut Leasing Company 40894 Cf6-80c2b6f 2011-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.28
777-21HER Capital MgmtHouse Sechzehnte Gamma 29324 Trent892 1998-09 Sold 2011.04.01
777-21HER Emirates Capital MgmtHouse 29324 Trent892 1998-09 Leased 2011.04.02
777-223ER American Airlines Wells Fargo 29588 Trent892-17 2000-02 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.05
777-260LR Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 40773 Ge90-110b1l 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.27
777-367ER Cathay Pacic Airways Boeing 37896 Ge90-115bl2 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.29
777-3DZER Qatar Airways Boeing 38246 Ge90-115b 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.01
777-36NER GECAS Boeing 38291 Ge90-115b 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.12
777-36NER Egyptair GECAS 38291 Ge90-115b 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.12
777-328ER Air France Boeing 38706 Ge90-115b 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.15
777-328ER Daire Aviation Boeing 38706 Ge90-115b 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.15
777-328ER Air France Daire Aviation 38706 Ge90-115b 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.15
777-328ER Air France Boeing 39973 Ge90-115b 2011-02 Delivered 2011.04.01
777-328ER Msn 39973 Boeing Company 39973 Ge90-115b 2011-02 Sold 2011.04.01
777-328ER Air France Msn 39973 39973 Ge90-115b 2011-02 Leased 2011.04.01
777-323ER American Airlines Boeing (2) Ge90-115b 2013-03 Ordered 2011.04.29
787-9X2 Air Pacic Boeing (-8) Genx-1b70 - Cncl-Order 2011.04.01
A300B4-605R Vertir Airlines Thai Airways 518 Cf6-80c2a5 1989-05 Sold 2011.04.01
A300B4-622R Wells Fargo Japan Airlines 621 Pw4158 1991-10 Sold 2011.04.28
A300B4-622R Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 637 Pw4158 1992-04 Sold 2011.04.21
A300B4-622R Wells Fargo Ga Telesis 740 Pw4158 1994-07 Sold 2011.04.07
A300B4-622R Maximus Air Cargo Japan Airlines 836 Pw4158 2002-05 Sold 2011.04.21
A318-111 Frontier Airlines Wells Fargo 1991 Cfm56-5b8/P 2003-07 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.26
A318-111 Wells Fargo Frontier Airlines 2051 Cfm56-5b8/P 2003-09 Sold 2011.04.28
A318-111 Avianca Wells Fargo 2377 Cfm56-5b8/P 2004-12 Leased 2011.04.04
A318-111 Avianca Wells Fargo 2394 Cfm56-5b8/P 2005-01 Leased 2011.04.20
A318-121 Airbus Financial Services Lan Airlines 3001 Pw6122a 2007-02 Sold 2011.04.18
A318-121 Oceanair Linhas Aereas Airbus Financial Services 3001 Pw6122a 2007-02 Leased 2011.04.18
A318-121 Lan Airlines Lan Ecuador 3469 Pw6122a 2008-05 Returned 2011.04.15
A319-112 Aercap Lan Airlines 1612 Cfm56-5b6/P 2001-10 Returned 2011.04.29
A319-112 Taca International CIT Leasing 1625 Cfm56-5b6/P 2001-11 Sub-Leased 2011.04.14
A319-112 Aerolineas Galapagos Wells Fargo 2078 Cfm56-5b6/P 2003-11 Leased 2011.04.15
(Orders)/ [Options]
A319-111 Easyjet Easyjet Switzerland 2196 Cfm56-5b5/P 2004-03 Returned 2011.04.11
A319-111 Easyjet Easyjet Switzerland 2230 Cfm56-5b5/P 2004-04 Returned 2011.04.05
A319-132 ILFC Air Berlin 2383 V2524-A5 2005-01 Returned 2011.04.21
A319-132 Cyprus Airways ILFC 2383 V2524-A5 2005-01 Leased 2011.04.21
A319-132 ILFC Air Berlin 2468 V2524-A5 2005-05 Returned 2011.04.27
A319-132 AWAS ILFC 2468 V2524-A5 2005-05 Sold 2011.04.27
A319-132 Aegean Airlines AWAS 2468 V2524-A5 2005-05 Leased 2011.04.27
A319-111 RBS Aviation Capital Iberia 2889 Cfm56-5b5/P 2006-09 Sold 2011.04.01
A319-111 Vueling Airlines RBS Aviation 2889 Cfm56-5b5/P 2006-09 Leased 2011.04.02
A319-112 Germania Niki Luftfahrt 3407 Cfm56-5b6/3 2008-02 Leased 2011.04.01
A319-112 Germania Airbus 4663 Cfm56-5b6/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.18
A319-111 Easyjet Airbus 4667 Cfm56-5b5/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.12
A319-132LR Aegean Airlines Olympic Air 1880 V2524-A5 2003-03 Sub-Leased 2011.04.01
ACJ319-115 Stumpf Group Triple Alpha 3046 Cfm56-5b7/P 2007-03 Returned 2011.04.01
ACJ319-115 K5 Aviation Stumpf Group 3046 Cfm56-5b7/P 2007-03 Leased 2011.04.02
ACJ319-133 Deer Air Airbus 4042 V2527m-A5 2009-10 Returned 2011.04.22
ACJ319-133 Hainan Airlines Airbus 4042 V2527m-A5 2009-10 Returned 2011.04.22
ACJ319-133 Beijing Capital Airlines Hainan Airlines 4042 V2527m-A5 2009-10 Leased 2011.04.22
ACJ319-115 Rossiya Airlines Airbus 4679 Cfm56-5b7/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.19
ACJ319-115 Airbus Rossiya Airlines 4679 Cfm56-5b7/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.19
A320-211 Jordan Aviation Syrianair 029 Cfm56-5a1 1989-01 Returned 2011.04.01
A320-211 Dubrovnik Airlines Astraeus Airlines 136 Cfm56-5a1 1990-10 Sub-Leased 2011.04.30
A320-232 MCAP Europe Thomas Cook Airline 1411 V2527-A5 2001-01 Returned 2011.04.01
A320-232 Small Planet Airlines MCAP Europe 1411 V2527-A5 2001-01 Leased 2011.04.01
A320-233 Lan Argentina Lan Airlines 1568 V2527e-A5 2001-08 Sub-Leased 2011.04.08
A320-211 Vueling Airlines Iberia 173 Cfm56-5a1 1991-02 Leased 2011.04.01
A320-214 Vueling Airlines Iberia 2143 Cfm56-5b4/P 2003-11 Leased 2011.04.01
A320-232 RBS Aerospace Easyjet 2157 V2527-A5 2004-01 Returned 2011.04.21
A320-232 Avianova [Russia] RBS Aerospace 2157 V2527-A5 2004-01 Leased 2011.04.21
A320-232 Macquarie Airnance White Airways 2204 V2527-A5 2004-04 Returned 2011.04.13
A320-232 Volaris Macquarie Airnance 2204 V2527-A5 2004-04 Leased 2011.04.13
A320-232 Srilankan Airlines CIT Aerospace 2345 V2527-A5 2004-12 Leased 2011.04.07
A320-211 Vueling Airlines Iberia 266 Cfm56-5a1 1991-10 Leased 2011.04.02
A320-214 Azerbaijan Airlines Air Berlin 2685 Cfm56-5b4/P 2006-02 Sold 2011.04.15
A320-212 Aerco Nouvelair Tunisie 299 Cfm56-5a3 1992-01 Returned 2011.04.18
A320-212 Amsterdam Airlines Aerco 299 Cfm56-5a3 1992-01 Leased 2011.04.18
A320-211 Nouvelair Tunisie Libyan Airlines 348 Cfm56-5a1 1992-06 Returned 2011.04.01
A320-212 Firstnation Airways Wells Fargo 409 Cfm56-5a3 1993-02 Leased 2011.04.04
A320-212 Aeroturbine Wells Fargo 420 Cfm56-5a3 1993-03 Transferred 2011.04.15
A320-214 Skylease Netherlands Aerventure 4235 Cfm56-5b4/3 2010-02 Sold 2011.04.01
A320-232 Wizz Air Hungary Wizz Air Bulgaria 4308 V2527-A5 2010-05 Returned 2011.04.01
A320-233 Lan Ecuador Lan Airlines 4383 V2527e-A5 2010-07 Leased 2011.04.08
A320-233 Lan Ecuador Lan Airlines 4400 V2527e-A5 2010-08 Sub-Leased 2011.04.29
A320-214 Aerventure Skylease Netherlands 4411 Cfm56-5b4/3 2010-08 Sold 2011.04.28
A320-231 Phoenix Leasing Hanover Leasing 444 V2500-A1 1993-08 Sold 2011.04.21
A320-231 Adria Airways Phoenix Leasing 444 V2500-A1 1993-08 Leased 2011.04.21
A320-232 Sichuan Airlines Airbus 4525 V2527-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.01
A320-214 China Southern Airbus 4550 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.29
A320-214 GECAS Airbus 4600 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-02 Delivered 2011.04.06
A320-214 Bahrain Air GECAS 4600 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-02 Leased 2011.04.06
A320-214 Aeroot GECAS 4625 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.21
A320-232 Tiger Airways Falcon Aircraft 4645 V2527-A5 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.21
A320-232 Tiger Airways Aus Airbus 4645 V2527-A5 2011-03 Sub-Leased 2011.04.21
A320-214 BOC Aviation Airbus 4649 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.06
A320-214 Aeroot BOC Aviation 4649 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.06
A320-214 Uzbekistan Airways Airbus 4651 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.01
A320-232 Yemenia Airbus 4653 V2527-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.27
A320-214 ACG Airbus 4655 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.07
A320-214 Bank Of Utah Airbus 4655 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.07
A320-214 Virgin America Bank Of Utah 4655 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.07
A320-214 BOC Aviation Airbus 4656 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.14
A320-214 Aeroot BOC Aviation 4656 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.14
A320-214 ACG Airbus 4658 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.22
A320-214 Free Bird Airlines ACG 4658 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.22
A320-214 China Eastern Airbus 4659 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.01
A320-212 Firstnation Airways ACG Acquisition 466 Cfm56-5a3 1994-04 Leased 2011.04.04
A320-214 Vueling Airlines GECAS 4661 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.14
A320-214 Air France Airbus 4664 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.14
A320-214 Air France Chishima Real Estate 4664 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.19
A320-214 Frontier Airlines Airbus 4668 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.21
A320-214 Bank Of Utah Airbus 4668 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Sold 2011.04.21
A320-214 Frontier Airlines Bank Of Utah 4668 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.04.21
A320-232 AWAS Airbus 4670 V2527-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.29
A320-232 Royal Jordanian AWAS 4670 V2527-A5 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.29
A320-214 Air Berlin Airbus 4671 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.14
A320-214 ICBC Air Berlin 4671 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Sold 2011.04.20
A320-214 China Southern ICBC 4671 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.04.20
A320-214 CIT Leasing Airbus 4673 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.20
(Orders)/ [Options]
A320-214 Wells Fargo Airbus 4673 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Sold 2011.04.20
A320-214 Swiss International Wells Fargo 4673 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.04.20
A320-214 Air Berlin Airbus 4674 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.18
A320-214 Celestial Aviation Airbus 4675 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Sold 2011.04.21
A320-214 Aigle Azur Celestial Aviation 4675 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.04.21
A320-214 Aer Lingus Airbus 4678 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.27
A320-214 Air Lease Airbus 4681 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.29
A320-214 Vueling Airlines Air Lease 4681 Cfm56-5b4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.04.29
A320-232 Wizz Air Hungary Jackson Square 4683 V2527-A5 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.29
A320-212 Firstnation Airways Wells Fargo 497 Cfm56-5a3 1994-09 Leased 2011.04.04
A320-214 Yes Airways Wells Fargo 533 Cfm56-5b4/2p 1995-03 Leased 2011.04.28
A320-212 ILFC Bahrain Air 579 Cfm56-5a3 1996-02 Returned 2011.04.18
A320-212 ILFC Bahrain Air 645 Cfm56-5a3 1996-11 Returned 2011.04.05
A320-233 RAK Airways Air Moldova 741 V2527e-A5 1997-10 Sub-Leased 2011.04.01
A320-200NEO(W) ILFC Airbus (42) Pw1127g 2015-12 Ordered 2011.04.27
A320-200NEO(W) ILFC Airbus (33) 2016-01 Ordered 2011.04.27
A321-111 Air Mediterranee Myanma Airways 642 Cfm56-5b1/P 1997-01 Returned 2011.04.01
A321-231 Sierra Leasing Airblue 1199 V2533-A5 2000-03 Returned 2011.04.18
A321-231 Calliope Sierra Leasing 1199 V2533-A5 2000-03 Sold 2011.04.18
A321-211 ILFC ILFC 1905 Cfm56-5b3/P 2003-01 Sold 2011.04.19
A321-211 Bellevue Leasing Wells Fargo 2117 Cfm56-5b3/P 2003-12 Sold 2011.04.28
A321-211 Solaris Airlines Bellevue Leasing 2117 Cfm56-5b3/P 2003-12 Leased 2011.04.28
A321-231 Tam Linhas Aereas Airbus 4662 V2533-A5 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.28
A321-231 Vietnam Airlines Airbus 4669 V2533-A5 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.28
A321-211 ILFC Aer Lingus 841 Cfm56-5b3/P 1998-06 Returned 2011.04.05
A321-211 Ural Airlines ILFC 841 Cfm56-5b3/P 1998-06 Leased 2011.04.05
A321-211 ILFC Aer Lingus 991 Cfm56-5b3/P 1999-03 Returned 2011.04.28
A321-211 Ural Airlines ILFC 991 Cfm56-5b3/P 1999-03 Leased 2011.04.28
A321-200NEO(W) ILFC Airbus (18) Pw1133g 2018-11 Ordered 2011.04.27
A321-200NEO(W) ILFC Airbus (7) 2019-02 Ordered 2011.04.27
A330-223 Tam Linhas Aereas Airbus 1213 Pw4170 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.14
A330-243 AWAS Airbus 1214 Trent772b-60 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.14
A330-243 Garuda Indonesian AWAS 1214 Trent772b-60 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.14
A330-243 Hawaiian Airlines Airbus 1217 Trent772b-60 2011-02 Delivered 2011.04.12
A330-202 Air Lease Airbus 1218 Cf6-80e1a4b 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.15
A330-202 ALC Warehouse Airbus 1218 Cf6-80e1a4b 2011-03 Sold 2011.04.15
A330-202 Alitalia ALC Warehouse 1218 Cf6-80e1a4b 2011-03 Leased 2011.04.15
A330-223 China Southern Airlines Airbus 1220 Pw4170 2011-04 Delivered 2011.04.29
A330-243 Vb A330 Leasing Zamrid 372 Trent772b-60 2000-11 Sold 2011.04.19
A330-243 Virgin Blue Airlines Vb A330 Leasing 372 Trent772b-60 2000-11 Leased 2011.04.19
A330-200 Aercap Aviation Airbus (-1) - Cncl-Order 2011.04.01
A330-301 Airbus Aer Lingus 059 Cf6-80e1a2 1994-06 Returned 2011.04.16
A330-301 GECAS Airbus 059 Cf6-80e1a2 1994-06 Sold 2011.04.16
A330-323E Malaysian Airline System Airbus 1209 Pw4168a 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.04
A330-343E Virgin Atlantic Airbus 1215 Trent772b-60 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.11
A330-343E Virgin Atlantic Aercap 1215 Trent772b-60 2011-03 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.11
A330-343E China Airlines Airbus 1215 Trent772b-60 2011-03 Sub-Leased 2011.04.11
A330-343 Air China Airbus 1216 Trent772c-60 2011-03 Delivered 2011.04.06
A330-343E Orbest Xl Airways France 833 Trent772b-60 2007-03 Returned 2011.04.11
A340-212 Republic Financial South African Airways 021 Cfm56-5c3/F 1993-08 Returned 2011.04.30
A340-313X Iberia Ames-Camo 414 Cfm56-5c4 2001-05 Leased 2011.04.01
A380-842 Qantas Airways Airbus 062 Trent972-84 2010-09 Delivered 2011.04.08
A380-842 Qantas Airways QF ECA 062 Trent972-84 2010-09 Sale-Leaseback 2011.04.08
A380-861 ILFC Airbus (-4) Gp7270 - Cncl-Order 2011.04.01
A380-800 ILFC Airbus (-6) - Cncl-Order 2011.04.01
MAY
717-2K9 Aerolineas De Baleares Spanair 55056 BR715A1-30 1999-11 Returned 2011.05.28
717-2K9 Bavaria Leasing Spanair 55056 BR715A1-30 1999-11 Returned 2011.05.28
717-2K9 Blue1 Bavaria Leasing 55056 BR715A1-30 1999-11 Leased 2011.05.29
727-23 DJ Aerospace Trump Group 20046 JT8D-7 1968-06 Returned 2011.05.25
727-23 Weststar Aviation DJ Aerospace 20046 JT8D-7 1968-06 Sold 2011.05.26
727-2B6 Team Aviation New Orleans Hornets 21068 JT8D-15 1975-01 Returned 2011.05.16
737-2K5 Map Asset Preservation Wells Fargo 22597 JT8D-15A 1981-05 Sold 2011.05.17
737-277 Unknown Starline 22650 JT8D-15 1981-09 Sold 2011.05.01
737-2T5 Aeronance Aerolineas Galapagos 22979 JT8D-15 1983-02 Returned 2011.05.01
737-2T5 Avior Airlines Aeronance 22979 JT8D-15 1983-02 Leased 2011.05.02
737-2Y5 Avior Airlines Belina Export 23848 JT8D-15A 1987-06 Leased 2011.05.12
737-33A Alba Star Air Batumi 23628 CFM56-3B1 1986-10 Sub-Leased 2011.05.26
737-375 Jet Time Wells Fargo 23808 CFM56-3B2 1987-07 Leased 2011.05.06
737-3Y0 Air Guinee Larrett 23927 CFM56-3B1 1988-06 Sold 2011.05.24
737-322 Source One Wilmington Trust 24245 CFM56-3C1 1988-09 Sold 2011.05.11
737-3K2 Jetscape NAS 24327 CFM56-3B2 1989-04 Returned 2011.05.12
737-3K2 Small Planet Airlines Jetscape 24327 CFM56-3B2 1989-04 Leased 2011.05.12
737-329 Transalpine Leasing Unknown 24355 CFM56-3B2 1989-03 Sold 2011.05.11
737-329 Transaero Airlines Transalpine Leasing 24355 CFM56-3B2 1989-03 Leased 2011.05.11
737-3G7 Orix Aviation Wells Fargo 24634 CFM56-3B2 1990-01 Sold 2011.05.10
737-3G7 Aerolinea Principal Chile Orix Aviation 24634 CFM56-3B2 1990-01 Leased 2011.05.10
737-322 Tor Air Small Planet Airlines 24664 CFM56-3C1 1990-05 Sub-Leased 2011.05.17
737-35B Tor Air Flylal Charter 25069 CFM56-3B2 1991-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
737-3L9 Galaxy Aviation Eastern Sky Jets 25125 CFM56-3B2 1991-05 Returned 2011.05.01
737-33A AWMS NAS 27458 CFM56-3B1 1997-10 Returned 2011.05.26
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-36N Hainan Airlines China West Air 28606 CFM56-3B2 1999-09 Returned 2011.05.10
737-31S Air Zena Deutsche Finance 29116 CFM56-3C1 1998-02 Leased 2011.05.01
737-3S3 Pinewatch Salg-7 29245 CFM56-3C1 1998-07 Sold 2011.05.11
737-3S3 Transaero Airlines Pinewatch 29245 CFM56-3C1 1998-07 Leased 2011.05.13
737-4B3 Jetairy Jet4you 24750 CFM56-3C1 1990-08 Returned 2011.05.10
737-4B3 Tuiy Nordic Jet4you 24750 CFM56-3C1 1990-08 Returned 2011.05.10
737-4B3 Aar Services Tuiy Nordic 24750 CFM56-3C1 1990-08 Sold 2011.05.10
737-4B3 Nat Nuclear Aar Services 24750 CFM56-3C1 1990-08 Sold 2011.05.17
737-4Y0 Airplanes Holdings Air One 24906 CFM56-3C1 1991-02 Returned 2011.05.25
737-4Q8 BCC Leasing Solitaire Air 25109 CFM56-3C1 1993-11 Returned 2011.05.10
737-429 Japan Transocean Air Hibiscus 25247 CFM56-3C1 1991-07 Lease-Buyout 2011.05.30
737-484 Bank Of Utah Aersale 25361 CFM56-3C1 1991-08 Sold 2011.05.19
737-48E Alnaser Airlines Jetran 25765 CFM56-3C1 1992-06 Leased 2011.05.06
737-436 Ryan Ryan Intl 25843 CFM56-3C1 1992-02 Returned 2011.05.09
737-436 Aviation Exchange Ryan 25843 CFM56-3C1 1992-02 Sold 2011.05.09
737-436 Aviation Technologies Aviation Exchange 25843 CFM56-3C1 1992-02 Sold 2011.05.09
737-436 Mistral Air Dillondell 25851 CFM56-3C1 1992-10 Leased 2011.05.01
737-46J Eastern Sky Jets East Air 27213 CFM56-3C1 1994-02 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
737-4Q3 Japan Transocean Air Japan Airlines 29485 CFM56-3C1 1998-10 Lease-Buyout 2011.05.31
737-505 Nbb- Lease Pship Blue Air 24274 CFM56-3C1 1991-03 Returned 2011.05.19
737-505 Jeritt Nbb- Lease Pship 24274 CFM56-3C1 1991-03 Sold 2011.05.19
737-5Y0 Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 24897 CFM56-3B1 1991-01 Sold 2011.05.20
737-53A AWMS I Skyexpress 24921 CFM56-3C1 1990-11 Returned 2011.05.24
737-548(W) Barkham Associates Air Baltic 24968 CFM56-3B1 1990-11 Returned 2011.05.31
737-529 Kalstar Aviation Aero North Intl 26537 CFM56-3B1 1992-05 Leased 2011.05.01
737-55D Celestial Aviation Lot Polish Airlines 27418 CFM56-3C1 1992-10 Returned 2011.05.01
737-528 Itochu Lease Estonian Air 27425 CFM56-3C1 1995-05 Returned 2011.05.27
737-528 Wells Fargo Itochu Lease 27425 CFM56-3C1 1995-05 Sold 2011.05.27
737-5Q8 ILFC Pegasus Airlines 28201 CFM56-3C1 1998-01 Returned 2011.05.04
737-524(W) Utair Aviation Wells Fargo 28901 CFM56-3C1 1997-07 Leased 2011.05.23
737-524(W) Utair Aviation BLF 28911 CFM56-3C1 1997-11 Leased 2011.05.10
737-683 Innity Aviation Fl Uranus Leasing 28295 CFM56-7B20 1998-10 Sold 2011.05.05
737-683 SAS Innity Aviation 28295 CFM56-7B20 1998-10 Leased 2011.05.05
737-683 Innity Aviation FG Honest Kumiai 28296 CFM56-7B20 1997-12 Sold 2011.05.05
737-683 Innity Aviation Fl Titan Leasing 28297 CFM56-7B20 1998-01 Sold 2011.05.05
737-7Q8(W) ILFC Virgin Blue Airlines 28238 CFM56-7B24 2001-03 Returned 2011.05.03
737-7Q8(W) ILFC ILFC 28238 CFM56-7B24 2001-03 Sold 2011.05.03
737-7Q8(W) Aerolineas Argentinas ILFC 28238 CFM56-7B24 2001-03 Leased 2011.05.18
737-7Q8(W) ILFC Virgin Blue Airlines 28240 CFM56-7B24 2001-04 Returned 2011.05.09
737-7Q8(W) ILFC ILFC 28240 CFM56-7B24 2001-04 Sold 2011.05.09
737-7Q8(W) Aerolineas Argentinas ILFC 28240 CFM56-7B24 2001-04 Leased 2011.05.22
737-76Q(W) Rain Air Berlin 30277 CFM56-7B24 2001-08 Returned 2011.05.31
737-73V SA Victoria BOC Aviation 32422 CFM56-7B20 2003-07 Sold 2011.05.11
737-73V(W) Air Italy SA Victoria 32422 CFM56-7B20 2003-07 Leased 2011.05.12
737-7BD(W) Cameroon Airlines ACG 33920 CFM56-7B20 2005-06 Leased 2011.05.10
737-7CT(W) BOC Aviation Boeing 37956 CFM56-7B20 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.19
737-7CT(W) Westjet BOC Aviation 37956 CFM56-7B20 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.19
737-8K5(W) Air Berlin Tuiy 27981 CFM56-7B26 1997-06 Sub-Leased 2011.05.10
737-8K5(W) Air Berlin Tuiy 27987 CFM56-7B27 2000-02 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
737-86J(W) ACG Saga Airlines 28069 CFM56-7B26 1998-03 Returned 2011.05.31
737-85P Aircastle Lombard Aviation 28381 CFM56-7B26 1999-03 Sold 2011.05.01
737-85P(W) Orenburg Airlines Aircastle 28381 CFM56-7B26 1999-03 Leased 2011.05.02
737-85P Comair Aircastle 28382 CFM56-7B26 1999-03 Leased 2011.05.04
737-85F Travel Service Airlines Calima De Aviacion 28821 CFM56-7B26 1998-10 Sub-Leased 2011.05.27
737-82R ILFC Pegasus Airlines 29344 CFM56-7B26 2001-04 Returned 2011.05.31
737-8Q8(W) Travel Service Airlines Sunwing Airlines 29351 CFM56-7B26 2004-03 Sub-Leased 2011.05.20
737-85F(W) Flyrey Macquarie 30007 CFM56-7B26 2000-12 Leased 2011.05.12
737-86Q(W) Air Lease Wells Fargo 30292 CFM56-7B26 2004-01 Sold 2011.05.01
737-86Q(W) Sunwing Airlines Air Lease 30292 CFM56-7B26 2004-01 Leased 2011.05.02
737-86Q(W) Travel Service Sunwing Airlines 30294 CFM56-7B26 2004-02 Returned 2011.05.19
737-85F(W) Macquarie South African Airways 30567 CFM56-7B26 2001-01 Returned 2011.05.20
737-85F(W) Flyrey Macquarie 30567 CFM56-7B26 2001-01 Leased 2011.05.20
737-8Q8(W) Sun Country ILFC 30637 CFM56-7B26 2001-02 Leased 2011.05.14
737-8Q8(W) Travel Service Airlines Sunwing Airlines 30719 CFM56-7B26 2007-04 Returned 2011.05.27
737-86N(W) Flyrey MAS 32690 CFM56-7B26 2007-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
737-86N(W) GECAS Pegasus Airlines 32735 CFM56-7B26 2002-03 Returned 2011.05.23
737-86N(W) Orenburg Airlines GECAS 32735 CFM56-7B26 2002-03 Leased 2011.05.24
737-86N(W) Celestial Aviation Pegasus Airlines 32736 CFM56-7B26 2002-03 Returned 2011.05.29
737-8K5(W) Travel Service Airlines Tabarak Aviation 32907 CFM56-7B27B1 2002-03 Returned 2011.05.01
737-86J(W) Caribbean Airlines ALC 32919 CFM56-7B26 2003-01 Leased 2011.05.07
737-86J(W) Air Jamaica Caribbean Airlines 32919 CFM56-7B26 2003-01 Sub-Leased 2011.05.08
737-8BK(W) Thomson Airways Sunwing Airlines 33029 CFM56-7B26 2006-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.27
737-8AS(W) Sunexpress Germany RBS Aerospace 33558 CFM56-7B24 2004-01 Leased 2011.05.17
737-8Q8(W) Spicejet ILFC 33699 CFM56-7B27 2003-03 Leased 2011.05.16
737-8FE(W) Virgin Australia Virgin Blue 33796 CFM56-7B26 2003-08 Transferred 2011.05.04
737-8FE(W) Pacic Blue Virgin Australia 33796 CFM56-7B26 2003-08 Leased 2011.05.04
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-8FE(W) Polynesian Blue Polynesian Blue 33799 CFM56-7B26 2004-02 Sub-Leased 2011.05.04
737-8FE(W) Vbnc 4 Boeing 34013 CFM56-7B26 2004-08 Transferred 2011.05.04
737-8FE(W) Pacic Blue Pacic Blue 34013 CFM56-7B26 2004-08 Sub-Leased 2011.05.04
737-8FE(W) Vbnc 4 Boeing 34015 CFM56-7B26 2004-10 Transferred 2011.05.04
737-86N(W) ALC GECAS 34253 CFM56-7B26 2006-01 Sold 2011.05.01
737-86N(W) Xiamen Airlines ALC 34253 CFM56-7B26 2006-01 Leased 2011.05.02
737-86N(W) Air Lease GECAS 34254 CFM56-7B26 2006-02 Sold 2011.05.01
737-86N(W) Shanghai Airlines Air Lease 34254 CFM56-7B26 2006-02 Leased 2011.05.02
737-808(W) Travel Service Airlines Sunwing Airlines 34704 CFM56-7B27 2006-05 Sub-Leased 2011.05.26
737-808(W) Lucky Air Hainan Airlines 34967 CFM56-7B26 2007-03 Sub-Leased 2011.05.31
737-808(W) Lucky Air Hainan Airlines 34968 CFM56-7B26 2007-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.31
737-84P(W) ALC BOC Aviation 35077 CFM56-7B26 2007-10 Sold 2011.05.01
737-84P(W) Hainan Airlines ALC 35077 CFM56-7B26 2007-10 Leased 2011.05.02
737-8FH(W) Pegasus Airlines RAK Airways 35094 CFM56-7B26 2007-02 Returned 2011.05.31
737-8FH(W) ALC RBS Aerospace 35101 CFM56-7B26 2007-11 Sold 2011.05.01
737-8FH(W) Hainan Airlines ALC 35101 CFM56-7B26 2007-11 Leased 2011.05.02
737-852(W) Aeromexico Air Lease 35120 CFM56-7B26 2007-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.05.02
737-8K5(W) Tuiy Sunwing Airlines 35143 CFM56-7B27B1 2008-12 Returned 2011.05.12
737-8K5(W) Jetairy Canjet Airlines 35148 CFM56-7B27B1 2009-01 Returned 2011.05.03
737-86N(W) Astra Airlines AMC Airlines 35213 CFM56-7B26 2007-05 Sub-Leased 2011.05.25
737-8EH(W) Gol Boeing 35842 CFM56-7B27 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.27
737-8HC(W) Air Lease GE Capital 36529 CFM56-7B26 2008-03 Sold 2011.05.01
737-8HC(W) Sunexpress Air Lease 36529 CFM56-7B26 2008-03 Leased 2011.05.02
737-85P(W) Air Europa Boeing 36584 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.12
737-85P(W) Dragon Aviation Air Europa 36584 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.12
737-85P(W) Shandong Airlines Dragon Aviation 36584 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.12
737-8FE(W) Vbnc 9 Virgin Blue 36604 CFM56-7B26 2008-06 Transferred 2011.05.04
737-8FE(W) BOC Aviation Virgin Blue 36605 CFM56-7B26 2008-07 Transferred 2011.05.04
737-86J(W) ICBC Air Berlin 36878 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.16
737-86J(W) China Southern ICBC 36878 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.16
737-8ZS(W) S7 Airlines Boeing 37085 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.23
737-8ZS(W) Eight Hundred Boeing 37085 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.23
737-8ZS(W) S7 Airlines Eight Hundred 37085 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.23
737-8ZS(W) Globus Boeing 37085 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.23
737-8K5(W) RBS Aerospace Tui Travel 37258 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-05 Sold 2011.05.23
737-8K5(W) Thomson Airways RBS Aerospace 37258 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-05 Leased 2011.05.23
737-8GJ(W) Spicejet Boeing 37366 CFM56-7B24 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.04
737-8GJ(W) Wonkadell Boeing 37366 CFM56-7B24 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.04
737-8GJ(W) Spicejet Wonkadell 37366 CFM56-7B24 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.04
737-8GU(W) BLF Boeing 37552 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.26
737-8GU(W) Utair Aviation BLF 37552 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.26
737-8GU(W) BLF Boeing 37553 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.31
737-8GU(W) Utair Aviation BLF 37553 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.31
737-86N(W) Sc Air Boeing 38019 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.11
737-86N(W) Skymark Airlines Sc Air 38019 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.11
737-8Q8(W) ILFC Boeing 38820 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.24
737-8Q8(W) Tuiy ILFC 38820 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.24
737-81B(W) China Southern Boeing 38966 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.28
737-8JP(W) Dy2 Leasing Boeing 39047 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.04
737-8K5(W) ACG Boeing 39094 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.17
737-8K5(W) Tuiy ACG 39094 CFM56-7B27B1 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.17
737-87L(W) Shenzhen Airlines Boeing 39143 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.19
737-87L(W) Shenzhen Airlines Boeing 39144 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.24
737-84P(W) Hainan Airlines Boeing 39224 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.24
737-8K2(W) Transavia Airlines Boeing 39259 CFM56-7B27/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.19
737-86N(W) Travel Service Airlines GECAS 39404 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.05
737-8BK(W) CIT Leasing Boeing 39443 CFM56-7B24 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.26
737-8BK(W) KLM CIT Leasing 39443 CFM56-7B24 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.26
737-8KN(W) MCAPEurope Boeing 40245 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.11
737-8KN(W) Flydubai MCAPEurope 40245 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.11
737-82R(W) Pegasus Airlines GE Capital 40727 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sale-Leaseback 2011.05.20
737-823(W) American Airlines Boeing 40762 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.24
737-823(W) American Airlines Wilmington Trust 40762 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sale-Leaseback 2011.05.26
737-8D6(W) Air Algerie Boeing 40863 CFM56-7B26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.26
737-8JP(W) Dy2 Leasing Boeing 40869 CFM56-7B26 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.23
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-800(W) Mongolian Airlines Boeing -2 CFM56-7B26 2013-03 Ordered 2011.05.31
737-8GK(W) Buraq Air Transport Boeing (-1) CFM56-7B24 - Cncl-Order 2011.05.01
737-800(W) Unknown Boeing -1 CFM56-7B26 2012-09 Ordered 2011.05.02
747-2U3B(F) Kalitta Air Wells Fargo 22769 JT9D-7Q 1982-04 Sold 2011.05.16
747-256B(F) Kalitta Air Wells Fargo 24071 JT9D-7Q3 1988-03 Sold 2011.05.16
747-438 Max Air Qantas Airways 25067 RB211-524G 1991-05 Sold 2011.05.20
747-446 Transaero Airlines SB Leasing 27100 CF6-80C2B1F 1999-11 Leased 2011.05.11
747-412 Wells Fargo Singapore Airlines 29950 PW4056 2000-01 Sold 2011.05.26
747-412 Transaero Airlines Wells Fargo 29950 PW4056 2000-01 Leased 2011.05.26
757-28A Thomson Airways Astraeus Airlines 24543 RB211-535E4 1990-01 Sub-Leased 2011.05.12
757-21B SCAT ACG 25083 RB211-535E4 1991-03 Leased 2011.05.01
757-2Q8(ETOPS) Thomson Airways Astraeus Airlines 25621 RB211-535E4 1992-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
757-2Q8(ETOPS) Astraeus Airlines Thomson Airways 25621 RB211-535E4 1992-04 Returned 2011.05.11
757-2Y0 Icelandair United Nations 26151 RB211-535E4 1992-06 Returned 2011.05.20
757-2Q8(W) Utair Aviation Castle 26268 PW2037 1993-11 Leased 2011.05.01
757-2Q8(W) Air Transport Intl Cargo Aircraft Mgmt 26273 PW2037 1993-12 Leased 2011.05.01
757-28A(ETOPS) Thomas Cook Mint Airways 26276 RB211-535E4 1996-02 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
757-28A North American Westjet 26277 RB211-535E4 1994-12 Returned 2011.05.01
757-204(W) Thomson Airways Tuiy Nordic 27219 RB211-535E4 1993-12 Returned 2011.05.16
757-236 Federal Express British Airways 28666 RB211-535E4 1997-03 Sold 2011.05.31
757-256(ETOPS) Towy Leasing RAK Airways 29311 RB211-535E4 2000-08 Returned 2011.05.01
757-23N(ETOPS) United Nations Icelandair 30735 RB211-535E4-B 2000-05 Sub-Leased 2011.05.19
767-266ER Executive Jet Congo Hewa Bora Airways 23178 JT9D-7R4E 1984-06 Sold 2011.05.19
767-266ER Executive Executive Jet Congo 23178 JT9D-7R4E 1984-06 Sold 2011.05.19
767-269ER Sunny Airways KMW Leasing 23280 JT9D-7R4E4 1985-11 Leased 2011.05.13
767-2B1ER Aerousa Avianca 25421 PW4060 1991-11 Returned 2011.05.05
767-224ER Omni Air Continental Airlines 30434 CF6-80C2B4F 2001-01 Leased 2011.05.19
767-332 Delta Air Lines Wilmington Trust 25988 PW4060 1993-05 Lease-Buyout 2011.05.11
767-31AER(W) Austrian Airlines Air Finance Amsterdam 25273 PW4060 1991-08 Lease-Buyout 2011.05.01
767-33AER Msa I Martinair Holland 25535 PW4060 1993-03 Returned 2011.05.31
767-328ER Nordwind Airlines Jb 27427 27427 CF6-80C2B6F 1995-04 Leased 2011.05.29
767-3W0ER Air Lease China Eastern 28149 RB211-524H 1996-08 Sold 2011.05.24
767-3W0ER Mongolian Airlines Air Lease 28149 RB211-524H 1996-08 Leased 2011.05.24
767-3Q8ER Wilmington Trust ILFC 29383 CF6-80C2B6F 1999-03 Sold 2011.05.06
767-3Q8ER Transaero Airlines Wilmington Trust 29383 CF6-80C2B6F 1999-03 Leased 2011.05.06
767-3Z9ER(W) Austrian Airlines GE Capital 29867 PW4060 1998-11 Lease-Buyout 2011.05.01
767-33AER Air Canada AWMS 33423 PW4060 2002-12 Leased 2011.05.18
767-32LER Azerbaijan Airlines Boeing 40343 CF6-80C2B7F 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.31
767-316ER Lan Airlines Boeing -5 CF6-80C2B7F 2012-12 Ordered 2011.05.18
767-316ER Lan Airlines Boeing [4] CF6-80C2B7F 2013-03 Optioned 2011.05.18
767-300ER Mongolian Airlines Boeing -1 CF6-80C2B7F 2013-12 Ordered 2011.05.03
777-222ER T7 Aviation US Bank 26943 PW4090 1997-07 Sold 2011.05.20
777-222ER Omni Air T7 Aviation 26943 PW4090 1997-07 Leased 2011.05.20
777-3B5ER Korean Air Lines Boeing 37647 GE90-115B 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.18
777-31HER Emirates Boeing 38985 GE90-115B 2011-03 Delivered 2011.05.05
777-367ER Cathay Pacic Boeing 39233 GE90-115BL2 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.27
777-3FXER Etihad Airways Boeing 39681 GE90-115B 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.18
777-328ER Air France Boeing 39971 GE90-115B 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.03
777-323ER American Airlines Boeing -1 GE90-115B 2013-08 Ordered 2011.05.25
777-3DZER Qatar Airways Boeing -4 GE90-115B 2013-06 Ordered 2011.05.27
777-3M0ER Aeroot Airlines Boeing -8 GE90-115B 2015-08 Ordered 2011.05.11
787-85C Xiamen Airlines Boeing -6 2014-07 Ordered 2011.05.01
A300B4-622R Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 621 PW4158 1991-10 Sold 2011.05.23
A300B4-622R Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 730 PW4158 1994-02 Sold 2011.05.16
A310-304 Ariana Airlines Saga Airlines 562 CF6-80C2A2 1990-11 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
A310-324 Airbus Wilmington Trust 686 PW4152 1993-08 Sold 2011.05.31
A318-111 Frontier Airlines Wells Fargo 1660 CFM56-5B8/P 2002-06 Sale-Leaseback 2011.05.04
A318-121 Airbus Lan Airlines 3030 PW6122A 2007-08 Sold 2011.05.01
A318-121 Oceanair Airbus 3030 PW6122A 2007-08 Leased 2011.05.02
A318-121 Airbus Lan Airlines 3062 PW6122A 2007-10 Sold 2011.05.17
A318-121 Oceanair Airbus 3062 PW6122A 2007-10 Leased 2011.05.17
A318-121 Lan Airlines Lan Ecuador 3390 PW6122A 2008-02 Returned 2011.05.06
A318-121 Lan Airlines Lan Ecuador 3438 PW6122A 2008-04 Returned 2011.05.13
A319-112 TACA Wells Fargo 2066 CFM56-5B6/P 2003-10 Leased 2011.05.23
A319-115 Hainan Airlines Beijing Airlines 2581 CFM56-5B7/P 2005-10 Returned 2011.05.12
A319-115 Lucky Air Hainan Airlines 2581 CFM56-5B7/P 2005-10 Leased 2011.05.12
A319-112 Eden Irish Karthago Airlines 3171 CFM56-5B6/P 2007-06 Returned 2011.05.13
A319-112 ALS Irish Leasing Eden 3171 CFM56-5B6/P 2007-06 Sold 2011.05.13
A319-112 Aircraft Portfolio Air Jamaica 3331 CFM56-5B6/3 2007-11 Returned 2011.05.13
A319-112 Germania Airbus 4691 CFM56-5B6/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.03
A319-112 Csa Czech Airlines Airbus 4713 CFM56-5B6/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.23
A319-112 Csa Czech Airlines Eastwest Leasing 4713 CFM56-5B6/3 2011-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.05.23
A319-132LR Aegean Airlines Olympic Air 1727 V2524-A5 2002-09 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
ACJ319-115 Qatar Amiri Flight Airbus 3994 CFM56-5B7/3 2009-08 Returned 2011.05.27
A320-214 Vueling Airlines Iberia 1101 CFM56-5B4/P 1999-09 Leased 2011.05.01
A320-214 Castletroy Leasing Air Berlin 1493 CFM56-5B4/P 2001-05 Returned 2011.05.02
A320-214 Brussels Airlines Castletroy Leasing 1493 CFM56-5B4/P 2001-05 Leased 2011.05.02
A320-214 ALC Rain I 1686 CFM56-5B4/P 2001-12 Sold 2011.05.01
A320-214 Spring Airlines ALC 1686 CFM56-5B4/P 2001-12 Leased 2011.05.02
A320-231 Travel Service Airlines Air Sweden 169 V2500-A1 1991-08 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
A320-211 Adria Airways Bayerischehausbau 191 CFM56-5A1 1991-03 Leased 2011.05.01
(Orders)/ [Options]
A320-214 Vueling Airlines Iberia 2104 CFM56-5B4/P 2003-09 Leased 2011.05.01
A320-232 Air Caledonie Air New Zealand 2173 V2527-A5 2004-02 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
A320-232 Air New Zealand Air Caledonie 2173 V2527-A5 2004-02 Returned 2011.05.10
A320-214 ILFC Thomson Airways 2180 CFM56-5B4/P 2004-02 Returned 2011.05.03
A320-214 Holidays Airlines ILFC 2180 CFM56-5B4/P 2004-02 Leased 2011.05.03
A320-212 Tor Air Bh-Air 294 CFM56-5A3 1992-01 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
A320-211 Solomon Airlines Pegasus Aviation 302 CFM56-5A1 1992-02 Leased 2011.05.20
A320-211 Smartlynx Airlines Travel Service Airlines 311 CFM56-5A1 1992-03 Returned 2011.05.01
A320-211 Small Planet Airlines Travel Service Airlines 311 CFM56-5A1 1992-03 Sub-Leased 2011.05.02
A320-231 Orix Aviation Indian Airlines 327 V2500-A1 1992-04 Returned 2011.05.30
A320-231 GMT Aircraft Leasing Indian Airlines 327 V2500-A1 1992-04 Returned 2011.05.30
A320-214 Travel Service Airlines Nouvelair Tunisie 3480 CFM56-5B4/3 2008-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.05
A320-232 Volaris Amentum Aircraft 3524 V2527-A5 2008-06 Leased 2011.05.23
A320-211 Travel Service Airlines Smartlynx Airlines 359 CFM56-5A1 1992-08 Sub-Leased 2011.05.25
A320-231 Ata Airlines Khors Air 362 V2500-A1 1992-09 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
A320-214 Whitney Leasing ILFC 3907 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-05 Sold 2011.05.19
A320-214 Kam Air Bahrain Air 4055 CFM56-5B4/3 2009-09 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
A320-231 Viking Hellas Wells Fargo 415 V2500-A1 1994-01 Leased 2011.05.31
ACJ320-214 Continent Aircraft Air Luther 4199 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-01 Returned 2011.05.02
ACJ320-214 Air Luther Aircraft Guaranty 4199 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-01 Sold 2011.05.02
ACJ320-214 Comlux Malta Air Luther 4199 CFM56-5B4/3 2010-01 Sold 2011.05.03
A320-212 Strategic Airlines Aeroturbine 436 CFM56-5A3 1993-06 Leased 2011.05.18
A320-231 Kellstrom Triton Aviation 443 V2500-A1 1993-08 Sold 2011.05.01
A320-233 Lan Ecuador Lan Airlines 4439 V2527E-A5 2010-09 Sub-Leased 2011.05.04
A320-233 Lan Ecuador Lan Airlines 4476 V2527E-A5 2010-10 Sub-Leased 2011.05.10
A320-232 Lan Ecuador Lan Airlines 4509 V2527-A5 2010-10 Sub-Leased 2011.05.17
A320-232 Aerdragon Aviation Airbus 4575 V2527-A5 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.18
A320-232 Sichuan Airlines Aerdragon Aviation 4575 V2527-A5 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.18
A320-232 Aerventure Airbus 4686 V2527-A5 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.10
A320-232 Hainan Airlines Aerventure 4686 V2527-A5 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.10
A320-232 China West Air Airbus 4686 V2527-A5 2011-04 Sub-Leased 2011.05.10
A320-214 Frontier Airlines Bank Of Utah 4688 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.10
A320-214 Tunis Air Airbus 4689 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.06
A320-232 Yemenia Airbus 4690 V2527-A5 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.30
A320-214 Air Lease Airbus 4694 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.17
A320-214 Srilankan Airlines Air Lease 4694 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.17
A320-232 China Southern Airbus 4696 V2527-A5 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.18
A320-214 Celestial Aviation Airbus 4699 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.20
A320-214 Holidays Airlines Celestial Aviation 4699 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.20
A320-232 Qatar Airways Airbus 4700 V2527-A5 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.25
A320-233 Silkair Airbus 4701 V2527E-A5 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.12
A320-214 Frontier Airlines Airbus 4704 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.19
A320-214 Frontier Airlines Bank Of Utah 4704 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.19
A320-214 China Eastern Airbus 4709 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.23
A320-214 Aeroot Airlines GECAS 4712 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.26
A320-214 Air France Emscote Aviation 4714 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.05.26
A320-214 Zen Nikku Leasing Airbus 4720 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-05 Sold 2011.05.31
A320-214 Star Flyer Zen Nikku Leasing 4720 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-05 Leased 2011.05.31
A320-214 Uzbekistan Airways Airbus 4724 CFM56-5B4/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.26
A320-232 ILFC Atlasjet Intl 640 V2527-A5 1996-11 Returned 2011.05.01
A320-232 Onur Air ILFC 640 V2527-A5 1996-11 Leased 2011.05.01
A320-232 Aircastle Lotus Airline 667 V2527-A5 1997-02 Returned 2011.05.10
A320-232 Atlasjet Intl Anadolujet 676 V2527-A5 1997-03 Returned 2011.05.01
A320-232 ILFC Anadolujet 676 V2527-A5 1997-03 Returned 2011.05.01
A320-232 Onur Air ILFC 676 V2527-A5 1997-03 Leased 2011.05.01
A320-214 Interjet [Mexico] Wells Fargo 707 CFM56-5B4/P 1997-06 Leased 2011.05.25
A320-214 GECAS Air China 724 CFM56-5B4/P 1997-09 Returned 2011.05.01
A320-214 Smartlynx Airlines GECAS 724 CFM56-5B4/P 1997-09 Leased 2011.05.02
A320-211 ILFC Smartlynx Airlines 726 CFM56-5A1 1997-10 Returned 2011.05.01
A320-233 Aircastle Lotus Airline 739 V2527E-A5 1997-10 Returned 2011.05.11
A320-233 Aircastle Lotus Airline 743 V2527E-A5 1997-10 Returned 2011.05.11
A320-232 ILFC Airblue 760 V2527-A5 1997-11 Returned 2011.05.31
A320-212 Travel Service Airlines Nouvelair Tunisie 793 CFM56-5A3 1998-02 Sub-Leased 2011.05.01
A320-214 B&B Air Funding Aigle Azur 888 CFM56-5B4/P 1998-09 Returned 2011.05.16
A320-214 Hello Wells Fargo 888 CFM56-5B4/P 1998-09 Leased 2011.05.16
A320-214 Star Flyer Airbus -2 CFM56-5B4/3 2013-06 Ordered 2011.05.09
A321-211 Solaris Airlines ILFC 1905 CFM56-5B3/P 2003-01 Leased 2011.05.10
(Orders)/ [Options]
A321-231 PK Airnance Gaif Ii 792 V2533-A5 1998-02 Sold 2011.05.20
A330-243 Air Lease Aercap 1138 TRENT772C-60 2010-07 Sold 2011.05.01
A330-243 Sichuan Airlines Air Lease 1138 TRENT772C-60 2010-07 Leased 2011.05.02
A330-223 Tam Linhas Aereas Airbus 1221 PW4170 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.11
A330-243 Avianca Airbus 1224 TRENT772B-60 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.19
A330-243 Wells Fargo Airbus 1224 TRENT772B-60 2011-05 Sold 2011.05.19
A330-243 Avianca Wells Fargo 1224 TRENT772B-60 2011-05 Leased 2011.05.19
A330-202 Air Lease Airbus 1225 CF6-80E1A4B 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.19
A330-202 ALC Shamrock Airbus 1225 CF6-80E1A4B 2011-04 Sold 2011.05.19
A330-202 Alitalia ALC Shamrock 1225 CF6-80E1A4B 2011-04 Leased 2011.05.19
A330-243 Oman Air Airbus 1227 TRENT772B-60 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.25
A330-243 Air Europa Whitney 597 TRENT772B-60 2004-05 Leased 2011.05.23
A330-223(HGW) Korean Air Lines Airbus -5 PW4170 2013-06 Ordered 2011.05.03
A330-343E Etihad Airways Airbus 1205 TRENT772B-60 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.31
A330-323E MAS Airbus 1219 PW4168A 2011-04 Delivered 2011.05.04
A330-342E Cathay Pacic Airbus 1222 TRENT772-60 2011-05 Delivered 2011.05.13
A340-312 Squadron Leasing Gulf Air 133 CFM56-5C3/F 1996-11 Sold 2011.05.27
A340-313X Hi Fly Adagold Aviation 450 CFM56-5C4 2002-01 Returned 2011.05.26
A380-861 Korean Air Lines Airbus 35 GP7270 2010-11 Delivered 2011.05.31
A380-861 Air France Airbus 52 GP7270 2010-08 Delivered 2011.05.17
A380-861 Air France Ds-Rendite-Fonds 52 GP7270 2010-08 Sale-Leaseback 2011.05.17
JUNE
717-2cm Hawaiian Airlines Wells Fargo 55001 BR715a1-30 1998-10 Lease-Buyout 2011.06.28
717-22a Hawaiian Airlines Wells Fargo 55118 BR715a1-30 2001-02 Lease-Buyout 2011.06.28
737-291 Jet Care Corporation San Jose Sharks 21508 JT8d-9a 1978-04 Sold 2011.06.17
737-217 Unknown PALS 22256 JT8d-17 1980-05 Leased 2011.06.23
737-291 Aircraft Guaranty Corp Sindie, Christian 22384 JT8d-17 1980-10 Sold 2011.06.24
737-2v6 Sarab Blair Investors 22431 JT8d-15a 1981-09 Sold 2011.06.05
737-2v6 Jet Connections Sarab 22431 JT8d-15a 1981-09 Leased 2011.06.18
737-247 Bradley Air Services Celtic Capital 23521 JT8d-15a 1987-01 Sold 2011.06.10
737-3h4 Frontiers Of Flight Museum Southwest Airlines 22940 CFM56-3b1 1984-07 Sold 2011.06.14
737-3t0(W) Grandmax Group As & L 23371 CFM56-3b1 1985-12 Sold 2011.06.03
737-3t0(W) Orient Thai Airlines Grandmax Group 23371 CFM56-3b1 1985-12 Leased 2011.06.03
737-3t0(W) Orient Thai Airlines As & L 23375 CFM56-3b1 1986-02 Leased 2011.06.01
737-33a Alba Star RPK Capital 23628 CFM56-3b1 1986-10 Leased 2011.06.01
737-3g7 Desert Rainier Us Airways 23776 CFM56-3b1 1987-06 Returned 2011.06.04
737-3g7 Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 23776 CFM56-3b1 1987-06 Sold 2011.06.21
737-3g7 Wells Fargo Wells Fargo 23777 CFM56-3b1 1987-06 Sold 2011.06.16
737-382 Airexplore Triton Aviation 24365 CFM56-3b2 1989-02 Leased 2011.06.09
737-3l9 Vista Georgia Galaxy Aviation 25125 CFM56-3b2 1991-05 Leased 2011.06.25
737-3l9 GE Capital Corp Norwegian Air Shuttle 27336 CFM56-3c1 1994-02 Returned 2011.06.29
737-31s Small Planet Airlines Small Planet Airlines 29055 CFM56-3c1 1997-07 Leased 2011.06.30
737-4k5 Alba Star Wells Fargo 24130 CFM56-3c1 1990-02 Leased 2011.06.17
737-42c East Ireland Wells Fargo 24813 CFM56-3c1 1991-05 Sold 2011.06.02
737-42c Central Connect Airlines East Ireland 24813 CFM56-3c1 1991-05 Leased 2011.06.02
737-484 Aersale Aersale 25314 CFM56-3c1 1991-08 Sold 2011.06.23
737-484 Blue Air-Transport Aersale 25314 CFM56-3c1 1991-08 Leased 2011.06.30
737-484 Air Manas Bank Of Utah 25361 CFM56-3c1 1991-08 Leased 2011.06.23
737-4q8 Tombo Aviation Merpati Nusantara 26280 CFM56-3c1 1992-02 Returned 2011.06.15
737-48e Blue Bird Airways ILFC 27632 CFM56-3c1 1997-01 Leased 2011.06.07
737-548(W) Goiania Comercio Barkham Associates 24968 CFM56-3b1 1990-11 Sold 2011.06.02
737-548(W) Aerosvit Airlines Goiania Comercio 24968 CFM56-3b1 1990-11 Leased 2011.06.02
737-55d Ukraine Intl Airlines Celestial Aviation 27418 CFM56-3c1 1992-10 Leased 2011.06.11
737-524(W) Continental Airlines Wells Fargo 28900 CFM56-3c1 1997-07 Lease-Buyout 2011.06.03
737-524(W) Wells Fargo Continental Airlines 28900 CFM56-3c1 1997-07 Sold 2011.06.10
737-524(W) Utair Aviation Wells Fargo 28913 CFM56-3c1 1997-12 Leased 2011.06.27
737-76n Hainan Airlines Lucky Air 28582 CFM56-7b24 1998-10 Returned 2011.06.21
737-76n Hainan Airlines Lucky Air 28585 CFM56-7b24 1998-11 Returned 2011.06.21
737-76q(W) Boullioun Aircraft Air Berlin 30271 CFM56-7b24 2000-12 Returned 2011.06.15
737-76q(W) Yakutia Airlines Boullioun Aircraft 30271 CFM56-7b24 2000-12 Leased 2011.06.16
737-76q(W) Yakutia Airlines Rain I 30277 CFM56-7b24 2001-08 Leased 2011.06.05
737-73v BOC Aviation BOC Aviation 32426 CFM56-7b20 2004-03 Sold 2011.06.15
737-73v Jet Lite BOC Aviation 32426 CFM56-7b20 2004-03 Leased 2011.06.15
737-7h4(W) Southwest Airlines Boeing 36674 CFM56-7b24 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.29
737-7eh(W) Gol Transportes Aereos Boeing 37608 CFM56-7b24 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.23
737-7k2(W) KLM Boeing 39256 CFM56-7b22/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.22
737-7bc(W) F & L Aviation Boeing 30327 CFM56-7b26 1999-08 Sold 2011.06.09
(Orders)/ [Options]
737-7bc(W) Frank & Victoria Fertitta F & L Aviation 30327 CFM56-7b26 1999-08 Leased 2011.06.09
737-7afc(W) United States Navy Boeing 40577 CFM56-7b20 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.24
737-86j(W) ACG Saga Airlines 28068 CFM56-7b26 1998-02 Returned 2011.06.09
737-8q8(W) ILFC Yemenia 28252 CFM56-7b26 2002-07 Returned 2011.06.02
737-8q8(W) Caribbean Airlines ILFC 28252 CFM56-7b26 2002-07 Leased 2011.06.03
737-8q8(W) Air Jamaica ILFC 28252 CFM56-7b26 2002-07 Sub-Leased 2011.06.03
737-82r Jeju Air ILFC 29344 CFM56-7b26 2001-04 Leased 2011.06.16
737-8k5(W) Bil Aircraftleasing TUIy 30414 CFM56-7b27 2000-10 Returned 2011.06.27
737-83n(WEtops) Unknown ILFC 30706 CFM56-7b27b1 2001-08 Sold 2011.06.10
737-83n(WEtops) Aeromexico Unknown 30706 CFM56-7b27b1 2001-08 Leased 2011.06.16
737-8q8(W) ILFC Yemenia 30730 CFM56-7b27 2007-09 Returned 2011.06.30
737-86n(W) Xl Airways France Celestial Aviation 32736 CFM56-7b26 2002-03 Leased 2011.06.08
737-8q8(W) RAK Airways Midwest Airlines 32841 CFM56-7b27 2005-04 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
737-881(W) ANA Boeing 33911 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.21
737-838(W) OAS Australia Macquarie 34180 CFM56-7b24 2005-10 Transferred 2011.06.01
737-838(W) Qantas Airways OAS Australia 34180 CFM56-7b24 2005-10 Leased 2011.06.01
737-838(W) Qantas Airways Boeing 34190 CFM56-7b24 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.22
737-838(W) Jetconnect Qantas Airways 34190 CFM56-7b24 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.22
737-8kn(W) Corendon Airlines Flydubai 35794 CFM56-7b26 2009-01 Leased 2011.06.03
737-8eh(W) Gol Transportes Aereos Boeing 35843 CFM56-7b27 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.09
737-8eh(W) Transavia Airlines Gol Transportes Aereos 36596 CFM56-7b27 2010-01 Leased 2011.06.27
737-86j(W) Air Berlin Boeing 36880 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.21
737-86j(W) Air Berlin Boeing 36881 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.08
737-8k5(W) TUI Travel Boeing 37259 CFM56-7b27b1 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.13
737-8k5(W) RBS Aerospace Boeing Company 37259 CFM56-7b27b1 2011-05 Sold 2011.06.13
737-8k5(W) TUIy Nordic RBS Aerospace 37259 CFM56-7b27b1 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.13
737-8k5(W) TUI Travel Boeing 37260 CFM56-7b27b1 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.24
737-8k5(W) Jetairy TUI Travel 37260 CFM56-7b27b1 2011-06 Leased 2011.06.24
737-86j(W) RBS Aerospace Air Berlin 37747 CFM56-7b26 2009-11 Sold 2011.06.12
737-86j(W) Airline Taimyr RBS Aerospace 37747 CFM56-7b26 2009-11 Leased 2011.06.12
737-86n(W) GE Capital Boeing 38021 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.17
737-86n(W) China Eastern Airlines GE Capital 38021 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.17
737-86n(W) China United Airlines Boeing Company 38021 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Sub-Leased 2011.06.17
737-86n(W) Xiamen Airlines GE Capital 38022 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.10
737-8u3(W) ILFC Boeing 38821 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.21
737-8u3(W) Garuda Indonesian ILFC 38821 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.21
737-8jp(W) Norwegian Air Shuttle Boeing 39007 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.07
737-87l(W) Shenzhen Airlines Boeing 39145 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.09
737-8fz(W) Babcock & Brown Boeing 39320 CFM56-7b26 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.28
737-8fz(W) MAS Babcock & Brown 39320 CFM56-7b26 2011-06 Leased 2011.06.28
737-8fz(W) Flyrey Boeing Company 39320 CFM56-7b26 2011-06 Sub-Leased 2011.06.28
737-86n(W) Garuda Indonesian GE Capital 39403 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.15
737-81d(W) AWAS Boeing 39415 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.21
737-81d(W) Skynet Asia Airways AWAS 39415 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.21
737-82r(W) Pegasus Airlines Boeing 40011 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.06
737-89l(W) Air China Boeing 40027 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.13
737-8kn(W) Avolon GE Capital 40234 CFM56-7b26 2009-06 Sold 2011.06.01
737-8kn(W) Virgin Australia Airlines Avolon 40234 CFM56-7b26 2009-06 Leased 2011.06.02
737-8kn(W) Flydubai Boeing 40246 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.03
737-8kn(W) Avolon Flydubai 40246 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Sold 2011.06.03
737-8kn(W) Virgin Australia Airlines Avolon 40246 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.03
737-846(W) Japan Airlines Boeing 40354 CFM56-7b24 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.27
737-823(W) American Airlines Boeing 40763 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.09
737-823(W) American Airlines Wilmington Trust 40763 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.13
737-866(W) Egyptair Boeing 40800 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.15
737-8fe(W) Virgin Australia Airlines Boeing 40994 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.08
737-8fe(W) Virgin Australia Airlines Avolon 40994 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.08
737-8fe(W) Virgin Australia Airlines Boeing 40995 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.20
737-8fe(W) RBS Aerospace Boeing 40995 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Sold 2011.06.20
737-8fe(W) Virgin Australia Airlines RBS Aerospace 40995 CFM56-7b26 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.20
737-800(W) ALC Boeing (6) CFM56-7b24 2017-06 Ordered 2011.06.01
737-8jp(W) Norwegian Air Shuttle Boeing (15) CFM56-7b26 2015-02 Ordered 2011.06.01
737-800(W) Mongolian Airlines Boeing (2) CFM56-7b26 2013-03 Ordered 2011.06.01
737-9gper(W) Lion Air Boeing 37282 CFM56-7b27 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.07
737-9b5er(W) Korean Air Lines Boeing 37633 CFM56-7b27 2011-04 Delivered 2011.06.14
737-9b5er(W) Korean Air Lines Boeing 37634 CFM56-7b27 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.28
747-338 Unknown Bank Of Utah 23408 RB211-524d4-19 1986-03 Leased 2011.06.22
747-446 Aersale Japan Airlines 26342 CF6-80c2b1f 1992-02 Sold 2011.06.29
747-446 Aersale Aersale 26346 CF6-80c2b1f 1991-12 Sold 2011.06.14
747-446 Pullmantur Air Aersale 26346 CF6-80c2b1f 1991-12 Leased 2011.06.16
747-4f6 ILFC Air New Zealand 27602 CF6-80c2b1f 1998-05 Returned 2011.06.30
747-446 Wells Fargo Japan Airlines 27650 CF6-80c2b1f 1999-10 Sold 2011.06.23
747-8 Unknown Boeing (2) GENX-2b67 2014-10 Ordered 2011.06.01
757-2j4(W) Trump Group Tag Air 25155 RB211-535e4 1991-04 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
757-21b ACG China Southern Airlines 25258 RB211-535e4 1991-07 Returned 2011.06.24
757-2k2(W) Icelandair Air Finland 26330 RB211-535e4 1996-05 Sub-Leased 2011.06.11
757-28a(Etops) Astraeus Airlines British Midland 28161 RB211-535e4 1996-07 Returned 2011.06.04
757-256(Etops) Icelandair Towy Leasing 29311 RB211-535e4 2000-08 Leased 2011.06.10
(Orders)/ [Options]
767-231 Wells Fargo DHL 22566 JT9d-7r4d 1982-09 Transferred 2011.06.13
767-231 ABX Air Wells Fargo 22566 JT9d-7r4d 1982-09 Leased 2011.06.13
767-338er Cargo Aircraft Mgmt Qantas Airways 24316 CF6-80c2b6 1988-09 Sold 2011.06.28
767-383er Pegasus Aviation Avianca 24357 PW4060 1989-03 Returned 2011.06.14
767-319er North American Castle 24876 CF6-80c2b6 1992-01 Leased 2011.06.08
767-338er Qantas Airways TJT Leasing 24930 CF6-80c2b6 1990-11 Lease-Buyout 2011.06.23
767-383er Muzun Leasing One Air Madagascar 25088 PW4062-3 1991-02 Returned 2011.06.30
767-38eer Guggenheim Gol Transportes Aereos 25132 CF6-80c2b6f 1992-01 Returned 2011.06.30
767-38eer Atlas Air Wells Fargo 25132 CF6-80c2b6f 1992-01 Sold 2011.06.30
767-338er Qantas Airways Ril Aviation 25316 CF6-80c2b6 1991-09 Lease-Buyout 2011.06.23
767-3y0er Sunwing Airlines Euro Atlantic Airways 25411 PW4060 1991-11 Sub-Leased 2011.06.14
767-3y0er Sunwing Airlines Euro Atlantic Airways 26208 PW4060 1993-06 Sub-Leased 2011.06.14
767-306er Wilmington Trust North American 28098 CF6-80c2b6f 1996-02 Returned 2011.06.22
767-306er Nordwind Airlines Wilmington Trust 28098 CF6-80c2b6f 1996-02 Leased 2011.06.23
767-343er Condor GECAS Technical 30009 CF6-80c2b6f 1999-03 Leased 2011.06.01
767-316er(W) LAN Ecuador LAN Airlines 35696 CF6-80c2b7f 2008-05 Leased 2011.06.09
767-300er Mongolian Airlines Boeing (1) Unknown 2014-02 Ordered 2011.06.01
767-34af UPS Boeing 37866 CF6-80c2b7f 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.08
767-34af UPS Boeing 37867 CF6-80c2b7f 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.29
777-F6n GE Capital Boeing 37716 GE90-110b1l 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.27
777-F6n China Cargo Airlines GE Capital 37716 GE90-110b1l 2011-06 Leased 2011.06.27
777-Fs2 Federal Express Boeing 37729 GE90-110b1l 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.03
777-Ffx Etihad Airways Boeing 39682 GE90-110b1l 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.21
777-F1b China Southern Airlines Boeing (6) GE90-110b1l 2012-02 Ordered 2011.06.01
777-2fblr Boeing Business Jets Boeing 40668 GE90-110b1l 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.17
777-2fblr Ceiba Intercontinental Boeing Company 40668 GE90-110b1l 2011-05 Sold 2011.06.17
777-3b5er Korean Air Lines Boeing 37648 GE90-115b 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.07
777-367er Cathay Pacic Boeing 37901 GE90-115bl2 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.24
777-3f2er Turk Hava Yollari Boeing 40795 GE90-115b 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.24
777-3m2er Taag Angola Airlines Boeing 40805 GE90-115b 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.14
A300b4-622r Wells Fargo Japan Airlines 703 PW4158 1993-06 Sold 2011.06.06
A318-111 Avianca Wells Fargo 2552 CFM56-5b8/P 2005-08 Leased 2011.06.06
A318-111 Avianca Wells Fargo 2575 CFM56-5b8/P 2005-09 Leased 2011.06.24
A318-121 Oceanair LAN Airlines 3214 PW6122a 2007-12 Sold 2011.06.14
A319-112 Constitution Aircraft Wells Fargo 1124 CFM56-5b6/2p 1999-10 Sold 2011.06.14
A319-112 Atlasjet International Constitution Aircraft 1124 CFM56-5b6/2p 1999-10 Leased 2011.06.14
A319-112 Hainan Airlines Beijing Capital Airlines 2617 CFM56-5b6/P 2005-11 Returned 2011.06.15
A319-112 Lucky Air Hainan Airlines 2617 CFM56-5b6/P 2005-11 Leased 2011.06.15
A319-111 RBS Aerospace Iberia 3169 CFM56-5b5/P 2007-06 Returned 2011.06.30
A319-112 ALS ALS 3171 CFM56-5b6/P 2007-06 Sold 2011.06.29
A319-112 Tatarstan Airlines ALS Bermuda 3171 CFM56-5b6/P 2007-06 Leased 2011.06.29
A319-112 Flynext Germania 3589 CFM56-5b6/3 2008-07 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A319-112 Germania Germania 3589 CFM56-5b6/3 2008-07 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A319-112 Flynext Germania 3818 CFM56-5b6/3 2009-02 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A319-112 Germania Germania 3818 CFM56-5b6/3 2009-02 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A319-112 Tam Linhas Aereas Airbus 4734 CFM56-5b6/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.07
A319-111 Easyjet Airbus 4744 CFM56-5b5/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.09
A319-111 Aircraft Purchase Fleet Airbus 4759 CFM56-5b5/3 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.29
A319-111 Herodias Airbus 4759 CFM56-5b5/3 2011-06 Sold 2011.06.29
A319-111 Alitalia Herodias 4759 CFM56-5b5/3 2011-06 Leased 2011.06.29
A319-115 Tibet Airlines Airbus 4766 CFM56-5b7/3 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.26
A320-214 ILFC Iberia 1087 CFM56-5b4/P 1999-09 Returned 2011.06.01
A320-214 BH-Air ILFC 1087 CFM56-5b4/P 1999-09 Leased 2011.06.02
A320-211 African Holding Comp Of America Castle 112 CFM56-5a1 1990-07 Sold 2011.06.01
A320-214 ILFC Koralblue Airlines 1454 CFM56-5b4/P 2001-03 Returned 2011.06.23
A320-214 Calliope ILFC 1454 CFM56-5b4/P 2001-03 Sold 2011.06.23
A320-214 Ural Airlines AFS 1751 CFM56-5b4/P 2002-03 Leased 2011.06.23
A320-232 Qantas Airways Ril Aviation 2515 V2527-A5 2005-07 Sold 2011.06.01
A320-232 Jetstar Airways Qantas Airways 2515 V2527-A5 2005-07 Leased 2011.06.01
A320-214 Unknown Air Berlin 2539 CFM56-5b4/P 2005-09 Returned 2011.06.25
A320-214 Interjet Unknown 2539 CFM56-5b4/P 2005-09 Leased 2011.06.25
A320-232 OAS Australia Macquarie 2642 V2527-A5 2006-03 Transferred 2011.06.01
A320-232 Qantas Airways OAS Australia 2642 V2527-A5 2006-03 Leased 2011.06.01
A320-232 Jetstar Airways Jetstar Airways 2642 V2527-A5 2006-03 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A320-232 OAS Australia Macquarie 2651 V2527-A5 2005-12 Transferred 2011.06.01
A320-232 Qantas Airways OAS Australia 2651 V2527-A5 2005-12 Leased 2011.06.01
A320-232 Jetstar Airways Jetstar Airways 2651 V2527-A5 2005-12 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A320-214 GE Capital Orbest Orizonia Airlines 2745 CFM56-5b4/P 2006-03 Returned 2011.06.24
A320-214 Celestial GE Capital 2745 CFM56-5b4/P 2006-03 Sold 2011.06.24
A320-212 Transamerica Aviation Smartlynx Airlines 283 CFM56-5a3 1991-12 Returned 2011.06.01
A320-214 Azerbaijan Airlines Belair Airlines 3006 CFM56-5b4/P 2006-12 Sub-Leased 2011.06.14
A320-232 Turk Hava Yollari Wells Fargo 3308 V2527-A5 2007-10 Leased 2011.06.14
A320-232 Anadolujet Crescent Leasing 3308 V2527-A5 2007-10 Sub-Leased 2011.06.14
A320-232 Volaris Amentum 3543 V2527-A5 2008-06 Leased 2011.06.06
A320-212 Travel Service Airlines Nouvelair Tunisie 400 CFM56-5a3 1993-01 Sub-Leased 2011.06.19
A320-211 Arkia Israel Airlines Smartlynx Airlines 426 CFM56-5a1 1993-04 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A320-214 Avolon Aerventure 4310 CFM56-5b4/3 2010-05 Sold 2011.06.01
A320-214 Air Arabia Avolon 4310 CFM56-5b4/3 2010-05 Leased 2011.06.01
A320-214 Air Arabia Maroc Air Arabia Maroc 4310 CFM56-5b4/3 2010-05 Sub-Leased 2011.06.02
A320-214 Avolon Aerventure 4375 CFM56-5b4/3 2010-07 Sold 2011.06.01
A320-214 Spring Airlines Avolon 4375 CFM56-5b4/3 2010-07 Leased 2011.06.02
(Orders)/ [Options]
KEEPING YOU IN THE AIR
www.elfc.com
Engine Leasing
Asset Management
All Manufacturer Types
Long, Medium & Short Term
Leases Operating Leases Asset
Management Sales & Leasebacks
All Manufacturer Types Operating Leases
Asset Management Sales & Leasebacks
All Manufacturer Types Long, Medium & Short Term
Leases Operating Leases Asset Management Engine
Trading All Manufacturer Types Sales & Leasebacks Asset
nagement Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating Leases
Asset Management All Manufacturer Types Sales & Leasebacks
Operating Leases Engine Trading Long, Medium & Short Term Leases
All Manufacturer Types Operating Leases Asset Management
Leases Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating Leases
Manufacturer Types Sales & Leasebacks Engine Trading
Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating Leases Sales
& Leasebacks Engine Trading Asset Management Long
Medium & Short Term Leases Engine Trading Operating
Leases All Manufacturer Types Asset Management
um & Short Term Leases Asset Management Sales
Leasebacks All Manufacturer Types Long, Medium
and Short Term Leases Operating Leases Asset
Management Sales & Leasebacks All Manufacturer
Management Long, Medium & Short Term Leases
er Types Operati ng Leases Asset Management
Sal es & Leasebacks All Manufacturer Types
Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating
Leases Asset Management Sales Leasebacks
ati ng Leases All Manufacturer Types Long
Medium Short Term Leases Operating
Leases Asset Management Engine
Engine Trading All Manufacturer Types
Leasebacks Engine Trading Asset
Management Medium & Shor t Term
Management All Manufacturer Types
Sales & Leasebacks Operating
Leases Engine Trading Long
Medium & Short Term Leases
eases All Manufacturer Types
ent Asset Management
Medium & Short Term
Leases Operating
Leases Sales & Leasebacks
Engine Trading Long, Medium & Short
Term Leases Operating Leases
Sales & Leasebacks Engine
Trading Asset Management Operating
Leases Long, Medium & Short Term Leases
Asset Management
Management
Term Leases
Term
A320-214 Interjet Aerventure 4411 CFM56-5b4/3 2010-08 Leased 2011.06.27
A320-232 Avolon Crescent Leasing 4518 V2527-A5 2010-11 Sold 2011.06.01
A320-232 Indigo Avolon 4518 V2527-A5 2010-11 Leased 2011.06.02
A320-214 Juneyao Airlines Airbus 4587 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.01
A320-214 China Eastern Airlines Airbus 4627 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.24
A320-232 Tiger Airways Tiger Airways 4645 V2527-A5 2011-03 Returned 2011.06.02
A320-232 British Airways Airbus 4725 V2527-A5 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.01
A320-214 AWAS Airbus 4727 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.09
A320-214 AWAS Airbus 4727 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Sold 2011.06.09
A320-214 Frontier Airlines AWAS 4727 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.09
A320-214 Interjet Airbus 4733 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.22
A320-214 GE Capital Airbus 4735 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.07
A320-214 Orbest Orizonia Airlines GE Capital 4735 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.07
A320-232 Wizz Air Hungary JSA 4736 V2527-A5 2011-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.17
A320-214 GE Capital Airbus 4738 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.20
A320-214 Spring Airlines GE Capital 4738 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.20
A320-232 Avolon Wizz Air Hungary 4741 V2527-A5 2011-05 Sold 2011.06.23
A320-232 Volaris Avolon 4741 V2527-A5 2011-05 Leased 2011.06.23
A320-214 CIT Airbus 4742 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.22
A320-214 Vueling Airlines CIT 4742 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Leased 2011.06.22
A320-214 Aviation Capital Group Airbus 4745 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.27
A320-214 Bank Of Utah Airbus 4745 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Sold 2011.06.27
A320-214 Frontier Airlines Bank Of Utah 4745 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Leased 2011.06.27
A320-214 Air France Airbus 4747 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.01
A320-214 Air France JSA Aircraft 4747 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.02
A320-214 Spring Airlines Airbus 4750 CFM56-5b4/3 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.28
A320-232 Indigo HKAC Leasing 4757 V2527-A5 2011-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.02
A320-214 Yes Airways Jet-I 566 CFM56-5b4/2 1995-11 Leased 2011.06.21
A320-212 Unknown ILFC 579 CFM56-5a3 1996-02 Sold 2011.06.09
A320-212 Donbassaero Unknown 579 CFM56-5a3 1996-02 Leased 2011.06.20
A320-212 Unknown ILFC 645 CFM56-5a3 1996-11 Sold 2011.06.10
A320-212 Donbassaero Unknown 645 CFM56-5a3 1996-11 Leased 2011.06.20
A320-214 Aegean Airlines Smartlynx Airlines 724 CFM56-5b4/P 1997-09 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A320-211 White Airways ILFC 726 CFM56-5a1 1997-10 Leased 2011.06.01
A320-200neo(W) AirAsia Airbus (200) Leap-X 2016-11 Ordered 2011.06.23
A320-200 China Aviation Supplies Airbus (46) 2012-11 Ordered 2011.06.28
A320-200neo(W) Goair Airbus (72) 2015-11 Ordered 2011.06.23
A320-200neo(W) GE Capital Airbus (60) Leap-X 2016-09 Ordered 2011.06.20
A320-200 ICBC Airbus (42) 2012-09 Ordered 2011.06.28
A320-200 Indigo Airbus (30) 2016-01 Ordered 2011.06.22
A320-200neo(W) Indigo Airbus (150) 2016-04 Ordered 2011.06.22
A320-200neo(W) LAN Airlines Airbus (20) 2016-10 Ordered 2011.06.22
A320-200neo(W) SAS Airbus (30) Leap-X 2017-01 Ordered 2011.06.20
A320-200neo(W) SAS Airbus [11] Leap-X 2021-01 Optioned 2011.06.20
A321-231 China Eastern Airlines Airbus 4746 V2533-A5 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.23
A321-211 Dgvr Alpha Mobilien Gulf Air 675 CFM56-5b3/P 1997-05 Returned 2011.06.01
A321-231 Onur Air PK Airnance 792 V2533-A5 1998-02 Leased 2011.06.03
A321-200neo(W) Transasia Airways Airbus (6) 2017-04 Ordered 2011.06.21
A330-223 Hong Kong Airlines Hainan Airlines 1034 PW4170 2009-06 Returned 2011.06.29
A330-223 China Southern Airbus 1233 PW4170 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.22
A330-243 Aircastle Airbus 1236 Trent772b-60 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.01
A330-243 South African Aircastle 1236 Trent772b-60 2011-06 Leased 2011.06.02
A330-243 Air Europa Calliope 551 Trent772b-60 2003-11 Leased 2011.06.08
A330-203 OAS Australia Macquarie 887 CF6-80e1a3 2007-11 Transferred 2011.06.01
A330-203 Qantas Airways OAS Australia 887 CF6-80e1a3 2007-11 Leased 2011.06.01
A330-202 OAS Australia Macquarie 945 CF6-80e1a4 2008-07 Transferred 2011.06.01
A330-202 Qantas Airways OAS Australia 945 CF6-80e1a4 2008-07 Leased 2011.06.01
A330-202 Jetstar Airways Jetstar Airways 945 CF6-80e1a4 2008-07 Sub-Leased 2011.06.01
A330-203(Mrtt) Australian Air Force MTAD 951 CF6-80e1a3 2008-04 Sold 2011.06.22
A330-203(Mrtt) Australian Air Force MTAD 969 CF6-80e1a3 2008-10 Sold 2011.06.01
A330-243f Turk Hava Yollari Airbus 1092 Trent772b-60 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.01
A330-343e Etihad Airways Airbus 1226 Trent772b-60 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.01
A330-323e MAS Airbus 1229 PW4168a 2011-05 Delivered 2011.06.01
A330-323e MAS JSA 1229 PW4168a 2011-05 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.02
A330-343e Aeroot Airbus 1232 Trent772b-60 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.23
A330-323e MAS Airbus 1234 PW4168a 2011-06 Delivered 2011.06.24
A330-323e MAS JSA 1234 PW4168a 2011-06 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.24
A330-343e Singapore Airlines Airbus (15) Trent772b-60 2013-05 Ordered 2011.06.29
A330-343e Saudi Arabian Airlines Airbus (4) Trent772b-60 2013-07 Ordered 2011.06.20
A340-313x ILFC Cathay Pacic 381 CFM56-5c4 2000-12 Returned 2011.06.01
A340-313x Srilankan Airlines ILFC 381 CFM56-5c4 2000-12 Leased 2011.06.02
A380-841 Singapore Airlines Airbus 058 Trent970-84 2010-07 Delivered 2011.06.16
A380-861 Air France Airbus 064 GP7270 2010-08 Delivered 2011.06.17
A380-861 Air France SNC Otter Bail 064 GP7270 2010-08 Sale-Leaseback 2011.06.17
A380-800 Skymark Airlines Airbus (2) 2016-10 Ordered 2011.06.23
KEEPING YOU IN THE AIR
www.elfc.com
Engine Leasing
Asset Management
Long, Medium & Short Term
Management Sales & Leasebacks
All Manufacturer Types Operating Leases
Asset Management Sales & Leasebacks
All Manufacturer Types Long, Medium & Short Term
Leases Operating Leases Asset Management Engine
Trading All Manufacturer Types Sales & Leasebacks Asset
nagement Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating Leases
Asset Management All Manufacturer Types Sales & Leasebacks
Operating Leases Engine Trading Long, Medium & Short Term Leases
All Manufacturer Types Operating Leases Asset Management
Leases Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating Leases
Manufacturer Types Sales & Leasebacks Engine Trading
Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating Leases Sales
& Leasebacks Engine Trading Asset Management Long
Medium & Short Term Leases Engine Trading Operating
Leases All Manufacturer Types Asset Management
um & Short Term Leases Asset Management Sales
Leasebacks All Manufacturer Types Long, Medium
and Short Term Leases Operating Leases Asset
Management Sales & Leasebacks All Manufacturer
Management Long, Medium & Short Term Leases
er Types Operati ng Leases Asset Management
Sal es & Leasebacks All Manufacturer Types
Long, Medium & Short Term Leases Operating
Leases Asset Management Sales Leasebacks
ati ng Leases All Manufacturer Types Long
Medium Short Term Leases Operating
Leases Asset Management Engine
Engine Trading All Manufacturer Types
Leasebacks Engine Trading Asset
Management Medium & Shor t Term
Management All Manufacturer Types
Sales & Leasebacks Operating
Leases Engine Trading Long
eases All Manufacturer Types
ent Asset Management
Medium & Short Term
Leases Operating
Leases Sales & Leasebacks
Engine Trading Long, Medium & Short
Term Leases Operating Leases
Sales & Leasebacks Engine
Trading Asset Management Operating
Leases Long, Medium & Short Term Leases
Asset Management
Management
Term Leases
Term
To us, each transaction builds a relationship. And its these long relationships that provide
stability and predictable performance for our customers, nancial partners and suppliers.
After all, if we make the deal work for everyone today, well all look forward to doing the
next one tomorrow. Learn more at www.aviationcapital.com
Operating Leases Asset Management Aviation Investment
Main Office: Newport Beach +1 949 219 4600 Regional Offices: London, Santiago, Seattle, Shanghai, Singapore
Its about a lease that lasts ve years
and a relationship with no expiration date.
Its about more than the plane.
Fin_ACG No Expiration Date Ad_v3_AFM.indd 1 5/4/11 9:26 AM

Aircraft Finance Guide 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aircraft Finance Guide 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012 Edition

Engine already does.

PurePower_Blueprint_AircraftFinanceGuide.indd 1 8/17/11 1:32 PM

Engine already does.

PurePower_Blueprint_AircraftFinanceGuide.indd 1 8/17/11 1:32 PM

AFG Yearbook 2012.indd 33 07/09/2011 13:53

34 AIRCRAFT FINANCE GUIDE 2012

MARKET DEVELOPMENT: WIDE BODIED PASSENGER FLEET

AFG Yearbook 2012.indd 77 07/09/2011 13:54

You might also like