I'm too busy making pointless posts.

Hmmmm....Maybe you could remove the "too" in that sentence... :( Those Airbus vs Boeing posts are not only pointless but full of flawed comparisons and factual errors (yours too, if you're not too busy to re-read it).And now you're saying you were bashing BOTH Airbus AND Boeing? Great. So what?Can we please go back to the original topic? Apparently, American Airlines, foolishly disregarding the advise of some of the world class experts in this forum, will buy some Airbuses...and Boeing might re-engine the NG.Best regards,Bruno

You guys are not making a valid analysis wiyh hull losses. Is one of those 747 losses the result of the KLM taxiing onto an active runway? Boeing's fault? Not at all. How about the Air India 747 hijack? You have to consider which of these are a direct result of manufacturing. Both the bus and boeing are great planes.

Exactly. KAL 007, Lockerbie and 9/11 cost 6 Boeing hulls... does Airbus get points for those, too? The best-engineered airplane in the world is going to make every bit as big of a fireball as the worst one when pilot error, shoddy maintenance, or a hijacker brings it down. Comparing hull loss numbers straight up is pointless. Note the inordinate number of hull loss incidents involving airplanes retired from "first world" countries thirty years ago and shipped off to some country with a biennial coup and a GDP per capita of less than the cost of an economy ticket... We can't really be blaming the manufacturers when planes crash in some of these places where the captain got his job because he's the General's cousin's husband and preflighting the aircraft means counting the wings and closing the doors.Terrific first name, by the way.

I always tell my brother that the MD-80 is like the Millenium Falcon of the AA fleet.

I'm going to have to borrow that line.

I think that's enough with this one folks.