Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A380: Airbus eyes private buyers
DH News Service, New Delhi via the Deccan Herald ^ | Tuesday, May 3, 2005 | B S Arun

Posted on 05/02/2005 6:48:03 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative

According to sources in the company, an Indian airline has asked for a plane with an all-economy configuration, which means a carrying capacity of 850.

Airbus Industries may have lost to its American rival Boeing in the race to sell its aircraft to Air-India, but the European company is seriously pursuing private airlines in India, pitching the biggest passenger aircraft ever built, the A380.

Senior officials in Airbus Industrie told Deccan Herald that the company is in serious talks with at least one such carrier which may buy the super-jumbo sometime next year.

Refusing to disclose the name of the airline, Mr Nigel Harwood, Airbus Vice-President, Sales (India and South Asia), said: “There are several requests for the A380 worldwide and in India one domestic carrier has expressed interest in purchasing it. It will have an all-economy configuration, which means the aircraft will have 850 seats. It will fly in the domestic sector. We are also working with the Airports Authority of India to prepare Indian airports to receive A380s.”

Mr Harwood’s statement points to the likelihood that the new Indian buyer would be a budget airline, a carrier other than Indian Airlines, Jet Airways and Air Sahara. The budget airlines, apart from Air Deccan, which are likely to take off in the next year include Kingfisher Airlines, SpiceJet, Magic Air, Go Air, Air One and Yamuna Airlines. As of now, Deccan and Kingfisher, which have asked for Airbus aircraft, have not included A380 on their shopping list. SpiceJet has favoured an all-Boeing fleet.

The double-decker A380, which last week successfully completed its initial test flight at Toulouse, its manufacturing base in France, will start commercial flights from 2006 when Singapore Airlines receives the first of the $285-million aircraft. Airbus has 154 orders for the 560 ton plane from leading airlines like Lufthansa, Virgin and Air France; Emirates Air tops the list with an order for 43 aircraft.

Airports gear up

While airports around the world, including Heathrow in London, JFK in New York, Los Angeles, Tokyo, Seoul, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Singapore, Frankfurt, are upgrading to welcome the A380, Indian airports will have to gear up too.

Singapore Airlines is expected to fly A380 to either Mumbai or Delhi late next year, making it mandatory for AAI to upgrade these airports.

AAI Chairman K Ramalingam said in Chennai on Sunday that his organisation would take up work at the four international airports in the metropolitan cities to handle A380 jets.

The A380s need exclusive parking bays, strengthening of taxiing tracks and adequate space for the mighty 79.9 metre wing span. “AAI has received written requests from various foreign carriers, especially those having a large presence at Indian airports, such as Singapore Airlines, Emirates Airlines and Lufthansa,” Mr Ramalingam said.

Also, AAI must take care of what happens inside the terminal: check-in space, baggage handling and security to service up to 850 passengers. For international terminals it will also have to provide space and increase manpower at the customs and immigration counters.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: 747; 777; a380; airbus; boeing; trade

1 posted on 05/02/2005 6:48:05 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145; microgood; liberallarry; cmsgop; shaggy eel; RayChuang88; Larry Lucido; namsman; ...
Ping!

If you want on or off my aviation ping list, please contact me by Freep mail not by posting to this thread.

2 posted on 05/02/2005 6:50:09 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

The only people I see buying something like this are a bunch of rich oil sheiks in the Middle East.


3 posted on 05/02/2005 6:51:36 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (Just Blame President Bush For Everything, It Is Easier Than Using Your Brain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

If I were Bill Gates and this was 1998 and I was worth $130 billion, I'd buy one.


4 posted on 05/02/2005 6:52:18 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

As much as I love seeing new planes, I'm not fond of Airbus or their host countries. But I would like to see the new bird!


5 posted on 05/02/2005 6:53:19 PM PDT by pissant (select your paddle carefully)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
According to sources in the company, an Indian airline has asked for a plane with an all-economy configuration, which means a carrying capacity of 850.


6 posted on 05/02/2005 6:54:01 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Sorry, but a plane with 850 Indians on it would stink (literally) to high heaven.

You couldn't pay me to get on that flight, without an oxygen mask.


7 posted on 05/02/2005 6:57:31 PM PDT by Guillermo (Vote for Pedro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Airports are upgrading? I hope not with public money.


8 posted on 05/02/2005 6:57:38 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

So, they're going to cram a bunch of people in an A380 in cattle-car mode? This will be interesting to see.


9 posted on 05/02/2005 6:57:46 PM PDT by wk4bush2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Could it be that Airbus is keeping secret because 1. they are afraid of loosing out to boeing or 2. there is no deal and airbus is trying to save their humiliated face.

I do find it VERY ironic that the people here on FR who predicted this would become a super cramped bus configuration in the end have been proven correct.

Does anyone know what the cost per passenger mile is compared to the dreamliner.


10 posted on 05/02/2005 6:58:24 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
Lemme call Bill and his pal Paul Allen, maybe they are interested in the Airbus. Hey, Paul Allen own 3 superyachts, one of them is the octopus
11 posted on 05/02/2005 7:00:09 PM PDT by Random Nonsense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

850 people X how many minutes each to get off and on ?


12 posted on 05/02/2005 7:04:58 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Random Nonsense

Is the back detachable and does it contain henchmen willing to fight to the death if he should have to make a quick getaway?


13 posted on 05/02/2005 7:10:24 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Imagine: a 12-hour flight on a plane with 849 other people, it takes you 20 minutes to get off the plane, 10 minutes to get to customs, three hours to get through customs, and two hours searching for your baggage.


14 posted on 05/02/2005 7:15:29 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

it does not end there. 850 people with needs for taxis, rental cars, and parking for people who are there to pick them up.

850 people going onto the surrounding roads and highways.

(not to mention bathroom facilities)

Now add all the other flights comming and going.

i really think the cost per passenger mile will make the final decision.


15 posted on 05/02/2005 7:17:23 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

Absolutely, here's the summary:

Octopus

Description:
In 2003, Paul Allen's 416 ft "Octopus" toppled 408 ft Savarona from its number one position as the world's largest yatch.

Microsoft's "accidental zillionnaire" Paul Allen - worth $20bn according to Forbes, third richest man in America - owns two other yatch monsters and a his latest toy is an investment in the future of space tourism, reaching 62 miles above the earth, SpaceShipOne.

But of Octopus, the vessel cost Allen $200 million and has a permanent crew of 60 people, including several former Navy Seals. It has two helicopters, seven boats and a remote-controlled vehicle for crawling on the ocean floor. Its "James Bond" interior includes a dry dock for a submarine, which has the capacity to sleep eight for up to two weeks under water.

Paul also owns the magnificent Villa Maryland on the Cap Ferrat, allowing him to host parties during the Cannes Film Festival that allow him to associate with Hollywoods most top celebrities.

Octopus's number one place was recently toppled by the new longer yatch commissioned by Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellisdon. His "Rising Sun" is 12 metres longer ("Mines bigger than yours, nananananaa").

Not for long however, as the Crown Prince of Dubai has ordered a 160m yatch "Platinum" - reference no doubt to his having paid by credit card. With oil reaching $60 a barrel the Crown Prince is going to have to find even more extravagent ways to spend those petrodollars.


16 posted on 05/02/2005 7:18:20 PM PDT by Random Nonsense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Random Nonsense
LOLOLOLOLOLOL

And I thought you were kidding. :-)

17 posted on 05/02/2005 7:19:44 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Imagine 850 passengers waiting at the gate, only to find out their flight has been cancelled. What will the airlines do? It doesn't even make sense to try to move that many people at one time.


18 posted on 05/02/2005 7:20:14 PM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

"I hope not with public money."

Have you so soon forgotten? All money - yours and mine included - is public money in their perverted minds.


19 posted on 05/02/2005 7:20:49 PM PDT by DennisR (Look around - there are countless observable clues that God exists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Anybody ever figure the logistical upgrade cost to handle a big plane like that? I don't think one can just drive up to a standard terminal to load/unload one of those monsters.


20 posted on 05/02/2005 7:23:29 PM PDT by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: caisson71
Anybody ever figure the logistical upgrade cost to handle a big plane like that? I don't think one can just drive up to a standard terminal to load/unload one of those monsters.

It can be much worse than that. Some airports will have to stop the movements of all other aircraft on all the taxiways and runways when one of these things is moving on the airfield. In many cases parallel runways will have to be shut down. Of course this is so efficient.

21 posted on 05/02/2005 7:33:40 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo

[ Sorry, but a plane with 850 Indians on it would stink (literally) to high heaven. ]
Sorry, but a plane with 850 Frenchmen on it would stink (literally) to high heaven.


22 posted on 05/02/2005 7:42:16 PM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Stink is not the only thing you have to worry about.

What is going to happen when one those planes goes down with all 850 souls lost? Every time a plane crashes, they will refer to Airbus Flight XXX as the worst civil aviation disaster ever. The public relations effect will be a disastrous nightmare for Airbus.

I spent five years in the Air Foce and I hate to fly. There is no way I will even consider flying on a plane that large.


23 posted on 05/02/2005 7:49:54 PM PDT by Max Flatow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

According to sources in the company, an Indian airline has asked for a plane with an all-economy configuration, which means a carrying capacity of 850.

Airbus Industries may have lost to its American rival Boeing in the race to sell its aircraft to Air-India, but the European company is seriously pursuing private airlines in India, pitching the biggest passenger aircraft ever built, the A380.

It's really too bad...that just means more people are going to die in each Airbust crash. =(

24 posted on 05/02/2005 7:50:47 PM PDT by Zeppelin (Keep on FReepin' on.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

True, dat.


25 posted on 05/02/2005 7:52:36 PM PDT by Guillermo (Vote for Pedro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
[ Sorry, but a plane with 850 Indians on it would stink (literally) to high heaven. ] Sorry, but a plane with 850 Frenchmen on it would stink (literally) to high heaven.

Hey, by the way, who actually won the French & Indian War?

26 posted on 05/02/2005 7:52:49 PM PDT by FDNYRHEROES (Make welfare as hard to get as a building permit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Not to mention the time wasted going through TSA "security" sceenings. Geeesh Louise!!!!!


27 posted on 05/02/2005 7:56:58 PM PDT by NCC-1701 (AN ACTIVIST JUDICIARY IS A CULT!!!!! IT MUST BE ERADICATED FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FDNYRHEROES
[ Hey, by the way, who actually won the French & Indian War? ]

Now theres a disgusting thought..

28 posted on 05/02/2005 7:58:35 PM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Zeppelin; Max Flatow; COEXERJ145
It's really too bad...that just means more people are going to die in each Airbust crash. =(

Hopefully that won't happen very often. That was one of the arguments used against the 747 when it came out. One of the rebuttals is that with fewer planes flying around, it is easier for air traffic control to prevent midair collisions.

If it does as well as recent aircraft models, that may never happen. The 777 which has been in service since June of 1995 has never had a fatal incident. Neither have the A330, A340, or Next Generation 737s.

29 posted on 05/02/2005 8:03:23 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Max Flatow
Every time a plane crashes, they will refer to Airbus Flight XXX as the worst civil aviation disaster ever. The public relations effect will be a disastrous nightmare for Airbus.

Only if it is flown into the Louvre or some other landmark in Paris. The worst civil aviation disaster in in history was Boeing 767-200 crash by AA flight 11 into the North Tower of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Most of the people who died were in that tower. Many of the occupants of the South Tower started evacutating the building after they saw people in the North tower jump to their deaths, but before the second plane hit.

30 posted on 05/02/2005 8:12:58 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Exactly what a slaveship owner would count on. But 850 bags of peanuts may be more than anyone could manage.


31 posted on 05/02/2005 8:13:39 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

You can on an ocean liner. Parked at a dock for two days, two hundred Tobys carrying aboard all manner of goods, food and household goods for the trip. I don't think this is what Airbus has in mind, tho.


32 posted on 05/02/2005 8:17:20 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

good point.


33 posted on 05/02/2005 8:19:56 PM PDT by Zeppelin (Keep on FReepin' on.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
The only use for these planes is maybe in cargo, but even there it doesn't seem too smart.

FedEx is planning to buy 10 of the monsters, but doesn't have enough traffic on any lanes to support it. Maybe with a lot of growth, they could use a handful, but my guess is that it was done because

1) Fred Smith just loves airplanes and
2) wants to curry favor with the Euros.

34 posted on 05/02/2005 8:27:11 PM PDT by cookcounty ("We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts" ---Abe Lincoln, 1858.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
The economics of the airline industry are such that every additional pound of capacity costs more to build than the previous pound. This is a curve that will get very nasty on the high end.

The future is in the RJs and the Beyond-Regional-Mini-Jets.

35 posted on 05/02/2005 8:33:32 PM PDT by cookcounty ("We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts" ---Abe Lincoln, 1858.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

That would be one hell of a fun party jet.

I doubt John Travolta has the dough for it (the rumor is he may buy a Convair 880 and fix it up).

The Saudi family has a nice duded up 747SP and a L1011 that are toys.


36 posted on 05/02/2005 8:38:45 PM PDT by Central Scrutiniser (Remember when conservatives embraced the rule of law? (Do ya?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
We all laugh at the plane that can put 850 passengers on it. But what about the one in twenty years that puts 3,300 on it?

Seriously, I see a market for this capacity at a LOW cost. How better to get 850 more scabs to the US at a cheap price? The Indian Gvt will pay for it to get rid of them.

37 posted on 05/02/2005 9:23:16 PM PDT by AGreatPer (Take my advise. Im not using it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: AGreatPer

discovery channel did a speacial about that. Micro jets that would be about the price of a modest luxury car, about 45-60 k and be able to use regional executive airports. They would have such simplified and automated controls that they practically fly themselves.

Imagine what that would do to the superjumbos.


38 posted on 05/02/2005 9:26:02 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
If 850 passengers went down in a plane, on the insurance form for the company it just might be a little blip. No big deal.

These capacities are going to be a reality and the norm as countries spread their poor to better countries.

39 posted on 05/02/2005 9:48:15 PM PDT by AGreatPer (Take my advise. Im not using it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Back in the day, I used to fly into Dehli on Pan Am One, which would arrive 20 minutes before Pan Am Two, coming around the other way. The two 747s would leave New York 20 minutes apart, One going East and Two going West. They would cross over in Dehli in the middle of the night.

So you had two 747s hit Pahlgam Airport within 20 minutes of each other, every day. To say it was mayhem is an considerable understatement. They never did fix the problem. They just had a slug of passengers arrive every day at midnight, and tried to get them out the door by 6 AM.


40 posted on 05/03/2005 3:15:06 AM PDT by gridlock (ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Yes. . .the ramps have to be re-done to accommodate the stress and the terminals have to be re-designed to accept A380 parking at the terminals. All at taxpayer expense.

And here's something else:

850 people from one jet show up at passport control---AT THE SAME TIME. Think about this for a moment.

You may have the same number of people being processed in any given 24-hr period BUT you will have literally thousands (more than one A-380) being processed at the SAME TIME and there will be the same number of passport control agents manning the same number of kiosks. . .making life hell for travelers. . .a mere 1/2 hour wait at passport control now will become hours.

A-380. . .a nightmare come true.
41 posted on 05/03/2005 4:51:33 AM PDT by Gunrunner2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: gridlock

Wow. . .I should have read your post before posting mine. . .with 850 passengers arriving on one jet, let alone two, and you will have riots in passport control.


42 posted on 05/03/2005 4:52:55 AM PDT by Gunrunner2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Max Flatow
>>I spent five years in the Air Force and I hate to fly."

Hmmm. . .there is an obvious question there but I just can't seem to get a handle on it. . .now, what would that be. . .?

;-)
43 posted on 05/03/2005 4:55:05 AM PDT by Gunrunner2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

850 people would be like sitting in a crowded movie theater - for 6, 8, 9, 10, hours of the flight.

Not for Me.....


44 posted on 05/03/2005 5:27:23 AM PDT by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty

I was in Memphis overnight a couple weeks ago at a hotel near the airport. FedEx DC-10s light up at 3 am. I thought I was back in the Twin Cities.


45 posted on 05/03/2005 6:18:49 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
FedEx is planning to buy 10 of the monsters, but doesn't have enough traffic on any lanes to support it. Maybe with a lot of growth, they could use a handful, but my guess is that it was done because

They have plenty of traffic. China - US.

46 posted on 05/03/2005 9:12:23 AM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
The A380s need exclusive parking bays, strengthening of taxiing tracks and adequate space for the mighty 79.9 metre wing span. “AAI has received written requests from various foreign carriers, especially those having a large presence at Indian airports, such as Singapore Airlines, Emirates Airlines and Lufthansa,” Mr Ramalingam said.

Also, AAI must take care of what happens inside the terminal: check-in space, baggage handling and security to service up to 850 passengers. For international terminals it will also have to provide space and increase manpower at the customs and immigration counters.

Anybody know how/if these costs will be reflected in landing fees?

Will airlines have to pay more for landing one of these aircrapt and might airports try to establish fees that incorporate the needs of the A380 into all the other landings so the A380 fees aren't relatively higher?

47 posted on 05/03/2005 9:33:18 AM PDT by N. Theknow (Planned Parenthood is neither.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
Imagine: a 12-hour flight on a plane with 849 other people, it takes you 20 minutes to get off the plane, 10 minutes to get to customs, three hours to get through customs, and two hours searching for your baggage.

You're right, I'd rather drive to Australia ;-) Seriously, the market is in Boeing's favor. The A380 will only fly the true cattle drive routes like Bombay-London and Riyadh-Paris.

Atlanta refuses to upgrade for the A380 and it looks like Chicago-O'Hare is headed in the same direction. The only airports committed to upgrades are San Francisco, JFK, Miami and LAX.

48 posted on 05/03/2005 4:49:21 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (Rick Nash will score 50 goals this season ( if there is a season)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
I do understand the Boeing concept of launching a product that enables airlines to establish more direct connections.

But I don't see that's a black and white competition to a product that optimizes costs for existing demands that are likely to grow.

If India and China continue to expand their economies, the number of traveling passengers will increase while the price for oil will increase, too. Both in very steep slopes.

I don't have a 'cattle train' or 'logistics disaster' feeling thinking of the super jumbo. Imagine 1000 passengers traveling from A to B. Do you want to handle one or two planes at a time ?

And do you feel more like cattle in a train of one wagon or in a train of 1000 wagons ?

Customers are not only passenger carriers but also logistic companies such as UPS and FedEx. If they have the amount of cargo to fill the big birds a more efficient plane in terms of fuel/kg is what they have to order.

If the decision makers of the Airports figures out, that they will have the chance to grow by offering their customers the possibility to handle super jumbos yielding a higher turn over of passengers or freight or loosing turn over to other hubs otherwise, they will invest if they can. Hopefully not with tax payers money - that would certainly be a distortion of the free market.
49 posted on 05/11/2005 4:25:22 AM PDT by patience+plumpudding (All fun and games until somebody loses an eye)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson