With the same caveat as mentioned before: a NOTAM can be pulled (cancelled) in a matter of minutes, so this extensions doesn’t really mean anything in terms of an expectation.

The only possible case of wake turbulence would be the Iberia aircraft going around on runway heading and not climbing above the wake of the 747. There’s a rather small chance of this happening, since a twin-engine aircraft is always going to have a lot more power in reserve than a quad. That being ...

I guess anything is possible, if you put the right amount of money on the table. Sometimes, it just makes sense to have a third party do some modifications. EIN may have some special wishes in terms of integration or whatnot which could make the modification hideously expensive if done by Airbus, bu...

It’s been a long time since I’ve had my last experience with the Moroccan side of their operation, but the last time I did, crew composition was mixed. Usually one BE pilot and one local pilot, or a full BE flight deck. Cabin crew was mixed as well, usually one BE CCM and two or three, dependant on ...

Correct. AUA3EM diverted as well.

Isn’t there a difference in configuration between JDL and LOE?

As far as I know, an RNAV approach is still not published for both the 07 runways, I could be wrong though.

RWY 07L is not equipped with an ILS, it’s a VOR/DME approach.

None of those stands had double boarding bridges in the past, I feel like you’re thinking of 233. That stand is A380 capable, with double bridges. Whether or not double bridges will be installed, I have no clue, but I do think others on this forum might.

Correct. 237,238 and 240 will all get new boarding bridges in the coming months.
Whether other works are planned at those stands as well, I have no idea.

I know a few pilots who I’d consider to be personal friends, and except for one, they all get their roster one month in advance. The one that’s an exception is due to the nature of the company he flies for, a (subcharter) cargo operator. I don’t consider it a secret that I’ve been a cabin crew membe...

Tell that to people who recently moved to other ANSPs. Skyguide, LVNL, Eurocontrol, NATS, to name a few. None of those who left is even marginally interested in returning. Why do you think that is? Sure, we’re the odd one out, but not on the positive side of the scale these days. By the end of this ...

The question is rather whether the Embraer, E1 or E2, would be able to make it out of EBAW for a 5 hour flight whilst being commercially viable.
That’s something only people with flight planning software and a look at the yields can decipher.

In my eyes, one doesn’t rule out the other.
The A321 could be considered part of the fleet as well, but it’s still a contracted aircraft. The same could be true for a hypothetical FA7X.

As from July 1st, if everything went according to plan.
It’s been a while since I’ve visited that side of the airport.

As far as I can tell, the B77W is hardly ever used by UAL at Brussels. Most of the time, I’d say over 99% of flights, is performed by the B772 whenever a B777 is used.

Probably just the way the photos were stitched, and a bit of luck/coincidence. More often than not, photos from multiple passes are used for adjacent images. If things work out just right, this could be the result you’ll get. I don’t really see the benefit of actively removing aircraft from the imag...

CH-10 has been donated to the Fire Department at Brussels Airport, it now sits outside Fire Station West, South of OUT1. No clue about the other “missing” tail(s).

The Avro would be nicer in the 5-across layout. Flying on a 6-across Avro doesn't really seem like a great ride.
Then again, these are quite short flights, I don't think it matters that much to most people.

Which only reinforces my point that “MAX” is a commercial name, and not a technical name. Hence the term “MAX” being in the press release, and not in the technical documentation such as the Type Certificate Data Sheet. (Except when used as a referral name.)