OZ - USA open skies agreement

[badog]

Could this be the start of something better than China? Has Expressjet taken the inititave on this wagon train and positioned itself to capture some feed for say ? Quantas? I know it's pacific routes but here comes the calvary! Could the Jim's be smarter than everyone gives them credit for. I want an rzv 500 so don't spoil this for me flamers,

 

[FirstMate]

I'd be more concerned about the European and other foreign carriers coming in and being the feeders for US mainline companies on US soil.

 

[Kenny]

I think you'll find it's only an open skies agreement for trans pacific routes, not within eachothers countries.

BTW, it's QANTAS. as in no "U"

 

[FirstMate]

Isn't Air France launching a route via DFW to service cities within in the US starting in March?

 

[MusicMan]

If they are it's a code share with Delta or they are simply flying through cities without picking up new passengers. Otherwise they would be violating cabotage rules.

 

[Mike man]

I followed a BA 767 from DTW to IAH last week.

 

[MusicMan]

I'm sure you did, but I can guarantee you that BA did not sell any tickets to people who only wanted to go DTW to IAH. They will have let people off in DTW after arriving from England and then they would have taken the rest of the folks to IAH. Used to do the same thing LHR-PHX-SAN. Only ever 50 people on the PHX-SAN leg.

 

[flyf15]

The domestic stuff isnt happening and shouldn't worry anyone. The international stuff is what should. Its what makes carriers money and its whats easily eroded with open skies and code share agreements.

Imagine a day where all domestic flying is carried out by contract regionals, connecting to hubs where all international flying is carried out by cheap no-name third world codeshare partners. The majors would cease to have any airplanes of their own and would be nothing but a middle-man organizing it all, creating the agreements, overseeing everything, selling the tickets, and skimming their chunk of the profit.

Its already happening. You can buy a plane ticket on United Airlines from the middle of nowhere of the Midwest US to the middle of nowhere eastern Europe... and proceed to fly thousands of miles through multiple airports and countries without ever stepping foot on a United airplane or ever being flown by a United pilot.

 

[badog]

Could this be the start of something better than China? Has Expressjet taken the inititave on this wagon train and positioned itself to capture some feed for say ? Quantas? I know it's pacific routes but here comes the calvary! Could the Jim's be smarter than everyone gives them credit for. I want an rzv 500 so don't spoil this for me flamers,

Isn't that what I said dill weed?

 

[OzBushWhacker]

We stopped listening after you demonstrated a lack of spelling ability.

Don't think an ERJ could do the Pacific route either!

What you may be referring to is a possible agreement from a company called skyairworld to wetlease some 145s from Xjet.

 

[Kenny]

Thanks for that, you are obviously a far more intellgent person and far less ignorant than I had thought from your post.

BTW keep working on the spelling and grammar; others might come to a different conclusion based on them.

 

[OzBushWhacker]

Love the Avatar Kenny! imp:

 

[FSIGRAD]

BTW, it's QANTAS. as in no "U"

Stupid trivia for those who care. Qantas stands for Queensland and Northern Territory Airservice. Those are states in OZ for the geographically challegened.

 

[General Lee]

Isn't Air France launching a route via DFW to service cities within in the US starting in March?

NO, no they are not. You are allowed to fly between cities in the US, but not pick up new passengers. Qantas flies from SYD to LAX, and then onto JFK, primarily because it cannot make it nonstop between SYD and JFK. Pax can deplane and stay in LA for awhile, and then continue onto JFK later, though. But, Qantas cannot sell tickets solely between LAX and JFK to American Citizens.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

I followed a BA 767 from DTW to IAH last week.

Yes, that would be flight 203, a 767-300ER that starts in LHR at 0910. The key here is that until Open Skies operates in late March, BA only has a certain number of Slots from LHR to the US, and their other two flights (2025 and 2027--both 777s) operate from LGW, not Heathrow. The 767 connection is for oil men who connect in LHR from Dubai, Doha, etc. BA cannot just fly people from IAH to DTW for fun, they have to continue onto LHR. I believe they will start flying to IAH from LHR in late March or early April, along with DFW I believe.(also currently flying from Gatwick)


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[FirstMate]

Lee,
I just booked a flight from Dubai to EWN. How long is the leg to ATL from there??? Maybe I don't want to know...

 

[badog]

D!cks

Thanks for that, you are obviously a far more intellgent person and far less ignorant than I had thought from your post.

BTW keep working on the spelling and grammar; others might come to a different conclusion based on them.

You mean based on THOSE, not them, right teacher?

I never said anything about erj's doing pacific routes dope? I'm saying maybe our management maybe was just forward looking enough to see some agreement between OZ and the US. Opening the door to more speculation. pole smoker! Wet lease? yeah, like there's too many EU pilots walking around to staff anything!

 

[Kenny]

You mean based on THOSE, not them, right teacher?

No, I meant "them". Not only would it sound like nonsense had I used "those" but it would also have been the wrong use of the plural of "that". Wheras, the construction of that particular sentence required the use of the objective case of "they". As in they were wrong.

Being the articulate and well educated person you obviously are, I'm sure you already knew that.