Fuzzy Lager

Ok, so before it was suggested that it was legal because each flight, although in one of their aeroplanes, was a charter because of some "operator lottery" that made it impossible to tell who would be operating which flight. Thus returning ad-hoc to an other scheduled type operation.

But now there is apparently only one operator (TAB). So what non existant loop hole stops this from being illegal?

Cardinal Puff

Always with the negative waves, Moriarty.....

gchangflyer

"Studio 88" sounds like a nightclub...or a low budget SABC jazz programme...

warloc67

Am I the only one reading this thread thinking, WHAT THE HELL???

We have a new operator (sic) in the process of obtaining all the SACAA required docs etc. Proving the viability of the bussiness before committing resources etc. Plus they, if I listen to their adds, are not doing it under the carpet(Declaring who the actual operators are). Whats the difference between ex, Solenta and Federal, BA and Comair, at least they are providing services(more than can be said of SAA) and jobs to a new generation of pilots within the borders of SA, without having to play contract dog.

Propellerpilot

Beware of any illusions This will hardly become the "job creator or Kingdom come" for a new generation of pilots... has it actually even created one single new job ? If at all, it might save a couple of jobs in the end, permitted it may continue.

Solenta

Warloc

BIG difference - Federal Airlines is it's own company with its own AOC. Solenta likewise. Each have their own ASL's - approved by the ASLC. Same as BA/Comair. Linking these to what appears to be the situation at Studio 88 is a very far stretch ! and a poor comparison.
Why not throw in BA / Iberia with your comparison !!!

WhinerLiner

You can't drive a car before you have a drivers license, you can't fly an aeroplane before you have a pilots license and you can't run an airline before you have an AOC and ops spec for what you intend to do. You can't prove the concept and then comply with the rules, and you can't use a different company that also doesn't hold the correct license to make a smokescreen.

elkman

Rumour? - --Studio 88 getting in bed now with Freedom Air????
Anybody know about this?

Fuzzy Lager

Seems Studio 88 isn't big on paying its bills. There is an ever growing collection of people complaining about not being able to recover what they are owed.

Maybe this is just another "loop hole" in the system that they discovered.

RSQ

I have been watching this thread for some time, and as a licenced operator, I must say that having someone come into one's operating arena and ignore the laws, does burn one's arse somewhat. But, looking at the law, if a client comes to me as an operator and says, "take me to X" on Thursday, and then next week calls for the same charter, at what point am I operating a schedule? assuming I sell the entire aircraft to the client, it is actually a regular charter. While, as I mentioned before, although this does warm one's butt some, I am inclined to say to the "broker", good for you, build a route, build a sustainable business, employ more people, then if it works, go the whole hog and get all the licences for yourself. As opposed to spending huge money to set up a licence, aircraft staff and route, and then have it fail due to the capital required and slow growth. As long as the service is run to what the CAA sees as a safe standard for non sched operators, give them a break! Imagine if there were 30 flights a day going to out of the way towns, better for everybody, - including the pax!