What would happen if air travel became expensive again?
Thread Starter
What would happen if air travel became expensive again?
Interested in working through this question on the back of various threads in R&N.
I'm wondering whom it would benefit, and who would really suffer if prices went right back up to unaffordable by a lot of people.
It seems that a lot of crew feel the travelling public expect rock bottom prices and then wonder why there isn't better regulation, a better guarantee of safety, and why there is perhaps? a company culture that allows certain character traits to slip through the net, as it were, because it's become all about cheap travel and far less about (standards? / whatever)
Forgive me for having very little background knowledge on this, but as SLF (very infrequent I should say) I would be far happier to pay a reasonable fare and know the crew were being treated well, happy in their employment, and so on.
People can now get to places they could never previously afford to visit for a paltry sum, yet the pilots that fly them there are forced to 'pay for their own uniform, food, type rating and accommodation', to quote from a recent thread.
This doesn't seem like a happy situation. And then we have the pollution, the ever more crowded skies, the objections to new runways (personally I'd pay extra to live under a flight path) and so on.
So what would happen if prices went sky high, as it were - traffic would reduce but could the industry still support itself? And what has driven the current situation?
All thoughts welcome.
I'm wondering whom it would benefit, and who would really suffer if prices went right back up to unaffordable by a lot of people.
It seems that a lot of crew feel the travelling public expect rock bottom prices and then wonder why there isn't better regulation, a better guarantee of safety, and why there is perhaps? a company culture that allows certain character traits to slip through the net, as it were, because it's become all about cheap travel and far less about (standards? / whatever)
Forgive me for having very little background knowledge on this, but as SLF (very infrequent I should say) I would be far happier to pay a reasonable fare and know the crew were being treated well, happy in their employment, and so on.
People can now get to places they could never previously afford to visit for a paltry sum, yet the pilots that fly them there are forced to 'pay for their own uniform, food, type rating and accommodation', to quote from a recent thread.
This doesn't seem like a happy situation. And then we have the pollution, the ever more crowded skies, the objections to new runways (personally I'd pay extra to live under a flight path) and so on.
So what would happen if prices went sky high, as it were - traffic would reduce but could the industry still support itself? And what has driven the current situation?
All thoughts welcome.
Last edited by susier; 13th Apr 2015 at 15:10. Reason: Clarity and sppelling
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Susier,
What if? Well without a significant increase to, for example, fuel prices I really don't see airfares rising to the equivalent levels we had in the 70s and 80s. Even then the network airlines (who all interlined with each other at fixed prices) were dogged by the less expensive 'charter' airlines.
It's not going to happen though. Point-to-point is the new model, and is the least expensive to provide.
Which is the most profitable airline in Europe*? (Probably the best business measurement). They are also one of the airlines with the best safety record.
We are just going to have to live with the lager-louts, and be happy that we can afford to travel to just about anywhere we want to go, whenever we want to. Even the longest journey is going to be over with in no more than a day, or two.
*Almost a rhetorical question. It's FR
What if? Well without a significant increase to, for example, fuel prices I really don't see airfares rising to the equivalent levels we had in the 70s and 80s. Even then the network airlines (who all interlined with each other at fixed prices) were dogged by the less expensive 'charter' airlines.
It's not going to happen though. Point-to-point is the new model, and is the least expensive to provide.
Which is the most profitable airline in Europe*? (Probably the best business measurement). They are also one of the airlines with the best safety record.
We are just going to have to live with the lager-louts, and be happy that we can afford to travel to just about anywhere we want to go, whenever we want to. Even the longest journey is going to be over with in no more than a day, or two.
*Almost a rhetorical question. It's FR
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Doncaster
Age: 50
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally think air travel is expensive from the UK.
On our next jaunt to US we are saving a not inconsiderable amount of money (about a third) by flying to Dublin and leaving from there and vice versa.
And it's not a 'cheaper' flight overall as we then fly back to the UK to connect in London - all Economy class.
On our next jaunt to US we are saving a not inconsiderable amount of money (about a third) by flying to Dublin and leaving from there and vice versa.
And it's not a 'cheaper' flight overall as we then fly back to the UK to connect in London - all Economy class.
Thread Starter
Thank you for your reply, much appreciated. I suppose what you are saying makes sense however the current situation doesn't seem to be seen as a good thing by many of those who work in the industry.
I'm trying to see if there could be an answer for them, I suppose, because as SLF I don't like to feel I am shouldering the blame for what they consider to be poor working conditions. If that makes sense? I'd rather pay more if I knew it was helpful.
Perhaps that isn't the answer though.
I'm trying to see if there could be an answer for them, I suppose, because as SLF I don't like to feel I am shouldering the blame for what they consider to be poor working conditions. If that makes sense? I'd rather pay more if I knew it was helpful.
Perhaps that isn't the answer though.
Thread Starter
Sorry, crossed posts. I was under the impression that you could get tickets to certain places for, well say £29 to Brussels, or so? That seems extraordinarily cheap to me.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Susier, I think pricing like that is either a loss-leader, just like the supermarkets do, or a fill up price trying to get something for a seat they expect to go empty (with the hope that you will spend another £30 on bags, baguettes, and beer).
Last edited by ExXB; 13th Apr 2015 at 18:15.
Paxing All Over The World
susier, I might well agree that the working conditions of the flight and cabin crew are not conducive to a happy work/life balance BUT ... No one's work/life balance is what it used to be! Leastways not 99% of people! 
All my friends and family feel the exigencies of modern life and only one of them is a commercial pilot. I am self-employed and, during the recession from 2008 onwards, have seen my income decline in real terms because I work in a (now) highly competitive field. Whereas there were a smallish number of people in my area doing my job (at average rates, not excessive I can assure you) now dozens have jumped on the bandwagon. I have to compete against newcomers who undercut and yet purport to offer the same level of service as myself who has been doing the job (part and then fulltime) for nearly 24 years.
Naturally, I cannot stop the newcomers and I cannot change the regulations and yet I have to continue trying to earn a living in the most expensive part of the UK. Some of the new people into this line of work have taken early retirement and are doing this for 'pin money' and have already paid off their mortgage and have a company pension to cushion them. I do not. I could continue the airline analogy about overtime and weekends but I'll save you.
When I worked in telecommunications (27 years all told) I worked in many different fields (retail, finance, shipping etc) and I have seen every single one of those bend under the same rules of harsh commercial supply and demand. It's not pretty but the only certainty is that there is no going back.
Which is why any politician who says that we can 'go back' to some other time when things were better - is talking rubbish. Humans only go in one direction and change is brought about slowly (jet propulsion replacing prop) or suddenly (govts changing the rules to allow LCCs). It's not always fun.
All my friends and family feel the exigencies of modern life and only one of them is a commercial pilot. I am self-employed and, during the recession from 2008 onwards, have seen my income decline in real terms because I work in a (now) highly competitive field. Whereas there were a smallish number of people in my area doing my job (at average rates, not excessive I can assure you) now dozens have jumped on the bandwagon. I have to compete against newcomers who undercut and yet purport to offer the same level of service as myself who has been doing the job (part and then fulltime) for nearly 24 years.
Naturally, I cannot stop the newcomers and I cannot change the regulations and yet I have to continue trying to earn a living in the most expensive part of the UK. Some of the new people into this line of work have taken early retirement and are doing this for 'pin money' and have already paid off their mortgage and have a company pension to cushion them. I do not. I could continue the airline analogy about overtime and weekends but I'll save you.
When I worked in telecommunications (27 years all told) I worked in many different fields (retail, finance, shipping etc) and I have seen every single one of those bend under the same rules of harsh commercial supply and demand. It's not pretty but the only certainty is that there is no going back.
Which is why any politician who says that we can 'go back' to some other time when things were better - is talking rubbish. Humans only go in one direction and change is brought about slowly (jet propulsion replacing prop) or suddenly (govts changing the rules to allow LCCs). It's not always fun.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not that pilots are starving though is it. I know a couple of new FO's for locos and although their salary is nothing to write home about it's still better than working at Next trying to flog t shirts. Yes they probably have massive sums invested in getting into that RH seat but no one forced them to become pilots; you know the drawbacks and you make the choice whether it's for you or not. That's the way it is.
Back in the early 70's I used to make a good living playing in bands in clubland. You think it's going to go on forever, it doesn't. Things change all of the time, we are now and have been for some time in the ridiculous situation where bands pay to play at a venue. I might add that I got out of that line of business a long time ago.
Back in the early 70's I used to make a good living playing in bands in clubland. You think it's going to go on forever, it doesn't. Things change all of the time, we are now and have been for some time in the ridiculous situation where bands pay to play at a venue. I might add that I got out of that line of business a long time ago.
If airfare returned to the level of, say, 35 years ago (corrected for inflation), the short answer is a whole lot less people would be flying. And that means that a whole lot fewer people would be employed in the airline business. That means a whole lot of those grumpy, unhappy airline employees would be grumpy, unhappy, and unemployed.
Working in the airline business in the 60's and 70's was a sweet gig for those who could get it. But not many got it. Similarly those that could afford to fly got a nice experience. But not many could afford it.
Working in the airline business in the 60's and 70's was a sweet gig for those who could get it. But not many got it. Similarly those that could afford to fly got a nice experience. But not many could afford it.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Demand and supply...not all routess go cheap and not all flights go cheap...
Locos are there for a reason and will remain, legacy carriers do charge a pretty penny....
In the end you get what you pay for (service and amenities), safety is a mandatory requirement not determined by price but by govt. regulation
Locos are there for a reason and will remain, legacy carriers do charge a pretty penny....
In the end you get what you pay for (service and amenities), safety is a mandatory requirement not determined by price but by govt. regulation
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All, it seems to me, the modern day low cost carriers introduced was one-way fares, before then one-way fares were extremely expensive so of course "we" would regularly buy return tickets that included a Saturday overnight and, if we weren't going to use it, we'd throw the other half of the ticket away.
But these low cost carriers aren't necessarily cheap, an ex boss of mine, we were mid point between LTN & BHX, she had friends in the city of Belfast and she swore blind travelling "orange" LTN/BFS/LTN even though I pointed out to her that it was actually more convenient and cheaper to travel "BACON" BHX/BHD/BHX.
I regularly had business in FCO and MXP, from BHX Jet2 did FCO and FlyBE did MXP but it was actually cheaper, and more convenient, to travel via ZRH (an hour (ish) in ZRH in each direction) and on each of the four sectors one got a complimentary snack, coffee, beer and Swiss chocolate ... and one could buy duty frees routing non EU!
So I'm not a great believer in these, supposed, low cost carriers and if it were to go back to the way it were before them, i.e. those cheap Saturday night returns, I don't think that would be such a bad nor expensive thing.
These days I own and operate a small resort, here to eat out (BBQ chicken & rice) can cost less than one GBP ... I have guests coming to me expecting to use our restaurant kitchen (free of charge) because they can't afford to eat out ... I'm sorry but these people should never have left home and I simply cannot understand their mentality that they are taking a holiday that they cannot afford to take!
The OP has hinted at less than desirable "safety" standards ... Well I'd suggest going back to the old days whereas it was aviation professionals running the airlines and not the beancounters, a beancounter understands diddly squat about safety, they only understand pounds, shillings and pence!
But these low cost carriers aren't necessarily cheap, an ex boss of mine, we were mid point between LTN & BHX, she had friends in the city of Belfast and she swore blind travelling "orange" LTN/BFS/LTN even though I pointed out to her that it was actually more convenient and cheaper to travel "BACON" BHX/BHD/BHX.
I regularly had business in FCO and MXP, from BHX Jet2 did FCO and FlyBE did MXP but it was actually cheaper, and more convenient, to travel via ZRH (an hour (ish) in ZRH in each direction) and on each of the four sectors one got a complimentary snack, coffee, beer and Swiss chocolate ... and one could buy duty frees routing non EU!
So I'm not a great believer in these, supposed, low cost carriers and if it were to go back to the way it were before them, i.e. those cheap Saturday night returns, I don't think that would be such a bad nor expensive thing.
These days I own and operate a small resort, here to eat out (BBQ chicken & rice) can cost less than one GBP ... I have guests coming to me expecting to use our restaurant kitchen (free of charge) because they can't afford to eat out ... I'm sorry but these people should never have left home and I simply cannot understand their mentality that they are taking a holiday that they cannot afford to take!
The OP has hinted at less than desirable "safety" standards ... Well I'd suggest going back to the old days whereas it was aviation professionals running the airlines and not the beancounters, a beancounter understands diddly squat about safety, they only understand pounds, shillings and pence!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 66
Posts: 2,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For an example of what I believe Susier means, my first job upon leaving school was in a local Travel Agency.
It was 1977 and inflation was rife.
One of my tasks was to keep the Fare manual up to date ( no computers all paper) and the contents of this changed on a weekly basis.
I remember being amazed that the standard return fare BFS-LHR ( without the Saturday night stay,or booked as an APEX ) had leapt to £100. We were told by management that only those with deep pockets would be able to afford fares of that nature.
Leisure travel at those rates would have been difficult.
I looked at an inflation calculator before posting and in today's money £100 equates to ~£640.
I was earning £ 90 per month.
It was 1977 and inflation was rife.
One of my tasks was to keep the Fare manual up to date ( no computers all paper) and the contents of this changed on a weekly basis.
I remember being amazed that the standard return fare BFS-LHR ( without the Saturday night stay,or booked as an APEX ) had leapt to £100. We were told by management that only those with deep pockets would be able to afford fares of that nature.
Leisure travel at those rates would have been difficult.
I looked at an inflation calculator before posting and in today's money £100 equates to ~£640.
I was earning £ 90 per month.
Last edited by eastern wiseguy; 15th Apr 2015 at 13:43. Reason: Speeling
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that RYR has an excellent safety record regarding pax fatalaties. But their safety record regarding incidents is not that impressive. Taxying at high speed, flapless landings, clipping wingtips and APUs from other airplanes, fuel starvation maydays.. these are small but important things that all is not well. Having an insecure workplace with a fierce opposition towards any kind of union is also one of those things that raises my eyebrows.
I know, we all have stressful days at work, blabla, but almost none of us have such an important task of keeping calm cool and collected if things goes tits up, as pilots do. Airplanes operate in such hostile environments, many thousand metres higher than Mount Everest, and I for one want to KNOW that my Capt and FO has job security, good training, proper medical supervision and a nice pension plan so ALL they need to worry about is getting their asses down on the ground to live another day. Which means I get to live another day.
When things happen on the ground, I'm not that concerned. This is, after all solid and steady and stuff goes wrong all the time but since we can breathe and move unhindered it gives a (sometimes faulty) sense of security.
While in the air I know for SURE that I just can't jump out the window/run down the escape stairs or call the fire dept. I need those pilots to be well rested, well gathered and quick thinking. Just as I would like my heart surgeon to be well rested, well gathered and quick thinking.
I try to avoid locos as much as possible. I know, they do have great safety records, (unlike, say AF..) but the company policy of mandatory get-there-itis that many locos have is not reassuring to me. Personally I'd rather wait for the weather to clear than rushing a take off and getting into serious trouble including all kinds of damage.
I also believe that I as a customer should be treated with at least some respect. It is unexplainable to me that people crowd outside locos to get their luggage measured and the cabin crew wanting them to pay for paper towels. No change accepted. Nah, to me it all screams flip-flops and sweatpants.
SAS (I'm Swedish) and its cooperators in Star Alliance has excellent prices to many destinations. Sure, I don't get to go to Malaga for £4 but I'd rather pay some extra money and look at it as the insurance fee that my pilots are treated well while we are at altitudes high above the Himalayas.
I know, we all have stressful days at work, blabla, but almost none of us have such an important task of keeping calm cool and collected if things goes tits up, as pilots do. Airplanes operate in such hostile environments, many thousand metres higher than Mount Everest, and I for one want to KNOW that my Capt and FO has job security, good training, proper medical supervision and a nice pension plan so ALL they need to worry about is getting their asses down on the ground to live another day. Which means I get to live another day.
When things happen on the ground, I'm not that concerned. This is, after all solid and steady and stuff goes wrong all the time but since we can breathe and move unhindered it gives a (sometimes faulty) sense of security.
While in the air I know for SURE that I just can't jump out the window/run down the escape stairs or call the fire dept. I need those pilots to be well rested, well gathered and quick thinking. Just as I would like my heart surgeon to be well rested, well gathered and quick thinking.
I try to avoid locos as much as possible. I know, they do have great safety records, (unlike, say AF..) but the company policy of mandatory get-there-itis that many locos have is not reassuring to me. Personally I'd rather wait for the weather to clear than rushing a take off and getting into serious trouble including all kinds of damage.
I also believe that I as a customer should be treated with at least some respect. It is unexplainable to me that people crowd outside locos to get their luggage measured and the cabin crew wanting them to pay for paper towels. No change accepted. Nah, to me it all screams flip-flops and sweatpants.
SAS (I'm Swedish) and its cooperators in Star Alliance has excellent prices to many destinations. Sure, I don't get to go to Malaga for £4 but I'd rather pay some extra money and look at it as the insurance fee that my pilots are treated well while we are at altitudes high above the Himalayas.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Snuggles,
I flew SAS a couple of times, loved the MD87 CPH/BHX but my one notable experience was LHR/ARN/LHR.
I was up at stupid o'clock for a 2 or 3 hour drive to LHR, then check-in etc. and as soon as I arrived in ARN I was straight in to a meeting in the, then, SAS Flight Academy (in fact it was my suggestion at that meeting that they took up to source a B767F to utilise for their base training).
Straight out of the meeting and back on to an MD Scud to LHR ... And I still hadn't taken breakfast. I don't know what happens now but this was in an era when one paid for food and beverages on SAS and, bearing in mind I had my car parked at LHR, fantastically they sold low alcohol beer.
Well I got well in to it, all on business expenses, seafood baguettes, low alcohol beers, the cabin crew kept coming back to me, I had a fantastic flight and have no complaint of flying SAS.
Ryan ... who did you mention?
I flew SAS a couple of times, loved the MD87 CPH/BHX but my one notable experience was LHR/ARN/LHR.
I was up at stupid o'clock for a 2 or 3 hour drive to LHR, then check-in etc. and as soon as I arrived in ARN I was straight in to a meeting in the, then, SAS Flight Academy (in fact it was my suggestion at that meeting that they took up to source a B767F to utilise for their base training).
Straight out of the meeting and back on to an MD Scud to LHR ... And I still hadn't taken breakfast. I don't know what happens now but this was in an era when one paid for food and beverages on SAS and, bearing in mind I had my car parked at LHR, fantastically they sold low alcohol beer.
Well I got well in to it, all on business expenses, seafood baguettes, low alcohol beers, the cabin crew kept coming back to me, I had a fantastic flight and have no complaint of flying SAS.
Ryan ... who did you mention?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree aircrew require looking after but what about the maintenance guys & girls who are working long hours outside in all weather conditions. They are just as responsible for SLF safety as the flight crew & they are not protected with any duty period limitations.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phileas Fogg
Nice that you enjoyed SAS. I'm a bit proud of it, though I know it has undergone some major structural changes with Norwegian as a tough competitor. The pilots and other crew had to take some salary cuts and I can imagine that's nothing they are very enjoyed about. Still, I believe that SAS being such a global brand name, it does have some pride and standard to achieve.
The reason I mentioned the Airline Who Must Not Be Named was that it has, in fact never had fatalities. SAS has. The worst disaster was the Linate (on of the Milano airports) disaster in Oct 2001, so I believe not many have heard about it. One of the MD-80s collided with a small plane that was totally lost and ended up on the runway when the SAS plane took off. The investigation discovered that Linate was extremely very below average regarding taxiway lines, lights, naming conventions, markings and other thing that one might use to navigate an airport. Some taxiways were referred to as aprons and taxiways and one apron was referred to as the big apron, the north apron or the large apron. And on it went. So, as a little relief, the SAS pilots did nothing wrong and actually managed to fly the plane for about 10 seconds before crashing into a building after colliding with the small plane. The small plane pilots were not allowed to operate in foggy conditions, visibility below 500m, which was the case for that particular day.
The accident we had before that was Gottröra. Everyone survived but the plane broke up in three pieces.
Nice that you enjoyed SAS. I'm a bit proud of it, though I know it has undergone some major structural changes with Norwegian as a tough competitor. The pilots and other crew had to take some salary cuts and I can imagine that's nothing they are very enjoyed about. Still, I believe that SAS being such a global brand name, it does have some pride and standard to achieve.
The reason I mentioned the Airline Who Must Not Be Named was that it has, in fact never had fatalities. SAS has. The worst disaster was the Linate (on of the Milano airports) disaster in Oct 2001, so I believe not many have heard about it. One of the MD-80s collided with a small plane that was totally lost and ended up on the runway when the SAS plane took off. The investigation discovered that Linate was extremely very below average regarding taxiway lines, lights, naming conventions, markings and other thing that one might use to navigate an airport. Some taxiways were referred to as aprons and taxiways and one apron was referred to as the big apron, the north apron or the large apron. And on it went. So, as a little relief, the SAS pilots did nothing wrong and actually managed to fly the plane for about 10 seconds before crashing into a building after colliding with the small plane. The small plane pilots were not allowed to operate in foggy conditions, visibility below 500m, which was the case for that particular day.
The accident we had before that was Gottröra. Everyone survived but the plane broke up in three pieces.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Snuggles,
SAS is/was an accountant's worst nightmare.
Invariably an airline operates B737's or A320's or MD80's.
A nightmare becomes when an airline operates two of these types.
A worst nightmare is/was SAS operating all three of these types
SAS is/was an accountant's worst nightmare.
Invariably an airline operates B737's or A320's or MD80's.
A nightmare becomes when an airline operates two of these types.
A worst nightmare is/was SAS operating all three of these types
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phileas Fogg
I laughed here when I read about the accountant! Yes, it is true. At one point a few years ago SAS had all three types in service. Now they have retired the MD-80 in favour of the Airbus.
SAS was a very faithful McDonnall-Douglas customer and once operated the world's biggest fleet of DC-9's. The merge with Boeing meant SAS could get favourable deals on the 737 although they had started to buy Airbus aircraft already in the 80's to replace even older aircrafts. The plan is to phase out the 737's in favour of Airbus, complete around 2020.
At the moment though, SAS have both 737's and 320's around. Through codeshare with Blue1, there are also B717's in operation (so you could argue that they still have all three aircrafts, LOL!). Blue1 will acquire the 737's and the SAS fleet will be harmonized around Airbus aircrafts.
In the golden days of the 1970's SAS also had DC-10's and some 747's swooshing around.
I laughed here when I read about the accountant! Yes, it is true. At one point a few years ago SAS had all three types in service. Now they have retired the MD-80 in favour of the Airbus.
SAS was a very faithful McDonnall-Douglas customer and once operated the world's biggest fleet of DC-9's. The merge with Boeing meant SAS could get favourable deals on the 737 although they had started to buy Airbus aircraft already in the 80's to replace even older aircrafts. The plan is to phase out the 737's in favour of Airbus, complete around 2020.
At the moment though, SAS have both 737's and 320's around. Through codeshare with Blue1, there are also B717's in operation (so you could argue that they still have all three aircrafts, LOL!). Blue1 will acquire the 737's and the SAS fleet will be harmonized around Airbus aircrafts.
In the golden days of the 1970's SAS also had DC-10's and some 747's swooshing around.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snuggles,
Just over 33 years ago I was working for the largest DC10 operator outside of USA ... which also happened to be Europe's first low cost airline and the first UK Airbus operator!
There's nothing wrong with the MD Scud (B717) except I understand they're somewhat noisy, they can get in and out of airfields and don't require steps, nice piece of kit, a shame Boeing bought out MD and stopped production.
Just over 33 years ago I was working for the largest DC10 operator outside of USA ... which also happened to be Europe's first low cost airline and the first UK Airbus operator!
There's nothing wrong with the MD Scud (B717) except I understand they're somewhat noisy, they can get in and out of airfields and don't require steps, nice piece of kit, a shame Boeing bought out MD and stopped production.
Son of Slot
Super Senior Moderator
Super Senior Moderator
The topic is NOT 'Bash all the locos AGAIN'.
I have deleted a post that was a rant about LCC carriers that did not make any attempt at discussion. PPRuNe is for discussing topics NOT to just sound off without justification. Let's see if there is any more sensible mileage as to what might happen in the unlikely event of time going into reverse and we went back to the old way of doing things.
I have deleted a post that was a rant about LCC carriers that did not make any attempt at discussion. PPRuNe is for discussing topics NOT to just sound off without justification. Let's see if there is any more sensible mileage as to what might happen in the unlikely event of time going into reverse and we went back to the old way of doing things.