Originally Posted by
WHBM
I think there are many, who are aviation knowledgeable, who find inappropriate this attitude of portraying the whole operation as that of a major carrier until the moment something goes wrong, when all of a sudden everything is reversed and it's "nuffin' to do wiv us, mate". Well in that case, why do you do Due Diligence on your subcharter operators. And why do you require them to strip their own branding off the aircraft, as here.
The regularly cited Colgan accident is another example. Every bit of branding at the airport and on the aircraft plainly said Continental. But their
PR team worked full time to deny this once there had been an accident. It was notable that all the Continental-generated news matter pointedly said "Colgan", while all of Colgan's own material prominently said "Continental".
Oh get off your high horse. If we're going to ruminate about the technical details of an incident, the company it actually happened at operationally is far more relevant than the logo on the ticket.
I do agree that the ones who sell the tickets have to bear the responsibility when something goes wrong under their banner. Legally, morally, ethically, I have no problem with that.
That doesn't change the actual facts that it wasn't Norwegian company pilots jettisoning fuel on a runway, it wasn't Continental pilots stalling a Dash 8, and it wasn't British Airways pilots heading to Edinburgh instead of Dusseldorf.
I don't expect the general public to be aware of the use of subcharters, wetleases, and codeshares, but I obviously gave too much credit to the self-professed "aviation-knowledgable" to have thought that perhaps they could grasp the nuances.
