LGW Vulture:
I don't mean the aircraft are badly maintained, they are not and they are sound aircraft, being very strongly and well built.
BUT, they are not modern aircraft. By "bad" I mean they are very old (the -200's are from 1984-86), very fuel inefficient (at about 2.1 tonnes per hour, about the same fuel burn as the 738 which carries twice the pax), underpowered, slow, with rubbish avionics and autoflight systems (i.e. non-RVSM, non-RNAV in the terminal area), noisy (inside anyway), uncomfortable for pax and crew etc etc etc, the list is long of valid complaints about it is long and varied.
They do the job well that they were designed for, short runways like LCY and FLR. But on the rest of the routes its substandard. On the other hand, its dirt cheap to lease so WX makes money. I imagine an efficient aircraft would make even more money, but thats just my opinion and ignores the AF politics involved in getting new equipment.
flyerbae146:
Such comments from CDG crew are fairly common I'm afraid. I think the DUb crew are generally a happier bunch. As you say, some think they are AF mainline and reminders of otherwise doesn't go down too well!
VanillaSky, you say "she didnt call back... this is really weird!~"
No its not, its called the SOP for airline recruitment.