Originally Posted by Lite
UKJet will be operating this MD-83 on the Viking AOC under the brand name UKJet on behalf of Excel Airways. Not sure if flight crews will call them UKJet or Excel, but we will be announcing flights on the ground as "Excel Airways flight XLA..." and not mentioning the UKJet name. It seems a similar setup to "Greece Airways-Air Scotland" with UK bases but all administration in Greece.
It is to my bewilderment why EMA, where this aircraft will be based, is to be allowed back. Whilst Viking have a clear credit history to the best of my knowledge, this arrangement stinks of the Air Scandic operating for Excel deal that caused the airport a small financial hole last year. Never mind the headaches it caused with ridiculously long delays and poor communication. As nice as it is to see diversity of destinations & airlines, I wish Excel would base their own aircraft or find a well known brand like Air Atlanta or Air Malta to do these flights.
Well after that pessimistic rant we'll see how things go.
It all seems a quite involved mess - and sadly I think the people who will end up with the raw end of the deal are passengers who have spent hard earned cash on an annual holiday that may well be ruined by a tech fiasco (remember last year).
I'm sorry, but am I the only one who thinks this arrangement just seems dodgy? Why couldn't an operation the size of Excel/Atlanta just lease in an aircraft for the summer to operate alongside the rest of the Excel fleet. A type that is already common to them (737), could either be wet lease or dry, paint Excel Airways on it and hey presto. Atlanta could arrange something like that in their sleep.
Instead we have a lone aircraft type (that already has history), with an operational base in Greece, operating for Excel Airways, with a name down the side of it that seems to bear absolutely no relevance at all (flights are being sold as "Excel Scheduled").
All just seems a bit weird, who is gaining from this?